# Is Israel the Same as South Africa?



## georgephillip

"The question is not 'Is Israel the same as South Africa?'
It is 'do Israel's actions meet the international definition of what apartheid is?'

The crime of apartheid is defined by the 2002 Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court as inhumane acts of a character similar to other crimes against humanity 'committed in the context of an institutionalized regime of systematic oppression and domination by one racial group over any other racial group or groups and committed with the intention of maintaining that regime.'"

A couple of other relevant questions include did Israel sign the 2002 Rome Statute, if not;why not, and does it even matter?

Is Israel an Apartheid State?


----------



## RoccoR

georgephillip;  _et al,_

Interesting?



georgephillip said:


> "The question is not 'Is Israel the same as South Africa?'
> It is 'do Israel's actions meet the international definition of what apartheid is?'
> 
> The crime of apartheid is defined by the 2002 Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court as inhumane acts of a character similar to other crimes against humanity 'committed in the context of an institutionalized regime of systematic oppression and domination by one racial group over any other racial group or groups and committed with the intention of maintaining that regime.'"
> 
> A couple of other relevant questions include did Israel sign the 2002 Rome Statute, if not;why not, and does it even matter?
> 
> Is Israel an Apartheid State?


*(FIRST QUESTION)*

What races are involved?  (one racial group over any other racial group)

Most Respectfully,
R


----------



## P F Tinmore

RoccoR said:


> georgephillip;  _et al,_
> 
> Interesting?
> 
> 
> 
> georgephillip said:
> 
> 
> 
> "The question is not 'Is Israel the same as South Africa?'
> It is 'do Israel's actions meet the international definition of what apartheid is?'
> 
> The crime of apartheid is defined by the 2002 Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court as inhumane acts of a character similar to other crimes against humanity 'committed in the context of an institutionalized regime of systematic oppression and domination by one racial group over any other racial group or groups and committed with the intention of maintaining that regime.'"
> 
> A couple of other relevant questions include did Israel sign the 2002 Rome Statute, if not;why not, and does it even matter?
> 
> Is Israel an Apartheid State?
> 
> 
> 
> *(FIRST QUESTION)*
> 
> What races are involved?  (one racial group over any other racial group)
> 
> Most Respectfully,
> R
Click to expand...


Picayune.


----------



## sealadaigh

RoccoR said:


> georgephillip;  _et al,_
> 
> Interesting?
> 
> 
> 
> georgephillip said:
> 
> 
> 
> "The question is not 'Is Israel the same as South Africa?'
> It is 'do Israel's actions meet the international definition of what apartheid is?'
> 
> The crime of apartheid is defined by the 2002 Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court as inhumane acts of a character similar to other crimes against humanity 'committed in the context of an institutionalized regime of systematic oppression and domination by one racial group over any other racial group or groups and committed with the intention of maintaining that regime.'"
> 
> A couple of other relevant questions include did Israel sign the 2002 Rome Statute, if not;why not, and does it even matter?
> 
> Is Israel an Apartheid State?
> 
> 
> 
> *(FIRST QUESTION)*
> 
> What races are involved?  (one racial group over any other racial group)
> 
> Most Respectfully,
> R
Click to expand...


i think jews are a religious group and not an ethnic/racial group. am i wrong in assuming that you do the same?


----------



## georgephillip

RoccoR said:


> georgephillip;  _et al,_
> 
> Interesting?
> 
> 
> 
> georgephillip said:
> 
> 
> 
> "The question is not 'Is Israel the same as South Africa?'
> It is 'do Israel's actions meet the international definition of what apartheid is?'
> 
> The crime of apartheid is defined by the 2002 Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court as inhumane acts of a character similar to other crimes against humanity 'committed in the context of an institutionalized regime of systematic oppression and domination by one racial group over any other racial group or groups and committed with the intention of maintaining that regime.'"
> 
> A couple of other relevant questions include did Israel sign the 2002 Rome Statute, if not;why not, and does it even matter?
> 
> Is Israel an Apartheid State?
> 
> 
> 
> *(FIRST QUESTION)*
> 
> What races are involved?  (one racial group over any other racial group)
> 
> Most Respectfully,
> R
Click to expand...


The Jewish race over any and all other racial groups living between the River and the sea.


----------



## High_Gravity

Nope, next question.


----------



## georgephillip

reabhloideach said:


> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> 
> georgephillip;  _et al,_
> 
> Interesting?
> 
> 
> 
> georgephillip said:
> 
> 
> 
> "The question is not 'Is Israel the same as South Africa?'
> It is 'do Israel's actions meet the international definition of what apartheid is?'
> 
> The crime of apartheid is defined by the 2002 Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court as inhumane acts of a character similar to other crimes against humanity 'committed in the context of an institutionalized regime of systematic oppression and domination by one racial group over any other racial group or groups and committed with the intention of maintaining that regime.'"
> 
> A couple of other relevant questions include did Israel sign the 2002 Rome Statute, if not;why not, and does it even matter?
> 
> Is Israel an Apartheid State?
> 
> 
> 
> *(FIRST QUESTION)*
> 
> What races are involved?  (one racial group over any other racial group)
> 
> Most Respectfully,
> R
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> i think jews are a religious group and not an ethnic/racial group. am i wrong in assuming that you do the same?
Click to expand...


I think that Hitler made a strategic decision to classify Jews as a race and not a religion since, had he chosen the latter, half the Jews in Germany would have converted to Christianity. 

It seems to me that distinction between race and religion has been used by Jews and non-Jews to cover many crimes during the last hundred years including the Right of Return in Palestine.


----------



## RoccoR

reabhloideach,  _et al,_

Well, I agree that a Jewish is not a racial category.  So, right off the bat, its not a matter of "apartheid" under the international criminal code.  As you can see, "apartheid" is defined as crimes committed "by one racial group over any other racial group;" a major element of the offense.



reabhloideach said:


> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> 
> georgephillip;  _et al,_
> 
> Interesting?
> 
> 
> 
> georgephillip said:
> 
> 
> 
> "The question is not 'Is Israel the same as South Africa?'
> It is 'do Israel's actions meet the international definition of what apartheid is?'
> 
> The crime of apartheid is defined by the 2002 Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court as inhumane acts of a character similar to other crimes against humanity 'committed in the context of an institutionalized regime of systematic oppression and domination by one racial group over any other racial group or groups and committed with the intention of maintaining that regime.'"
> 
> A couple of other relevant questions include did Israel sign the 2002 Rome Statute, if not;why not, and does it even matter?
> 
> Is Israel an Apartheid State?
> 
> 
> 
> *(FIRST QUESTION)*
> 
> What races are involved?  (one racial group over any other racial group)
> 
> Most Respectfully,
> R
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> i think jews are a religious group and not an ethnic/racial group. am i wrong in assuming that you do the same?
Click to expand...

*(COMMENT)*

No, you are not wrong.

But more importantly, being Israeli is not a racial category either; it is a nationality.  And, you can be Israeli and Palestinian simultaneously; however you define a Palestinian.

But it is also important to understand that when speaking of "apartheid" --- you are speaking of treatment difference with a given country.  That is to say, the crime of "apartheid" doesn't apply to the "Occupied Territories" because it is not "sovereign Israeli territory."   The crime of "apartheid" is "committed with the intention of maintaining that regime."  So, in order to determine if there is the crime of "apartheid," you have to examine if an "Israeli" of one racial class is being treated differently than an "Israeli" of another racial class within the same regime.

Of the LINK cited, I did not see one "apartheid" issue mentioned.

Most Respectfully,
R


----------



## RoccoR

georgephillip,  _et al,_

I'm not sure I completely understand.



georgephillip said:


> It seems to me that distinction between race and religion has been used by Jews and non-Jews to cover many crimes during the last hundred years including the Right of Return in Palestine.


*(COMMENT)*

I think you better ask for legal advise on the matter.

Anyone living in Israel at the time it declared independence in 1948 and at the end of the War of Independence, is an Israeli Citizen.  (I think) They need not apply for citizenship, they are citizens.  They just need to get their _Oleh's_ certificate.  I'm not an expert on their law, but it might be worth looking into if you fall in that category.

But remember, the entire idea behind the establishment of the Jewish State, was to find a protective landscape for those that would be oppresses simply because they were Jewish.

Most Respectfully,
R


----------



## georgephillip

Surfer said:


> No. Israel is full of God-worshiping Jews who just want to be left alone. South Africa is a hellhole full of godless blacks who breed like rats.


"Jewish atheism refers to atheism as practiced by people who are ethnically, and to some extent culturally, Jewish. Because Jewishness encompasses ethnic as well as religious components, the term "Jewish atheism" does not necessarily imply a contradiction. 

"Based on Jewish law's emphasis on matrilineal descent, even religiously conservative Orthodox Jewish authorities would accept an atheist born to a Jewish mother as fully Jewish.[1] 

"One recent study found that half of all American Jews have doubts about the existence of God, compared to 1015% of other American religious groups."
Jewish atheism - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

BTW, are you prejudiced against black rats?


----------



## sealadaigh

RoccoR said:


> reabhloideach,  _et al,_
> 
> Well, I agree that a Jewish is not a racial category.  So, right off the bat, its not a matter of "apartheid" under the international criminal code.  As you can see, "apartheid" is defined as crimes committed "by one racial group over any other racial group;" a major element of the offense.
> 
> 
> 
> reabhloideach said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> 
> georgephillip;  _et al,_
> 
> Interesting?
> 
> 
> *(FIRST QUESTION)*
> 
> What races are involved?  (one racial group over any other racial group)
> 
> Most Respectfully,
> R
> 
> 
> 
> 
> i think jews are a religious group and not an ethnic/racial group. am i wrong in assuming that you do the same?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> No, you are not wrong.
> 
> But more importantly, being Israeli is not a racial category either; it is a nationality.  And, you can be Israeli and Palestinian simultaneously; however you define a Palestinian.
> 
> But it is also important to understand that when speaking of "apartheid" --- you are speaking of treatment difference with a given country.  That is to say, the crime of "apartheid" doesn't apply to the "Occupied Territories" because it is not "sovereign Israeli territory."   The crime of "apartheid" is "committed with the intention of maintaining that regime."  So, in order to determine if there is the crime of "apartheid," you have to examine if an "Israeli" of one racial class is being treated differently than an "Israeli" of another racial class within the same regime.
> 
> Of the LINK cited, I did not see one "apartheid" issue mentioned.
> 
> Most Respectfully,
> R
Click to expand...


so then, what i understand, and i could be wrong, but you are not opposed and, indeed, are in favour of religious groups being able to carve out national homelands and soveriegn states in the places of their choosing, depriving the indigenous people, natives, and current inhabitants of their properties, rights, and thwarting their national aspirations?

if this is not the case, then i see no way around concluding that you advocate special treatment of a people based upon their religious choice?

and i also imagine that is the feelings of most zionists.


----------



## sealadaigh

georgephillip said:


> reabhloideach said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> 
> georgephillip;  _et al,_
> 
> Interesting?
> 
> 
> *(FIRST QUESTION)*
> 
> What races are involved?  (one racial group over any other racial group)
> 
> Most Respectfully,
> R
> 
> 
> 
> 
> i think jews are a religious group and not an ethnic/racial group. am i wrong in assuming that you do the same?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I think that Hitler made a strategic decision to classify Jews as a race and not a religion since, had he chosen the latter, half the Jews in Germany would have converted to Christianity.
> 
> It seems to me that distinction between race and religion has been used by Jews and non-Jews to cover many crimes during the last hundred years including the Right of Return in Palestine.
Click to expand...


i think i am going to have to go with religion with a small ethnic component. perhaps at one time it was an ethnicity but you really can't convert to an ethnicity.


----------



## P F Tinmore

RoccoR said:


> reabhloideach,  _et al,_
> 
> Well, I agree that a Jewish is not a racial category.  So, right off the bat, its not a matter of "apartheid" under the international criminal code.  As you can see, "apartheid" is defined as crimes committed "by one racial group over any other racial group;" a major element of the offense.
> 
> 
> 
> reabhloideach said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> 
> georgephillip;  _et al,_
> 
> Interesting?
> 
> 
> *(FIRST QUESTION)*
> 
> What races are involved?  (one racial group over any other racial group)
> 
> Most Respectfully,
> R
> 
> 
> 
> 
> i think jews are a religious group and not an ethnic/racial group. am i wrong in assuming that you do the same?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> No, you are not wrong.
> 
> But more importantly, being Israeli is not a racial category either; it is a nationality.  And, you can be Israeli and Palestinian simultaneously; however you define a Palestinian.
> 
> But it is also important to understand that when speaking of "apartheid" --- you are speaking of treatment difference with a given country.  That is to say, the crime of "apartheid" doesn't apply to the "Occupied Territories" because it is not "sovereign Israeli territory."   The crime of "apartheid" is "committed with the intention of maintaining that regime."  So, in order to determine if there is the crime of "apartheid," you have to examine if an "Israeli" of one racial class is being treated differently than an "Israeli" of another racial class within the same regime.
> 
> Of the LINK cited, I did not see one "apartheid" issue mentioned.
> 
> Most Respectfully,
> R
Click to expand...


Is "Arab" a race?


----------



## RoccoR

P F Tinmore,  _et al,_

I don't like these kinds of questions.



P F Tinmore said:


> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> 
> reabhloideach,  _et al,_
> 
> Well, I agree that a Jewish is not a racial category.  So, right off the bat, its not a matter of "apartheid" under the international criminal code.  As you can see, "apartheid" is defined as crimes committed "by one racial group over any other racial group;" a major element of the offense.
> 
> 
> 
> reabhloideach said:
> 
> 
> 
> i think jews are a religious group and not an ethnic/racial group. am i wrong in assuming that you do the same?
> 
> 
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> No, you are not wrong.
> 
> But more importantly, being Israeli is not a racial category either; it is a nationality.  And, you can be Israeli and Palestinian simultaneously; however you define a Palestinian.
> 
> But it is also important to understand that when speaking of "apartheid" --- you are speaking of treatment difference with a given country.  That is to say, the crime of "apartheid" doesn't apply to the "Occupied Territories" because it is not "sovereign Israeli territory."   The crime of "apartheid" is "committed with the intention of maintaining that regime."  So, in order to determine if there is the crime of "apartheid," you have to examine if an "Israeli" of one racial class is being treated differently than an "Israeli" of another racial class within the same regime.
> 
> Of the LINK cited, I did not see one "apartheid" issue mentioned.
> 
> Most Respectfully,
> R
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Is "Arab" a race?
Click to expand...

*(COMMENT)*

No, Arabs are Semitic _(including Hebrew, Arabic, Aramaic, Maltese, and Amharic)_  language speaking people, that speak Arabic as a primary language.

It has no relationship to race.

Most Respectfully,
R


----------



## P F Tinmore

RoccoR said:


> P F Tinmore,  _et al,_
> 
> I don't like these kinds of questions.
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> 
> reabhloideach,  _et al,_
> 
> Well, I agree that a Jewish is not a racial category.  So, right off the bat, its not a matter of "apartheid" under the international criminal code.  As you can see, "apartheid" is defined as crimes committed "by one racial group over any other racial group;" a major element of the offense.
> 
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> No, you are not wrong.
> 
> But more importantly, being Israeli is not a racial category either; it is a nationality.  And, you can be Israeli and Palestinian simultaneously; however you define a Palestinian.
> 
> But it is also important to understand that when speaking of "apartheid" --- you are speaking of treatment difference with a given country.  That is to say, the crime of "apartheid" doesn't apply to the "Occupied Territories" because it is not "sovereign Israeli territory."   The crime of "apartheid" is "committed with the intention of maintaining that regime."  So, in order to determine if there is the crime of "apartheid," you have to examine if an "Israeli" of one racial class is being treated differently than an "Israeli" of another racial class within the same regime.
> 
> Of the LINK cited, I did not see one "apartheid" issue mentioned.
> 
> Most Respectfully,
> R
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Is "Arab" a race?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> No, Arabs are Semitic _(including Hebrew, Arabic, Aramaic, Maltese, and Amharic)_  language speaking people, that speak Arabic as a primary language.
> 
> It has no relationship to race.
> 
> Most Respectfully,
> R
Click to expand...


Then what is the distinguishing characteristic that separates them from Israelis?


----------



## RoccoR

P F Tinmore,  _et al,_

Every country has immigration laws.



P F Tinmore said:


> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore,  _et al,_
> 
> I don't like these kinds of questions.
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> Is "Arab" a race?
> 
> 
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> No, Arabs are Semitic _(including Hebrew, Arabic, Aramaic, Maltese, and Amharic)_  language speaking people, that speak Arabic as a primary language.
> 
> It has no relationship to race.
> 
> Most Respectfully,
> R
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Then what is the distinguishing characteristic that separates them from Israelis?
Click to expand...

*(COMMENT)*

Criteria for immigration or citizenship.

Most Respectfully,
R


----------



## P F Tinmore

RoccoR said:


> P F Tinmore,  _et al,_
> 
> Every country has immigration laws.
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore,  _et al,_
> 
> I don't like these kinds of questions.
> 
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> No, Arabs are Semitic _(including Hebrew, Arabic, Aramaic, Maltese, and Amharic)_  language speaking people, that speak Arabic as a primary language.
> 
> It has no relationship to race.
> 
> Most Respectfully,
> R
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Then what is the distinguishing characteristic that separates them from Israelis?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> Criteria for immigration or citizenship.
> 
> Most Respectfully,
> R
Click to expand...


Explain immigration to your homeland.


----------



## RoccoR

P F Tinmore,  _et al,_

It depends if it is your homeland.



P F Tinmore said:


> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore,  _et al,_
> 
> Every country has immigration laws.
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> Then what is the distinguishing characteristic that separates them from Israelis?
> 
> 
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> Criteria for immigration or citizenship.
> 
> Most Respectfully,
> R
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Explain immigration to your homeland.
Click to expand...

*(COMMENT)* PART ONE: ACQUISITION OF NATIONALITY, NATIONALITY LAW, 5712-1952

Nationality by Return.

(a) Every 'oleh** under the Law of Return, 5710-1950(1), shall become an Israel national.
(b) Israel nationality by return is acquired-

(1) by a person who came as an 'oleh into, or was born in, the country before the establishment of the State - with effect from the day of the establishment of the State;
(2) by a person having come to Israel as an 'oleh after the establishment of the State - with effect from the day of his 'aliyah**;
(3) by a person born in Israel after the establishment of the State - with effect from the day of his birth;
(4) by a person who has received an 'oleh's certificate under section 3 of the Law of Return, 5710-1950 - with effect from the day of the issue of the certificate.
(c) This section does not apply-

(1) to a person having ceased to be an inhabitant of Israel before the coming into force of this Law;
(2) to a person of full age who, immediately before the day of his 'aliyah or the day of his 'oleh's certificate is a foreign national and who, on or before such day, declares that he does not desire to become an Israel national;
(3) to a minor whose parents have made a declaration under paragraph (2) and included him therein.

Nationality by Residence in Israel.	

(a) A person who, immediately before the establishment of the State, was a Palestinian citizen and who does not become a Israel national under section 2, shall become an Israel national with effect from the day of the establishment of the State if -

(1) he was registered on the 4th Adar, 5712 (1st March 1952) as an inhabitant under the Registration of Inhabitants Ordinance, 5709-1949(2); and
(2) he is an inhabitant of Israel on the day of the coming into force of this Law; and
(3) he was in Israel, or in an area which became Israel territory after the establishment of the State, from the day of the establishment of the State to the day of the coming into force of this Law, or entered Israel legally during that period.
(b) A person born after the establishment of the State who is an inhabitant of Israel on the day of the coming into force of this Law, and whose father or mother becomes an Israel national under subsection (a), shall become an Israel national with effect from the day of his birth.​
For more information see:  Acquisition of Israeli Nationality - Israel Ministry of Foreign Affairs

*Disclaimer:*

You need to ask a specialist in the law or the Israeli Consulate.

Most Respectfully,
R


----------



## Surfer

georgephillip said:


> BTW, are you prejudiced against black rats?



I don't like any kind of rats. I especially despise people who won't behave or contribute to this awesome country. Criminals and most liberals make me sick. Muslimes, criminal aliens and white trash are repulsive. I like good, decent, Christian and Jewish people who behave and don't have too many kids they can not afford.


----------



## P F Tinmore

RoccoR said:


> P F Tinmore,  _et al,_
> 
> It depends if it is your homeland.
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore,  _et al,_
> 
> Every country has immigration laws.
> 
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> Criteria for immigration or citizenship.
> 
> Most Respectfully,
> R
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Explain immigration to your homeland.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> *(COMMENT)* PART ONE: ACQUISITION OF NATIONALITY, NATIONALITY LAW, 5712-1952
> 
> Nationality by Return.
> 
> (a) Every 'oleh** under the Law of Return, 5710-1950(1), shall become an Israel national.
> (b) Israel nationality by return is acquired-
> 
> (1) by a person who came as an 'oleh into, or was born in, the country before the establishment of the State - with effect from the day of the establishment of the State;
> (2) by a person having come to Israel as an 'oleh after the establishment of the State - with effect from the day of his 'aliyah**;
> (3) by a person born in Israel after the establishment of the State - with effect from the day of his birth;
> (4) by a person who has received an 'oleh's certificate under section 3 of the Law of Return, 5710-1950 - with effect from the day of the issue of the certificate.
> (c) This section does not apply-
> 
> (1) to a person having ceased to be an inhabitant of Israel before the coming into force of this Law;
> (2) to a person of full age who, immediately before the day of his 'aliyah or the day of his 'oleh's certificate is a foreign national and who, on or before such day, declares that he does not desire to become an Israel national;
> (3) to a minor whose parents have made a declaration under paragraph (2) and included him therein.
> 
> Nationality by Residence in Israel.
> 
> (a) A person who, immediately before the establishment of the State, was a Palestinian citizen and who does not become a Israel national under section 2, shall become an Israel national with effect from the day of the establishment of the State if -
> 
> (1) he was registered on the 4th Adar, 5712 (1st March 1952) as an inhabitant under the Registration of Inhabitants Ordinance, 5709-1949(2); and
> (2) he is an inhabitant of Israel on the day of the coming into force of this Law; and
> (3) he was in Israel, or in an area which became Israel territory after the establishment of the State, from the day of the establishment of the State to the day of the coming into force of this Law, or entered Israel legally during that period.
> (b) A person born after the establishment of the State who is an inhabitant of Israel on the day of the coming into force of this Law, and whose father or mother becomes an Israel national under subsection (a), shall become an Israel national with effect from the day of his birth.​
> For more information see:  Acquisition of Israeli Nationality - Israel Ministry of Foreign Affairs
> 
> *Disclaimer:*
> 
> You need to ask a specialist in the law or the Israeli Consulate.
> 
> Most Respectfully,
> R
Click to expand...


All smoke and bullshit aside, I was referring to the natives of the land.


----------



## georgephillip

High_Gravity said:


> Nope, next question.



"A further impetus for confining the 'apartheid label' to a comparison with South Africa is that the commonalities and similarities between the liberation struggles of South Africa and Palestine are quite stark. 

"Both cases involved a process of *settler-colonialism involving the forced displacement of the indigenous population from most of their ancestral lands* and concentrating them in townships and reservations, dividing the colonized community into different groups with differing rights, strict mobility restrictions that suffocated the colonized, and the use of brutal military force to repress any actual or potential resistance against the racist colonial regime."

Is Israel an Apartheid State?


----------



## RoccoR

P F Tinmore,  _et al,_

All smoke and bullshit aside, I didn't see that as a category of citizen.



P F Tinmore said:


> All smoke and bullshit aside, I was referring to the natives of the land.


*(COMMENT)*

All technical BS and made-up Palestinian jargon aside, I think the criteria is pretty straight forward.

What is a "native of the land?"  What sovereignty was the land?  Where were they born and when?  

My thought is to ask why don't they meet the criteria?

Most Respectfully,
R


----------



## P F Tinmore

RoccoR said:


> P F Tinmore,  _et al,_
> 
> All smoke and bullshit aside, I didn't see that as a category of citizen.
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> All smoke and bullshit aside, I was referring to the natives of the land.
> 
> 
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> All technical BS and made-up Palestinian jargon aside, I think the criteria is pretty straight forward.
> 
> What is a "native of the land?"  What sovereignty was the land?  Where were they born and when?
> 
> My thought is to ask why don't they meet the criteria?
> 
> Most Respectfully,
> R
Click to expand...


Just asking why the natives of the land are not allowed to live there.


----------



## georgephillip

RoccoR said:


> reabhloideach,  _et al,_
> 
> Well, I agree that a Jewish is not a racial category.  So, right off the bat, its not a matter of "apartheid" under the international criminal code.  As you can see, "apartheid" is defined as crimes committed "by one racial group over any other racial group;" a major element of the offense.
> 
> 
> 
> reabhloideach said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> 
> georgephillip;  _et al,_
> 
> Interesting?
> 
> 
> *(FIRST QUESTION)*
> 
> What races are involved?  (one racial group over any other racial group)
> 
> Most Respectfully,
> R
> 
> 
> 
> 
> i think jews are a religious group and not an ethnic/racial group. am i wrong in assuming that you do the same?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> No, you are not wrong.
> 
> *But more importantly, being Israeli is not a racial category either; it is a nationality.*  And, you can be Israeli and Palestinian simultaneously; however you define a Palestinian.
> 
> Snip.
> 
> Of the LINK cited, I did not see one "apartheid" issue mentioned.
> 
> Most Respectfully,
> R
Click to expand...

Rocco...Israel makes a unique distinction between "nationality" and "citizenship" that few, if any, other countries make. 

As I understand it all Israelis qualify as "citizens" of Israel; however, the state belongs solely to the "Jewish nation" which encompasses not only the 5.6 million Jews living in Israel but also more than 7 million living in the diaspora.

This has come to the attention of a retired linguistics professor in Israel:

"The head of the campaign for Israeli nationality, Uzzi Ornan, a retired linguistics professor, said: '*It is absurd that Israel, which recognizes dozens of different nationalities, refuses to recognize the one nationality it is supposed to represent...'*

"Mr. Ornan, 86, said that denying a common Israeli nationality was the linchpin of state-sanctioned discrimination against the Arab population.

"There are even two laws -- the Law of Return for Jews and the Citizenship Law for Arabs -- that determine how you belong to the state," he said.  '*What kind of democracy divides its citizens into two kinds?*'"

Jonathan Cook, "'Israeli Nation' vs. 'Jewish State'"


----------



## RoccoR

P F Tinmore,  _et al,_

Just rephrasing the question doesn't give me a clue.  (I'm slow!)



P F Tinmore said:


> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore,  _et al,_
> 
> All smoke and bullshit aside, I didn't see that as a category of citizen.
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> All smoke and bullshit aside, I was referring to the natives of the land.
> 
> 
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> All technical BS and made-up Palestinian jargon aside, I think the criteria is pretty straight forward.
> 
> What is a "native of the land?"  What sovereignty was the land?  Where were they born and when?
> 
> My thought is to ask why don't they meet the criteria?
> 
> Most Respectfully,
> R
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Just asking why the natives of the land are not allowed to live there.
Click to expand...

*(COMMENT)*


What does that mean:  "natives of the land"
Where is there:  "not allowed to live there"

If you are using the Covenant/Charter definition for Palestine and that phony claim that all of Israel is in Palestine, then you are barking up the wrong tree.  That just won't fly.  Just to be a Palestinian under that made-up rule is not sufficient to enter the sovereign territory of Israel.  Just the same as they just can't wonder and live in other Arab countries.  

But if you were in Israel when Israel declared independence, then you might be in one of the categories.

Most Respectfully,
R


----------



## Bloodrock44

P F Tinmore said:


> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore,  _et al,_
> 
> All smoke and bullshit aside, I didn't see that as a category of citizen.
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> All smoke and bullshit aside, I was referring to the natives of the land.
> 
> 
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> All technical BS and made-up Palestinian jargon aside, I think the criteria is pretty straight forward.
> 
> What is a "native of the land?"  What sovereignty was the land?  Where were they born and when?
> 
> My thought is to ask why don't they meet the criteria?
> 
> Most Respectfully,
> R
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Just asking why the natives of the land are not allowed to live there.
Click to expand...


*When did the squatters declare a state? When did they define borders or form a government?*


----------



## georgephillip

Bloodrock44 said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore,  _et al,_
> 
> All smoke and bullshit aside, I didn't see that as a category of citizen.
> 
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> All technical BS and made-up Palestinian jargon aside, I think the criteria is pretty straight forward.
> 
> What is a "native of the land?"  What sovereignty was the land?  Where were they born and when?
> 
> My thought is to ask why don't they meet the criteria?
> 
> Most Respectfully,
> R
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Just asking why the natives of the land are not allowed to live there.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> *When did the squatters declare a state? When did they define borders or form a government?*
Click to expand...


"The Israeli Declaration of Independence (Hebrew: &#1492;&#1499;&#1512;&#1494;&#1514; &#1492;&#1506;&#1510;&#1502;&#1488;&#1493;&#1514;*, Hakhrazat HaAtzma'ut or Hebrew: &#1502;&#1490;&#1497;&#1500;&#1514; &#1492;&#1506;&#1510;&#1502;&#1488;&#1493;&#1514;* Megilat HaAtzma'ut), was made on 14 May 1948 (5 Iyar 5708), the day before the British Mandate was due to expire. David Ben-Gurion, the Executive Head of the World Zionist Organization[2][3] and the chairman of the Jewish Agency for Palestine,[4] declared the establishment of a Jewish state in Eretz-Israel, to be known as the State of Israel."

Israeli Declaration of Independence - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


----------



## P F Tinmore

RoccoR said:


> P F Tinmore,  _et al,_
> 
> Just rephrasing the question doesn't give me a clue.  (I'm slow!)
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore,  _et al,_
> 
> All smoke and bullshit aside, I didn't see that as a category of citizen.
> 
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> All technical BS and made-up Palestinian jargon aside, I think the criteria is pretty straight forward.
> 
> What is a "native of the land?"  What sovereignty was the land?  Where were they born and when?
> 
> My thought is to ask why don't they meet the criteria?
> 
> Most Respectfully,
> R
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Just asking why the natives of the land are not allowed to live there.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> 
> What does that mean:  "natives of the land"
> Where is there:  "not allowed to live there"
> 
> If you are using the Covenant/Charter definition for Palestine and that phony claim that all of Israel is in Palestine, then you are barking up the wrong tree.  That just won't fly.  Just to be a Palestinian under that made-up rule is not sufficient to enter the sovereign territory of Israel.  Just the same as they just can't wonder and live in other Arab countries.
> 
> But if you were in Israel when Israel declared independence, then you might be in one of the categories.
> 
> Most Respectfully,
> R
Click to expand...


What do you mean, made up rule?

*They were born there.*


----------



## P F Tinmore

Bloodrock44 said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore,  _et al,_
> 
> All smoke and bullshit aside, I didn't see that as a category of citizen.
> 
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> All technical BS and made-up Palestinian jargon aside, I think the criteria is pretty straight forward.
> 
> What is a "native of the land?"  What sovereignty was the land?  Where were they born and when?
> 
> My thought is to ask why don't they meet the criteria?
> 
> Most Respectfully,
> R
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Just asking why the natives of the land are not allowed to live there.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> *When did the squatters declare a state? When did they define borders or form a government?*
Click to expand...


May 14, 1948.

They never declared borders.


----------



## P F Tinmore

georgephillip said:


> Bloodrock44 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> Just asking why the natives of the land are not allowed to live there.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *When did the squatters declare a state? When did they define borders or form a government?*
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> "The Israeli Declaration of Independence (Hebrew: &#1492;&#1499;&#1512;&#1494;&#1514; &#1492;&#1506;&#1510;&#1502;&#1488;&#1493;&#1514;*, Hakhrazat HaAtzma'ut or Hebrew: &#1502;&#1490;&#1497;&#1500;&#1514; &#1492;&#1506;&#1510;&#1502;&#1488;&#1493;&#1514;* Megilat HaAtzma'ut), was made on 14 May 1948 (5 Iyar 5708), the day before the British Mandate was due to expire. David Ben-Gurion, the Executive Head of the World Zionist Organization[2][3] and the chairman of the Jewish Agency for Palestine,[4] declared the establishment of a Jewish state in Eretz-Israel, to be known as the State of Israel."
> 
> Israeli Declaration of Independence - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Click to expand...


Of course the World Zionist Organization and the Jewish Agency are both foreign organizations. They declared their state inside Palestine.


----------



## georgephillip

reabhloideach said:


> georgephillip said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> reabhloideach said:
> 
> 
> 
> i think jews are a religious group and not an ethnic/racial group. am i wrong in assuming that you do the same?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I think that Hitler made a strategic decision to classify Jews as a race and not a religion since, had he chosen the latter, half the Jews in Germany would have converted to Christianity.
> 
> It seems to me that distinction between race and religion has been used by Jews and non-Jews to cover many crimes during the last hundred years including the Right of Return in Palestine.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> i think i am going to have to go with religion with a small ethnic component. perhaps at one time it was an ethnicity but you really can't convert to an ethnicity.
Click to expand...


Race, religion, culture, ethnicity, citizenship and nationality all obscure the one fundamental principle of Israel: Jewish privilege. Race relations in the US during the 1950s were completely transparent in the sense that whites and Blacks stood out as two distinct racial groups. That same distinction doesn't hold for Jew and Arab, yet there are striking similarities between how Blacks were treated here and how Arabs are treated in Israel and its occupied territories today.

From Jewish Currents: 

"Most American Jews are proud of Jewish participation in the U.S. civil rights movement, but fail to realize that Israel is also in need of a civil rights revolution. 

"Arab citizens of Israel live under conditions roughly similar to those of African-Americans living in the North during the early 1950s. 

"Despite possessing the right to vote, they suffer grave inequalities in employment, housing, education, social services and representation in government, business and the media. 

"Israel is a highly segregated society in which 'separate but unequal' is the norm. Racist attitudes against Arabs are pervasive. A common insult among Israeli Jews is 'Don't be an Arab.'"


----------



## Hossfly

georgephillip said:


> Surfer said:
> 
> 
> 
> No. Israel is full of God-worshiping Jews who just want to be left alone. South Africa is a hellhole full of godless blacks who breed like rats.
> 
> 
> 
> "Jewish atheism refers to atheism as practiced by people who are ethnically, and to some extent culturally, Jewish. Because Jewishness encompasses ethnic as well as religious components, the term "Jewish atheism" does not necessarily imply a contradiction.
> 
> "Based on Jewish law's emphasis on matrilineal descent, even religiously conservative Orthodox Jewish authorities would accept an atheist born to a Jewish mother as fully Jewish.[1]
> 
> "One recent study found that half of all American Jews have doubts about the existence of God, compared to 1015% of other American religious groups."
> Jewish atheism - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
> 
> BTW, are you prejudiced against black rats?
Click to expand...

Why, Georgie Boy, we know that you are an atheist (even though you were probably taken to the AME church when you were a boy) so it is quite amusing for you to be speaking about atheists.  Meanwhile, do you have a problem when white rats inhabit your abode?  Of course, Georgie Boy has no problem with his Arab friends being prejudiced against Blacks and that the President of Sudan wants to get rid of all black skinned people living in his country along with all Christians, even if it means killing them to accomplish this.  By the way, Georgie Boy, your friends all over the Muslim world detest atheists and that is why many who have dropped out of Islam keep it quiet that they don't believe anymore.


----------



## georgephillip

Hossfly said:


> georgephillip said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Surfer said:
> 
> 
> 
> No. Israel is full of God-worshiping Jews who just want to be left alone. South Africa is a hellhole full of godless blacks who breed like rats.
> 
> 
> 
> "Jewish atheism refers to atheism as practiced by people who are ethnically, and to some extent culturally, Jewish. Because Jewishness encompasses ethnic as well as religious components, the term "Jewish atheism" does not necessarily imply a contradiction.
> 
> "Based on Jewish law's emphasis on matrilineal descent, even religiously conservative Orthodox Jewish authorities would accept an atheist born to a Jewish mother as fully Jewish.[1]
> 
> "One recent study found that half of all American Jews have doubts about the existence of God, compared to 1015% of other American religious groups."
> Jewish atheism - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
> 
> BTW, are you prejudiced against black rats?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Why, Georgie Boy, we know that you are an atheist (even though you were probably taken to the AME church when you were a boy) so it is quite amusing for you to be speaking about atheists.  Meanwhile, do you have a problem when white rats inhabit your abode?  Of course, Georgie Boy has no problem with his Arab friends being prejudiced against Blacks and that the President of Sudan wants to get rid of all black skinned people living in his country along with all Christians, even if it means killing them to accomplish this.  By the way, Georgie Boy, your friends all over the Muslim world detest atheists and that is why many who have dropped out of Islam keep it quiet that they don't believe anymore.
Click to expand...

How many Muslims do you talk to on a regular basis


----------



## RoccoR

P F Tinmore;  _et al,_

While the various wars altered the border outcomes, the original borders were declared on mid-night 14/15 May.



P F Tinmore said:


> Bloodrock44 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> Just asking why the natives of the land are not allowed to live there.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *When did the squatters declare a state? When did they define borders or form a government?*
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> May 14, 1948.
> 
> They never declared borders.
Click to expand...

*(COMMENT)*

As declared:



			
				Excerpt: CABLEGRAM DATED 15 MAY 1948 ADDRESSED TO THE
SECRETARY-GENERAL BY FOREIGN SECRETARY OF THE PROVISIONAL
GOVERNMENT OF ISRAEL said:
			
		

> STATE OF ISRAEL WILL BE READY COOPERATE WITH ORGANS AND REPRESENTATIVES OF UNITED NATIONS IN IMPLEMENTATION OF RESOLUTION OF ASSEMBLY OF NOVEMBER 29 1947 AND WILL TAKE STEPS TO BRING ABOUT ECONOMIC UNION OVER WHOLE OF PALESTINE.
> 
> _*SOURCE:*_ S/747 16 May 1948






			
				 Part II - Section B. THE JEWISH STATE said:
			
		

> The north-eastern sector of the Jewish State (Eastern) Galilee) is bounded on the north and west by the Lebanese frontier and on the east by the frontiers of Syria and Transjordan. It includes the whole of the Hula Basin, Lake Tiberias, the whole of the Beisan sub-district, the boundary line being extended to the crest of the Gilboa mountains and the Wadi Malih. From there the Jewish State extends north-west, following the boundary described in respect of the Arab State.
> 
> The Jewish Section of the coastal plain extends from a point between Minat et Qila and Nabi Yunis in the Gaza sub-district and includes the towns of Haifa and Tel-Aviv, leaving Jaffa as an enclave of the Arab State. The eastern frontier of the Jewish State follows the boundary described in respect of the Arab State.
> 
> The Beersheba area comprises the whole of the Beersheba sub-district, including the Negeb and the eastern part of the Gaza sub-district, but excluding the town of Beersheba and those areas described in respect of the Arab State. It includes also a strip of land along the Dead Sea stretching from the Beersheba-Hebron sub-district boundary line to Ein Geddi, as described in respect of the Arab State.
> *----------     ----------     ----------     ----------     ----------     ----------     ----------     ----------​*The boundary lines described in part II are indicated in Annex A. The base map used in marking and describing this boundary is "Palestine 1:250000" published by the Survey of Palestine, 1946.
> 
> *SOURCE:* A/RES/181(II) 29 November 1947



Most Respectfully,
R


----------



## P F Tinmore

RoccoR said:


> P F Tinmore;  _et al,_
> 
> While the various wars altered the border outcomes, the original borders were declared on mid-night 14/15 May.
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Bloodrock44 said:
> 
> 
> 
> *When did the squatters declare a state? When did they define borders or form a government?*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> May 14, 1948.
> 
> They never declared borders.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> As declared:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Excerpt: CABLEGRAM DATED 15 MAY 1948 ADDRESSED TO THE
> SECRETARY-GENERAL BY FOREIGN SECRETARY OF THE PROVISIONAL
> GOVERNMENT OF ISRAEL said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> STATE OF ISRAEL WILL BE READY COOPERATE WITH ORGANS AND REPRESENTATIVES OF UNITED NATIONS IN IMPLEMENTATION OF RESOLUTION OF ASSEMBLY OF NOVEMBER 29 1947 AND WILL TAKE STEPS TO BRING ABOUT ECONOMIC UNION OVER WHOLE OF PALESTINE.
> 
> _*SOURCE:*_ S/747 16 May 1948
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Part II - Section B. THE JEWISH STATE said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The north-eastern sector of the Jewish State (Eastern) Galilee) is bounded on the north and west by the Lebanese frontier and on the east by the frontiers of Syria and Transjordan. It includes the whole of the Hula Basin, Lake Tiberias, the whole of the Beisan sub-district, the boundary line being extended to the crest of the Gilboa mountains and the Wadi Malih. From there the Jewish State extends north-west, following the boundary described in respect of the Arab State.
> 
> The Jewish Section of the coastal plain extends from a point between Minat et Qila and Nabi Yunis in the Gaza sub-district and includes the towns of Haifa and Tel-Aviv, leaving Jaffa as an enclave of the Arab State. The eastern frontier of the Jewish State follows the boundary described in respect of the Arab State.
> 
> The Beersheba area comprises the whole of the Beersheba sub-district, including the Negeb and the eastern part of the Gaza sub-district, but excluding the town of Beersheba and those areas described in respect of the Arab State. It includes also a strip of land along the Dead Sea stretching from the Beersheba-Hebron sub-district boundary line to Ein Geddi, as described in respect of the Arab State.
> *----------     ----------     ----------     ----------     ----------     ----------     ----------     ----------​*The boundary lines described in part II are indicated in Annex A. The base map used in marking and describing this boundary is "Palestine 1:250000" published by the Survey of Palestine, 1946.
> 
> *SOURCE:* A/RES/181(II) 29 November 1947
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Most Respectfully,
> R
Click to expand...


Of course resolution 181 never happened so that is irrelevant.

And besides, Israel blew past those borders in its quest to take all of Palestine before the foreigners declared themselves to be a state inside Palestine.

Those *proposed borders* never became borders.


----------



## RoccoR

P F Tinmore.  _et al,_

Again, this is a HAMAS position, and not held in fact.



P F Tinmore said:


> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore;  _et al,_
> 
> While the various wars altered the border outcomes, the original borders were declared on mid-night 14/15 May.
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> May 14, 1948.
> 
> They never declared borders.
> 
> 
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> As declared:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Part II - Section B. THE JEWISH STATE said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The north-eastern sector of the Jewish State (Eastern) Galilee) is bounded on the north and west by the Lebanese frontier and on the east by the frontiers of Syria and Transjordan. It includes the whole of the Hula Basin, Lake Tiberias, the whole of the Beisan sub-district, the boundary line being extended to the crest of the Gilboa mountains and the Wadi Malih. From there the Jewish State extends north-west, following the boundary described in respect of the Arab State.
> 
> The Jewish Section of the coastal plain extends from a point between Minat et Qila and Nabi Yunis in the Gaza sub-district and includes the towns of Haifa and Tel-Aviv, leaving Jaffa as an enclave of the Arab State. The eastern frontier of the Jewish State follows the boundary described in respect of the Arab State.
> 
> The Beersheba area comprises the whole of the Beersheba sub-district, including the Negeb and the eastern part of the Gaza sub-district, but excluding the town of Beersheba and those areas described in respect of the Arab State. It includes also a strip of land along the Dead Sea stretching from the Beersheba-Hebron sub-district boundary line to Ein Geddi, as described in respect of the Arab State.
> *----------     ----------     ----------     ----------     ----------     ----------     ----------     ----------​*The boundary lines described in part II are indicated in Annex A. The base map used in marking and describing this boundary is "Palestine 1:250000" published by the Survey of Palestine, 1946.
> 
> *SOURCE:* A/RES/181(II) 29 November 1947
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Most Respectfully,
> R
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Of course resolution 181 never happened so that is irrelevant.
> 
> And besides, Israel blew past those borders in its quest to take all of Palestine before the foreigners declared themselves to be a state inside Palestine.
> 
> Those *proposed borders* never became borders.
Click to expand...

*(COMMENT)*

It is hard to say who speaks for the Palestinian.



			
				Letter dated 25 March 1999 from the Permanent Observer of Palestine to the United Nations addressed to the Secretary-General said:
			
		

> The Palestinian side adheres to international legitimacy and respects General Assembly resolution 181 (II), as well as Security Council resolution 242 (1967), the implementation of which is the aim of the current Middle East peace process.
> _(Signed) Nasser AL-KIDWA
> Ambassador
> Permanent Observer of
> Palestine to the United Nations_​
> _*SOURCE:*_ A/53/879  S/1999/334  25 March 1999



There is no voice for the Palestinian and not documented position other than the above.  Are you suggesting that the Palestinians have flip-flopped on the issue again?

Are you guessing at the Palestinian Position?  Or, do you have something you base it on.

The UN Position is quite clear.  It uses GA Resolution 181(II) as a basis for Resolution 273 (III) - Admission of Israel to membership in the United Nations; with declarations and explanations.

Most Respectfully,
R


----------



## MHunterB

To the 'question' in the OP:  NO.  Not the same  - and it's a ridiculous 'comparison'.


----------



## P F Tinmore

RoccoR said:


> P F Tinmore.  _et al,_
> 
> Again, this is a HAMAS position, and not held in fact.
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore;  _et al,_
> 
> While the various wars altered the border outcomes, the original borders were declared on mid-night 14/15 May.
> 
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> As declared:
> 
> 
> 
> Most Respectfully,
> R
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Of course resolution 181 never happened so that is irrelevant.
> 
> And besides, Israel blew past those borders in its quest to take all of Palestine before the foreigners declared themselves to be a state inside Palestine.
> 
> Those *proposed borders* never became borders.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> It is hard to say who speaks for the Palestinian.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Letter dated 25 March 1999 from the Permanent Observer of Palestine to the United Nations addressed to the Secretary-General said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Palestinian side adheres to international legitimacy and respects General Assembly resolution 181 (II), as well as Security Council resolution 242 (1967), the implementation of which is the aim of the current Middle East peace process.
> _(Signed) Nasser AL-KIDWA
> Ambassador
> Permanent Observer of
> Palestine to the United Nations_​
> _*SOURCE:*_ A/53/879  S/1999/334  25 March 1999
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> There is no voice for the Palestinian and not documented position other than the above.  Are you suggesting that the Palestinians have flip-flopped on the issue again?
> 
> Are you guessing at the Palestinian Position?  Or, do you have something you base it on.
> 
> The UN Position is quite clear.  It uses GA Resolution 181(II) as a basis for Resolution 273 (III) - Admission of Israel to membership in the United Nations; with declarations and explanations.
> 
> Most Respectfully,
> R
Click to expand...




> It is hard to say who speaks for the Palestinian.



Indeed, the PA was created by foreigners and imposed on Palestine.

Do they really speak for the Palestinians?


----------



## RoccoR

P F Tinmore,  _et al,_

Here are the basic interrogatives.



P F Tinmore said:


> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore.  _et al,_
> 
> Again, this is a HAMAS position, and not held in fact.
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> Of course resolution 181 never happened so that is irrelevant.
> 
> And besides, Israel blew past those borders in its quest to take all of Palestine before the foreigners declared themselves to be a state inside Palestine.
> 
> Those *proposed borders* never became borders.
> 
> 
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> It is hard to say who speaks for the Palestinian.
> 
> 
> 
> There is no voice for the Palestinian and not documented position other than the above.  Are you suggesting that the Palestinians have flip-flopped on the issue again?
> 
> Are you guessing at the Palestinian Position?  Or, do you have something you base it on.
> 
> The UN Position is quite clear.  It uses GA Resolution 181(II) as a basis for Resolution 273 (III) - Admission of Israel to membership in the United Nations; with declarations and explanations.
> 
> Most Respectfully,
> R
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> It is hard to say who speaks for the Palestinian.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Indeed, the PA was created by foreigners and imposed on Palestine.
> 
> Do they really speak for the Palestinians?
Click to expand...

*(QUESTION)*


Who speaks for the Palestinians?
Gaza
West Bank
Other Refugees

Who does the Permanent UN Observer for Palestine Represent?
What validity does State of Palestine Have?
Borders?
Government?
How does it communicate?
Does it have a Constitution of some foundation for the Government?
Who is the leader (Head of State) for Palestine?
Where is the seat of Government?

Self-Sustaining?


Most Respectfully,
R


----------



## georgephillip

"While several political and historical comparisons between Israel and South Africa have been published, there has been no systematic legal analysis of Israeli apartheid as it affects all sectors of Palestinian society: Palestinians in the occupied territory, Palestinian citizens of Israel, and Palestinian refugees. 

"This article is a work in progress which aims to provide a legal framework within which the applicability of the crime of apartheid to Israel can be discussed. 

"It argues that the policies and practices of the Israeli government amount to apartheid against Palestinian nationals - wherever they are and whatever their legal status. Hence, Palestinian citizens of Israel, refugees, and those in the OPT are victims, albeit in different ways, of Israel's regime of apartheid.

While this article is limited to the applicability of the crime of apartheid, it does not negate nor contradict the fact that Israel's regime against the Palestinian people is also one of belligerent occupation and colonialism..."

Is Israel an Apartheid State?

The Zionist colonization of Palestine has always depended upon an "Iron Wall of bayonets" to discourage the indigenous Palestinian from effectively resisting the theft of their natural resources. The British supplied the initial bayonets for Zionist expansion and the US continues His Majesty's policies of colonial conquest today.


----------



## ForeverYoung436

georgephillip said:


> "While several political and historical comparisons between Israel and South Africa have been published, there has been no systematic legal analysis of Israeli apartheid as it affects all sectors of Palestinian society: Palestinians in the occupied territory, Palestinian citizens of Israel, and Palestinian refugees.
> 
> "This article is a work in progress which aims to provide a legal framework within which the applicability of the crime of apartheid to Israel can be discussed.
> 
> "It argues that the policies and practices of the Israeli government amount to apartheid against Palestinian nationals - wherever they are and whatever their legal status. Hence, Palestinian citizens of Israel, refugees, and those in the OPT are victims, albeit in different ways, of Israel's regime of apartheid.
> 
> While this article is limited to the applicability of the crime of apartheid, it does not negate nor contradict the fact that Israel's regime against the Palestinian people is also one of belligerent occupation and colonialism..."
> 
> Is Israel an Apartheid State?
> 
> The Zionist colonization of Palestine has always depended upon an "Iron Wall of bayonets" to discourage the indigenous Palestinian from effectively resisting the theft of their natural resources. The British supplied the initial bayonets for Zionist expansion and the US continues His Majesty's policies of colonial conquest today.



If the expert on Israel, George, would actually visit Israel, he would see Arab doctors and nurses, such as the ones who treated my grandmother in Haifa, or Arab students and teachers, like ones who studied with my cousin at Hebrew University.  It's easy to scream "apartheid" while reading Wikipedia articles in one's apt., while never visiting the place that you have dedicated your life to bashing.


----------



## Bumberclyde

If Israel is the same as SA, then when is Israel going to give back the land they took from the natives?


----------



## ForeverYoung436

Bumberclyde said:


> If Israel is the same as SA, then when is Israel going to give back the land they took from the natives?



There are negotiations going on right now, but whenever Israel gives up any land, death follows.  Also, many ppl are of the opinion that Jews are the natives of the land, and Arabs from Arabia are the squatters.


----------



## Hossfly

ForeverYoung436 said:


> georgephillip said:
> 
> 
> 
> "While several political and historical comparisons between Israel and South Africa have been published, there has been no systematic legal analysis of Israeli apartheid as it affects all sectors of Palestinian society: Palestinians in the occupied territory, Palestinian citizens of Israel, and Palestinian refugees.
> 
> "This article is a work in progress which aims to provide a legal framework within which the applicability of the crime of apartheid to Israel can be discussed.
> 
> "It argues that the policies and practices of the Israeli government amount to apartheid against Palestinian nationals - wherever they are and whatever their legal status. Hence, Palestinian citizens of Israel, refugees, and those in the OPT are victims, albeit in different ways, of Israel's regime of apartheid.
> 
> While this article is limited to the applicability of the crime of apartheid, it does not negate nor contradict the fact that Israel's regime against the Palestinian people is also one of belligerent occupation and colonialism..."
> 
> Is Israel an Apartheid State?
> 
> The Zionist colonization of Palestine has always depended upon an "Iron Wall of bayonets" to discourage the indigenous Palestinian from effectively resisting the theft of their natural resources. The British supplied the initial bayonets for Zionist expansion and the US continues His Majesty's policies of colonial conquest today.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> If the expert on Israel, George, would actually visit Israel, he would see Arab doctors and nurses, such as the ones who treated my grandmother in Haifa, or Arab students and teachers, like ones who studied with my cousin at Hebrew University.  It's easy to scream "apartheid" while reading Wikipedia articles in one's apt., while never visiting the place that you have dedicated your life to bashing.
Click to expand...

I wonder how many "apartheid" screamers have read Michener's historical novel, The Covenant? It's a novel but Michener gives the best description, history and examples of the practice of apartheid one could find. I think the reason they wouldn't read it is because they are afraid of the truth and would have to amend and retract their unfounded charges. That's just my opinion.


----------



## peach174

Bumberclyde said:


> If Israel is the same as SA, then when is Israel going to give back the land they took from the natives?



The so called Natives as you call them took the land from the Israelis.
Arab Muslims invaded them and took the land from them.
Jews were there way before the religion of Islam.


----------



## Hossfly

Bumberclyde said:


> If Israel is the same as SA, then when is Israel going to give back the land they took from the natives?


They are not the same as SA, therefore the "natives" won't get their land back. Problem solved.


----------



## Bumberclyde

peach174 said:


> Bumberclyde said:
> 
> 
> 
> If Israel is the same as SA, then when is Israel going to give back the land they took from the natives?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The so called Natives as you call them took the land from the Israelis.
> Arab Muslims invaded them and took the land from them.
> Jews were there way before the religion of Islam.
Click to expand...


If Israel didn't displace any natives, then why do they need a law barring some people from returning?


----------



## RoccoR

Bumberclyde,

What is "SA?"  Who are the "natives?"  What piece of territory are you addressing?



Bumberclyde said:


> If Israel is the same as SA, then when is Israel going to give back the land they took from the natives?



Very Respectfully,
R


----------



## RoccoR

Bumberclyde,  _et al,_

Yes, good question.



Bumberclyde said:


> If Israel didn't displace any natives, then why do they need a law barring some people from returning?


*(COMMENT)*

This is somewhat of a reverse view.

Israeli law doesn't actually "bar" people from entering Israel.  What it does is outline who can enter and under what circumstances.

Almost all displaced persons have some grievance with the based on a perception of their claim.  That is why these are best negotiated out; or, subjected to legal adjudication.

However, these have not been methods the Palestinians have chosen in the past to avail themselves.  The history of their behaviors is that they choose the combative approach; very HAMAS like.

Most Respectfully,
R


----------



## Bumberclyde

RoccoR said:


> Bumberclyde,  _et al,_
> 
> Yes, good question.
> 
> 
> 
> Bumberclyde said:
> 
> 
> 
> If Israel didn't displace any natives, then why do they need a law barring some people from returning?
> 
> 
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> This is somewhat of a reverse view.
> 
> Israeli law doesn't actually "bar" people from entering Israel.  What it does is outline who can enter and under what circumstances.
> 
> Almost all displaced persons have some grievance with the based on a perception of their claim.  That is why these are best negotiated out; or, subjected to legal adjudication.
> 
> However, these have not been methods the Palestinians have chosen in the past to avail themselves.  The history of their behaviors is that they choose the combative approach; very HAMAS like.
> 
> Most Respectfully,
> R
Click to expand...


So your trying to say that Israel was created in a non-combative way? Really? Then go tell Pat Sajak that you want to buy a clue.


----------



## P F Tinmore

RoccoR said:


> P F Tinmore,  _et al,_
> 
> Here are the basic interrogatives.
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore.  _et al,_
> 
> Again, this is a HAMAS position, and not held in fact.
> 
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> It is hard to say who speaks for the Palestinian.
> 
> 
> 
> There is no voice for the Palestinian and not documented position other than the above.  Are you suggesting that the Palestinians have flip-flopped on the issue again?
> 
> Are you guessing at the Palestinian Position?  Or, do you have something you base it on.
> 
> The UN Position is quite clear.  It uses GA Resolution 181(II) as a basis for Resolution 273 (III) - Admission of Israel to membership in the United Nations; with declarations and explanations.
> 
> Most Respectfully,
> R
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> It is hard to say who speaks for the Palestinian.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Indeed, the PA was created by foreigners and imposed on Palestine.
> 
> Do they really speak for the Palestinians?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> *(QUESTION)*
> 
> 
> Who speaks for the Palestinians?
> Gaza
> West Bank
> Other Refugees
Click to expand...

Israel  No seriously. All the MSM outlets have their offices in Israel. All articles about Palestine are written in Israel. Only select information gets reported.



> Who does the Permanent UN Observer for Palestine Represent?


The PLO


> What validity does State of Palestine Have?
> 
> Borders?
> Government?
> How does it communicate?
> Does it have a Constitution of some foundation for the Government?
> Who is the leader (Head of State) for Palestine?
> Where is the seat of Government?
> 
> Self-Sustaining?


Palestine has had international borders since 1922.

Palestine is now under the Amended Basic Law of 2003. It defines the executive, legislative, and judicial branches. It has a bill of rights similar to, and in some instances more comprehensive than, the US constitution. It was written with the assistance of a US constitutional scholar.

There is a serious problem with leadership. The last legally constituted government was the unity government of March 2007. It was the model government in the ME.

The US and Israel did not like it. With the assistance of the US and Israel, Abbas attempted to overthrow the legal government. When this coup failed in Gaza in June of 2007, Abbas quit the government.

Again, with the help of the US and Israel Abbas set up an illegal government in the West Bank.


> Most Respectfully,
> R


----------



## toastman

Palestine has no internationally recognized borders. 
If they did, what are they ? Where are the agreements ?


----------



## toastman

List of sovereign states - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

* The proclaimed state has no agreed territorial borders, or effective control on the territory that it proclaimed*


----------



## P F Tinmore

RoccoR said:


> Bumberclyde,  _et al,_
> 
> Yes, good question.
> 
> 
> 
> Bumberclyde said:
> 
> 
> 
> If Israel didn't displace any natives, then why do they need a law barring some people from returning?
> 
> 
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> This is somewhat of a reverse view.
> 
> Israeli law doesn't actually "bar" people from entering Israel.  What it does is outline who can enter and under what circumstances.
> 
> Almost all displaced persons have some grievance with the based on a perception of their claim.  That is why these are best negotiated out; or, subjected to legal adjudication.
> 
> However, these have not been methods the Palestinians have chosen in the past to avail themselves.  The history of their behaviors is that they choose the combative approach; very HAMAS like.
> 
> Most Respectfully,
> R
Click to expand...


People who have homes in Israel cannot go home.

Why is that?


----------



## toastman

Because Right of Return is a pipe dream, that's why


----------



## Bumberclyde

toastman said:


> Because Right of Return is a pipe dream, that's why



Ya, like, who ever gave back stolen shit anyways?


----------



## ForeverYoung436

P F Tinmore said:


> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> 
> Bumberclyde,  _et al,_
> 
> Yes, good question.
> 
> 
> 
> Bumberclyde said:
> 
> 
> 
> If Israel didn't displace any natives, then why do they need a law barring some people from returning?
> 
> 
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> This is somewhat of a reverse view.
> 
> Israeli law doesn't actually "bar" people from entering Israel.  What it does is outline who can enter and under what circumstances.
> 
> Almost all displaced persons have some grievance with the based on a perception of their claim.  That is why these are best negotiated out; or, subjected to legal adjudication.
> 
> However, these have not been methods the Palestinians have chosen in the past to avail themselves.  The history of their behaviors is that they choose the combative approach; very HAMAS like.
> 
> Most Respectfully,
> R
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> People who have homes in Israel cannot go home.
> 
> Why is that?
Click to expand...


That is to be determined in negotiations.  The dad of a friend of mine was forced out of his home in Egypt, but he started a clothing store here in Brooklyn.  This friend now works in the media.  Like Tom Petty sang,  "You don't have to live like a refugee."  My parents were also once refugees, but they went on with their lives.


----------



## toastman

Bumberclyde said:


> toastman said:
> 
> 
> 
> Because Right of Return is a pipe dream, that's why
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Ya, like, who ever gave back stolen shit anyways?
Click to expand...


So you think the Israeli government will allow for Israel to be flooded with tens of thousands of Palestinians, many of who are likely very hostile towards Israel ?

I'm sure that won't cause any problems


----------



## toastman

toastman said:


> Palestine has no internationally recognized borders.
> If they did, what are they ? Where are the agreements ?



Anything Tinnie ?????


----------



## P F Tinmore

toastman said:


> toastman said:
> 
> 
> 
> Palestine has no internationally recognized borders.
> If they did, what are they ? Where are the agreements ?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Anything Tinnie ?????
Click to expand...


I have answered that many times.

You have been hanging out with MJB too much.


----------



## toastman

Liar. You answered nothing
What are Palestines current borders and where are the agreements? Im not talking about 1922


----------



## Bumberclyde

toastman said:


> Bumberclyde said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> toastman said:
> 
> 
> 
> Because Right of Return is a pipe dream, that's why
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Ya, like, who ever gave back stolen shit anyways?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> So you think the Israeli government will allow for Israel to be flooded with tens of thousands of Palestinians, many of who are likely very hostile towards Israel ?
> 
> I'm sure that won't cause any problems
Click to expand...


Maybe it's time for Israelis to ask themselves: why are these people SO pissed off that we have to pass a law not allowing them to return to their homes? Is it possibly time to make things right?


----------



## Hossfly

Bumberclyde said:


> toastman said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Bumberclyde said:
> 
> 
> 
> Ya, like, who ever gave back stolen shit anyways?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> So you think the Israeli government will allow for Israel to be flooded with tens of thousands of Palestinians, many of who are likely very hostile towards Israel ?
> 
> I'm sure that won't cause any problems
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Maybe it's time for Israelis to ask themselves: why are these people SO pissed off that we have to pass a law not allowing them to return to their homes? Is it possibly time to make things right?
Click to expand...

Who is this, really?


----------



## P F Tinmore

toastman said:


> Liar. You answered nothing
> What are Palestines current borders and where are the agreements? Im not talking about 1922



1922 is when the final international border was defined.

If you think those borders have been disputed, it is up to you to post those disputes.

If not they remain unchanged.


----------



## Hossfly

ForeverYoung436 said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> 
> Bumberclyde,  _et al,_
> 
> Yes, good question.
> 
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> This is somewhat of a reverse view.
> 
> Israeli law doesn't actually "bar" people from entering Israel.  What it does is outline who can enter and under what circumstances.
> 
> Almost all displaced persons have some grievance with the based on a perception of their claim.  That is why these are best negotiated out; or, subjected to legal adjudication.
> 
> However, these have not been methods the Palestinians have chosen in the past to avail themselves.  The history of their behaviors is that they choose the combative approach; very HAMAS like.
> 
> Most Respectfully,
> R
> 
> 
> 
> 
> People who have homes in Israel cannot go home.
> 
> Why is that?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> That is to be determined in negotiations.  The dad of a friend of mine was forced out of his home in Egypt, but he started a clothing store here in Brooklyn.  This friend now works in the media.  Like Tom Petty sang,  "You don't have to live like a refugee."  My parents were also once refugees, but they went on with their lives.
Click to expand...

Many people have been refugees.  There were millions and millions of displaced persons as a result of World War II, and they moved thousands of miles from their homes and had to learn a new language and a new culture.  Many of these people were very successful, whether they went to America, Canada or to countries south of our border.  Even today we have many refugees from all over the world, and I doubt most of them are wishing to go back to their origin country.  The main thing is that the "Palestinians" and the rest of the Muslim world want to flood Israel with Muslims so that they eventually can take over.  It is devastating to them that Jews should actually govern one tiny piece of land when it should belong to Muslims.


----------



## toastman

P F Tinmore said:


> toastman said:
> 
> 
> 
> Liar. You answered nothing
> What are Palestines current borders and where are the agreements? Im not talking about 1922
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 1922 is when the final international border was defined.
> 
> If you think those borders have been disputed, it is up to you to post those disputes.
> 
> If not they remain unchanged.
Click to expand...


I've showed you the agreements with Israel and Egypt as well as Israel and Jordan. Those agreements that gave Israel INTERNATIONALLY recognized borders were made well after 1922

Then theres the link I gave you that says Palestine has not internationally recognized territorial borders.
Back to the main question. What are Palestines current borders that you claim? Post them so we can have a look.


----------



## Hossfly

P F Tinmore said:


> toastman said:
> 
> 
> 
> Liar. You answered nothing
> What are Palestines current borders and where are the agreements? Im not talking about 1922
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 1922 is when the final international border was defined.
> 
> If you think those borders have been disputed, it is up to you to post those disputes.
> 
> If not they remain unchanged.
Click to expand...

No one is disputing the borders because they don't exist anymore. Why can't you accept reality? Why don't you contact your beloved UN and have them send you proof of the actual borders?


----------



## toastman

Funny think about Tinnie is that he says I'M the one who has to dispute what he said


----------



## toastman

Borders of Israel - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

*The Israel-Jordan Treaty of Peace was signed on October 26, 1994. The treaty resolved territorial and border issues that were ongoing since the 1948 war. The treaty specified and fully recognized the international border between Israel and Jordan. Upon its signing, the Jordan and Yarmouk Rivers, the Dead Sea, the Emek Ha'arva/Wadi Araba and the Gulf of Aqaba were officially designated as the borders between Israel and Jordan*

*The Israel-Egypt Peace Treaty, signed on March 26, 1979 created an officially recognized international border along the 1906 line, with Egypt renouncing all claims to the Gaza Strip*


----------



## P F Tinmore

toastman said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> toastman said:
> 
> 
> 
> Liar. You answered nothing
> What are Palestines current borders and where are the agreements? Im not talking about 1922
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 1922 is when the final international border was defined.
> 
> If you think those borders have been disputed, it is up to you to post those disputes.
> 
> If not they remain unchanged.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I've showed you the agreements with Israel and Egypt as well as Israel and Jordan. Those agreements that gave Israel INTERNATIONALLY recognized borders were made well after 1922
> 
> Then theres the link I gave you that says Palestine has not internationally recognized territorial borders.
> Back to the main question. What are Palestines current borders that you claim? Post them so we can have a look.
Click to expand...


You are still not posting any disputes. You only have say so. Show some documents saying that Palestine's borders were changed.


----------



## toastman

You havent even shown me what the borders are top begin with ??????????? So what is there to dispute

You have to be the all time worst debater on USMB


----------



## P F Tinmore

toastman said:


> Borders of Israel - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
> 
> *The Israel-Jordan Treaty of Peace was signed on October 26, 1994. The treaty resolved territorial and border issues that were ongoing since the 1948 war. The treaty specified and fully recognized the international border between Israel and Jordan. Upon its signing, the Jordan and Yarmouk Rivers, the Dead Sea, the Emek Ha'arva/Wadi Araba and the Gulf of Aqaba were officially designated as the borders between Israel and Jordan*
> 
> *The Israel-Egypt Peace Treaty, signed on March 26, 1979 created an officially recognized international border along the 1906 line, with Egypt renouncing all claims to the Gaza Strip*



Israel attempts to back door borders with treaties with third countries. It claims borders on land it has never legally acquired.


----------



## toastman

P F Tinmore said:


> toastman said:
> 
> 
> 
> Borders of Israel - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
> 
> *The Israel-Jordan Treaty of Peace was signed on October 26, 1994. The treaty resolved territorial and border issues that were ongoing since the 1948 war. The treaty specified and fully recognized the international border between Israel and Jordan. Upon its signing, the Jordan and Yarmouk Rivers, the Dead Sea, the Emek Ha'arva/Wadi Araba and the Gulf of Aqaba were officially designated as the borders between Israel and Jordan*
> 
> *The Israel-Egypt Peace Treaty, signed on March 26, 1979 created an officially recognized international border along the 1906 line, with Egypt renouncing all claims to the Gaza Strip*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Israel attempts to back door borders with treaties with third countries. It claims borders on land it has never legally acquired.
Click to expand...


It's not Israels claim genius. Those are agreements that are internationally recognized. You cannot dispute those.


----------



## P F Tinmore

toastman said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> toastman said:
> 
> 
> 
> Borders of Israel - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
> 
> *The Israel-Jordan Treaty of Peace was signed on October 26, 1994. The treaty resolved territorial and border issues that were ongoing since the 1948 war. The treaty specified and fully recognized the international border between Israel and Jordan. Upon its signing, the Jordan and Yarmouk Rivers, the Dead Sea, the Emek Ha'arva/Wadi Araba and the Gulf of Aqaba were officially designated as the borders between Israel and Jordan*
> 
> *The Israel-Egypt Peace Treaty, signed on March 26, 1979 created an officially recognized international border along the 1906 line, with Egypt renouncing all claims to the Gaza Strip*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Israel attempts to back door borders with treaties with third countries. It claims borders on land it has never legally acquired.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> It's not Israels claim genius. Those are agreements that are internationally recognized. You cannot dispute those.
Click to expand...


Why not? They are not true. When did Israel legally acquire the land it claims a border to?


----------



## toastman

P F Tinmore said:


> toastman said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> Israel attempts to back door borders with treaties with third countries. It claims borders on land it has never legally acquired.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> It's not Israels claim genius. Those are agreements that are internationally recognized. You cannot dispute those.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Why not? They are not true. When did Israel legally acquire the land it claims a border to?
Click to expand...


Deflection. You are blowing smoke. These are agreements that were signed by two countries. 
Where are the agreements between 'Palestine' and Egypt?
What about 'Palestine' and Jordan ???


----------



## RoccoR

P F Tinmore;  et al,

Well, this is a view that I don't necessarily agree with; but we can certainly discuss it.



P F Tinmore said:


> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore,  _et al,_
> 
> Here are the basic interrogatives.
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> Indeed, the PA was created by foreigners and imposed on Palestine.
> 
> Do they really speak for the Palestinians?
> 
> 
> 
> *(QUESTION)*
> 
> 
> Who speaks for the Palestinians?
> Gaza
> West Bank
> Other Refugees
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Israel  No seriously. All the MSM outlets have their offices in Israel. All articles about Palestine are written in Israel. Only select information gets reported.
Click to expand...

*(COMMENT)*


Middle East Newspapers and News Sites - World Newspapers

Broadcast Media: The Middle East and North Africa



P F Tinmore said:


> The PLO


*(COMMENT)*

Is not Mahmoud Abbas (Abu Mazen), the Chairman of the PLO?  



> What validity does State of Palestine Have?
> 
> Borders?
> Government?
> How does it communicate?
> Does it have a Constitution of some foundation for the Government?
> Who is the leader (Head of State) for Palestine?
> Where is the seat of Government?
> 
> Self-Sustaining?





P F Tinmore said:


> Palestine has had international borders since 1922.


*(COMMENT)*

There was no such country as Palestine.  In 1922, the territory was remanded into the custody and trusteeship of the Allied Powers and the League of Nations.  The boundaries for the Territory under the Mandate of Palestine were designated by the Allied Powers; in accordance with the Treaty.



P F Tinmore said:


> Palestine is now under the Amended Basic Law of 2003. It defines the executive, legislative, and judicial branches. It has a bill of rights similar to, and in some instances more comprehensive than, the US constitution. It was written with the assistance of a US constitutional scholar.


*(COMMENT)*

Reference:  THE PALESTINIAN BASIC LAW (PBL):

This *temporary Basic Law* draws its strength from the will of the Palestinian people, their firm rights, their continuous struggle and the exercise of their democratic right  as represented in the election of the President of the Palestinian National Authority and the members of the Palestinian Legislative Council  to commence the organization and establishment of a sound, democratic and legislative life in Palestine.​
2003 Amended Basic Law 
Amendment to the Basic Law in 2005

Yes, let's look at that.


Under The PBL Palestine is an Islamic.
Under The PBL, it follows Islamic Sharia (Law). 
Under The PBL, the principle of the rule of law (RoL) shall be the basis of government in Palestine.

This is a relatively young document, less than two Presidential terms old.  Already it is in conflict with the HAMAS Covenant and the PNA Charter.



			
				A/RES/2625(XXV) PRINCIPLES OF INTERNATIONAL LAW FRIENDLY RELATIONS AND CO-OPERATION said:
			
		

> (b) The principle that States shall settle their international disputes by peaceful means in such a manner that international peace and security and justice are not endangered,
> *.....          .....           .....           .....          .....           .....          .....          .....​*Every State has the duty to refrain from the threat or use of force to violate the existing international boundaries of another State or as a means of solving international
> disputes, including territorial disputes and problems concerning frontiers of States.
> 
> _*SOURCE:*_ http://www.unrol.org/files/3dda1f104.pdf
> OR
> http://www.un.org/ga/search/view_doc.asp?symbol=A/RES/2625(XXV)




Article 13 of Covanent:  There is no solution for the Palestinian question except through Jihad.
Article 9 of Charter: Armed struggle is the only way to liberate Palestine.



P F Tinmore said:


> There is a serious problem with leadership. The last legally constituted government was the unity government of March 2007. It was the model government in the ME.


*(COMMENT)*

Yes, well, there are few governments in the Middle East that change on schedule.  Abu Mazen's term should be ending soon.     



P F Tinmore said:


> The US and Israel did not like it. With the assistance of the US and Israel, Abbas attempted to overthrow the legal government. When this coup failed in Gaza in June of 2007, Abbas quit the government.
> 
> Again, with the help of the US and Israel Abbas set up an illegal government in the West Bank.


*(COMMENT)*

There is nothing that is illegal in that region of the world.  While I did not then, and do not now, exercise my vote in support of US Policy there, it was a consensus that HAMAS would be an obstruction to the peace process.  And that turned out to be more true than not.

Most Respectfully,
R


----------



## P F Tinmore

toastman said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> toastman said:
> 
> 
> 
> It's not Israels claim genius. Those are agreements that are internationally recognized. You cannot dispute those.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Why not? They are not true. When did Israel legally acquire the land it claims a border to?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Deflection. You are blowing smoke. These are agreements that were signed by two countries.
> Where are the agreements between 'Palestine' and Egypt?
> What about 'Palestine' and Jordan ???
Click to expand...




> 2. This withdrawal shall begin on the day after that which follows the signing of this Agreement, at 0500 hours GMT, and shall be beyond the* Egypt-Palestine frontier.*
> 
> . The road Taba-Qouseima-Auja shall not be employed by any military forces whatsoever for the purpose of* entering Palestine. *
> 
> The Avalon Project : Egyptian-Israeli General Armistice Agreement, February 24, 1949





> (d) In the sector from a point on the Dead Sea (MR 1925-0958) to the *southernmost tip of Palestine,* the Armistice Demarcation Line shall be determined...
> 
> The Avalon Project : Jordanian-Israeli General Armistice Agreement, April 3, 1949



Israel claims it has borders on that land. When did Israel legally acquire that land?


----------



## toastman

It's not just Israel. The borders are INTERNATIONALLY RECOGNIZED. You cannot dispute those treaties.


----------



## toastman

Egypt and Jordan also signed the treaties Tinmore. You really are not making sense . You cannot just claim that internationally recognized treaties are null. It doesn't work like that.


----------



## P F Tinmore

toastman said:


> Egypt and Jordan also signed the treaties Tinmore. You really are not making sense . You cannot just claim that internationally recognized treaties are null. It doesn't work like that.



Israel claims borders on land that is not theirs.

You can recognize that all you want.


----------



## toastman

P F Tinmore said:


> toastman said:
> 
> 
> 
> Egypt and Jordan also signed the treaties Tinmore. You really are not making sense . You cannot just claim that internationally recognized treaties are null. It doesn't work like that.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Israel claims borders on land that is not theirs.
> 
> You can recognize that all you want.
Click to expand...


INTERNATIONALLY RECOGNIZED BORDERS
Did you read the link or not ?


----------



## toastman

Are you trying to say the treaties are null ?


----------



## toastman

P F Tinmore said:


> toastman said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> Why not? They are not true. When did Israel legally acquire the land it claims a border to?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Deflection. You are blowing smoke. These are agreements that were signed by two countries.
> Where are the agreements between 'Palestine' and Egypt?
> What about 'Palestine' and Jordan ???
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 2. This withdrawal shall begin on the day after that which follows the signing of this Agreement, at 0500 hours GMT, and shall be beyond the* Egypt-Palestine frontier.*
> 
> . The road Taba-Qouseima-Auja shall not be employed by any military forces whatsoever for the purpose of* entering Palestine. *
> 
> The Avalon Project : Egyptian-Israeli General Armistice Agreement, February 24, 1949
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> (d) In the sector from a point on the Dead Sea (MR 1925-0958) to the *southernmost tip of Palestine,* the Armistice Demarcation Line shall be determined...
> 
> The Avalon Project : Jordanian-Israeli General Armistice Agreement, April 3, 1949
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Israel claims it has borders on that land. When did Israel legally acquire that land?
Click to expand...

It says 1949 /// The borders with Egypt were finalized in 1979
With Jordan in 1994

You have not provided ANY article or DOCUMENT that suggests those treaties are null . You have only provided you crappy opinion.


----------



## P F Tinmore

RoccoR said:


> P F Tinmore;  et al,
> 
> Well, this is a view that I don't necessarily agree with; but we can certainly discuss it.
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore,  _et al,_
> 
> Here are the basic interrogatives.
> 
> 
> *(QUESTION)*
> 
> 
> Who speaks for the Palestinians?
> Gaza
> West Bank
> Other Refugees
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Israel  No seriously. All the MSM outlets have their offices in Israel. All articles about Palestine are written in Israel. Only select information gets reported.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> 
> Middle East Newspapers and News Sites - World Newspapers
> 
> Broadcast Media: The Middle East and North Africa
> 
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> Is not Mahmoud Abbas (Abu Mazen), the Chairman of the PLO?
> 
> 
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> There was no such country as Palestine.  In 1922, the territory was remanded into the custody and trusteeship of the Allied Powers and the League of Nations.  The boundaries for the Territory under the Mandate of Palestine were designated by the Allied Powers; in accordance with the Treaty.
> 
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> Reference:  THE PALESTINIAN BASIC LAW (PBL):
> 
> This *temporary Basic Law* draws its strength from the will of the Palestinian people, their firm rights, their continuous struggle and the exercise of their democratic right  as represented in the election of the President of the Palestinian National Authority and the members of the Palestinian Legislative Council  to commence the organization and establishment of a sound, democratic and legislative life in Palestine.​
> 2003 Amended Basic Law
> Amendment to the Basic Law in 2005
> 
> Yes, let's look at that.
> 
> 
> Under The PBL Palestine is an Islamic.
> Under The PBL, it follows Islamic Sharia (Law).
> Under The PBL, the principle of the rule of law (RoL) shall be the basis of government in Palestine.
> 
> This is a relatively young document, less than two Presidential terms old.  Already it is in conflict with the HAMAS Covenant and the PNA Charter.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Article 13 of Covanent:  There is no solution for the Palestinian question except through Jihad.
> Article 9 of Charter: Armed struggle is the only way to liberate Palestine.
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> There is a serious problem with leadership. The last legally constituted government was the unity government of March 2007. It was the model government in the ME.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> Yes, well, there are few governments in the Middle East that change on schedule.  Abu Mazen's term should be ending soon.
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> The US and Israel did not like it. With the assistance of the US and Israel, Abbas attempted to overthrow the legal government. When this coup failed in Gaza in June of 2007, Abbas quit the government.
> 
> Again, with the help of the US and Israel Abbas set up an illegal government in the West Bank.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> There is nothing that is illegal in that region of the world.  While I did not then, and do not now, exercise my vote in support of US Policy there, it was a consensus that HAMAS would be an obstruction to the peace process.  And that turned out to be more true than not.
> 
> Most Respectfully,
> R
Click to expand...




> There is nothing that is illegal in that region of the world.



Indeed, that explains the content of your posts.


----------



## P F Tinmore

toastman said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> toastman said:
> 
> 
> 
> Deflection. You are blowing smoke. These are agreements that were signed by two countries.
> Where are the agreements between 'Palestine' and Egypt?
> What about 'Palestine' and Jordan ???
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> (d) In the sector from a point on the Dead Sea (MR 1925-0958) to the *southernmost tip of Palestine,* the Armistice Demarcation Line shall be determined...
> 
> The Avalon Project : Jordanian-Israeli General Armistice Agreement, April 3, 1949
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Israel claims it has borders on that land. When did Israel legally acquire that land?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> It says 1949 /// The borders with Egypt were finalized in 1979
> With Jordan in 1994
> 
> You have not provided ANY article or DOCUMENT that suggests those treaties are null . You have only provided you crappy opinion.
Click to expand...




> The Legacy of Undefined Borders, Tel Aviv Notes No. 40, June 5, 2002
> Kumaraswamy, P. R.
> 
> We are the only country in the world without a border,...
> 
> http://www.inss.org.il/publications.php?cat=21&incat=&read=203



It is not just my opinion.


----------



## toastman

I already showed you the treaties that gave Israel borders. Sorry, you cannot dispute those.


----------



## P F Tinmore

toastman said:


> I already showed you the treaties that gave Israel borders. Sorry, you cannot dispute those.



Egypt and Jordan have the authority to give borders to Israel?


----------



## toastman

P F Tinmore said:


> toastman said:
> 
> 
> 
> I already showed you the treaties that gave Israel borders. Sorry, you cannot dispute those.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Egypt and Jordan have the authority to give borders to Israel?
Click to expand...


It gave BOTH of them borders between each other. 
Stop blabbering ans show me some evidence that those borders are non existent


----------



## P F Tinmore

toastman said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> toastman said:
> 
> 
> 
> I already showed you the treaties that gave Israel borders. Sorry, you cannot dispute those.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Egypt and Jordan have the authority to give borders to Israel?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> It gave BOTH of them borders between each other.
> Stop blabbering ans show me some evidence that those borders are non existent
Click to expand...


Show me how Israel can claim borders on land that is not theirs.


----------



## toastman

P F Tinmore said:


> toastman said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> Egypt and Jordan have the authority to give borders to Israel?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> It gave BOTH of them borders between each other.
> Stop blabbering ans show me some evidence that those borders are non existent
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Show me how Israel can claim borders on land that is not theirs.
Click to expand...


The land is theirs. You can dispute that the West Bank sin;t theirs, but everything else is ISraels land.
Now, back to my original question which you have been avoiding. Shoe me an article that suggests the borders are non existent, even though the treaties gave them internationally recognized borders


----------



## P F Tinmore

toastman said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> toastman said:
> 
> 
> 
> It gave BOTH of them borders between each other.
> Stop blabbering ans show me some evidence that those borders are non existent
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Show me how Israel can claim borders on land that is not theirs.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> The land is theirs. You can dispute that the West Bank sin;t theirs, but everything else is ISraels land.
> Now, back to my original question which you have been avoiding. Shoe me an article that suggests the borders are non existent, even though the treaties gave them internationally recognized borders
Click to expand...




> The land is theirs.



And you can document that, right?


----------



## toastman

Document that the land is theirs ?? Well just look at a map..


----------



## Hossfly

P F Tinmore said:


> toastman said:
> 
> 
> 
> Egypt and Jordan also signed the treaties Tinmore. You really are not making sense . You cannot just claim that internationally recognized treaties are null. It doesn't work like that.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Israel claims borders on land that is not theirs.
> 
> You can recognize that all you want.
Click to expand...

Here are he Palestine Territories recognized by the UN.  What's wrong with them?


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Palestinian_territories


----------



## RoccoR

P F Tinmore,  _et al,_

Yes, interesting question.



P F Tinmore said:


> toastman said:
> 
> 
> 
> I already showed you the treaties that gave Israel borders. Sorry, you cannot dispute those.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Egypt and Jordan have the authority to give borders to Israel?
Click to expand...

*(COMMENT)*

Both Egypt and Israel were sovereign entities.  The Palestinians rejected sovereignty un the Partition Plan and rejected the use of non-violent means to resolve territorial differences; opting for war.  

Two sovereign nations made a Treaty.  Palestine, not opting to follow the Rule of Law, was not involved.

You are asking the wrong question.  It is not about "who gave them authority."  It is about the right of two sovereign nations to enter into friendly relations and agreements.  Palestinians, not being sovereign or having sovereignty over any territory, had no right to interfere.

You have the question backwards.  Who gave the Palestinians any authority to do anything that they did not already reject?  

At some point, the Palestinians have to accept the consequences for their actions.  They need to quit blaming everybody else and start building a nation of peace instead of a Jihadist supporting government.

Most Respectfully,
R


----------



## fairandbalanced

My son and his new wife just arrived from a monthlong of honeymooning in Africa. He told me about how the white businesses abandoned downtown Pretoria after "infestation" by blacks and built their own black free downtown, and the rampant reversed racism. Now tell me where in Israel such segregation exists based on  race or color or religion. Those who keep comparing Israel with S. Africa have no clue WTH they are talking about.


----------



## Hossfly

fairandbalanced said:


> My son and his new wife just arrived from a monthlong of honeymooning in Africa. He told me about how the white businesses abandoned downtown Pretoria after "infestation" by blacks and built their own black free downtown, and the rampant reversed racism. Now tell me where in Israel such segregation exists based on  race or color or religion. Those who keep comparing Israel with S. Africa have no clue WTH they are talking about.


And imagine how no Jews are wanted in a Palestine State!!!

Palestine: No Jews allowed! - Israel Today | Israel News


----------



## Bumberclyde

Hossfly said:


> fairandbalanced said:
> 
> 
> 
> My son and his new wife just arrived from a monthlong of honeymooning in Africa. He told me about how the white businesses abandoned downtown Pretoria after "infestation" by blacks and built their own black free downtown, and the rampant reversed racism. Now tell me where in Israel such segregation exists based on  race or color or religion. Those who keep comparing Israel with S. Africa have no clue WTH they are talking about.
> 
> 
> 
> And imagine how no Jews are wanted in a Palestine State!!!
> 
> Palestine: No Jews allowed! - Israel Today | Israel News
Click to expand...


Jews have shown that they don't want to live with arabs anyways. So my question would be: what the fuck are they doing in palestine in the first place if they hate arabs so much?


----------



## Hossfly

Bumberclyde said:


> Hossfly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> fairandbalanced said:
> 
> 
> 
> My son and his new wife just arrived from a monthlong of honeymooning in Africa. He told me about how the white businesses abandoned downtown Pretoria after "infestation" by blacks and built their own black free downtown, and the rampant reversed racism. Now tell me where in Israel such segregation exists based on  race or color or religion. Those who keep comparing Israel with S. Africa have no clue WTH they are talking about.
> 
> 
> 
> And imagine how no Jews are wanted in a Palestine State!!!
> 
> Palestine: No Jews allowed! - Israel Today | Israel News
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Jews have shown that they don't want to live with arabs anyways. So my question would be: what the fuck are they doing in palestine in the first place if they hate arabs so much?
Click to expand...

Who told you that fairy tale?


----------



## Hossfly

Bumberclyde said:


> Hossfly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> fairandbalanced said:
> 
> 
> 
> My son and his new wife just arrived from a monthlong of honeymooning in Africa. He told me about how the white businesses abandoned downtown Pretoria after "infestation" by blacks and built their own black free downtown, and the rampant reversed racism. Now tell me where in Israel such segregation exists based on  race or color or religion. Those who keep comparing Israel with S. Africa have no clue WTH they are talking about.
> 
> 
> 
> And imagine how no Jews are wanted in a Palestine State!!!
> 
> Palestine: No Jews allowed! - Israel Today | Israel News
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Jews have shown that they don't want to live with arabs anyways. So my question would be: what the fuck are they doing in palestine in the first place if they hate arabs so much?
Click to expand...

Do you really have a big problem with where some Jews might want to live?  If you have a problem with where people want to live, why not ask some Christians and Hindus living in Pakistan why they still live there even though they are harassed and murdered by Muslims?  By the way, there are many Arabs in Israel who are working alongside of Jews and each side doesn't care who their working partners are.  I doubt very much that a Jew in Israel is telling his boss that he doesn't want to work with an Arab.  Maybe it is  you who would have a problem working with and living among Jews.


----------



## toastman

Bumberclyde said:


> Hossfly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> fairandbalanced said:
> 
> 
> 
> My son and his new wife just arrived from a monthlong of honeymooning in Africa. He told me about how the white businesses abandoned downtown Pretoria after "infestation" by blacks and built their own black free downtown, and the rampant reversed racism. Now tell me where in Israel such segregation exists based on  race or color or religion. Those who keep comparing Israel with S. Africa have no clue WTH they are talking about.
> 
> 
> 
> And imagine how no Jews are wanted in a Palestine State!!!
> 
> Palestine: No Jews allowed! - Israel Today | Israel News
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Jews have shown that they don't want to live with arabs anyways. So my question would be: what the fuck are they doing in palestine in the first place if they hate arabs so much?
Click to expand...


Massive lie.
Yes, there are some extremists Jews who'd rather Israel be Arab free, but Jews as a whole do not feel that way. Take it from someone like me who's entire family lives in Israel and has been there over ten times. 

And when you say Palestine, are you referring to the West Bank


----------



## Bloodrock44

Bumberclyde said:


> Hossfly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> fairandbalanced said:
> 
> 
> 
> My son and his new wife just arrived from a monthlong of honeymooning in Africa. He told me about how the white businesses abandoned downtown Pretoria after "infestation" by blacks and built their own black free downtown, and the rampant reversed racism. Now tell me where in Israel such segregation exists based on  race or color or religion. Those who keep comparing Israel with S. Africa have no clue WTH they are talking about.
> 
> 
> 
> And imagine how no Jews are wanted in a Palestine State!!!
> 
> Palestine: No Jews allowed! - Israel Today | Israel News
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Jews have shown that they don't want to live with arabs anyways. So my question would be: what the fuck are they doing in palestine in the first place if they hate arabs so much?
Click to expand...


They are  there to irritate you.


----------



## georgephillip

ForeverYoung436 said:


> georgephillip said:
> 
> 
> 
> "While several political and historical comparisons between Israel and South Africa have been published, there has been no systematic legal analysis of Israeli apartheid as it affects all sectors of Palestinian society: Palestinians in the occupied territory, Palestinian citizens of Israel, and Palestinian refugees.
> 
> "This article is a work in progress which aims to provide a legal framework within which the applicability of the crime of apartheid to Israel can be discussed.
> 
> "It argues that the policies and practices of the Israeli government amount to apartheid against Palestinian nationals - wherever they are and whatever their legal status. Hence, Palestinian citizens of Israel, refugees, and those in the OPT are victims, albeit in different ways, of Israel's regime of apartheid.
> 
> While this article is limited to the applicability of the crime of apartheid, it does not negate nor contradict the fact that Israel's regime against the Palestinian people is also one of belligerent occupation and colonialism..."
> 
> Is Israel an Apartheid State?
> 
> The Zionist colonization of Palestine has always depended upon an "Iron Wall of bayonets" to discourage the indigenous Palestinian from effectively resisting the theft of their natural resources. The British supplied the initial bayonets for Zionist expansion and the US continues His Majesty's policies of colonial conquest today.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> If the expert on Israel, George, would actually visit Israel, he would see Arab doctors and nurses, such as the ones who treated my grandmother in Haifa, or Arab students and teachers, like ones who studied with my cousin at Hebrew University.  It's easy to scream "apartheid" while reading Wikipedia articles in one's apt., while never visiting the place that you have dedicated your life to bashing.
Click to expand...


George isn't an expert of North Korea either. (don't laugh; polls in some parts of the world reveal the Jewish state and the Hermit kingdom are almost equally despised).
Human Rights Watch claims there are separate and inferior schools for Arabs inside Israel:

" In 2001, Human Rights Watch reported that one in four of Israel's 1.6 million schoolchildren is educated in a completely separate public school system. 

"The report stated that 'Palestinian Arab children attend schools with larger classes and fewer teachers than do those in the Jewish school system, with some children having to travel long distances to reach the nearest school. Arab schools also contrast dramatically with the larger system in their frequent lack of basic learning facilities like libraries, computers, science laboratories, and even recreation space'"

Is Israel an Apartheid State?

400,000 Israeli children find it much harder to reach Hebrew University based simply on their ethnicity. That sounds like apartheid in any apartment beyond the Green Line.


----------



## georgephillip

Bumberclyde said:


> If Israel is the same as SA, then when is Israel going to give back the land they took from the natives?



"In 1986  about 40 years after the beginning of Apartheid  South Africas most important trading partners (the USA, the EC, and Japan) imposed economic sanctions. During the course of the 
1985 debt crisis, the time seemed to have arrived to finally force the Apartheid regime to its 
knees by economic sanctions. Switzerland did not abide by the sanctions. The study examines if 
the fact that Switzerland did not take part in official economic sanctions delayed the political 
transformation of South Africa."

http://www.snf.ch/SiteCollectionDocuments/nfp/nfp42p/nfp42p_staehelin-e.pdf

Only when the Jewish state's economy screams the way South Africa's did will the Jews finally decide to trade land for peace (and prosperity)


----------



## Kondor3

Is Israel the same as South Africa?

No.


----------



## Bumberclyde

Kondor3 said:


> Is Israel the same as South Africa?
> 
> No.



If it was, then the Jews would have 1) attacked it, 2) occupied their land, and 3) give it back when they realized that they would never get away with it.

So far Israel has only done 1) and 2).


----------



## toastman

Israel tried to give back the West Bank in 1967, 2000 (95%) and in 2008 (93%)


----------



## P F Tinmore

toastman said:


> Israel tried to give back the West Bank in 1967, 2000 (95%) and in 2008 (93%)



Why not all of it?


----------



## P F Tinmore

RoccoR said:


> P F Tinmore,  _et al,_
> 
> Yes, interesting question.
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> toastman said:
> 
> 
> 
> I already showed you the treaties that gave Israel borders. Sorry, you cannot dispute those.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Egypt and Jordan have the authority to give borders to Israel?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> Both Egypt and Israel were sovereign entities.  The Palestinians rejected sovereignty un the Partition Plan and rejected the use of non-violent means to resolve territorial differences; opting for war.
> 
> Two sovereign nations made a Treaty.  Palestine, not opting to follow the Rule of Law, was not involved.
> 
> You are asking the wrong question.  It is not about "who gave them authority."  It is about the right of two sovereign nations to enter into friendly relations and agreements.  Palestinians, not being sovereign or having sovereignty over any territory, had no right to interfere.
> 
> You have the question backwards.  Who gave the Palestinians any authority to do anything that they did not already reject?
> 
> At some point, the Palestinians have to accept the consequences for their actions.  They need to quit blaming everybody else and start building a nation of peace instead of a Jihadist supporting government.
> 
> Most Respectfully,
> R
Click to expand...




> The Palestinians rejected sovereignty...



Of course that is a lie, but go ahead keep pimping it.


----------



## toastman

P F Tinmore said:


> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore,  _et al,_
> 
> Yes, interesting question.
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> Egypt and Jordan have the authority to give borders to Israel?
> 
> 
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> Both Egypt and Israel were sovereign entities.  The Palestinians rejected sovereignty un the Partition Plan and rejected the use of non-violent means to resolve territorial differences; opting for war.
> 
> Two sovereign nations made a Treaty.  Palestine, not opting to follow the Rule of Law, was not involved.
> 
> You are asking the wrong question.  It is not about "who gave them authority."  It is about the right of two sovereign nations to enter into friendly relations and agreements.  Palestinians, not being sovereign or having sovereignty over any territory, had no right to interfere.
> 
> You have the question backwards.  Who gave the Palestinians any authority to do anything that they did not already reject?
> 
> At some point, the Palestinians have to accept the consequences for their actions.  They need to quit blaming everybody else and start building a nation of peace instead of a Jihadist supporting government.
> 
> Most Respectfully,
> R
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Palestinians rejected sovereignty...
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Of course that is a lie, but go ahead keep pimping it.
Click to expand...


Would the UN Partition plan have given them sovereignty ? Yes
Did they reject it? Yes


----------



## P F Tinmore

toastman said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore,  _et al,_
> 
> Yes, interesting question.
> 
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> Both Egypt and Israel were sovereign entities.  The Palestinians rejected sovereignty un the Partition Plan and rejected the use of non-violent means to resolve territorial differences; opting for war.
> 
> Two sovereign nations made a Treaty.  Palestine, not opting to follow the Rule of Law, was not involved.
> 
> You are asking the wrong question.  It is not about "who gave them authority."  It is about the right of two sovereign nations to enter into friendly relations and agreements.  Palestinians, not being sovereign or having sovereignty over any territory, had no right to interfere.
> 
> You have the question backwards.  Who gave the Palestinians any authority to do anything that they did not already reject?
> 
> At some point, the Palestinians have to accept the consequences for their actions.  They need to quit blaming everybody else and start building a nation of peace instead of a Jihadist supporting government.
> 
> Most Respectfully,
> R
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Palestinians rejected sovereignty...
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Of course that is a lie, but go ahead keep pimping it.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Would the UN Partition plan have given them sovereignty ? Yes
> Did they reject it? Yes
Click to expand...


The UN cannot give sovereignty.


----------



## toastman

P F Tinmore said:


> toastman said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> Of course that is a lie, but go ahead keep pimping it.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Would the UN Partition plan have given them sovereignty ? Yes
> Did they reject it? Yes
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> The UN cannot give sovereignty.
Click to expand...


Had the Palestinian Arabs accepted the PArtition plan, would they have had their own state and sovereignty ????


----------



## P F Tinmore

toastman said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> toastman said:
> 
> 
> 
> Would the UN Partition plan have given them sovereignty ? Yes
> Did they reject it? Yes
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The UN cannot give sovereignty.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Had the Palestinian Arabs accepted the PArtition plan, would they have had their own state and sovereignty ????
Click to expand...


Sovereignty is independent from the UN.


----------



## toastman

Had the Palestinians accepted the Partition plan, would they have had their own state and sovereignty ??


----------



## georgephillip

toastman said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> toastman said:
> 
> 
> 
> Would the UN Partition plan have given them sovereignty ? Yes
> Did they reject it? Yes
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The UN cannot give sovereignty.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Had the Palestinian Arabs accepted the PArtition plan, would they have had their own state and sovereignty ????
Click to expand...


Why would 1.2 million Arabs agree with the UN's decision to give 55% of Mandate Palestine to 650,000 (mostly) European Jews?


----------



## P F Tinmore

toastman said:


> Had the Palestinians accepted the Partition plan, would they have had their own state and sovereignty ??



Perhaps, but it was not necessary.


----------



## toastman

P F Tinmore said:


> toastman said:
> 
> 
> 
> Had the Palestinians accepted the Partition plan, would they have had their own state and sovereignty ??
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Perhaps, but it was not necessary.
Click to expand...


Not perhaps . The answer is yes


----------



## toastman

georgephillip said:


> toastman said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> The UN cannot give sovereignty.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Had the Palestinian Arabs accepted the PArtition plan, would they have had their own state and sovereignty ????
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Why would 1.2 million Arabs agree with the UN's decision to give 55% of Mandate Palestine to 650,000 (mostly) European Jews?
Click to expand...


Because the British captured the land during WW1, not the Palestinians


----------



## P F Tinmore

toastman said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> toastman said:
> 
> 
> 
> Had the Palestinians accepted the Partition plan, would they have had their own state and sovereignty ??
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Perhaps, but it was not necessary.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Not perhaps . The answer is yes
Click to expand...


How many sovereign states were created by UN resolution?


----------



## toastman

Abbas: Arabs erred in rejecting 1947 partition plan | JPost | Israel News

*Abbas: Arabs erred in rejecting 1947 partition plan *


----------



## toastman

P F Tinmore said:


> toastman said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> Perhaps, but it was not necessary.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Not perhaps . The answer is yes
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> How many sovereign states were created by UN resolution?
Click to expand...


What does that have to do with anything ? We're talking about the British Mandate of Palestine


----------



## P F Tinmore

toastman said:


> georgephillip said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> toastman said:
> 
> 
> 
> Had the Palestinian Arabs accepted the PArtition plan, would they have had their own state and sovereignty ????
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Why would 1.2 million Arabs agree with the UN's decision to give 55% of Mandate Palestine to 650,000 (mostly) European Jews?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Because the British captured the land during WW1, not the Palestinians
Click to expand...


Britain never annexed or otherwise claimed ownership of Palestine.


----------



## georgephillip

toastman said:


> georgephillip said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> toastman said:
> 
> 
> 
> Had the Palestinian Arabs accepted the PArtition plan, would they have had their own state and sovereignty ????
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Why would 1.2 million Arabs agree with the UN's decision to give 55% of Mandate Palestine to 650,000 (mostly) European Jews?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Because the British captured the land during WW1, not the Palestinians
Click to expand...


How many Jews lived on the land captured by the British after WWI?
How many Arabs?
Why do racists always object to self-determination at the ballot box?


----------



## P F Tinmore

toastman said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> toastman said:
> 
> 
> 
> Not perhaps . The answer is yes
> 
> 
> 
> 
> How many sovereign states were created by UN resolution?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> What does that have to do with anything ? We're talking about the British Mandate of Palestine
Click to expand...


What does that matter? The mandate was to render administrative assistance and advice to Palestine.


----------



## RoccoR

toastman, P F Tinmore,  _et al,_

In a way, P F Tinmore is correct.  Sovereignty is a state of being by the people.



toastman said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> toastman said:
> 
> 
> 
> Would the UN Partition plan have given them sovereignty ? Yes
> Did they reject it? Yes
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The UN cannot give sovereignty.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Had the Palestinian Arabs accepted the PArtition plan, would they have had their own state and sovereignty ????
Click to expand...

*(COMMENT)*

The answer is: YES  Had the Arab-Palestinians accepted the provisions of the Partition Plan in GA Resolution 181(II), the UN would have (in effect) granted independence from the trusteeship and Mandate.  In fact, they would have had more land then just the Gaza Strip and West Bank  (See Map Annex A).

The "Arab State" would have been as outlined in Part II Boundaries - Section "A".

Most Respectfully,
R


----------



## P F Tinmore

RoccoR said:


> toastman, P F Tinmore,  _et al,_
> 
> In a way, P F Tinmore is correct.  Sovereignty is a state of being by the people.
> 
> 
> 
> toastman said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> The UN cannot give sovereignty.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Had the Palestinian Arabs accepted the PArtition plan, would they have had their own state and sovereignty ????
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> The answer is: YES  Had the Arab-Palestinians accepted the provisions of the Partition Plan in GA Resolution 181(II), the UN would have (in effect) granted independence from the trusteeship and Mandate.  In fact, they would have had more land then just the Gaza Strip and West Bank  (See Map Annex A).
> 
> The "Arab State" would have been as outlined in Part II Boundaries - Section "A".
> 
> Most Respectfully,
> R
Click to expand...




> In a way, P F Tinmore is correct. Sovereignty is a state of being by the people.



That is correct. Sovereignty is the inherent right of the native people.

Occupation does not negate rights. It merely temporarily denies the exercise of rights.


----------



## Kondor3

Have we figured out yet that Old Legalities favoring Party B don't mean a damned thing, when Party A has been in possession of the land for 65 years, and is 1,000 times stronger than Party B, and when Party A is backed by Party C, which is 1,000 times stronger than Party A?

The Arab-Muslim Palestinians of the West Bank and Gaza would be far better off, packing their belongings and heading for greener pastures, outside of what very little is left of scattered, fragmented Rump Palestine.

There is no future nor happiness to be found for the Arab-Muslim Palestinians in that unhappy place.

Consequently, it's time to move elsewhere, to begin new lives, and to create a future for themselves that will be denied them should they prove foolish enough to remain where they are for another 65 years.

"_The definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results each time._"

Time to wake-up and smell the coffee, Palestinians.


----------



## RoccoR

P F Tinmore, toastman,  _et al,_

P F Tinmore is partly correct.



P F Tinmore said:


> toastman said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> georgephillip said:
> 
> 
> 
> Why would 1.2 million Arabs agree with the UN's decision to give 55% of Mandate Palestine to 650,000 (mostly) European Jews?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Because the British captured the land during WW1, not the Palestinians
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Britain never annexed or otherwise claimed ownership of Palestine.
Click to expand...

*(COMMENT)*

Again, this is the Palestinian version of the truth.  The reality is (rounded off):

77% went to form the Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan.
13% went to form the State of Israel.
10% went to form the Partition for the rejected Arab State.
The Allied Powers _(mostly UK/FR/Arab Bedouins irregulars)_ secured the Middle East during WWI.  At the 1920, San Remo Convention, the Allied Powers on the intent, purpose and language to be used in the in the Treaty of Sevres and the Mandate of Palestine.

The entire territory was relinquished by the Turks from the Ottoman Empire to the Allied Powers in trusteeship.  _(Part III of the Treaty.)_  By the time the War ended, the Allied Forces _(UK/FR/Arab Bedouins irregulars)_ had militarily secured the entire region.  For the UK side, General Allenby had already begun reporting on the territorial administration as of the 1st JULY, 1920; which "included in the area of the Palestine Mandate was the territory of Trans-Jordania (Report Part X).  This was pursuant and IAW the San Remo outline _(made three months prior)_ and prior to the formalization of the Mandate.

Most Respectfully,
R


----------



## P F Tinmore

RoccoR said:


> P F Tinmore, toastman,  _et al,_
> 
> P F Tinmore is partly correct.
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> toastman said:
> 
> 
> 
> Because the British captured the land during WW1, not the Palestinians
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Britain never annexed or otherwise claimed ownership of Palestine.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> Again, this is the Palestinian version of the truth.  The reality is (rounded off):
> 
> 77% went to form the Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan.
> 13% went to form the State of Israel.
> 10% went to form the Partition for the rejected Arab State.
> The Allied Powers _(mostly UK/FR/Arab Bedouins irregulars)_ secured the Middle East during WWI.  At the 1920, San Remo Convention, the Allied Powers on the intent, purpose and language to be used in the in the Treaty of Sevres and the Mandate of Palestine.
> 
> The entire territory was relinquished by the Turks from the Ottoman Empire to the Allied Powers in trusteeship.  _(Part III of the Treaty.)_  By the time the War ended, the Allied Forces _(UK/FR/Arab Bedouins irregulars)_ had militarily secured the entire region.  For the UK side, General Allenby had already begun reporting on the territorial administration as of the 1st JULY, 1920; which "included in the area of the Palestine Mandate was the territory of Trans-Jordania (Report Part X).  This was pursuant and IAW the San Remo outline _(made three months prior)_ and prior to the formalization of the Mandate.
> 
> Most Respectfully,
> R
Click to expand...


And the relevance of all that is?


----------



## RoccoR

P F Tinmore,

Just making sure the record is complete.



P F Tinmore said:


> And the relevance of all that is?


*(COMMENT)*

We would not want unsuspecting readers to believe that a disproportionate distribution of territory was made, or that the Mandatory did not have cognizant authority over Palestine.

v/r
R


----------



## Kondor3

georgephillip said:


> "..._Why would 1.2 million Arabs agree with the UN's decision to give 55% of Mandate Palestine to 650,000 (mostly) European Jews?_"


*Their consent was not deemed necessary* at the time by either the victorious Allied Powers who seized the land from the Ottoman Empire nor by the League of Nations.

The Arabs of Palestine were merely conquered subjects of the Ottoman Empire with no clear-cut national identity nor autonomy nor sovereignty of their own and they were (rightfully) judged as unorganized (in a political and national sense) and politically and socially incompetent to govern themselves as a sovereignty in the modern world.

So the people in charge of the region divvied-up the place and carved off a big slice for far more civilized immigrant-folk who showed some potential for turning the place into something worthwhile and productive for the first time in centuries.

It was the misfortune of the disorganized, disjointed tribal folk of the region in those former times to have never evolved (politically and socially) to a self-governing state or to have degenerated into such a state so as to make themselves vulnerable to such treatment by powers and peoples far more advanced and sophisticated than themselves.

Their descendants are still paying a price for that, although the end-game is fast approaching, as the last of them are being squeezed off their land and forced to move elsewhere.

It need not have come to that, and their Adversaries were still open to talks of a serious political settlement, right up to the time of the 1967 war, but, as usual, the Palestinians never miss an opportunity to miss an opportunity, and the moment passed - major concessions by the Israelis are off the table, and have been, since 1967 - and, from their perspective, rightfully so.

Next time, don't pick a fight alongside lying Arab neighbors who promise mountains (Redemption) but deliver molehills (defeat) - 1948, 1967, 1973 - and expect to emerge intact.

Vae victus.

Karma is a bitch.

Perhaps in the Next Life the Palestinians won't allow themselves to degenerate and disintegrate so badly that they are considered politically incompetent and have Empires and Mandates and Leagues making decisions for them like children.

But that's the fate they're stuck with, in this life.

It's over... time for the Palestinians to emmigrate, and move on with their lives and futures, someplace else, where they stand some chance of finding peace and happiness.

After 65 years, the world at-large is bloody sick-and-tired of listening to this shit over a sliver of land in a corner of the Med.

The world at-large just wants this to be over with, one way or the other, and the sooner the better.

The Israelis understand this as well.

Consolidation and mop-up operations continue.


----------



## P F Tinmore

Kondor3 said:


> georgephillip said:
> 
> 
> 
> "..._Why would 1.2 million Arabs agree with the UN's decision to give 55% of Mandate Palestine to 650,000 (mostly) European Jews?_"
> 
> 
> 
> *Their consent was not deemed necessary* at the time by either the victorious Allied Powers who seized the land from the Ottoman Empire nor by the League of Nations.
> 
> The Arabs of Palestine were merely conquered subjects of the Ottoman Empire with no clear-cut national identity nor autonomy nor sovereignty of their own and they were (rightfully) judged as unorganized (in a political and national sense) and politically and socially incompetent to govern themselves as a sovereignty in the modern world.
> 
> So the people in charge of the region divvied-up the place and carved off a big slice for far more civilized immigrant-folk who showed some potential for turning the place into something worthwhile and productive for the first time in centuries.
> 
> It was the misfortune of the disorganized, disjointed tribal folk of the region in those former times to have never evolved (politically and socially) to a self-governing state or to have degenerated into such a state so as to make themselves vulnerable to such treatment by powers and peoples far more advanced and sophisticated than themselves.
> 
> Their descendants are still paying a price for that, although the end-game is fast approaching, as the last of them are being squeezed off their land and forced to move elsewhere.
> 
> It need not have come to that, and their Adversaries were still open to talks of a serious political settlement, right up to the time of the 1967 war, but, as usual, the Palestinians never miss an opportunity to miss an opportunity, and the moment passed - major concessions by the Israelis are off the table, and have been, since 1967 - and, from their perspective, rightfully so.
> 
> Next time, don't pick a fight alongside lying Arab neighbors who promise mountains (Redemption) but deliver molehills (defeat) - 1948, 1967, 1973 - and expect to emerge intact.
> 
> Vae victus.
> 
> Karma is a bitch.
> 
> Perhaps in the Next Life the Palestinians won't allow themselves to degenerate and disintegrate so badly that they are considered politically incompetent and have Empires and Mandates and Leagues making decisions for them like children.
> 
> But that's the fate they're stuck with, in this life.
> 
> It's over... time for the Palestinians to emmigrate, and move on with their lives and futures, someplace else, where they stand some chance of finding peace and happiness.
> 
> After 65 years, the world at-large is bloody sick-and-tired of listening to this shit over a sliver of land in a corner of the Med.
> 
> The world at-large just wants this to be over with, one way or the other, and the sooner the better.
> 
> The Israelis understand this as well.
> 
> Consolidation and mop-up operations continue.
Click to expand...


Their consent was necessary. The plan was not to be implemented without the consent of the Palestinians.

The Palestinians rejected the plan so it was not implemented.


----------



## P F Tinmore

RoccoR said:


> P F Tinmore,
> 
> Just making sure the record is complete.
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> And the relevance of all that is?
> 
> 
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> We would not want unsuspecting readers to believe that a disproportionate distribution of territory was made, or that the Mandatory did not have cognizant authority over Palestine.
> 
> v/r
> R
Click to expand...


There was no distribution of territory under resolution 181.


----------



## toastman

P F Tinmore said:


> Kondor3 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> georgephillip said:
> 
> 
> 
> "..._Why would 1.2 million Arabs agree with the UN's decision to give 55% of Mandate Palestine to 650,000 (mostly) European Jews?_"
> 
> 
> 
> *Their consent was not deemed necessary* at the time by either the victorious Allied Powers who seized the land from the Ottoman Empire nor by the League of Nations.
> 
> The Arabs of Palestine were merely conquered subjects of the Ottoman Empire with no clear-cut national identity nor autonomy nor sovereignty of their own and they were (rightfully) judged as unorganized (in a political and national sense) and politically and socially incompetent to govern themselves as a sovereignty in the modern world.
> 
> So the people in charge of the region divvied-up the place and carved off a big slice for far more civilized immigrant-folk who showed some potential for turning the place into something worthwhile and productive for the first time in centuries.
> 
> It was the misfortune of the disorganized, disjointed tribal folk of the region in those former times to have never evolved (politically and socially) to a self-governing state or to have degenerated into such a state so as to make themselves vulnerable to such treatment by powers and peoples far more advanced and sophisticated than themselves.
> 
> Their descendants are still paying a price for that, although the end-game is fast approaching, as the last of them are being squeezed off their land and forced to move elsewhere.
> 
> It need not have come to that, and their Adversaries were still open to talks of a serious political settlement, right up to the time of the 1967 war, but, as usual, the Palestinians never miss an opportunity to miss an opportunity, and the moment passed - major concessions by the Israelis are off the table, and have been, since 1967 - and, from their perspective, rightfully so.
> 
> Next time, don't pick a fight alongside lying Arab neighbors who promise mountains (Redemption) but deliver molehills (defeat) - 1948, 1967, 1973 - and expect to emerge intact.
> 
> Vae victus.
> 
> Karma is a bitch.
> 
> Perhaps in the Next Life the Palestinians won't allow themselves to degenerate and disintegrate so badly that they are considered politically incompetent and have Empires and Mandates and Leagues making decisions for them like children.
> 
> But that's the fate they're stuck with, in this life.
> 
> It's over... time for the Palestinians to emmigrate, and move on with their lives and futures, someplace else, where they stand some chance of finding peace and happiness.
> 
> After 65 years, the world at-large is bloody sick-and-tired of listening to this shit over a sliver of land in a corner of the Med.
> 
> The world at-large just wants this to be over with, one way or the other, and the sooner the better.
> 
> The Israelis understand this as well.
> 
> Consolidation and mop-up operations continue.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> *Their consent was necessary. The plan was not to be implemented without the consent of the Palestinians.*
> 
> The Palestinians rejected the plan so it was not implemented.
Click to expand...


You've made that claim many time. Where did you read that? (the bold)


----------



## Kondor3

P F Tinmore said:


> "..._Their consent was necessary.The plan was not to be implemented without the consent of the Palestinians_..."


Indeed.

I was mistakenly dwelling upon old Mandate and League determinations while George's question was actually about the UN Plan.

My bad... I should have paid closer attention to the tag-line in that post.

The comments still stand, in that 'alternative' context, but they don't apply to UN determinations.



> "..._The Palestinians rejected the plan so it was not implemented._"



Correct.

So the Jews formulated a plan of their own.

And succeeded.

Being recognized by the UN as a fait accompli in 1949.

Sweeping away old legalities and arguments with the flick of a pen.

The UN has never had a closely vested interest in 'defending' Old Palestine.

There wasn't much there worth defending, and the New Tenants are doing much more with the place the the old bunch ever did.

Besides, the old bunch can go elsewhere and survive, in the surrounding countryside, amongst their ethnic brethren and co-religionists.

The New Tenants have nowhere else to go, and they have an old, rusted-over claim anyway which serves as a convenient conscience-soother for most non-Muslim folk.

The UN, and the EU, and even the US, can thump their chests and shake their fingers at Israel from time to time, for showmanship's sake, but, secretly, and in the main, they're on Israel's side and cheering for them when the Muslims aren't looking.

If the Muslims have a Patron Saint of Lost Causes, there's a good chance he was Palestinian.

The sad truth is, none of that old legal horseshit matters one little bit in today's Real World.

I understand why you cling to it.

You have very little else to cling to, in this context.

But it will avail you nothing.

Nothing.

The war for Palestine is over, and it's been over, for a very long time now.

Time to toss in the towel and seek life elsewhere.


----------



## RoccoR

toastman,  _et al,_

He did not read the Partition Plans as passed by the General Assembly.  Otherwise he would know.



toastman said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Palestinians rejected the plan so it was not implemented.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You've made that claim many time. Where did you read that? (the bold)
Click to expand...

*(COMMENT)*

The Security Council had implemented the Plan, and that is when the Arab Higher Council formally rejected it.  So the implementation went on without them.

But the stanch insistence that there was no validity flies in the face of the Palestinian recognition of GA Resolution 181(II).  If he doesn't believe his own kind, he'll never believe us.

_Recalling the Words of HAMAS:_  "There is no solution for the Palestinian question except through Jihad. "
_Recalling the Words of HAMAS: _ "Initiatives, and so-called peaceful solutions and international conferences, are in contradiction to the principles of the Islamic Resistance Movement."

Most Respectfully,
R


----------



## Kondor3

RoccoR said:


> "...Recalling the Words of HAMAS: '_There is no solution for the Palestinian question except through Jihad'..." _


Then Hamas must be destroyed, like the mad dog that it is.


----------



## georgephillip

Kondor3 said:


> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> 
> "...Recalling the Words of HAMAS: '_There is no solution for the Palestinian question except through Jihad'..." _
> 
> 
> 
> Then Hamas must be destroyed, like the mad dog that it is.
Click to expand...


Racists should be destroyed on both sides of the Green Line starting with those who control the monopoly of violence:

"According to the 2004 U.S. State Department Country Reports on Human Rights Practices for Israel and the Occupied Territories, the Israeli government had done 'little to reduce institutional, legal, and societal discrimination against the country's Arab citizens.'[8] 

"The 2005 US Department of State report on Israel wrote: '[T]he government generally respected the human rights of its citizens; however, there were problems in some areas, including... institutional, legal, and societal discrimination against the countrys Arab citizens.'[9] 

"The 2010 U.S. State Department Country Report stated that Israeli law prohibits discrimination on the basis of race, and that government effectively enforced these prohibitions.[10] Former Likud MK and Minister of Defense Moshe Arens has criticized the treatment of minorities in Israel, saying that they did not bear the full obligation of Israeli citizenship, nor were they extended the full privileges of citizenship.[11]"

Racism in Israel - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

650, 000 Jews inflicted an ethnocracy on 1.2 million non-Jews in 1948 and three generations later their racist state is swirling the same drain as White South Africa a generation ago.

Can you hear the FLUSH?


----------



## Bloodrock44

georgephillip said:


> Kondor3 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> 
> "...Recalling the Words of HAMAS: '_There is no solution for the Palestinian question except through Jihad'..." _
> 
> 
> 
> Then Hamas must be destroyed, like the mad dog that it is.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Racists should be destroyed on both sides of the Green Line starting with those who control the monopoly of violence:
> 
> "According to the 2004 U.S. State Department Country Reports on Human Rights Practices for Israel and the Occupied Territories, the Israeli government had done 'little to reduce institutional, legal, and societal discrimination against the country's Arab citizens.'[8]
> 
> "The 2005 US Department of State report on Israel wrote: '[T]he government generally respected the human rights of its citizens; however, there were problems in some areas, including... institutional, legal, and societal discrimination against the countrys Arab citizens.'[9]
> 
> "The 2010 U.S. State Department Country Report stated that Israeli law prohibits discrimination on the basis of race, and that government effectively enforced these prohibitions.[10] Former Likud MK and Minister of Defense Moshe Arens has criticized the treatment of minorities in Israel, saying that they did not bear the full obligation of Israeli citizenship, nor were they extended the full privileges of citizenship.[11]"
> 
> Racism in Israel - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
> 
> 650, 000 Jews inflicted an ethnocracy on 1.2 million non-Jews in 1948 and three generations later their racist state is swirling the same drain as White South Africa a generation ago.
> 
> Can you hear the FLUSH?
Click to expand...


*I was beginning to worry Georgie. You hadn't mentioned racism for several minutes.*


----------



## Kondor3

georgephillip said:


> Kondor3 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> 
> "...Recalling the Words of HAMAS: '_There is no solution for the Palestinian question except through Jihad'..." _
> 
> 
> 
> Then Hamas must be destroyed, like the mad dog that it is.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Racists should be destroyed on both sides of the Green Line starting with those who control the monopoly of violence: ...
Click to expand...


Now, all you need is the muscle to destroy the Israelis.

The Israelis, on the other hand, _already_ have the muscle to destroy Hamas.

They have simply refrained from using that muscle _to date_ for international political reasons.

I wouldn't count on that restraint lasting much longer if I were you.



> "...According to the 2004 U.S. State Department Country Reports...
> 
> ...The 2005 US Department of State report on Israel...
> 
> ...The 2010 U.S. State Department Country Report...



That's nice.

That and $3.50 will get you a cup of Starbucks.

Or you can always use the reports when you run out of toilet paper.



> ".._.650,000 Jews inflicted an ethnocracy on 1.2 million non-Jews in 1948 and three generations later their racist state is swirling the same drain as White South Africa a generation ago_..."



Well, that's one interpretation, certainly.

You can always hope, I suppose.

But I wouldn't bet your paycheck on it.



> "..._Can you hear the FLUSH?_"



No, but I can hear the laughter at your unrealistic pie-in-the-sky rant...


----------



## RoccoR

georgephillip,  _et al,_

I keep asking!



georgephillip said:


> Kondor3 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> 
> "...Recalling the Words of HAMAS: '_There is no solution for the Palestinian question except through Jihad'..." _
> 
> 
> 
> Then Hamas must be destroyed, like the mad dog that it is.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Racists should be destroyed on both sides of the Green Line starting with those who control the monopoly of violence:
> 
> "According to the 2004 U.S. State Department Country Reports on Human Rights Practices for Israel and the Occupied Territories, the Israeli government had done 'little to reduce institutional, legal, and societal discrimination against the country's Arab citizens.'[8]
> 
> "The 2005 US Department of State report on Israel wrote: '[T]he government generally respected the human rights of its citizens; however, there were problems in some areas, including... institutional, legal, and societal discrimination against the countrys Arab citizens.'[9]
> 
> "The 2010 U.S. State Department Country Report stated that Israeli law prohibits discrimination on the basis of race, and that government effectively enforced these prohibitions.[10] Former Likud MK and Minister of Defense Moshe Arens has criticized the treatment of minorities in Israel, saying that they did not bear the full obligation of Israeli citizenship, nor were they extended the full privileges of citizenship.[11]"
> 
> Racism in Israel - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
> 
> 650, 000 Jews inflicted an ethnocracy on 1.2 million non-Jews in 1948 and three generations later their racist state is swirling the same drain as White South Africa a generation ago.
> 
> Can you hear the FLUSH?
Click to expand...

*(QUESTION)*

What are the two (or more) races involved in the Racism?

Most Respectfully,
R


----------



## georgephillip

RoccoR said:


> georgephillip,  _et al,_
> 
> I keep asking!
> 
> 
> 
> georgephillip said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Kondor3 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Then Hamas must be destroyed, like the mad dog that it is.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Racists should be destroyed on both sides of the Green Line starting with those who control the monopoly of violence:
> 
> "According to the 2004 U.S. State Department Country Reports on Human Rights Practices for Israel and the Occupied Territories, the Israeli government had done 'little to reduce institutional, legal, and societal discrimination against the country's Arab citizens.'[8]
> 
> "The 2005 US Department of State report on Israel wrote: '[T]he government generally respected the human rights of its citizens; however, there were problems in some areas, including... institutional, legal, and societal discrimination against the countrys Arab citizens.'[9]
> 
> "The 2010 U.S. State Department Country Report stated that Israeli law prohibits discrimination on the basis of race, and that government effectively enforced these prohibitions.[10] Former Likud MK and Minister of Defense Moshe Arens has criticized the treatment of minorities in Israel, saying that they did not bear the full obligation of Israeli citizenship, nor were they extended the full privileges of citizenship.[11]"
> 
> Racism in Israel - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
> 
> 650, 000 Jews inflicted an ethnocracy on 1.2 million non-Jews in 1948 and three generations later their racist state is swirling the same drain as White South Africa a generation ago.
> 
> Can you hear the FLUSH?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> *(QUESTION)*
> 
> What are the two (or more) races involved in the Racism?
> 
> Most Respectfully,
> R
Click to expand...


Why are you perplexed about racial tensions in the holy land?

"In the spring, several Jewish teenage girls asked a women standing at a bus stop in Jerusalem whether she was an Arab. The woman, wearing a headscarf, replied that she was. One of the girls pulled the hijab from the woman's head and spat in her face. The others kicked and beat the woman. A police officer stood nearby and watched. Hana Amtir, 38, three months' pregnant, locked herself into her house for three days before filing a complaint with the police.

"In a beach bar in Tel Aviv, an Arab waiter was clearing away bottles of mayonnaise and ketchup, but the men sitting at one of the tables weren't finished yet. 'Damn Arab,' they cursed, and then proceeded to beat the man, who was later hospitalized. None of the other guests came to his aid."

Racist Attacks Against Arabs Increase in Israel - SPIEGEL ONLINE

Obviously many of those you support in Israel are very clear on the difference between Jews and Damn Arabs.


----------



## georgephillip

Kondor3 said:


> georgephillip said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Kondor3 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Then Hamas must be destroyed, like the mad dog that it is.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Racists should be destroyed on both sides of the Green Line starting with those who control the monopoly of violence: ...
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Now, all you need is the muscle to destroy the Israelis.
> 
> The Israelis, on the other hand, _already_ have the muscle to destroy Hamas.
> 
> They have simply refrained from using that muscle _to date_ for international political reasons.
> 
> I wouldn't count on that restraint lasting much longer if I were you.
> 
> 
> 
> That's nice.
> 
> That and $3.50 will get you a cup of Starbucks.
> 
> Or you can always use the reports when you run out of toilet paper.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ".._.650,000 Jews inflicted an ethnocracy on 1.2 million non-Jews in 1948 and three generations later their racist state is swirling the same drain as White South Africa a generation ago_..."
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Well, that's one interpretation, certainly.
> 
> You can always hope, I suppose.
> 
> But I wouldn't bet your paycheck on it.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> "..._Can you hear the FLUSH?_"
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> No, but I can hear the laughter at your unrealistic pie-in-the-sky rant...
Click to expand...


Funny, all I'm hearing are the amateur-night squeals of a self-absorbed apologist for kosher Kooks:

"The earlier influence of fundamentalist Rabbi Abraham Kook (1865-1935), or Kuk, was significant. He preached Jewish supremacy and said: 'The difference between a Jewish soul and souls of non-Jews -- all of them in all different levels -- is greater and deeper than the difference between a human soul and the souls of cattle.' 

"His teachings helped create the settler movement, and his son, Rabbi Tzvi Yehuda Kook, founded the extremist Gush Emunim (GE) under the slogan: 'The Land of Israel, for the people of Israel, according to the Torah of Israel.'"

Al-Ahram Weekly | Focus | Religious fundamentalism in Israel

Do you Gush over Zionist rants?


----------



## Hossfly

georgephillip said:


> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> 
> georgephillip,  _et al,_
> 
> I keep asking!
> 
> 
> 
> georgephillip said:
> 
> 
> 
> Racists should be destroyed on both sides of the Green Line starting with those who control the monopoly of violence:
> 
> "According to the 2004 U.S. State Department Country Reports on Human Rights Practices for Israel and the Occupied Territories, the Israeli government had done 'little to reduce institutional, legal, and societal discrimination against the country's Arab citizens.'[8]
> 
> "The 2005 US Department of State report on Israel wrote: '[T]he government generally respected the human rights of its citizens; however, there were problems in some areas, including... institutional, legal, and societal discrimination against the countrys Arab citizens.'[9]
> 
> "The 2010 U.S. State Department Country Report stated that Israeli law prohibits discrimination on the basis of race, and that government effectively enforced these prohibitions.[10] Former Likud MK and Minister of Defense Moshe Arens has criticized the treatment of minorities in Israel, saying that they did not bear the full obligation of Israeli citizenship, nor were they extended the full privileges of citizenship.[11]"
> 
> Racism in Israel - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
> 
> 650, 000 Jews inflicted an ethnocracy on 1.2 million non-Jews in 1948 and three generations later their racist state is swirling the same drain as White South Africa a generation ago.
> 
> Can you hear the FLUSH?
> 
> 
> 
> *(QUESTION)*
> 
> What are the two (or more) races involved in the Racism?
> 
> Most Respectfully,
> R
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Why are you perplexed about racial tensions in the holy land?
> 
> "In the spring, several Jewish teenage girls asked a women standing at a bus stop in Jerusalem whether she was an Arab. The woman, wearing a headscarf, replied that she was. One of the girls pulled the hijab from the woman's head and spat in her face. The others kicked and beat the woman. A police officer stood nearby and watched. Hana Amtir, 38, three months' pregnant, locked herself into her house for three days before filing a complaint with the police.
> 
> "In a beach bar in Tel Aviv, an Arab waiter was clearing away bottles of mayonnaise and ketchup, but the men sitting at one of the tables weren't finished yet. 'Damn Arab,' they cursed, and then proceeded to beat the man, who was later hospitalized. None of the other guests came to his aid."
> 
> Racist Attacks Against Arabs Increase in Israel - SPIEGEL ONLINE
> 
> Obviously many of those you support in Israel are very clear on the difference between Jews and Damn Arabs.
Click to expand...

I have a better idea, Georgie Boy.  Why don't you go into an Arab country in northern Africa where the people have a much, much lighter skin, and see how you would fare when it comes to racism.  There was once something written by a Black African who took a vacation in northern Africa, and he was shocked at how the people treated him and other Blacks.  Maybe Georgie Boy can find some "damn" Libyan and ask him why the Black workers were treated so badly during the Arab Spring there that the unfortunate Blacks were imprisoned or killed.  By the way, Georgie Boy, can you find us some Der Spiegel articles about how the Muslims are trying to take over Germany?
African migrant in Libya


----------



## RoccoR

georgephillip,  _et al,_

Hummm!  You ask the question and you make the claim.



georgephillip said:


> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> 
> georgephillip,  _et al,_
> 
> I keep asking!
> 
> 
> 
> georgephillip said:
> 
> 
> 
> *Racists* should be destroyed on both sides of the Green Line starting with those who control the monopoly of violence:
> 
> *------       ------      ------       -------      ------       ------      ------       -------       ------       ------      ------       -------*​
> 650, 000 Jews inflicted an ethnocracy on 1.2 million non-Jews in 1948 and three generations later their racist state is swirling the same drain as White South Africa a generation ago.
> 
> Can you hear the FLUSH?
> 
> 
> 
> *(QUESTION)*
> 
> What are the two (or more) races involved in the Racism?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Why are you perplexed about racial tensions in the holy land?
> 
> *------       ------      ------       -------      ------       ------      ------       -------       ------       ------      ------       -------*​
> Obviously many of those you support in Israel are very clear on the difference between Jews and Damn Arabs.
Click to expand...

*(OBSERVATIONS)*


You clearly stated an argument based on Racism; a belief that race is the primary determinant of human traits and capacities and that racial differences produce an inherent superiority of a particular race.

Ethnocracy is where a government is controlled by a particular race or national group.  Here you implied Israel is a "racist state."

*(COMMENT)*

You unceremoniously highlight the "difference between Jews and Damn Arabs."  This is odd in that they are both "Semitic" cultures.  So what difference are you speaking of in this context.  Clearly, you go on to say, that it is on the basis of "racism" and "ethnocracy."   And that clearly goes back to "race."  Practicing Jews and Arab are both Semitic.

The rift and separation between the citizens of Israel and the Arab Palestinian is based on the establish pattern and history of criminal and adverse behaviors exhibited over an extended period of time.  And it is this historical evidence that makes the "right of return" for most Arab-Palestinian (who would otherwise qualify) so difficult.



			
				Paragraph 11 said:
			
		

> 11.	Resolves that the refugees *wishing to return to their homes and live at peace with their neighbours* should be permitted to do so at the earliest practicable date, and that compensation should be paid for the property of those choosing not to return and for loss of or damage to property which, under principles of international law or in equity, should be made good by the Governments or authorities responsible;
> 
> _*SOURCE: *_A/RES/194 (III) 11 December 1948



Already it is in conflict with the HAMAS Covenant and the PNA Charter.

In GA Resolution 194(III) the first key qualification is that the Arab-Palestinian "live at peace with their neighbors."  Of course, this falls in line with the general Rule of Law (RoL) that is expressed in Resolution 2625 (The Principles).



			
				A/RES/2625(XXV) PRINCIPLES OF INTERNATIONAL LAW FRIENDLY RELATIONS AND CO-OPERATION said:
			
		

> (b) The principle that States shall settle their international disputes by peaceful means in such a manner that international peace and security and justice are not endangered,
> ..... ..... ..... ..... ..... ..... ..... .....
> 
> Every State has the duty to refrain from the threat or use of force to violate the existing international boundaries of another State or as a means of solving international
> disputes, including territorial disputes and problems concerning frontiers of States.
> 
> SOURCE: http://www.unrol.org/files/3dda1f104.pdf
> OR
> United Nations Official Document)



But this first key qualification and the RoL come in conflict with Palestinian enacted beliefs and policy.


Article 13 of Covenant:  There is no solution for the Palestinian question except through Jihad.
Article 14 of Covenant:  Since this is the case, liberation of Palestine is then an individual duty for very Moslem wherever he may be.
Article 15 of Covenant:  The day that enemies usurp part of Moslem land, Jihad becomes the individual duty of every Moslem. In face of the Jews' usurpation of Palestine, it is compulsory that the banner of Jihad be raised.
Article 8 of Charter:  On this basis the Palestinian masses, regardless of whether they are residing in the national homeland or in Diaspora (mahajir) constitute- both their organizations and the individuals- one national front working for the retrieval of Palestine and its liberation through armed struggle.
Article 9 of Charter: Armed struggle is the only way to liberate Palestine.
Article 10 of Charter:  Commando _(Feday'ee)_ action constitutes the nucleus of the Palestinian popular liberation war. This requires its escalation, comprehensiveness, and the mobilization of all the Palestinian popular and educational efforts and their organization and involvement in the armed Palestinian revolution.

By their own words, they deny themselves the "right of return" if we use your interpretation of UN mandate.

This position was reaffirmed by HAMAS within the last few months:



			
				EXCERPT - Hamas Refugee Affairs Department head Dr 'Issam 'Adwan said:
			
		

> "The Palestinian resistance requires the Palestinian people to remain united under the resistance banner, and it [the resistance] has the right to smite with an iron fist any hand that seeks to rip apart the people's unity and [cause it to] abandon its rights. It must also pursue the agents of the occupation wherever they may be, even outside Palestine, because leaving them in peace damages the Palestinian cause and places the Palestinian people, its leadership, and its resistance in grave danger.
> 
> *SOURCE:* SENIOR HAMAS OFFICIAL: THE RESISTANCE IS ENTITLED TO ATTACK ISRAEL'S EMBASSIES, INTERESTS, AND OFFICIALS WORLDWIDE -- AND THE INTERESTS OF ITS ALLIES, HEADED BY THE U.S.



The separation is NOT based on race, as you imply, but based on the fact that the Arab-Palestinian has declared a "Jihad" and "armed struggle" as the solution.  

Not only is it disingenuous to suggest that there is a racial component as the catalyst for the separation, but is also cast doubt on the intent of the racism claim _(to be purposely inflammatory)_.  One of the purposes of the separation is to maintain a distance between the belligerents; protecting the citizenry not party to the dispute or conflict. 

The denial of the "right of return" (the separation) is wholly self-inflicted.

Most Respectfully,
R


----------



## georgephillip

RoccoR said:


> georgephillip,  _et al,_
> 
> Hummm!  You ask the question and you make the claim.
> 
> 
> 
> georgephillip said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> 
> georgephillip,  _et al,_
> 
> I keep asking!
> 
> 
> *(QUESTION)*
> 
> What are the two (or more) races involved in the Racism?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Why are you perplexed about racial tensions in the holy land?
> 
> *------       ------      ------       -------      ------       ------      ------       -------       ------       ------      ------       -------*​
> Obviously many of those you support in Israel are very clear on the difference between Jews and Damn Arabs.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> *(OBSERVATIONS)*
> 
> 
> You clearly stated an argument based on Racism; a belief that race is the primary determinant of human traits and capacities and that racial differences produce an inherent superiority of a particular race.
> 
> Ethnocracy is where a government is controlled by a particular race or national group.  Here you implied Israel is a "racist state."
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> You unceremoniously highlight the "difference between Jews and Damn Arabs."  This is odd in that they are both "Semitic" cultures.  So what difference are you speaking of in this context.  Clearly, you go on to say, that it is on the basis of "racism" and "ethnocracy."   And that clearly goes back to "race."  Practicing Jews and Arab are both Semitic.
> 
> The rift and separation between the citizens of Israel and the Arab Palestinian is based on the establish pattern and history of criminal and adverse behaviors exhibited over an extended period of time.  And it is this historical evidence that makes the "right of return" for most Arab-Palestinian (who would otherwise qualify) so difficult.
> 
> 
> 
> Already it is in conflict with the HAMAS Covenant and the PNA Charter.
> 
> In GA Resolution 194(III) the first key qualification is that the Arab-Palestinian "live at peace with their neighbors."  Of course, this falls in line with the general Rule of Law (RoL) that is expressed in Resolution 2625 (The Principles).
> 
> 
> 
> 
> A/RES/2625(XXV) PRINCIPLES OF INTERNATIONAL LAW FRIENDLY RELATIONS AND CO-OPERATION said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> (b) The principle that States shall settle their international disputes by peaceful means in such a manner that international peace and security and justice are not endangered,
> ..... ..... ..... ..... ..... ..... ..... .....
> 
> Every State has the duty to refrain from the threat or use of force to violate the existing international boundaries of another State or as a means of solving international
> disputes, including territorial disputes and problems concerning frontiers of States.
> 
> SOURCE: http://www.unrol.org/files/3dda1f104.pdf
> OR
> United Nations Official Document)
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> But this first key qualification and the RoL come in conflict with Palestinian enacted beliefs and policy.
> 
> 
> Article 13 of Covenant:  There is no solution for the Palestinian question except through Jihad.
> Article 14 of Covenant:  Since this is the case, liberation of Palestine is then an individual duty for very Moslem wherever he may be.
> Article 15 of Covenant:  The day that enemies usurp part of Moslem land, Jihad becomes the individual duty of every Moslem. In face of the Jews' usurpation of Palestine, it is compulsory that the banner of Jihad be raised.
> Article 8 of Charter:  On this basis the Palestinian masses, regardless of whether they are residing in the national homeland or in Diaspora (mahajir) constitute- both their organizations and the individuals- one national front working for the retrieval of Palestine and its liberation through armed struggle.
> Article 9 of Charter: Armed struggle is the only way to liberate Palestine.
> Article 10 of Charter:  Commando _(Feday'ee)_ action constitutes the nucleus of the Palestinian popular liberation war. This requires its escalation, comprehensiveness, and the mobilization of all the Palestinian popular and educational efforts and their organization and involvement in the armed Palestinian revolution.
> 
> By their own words, they deny themselves the "right of return" if we use your interpretation of UN mandate.
> 
> This position was reaffirmed by HAMAS within the last few months:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> EXCERPT - Hamas Refugee Affairs Department head Dr 'Issam 'Adwan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> "The Palestinian resistance requires the Palestinian people to remain united under the resistance banner, and it [the resistance] has the right to smite with an iron fist any hand that seeks to rip apart the people's unity and [cause it to] abandon its rights. It must also pursue the agents of the occupation wherever they may be, even outside Palestine, because leaving them in peace damages the Palestinian cause and places the Palestinian people, its leadership, and its resistance in grave danger.
> 
> *SOURCE:* SENIOR HAMAS OFFICIAL: THE RESISTANCE IS ENTITLED TO ATTACK ISRAEL'S EMBASSIES, INTERESTS, AND OFFICIALS WORLDWIDE -- AND THE INTERESTS OF ITS ALLIES, HEADED BY THE U.S.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> The separation is NOT based on race, as you imply, but based on the fact that the Arab-Palestinian has declared a "Jihad" and "armed struggle" as the solution.
> 
> Not only is it disingenuous to suggest that there is a racial component as the catalyst for the separation, but is also cast doubt on the intent of the racism claim _(to be purposely inflammatory)_.  One of the purposes of the separation is to maintain a distance between the belligerents; protecting the citizenry not party to the dispute or conflict.
> 
> The denial of the "right of return" (the separation) is wholly self-inflicted.
> 
> Most Respectfully,
> R
Click to expand...


The denial of the "right of return" is wholly self inflicted only for those who start keeping score after 650,000 Jews imposed an ethnocracy on 1.2 million Arabs in 1948 Mandate Palestine. For half-a-century before the ethnic cleansing of 700,000 non-Jews from the Land of Israel, Zionists made no secret of the role race played in their efforts to colonize Palestine. While supporters of Zionism's racist core are always quick to vilify Islamic extremism, they seem reluctant to criticize comparable Jewish extremism.

Do you find the following an example of racism or not?

"The difference between a Jewish soul and souls of non-Jews -- all of them in all different levels -- is greater and deeper than the difference between a human soul and the souls of cattle' -- Rabbi Abraham Kook"

Al-Ahram Weekly | Focus | Religious fundamentalism in Israel


----------



## georgephillip

Hossfly said:


> georgephillip said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> 
> georgephillip,  _et al,_
> 
> I keep asking!
> 
> 
> *(QUESTION)*
> 
> What are the two (or more) races involved in the Racism?
> 
> Most Respectfully,
> R
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Why are you perplexed about racial tensions in the holy land?
> 
> "In the spring, several Jewish teenage girls asked a women standing at a bus stop in Jerusalem whether she was an Arab. The woman, wearing a headscarf, replied that she was. One of the girls pulled the hijab from the woman's head and spat in her face. The others kicked and beat the woman. A police officer stood nearby and watched. Hana Amtir, 38, three months' pregnant, locked herself into her house for three days before filing a complaint with the police.
> 
> "In a beach bar in Tel Aviv, an Arab waiter was clearing away bottles of mayonnaise and ketchup, but the men sitting at one of the tables weren't finished yet. 'Damn Arab,' they cursed, and then proceeded to beat the man, who was later hospitalized. None of the other guests came to his aid."
> 
> Racist Attacks Against Arabs Increase in Israel - SPIEGEL ONLINE
> 
> Obviously many of those you support in Israel are very clear on the difference between Jews and Damn Arabs.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I have a better idea, Georgie Boy.  Why don't you go into an Arab country in northern Africa where the people have a much, much lighter skin, and see how you would fare when it comes to racism.  There was once something written by a Black African who took a vacation in northern Africa, and he was shocked at how the people treated him and other Blacks.  Maybe Georgie Boy can find some "damn" Libyan and ask him why the Black workers were treated so badly during the Arab Spring there that the unfortunate Blacks were imprisoned or killed.  By the way, Georgie Boy, can you find us some Der Spiegel articles about how the Muslims are trying to take over Germany?
> African migrant in Libya
Click to expand...


"The difference between a Jewish soul and souls of non-Jews -- all of them in all different levels -- is greater and deeper than the difference between a human soul and the souls of cattle' -- Rabbi Abraham Kook"

Agree or disagree?

Al-Ahram Weekly | Focus | Religious fundamentalism in Israel


----------



## Sweet_Caroline

georgephillip said:


> Hossfly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> georgephillip said:
> 
> 
> 
> Why are you perplexed about racial tensions in the holy land?
> 
> "In the spring, several Jewish teenage girls asked a women standing at a bus stop in Jerusalem whether she was an Arab. The woman, wearing a headscarf, replied that she was. One of the girls pulled the hijab from the woman's head and spat in her face. The others kicked and beat the woman. A police officer stood nearby and watched. Hana Amtir, 38, three months' pregnant, locked herself into her house for three days before filing a complaint with the police.
> 
> "In a beach bar in Tel Aviv, an Arab waiter was clearing away bottles of mayonnaise and ketchup, but the men sitting at one of the tables weren't finished yet. 'Damn Arab,' they cursed, and then proceeded to beat the man, who was later hospitalized. None of the other guests came to his aid."
> 
> Racist Attacks Against Arabs Increase in Israel - SPIEGEL ONLINE
> 
> Obviously many of those you support in Israel are very clear on the difference between Jews and Damn Arabs.
> 
> 
> 
> I have a better idea, Georgie Boy.  Why don't you go into an Arab country in northern Africa where the people have a much, much lighter skin, and see how you would fare when it comes to racism.  There was once something written by a Black African who took a vacation in northern Africa, and he was shocked at how the people treated him and other Blacks.  Maybe Georgie Boy can find some "damn" Libyan and ask him why the Black workers were treated so badly during the Arab Spring there that the unfortunate Blacks were imprisoned or killed.  By the way, Georgie Boy, can you find us some Der Spiegel articles about how the Muslims are trying to take over Germany?
> African migrant in Libya
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> "The difference between a Jewish soul and souls of non-Jews -- all of them in all different levels -- is greater and deeper than the difference between a human soul and the souls of cattle' -- Rabbi Abraham Kook"
> 
> Agree or disagree?
> 
> Al-Ahram Weekly | Focus | Religious fundamentalism in Israel
Click to expand...


*He died in 1935.  What are you bringing up quotes for from someone who died almost 100 years ago.  You want to see some quotes banded about today from Islamists about non-Muslims?  Just let me know.

*


----------



## Bumberclyde

Hossfly said:


> georgephillip said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> 
> georgephillip,  _et al,_
> 
> I keep asking!
> 
> 
> *(QUESTION)*
> 
> What are the two (or more) races involved in the Racism?
> 
> Most Respectfully,
> R
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Why are you perplexed about racial tensions in the holy land?
> 
> "In the spring, several Jewish teenage girls asked a women standing at a bus stop in Jerusalem whether she was an Arab. The woman, wearing a headscarf, replied that she was. One of the girls pulled the hijab from the woman's head and spat in her face. The others kicked and beat the woman. A police officer stood nearby and watched. Hana Amtir, 38, three months' pregnant, locked herself into her house for three days before filing a complaint with the police.
> 
> "In a beach bar in Tel Aviv, an Arab waiter was clearing away bottles of mayonnaise and ketchup, but the men sitting at one of the tables weren't finished yet. 'Damn Arab,' they cursed, and then proceeded to beat the man, who was later hospitalized. None of the other guests came to his aid."
> 
> Racist Attacks Against Arabs Increase in Israel - SPIEGEL ONLINE
> 
> Obviously many of those you support in Israel are very clear on the difference between Jews and Damn Arabs.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I have a better idea, Georgie Boy.  Why don't you go into an Arab country in northern Africa where the people have a much, much lighter skin, and see how you would fare when it comes to racism.  There was once something written by a Black African who took a vacation in northern Africa, and he was shocked at how the people treated him and other Blacks.  Maybe Georgie Boy can find some "damn" Libyan and ask him why the Black workers were treated so badly during the Arab Spring there that the unfortunate Blacks were imprisoned or killed.  By the way, Georgie Boy, can you find us some Der Spiegel articles about how the Muslims are trying to take over Germany?
> African migrant in Libya
Click to expand...


That still doesn't address what he was talking about, which was racism by Israelis towards arabs, but then again, you had no response to that so you try to deflect onto something irrelevant... as usual.


----------



## P F Tinmore

Rocco, your posts are back assward.

You always ignore the fact that the Palestinians were at home minding their own business when foreigners came down from Europe and ran them off their land.


----------



## RoccoR

georgephillip,  _et al,_

This is where logic and critical thinking comes into play.



georgephillip said:


> Do you find the following an example of racism or not?
> 
> "The difference between a Jewish soul and souls of non-Jews -- all of them in all different levels -- is greater and deeper than the difference between a human soul and the souls of cattle' -- Rabbi Abraham Kook"


*(ANSWER)*

NO!  This is NOT racist.

*(COMMENT)*

This is a rabbinical distinction _(relating to the rabbis interpretation and beliefs, language, teachings, or writings)_ in the same way that ecclesiastical laws and teachings _(relating to established religious institutions)_ have been in existence for century upon century.  

The distinction does not even relate to the tangible world; but to an  immaterial asset that is separate from the physical body.  Racism is definitely related to the physical body.

In the context that Rabbi Kook uses this phrasing _(turn of the 20th Century)_, Jewish supremacy is that of the spiritual realm - the intangible.  That is completely different from --- say --- Islamic supremacy:  "The Islamic Resistance Movement is a distinguished Palestinian movement, whose allegiance is to Allah, and whose way of life is Islam. It strives to raise the banner of Allah over every inch of Palestine."  (Article 6 - HAMAS Covenant.)  This is very tangible and political in nature --- over land and holdings.  Yet, it is still not racial at its core.  It is religious fundamentalism; one over the tangible and one over the intangible.  One dangerous and one not so dangerous.

Most Respectfully,
R


----------



## georgephillip

Sweet_Caroline said:


> georgephillip said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Hossfly said:
> 
> 
> 
> I have a better idea, Georgie Boy.  Why don't you go into an Arab country in northern Africa where the people have a much, much lighter skin, and see how you would fare when it comes to racism.  There was once something written by a Black African who took a vacation in northern Africa, and he was shocked at how the people treated him and other Blacks.  Maybe Georgie Boy can find some "damn" Libyan and ask him why the Black workers were treated so badly during the Arab Spring there that the unfortunate Blacks were imprisoned or killed.  By the way, Georgie Boy, can you find us some Der Spiegel articles about how the Muslims are trying to take over Germany?
> African migrant in Libya
> 
> 
> 
> 
> "The difference between a Jewish soul and souls of non-Jews -- all of them in all different levels -- is greater and deeper than the difference between a human soul and the souls of cattle' -- Rabbi Abraham Kook"
> 
> Agree or disagree?
> 
> Al-Ahram Weekly | Focus | Religious fundamentalism in Israel
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> *He died in 1935.  What are you bringing up quotes for from someone who died almost 100 years ago.  You want to see some quotes banded about today from Islamists about non-Muslims?  Just let me know.
> 
> *
Click to expand...


*The settler movement lives on in Palestine:*

"The earlier influence of fundamentalist Rabbi Abraham Kook (1865-1935), or Kuk, was significant. He preached Jewish supremacy and said: 'The difference between a Jewish soul and souls of non-Jews -- all of them in all different levels -- is greater and deeper than the difference between a human soul and the souls of cattle.' 

"*His teachings helped create the settler movement*, and his son, Rabbi Tzvi Yehuda Kook, founded the extremist Gush Emunim (GE) under the slogan: 'The Land of Israel, for the people of Israel, according to the Torah of Israel.'"

Al-Ahram Weekly | Focus | Religious fundamentalism in Israel

Racist extremists flourish among Muslims and Jews; however, it's the Jews who possess the power of the mushroom cloud, and it's US tax dollars that made that possible. That makes me think racist Jews and their apologists pose a greater threat to humanity than idiotic Imams.


----------



## Bloodrock44

Bumberclyde said:


> Hossfly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> georgephillip said:
> 
> 
> 
> Why are you perplexed about racial tensions in the holy land?
> 
> "In the spring, several Jewish teenage girls asked a women standing at a bus stop in Jerusalem whether she was an Arab. The woman, wearing a headscarf, replied that she was. One of the girls pulled the hijab from the woman's head and spat in her face. The others kicked and beat the woman. A police officer stood nearby and watched. Hana Amtir, 38, three months' pregnant, locked herself into her house for three days before filing a complaint with the police.
> 
> "In a beach bar in Tel Aviv, an Arab waiter was clearing away bottles of mayonnaise and ketchup, but the men sitting at one of the tables weren't finished yet. 'Damn Arab,' they cursed, and then proceeded to beat the man, who was later hospitalized. None of the other guests came to his aid."
> 
> Racist Attacks Against Arabs Increase in Israel - SPIEGEL ONLINE
> 
> Obviously many of those you support in Israel are very clear on the difference between Jews and Damn Arabs.
> 
> 
> 
> I have a better idea, Georgie Boy.  Why don't you go into an Arab country in northern Africa where the people have a much, much lighter skin, and see how you would fare when it comes to racism.  There was once something written by a Black African who took a vacation in northern Africa, and he was shocked at how the people treated him and other Blacks.  Maybe Georgie Boy can find some "damn" Libyan and ask him why the Black workers were treated so badly during the Arab Spring there that the unfortunate Blacks were imprisoned or killed.  By the way, Georgie Boy, can you find us some Der Spiegel articles about how the Muslims are trying to take over Germany?
> African migrant in Libya
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> That still doesn't address what he was talking about, which was racism by Israelis towards arabs, but then again, you had no response to that so you try to deflect onto something irrelevant... as usual.
Click to expand...


*Hey genius...how many times do we have to tell you that Jews and arabs are of the same race so your term doesn't apply? We are on to your antics. You are using the term to inflame hatred of Jews. Time to stop accusing people of something you are guilty of. Talk about deflection!*


----------



## georgephillip

Bloodrock44 said:


> Bumberclyde said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Hossfly said:
> 
> 
> 
> I have a better idea, Georgie Boy.  Why don't you go into an Arab country in northern Africa where the people have a much, much lighter skin, and see how you would fare when it comes to racism.  There was once something written by a Black African who took a vacation in northern Africa, and he was shocked at how the people treated him and other Blacks.  Maybe Georgie Boy can find some "damn" Libyan and ask him why the Black workers were treated so badly during the Arab Spring there that the unfortunate Blacks were imprisoned or killed.  By the way, Georgie Boy, can you find us some Der Spiegel articles about how the Muslims are trying to take over Germany?
> African migrant in Libya
> 
> 
> 
> 
> That still doesn't address what he was talking about, which was racism by Israelis towards arabs, but then again, you had no response to that so you try to deflect onto something irrelevant... as usual.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> *Hey genius...how many times do we have to tell you that Jews and arabs are of the same race so your term doesn't apply? We are on to your antics. You are using the term to inflame hatred of Jews. Time to stop accusing people of something you are guilty of. Talk about deflection!*
Click to expand...


Give us your definition of "race."


----------



## Bumberclyde

Bloodrock44 said:


> Bumberclyde said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Hossfly said:
> 
> 
> 
> I have a better idea, Georgie Boy.  Why don't you go into an Arab country in northern Africa where the people have a much, much lighter skin, and see how you would fare when it comes to racism.  There was once something written by a Black African who took a vacation in northern Africa, and he was shocked at how the people treated him and other Blacks.  Maybe Georgie Boy can find some "damn" Libyan and ask him why the Black workers were treated so badly during the Arab Spring there that the unfortunate Blacks were imprisoned or killed.  By the way, Georgie Boy, can you find us some Der Spiegel articles about how the Muslims are trying to take over Germany?
> African migrant in Libya
> 
> 
> 
> 
> That still doesn't address what he was talking about, which was racism by Israelis towards arabs, but then again, you had no response to that so you try to deflect onto something irrelevant... as usual.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> *Hey genius...how many times do we have to tell you that Jews and arabs are of the same race so your term doesn't apply? We are on to your antics. You are using the term to inflame hatred of Jews. Time to stop accusing people of something you are guilty of. Talk about deflection!*
Click to expand...


So you claim that because they are from the same race, Jews and arabs don't hate each other?  Thanks for the laugh.


----------



## Bloodrock44

Bumberclyde said:


> Bloodrock44 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Bumberclyde said:
> 
> 
> 
> That still doesn't address what he was talking about, which was racism by Israelis towards arabs, but then again, you had no response to that so you try to deflect onto something irrelevant... as usual.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *Hey genius...how many times do we have to tell you that Jews and arabs are of the same race so your term doesn't apply? We are on to your antics. You are using the term to inflame hatred of Jews. Time to stop accusing people of something you are guilty of. Talk about deflection!*
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> So you claim that because they are from the same race, Jews and arabs don't hate each other?  Thanks for the laugh.
Click to expand...


*Thanks for putting words in my mouth genius. Where did I say Jews and arabs don't hate each other. I said your bogus claims of racism were just that...bogus.*


----------



## Bumberclyde

Bloodrock44 said:


> Bumberclyde said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Bloodrock44 said:
> 
> 
> 
> *Hey genius...how many times do we have to tell you that Jews and arabs are of the same race so your term doesn't apply? We are on to your antics. You are using the term to inflame hatred of Jews. Time to stop accusing people of something you are guilty of. Talk about deflection!*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> So you claim that because they are from the same race, Jews and arabs don't hate each other?  Thanks for the laugh.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> *Thanks for putting words in my mouth genius. Where did I say Jews and arabs don't hate each other. I said your bogus claims of racism were just that...bogus.*
Click to expand...

From Wiki: "Racism and racial discrimination are often used to describe discrimination on an ethnic or cultural basis, independent of whether these differences are described as racial."

Now, you are less ignorant than before. You're welcome.


----------



## P F Tinmore

Bloodrock44 said:


> Bumberclyde said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Hossfly said:
> 
> 
> 
> I have a better idea, Georgie Boy.  Why don't you go into an Arab country in northern Africa where the people have a much, much lighter skin, and see how you would fare when it comes to racism.  There was once something written by a Black African who took a vacation in northern Africa, and he was shocked at how the people treated him and other Blacks.  Maybe Georgie Boy can find some "damn" Libyan and ask him why the Black workers were treated so badly during the Arab Spring there that the unfortunate Blacks were imprisoned or killed.  By the way, Georgie Boy, can you find us some Der Spiegel articles about how the Muslims are trying to take over Germany?
> African migrant in Libya
> 
> 
> 
> 
> That still doesn't address what he was talking about, which was racism by Israelis towards arabs, but then again, you had no response to that so you try to deflect onto something irrelevant... as usual.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> *Hey genius...how many times do we have to tell you that Jews and arabs are of the same race so your term doesn't apply? We are on to your antics. You are using the term to inflame hatred of Jews. Time to stop accusing people of something you are guilty of. Talk about deflection!*
Click to expand...


If Jews and Arabs are the same race, then the one state solution should be a piece of cake.


----------



## Bloodrock44

Bumberclyde said:


> Bloodrock44 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Bumberclyde said:
> 
> 
> 
> So you claim that because they are from the same race, Jews and arabs don't hate each other?  Thanks for the laugh.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *Thanks for putting words in my mouth genius. Where did I say Jews and arabs don't hate each other. I said your bogus claims of racism were just that...bogus.*
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> From Wiki: "Racism and racial discrimination are often used to describe discrimination on an ethnic or cultural basis, independent of whether these differences are described as racial."
> 
> Now, you are less ignorant than before. You're welcome.
Click to expand...


*So genius...what you're saying is that you can be racist against you're own race. If brains were dynamite, you wouldn't have enough to blow your nose.*


----------



## Bumberclyde

Bloodrock44 said:


> Bumberclyde said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Bloodrock44 said:
> 
> 
> 
> *Thanks for putting words in my mouth genius. Where did I say Jews and arabs don't hate each other. I said your bogus claims of racism were just that...bogus.*
> 
> 
> 
> From Wiki: "Racism and racial discrimination are often used to describe discrimination on an ethnic or cultural basis, independent of whether these differences are described as racial."
> 
> Now, you are less ignorant than before. You're welcome.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> *So genius...what you're saying is that you can be racist against you're own race. If brains were dynamite, you wouldn't have enough to blow your nose.*
Click to expand...


Lucky for you, being original isn't a pre-requisite here. 

Did you know that dark skinned blacks often show racist attitudes towards lighter skinned blacks? I'm guessing not, but now you do.
Btw, does bolding everything mean you consider what you say is more important, or are you just shouting?


----------



## Kondor3

Neither the Arab-Muslims of Palestine nor the Jews of the State of Israel (or elsewhere) are pure-bloods.

Both groups carry the genetic markers of the endless array of conquerors and contestants for the region over the past several thousand years.

And even with all that admixture, the Arab-Muslims of Palestine are probably more narrowly defined, genetically, than their Jewish antagonists.

Mostly because the Jews have been wandering for 2,000 years and have picked-up strong genetic markers from the Two-Rivers region (Bablylonian, Sumerian, etc.) and the Caucuses and Urals and Slavic and Mongol and Eurasian sources, as well as some heavy genetic contributions from Central and Western Europe over the past several centuries.

As I recall from earlier readings about the beginning-times for the Jewish Diaspora, Judaism was, for some considerable period of time, entirely embracing and welcoming of new converts from the lands into which they dispersed, to an extent where some Jewish ancestry-lines actually begin with a *post*-Diaspora conversion of Gentiles, rather than a maternal link all the way back to ancient Judea-Israel.

This, of course, forms the basis for objections that the Jews of today are not the inheritors of the Jews of Antiquity, and, genetically speaking, there seems to be some truth in that assertion; but, as with most things, it's only a Partial Truth, and, in many persons of the Jewish faith, we can, indeed, find genetic markers linking them to the Judea-Israel of Antiquity, so, that's pretty much a 'wash' - a mixed bag.

But such distinctions grow fuzzy and they lose some measure of importance in light of the mixed racial-ethnic genetic inheritance of the Arab-Muslims of so-called Palestine... part Arab Beduoin blood, part Western European crusader blood, part Hebrew blood, part Byzantine blood, part Roman Legionary blood, part Egyptian blood, part Berber blood, part Iraqi or Persian or Greek blood, part Ottoman Turkish blood, etc... like most folks on the face of the planet... mutts rather than pure-bloods.

So it comes down to Religion and Culture and Philosophy as much as race.

The Jews of modern-day Israel are the Cultural and Spiritual and Philosophical Heirs of Judea-Israel of Anquitity, and, after the slaughter of 6,000,000 of their men, women and children at the hands of Euro-trash during the Holocaust, the Jews decided to stop Wandering and to take back their ancestral and spiritual Homeland.

Nobody was going to hand it to them, and they'd been shoved-around for centuries up to that time, so, they chose to do some shoving themselves, for once, and to stop playing the victim-sheeple.

They succeeded beyond their - or the world's - wildest dreams.


----------



## RoccoR

P F Tinmore,  _et al,_

You need to get real.



P F Tinmore said:


> If Jews and Arabs are the same race, then the one state solution should be a piece of cake.


*(COMMENT)*

There are more than 450 active street gangs in the City of Los Angeles; all ethnic cultures and racial groups.  There are more than one of each major categories; with multiple Black and Latino Gangs having the largest representation.  They don't all get along, and race has very little to do with it.  Power, influence, territory and money are the biggest drivers.

Don't be foolish.

Most Respectfully,
R


----------



## sealadaigh

RoccoR said:


> P F Tinmore,  _et al,_
> 
> You need to get real.
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> If Jews and Arabs are the same race, then the one state solution should be a piece of cake.
> 
> 
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> There are more than 450 active street gangs in the City of Los Angeles; all ethnic cultures and racial groups.  There are more than one of each major categories; with multiple Black and Latino Gangs having the largest representation.  They don't all get along, and race has very little to do with it.  Power, influence, territory and money are the biggest drivers.
> 
> Don't be foolish.
> 
> Most Respectfully,
> R
Click to expand...


you really do need to get real if you think race has nothing to do with gang affiliation.

but hey, california knows how to party...

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BKtMiCD_oqk]California Love - Tupac (Official Video) - YouTube[/ame]


----------



## georgephillip

P F Tinmore said:


> Bloodrock44 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Bumberclyde said:
> 
> 
> 
> That still doesn't address what he was talking about, which was racism by Israelis towards arabs, but then again, you had no response to that so you try to deflect onto something irrelevant... as usual.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *Hey genius...how many times do we have to tell you that Jews and arabs are of the same race so your term doesn't apply? We are on to your antics. You are using the term to inflame hatred of Jews. Time to stop accusing people of something you are guilty of. Talk about deflection!*
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> If Jews and Arabs are the same race, then the one state solution should be a piece of cake.
Click to expand...


Maybe a Semitic Union is still possible in a single state occupied by UNSC peacekeepers for the next generation or two? Since it was France and Britain and their Sykes-Picot Agreement in 1916 that laid the groundwork for much of the misery in today's Middle East, I'm proposing reparations paid by French and British economic elites (corporations and individuals) that would fund a US, Russian, and Chinese peacekeeping operation on the West Bank and Gaza. (Possibly the US and China could outsource some of their manpower requirement to North and South Korean special forces?) Left to their own devices, Semites don't appear willing to make the necessary compromises for a lasting peace in the Holy Land, and some on both sides appear suicidal enough to introduce nuclear weapons into the "solution."


----------



## sealadaigh

Kondor3 said:


> Neither the Arab-Muslims of Palestine nor the Jews of the State of Israel (or elsewhere) are pure-bloods.
> 
> Both groups carry the genetic markers of the endless array of conquerors and contestants for the region over the past several thousand years.
> 
> And even with all that admixture, the Arab-Muslims of Palestine are probably more narrowly defined, genetically, than their Jewish antagonists.
> 
> Mostly because the Jews have been wandering for 2,000 years and have picked-up strong genetic markers from the Two-Rivers region (Bablylonian, Sumerian, etc.) and the Caucuses and Urals and Slavic and Mongol and Eurasian sources, as well as some heavy genetic contributions from Central and Western Europe over the past several centuries.
> 
> As I recall from earlier readings about the beginning-times for the Jewish Diaspora, Judaism was, for some considerable period of time, entirely embracing and welcoming of new converts from the lands into which they dispersed, to an extent where some Jewish ancestry-lines actually begin with a *post*-Diaspora conversion of Gentiles, rather than a maternal link all the way back to ancient Judea-Israel.
> 
> This, of course, forms the basis for objections that the Jews of today are not the inheritors of the Jews of Antiquity, and, genetically speaking, there seems to be some truth in that assertion; but, as with most things, it's only a Partial Truth, and, in many persons of the Jewish faith, we can, indeed, find genetic markers linking them to the Judea-Israel of Antiquity, so, that's pretty much a 'wash' - a mixed bag.
> 
> But such distinctions grow fuzzy and they lose some measure of importance in light of the mixed racial-ethnic genetic inheritance of the Arab-Muslims of so-called Palestine... part Arab Beduoin blood, part Western European crusader blood, part Hebrew blood, part Byzantine blood, part Roman Legionary blood, part Egyptian blood, part Berber blood, part Iraqi or Persian or Greek blood, part Ottoman Turkish blood, etc... like most folks on the face of the planet... mutts rather than pure-bloods.
> 
> So it comes down to Religion and Culture and Philosophy as much as race.
> 
> The Jews of modern-day Israel are the Cultural and Spiritual and Philosophical Heirs of Judea-Israel of Anquitity, and, after the slaughter of 6,000,000 of their men, women and children at the hands of Euro-trash during the Holocaust, the Jews decided to stop Wandering and to take back their ancestral and spiritual Homeland.
> 
> Nobody was going to hand it to them, and they'd been shoved-around for centuries up to that time, so, they chose to do some shoving themselves, for once, and to stop playing the victim-sheeple.
> 
> They succeeded beyond their - or the world's - wildest dreams.



cool.

england handed it to them.


----------



## Hossfly

sealadaigh said:


> Kondor3 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Neither the Arab-Muslims of Palestine nor the Jews of the State of Israel (or elsewhere) are pure-bloods.
> 
> Both groups carry the genetic markers of the endless array of conquerors and contestants for the region over the past several thousand years.
> 
> And even with all that admixture, the Arab-Muslims of Palestine are probably more narrowly defined, genetically, than their Jewish antagonists.
> 
> Mostly because the Jews have been wandering for 2,000 years and have picked-up strong genetic markers from the Two-Rivers region (Bablylonian, Sumerian, etc.) and the Caucuses and Urals and Slavic and Mongol and Eurasian sources, as well as some heavy genetic contributions from Central and Western Europe over the past several centuries.
> 
> As I recall from earlier readings about the beginning-times for the Jewish Diaspora, Judaism was, for some considerable period of time, entirely embracing and welcoming of new converts from the lands into which they dispersed, to an extent where some Jewish ancestry-lines actually begin with a *post*-Diaspora conversion of Gentiles, rather than a maternal link all the way back to ancient Judea-Israel.
> 
> This, of course, forms the basis for objections that the Jews of today are not the inheritors of the Jews of Antiquity, and, genetically speaking, there seems to be some truth in that assertion; but, as with most things, it's only a Partial Truth, and, in many persons of the Jewish faith, we can, indeed, find genetic markers linking them to the Judea-Israel of Antiquity, so, that's pretty much a 'wash' - a mixed bag.
> 
> But such distinctions grow fuzzy and they lose some measure of importance in light of the mixed racial-ethnic genetic inheritance of the Arab-Muslims of so-called Palestine... part Arab Beduoin blood, part Western European crusader blood, part Hebrew blood, part Byzantine blood, part Roman Legionary blood, part Egyptian blood, part Berber blood, part Iraqi or Persian or Greek blood, part Ottoman Turkish blood, etc... like most folks on the face of the planet... mutts rather than pure-bloods.
> 
> So it comes down to Religion and Culture and Philosophy as much as race.
> 
> The Jews of modern-day Israel are the Cultural and Spiritual and Philosophical Heirs of Judea-Israel of Anquitity, and, after the slaughter of 6,000,000 of their men, women and children at the hands of Euro-trash during the Holocaust, the Jews decided to stop Wandering and to take back their ancestral and spiritual Homeland.
> 
> Nobody was going to hand it to them, and they'd been shoved-around for centuries up to that time, so, they chose to do some shoving themselves, for once, and to stop playing the victim-sheeple.
> 
> They succeeded beyond their - or the world's - wildest dreams.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> cool.
> 
> england handed it to them.
Click to expand...

Pakistan was handed to the Muslims.  Why not tell us how wonderful they are doing there when they are not busy suicide or car bombing innocent people because they don't like that particular sect?


----------



## Bumberclyde

Hossfly said:


> sealadaigh said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Kondor3 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Neither the Arab-Muslims of Palestine nor the Jews of the State of Israel (or elsewhere) are pure-bloods.
> 
> Both groups carry the genetic markers of the endless array of conquerors and contestants for the region over the past several thousand years.
> 
> And even with all that admixture, the Arab-Muslims of Palestine are probably more narrowly defined, genetically, than their Jewish antagonists.
> 
> Mostly because the Jews have been wandering for 2,000 years and have picked-up strong genetic markers from the Two-Rivers region (Bablylonian, Sumerian, etc.) and the Caucuses and Urals and Slavic and Mongol and Eurasian sources, as well as some heavy genetic contributions from Central and Western Europe over the past several centuries.
> 
> As I recall from earlier readings about the beginning-times for the Jewish Diaspora, Judaism was, for some considerable period of time, entirely embracing and welcoming of new converts from the lands into which they dispersed, to an extent where some Jewish ancestry-lines actually begin with a *post*-Diaspora conversion of Gentiles, rather than a maternal link all the way back to ancient Judea-Israel.
> 
> This, of course, forms the basis for objections that the Jews of today are not the inheritors of the Jews of Antiquity, and, genetically speaking, there seems to be some truth in that assertion; but, as with most things, it's only a Partial Truth, and, in many persons of the Jewish faith, we can, indeed, find genetic markers linking them to the Judea-Israel of Antiquity, so, that's pretty much a 'wash' - a mixed bag.
> 
> But such distinctions grow fuzzy and they lose some measure of importance in light of the mixed racial-ethnic genetic inheritance of the Arab-Muslims of so-called Palestine... part Arab Beduoin blood, part Western European crusader blood, part Hebrew blood, part Byzantine blood, part Roman Legionary blood, part Egyptian blood, part Berber blood, part Iraqi or Persian or Greek blood, part Ottoman Turkish blood, etc... like most folks on the face of the planet... mutts rather than pure-bloods.
> 
> So it comes down to Religion and Culture and Philosophy as much as race.
> 
> The Jews of modern-day Israel are the Cultural and Spiritual and Philosophical Heirs of Judea-Israel of Anquitity, and, after the slaughter of 6,000,000 of their men, women and children at the hands of Euro-trash during the Holocaust, the Jews decided to stop Wandering and to take back their ancestral and spiritual Homeland.
> 
> Nobody was going to hand it to them, and they'd been shoved-around for centuries up to that time, so, they chose to do some shoving themselves, for once, and to stop playing the victim-sheeple.
> 
> They succeeded beyond their - or the world's - wildest dreams.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> cool.
> 
> england handed it to them.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Pakistan was handed to the Muslims.  Why not tell us how wonderful they are doing there when they are not busy suicide or car bombing innocent people because they don't like that particular sect?
Click to expand...


because that's not the topic, is it? You're the King (Queen?) of Deflection.


----------



## Hossfly

Bumberclyde said:


> Hossfly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> sealadaigh said:
> 
> 
> 
> cool.
> 
> england handed it to them.
> 
> 
> 
> Pakistan was handed to the Muslims.  Why not tell us how wonderful they are doing there when they are not busy suicide or car bombing innocent people because they don't like that particular sect?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> because that's not the topic, is it? You're the King (Queen?) of Deflection.
Click to expand...

Don't worry, Little Guy, anyone with a head on their shoulder knows that there is racism and religious intolerance all over the Muslim world.  If you want to stick your head in the sand like the rest of the anti-Semites and just want to diss Israel, go right ahead.


----------



## ForeverYoung436

Kondor3 said:


> Neither the Arab-Muslims of Palestine nor the Jews of the State of Israel (or elsewhere) are pure-bloods.
> 
> Both groups carry the genetic markers of the endless array of conquerors and contestants for the region over the past several thousand years.
> 
> And even with all that admixture, the Arab-Muslims of Palestine are probably more narrowly defined, genetically, than their Jewish antagonists.
> 
> Mostly because the Jews have been wandering for 2,000 years and have picked-up strong genetic markers from the Two-Rivers region (Bablylonian, Sumerian, etc.) and the Caucuses and Urals and Slavic and Mongol and Eurasian sources, as well as some heavy genetic contributions from Central and Western Europe over the past several centuries.
> 
> As I recall from earlier readings about the beginning-times for the Jewish Diaspora, Judaism was, for some considerable period of time, entirely embracing and welcoming of new converts from the lands into which they dispersed, to an extent where some Jewish ancestry-lines actually begin with a *post*-Diaspora conversion of Gentiles, rather than a maternal link all the way back to ancient Judea-Israel.
> 
> This, of course, forms the basis for objections that the Jews of today are not the inheritors of the Jews of Antiquity, and, genetically speaking, there seems to be some truth in that assertion; but, as with most things, it's only a Partial Truth, and, in many persons of the Jewish faith, we can, indeed, find genetic markers linking them to the Judea-Israel of Antiquity, so, that's pretty much a 'wash' - a mixed bag.
> 
> But such distinctions grow fuzzy and they lose some measure of importance in light of the mixed racial-ethnic genetic inheritance of the Arab-Muslims of so-called Palestine... part Arab Beduoin blood, part Western European crusader blood, part Hebrew blood, part Byzantine blood, part Roman Legionary blood, part Egyptian blood, part Berber blood, part Iraqi or Persian or Greek blood, part Ottoman Turkish blood, etc... like most folks on the face of the planet... mutts rather than pure-bloods.
> 
> So it comes down to Religion and Culture and Philosophy as much as race.
> 
> The Jews of modern-day Israel are the Cultural and Spiritual and Philosophical Heirs of Judea-Israel of Anquitity, and, after the slaughter of 6,000,000 of their men, women and children at the hands of Euro-trash during the Holocaust, the Jews decided to stop Wandering and to take back their ancestral and spiritual Homeland.
> 
> Nobody was going to hand it to them, and they'd been shoved-around for centuries up to that time, so, they chose to do some shoving themselves, for once, and to stop playing the victim-sheeple.
> 
> They succeeded beyond their - or the world's - wildest dreams.



I must disagree with some of what you said.  They did get back most of historical Eretz Yisroel, but they might still lose the West Bank, or most of it.  Having ALL of that tiny speck of land called Israel in their possession, would have gone beyond their wildest dreams.


----------



## Kondor3

ForeverYoung436 said:


> "..._I must disagree with some of what you said. They did get back most of historical Eretz Yisroel, but they might still lose the West Bank, or most of it. Having ALL of that tiny speck of land called Israel in their possession, would have gone beyond their wildest dreams._"



OK.

"..._They exceeded beyond their most optimistic practical expectations at the time of their Independence in 1948, based upon conditions that existed at the time that they embarked upon that process._"

Fixed... I think.

I presume that I got the rest of it 'right' ?


----------



## Roudy

Bumberclyde said:


> Hossfly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> sealadaigh said:
> 
> 
> 
> cool.
> 
> england handed it to them.
> 
> 
> 
> Pakistan was handed to the Muslims.  Why not tell us how wonderful they are doing there when they are not busy suicide or car bombing innocent people because they don't like that particular sect?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> because that's not the topic, is it? You're the King (Queen?) of Deflection.
Click to expand...

So what's the topic, sock of Gardener?


----------



## Bumberclyde

*Is Israel the Same as South Africa?*

No, because SA finally did the right thing. And Israel has no real heros like Nelson Mandela.


----------



## Bumberclyde

Btw, what's the sock thing with a hole in it? What does that even mean, I'm a sock?


----------



## georgephillip

Kondor3 said:


> Neither the Arab-Muslims of Palestine nor the Jews of the State of Israel (or elsewhere) are pure-bloods.
> 
> Both groups carry the genetic markers of the endless array of conquerors and contestants for the region over the past several thousand years.
> 
> And even with all that admixture, the Arab-Muslims of Palestine are probably more narrowly defined, genetically, than their Jewish antagonists.
> 
> Mostly because the Jews have been wandering for 2,000 years and have picked-up strong genetic markers from the Two-Rivers region (Bablylonian, Sumerian, etc.) and the Caucuses and Urals and Slavic and Mongol and Eurasian sources, as well as some heavy genetic contributions from Central and Western Europe over the past several centuries.
> 
> As I recall from earlier readings about the beginning-times for the Jewish Diaspora, Judaism was, for some considerable period of time, entirely embracing and welcoming of new converts from the lands into which they dispersed, to an extent where some Jewish ancestry-lines actually begin with a *post*-Diaspora conversion of Gentiles, rather than a maternal link all the way back to ancient Judea-Israel.
> 
> This, of course, forms the basis for objections that the Jews of today are not the inheritors of the Jews of Antiquity, and, genetically speaking, there seems to be some truth in that assertion; but, as with most things, it's only a Partial Truth, and, in many persons of the Jewish faith, we can, indeed, find genetic markers linking them to the Judea-Israel of Antiquity, so, that's pretty much a 'wash' - a mixed bag.
> 
> But such distinctions grow fuzzy and they lose some measure of importance in light of the mixed racial-ethnic genetic inheritance of the Arab-Muslims of so-called Palestine... part Arab Beduoin blood, part Western European crusader blood, part Hebrew blood, part Byzantine blood, part Roman Legionary blood, part Egyptian blood, part Berber blood, part Iraqi or Persian or Greek blood, part Ottoman Turkish blood, etc... like most folks on the face of the planet... mutts rather than pure-bloods.
> 
> So it comes down to Religion and Culture and Philosophy as much as race.
> 
> The Jews of modern-day Israel are the Cultural and Spiritual and Philosophical Heirs of Judea-Israel of Anquitity, and, after the slaughter of 6,000,000 of their men, women and children at the hands of Euro-trash during the Holocaust, the Jews decided to stop Wandering and to take back their ancestral and spiritual Homeland.
> 
> Nobody was going to hand it to them, and they'd been shoved-around for centuries up to that time, so, they chose to do some shoving themselves, for once, and to stop playing the victim-sheeple.
> 
> They succeeded beyond their - or the world's - wildest dreams.



So it all comes down to today's Jews deserving the same right to pillage Palestine as their "cultural and spiritual and philosophical" ancestors had to loot Canaan? 

Do you suppose those ancient Jews felt holy when exterminating entire communities?
(Except for females too young for marriage but old enough for rape)

*"THE RELIGIOUS WAR*: Gush Emunim adherents and other Israeli religious zealots plan it. They're active in politics, hold seats in the Knesset, are Netanyahu government coalition partners (including Shas, United Torah and Yisrael Beiteinu) and are prominently represented in Israel's military throughout its ranks and rabbinate. 

"Chief military rabbi, Brigadier General Avichai Rontzki, called Operation Cast Lead a 'religious war' in which it was 'immoral' to show mercy to an enemy of 'murderers'.

"Many others feel the same way, prominently among them graduates of Hesder Yeshivat schools that combine extremist religious indoctrination with military service to defend the Jewish state."

Al-Ahram Weekly | Focus | Religious fundamentalism in Israel


----------



## ForeverYoung436

georgephillip said:


> Kondor3 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Neither the Arab-Muslims of Palestine nor the Jews of the State of Israel (or elsewhere) are pure-bloods.
> 
> Both groups carry the genetic markers of the endless array of conquerors and contestants for the region over the past several thousand years.
> 
> And even with all that admixture, the Arab-Muslims of Palestine are probably more narrowly defined, genetically, than their Jewish antagonists.
> 
> Mostly because the Jews have been wandering for 2,000 years and have picked-up strong genetic markers from the Two-Rivers region (Bablylonian, Sumerian, etc.) and the Caucuses and Urals and Slavic and Mongol and Eurasian sources, as well as some heavy genetic contributions from Central and Western Europe over the past several centuries.
> 
> As I recall from earlier readings about the beginning-times for the Jewish Diaspora, Judaism was, for some considerable period of time, entirely embracing and welcoming of new converts from the lands into which they dispersed, to an extent where some Jewish ancestry-lines actually begin with a *post*-Diaspora conversion of Gentiles, rather than a maternal link all the way back to ancient Judea-Israel.
> 
> This, of course, forms the basis for objections that the Jews of today are not the inheritors of the Jews of Antiquity, and, genetically speaking, there seems to be some truth in that assertion; but, as with most things, it's only a Partial Truth, and, in many persons of the Jewish faith, we can, indeed, find genetic markers linking them to the Judea-Israel of Antiquity, so, that's pretty much a 'wash' - a mixed bag.
> 
> But such distinctions grow fuzzy and they lose some measure of importance in light of the mixed racial-ethnic genetic inheritance of the Arab-Muslims of so-called Palestine... part Arab Beduoin blood, part Western European crusader blood, part Hebrew blood, part Byzantine blood, part Roman Legionary blood, part Egyptian blood, part Berber blood, part Iraqi or Persian or Greek blood, part Ottoman Turkish blood, etc... like most folks on the face of the planet... mutts rather than pure-bloods.
> 
> So it comes down to Religion and Culture and Philosophy as much as race.
> 
> The Jews of modern-day Israel are the Cultural and Spiritual and Philosophical Heirs of Judea-Israel of Anquitity, and, after the slaughter of 6,000,000 of their men, women and children at the hands of Euro-trash during the Holocaust, the Jews decided to stop Wandering and to take back their ancestral and spiritual Homeland.
> 
> Nobody was going to hand it to them, and they'd been shoved-around for centuries up to that time, so, they chose to do some shoving themselves, for once, and to stop playing the victim-sheeple.
> 
> They succeeded beyond their - or the world's - wildest dreams.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> So it all comes down to today's Jews deserving the same right to pillage Palestine as their "cultural and spiritual and philosophical" ancestors had to loot Canaan?
> 
> Do you suppose those ancient Jews felt holy when exterminating entire communities?
> (Except for females too young for marriage but old enough for rape)
> 
> *"THE RELIGIOUS WAR*: Gush Emunim adherents and other Israeli religious zealots plan it. They're active in politics, hold seats in the Knesset, are Netanyahu government coalition partners (including Shas, United Torah and Yisrael Beiteinu) and are prominently represented in Israel's military throughout its ranks and rabbinate.
> 
> "Chief military rabbi, Brigadier General Avichai Rontzki, called Operation Cast Lead a 'religious war' in which it was 'immoral' to show mercy to an enemy of 'murderers'.
> 
> "Many others feel the same way, prominently among them graduates of Hesder Yeshivat schools that combine extremist religious indoctrination with military service to defend the Jewish state."
> 
> Al-Ahram Weekly | Focus | Religious fundamentalism in Israel
Click to expand...


Oh, get over it.  Israel is so small that you need a magnifying glass to find it on a map or a globe.


----------



## georgephillip

Bumberclyde said:


> Btw, what's the sock thing with a hole in it? What does
> that even mean, I'm a sock?



More likely it's more hasbara hate.
Don't take it personally.

"Until a few years ago, the main government agency carrying out Hasbara work was the Israeli Ministry of Foreign Affairs, through its Media and Hasbara department. 

"Under Ehud Olmerts government, and more so under Netanyahus, there was a considerable increase in Hasbara efforts. 

"Prime Minister Netanyahu has launched for the first time a Hasbara Ministry, headed by a government minister (the current hasbara minister is Yuli Edelstein). 

"The Hasbara Ministry includes a situation room, which operates in five languages; it has a new-media team that can reach, according to the offices web page, 100,000 volunteers on social media networks, as well as many bloggers.

"UPDATE: The Ministry of Hasbara is hiring! 'Advantage to minorities and representatives of the gay community.' More details here."

Hasbara: Why does the world fail to understand us? | +972 Magazine


----------



## georgephillip

ForeverYoung436 said:


> georgephillip said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Kondor3 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Neither the Arab-Muslims of Palestine nor the Jews of the State of Israel (or elsewhere) are pure-bloods.
> 
> Both groups carry the genetic markers of the endless array of conquerors and contestants for the region over the past several thousand years.
> 
> And even with all that admixture, the Arab-Muslims of Palestine are probably more narrowly defined, genetically, than their Jewish antagonists.
> 
> Mostly because the Jews have been wandering for 2,000 years and have picked-up strong genetic markers from the Two-Rivers region (Bablylonian, Sumerian, etc.) and the Caucuses and Urals and Slavic and Mongol and Eurasian sources, as well as some heavy genetic contributions from Central and Western Europe over the past several centuries.
> 
> As I recall from earlier readings about the beginning-times for the Jewish Diaspora, Judaism was, for some considerable period of time, entirely embracing and welcoming of new converts from the lands into which they dispersed, to an extent where some Jewish ancestry-lines actually begin with a *post*-Diaspora conversion of Gentiles, rather than a maternal link all the way back to ancient Judea-Israel.
> 
> This, of course, forms the basis for objections that the Jews of today are not the inheritors of the Jews of Antiquity, and, genetically speaking, there seems to be some truth in that assertion; but, as with most things, it's only a Partial Truth, and, in many persons of the Jewish faith, we can, indeed, find genetic markers linking them to the Judea-Israel of Antiquity, so, that's pretty much a 'wash' - a mixed bag.
> 
> But such distinctions grow fuzzy and they lose some measure of importance in light of the mixed racial-ethnic genetic inheritance of the Arab-Muslims of so-called Palestine... part Arab Beduoin blood, part Western European crusader blood, part Hebrew blood, part Byzantine blood, part Roman Legionary blood, part Egyptian blood, part Berber blood, part Iraqi or Persian or Greek blood, part Ottoman Turkish blood, etc... like most folks on the face of the planet... mutts rather than pure-bloods.
> 
> So it comes down to Religion and Culture and Philosophy as much as race.
> 
> The Jews of modern-day Israel are the Cultural and Spiritual and Philosophical Heirs of Judea-Israel of Anquitity, and, after the slaughter of 6,000,000 of their men, women and children at the hands of Euro-trash during the Holocaust, the Jews decided to stop Wandering and to take back their ancestral and spiritual Homeland.
> 
> Nobody was going to hand it to them, and they'd been shoved-around for centuries up to that time, so, they chose to do some shoving themselves, for once, and to stop playing the victim-sheeple.
> 
> They succeeded beyond their - or the world's - wildest dreams.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> So it all comes down to today's Jews deserving the same right to pillage Palestine as their "cultural and spiritual and philosophical" ancestors had to loot Canaan?
> 
> Do you suppose those ancient Jews felt holy when exterminating entire communities?
> (Except for females too young for marriage but old enough for rape)
> 
> *"THE RELIGIOUS WAR*: Gush Emunim adherents and other Israeli religious zealots plan it. They're active in politics, hold seats in the Knesset, are Netanyahu government coalition partners (including Shas, United Torah and Yisrael Beiteinu) and are prominently represented in Israel's military throughout its ranks and rabbinate.
> 
> "Chief military rabbi, Brigadier General Avichai Rontzki, called Operation Cast Lead a 'religious war' in which it was 'immoral' to show mercy to an enemy of 'murderers'.
> 
> "Many others feel the same way, prominently among them graduates of Hesder Yeshivat schools that combine extremist religious indoctrination with military service to defend the Jewish state."
> 
> Al-Ahram Weekly | Focus | Religious fundamentalism in Israel
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Oh, get over it.  Israel is so small that you need a magnifying glass to find it on a map or a globe.
Click to expand...


"Size and shape of the cells

"*The overall size and shape of cancer cells are often abnormal*. They may be either smaller or larger than normal cells. Normal cells often have certain shapes that help them do their jobs. Cancer cells usually do not function in a useful way and their shapes are often distorted. Unlike normal cells that tend to have the same size and shape, cancer cells often are very different in their sizes and shapes."

What do doctors look for under the microscope?


----------



## georgephillip

RoccoR said:


> P F Tinmore,  _et al,_
> 
> You need to get real.
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> If Jews and Arabs are the same race, then the one state solution should be a piece of cake.
> 
> 
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> There are more than 450 active street gangs in the City of Los Angeles; all ethnic cultures and racial groups.  There are more than one of each major categories; with multiple Black and Latino Gangs having the largest representation.  They don't all get along, and race has very little to do with it.  Power, influence, territory and money are the biggest drivers.
> 
> Don't be foolish.
> 
> Most Respectfully,
> R
Click to expand...


Survival is the biggest driver of street gang recruitment.
Since 1% of Americans hoard over 20% of US income and much of that loot has come from off-shoring middle class jobs over the past two generations, today's gangs have more applicants than ever before. 

Two of the biggest LA gangs got their start during Ronald Reagan's Iran/Contra adventures when US trained death squads were murdering hundreds of thousands of Central Americans on behalf of "Freedom," and thousands of survivors flooded into the neighborhoods just west of downtown LA. 

Funny how some of the same people getting rich from Israel's occupation of Palestine also profit from the prison/industrial complex in California today.


----------



## sealadaigh

RoccoR said:


> georgephillip,  _et al,_
> 
> I keep asking!
> 
> 
> 
> georgephillip said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Kondor3 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Then Hamas must be destroyed, like the mad dog that it is.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Racists should be destroyed on both sides of the Green Line starting with those who control the monopoly of violence:
> 
> "According to the 2004 U.S. State Department Country Reports on Human Rights Practices for Israel and the Occupied Territories, the Israeli government had done 'little to reduce institutional, legal, and societal discrimination against the country's Arab citizens.'[8]
> 
> "The 2005 US Department of State report on Israel wrote: '[T]he government generally respected the human rights of its citizens; however, there were problems in some areas, including... institutional, legal, and societal discrimination against the countrys Arab citizens.'[9]
> 
> "The 2010 U.S. State Department Country Report stated that Israeli law prohibits discrimination on the basis of race, and that government effectively enforced these prohibitions.[10] Former Likud MK and Minister of Defense Moshe Arens has criticized the treatment of minorities in Israel, saying that they did not bear the full obligation of Israeli citizenship, nor were they extended the full privileges of citizenship.[11]"
> 
> Racism in Israel - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
> 
> 650, 000 Jews inflicted an ethnocracy on 1.2 million non-Jews in 1948 and three generations later their racist state is swirling the same drain as White South Africa a generation ago.
> 
> Can you hear the FLUSH?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> *(QUESTION)*
> 
> What are the two (or more) races involved in the Racism?
> 
> Most Respectfully,
> R
Click to expand...


first of all, there do not have to be two or more "races" involved in racism.

your simple and simplistic dictionary definitions of "racism" fail to address a very complex problem and are merely an exercise in aggrandising your ego in a rather stupid and ignorant way.

shall i supply you with article after article decrying the racism among jews and israels and zionists and the state of israel? and you have my assurance that, unlike those who are celebrating your stance, my sources will be neutral or pro-israel unlike the regular parade of hate and propaganda of your cohorts.

you are aware that among your suppoters on this board of "israel has no racism" are those who regularly say "palestinians/arabs/muslims are animals" or worse or, in effect. racists and bigots.

forgive me for impugning your self perceived omnipotence, but the constant denial of the existence of a problem will not make it disappear.

vade in pace,


----------



## sealadaigh

Bumberclyde said:


> Btw, what's the sock thing with a hole in it? What does that even mean, I'm a sock?



it means two things.

first it means they think you are an "impersonator" or something like that, something the admin and mods take care of effectively in my opinion and i think your accusers realise this.

the most IMPORTANT meaning it has though is they have no adequate answer to the issue at hand and think that argument strictly by insult and with no content whatsoever serves. the only pirpose it serves though is salving the delicare egos of those who somehow feel that it is a blow to their mangood to admit a mistake. silly really.

it should be obvious to even the most casual of obsevers that their in an incredib;e amount of radism in israel and, if this board is any indication, in jewish culture as a whole, but they really are clueless when it comes to defining the problem and are unwilling to look at the problem of racism as it eists in their own society/culture.


----------



## Bumberclyde

sealadaigh said:


> Bumberclyde said:
> 
> 
> 
> Btw, what's the sock thing with a hole in it? What does that even mean, I'm a sock?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> it means two things.
> 
> first it means they think you are an "impersonator" or something like that, something the admin and mods take care of effectively in my opinion and i think your accusers realise this.
> 
> the most IMPORTANT meaning it has though is they have no adequate answer to the issue at hand and think that argument strictly by insult and with no content whatsoever serves. the only pirpose it serves though is salving the delicare egos of those who somehow feel that it is a blow to their mangood to admit a mistake. silly really.
> 
> it should be obvious to even the most casual of obsevers that their in an incredib;e amount of radism in israel and, if this board is any indication, in jewish culture as a whole, but they really are clueless when it comes to defining the problem and are unwilling to look at the problem of racism as it eists in their own society/culture.
Click to expand...

So is the whole pro-Israel side here a bunch of babies, or is it just those clowns?


----------



## Bumberclyde

Hossfly said:


> Bumberclyde said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Hossfly said:
> 
> 
> 
> Pakistan was handed to the Muslims.  Why not tell us how wonderful they are doing there when they are not busy suicide or car bombing innocent people because they don't like that particular sect?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> because that's not the topic, is it? You're the King (Queen?) of Deflection.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Don't worry, Little Guy, anyone with a head on their shoulder knows that there is racism and religious intolerance all over the Muslim world.  If you want to stick your head in the sand like the rest of the anti-Semites and just want to diss Israel, go right ahead.
Click to expand...


If you want to start a thread on that, go ahead, I might even agree with you on some of the stuff. But does Muslim racism even justify taking their land in Palestine and passing a law so that they can't return to it, ever?


----------



## sealadaigh

Bumberclyde said:


> sealadaigh said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Bumberclyde said:
> 
> 
> 
> Btw, what's the sock thing with a hole in it? What does that even mean, I'm a sock?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> it means two things.
> 
> first it means they think you are an "impersonator" or something like that, something the admin and mods take care of effectively in my opinion and i think your accusers realise this.
> 
> the most IMPORTANT meaning it has though is they have no adequate answer to the issue at hand and think that argument strictly by insult and with no content whatsoever serves. the only pirpose it serves though is salving the delicare egos of those who somehow feel that it is a blow to their mangood to admit a mistake. silly really.
> 
> it should be obvious to even the most casual of obsevers that their in an incredib;e amount of radism in israel and, if this board is any indication, in jewish culture as a whole, but they really are clueless when it comes to defining the problem and are unwilling to look at the problem of racism as it eists in their own society/culture.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> So is the whole pro-Israel side here a bunch of babies, or is it just those clowns?
Click to expand...



personally, i think this is not the place to discuss it and i should heed my own advice. in the future i will PM.

that being said though, the accusations of people impersonating other people or being anotheperson is generally limited to a few posters.

the topic is, of course, is israel the same as south arica and while their are similarities, to say they are the same would probably be erroneous.

it would not be a mistake at all though to say that the west bank is very close to being the same as south africa, and that is israel's doing.

personally, i think pro-palestinian and human rights supporters realoy make a mistake and play into the hands of the colonialist type arguments of the zionists by not differentiating between the two.


----------



## sealadaigh

Hossfly said:


> Bumberclyde said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Hossfly said:
> 
> 
> 
> Pakistan was handed to the Muslims.  Why not tell us how wonderful they are doing there when they are not busy suicide or car bombing innocent people because they don't like that particular sect?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> because that's not the topic, is it? You're the King (Queen?) of Deflection.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Don't worry, Little Guy, anyone with a head on their shoulder knows that there is racism and religious intolerance all over the Muslim world.  If you want to stick your head in the sand like the rest of the anti-Semites and just want to diss Israel, go right ahead.
Click to expand...


in your response, you are just confirming his assertion about your constantly deflecting.

there is racism all over the world, to include here in the good ol' USA, but this is the palestine/israel forum and not some place to promote your bigotry and hatred of muslims at will. try to confine your extraordinary racist and hateful comments about peoples based upon their religion to matters concerning israel and palestine.

guess what? the fact that i am not discussing my ongoing bout with south east asian jungle rot from living in a wet climate does not mean thaat i am not concerned about it.

those "dog playing poker" pictures bug me too, and sometimes those voices of talking cats that i hear late at night.

israel has a lot of racism, or bigotry, or discrimination...


----------



## Roudy

georgephillip said:


> Bumberclyde said:
> 
> 
> 
> Btw, what's the sock thing with a hole in it? What does
> that even mean, I'm a sock?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> More likely it's more hasbara hate.
> Don't take it personally.
> 
> "Until a few years ago, the main government agency carrying out Hasbara work was the Israeli Ministry of Foreign Affairs, through its Media and Hasbara department.
> 
> "Under Ehud Olmerts government, and more so under Netanyahus, there was a considerable increase in Hasbara efforts.
> 
> "Prime Minister Netanyahu has launched for the first time a Hasbara Ministry, headed by a government minister (the current hasbara minister is Yuli Edelstein).
> 
> "The Hasbara Ministry includes a situation room, which operates in five languages; it has a new-media team that can reach, according to the offices web page, 100,000 volunteers on social media networks, as well as many bloggers.
> 
> "UPDATE: The Ministry of Hasbara is hiring! 'Advantage to minorities and representatives of the gay community.' More details here."
> 
> Hasbara: Why does the world fail to understand us? | +972 Magazine
Click to expand...

Somebody spreading IslamoNazi hate and terrorist propaganda shouldn't really be talking?  You know the Internet is being watched by the govt., and guess what type they're profiling?


----------



## Roudy

sealadaigh said:


> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> 
> georgephillip,  _et al,_
> 
> I keep asking!
> 
> 
> 
> georgephillip said:
> 
> 
> 
> Racists should be destroyed on both sides of the Green Line starting with those who control the monopoly of violence:
> 
> "According to the 2004 U.S. State Department Country Reports on Human Rights Practices for Israel and the Occupied Territories, the Israeli government had done 'little to reduce institutional, legal, and societal discrimination against the country's Arab citizens.'[8]
> 
> "The 2005 US Department of State report on Israel wrote: '[T]he government generally respected the human rights of its citizens; however, there were problems in some areas, including... institutional, legal, and societal discrimination against the countrys Arab citizens.'[9]
> 
> "The 2010 U.S. State Department Country Report stated that Israeli law prohibits discrimination on the basis of race, and that government effectively enforced these prohibitions.[10] Former Likud MK and Minister of Defense Moshe Arens has criticized the treatment of minorities in Israel, saying that they did not bear the full obligation of Israeli citizenship, nor were they extended the full privileges of citizenship.[11]"
> 
> Racism in Israel - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
> 
> 650, 000 Jews inflicted an ethnocracy on 1.2 million non-Jews in 1948 and three generations later their racist state is swirling the same drain as White South Africa a generation ago.
> 
> Can you hear the FLUSH?
> 
> 
> 
> *(QUESTION)*
> 
> What are the two (or more) races involved in the Racism?
> 
> Most Respectfully,
> R
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> first of all, there do not have to be two or more "races" involved in racism.
> 
> your simple and simplistic dictionary definitions of "racism" fail to address a very complex problem and are merely an exercise in aggrandising your ego in a rather stupid and ignorant way.
> 
> shall i supply you with article after article decrying the racism among jews and israels and zionists and the state of israel? and you have my assurance that, unlike those who are celebrating your stance, my sources will be neutral or pro-israel unlike the regular parade of hate and propaganda of your cohorts.
> 
> you are aware that among your suppoters on this board of "israel has no racism" are those who regularly say "palestinians/arabs/muslims are animals" or worse or, in effect. racists and bigots.
> 
> forgive me for impugning your self perceived omnipotence, but the constant denial of the existence of a problem will not make it disappear.
> 
> vade in pace,
Click to expand...

Oh so it exists because bigot anti Semites like you say so?  Yeah, who cares what the definition of racism or apartheid is?  SQUEAL says there is. And that's what matters. Ha ha ha.


----------



## Roudy

sealadaigh said:


> Hossfly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Bumberclyde said:
> 
> 
> 
> because that's not the topic, is it? You're the King (Queen?) of Deflection.
> 
> 
> 
> Don't worry, Little Guy, anyone with a head on their shoulder knows that there is racism and religious intolerance all over the Muslim world.  If you want to stick your head in the sand like the rest of the anti-Semites and just want to diss Israel, go right ahead.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> in your response, you are just confirming his assertion about your constantly deflecting.
> 
> there is racism all over the world, to include here in the good ol' USA, but this is the palestine/israel forum and not some place to promote your bigotry and hatred of muslims at will. try to confine your extraordinary racist and hateful comments about peoples based upon their religion to matters concerning israel and palestine.
> 
> guess what? the fact that i am not discussing my ongoing bout with south east asian jungle rot from living in a wet climate does not mean thaat i am not concerned about it.
> 
> those "dog playing poker" pictures bug me too, and sometimes those voices of talking cats that i hear late at night.
> 
> israel has a lot of racism, or bigotry, or discrimination...
Click to expand...

Guess what...guess what...guess what...IT DOESN'T...as eloquently proven many times. The fact that you keep repeating and whining about it doesn't make it true.


----------



## Kondor3

Racism, even in the common vernacular, is most widely and broadly understood to mean bias or preference towards, or conflict between, distinguishable Race(s)...

There is no such thing as a Jewish Race or an Arab Race...

Virtually all of the peoples of the Mediterranean Basin are 'mutts' - poly-ethnic (and even poly-racial) 'beneficiaries' of a very long (20,000 or 30,000 years or better) and very broad admixture of ethnicities and races which dwell in the region...

Even 'ethnicity' is blurred when attempting to distinguish Jews from Arabs in Israel-Palestine, although some considerable percentage of the Jews living there are, stereotypically, a bit more light-skinned and European in appearance than their Arab-Muslim Palestinian neighbors...

We're not talking about Race Hatred between the parties...

We're talking about Group-vs-Group Hatred between the parties...

The dividing line between those Groups is largely defined by Religion and Cultural Inheritance and Philosophical Differences and immediate ancestry, as that pertains to old land-rights in the region.

Attempting to portray this particular Manifestation of Group Hate as Racial Hate is an artificial construct designed by pro-Palestinian advocates to trigger the maximum visceral revulsion for the Israeli side of this Hate-Relationship while leaving the Palestinian side seeming to be innocent (or, at least, less guilty) of such passions - given that Racial Hatred, nowadays, triggers revulsion in many Western countries.

But it's a falsehood - an artificial construct - vigorously pursued, and cleverly contrived and sustained - but, in the end, it's still a falsehood - and an artificial construct - and a propaganda tactic that needs to be called-out for what it is.

This is not a case of Race Hatred.

This is a case of Religious and Cultural Differences and Hostility.

And, in actuality, the Palestinians behave far more despicably in this than do their Israeli counterparts.

I have yet to see Israelis brainwashing their little children through their childrens' television programming and schools that it is God's Work to kill Palestinians, nor to pledge to drive the Palestinians into the sea, nor to wipe the Palestinians from the face of the earth, nor that a Jew will go to Heaven if he (or she) dies killing Palestinians.

I think we've lost a little perspective here, regarding specifics, intensity, scale, frequency and audience - in the context of Hate-Mongering by one party or the other.


----------



## sealadaigh

Roudy said:


> georgephillip said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Bumberclyde said:
> 
> 
> 
> Btw, what's the sock thing with a hole in it? What does
> that even mean, I'm a sock?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> More likely it's more hasbara hate.
> Don't take it personally.
> 
> "Until a few years ago, the main government agency carrying out Hasbara work was the Israeli Ministry of Foreign Affairs, through its Media and Hasbara department.
> 
> "Under Ehud Olmerts government, and more so under Netanyahus, there was a considerable increase in Hasbara efforts.
> 
> "Prime Minister Netanyahu has launched for the first time a Hasbara Ministry, headed by a government minister (the current hasbara minister is Yuli Edelstein).
> 
> "The Hasbara Ministry includes a situation room, which operates in five languages; it has a new-media team that can reach, according to the offices web page, 100,000 volunteers on social media networks, as well as many bloggers.
> 
> "UPDATE: The Ministry of Hasbara is hiring! 'Advantage to minorities and representatives of the gay community.' More details here."
> 
> Hasbara: Why does the world fail to understand us? | +972 Magazine
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Somebody spreading IslamoNazi hate and terrorist propaganda shouldn't really be talking?  You know the Internet is being watched by the govt., and guess what type they're profiling?
Click to expand...



blustery immigrants from iran who pretend to be good americans but know very little about our country?


----------



## sealadaigh

Roudy said:


> sealadaigh said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Hossfly said:
> 
> 
> 
> Don't worry, Little Guy, anyone with a head on their shoulder knows that there is racism and religious intolerance all over the Muslim world.  If you want to stick your head in the sand like the rest of the anti-Semites and just want to diss Israel, go right ahead.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> in your response, you are just confirming his assertion about your constantly deflecting.
> 
> there is racism all over the world, to include here in the good ol' USA, but this is the palestine/israel forum and not some place to promote your bigotry and hatred of muslims at will. try to confine your extraordinary racist and hateful comments about peoples based upon their religion to matters concerning israel and palestine.
> 
> guess what? the fact that i am not discussing my ongoing bout with south east asian jungle rot from living in a wet climate does not mean thaat i am not concerned about it.
> 
> those "dog playing poker" pictures bug me too, and sometimes those voices of talking cats that i hear late at night.
> 
> israel has a lot of racism, or bigotry, or discrimination...
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Guess what...guess what...guess what...IT DOESN'T...as eloquently proven many times. The fact that you keep repeating and whining about it doesn't make it true.
Click to expand...


guess what...guess what...guess what...i, and the rest of the honest world, disagree.


----------



## RoccoR

sealadaigh,  

OK guy, lean back and take a big breath.  We all feel your pain.



sealadaigh said:


> those "dog playing poker" pictures bug me too, and sometimes those voices of talking cats that i hear late at night.


*(COMMENT)*

I have my Black Lab (Raven) right beside me here.  She likes the pictures:






sealadaigh said:


> guess what...guess what...guess what...i, and the rest of the honest world, disagree.


*(COMMENT)*

I'm still looking for the rest of the "honest world."  Just because the Israelis are suspicious and untrusting of the neighborhood, doesn't mean they are paranoid or racist.  It only means that the neighbors have relatives with dubious pasts.

Most Respectfully,
R


----------



## toastman

sealadaigh said:


> Hossfly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Bumberclyde said:
> 
> 
> 
> because that's not the topic, is it? You're the King (Queen?) of Deflection.
> 
> 
> 
> Don't worry, Little Guy, anyone with a head on their shoulder knows that there is racism and religious intolerance all over the Muslim world.  If you want to stick your head in the sand like the rest of the anti-Semites and just want to diss Israel, go right ahead.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> in your response, you are just confirming his assertion about your constantly deflecting.
> 
> there is racism all over the world, to include here in the good ol' USA, but this is the palestine/israel forum and not some place to promote your bigotry and hatred of muslims at will. try to confine your extraordinary racist and hateful comments about peoples based upon their religion to matters concerning israel and palestine.
> 
> guess what? the fact that i am not discussing my ongoing bout with south east asian jungle rot from living in a wet climate does not mean thaat i am not concerned about it.
> 
> those "dog playing poker" pictures bug me too, and sometimes those voices of talking cats that i hear late at night.
> 
> *israel has a lot of racism, or bigotry, or discrimination*...
Click to expand...


You can repeat that (the bold) all the time, but when it comes to racism, bigotry and discrimination...
well, you know EXACTLY how that sentence ends


----------



## Roudy

sealadaigh said:


> Roudy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> georgephillip said:
> 
> 
> 
> More likely it's more hasbara hate.
> Don't take it personally.
> 
> "Until a few years ago, the main government agency carrying out Hasbara work was the Israeli Ministry of Foreign Affairs, through its Media and Hasbara department.
> 
> "Under Ehud Olmerts government, and more so under Netanyahus, there was a considerable increase in Hasbara efforts.
> 
> "Prime Minister Netanyahu has launched for the first time a Hasbara Ministry, headed by a government minister (the current hasbara minister is Yuli Edelstein).
> 
> "The Hasbara Ministry includes a situation room, which operates in five languages; it has a new-media team that can reach, according to the offices web page, 100,000 volunteers on social media networks, as well as many bloggers.
> 
> "UPDATE: The Ministry of Hasbara is hiring! 'Advantage to minorities and representatives of the gay community.' More details here."
> 
> Hasbara: Why does the world fail to understand us? | +972 Magazine
> 
> 
> 
> Somebody spreading IslamoNazi hate and terrorist propaganda shouldn't really be talking?  You know the Internet is being watched by the govt., and guess what type they're profiling?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> blustery immigrants from iran who pretend to be good americans but know very little about our country?
Click to expand...

I guess we should go with Irish, anti Semite neo Nazi Islamic terrorist worshippers like you then.


----------



## Roudy

sealadaigh said:


> Roudy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> sealadaigh said:
> 
> 
> 
> in your response, you are just confirming his assertion about your constantly deflecting.
> 
> there is racism all over the world, to include here in the good ol' USA, but this is the palestine/israel forum and not some place to promote your bigotry and hatred of muslims at will. try to confine your extraordinary racist and hateful comments about peoples based upon their religion to matters concerning israel and palestine.
> 
> guess what? the fact that i am not discussing my ongoing bout with south east asian jungle rot from living in a wet climate does not mean thaat i am not concerned about it.
> 
> those "dog playing poker" pictures bug me too, and sometimes those voices of talking cats that i hear late at night.
> 
> israel has a lot of racism, or bigotry, or discrimination...
> 
> 
> 
> Guess what...guess what...guess what...IT DOESN'T...as eloquently proven many times. The fact that you keep repeating and whining about it doesn't make it true.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> guess what...guess what...guess what...i, and the rest of the honest world, disagree.
Click to expand...

You and the Islamic world and a bunch of Nazi anti Semites don't count.


----------



## Roudy

RoccoR said:


> sealadaigh,
> 
> OK guy, lean back and take a big breath.  We all feel your pain.
> 
> 
> 
> sealadaigh said:
> 
> 
> 
> those "dog playing poker" pictures bug me too, and sometimes those voices of talking cats that i hear late at night.
> 
> 
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> I have my Black Lab (Raven) right beside me here.  She likes the pictures:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> sealadaigh said:
> 
> 
> 
> guess what...guess what...guess what...i, and the rest of the honest world, disagree.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> I'm still looking for the rest of the "honest world."  Just because the Israelis are suspicious and untrusting of the neighborhood, doesn't mean they are paranoid or racist.  It only means that the neighbors have relatives with dubious pasts.
> 
> Most Respectfully,
> R
Click to expand...

And that's exactly why Squeal admires them.


----------



## Hossfly

Bumberclyde said:


> Hossfly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Bumberclyde said:
> 
> 
> 
> because that's not the topic, is it? You're the King (Queen?) of Deflection.
> 
> 
> 
> Don't worry, Little Guy, anyone with a head on their shoulder knows that there is racism and religious intolerance all over the Muslim world.  If you want to stick your head in the sand like the rest of the anti-Semites and just want to diss Israel, go right ahead.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> If you want to start a thread on that, go ahead, I might even agree with you on some of the stuff. But does Muslim racism even justify taking their land in Palestine and passing a law so that they can't return to it, ever?
Click to expand...

Can you tell us why the UN said that anyone who has been in the area only two years could be considered a refugee?  Do you consider someone who has been in any area for only two years indigenous to that area?  Yessiree, we sure did see the millions and millions of actual refugees as a result of World War II clamoring to get back to their original countries and reclaim all their old houses , didn't we, BumberClyde?  Meanwhile, I guess you are another one who thinks Winston Churchill and the officials in the area who saw what was going on were liars when they reported that these Arabs were coming in droves from the poor surrounding countries when the Jews had jobs from them.  Are you comatose, or don't you see how the population is changing in Europe, America and Canada where people are swarming in from different countries?  I don't know why these posters like BumberClyde think that most of the viewers actually think they care about the Arabs, but it is the same whine from them about the Arabs not being able to return.


----------



## Hossfly

toastman said:


> sealadaigh said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Hossfly said:
> 
> 
> 
> Don't worry, Little Guy, anyone with a head on their shoulder knows that there is racism and religious intolerance all over the Muslim world.  If you want to stick your head in the sand like the rest of the anti-Semites and just want to diss Israel, go right ahead.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> in your response, you are just confirming his assertion about your constantly deflecting.
> 
> there is racism all over the world, to include here in the good ol' USA, but this is the palestine/israel forum and not some place to promote your bigotry and hatred of muslims at will. try to confine your extraordinary racist and hateful comments about peoples based upon their religion to matters concerning israel and palestine.
> 
> guess what? the fact that i am not discussing my ongoing bout with south east asian jungle rot from living in a wet climate does not mean thaat i am not concerned about it.
> 
> those "dog playing poker" pictures bug me too, and sometimes those voices of talking cats that i hear late at night.
> 
> *israel has a lot of racism, or bigotry, or discrimination*...
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You can repeat that (the bold) all the time, but when it comes to racism, bigotry and discrimination...
> well, you know EXACTLY how that sentence ends
Click to expand...

Don't worry, Toast.  I think most viewers realize that Seal and company are not interested in what is happening to innocent people in the Muslim world.  You will never see them on any forum discussing this, nor would they ever discuss the terrible racism in the Muslim world where people not only are murdered for their religious beliefs but also for the color of their skin.  Meanwhile, Seal had a heck of a good time playing Solly the Jewish longshoreman plus other characters , like these characters actually had something to do with the Middle East.  Now he is having a heck of a good time getting on his high horse.


----------



## Kondor3

Now... now... now... ya'll aren't saying that Muslims are capable of discrimination, above and beyond that which they accuse Israel of manifesting, are you?


----------



## Roudy

Kondor3 said:


> Now... now... now... ya'll aren't saying that Muslims are capable of discrimination, above and beyond that which they accuse Israel of manifesting, are you?


Anti Semites hold Israel to standards even higher than Western nations.


----------



## georgephillip

sealadaigh said:


> Bumberclyde said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> sealadaigh said:
> 
> 
> 
> it means two things.
> 
> first it means they think you are an "impersonator" or something like that, something the admin and mods take care of effectively in my opinion and i think your accusers realise this.
> 
> the most IMPORTANT meaning it has though is they have no adequate answer to the issue at hand and think that argument strictly by insult and with no content whatsoever serves. the only pirpose it serves though is salving the delicare egos of those who somehow feel that it is a blow to their mangood to admit a mistake. silly really.
> 
> it should be obvious to even the most casual of obsevers that their in an incredib;e amount of radism in israel and, if this board is any indication, in jewish culture as a whole, but they really are clueless when it comes to defining the problem and are unwilling to look at the problem of racism as it eists in their own society/culture.
> 
> 
> 
> So is the whole pro-Israel side here a bunch of babies, or is it just those clowns?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> personally, i think this is not the place to discuss it and i should heed my own advice. in the future i will PM.
> 
> that being said though, the accusations of people impersonating other people or being anotheperson is generally limited to a few posters.
> 
> the topic is, of course, is israel the same as south arica and while their are similarities, to say they are the same would probably be erroneous.
> 
> it would not be a mistake at all though to say that the west bank is very close to being the same as south africa, and that is israel's doing.
> 
> personally, i think pro-palestinian and human rights supporters realoy make a mistake and play into the hands of the colonialist type arguments of the zionists by not differentiating between the two.
Click to expand...


Zionists have never based their right to occupy  Palestine on anything except superior military might, always backed-up by the reigning superpower of the day; their conduct today on the West Bank and Gaza is a continuation of the policy of "creeping annexation" until all the land between the River and the sea is ruled by Jews.

"In 2007, the UN Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination reported that Palestinians and Israeli settlers in the occupied territories are subject to different criminal laws, leading to longer detention and harsher punishments for Palestinians than for Israelis for the same offenses.[68] 

"Amnesty International has reported that in the West Bank, Israeli settlers and soldiers who engage in abuses against Palestinians, including unlawful killings, enjoy 'impunity' from punishment and are rarely prosecuted. 

"However Palestinians detained by Israeli security forces may be imprisoned for prolonged periods of time, and reports of their torture and other ill-treatment are not credibly investigated.[69][70][71]

"John Dugard has compared Israeli imprisonment of Palestinians to policies of Apartheid-era South Africa, saying 'Apartheid's security police practiced torture on a large scale. So do the Israeli security forces. There were many political prisoners on Robben Island but there are more Palestinian political prisoners in Israeli jails.' [72]"

Israel and the apartheid analogy - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


----------



## georgephillip

Roudy said:


> georgephillip said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Bumberclyde said:
> 
> 
> 
> Btw, what's the sock thing with a hole in it? What does
> that even mean, I'm a sock?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> More likely it's more hasbara hate.
> Don't take it personally.
> 
> "Until a few years ago, the main government agency carrying out Hasbara work was the Israeli Ministry of Foreign Affairs, through its Media and Hasbara department.
> 
> "Under Ehud Olmerts government, and more so under Netanyahus, there was a considerable increase in Hasbara efforts.
> 
> "Prime Minister Netanyahu has launched for the first time a Hasbara Ministry, headed by a government minister (the current hasbara minister is Yuli Edelstein).
> 
> "The Hasbara Ministry includes a situation room, which operates in five languages; it has a new-media team that can reach, according to the offices web page, 100,000 volunteers on social media networks, as well as many bloggers.
> 
> "UPDATE: The Ministry of Hasbara is hiring! 'Advantage to minorities and representatives of the gay community.' More details here."
> 
> Hasbara: Why does the world fail to understand us? | +972 Magazine
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Somebody spreading IslamoNazi hate and terrorist propaganda shouldn't really be talking?  You know the Internet is being watched by the govt., and guess what type they're profiling?
Click to expand...


Profession writers looking to buy pressure cookers and their husbands researching backpacks?

"Michelle Catalano and her family were shaken and made anxious on Wednesday after being visited by 'six gentleman in casual clothes'who turned out to be local police operating under the authority of, or least in connection with, federal agenciesand getting 'peppered' with questions resulting from a series of coincidently entered search terms made on their home computer in recent weeks.

"Catalano, who writes professionally, explained the whole story in her own words on her blog. In way of background, she explained:

"Most of it was innocent enough. I had researched pressure cookers. My husband was looking for a backpack. And maybe in another time those two things together would have seemed innocuous, but we are in these times...'

Online Search for Pressure Cooker Sparks Police Visit | Common Dreams


----------



## Hossfly

georgephillip said:


> Roudy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> georgephillip said:
> 
> 
> 
> More likely it's more hasbara hate.
> Don't take it personally.
> 
> "Until a few years ago, the main government agency carrying out Hasbara work was the Israeli Ministry of Foreign Affairs, through its Media and Hasbara department.
> 
> "Under Ehud Olmerts government, and more so under Netanyahus, there was a considerable increase in Hasbara efforts.
> 
> "Prime Minister Netanyahu has launched for the first time a Hasbara Ministry, headed by a government minister (the current hasbara minister is Yuli Edelstein).
> 
> "The Hasbara Ministry includes a situation room, which operates in five languages; it has a new-media team that can reach, according to the offices web page, 100,000 volunteers on social media networks, as well as many bloggers.
> 
> "UPDATE: The Ministry of Hasbara is hiring! 'Advantage to minorities and representatives of the gay community.' More details here."
> 
> Hasbara: Why does the world fail to understand us? | +972 Magazine
> 
> 
> 
> Somebody spreading IslamoNazi hate and terrorist propaganda shouldn't really be talking?  You know the Internet is being watched by the govt., and guess what type they're profiling?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Profession writers looking to buy pressure cookers and their husbands researching backpacks?
> 
> "Michelle Catalano and her family were shaken and made anxious on Wednesday after being visited by 'six gentleman in casual clothes'who turned out to be local police operating under the authority of, or least in connection with, federal agenciesand getting 'peppered' with questions resulting from a series of coincidently entered search terms made on their home computer in recent weeks.
> 
> "Catalano, who writes professionally, explained the whole story in her own words on her blog. In way of background, she explained:
> 
> "Most of it was innocent enough. I had researched pressure cookers. My husband was looking for a backpack. And maybe in another time those two things together would have seemed innocuous, but we are in these times...'
> 
> Online Search for Pressure Cooker Sparks Police Visit | Common Dreams
Click to expand...

Since Georgie Boy is so, so intelligent and naturally loves this country very much, he certainly must appreciate that people all over the world have differences of opinions on many different subjects, and no doubt he likes the fact that here in America people are allowed to express themselves freely, just as Georgie Boy does on the Internet, bashing Israel and those he calls "kosher" every chance he gets.

A myth-illogical apartheid


----------



## Kondor3

georgephillip said:


> "...Zionists have never based their right to occupy  Palestine on anything except superior military might, always backed-up by the reigning superpower of the day..."



Yep... fun, ain't it?



> "..._their conduct today on the West Bank and Gaza is a continuation of the policy of 'creeping annexation' until all the land between the River and the sea is ruled by Jews_..."



Yep... this was well-known, as far back as 1922, never mind 1948...







...and it is just as true 91 years later, in 2013, as it was in 1922.

Nothing new there.



> "..._In 2007, the UN Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination_..."



The Israelis are not out to discriminate against Palestinians.

They just want them to move outside the country, as that country is defined in the 1922 League of Nations Partition Plan.

Once that happens (_and it will - just look at today's maps of the few slices of non-contiguous land still under Palestinian control within those borders_) all of that horseshit goes away.


----------



## sealadaigh

Roudy said:


> Kondor3 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Now... now... now... ya'll aren't saying that Muslims are capable of discrimination, above and beyond that which they accuse Israel of manifesting, are you?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Anti Semites hold Israel to standards even higher than Western nations.
Click to expand...


why post a pic from a hate site called bare naked islam.

i can't believe you peeps. you actually have no idea what you are doing, do you.


----------



## sealadaigh

RoccoR said:


> sealadaigh,
> 
> OK guy, lean back and take a big breath.  We all feel your pain.
> 
> 
> 
> sealadaigh said:
> 
> 
> 
> those "dog playing poker" pictures bug me too, and sometimes those voices of talking cats that i hear late at night.
> 
> 
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> I have my Black Lab (Raven) right beside me here.  She likes the pictures:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> sealadaigh said:
> 
> 
> 
> guess what...guess what...guess what...i, and the rest of the honest world, disagree.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> I'm still looking for the rest of the "honest world."  Just because the Israelis are suspicious and untrusting of the neighborhood, doesn't mean they are paranoid or racist.  It only means that the neighbors have relatives with dubious pasts.
> 
> Most Respectfully,
> R
Click to expand...


i'll see your chicken and raise you a dozen eggs.

just because the israelis are paranoid and racist doesn't mean they should blame it on their neighbours. the palestinians, after all, did not flood post war europe and try to create a state by marginalising the native peoples.


----------



## RoccoR

sealadaigh,  _et al,_

Oh, I can't believe you said that.



sealadaigh said:


> just because the israelis are paranoid and racist doesn't mean they should blame it on their neighbours. the palestinians, after all, did not flood post war europe and try to create a state by marginalising the native peoples.



Well yeah.  We thought of it first!  When did you ever know a Palestinian to have an original thought?

v/r
R


----------



## Kondor3

sealadaigh said:


> "..._why post a pic from a hate site called bare naked islam. i can't believe you peeps. you actually have no idea what you are doing, do you._"



Doesn't matter.

I spotted the image elsewhere, months ago, and Googled it, today, to insert on this page.

And clicked on the first iteration found on the Google Image search-results page, to copy its URL without even looking at the URL, in order to bring it here.

It's a great image.

It sends exactly the right message, to counter Islamic claims of discrimination.

In effect: "_Yeah. Look who's talking. You've got a long-standing tradition of that yourselves, stretching back more than a thousand years, and still going strong._"

That's the message.

That's the value of the image.

Not whether the chosen iteration on a search-engine came from Site A or B or C.

Don't bother me with the small shit when I'm on a roll.

Or shall I pull-up something from any of a hundred-and-one Islamic hate-sites as a counterweight?

I really don't see the point, but I'll be happy to oblige, if that is indicated later.


----------



## Roudy

RoccoR said:


> sealadaigh,  _et al,_
> 
> Oh, I can't believe you said that.
> 
> 
> 
> sealadaigh said:
> 
> 
> 
> just because the israelis are paranoid and racist doesn't mean they should blame it on their neighbours. the palestinians, after all, did not flood post war europe and try to create a state by marginalising the native peoples.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Well yeah.  We thought of it first!  When did you ever know a Palestinian to have an original thought?
> 
> v/r
> R
Click to expand...

Aw come on Rocco, Palestinians, racist or bigoted?!  Naaaaah. Who woulda eva thought?!  

If you ask me, with supporters like Squeal why would Palestinians ever need enemies?  Just my humble opinion.


----------



## Bumberclyde

Kondor3 said:


>



2 questions I'm curious about:

1) How/why did the Jews end up with the good part with the beaches and coastline and the arabs got sand?

2) When these lines were drawn up, were the arabs all supposed to leave the Jewish part (by force if necessary), or was everyone already living there going to be allowed to stay put?

Thanks.


----------



## toastman

Bumberclyde said:


> Kondor3 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 2 questions I'm curious about:
> 
> 1) How/why did the Jews end up with the good part with the beaches and coastline and the arabs got sand?
> 
> 2) When these lines were drawn up, were the arabs all supposed to leave the Jewish part (by force if necessary), or was everyone already living there going to be allowed to stay put?
> 
> Thanks.
Click to expand...



1) The land that was allotted to them in the U.N partition plan was the reason they got the beaches. However, the Arabs got Gaza, which is by the beach

2) Good question. I would imagine that if the Arabs wanted to stay in the Jewish part, they would have to become Israeli civilians. And vice versa for the Jews living in the Arab side.


----------



## Bumberclyde

toastman said:


> Bumberclyde said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Kondor3 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 2 questions I'm curious about:
> 
> 1) How/why did the Jews end up with the good part with the beaches and coastline and the arabs got sand?
> 
> 2) When these lines were drawn up, were the arabs all supposed to leave the Jewish part (by force if necessary), or was everyone already living there going to be allowed to stay put?
> 
> Thanks.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 1) The land that was allotted to them in the U.N partition plan was the reason they got the beaches. However, the Arabs got Gaza, which is by the beach
> 
> 2) Good question. I would imagine that if the Arabs wanted to stay in the Jewish part, they would have to become Israeli civilians. And vice versa for the Jews living in the Arab side.
Click to expand...

1) the UN didn't exist back in 1922.
2) So why were the Jews allowed to kick out the arabs and pass a law of non-return for them?


----------



## toastman

Whoops i thought you were talking about the 1947 partition plan nevermind


----------



## Kondor3

Bumberclyde said:


> Kondor3 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 2 questions I'm curious about:
> 
> 1) How/why did the Jews end up with the good part with the beaches and coastline and the arabs got sand?
Click to expand...


I dunno. The British and the League of Nations liked the Jews better than the Arabs?



> "..._2) When these lines were drawn up, were the arabs all supposed to leave the Jewish part (by force if necessary), or was everyone already living there going to be allowed to stay put?. Thanks._"



I dunno. My guess is that, in each section, the fewer of The Opposite present upon one's soil, the better; for both Jews and Arabs; akin to the Expulsions of Jews from Arab lands during the 1948-1970 timeframe.

In any event, it is clear that the Israelis are playing to the 1922 Partition Map, and always have been. They're nearly there, now, and I wish them success in the end-game.


----------



## Indofred

georgephillip said:


> "The question is not 'Is Israel the same as South Africa?'



What a silly OP.
SA is nothing like Israel; South Africa was never blindly paid for by the American taxpayer and America never started any wars, leading to the deaths of so many Americans to save SA the trouble of actually having any Jews die when Christians could die instead..


----------



## toastman

Indofred said:


> georgephillip said:
> 
> 
> 
> "The question is not 'Is Israel the same as South Africa?'
> 
> 
> 
> 
> What a silly OP.
> SA is nothing like Israel; South Africa was never blindly paid for by the American taxpayer and America never started any wars, leading to the deaths of so many Americans to save SA the trouble of actually having any Jews die when Christians could die instead..
Click to expand...


Oh look, another idiot whining that the U.S gives Israel money. 

So original freddie boy. I have never heard that before


----------



## Roudy

Bumberclyde said:


> Kondor3 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 2 questions I'm curious about:
> 
> 1) How/why did the Jews end up with the good part with the beaches and coastline and the arabs got sand?
> 
> 2) When these lines were drawn up, were the arabs all supposed to leave the Jewish part (by force if necessary), or was everyone already living there going to be allowed to stay put?
> 
> Thanks.
Click to expand...

Duh, what grade did you graduate from?  "The Jewish part" has been the Jewish part aka ancient Israel for 3000 years. And you ask how "they ended up with it?  It's the same land their ancestors lived, loved, and built.


----------



## Roudy

Bumberclyde said:


> toastman said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Bumberclyde said:
> 
> 
> 
> 2 questions I'm curious about:
> 
> 1) How/why did the Jews end up with the good part with the beaches and coastline and the arabs got sand?
> 
> 2) When these lines were drawn up, were the arabs all supposed to leave the Jewish part (by force if necessary), or was everyone already living there going to be allowed to stay put?
> 
> Thanks.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 1) The land that was allotted to them in the U.N partition plan was the reason they got the beaches. However, the Arabs got Gaza, which is by the beach
> 
> 2) Good question. I would imagine that if the Arabs wanted to stay in the Jewish part, they would have to become Israeli civilians. And vice versa for the Jews living in the Arab side.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 1) the UN didn't exist back in 1922.
> 2) So why were the Jews allowed to kick out the arabs and pass a law of non-return for them?
Click to expand...

The land was under the control of the British after the collapse of the Ottomans who controlled it for 700 years. The Arabs never controlled or owned an inch of the land for 800 years. They are recent invaders from neighboring lands.  The League of Nations which later evolved into the UN allocated some of the land to the Jews aka Israel, and most of it to the Arab Muslims aka Jordan.


----------



## Roudy

Indofred said:


> georgephillip said:
> 
> 
> 
> "The question is not 'Is Israel the same as South Africa?'
> 
> 
> 
> 
> What a silly OP.
> SA is nothing like Israel; South Africa was never blindly paid for by the American taxpayer and America never started any wars, leading to the deaths of so many Americans to save SA the trouble of actually having any Jews die when Christians could die instead..
Click to expand...

You're right SA is nothing like Israel. Israel absorbed two million Arab Muslims and gave them equal rights as Israeli citizens. Israel also absorbed hundreds of thousands of Ethiopians blacks in a massive humanitarian mission led by its Government.  That's what a democracy with compassion does. 

Ethiopian Jews in Israel - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The Ethiopian Jews in Israel [2][3][4] (Hebrew: &#1497;&#1492;&#1493;&#1491;&#1497; &#1488;&#1514;&#1497;&#1493;&#1508;&#1497;&#1492; &#1489;&#1497;&#1513;&#1512;&#1488;&#1500 or the Ethiopian Jewish community in Israel[5][6] (Hebrew: &#1511;&#1492;&#1497;&#1500;&#1514; &#1497;&#1492;&#1493;&#1491;&#1497; &#1488;&#1514;&#1497;&#1493;&#1508;&#1497;&#1492; &#1489;&#1497;&#1513;&#1512;&#1488;&#1500; or &#1492;&#1506;&#1491;&#1492; &#1492;&#1488;&#1514;&#1497;&#1493;&#1508;&#1497;&#1514; &#1489;&#1497;&#1513;&#1512;&#1488;&#1500 refers to the immigrants and descendants of the immigrants of the Beta Israel communities of Ethiopia, who nowadays reside in Israel.
Most of Beta Israel community emigrated from Ethiopia to Israel during two massive waves of immigration mounted by the Israeli government&#8212;"Operation Moses" (1984) and during "Operation Solomon" (1991)[7][8].
Today Israel is home to the largest Beta Israel community in the world with about 121,000 citizens of Ethiopian descent in 2009,[1] who are mainly assembled in the smaller urban areas of central Israel.[9]


----------



## Sweet_Caroline

Roudy said:


> Bumberclyde said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> toastman said:
> 
> 
> 
> 1) The land that was allotted to them in the U.N partition plan was the reason they got the beaches. However, the Arabs got Gaza, which is by the beach
> 
> 2) Good question. I would imagine that if the Arabs wanted to stay in the Jewish part, they would have to become Israeli civilians. And vice versa for the Jews living in the Arab side.
> 
> 
> 
> 1) the UN didn't exist back in 1922.
> 2) So why were the Jews allowed to kick out the arabs and pass a law of non-return for them?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> The land was under the control of the British after the collapse of the Ottomans who controlled it for 700 years. The Arabs never controlled or owned an inch of the land for 800 years. They are recent invaders from neighboring lands.  The League of Nations which later evolved into the UN allocated some of the land to the Jews aka Israel, and most of it to the Arab Muslims aka Jordan.
Click to expand...


Bumberclyde is new here so here is an excellent explanation for him and anyone else who is interested.  I have put this video on the forum before.  It explains the situation clearly.  The Professor speaking, Professor Howard Grief, has written an excellent comprehensive book which anyone interested in the situation should try to read.  Details below with reviews of the book on the web page.    

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

[ame=http://www.amazon.com/Legal-Foundation-Borders-Israel-International/dp/1936778556/ref=pd_sxp_f_pt]The Legal Foundation And Borders Of Israel Under International Law: A Treatise on Jewish Sovereignty over the Land of Israel: Howard Grief: 9781936778553: Amazon.com: Books[/ame]


----------



## Bumberclyde

Sweet_Caroline said:


> Roudy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Bumberclyde said:
> 
> 
> 
> 1) the UN didn't exist back in 1922.
> 2) So why were the Jews allowed to kick out the arabs and pass a law of non-return for them?
> 
> 
> 
> The land was under the control of the British after the collapse of the Ottomans who controlled it for 700 years. The Arabs never controlled or owned an inch of the land for 800 years. They are recent invaders from neighboring lands.  The League of Nations which later evolved into the UN allocated some of the land to the Jews aka Israel, and most of it to the Arab Muslims aka Jordan.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Bumberclyde is new here so here is an excellent explanation for him and anyone else who is interested.  I have put this video on the forum before.  It explains the situation clearly.  The Professor speaking, Professor Howard Grief, has written an excellent comprehensive book which anyone interested in the situation should try to read.  Details below with reviews of the book on the web page.
> 
> [ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ubDhnM0MUmY]Howard Grief - EC4I middle east conflict documentary: Give Peace A Chance - YouTube[/ame]
> 
> [ame=http://www.amazon.com/Legal-Foundation-Borders-Israel-International/dp/1936778556/ref=pd_sxp_f_pt]The Legal Foundation And Borders Of Israel Under International Law: A Treatise on Jewish Sovereignty over the Land of Israel: Howard Grief: 9781936778553: Amazon.com: Books[/ame]
Click to expand...


So basically, a bunch of old white guys got together in San Remo and decided what was going to happen to land they had never even been to, regardless of what the occupants wanted? Did I get that right? So in other words, Israel has no real basis to its claims then.


----------



## Sweet_Caroline

Bumberclyde said:


> Sweet_Caroline said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Roudy said:
> 
> 
> 
> The land was under the control of the British after the collapse of the Ottomans who controlled it for 700 years. The Arabs never controlled or owned an inch of the land for 800 years. They are recent invaders from neighboring lands.  The League of Nations which later evolved into the UN allocated some of the land to the Jews aka Israel, and most of it to the Arab Muslims aka Jordan.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Bumberclyde is new here so here is an excellent explanation for him and anyone else who is interested.  I have put this video on the forum before.  It explains the situation clearly.  The Professor speaking, Professor Howard Grief, has written an excellent comprehensive book which anyone interested in the situation should try to read.  Details below with reviews of the book on the web page.
> 
> [ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ubDhnM0MUmY]Howard Grief - EC4I middle east conflict documentary: Give Peace A Chance - YouTube[/ame]
> 
> [ame=http://www.amazon.com/Legal-Foundation-Borders-Israel-International/dp/1936778556/ref=pd_sxp_f_pt]The Legal Foundation And Borders Of Israel Under International Law: A Treatise on Jewish Sovereignty over the Land of Israel: Howard Grief: 9781936778553: Amazon.com: Books[/ame]
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> So basically, a bunch of old white guys got together in San Remo and decided what was going to happen to land they had never even been to, regardless of what the occupants wanted? Did I get that right? So in other words, Israel has no real basis to its claims then.
Click to expand...



No, you have it incorrectly.  You need to particularly take notice of what is said up until 3 mins 50 seconds.  

The Mandate was based on what the Zionists *and* the Arabs wanted.  You may need to watch the video a couple of times, stopping and rewinding, as it is important you get to know the facts.


----------



## Roudy

Bumberclyde said:


> Sweet_Caroline said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Roudy said:
> 
> 
> 
> The land was under the control of the British after the collapse of the Ottomans who controlled it for 700 years. The Arabs never controlled or owned an inch of the land for 800 years. They are recent invaders from neighboring lands.  The League of Nations which later evolved into the UN allocated some of the land to the Jews aka Israel, and most of it to the Arab Muslims aka Jordan.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Bumberclyde is new here so here is an excellent explanation for him and anyone else who is interested.  I have put this video on the forum before.  It explains the situation clearly.  The Professor speaking, Professor Howard Grief, has written an excellent comprehensive book which anyone interested in the situation should try to read.  Details below with reviews of the book on the web page.
> 
> [ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ubDhnM0MUmY]Howard Grief - EC4I middle east conflict documentary: Give Peace A Chance - YouTube[/ame]
> 
> [ame=http://www.amazon.com/Legal-Foundation-Borders-Israel-International/dp/1936778556/ref=pd_sxp_f_pt]The Legal Foundation And Borders Of Israel Under International Law: A Treatise on Jewish Sovereignty over the Land of Israel: Howard Grief: 9781936778553: Amazon.com: Books[/ame]
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> So basically, a bunch of old white guys got together in San Remo and decided what was going to happen to land they had never even been to, regardless of what the occupants wanted? Did I get that right? So in other words, Israel has no real basis to its claims then.
Click to expand...

The Ottoman Empire collapsed shortly after WWI! The entire region was under the control of the British or the French as mandates and they eventually divided the area up into various states, all of them ended up being Arab /Muslim entities except for one, Israel. Arabs didn't have a problem with anything other than the one Jewish state.  The country of Palestine was never considered because it never existed, and the Arabs never considered themselves "Palestinians" until the mid 1960's. Before 1948 the the Palestinians were considered to ONLY be Jews who had settled in the region, and because of that intolerant racist Arabs regarded that label as an insult.  

Arabs didn't "approve" the only Jewish state in the region in the same land as ancient Israel?  TOUGH SHIT. It wasn't up to the greedy Arabs in the first place.


----------



## toastman

Roudy said:


> Bumberclyde said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sweet_Caroline said:
> 
> 
> 
> Bumberclyde is new here so here is an excellent explanation for him and anyone else who is interested.  I have put this video on the forum before.  It explains the situation clearly.  The Professor speaking, Professor Howard Grief, has written an excellent comprehensive book which anyone interested in the situation should try to read.  Details below with reviews of the book on the web page.
> 
> Howard Grief - EC4I middle east conflict documentary: Give Peace A Chance - YouTube
> 
> The Legal Foundation And Borders Of Israel Under International Law: A Treatise on Jewish Sovereignty over the Land of Israel: Howard Grief: 9781936778553: Amazon.com: Books
> 
> 
> 
> 
> So basically, a bunch of old white guys got together in San Remo and decided what was going to happen to land they had never even been to, regardless of what the occupants wanted? Did I get that right? So in other words, Israel has no real basis to its claims then.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> The Ottoman Empire collapsed shortly after WWI! The entire region was under the control of the British or the French as mandates and they eventually divided the area up into various states, all of them ended up being Arab /Muslim entities except for one, Israel. Arabs didn't have a problem with anything other than the one Jewish state.  A country called Palestine was never considered because it never existed and the Arabs never considered themselves "Palestinians" until the mid 1960's. Before 1948 the only Palestinians were ONLY Jews who had settled in the region, and because of that intolerant racist Arabs considered that label as an insult.  Arabs didn't "approve" the only Jewish state in the region in the same land as ancient Israel?  TOUGH SHIT. *It wasn't up to the greedy Arabs in the first place*.
Click to expand...


BINGO on the bold. The Palestinians had NO sovereignty over the land.
Owning land and having sovereignty over that land are two very different things.


----------



## Bumberclyde

Sweet_Caroline said:


> Bumberclyde said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sweet_Caroline said:
> 
> 
> 
> Bumberclyde is new here so here is an excellent explanation for him and anyone else who is interested.  I have put this video on the forum before.  It explains the situation clearly.  The Professor speaking, Professor Howard Grief, has written an excellent comprehensive book which anyone interested in the situation should try to read.  Details below with reviews of the book on the web page.
> 
> Howard Grief - EC4I middle east conflict documentary: Give Peace A Chance - YouTube
> 
> The Legal Foundation And Borders Of Israel Under International Law: A Treatise on Jewish Sovereignty over the Land of Israel: Howard Grief: 9781936778553: Amazon.com: Books
> 
> 
> 
> 
> So basically, a bunch of old white guys got together in San Remo and decided what was going to happen to land they had never even been to, regardless of what the occupants wanted? Did I get that right? So in other words, Israel has no real basis to its claims then.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> No, you have it incorrectly.  You need to particularly take notice of what is said up until 3 mins 50 seconds.
> 
> The Mandate was based on what the Zionists *and* the Arabs wanted.  You may need to watch the video a couple of times, stopping and rewinding, as it is important you get to know the facts.
Click to expand...


No, they asked the arabs and jews what they wanted and chose whatever they felt like. No referendum on the outcome by the people living there or anything like that, white old men decided to give their land away, then the jews kicked them out and passed a law of no return. Did I get that right? The people involved who lived there at the time obviously didn't agree, or they wouldn't still be fighting.


----------



## RoccoR

Bumberclyde,  _et al,_

What are you, a stand-up comedian?  Where are you playing?



Bumberclyde said:


> So basically, a bunch of old white guys got together in San Remo and decided what was going to happen to land they had never even been to, regardless of what the occupants wanted? Did I get that right? So in other words, Israel has no real basis to its claims then.


*(COMMENT)*

You didn't even get the "old white guys" part right.

But they were one of the great generations of our time.  They were the representatives of the Allied Powers that remained when four Empires fell.

What is your allegation specifically, without the wisecracks?  Clear and coherent!

Most Respectfully,
R


----------



## Sweet_Caroline

Bumberclyde said:


> Sweet_Caroline said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Bumberclyde said:
> 
> 
> 
> So basically, a bunch of old white guys got together in San Remo and decided what was going to happen to land they had never even been to, regardless of what the occupants wanted? Did I get that right? So in other words, Israel has no real basis to its claims then.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> No, you have it incorrectly.  You need to particularly take notice of what is said up until 3 mins 50 seconds.
> 
> The Mandate was based on what the Zionists *and* the Arabs wanted.  You may need to watch the video a couple of times, stopping and rewinding, as it is important you get to know the facts.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> No, they asked the arabs and jews what they wanted and chose whatever they felt like. No referendum on the outcome by the people living there or anything like that, white old men decided to give their land away, then the jews kicked them out and passed a law of no return. *Did I get that right?* The people involved who lived there at the time obviously didn't agree, or they wouldn't still be fighting.
Click to expand...


No, you got it wrong.  You really need to listen carefully and concentrate.


----------



## Bumberclyde

RoccoR said:


> Bumberclyde,  _et al,_
> 
> What are you, a stand-up comedian?  Where are you playing?
> 
> 
> 
> Bumberclyde said:
> 
> 
> 
> So basically, a bunch of old white guys got together in San Remo and decided what was going to happen to land they had never even been to, regardless of what the occupants wanted? Did I get that right? So in other words, Israel has no real basis to its claims then.
> 
> 
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> You didn't even get the "old white guys" part right.
> 
> But they were one of the great generations of our time.  They were the representatives of the Allied Powers that remained when four Empires fell.
> 
> What is your allegation specifically, without the wisecracks?  Clear and coherent!
> 
> Most Respectfully,
> R
Click to expand...


I was asking about the partition map in a post just above, I was curious to know how they came to that particular split. And someone posted that video explaining the white guys who gave land to their friends. Just trying to figure out really what the basis is for the conflict today, how it all came about.






These were my questions:

1) How/why did the Jews end up with the good part with the beaches and coastline and the arabs got sand?

2) When these lines were drawn up, were the arabs all supposed to leave the Jewish part (by force if necessary), or was everyone already living there going to be allowed to stay put?


----------



## RoccoR

Bumberclyde;  _et al,_

OK, good questions.



Bumberclyde said:


> These were my questions:
> 
> 1) How/why did the Jews end up with the good part with the beaches and coastline and the arabs got sand?
> 
> 2) When these lines were drawn up, were the arabs all supposed to leave the Jewish part (by force if necessary), or was everyone already living there going to be allowed to stay put?​


*(ANSWERS)*

1:  The three partitions were given access to land/water trade routes.   The Arab State and Hashemite Kingdom were given access to the Jordan River and the Dead Sea.  The Jewish State given Mediterranean access.



2:  Yes: "everyone already living there going to be allowed to stay put?"  Nothing in the Independence Process was to effect private land ownership.  Everyone in the State of Israel at the time independence was to be an equal citizen.

Most Respectfully,
R


----------



## Roudy

"The Jews got the beaches and the Arabs got the sand"  Phew what an embecile. Arabs always had the sand. I think we are dealing with a teenager that sounds eerily familiar.


----------



## georgephillip

RoccoR said:


> Bumberclyde,  _et al,_
> 
> What are you, a stand-up comedian?  Where are you playing?
> 
> 
> 
> Bumberclyde said:
> 
> 
> 
> So basically, a bunch of old white guys got together in San Remo and decided what was going to happen to land they had never even been to, regardless of what the occupants wanted? Did I get that right? So in other words, Israel has no real basis to its claims then.
> 
> 
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> You didn't even get the "old white guys" part right.
> 
> *But they were one of the great generations of our time.  They were the representatives of the Allied Powers that remained when four Empires fell.*
> 
> What is your allegation specifically, without the wisecracks?  Clear and coherent!
> 
> Most Respectfully,
> R
Click to expand...


*Were they racists?*

"The San Remo conference was an international meeting of the post-World War I Allied Supreme Council, held at Villa Devachan in Sanremo, Italy, from 19 to 26 April 1920. It was attended by the four Principal Allied Powers of World War I who were represented by the prime ministers of Britain (David Lloyd George), France (Alexandre Millerand) and Italy (Francesco Nitti) and by Japan's Ambassador K. Matsui.[citation needed]

Resolutions passed at this conference determined the allocation of Class 'A' League of Nations mandates for administration of the former Ottoman-ruled lands of the Middle East."

Rocco...
What moral authority did four rich (mostly white) imperialist bigots possess in 1920 to deny the right of self-determination to Jew and Arab alike in Palestine?

San Remo conference - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


----------



## georgephillip

Hossfly said:


> georgephillip said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Roudy said:
> 
> 
> 
> Somebody spreading IslamoNazi hate and terrorist propaganda shouldn't really be talking?  You know the Internet is being watched by the govt., and guess what type they're profiling?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Profession writers looking to buy pressure cookers and their husbands researching backpacks?
> 
> "Michelle Catalano and her family were shaken and made anxious on Wednesday after being visited by 'six gentleman in casual clothes'who turned out to be local police operating under the authority of, or least in connection with, federal agenciesand getting 'peppered' with questions resulting from a series of coincidently entered search terms made on their home computer in recent weeks.
> 
> "Catalano, who writes professionally, explained the whole story in her own words on her blog. In way of background, she explained:
> 
> "Most of it was innocent enough. I had researched pressure cookers. My husband was looking for a backpack. And maybe in another time those two things together would have seemed innocuous, but we are in these times...'
> 
> Online Search for Pressure Cooker Sparks Police Visit | Common Dreams
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Since Georgie Boy is so, so intelligent and naturally loves this country very much, he certainly must appreciate that people all over the world have differences of opinions on many different subjects, and no doubt he likes the fact that here in America people are allowed to express themselves freely, just as Georgie Boy does on the Internet, bashing Israel and those he calls "kosher" every chance he gets.
> 
> A myth-illogical apartheid
Click to expand...

Your link:

"The Jews created one of the most progressive democracies in the world, most accepting of minorities, yet they're branded racist by Islamists, themselves severely discriminatory. Jews resettled peacefully in their homeland of 3,000+ years..."

650,000 Jews inflict their nation upon 1.2 million Arabs by force of arms in 1948 Palestine, driving 700,000 Arabs from their homes, businesses, and bank accounts and your source calls that "peaceful?"

Compared to what...the rape of Canaan?


----------



## Bloodrock44

georgephillip said:


> Hossfly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> georgephillip said:
> 
> 
> 
> Profession writers looking to buy pressure cookers and their husbands researching backpacks?
> 
> "Michelle Catalano and her family were shaken and made anxious on Wednesday after being visited by 'six gentleman in casual clothes'who turned out to be local police operating under the authority of, or least in connection with, federal agenciesand getting 'peppered' with questions resulting from a series of coincidently entered search terms made on their home computer in recent weeks.
> 
> "Catalano, who writes professionally, explained the whole story in her own words on her blog. In way of background, she explained:
> 
> "Most of it was innocent enough. I had researched pressure cookers. My husband was looking for a backpack. And maybe in another time those two things together would have seemed innocuous, but we are in these times...'
> 
> Online Search for Pressure Cooker Sparks Police Visit | Common Dreams
> 
> 
> 
> Since Georgie Boy is so, so intelligent and naturally loves this country very much, he certainly must appreciate that people all over the world have differences of opinions on many different subjects, and no doubt he likes the fact that here in America people are allowed to express themselves freely, just as Georgie Boy does on the Internet, bashing Israel and those he calls "kosher" every chance he gets.
> 
> A myth-illogical apartheid
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Your link:
> 
> "The Jews created one of the most progressive democracies in the world, most accepting of minorities, yet they're branded racist by Islamists, themselves severely discriminatory. Jews resettled peacefully in their homeland of 3,000+ years..."
> 
> 650,000 Jews inflict their nation upon 1.2 million Arabs by force of arms in 1948 Palestine, driving 700,000 Arabs from their homes, businesses, and bank accounts and your source calls that "peaceful?"
> 
> Compared to what...the rape of Canaan?
Click to expand...


*You're slipping Gerogie. You didn't use the term racism here. Please be more careful in the future or your handlers may come down on you.*


----------



## georgephillip

Kondor3 said:


> georgephillip said:
> 
> 
> 
> "...Zionists have never based their right to occupy  Palestine on anything except superior military might, always backed-up by the reigning superpower of the day..."
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Yep... fun, ain't it?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> "..._their conduct today on the West Bank and Gaza is a continuation of the policy of 'creeping annexation' until all the land between the River and the sea is ruled by Jews_..."
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Yep... this was well-known, as far back as 1922, never mind 1948...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ...and it is just as true 91 years later, in 2013, as it was in 1922.
> 
> Nothing new there.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> "..._In 2007, the UN Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination_..."
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> The Israelis are not out to discriminate against Palestinians.
> 
> They just want them to move outside the country, as that country is defined in the 1922 League of Nations Partition Plan.
> 
> Once that happens (_and it will - just look at today's maps of the few slices of non-contiguous land still under Palestinian control within those borders_) all of that horseshit goes away.
Click to expand...

'Still swimming in denial?

"The mandate was a legal and administrative instrument, not a geographical territory.[26] The territorial jurisdiction of the mandate was subject to change by treaty, capitulation, grant, usage, sufferance or other lawful means."

50,000 Jews, 50,000 Arab Christians, and 500,000 Muslims lived in Palestine around 1922.
Maybe that's why the kosher chickenshits didn't want elections?
'Still don't, apparently.
SPLASH!

British Mandate for Palestine (legal instrument) - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


----------



## Hossfly

Bumberclyde said:


> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> 
> Bumberclyde,  _et al,_
> 
> What are you, a stand-up comedian?  Where are you playing?
> 
> 
> 
> Bumberclyde said:
> 
> 
> 
> So basically, a bunch of old white guys got together in San Remo and decided what was going to happen to land they had never even been to, regardless of what the occupants wanted? Did I get that right? So in other words, Israel has no real basis to its claims then.
> 
> 
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> You didn't even get the "old white guys" part right.
> 
> But they were one of the great generations of our time.  They were the representatives of the Allied Powers that remained when four Empires fell.
> 
> What is your allegation specifically, without the wisecracks?  Clear and coherent!
> 
> Most Respectfully,
> R
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I was asking about the partition map in a post just above, I was curious to know how they came to that particular split. And someone posted that video explaining the white guys who gave land to their friends. Just trying to figure out really what the basis is for the conflict today, how it all came about.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> These were my questions:
> 
> 1) How/why did the Jews end up with the good part with the beaches and coastline and the arabs got sand?
> 
> 2) When these lines were drawn up, were the arabs all supposed to leave the Jewish part (by force if necessary), or was everyone already living there going to be allowed to stay put?
Click to expand...

Why don't you tell us from some legitimate source the percentage of the Negev Desert makes up  the total land given to Israel?  Meanwhile, you can tell your friends in Gaza that no one is stopping them from building some resorts on the Mediterranean.  Think of all the money they could make from the gambling casinos.  Why, they could be like Monaco!!   Now if only they asked for supplies to do this with from Iran instead of Iran supplying them with weapons and missiles.

Maybe you are the one to tell us why those Arabs in the area heeded the call of the Arabs leaders to leave, and once they got out of the way, there would be a clear field to murder the Jews and then they could return.  By the way, look at the map of the Arab world, and look at the tiny piece of land they are having a fit over because all the land there should belong to them and not one inch for the Jews.

Size Comparison Map of Israel and the Arab World


----------



## toastman

Hossfly said:


> Bumberclyde said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> 
> Bumberclyde,  _et al,_
> 
> What are you, a stand-up comedian?  Where are you playing?
> 
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> You didn't even get the "old white guys" part right.
> 
> But they were one of the great generations of our time.  They were the representatives of the Allied Powers that remained when four Empires fell.
> 
> What is your allegation specifically, without the wisecracks?  Clear and coherent!
> 
> Most Respectfully,
> R
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I was asking about the partition map in a post just above, I was curious to know how they came to that particular split. And someone posted that video explaining the white guys who gave land to their friends. Just trying to figure out really what the basis is for the conflict today, how it all came about.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> These were my questions:
> 
> 1) How/why did the Jews end up with the good part with the beaches and coastline and the arabs got sand?
> 
> 2) When these lines were drawn up, were the arabs all supposed to leave the Jewish part (by force if necessary), or was everyone already living there going to be allowed to stay put?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Why don't you tell us from some legitimate source the percentage of the Negev Desert makes up  the total land given to Israel?  Meanwhile, you can tell your friends in Gaza that no one is stopping them from building some resorts on the Mediterranean.  Think of all the money they could make from the gambling casinos.  Why, they could be like Monaco!!   Now if only they asked for supplies to do this with from Iran instead of Iran supplying them with weapons and missiles.
> 
> Maybe you are the one to tell us why those Arabs in the area heeded the call of the Arabs leaders to leave, and once they got out of the way, there would be a clear field to murder the Jews and then they could return.  By the way, look at the map of the Arab world, and look at the tiny piece of land they are having a fit over because all the land there should belong to them and not one inch for the Jews.
> 
> Size Comparison Map of Israel and the Arab World
Click to expand...


Unfortunately for the Palestinians in Gaza, their government is embedded in a Jihad against Israel. Anything else comes second


----------



## Roudy

georgephillip said:


> Kondor3 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> georgephillip said:
> 
> 
> 
> "...Zionists have never based their right to occupy  Palestine on anything except superior military might, always backed-up by the reigning superpower of the day..."
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Yep... fun, ain't it?
> 
> 
> 
> Yep... this was well-known, as far back as 1922, never mind 1948...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ...and it is just as true 91 years later, in 2013, as it was in 1922.
> 
> Nothing new there.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> "..._In 2007, the UN Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination_..."
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> The Israelis are not out to discriminate against Palestinians.
> 
> They just want them to move outside the country, as that country is defined in the 1922 League of Nations Partition Plan.
> 
> Once that happens (_and it will - just look at today's maps of the few slices of non-contiguous land still under Palestinian control within those borders_) all of that horseshit goes away.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 'Still swimming in denial?
> 
> "The mandate was a legal and administrative instrument, not a geographical territory.[26] The territorial jurisdiction of the mandate was subject to change by treaty, capitulation, grant, usage, sufferance or other lawful means."
> 
> 50,000 Jews, 50,000 Arab Christians, and 500,000 Muslims lived in Palestine around 1922.
> Maybe that's why the kosher chickenshits didn't want elections?
> 'Still don't, apparently.
> SPLASH!
> 
> British Mandate for Palestine (legal instrument) - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Click to expand...

Yup and that "Palestine" they keep referring to also included Jordan.  And most of them are ended up there, after Palestine was divided into Israel and Jordan.  In reality a total of about 300,000 Arab - Palestinians lived in Israel pre 1948, most of them invaders from neighboring lands that came looking for work.


----------



## Kondor3

georgephillip said:


> "..._Still swimming in denial? 'The mandate was a legal and administrative instrument, not a geographical territory.[26] The territorial jurisdiction of the mandate was subject to change by treaty, capitulation, grant, usage, sufferance or other lawful means.'_..."



Whatever in the world are you talking about... 'denial'?

Nowhere in that post will you find reference to the Mandate as either one sort of artificial construct or another, territorial or legal or administrative or otherwise.

Both the Israelis and Palestinians can serve-up some halfway decent-sounding argument in support of their case, or in support of bits-and-pieces of it, anyway.

But, in the end, none of that shit signifies to an extent sufficient to influence the existence or sustaining of nations.

Allow me to introduce you to the *Real World* basis for the existence of the State of Israel:


























...not to mention the reported existence of some 200 nuclear warheads.

...and the fierce determination of the Jews never again be put into a position of weakness that would allow others to slaughter them in their millions.

...which tends to make nonsense out of any old legal arguments.

The Jews are, historically, one of the most and longest-persecuted and slaughtered peoples on the face of the planet.

After the Holocaust, they turned things around for themselves, toughened-up, found their courage as a People once again, re-formed as a polity after a 1900-year-long absence, and have become the most hardened Survivalist Nation on the face of the planet.

Their Arab-Muslim neighbors also forced the Jews to learn how to make War better than anybody else in the region.

War has a tendency to cancel-out old understandings and arrangements and legal status.

As is the case here, practically speaking.

Your side lost.

Repeatedly.

Vae victus.



> "..._50,000 Jews, 50,000 Arab Christians, and 500,000 Muslims lived in Palestine around 1922..." _



I was not aware that either the League of Nations nor the British Mandate Authority had ever considered such a possibility during the 1920s or thereabouts on the timeline.

Do you have a link to credible initiatives of those times to undertake such Elections for all residents of the region, which the Jews would have rejected?



> "..._Maybe that's why the kosher chickenshits_..."



Having kicked the arses of all of their *combined* and allied Arab Enemies in 1948, 1967 and 1973, I think the Israelis have put the lie to accusations of being 'chickenshit'.

At the very least, they are far, far *LESS* 'chickenshit' than the Arabs whose arse they've kicked time and again.



> "..._didn't want elections? 'Still don't, apparently_..."



Too late for that.

The Arab-Muslim Palestinians who chose to remain within Israeli jurisdiction in 1948 when the State of Israel was declared, are all full-fledged Israeli citizens and enfranchised to vote.

The Arab-Muslim Palestinians who chose to side with the Five Invading Aggressor Arab Countries in  1948 and to abandon their lands and hunker-down in the West Bank and Gaza until the Arabs won the war (_and redeemed all the land for the Arabs alone and to drive the Jews into the Mediterranean_), and who have been fighting a guerrilla war against Israel off-and-on ever since...those Arab-Muslim Palestinians are not citizens of Israel.

They had their chance.

They made their choice.

They chose poorly.

Welcome to your consequences.



> "...SPLASH!"



Indeed.

None of that old legal horseshit matters a damn.

And hasn't, practically speaking, for a great many years.

Some folks, however, insist upon beating their heads against a thick stone wall that will never budge.

All that gets them is a headache.

The party's over... time for the Palestinians to pack up and move someplace else... 'cause there's no place for them in Israel after what they've done... and what few slivers of land still remain in their possession will be annexed over the next decade or two in order to round-out and complete the 1922 map.

Might as well avoid the Christmas Rush and leave now.

The sooner they leave, the sooner they and their families can build new lives and find happiness elsewhere, amongst their co-religionists and ethnic brethren.


----------



## sealadaigh

Kondor3 said:


> georgephillip said:
> 
> 
> 
> "..._Still swimming in denial? 'The mandate was a legal and administrative instrument, not a geographical territory.[26] The territorial jurisdiction of the mandate was subject to change by treaty, capitulation, grant, usage, sufferance or other lawful means.'_..."
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Allow me to introduce you to the *Real World* basis for the existence of the State of Israel:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> OMG...is that the el quesir. it is so hard to tell without unmarked, french made mirages swarming around it.
Click to expand...


----------



## Kondor3

sealadaigh said:


> "..._OMG...is that the el quesir. it is so hard to tell without unmarked, french made mirages swarming around it._


Does it matter in the slightest, to the point being made?

If the Israeli Navy consisted of two rowboats and a single motor-launch, their Navy would still be bigger than that of the Palestinians, and, of course, it is large enough to make the Egyptians and Turks and other Muslim countries respect them on the open water and in the Suez and nearby waters.

It happens to be the INS Hetz ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sa'ar_4.5-class_missile_boat ) - a missile boat.

But, thank you for your tax money, which contributes to some modest degree to helping our good friends (and, nowadays, allies), the Israelis, defend themselves.


----------



## sealadaigh

Kondor3 said:


> sealadaigh said:
> 
> 
> 
> "..._OMG...is that the el quesir. it is so hard to tell without unmarked, french made mirages swarming around it._
> 
> 
> 
> Does it matter in the slightest, to the point being made?
> 
> If the Israeli Navy consisted of two rowboats and a single motor-launch, their Navy would still be bigger than that of the Palestinians, and, of course, it is large enough to make the Egyptians and Turks and other Muslim countries respect them on the open water and in the Suez and nearby waters.
> 
> It happens to be the INS Hetz ( Sa'ar 4.5-class missile boat - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia ) - a missile boat.
> 
> But, thank you for your tax money, which contributes to some modest degree to helping our good friends (and, nowadays, allies), the Israelis, defend themselves.
Click to expand...


i think that the "might makes right" being proferred by jews on behalf of the israeli state is a very poor argument for a people who lost millions in europe and russia in the middle of the last century.

of course then, hitler was wrong when he attacked great britain, which (in part) led to his downfall but had he not done that, maybe you wouldn't be around to squawk about the rectitude behind behind a superior and brutal military.


----------



## sealadaigh

Kondor3 said:


> sealadaigh said:
> 
> 
> 
> "..._OMG...is that the el quesir. it is so hard to tell without unmarked, french made mirages swarming around it._
> 
> 
> 
> Does it matter in the slightest, to the point being made?
> 
> If the Israeli Navy consisted of two rowboats and a single motor-launch, their Navy would still be bigger than that of the Palestinians, and, of course, it is large enough to make the Egyptians and Turks and other Muslim countries respect them on the open water and in the Suez and nearby waters.
> 
> It happens to be the INS Hetz ( Sa'ar 4.5-class missile boat - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia ) - a missile boat.
> 
> But, thank you for your tax money, which contributes to some modest degree to helping our good friends (and, nowadays, allies), the Israelis, defend themselves.
Click to expand...


yes, like on 5 june, 1967 they defended themselves against the el quesir.

i wouldn't call what the israelis are doing "defending themselves" and you won't have america forever.


----------



## Kondor3

sealadaigh said:


> "...yes, like on 5 june, 1967 they defended themselves against the el quesir..."



Yawn.



> "..._i wouldn't call what the israelis are doing 'defending themselves'_..."



You would not.

They would.

And, generally speak, so does the United States.



> "..._and you won't have america forever._"



Who is 'you'?

I'm a German-Irish 4th generation American living within 40 miles of Chicago.

There is no end in sight, to the America-Israel friendship and alliance.

Wake me up when you've got something a little more solid in that vein, eh?


----------



## RoccoR

georgephillip,  _et al,_

What "moral authority?"

Denial of the "right of self-determination?"



georgephillip said:


> What moral authority did four rich (mostly white) imperialist bigots possess in 1920 to deny the right of self-determination to Jew and Arab alike in Palestine?


*(REFERENCE)*



			
				Definition said:
			
		

> Moral authority is an philosophical concept that should serve as a basis for, but is not in itself a rule of written law. The moral authority and legitimacy of law can be based on metaphysics or religion, on nature, on some aspect of society, or on the individual. It may be referred to as a "higher law", involving right reason, which calls a person to the performance of their duties and restrains them from doing wrong.
> 
> _*SOURCE:*_ Moral Authority Law & Legal Definition



*(COMMENT)*

You are asking a negative question.

First, the recognition of the "right of self-determination" is a human engineered concept; a philosophical construct that came about through the evolution of human society.  It is less than 500 years old as active concepts go.  The great empires and kingdoms of the ancient world through the 16th century did not subscribe to the theory of individual freedoms or the right of self-determination.  It has only been less than a century since the great generals dispatched the last of the great empires (Japan).  They were kings and emperors - sheiks, shahs and pharaohs.  They thought of themselves as authorities unto themselves - and seldom did anyone argue the point.

The ethical system called "utilitarianism" _(a form of a larger theory called consequentialism)_ generally states _(as one component)_ that the "it is the greatest good to the greatest number of people which is the measure of right and wrong.&#8221;  But in modern times the (the last 300 years) the twin questions have been raised as to:

When, and under what conditions, should the rule of the majority be curtailed in order to protect the rights of the minority? 
And, conversely, when, and under what conditions, must the rights of the minority be restrained in order to prevent the subversion of majority rule?
In this case, the Allied Powers examined the necessity for the protection and preservation of the Jewish Culture _(the minority)_, through the establishment of a Jewish National Home.  Since those greater moral decisions were made by the Allied Powers, the "tyranny of the majority" (Arab Palestinians) have continuously and violently opposed the moral authority and legitimacy; unable to comprehend the greater issues.  The decisions of the Allied Powers to protection and preservation of the Jewish Culture was made even more imperative after the holocaust events experienced in WWII.

It was determined that the needs of the few _(a smaller Jewish population)_, outweighed the needs of the many _(the larger Arab population)_; the majority not being in danger.

*(EPILOG)*

In your vernacular, the "four rich (mostly white) imperialist" opted to preserve and protect the "minority" (Jewish) culture over the preferences of the "majority" (Arab) culture and the tyrannical attitudes, objections, and violent actions they projected towards the minority. 

Most Respectfully,
R


----------



## Kondor3

sealadaigh said:


> "...i think that the "might makes right" being proferred by jews on behalf of the israeli state is a very poor argument for a people who lost millions in europe and russia in the middle of the last century..."



I am guessing that the Jews learned their lesson well.

Weakness invites disaster.

Either you are strong enough to carve-out and hold a place for yourself in the world or you die.

After 1,900 years of playing possum it was time to give Strength another try.

And they succeeded beyond all reasonable expectations.


----------



## Roudy

sealadaigh said:


> Kondor3 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> sealadaigh said:
> 
> 
> 
> "..._OMG...is that the el quesir. it is so hard to tell without unmarked, french made mirages swarming around it._
> 
> 
> 
> Does it matter in the slightest, to the point being made?
> 
> If the Israeli Navy consisted of two rowboats and a single motor-launch, their Navy would still be bigger than that of the Palestinians, and, of course, it is large enough to make the Egyptians and Turks and other Muslim countries respect them on the open water and in the Suez and nearby waters.
> 
> It happens to be the INS Hetz ( Sa'ar 4.5-class missile boat - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia ) - a missile boat.
> 
> But, thank you for your tax money, which contributes to some modest degree to helping our good friends (and, nowadays, allies), the Israelis, defend themselves.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> yes, like on 5 june, 1967 they defended themselves against the el quesir.
> 
> i wouldn't call what the israelis are doing "defending themselves" and you won't have america forever.
Click to expand...

Remind us again why you actually believe anybody cares what you "think"?  Israel has done and will continue doing a good job defending itself and will be one of America's closest allies.  

Does that make you bigots angry?  GOOD. LOL


----------



## sealadaigh

Kondor3 said:


> sealadaigh said:
> 
> 
> 
> "...i think that the "might makes right" being proferred by jews on behalf of the israeli state is a very poor argument for a people who lost millions in europe and russia in the middle of the last century..."
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I am guessing that the Jews learned their lesson well.
> 
> Weakness invites disaster.
> 
> Either you are strong enough to carve-out and hold a place for yourself in the world or you die.
> 
> After 1,900 years of playing possum it was time to give Strength another try.
> 
> And they succeeded beyond all reasonable expectations.
Click to expand...


that is fine, albeit a bit amoral. amorality, i can take it of leave it. i do have a difficult time when an amoral person or people whine about the amoral acts of power directed at them by their enemies.


----------



## sealadaigh

Roudy said:


> sealadaigh said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Kondor3 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Does it matter in the slightest, to the point being made?
> 
> If the Israeli Navy consisted of two rowboats and a single motor-launch, their Navy would still be bigger than that of the Palestinians, and, of course, it is large enough to make the Egyptians and Turks and other Muslim countries respect them on the open water and in the Suez and nearby waters.
> 
> It happens to be the INS Hetz ( Sa'ar 4.5-class missile boat - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia ) - a missile boat.
> 
> But, thank you for your tax money, which contributes to some modest degree to helping our good friends (and, nowadays, allies), the Israelis, defend themselves.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> yes, like on 5 june, 1967 they defended themselves against the el quesir.
> 
> i wouldn't call what the israelis are doing "defending themselves" and you won't have america forever.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> *Remind us again why you actually believe anybody cares what you "think"?*  Israel has done and will continue doing a good job defending itself and will be one of America's closest allies.
> 
> Does that make you bigots angry?  GOOD. LOL
Click to expand...


well, perhaps i feel that way because some of you follow me around constantly like a hurt puppy dog and go to some effory yo lie in order to discredit me.

as for america, it is, like the rest of the world, changing in its attitude towards israel and soon the arab/muslim population is increasing. as they increase, people will become more exposed to them as hard working, patriotic members of their community and good neighbours and the attacks on them, many by jewish people, will be exposed for what they are, acts of bigotry and hate ccrimes or precursors to hate crimes.

america will not just do an "about-FACE", it will execute a snappy "to the rear-MARCH!!!"if history is any indication. our government is very, very slow to act on social issues but when the do, they do so qquickly and with a determination.


----------



## Kondor3

sealadaigh said:


> "..._i do have a difficult time when an amoral person or people whine about the amoral acts of power directed at them by their enemies._"



The only significant issue that Israelis seem to be 'amoral' about is their right to a State in the location where they established themselves.

And that only because they were promised a homeland there and because the British and the League of Nations and the United Nations all failed to deliver on such promises.

Everything that follows afterwards is merely a matter of (1) hanging onto what they already have and (2) rounding-out the map to make their homeland defensible and viable.

Had they been a truly amoral and expansionist power they would own Sinai and Lebanon rather than giving them back after winning various wars and campaigns, and they would have taken over most of Jordan by now and subjugated or killed off the indigenous populations of all those places, as well as the West Bank and Gaza.

Had they been a truly amoral power they would have begun building the West Bank Wall in 1949 rather than 2000.

Had they been a truly amoral power they would have begun blockading Gaza in 1949 rather than 2007.

Generally speaking, they do no more than reestablish and secure their ancestral and spiritual homeland, after a 1,900 year -long absence.

Beyond those necessary survivalist goals, they are, generally speaking, a far more 'moral' and civilized and productive people than their Arab neighbors.

Beyond those necessary survivalist goals, they do no more than their nasty and aggressive Arab neighbors force upon them.

But when they *ARE* forced to get nasty in return, they are *MUCH* better at finishing their fights than those who foolishly pick or provoke them.

Endless attacks upon Israel by the Arabs have taught them that lesson, as well.

The America-Israel friendship and alliance is in no danger.

Not even a (perceived) hostile US President such as the present one is going to change that, and he will be gone in 3-1/2 years - long before he can do any permanent damage.

The American People at-large and their military and intelligence services are all firmly in the Israeli camp and are likely to be for many years to come.

This is doubly true after 9-11.

Americans do not take kindly to pi$$ant redneck Religious Fundie Muslims who kill thousands of innocent American civilians in a cowardly attempt to dictate to us whom we can have as friends and allies and whom we cannot.

If anything, 9-11 has solidified the America-Israel connection like no other event in modern times; a consequence that bin-Laden and his bunch failed to foresee.

A blip here and there on the demographics scope with respect to Muslim immigration isn't going to change that one little bit, despite the pie-in-the-sky pipe-dreams of some Muslims living in the US. Generally speaking, as a bloc, Muslims have never had the trust of the American People at large, and they certainly do not have that trust at present.

After 9-11, it seems highly unlikely that they will gain that trust anytime during the next couple of generations, at the very least, until the majority of those living at the time of 9-11 and able to remember it personally, have passed into history, if not, indeed, long beyond that.

Yet another example of consequences that bin-Laden and his gang failed to anticipate - although the blame for that distrust lies squarely upon him and his followers; aggravated by those who cheered him on, and who make excuses for and attempt to rationalize and justify his actions post facto.


----------



## sealadaigh

Kondor3 said:


> sealadaigh said:
> 
> 
> 
> "...yes, like on 5 june, 1967 they defended themselves against the el quesir..."
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Yawn.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> "..._i wouldn't call what the israelis are doing 'defending themselves'_..."
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You would not.
> 
> They would.
> 
> And, generally speak, so does the United States.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> "..._and you won't have america forever._"
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Who is 'you'?
> 
> I'm a German-Irish 4th generation American living within 40 miles of Chicago.
> 
> There is no end in sight, to the America-Israel friendship and alliance.
> 
> Wake me up when you've got something a little more solid in that vein, eh?
Click to expand...


"you" would be zionists, be they jew or gentile.

america's relationship with america today is strained at best. yes, it is currently strong bit it gets weaker everyday as people begin to see through the charade. particularly young college students.

the simple fact of the matter is that a whole lot of people, especially young people, are seeing through the hate propaganda being put out by jews and zionists and rejecting it outright. personally, i think people are mistaken when they make decisions based upon propaganda, whether they accept it or reject it, and think actual facts are important but it is what it is. toung people are not so much motivated by fear tactics.

why would i wake you up. sleep through it. one less person to think about as far as i am concerned.


----------



## sealadaigh

Kondor3 said:


> sealadaigh said:
> 
> 
> 
> "..._i do have a difficult time when an amoral person or people whine about the amoral acts of power directed at them by their enemies._"
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The only significant issue that Israelis seem to be 'amoral' about is their right to a State in the location where they established themselves.
> 
> And that only because they were promised a homeland there and because the British and the League of Nations and the United Nations all failed to deliver on such promises.
> 
> Everything that follows afterwards is merely a matter of (1) hanging onto what they already have and (2) rounding-out the map to make their homeland defensible and viable.
> 
> Had they been a truly amoral and expansionist power they would own Sinai and Lebanon rather than giving them back after winning various wars and campaigns, and they would have taken over most of Jordan by now and subjugated or killed off the indigenous populations of all those places, as well as the West Bank and Gaza.
> 
> Had they been a truly amoral power they would have begun building the West Bank Wall in 1949 rather than 2000.
> 
> Had they been a truly amoral power they would have begun blockading Gaza in 1949 rather than 2007.
> 
> Generally speaking, they do no more than reestablish and secure their ancestral and spiritual homeland, after a 1,900 year -long absence.
> 
> Beyond those necessary survivalist goals, they are, generally speaking, a far more 'moral' and civilized and productive people than their Arab neighbors.
> 
> Beyond those necessary survivalist goals, they do no more than their nasty and aggressive Arab neighbors force upon them.
> 
> But when they *ARE* forced to get nasty in return, they are *MUCH* better at finishing their fights than those who foolishly pick or provoke them.
> 
> Endless attacks upon Israel by the Arabs have taught them that lesson, as well.
> 
> The America-Israel friendship and alliance is in no danger.
> 
> Not even a (perceived) hostile US President such as the present one is going to change that, and he will be gone in 3-1/2 years - long before he can do any permanent damage.
> 
> The American People at-large and their military and intelligence services are all firmly in the Israeli camp and are likely to be for many years to come.
> 
> This is doubly true after 9-11.
> 
> Americans do not take kindly to pi$$ant redneck Religious Fundie Muslims who kill thousands of innocent American civilians in a cowardly attempt to dictate to us whom we can have as friends and allies and whom we cannot.
> 
> If anything, 9-11 has solidified the America-Israel connection like no other event in modern times; a consequence that bin-Laden and his bunch failed to foresee.
> 
> A blip here and there on the demographics scope with respect to Muslim immigration isn't going to change that one little bit, despite the pie-in-the-sky pipe-dreams of some Muslims living in the US. Generally speaking, as a bloc, Muslims have never had the trust of the American People at large, and they certainly do not have that trust at present.
> 
> After 9-11, it seems highly unlikely that they will gain that trust anytime during the next couple of generations, at the very least, until the majority of those living at the time of 9-11 and able to remember it personally, have passed into history, if not, indeed, long beyond that.
> 
> Yet another example of consequences that bin-Laden and his gang failed to anticipate - although the blame for that distrust lies squarely upon him and his followers; aggravated by those who cheered him on, and who make excuses for and attempt to rationalize and justify his actions post facto.
Click to expand...


when you are at war for 60+ years...

#1. you picked a horrible location to relovaye your people to form this so called nation.
#2. you have not finished any fight.

as for osama bin laden. i don't think it escapes most people that jews aand zionists think, as netanyahu said about 9-11, that "it is good for israel". at first, i think most americans accepted that but i think it becomes more increasingly apparent, or so it seems, that the deaths of these americans are just being used by jews and zionists as fodder to promote hatred towards all muslims and pirsue a political agensa that does not seem at all to be in america's best interests.

also, i do not hold your opinion that the american people at large are bigots. you may be right, but that will sound the death knell for american jews as well.


----------



## Bumberclyde

Hossfly said:


> Bumberclyde said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> 
> Bumberclyde,  _et al,_
> 
> What are you, a stand-up comedian?  Where are you playing?
> 
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> You didn't even get the "old white guys" part right.
> 
> But they were one of the great generations of our time.  They were the representatives of the Allied Powers that remained when four Empires fell.
> 
> What is your allegation specifically, without the wisecracks?  Clear and coherent!
> 
> Most Respectfully,
> R
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I was asking about the partition map in a post just above, I was curious to know how they came to that particular split. And someone posted that video explaining the white guys who gave land to their friends. Just trying to figure out really what the basis is for the conflict today, how it all came about.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> These were my questions:
> 
> 1) How/why did the Jews end up with the good part with the beaches and coastline and the arabs got sand?
> 
> 2) When these lines were drawn up, were the arabs all supposed to leave the Jewish part (by force if necessary), or was everyone already living there going to be allowed to stay put?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Why don't you tell us from some legitimate source the percentage of the Negev Desert makes up  the total land given to Israel?  Meanwhile, you can tell your friends in Gaza that no one is stopping them from building some resorts on the Mediterranean.  Think of all the money they could make from the gambling casinos.  Why, they could be like Monaco!!   Now if only they asked for supplies to do this with from Iran instead of Iran supplying them with weapons and missiles.
> 
> Maybe you are the one to tell us why those Arabs in the area heeded the call of the Arabs leaders to leave, and once they got out of the way, there would be a clear field to murder the Jews and then they could return.  By the way, look at the map of the Arab world, and look at the tiny piece of land they are having a fit over because all the land there should belong to them and not one inch for the Jews.
> 
> Size Comparison Map of Israel and the Arab World
Click to expand...


It just doesn't seem like a fair split to me. Plus, the old white guys just basically did what they wanted without regard to the people living there at the time (because they didn't want Jews in their countries, but that's another story). And if they're still fighting, doesn't that tell you something about how their plan to partition the area is a total failure?


----------



## Bloodrock44

sealadaigh said:


> Kondor3 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> sealadaigh said:
> 
> 
> 
> "..._i do have a difficult time when an amoral person or people whine about the amoral acts of power directed at them by their enemies._"
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The only significant issue that Israelis seem to be 'amoral' about is their right to a State in the location where they established themselves.
> 
> And that only because they were promised a homeland there and because the British and the League of Nations and the United Nations all failed to deliver on such promises.
> 
> Everything that follows afterwards is merely a matter of (1) hanging onto what they already have and (2) rounding-out the map to make their homeland defensible and viable.
> 
> Had they been a truly amoral and expansionist power they would own Sinai and Lebanon rather than giving them back after winning various wars and campaigns, and they would have taken over most of Jordan by now and subjugated or killed off the indigenous populations of all those places, as well as the West Bank and Gaza.
> 
> Had they been a truly amoral power they would have begun building the West Bank Wall in 1949 rather than 2000.
> 
> Had they been a truly amoral power they would have begun blockading Gaza in 1949 rather than 2007.
> 
> Generally speaking, they do no more than reestablish and secure their ancestral and spiritual homeland, after a 1,900 year -long absence.
> 
> Beyond those necessary survivalist goals, they are, generally speaking, a far more 'moral' and civilized and productive people than their Arab neighbors.
> 
> Beyond those necessary survivalist goals, they do no more than their nasty and aggressive Arab neighbors force upon them.
> 
> But when they *ARE* forced to get nasty in return, they are *MUCH* better at finishing their fights than those who foolishly pick or provoke them.
> 
> Endless attacks upon Israel by the Arabs have taught them that lesson, as well.
> 
> The America-Israel friendship and alliance is in no danger.
> 
> Not even a (perceived) hostile US President such as the present one is going to change that, and he will be gone in 3-1/2 years - long before he can do any permanent damage.
> 
> The American People at-large and their military and intelligence services are all firmly in the Israeli camp and are likely to be for many years to come.
> 
> This is doubly true after 9-11.
> 
> Americans do not take kindly to pi$$ant redneck Religious Fundie Muslims who kill thousands of innocent American civilians in a cowardly attempt to dictate to us whom we can have as friends and allies and whom we cannot.
> 
> If anything, 9-11 has solidified the America-Israel connection like no other event in modern times; a consequence that bin-Laden and his bunch failed to foresee.
> 
> A blip here and there on the demographics scope with respect to Muslim immigration isn't going to change that one little bit, despite the pie-in-the-sky pipe-dreams of some Muslims living in the US. Generally speaking, as a bloc, Muslims have never had the trust of the American People at large, and they certainly do not have that trust at present.
> 
> After 9-11, it seems highly unlikely that they will gain that trust anytime during the next couple of generations, at the very least, until the majority of those living at the time of 9-11 and able to remember it personally, have passed into history, if not, indeed, long beyond that.
> 
> Yet another example of consequences that bin-Laden and his gang failed to anticipate - although the blame for that distrust lies squarely upon him and his followers; aggravated by those who cheered him on, and who make excuses for and attempt to rationalize and justify his actions post facto.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> when you are at war for 60+ years...
> 
> #1. you picked a horrible location to relovaye your people to form this so called nation.
> #2. you have not finished any fight.
> 
> as for osama bin laden. i don't think it escapes most people that jews aand zionists think, as netanyahu said about 9-11, that "it is good for israel". at first, i think most americans accepted that but i think it becomes more increasingly apparent, or so it seems, that the deaths of these americans are just being used by jews and zionists as fodder to promote hatred towards all muslims and pirsue a political agensa that does not seem at all to be in america's best interests.
> 
> also, i do not hold your opinion that the american people at large are bigots. you may be right, but that will sound the death knell for american jews as well.
Click to expand...


*So Jews and Zionists think 9/11 was good for Israel? I also don't think it escapes most people that some pro-Palestinians believed that America deserved to get hit and deserves to get hit again.*


----------



## georgephillip

Roudy said:


> georgephillip said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Kondor3 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Yep... fun, ain't it?
> 
> 
> 
> Yep... this was well-known, as far back as 1922, never mind 1948...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ...and it is just as true 91 years later, in 2013, as it was in 1922.
> 
> Nothing new there.
> 
> 
> 
> The Israelis are not out to discriminate against Palestinians.
> 
> They just want them to move outside the country, as that country is defined in the 1922 League of Nations Partition Plan.
> 
> Once that happens (_and it will - just look at today's maps of the few slices of non-contiguous land still under Palestinian control within those borders_) all of that horseshit goes away.
> 
> 
> 
> 'Still swimming in denial?
> 
> "The mandate was a legal and administrative instrument, not a geographical territory.[26] The territorial jurisdiction of the mandate was subject to change by treaty, capitulation, grant, usage, sufferance or other lawful means."
> 
> 50,000 Jews, 50,000 Arab Christians, and 500,000 Muslims lived in Palestine around 1922.
> Maybe that's why the kosher chickenshits didn't want elections?
> 'Still don't, apparently.
> SPLASH!
> 
> British Mandate for Palestine (legal instrument) - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Yup and that "Palestine" they keep referring to also included Jordan.  And most of them are ended up there, after Palestine was divided into Israel and Jordan.  In reality a total of about 300,000 Arab - Palestinians lived in Israel pre 1948, most of them invaders from neighboring lands that came looking for work.
Click to expand...


"By 1948, the population (of Palestine) had risen to 1,900,000, of whom 68% were Arabs, and 32% were Jews (UNSCOP report, including bedouin).

"The question of late Arab immigration to Palestine[edit source | editbeta]
Whether there was significant Arab immigration into Palestine after the beginning of Jewish settlement there in the late 19th century has become a matter of some controversy. 

"According to Martin Gilbert, 50,000 Arabs immigrated to Mandatory Palestine from the neighboring lands between 1919 and 1939 "attracted by the improving agricultural conditions and growing job opportunities, most of them created by the Jews".[29]

"The overall assessment of several British reports was that the increase in the Arab population was primarily due to natural increase.[30][31] These included the Hope Simpson report (1930),[32] the Passfield White Paper (1930)[33] the Peel Commission report (1937)[34] and the Survey of Palestine (1945).[35]" 

Demographics of Palestine - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


----------



## Roudy

sealadaigh said:


> Roudy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> sealadaigh said:
> 
> 
> 
> yes, like on 5 june, 1967 they defended themselves against the el quesir.
> 
> i wouldn't call what the israelis are doing "defending themselves" and you won't have america forever.
> 
> 
> 
> *Remind us again why you actually believe anybody cares what you "think"?*  Israel has done and will continue doing a good job defending itself and will be one of America's closest allies.
> 
> Does that make you bigots angry?  GOOD. LOL
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> well, perhaps i feel that way because some of you follow me around constantly like a hurt puppy dog and go to some effory yo lie in order to discredit me.
> 
> as for america, it is, like the rest of the world, changing in its attitude towards israel and soon the arab/muslim population is increasing. as they increase, people will become more exposed to them as hard working, patriotic members of their community and good neighbours and the attacks on them, many by jewish people, will be exposed for what they are, acts of bigotry and hate ccrimes or precursors to hate crimes.
> 
> america will not just do an "about-FACE", it will execute a snappy "to the rear-MARCH!!!"if history is any indication. our government is very, very slow to act on social issues but when the do, they do so qquickly and with a determination.
Click to expand...

Sorry to burst your neo Nazi fantasy. Approval of Israel is at a long time high, and EU just put Hezbollah on the terrorist list. 

Looks like things are only getting better for Israel. 

Looks like you're the hurt puppy here.


----------



## Roudy

georgephillip said:


> Roudy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> georgephillip said:
> 
> 
> 
> 'Still swimming in denial?
> 
> "The mandate was a legal and administrative instrument, not a geographical territory.[26] The territorial jurisdiction of the mandate was subject to change by treaty, capitulation, grant, usage, sufferance or other lawful means."
> 
> 50,000 Jews, 50,000 Arab Christians, and 500,000 Muslims lived in Palestine around 1922.
> Maybe that's why the kosher chickenshits didn't want elections?
> 'Still don't, apparently.
> SPLASH!
> 
> British Mandate for Palestine (legal instrument) - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
> 
> 
> 
> Yup and that "Palestine" they keep referring to also included Jordan.  And most of them are ended up there, after Palestine was divided into Israel and Jordan.  In reality a total of about 300,000 Arab - Palestinians lived in Israel pre 1948, most of them invaders from neighboring lands that came looking for work.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> "By 1948, the population (of Palestine) had risen to 1,900,000, of whom 68% were Arabs, and 32% were Jews (UNSCOP report, including bedouin).
> 
> "The question of late Arab immigration to Palestine[edit source | editbeta]
> Whether there was significant Arab immigration into Palestine after the beginning of Jewish settlement there in the late 19th century has become a matter of some controversy.
> 
> "According to Martin Gilbert, 50,000 Arabs immigrated to Mandatory Palestine from the neighboring lands between 1919 and 1939 "attracted by the improving agricultural conditions and growing job opportunities, most of them created by the Jews".[29]
> 
> "The overall assessment of several British reports was that the increase in the Arab population was primarily due to natural increase.[30][31] These included the Hope Simpson report (1930),[32] the Passfield White Paper (1930)[33] the Peel Commission report (1937)[34] and the Survey of Palestine (1945).[35]"
> 
> Demographics of Palestine - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Click to expand...

Palestine included Jordan, DUFUS.


----------



## georgephillip

Kondor3 said:


> georgephillip said:
> 
> 
> 
> "..._Still swimming in denial? 'The mandate was a legal and administrative instrument, not a geographical territory.[26] The territorial jurisdiction of the mandate was subject to change by treaty, capitulation, grant, usage, sufferance or other lawful means.'_..."
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Whatever in the world are you talking about... 'denial'?
> 
> Nowhere in that post will you find reference to the Mandate as either one sort of artificial construct or another, territorial or legal or administrative or otherwise.
> 
> Both the Israelis and Palestinians can serve-up some halfway decent-sounding argument in support of their case, or in support of bits-and-pieces of it, anyway.
> 
> But, in the end, none of that shit signifies to an extent sufficient to influence the existence or sustaining of nations.
> 
> Allow me to introduce you to the *Real World* basis for the existence of the State of Israel:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ...not to mention the reported existence of some 200 nuclear warheads.
> 
> ...and the fierce determination of the Jews never again be put into a position of weakness that would allow others to slaughter them in their millions.
> 
> ...which tends to make nonsense out of any old legal arguments.
> 
> The Jews are, historically, one of the most and longest-persecuted and slaughtered peoples on the face of the planet.
> 
> After the Holocaust, they turned things around for themselves, toughened-up, found their courage as a People once again, re-formed as a polity after a 1900-year-long absence, and have become the most hardened Survivalist Nation on the face of the planet.
> 
> Their Arab-Muslim neighbors also forced the Jews to learn how to make War better than anybody else in the region.
> 
> War has a tendency to cancel-out old understandings and arrangements and legal status.
> 
> As is the case here, practically speaking.
> 
> Your side lost.
> 
> Repeatedly.
> 
> Vae victus.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> "..._50,000 Jews, 50,000 Arab Christians, and 500,000 Muslims lived in Palestine around 1922..." _
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I was not aware that either the League of Nations nor the British Mandate Authority had ever considered such a possibility during the 1920s or thereabouts on the timeline.
> 
> Do you have a link to credible initiatives of those times to undertake such Elections for all residents of the region, which the Jews would have rejected?
> 
> 
> 
> Having kicked the arses of all of their *combined* and allied Arab Enemies in 1948, 1967 and 1973, I think the Israelis have put the lie to accusations of being 'chickenshit'.
> 
> At the very least, they are far, far *LESS* 'chickenshit' than the Arabs whose arse they've kicked time and again.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> "..._didn't want elections? 'Still don't, apparently_..."
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Too late for that.
> 
> The Arab-Muslim Palestinians who chose to remain within Israeli jurisdiction in 1948 when the State of Israel was declared, are all full-fledged Israeli citizens and enfranchised to vote.
> 
> The Arab-Muslim Palestinians who chose to side with the Five Invading Aggressor Arab Countries in  1948 and to abandon their lands and hunker-down in the West Bank and Gaza until the Arabs won the war (_and redeemed all the land for the Arabs alone and to drive the Jews into the Mediterranean_), and who have been fighting a guerrilla war against Israel off-and-on ever since...those Arab-Muslim Palestinians are not citizens of Israel.
> 
> They had their chance.
> 
> They made their choice.
> 
> They chose poorly.
> 
> Welcome to your consequences.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> "...SPLASH!"
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Indeed.
> 
> None of that old legal horseshit matters a damn.
> 
> And hasn't, practically speaking, for a great many years.
> 
> Some folks, however, insist upon beating their heads against a thick stone wall that will never budge.
> 
> All that gets them is a headache.
> 
> The party's over... time for the Palestinians to pack up and move someplace else... 'cause there's no place for them in Israel after what they've done... and what few slivers of land still remain in their possession will be annexed over the next decade or two in order to round-out and complete the 1922 map.
> 
> Might as well avoid the Christmas Rush and leave now.
> 
> The sooner they leave, the sooner they and their families can build new lives and find happiness elsewhere, amongst their co-religionists and ethnic brethren.
Click to expand...


What's your point?

Scary Jews with a "fierce determination" to kill as many women and kids as they can while hiding behind star-spangled skirts?

Save your amateurish posturing for Hanukkah.


----------



## toastman

Fierce Determination to kill as many women and kids?? What a disgusting lying statement. 
You know it's false you piece of garbage George. Very immature comment .

Why would the IDF want to kill as many women and kids 

and

If they have that determination, why are they not doing so since they obviously have the capability?

Could it be that you're a typical Jihadist supporting liar who makes up bullshit to vilify Israel ??? 
YUP! That sounds about right

Now go hang your head in shame in the corner of your studio apartment


----------



## georgephillip

Kondor3 said:


> sealadaigh said:
> 
> 
> 
> "..._OMG...is that the el quesir. it is so hard to tell without unmarked, french made mirages swarming around it._
> 
> 
> 
> Does it matter in the slightest, to the point being made?
> 
> If the Israeli Navy consisted of two rowboats and a single motor-launch, their Navy would still be bigger than that of the Palestinians, and, of course, it is large enough to make the Egyptians and Turks and other Muslim countries respect them on the open water and in the Suez and nearby waters.
> 
> It happens to be the INS Hetz ( Sa'ar 4.5-class missile boat - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia ) - a missile boat.
> 
> But, thank you for your tax money, which contributes to some modest degree to helping our good friends (and, nowadays, allies), the Israelis, defend themselves.
Click to expand...


Don't forget to thank those who've contributed life, limb, and blood for your good friends in their heroic quest to colonize Palestine:

"USS Liberty: Contact Page


----------



## toastman

georgephillip said:


> Kondor3 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> sealadaigh said:
> 
> 
> 
> "..._OMG...is that the el quesir. it is so hard to tell without unmarked, french made mirages swarming around it._
> 
> 
> 
> Does it matter in the slightest, to the point being made?
> 
> If the Israeli Navy consisted of two rowboats and a single motor-launch, their Navy would still be bigger than that of the Palestinians, and, of course, it is large enough to make the Egyptians and Turks and other Muslim countries respect them on the open water and in the Suez and nearby waters.
> 
> It happens to be the INS Hetz ( Sa'ar 4.5-class missile boat - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia ) - a missile boat.
> 
> But, thank you for your tax money, which contributes to some modest degree to helping our good friends (and, nowadays, allies), the Israelis, defend themselves.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Don't forget to thank those who've contributed life, limb, and blood for your good friends in their heroic quest to colonize Palestine:
> 
> "USS Liberty: Contact Page
Click to expand...


Jew hater, why did you ignore my two questions above ?


----------



## toastman

georgephillip said:


> Kondor3 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> sealadaigh said:
> 
> 
> 
> "..._OMG...is that the el quesir. it is so hard to tell without unmarked, french made mirages swarming around it._
> 
> 
> 
> Does it matter in the slightest, to the point being made?
> 
> If the Israeli Navy consisted of two rowboats and a single motor-launch, their Navy would still be bigger than that of the Palestinians, and, of course, it is large enough to make the Egyptians and Turks and other Muslim countries respect them on the open water and in the Suez and nearby waters.
> 
> It happens to be the INS Hetz ( Sa'ar 4.5-class missile boat - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia ) - a missile boat.
> 
> But, thank you for your tax money, which contributes to some modest degree to helping our good friends (and, nowadays, allies), the Israelis, defend themselves.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Don't forget to thank those who've contributed life, limb, and blood for your good friends in their heroic quest to colonize Palestine:
> 
> "USS Liberty: Contact Page
Click to expand...


Why do you ignore the Americans who were not just killed, BUT MURDERED by PAlestinians, the people you so gracefully support ?


----------



## Kondor3

sealadaigh said:


> "..._the simple fact of the matter is that a whole lot of people, especially young people, are seeing through the hate propaganda being put out by jews and zionists and rejecting it outright_..."



Feel free to continue to cling to such impressions if they bring you any comfort.


----------



## Kondor3

georgephillip said:


> "..._What's your point? Scary Jews with a "fierce determination" to kill as many women and kids as they can while hiding behind star-spangled skirts? Save your amateurish posturing for Hanukkah._"



My point is, that all your fuss about Old Legal Standings don't matter a damn.

Victory in war overturned that old state of affairs.

And overwhelming military strength sustains the new state of affairs.

Arab-Muslim Palestinians long ago divided themselves into two camps.

Those who were willing to live alongside the Israelis.

And those who were not.

The former enjoy all the rights and privileges of enfranchised Israeli citizenship.

The latter have been living as cast-outs in shit-holes for the past sixty-five years waiting for a promised pan-Arab Victory or Deliverance that is never going to come.

With nothing left to do but fire-off rockets and whine about Old Legal Standings.

That's my point.

But you knew that all along, before you even wrote what you did.


----------



## ForeverYoung436

georgephillip said:


> Kondor3 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> sealadaigh said:
> 
> 
> 
> "..._OMG...is that the el quesir. it is so hard to tell without unmarked, french made mirages swarming around it._
> 
> 
> 
> Does it matter in the slightest, to the point being made?
> 
> If the Israeli Navy consisted of two rowboats and a single motor-launch, their Navy would still be bigger than that of the Palestinians, and, of course, it is large enough to make the Egyptians and Turks and other Muslim countries respect them on the open water and in the Suez and nearby waters.
> 
> It happens to be the INS Hetz ( Sa'ar 4.5-class missile boat - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia ) - a missile boat.
> 
> But, thank you for your tax money, which contributes to some modest degree to helping our good friends (and, nowadays, allies), the Israelis, defend themselves.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Don't forget to thank those who've contributed life, limb, and blood for your good friends in their heroic quest to colonize Palestine:
> 
> "USS Liberty: Contact Page
Click to expand...


Anyone who has ever spent time in Israel, and knows how much they worship America, would also know that they would never murder Americans intentionally.


----------



## toastman

ForeverYoung436 said:


> georgephillip said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Kondor3 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Does it matter in the slightest, to the point being made?
> 
> If the Israeli Navy consisted of two rowboats and a single motor-launch, their Navy would still be bigger than that of the Palestinians, and, of course, it is large enough to make the Egyptians and Turks and other Muslim countries respect them on the open water and in the Suez and nearby waters.
> 
> It happens to be the INS Hetz ( Sa'ar 4.5-class missile boat - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia ) - a missile boat.
> 
> But, thank you for your tax money, which contributes to some modest degree to helping our good friends (and, nowadays, allies), the Israelis, defend themselves.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Don't forget to thank those who've contributed life, limb, and blood for your good friends in their heroic quest to colonize Palestine:
> 
> "USS Liberty: Contact Page
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Anyone who has ever spent time in Israel, and knows how much they worship America, would also know that they would never murder Americans intentionally.
Click to expand...


He knows it too. But bringing up the Liberty is just a little trick the pro - Palestinians try to use to demonize Israel. It's usually a sign that they have their back to the wall. 
Then if you bring up Palestinians who blew themselves up in cafes and restaurants and killed Americans in the process, they say it is the same thing as what was done to the Liberty.

Very very very feeble minded people, some of these pro - Palestinians


----------



## Bloodrock44

georgephillip said:


> Kondor3 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> sealadaigh said:
> 
> 
> 
> "..._OMG...is that the el quesir. it is so hard to tell without unmarked, french made mirages swarming around it._
> 
> 
> 
> Does it matter in the slightest, to the point being made?
> 
> If the Israeli Navy consisted of two rowboats and a single motor-launch, their Navy would still be bigger than that of the Palestinians, and, of course, it is large enough to make the Egyptians and Turks and other Muslim countries respect them on the open water and in the Suez and nearby waters.
> 
> It happens to be the INS Hetz ( Sa'ar 4.5-class missile boat - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia ) - a missile boat.
> 
> But, thank you for your tax money, which contributes to some modest degree to helping our good friends (and, nowadays, allies), the Israelis, defend themselves.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Don't forget to thank those who've contributed life, limb, and blood for your good friends in their heroic quest to colonize Palestine:
> 
> "USS Liberty: Contact Page
Click to expand...


*You know when they resort to the Liberty they've done shot their wad.*


----------



## sealadaigh

toastman said:


> georgephillip said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Kondor3 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Does it matter in the slightest, to the point being made?
> 
> If the Israeli Navy consisted of two rowboats and a single motor-launch, their Navy would still be bigger than that of the Palestinians, and, of course, it is large enough to make the Egyptians and Turks and other Muslim countries respect them on the open water and in the Suez and nearby waters.
> 
> It happens to be the INS Hetz ( Sa'ar 4.5-class missile boat - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia ) - a missile boat.
> 
> But, thank you for your tax money, which contributes to some modest degree to helping our good friends (and, nowadays, allies), the Israelis, defend themselves.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Don't forget to thank those who've contributed life, limb, and blood for your good friends in their heroic quest to colonize Palestine:
> 
> "USS Liberty: Contact Page
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Jew hater, why did you ignore my two questions above ?
Click to expand...


lol...he is a "jew hater" because he ignores your questions? LOL.

get used to it. i have a feeling a lot more people are going to ignore your petty whining.  he was posting about the USS liberty. show some respect.


----------



## sealadaigh

Bloodrock44 said:


> georgephillip said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Kondor3 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Does it matter in the slightest, to the point being made?
> 
> If the Israeli Navy consisted of two rowboats and a single motor-launch, their Navy would still be bigger than that of the Palestinians, and, of course, it is large enough to make the Egyptians and Turks and other Muslim countries respect them on the open water and in the Suez and nearby waters.
> 
> It happens to be the INS Hetz ( Sa'ar 4.5-class missile boat - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia ) - a missile boat.
> 
> But, thank you for your tax money, which contributes to some modest degree to helping our good friends (and, nowadays, allies), the Israelis, defend themselves.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Don't forget to thank those who've contributed life, limb, and blood for your good friends in their heroic quest to colonize Palestine:
> 
> "USS Liberty: Contact Page
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> *You know when they resort to the Liberty they've done shot their wad.*
Click to expand...


i swear, i never ever thought i would hear a vet say something like that.


----------



## Bloodrock44

sealadaigh said:


> Bloodrock44 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> georgephillip said:
> 
> 
> 
> Don't forget to thank those who've contributed life, limb, and blood for your good friends in their heroic quest to colonize Palestine:
> 
> "USS Liberty: Contact Page
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *You know when they resort to the Liberty they've done shot their wad.*
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> i swear, i never ever thought i would hear a vet say something like that.
Click to expand...


*I've said it a thousand times and you know it. Quit being such a drama queen.*


----------



## sealadaigh

Bloodrock44 said:


> sealadaigh said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Bloodrock44 said:
> 
> 
> 
> *You know when they resort to the Liberty they've done shot their wad.*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> i swear, i never ever thought i would hear a vet say something like that.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> *I've said it a thousand times and you know it. Quit being such a drama queen.*
Click to expand...



don't sell them out. you know they deserve a full congressional investigation.

c'mon, you say you were a tank commander. you must know something about target acquisition. there is no way they knew without a doubt that it was not american and an immediate attack wasn't necessary.

they had four .50 cal machine guns for christ sake. that is all.


----------



## Bloodrock44

sealadaigh said:


> Bloodrock44 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> sealadaigh said:
> 
> 
> 
> i swear, i never ever thought i would hear a vet say something like that.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *I've said it a thousand times and you know it. Quit being such a drama queen.*
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> don't sell them out. you know they deserve a full congressional investigation.
> 
> c'mon, you say you were a tank commander. you must know something about target acquisition. there is no way they knew without a doubt that it was not american and an immediate attack wasn't necessary.
> 
> they had four .50 cal machine guns for christ sake. that is all.
Click to expand...


*I stopped discussing the Liberty 10 years ago. I accepted Israel's explanation. That is all.*


----------



## Hossfly

sealadaigh said:


> Bloodrock44 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> sealadaigh said:
> 
> 
> 
> i swear, i never ever thought i would hear a vet say something like that.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *I've said it a thousand times and you know it. Quit being such a drama queen.*
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> don't sell them out. you know they deserve a full congressional investigation.
> 
> c'mon, you say you were a tank commander. you must know something about target acquisition. there is no way they knew without a doubt that it was not american and an immediate attack wasn't necessary.
> 
> they had four .50 cal machine guns for christ sake. that is all.
Click to expand...

I think that most of the posters and viewers realize by now that those with the mind set as Seal wouldn't be satisfied if a thousand investigations were made if these investigations didn't show Israel to be at fault.


----------



## Hossfly

sealadaigh said:


> Bloodrock44 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> georgephillip said:
> 
> 
> 
> Don't forget to thank those who've contributed life, limb, and blood for your good friends in their heroic quest to colonize Palestine:
> 
> "USS Liberty: Contact Page
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *You know when they resort to the Liberty they've done shot their wad.*
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> i swear, i never ever thought i would hear a vet say something like that.
Click to expand...

And I am pretty sure that the anti-Semites/anti-Israel crowd will never stop dragging up the Liberty incident even though it has been posted hundreds and hundreds of times by them throughout the years on different forums.  Bloodrock is right.  When all else fails, the anti-Semites/anti-Israel crowd never fails to bring up the Liberty incident.  You can count on it.


----------



## Hossfly

georgephillip said:


> Kondor3 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> georgephillip said:
> 
> 
> 
> "..._Still swimming in denial? 'The mandate was a legal and administrative instrument, not a geographical territory.[26] The territorial jurisdiction of the mandate was subject to change by treaty, capitulation, grant, usage, sufferance or other lawful means.'_..."
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Whatever in the world are you talking about... 'denial'?
> 
> Nowhere in that post will you find reference to the Mandate as either one sort of artificial construct or another, territorial or legal or administrative or otherwise.
> 
> Both the Israelis and Palestinians can serve-up some halfway decent-sounding argument in support of their case, or in support of bits-and-pieces of it, anyway.
> 
> But, in the end, none of that shit signifies to an extent sufficient to influence the existence or sustaining of nations.
> 
> Allow me to introduce you to the *Real World* basis for the existence of the State of Israel:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ...not to mention the reported existence of some 200 nuclear warheads.
> 
> ...and the fierce determination of the Jews never again be put into a position of weakness that would allow others to slaughter them in their millions.
> 
> ...which tends to make nonsense out of any old legal arguments.
> 
> The Jews are, historically, one of the most and longest-persecuted and slaughtered peoples on the face of the planet.
> 
> After the Holocaust, they turned things around for themselves, toughened-up, found their courage as a People once again, re-formed as a polity after a 1900-year-long absence, and have become the most hardened Survivalist Nation on the face of the planet.
> 
> Their Arab-Muslim neighbors also forced the Jews to learn how to make War better than anybody else in the region.
> 
> War has a tendency to cancel-out old understandings and arrangements and legal status.
> 
> As is the case here, practically speaking.
> 
> Your side lost.
> 
> Repeatedly.
> 
> Vae victus.
> 
> 
> 
> I was not aware that either the League of Nations nor the British Mandate Authority had ever considered such a possibility during the 1920s or thereabouts on the timeline.
> 
> Do you have a link to credible initiatives of those times to undertake such Elections for all residents of the region, which the Jews would have rejected?
> 
> 
> 
> Having kicked the arses of all of their *combined* and allied Arab Enemies in 1948, 1967 and 1973, I think the Israelis have put the lie to accusations of being 'chickenshit'.
> 
> At the very least, they are far, far *LESS* 'chickenshit' than the Arabs whose arse they've kicked time and again.
> 
> 
> 
> Too late for that.
> 
> The Arab-Muslim Palestinians who chose to remain within Israeli jurisdiction in 1948 when the State of Israel was declared, are all full-fledged Israeli citizens and enfranchised to vote.
> 
> The Arab-Muslim Palestinians who chose to side with the Five Invading Aggressor Arab Countries in  1948 and to abandon their lands and hunker-down in the West Bank and Gaza until the Arabs won the war (_and redeemed all the land for the Arabs alone and to drive the Jews into the Mediterranean_), and who have been fighting a guerrilla war against Israel off-and-on ever since...those Arab-Muslim Palestinians are not citizens of Israel.
> 
> They had their chance.
> 
> They made their choice.
> 
> They chose poorly.
> 
> Welcome to your consequences.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> "...SPLASH!"
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Indeed.
> 
> None of that old legal horseshit matters a damn.
> 
> And hasn't, practically speaking, for a great many years.
> 
> Some folks, however, insist upon beating their heads against a thick stone wall that will never budge.
> 
> All that gets them is a headache.
> 
> The party's over... time for the Palestinians to pack up and move someplace else... 'cause there's no place for them in Israel after what they've done... and what few slivers of land still remain in their possession will be annexed over the next decade or two in order to round-out and complete the 1922 map.
> 
> Might as well avoid the Christmas Rush and leave now.
> 
> The sooner they leave, the sooner they and their families can build new lives and find happiness elsewhere, amongst their co-religionists and ethnic brethren.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> What's your point?
> 
> Scary Jews with a "fierce determination" to kill as many women and kids as they can while hiding behind star-spangled skirts?
> 
> Save your amateurish posturing for Hanukkah.
Click to expand...

Gee, Georgie Boy, I sure hope you are saving some of yours for Kwaansa.  Isn't it something how Georgie Boy appears to not have a care in the world when it comes to his new friends murdering people who are non Muslims and even Muslims of different sects.  I would think that he would at least be concerned about what is happening in Nigeria and other parts of Africa and, therefore, would participate in a forum on Africa.


----------



## Bumberclyde

*Is Israel the Same as South Africa?*

No, SA is a peaceful nation.


----------



## Hossfly

Bumberclyde said:


> *Is Israel the Same as South Africa?*
> 
> No, SA is a peaceful nation.


D'ya think SA would take the Palestinians in? And remain peaceful?


----------



## Bumberclyde

Hossfly said:


> Bumberclyde said:
> 
> 
> 
> *Is Israel the Same as South Africa?*
> 
> No, SA is a peaceful nation.
> 
> 
> 
> D'ya think SA would take the Palestinians in? And remain peaceful?
Click to expand...


No, but they sure could give the Israelis some advice. Maybe Nelson Mandela should go and explain life to the Israelis.


----------



## Kondor3

Hossfly said:


> Bumberclyde said:
> 
> 
> 
> *Is Israel the Same as South Africa?*
> 
> No, SA is a peaceful nation.
> 
> 
> 
> *D'ya think SA would take the Palestinians in? And remain peaceful?*
Click to expand...


----------



## Kondor3

Bumberclyde said:


> Hossfly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Bumberclyde said:
> 
> 
> 
> *Is Israel the Same as South Africa?*
> 
> No, SA is a peaceful nation.
> 
> 
> 
> D'ya think SA would take the Palestinians in? And remain peaceful?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> No, but they sure could give the Israelis some advice. Maybe Nelson Mandela should go and explain life to the Israelis.
Click to expand...

Perhaps Mandela can tell the Jews of the 6,000,000 South Africans slaughtered in the Nazi concentration camps of Europe before they were promised a land of their own and seized their allotted share when the promisers looked like they were going to welch on the deal.

Oh, wait, that was the Jews, not the South Africans... sorry... my bad... never mind.


----------



## Bumberclyde

Kondor3 said:


> Bumberclyde said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Hossfly said:
> 
> 
> 
> D'ya think SA would take the Palestinians in? And remain peaceful?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> No, but they sure could give the Israelis some advice. Maybe Nelson Mandela should go and explain life to the Israelis.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Perhaps Mandela can tell the Jews of the 6,000,000 South Africans slaughtered in the Nazi concentration camps of Europe before they were promised a land of their own and seized their allotted share when the promisers looked like they were going to welch on the deal.
> 
> Oh, wait, that was the Jews, not the South Africans... sorry... my bad... never mind.
Click to expand...


So if the Jews were done wrong in Europe, shouldn't their homeland be there? Why should the arabs pay for that?


----------



## ForeverYoung436

Bumberclyde said:


> Kondor3 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Bumberclyde said:
> 
> 
> 
> No, but they sure could give the Israelis some advice. Maybe Nelson Mandela should go and explain life to the Israelis.
> 
> 
> 
> Perhaps Mandela can tell the Jews of the 6,000,000 South Africans slaughtered in the Nazi concentration camps of Europe before they were promised a land of their own and seized their allotted share when the promisers looked like they were going to welch on the deal.
> 
> Oh, wait, that was the Jews, not the South Africans... sorry... my bad... never mind.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> So if the Jews were done wrong in Europe, shouldn't their homeland be there? Why should the arabs pay for that?
Click to expand...


Poor, poor Arabs...having to give up less than 1% of the Middle East.


----------



## Bumberclyde

ForeverYoung436 said:


> Bumberclyde said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Kondor3 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Perhaps Mandela can tell the Jews of the 6,000,000 South Africans slaughtered in the Nazi concentration camps of Europe before they were promised a land of their own and seized their allotted share when the promisers looked like they were going to welch on the deal.
> 
> Oh, wait, that was the Jews, not the South Africans... sorry... my bad... never mind.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> So if the Jews were done wrong in Europe, shouldn't their homeland be there? Why should the arabs pay for that?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Poor, poor Arabs...having to give up less than 1% of the Middle East.
Click to expand...


That doesn't explain anything. Ok, you have nothing. Got it.


----------



## Kondor3

Bumberclyde said:


> "..._So if the Jews were done wrong in Europe, shouldn't their homeland be there? Why should the arabs pay for that?_"


Because the Euros didn't want 'em in Europe and because they controlled the Middle East at the time and because the Arabs weren't really doing anything worthwhile with Palestine at the time and because there was already a sizable land-owning Jewish minority in Palestine and because a case could be made that the Arabs had been squatting for centuries on Jewish territory that they had conquered or taken-over and because the Arabs had so much empty land-mass in the region that they should not have missed or begrudged a pissant little sliver of land like that and because the Christians and Muslims had 'Religious Capitals' while the Spiritual Mothership (Judaism) had been without one for centuries and because the Euros were stronger than the Arabs and could force their will and and because the Muslims had subjugated the Jews for centuries in Dhimmitude and owed them something too and because the Euros figured they'd leave it to the Arabs to wipe out the Jews and keep any more blood from staining their own hands and because Euro-trash had just killed 6,000,000 of them and because the Euros had a modest case of guilt over it and wanted to do something nice for them for once and because the Jews have been trying to get back there for 1900 years and because the Euros figured to give them a consolation-prize as compensation for the Holocaust and because the Euros bloody-well felt like it and because there wasn't shit that the Arabs were going to do about it other than fight with the Jews?

( nominated for _Longest Rambling Sentence Without Punctuation Marks_ of the day )

Honest enough to suit you?


----------



## Sweet_Caroline

ForeverYoung436 said:


> Bumberclyde said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Kondor3 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Perhaps Mandela can tell the Jews of the 6,000,000 South Africans slaughtered in the Nazi concentration camps of Europe before they were promised a land of their own and seized their allotted share when the promisers looked like they were going to welch on the deal.
> 
> Oh, wait, that was the Jews, not the South Africans... sorry... my bad... never mind.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> So if the Jews were done wrong in Europe, shouldn't their homeland be there? Why should the arabs pay for that?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Poor, poor Arabs...having to give up less than 1% of the Middle East.
Click to expand...


*Yes, poor poor arabs.   

Bumbercyle - The arabs had a large portion of land offered to them in San Remo in 1922, and the Jews were offered Israel.  I told you this Bumberclyde the other day, don't you remember?

I guess you don't know how tiny the land is that the Jews have as you do appear to be very ignorant of the matter.

Here, let me show you.  You can sing along to the music or put it on mute, but watch the video and then tell me why the Jews shouldn't have that tiny portion of land that was theirs a couple of thousand years before Mohammed was a twinkle in his mother's eye.
*
[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qb6ZZg0gSHs]That Tiny Strip of Land, ISRAEL - YouTube[/ame]


----------



## Bumberclyde

Kondor3 said:


> Bumberclyde said:
> 
> 
> 
> "..._So if the Jews were done wrong in Europe, shouldn't their homeland be there? Why should the arabs pay for that?_"
> 
> 
> 
> Because the Euros didn't want 'em in Europe and because they controlled the Middle East at the time and because the Arabs weren't really doing anything worthwhile with Palestine at the time and because there was already a sizable land-owning Jewish minority in Palestine and because a case could be made that the Arabs had been squatting for centuries on Jewish territory that they had conquered or taken-over and because the Arabs had so much empty land-mass in the region that they should not have missed or begrudged a pissant little sliver of land like that and because the Christians and Muslims had 'Religious Capitals' while the Spiritual Mothership (Judaism) had been without one for centuries and because the Euros were stronger than the Arabs and could force their will and and because the Muslims had subjugated the Jews for centuries in Dhimmitude and owed them something too and because the Euros figured they'd leave it to the Arabs to wipe out the Jews and keep any more blood from staining their own hands and because the Euros bloody-well felt like it and because there wasn't shit that the Arabs were going to do about it other than fight with the Jews?
> 
> ( nominated for _Longest Rambling Sentence Without Punctuation Marks_ of the day )
> 
> Honest enough to suit you?
Click to expand...


----------



## Kondor3

Bumberclyde said:


>



_Thought_ you'd like that one...


----------



## georgephillip

"South Africa was among the 33 states that voted in favour of the 1947 UN partition resolution,[1] which led to the creation of the State of Israel, and was one of only four Commonwealth nations to do so. 

"On 24 May 1948,[2] nine days after Israel's declaration of independence, the South African government of Jan Smuts, a long-time supporter of Zionism, granted de facto recognition to the State of Israel, just two days before his United Party was voted out of office and replaced by the pro-apartheid National Party. 

"South Africa was the seventh nation to recognise the new Jewish state. On 14 May 1949, South Africa granted de jure recognition to the State of Israel.[3][4]"

Israel?South Africa relations - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


----------



## Bumberclyde

Kondor3 said:


> Bumberclyde said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _Thought_ you'd like that one...
Click to expand...


I'm shocked anyone from your side would be even THAT honest!!!!
Pass the word around (I edited it for clarity and precision):

"Because the Euros didn't want 'em in Europe and because they controlled the Middle East at the time and because the Euros bloody-well felt like it and because there wasn't shit that the Arabs were going to do about it other than fight with the Jews."


----------



## Kondor3

Bumberclyde said:


> "..._I'm shocked anyone from your side would be even THAT honest!!!!_..."



There is no harm in serving-up honest personal opinion relating to how all this materialized in the 1948-1949 timeframe.

We (the world) spend far too much time quibbling over Old Legalities and not enough time dealing with the New Reality of What-Is.

*HOW* we got to this place is nowhere *NEAR* as important as the fact that we *ARE* here.

We (the world) cannot move forward unless we stop looking backwards as our main tactic in this context.

And we cannot stop looking backwards until we stop leaning upon the past to rationalize the *WHY* of where we are *NOW*.

Of course, the quickest way to do that, is to cut through all the bullshit and to recognize the culpability of the Euros in creating this mess in the first place, and how the battered, desperate Jews of Europe averted extinction and won their old homeland back in the shadow of that European culpability.

It is a '_road less traveled_' but it is also a logical approach.


----------



## Bumberclyde

Kondor3 said:


> Bumberclyde said:
> 
> 
> 
> "..._I'm shocked anyone from your side would be even THAT honest!!!!_..."
> 
> 
> 
> 
> There is no harm in serving-up honest personal opinion relating to how all this materialized in the 1948-1949 timeframe.
> 
> We (the world) spend far too much time quibbling over Old Legalities and not enough time dealing with the New Reality of What-Is.
> 
> *HOW* we got to this place is nowhere *NEAR* as important as the fact that we *ARE* here.
> 
> We (the world) cannot move forward unless we stop looking backwards as our main tactic in this context.
> 
> And we cannot stop looking backwards until we stop leaning upon the past to rationalize the *WHY* of where we are *NOW*.
> 
> Of course, the quickest way to do that, is to cut through all the bullshit and to recognize the culpability of the Euros in creating this mess in the first place, and how the battered, desperate Jews of Europe averted extinction and won their old homeland back in the shadow of that European culpability.
> 
> It is a '_road less traveled_' but it is also a logical approach.
Click to expand...


Of course it matters how you got there. Was taking the land done peacefully or was it done at the end of a gun barrel. Makes a BIG difference. Was it even a good place to set up shop in the first place, knowing that the arabs are going to be pissed until the end of time, or Israel's annihilation, which ever comes first?


----------



## Bloodrock44

Bumberclyde said:


> Kondor3 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Bumberclyde said:
> 
> 
> 
> "..._I'm shocked anyone from your side would be even THAT honest!!!!_..."
> 
> 
> 
> 
> There is no harm in serving-up honest personal opinion relating to how all this materialized in the 1948-1949 timeframe.
> 
> We (the world) spend far too much time quibbling over Old Legalities and not enough time dealing with the New Reality of What-Is.
> 
> *HOW* we got to this place is nowhere *NEAR* as important as the fact that we *ARE* here.
> 
> We (the world) cannot move forward unless we stop looking backwards as our main tactic in this context.
> 
> And we cannot stop looking backwards until we stop leaning upon the past to rationalize the *WHY* of where we are *NOW*.
> 
> Of course, the quickest way to do that, is to cut through all the bullshit and to recognize the culpability of the Euros in creating this mess in the first place, and how the battered, desperate Jews of Europe averted extinction and won their old homeland back in the shadow of that European culpability.
> 
> It is a '_road less traveled_' but it is also a logical approach.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Of course it matters how you got there. Was taking the land done peacefully or was it done at the end of a gun barrel. Makes a BIG difference. Was it even a good place to set up shop in the first place, knowing that the arabs are going to be pissed until the end of time, or Israel's annihilation, which ever comes first?
Click to expand...


*Israel's annihilation? Hell, arabs can't even win a war amongst themselves. *


----------



## Bumberclyde

Bloodrock44 said:


> Bumberclyde said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Kondor3 said:
> 
> 
> 
> There is no harm in serving-up honest personal opinion relating to how all this materialized in the 1948-1949 timeframe.
> 
> We (the world) spend far too much time quibbling over Old Legalities and not enough time dealing with the New Reality of What-Is.
> 
> *HOW* we got to this place is nowhere *NEAR* as important as the fact that we *ARE* here.
> 
> We (the world) cannot move forward unless we stop looking backwards as our main tactic in this context.
> 
> And we cannot stop looking backwards until we stop leaning upon the past to rationalize the *WHY* of where we are *NOW*.
> 
> Of course, the quickest way to do that, is to cut through all the bullshit and to recognize the culpability of the Euros in creating this mess in the first place, and how the battered, desperate Jews of Europe averted extinction and won their old homeland back in the shadow of that European culpability.
> 
> It is a '_road less traveled_' but it is also a logical approach.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Of course it matters how you got there. Was taking the land done peacefully or was it done at the end of a gun barrel. Makes a BIG difference. Was it even a good place to set up shop in the first place, knowing that the arabs are going to be pissed until the end of time, or Israel's annihilation, which ever comes first?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> *Israel's annihilation? Hell, arabs can't even win a war amongst themselves. *
Click to expand...


The arabs don't need to win, they just need to detonate ONE nuke.


----------



## Sweet_Caroline

Bumberclyde said:


> Bloodrock44 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Bumberclyde said:
> 
> 
> 
> Of course it matters how you got there. Was taking the land done peacefully or was it done at the end of a gun barrel. Makes a BIG difference. Was it even a good place to set up shop in the first place, knowing that the arabs are going to be pissed until the end of time, or Israel's annihilation, which ever comes first?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *Israel's annihilation? Hell, arabs can't even win a war amongst themselves. *
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> The arabs don't need to win, they just need to detonate ONE nuke.
Click to expand...


Which arab country needs to "detonate ONE nuke" and where do you suggest they detonate it?


----------



## Bloodrock44

Bumberclyde said:


> Bloodrock44 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Bumberclyde said:
> 
> 
> 
> Of course it matters how you got there. Was taking the land done peacefully or was it done at the end of a gun barrel. Makes a BIG difference. Was it even a good place to set up shop in the first place, knowing that the arabs are going to be pissed until the end of time, or Israel's annihilation, which ever comes first?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *Israel's annihilation? Hell, arabs can't even win a war amongst themselves. *
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> The arabs don't need to win, they just need to detonate ONE nuke.
Click to expand...


*Right genius. And kill 10 times as many arabs as Jews. I imagine that would be fine with you.*


----------



## Kondor3

Bumberclyde said:


> "..._The arabs don't need to win, they just need to detonate ONE nuke._"


And you don't think that the Israelis have their own nukes tucked-away in hardened shelters?

Light off that one Arab nuke and within 60 minutes you'll see airbursts over Mecca and Medinah and Damascus and Baghdad and Cairo, and within a day over Tehran and Islamabad, courtesy of the IDF.

No, I don't think so.


----------



## skye

Bumberclyde said:


> Bloodrock44 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Bumberclyde said:
> 
> 
> 
> Of course it matters how you got there. Was taking the land done peacefully or was it done at the end of a gun barrel. Makes a BIG difference. Was it even a good place to set up shop in the first place, knowing that the arabs are going to be pissed until the end of time, or Israel's annihilation, which ever comes first?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *Israel's annihilation? Hell, arabs can't even win a war amongst themselves. *
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> The arabs don't need to win, they just need to detonate ONE nuke.
Click to expand...



That's exactly the reason why Iran will never be allowed to get the bomb.


----------



## Kondor3

Bumberclyde said:


> "..._Of course it matters how you got there_..."



I did not say that 'how we got here' does not matter.

I said that how we got there is nowhere near as important as the fact that we ARE here.

Big difference.

It's all well-and-good to harp on Old Legal Standings as background and history.

But victory and defeat on the battlefield tend to make nonsense of such things, and relegate them to the sidelines.

It's OK to include the sidelines-stuff in the conversation but it is pointless to attempt to resurrect it as the Primary Focus, once events on the battlefield had rendered it moot, beyond its utility as background.

Ol' Brennus knew what he was talkin' about...

Vae victis.

To move forward, the Palestinian side is simply going to have to abandon some of its focus upon mooted Old Legal Standings.

But they won't.

So we won't move forward.

And, not moving forward, the building of the West Bank Barrier will continue and the enlarging and creation of Israeli settlements will continue apace.

Every month and year that goes by, the Palestinians grow weaker, and their share of the land grows smaller, while the Israelis grow stronger, and their share grows larger.

Time is on the side of Israel.

I seriously doubt that they give two shits whether this latest round of US-Forced Talks goes anywhere or not.

And I'm on their side, in not giving two shits either.

It's like trying to make a deal with the inmates of some kind of weird Palestinian insane asylum.

It's been 65 years and all of these Talks and Land-for-Peace Deals have yielded nothing more than Manure, from Israel's perspective.

So the Israelis willl come to Washington, begrudging Obama and Kerry, they'll sit, they'll listen politely, they'll let the Palestinians rant and chew the carpet for a few days, then call it quits, and nothing will change.

Just to 'play nice' with the naive and idiotic Americans and to say: 'Well, we tried to tell ya, but ya forced us to come, and it didn't work out. We told ya, didn't we? Believe us now?'

And commerce and aid and military interaction will continue to flow between the United States and Israel just as it always has.


----------



## Kondor3

Letting Iran have nukes?

Kinda like time-warping back a thousand years and giving Pope Urban II a nuclear arsenal.

Hmmmmm... I smell a Harry Turtledove -caliber Alternative History plot for a sci-fi novel... 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




It would probably sell... I mean, after all, that sure would have solved one helluva lot of problems, before they even materialized...


----------



## georgephillip

"Most African states broke ties after the 1973 Yom Kippur War, and Israel once again began to take a more cordial view of the similarly-isolated regime in Pretoria.[12] 

"Ethan A. Nadelmann has claimed that the relationship developed due to the fact that many African countries broke diplomatic ties with Israel during the 1970s following Israeli occupation of Arab land during the Arab-Israeli wars, causing Israel to deepen relations with other isolated countries.[13]

"By the mid 1970s, Israel's relations with South Africa had warmed. 

"In 1975, the Israel&#8211;South Africa Agreement was signed, and increasing economic co-operation between Israel and South Africa was reported, including the construction of a major new railway in Israel, and the building of a desalination plant in South Africa.[14] 

"In April 1976 South African Prime Minister John Vorster was invited to make a state visit, meeting Israeli Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin.[12] [15] 

"Later in 1976, the 5th Conference of Non-Aligned Nations in Colombo, Sri Lanka, adopted a resolution calling for an oil embargo against France and Israel because of their arms sales to South Africa.[14] 

"In 1977, South African Foreign Minister Pik Botha visited Israel to discuss South African issues with Israeli Prime Minister Menachem Begin and Foreign Minister Moshe Dayan."

Israel?South Africa relations - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


----------



## Bumberclyde

Kondor3 said:


> Bumberclyde said:
> 
> 
> 
> "..._Of course it matters how you got there_..."
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I did not say that 'how we got here' does not matter.
> 
> I said that how we got there is nowhere near as important as the fact that we ARE here.
> 
> Big difference.
> 
> It's all well-and-good to harp on Old Legal Standings as background and history.
> 
> But victory and defeat on the battlefield tend to make nonsense of such things, and relegate them to the sidelines.
> 
> It's OK to include the sidelines-stuff in the conversation but it is pointless to attempt to resurrect it as the Primary Focus, once events on the battlefield had rendered it moot, beyond its utility as background.
> 
> Ol' Brennus knew what he was talkin' about...
> 
> Vae victis.
> 
> To move forward, the Palestinian side is simply going to have to abandon some of its focus upon mooted Old Legal Standings.
> 
> But they won't.
> 
> So we won't move forward.
> 
> And, not moving forward, the building of the West Bank Barrier will continue and the enlarging and creation of Israeli settlements will continue apace.
> 
> Every month and year that goes by, the Palestinians grow weaker, and their share of the land grows smaller, while the Israelis grow stronger, and their share grows larger.
> 
> Time is on the side of Israel.
> 
> I seriously doubt that they give two shits whether this latest round of US-Forced Talks goes anywhere or not.
> 
> And I'm on their side, in not giving two shits either.
> 
> It's like trying to make a deal with the inmates of some kind of weird Palestinian insane asylum.
> 
> It's been 65 years and all of these Talks and Land-for-Peace Deals have yielded nothing more than Manure, from Israel's perspective.
> 
> So the Israelis willl come to Washington, begrudging Obama and Kerry, they'll sit, they'll listen politely, they'll let the Palestinians rant and chew the carpet for a few days, then call it quits, and nothing will change.
> 
> Just to 'play nice' with the naive and idiotic Americans and to say: 'Well, we tried to tell ya, but ya forced us to come, and it didn't work out. We told ya, didn't we? Believe us now?'
> 
> And commerce and aid and military interaction will continue to flow between the United States and Israel just as it always has.
Click to expand...


Problem is, the war's not over. The Pals never surrendered and a treaty never signed. Most wars end is one side being victorious, so this fight is ongoing, and imo, time is on the side of the arabs, who like the afghans, will grind it out for 500 years if they have to. Plus, once they get some nukes, Israel is so small that it would only take one or two to take it out for good.
Obama should stay home, like he did with Russia, because he's quite frankly an embarrassment, he's the wet noodle of all presidents (and I supported him early on). The US has no business being involved in the area anyways.


----------



## Bloodrock44

Bumberclyde said:


> Kondor3 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Bumberclyde said:
> 
> 
> 
> "..._Of course it matters how you got there_..."
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I did not say that 'how we got here' does not matter.
> 
> I said that how we got there is nowhere near as important as the fact that we ARE here.
> 
> Big difference.
> 
> It's all well-and-good to harp on Old Legal Standings as background and history.
> 
> But victory and defeat on the battlefield tend to make nonsense of such things, and relegate them to the sidelines.
> 
> It's OK to include the sidelines-stuff in the conversation but it is pointless to attempt to resurrect it as the Primary Focus, once events on the battlefield had rendered it moot, beyond its utility as background.
> 
> Ol' Brennus knew what he was talkin' about...
> 
> Vae victis.
> 
> To move forward, the Palestinian side is simply going to have to abandon some of its focus upon mooted Old Legal Standings.
> 
> But they won't.
> 
> So we won't move forward.
> 
> And, not moving forward, the building of the West Bank Barrier will continue and the enlarging and creation of Israeli settlements will continue apace.
> 
> Every month and year that goes by, the Palestinians grow weaker, and their share of the land grows smaller, while the Israelis grow stronger, and their share grows larger.
> 
> Time is on the side of Israel.
> 
> I seriously doubt that they give two shits whether this latest round of US-Forced Talks goes anywhere or not.
> 
> And I'm on their side, in not giving two shits either.
> 
> It's like trying to make a deal with the inmates of some kind of weird Palestinian insane asylum.
> 
> It's been 65 years and all of these Talks and Land-for-Peace Deals have yielded nothing more than Manure, from Israel's perspective.
> 
> So the Israelis willl come to Washington, begrudging Obama and Kerry, they'll sit, they'll listen politely, they'll let the Palestinians rant and chew the carpet for a few days, then call it quits, and nothing will change.
> 
> Just to 'play nice' with the naive and idiotic Americans and to say: 'Well, we tried to tell ya, but ya forced us to come, and it didn't work out. We told ya, didn't we? Believe us now?'
> 
> And commerce and aid and military interaction will continue to flow between the United States and Israel just as it always has.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Problem is, the war's not over. The Pals never surrendered and a treaty never signed. Most wars end is one side being victorious, so this fight is ongoing, and imo, time is on the side of the arabs, who like the afghans, will grind it out for 500 years if they have to. Plus, once they get some nukes, Israel is so small that it would only take one or two to take it out for good.
> Obama should stay home, like he did with Russia, because he's quite frankly an embarrassment, he's the wet noodle of all presidents (and I supported him early on). The US has no business being involved in the area anyways.
Click to expand...


*Obsessed with nuking Israel huh? Israel will never let them get nukes. And genius, even if they did nuke Israel it would take out 10 times as many arabs. How many arabs are you willing to trade for 1 Jew?*


----------



## Bumberclyde

Bloodrock44 said:


> Bumberclyde said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Kondor3 said:
> 
> 
> 
> I did not say that 'how we got here' does not matter.
> 
> I said that how we got there is nowhere near as important as the fact that we ARE here.
> 
> Big difference.
> 
> It's all well-and-good to harp on Old Legal Standings as background and history.
> 
> But victory and defeat on the battlefield tend to make nonsense of such things, and relegate them to the sidelines.
> 
> It's OK to include the sidelines-stuff in the conversation but it is pointless to attempt to resurrect it as the Primary Focus, once events on the battlefield had rendered it moot, beyond its utility as background.
> 
> Ol' Brennus knew what he was talkin' about...
> 
> Vae victis.
> 
> To move forward, the Palestinian side is simply going to have to abandon some of its focus upon mooted Old Legal Standings.
> 
> But they won't.
> 
> So we won't move forward.
> 
> And, not moving forward, the building of the West Bank Barrier will continue and the enlarging and creation of Israeli settlements will continue apace.
> 
> Every month and year that goes by, the Palestinians grow weaker, and their share of the land grows smaller, while the Israelis grow stronger, and their share grows larger.
> 
> Time is on the side of Israel.
> 
> I seriously doubt that they give two shits whether this latest round of US-Forced Talks goes anywhere or not.
> 
> And I'm on their side, in not giving two shits either.
> 
> It's like trying to make a deal with the inmates of some kind of weird Palestinian insane asylum.
> 
> It's been 65 years and all of these Talks and Land-for-Peace Deals have yielded nothing more than Manure, from Israel's perspective.
> 
> So the Israelis willl come to Washington, begrudging Obama and Kerry, they'll sit, they'll listen politely, they'll let the Palestinians rant and chew the carpet for a few days, then call it quits, and nothing will change.
> 
> Just to 'play nice' with the naive and idiotic Americans and to say: 'Well, we tried to tell ya, but ya forced us to come, and it didn't work out. We told ya, didn't we? Believe us now?'
> 
> And commerce and aid and military interaction will continue to flow between the United States and Israel just as it always has.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Problem is, the war's not over. The Pals never surrendered and a treaty never signed. Most wars end is one side being victorious, so this fight is ongoing, and imo, time is on the side of the arabs, who like the afghans, will grind it out for 500 years if they have to. Plus, once they get some nukes, Israel is so small that it would only take one or two to take it out for good.
> Obama should stay home, like he did with Russia, because he's quite frankly an embarrassment, he's the wet noodle of all presidents (and I supported him early on). The US has no business being involved in the area anyways.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> *Obsessed with nuking Israel huh? Israel will never let them get nukes. And genius, even if they did nuke Israel it would take out 10 times as many arabs. How many arabs are you willing to trade for 1 Jew?*
Click to expand...


Don't get your payots in a knot, of course I don't want anyone to get nuked, I've seen the footage of Hiroshima and Nagasaki a few times... But I'm just saying, Iran is developing a bomb and have vowed to wipe Israel off the map. So it seems not out of the realm of possibilities that that might happen.
And I don't think that the arabs care much about how many of their own they take out. I know I don't.


----------



## Sweet_Caroline

Bumberclyde said:


> Bloodrock44 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Bumberclyde said:
> 
> 
> 
> Problem is, the war's not over. The Pals never surrendered and a treaty never signed. Most wars end is one side being victorious, so this fight is ongoing, and imo, time is on the side of the arabs, who like the afghans, will grind it out for 500 years if they have to. Plus, once they get some nukes, Israel is so small that it would only take one or two to take it out for good.
> Obama should stay home, like he did with Russia, because he's quite frankly an embarrassment, he's the wet noodle of all presidents (and I supported him early on). The US has no business being involved in the area anyways.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *Obsessed with nuking Israel huh? Israel will never let them get nukes. And genius, even if they did nuke Israel it would take out 10 times as many arabs. How many arabs are you willing to trade for 1 Jew?*
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Don't get your payots in a knot, of course I don't want anyone to get nuked, I've seen the footage of Hiroshima and Nagasaki a few times... But I'm just saying, Iran is developing a bomb and have vowed to wipe Israel off the map. So it seems not out of the realm of possibilities that that might happen.
> And I don't think that the arabs care much about how many of their own they take out. I know I don't.
Click to expand...


Yes, true, the arabs don't care how many of their own they take out with a nuclear war.  What is not true though is Iran being able to get their bomb.  That will definitely not happen, you can trust me on my instinct on that one.


----------



## patrickcaturday

*It amazes me how cavalier some people are on this board with the blood and freedom of other people !!!*


----------



## Sweet_Caroline

patrickcaturday said:


> *It amazes me how cavalier some people are on this board with the blood and freedom of other people !!!*



You mean this?



Bumberclyde said:


> And I don't think that the arabs care much about how many of their own they take out. I know I don't.



Yes, well I supposed Bumberclyde is a kid without much knowledge of the horrors of what nuclear weapons can do.


----------



## MHunterB

patrickcaturday said:


> *It amazes me how cavalier some people are on this board with the blood and freedom of other people !!!*



PC - just which comments so amaze you?


----------



## patrickcaturday

> MHunterB said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> patrickcaturday said:
> 
> 
> 
> *It amazes me how cavalier some people are on this board with the blood and freedom of other people !!!*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PC - just which comments so amaze you?
> 
> Click to expand...
Click to expand...



*If I have to tell you then what is the point ???*


----------



## ForeverYoung436

Sweet_Caroline said:


> Bumberclyde said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Bloodrock44 said:
> 
> 
> 
> *Obsessed with nuking Israel huh? Israel will never let them get nukes. And genius, even if they did nuke Israel it would take out 10 times as many arabs. How many arabs are you willing to trade for 1 Jew?*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Don't get your payots in a knot, of course I don't want anyone to get nuked, I've seen the footage of Hiroshima and Nagasaki a few times... But I'm just saying, Iran is developing a bomb and have vowed to wipe Israel off the map. So it seems not out of the realm of possibilities that that might happen.
> And I don't think that the arabs care much about how many of their own they take out. I know I don't.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Yes, true, the arabs don't care how many of their own they take out with a nuclear war.  What is not true though is Iran being able to get their bomb.  That will definitely not happen, you can trust me on my instinct on that one.
Click to expand...


If your response is to Bloodrock, your anti-Semitic comment about "payots" doesn't apply--he isn't Jewish.  As for your nonchalance about how many Arabs will die, I guess you're at least honest about that.  You don't care a fig about the Arabs--you just hate Jews.


----------



## Bloodrock44

ForeverYoung436 said:


> Sweet_Caroline said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Bumberclyde said:
> 
> 
> 
> Don't get your payots in a knot, of course I don't want anyone to get nuked, I've seen the footage of Hiroshima and Nagasaki a few times... But I'm just saying, Iran is developing a bomb and have vowed to wipe Israel off the map. So it seems not out of the realm of possibilities that that might happen.
> And I don't think that the arabs care much about how many of their own they take out. I know I don't.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Yes, true, the arabs don't care how many of their own they take out with a nuclear war.  What is not true though is Iran being able to get their bomb.  That will definitely not happen, you can trust me on my instinct on that one.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> If your response is to Bloodrock, your anti-Semitic comment about "payots" doesn't apply--he isn't Jewish.  As for your nonchalance about how many Arabs will die, I guess you're at least honest about that.  You don't care a fig about the Arabs--you just hate Jews.
Click to expand...


*Thanks for clearing that up. I had never heard the word "payot" before and had to google it. Changing my avatar so Clyde can clearly see that I am a WASP...White Anglo Saxon Protestant. Oh well...some people can't help but to be bigots.*


----------



## RoccoR

_et al,_

At least I learned something new:  what a "payot" is.



Bloodrock44 said:


> ForeverYoung436 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sweet_Caroline said:
> 
> 
> 
> Yes, true, the arabs don't care how many of their own they take out with a nuclear war.  What is not true though is Iran being able to get their bomb.  That will definitely not happen, you can trust me on my instinct on that one.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> If your response is to Bloodrock, your anti-Semitic comment about "payots" doesn't apply--he isn't Jewish.  As for your nonchalance about how many Arabs will die, I guess you're at least honest about that.  You don't care a fig about the Arabs--you just hate Jews.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Thanks for clearing that up. I had never heard the word "payot" before and had to google it. Changing my avatar so Clyde can clearly see that I am a WASP...White Anglo Saxon Protestant. Oh well...some people can't help but to be bigots.
Click to expand...

*(COMMENT)*

I am not sure that any of the regional powers really considers going to war (again) is really worth the effort, in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.  There are simply no advantages.  And they certainly would not start a nuclear exchange over it.

The Arab League, if they as individual nations, care anything at all, in a realistic and practical sense, probably see (in part) that the continuation of the conflict is to their advantage; in terms of regional security stabilization.  One can just look at the mess Syria, Libya and Egypt are in to see that the last thing they want is a bunch of free roaming radical Islamic terrorists turning their attention from Israel to their nations as part of their liberation movement.  For more than 6 generations, the only noteworthy thing the Palestinians have produced is insurgents and radical fundamentalist.

None, absolutely none, of the Arab League, has extended a charitable helping hand in the creation of a settlement for the Palestinian.  There are less than 10 million (tax, title, dealer  prep and options) of them.  That is the establishment of 1 metropolis _[much - much smaller than Mexico City (by half); Sao Paulo (by half), Brazil (by half); New York City (by half); Karachi (by half); Manila (by half); Shanghai (by half); Delhi (by half); Seoul (by half); Jakarta (by half); Tokyo (nearly four times larger)]_.  Yet "charity" is a major pillar of the core belief.  It is not because they don't belief in or practice their own faith, but because it is to their advantage to have the Palestinian _(and all who would support them)_ focused in another direction because they are an unproductive society which is parasitic in nature.  It is both a very good political-economic strategy.

On face value, the Arab League must render psychological support to the Palestinian, but when it comes to actual contributions of any significants, even they can see that it is just throwing good money after bad.

If, someday, the Palestinian People start to focus their attention on nation building efforts, and are making progress --- moving into the 21st century; I think they would be surprised at the number of nations that would rally to their assistance.  But as long as they continue the path they are on, it will be a different story.

Most Respectfully,
R


----------



## P F Tinmore

RoccoR said:
			
		

> If, someday, the Palestinian People start to focus their attention on nation building efforts,



Palestinians build.

Israel destroys.


----------



## ForeverYoung436

P F Tinmore said:


> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> If, someday, the Palestinian People start to focus their attention on nation building efforts,
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Palestinians build.
> 
> Israel destroys.
Click to expand...


Link?


----------



## Bumberclyde

Bloodrock44 said:


> ForeverYoung436 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sweet_Caroline said:
> 
> 
> 
> Yes, true, the arabs don't care how many of their own they take out with a nuclear war.  What is not true though is Iran being able to get their bomb.  That will definitely not happen, you can trust me on my instinct on that one.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> If your response is to Bloodrock, your anti-Semitic comment about "payots" doesn't apply--he isn't Jewish.  As for your nonchalance about how many Arabs will die, I guess you're at least honest about that.  You don't care a fig about the Arabs--you just hate Jews.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> *Thanks for clearing that up. I had never heard the word "payot" before and had to google it. Changing my avatar so Clyde can clearly see that I am a WASP...White Anglo Saxon Protestant. Oh well...some people can't help but to be bigots.*
Click to expand...


 You guys have ZERO sense of humour. Thanks for the laugh. 
Plus, you rushed so fast to make sure that I know that you're not Jewish, LOL! Makes one wonder who the real anti-semite is!


----------



## Bloodrock44

Bumberclyde said:


> Bloodrock44 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ForeverYoung436 said:
> 
> 
> 
> If your response is to Bloodrock, your anti-Semitic comment about "payots" doesn't apply--he isn't Jewish.  As for your nonchalance about how many Arabs will die, I guess you're at least honest about that.  You don't care a fig about the Arabs--you just hate Jews.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *Thanks for clearing that up. I had never heard the word "payot" before and had to google it. Changing my avatar so Clyde can clearly see that I am a WASP...White Anglo Saxon Protestant. Oh well...some people can't help but to be bigots.*
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You guys have ZERO sense of humour. Thanks for the laugh.
> Plus, you rushed so fast to make sure that I know that you're not Jewish, LOL! Makes one wonder who the real anti-semite is!
Click to expand...


*The laugh is on you Clyde. You really are a joke.*


----------



## Bloodrock44

P F Tinmore said:


> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> If, someday, the Palestinian People start to focus their attention on nation building efforts,
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Palestinians build.
> 
> Israel destroys.
Click to expand...


*Good Gawd Almighty. Name one thing the Palestinians have built. As Rocco said...maybe if they focused on nation building instead of playing perpetual victim and being the worlds welfare queens, other countries would take interest.*


----------



## Hossfly

P F Tinmore said:


> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> If, someday, the Palestinian People start to focus their attention on nation building efforts,
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Palestinians build.
> 
> Israel destroys.
Click to expand...

Since I am a grownup, I will restrain myself and not snicker at Tinnie's post.


----------



## Hossfly

Bumberclyde said:


> Bloodrock44 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ForeverYoung436 said:
> 
> 
> 
> If your response is to Bloodrock, your anti-Semitic comment about "payots" doesn't apply--he isn't Jewish.  As for your nonchalance about how many Arabs will die, I guess you're at least honest about that.  You don't care a fig about the Arabs--you just hate Jews.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *Thanks for clearing that up. I had never heard the word "payot" before and had to google it. Changing my avatar so Clyde can clearly see that I am a WASP...White Anglo Saxon Protestant. Oh well...some people can't help but to be bigots.*
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You guys have ZERO sense of humour. Thanks for the laugh.
> Plus, you rushed so fast to make sure that I know that you're not Jewish, LOL! Makes one wonder who the real anti-semite is!
Click to expand...

I guess Clyde here doesn't realize that anti-Semites like he is are very easy to spot.  I think most of the posters and viewers have realized previously that Bloodrock is not Jewish.  However, it is realized that the true anti-Semites can't stand to see non Jews sticking up for Israel or the Jews in general.  By the way, Clyde, thanks for giving a lot of us a laugh because someone like you mentioning others having a lack of a sense of humor is hilarious.


----------



## Roudy

ForeverYoung436 said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> If, someday, the Palestinian People start to focus their attention on nation building efforts,
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Palestinians build.
> 
> Israel destroys.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Link?
Click to expand...

He's right, they're actually pretty good at building new ways to kill and terrorize people.


----------



## Kondor3

Sweet_Caroline said:


> "...the arabs don't care how many of their own they take out with a nuclear war..."


"*Peace will come when the Arabs will love their children more than they hate us*." - Golda Meirl_ - former Prime Minister of Israel (1969-1974) - in a statement to the National Press Club in Washington, D. C. in 1957, as quoted in A Land of Our Own : An Oral Autobiography (1973) edited by Marie Syrkin, p. 242_


----------



## Kondor3

P F Tinmore said:


> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> If, someday, the Palestinian People start to focus their attention on nation building efforts,
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *Palestinians build.
> 
> Israel destroys.*
Click to expand...


You couldn't tell that by the condition of Palestine *prior to* the 1948 time-frame, that much is certain; a backwards flea-trap whose only redeeming features were ancient religious sites and newer Jewish settlement farms and villages.

Perhaps if the Palestinians had foregone the building of rockets and suicide-bombs and focused more upon schools and hospitals and housing and commerce and industry, and remained peaceful, they would not have brought such destruction down upon their own heads. Their choice. And choices have consequences. Then again, the Arab-Muslim Palestinians who chose separatism or exile been making one bad choice after another since 1948, so it may be unrealistic to expect good choices from them.


----------



## Bumberclyde

Hossfly said:


> Bumberclyde said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Bloodrock44 said:
> 
> 
> 
> *Thanks for clearing that up. I had never heard the word "payot" before and had to google it. Changing my avatar so Clyde can clearly see that I am a WASP...White Anglo Saxon Protestant. Oh well...some people can't help but to be bigots.*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You guys have ZERO sense of humour. Thanks for the laugh.
> Plus, you rushed so fast to make sure that I know that you're not Jewish, LOL! Makes one wonder who the real anti-semite is!
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I guess Clyde here doesn't realize that anti-Semites like he is are very easy to spot.  I think most of the posters and viewers have realized previously that Bloodrock is not Jewish.  However, it is realized that the true anti-Semites can't stand to see non Jews sticking up for Israel or the Jews in general.  By the way, Clyde, thanks for giving a lot of us a laugh because someone like you mentioning others having a lack of a sense of humor is hilarious.
Click to expand...


I'm an anti-semite because I made a joke about not getting your payots in a knot? LOL! Seriously bro, get a life.
PS Don't get your payots in a knot either!


----------



## Sweet_Caroline

Bumberclyde said:


> Hossfly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Bumberclyde said:
> 
> 
> 
> You guys have ZERO sense of humour. Thanks for the laugh.
> Plus, you rushed so fast to make sure that I know that you're not Jewish, LOL! Makes one wonder who the real anti-semite is!
> 
> 
> 
> I guess Clyde here doesn't realize that anti-Semites like he is are very easy to spot.  I think most of the posters and viewers have realized previously that Bloodrock is not Jewish.  However, it is realized that the true anti-Semites can't stand to see non Jews sticking up for Israel or the Jews in general.  By the way, Clyde, thanks for giving a lot of us a laugh because someone like you mentioning others having a lack of a sense of humor is hilarious.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I'm an anti-semite because I made a joke about not getting your payots in a knot? LOL! Seriously bro, get a life.
> PS Don't get your payots in a knot either!
Click to expand...


Anti-Zionism is antisemitism.  One goes hand in hand with the other.  Anyone in my opinion who denies the Jews' right to the whole of the land of Israel is as antisemitic as they come.


----------



## Hossfly

Bumberclyde said:


> Hossfly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Bumberclyde said:
> 
> 
> 
> You guys have ZERO sense of humour. Thanks for the laugh.
> Plus, you rushed so fast to make sure that I know that you're not Jewish, LOL! Makes one wonder who the real anti-semite is!
> 
> 
> 
> I guess Clyde here doesn't realize that anti-Semites like he is are very easy to spot.  I think most of the posters and viewers have realized previously that Bloodrock is not Jewish.  However, it is realized that the true anti-Semites can't stand to see non Jews sticking up for Israel or the Jews in general.  By the way, Clyde, thanks for giving a lot of us a laugh because someone like you mentioning others having a lack of a sense of humor is hilarious.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I'm an anti-semite because I made a joke about not getting your payots in a knot? LOL! Seriously bro, get a life.
> PS Don't get your payots in a knot either!
Click to expand...

Can anyone imagine Clyde getting on a board with a bunch of Muslims and telling them not to get their beards in a knot?  Hmm, I wonder how many Muslims woukd take that as a joke.  Meanwhile, Clyde, don't let your bloomers (or is it pantyhose?) get into a knot, and please don't try out for the Comedy Store.  I don't think you would go over big.


----------



## georgephillip

Bloodrock44 said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> If, someday, the Palestinian People start to focus their attention on nation building efforts,
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Palestinians build.
> 
> Israel destroys.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> *Good Gawd Almighty. Name one thing the Palestinians have built. As Rocco said...maybe if they focused on nation building instead of playing perpetual victim and being the worlds welfare queens, other countries would take interest.*
Click to expand...


How do Palestinians build a nation without sovereignty over their airspace, land, and water?

"Sovereignty is the quality of having independent authority over a geographic area, such as a territory.[1] It can be found in a power to rule and make laws that rests on a political fact for which no pure legal definition can be provided." 

Sovereignty - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


----------



## Bloodrock44

georgephillip said:


> Bloodrock44 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> Palestinians build.
> 
> Israel destroys.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *Good Gawd Almighty. Name one thing the Palestinians have built. As Rocco said...maybe if they focused on nation building instead of playing perpetual victim and being the worlds welfare queens, other countries would take interest.*
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> How do Palestinians build a nation without sovereignty over their airspace, land, and water?
> 
> "Sovereignty is the quality of having independent authority over a geographic area, such as a territory.[1] It can be found in a power to rule and make laws that rests on a political fact for which no pure legal definition can be provided."
> 
> Sovereignty - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Click to expand...


*Hold on while I cry a few tears for your poor compatriots. *


----------



## Kondor3

I'll bet that right about now those Palestinians are wishin' that they had not chosen Separatism rather than Citizenship, or taken the UN's offer of Partition for Dual Statehood, back in 1948...

And they and their aging children and their grandchildren and great-grandchildren are all paying the price for their bad choices back in 1948...

Bad choices - like all choices - have consequences...

Sometimes those consequences last for decades or generations or centuries...

And they don't even get a Do-Over...


----------



## RoccoR

georgephillip;  _et al,_

This is really a loser question.



georgephillip said:


> How do Palestinians build a nation without sovereignty over their airspace, land, and water?
> 
> "Sovereignty is the quality of having independent authority over a geographic area, such as a territory.[1] It can be found in a power to rule and make laws that rests on a political fact for which no pure legal definition can be provided."


*(COMMENT)*

It starts out small, demonstrating peaceful intentions and building confidence.

Not be supporting bomb makers for release; like that Samer Issawi.

Most Respectfully,
R


----------



## Bumberclyde

Hossfly said:


> Bumberclyde said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Hossfly said:
> 
> 
> 
> I guess Clyde here doesn't realize that anti-Semites like he is are very easy to spot.  I think most of the posters and viewers have realized previously that Bloodrock is not Jewish.  However, it is realized that the true anti-Semites can't stand to see non Jews sticking up for Israel or the Jews in general.  By the way, Clyde, thanks for giving a lot of us a laugh because someone like you mentioning others having a lack of a sense of humor is hilarious.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I'm an anti-semite because I made a joke about not getting your payots in a knot? LOL! Seriously bro, get a life.
> PS Don't get your payots in a knot either!
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Can anyone imagine Clyde getting on a board with a bunch of Muslims and telling them not to get their beards in a knot?  Hmm, I wonder how many Muslims woukd take that as a joke.  Meanwhile, Clyde, don't let your bloomers (or is it pantyhose?) get into a knot, and please don't try out for the Comedy Store.  I don't think you would go over big.
Click to expand...


The joke for muslims isn't to tie your beard in a knot, because their beards already look tougher to comb than a rastafarian's hairdo.
What you say to a muslim is: don't pretend like you just dropped your koran in the toilet!


----------



## P F Tinmore

Bloodrock44 said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> If, someday, the Palestinian People start to focus their attention on nation building efforts,
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Palestinians build.
> 
> Israel destroys.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> *Good Gawd Almighty. Name one thing the Palestinians have built. As Rocco said...maybe if they focused on nation building instead of playing perpetual victim and being the worlds welfare queens, other countries would take interest.*
Click to expand...


[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=77EKO3tWXnY]27 Sleepless Gaza Jerusalem.divx - YouTube[/ame]

Of course some assholes are holding up some equipment so they cannot go on the air.


----------



## P F Tinmore

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RDpO8p5dUcA]Are Palestinian Chickens A Threat to Israel? - YouTube[/ame]


----------



## RoccoR

P F Tinmore,  _et al,_

I loved Episode 27.  Ah, to be young again.



P F Tinmore said:


> Bloodrock44 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> Palestinians build.
> 
> Israel destroys.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *Good Gawd Almighty. Name one thing the Palestinians have built. As Rocco said...maybe if they focused on nation building instead of playing perpetual victim and being the worlds welfare queens, other countries would take interest.*
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> *----------          ----------          ----------          ----------          ----------          ----------          ----------          ----------          ----------​*Of course some assholes are holding up some equipment so they cannot go on the air.
Click to expand...

*(COMMENT)*

As I have said many times, if I were the Israelis, I would do it differently.  But I'm not.  I've spent nearly a decade in areas that have been designated hostile fire zones; from Vietnam to Yemen and Afghanistan to Iraq.  But I have not had the experiences that the Israelis have had, living under a constant threat.

Conversely, it is necessary to remember that the security quarantine that the Palestinians have faced, are a cumulative consequence of their actions.  If they have taken no action, they need not fear reprisal and retaliation (action of military necessity) to fear.  If they fire no rocket, plant no bombs, sent no suicide attacks, conduct no ambushes, hijack no planes or ships, make no threats, they have nothing to fear.  In fact they would actually be changing their established behaviors that might, over time, convince the Occupation Force to gradually relax the security constraints that have been imposed.

Most Respectfully,
R


----------



## P F Tinmore

RoccoR said:


> P F Tinmore,  _et al,_
> 
> I loved Episode 27.  Ah, to be young again.
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Bloodrock44 said:
> 
> 
> 
> *Good Gawd Almighty. Name one thing the Palestinians have built. As Rocco said...maybe if they focused on nation building instead of playing perpetual victim and being the worlds welfare queens, other countries would take interest.*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *----------          ----------          ----------          ----------          ----------          ----------          ----------          ----------          ----------​*Of course some assholes are holding up some equipment so they cannot go on the air.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> As I have said many times, if I were the Israelis, I would do it differently.  But I'm not.  I've spent nearly a decade in areas that have been designated hostile fire zones; from Vietnam to Yemen and Afghanistan to Iraq.  But I have not had the experiences that the Israelis have had, living under a constant threat.
> 
> Conversely, it is necessary to remember that the security quarantine that the Palestinians have faced, are a cumulative consequence of their actions.  If they have taken no action, they need not fear reprisal and retaliation (action of military necessity) to fear.  If they fire no rocket, plant no bombs, sent no suicide attacks, conduct no ambushes, hijack no planes or ships, make no threats, they have nothing to fear.  In fact they would actually be changing their established behaviors that might, over time, convince the Occupation Force to gradually relax the security constraints that have been imposed.
> 
> Most Respectfully,
> R
Click to expand...


Occupations always have security problems. It comes with the (occupied) territory.

Ending the occupation will end the security threats,


----------



## RoccoR

P F Tinmore,  _et al,_

Damn, Paul --- didn't you just watch the video and see how combat chicken, which have not been demilitarized, are dangerous and can be used offensively?



P F Tinmore said:


> Are Palestinian Chickens A Threat to Israel?


*(COMMENT)*

I cannot honestly tell you what the strategy was at that time.  But I find it hard to feel sympathy.  Again, when the question was asked of the Olympic Massacre, or the Achille Lauro, incidents, did the Palestinians believe that the Olympic Team was part of the IDF?  Did the Palestinians believe the Italian Cruise Liner was really a Israeli warship?

Much of what is done in war is to break the will of the opponent to press-on with the conflict.  I doubt that all the ideas work.  But I would rather see them destroy a cement factory or a Chicken Farm, then something far worse.  All that can be replaced.

Most Respectfully,
R


----------



## RoccoR

P F Tinmore,  _et al,_

Yes, exactly.  To an extent --- there is some agreement here.



P F Tinmore said:


> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore,  _et al,_
> 
> I loved Episode 27.  Ah, to be young again.
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> *----------          ----------          ----------          ----------          ----------          ----------          ----------          ----------          ----------​*Of course some assholes are holding up some equipment so they cannot go on the air.
> 
> 
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> As I have said many times, if I were the Israelis, I would do it differently.  But I'm not.  I've spent nearly a decade in areas that have been designated hostile fire zones; from Vietnam to Yemen and Afghanistan to Iraq.  But I have not had the experiences that the Israelis have had, living under a constant threat.
> 
> Conversely, it is necessary to remember that the security quarantine that the Palestinians have faced, are a cumulative consequence of their actions.  If they have taken no action, they need not fear reprisal and retaliation (action of military necessity) to fear.  If they fire no rocket, plant no bombs, sent no suicide attacks, conduct no ambushes, hijack no planes or ships, make no threats, they have nothing to fear.  In fact they would actually be changing their established behaviors that might, over time, convince the Occupation Force to gradually relax the security constraints that have been imposed.
> 
> Most Respectfully,
> R
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Occupations always have security problems. It comes with the (occupied) territory.
> 
> Ending the occupation will end the security threats,
Click to expand...

*(COMMENT)*

This is a question of which comes first.

Does Israel assume the risk and unilaterally withdraw?
------------------------------  or -------------------------------
Does the Palestinian adopt the peace, and induce withdrawal?​
Which comes first?

Most Respectfully,
R


----------



## P F Tinmore

RoccoR said:


> P F Tinmore,  _et al,_
> 
> Damn, Paul --- didn't you just watch the video and see how combat chicken, which have not been demilitarized, are dangerous and can be used offensively?
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> Are Palestinian Chickens A Threat to Israel?
> 
> 
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> I cannot honestly tell you what the strategy was at that time.  But I find it hard to feel sympathy.  Again, when the question was asked of the Olympic Massacre, or the Achille Lauro, incidents, did the Palestinians believe that the Olympic Team was part of the IDF?  Did the Palestinians believe the Italian Cruise Liner was really a Israeli warship?
> 
> Much of what is done in war is to break the will of the opponent to press-on with the conflict.  I doubt that all the ideas work.  But I would rather see them destroy a cement factory or a Chicken Farm, then something far worse.  All that can be replaced.
> 
> Most Respectfully,
> R
Click to expand...


It was not "at that time."

Israel has always targeted Palestinian civilian infrastructure. That way the Palestinians move out and Israel steals their land.


----------



## P F Tinmore

RoccoR said:


> P F Tinmore,  _et al,_
> 
> Yes, exactly.  To an extent --- there is some agreement here.
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore,  _et al,_
> 
> I loved Episode 27.  Ah, to be young again.
> 
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> As I have said many times, if I were the Israelis, I would do it differently.  But I'm not.  I've spent nearly a decade in areas that have been designated hostile fire zones; from Vietnam to Yemen and Afghanistan to Iraq.  But I have not had the experiences that the Israelis have had, living under a constant threat.
> 
> Conversely, it is necessary to remember that the security quarantine that the Palestinians have faced, are a cumulative consequence of their actions.  If they have taken no action, they need not fear reprisal and retaliation (action of military necessity) to fear.  If they fire no rocket, plant no bombs, sent no suicide attacks, conduct no ambushes, hijack no planes or ships, make no threats, they have nothing to fear.  In fact they would actually be changing their established behaviors that might, over time, convince the Occupation Force to gradually relax the security constraints that have been imposed.
> 
> Most Respectfully,
> R
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Occupations always have security problems. It comes with the (occupied) territory.
> 
> Ending the occupation will end the security threats,
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> This is a question of which comes first.
> 
> Does Israel assume the risk and unilaterally withdraw?
> ------------------------------  or -------------------------------
> Does the Palestinian adopt the peace, and induce withdrawal?​
> Which comes first?
> 
> Most Respectfully,
> R
Click to expand...


The only thing preventing peace is the occupation. The resistance to the occupation will continue until the occupation ends.


----------



## Hossfly

Bumberclyde said:


> Hossfly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Bumberclyde said:
> 
> 
> 
> I'm an anti-semite because I made a joke about not getting your payots in a knot? LOL! Seriously bro, get a life.
> PS Don't get your payots in a knot either!
> 
> 
> 
> Can anyone imagine Clyde getting on a board with a bunch of Muslims and telling them not to get their beards in a knot?  Hmm, I wonder how many Muslims woukd take that as a joke.  Meanwhile, Clyde, don't let your bloomers (or is it pantyhose?) get into a knot, and please don't try out for the Comedy Store.  I don't think you would go over big.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> The joke for muslims isn't to tie your beard in a knot, because their beards already look tougher to comb than a rastafarian's hairdo.
> What you say to a muslim is: don't pretend like you just dropped your koran in the toilet!
Click to expand...

That's great, Clyde!!!  What a comedian Clyde is!!! Now all you have to do is find some site where extremist Muslims are posting and tell them that.  Then lie low for a while.


----------



## Hossfly

P F Tinmore said:


> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore,  _et al,_
> 
> Yes, exactly.  To an extent --- there is some agreement here.
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> Occupations always have security problems. It comes with the (occupied) territory.
> 
> Ending the occupation will end the security threats,
> 
> 
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> This is a question of which comes first.
> 
> Does Israel assume the risk and unilaterally withdraw?
> ------------------------------  or -------------------------------
> Does the Palestinian adopt the peace, and induce withdrawal?​
> Which comes first?
> 
> Most Respectfully,
> R
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> The only thing preventing peace is the occupation. The resistance to the occupation will continue until the occupation ends.
Click to expand...

When you say "occupation," Tinnie, are you speaking about the West Bank or about Israel proper too as being occupied.  In many of your posts you have inferred that Israel is on land that is actually part of Palestine.


----------



## P F Tinmore

Hossfly said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore,  _et al,_
> 
> Yes, exactly.  To an extent --- there is some agreement here.
> 
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> This is a question of which comes first.
> 
> Does Israel assume the risk and unilaterally withdraw?
> ------------------------------  or -------------------------------
> Does the Palestinian adopt the peace, and induce withdrawal?​
> Which comes first?
> 
> Most Respectfully,
> R
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The only thing preventing peace is the occupation. The resistance to the occupation will continue until the occupation ends.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> When you say "occupation," Tinnie, are you speaking about the West Bank or about Israel proper too as being occupied.  In many of your posts you have inferred that Israel is on land that is actually part of Palestine.
Click to expand...


It is.


----------



## Sweet_Caroline

P F Tinmore said:


> Hossfly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> The only thing preventing peace is the occupation. The resistance to the occupation will continue until the occupation ends.
> 
> 
> 
> When you say "occupation," Tinnie, are you speaking about the West Bank or about Israel proper too as being occupied.  In many of your posts you have inferred that Israel is on land that is actually part of Palestine.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> It is.
Click to expand...

*
  'tis deja-vu time, yet again  *​


----------



## RoccoR

P F Tinmore,  _et al,_

You do realize the enormous risk and danger you are asking the Israeli's to assume in a total withdrawal behind the the wall?  That's not to mention the sacrifice of their national aspiration to a connection to Jerusalem, unobstructed by Arab Palestinian dominance.  You're asking for something similar to blockading Mecca, in a religious sense.



P F Tinmore said:


> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore,  _et al,_
> 
> Yes, exactly.  To an extent --- there is some agreement here.
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> Occupations always have security problems. It comes with the (occupied) territory.
> 
> Ending the occupation will end the security threats,
> 
> 
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> This is a question of which comes first.
> 
> Does Israel assume the risk and unilaterally withdraw?
> ------------------------------  or -------------------------------
> Does the Palestinian adopt the peace, and induce withdrawal?​
> Which comes first?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> The only thing preventing peace is the occupation. The resistance to the occupation will continue until the occupation ends.
Click to expand...

*(COMMENT)*

I'm not at all a religious person, an in being unaffiliated with an organized belief (no conviction to a specific deity), I cannot say I understand the affinity for either Jerusalem or Mecca.  But I have seen, first hand, what men of conviction in a religious struggle will do to one another in the name of righteousness in their belief.  If it were up to me, I give-up any aspirations the Israeli's might have for Jerusalem; but I don't see that happening; any more than I see the Arab relinquishing Mecca.  I'll admit, I don understand fanatical mysticism _(on either side)_.  So that is something that is very tough for one like me to resolve.

In terms of the 1949 Armistice Agreements (Green Line) and the need (in this hypothetical) for Israel making territorial and political concessions; there must be some means of underwriting the agreement that is both swift and effective.  Currently, the Palestinians have no credibility in adhering to any agreement they make.  This is a very grave risk.

Most Respectfully,
R


----------



## Kondor3

P F Tinmore said:


> "...*It is.*"



Then your people must take it back.

But they'll be forcibly split-up and dispersed into surrounding Lebanon and Jordan, etc., and their few remaining slivers of West Bank and Gaza land will be annexed by Israel and occupied by Israeli Jews, long before that can materialize.

Take it back? Never gonna happen.

Might as well toss in the towel and pack up and move now, and avoid the Christmas Rush and all the stress and pain and blood and grief, because that's the way it's going to end anyway.


----------



## P F Tinmore

RoccoR said:


> P F Tinmore,  _et al,_
> 
> You do realize the enormous risk and danger you are asking the Israeli's to assume in a total withdrawal behind the the wall?  That's not to mention the sacrifice of their national aspiration to a connection to Jerusalem, unobstructed by Arab Palestinian dominance.  You're asking for something similar to blockading Mecca, in a religious sense.
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore,  _et al,_
> 
> Yes, exactly.  To an extent --- there is some agreement here.
> 
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> This is a question of which comes first.
> 
> Does Israel assume the risk and unilaterally withdraw?
> ------------------------------  or -------------------------------
> Does the Palestinian adopt the peace, and induce withdrawal?​
> Which comes first?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The only thing preventing peace is the occupation. The resistance to the occupation will continue until the occupation ends.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> I'm not at all a religious person, an in being unaffiliated with an organized belief (no conviction to a specific deity), I cannot say I understand the affinity for either Jerusalem or Mecca.  But I have seen, first hand, what men of conviction in a religious struggle will do to one another in the name of righteousness in their belief.  If it were up to me, I give-up any aspirations the Israeli's might have for Jerusalem; but I don't see that happening; any more than I see the Arab relinquishing Mecca.  I'll admit, I don understand fanatical mysticism _(on either side)_.  So that is something that is very tough for one like me to resolve.
> 
> In terms of the 1949 Armistice Agreements (Green Line) and the need (in this hypothetical) for Israel making territorial and political concessions; there must be some means of underwriting the agreement that is both swift and effective.  Currently, the Palestinians have no credibility in adhering to any agreement they make.  This is a very grave risk.
> 
> Most Respectfully,
> R
Click to expand...




> Currently, the Palestinians have no credibility in adhering to any agreement they make.



Like what?


----------



## Hossfly

Sweet_Caroline said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Hossfly said:
> 
> 
> 
> When you say "occupation," Tinnie, are you speaking about the West Bank or about Israel proper too as being occupied.  In many of your posts you have inferred that Israel is on land that is actually part of Palestine.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> It is.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> *
> 'tis deja-vu time, yet again  *​
Click to expand...

I know, Caroline.  Tinnie is under the impression that his relatives owned lots of land and other assets and those bad Jews took it all away from them.  By the way, I wonder if any of the Gazans have taken up one of the Egyptian officlals advice that they should come home to Egypt.


----------



## P F Tinmore

RoccoR said:


> P F Tinmore,  _et al,_
> 
> Damn, Paul --- didn't you just watch the video and see how combat chicken, which have not been demilitarized, are dangerous and can be used offensively?
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> Are Palestinian Chickens A Threat to Israel?
> 
> 
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> I cannot honestly tell you what the strategy was at that time.  But I find it hard to feel sympathy.  Again, when the question was asked of the Olympic Massacre, or the Achille Lauro, incidents, did the Palestinians believe that the Olympic Team was part of the IDF?  Did the Palestinians believe the Italian Cruise Liner was really a Israeli warship?
> 
> Much of what is done in war is to break the will of the opponent to press-on with the conflict.  I doubt that all the ideas work.  But I would rather see them destroy a cement factory or a Chicken Farm, then something far worse.  All that can be replaced.
> 
> Most Respectfully,
> R
Click to expand...


Israel systematically destroys Palestinian civilian infrastructure. Sometimes entire villages. Israel regularly destroys food and water resources. These are not only war crimes, they are also acts of genocide.

I don't recall you ever calling for arrests and prosecutions.


----------



## RoccoR

P F Tinmore,  _et al,_

I think I might have not expressed this well.



P F Tinmore said:


> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> 
> Currently, the Palestinians have no credibility in adhering to any agreement they make.
> 
> 
> 
> Like what?
Click to expand...

*(OBSERVATION)*



			
				Palestinian Affairs: Abbass credibility problem said:
			
		

> Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbass credibility has been damaged to a point where its hard to envision a situation where he would be able to convince even a handful of Palestinians to accept any agreement he strikes with Israel.
> 
> _*SOURCE:*_ Palestinian Affairs: Abbas?s credibility problem | JPost | Israel News





			
				Abbas's Credibility Problem said:
			
		

> Abbas's credibility, supporters and critics say, is wholly tied to those negotiations. If progress is not imminent -- whether in the shape of a final agreement or at least something tangibly felt among Palestinians -- his shaky hold on power could collapse, a setback for those who favor a moderate course.
> 
> _*SOURCE:*_ Abbas's Credibility Problem - Washington Post



*(COMMENT)*

The credibility issue is a risk which goes both ways:


With the Palestinian support for any agreement he might come strike with the Israeli.
With the Israelis if they cannot make a good faith offer to which Abbas can accept.

Most Respectfully,
R


----------



## P F Tinmore

> Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbass credibility has been damaged to a point where its hard to envision a situation where he would be able to convince even a handful of Palestinians to accept any agreement he strikes with Israel.



Indeed, Abbas left the government in 2007 and his official term in office expired in 2009.

Fatah lost the nationwide elections in Palestine in 2006. Why are they still ruling the West Bank?

Abbas is widely viewed as an Israeli tool.


----------



## Bloodrock44

P F Tinmore said:


> Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbass credibility has been damaged to a point where its hard to envision a situation where he would be able to convince even a handful of Palestinians to accept any agreement he strikes with Israel.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeed, Abbas left the government in 2007 and his official term in office expired in 2009.
> 
> Fatah lost the nationwide elections in Palestine in 2006. Why are they still ruling the West Bank?
> 
> Abbas is widely viewed as an Israeli tool.
Click to expand...


*Because the West Bank is FUBAR.*


----------



## RoccoR

P F Tinmore,  _et al,_

Make the case before the court.



P F Tinmore said:


> Israel systematically destroys Palestinian civilian infrastructure. Sometimes entire villages. Israel regularly destroys food and water resources. These are not only war crimes, they are also acts of genocide.
> 
> I don't recall you ever calling for arrests and prosecutions.


*(COMMENT)*

Commitment to the truth is as important --- as is --- the commitment to the peace.

Most Respectfully,
R


----------



## P F Tinmore

RoccoR said:


> P F Tinmore,  _et al,_
> 
> Make the case before the court.
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> Israel systematically destroys Palestinian civilian infrastructure. Sometimes entire villages. Israel regularly destroys food and water resources. These are not only war crimes, they are also acts of genocide.
> 
> I don't recall you ever calling for arrests and prosecutions.
> 
> 
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> *Commitment to the truth is as important --- as is --- the commitment to the peace.*
> 
> Most Respectfully,
> R
Click to expand...


Indeed.


----------



## P F Tinmore

RoccoR said:


> P F Tinmore,  _et al,_
> 
> Make the case before the court.
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> Israel systematically destroys Palestinian civilian infrastructure. Sometimes entire villages. Israel regularly destroys food and water resources. These are not only war crimes, they are also acts of genocide.
> 
> I don't recall you ever calling for arrests and prosecutions.
> 
> 
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> Commitment to the truth is as important --- as is --- the commitment to the peace.
> 
> Most Respectfully,
> R
Click to expand...




> *Make the case before the court.*



It is a matter of recorded history.

Why do you think Israel is so freaked about Palestine being recognized as a state?


----------



## RoccoR

P F Tinmore,  _et al,_

You are misinterpreting the events as they happened.



P F Tinmore said:


> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore,  _et al,_
> 
> Make the case before the court.
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> Israel systematically destroys Palestinian civilian infrastructure. Sometimes entire villages. Israel regularly destroys food and water resources. These are not only war crimes, they are also acts of genocide.
> 
> I don't recall you ever calling for arrests and prosecutions.
> 
> 
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> Commitment to the truth is as important --- as is --- the commitment to the peace.
> 
> Most Respectfully,
> R
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *Make the case before the court.*
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> It is a matter of recorded history.
> 
> Why do you think Israel is so freaked about Palestine being recognized as a state?
Click to expand...

*(COMMENT)*

Israel is not "freaked out" about Palestine being recognized as a state; it is a little late for that now.  WOW, sometimes I think you guys don't know your own history.

Palestine has been (officially) the State of Palestine since 15 November 1988 [Annex II - Declaration of Independence (A/43/827  S/20278  18 November 1988)] which has been acknowledged by the United Nations.  The UN further gave the in its (first) "capacity as observer" (A/RES/52/250 13 July 1998) on 7 July 1998.

You are confusing the second change in status, where the UN "accord to Palestine non-member observer State status in the United Nations, without prejudice to the acquired rights, privileges and role of the Palestine Liberation Organization in the United Nations as the representative of the Palestinian people, in accordance with the relevant resolutions and practice."  This was to give President Abbas just as much authenticity as possible.

The current problem with the application for admission to the UN is the wording and language of the Palestinian National Charter; which was suppose to be changed after the Oslo Accords, but with the change being rejected by the Palestinian Executive Committee.   The Charter contains language which cannot be certified by the Security Council as meeting the peaceful intent of the United Nations.



			
				 Important Events of the Last 100 Years said:
			
		

> At a news conference in Geneva on 14 December, Yasser Arafat accepts General Assembly resolution 181 (II) (1947) and Security Council 242 (1967), recognizes Israel s right to exist and renounces terrorism. On the same day, the U.S. government issues a statement in which the president authorizes the State Department to enter into a substantive dialogue with PLO representatives.
> 
> The U.N. General Assembly, on 15 December, adopts resolution 43/177 in which it acknowledges the proclamation of a state of Palestine by the PNC and decides that the designation Palestine should be used instead of PLO in the U.N. system.
> 
> On 7 July 1998, the General Assembly adopts resolution 52/250, entitled Participation of Palestine in the work of the United Nations, voting overwhelmingly to upgrade Palestine s representation at the United Nations to a unique and unprecedented level. The resolution conferred upon Palestine additional rights and privileges of participation that had traditionally been exclusive to Member States.
> 
> *SOURCE:* State of Palestine Permanent Observer... | History of Palestine



Most Respectfully,
R


----------



## P F Tinmore

RoccoR said:
			
		

> The current problem with the application for admission to the UN is the wording and language of the Palestinian National Charter; which was suppose to be changed after the Oslo Accords, but with the change being rejected by the Palestinian Executive Committee. The Charter contains language which cannot be certified by the Security Council as meeting the peaceful intent of the United Nations.



Of course they could do what Israel did.

*Just lie.*

Palestine is not a threat to any of its neighbors.


----------



## RoccoR

P F Tinmore, _et al,_

I don't think you understand.



P F Tinmore said:


> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The current problem with the application for admission to the UN is the wording and language of the Palestinian National Charter; which was suppose to be changed after the Oslo Accords, but with the change being rejected by the Palestinian Executive Committee. The Charter contains language which cannot be certified by the Security Council as meeting the peaceful intent of the United Nations.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Of course they could do what Israel did.
> 
> *Just lie.*
> 
> Palestine is not a threat to any of its neighbors.
Click to expand...

*(COMMENT)*

Palestine is an admitted threat to Israel.  

The UN set the conditions for Israeli statehood.  
The Palestinians oppose those decisions;
The Palestinians have decided to use force to challenge the UN decision.
The Palestinians have decided to use force to challenge sovereignty of Israeli. statehood.



The Palestinian concept is diametrically opposed to the Rule of Law (RoL).


Article 2: Palestine, with the boundaries it had during the British Mandate, is an indivisible territorial unit.
Article 19: The partition of Palestine in 1947, and the establishment of the state of Israel are entirely illegal, regardless of the passage of time, because they were contrary to the will of the Palestinian people and its natural right in their homeland, and were inconsistent with the principles embodied in the Charter of the United Nations, particularly the right to self-determination.

Article 51:  Nothing in the present Charter shall impair the inherent right of individual or collective self-defence if an armed attack occurs against a Member of the United Nations, 

Every State has the duty to refrain from the threat or use of force to violate the existing international boundaries of another State or as a means of solving international disputes, including territorial disputes and problems concerning frontiers of States.



Article 9: Armed struggle is the only way to liberate Palestine. This is the overall strategy, not merely a tactical phase. The Palestinian Arab people assert their absolute determination and firm resolution to continue their armed struggle and to work for an armed popular revolution for the liberation of their country and their return to it.

Every State likewise has the duty to refrain from the threat or use of force to violate international lines of demarcation, such as armistice lines, established by or pursuant to an international agreement to which it is a party or which it is otherwise bound to respect. 

Every State has the duty to refrain from organizing or encouraging the organization of irregular forces or armed bands including mercenaries, for incursion into the territory of another State.



Article 10: Commando (Feday'ee) action constitutes the nucleus of the Palestinian popular liberation war. This requires its escalation, comprehensiveness, and the mobilization of all the Palestinian popular and educational efforts and their organization and involvement in the armed Palestinian revolution. 

Every State has the duty to refrain from organizing, instigating, facilitating, participating in, financing, encouraging or tolerating terrorist activities and to take appropriate practical measures to ensure that our respective territories are not used for terrorist installations or training camps, or for the preparation or organization of terrorist acts intended to be committed against other States or their citizens.
Every State has the duty to refrain from organizing, instigating, assisting or participating in acts of civil strife or terrorist acts in another State or acquiescing in 
organized activities within its territory directed towards the commission of such acts, when the acts referred to in the present paragraph involve a threat or use of force.



Article 20: The Balfour Declaration, the Palestine Mandate, and everything that has been based on them, are deemed null and void. Claims of historical or religious ties of Jews with Palestine are incompatible with the facts of history and the conception of what constitutes statehood. Judaism, being a religion, is not an independent nationality. Nor do Jews constitute a single nation with an identity of their own; they are citizens of the states to which they belong.

All States shall comply in good faith with their obligations under the generally recognized principles and rules of international law with respect to the maintenance of international peace and security, and shall endeavor to make the United Nations security system based on the Charter more effective.



Article 21: The Arab Palestinian people, expressing themselves by armed Palestinian revolution, reject all solutions which are substitutes for the total liberation of Palestine and reject all proposals aimed at the liquidation of the Palestinian cause, or at its internationalization.

Every State shall settle its international disputes with other States by peaceful means in such a manner that international peace and security and justice are not endangered. States shall accordingly seek early and just settlement of their international disputes by negotiation, inquiry, mediation, conciliation, arbitration, judicial settlement, resort to regional agencies or arrangements or other peaceful means of their choice. In seeking such a settlement the parties shall agree upon such peaceful means as may be appropriate to the circumstances and nature of the dispute.


I think this makes the point.  The State of Palestine, while today, only says it challenges Israel, in reality, its logic and reasoning opposes the entire concept of international law.

Most Respectfully,
R


----------



## P F Tinmore

RoccoR said:


> P F Tinmore, _et al,_
> 
> I don't think you understand.
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The current problem with the application for admission to the UN is the wording and language of the Palestinian National Charter; which was suppose to be changed after the Oslo Accords, but with the change being rejected by the Palestinian Executive Committee. The Charter contains language which cannot be certified by the Security Council as meeting the peaceful intent of the United Nations.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Of course they could do what Israel did.
> 
> *Just lie.*
> 
> Palestine is not a threat to any of its neighbors.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> Palestine is an admitted threat to Israel.
> 
> The UN set the conditions for Israeli statehood.
> The Palestinians oppose those decisions;
> The Palestinians have decided to use force to challenge the UN decision.
> The Palestinians have decided to use force to challenge sovereignty of Israeli. statehood.
> 
> 
> 
> The Palestinian concept is diametrically opposed to the Rule of Law (RoL).
> 
> 
> Article 2: Palestine, with the boundaries it had during the British Mandate, is an indivisible territorial unit.
> Article 19: The partition of Palestine in 1947, and the establishment of the state of Israel are entirely illegal, regardless of the passage of time, because they were contrary to the will of the Palestinian people and its natural right in their homeland, and were inconsistent with the principles embodied in the Charter of the United Nations, particularly the right to self-determination.
> 
> Article 51:  Nothing in the present Charter shall impair the inherent right of individual or collective self-defence if an armed attack occurs against a Member of the United Nations,
> 
> Every State has the duty to refrain from the threat or use of force to violate the existing international boundaries of another State or as a means of solving international disputes, including territorial disputes and problems concerning frontiers of States.
> 
> 
> 
> Article 9: Armed struggle is the only way to liberate Palestine. This is the overall strategy, not merely a tactical phase. The Palestinian Arab people assert their absolute determination and firm resolution to continue their armed struggle and to work for an armed popular revolution for the liberation of their country and their return to it.
> 
> Every State likewise has the duty to refrain from the threat or use of force to violate international lines of demarcation, such as armistice lines, established by or pursuant to an international agreement to which it is a party or which it is otherwise bound to respect.
> 
> Every State has the duty to refrain from organizing or encouraging the organization of irregular forces or armed bands including mercenaries, for incursion into the territory of another State.
> 
> 
> 
> Article 10: Commando (Feday'ee) action constitutes the nucleus of the Palestinian popular liberation war. This requires its escalation, comprehensiveness, and the mobilization of all the Palestinian popular and educational efforts and their organization and involvement in the armed Palestinian revolution.
> 
> Every State has the duty to refrain from organizing, instigating, facilitating, participating in, financing, encouraging or tolerating terrorist activities and to take appropriate practical measures to ensure that our respective territories are not used for terrorist installations or training camps, or for the preparation or organization of terrorist acts intended to be committed against other States or their citizens.
> Every State has the duty to refrain from organizing, instigating, assisting or participating in acts of civil strife or terrorist acts in another State or acquiescing in
> organized activities within its territory directed towards the commission of such acts, when the acts referred to in the present paragraph involve a threat or use of force.
> 
> 
> 
> Article 20: The Balfour Declaration, the Palestine Mandate, and everything that has been based on them, are deemed null and void. Claims of historical or religious ties of Jews with Palestine are incompatible with the facts of history and the conception of what constitutes statehood. Judaism, being a religion, is not an independent nationality. Nor do Jews constitute a single nation with an identity of their own; they are citizens of the states to which they belong.
> 
> All States shall comply in good faith with their obligations under the generally recognized principles and rules of international law with respect to the maintenance of international peace and security, and shall endeavor to make the United Nations security system based on the Charter more effective.
> 
> 
> 
> Article 21: The Arab Palestinian people, expressing themselves by armed Palestinian revolution, reject all solutions which are substitutes for the total liberation of Palestine and reject all proposals aimed at the liquidation of the Palestinian cause, or at its internationalization.
> 
> Every State shall settle its international disputes with other States by peaceful means in such a manner that international peace and security and justice are not endangered. States shall accordingly seek early and just settlement of their international disputes by negotiation, inquiry, mediation, conciliation, arbitration, judicial settlement, resort to regional agencies or arrangements or other peaceful means of their choice. In seeking such a settlement the parties shall agree upon such peaceful means as may be appropriate to the circumstances and nature of the dispute.
> 
> 
> I think this makes the point.  The State of Palestine, while today, only says it challenges Israel, in reality, its logic and reasoning opposes the entire concept of international law.
> 
> Most Respectfully,
> R
Click to expand...


OK, what doesn't comply with international law?


----------



## RoccoR

P F Tinmore,



P F Tinmore said:


> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore, _et al,_
> 
> I don't think you understand.
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> Of course they could do what Israel did.
> 
> *Just lie.*
> 
> Palestine is not a threat to any of its neighbors.
> 
> 
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> Palestine is an admitted threat to Israel.
> 
> The UN set the conditions for Israeli statehood.
> The Palestinians oppose those decisions;
> The Palestinians have decided to use force to challenge the UN decision.
> The Palestinians have decided to use force to challenge sovereignty of Israeli. statehood.
> 
> 
> 
> The Palestinian concept is diametrically opposed to the Rule of Law (RoL).
> 
> 
> Article 2: Palestine, with the boundaries it had during the British Mandate, is an indivisible territorial unit.
> Article 19: The partition of Palestine in 1947, and the establishment of the state of Israel are entirely illegal, regardless of the passage of time, because they were contrary to the will of the Palestinian people and its natural right in their homeland, and were inconsistent with the principles embodied in the Charter of the United Nations, particularly the right to self-determination.
> 
> Article 51:  Nothing in the present Charter shall impair the inherent right of individual or collective self-defence if an armed attack occurs against a Member of the United Nations,
> 
> Every State has the duty to refrain from the threat or use of force to violate the existing international boundaries of another State or as a means of solving international disputes, including territorial disputes and problems concerning frontiers of States.
> 
> 
> 
> Article 9: Armed struggle is the only way to liberate Palestine. This is the overall strategy, not merely a tactical phase. The Palestinian Arab people assert their absolute determination and firm resolution to continue their armed struggle and to work for an armed popular revolution for the liberation of their country and their return to it.
> 
> Every State likewise has the duty to refrain from the threat or use of force to violate international lines of demarcation, such as armistice lines, established by or pursuant to an international agreement to which it is a party or which it is otherwise bound to respect.
> 
> Every State has the duty to refrain from organizing or encouraging the organization of irregular forces or armed bands including mercenaries, for incursion into the territory of another State.
> 
> 
> 
> Article 10: Commando (Feday'ee) action constitutes the nucleus of the Palestinian popular liberation war. This requires its escalation, comprehensiveness, and the mobilization of all the Palestinian popular and educational efforts and their organization and involvement in the armed Palestinian revolution.
> 
> Every State has the duty to refrain from organizing, instigating, facilitating, participating in, financing, encouraging or tolerating terrorist activities and to take appropriate practical measures to ensure that our respective territories are not used for terrorist installations or training camps, or for the preparation or organization of terrorist acts intended to be committed against other States or their citizens.
> Every State has the duty to refrain from organizing, instigating, assisting or participating in acts of civil strife or terrorist acts in another State or acquiescing in
> organized activities within its territory directed towards the commission of such acts, when the acts referred to in the present paragraph involve a threat or use of force.
> 
> 
> 
> Article 20: The Balfour Declaration, the Palestine Mandate, and everything that has been based on them, are deemed null and void. Claims of historical or religious ties of Jews with Palestine are incompatible with the facts of history and the conception of what constitutes statehood. Judaism, being a religion, is not an independent nationality. Nor do Jews constitute a single nation with an identity of their own; they are citizens of the states to which they belong.
> 
> All States shall comply in good faith with their obligations under the generally recognized principles and rules of international law with respect to the maintenance of international peace and security, and shall endeavor to make the United Nations security system based on the Charter more effective.
> 
> 
> 
> Article 21: The Arab Palestinian people, expressing themselves by armed Palestinian revolution, reject all solutions which are substitutes for the total liberation of Palestine and reject all proposals aimed at the liquidation of the Palestinian cause, or at its internationalization.
> 
> Every State shall settle its international disputes with other States by peaceful means in such a manner that international peace and security and justice are not endangered. States shall accordingly seek early and just settlement of their international disputes by negotiation, inquiry, mediation, conciliation, arbitration, judicial settlement, resort to regional agencies or arrangements or other peaceful means of their choice. In seeking such a settlement the parties shall agree upon such peaceful means as may be appropriate to the circumstances and nature of the dispute.
> 
> 
> I think this makes the point.  The State of Palestine, while today, only says it challenges Israel, in reality, its logic and reasoning opposes the entire concept of international law.
> 
> Most Respectfully,
> R
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> OK, what doesn't comply with international law?
Click to expand...

*(COMMENT)*

In the Posting above, I noted the specific language is challenged;  indented and below it I posted the RoL that it violates.

Most Respectfully,
R


----------



## georgephillip

P F Tinmore said:


> Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbass credibility has been damaged to a point where its hard to envision a situation where he would be able to convince even a handful of Palestinians to accept any agreement he strikes with Israel.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeed, Abbas left the government in 2007 and his official term in office expired in 2009.
> 
> Fatah lost the nationwide elections in Palestine in 2006. Why are they still ruling the West Bank?
> 
> Abbas is widely viewed as an Israeli tool.
Click to expand...


Why are rich corrupt parasites ruling on the West Bank?
For exactly the same reason they rule in Tel Aviv.

"Since the establishment of limited Palestinian self-rule in the West Bank and Gaza Strip in the mid-1990s, the U.S. government has committed over $4 billion in bilateral assistance to the Palestinians, who are among the worlds largest per capita recipients of international foreign aid..."

Because rich and corrupt parasites in the greatest purveyor of violence on the planet profit by dividing Jew and Arab in Palestine in the same way they profit from the division of Sunni and Shia in Iraq.

U.S. Foreign Aid to the Palestinians (FY 2012-2013)


----------



## RoccoR

georgephillip,  _et al,_

To some degree, you are probably correct.

While we recognize the plight of the Palestinian, we also feel the backlash they torque our way.  It may be that we are throwing good money after bad in any assistance we give the Palestinians.  Already, the government has to keep the public awareness obscure to how much we give Palestinians, for fear that public outcry will force an end to it.  There have been lawsuits already against the government for funding Palestinian which were portrayed to be all terrorists, or supporting constituents of terrorists.



georgephillip said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbass credibility has been damaged to a point where its hard to envision a situation where he would be able to convince even a handful of Palestinians to accept any agreement he strikes with Israel.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeed, Abbas left the government in 2007 and his official term in office expired in 2009.
> 
> Fatah lost the nationwide elections in Palestine in 2006. Why are they still ruling the West Bank?
> 
> Abbas is widely viewed as an Israeli tool.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Why are rich corrupt parasites ruling on the West Bank?
> For exactly the same reason they rule in Tel Aviv.
> 
> "Since the establishment of limited Palestinian self-rule in the West Bank and Gaza Strip in the mid-1990s, the U.S. government has committed over $4 billion in bilateral assistance to the Palestinians, who are among the worlds largest per capita recipients of international foreign aid..."
> 
> Because rich and corrupt parasites in the greatest purveyor of violence on the planet profit by dividing Jew and Arab in Palestine in the same way they profit from the division of Sunni and Shia in Iraq.
Click to expand...

*(COMMENT)*

From a political-economic standpoint, you must be careful not to suggest that the "rich and corrupt parasites" created the division between Jew-Arab or Sunni-Shia.  They merely capitalize on it.  I might also suggest you change the word "parasites" to "profiteers."  There are all sorts of conflict and war profiteers, but the "parasites" are those that demand everything and contribute little in return.

Palestinians are the parasites in the Arab-Israeli conflict; not intentionally, but because they generationally did not productively develop.  About four generations emerged in an atmosphere where war was made more important than cultural advancements.

Most Respectfully,
R


----------



## Bumberclyde

RoccoR said:


> P F Tinmore, _et al,_
> 
> I don't think you understand.
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The current problem with the application for admission to the UN is the wording and language of the Palestinian National Charter; which was suppose to be changed after the Oslo Accords, but with the change being rejected by the Palestinian Executive Committee. The Charter contains language which cannot be certified by the Security Council as meeting the peaceful intent of the United Nations.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Of course they could do what Israel did.
> 
> *Just lie.*
> 
> Palestine is not a threat to any of its neighbors.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> Palestine is an admitted threat to Israel.
> 
> The UN set the conditions for Israeli statehood.
> The Palestinians oppose those decisions;
> The Palestinians have decided to use force to challenge the UN decision.
> The Palestinians have decided to use force to challenge sovereignty of Israeli. statehood.
> 
> 
> 
> The Palestinian concept is diametrically opposed to the Rule of Law (RoL).
> 
> 
> Article 2: Palestine, with the boundaries it had during the British Mandate, is an indivisible territorial unit.
> Article 19: The partition of Palestine in 1947, and the establishment of the state of Israel are entirely illegal, regardless of the passage of time, because they were contrary to the will of the Palestinian people and its natural right in their homeland, and were inconsistent with the principles embodied in the Charter of the United Nations, particularly the right to self-determination.
> 
> Article 51:  Nothing in the present Charter shall impair the inherent right of individual or collective self-defence if an armed attack occurs against a Member of the United Nations,
> 
> Every State has the duty to refrain from the threat or use of force to violate the existing international boundaries of another State or as a means of solving international disputes, including territorial disputes and problems concerning frontiers of States.
> 
> 
> 
> Article 9: Armed struggle is the only way to liberate Palestine. This is the overall strategy, not merely a tactical phase. The Palestinian Arab people assert their absolute determination and firm resolution to continue their armed struggle and to work for an armed popular revolution for the liberation of their country and their return to it.
> 
> Every State likewise has the duty to refrain from the threat or use of force to violate international lines of demarcation, such as armistice lines, established by or pursuant to an international agreement to which it is a party or which it is otherwise bound to respect.
> 
> Every State has the duty to refrain from organizing or encouraging the organization of irregular forces or armed bands including mercenaries, for incursion into the territory of another State.
> 
> 
> 
> Article 10: Commando (Feday'ee) action constitutes the nucleus of the Palestinian popular liberation war. This requires its escalation, comprehensiveness, and the mobilization of all the Palestinian popular and educational efforts and their organization and involvement in the armed Palestinian revolution.
> 
> Every State has the duty to refrain from organizing, instigating, facilitating, participating in, financing, encouraging or tolerating terrorist activities and to take appropriate practical measures to ensure that our respective territories are not used for terrorist installations or training camps, or for the preparation or organization of terrorist acts intended to be committed against other States or their citizens.
> Every State has the duty to refrain from organizing, instigating, assisting or participating in acts of civil strife or terrorist acts in another State or acquiescing in
> organized activities within its territory directed towards the commission of such acts, when the acts referred to in the present paragraph involve a threat or use of force.
> 
> 
> 
> Article 20: The Balfour Declaration, the Palestine Mandate, and everything that has been based on them, are deemed null and void. Claims of historical or religious ties of Jews with Palestine are incompatible with the facts of history and the conception of what constitutes statehood. Judaism, being a religion, is not an independent nationality. Nor do Jews constitute a single nation with an identity of their own; they are citizens of the states to which they belong.
> 
> All States shall comply in good faith with their obligations under the generally recognized principles and rules of international law with respect to the maintenance of international peace and security, and shall endeavor to make the United Nations security system based on the Charter more effective.
> 
> 
> 
> Article 21: The Arab Palestinian people, expressing themselves by armed Palestinian revolution, reject all solutions which are substitutes for the total liberation of Palestine and reject all proposals aimed at the liquidation of the Palestinian cause, or at its internationalization.
> 
> Every State shall settle its international disputes with other States by peaceful means in such a manner that international peace and security and justice are not endangered. States shall accordingly seek early and just settlement of their international disputes by negotiation, inquiry, mediation, conciliation, arbitration, judicial settlement, resort to regional agencies or arrangements or other peaceful means of their choice. In seeking such a settlement the parties shall agree upon such peaceful means as may be appropriate to the circumstances and nature of the dispute.
> 
> 
> I think this makes the point.  The State of Palestine, while today, only says it challenges Israel, in reality, its logic and reasoning opposes the entire concept of international law.
> 
> Most Respectfully,
> R
Click to expand...


So Roc, if a gang of people with weapons come to your house and give you 5 minutes to get out or they'll kill you and your whole family, would you accept it peacefully and let them take your house and land and then send you to a Warsaw Ghetto style camp, or would you be pissed off and want to fight to get it back?


----------



## georgephillip

RoccoR said:


> georgephillip,  _et al,_
> 
> To some degree, you are probably correct.
> 
> While we recognize the plight of the Palestinian, we also feel the backlash they torque our way.  It may be that we are throwing good money after bad in any assistance we give the Palestinians.  Already, the government has to keep the public awareness obscure to how much we give Palestinians, for fear that public outcry will force an end to it.  There have been lawsuits already against the government for funding Palestinian which were portrayed to be all terrorists, or supporting constituents of terrorists.
> 
> 
> 
> georgephillip said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> Indeed, Abbas left the government in 2007 and his official term in office expired in 2009.
> 
> Fatah lost the nationwide elections in Palestine in 2006. Why are they still ruling the West Bank?
> 
> Abbas is widely viewed as an Israeli tool.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Why are rich corrupt parasites ruling on the West Bank?
> For exactly the same reason they rule in Tel Aviv.
> 
> "Since the establishment of limited Palestinian self-rule in the West Bank and Gaza Strip in the mid-1990s, the U.S. government has committed over $4 billion in bilateral assistance to the Palestinians, who are among the worlds largest per capita recipients of international foreign aid..."
> 
> Because rich and corrupt parasites in the greatest purveyor of violence on the planet profit by dividing Jew and Arab in Palestine in the same way they profit from the division of Sunni and Shia in Iraq.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> From a political-economic standpoint, you must be careful not to suggest that the "rich and corrupt parasites" created the division between Jew-Arab or Sunni-Shia.  They merely capitalize on it.  I might also suggest you change the word "parasites" to "profiteers."  There are all sorts of conflict and war profiteers, but the "parasites" are those that demand everything and contribute little in return.
> 
> Palestinians are the parasites in the Arab-Israeli conflict; not intentionally, but because they generationally did not productively develop.  About four generations emerged in an atmosphere where war was made more important than cultural advancements.
> 
> Most Respectfully,
> R
Click to expand...


How would you reasonably expect productive development in Palestine when Israel controls air, land, and water resources? Zionism made no secret of its dependence on English bayonets to lay the infrastructure of the Jewish state, and their descendants remain indebted, to say the least, to US cover at the UN and $8 million a day welfare from the American taxpayer.


----------



## P F Tinmore

RoccoR said:
			
		

> Palestine is an admitted threat to Israel.
> 
> The UN set the conditions for Israeli statehood.
> The Palestinians oppose those decisions;
> The Palestinians have decided to use force to challenge the UN decision.
> The Palestinians have decided to use force to challenge sovereignty of Israeli. statehood.



The UN can only give political recognition to "states." This has nothing to do with legalities.

Switzerland did not become a member of the UN until 2002. Does that mean it was not a state before then?

Israel is recognized as a state but about 30 (?) UN member states do not recognize Israel.

Palestine is recognized as a state but Israel and the US say no.

Just because the UN recognizes a state does not require others to do so.


----------



## P F Tinmore

RoccoR said:
			
		

> The Palestinian concept is diametrically opposed to the Rule of Law (RoL).
> 
> 
> Article 2: Palestine, with the boundaries it had during the British Mandate, is an indivisible territorial unit.
> Article 19: The partition of Palestine in 1947, and the establishment of the state of Israel are entirely illegal, regardless of the passage of time, because they were contrary to the will of the Palestinian people and its natural right in their homeland, and were inconsistent with the principles embodied in the Charter of the United Nations, particularly the right to self-determination.



I don't see a problem here.



> Article 51:  Nothing in the present Charter shall impair the inherent right of individual or collective self-defence if an armed attack occurs against a Member of the United Nations,
> 
> Every State has the duty to refrain from the threat or use of force to violate the existing international boundaries of another State or as a means of solving international disputes, including territorial disputes and problems concerning frontiers of States.



All people have the right to self defense. UN membership is not necessary.

Israel's "international boundaries" are inside Palestine. How can Palestine violate boundaries that are inside Palestine? How can that be deemed international?


----------



## P F Tinmore

RoccoR said:
			
		

> Every State likewise has the duty to refrain from the threat or use of force to violate international lines of demarcation, such as armistice lines, established by or pursuant to an international agreement to which it is a party or which it is otherwise bound to respect.



Link?


----------



## RoccoR

P F Tinmore,  _et al,_

Certainly, it comes from the UN Rule of Law cite.



P F Tinmore said:


> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Every State likewise has the duty to refrain from the threat or use of force to violate international lines of demarcation, such as armistice lines, established by or pursuant to an international agreement to which it is a party or which it is otherwise bound to respect.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Link?
Click to expand...

(REFERENCE)

It is A/RES/2625(XXV), DECLARATION ON PRINCIPLES OF INTERNATIONAL LAW CONCERNING FRIENDLY RELATIONS AND CO-OPERATION AMONG STATES IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE CHARTER OF THE UNITED NATIONS.

Page 122 on the lower right hand side:  

http://www.un.org/ga/search/view_doc.asp?symbol=A/RES/2625(XXV)

Or, 

http://www.unrol.org/files/3dda1f104.pdf​
Most Respectfully,
R


----------



## RoccoR

P F Tinmore,  _et al,_

The sovereignty of the State of Israel and the State of Palestine do not conflict or overlap.



P F Tinmore said:


> All people have the right to self defense. UN membership is not necessary.
> 
> Israel's "international boundaries" are inside Palestine. How can Palestine violate boundaries that are inside Palestine? How can that be deemed international?


*(COMMENT)*

Territory of Palestine (formerly under UN Mandate); not the State of Palestine.

Most Respectfully,
R


----------



## georgephillip

"Semitic Action (Hebrew: &#1492;&#1508;&#1506;&#1493;&#1500;&#1492; &#1492;&#1513;&#1502;&#1497;&#1514;*, HaPeulah Hashemit) was a small Israeli political group of the 1950s and 1960s which sought the creation of a regional federation encompassing Israel and its Arab neighbors.[1][2] 

"Created in 1956,[2] the group's key members were Uri Avnery, Natan Yellin-Mor, and Boaz Evron,[3] with other members including Maxim Ghilan, Shalom Cohen, and Amos Kenan.[4] 

"Joel Beinin describes the group as 'a political expression of the Canaanite movement' which "advocated that Hebrew-speaking Israelis cut their ties with the Jewish diaspora and integrate into the Middle East as natives of the region on the basis of an anticolonialist alliance with its indigenous Arab inhabitants."

*Do you think AIPAC would approve?*


----------



## P F Tinmore

RoccoR said:


> P F Tinmore,  _et al,_
> 
> Certainly, it comes from the UN Rule of Law cite.
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Every State likewise has the duty to refrain from the threat or use of force to violate international lines of demarcation, such as armistice lines, established by or pursuant to an international agreement to which it is a party or which it is otherwise bound to respect.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Link?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> (REFERENCE)
> 
> It is A/RES/2625(XXV), DECLARATION ON PRINCIPLES OF INTERNATIONAL LAW CONCERNING FRIENDLY RELATIONS AND CO-OPERATION AMONG STATES IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE CHARTER OF THE UNITED NATIONS.
> 
> Page 122 on the lower right hand side:
> 
> http://www.un.org/ga/search/view_doc.asp?symbol=A/RES/2625(XXV)
> 
> Or,
> 
> http://www.unrol.org/files/3dda1f104.pdf​
> Most Respectfully,
> R
Click to expand...




> use of force to violate international lines of demarcation, such as armistice lines,



OK but the armistice lines run through and around Palestine. If Palestine is on both sides of the line, how can they violate it?


----------



## P F Tinmore

RoccoR said:


> P F Tinmore,  _et al,_
> 
> The sovereignty of the State of Israel and the State of Palestine do not conflict or overlap.
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> All people have the right to self defense. UN membership is not necessary.
> 
> Israel's "international boundaries" are inside Palestine. How can Palestine violate boundaries that are inside Palestine? How can that be deemed international?
> 
> 
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> Territory of Palestine (formerly under UN Mandate); not the State of Palestine.
> 
> Most Respectfully,
> R
Click to expand...


Whatever it is, Palestine is there and it has international borders.

Israel sits inside Palestine with no borders of its own.


----------



## RoccoR

P F Tinmore,  _et al,_

Again, you are confusing the Territory of Palestine (formerly under Mandated) and the State of Palestine (which is the Gaza Strip and West Bank).



P F Tinmore said:


> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore,  _et al,_
> 
> Certainly, it comes from the UN Rule of Law cite.
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> Link?
> 
> 
> 
> (REFERENCE)
> 
> It is A/RES/2625(XXV), DECLARATION ON PRINCIPLES OF INTERNATIONAL LAW CONCERNING FRIENDLY RELATIONS AND CO-OPERATION AMONG STATES IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE CHARTER OF THE UNITED NATIONS.
> 
> Page 122 on the lower right hand side:
> 
> http://www.un.org/ga/search/view_doc.asp?symbol=A/RES/2625(XXV)
> 
> Or,
> 
> http://www.unrol.org/files/3dda1f104.pdf​
> Most Respectfully,
> R
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> use of force to violate international lines of demarcation, such as armistice lines,
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> OK but the armistice lines run through and around Palestine. If Palestine is on both sides of the line, how can they violate it?
Click to expand...

*(COMMENT)*

You have to remember that the RoL covers the State of Israel (created in 1948) as well as the State of Palestine (created in 1988).  

Under the RoL, Israel is not inside of Palestine.  The territory was allocated to Israel by GA/RES/181(II). 

Most Respectfully,
R


----------



## P F Tinmore

RoccoR said:


> P F Tinmore,  _et al,_
> 
> Again, you are confusing the Territory of Palestine (formerly under Mandated) and the State of Palestine (which is the Gaza Strip and West Bank).
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore,  _et al,_
> 
> Certainly, it comes from the UN Rule of Law cite.
> 
> 
> (REFERENCE)
> 
> It is A/RES/2625(XXV), DECLARATION ON PRINCIPLES OF INTERNATIONAL LAW CONCERNING FRIENDLY RELATIONS AND CO-OPERATION AMONG STATES IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE CHARTER OF THE UNITED NATIONS.
> 
> Page 122 on the lower right hand side:
> 
> http://www.un.org/ga/search/view_doc.asp?symbol=A/RES/2625(XXV)
> 
> Or,
> 
> http://www.unrol.org/files/3dda1f104.pdf​
> Most Respectfully,
> R
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> use of force to violate international lines of demarcation, such as armistice lines,
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> OK but the armistice lines run through and around Palestine. If Palestine is on both sides of the line, how can they violate it?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> You have to remember that the RoL covers the State of Israel (created in 1948) as well as the State of Palestine (created in 1988).
> 
> Under the RoL, Israel is not inside of Palestine.  The territory was allocated to Israel by GA/RES/181(II).
> 
> Most Respectfully,
> R
Click to expand...


Not true.

Resolution 181 did not transfer any land to Israel. Israel never claimed those borders.

You keep bringing up resolution 181 like it had meaning.


----------



## Bumberclyde

So Roc, if a gang of people with weapons come to your house and give you 5 minutes to get out or they'll kill you and your whole family, would you accept it peacefully and let them take your house and land and then send you to a Warsaw Ghetto style camp, or would you be pissed off and want to fight to get it back?


----------



## RoccoR

P F Tinmore,  _et al,_

An here in lays the problem.



P F Tinmore said:


> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore,  _et al,_
> 
> Again, you are confusing the Territory of Palestine (formerly under Mandated) and the State of Palestine (which is the Gaza Strip and West Bank).
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> OK but the armistice lines run through and around Palestine. If Palestine is on both sides of the line, how can they violate it?
> 
> 
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> You have to remember that the RoL covers the State of Israel (created in 1948) as well as the State of Palestine (created in 1988).
> 
> Under the RoL, Israel is not inside of Palestine.  The territory was allocated to Israel by GA/RES/181(II).
> 
> Most Respectfully,
> R
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Not true.
> 
> Resolution 181 did not transfer any land to Israel. Israel never claimed those borders.
> 
> You keep bringing up resolution 181 like it had meaning.
Click to expand...

*(COMMENT)*

This is something you keep saying:  "Resolution 181 did not transfer any land to Israel."  And I agree.  It was "PLAN" that Israel agreed to, and then later (1988) the Palestinians agreed to.

The Jewish Agency agree to the Partition and declared independence in accordance with the Plan.  The original boundaries, sited in the Plan, have long since been overtaken by events; but in the beginning, it was the foundational agreement.

Does it have meaning?  Well, it had enough meaning that the Palestinians cited it in their own Declaration of Independence, some twenty years later,  and then it was recalled again (November 2012) when the UN accorded Palestine non-member observer State status.

You keep saying, that "Israel never claimed those borders."  I think it is fair to say it was activated in the  Cablegram (S/747 16 May 1948) to the Secretary-General on 15 May, 1948.

You keep implying that the Resolution has no validity, yet the Palestinians made a special effort to confirm with the UN and Secretary-General that the Palestinians recognize it legitimacy.

In any event, your understanding of the place the Resolution had, is corrupted.  More importantly, your understanding of the difference between the Territory of Palestine and the State of Palestine is corrupted.

RELATIVE to the QUESTION:  There are some sort of "international lines of demarcation" all around the recognized State of Israel; as well as the Gaza Strip and West Bank.   Some are Treaty Borders and some are Armistice Lines, but they exist.

Most Respectfully,
R


----------



## P F Tinmore

RoccoR said:


> P F Tinmore,  _et al,_
> 
> An here in lays the problem.
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore,  _et al,_
> 
> Again, you are confusing the Territory of Palestine (formerly under Mandated) and the State of Palestine (which is the Gaza Strip and West Bank).
> 
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> You have to remember that the RoL covers the State of Israel (created in 1948) as well as the State of Palestine (created in 1988).
> 
> Under the RoL, Israel is not inside of Palestine.  The territory was allocated to Israel by GA/RES/181(II).
> 
> Most Respectfully,
> R
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Not true.
> 
> Resolution 181 did not transfer any land to Israel. Israel never claimed those borders.
> 
> You keep bringing up resolution 181 like it had meaning.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> This is something you keep saying:  "Resolution 181 did not transfer any land to Israel."  And I agree.  It was "PLAN" that Israel agreed to, and then later (1988) the Palestinians agreed to.
> 
> The Jewish Agency agree to the Partition and declared independence in accordance with the Plan.  The original boundaries, sited in the Plan, have long since been overtaken by events; but in the beginning, it was the foundational agreement.
> 
> Does it have meaning?  Well, it had enough meaning that the Palestinians cited it in their own Declaration of Independence, some twenty years later,  and then it was recalled again (November 2012) when the UN accorded Palestine non-member observer State status.
> 
> You keep saying, that "Israel never claimed those borders."  I think it is fair to say it was activated in the  Cablegram (S/747 16 May 1948) to the Secretary-General on 15 May, 1948.
> 
> You keep implying that the Resolution has no validity, yet the Palestinians made a special effort to confirm with the UN and Secretary-General that the Palestinians recognize it legitimacy.
> 
> In any event, your understanding of the place the Resolution had, is corrupted.  More importantly, your understanding of the difference between the Territory of Palestine and the State of Palestine is corrupted.
> 
> RELATIVE to the QUESTION:  There are some sort of "international lines of demarcation" all around the recognized State of Israel; as well as the Gaza Strip and West Bank.   Some are Treaty Borders and some are Armistice Lines, but they exist.
> 
> Most Respectfully,
> R
Click to expand...


When you say "the Palestinians" how many Palestinians are you talking about?

Israel never agreed with resolution 181.  The  Cablegram (S/747 16 May 1948) to the Secretary-General on 15 May, 1948 was a lie.

The Palestinians declared independence in 1948 only to have the UN place it under three areas of occupation in 1949. That state was declared inside its international borders. A state does not cease to exist even when it is under occupation.

The armistice lines, that were specifically not to be political or territorial borders, have become Israel's *de facto* borders.


----------



## RoccoR

P F Tinmore,  _et al,_

You use that word "lie" quite frequently.  



P F Tinmore said:


> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore,  _et al,_
> 
> An here in lays the problem.
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> Not true.
> 
> Resolution 181 did not transfer any land to Israel. Israel never claimed those borders.
> 
> You keep bringing up resolution 181 like it had meaning.
> 
> 
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> This is something you keep saying:  "Resolution 181 did not transfer any land to Israel."  And I agree.  It was "PLAN" that Israel agreed to, and then later (1988) the Palestinians agreed to.
> 
> The Jewish Agency agree to the Partition and declared independence in accordance with the Plan.  The original boundaries, sited in the Plan, have long since been overtaken by events; but in the beginning, it was the foundational agreement.
> 
> Does it have meaning?  Well, it had enough meaning that the Palestinians cited it in their own Declaration of Independence, some twenty years later,  and then it was recalled again (November 2012) when the UN accorded Palestine non-member observer State status.
> 
> You keep saying, that "Israel never claimed those borders."  I think it is fair to say it was activated in the  Cablegram (S/747 16 May 1948) to the Secretary-General on 15 May, 1948.
> 
> You keep implying that the Resolution has no validity, yet the Palestinians made a special effort to confirm with the UN and Secretary-General that the Palestinians recognize it legitimacy.
> 
> In any event, your understanding of the place the Resolution had, is corrupted.  More importantly, your understanding of the difference between the Territory of Palestine and the State of Palestine is corrupted.
> 
> RELATIVE to the QUESTION:  There are some sort of "international lines of demarcation" all around the recognized State of Israel; as well as the Gaza Strip and West Bank.   Some are Treaty Borders and some are Armistice Lines, but they exist.
> 
> Most Respectfully,
> R
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> When you say "the Palestinians" how many Palestinians are you talking about?
Click to expand...

*(COMMENT)*

The voice of the Palestinians is sometimes hard to gauge.  No matter who I cite as the applicable voice, you challenge it.  It is as if there is no recognized government leadership behind the Palestinian.



P F Tinmore said:


> Israel never agreed with resolution 181.  The  Cablegram (S/747 16 May 1948) to the Secretary-General on 15 May, 1948 was a lie.


*(COMMENT)*

Again, with the word "lie."  I don't know how you can claim this, as the Arab-Palestinian (along with the Arab League) immediately opened hostilities with the new state of Israel on their independence say.  So, how could you possible know what they accepted and what they didn't.



P F Tinmore said:


> The Palestinians declared independence in 1948 only to have the UN place it under three areas of occupation in 1949. That state was declared inside its international borders. A state does not cease to exist even when it is under occupation.


*(COMMENT)*

The Palestinians cannot declare independence on territory that is already declared independent by the Israelis.  The UN did not occupy any territory or place any territory under occupation.



P F Tinmore said:


> The armistice lines, that were specifically not to be political or territorial borders, have become Israel's *de facto* borders.


*(COMMENT)*

But they are, by definition, a demarcation line.

There are two Rules of Law (RoL) that can be applicable.  It doesn't matter to me, or anyone else, which argument to choose; or if you choose both.  There is a set of RoL's that cover the situation.


If you argue that ALL international lines of demarcation for Israel are in dispute, then the following RoL applies:

Every State has the duty to refrain from the threat or use of force to violate the existing international boundaries of another State or as a means of solving international disputes, including territorial disputes and problems concerning frontiers of States.



If you are selectively challenging specific international lines of demarcation are in dispute, then the following applies:

Every State likewise has the duty to refrain from the threat or use of force to violate international lines of demarcation, such as armistice lines, established by or pursuant to an international agreement to which it is a party or which it is otherwise bound to respect. Nothing in the foregoing shall be construed as prejudicing the positions of the parties concerned with regard to the status and effects of such lines under their special regimes or as affecting their temporary character.


In any case, the discussion and annotations of the Previous Posting #353 is dead-on accurate.  Both voices _(HAMAS and FATAH)_, which ever is the most applicable or representative, are outside the RoL.  It doesn't matter what position you take.



			
				UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moons remarks to the Security Council said:
			
		

> Nothing can justify terrorism  ever.  No grievance, no goal, no cause can excuse terrorist acts.
> 
> _*SOURCE:*_ Secretary-General  SG/SM/14764  SC/10883



Most Respectfully,
R


----------



## RoccoR

Bumberclyde;  _et al,_

I guess that depends on if I'm a good guy or a bad guy.



Bumberclyde said:


> So Roc, if a gang of people with weapons come to your house and give you 5 minutes to get out or they'll kill you and your whole family, would you accept it peacefully and let them take your house and land and then send you to a Warsaw Ghetto style camp, or would you be pissed off and want to fight to get it back?


*(COMMENT)*

This is a pro-Victimization question.

If I, as a lawless member of the population, open up hostilities on the Sovereign State, and back the aggression of five foreign Armies that launch an attack on my behalf, then I expect to be treated as an aggressor and hostile member of the population.

But make no mistake.  I know that I am a hostile threat and operating outside the RoL.

As for the "Warsaw Ghetto style camp."  May I ask, who set those camps up and why?  Remember, the Arab League reconstituted the Arab Higher Committee that rejected the Partition Plan.  It was the Arab League that launched the coordinated attack.  It was the Arab League that failed to reach their objective.  

The Hostile Arab Palestinian trusted in the Arab League and its leadership to accomplish the goal of defeating the State of Israel.  Who bares the responsibility for the refugee that comes from the illegal aggression by the Arab League?

Most Respectfully,
R


----------



## P F Tinmore

RoccoR said:
			
		

> You use that word "lie" quite frequently.



Israel lies quite frequently.


----------



## P F Tinmore

RoccoR said:
			
		

> The voice of the Palestinians is sometimes hard to gauge. No matter who I cite as the applicable voice, you challenge it. It is as if there is no recognized government leadership behind the Palestinian.



You usually quote Palestinians who were appointed leaders by foreign powers.

Nobody has ever answered my question: If Fatah lost the elections, why are they ruling the West Bank?


----------



## P F Tinmore

P F Tinmore said:
			
		

> Israel never agreed with resolution 181. The Cablegram (S/747 16 May 1948) to the Secretary-General on 15 May, 1948 was a lie.





			
				RoccoR said:
			
		

> Again, with the word "lie." I don't know how you can claim this, as the Arab-Palestinian (along with the Arab League) immediately opened hostilities with the new state of Israel on their independence say. So, how could you possible know what they accepted and what they didn't.



Israel had ethnically cleansed hundreds of thousand of Palestinians out of the area allotted to the Jewish state. It also was cleansing thousands of Palestinians out of the area allotted to the Arabs including from the international city of Jerusalem.

All of this was *before* Israel sent that lie to the UN and *before* any Arab country entered Palestine..

What part of resolution 181 did they agree with?


----------



## RoccoR

P F Tinmore,  _et al,_

Only the Palestinians can answer this question.



P F Tinmore said:


> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The voice of the Palestinians is sometimes hard to gauge. No matter who I cite as the applicable voice, you challenge it. It is as if there is no recognized government leadership behind the Palestinian.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You usually quote Palestinians who were appointed leaders by foreign powers.
> 
> Nobody has ever answered my question: If Fatah lost the elections, why are they ruling the West Bank?
Click to expand...

*(COMMENT)*

And no one can answer why the Palestinians have a bifurcated government, except the Palestinians.  It is their government.

Now I suppose that Israel and the US will be blamed for the Palestinians not having the capacity to seat their government.  It is part and parcel the way the victim plays the role.  But only the Palestinians can rise up and change the voice.

For me, it doesn't matter.  As I said, both HAMAS and FATAH are equally outside the Rule of Law.

Most Respectfully,
R


----------



## P F Tinmore

P F Tinmore said:
			
		

> The Palestinians declared independence in 1948 only to have the UN place it under three areas of occupation in 1949. That state was declared inside its international borders. A state does not cease to exist even when it is under occupation.





			
				RoccoR said:
			
		

> The Palestinians cannot declare independence on territory that is already declared independent by the Israelis. The UN did not occupy any territory or place any territory under occupation.



Israel never declared any territory. Palestine declared its territory inside its already existing international borders.

The UN divided Palestine into three areas of occupation with it armistice lines in 1949. This was after Palestine declared its independence from the mandate in 1948.


----------



## P F Tinmore

RoccoR said:


> P F Tinmore,  _et al,_
> 
> Only the Palestinians can answer this question.
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The voice of the Palestinians is sometimes hard to gauge. No matter who I cite as the applicable voice, you challenge it. It is as if there is no recognized government leadership behind the Palestinian.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You usually quote Palestinians who were appointed leaders by foreign powers.
> 
> Nobody has ever answered my question: If Fatah lost the elections, why are they ruling the West Bank?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> And no one can answer why the Palestinians have a bifurcated government, except the Palestinians.  It is their government.
> 
> Now I suppose that Israel and the US will be blamed for the Palestinians not having the capacity to seat their government.  It is part and parcel the way the victim plays the role.  But only the Palestinians can rise up and change the voice.
> 
> For me, it doesn't matter.  As I said, both HAMAS and FATAH are equally outside the Rule of Law.
> 
> Most Respectfully,
> R
Click to expand...


It is a matter of history.

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=72ai-Udti1M]On The Map with Avi Lewis: Gaza Coup d'Etat? - YouTube[/ame]


----------



## P F Tinmore

RoccoR said:
			
		

> If you argue that ALL international lines of demarcation for Israel are in dispute, then the following RoL applies:



Palestine has international borders.

Israel has no borders.

I don't see a dispute. None of the following applies.


----------



## RoccoR

P F Tinmore,  _et al,_

They accepted all of it.  It was the outbreak of hostilities the changed the conditions.



P F Tinmore said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Israel never agreed with resolution 181. The Cablegram (S/747 16 May 1948) to the Secretary-General on 15 May, 1948 was a lie.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Again, with the word "lie." I don't know how you can claim this, as the Arab-Palestinian (along with the Arab League) immediately opened hostilities with the new state of Israel on their independence say. So, how could you possible know what they accepted and what they didn't.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Israel had ethnically cleansed hundreds of thousand of Palestinians out of the area allotted to the Jewish state. It also was cleansing thousands of Palestinians out of the area allotted to the Arabs including from the international city of Jerusalem.
> 
> All of this was *before* Israel sent that lie to the UN and *before* any Arab country entered Palestine..
> 
> What part of resolution 181 did they agree with?
Click to expand...

*(OBSERVATION)*

Again, the records shows:



			
				Pages 9 & 10 The Question of Palestine and the United Nations said:
			
		

> *End of the British Mandate*
> 
> The adoption of resolution 181 (II) was followed by outbreaks of violence in  Palestine. As the situation deteriorated, the Security Council called for a special session of the General Assembly, which then met from 16 April to 14 May 1948.  On 17 April, the Security Council called for the cessation of all military and paramilitary activities in Palestine, and on 23 April it established a Truce Commission to supervise and help bring about a ceasefire. For its part, the General Assembly relieved the Palestine Commission of its responsibilities and decided to appoint a mediator charged with promoting a peaceful settlement in cooperation with the Truce Commission. On 20 May, Count Folke Bernadotte, President of the Swedish Red Cross, was chosen as United Nations Mediator.​
> *The first Arab-Israeli war, 1948-1949*
> 
> On 14 May 1948, Britain relinquished its Mandate over Palestine and disengaged its forces. On the same day, the Jewish Agency proclaimed the establishment of the State of Israel on the territory allotted to it by the partition plan. Fierce hostilities immediately broke out between the Arab and Jewish communities. The next day, regular troops of the neighbouring Arab States entered the territory to assist the Palestinian Arabs.​
> _*SOURCE:*_ The Question of Palestine and the United Nations



The history is what it is.  No one can turn the clock back and fix the mistakes made over a half-century ago.  The strategy to overrun Israel using the "Right of Return" concept is not going to work.  The Hostile Arab Palestinian created the impetus that triggered the refugee flow, and they lost.  Now they have to solve the dilemma and live with the consequences. 

Most Respectfully,
R


----------



## MHunterB

georgephillip said:


> "Semitic Action (Hebrew: &#1492;&#1508;&#1506;&#1493;&#1500;&#1492; &#1492;&#1513;&#1502;&#1497;&#1514;*, HaPeulah Hashemit) was a small Israeli political group of the 1950s and 1960s which sought the creation of a regional federation encompassing Israel and its Arab neighbors.[1][2]
> 
> "Created in 1956,[2] the group's key members were Uri Avnery, Natan Yellin-Mor, and Boaz Evron,[3] with other members including Maxim Ghilan, Shalom Cohen, and Amos Kenan.[4]
> 
> "Joel Beinin describes the group as 'a political expression of the Canaanite movement' which "advocated that Hebrew-speaking Israelis cut their ties with the Jewish diaspora and integrate into the Middle East as natives of the region on the basis of an anticolonialist alliance with its indigenous Arab inhabitants."
> 
> *Do you think AIPAC would approve?*



I think it's entirely irrelevant - and simply one more attempt at 'Jew-baiting'.


----------



## MHunterB

P F Tinmore said:


> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The current problem with the application for admission to the UN is the wording and language of the Palestinian National Charter; which was suppose to be changed after the Oslo Accords, but with the change being rejected by the Palestinian Executive Committee. The Charter contains language which cannot be certified by the Security Council as meeting the peaceful intent of the United Nations.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Of course they could do what Israel did.
> 
> *Just lie.*
> 
> *Palestine is not a threat to any of its neighbors*.
Click to expand...


Thanks for giving us an illustration of the kind of lie you meant - but why not give us an example of what you consider to be a lie told by Israelis ?


----------



## P F Tinmore

RoccoR said:


> P F Tinmore,  _et al,_
> 
> They accepted all of it.  It was the outbreak of hostilities the changed the conditions.
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Israel never agreed with resolution 181. The Cablegram (S/747 16 May 1948) to the Secretary-General on 15 May, 1948 was a lie.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Israel had ethnically cleansed hundreds of thousand of Palestinians out of the area allotted to the Jewish state. It also was cleansing thousands of Palestinians out of the area allotted to the Arabs including from the international city of Jerusalem.
> 
> All of this was *before* Israel sent that lie to the UN and *before* any Arab country entered Palestine..
> 
> What part of resolution 181 did they agree with?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> *(OBSERVATION)*
> 
> Again, the records shows:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Pages 9 & 10 The Question of Palestine and the United Nations said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *End of the British Mandate*
> 
> The adoption of resolution 181 (II) was followed by outbreaks of violence in  Palestine. As the situation deteriorated, the Security Council called for a special session of the General Assembly, which then met from 16 April to 14 May 1948.  On 17 April, the Security Council called for the cessation of all military and paramilitary activities in Palestine, and on 23 April it established a Truce Commission to supervise and help bring about a ceasefire. For its part, the General Assembly relieved the Palestine Commission of its responsibilities and decided to appoint a mediator charged with promoting a peaceful settlement in cooperation with the Truce Commission. On 20 May, Count Folke Bernadotte, President of the Swedish Red Cross, was chosen as United Nations Mediator.​
> *The first Arab-Israeli war, 1948-1949*
> 
> On 14 May 1948, Britain relinquished its Mandate over Palestine and disengaged its forces. On the same day, the Jewish Agency proclaimed the establishment of the State of Israel on the territory allotted to it by the partition plan. Fierce hostilities immediately broke out between the Arab and Jewish communities. The next day, regular troops of the neighbouring Arab States entered the territory to assist the Palestinian Arabs.​
> _*SOURCE:*_ The Question of Palestine and the United Nations
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> The history is what it is.  No one can turn the clock back and fix the mistakes made over a half-century ago.  The strategy to overrun Israel using the "Right of Return" concept is not going to work.  The Hostile Arab Palestinian created the impetus that triggered the refugee flow, and they lost.  Now they have to solve the dilemma and live with the consequences.
> 
> Most Respectfully,
> R
Click to expand...




> They accepted all of it. It was the outbreak of hostilities the changed the conditions.



What part of the word* before* confuses you?


----------



## RoccoR

P F Tinmore,  _et al,_

What you describe is the very description of the dispute.



P F Tinmore said:


> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> If you argue that ALL international lines of demarcation for Israel are in dispute, then the following RoL applies:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Palestine has international borders.
> 
> Israel has no borders.
> 
> I don't see a dispute. None of the following applies.
Click to expand...

*(COMMENT)*

This is just a Palestinian way of trying to "not recognize" the State of Israel.  It is their way of trying to escape the Rule of Law.

And as long as the Palestinian attempts to skirt the Rule of Law, there will always be those that will oppose their behaviors and recognize them as a deserving peace culture.

Most Respectfully,
R


----------



## P F Tinmore

RoccoR said:


> P F Tinmore,  _et al,_
> 
> What you describe is the very description of the dispute.
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> If you argue that ALL international lines of demarcation for Israel are in dispute, then the following RoL applies:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Palestine has international borders.
> 
> Israel has no borders.
> 
> I don't see a dispute. None of the following applies.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> This is just a Palestinian way of trying to "not recognize" the State of Israel.  It is their way of trying to escape the Rule of Law.
> 
> And as long as the Palestinian attempts to skirt the Rule of Law, there will always be those that will oppose their behaviors and recognize them as a deserving peace culture.
> 
> Most Respectfully,
> R
Click to expand...


Israel occupies Palestine. What laws are the Palestinians violating by resisting the occupation?


----------



## RoccoR

P F Tinmore,  _et al,_

I've cited the Rule of Laws.  You just fail to recognize them as legitimate.  Which is in keeping with the HAMAS tenant:


"Anything contrary or contradictory to these trends, is a lie disseminated by enemies or their lackeys for the purpose of sowing confusion, disrupting the ranks and occupy them with side issues."
 
Two issues here.



P F Tinmore said:


> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore,  _et al,_
> 
> What you describe is the very description of the dispute.
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> Palestine has international borders.
> 
> Israel has no borders.
> 
> I don't see a dispute. None of the following applies.
> 
> 
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> This is just a Palestinian way of trying to "not recognize" the State of Israel.  It is their way of trying to escape the Rule of Law.
> 
> And as long as the Palestinian attempts to skirt the Rule of Law, there will always be those that will oppose their behaviors and recognize them as a deserving peace culture.
> 
> Most Respectfully,
> R
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Israel occupies Palestine. What laws are the Palestinians violating by resisting the occupation?
Click to expand...

*(COMMENT)*

First, Israel only "occupies" the areas as described in UN Security Council Resolution 242 (AKA:  The "Land for Peace" Resolution); note the map link called "territories."  



			
				UN Security Council Resolution 242  said:
			
		

> The Security Council,
> 
> Expressing its continuing concern with the grave situation in the Middle East,
> 
> Emphasizing the inadmissibility of the acquisition of territory by war and the need to work for a just and lasting peace in which every State in the area can live in security,
> 
> Emphasizing further that all Member States in their acceptance of the Charter of the United Nations have undertaken a commitment to act in accordance with Article 2 of the Charter,
> 
> 1.	Affirms that the fulfilment of Charter principles requires the establishment of a just and lasting peace in the Middle East which should include the application of both the following principles:
> 
> (i)	Withdrawal of Israel armed forces from territories occupied in the recent conflict;
> 
> (ii)	Termination of all claims or states of belligerency and respect for and acknowledgment of the sovereignty, territorial integrity and political independence of every State in the area and their right to live in peace within secure and recognized boundaries free from threats or acts of force;​
> 2.	Affirms further the necessity
> 
> (a)	For guaranteeing freedom of navigation through international waterways in the area;
> 
> (b)	For achieving a just settlement of the refugee problem;
> 
> (c)	For guaranteeing the territorial inviolability and political independence of every State in the area, through measures including the establishment of demilitarized zones;​
> 3.	Requests the Secretary-General to designate a Special Representative to proceed to the Middle East to establish and maintain contacts with the States concerned in order to promote agreement and assist efforts to achieve a peaceful and accepted settlement in accordance with the provisions and principles in this resolution;
> 
> 4.	Requests the Secretary-General to report to the Security Council on the progress of the efforts of the Special Representative as soon as possible.
> Adopted unanimously at the 1382nd meeting.​
> _*SOURCE:*_ S/RES/242 22 November 1967



The second question is, "what happens when you release the Tiger's tail?"  (You get eaten!)  No matter which voice you choose to accept as the voice of the Arab Palestinian, neither recognize the legitimacy of the State of Israel in policy or political position.


"Israel will exist and will continue to exist until Islam will obliterate it, just as it obliterated others before it" (The Martyr, Imam Hassan al-Banna, of blessed memory)."

To withdraw the Occupation, is to leave the Palestinian People the open opportunity to reinitiate hostilities.  Under what rationale would it be advisable to release a hostile population to pursue the historical behaviors that they themselves acknowledge?


"The Islamic Resistance Movement is one of the links in the chain of the struggle against the Zionist invaders. It goes back to 1939, to the emergence of the martyr Izz al-Din al Qassam and his brethren the fighters, members of Moslem Brotherhood."

Until such time as Hostile Arab Palestinian can demonstrate that the are willing to joint in a peaceful solution to grievances, the release of the Occupation is ill advised.  Remember the Arab Palestinian pledge:


"There is no solution for the Palestinian question except through Jihad. Initiatives, proposals and international conferences are all a waste of time and vain endeavors."

Most Respectfully,
R


----------



## P F Tinmore

RoccoR said:


> P F Tinmore,  _et al,_
> 
> I've cited the Rule of Laws.  You just fail to recognize them as legitimate.  Which is in keeping with the HAMAS tenant:
> 
> 
> "Anything contrary or contradictory to these trends, is a lie disseminated by enemies or their lackeys for the purpose of sowing confusion, disrupting the ranks and occupy them with side issues."
> 
> Two issues here.
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore,  _et al,_
> 
> What you describe is the very description of the dispute.
> 
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> This is just a Palestinian way of trying to "not recognize" the State of Israel.  It is their way of trying to escape the Rule of Law.
> 
> And as long as the Palestinian attempts to skirt the Rule of Law, there will always be those that will oppose their behaviors and recognize them as a deserving peace culture.
> 
> Most Respectfully,
> R
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Israel occupies Palestine. What laws are the Palestinians violating by resisting the occupation?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> First, Israel only "occupies" the areas as described in UN Security Council Resolution 242 (AKA:  The "Land for Peace" Resolution); note the map link called "territories."
> 
> 
> 
> 
> UN Security Council Resolution 242  said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Security Council,
> 
> Expressing its continuing concern with the grave situation in the Middle East,
> 
> Emphasizing the inadmissibility of the acquisition of territory by war and the need to work for a just and lasting peace in which every State in the area can live in security,
> 
> Emphasizing further that all Member States in their acceptance of the Charter of the United Nations have undertaken a commitment to act in accordance with Article 2 of the Charter,
> 
> 1.	Affirms that the fulfilment of Charter principles requires the establishment of a just and lasting peace in the Middle East which should include the application of both the following principles:
> 
> (i)	Withdrawal of Israel armed forces from territories occupied in the recent conflict;
> 
> (ii)	Termination of all claims or states of belligerency and respect for and acknowledgment of the sovereignty, territorial integrity and political independence of every State in the area and their right to live in peace within secure and recognized boundaries free from threats or acts of force;​
> 2.	Affirms further the necessity
> 
> (a)	For guaranteeing freedom of navigation through international waterways in the area;
> 
> (b)	For achieving a just settlement of the refugee problem;
> 
> (c)	For guaranteeing the territorial inviolability and political independence of every State in the area, through measures including the establishment of demilitarized zones;​
> 3.	Requests the Secretary-General to designate a Special Representative to proceed to the Middle East to establish and maintain contacts with the States concerned in order to promote agreement and assist efforts to achieve a peaceful and accepted settlement in accordance with the provisions and principles in this resolution;
> 
> 4.	Requests the Secretary-General to report to the Security Council on the progress of the efforts of the Special Representative as soon as possible.
> Adopted unanimously at the 1382nd meeting.​
> _*SOURCE:*_ S/RES/242 22 November 1967
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> The second question is, "what happens when you release the Tiger's tail?"  (You get eaten!)  No matter which voice you choose to accept as the voice of the Arab Palestinian, neither recognize the legitimacy of the State of Israel in policy or political position.
> 
> 
> "Israel will exist and will continue to exist until Islam will obliterate it, just as it obliterated others before it" (The Martyr, Imam Hassan al-Banna, of blessed memory)."
> 
> To withdraw the Occupation, is to leave the Palestinian People the open opportunity to reinitiate hostilities.  Under what rationale would it be advisable to release a hostile population to pursue the historical behaviors that they themselves acknowledge?
> 
> 
> "The Islamic Resistance Movement is one of the links in the chain of the struggle against the Zionist invaders. It goes back to 1939, to the emergence of the martyr Izz al-Din al Qassam and his brethren the fighters, members of Moslem Brotherhood."
> 
> Until such time as Hostile Arab Palestinian can demonstrate that the are willing to joint in a peaceful solution to grievances, the release of the Occupation is ill advised.  Remember the Arab Palestinian pledge:
> 
> 
> "There is no solution for the Palestinian question except through Jihad. Initiatives, proposals and international conferences are all a waste of time and vain endeavors."
> 
> Most Respectfully,
> R
Click to expand...




> Emphasizing the inadmissibility of the acquisition of territory by war and the need to work for a just and lasting peace in which every State in the area can live in security,



Israel is a foreign power that acquired all of its territory at the point of a gun.


----------



## Bumberclyde

RoccoR said:


> Bumberclyde;  _et al,_
> 
> I guess that depends on if I'm a good guy or a bad guy.
> 
> 
> 
> Bumberclyde said:
> 
> 
> 
> So Roc, if a gang of people with weapons come to your house and give you 5 minutes to get out or they'll kill you and your whole family, would you accept it peacefully and let them take your house and land and then send you to a Warsaw Ghetto style camp, or would you be pissed off and want to fight to get it back?
> 
> 
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> This is a pro-Victimization question.
> 
> If I, as a lawless member of the population, open up hostilities on the Sovereign State, and back the aggression of five foreign Armies that launch an attack on my behalf, then I expect to be treated as an aggressor and hostile member of the population.
> 
> But make no mistake.  I know that I am a hostile threat and operating outside the RoL.
> 
> As for the "Warsaw Ghetto style camp."  May I ask, who set those camps up and why?  Remember, the Arab League reconstituted the Arab Higher Committee that rejected the Partition Plan.  It was the Arab League that launched the coordinated attack.  It was the Arab League that failed to reach their objective.
> 
> The Hostile Arab Palestinian trusted in the Arab League and its leadership to accomplish the goal of defeating the State of Israel.  Who bares the responsibility for the refugee that comes from the illegal aggression by the Arab League?
> 
> Most Respectfully,
> R
Click to expand...


Nice deflection, I asked: "So Roc, if a gang of people with weapons come to your house and give you 5 minutes to get out or they'll kill you and your whole family, would you accept it peacefully and let them take your house and land and then send you to a Warsaw Ghetto style camp, or would you be pissed off and want to fight to get it back?"

Not, if after that happens, will you get branded "Hostile" and be blamed for losing your home and wanting it back. Please try again. Or does my question make you squirm?


----------



## RoccoR

Bumberclyde;  _et al,_

As a member of a body of criminals, I might.  Nearly all criminals object to correctional activity.



Bumberclyde said:


> Nice deflection, I asked: "So Roc, if a gang of people with weapons come to your house and give you 5 minutes to get out or they'll kill you and your whole family, would you accept it peacefully and let them take your house and land and then send you to a Warsaw Ghetto style camp, or would you be pissed off and want to fight to get it back?"
> 
> Not, if after that happens, will you get branded "Hostile" and be blamed for losing your home and wanting it back. Please try again. Or does my question make you squirm?


*(COMMENT)*

Does it make me squirm?  No!  I'm not a party to the conflict.  

I'm surely not related to the people that hold up Izz ad-Din al-Qassam, founder of the Black Hand, and first among Palestinian terrorists which triggered the conflict in the 1930's.  Yes, if I was assaulted by the Black Hand, I might be a little annoyed.

If the question is still, after three major wars, undecided, and you are still attempting to achieve and alternate ending by force, then --- Occupation should continue.

Most Respectfully,
R


----------



## Bumberclyde

RoccoR said:


> Bumberclyde;  _et al,_
> 
> As a member of a body of criminals, I might.  Nearly all criminals object to correctional activity.
> 
> 
> 
> Bumberclyde said:
> 
> 
> 
> Nice deflection, I asked: "So Roc, if a gang of people with weapons come to your house and give you 5 minutes to get out or they'll kill you and your whole family, would you accept it peacefully and let them take your house and land and then send you to a Warsaw Ghetto style camp, or would you be pissed off and want to fight to get it back?"
> 
> Not, if after that happens, will you get branded "Hostile" and be blamed for losing your home and wanting it back. Please try again. Or does my question make you squirm?
> 
> 
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> Does it make me squirm?  No!  I'm not a party to the conflict.
> 
> I'm surely not related to the people that hold up Izz ad-Din al-Qassam, founder of the Black Hand, and first among Palestinian terrorists which triggered the conflict in the 1930's.  Yes, if I was assaulted by the Black Hand, I might be a little annoyed.
> 
> If the question is still, after three major wars, undecided, and you are still attempting to achieve and alternate ending by force, then --- Occupation should continue.
> 
> Most Respectfully,
> R
Click to expand...


I'm guessing that English isn't your first language, so I'll cut you some slack. I wasn't talking about you being a Palestinian, I was hypothetically saying if that happened to you today where you live now, how would you feel? Pissed off? Don't care and would move no problem? ...


----------



## P F Tinmore

RoccoR said:


> Bumberclyde;  _et al,_
> 
> As a member of a body of criminals, I might.  Nearly all criminals object to correctional activity.
> 
> 
> 
> Bumberclyde said:
> 
> 
> 
> Nice deflection, I asked: "So Roc, if a gang of people with weapons come to your house and give you 5 minutes to get out or they'll kill you and your whole family, would you accept it peacefully and let them take your house and land and then send you to a Warsaw Ghetto style camp, or would you be pissed off and want to fight to get it back?"
> 
> Not, if after that happens, will you get branded "Hostile" and be blamed for losing your home and wanting it back. Please try again. Or does my question make you squirm?
> 
> 
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> Does it make me squirm?  No!  I'm not a party to the conflict.
> 
> I'm surely not related to the people that hold up Izz ad-Din al-Qassam, founder of the Black Hand, and first among Palestinian terrorists which triggered the conflict in the 1930's.  Yes, if I was assaulted by the Black Hand, I might be a little annoyed.
> 
> If the question is still, after three major wars, undecided, and you are still attempting to achieve and alternate ending by force, then --- Occupation should continue.
> 
> Most Respectfully,
> R
Click to expand...




> I'm surely not related to the people that hold up Izz ad-Din al-Qassam, founder of the Black Hand, and first among Palestinian terrorists which triggered the conflict in the 1930's.



Organizations are not formed in a vacuum. What was the purpose for their formation?


----------



## RoccoR

P F Tinmore,  et al,[/I]

*(SIDEBAR REFERENCES)*


The Official Website of Hamas can be viewed at: www.hamasinfo.net
The Official Website of the Ezzedeen Al-Qassam Brigades (EQB) can be viewed at: http://www.qassam.ps/index.html

*(PREFACE)*

First, let me say, that racial, gender and age profiling are unreliable methods of determining generic organizational characteristics or the scope and nature of the threat they actually present.  While it works for some insurgent groups, revolutionaries, and martyrdom activities, it doesn't in the case of Palestinians.  The left extreme example is 1972 Airport massacre in Tel Aviv.  While the Airport attack was executed on behalf of the People&#8217;s Front for the Liberation of Palestine (PFLP), it was actually perpetrated by sympathetic members of the Japanese Red Army (JRA).  On the right hand side of the extreme, you will notice that the HAMAS Covenant goes out of it way to include and recruit "women" in the Jihadist effort; the PFLP&#8217;s Leila Khalid is a classic example; as well as Reem Riyashi of HAMAS.



P F Tinmore said:


> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> 
> I'm surely not related to the people that hold up Izz ad-Din al-Qassam, founder of the Black Hand, and first among Palestinian terrorists which triggered the conflict in the 1930's.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Organizations are not formed in a vacuum. What was the purpose for their formation?
Click to expand...

*(COMMENT)*

Izz ad-Din al-Qassam was an anti-Zionist and anti-British militant who fight against British, French, and Zionist activites in the eastern Levant territories _(usually areas under LoN Mandate)_ in the 1920s and 1930s.  Originally, al-Qassam fought against the Allied Powers on religious grounds, and not a political basis.  Sheik al-Qassem had  secured an Islamic Fatwa from The "Greatest Muhaddith of Damascus" _(who was himself, engaged in anti-Government activity against the French Mandates over Lebanon and Syria)_ to pursue his Jihad in the British Mandate and attack Jewish settlers.  Much of that approach was do to the influence of his father who was a Sharia court official and leader of the Qadari Suffi Order _(a traditional, Islamic order whose origins started with two great Saints of early Sufism)_.

The resistance movements took various shapes and positions in the years leading up to WWII, but always came back to Islamic fundamentalist teachings and anti-Zionism (immigration into the region). As a general footprint, organizations that follow the al-Qassam model, have these characteristics in common:


Feel angry at being isolated or excluded, especially from society at large; or at being deprived of a privilege, immunity, or legal rights. 
Feel angry at being in a political environment without the power to effect real change. 
They have a tendency to identify with other victims of the social injustice. 
Feel the need to take action rather than just talking about the problem. 
They don't believe that engaging in violence against the state is not immoral. 
Believe that joining a hostile or aggressive movement offers social and psychological rewards, adventure, camaraderie, and a new sense of identity.

And in this regard, you can see all of these symptoms in the Islamic Resistance Movement; both in HAMAS and FATAH.  Most of the leadership consists of disenchanted intellectuals either from a professional discipline or from deep exposures to religious teaching; sometimes both.  In the case of the Palestinian movements, they also tend to blame the job, the wife, the dog, the mother-in-law, the neighbor six doors down, the media, the government, the receptionist at the doctor&#8217;s office, or the tailor who measured them wrong  --- ALL are somehow responsible for the problems and plight of the Palestinian.   Rarely do they accept an alternative view that is contrary to theirs and rarely do the accept the consequences for any action they take.

Why are they at war with Israel?  I don't know, but it is not their fault!

Most Respectfully,
R


----------



## P F Tinmore

RoccoR said:


> P F Tinmore,  et al,[/I]
> 
> *(SIDEBAR REFERENCES)*
> 
> 
> The Official Website of Hamas can be viewed at: www.hamasinfo.net
> The Official Website of the Ezzedeen Al-Qassam Brigades (EQB) can be viewed at: http://www.qassam.ps/index.html
> 
> *(PREFACE)*
> 
> First, let me say, that racial, gender and age profiling are unreliable methods of determining generic organizational characteristics or the scope and nature of the threat they actually present.  While it works for some insurgent groups, revolutionaries, and martyrdom activities, it doesn't in the case of Palestinians.  The left extreme example is 1972 Airport massacre in Tel Aviv.  While the Airport attack was executed on behalf of the Peoples Front for the Liberation of Palestine (PFLP), it was actually perpetrated by sympathetic members of the Japanese Red Army (JRA).  On the right hand side of the extreme, you will notice that the HAMAS Covenant goes out of it way to include and recruit "women" in the Jihadist effort; the PFLPs Leila Khalid is a classic example; as well as Reem Riyashi of HAMAS.
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> 
> I'm surely not related to the people that hold up Izz ad-Din al-Qassam, founder of the Black Hand, and first among Palestinian terrorists which triggered the conflict in the 1930's.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Organizations are not formed in a vacuum. What was the purpose for their formation?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> Izz ad-Din al-Qassam was an anti-Zionist and anti-British militant who fight against British, French, and Zionist activites in the eastern Levant territories _(usually areas under LoN Mandate)_ in the 1920s and 1930s.  Originally, al-Qassam fought against the Allied Powers on religious grounds, and not a political basis.  Sheik al-Qassem had  secured an Islamic Fatwa from The "Greatest Muhaddith of Damascus" _(who was himself, engaged in anti-Government activity against the French Mandates over Lebanon and Syria)_ to pursue his Jihad in the British Mandate and attack Jewish settlers.  Much of that approach was do to the influence of his father who was a Sharia court official and leader of the Qadari Suffi Order _(a traditional, Islamic order whose origins started with two great Saints of early Sufism)_.
> 
> The resistance movements took various shapes and positions in the years leading up to WWII, but always came back to Islamic fundamentalist teachings and anti-Zionism (immigration into the region). As a general footprint, organizations that follow the al-Qassam model, have these characteristics in common:
> 
> 
> Feel angry at being isolated or excluded, especially from society at large; or at being deprived of a privilege, immunity, or legal rights.
> Feel angry at being in a political environment without the power to effect real change.
> They have a tendency to identify with other victims of the social injustice.
> Feel the need to take action rather than just talking about the problem.
> They don't believe that engaging in violence against the state is not immoral.
> Believe that joining a hostile or aggressive movement offers social and psychological rewards, adventure, camaraderie, and a new sense of identity.
> 
> And in this regard, you can see all of these symptoms in the Islamic Resistance Movement; both in HAMAS and FATAH.  Most of the leadership consists of disenchanted intellectuals either from a professional discipline or from deep exposures to religious teaching; sometimes both.  In the case of the Palestinian movements, they also tend to blame the job, the wife, the dog, the mother-in-law, the neighbor six doors down, the media, the government, the receptionist at the doctors office, or the tailor who measured them wrong  --- ALL are somehow responsible for the problems and plight of the Palestinian.   Rarely do they accept an alternative view that is contrary to theirs and rarely do the accept the consequences for any action they take.
> 
> Why are they at war with Israel?  I don't know, but it is not their fault!
> 
> Most Respectfully,
> R
Click to expand...


Wow, all that!

It wouldn't have anything to do with the Zionist takeover of Palestine, would it?

Of course not.


----------



## georgephillip

MHunterB said:


> georgephillip said:
> 
> 
> 
> "Semitic Action (Hebrew: &#1492;&#1508;&#1506;&#1493;&#1500;&#1492; &#1492;&#1513;&#1502;&#1497;&#1514;*, HaPeulah Hashemit) was a small Israeli political group of the 1950s and 1960s which sought the creation of a regional federation encompassing Israel and its Arab neighbors.[1][2]
> 
> "Created in 1956,[2] the group's key members were Uri Avnery, Natan Yellin-Mor, and Boaz Evron,[3] with other members including Maxim Ghilan, Shalom Cohen, and Amos Kenan.[4]
> 
> "Joel Beinin describes the group as 'a political expression of the Canaanite movement' which "advocated that Hebrew-speaking Israelis cut their ties with the Jewish diaspora and integrate into the Middle East as natives of the region on the basis of an anticolonialist alliance with its indigenous Arab inhabitants."
> 
> *Do you think AIPAC would approve?*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I think it's entirely irrelevant - and simply one more attempt at 'Jew-baiting'.
Click to expand...


*Of course you do.*

"In 1958 the group published a platform, titled 'The Hebrew Manifesto.' It described the 'Hebrew nation' in Israel as a new entity, albeit one linked to the Jewish diaspora, and called for moving beyond outmoded Zionist ideas that were now holding back the nation's development.[6] 

"It put forward a program of secularism, *complete civic equality between Jews and Arabs,* support for anti-colonial movements, and a relationship with the diaspora based on national interest rather than ethnic, religious, or cultural ties."

*Now tell us why you prefer ethnic, religious, or cultural ties over nationalistic ones?*

Semitic Action - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia]


----------



## RoccoR

P F Tinmore,  _et al,_

Actually, I think I did include that.



P F Tinmore said:


> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> 
> The resistance movements took various shapes and positions in the years leading up to WWII, but always came back to Islamic fundamentalist teachings and anti-Zionism (immigration into the region). As a general footprint, organizations that follow the al-Qassam model, have these characteristics in common:
> 
> Feel angry at being isolated or excluded, especially from society at large; or at being deprived of a privilege, immunity, or legal rights.
> Rarely do they accept an alternative view that is contrary to theirs and rarely do the accept the consequences for any action they take.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Wow, all that!
> 
> It wouldn't have anything to do with the Zionist takeover of Palestine, would it?
> 
> Of course not.
Click to expand...

*(COMMENT)*

But I also think that much of the other is as important, as to the "why."

Most Respectfully,
R


----------



## P F Tinmore

RoccoR said:


> P F Tinmore,  _et al,_
> 
> Actually, I think I did include that.
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> 
> The resistance movements took various shapes and positions in the years leading up to WWII, but always came back to Islamic fundamentalist teachings and anti-Zionism (immigration into the region). As a general footprint, organizations that follow the al-Qassam model, have these characteristics in common:
> 
> Feel angry at being isolated or excluded, especially from society at large; or at being deprived of a privilege, immunity, or legal rights.
> Rarely do they accept an alternative view that is contrary to theirs and rarely do the accept the consequences for any action they take.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Wow, all that!
> 
> It wouldn't have anything to do with the Zionist takeover of Palestine, would it?
> 
> Of course not.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> But I also think that much of the other is as important, as to the "why."
> 
> Most Respectfully,
> R
Click to expand...




> organizations that follow the al-Qassam model, have these characteristics in common:



Link?


----------



## RoccoR

P F Tinmore,  _et al,_

I doubt that there will be a open source link to this information.  Most organizational profiles are done by government agencies and are protected. 



P F Tinmore said:


> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> 
> The resistance movements took various shapes and positions in the years leading up to WWII, but always came back to Islamic fundamentalist teachings and anti-Zionism (immigration into the region). As a general footprint, organizations that follow the al-Qassam model, have these characteristics in common:
> 
> I wrote this based on my experience on the subject.
> 
> 
> Feel angry at being isolated or excluded, especially from society at large; or at being deprived of a privilege, immunity, or legal rights.
> Feel angry at being in a political environment without the power to effect real change.
> They have a tendency to identify with other victims of the social injustice.
> Feel the need to take action rather than just talking about the problem.
> They don't believe that engaging in violence against the state is not immoral.
> Believe that joining a hostile or aggressive movement offers social and psychological rewards, adventure, camaraderie, and a new sense of identity.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Link?
Click to expand...

*(COMMENT)*


Feel angry at being isolated or excluded, especially from society at large; or at being deprived of a privilege, immunity, or legal rights.

The al-Qassam followers often speak about "natural rights" of the Palestinian, and the fact that they are ignored by the greater body of the UN.  That these rights should be recognized and accepted as the Palestinian interprets them.  The cling to the notion of being deprived, and displaced --- not being afforded some rights behind their cause.  This idea is rooted in nearly every basic theme the Palestinian put forth; whether we speak of the original reasons they declined the portion of their partition in Resolution 181 (II), or their Declaration of Independence.



			
				EXCEPTS Palestinian Declaration of Independence said:
			
		

> Despite the historical injustice done to the Palestinian Arab people in its *displacement* and in being *deprived* of the *right to* self-determination following the adoption of General Assembly resolution 181 (II) of 1947, which partitioned Palestine into an Arab and a Jewish State, that resolution nevertheless continues to attach conditions to international legitimacy that guarantee the Palestinian Arab people the right to sovereignty and national independence.
> ----
> The occupation of Palestinian territory and parts of other Arab territory by Israeli forces, the uprooting of the majority of Palestinians and *their displacement* from their homes by means of organized intimidation, and the subjection of the remainder to occupation, *oppression and the destruction* of the distinctive features of their national life, are a flagrant violation of the principle of legitimacy and of the Charter of the United Nations and its resolutions recognizing the *national rights* of the Palestinian people, including the *right to* return and the *right to* self-determination, independence and sovereignty over the territory of its homeland.
> ----
> The Palestinian Arab people asserts once more its *inalienable rights* and its demand to exercise those rights in its Palestinian homeland.
> 
> _*SOURCE:*_ http://unispal.un.org/unispal.nsf/9a798adbf322aff38525617b006d88d7/6eb54a389e2da6c6852560de0070e392?OpenDocument




Feel angry at being in a political environment without the power to effect real change.

This is a very common theme, even within this discussion group.  How often has it been expressed that only through armed aggression and Jihad can change be effected.  It is the entire excuse for resorting to violence; because no other method has proven effective.​

Feel the need to take action rather than just talking about the problem.

This is tied directly to the previous position (otherwise powerless to effect change).  It is the most dangerous and common theme among Palestinians.



			
				Dr Issam Adwan said:
			
		

> "The Palestinian resistance is entitled to expand and diversify its means and tools of resistance; this is a legitimate resistance that defends a *defenseless people that has fallen under an oppressive occupation which is supported by the global forces of evil*."
> 
> *SOURCE:* ATTACK ISRAEL'S EMBASSIES, INTERESTS, AND OFFICIALS WORLDWIDE -- AND THE INTERESTS OF ITS ALLIES





			
				Palestine National Charter of 1968 said:
			
		

> Article 9: *Armed struggle is the only way to liberate Palestine*. This is the overall strategy, not merely a tactical phase. The Palestinian Arab people assert their absolute determination and firm resolution to continue their armed struggle and to work for an armed popular revolution for the liberation of their country and their return to it. They also assert their right to normal life in Palestine and to exercise their right to self-determination and sovereignty over it.
> _*SOURCE:*_ http://www.un.int/wcm/content/site/palestine/pid/12362[





			
				The Covenant of the Islamic Resistance Movement said:
			
		

> Article Seven:
> 
> The Islamic Resistance Movement is one of the links in the chain of the struggle against the Zionist invaders. It goes back to 1939, to the emergence of the martyr *Izz al-Din al Kissam and his brethren the fighters*, members of Moslem Brotherhood.
> 
> Article Thirteen:
> 
> Initiatives, and so-called peaceful solutions and international conferences, *are in contradiction to the principles of the Islamic Resistance Movement*. Abusing any part of Palestine is abuse directed against part of religion.
> 
> There is *no solution* for the Palestinian question *except through Jihad*. Initiatives, proposals and international conferences are all a waste of time and vain endeavors.
> 
> _*SOURCE:*_ The Avalon Project : Hamas Covenant 1988




They don't believe that engaging in violence against the state is not immoral.

Again, this is an interlocking concept.  And again, it has been expressed many ways in this discussion group by many people.  It incorporates the idea that the Palestinian perspective is the only legitimate perspective and that the ends to their objectives justifies the means to achieve that objective.



			
				Dr Issam Adwan said:
			
		

> "No one has the right to condemn the resistance for any of the methods that it adopts, because it knows better than everyone else what is good for it and for its noble objectives."
> 
> *SOURCE:* ATTACK ISRAEL'S EMBASSIES, INTERESTS, AND OFFICIALS WORLDWIDE -- AND THE INTERESTS OF ITS ALLIES




Believe that joining a hostile or aggressive movement offers social and psychological rewards, adventure, camaraderie, and a new sense of identity.

This is actually not all that uncommon among anti-government type movements.  It is the theme of solidarity.  However, it can be, as in the case of the Palestinians, taken to extremes in a number of different ways.  The first is the cohesive formulation of undergrounds groups such as the al-Qassam Brigade.  The second is the associated element as in the case of Mariam Farhat _(Palestinian lawmaker known as the mother of martyrs after three of her sons died in attacks against Israel)_; or the Female Fighter:  The Palestinian Mother Raises Her Children so She Can Sacrifice Them when They Become Young Men.  The third is the false glorification of the Jihadist.  Nothing gets more people killed then dying for a deity.

The fourth appeals to the adventurism in many young men.  Something about danger.  I had it once.  I lost it quickly after nearly being history.  But it is a very powerful magnet.​

Most Respectfully,
R


----------



## Bumberclyde

Rocco hates arabs, that much is plain to see.


----------



## Kondor3

Bumberclyde said:


> Rocco hates arabs, that much is plain to see.


Better than being an Arab *lover*, I'm sure...

Then again, most folks who take-up the Israeli side in this long-standing 'contest' don't hate Arabs...

They just don't like 'em very much, or just don't think very highly of them...

Big difference...

And quite an understandable perception, when compared side-by-side against the vitality and culture and courage and industry of the Jews of Israel...


----------



## RoccoR

Bumberclyde,  _et al,_

"Do" I hate Arabs?  Or, are the observations I made "false and misleading?"



Bumberclyde said:


> Rocco hates arabs, that much is plain to see.


*(COMMENT)*

There is no culture, and no country of power, that does not have dark parts in their past that haunts their history.

Most Respectfully,
R


----------



## P F Tinmore

RoccoR said:
			
		

> Feel angry at being isolated or excluded, especially from society at large; or at being deprived of a privilege, immunity, or legal rights.
> 
> The al-Qassam followers often speak about "natural rights" of the Palestinian, and the fact that they are ignored by the greater body of the UN.  That these rights should be recognized and accepted as the Palestinian interprets them.  The cling to the notion of being deprived, and displaced --- not being afforded some rights behind their cause.  This idea is rooted in nearly every basic theme the Palestinian put forth; whether we speak of the original reasons they declined the portion of their partition in Resolution 181 (II), or their Declaration of Independence.
> ​



Angry?

And rightly so. They are correct.


----------



## RoccoR

P F Tinmore,  _et al,_

The disenfranchised nearly always jump to say:  "We had every right to be angry."



P F Tinmore said:


> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Feel angry at being isolated or excluded, especially from society at large; or at being deprived of a privilege, immunity, or legal rights.
> 
> The al-Qassam followers often speak about "natural rights" of the Palestinian, and the fact that they are ignored by the greater body of the UN.  That these rights should be recognized and accepted as the Palestinian interprets them.  The cling to the notion of being deprived, and displaced --- not being afforded some rights behind their cause.  This idea is rooted in nearly every basic theme the Palestinian put forth; whether we speak of the original reasons they declined the portion of their partition in Resolution 181 (II), or their Declaration of Independence.
> ​
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Angry?
> 
> And rightly so. They are correct.
Click to expand...

*(COMMENT)*

It is important to remember that, no matter what agreements are made _(if any)_ from the talks underway at this moment, the Arab-Palestinian is going to walk away with _(essentially)_ less than they were offered in GA Resolution 181(II); had they accepted those initial conditions.  So, no matter how badly they thought they were treated them _(an unfounded perception)_, the consequence of their actions is still not fully comprehended.

What was the cost of the conflict?  Whether we talk about the territory before Israeli independence, or after Israeli independence, the ultimate goal of the Arab Palestinian was to take totally control of all the territory under the former Mandate _(less the Hashemite Kingdom)_.  It is a goal that some Arab Palestinians still hold today; a concept is still held over in the basic principles noted in both the HAMAS Covenant and the PNA Charter.  And that failed bid to achieve that, either by the insurgency before Israeli independence, or by war after Israeli independence, is the consequence they have to live with today.  Yes, they probably have a right to be angry, but who should they by angry with _(how about themselves)_?  _(Yes, the criminal is always angry at the police that arrests them.  Is that a justification for more crime?)_

Your response:  "Angry?  And rightly so. They are correct" -- merely shows that my description is correct.  It is not a justification for their actions --- right or wrong.



			
				UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon said:
			
		

> Nothing can justify terrorism  ever.  No grievance, no goal, no cause can excuse terrorist acts.
> 
> *SOURCE:* Secretary-General   SG/SM/14764   SC/10883



Most Respectfully,
R


----------



## P F Tinmore

RoccoR said:


> P F Tinmore,  _et al,_
> 
> The disenfranchised nearly always jump to say:  "We had every right to be angry."
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Feel angry at being isolated or excluded, especially from society at large; or at being deprived of a privilege, immunity, or legal rights.
> 
> The al-Qassam followers often speak about "natural rights" of the Palestinian, and the fact that they are ignored by the greater body of the UN.  That these rights should be recognized and accepted as the Palestinian interprets them.  The cling to the notion of being deprived, and displaced --- not being afforded some rights behind their cause.  This idea is rooted in nearly every basic theme the Palestinian put forth; whether we speak of the original reasons they declined the portion of their partition in Resolution 181 (II), or their Declaration of Independence.
> ​
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Angry?
> 
> And rightly so. They are correct.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> It is important to remember that, no matter what agreements are made _(if any)_ from the talks underway at this moment, the Arab-Palestinian is going to walk away with _(essentially)_ less than they were offered in GA Resolution 181(II); had they accepted those initial conditions.  So, no matter how badly they thought they were treated them _(an unfounded perception)_, the consequence of their actions is still not fully comprehended.
> 
> What was the cost of the conflict?  Whether we talk about the territory before Israeli independence, or after Israeli independence, the ultimate goal of the Arab Palestinian was to take totally control of all the territory under the former Mandate _(less the Hashemite Kingdom)_.  It is a goal that some Arab Palestinians still hold today; a concept is still held over in the basic principles noted in both the HAMAS Covenant and the PNA Charter.  And that failed bid to achieve that, either by the insurgency before Israeli independence, or by war after Israeli independence, is the consequence they have to live with today.  Yes, they probably have a right to be angry, but who should they by angry with _(how about themselves)_?  _(Yes, the criminal is always angry at the police that arrests them.  Is that a justification for more crime?)_
> 
> Your response:  "Angry?  And rightly so. They are correct" -- merely shows that my description is correct.  It is not a justification for their actions --- right or wrong.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Nothing can justify terrorism  ever.  No grievance, no goal, no cause can excuse terrorist acts.
> 
> *SOURCE:* Secretary-General   SG/SM/14764   SC/10883
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Most Respectfully,
> R
Click to expand...


You seem to miss the fact that the Palestinians were at home minding their own business when the criminals came down from Europe and kicked therm off their land.

The Palestinians have still not surrendered to that continuing aggression.


----------



## Kondor3

P F Tinmore said:


> "..._The Palestinians have still not surrendered to that continuing aggression._"



Rump-Palestine (_the few disconnected slivers of land that are still under Palestinian control_) is like a chicken with its head freshly cut off...

It runs frantically about the barnyard, flapping its wings, making a great deal of noise, and spouting great geysers of blood, but, after a little while, it figures-out that it's dead, it lies down decently, and is still...

The score is: Israel 65, Palestine 0 --- loser walks --- and we're down to the last two minutes on the game-clock...

Tick... tick... tick...


----------



## P F Tinmore

Kondor3 said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> "..._The Palestinians have still not surrendered to that continuing aggression._"
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Rump-Palestine (_the few disconnected slivers of land that are still under Palestinian control_) is like a chicken with its head freshly cut off...
> 
> It runs frantically about the barnyard, flapping its wings, making a great deal of noise, and spouting great geysers of blood, but, after a little while, it figures-out that it's dead, it lies down decently, and is still...
> 
> The score is: Israel 65, Palestine 0 --- loser walks --- and we're down to the last two minutes on the game-clock...
> 
> Tick... tick... tick...
Click to expand...


Israel is shooting itself in the foot. The more it steals, the more the world turns against it.


----------



## Bumberclyde

Kondor3 said:


> Bumberclyde said:
> 
> 
> 
> Rocco hates arabs, that much is plain to see.
> 
> 
> 
> Better than being an Arab *lover*, I'm sure...
> 
> Then again, most folks who take-up the Israeli side in this long-standing 'contest' don't hate Arabs...
> 
> They just don't like 'em very much, or just don't think very highly of them...
> 
> Big difference...
> 
> And quite an understandable perception, when compared side-by-side against the vitality and culture and courage and industry of the Jews of Israel...
Click to expand...


Ah! A Jewish supremacist! But then again, aren't you all?


----------



## RoccoR

P F Tinmore,   _et al,_

This is another unique perspective held by Palestinians.



P F Tinmore said:


> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore,  _et al,_
> 
> The disenfranchised nearly always jump to say:  "We had every right to be angry."
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> Angry?
> 
> And rightly so. They are correct.
> 
> 
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> It is important to remember that, no matter what agreements are made _(if any)_ from the talks underway at this moment, the Arab-Palestinian is going to walk away with _(essentially)_ less than they were offered in GA Resolution 181(II); had they accepted those initial conditions.  So, no matter how badly they thought they were treated them _(an unfounded perception)_, the consequence of their actions is still not fully comprehended.
> 
> What was the cost of the conflict?  Whether we talk about the territory before Israeli independence, or after Israeli independence, the ultimate goal of the Arab Palestinian was to take totally control of all the territory under the former Mandate _(less the Hashemite Kingdom)_.  It is a goal that some Arab Palestinians still hold today; a concept is still held over in the basic principles noted in both the HAMAS Covenant and the PNA Charter.  And that failed bid to achieve that, either by the insurgency before Israeli independence, or by war after Israeli independence, is the consequence they have to live with today.  Yes, they probably have a right to be angry, but who should they by angry with _(how about themselves)_?  _(Yes, the criminal is always angry at the police that arrests them.  Is that a justification for more crime?)_
> 
> Your response:  "Angry?  And rightly so. They are correct" -- merely shows that my description is correct.  It is not a justification for their actions --- right or wrong.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Nothing can justify terrorism  ever.  No grievance, no goal, no cause can excuse terrorist acts.
> 
> *SOURCE:* Secretary-General   SG/SM/14764   SC/10883
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Most Respectfully,
> R
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You seem to miss the fact that the Palestinians were at home minding their own business when the criminals came down from Europe and kicked therm off their land.
> 
> The Palestinians have still not surrendered to that continuing aggression.
Click to expand...

*(COMMENT)*

The venerated Izz al-Qassam, the Syrian namesake for today's rocket and the armed Palestinian Brigade, was very active anti-Zionist and anti-Mandate movement in the 1930's; and he was the first.  Sheikh al-Qassam not only preached Jihad, but participated in attacks on Jewish Settlers.  Together with Hajj Amin al-Husseini, Prince Rashed Al Khuzai, Sheikh Methkal Al-Fayez, and Sheikh Hadeetha Al-Kraisha --- Sheikh al-Qassam all were involved in the emergence of the Palestinian Liberation movements, even well before the rise of the counter force --- The Irgun; which splintered off from the "The Watchman" of the Haganah.

*(Palestinians were at home minding their own business)*

It is disingenuous to suggest that the peaceful Arabs of the territory were just quietly sitting at home, not bothering anyone, and were suddenly and most violently set upon by the wicked Jews.  No, that is not quite how it was.  Even before the Balfour Declaration (1917), the Bar-Giora (1907) _[Jewish defense force of the Second Aliyah, and forerunner of the Hashomer]_ and the Hashomer _["The Watchman" (1909) forerunner of the Haganah]_ were set up to protect the Jewish communities in Palestine against growing Arab aggression.  The character of (what we called today) the Arab Palestinian was set many decades before.  This stylized profile of the everlasting and eternal victim is just the latest in a string of attempts to gain sympathy.

Most Respectfully,
R


----------



## ForeverYoung436

Bumberclyde said:


> Kondor3 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Bumberclyde said:
> 
> 
> 
> Rocco hates arabs, that much is plain to see.
> 
> 
> 
> Better than being an Arab *lover*, I'm sure...
> 
> Then again, most folks who take-up the Israeli side in this long-standing 'contest' don't hate Arabs...
> 
> They just don't like 'em very much, or just don't think very highly of them...
> 
> Big difference...
> 
> And quite an understandable perception, when compared side-by-side against the vitality and culture and courage and industry of the Jews of Israel...
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Ah! A Jewish supremacist! But then again, aren't you all?
Click to expand...


Kondor isn't Jewish, and the opinions he's expressing about the situation on the ground are his own.  The sad reality is that Jews have to travel in bullet-proof busses to visit Abraham's or Rachel's Tombs.  Rachel's Tomb, once a beautiful little dome, now has an ugly fortress built over it.  Joseph's Tomb had been destroyed.  500,000 Jews live among almost 3 million hostile Arabs in the West Bank, Israel's ancestral heartland.


----------



## Bumberclyde

ForeverYoung436 said:


> Bumberclyde said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Kondor3 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Better than being an Arab *lover*, I'm sure...
> 
> Then again, most folks who take-up the Israeli side in this long-standing 'contest' don't hate Arabs...
> 
> They just don't like 'em very much, or just don't think very highly of them...
> 
> Big difference...
> 
> And quite an understandable perception, when compared side-by-side against the vitality and culture and courage and industry of the Jews of Israel...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Ah! A Jewish supremacist! But then again, aren't you all?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Kondor isn't Jewish, and the opinions he's expressing about the situation on the ground are his own.  The sad reality is that Jews have to travel in bullet-proof busses to visit Abraham's or Rachel's Tombs.  Rachel's Tomb, once a beautiful little dome, now has an ugly fortress built over it.  Joseph's Tomb had been destroyed.  500,000 Jews live among almost 3 million hostile Arabs in the West Bank, Israel's ancestral heartland.
Click to expand...


You don't need to be Jewish to think that they are the best. Personally, I wouldn't live on stolen land surrounded by people who want to wipe you off the face of the earth. And you'd think that the Jews had had enough off that shit with Hitler. Guess not...


----------



## P F Tinmore

RoccoR said:


> P F Tinmore,   _et al,_
> 
> This is another unique perspective held by Palestinians.
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore,  _et al,_
> 
> The disenfranchised nearly always jump to say:  "We had every right to be angry."
> 
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> It is important to remember that, no matter what agreements are made _(if any)_ from the talks underway at this moment, the Arab-Palestinian is going to walk away with _(essentially)_ less than they were offered in GA Resolution 181(II); had they accepted those initial conditions.  So, no matter how badly they thought they were treated them _(an unfounded perception)_, the consequence of their actions is still not fully comprehended.
> 
> What was the cost of the conflict?  Whether we talk about the territory before Israeli independence, or after Israeli independence, the ultimate goal of the Arab Palestinian was to take totally control of all the territory under the former Mandate _(less the Hashemite Kingdom)_.  It is a goal that some Arab Palestinians still hold today; a concept is still held over in the basic principles noted in both the HAMAS Covenant and the PNA Charter.  And that failed bid to achieve that, either by the insurgency before Israeli independence, or by war after Israeli independence, is the consequence they have to live with today.  Yes, they probably have a right to be angry, but who should they by angry with _(how about themselves)_?  _(Yes, the criminal is always angry at the police that arrests them.  Is that a justification for more crime?)_
> 
> Your response:  "Angry?  And rightly so. They are correct" -- merely shows that my description is correct.  It is not a justification for their actions --- right or wrong.
> 
> 
> 
> Most Respectfully,
> R
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You seem to miss the fact that the Palestinians were at home minding their own business when the criminals came down from Europe and kicked therm off their land.
> 
> The Palestinians have still not surrendered to that continuing aggression.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> The venerated Izz al-Qassam, the Syrian namesake for today's rocket and the armed Palestinian Brigade, was very active anti-Zionist and anti-Mandate movement in the 1930's; and he was the first.  Sheikh al-Qassam not only preached Jihad, but participated in attacks on Jewish Settlers.  Together with Hajj Amin al-Husseini, Prince Rashed Al Khuzai, Sheikh Methkal Al-Fayez, and Sheikh Hadeetha Al-Kraisha --- Sheikh al-Qassam all were involved in the emergence of the Palestinian Liberation movements, even well before the rise of the counter force --- The Irgun; which splintered off from the "The Watchman" of the Haganah.
> 
> *(Palestinians were at home minding their own business)*
> 
> It is disingenuous to suggest that the peaceful Arabs of the territory were just quietly sitting at home, not bothering anyone, and were suddenly and most violently set upon by the wicked Jews.  No, that is not quite how it was.  Even before the Balfour Declaration (1917), the Bar-Giora (1907) _[Jewish defense force of the Second Aliyah, and forerunner of the Hashomer]_ and the Hashomer _["The Watchman" (1909) forerunner of the Haganah]_ were set up to protect the Jewish communities in Palestine against growing Arab aggression.  The character of (what we called today) the Arab Palestinian was set many decades before.  This stylized profile of the everlasting and eternal victim is just the latest in a string of attempts to gain sympathy.
> 
> Most Respectfully,
> R
Click to expand...


Indeed, the Balfour declaration and the mandate ushered the *third Aliyah*. The Zionist invasion was decades old by then.

Why do you blame the Palestinians for that?


----------



## MHunterB

Actually there can be up to 7 Aliyot - but that's part of the Torah service in shul.

As far as returning to the Land to rebuild our home - that's been going on throughout the centuries.  Starting with the 'going up' out of Egypt.  Since Torah Judaism didn't exist (well, was not revealed to us) until Sinai, one could say that the entire history of the Jewish People has been one sustained Aliyah.


----------



## Kondor3

Bumberclyde said:


> "..._Ah! A Jewish supremacist! But then again, aren't you all?_"



If, by that, you mean judging...

...a large bloc of disorganized, rootless, shiftless people who lived in tents and mud-huts and played the semi-nomadic herders and who drifted from one Ottoman province to another and who really didn't do shit with the land for centuries, versus...

...comparing and judging another large bloc of people who had a direction and goals and unity of purpose and history and who took some of the worst real estate in the region and transformed it into productive and richly yielding agricultural and industrial real estate...

...well, uhhhh, yeah, that's probably spot-on.

Nobody is labeling either Jews or Arabs as superior to one another, genetically or with respect to capacity or capabilities, or as human beings, in the broadest metaphorical and philosophical sense.

But it's entirely legitimate to label one or the other as far more vibrant and energetic and industrious and purposeful and historically-aware of themselves and militarily competent and culturally superior and more valuable and important to the world stage and the world economy and world politics and international relationships than then other.

You're just sore 'cause your boys come out on the short end of the stick in any such analysis...


----------



## RoccoR

P F Tinmore,  _et al,_

This is still another unique perspective.



P F Tinmore said:


> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore,   _et al,_
> 
> This is another unique perspective held by Palestinians.
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> You seem to miss the fact that the Palestinians were at home minding their own business when the criminals came down from Europe and kicked therm off their land.
> 
> The Palestinians have still not surrendered to that continuing aggression.
> 
> 
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> The venerated Izz al-Qassam, the Syrian namesake for today's rocket and the armed Palestinian Brigade, was very active anti-Zionist and anti-Mandate movement in the 1930's; and he was the first.  Sheikh al-Qassam not only preached Jihad, but participated in attacks on Jewish Settlers.  Together with Hajj Amin al-Husseini, Prince Rashed Al Khuzai, Sheikh Methkal Al-Fayez, and Sheikh Hadeetha Al-Kraisha --- Sheikh al-Qassam all were involved in the emergence of the Palestinian Liberation movements, even well before the rise of the counter force --- The Irgun; which splintered off from the "The Watchman" of the Haganah.
> 
> *(Palestinians were at home minding their own business)*
> 
> It is disingenuous to suggest that the peaceful Arabs of the territory were just quietly sitting at home, not bothering anyone, and were suddenly and most violently set upon by the wicked Jews.  No, that is not quite how it was.  Even before the Balfour Declaration (1917), the Bar-Giora (1907) _[Jewish defense force of the Second Aliyah, and forerunner of the Hashomer]_ and the Hashomer _["The Watchman" (1909) forerunner of the Haganah]_ were set up to protect the Jewish communities in Palestine against growing Arab aggression.  The character of (what we called today) the Arab Palestinian was set many decades before.  This stylized profile of the everlasting and eternal victim is just the latest in a string of attempts to gain sympathy.
> 
> Most Respectfully,
> R
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Indeed, the Balfour declaration and the mandate ushered the *third Aliyah*. The Zionist invasion was decades old by then.
> 
> Why do you blame the Palestinians for that?
Click to expand...

*(COMMENT)*

The idea that Jewish immigration was an invasion.

That is also disingenuous.  There was no invasion.  That is just inflammatory language to gain additional sympathy as a perpetual victim.

Several Sultans of the Ottoman Empire not only invited the Jewish People to immigrate back into the empire, but went so far as to retrieve them.   Under Sultan Bayezid II, the Turkish Admiral Kemal Reis was sent to Europe and take Jewish refugees under his protection and bring them back to the Empire.  Sultan Suleiman "The Magnificent" also went along way to incorporating the Jewish communities into the Empire.



			
				Suleiman the Magnificient: Builder of Ottoman Jerusalem said:
			
		

> Suleiman, possessed of a remarkable religious tolerance for his time, also stressed the inclusion of the holy sites of all Jerusalem's faiths within his city plan. When he learned that his architects had left Mount Zion, holy to the city's Jews and Christians, outside the confines of the new wall, he had them executed _(the sultan was somewhat less tolerant of failure)_.
> 
> _*SOURCE:*_ http://www.gojerusalem.com/article_1457/Suleiman-the-Magnificient-Builder-of-Ottoman-Jerusalem



Under Sultan Mahmut I, the Jewish were given Ottoman Citizenship  and all the right thereto.  And as I mentioned before, the Sultan Abdul Aziz created the _"Alliance Israelite Universelle"_ and allocated 2600 dunams of land for the establishment of the University and granted permission for importing tools and machinery absent duty free.

During the Ottoman Empire, there was no "invasion."  And certainly, that brings us up to the end of WWI and the Treaty of Sevres (1920).  Post-War immigration was merely a continuation of the policy established by the Sovereign for the past 800 years.

What we call today, the Palestinians, never had sovereignty over the territory once under Mandate.  The Palestinian never experienced an "invasion;" at least not from the Jewish Community. There was a war, and the post-War repercussions.

Now do I expect any of this to make an impression on you?  NO!   Why do I say that?  Because I expect you to follow the Covenant:



			
				Hamas Covenant 1988 said:
			
		

> *Article Twenty-Five:*
> 
> Anything contrary or contradictory to these trends, is a lie disseminated by enemies or their lackeys for the purpose of sowing confusion, disrupting the ranks and occupy them with side issues.
> 
> _*SOURCE:*_ http://avalon.law.yale.edu/20th_century/hamas.asp



Decades old!



P F Tinmore said:


> The Zionist invasion was decades old by then.



No matter when you start the timeline, you can go back to the time of Saladin, first Sultan of Egypt and Syria; leader of the Islamic Forces against the Crusaders in the Levant and captured Jerusalem in the name of Islam; and you will not find a record of a Jewish Invasion.

What you will find is immigration at the invitation of the Sovereign over the territory, and later, the Protectorate over the territory (UK as Mandatory).

Most Respectfully,
R


----------



## P F Tinmore

Kondor3 said:


> Bumberclyde said:
> 
> 
> 
> "..._Ah! A Jewish supremacist! But then again, aren't you all?_"
> 
> 
> 
> 
> If, by that, you mean judging...
> 
> ...a large bloc of disorganized, rootless, shiftless people who lived in tents and mud-huts and played the semi-nomadic herders and who drifted from one Ottoman province to another and who really didn't do shit with the land for centuries, versus...
> 
> ...comparing and judging another large bloc of people who had a direction and goals and unity of purpose and history and who took some of the worst real estate in the region and transformed it into productive and richly yielding agricultural and industrial real estate...
> 
> ...well, uhhhh, yeah, that's probably spot-on.
> 
> Nobody is labeling either Jews or Arabs as superior to one another, genetically or with respect to capacity or capabilities, or as human beings, in the broadest metaphorical and philosophical sense.
> 
> But it's entirely legitimate to label one or the other as far more vibrant and energetic and industrious and purposeful and historically-aware of themselves and militarily competent and culturally superior and more valuable and important to the world stage and the world economy and world politics and international relationships than then other.
> 
> You're just sore 'cause your boys come out on the short end of the stick in any such analysis...
Click to expand...


Indeed, some worship mammon and some do not.


----------



## Bumberclyde

Kondor3 said:


> Bumberclyde said:
> 
> 
> 
> "..._Ah! A Jewish supremacist! But then again, aren't you all?_"
> 
> 
> 
> 
> If, by that, you mean judging...
> 
> ...a large bloc of disorganized, rootless, shiftless people who lived in tents and mud-huts and played the semi-nomadic herders and who drifted from one Ottoman province to another and who really didn't do shit with the land for centuries, versus...
> 
> ...comparing and judging another large bloc of people who had a direction and goals and unity of purpose and history and who took some of the worst real estate in the region and transformed it into productive and richly yielding agricultural and industrial real estate...
> 
> ...well, uhhhh, yeah, that's probably spot-on.
> 
> Nobody is labeling either Jews or Arabs as superior to one another, genetically or with respect to capacity or capabilities, or as human beings, in the broadest metaphorical and philosophical sense.
> 
> But it's entirely legitimate to label one or the other as far more vibrant and energetic and industrious and purposeful and historically-aware of themselves and militarily competent and culturally superior and more valuable and important to the world stage and the world economy and world politics and international relationships than then other.
> 
> You're just sore 'cause your boys come out on the short end of the stick in any such analysis...
Click to expand...


Not my "boys", I'm for peace with a negotiated settlement, or Israel getting nuked, whichever comes first. 

PS Your side gave us 9/11, is that what you mean by more " important to the world stage"? As for them being more valuable period, it shows your true colors.


----------



## P F Tinmore

RoccoR said:
			
		

> What we call today, the Palestinians, never had sovereignty over the territory once under Mandate. Blah, blah, blah.



Typical BS excuse to kick people out of their homeland.


----------



## Kondor3

ForeverYoung436 said:


> "..._Kondor isn't Jewish_..."



Correct. An Irish-German American mutt, and a long-lapsed and non-practicing Roman Catholic.



> "..._and the opinions he's expressing about the situation on the ground are his own_..."



Correct again. I am not a stakeholder. That makes it easier to discuss such things, and even to take sides, without the religious and emotional baggage. And, of course, from time to time, to say something that would make an Israeli government public-relations officer cringe; even if what is being said is commonly held to be true by both friends and enemies.



> "..._The sad reality is that Jews have to travel in bullet-proof busses to visit Abraham's or Rachel's Tombs_..."



That will change when Israel completes the process of annexing that land.



> ".._.Rachel's Tomb, once a beautiful little dome, now has an ugly fortress built over it. Joseph's Tomb had been destroyed_..."



No surprise there. Both historically and in our own modern age, Muslims *EXCEL* at acting like swine and either taking-over and re-tasking, or destroying, or building on top of, the historical and cultural and religious shrines and monuments and statuary of others who do not think like they do, rather than doing the upstanding and righteous thing and holding such sites *IN TRUST* for all of mankind. There is an overwhelming body of evidence to support such sad and incontrovertible conclusions.



> "..._500,000 Jews live among almost 3 million hostile Arabs in the West Bank, Israel's ancestral heartland._"



Again... that will change, and that, soon enough, as the annexation and expelling process reaches its finale.


----------



## Kondor3

P F Tinmore said:


> "..._Indeed, some worship mammon and some do not._"


Like your Saudi oil barons?

Yeah, right, Tinny.

To paraphrase one of your own, just a few minutes ago...

Typical BS excuse for Under-Performers...


----------



## RoccoR

P F Tinmore,  _et al,_

Remember the basics.



P F Tinmore said:


> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> What we call today, the Palestinians, never had sovereignty over the territory once under Mandate. Blah, blah, blah.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Typical BS excuse to kick people out of their homeland.
Click to expand...

*(COMMENT)*

Who started the conflict between the Jewish and the Arab Palestinian?

Don't take a swing at someone and then cry because they beat the snot out of you.  If I ever did that, my father would give me a second licking.

Most Respectfully,
R


----------



## P F Tinmore

Kondor3 said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> "..._Indeed, some worship mammon and some do not._"
> 
> 
> 
> Like your Saudi oil barons?
> 
> Yeah, right, Tinny.
> 
> To paraphrase one of your own, just a few minutes ago...
> 
> Typical BS excuse for Under-Performers...
Click to expand...


Israel has always been subsidized. What is your point?


----------



## P F Tinmore

RoccoR said:


> P F Tinmore,  _et al,_
> 
> Remember the basics.
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> What we call today, the Palestinians, never had sovereignty over the territory once under Mandate. Blah, blah, blah.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Typical BS excuse to kick people out of their homeland.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> Who started the conflict between the Jewish and the Arab Palestinian?
> 
> Don't take a swing at someone and then cry because they beat the snot out of you.  If I ever did that, my father would give me a second licking.
> 
> Most Respectfully,
> R
Click to expand...


You always get it back assward, Rocco.

The Palestinians did not go to Europe. The Europeans went to Palestine.


----------



## Kondor3

P F Tinmore said:


> "..._Israel has always been subsidized. What is your point?_"


So have the Palestinians...

By the Arabs...

Then again...

The Jews of Palestine were creating enclaves of high-yield Agriculture and Industry long before 1948, and long before they were receiving any sort of subsidies or foreign aid...

Never mind the fact that between the founding of the State of Israel in 1948 and the conclusion of the last big Arab-Israel War (1973), the United States was providing relatively small amounts of both economic and military aid to Israel (_although the US did step-in and help to replenish military inventories consumed in the 1967 War_).

And, beyond some modest grant-money from the US in the period 1948-1959 to help with accommodating new immigration, etc., during the period 1959-1973, most of the modest aid dollars that flowed from the US to Israel were actually in the form of loans, which Israel has mostly and long-since repaid by now.

No... the Jews pretty much did that by themselves, without a lot of outside help, prior to the end of the 1973 War.

And, rather than begrudging the Jews some modest aid from the outside, perhaps we should be focusing upon Arab aid to Palestine, yes?

Where, oh where, was the matching and equivalent aid to the Arab-Muslim Palestinians, by their Arab-Muslim brethren, to offset such so-called Subsidies?

If the Palestinians have been under-subsidized or under-funded in recent decades, we know where to place the blame.

Squarely upon the Muslim world.

It's not the Jews' fault if your boys are cheap-skates and tight-fisted misers.

Or, alternatively, perhaps they know a Loser Cause when they see one, and, beyond giving some lip-service to the Palestinians, they choose not to throw good money after bad.

I guess I can't blame them, if that's the case.

It's a Loser Cause, alright.

The only things that the Palestinians create are rockets and suicide-vests and excuses... lots and lots and lots of excuses for under-performing, compared to the Jews of Israel.


----------



## RoccoR

P F Tinmore,  _et al,_

What is this?



P F Tinmore said:


> Israel has always been subsidized. What is your point?


*(COMMENT)*

*US Aid to Lebanon:*

This partnership between the people of America and Lebanon dates back to 1951, and continues in strength today.  The American people are contributing $109 million to USAIDs programs in Lebanon in 2010.​
*US Aid to Jordan:*

U.S. Provides $360 Million in Additional Grant Assistance to Jordan.​
*US Aid to Palestine*

To date, we have moved $295.7 million in fiscal year 2012 money and $200 million in fiscal year 2013 assistance, State Department spokeswoman Victoria Nuland told reporters.​
Who do we not support in the Region?  We give over a Billion dollar to Egypt, and send $195 million in humanitarian and food aid to Syria.

Most Respectfully,
R


----------



## RoccoR

P F Tinmore,  _et al,_

No, I don't think I forgot to mention "immigration."



P F Tinmore said:


> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore,  _et al,_
> 
> Remember the basics.
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> Typical BS excuse to kick people out of their homeland.
> 
> 
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> Who started the conflict between the Jewish and the Arab Palestinian?
> 
> Don't take a swing at someone and then cry because they beat the snot out of you.  If I ever did that, my father would give me a second licking.
> 
> Most Respectfully,
> R
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You always get it back assward, Rocco.
> 
> The Palestinians did not go to Europe. The Europeans went to Palestine.
Click to expand...

*(COMMENT)*

Like I said, it has been going on for 800 years.  And yes, they came from all over the world.  That was the intention of the Sultan (the Sovereign over the Territory) and the LoN/UN/Allied Powers (to which the Ottoman's surrendered the Territory).  

It was the intention and the Arab Palestinians defied the powers, openly challenging the authority by force.

Most Respectfully,
R


----------



## ForeverYoung436

P F Tinmore said:


> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore,  _et al,_
> 
> Remember the basics.
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> Typical BS excuse to kick people out of their homeland.
> 
> 
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> Who started the conflict between the Jewish and the Arab Palestinian?
> 
> Don't take a swing at someone and then cry because they beat the snot out of you.  If I ever did that, my father would give me a second licking.
> 
> Most Respectfully,
> R
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You always get it back assward, Rocco.
> 
> The Palestinians did not go to Europe. The Europeans went to Palestine.
Click to expand...


You are also the descendent of immigrants, and not Cherokee or Apache.


----------



## P F Tinmore

Kondor3 said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> "..._Israel has always been subsidized. What is your point?_"
> 
> 
> 
> So have the Palestinians...
> 
> By the Arabs...
> 
> Then again...
> 
> The Jews of Palestine were creating enclaves of high-yield Agriculture and Industry long before 1948, and long before they were receiving any sort of subsidies or foreign aid...
> 
> Never mind the fact that between the founding of the State of Israel in 1948 and the conclusion of the last big Arab-Israel War (1973), the United States was providing relatively small amounts of both economic and military aid to Israel (_although the US did step-in and help to replenish military inventories consumed in the 1967 War_).
> 
> And, beyond some modest grant-money from the US in the period 1948-1959 to help with accommodating new immigration, etc., during the period 1959-1973, most of the modest aid dollars that flowed from the US to Israel were actually in the form of loans, which Israel has mostly and long-since repaid by now.
> 
> No... the Jews pretty much did that by themselves, without a lot of outside help, prior to the end of the 1973 War.
> 
> And, rather than begrudging the Jews some modest aid from the outside, perhaps we should be focusing upon Arab aid to Palestine, yes?
> 
> Where, oh where, was the matching and equivalent aid to the Arab-Muslim Palestinians, by their Arab-Muslim brethren, to offset such so-called Subsidies?
> 
> If the Palestinians have been under-subsidized or under-funded in recent decades, we know where to place the blame.
> 
> Squarely upon the Muslim world.
> 
> It's not the Jews' fault if your boys are cheap-skates and tight-fisted misers.
> 
> Or, alternatively, perhaps they know a Loser Cause when they see one, and, beyond giving some lip-service to the Palestinians, they choose not to throw good money after bad.
> 
> I guess I can't blame them, if that's the case.
> 
> It's a Loser Cause, alright.
> 
> The only things that the Palestinians create are rockets and suicide-vests and excuses... lots and lots and lots of excuses for under-performing, compared to the Jews of Israel.
Click to expand...


Get serious. Israel is the mooch capital of the world.


----------



## P F Tinmore

ForeverYoung436 said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore,  _et al,_
> 
> Remember the basics.
> 
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> Who started the conflict between the Jewish and the Arab Palestinian?
> 
> Don't take a swing at someone and then cry because they beat the snot out of you.  If I ever did that, my father would give me a second licking.
> 
> Most Respectfully,
> R
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You always get it back assward, Rocco.
> 
> The Palestinians did not go to Europe. The Europeans went to Palestine.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You are also the descendent of immigrants, and not Cherokee or Apache.
Click to expand...


Good point. Unfortunately, when the Europeans took over America military conquest was not illegal.

When the Europeans took over Palestine it was.


----------



## Kondor3

P F Tinmore said:


> "..._Get serious. Israel is the mooch capital of the world._"



*Translation*:

"_The points you made do not reflect well upon a people with whom I share such an affinity.

The points you made are accurate in the main and cannot be counterpointed sufficiently so as to redeem that aspect of the argument for 'my side'.

So, I will serve-up a terse, non-serious, meaningless dismissal as fluff or filler, and call the Israelis more names, on my way out the door, disengaging from the exchange._"

*Translation*:

For this round - final score: Kondor 1, Tinny 0.

But thank you for playing.


----------



## P F Tinmore

RoccoR said:


> P F Tinmore,  _et al,_
> 
> No, I don't think I forgot to mention "immigration."
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore,  _et al,_
> 
> Remember the basics.
> 
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> Who started the conflict between the Jewish and the Arab Palestinian?
> 
> Don't take a swing at someone and then cry because they beat the snot out of you.  If I ever did that, my father would give me a second licking.
> 
> Most Respectfully,
> R
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You always get it back assward, Rocco.
> 
> The Palestinians did not go to Europe. The Europeans went to Palestine.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> Like I said, it has been going on for 800 years.  And yes, they came from all over the world.  That was the intention of the Sultan (the Sovereign over the Territory) and the LoN/UN/Allied Powers (to which the Ottoman's surrendered the Territory).
> 
> It was the intention and the Arab Palestinians defied the powers, openly challenging the authority by force.
> 
> Most Respectfully,
> R
Click to expand...


Britain never annexed or otherwise claimed ownership. The territory was ceded to the people.


----------



## RoccoR

P F Tinmore;  _et al,_

I think you've made a small error here.



P F Tinmore said:


> ForeverYoung436 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> You always get it back assward, Rocco.
> 
> The Palestinians did not go to Europe. The Europeans went to Palestine.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You are also the descendent of immigrants, and not Cherokee or Apache.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Good point. Unfortunately, when the Europeans took over America military conquest was not illegal.
> 
> When the Europeans took over Palestine it was.
Click to expand...

*(COMMENT)*

The Law of Aggression and Military Conquest applies to the attacker (Aggressor); not the defender.  A state may not attack with an armed force and capture territorial for conquest.  However, it does not apply to the defender which successfully defeats the aggressor and captures hostile ground in the process.



			
				General Assembly Resolution 3314 (XXIX) said:
			
		

> *Article 2*
> 
> The first use of armed force by a State in contravention of the Charter shall constitute prima facie evidence of an act of aggression although the Security Council may, in conformity with the Charter, conclude that a determination that an act of aggression has been committed would not be justified in the light of other relevant circumstances, including the fact that the acts concerned or their consequences are not of sufficient gravity.​
> *Article 5*
> 
> 1. No consideration of whatever nature, whether political, economic, military or otherwise, may serve as a justification for aggression.
> 
> 2.	A war of aggression is a crime against international peace. Aggression gives rise to international responsibility.
> 
> 3.	No territorial acquisition or special advantage resulting from aggression is or shall be recognized as lawful.​
> *Article 7*
> 
> Nothing in this Definition, and in particular article 3, could in any way prejudice the right to self-determination, freedom and independence, as derived from the Charter, of peoples forcibly deprived of that right and referred to in the Declaration on Principles of International Law concerning Friendly Relations and Co-operation among States in accordance with the Charter of the United Nations, particularly peoples under colonial and racist regimes or other forms of alien domination; nor the right of these peoples to struggle to that end and to seek and receive support, in accordance with the principles of the Charter and in conformity with the above-mentioned Declaration.​
> _*SOURCE:*_ A/RES/3314(XXIX)  14 December 1974



In the case of Israel 'v' Arab Palestinian, the law would have to be retroactive to apply.  In respect to the conceptual applicability, the Arab Palestinians, and the Arab League, would be the "aggressors" relative to the Wars of 1948, 1967, and 1973.  Thus, the Law of Conquest (Article 5, Paragraph 3) does not apply.  The Israelis were not the "first use of armed force by a State in contravention of the Charter" (Article 2).

Relative to the Treaty agreements, the Law of Conquest still would not apply.  The Turkish State _(successor government to the Ottoman Empire)_ relinquished its authority to the Allied Powers *(*Article 139 of Treaty of Servers, in conjunction with Section VII - Syria,  Mesopotamia, Palestine*)*.  The territory was surrendered by the sovereign to the Allied Powers, not as a result of trial by combat.

*SPECIAL NOTE:*



			
				Treaty of Servers said:
			
		

> *ARTICLE 129.*
> 
> Jews of other than Turkish nationality who are habitually resident, on the coming into force of the present Treaty, within the boundaries of Palestine, as determined in accordance with Article 95 will ipso facto become citizens of Palestine to the exclusion of any other nationality.
> 
> _*SOURCE:*_ http://www.hri.org/docs/sevres/part3.html



Most Respectfully,
R


----------



## Roudy

RoccoR said:


> P F Tinmore,  _et al,_
> 
> Remember the basics.
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> What we call today, the Palestinians, never had sovereignty over the territory once under Mandate. Blah, blah, blah.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Typical BS excuse to kick people out of their homeland.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> Who started the conflict between the Jewish and the Arab Palestinian?
> 
> Don't take a swing at someone and then cry because they beat the snot out of you.  If I ever did that, my father would give me a second licking.
> 
> Most Respectfully,
> R
Click to expand...

 exactly.


----------



## Roudy

RoccoR said:


> P F Tinmore,  _et al,_
> 
> What is this?
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> Israel has always been subsidized. What is your point?
> 
> 
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> *US Aid to Lebanon:*
> 
> This partnership between the people of America and Lebanon dates back to 1951, and continues in strength today.  The American people are contributing $109 million to USAIDs programs in Lebanon in 2010.​
> *US Aid to Jordan:*
> 
> U.S. Provides $360 Million in Additional Grant Assistance to Jordan.​
> *US Aid to Palestine*
> 
> To date, we have moved $295.7 million in fiscal year 2012 money and $200 million in fiscal year 2013 assistance, State Department spokeswoman Victoria Nuland told reporters.​
> Who do we not support in the Region?  We give over a Billion dollar to Egypt, and send $195 million in humanitarian and food aid to Syria.
> 
> Most Respectfully,
> R
Click to expand...

You forgot Egypt and Pakistan that have received a whopping total of 30 billion since 2001.


----------



## Roudy

P F Tinmore said:


> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore,  _et al,_
> 
> Remember the basics.
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> Typical BS excuse to kick people out of their homeland.
> 
> 
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> Who started the conflict between the Jewish and the Arab Palestinian?
> 
> Don't take a swing at someone and then cry because they beat the snot out of you.  If I ever did that, my father would give me a second licking.
> 
> Most Respectfully,
> R
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You always get it back assward, Rocco.
> 
> The Palestinians did not go to Europe. The Europeans went to Palestine.
Click to expand...

Being that the only people with the label "Palestinians" at that time were Jews.  This makes no sense.


----------



## P F Tinmore

Rocco,

The Palestinians fought foreigners in Palestine yet you say they were the aggressors.


----------



## Kondor3

Any sign of Matching Funds yet from the Muslim world, in support of the Palestinians, to match the subsidies going to the Israelis? 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




Or does the Muslim world know that for what it is... throwing good money after bad?


----------



## RoccoR

P F Tinmore,  _et al,_

Yes, what we call today, Arab Palestinians, opened hostilities against Jewish Immigrants in defiance of the Allied Powers intentions to establish a Jewish National Home.



P F Tinmore said:


> Rocco,
> 
> The Palestinians fought foreigners in Palestine yet you say they were the aggressors.


*(COMMENT)*

Sovereignty and Citizenship was neither the responsibility of, or in the dominion of, the Arab Palestinian.

Neither is the concept that the Jewish Immigrant was a "foreigner."  That was not the intention of the Ottoman Empire (for 800 years) nor was it the intention of the Allied Powers.  If there was ever a case to be made, then the entire idea of Arab armed struggle against the Jewish Immigrant who were invited to participate in the establishment of a Jewish National Home, was the original justification for separation-like measures instituted by the Arab against the Jew.  For it was they that instituted the struggle for separation.    I see it as pure greediness and the promotion of a segregationist model, by armed force, on the part of the Arab and their cultural inability to share the land.



			
				Treaty of Servers said:
			
		

> *ARTICLE 129.*
> Jews of other than Turkish nationality who are habitually resident, on the coming into force of the present Treaty, within the boundaries of Palestine, as determined in accordance with Article 95 will _ipso facto_ become citizens of Palestine to the exclusion of any other nationality.
> 
> _*SOURCE:*_ Sevres Treaty: Part III



The Jewish People were authorized to be there.  And without regard of how the Arab Palestinian wants to define them, the Arab Palestinian was the first to draw blood.  And they _(as I said before)_ will use any excuse, even the xenophobic promotion you show here, in order to justify the continuation of the conflict.

Make no mistake, that no matter how you or Arab Palestinians, define the Jewish Immigrant _(foreigners, aliens, whatever)_, the Arab Palestinian was an aggressor culture that targeted a minority group of lawful immigrants.  You can attempt to justify it, as you have, but at the end of the day, you are the aggressor.

Most Respectfully,
R


----------



## P F Tinmore

RoccoR said:
			
		

> Treaty of Servers said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *ARTICLE 129.*
> Jews of other than Turkish nationality who are habitually resident, on the coming into force of the present Treaty, within the boundaries of Palestine, as determined in accordance with Article 95 will _ipso facto_ become citizens of Palestine to the exclusion of any other nationality.
> 
> _*SOURCE:*_ Sevres Treaty: Part III
Click to expand...


That is quite similar to the PLO Charter definition.



> Article 6:
> 
> The Jews who had normally resided in Palestine until the beginning of the Zionist invasion will be considered Palestinians.
> 
> The Avalon Project : The Palestinian National Charter



And the current Palestinian constitution states that all citizens are equal without regard to race, religion, sex, etc..


----------



## MHunterB

From Tinny's source:  Article 2:  "Palestine, with the boundaries it had during the British Mandate, is an indivisible territorial unit. "
IOW, they refuse to recognize the Partition.  So obviously they are NOT intending to abide by *ANY* UN Resolutions or rulings of the ICJ or whatever.

Isn't that just the very essence of a 'rogue state'?  As per the next two Articles:

Article 3:

The Palestinian Arab people possess the legal right to their homeland and have the right to determine their destiny after achieving the liberation of their country in accordance with their wishes and entirely of their own accord and will. 

Article 4:

The Palestinian identity is a genuine, essential, and inherent characteristic; it is transmitted from parents to children. The Zionist occupation and the dispersal of the Palestinian Arab people, through the disasters which befell them, do not make them lose their Palestinian identity and their membership in the Palestinian community, nor do they negate them.


----------



## P F Tinmore

MHunterB said:


> From Tinny's source:  Article 2:  "Palestine, with the boundaries it had during the British Mandate, is an indivisible territorial unit. "
> IOW, they refuse to recognize the Partition.  So obviously they are NOT intending to abide by *ANY* UN Resolutions or rulings of the ICJ or whatever.
> 
> Isn't that just the very essence of a 'rogue state'?  As per the next two Articles:
> 
> Article 3:
> 
> The Palestinian Arab people possess the legal right to their homeland and have the right to determine their destiny after achieving the liberation of their country in accordance with their wishes and entirely of their own accord and will.
> 
> Article 4:
> 
> The Palestinian identity is a genuine, essential, and inherent characteristic; it is transmitted from parents to children. The Zionist occupation and the dispersal of the Palestinian Arab people, through the disasters which befell them, do not make them lose their Palestinian identity and their membership in the Palestinian community, nor do they negate them.



That is the same thing any other people would say.

Why do you have a problem?


----------



## Coyote

*Thread has cleaned and violative posts removed.

Please note, the Administration and the Moderation Team are serious in their efforts to have a civil discourse as it pertains to the OP and any further posts which violate Zone 2 rules will be viewed in a more serious manner where infractions will be administered on a case by case basis.
*


----------



## P F Tinmore

RoccoR said:
			
		

> Neither is the concept that the Jewish Immigrant was a "foreigner."





> These related terms are often used in deliberately confusing and conflicting ways.  Here is a set of definitions that will help you sort out the difference.
> 
> IMMIGRANT:  In popular usage, an "immigrant" is generally understood to be a person who migrates to another country, usually for permanent residence.  Under this definition, therefore, an "immigrant" is an alien admitted to the U.S. as a lawful permanent resident.   The emphasis in this definition is upon the presumptions that (1) the immigrant followed U.S. laws and procedures in establishing residence in our country; (2) he or she wishes to reside here permanently; and *(3) he or she swears allegiance to our country or at least solemnly affirms that he/she will observe and respect our laws and our Constitution.
> *
> *ALIEN:  By contrast, an "alien" is generally understood to be a foreigner -- a person who comes from a foreign country -- who does not owe allegiance to our country.*
> 
> Definitions: Alien, Immigrant, Illegal Alien, Undocumented Immigrant



It seems that the Palestinians use the same definition as the US. Do you disagree with the US?


----------



## RoccoR

P F Tinmore,  _et al,_

The definition is fine.  Your application is faulty.  Immigration and Nationalization Laws are unique to each country.  There is no uniform citizenship model.  While the US laws work for the US, they are not applicable for any other country.



P F Tinmore said:


> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Neither is the concept that the Jewish Immigrant was a "foreigner."
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> These related terms are often used in deliberately confusing and conflicting ways.  Here is a set of definitions that will help you sort out the difference.
> 
> IMMIGRANT:  In popular usage, an "immigrant" is generally understood to be a person who migrates to another country, usually for permanent residence.  Under this definition, therefore, an "immigrant" is an alien admitted to the U.S. as a lawful permanent resident.   The emphasis in this definition is upon the presumptions that (1) the immigrant followed U.S. laws and procedures in establishing residence in our country; (2) he or she wishes to reside here permanently; and *(3) he or she swears allegiance to our country or at least solemnly affirms that he/she will observe and respect our laws and our Constitution.
> *
> *ALIEN:  By contrast, an "alien" is generally understood to be a foreigner -- a person who comes from a foreign country -- who does not owe allegiance to our country.*
> 
> Definitions: Alien, Immigrant, Illegal Alien, Undocumented Immigrant
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> It seems that the Palestinians use the same definition as the US. Do you disagree with the US?
Click to expand...

*(COMMENT)*

As I pointed out previously, and as you copied in the Posting Number 439, _supra,_ by treaty, all Jews in the undefined territory were made citizens on the Treaty coming in force; and the territory covered by the Mandate is defined.  

From that point on, Article 7 of the Mandate for Palestine, takes the lead on awarding citizenship.  As neat as the US Immigration and Naturalization Law is, it is not relevant to any aspect of the Palestine Question.  The Mandatory (UK) had full powers over the administration Palestine; and that administration was responsible for enacting a nationality law.  That included legal provisions framed so as to facilitate the acquisition of Palestinian citizenship by all Jews who take up their permanent residence in Palestine and who are willing to assist in the establishment of the Jewish national home (Article 4).  With citizenship, the Jewish immigrant ceased to be anything other that a Territorial Citizen.  

Incidentally, there was no country to pledge allegiance to until 15 May, 1948.

Most Respectfully,
R


----------



## Kondor3

The other major flaw in the analogy is the lack of a sovereign local power to which it was given to accede-to or bar immigration, at the time that the immigration occurred.

In the case of so-called Palestine, at the time of such immigration, no such sovereign local power existed.

Consequently, the analogy collapses, for lack of a foundation.


----------



## P F Tinmore

RoccoR said:


> P F Tinmore,  _et al,_
> 
> The definition is fine.  Your application is faulty.  Immigration and Nationalization Laws are unique to each country.  There is no uniform citizenship model.  While the US laws work for the US, they are not applicable for any other country.
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Neither is the concept that the Jewish Immigrant was a "foreigner."
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> These related terms are often used in deliberately confusing and conflicting ways.  Here is a set of definitions that will help you sort out the difference.
> 
> IMMIGRANT:  In popular usage, an "immigrant" is generally understood to be a person who migrates to another country, usually for permanent residence.  Under this definition, therefore, an "immigrant" is an alien admitted to the U.S. as a lawful permanent resident.   The emphasis in this definition is upon the presumptions that (1) the immigrant followed U.S. laws and procedures in establishing residence in our country; (2) he or she wishes to reside here permanently; and *(3) he or she swears allegiance to our country or at least solemnly affirms that he/she will observe and respect our laws and our Constitution.
> *
> *ALIEN:  By contrast, an "alien" is generally understood to be a foreigner -- a person who comes from a foreign country -- who does not owe allegiance to our country.*
> 
> Definitions: Alien, Immigrant, Illegal Alien, Undocumented Immigrant
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> It seems that the Palestinians use the same definition as the US. Do you disagree with the US?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> As I pointed out previously, and as you copied in the Posting Number 439, _supra,_ by treaty, all Jews in the undefined territory were made citizens on the Treaty coming in force; and the territory covered by the Mandate is defined.
> 
> From that point on, Article 7 of the Mandate for Palestine, takes the lead on awarding citizenship.  As neat as the US Immigration and Naturalization Law is, it is not relevant to any aspect of the Palestine Question.  The Mandatory (UK) had full powers over the administration Palestine; and that administration was responsible for enacting a nationality law.  That included legal provisions framed so as to facilitate the acquisition of Palestinian citizenship by all Jews who take up their permanent residence in Palestine and who are willing to assist in the establishment of the Jewish national home (Article 4).  With citizenship, the Jewish immigrant ceased to be anything other that a Territorial Citizen.
> 
> Incidentally, there was no country to pledge allegiance to until 15 May, 1948.
> 
> Most Respectfully,
> R
Click to expand...


Now all you have to do is convince the Palestinians that Palestine was not their country.

Good luck with that.


----------



## RoccoR

P F Tinmore,   _et al,_

And we are back to the beginning.



P F Tinmore said:


> Now all you have to do is convince the Palestinians that Palestine was not their country.
> 
> Good luck with that.


*(COMMENT)*

For more that couple Generations, Palestinians have been telling themselves that the arbitrary demarcation of Palestine _[(pursuant to Article 95 of the Treaty) (less the allocation for the Hashemite Kingdom)]_ was theirs by some right of longevity; yet also undefined.  I don't think anyone can convince the Palestinian otherwise.  That is what makes the situation so dangerous.  

While there is plenty of documentation that shows the trail of control, we've all seen it, most Palestinians will not to acknowledge it.  

And this is what makes it so risky in Occupation Disengagement.  

Most Respectfully,
R


----------



## P F Tinmore

RoccoR said:


> P F Tinmore,   _et al,_
> 
> And we are back to the beginning.
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> Now all you have to do is convince the Palestinians that Palestine was not their country.
> 
> Good luck with that.
> 
> 
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> For more that couple Generations, Palestinians have been telling themselves that the arbitrary demarcation of Palestine _[(pursuant to Article 95 of the Treaty) (less the allocation for the Hashemite Kingdom)]_ was theirs by some right of longevity; yet also undefined.  I don't think anyone can convince the Palestinian otherwise.  That is what makes the situation so dangerous.
> 
> While there is plenty of documentation that shows the trail of control, we've all seen it, most Palestinians will not to acknowledge it.
> 
> And this is what makes it so risky in Occupation Disengagement.
> 
> Most Respectfully,
> R
Click to expand...




> While there is plenty of documentation that shows the trail of control,



Indeed, they went from Ottoman rule to British occupation, to Israeli occupation.

Occupation does not negate rights it only delays the exercise of rights.


----------



## theliq

RoccoR said:


> P F Tinmore,  _et al,_
> 
> I don't like these kinds of questions.
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> 
> reabhloideach,  _et al,_
> 
> Well, I agree that a Jewish is not a racial category.  So, right off the bat, its not a matter of "apartheid" under the international criminal code.  As you can see, "apartheid" is defined as crimes committed "by one racial group over any other racial group;" a major element of the offense.
> 
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> No, you are not wrong.
> 
> But more importantly, being Israeli is not a racial category either; it is a nationality.  And, you can be Israeli and Palestinian simultaneously; however you define a Palestinian.
> 
> But it is also important to understand that when speaking of "apartheid" --- you are speaking of treatment difference with a given country.  That is to say, the crime of "apartheid" doesn't apply to the "Occupied Territories" because it is not "sovereign Israeli territory."   The crime of "apartheid" is "committed with the intention of maintaining that regime."  So, in order to determine if there is the crime of "apartheid," you have to examine if an "Israeli" of one racial class is being treated differently than an "Israeli" of another racial class within the same regime.
> 
> Of the LINK cited, I did not see one "apartheid" issue mentioned.
> 
> Most Respectfully,
> R
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Is "Arab" a race?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> No, Arabs are Semitic _(including Hebrew, Arabic, Aramaic, Maltese, and Amharic)_  language speaking people, that speak Arabic as a primary language.
> 
> It has no relationship to race.
> 
> Most Respectfully,
> R
Click to expand...


Well if we go back far enough Jews were part Arab.


----------



## theliq

RoccoR said:


> P F Tinmore,   _et al,_
> 
> And we are back to the beginning.
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> Now all you have to do is convince the Palestinians that Palestine was not their country.
> 
> Good luck with that.
> 
> 
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> For more that couple Generations, Palestinians have been telling themselves that the arbitrary demarcation of Palestine _[(pursuant to Article 95 of the Treaty) (less the allocation for the Hashemite Kingdom)]_ was theirs by some right of longevity; yet also undefined.  I don't think anyone can convince the Palestinian otherwise.  That is what makes the situation so dangerous.
> 
> While there is plenty of documentation that shows the trail of control, we've all seen it, most Palestinians will not to acknowledge it.
> 
> And this is what makes it so risky in Occupation Disengagement.
> 
> Most Respectfully,
> R
Click to expand...


Rocco,the same could be said of the Jordanians(Hashemites) and Jewish Israelis(Jews) neither had rights to either part of this area,the Hashemites were from Saudi and the Jews were mainly European.....and neither had any claim to either land......infact the only people who had a claim was the Palestinians,just sayin steve


----------



## Roudy

P F Tinmore said:


> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore,   _et al,_
> 
> And we are back to the beginning.
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> Now all you have to do is convince the Palestinians that Palestine was not their country.
> 
> Good luck with that.
> 
> 
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> For more that couple Generations, Palestinians have been telling themselves that the arbitrary demarcation of Palestine _[(pursuant to Article 95 of the Treaty) (less the allocation for the Hashemite Kingdom)]_ was theirs by some right of longevity; yet also undefined.  I don't think anyone can convince the Palestinian otherwise.  That is what makes the situation so dangerous.
> 
> While there is plenty of documentation that shows the trail of control, we've all seen it, most Palestinians will not to acknowledge it.
> 
> And this is what makes it so risky in Occupation Disengagement.
> 
> Most Respectfully,
> R
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> While there is plenty of documentation that shows the trail of control,
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Indeed, they went from Ottoman rule to British occupation, to Israeli occupation.
> 
> Occupation does not negate rights it only delays the exercise of rights.
Click to expand...

Who is they?  There was no country of Palestine nor were there any people called Palestinians under the three stages mentioned. Palestinians are a recent made up invention.  They are Arabs who decided to call themselves Palestinian, the name given exclusively to Jews, as of the 1960's.  

Therefore, there exists no "rights" that need to be exercised.  And they certainly won't get anywhere, especially with the Israelis, using violence and aggression.


----------



## Roudy

theliq said:


> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore,  _et al,_
> 
> I don't like these kinds of questions.
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> Is "Arab" a race?
> 
> 
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> No, Arabs are Semitic _(including Hebrew, Arabic, Aramaic, Maltese, and Amharic)_  language speaking people, that speak Arabic as a primary language.
> 
> It has no relationship to race.
> 
> Most Respectfully,
> R
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Well if we go back far enough Jews were part Arab.
Click to expand...

Thousands of years before the moon god worshippers of Saudi Arabia were hunting for lizards to eat in the deserts of Arabia, the monotheistic Jewish scribes were writing and documenting knowledge, history, science, philosophy, and ethics, to pass on to next generations.


----------



## theliq

Roudy said:


> theliq said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore,  _et al,_
> 
> I don't like these kinds of questions.
> 
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> No, Arabs are Semitic _(including Hebrew, Arabic, Aramaic, Maltese, and Amharic)_  language speaking people, that speak Arabic as a primary language.
> 
> It has no relationship to race.
> 
> Most Respectfully,
> R
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Well if we go back far enough Jews were part Arab.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Thousands of years before the moon god worshippers of Saudi Arabia were hunting for lizards to eat in the deserts of Arabia, the monotheistic Jewish scribes were writing and documenting knowledge, history, science, philosophy, and ethics, to pass on to next generations.
Click to expand...


You should read "The Empire of the Assyrians" who  dispersed Jews(circa 3000 souls) and other minorities out of Babylon. Nice to see you again Roudy still struggling with your history and relevant timelines.  steve


----------



## theliq

Roudy said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore,   _et al,_
> 
> And we are back to the beginning.
> 
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> For more that couple Generations, Palestinians have been telling themselves that the arbitrary demarcation of Palestine _[(pursuant to Article 95 of the Treaty) (less the allocation for the Hashemite Kingdom)]_ was theirs by some right of longevity; yet also undefined.  I don't think anyone can convince the Palestinian otherwise.  That is what makes the situation so dangerous.
> 
> While there is plenty of documentation that shows the trail of control, we've all seen it, most Palestinians will not to acknowledge it.
> 
> And this is what makes it so risky in Occupation Disengagement.
> 
> Most Respectfully,
> R
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> While there is plenty of documentation that shows the trail of control,
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Indeed, they went from Ottoman rule to British occupation, to Israeli occupation.
> 
> Occupation does not negate rights it only delays the exercise of rights.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Who is they?  There was no country of Palestine nor were there any people called Palestinians under the three stages mentioned. Palestinians are a recent made up invention.  They are Arabs who decided to call themselves Palestinian, the name given exclusively to Jews, as of the 1960's.
> 
> Therefore, there exists no "rights" that need to be exercised.  And they certainly won't get anywhere, especially with the Israelis, using violence and aggression.
Click to expand...


Sad to tell you most Israelis are moving towards a 2 State solution.Educated Jews

Except those Ultra's imported from the USA and those wretched Jew Settlers mostly from America..........Which most/the majority of Jews in Israel can't abide.

steve


----------



## theliq

Kondor3 said:


> Any sign of Matching Funds yet from the Muslim world, in support of the Palestinians, to match the subsidies going to the Israelis?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Or does the Muslim world know that for what it is... throwing good money after bad?



Silly Quote Kondor,if you knew anything about Middle Eastern Politics,you should be aware that other Muslim States want the Status Quo between Palestinians and Israelis.....I have always said that only the Palestinians and Jews will in the end will resolve this on going situation........other Arab nations plus Iran are a waste of space,as far as Israel and the Palestinians are concern....a total waste of space.steve


----------



## Kondor3

theliq said:


> Kondor3 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Any sign of Matching Funds yet from the Muslim world, in support of the Palestinians, to match the subsidies going to the Israelis?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Or does the Muslim world know that for what it is... throwing good money after bad?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Silly Quote Kondor,if you knew anything about Middle Eastern Politics,you should be aware that other Muslim States want the Status Quo between Palestinians and Israelis.....I have always said that only the Palestinians and Jews will in the end will resolve this on going situation........other Arab nations plus Iran are a waste of space,as far as Israel and the Palestinians are concern....a total waste of space.steve
Click to expand...


Well, of _course_ the Arabs haven't been much help to their Palestinian brethren, comparatively speaking...

That much is obvious to even the worst dullard and dolt... 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




And I'm a higher-end dullard and dolt, good sir... 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




I wrote that on behalf of our colleague Tinny, who begrudges Israel for the aid it receives from the US and other sources...

Rubbing salt in the wound of Arab tight-fistedness and miserliness, in connection with their Palestinian clients...

Saying, by inference, if their Arab brethren cared so much about the Palestinians, they would have matched Western and US funding and so-called subsidies all along, since 1948 to the present day...

But the Arab States have NOT done that; instead, throwing them a few million here and there over the years as a bone, and allowing them to continue their downward slide towards total collapse and dissolution, as a focal point for anti-Western anti-Infidel feelings and as a diversion from domestic problems...

I understood that years ago... long before I wrote that paragraph, which had another purpose in-mind altogether, as I've just outlined...

Hope that helps.


----------



## RoccoR

theliq, Kondor3,  _et al,_

Well, actually, the Arab League (AL) does provide some funding, but usually in trickle amounts and only after US Aid has been exhausted.  For instance, in 2011, when the US Congress cut funding to the Palestinian National Authority (PNA), Secretary General Nabil al-Arabi of the Arab League said the AL would provide for the PNA.  But when push came to shove, and the PNA could not make payroll, Congress released $190M+ for assistance.  So, in that regard, our friend "Kondor3" has a double-bulleyes.

The AL generally doesn't fund in parallel to US financial aid.  It will fund projects and programs that are beyond authorized limits US aid.  And example of the limit is the recent proposal for the creation of a Arabic and Islamic Heritage Fund for the Preservation of Jerusalem and Holy Ground.  The Emir of Qatar, Sheik Hamad bin Khalifa al-Thani, has already pledged to contribute about 25% _(about $250M)_ towards the proposed effort.

Earlier this year, a strange (very strange) thing happened.



			
				The Arabs Betrayal of the Palestinians said:
			
		

> At least one Palestinian leader is honest enough to blame his brotherly Arab states for the cash crisis faced by the Palestinian Authority (PA) in Ramallah.  PA Prime Minister Salam Fayyad, in an interview with the Associated Press on Sunday, January 6, 2013 complained of an immense financial crisis in the PA, *largely due to the Arab countries failure to dispatch promised millions of dollars in aid*.  Ironically, it is the Jewish state of Israel that the Palestinians regularly vilify and seek to destroy, which hitherto, provided the financial wherewithal to the PA by transferring $100 million in tax rebates to Ramallah, an amount that covers a third of the PA monthly operating costs.
> 
> _*SOURCE:*_ The Arabs? Betrayal of the Palestinians | FrontPage Magazine



It was an interesting event.  _(Fact is stranger than fiction!)_



theliq said:


> Kondor3 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Any sign of Matching Funds yet from the Muslim world, in support of the Palestinians, to match the subsidies going to the Israelis?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Or does the Muslim world know that for what it is... throwing good money after bad?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ...   Muslim States want the Status Quo between Palestinians and Israelis.....I have always said that only the Palestinians and Jews will in the end will resolve this on going situation...
Click to expand...

*(COMMENT)*

In the excerpt of "Steve's" comment, there is some very disturbing truth; but truth none the less.  (2x Single Bullseye.)

The AL does not want to be any more entangled with the Palestinians, than anyone else.  While they make, from time-to-time, anti-Israeli comments _(many with solid prima facie justification - nothing radical)_, they even more rarely make pro-Palestinian comments _(except for domestic consumption - that is purely political in religious appeasement)_.  There are many anti-government elements surrounding the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, which the AL would rather be pinned-down and focused on Israel, contained --- rather than cut loose and looking for a cause to incite elsewhere in the Region.

Oddly enough, while much of the world _(that actually cares)_ sees the Israeli-Palestinian conflict as a critical issue and humanitarian concern, within the Middle East Region, the leadership echelon see it as more of a imperfect solution to Regional Security in a time when they would like to limit radical resources that might further fuel the Arab Spring and Arab Spring like events.  There are several other lesser security concerns, but chief among those is the Iranian involvement and _(the unspoken elephant in the room)_ - the non-state actor; and the baggage all that brings with it in the form of a potential to induce a Sunni-Shi'ite disturbance and the spread of violence beyond the borders in dispute.

So, while we (in this discussion group) can say that the core issues over the more than half-century dispute include borders, Palestinian refugees, Jewish settlements in the West Bank, AND the status of Jerusalem _(politically and religiously)_; there are other critical aspect angles.  In the rarified gaseous chambers behind the closed doors of political intrigue, where dark agendas are played-out, and the stability and survival of nations and regimes are discussed, none of the issues that we discuss _(the way we discuss them)_ are black and white, a true matter of compliance versus non-compliance, or isolated and distinct as we address them here.  What may seem to us, to be individually corrupt, villainous, and violations of this, that and the other treaty, law, or convention ---> there is more _(much more)_ to those that have solution keys in hand.  And not everyone sees a solution as the best alternative; at least not yet.

Most Respectfully,
R


----------



## georgephillip

RoccoR said:


> theliq, Kondor3,  _et al,_
> 
> Well, actually, the Arab League (AL) does provide some funding, but usually in trickle amounts and only after US Aid has been exhausted.  For instance, in 2011, when the US Congress cut funding to the Palestinian National Authority (PNA), Secretary General Nabil al-Arabi of the Arab League said the AL would provide for the PNA.  But when push came to shove, and the PNA could not make payroll, Congress released $190M+ for assistance.  So, in that regard, our friend "Kondor3" has a double-bulleyes.
> 
> The AL generally doesn't fund in parallel to US financial aid.  It will fund projects and programs that are beyond authorized limits US aid.  And example of the limit is the recent proposal for the creation of a Arabic and Islamic Heritage Fund for the Preservation of Jerusalem and Holy Ground.  The Emir of Qatar, Sheik Hamad bin Khalifa al-Thani, has already pledged to contribute about 25% _(about $250M)_ towards the proposed effort.
> 
> Earlier this year, a strange (very strange) thing happened.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Arabs Betrayal of the Palestinians said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> At least one Palestinian leader is honest enough to blame his brotherly Arab states for the cash crisis faced by the Palestinian Authority (PA) in Ramallah.  PA Prime Minister Salam Fayyad, in an interview with the Associated Press on Sunday, January 6, 2013 complained of an immense financial crisis in the PA, *largely due to the Arab countries failure to dispatch promised millions of dollars in aid*.  Ironically, it is the Jewish state of Israel that the Palestinians regularly vilify and seek to destroy, which hitherto, provided the financial wherewithal to the PA by transferring $100 million in tax rebates to Ramallah, an amount that covers a third of the PA monthly operating costs.
> 
> _*SOURCE:*_ The Arabs? Betrayal of the Palestinians | FrontPage Magazine
> 
> 
> 
> 
> It was an interesting event.  _(Fact is stranger than fiction!)_
> 
> 
> 
> theliq said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Kondor3 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Any sign of Matching Funds yet from the Muslim world, in support of the Palestinians, to match the subsidies going to the Israelis?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Or does the Muslim world know that for what it is... throwing good money after bad?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> ...   Muslim States want the Status Quo between Palestinians and Israelis.....I have always said that only the Palestinians and Jews will in the end will resolve this on going situation...
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> In the excerpt of "Steve's" comment, there is some very disturbing truth; but truth none the less.  (2x Single Bullseye.)
> 
> The AL does not want to be any more entangled with the Palestinians, than anyone else.  While they make, from time-to-time, anti-Israeli comments _(many with solid prima facie justification - nothing radical)_, they even more rarely make pro-Palestinian comments _(except for domestic consumption - that is purely political in religious appeasement)_.  There are many anti-government elements surrounding the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, which the AL would rather be pinned-down and focused on Israel, contained --- rather than cut loose and looking for a cause to incite elsewhere in the Region.
> 
> Oddly enough, while much of the world _(that actually cares)_ sees the Israeli-Palestinian conflict as a critical issue and humanitarian concern, within the Middle East Region, the leadership echelon see it as more of a imperfect solution to Regional Security in a time when they would like to limit radical resources that might further fuel the Arab Spring and Arab Spring like events.  There are several other lesser security concerns, but chief among those is the Iranian involvement and _(the unspoken elephant in the room)_ - the non-state actor; and the baggage all that brings with it in the form of a potential to induce a Sunni-Shi'ite disturbance and the spread of violence beyond the borders in dispute.
> 
> So, while we (in this discussion group) can say that the core issues over the more than half-century dispute include borders, Palestinian refugees, Jewish settlements in the West Bank, AND the status of Jerusalem _(politically and religiously)_; there are other critical aspect angles.  In the rarified gaseous chambers behind the closed doors of political intrigue, where dark agendas are played-out, and the stability and survival of nations and regimes are discussed, none of the issues that we discuss _(the way we discuss them)_ are black and white, a true matter of compliance versus non-compliance, or isolated and distinct as we address them here.  What may seem to us, to be individually corrupt, villainous, and violations of this, that and the other treaty, law, or convention ---> there is more _(much more)_ to those that have solution keys in hand.  And not everyone sees a solution as the best alternative; at least not yet.
> 
> Most Respectfully,
> R
Click to expand...


Why do you suppose "those that have solution keys in hand" chose to slap at Anwar Sadat's peace proposal in 1971?

"The disagreements over interpretation came to a head in February 1971, when UN mediator Gunnar Jarring presented a proposal to Egypt and Israel that called for full peace between them in return for full Israeli withdrawal from Egyptian territory. 

"Egyptian President Sadat accepted the proposal. Sadat's acceptance of Jarring's "famous" peace proposal was a 'bombshell,' 

"Prime Minister Rabin recalls in his memoirs, a 'milestone.' 

"While officially welcoming Egypt's expression 'of its readiness to enter into a peace agreement with Israel,' the government of Israel rejected the agreement, stating that "Israel will not withdraw to the pre-June 5, 1967 lines. 

"The reasoning was explained by Haim Bar-Lev of the governing Labor Party: 'I think that we could obtain a peace settlement on the basis of the earlier [pre-June 1967] borders. If I were persuaded that this is the maximum that we might obtain, I would say: agreed. But I think that it is not the maximum. *I think that if we continue to hold out, we will obtain more.'"*

The Israel-Arafat Agreement, by Noam Chomsky

How much more do those who never miss a chance to miss a chance to choose expansion over peace think they are entitled to?


----------



## Kondor3

georgephillip said:


> "...How much more do ...<the Jews of Israel>...think they are entitled to?








See above.

Makes perfect sense... historically, emotionally, spiritually, militarily, economically, culturally, politically, and with respect to sustainability.

And they are getting very, very close to their goal.

I wish them well, in the coming end-game.


----------



## georgephillip

Kondor3 said:


> georgephillip said:
> 
> 
> 
> "...How much more do ...<the Jews of Israel>...think they are entitled to?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> See above.
> 
> Makes perfect sense... historically, emotionally, spiritually, militarily, economically, culturally, politically, and with respect to sustainability.
> 
> And they are getting very, very close to their goal.
> 
> I wish them well, in the coming end-game.
Click to expand...


What eastern border do you imagine for the Jewish super-state?


----------



## Kondor3

georgephillip said:


> "..._What eastern border do you imagine for the Jewish super-state?_"



Just the way you see it laid out in the 1922 map, as imagined by the British Mandate Authority and the League of Nations.

That map encompasses all of the old Jewish kingdoms of the region and is almost identical to the outline of borders that has been slowing materializing for the past 65 years.

I seriously doubt they'll need or want anything more... they just want their old homeland back again... and they'll get it... they're almost there, already.


----------



## MHunterB

"What eastern border do you imagine for the Jewish super-state?"

That depends on whether Jordan continues to abide by the peace treaty.


----------



## RoccoR

georgephillip, theliq, Kondor3,  _et al,_

We always want to think that the decisions of today, and the choices we make will have survivable and acceptable consequences.



georgephillip said:


> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> 
> theliq, Kondor3,  _et al,_
> 
> Well, actually, the Arab League (AL) does provide some funding, but usually in trickle amounts and only after US Aid has been exhausted.  For instance, in 2011, when the US Congress cut funding to the Palestinian National Authority (PNA), Secretary General Nabil al-Arabi of the Arab League said the AL would provide for the PNA.  But when push came to shove, and the PNA could not make payroll, Congress released $190M+ for assistance.  So, in that regard, our friend "Kondor3" has a double-bulleyes.
> 
> The AL generally doesn't fund in parallel to US financial aid.  It will fund projects and programs that are beyond authorized limits US aid.  And example of the limit is the recent proposal for the creation of a Arabic and Islamic Heritage Fund for the Preservation of Jerusalem and Holy Ground.  The Emir of Qatar, Sheik Hamad bin Khalifa al-Thani, has already pledged to contribute about 25% _(about $250M)_ towards the proposed effort.
> 
> Earlier this year, a strange (very strange) thing happened.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Arabs Betrayal of the Palestinians said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> At least one Palestinian leader is honest enough to blame his brotherly Arab states for the cash crisis faced by the Palestinian Authority (PA) in Ramallah.  PA Prime Minister Salam Fayyad, in an interview with the Associated Press on Sunday, January 6, 2013 complained of an immense financial crisis in the PA, *largely due to the Arab countries failure to dispatch promised millions of dollars in aid*.  Ironically, it is the Jewish state of Israel that the Palestinians regularly vilify and seek to destroy, which hitherto, provided the financial wherewithal to the PA by transferring $100 million in tax rebates to Ramallah, an amount that covers a third of the PA monthly operating costs.
> 
> _*SOURCE:*_ The Arabs? Betrayal of the Palestinians | FrontPage Magazine
> 
> 
> 
> 
> It was an interesting event.  _(Fact is stranger than fiction!)_
> 
> 
> 
> theliq said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...   Muslim States want the Status Quo between Palestinians and Israelis.....I have always said that only the Palestinians and Jews will in the end will resolve this on going situation...
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> In the excerpt of "Steve's" comment, there is some very disturbing truth; but truth none the less.  (2x Single Bullseye.)
> 
> The AL does not want to be any more entangled with the Palestinians, than anyone else.  While they make, from time-to-time, anti-Israeli comments _(many with solid prima facie justification - nothing radical)_, they even more rarely make pro-Palestinian comments _(except for domestic consumption - that is purely political in religious appeasement)_.  There are many anti-government elements surrounding the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, which the AL would rather be pinned-down and focused on Israel, contained --- rather than cut loose and looking for a cause to incite elsewhere in the Region.
> 
> Oddly enough, while much of the world _(that actually cares)_ sees the Israeli-Palestinian conflict as a critical issue and humanitarian concern, within the Middle East Region, the leadership echelon see it as more of a imperfect solution to Regional Security in a time when they would like to limit radical resources that might further fuel the Arab Spring and Arab Spring like events.  There are several other lesser security concerns, but chief among those is the Iranian involvement and _(the unspoken elephant in the room)_ - the non-state actor; and the baggage all that brings with it in the form of a potential to induce a Sunni-Shi'ite disturbance and the spread of violence beyond the borders in dispute.
> 
> So, while we (in this discussion group) can say that the core issues over the more than half-century dispute include borders, Palestinian refugees, Jewish settlements in the West Bank, AND the status of Jerusalem _(politically and religiously)_; there are other critical aspect angles.  In the rarified gaseous chambers behind the closed doors of political intrigue, where dark agendas are played-out, and the stability and survival of nations and regimes are discussed, none of the issues that we discuss _(the way we discuss them)_ are black and white, a true matter of compliance versus non-compliance, or isolated and distinct as we address them here.  What may seem to us, to be individually corrupt, villainous, and violations of this, that and the other treaty, law, or convention ---> there is more _(much more)_ to those that have solution keys in hand.  And not everyone sees a solution as the best alternative; at least not yet.
> 
> Most Respectfully,
> R
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Why do you suppose "those that have solution keys in hand" chose to slap at Anwar Sadat's peace proposal in 1971?
> 
> How much more do those who never miss a chance to miss a chance to choose expansion over peace think they are entitled to?
Click to expand...

*(COMMENT)*

I suppose that I don't know.  But I'm willing to bet that the Israelis had made another choice.  

Most Respectfully,
R


----------



## georgephillip

RoccoR said:


> georgephillip, theliq, Kondor3,  _et al,_
> 
> We always want to think that the decisions of today, and the choices we make will have survivable and acceptable consequences.
> 
> 
> 
> georgephillip said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> 
> theliq, Kondor3,  _et al,_
> 
> Well, actually, the Arab League (AL) does provide some funding, but usually in trickle amounts and only after US Aid has been exhausted.  For instance, in 2011, when the US Congress cut funding to the Palestinian National Authority (PNA), Secretary General Nabil al-Arabi of the Arab League said the AL would provide for the PNA.  But when push came to shove, and the PNA could not make payroll, Congress released $190M+ for assistance.  So, in that regard, our friend "Kondor3" has a double-bulleyes.
> 
> The AL generally doesn't fund in parallel to US financial aid.  It will fund projects and programs that are beyond authorized limits US aid.  And example of the limit is the recent proposal for the creation of a Arabic and Islamic Heritage Fund for the Preservation of Jerusalem and Holy Ground.  The Emir of Qatar, Sheik Hamad bin Khalifa al-Thani, has already pledged to contribute about 25% _(about $250M)_ towards the proposed effort.
> 
> Earlier this year, a strange (very strange) thing happened.
> 
> 
> 
> It was an interesting event.  _(Fact is stranger than fiction!)_
> 
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> In the excerpt of "Steve's" comment, there is some very disturbing truth; but truth none the less.  (2x Single Bullseye.)
> 
> The AL does not want to be any more entangled with the Palestinians, than anyone else.  While they make, from time-to-time, anti-Israeli comments _(many with solid prima facie justification - nothing radical)_, they even more rarely make pro-Palestinian comments _(except for domestic consumption - that is purely political in religious appeasement)_.  There are many anti-government elements surrounding the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, which the AL would rather be pinned-down and focused on Israel, contained --- rather than cut loose and looking for a cause to incite elsewhere in the Region.
> 
> Oddly enough, while much of the world _(that actually cares)_ sees the Israeli-Palestinian conflict as a critical issue and humanitarian concern, within the Middle East Region, the leadership echelon see it as more of a imperfect solution to Regional Security in a time when they would like to limit radical resources that might further fuel the Arab Spring and Arab Spring like events.  There are several other lesser security concerns, but chief among those is the Iranian involvement and _(the unspoken elephant in the room)_ - the non-state actor; and the baggage all that brings with it in the form of a potential to induce a Sunni-Shi'ite disturbance and the spread of violence beyond the borders in dispute.
> 
> So, while we (in this discussion group) can say that the core issues over the more than half-century dispute include borders, Palestinian refugees, Jewish settlements in the West Bank, AND the status of Jerusalem _(politically and religiously)_; there are other critical aspect angles.  In the rarified gaseous chambers behind the closed doors of political intrigue, where dark agendas are played-out, and the stability and survival of nations and regimes are discussed, none of the issues that we discuss _(the way we discuss them)_ are black and white, a true matter of compliance versus non-compliance, or isolated and distinct as we address them here.  What may seem to us, to be individually corrupt, villainous, and violations of this, that and the other treaty, law, or convention ---> there is more _(much more)_ to those that have solution keys in hand.  And not everyone sees a solution as the best alternative; at least not yet.
> 
> Most Respectfully,
> R
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Why do you suppose "those that have solution keys in hand" chose to slap at Anwar Sadat's peace proposal in 1971?
> 
> How much more do those who never miss a chance to miss a chance to choose expansion over peace think they are entitled to?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> I suppose that I don't know.  But I'm willing to bet that the Israelis had made another choice.
> 
> Most Respectfully,
> R
Click to expand...


Obviously.

"The Yom Kippur War, Ramadan War, or October War (Hebrew: &#1502;&#1500;&#1495;&#1502;&#1514; &#1497;&#1493;&#1501; &#1492;&#1499;&#1497;&#1508;&#1493;&#1512;&#1497;&#1501;* Mil&#7830;emet Yom HaKipurim or &#1502;&#1500;&#1495;&#1502;&#1514; &#1497;&#1493;&#1501; &#1499;&#1497;&#1508;&#1493;&#1512; Mil&#7830;emet Yom Kipur; Arabic: &#1581;&#1585;&#1576; &#1571;&#1603;&#1578;&#1608;&#1576;&#1585;* &#7717;arb &#702;Ukt&#333;bar, or &#1581;&#1585;&#1576; &#1578;&#1588;&#1585;&#1610;&#1606; &#7717;arb Tir&#299;n), also known as the 1973 ArabIsraeli War and the Fourth ArabIsraeli War, was a war fought by the coalition of Arab states led by Egypt and Syria against Israel from October 6 to 25, 1973."

Expansion over peace has been the Israeli choice for generations.

Yom Kippur War - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


----------



## Kondor3

georgephillip said:


> "...Expansion over peace has been the Israeli choice for generations..."


Only within the context and confines of the 1922 map boundaries.

They gave back the Sinai willingly enough.

They gave back southern Lebanon willingly enough.

So much for their insidious expansionist plans, beyond the 1922 map.


----------



## georgephillip

Kondor3 said:


> georgephillip said:
> 
> 
> 
> "...Expansion over peace has been the Israeli choice for generations..."
> 
> 
> 
> Only within the context and confines of the 1922 map boundaries.
> 
> They gave back the Sinai willingly enough.
> 
> They gave back southern Lebanon willingly enough.
> 
> So much for their insidious expansionist plans, beyond the 1922 map.
Click to expand...


Why did Golda wait so long to "willingly" return the Sinai?

"Between 1971 and 1973 Prime Minister Golda Meir rejected the peace signals of [Egyptian President Anwar] Sadat and ignored his proposal to establish full peace with Israel in return for a return of the Sinai [Peninsula] to Egypts hands.

The Myth of the Missed Opportunity In Israeli-Arab Peace - Al-Monitor: the Pulse of the Middle East


----------



## georgephillip

Kondor3 said:


> georgephillip said:
> 
> 
> 
> "..._What eastern border do you imagine for the Jewish super-state?_"
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Just the way you see it laid out in the 1922 map, as imagined by the British Mandate Authority and the League of Nations.
> 
> That map encompasses all of the old Jewish kingdoms of the region and is almost identical to the outline of borders that has been slowing materializing for the past 65 years.
> 
> I seriously doubt they'll need or want anything more... they just want their old homeland back again... and they'll get it... they're almost there, already.
Click to expand...

Now tell us why Jews alone, among all nations of the world, are entitled to their "old homeland" when the ancestors of today's Palestinian Arab population have occupied the same homeland for at least as long?


----------



## Kondor3

georgephillip said:


> Kondor3 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> georgephillip said:
> 
> 
> 
> "...Expansion over peace has been the Israeli choice for generations..."
> 
> 
> 
> Only within the context and confines of the 1922 map boundaries.
> 
> They gave back the Sinai willingly enough.
> 
> They gave back southern Lebanon willingly enough.
> 
> So much for their insidious expansionist plans, beyond the 1922 map.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Why did Golda wait so long to "willingly" return the Sinai? ...
Click to expand...


Holding onto it as a bargaining chip, until the Egyptians were willing to bargain...


----------



## Kondor3

georgephillip said:


> Kondor3 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> georgephillip said:
> 
> 
> 
> "..._What eastern border do you imagine for the Jewish super-state?_"
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Just the way you see it laid out in the 1922 map, as imagined by the British Mandate Authority and the League of Nations.
> 
> That map encompasses all of the old Jewish kingdoms of the region and is almost identical to the outline of borders that has been slowing materializing for the past 65 years.
> 
> I seriously doubt they'll need or want anything more... they just want their old homeland back again... and they'll get it... they're almost there, already.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Now tell us why Jews alone, among all nations of the world, are entitled to their "old homeland" when the ancestors of today's Palestinian Arab population have occupied the same homeland for at least as long?
Click to expand...


Because they are currently in possession of most of it?

Because they acquired pieces of it as the spoils of war, after the Arabs attacked them or postured so as to force Israel to strike preemptively in order to survive?

Because they're the biggest, baddest mother phukkers in the valley?


----------



## theliq

Kondor3 said:


> georgephillip said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Kondor3 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Just the way you see it laid out in the 1922 map, as imagined by the British Mandate Authority and the League of Nations.
> 
> That map encompasses all of the old Jewish kingdoms of the region and is almost identical to the outline of borders that has been slowing materializing for the past 65 years.
> 
> I seriously doubt they'll need or want anything more... they just want their old homeland back again... and they'll get it... they're almost there, already.
> 
> 
> 
> Now tell us why Jews alone, among all nations of the world, are entitled to their "old homeland" when the ancestors of today's Palestinian Arab population have occupied the same homeland for at least as long?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Because they are currently in possession of most of it?
> 
> Because they acquired pieces of it as the spoils of war, after the Arabs attacked them or postured so as to force Israel to strike preemptively in order to survive?
> 
> Because they're the biggest, baddest mother phukkers in the valley?
Click to expand...


Well your knowledge of History is chronically poor.

As in America today with illegal immigration....parallels exactly to the Palestinians situation from cira 1926.......Palestine was flooded with Illegal Jewish Migrants/Immigrants,to the point that they created a formidable Terrorist Force and they began their Killing,Looting,Murder,Stealing and eventually War against the Palestinians and British......They were TERRORISTS OF THE WORSE KIND.......eventually they overcame the owners of the land and expelled them.

According to you it would be OK for say for example for 100's of thousands of Illegal Mexicans to go into Texas,fight a war,Win,then throw out Texans,all under the guise that they or their ancestors lived there 10 generations ago.... the UN then agreed. The country of Texmex was born

Because that is exactly your premise regarding the Israeli,well Jewish invasion at the time.

You see Kondor,things are never as simplistic as you make them appear,you only see things through this moment in time.

But the majority of Israeli Jews want a 2 State solution.....apart from the latest lot of Jewish Immigrants "The Fundimentalist  Ultra's and the Settlers" all mainly imports from the US.

As the United States realize you may win the Battle but you can never win the War.....The Palestinians are one of the most educated,proud and caring peoples on earth and like their cousins the Jews...it will be these two peoples that will bring this Schism to an end.steve

Viva Palestine,Viva Israel


----------



## Kondor3

theliq said:


> "...Well your knowledge of History is chronically poor..."


Not true, but that really doesn't matter.

What *DOES* matter is that the Israelis control that land, and will continue to do so, and will continue to expand their holdings, until they have annexed the remainder of the West Bank and Gaza and scattered the inhabitants into Lebanon and Jordan and moved Jews into the vacuum in order to consolidate and finalize their holdings.

The rest is mere background noise and filler-fluff.


----------



## ForeverYoung436

georgephillip said:


> Kondor3 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> georgephillip said:
> 
> 
> 
> "..._What eastern border do you imagine for the Jewish super-state?_"
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Just the way you see it laid out in the 1922 map, as imagined by the British Mandate Authority and the League of Nations.
> 
> That map encompasses all of the old Jewish kingdoms of the region and is almost identical to the outline of borders that has been slowing materializing for the past 65 years.
> 
> I seriously doubt they'll need or want anything more... they just want their old homeland back again... and they'll get it... they're almost there, already.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Now tell us why Jews alone, among all nations of the world, are entitled to their "old homeland" when the ancestors of today's Palestinian Arab population have occupied the same homeland for at least as long?
Click to expand...


The Palestinians are part of the larger Arab nation that already has 22 countries.  I was just at a Jewish wedding last week.  The groom broke a glass.  Why?  To see Jerusalem rebuilt.  On the holiday of Tisha B'av, we fast.  Why?  To see Jerusalem rebuilt.  Orthodox Jews mention Jerusalem 3x every day in their prayers, and when saying Grace.  And all that praying finally payed off after 2,000 years.


----------



## Bumberclyde

ForeverYoung436 said:


> georgephillip said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Kondor3 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Just the way you see it laid out in the 1922 map, as imagined by the British Mandate Authority and the League of Nations.
> 
> That map encompasses all of the old Jewish kingdoms of the region and is almost identical to the outline of borders that has been slowing materializing for the past 65 years.
> 
> I seriously doubt they'll need or want anything more... they just want their old homeland back again... and they'll get it... they're almost there, already.
> 
> 
> 
> Now tell us why Jews alone, among all nations of the world, are entitled to their "old homeland" when the ancestors of today's Palestinian Arab population have occupied the same homeland for at least as long?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> The Palestinians are part of the larger Arab nation that already has 22 countries.  I was just at a Jewish wedding last week.  The groom broke a glass.  Why?  To see Jerusalem rebuilt.  On the holiday of Tisha B'av, we fast.  Why?  To see Jerusalem rebuilt.  Orthodox Jews mention Jerusalem 3x every day in their prayers, and when saying Grace.  *And all that praying finally payed off after 2,000 years.*
Click to expand...


...and gave us 9/11, among other things like jihad, shoe bombs... 

Btw, all our ancestors came from Africa. Can we go steal their land too? Just curious.


----------



## RoccoR

Bumberclyde,  _et al,_

I'm not so sure I totally disagree with this.  It does require some thought.



Bumberclyde said:


> ...and gave us 9/11, among other things like jihad, shoe bombs...


*(COMMENT)*

This is fairly cut and dry.

The Osama bin Laden "letter to the American people" explains it clearly.



			
				Osama bin Laden said:
			
		

> As for the first question: Why are we fighting and opposing you? The answer is very simple:
> 
> (1) Because you attacked us and continue to attack us.
> 
> a) You attacked us in Palestine:
> b) You attacked us in Somalia; you supported the Russian atrocities against us in Chechnya, the Indian oppression against us in Kashmir, and the Jewish aggression against us in Lebanon.
> c) Under your supervision, consent and orders, the governments of our countries which act as your agents, attack us on a daily basis;
> d) You steal our wealth and oil at paltry prices because of you international influence and military threats. This theft is indeed the biggest theft ever witnessed by mankind in the history of the world.
> e) Your forces occupy our countries; you spread your military bases throughout them; you corrupt our lands, and you besiege our sanctities, to protect the security of the Jews and to ensure the continuity of your pillage of our treasures.
> f) You have starved the Muslims of Iraq, where children die every day. It is a wonder that more than 1.5 million Iraqi children have died as a result of your sanctions, and you did not show concern. Yet when 3000 of your people died, the entire world rises and has not yet sat down.
> g) You have supported the Jews in their idea that Jerusalem is their eternal capital, and agreed to move your embassy there. With your help and under your protection, the Israelis are planning to destroy the Al-Aqsa mosque. Under the protection of your weapons, Sharon entered the Al-Aqsa mosque, to pollute it as a preparation to capture and destroy it.​



Whether the perceptions are true (or not) is unimportant.  The consequences of those perception brought us the events.



Bumberclyde said:


> Btw, all our ancestors came from Africa. Can we go steal their land too? Just curious.


*(COMMENT)*

This is a question of validity to ancient sovereign claims.  And most people have difficulty separating the concept of sovereignty from ownership.  The phrase "steal their land" is a real estate issue about ownership _(not an issue of sovereignty)_.

Most Respectfully,
R


----------



## Bumberclyde

RoccoR said:


> Bumberclyde,  _et al,_
> 
> I'm not so sure I totally disagree with this.  It does require some thought.
> 
> 
> 
> Bumberclyde said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...and gave us 9/11, among other things like jihad, shoe bombs...
> 
> 
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> This is fairly cut and dry.
> 
> The Osama bin Laden "letter to the American people" explains it clearly.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Osama bin Laden said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> As for the first question: Why are we fighting and opposing you? The answer is very simple:
> 
> (1) Because you attacked us and continue to attack us.
> 
> a) You attacked us in Palestine:
> b) You attacked us in Somalia; you supported the Russian atrocities against us in Chechnya, the Indian oppression against us in Kashmir, and the Jewish aggression against us in Lebanon.
> c) Under your supervision, consent and orders, the governments of our countries which act as your agents, attack us on a daily basis;
> d) You steal our wealth and oil at paltry prices because of you international influence and military threats. This theft is indeed the biggest theft ever witnessed by mankind in the history of the world.
> e) Your forces occupy our countries; you spread your military bases throughout them; you corrupt our lands, and you besiege our sanctities, to protect the security of the Jews and to ensure the continuity of your pillage of our treasures.
> f) You have starved the Muslims of Iraq, where children die every day. It is a wonder that more than 1.5 million Iraqi children have died as a result of your sanctions, and you did not show concern. Yet when 3000 of your people died, the entire world rises and has not yet sat down.
> g) You have supported the Jews in their idea that Jerusalem is their eternal capital, and agreed to move your embassy there. With your help and under your protection, the Israelis are planning to destroy the Al-Aqsa mosque. Under the protection of your weapons, Sharon entered the Al-Aqsa mosque, to pollute it as a preparation to capture and destroy it.​
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Whether the perceptions are true (or not) is unimportant.  The consequences of those perception brought us the events.
> 
> 
> 
> Bumberclyde said:
> 
> 
> 
> Btw, all our ancestors came from Africa. Can we go steal their land too? Just curious.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> This is a question of validity to ancient sovereign claims.  And most people have difficulty separating the concept of sovereignty from ownership.  The phrase "steal their land" is a real estate issue about ownership _(not an issue of sovereignty)_.
> 
> Most Respectfully,
> R
Click to expand...


Holy Deflection Batman!

So can I go take the land in Africa or not? My ancestors are from there. Or does everyone have to be Jewish for it to count?

Israel gave us 9/11, you're right, it IS fairly cut and dry.


----------



## ForeverYoung436

Bumberclyde said:


> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> 
> Bumberclyde,  _et al,_
> 
> I'm not so sure I totally disagree with this.  It does require some thought.
> 
> 
> 
> Bumberclyde said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...and gave us 9/11, among other things like jihad, shoe bombs...
> 
> 
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> This is fairly cut and dry.
> 
> The Osama bin Laden "letter to the American people" explains it clearly.
> 
> 
> 
> Whether the perceptions are true (or not) is unimportant.  The consequences of those perception brought us the events.
> 
> 
> 
> Bumberclyde said:
> 
> 
> 
> Btw, all our ancestors came from Africa. Can we go steal their land too? Just curious.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> This is a question of validity to ancient sovereign claims.  And most people have difficulty separating the concept of sovereignty from ownership.  The phrase "steal their land" is a real estate issue about ownership _(not an issue of sovereignty)_.
> 
> Most Respectfully,
> R
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Holy Deflection Batman!
> 
> So can I go take the land in Africa or not? My ancestors are from there. Or does everyone have to be Jewish for it to count?
> 
> Israel gave us 9/11, you're right, it IS fairly cut and dry.
Click to expand...


Are you black?  You can certainly move to Africa if you want.  Roots and all that.
The people who actually COMMITTED 9/11 brought you 9/11.


----------



## theliq

ForeverYoung436 said:


> georgephillip said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Kondor3 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Just the way you see it laid out in the 1922 map, as imagined by the British Mandate Authority and the League of Nations.
> 
> That map encompasses all of the old Jewish kingdoms of the region and is almost identical to the outline of borders that has been slowing materializing for the past 65 years.
> 
> I seriously doubt they'll need or want anything more... they just want their old homeland back again... and they'll get it... they're almost there, already.
> 
> 
> 
> Now tell us why Jews alone, among all nations of the world, are entitled to their "old homeland" when the ancestors of today's Palestinian Arab population have occupied the same homeland for at least as long?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> The Palestinians are part of the larger Arab nation that already has 22 countries.  I was just at a Jewish wedding last week.  The groom broke a glass.  Why?  To see Jerusalem rebuilt.  On the holiday of Tisha B'av, we fast.  Why?  To see Jerusalem rebuilt.  Orthodox Jews mention Jerusalem 3x every day in their prayers, and when saying Grace.  And all that praying finally payed off after 2,000 years.
Click to expand...


The Palestinians are nothing like other Arab nations,it's like saying the Brits or Australians are like Americans.........over time nations mentality changes...Crikey if anyone thought I was a Brit or American.....I would take it as an insult.

I by the way am pragmatic enough to realize Israel will remain but thinking Jews worldwide know that there will be a Country of Palestinian


----------



## georgephillip

Kondor3 said:


> georgephillip said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Kondor3 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Only within the context and confines of the 1922 map boundaries.
> 
> They gave back the Sinai willingly enough.
> 
> They gave back southern Lebanon willingly enough.
> 
> So much for their insidious expansionist plans, beyond the 1922 map.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Why did Golda wait so long to "willingly" return the Sinai? ...
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Holding onto it as a bargaining chip, until the Egyptians were willing to bargain...
Click to expand...


*Golda accepted the same peace deal in 1973 that Sadat put on the table in 1971.
What happened in between?*

"The Yom Kippur War, Ramadan War, or October War (Hebrew: &#1502;&#1500;&#1495;&#1502;&#1514; &#1497;&#1493;&#1501; &#1492;&#1499;&#1497;&#1508;&#1493;&#1512;&#1497;&#1501;* Mil&#7830;emet Yom HaKipurim or &#1502;&#1500;&#1495;&#1502;&#1514; &#1497;&#1493;&#1501; &#1499;&#1497;&#1508;&#1493;&#1512; Mil&#7830;emet Yom Kipur; Arabic: &#1581;&#1585;&#1576; &#1571;&#1603;&#1578;&#1608;&#1576;&#1585;* &#7717;arb &#702;Ukt&#333;bar, or &#1581;&#1585;&#1576; &#1578;&#1588;&#1585;&#1610;&#1606; &#7717;arb Tir&#299;n), also known as the 1973 ArabIsraeli War and the Fourth ArabIsraeli War, was a war fought by the coalition of Arab states led by Egypt and Syria against Israel from October 6 to 25, 1973."

*What price did Americans pay for Golda's gamble?*

"In response to U.S. support of Israel, the Arab members of OPEC, led by Saudi Arabia, decided to reduce oil production by 5% per month on October 17. On October 19, President Nixon authorized a major allocation of arms supplies and $2.2 billion in appropriations for Israel. 

"In response, Saudi Arabia declared an embargo against the United States, later joined by other oil exporters and extended against the Netherlands and other states, causing the 1973 energy crisis."

Yom Kippur War - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


----------



## Kondor3

It was worth the price, and you'll notice that the Arabs don't pull that kind of shit anymore...


----------



## georgephillip

Kondor3 said:


> It was worth the price, and you'll notice that the Arabs don't pull that kind of shit anymore...



Jews do:

"Families in Sheikh Jarrah, a Palestinian village in East Jerusalem, are being evicted from their homes and replaced by Jewish settlers. The al Kurd family, whose 94 year-old matriarch was displaced from her Haifa home in the 1948 war and has resided in Sheikh Jarrah for nearly 60 years, lost half of its home to an Israeli settler family in 2008and is currently under threat of being evicted from the rest."

A Story Your Reps Should Hear: House Evictions in Sheikh Jarrah

What makes you think non-Jews found the Arab oil embargo "worth the price?" of Golda's greed?


----------



## RoccoR

georgephillip,  _et al,_

In wars, especially a wars for independence and wars to maintain sovereignty, everyone loses something.  In wars, it is not about how much about won wins what ---- but, which side loses the least.



georgephillip said:


> Kondor3 said:
> 
> 
> 
> It was worth the price, and you'll notice that the Arabs don't pull that kind of shit anymore...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Jews do:
> 
> "Families in Sheikh Jarrah, a Palestinian village in East Jerusalem, are being evicted from their homes and replaced by Jewish settlers. The al Kurd family, whose 94 year-old matriarch was displaced from her Haifa home in the 1948 war and has resided in Sheikh Jarrah for nearly 60 years, lost half of its home to an Israeli settler family in 2008and is currently under threat of being evicted from the rest."
> 
> What makes you think non-Jews found the Arab oil embargo "worth the price?" of Golda's greed?
Click to expand...

*(COMMENT)*

So let's cut to the chase.  State the complaint clearly!  

What was the political condition at the time of the loss?

Who is losing What?
Which side where they on?
When did they lose it?
Why did they lose it?

Arabs & Palestinians = Aggressors [A/RES/3314(XXIX)]
Israel = State under assault and coercion.  [Chapter VII, Article 51, UN Charter]​
I'm an old man and sometimes get confused.  In this case I'm confused.

Most Respectfully,
R


----------



## Kondor3

georgephillip said:


> Kondor3 said:
> 
> 
> 
> I_t was worth the price, and you'll notice that *the Arabs don't pull that kind of shit anymore*_...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *Jews do*:,,,
Click to expand...


*I do not remember the last time that the Jews instituted an Oil Embargo against us*...


----------



## theliq

Kondor3 said:


> theliq said:
> 
> 
> 
> "...Well your knowledge of History is chronically poor..."
> 
> 
> 
> Not true, but that really doesn't matter.
> 
> What *DOES* matter is that the Israelis control that land, and will continue to do so, and will continue to expand their holdings, until they have annexed the remainder of the West Bank and Gaza and scattered the inhabitants into Lebanon and Jordan and moved Jews into the vacuum in order to consolidate and finalize their holdings.
> 
> The rest is mere background noise and filler-fluff.
Click to expand...


Well if thousands of Murdered Palestinians and Jews to a lesser extent are MERE FLUFF,then you are little more than a FUCKARD........You know only Fluff

In fact you are Fluff...... our interaction Ends Here


Thank Goodness


----------



## georgephillip

RoccoR said:


> georgephillip,  _et al,_
> 
> In wars, especially a wars for independence and wars to maintain sovereignty, everyone loses something.  In wars, it is not about how much about won wins what ---- but, which side loses the least.
> 
> 
> 
> georgephillip said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Kondor3 said:
> 
> 
> 
> It was worth the price, and you'll notice that the Arabs don't pull that kind of shit anymore...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Jews do:
> 
> "Families in Sheikh Jarrah, a Palestinian village in East Jerusalem, are being evicted from their homes and replaced by Jewish settlers. The al Kurd family, whose 94 year-old matriarch was displaced from her Haifa home in the 1948 war and has resided in Sheikh Jarrah for nearly 60 years, lost half of its home to an Israeli settler family in 2008and is currently under threat of being evicted from the rest."
> 
> What makes you think non-Jews found the Arab oil embargo "worth the price?" of Golda's greed?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> So let's cut to the chase.  State the complaint clearly!
> 
> What was the political condition at the time of the loss?
> 
> Who is losing What?
> Which side where they on?
> When did they lose it?
> Why did they lose it?
> 
> Arabs & Palestinians = Aggressors [A/RES/3314(XXIX)]
> Israel = State under assault and coercion.  [Chapter VII, Article 51, UN Charter]​
> I'm an old man and sometimes get confused.  In this case I'm confused.
> 
> Most Respectfully,
> R
Click to expand...


When it comes to "old" and "confused" you're no match for me, Rocco.

The 94 year-old matriarch of the al Kurd family has resided in Jerusalem for almost 60 years after being displaced from her Haifa home in 1948. In 2008 she lost half her home to Jewish settlers and now the "State under assault and coercion" is threatening to take the other half.

Imagine my confusion concerning those who conflate "aggressors" and "victims"?


----------



## Kondor3

theliq said:


> Kondor3 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> theliq said:
> 
> 
> 
> "...Well your knowledge of History is chronically poor..."
> 
> 
> 
> Not true, but that really doesn't matter.
> 
> What *DOES* matter is that the Israelis control that land, and will continue to do so, and will continue to expand their holdings, until they have annexed the remainder of the West Bank and Gaza and scattered the inhabitants into Lebanon and Jordan and moved Jews into the vacuum in order to consolidate and finalize their holdings.
> 
> The rest is mere background noise and filler-fluff.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Well if thousands of Murdered Palestinians and Jews to a lesser extent are MERE FLUFF,then you are little more than a FUCKARD........You know only Fluff
> 
> In fact you are Fluff...... our interaction Ends Here
> 
> 
> Thank Goodness
Click to expand...


I was referring to old legal arguments and claims and counter-claims and all the bitching and moaning by both sides over the past 65 years as background noise and fluff, not the varied loss of human life on both sides during that same timeframe...

I was referring to history as being relatively unimportant with respect to where we are today and what is likely to be unfolding during the next several years...

I was not diminishing the value of such loss of human life... not even close.. but you go ahead and read into that what you like, based upon your faulty initial interpretation and your apparent combative nature on the subject...

I have been nothing other than courteous to you, to date, but, in light of the above, and with your kind permission, and even without your kind permission... you can take your 'fuktard' appellation and cram it where the sun don't shine...

You *ARE* an emotional little creature, aren't you?

As to your crying about 'thousands of murdered Palestinians', well... I'm not sure that it's accurate to count Combatants as murder-victims, nor Enemy Leadership as murder-victims, nor unintended collateral civilian casualties as murder-victims, nor neutralized suicide bombers and rocket-launching teams as murder victims...

Oh, and, as to our Interaction ending here... doesn't faze me in the slightest... don't let the door hit you in the ass on the way out, yes?

Have a good evening...


----------



## RoccoR

georgephillip,  _et al,_

Something doesn't sound right about this story.  There is something missing.



georgephillip said:


> The 94 year-old matriarch of the al Kurd family has resided in Jerusalem for almost 60 years after being displaced from her Haifa home in 1948. In 2008 she lost half her home to Jewish settlers and now the "State under assault and coercion" is threatening to take the other half.
> 
> Imagine my confusion concerning those who conflate "aggressors" and "victims"?


*(COMMENT)*

There is not enough information here for me to comment, one way or the other.

Most Respectfully,
R


----------



## georgephillip

RoccoR said:


> georgephillip,  _et al,_
> 
> Something doesn't sound right about this story.  There is something missing.
> 
> 
> 
> georgephillip said:
> 
> 
> 
> The 94 year-old matriarch of the al Kurd family has resided in Jerusalem for almost 60 years after being displaced from her Haifa home in 1948. In 2008 she lost half her home to Jewish settlers and now the "State under assault and coercion" is threatening to take the other half.
> 
> Imagine my confusion concerning those who conflate "aggressors" and "victims"?
> 
> 
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> There is not enough information here for me to comment, one way or the other.
> 
> Most Respectfully,
> R
Click to expand...


There are definitely several sides to this issue, Rocco:

"In 2001, Israeli settlers moved into a sealed section of the al-Kurd family's house and refused to leave, claiming the property was owned by Jews.[23] 

"In 2008, the Jerusalem District Court ruled that the Shimon Hatzadik property belonged to the Sephardi Community Committee. The Arab families had protected tenant status as long as they paid rent but several families refused to pay, ending in their eviction. 

"The al-Kurds were evicted in November 2008. Muhammad al-Kurd, the head of the family, died eleven days later. 

"The court ruling was based on an Ottoman-era bill of sale whose authenticity was challenged in 2009 on the grounds that the building had only been rented to the Sephardi group.[24] Fawzieh al-Kurd continued to protest the eviction, moving into an encampment in East Jerusalem.[23][25]"

Sheikh Jarrah - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The following 25 minute documentary provides a rare example of Jewish and Arab collaboration against expanding settlement activity in East Jerusalem as it relates to the al-Kurds:

Watch | Just Vision


----------



## Bumberclyde

RoccoR said:


> georgephillip,  _et al,_
> 
> Something doesn't sound right about this story.  There is something missing.
> 
> 
> 
> georgephillip said:
> 
> 
> 
> The 94 year-old matriarch of the al Kurd family has resided in Jerusalem for almost 60 years after being displaced from her Haifa home in 1948. In 2008 she lost half her home to Jewish settlers and now the "State under assault and coercion" is threatening to take the other half.
> 
> Imagine my confusion concerning those who conflate "aggressors" and "victims"?
> 
> 
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> There is not enough information here for me to comment, one way or the other.
> 
> Most Respectfully,
> R
Click to expand...


You just did. And it's nice to see that you have no copy&paste answer for a change, because really, what is there to say about the encroachment of Jewish settlers on other peoples land?


----------



## ForeverYoung436

Bumberclyde said:


> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> 
> georgephillip,  _et al,_
> 
> Something doesn't sound right about this story.  There is something missing.
> 
> 
> 
> georgephillip said:
> 
> 
> 
> The 94 year-old matriarch of the al Kurd family has resided in Jerusalem for almost 60 years after being displaced from her Haifa home in 1948. In 2008 she lost half her home to Jewish settlers and now the "State under assault and coercion" is threatening to take the other half.
> 
> Imagine my confusion concerning those who conflate "aggressors" and "victims"?
> 
> 
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> There is not enough information here for me to comment, one way or the other.
> 
> Most Respectfully,
> R
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You just did. And it's nice to see that you have no copy&paste answer for a change, because really, what is there to say about the encroachment of Jewish settlers on other peoples land?
Click to expand...


Most of the land they settle on is vacant.  The West Bank is rich with Jewish history.  It's pretty crazy that a Jew can live in NY, Paris or Kansas City, but not in Hebron--where we come from.  Though I agree that at least for the 9 months of the negotiations, there should be no settlement activity as a matter of common sense.


----------



## RoccoR

Bumberclyde;  _et al,_

I can see why there would be reasoning to promote settlements.



Bumberclyde said:


> You just did. And it's nice to see that you have no copy&paste answer for a change, because really, what is there to say about the encroachment of Jewish settlers on other peoples land?


*(COMMENT)*

There are some security reasons and some political reasons.  But not being on the inside of the Israeli government, I don't have a feel for their reasoning.

Most Respectfully,
R


----------



## ForeverYoung436

RoccoR said:


> Bumberclyde;  _et al,_
> 
> I can see why there would be reasoning to promote settlements.
> 
> 
> 
> Bumberclyde said:
> 
> 
> 
> You just did. And it's nice to see that you have no copy&paste answer for a change, because really, what is there to say about the encroachment of Jewish settlers on other peoples land?
> 
> 
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> There are some security reasons and some political reasons.  But not being on the inside of the Israeli government, I don't have a feel for their reasoning.
> 
> Most Respectfully,
> R
Click to expand...


Also:  If Jews don't have a right to Hebron, what right do we have to Eilat?  Our fathers and mothers are buried there.


----------



## Bumberclyde

RoccoR said:


> Bumberclyde;  _et al,_
> 
> I can see why there would be reasoning to promote settlements.
> 
> 
> 
> Bumberclyde said:
> 
> 
> 
> You just did. And it's nice to see that you have no copy&paste answer for a change, because really, what is there to say about the encroachment of Jewish settlers on other peoples land?
> 
> 
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> There are some security reasons and some political reasons.  But not being on the inside of the Israeli government, I don't have a feel for their reasoning.
> 
> Most Respectfully,
> R
Click to expand...

You seem to be able to comment on EVERYTHING else. Is this topic just indefensible?


----------



## ForeverYoung436

georgephillip said:


> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> 
> georgephillip,  _et al,_
> 
> Something doesn't sound right about this story.  There is something missing.
> 
> 
> 
> georgephillip said:
> 
> 
> 
> The 94 year-old matriarch of the al Kurd family has resided in Jerusalem for almost 60 years after being displaced from her Haifa home in 1948. In 2008 she lost half her home to Jewish settlers and now the "State under assault and coercion" is threatening to take the other half.
> 
> Imagine my confusion concerning those who conflate "aggressors" and "victims"?
> 
> 
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> There is not enough information here for me to comment, one way or the other.
> 
> Most Respectfully,
> R
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> There are definitely several sides to this issue, Rocco:
> 
> "In 2001, Israeli settlers moved into a sealed section of the al-Kurd family's house and refused to leave, claiming the property was owned by Jews.[23]
> 
> "In 2008, the Jerusalem District Court ruled that the Shimon Hatzadik property belonged to the Sephardi Community Committee. The Arab families had protected tenant status as long as they paid rent but several families refused to pay, ending in their eviction.
> 
> "The al-Kurds were evicted in November 2008. Muhammad al-Kurd, the head of the family, died eleven days later.
> 
> "The court ruling was based on an Ottoman-era bill of sale whose authenticity was challenged in 2009 on the grounds that the building had only been rented to the Sephardi group.[24] Fawzieh al-Kurd continued to protest the eviction, moving into an encampment in East Jerusalem.[23][25]"
> 
> Sheikh Jarrah - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
> 
> The following 25 minute documentary provides a rare example of Jewish and Arab collaboration against expanding settlement activity in East Jerusalem as it relates to the al-Kurds:
> 
> Watch | Just Vision
Click to expand...


Haifa was mostly Arab prior to 1948.  The Shimon Hatzaddik neighborhood of East Jerusalem was mostly Jewish prior to 1948.  So both Jews and Arabs were displaced in 1948, but somehow we only hear about the Arab narrative.


----------



## RoccoR

Bumberclyde,  _et al,_

I don't know, and I'm absent the facts.



Bumberclyde said:


> You seem to be able to comment on EVERYTHING else. Is this topic just indefensible?


*(COMMENT)*

This is really a real estate matter for civil court action.

Rule of Law stuff.

Most Respectfully,
R


----------



## theliq

ForeverYoung436 said:


> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> 
> Bumberclyde;  _et al,_
> 
> I can see why there would be reasoning to promote settlements.
> 
> 
> 
> Bumberclyde said:
> 
> 
> 
> You just did. And it's nice to see that you have no copy&paste answer for a change, because really, what is there to say about the encroachment of Jewish settlers on other peoples land?
> 
> 
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> There are some security reasons and some political reasons.  But not being on the inside of the Israeli government, I don't have a feel for their reasoning.
> 
> Most Respectfully,
> R
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Also:  If Jews don't have a right to Hebron, what right do we have to Eilat?  Our fathers and mothers are buried there.
Click to expand...


So are Romans,Moabites,Caananites,Philistines,Egyptians and Palestinians.   To name a few

So YOUR POINT IS ?????????????


----------



## georgephillip

Kondor3 said:


> georgephillip said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Kondor3 said:
> 
> 
> 
> I_t was worth the price, and you'll notice that *the Arabs don't pull that kind of shit anymore*_...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *Jews do*:,,,
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> *I do not remember the last time that the Jews instituted an Oil Embargo against us*...
Click to expand...


*"Oil embargo*
In response to U.S. support of Israel, the Arab members of OPEC, led by Saudi Arabia, decided to reduce oil production by 5% per month on October 17. On October 19, President Nixon authorized a major allocation of arms supplies and $2.2 billion in appropriations for Israel. In response, Saudi Arabia declared an embargo against the United States, later joined by other oil exporters and extended against the Netherlands and other states, causing the 1973 energy crisis."
Yom Kippur War - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


----------



## toastman

theliq said:


> ForeverYoung436 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> 
> Bumberclyde;  _et al,_
> 
> I can see why there would be reasoning to promote settlements.
> 
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> There are some security reasons and some political reasons.  But not being on the inside of the Israeli government, I don't have a feel for their reasoning.
> 
> Most Respectfully,
> R
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Also:  If Jews don't have a right to Hebron, what right do we have to Eilat?  Our fathers and mothers are buried there.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> So are Romans,Moabites,Caananites,Philistines,Egyptians and Palestinians.   To name a few
> 
> So YOUR POINT IS ?????????????
Click to expand...


Out of all the people you named, which one exist today?


----------



## P F Tinmore

toastman said:


> theliq said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ForeverYoung436 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Also:  If Jews don't have a right to Hebron, what right do we have to Eilat?  Our fathers and mothers are buried there.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> So are Romans,Moabites,Caananites,Philistines,Egyptians and Palestinians.   To name a few
> 
> So YOUR POINT IS ?????????????
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Out of all the people you named, which one exist today?
Click to expand...


Which ones do not?


----------



## toastman

Nice deflection


----------



## ForeverYoung436

P F Tinmore said:


> toastman said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> theliq said:
> 
> 
> 
> So are Romans,Moabites,Caananites,Philistines,Egyptians and Palestinians.   To name a few
> 
> So YOUR POINT IS ?????????????
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Out of all the people you named, which one exist today?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Which ones do not?
Click to expand...


The ancient Roman Empire is no more.  Italy makes no claims on Israel.  The Moabites, Canaanites and Philistines are extinct.  The descendants of the ancient Egyptians, the Copts of Egypt, are being persecuted in their own country.  The Palestinians are Arabs that come from Arabia.  This was attested to in a document that Sherri posted on here, ironically.  The document, from the 1930's, said that the population from Palestine is constantly being replenished by nomadic tribes from Arabia.


----------



## P F Tinmore

ForeverYoung436 said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> toastman said:
> 
> 
> 
> Out of all the people you named, which one exist today?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Which ones do not?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> The ancient Roman Empire is no more.  Italy makes no claims on Israel.  The Moabites, Canaanites and Philistines are extinct.  The descendants of the ancient Egyptians, the Copts of Egypt, are being persecuted in their own country.  The Palestinians are Arabs that come from Arabia.  This was attested to in a document that Sherri posted on here, ironically.  The document, from the 1930's, said that the population from Palestine is constantly being replenished by nomadic tribes from Arabia.
Click to expand...


Israel ended thousands of years ago. Does that mean all of the Israelites died off and there are none left?


----------



## georgephillip

ForeverYoung436 said:


> georgephillip said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> 
> georgephillip,  _et al,_
> 
> Something doesn't sound right about this story.  There is something missing.
> 
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> There is not enough information here for me to comment, one way or the other.
> 
> Most Respectfully,
> R
> 
> 
> 
> 
> There are definitely several sides to this issue, Rocco:
> 
> "In 2001, Israeli settlers moved into a sealed section of the al-Kurd family's house and refused to leave, claiming the property was owned by Jews.[23]
> 
> "In 2008, the Jerusalem District Court ruled that the Shimon Hatzadik property belonged to the Sephardi Community Committee. The Arab families had protected tenant status as long as they paid rent but several families refused to pay, ending in their eviction.
> 
> "The al-Kurds were evicted in November 2008. Muhammad al-Kurd, the head of the family, died eleven days later.
> 
> "The court ruling was based on an Ottoman-era bill of sale whose authenticity was challenged in 2009 on the grounds that the building had only been rented to the Sephardi group.[24] Fawzieh al-Kurd continued to protest the eviction, moving into an encampment in East Jerusalem.[23][25]"
> 
> Sheikh Jarrah - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
> 
> The following 25 minute documentary provides a rare example of Jewish and Arab collaboration against expanding settlement activity in East Jerusalem as it relates to the al-Kurds:
> 
> Watch | Just Vision
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Haifa was mostly Arab prior to 1948.  The Shimon Hatzaddik neighborhood of East Jerusalem was mostly Jewish prior to 1948.  So both Jews and Arabs were displaced in 1948, but somehow we only hear about the Arab narrative.
Click to expand...

*Because Right of Return applies only to Jews.*
531 Arab towns were destroyed by Zionist forces in 1948.
Most of those towns have been rebuilt and given Jewish names.
33 massacres and assassinations by Zionists fueled the destruction.
Jews from around the planet were invited to "return home" while indigenous Arabs were told to move to Jordan or Lebanon.
Anyone opposed to the Universal Return of the Jew risked acquiring the label of "anti-Semite" or worse...

"Folke Bernadotte, Count of Wisborg (in Swedish: Greve af Wisborg; 2 January 1895  17 September 1948) was a Swedish diplomat and nobleman noted for his negotiation of the release of about 31,000 prisoners from German concentration camps during World War II, including 450 Danish Jews from Theresienstadt released on 14 April 1945..."

"After the war, Bernadotte was unanimously chosen to be the United Nations Security Council mediator in the ArabIsraeli conflict of 19471948. 

"He was assassinated in Jerusalem in 1948 by the militant Zionist group Lehi while pursuing his official duties. 

"*The decision to assassinate him had been taken by Natan Yellin-Mor, Yisrael Eldad and Yitzhak Shamir, who later became Prime Minister of Israel."*

Folke Bernadotte - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


----------



## theliq

toastman said:


> theliq said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ForeverYoung436 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Also:  If Jews don't have a right to Hebron, what right do we have to Eilat?  Our fathers and mothers are buried there.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> So are Romans,Moabites,Caananites,Philistines,Egyptians and Palestinians.   To name a few
> 
> So YOUR POINT IS ?????????????
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Out of all the people you named, which one exist today?
Click to expand...


PALESTINIANS

EGYPTIANS

ROMANS (ITALIANS)

The PHILISTINES after helping David overthrow Saul.......the male population were slaughtered and only young male babies,girls and women were absorbed into the general Jewish population. 

The MOABITES and  CAANANITES,I would imagine went the same way as the PHILISTINES.......THEY BECAME JEWS.......but if we go back far enough,JEWS ARE PARTLY DECENDED FROM ARABS.

So in conclusion, all exist today in some form.....I'm GOOD AINT I,Toastie,BLOODY GOOD.

And to think some have become a ZIONIST that Viscious,Vindictive TERRORIST ORGANIZATION


----------



## theliq

ForeverYoung436 said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> toastman said:
> 
> 
> 
> Out of all the people you named, which one exist today?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Which ones do not?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> The ancient Roman Empire is no more.  Italy makes no claims on Israel.  The Moabites, Canaanites and Philistines are extinct.  The descendants of the ancient Egyptians, the Copts of Egypt, are being persecuted in their own country.  The Palestinians are Arabs that come from Arabia.  This was attested to in a document that Sherri posted on here, ironically.  The document, from the 1930's, said that the population from Palestine is constantly being replenished by nomadic tribes from Arabia.
Click to expand...


Gee you talk a lot of shit....you are completely ignorant of history


----------



## Bumberclyde

*Is Israel the Same as South Africa?*

I wouldn't set foot in either place, so yes.


----------



## toastman

theliq said:


> toastman said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> theliq said:
> 
> 
> 
> So are Romans,Moabites,Caananites,Philistines,Egyptians and Palestinians.   To name a few
> 
> So YOUR POINT IS ?????????????
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Out of all the people you named, which one exist today?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> PALESTINIANS
> 
> EGYPTIANS
> 
> ROMANS (ITALIANS)
> 
> The PHILISTINES after helping David overthrow Saul.......the male population were slaughtered and only young male babies,girls and women were absorbed into the general Jewish population.
> 
> The MOABITES and  CAANANITES,I would imagine went the same way as the PHILISTINES.......THEY BECAME JEWS.......but if we go back far enough,JEWS ARE PARTLY DECENDED FROM ARABS.
> 
> So in conclusion, all exist today in some form.....I'm GOOD AINT I,Toastie,BLOODY GOOD.
> 
> And to think some have become a ZIONIST that Viscious,Vindictive TERRORIST ORGANIZATION
Click to expand...


WTF are you blabbing about ?


----------



## Bloodrock44

theliq said:


> toastman said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> theliq said:
> 
> 
> 
> So are Romans,Moabites,Caananites,Philistines,Egyptians and Palestinians.   To name a few
> 
> So YOUR POINT IS ?????????????
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Out of all the people you named, which one exist today?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> PALESTINIANS
> 
> EGYPTIANS
> 
> ROMANS (ITALIANS)
> 
> The PHILISTINES after helping David overthrow Saul.......the male population were slaughtered and only young male babies,girls and women were absorbed into the general Jewish population.
> 
> The MOABITES and  CAANANITES,I would imagine went the same way as the PHILISTINES.......THEY BECAME JEWS.......but if we go back far enough,JEWS ARE PARTLY DECENDED FROM ARABS.
> 
> So in conclusion, all exist today in some form.....I'm GOOD AINT I,Toastie,BLOODY GOOD.
> 
> And to think some have become a ZIONIST that Viscious,Vindictive TERRORIST ORGANIZATION
Click to expand...


*And you accuse Toastman of being ignorant of history? Jews are partly descended from Arabs? Really? Jews and Arabs agree that Abraham is the father of both. Abraham had 2 sons. Isaac and Ismael. Isaac is the father of the Jews and Ismael the father of Arabs. Arabs and Jews are cousins, and NOT Jews descended from Arabs. You ain't as good as you thought you were, genius.*


----------



## georgephillip

"'Isaac and Ishmael' is a non-sequential episode of The West Wing which unofficially launched the third season in 2001. The episode was a response to the 9/11 attacks and was written and filmed within two weeks of that event and aired before the third season officially began..."

*Some of us remember 911 and the role the Jewish state played and continues to play in generating Arab hatred for western terrorism:
*
"The episode's title stems from Abraham and his two sons Isaac and Ishmael in the Book of Genesis, and how the story explains the source of the conflicts between Jews and Arabs. The First Lady relates the story after one of the students asks, 'How did all this start?'"

*It started when 650,000 Jews inflicted their nation on 1.8 million Palestinians in 1948.*


----------



## toastman

theliq said:


> toastman said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> theliq said:
> 
> 
> 
> So are Romans,Moabites,Caananites,Philistines,Egyptians and Palestinians.   To name a few
> 
> So YOUR POINT IS ?????????????
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Out of all the people you named, which one exist today?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> PALESTINIANS
> 
> EGYPTIANS
> 
> ROMANS (ITALIANS)
> 
> The PHILISTINES after helping David overthrow Saul.......the male population were slaughtered and only young male babies,girls and women were absorbed into the general Jewish population.
> 
> The MOABITES and  CAANANITES,I would imagine went the same way as the PHILISTINES.......THEY BECAME JEWS.......but if we go back far enough,JEWS ARE PARTLY DECENDED FROM ARABS.
> 
> So in conclusion, all exist today in some form.....I'm GOOD AINT I,Toastie,BLOODY GOOD.
> 
> And to think some have become a ZIONIST that Viscious,Vindictive TERRORIST ORGANIZATION
Click to expand...


BTW, Philistines were NOT Arabs


----------



## ForeverYoung436

theliq said:


> ForeverYoung436 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> Which ones do not?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The ancient Roman Empire is no more.  Italy makes no claims on Israel.  The Moabites, Canaanites and Philistines are extinct.  The descendants of the ancient Egyptians, the Copts of Egypt, are being persecuted in their own country.  The Palestinians are Arabs that come from Arabia.  This was attested to in a document that Sherri posted on here, ironically.  The document, from the 1930's, said that the population from Palestine is constantly being replenished by nomadic tribes from Arabia.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Gee you talk a lot of shit....you are completely ignorant of history
Click to expand...


I refuse to debate with idiots.


----------



## ForeverYoung436

theliq said:


> toastman said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> theliq said:
> 
> 
> 
> So are Romans,Moabites,Caananites,Philistines,Egyptians and Palestinians.   To name a few
> 
> So YOUR POINT IS ?????????????
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Out of all the people you named, which one exist today?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> PALESTINIANS
> 
> EGYPTIANS
> 
> ROMANS (ITALIANS)
> 
> The PHILISTINES after helping David overthrow Saul.......the male population were slaughtered and only young male babies,girls and women were absorbed into the general Jewish population.
> 
> The MOABITES and  CAANANITES,I would imagine went the same way as the PHILISTINES.......THEY BECAME JEWS.......but if we go back far enough,JEWS ARE PARTLY DECENDED FROM ARABS.
> 
> So in conclusion, all exist today in some form.....I'm GOOD AINT I,Toastie,BLOODY GOOD.
> 
> And to think some have become a ZIONIST that Viscious,Vindictive TERRORIST ORGANIZATION
Click to expand...


It says in the Bible that the male Midianites were killed off and the females absorbed into the Hebrew population...but where does it say that that happened to the Philistines?  Chapter and verse please.


----------



## Bloodrock44

georgephillip said:


> "'Isaac and Ishmael' is a non-sequential episode of The West Wing which unofficially launched the third season in 2001. The episode was a response to the 9/11 attacks and was written and filmed within two weeks of that event and aired before the third season officially began..."
> 
> *Some of us remember 911 and the role the Jewish state played and continues to play in generating Arab hatred for western terrorism:
> *
> "The episode's title stems from Abraham and his two sons Isaac and Ishmael in the Book of Genesis, and how the story explains the source of the conflicts between Jews and Arabs. The First Lady relates the story after one of the students asks, 'How did all this start?'"
> 
> *It started when 650,000 Jews inflicted their nation on 1.8 million Palestinians in 1948.*



*Guess what hero? You can whine, bitch, moan, complain, propagandize, lie, spit, shit, pound sand, throw hissy fits, jump up and down, slap your boyfriend and bang your head against the wall. And you've probably done all of that. Your Palestinian friends will come out on the losing end. Every time.  *


----------



## georgephillip

Bloodrock44 said:


> georgephillip said:
> 
> 
> 
> "'Isaac and Ishmael' is a non-sequential episode of The West Wing which unofficially launched the third season in 2001. The episode was a response to the 9/11 attacks and was written and filmed within two weeks of that event and aired before the third season officially began..."
> 
> *Some of us remember 911 and the role the Jewish state played and continues to play in generating Arab hatred for western terrorism:
> *
> "The episode's title stems from Abraham and his two sons Isaac and Ishmael in the Book of Genesis, and how the story explains the source of the conflicts between Jews and Arabs. The First Lady relates the story after one of the students asks, 'How did all this start?'"
> 
> *It started when 650,000 Jews inflicted their nation on 1.8 million Palestinians in 1948.*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *Guess what hero? You can whine, bitch, moan, complain, propagandize, lie, spit, shit, pound sand, throw hissy fits, jump up and down, slap your boyfriend and bang your head against the wall. And you've probably done all of that. Your Palestinian friends will come out on the losing end. Every time.  *
Click to expand...

Maybe you should've noticed how inbred reasoning like the above lead directly to:

"The attacks of September 11, 2001 in the northeast United States were an organized terrorist act carried out by 19 hijackers, and organized by numerous members of al-Qaeda. Motives for the attacks were stated before and after the attacks in several sources, Osama bin Laden's declaration of a holy war against the United States, and a fatw&#257; signed by bin Laden and others calling for the killing of American civilians in 1998, are seen by investigators as evidence of his motivation.[2] In bin Laden's November 2002 "Letter to America",[3][4] he explicitly stated that al-Qaeda's motives for their attacks include: Western support for attacking Muslims in Somalia, supporting Russian atrocities against Muslims in Chechnya, supporting the Indian oppression against Muslims in Kashmir, the Jewish aggression against Muslims in Lebanon, the presence of U.S. troops in Saudi Arabia,[4][5][6] U.S. support of Israel,[7][8] and sanctions against Iraq.[9]"

Motives for the September 11 attacks - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Hired killers who maim, murder, rape, displace, and incarcerate millions of innocent Muslims half-a-world away from their beloved homeland for MONEY will never understand why their abortions failed. 

It's karma, Loser.


----------



## Kondor3

georgephillip said:


> "..._The attacks of September 11, 2001... Motives for the attacks... U.S. support of Israel_..."



The United States will not bow to others, dictating our foreign policy, and telling us whom we can choose as friends and allies, and whom we may not.

"_Millions for defense, but *not one cent for tribute*_"

Never.

We exacted a terrible price for that attack and killing of our people.

Knock over two of our buildings, and we'll knock over two of your countries.

Kill 3,000 of ours, and we'll kill 300,000 of yours.

Confidence is fairly high that OBL and his minions got the message, before we killed their asses.

Confidence is fairly high that various national leaders in that part of the world will now think long and hard before allowing anti-US/anti-Western terror bases to operate upon their soil.

The Muslim world will never dictate our foreign policy and our choices of friends and allies.

And if they hit us again, on a 9-11 scale or beyond, the retribution will prove far more terrible than that which we exacted the first time - by several orders of magnitude.

I wouldn't advise trying it a second time.

And, on the outside chance that any of that is unclear in some way...

That position may best be distilled down into two words: _Fuck 'em_ !

Hope that helps.


----------



## Bloodrock44

georgephillip said:


> Bloodrock44 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> georgephillip said:
> 
> 
> 
> "'Isaac and Ishmael' is a non-sequential episode of The West Wing which unofficially launched the third season in 2001. The episode was a response to the 9/11 attacks and was written and filmed within two weeks of that event and aired before the third season officially began..."
> 
> *Some of us remember 911 and the role the Jewish state played and continues to play in generating Arab hatred for western terrorism:
> *
> "The episode's title stems from Abraham and his two sons Isaac and Ishmael in the Book of Genesis, and how the story explains the source of the conflicts between Jews and Arabs. The First Lady relates the story after one of the students asks, 'How did all this start?'"
> 
> *It started when 650,000 Jews inflicted their nation on 1.8 million Palestinians in 1948.*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *Guess what hero? You can whine, bitch, moan, complain, propagandize, lie, spit, shit, pound sand, throw hissy fits, jump up and down, slap your boyfriend and bang your head against the wall. And you've probably done all of that. Your Palestinian friends will come out on the losing end. Every time.  *
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Maybe you should've noticed how inbred reasoning like the above lead directly to:
> 
> "The attacks of September 11, 2001 in the northeast United States were an organized terrorist act carried out by 19 hijackers, and organized by numerous members of al-Qaeda. Motives for the attacks were stated before and after the attacks in several sources, Osama bin Laden's declaration of a holy war against the United States, and a fatw&#257; signed by bin Laden and others calling for the killing of American civilians in 1998, are seen by investigators as evidence of his motivation.[2] In bin Laden's November 2002 "Letter to America",[3][4] he explicitly stated that al-Qaeda's motives for their attacks include: Western support for attacking Muslims in Somalia, supporting Russian atrocities against Muslims in Chechnya, supporting the Indian oppression against Muslims in Kashmir, the Jewish aggression against Muslims in Lebanon, the presence of U.S. troops in Saudi Arabia,[4][5][6] U.S. support of Israel,[7][8] and sanctions against Iraq.[9]"
> 
> Motives for the September 11 attacks - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
> 
> Hired killers who maim, murder, rape, displace, and incarcerate millions of innocent Muslims half-a-world away from their beloved homeland for MONEY will never understand why their abortions failed.
> 
> It's karma, Loser.
Click to expand...


*It's called you're a hate America firster, Comrade.*


----------



## theliq

toastman said:


> theliq said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> toastman said:
> 
> 
> 
> Out of all the people you named, which one exist today?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PALESTINIANS
> 
> EGYPTIANS
> 
> ROMANS (ITALIANS)
> 
> The PHILISTINES after helping David overthrow Saul.......the male population were slaughtered and only young male babies,girls and women were absorbed into the general Jewish population.
> 
> The MOABITES and  CAANANITES,I would imagine went the same way as the PHILISTINES.......THEY BECAME JEWS.......but if we go back far enough,JEWS ARE PARTLY DECENDED FROM ARABS.
> 
> So in conclusion, all exist today in some form.....I'm GOOD AINT I,Toastie,BLOODY GOOD.
> 
> And to think some have become a ZIONIST that Viscious,Vindictive TERRORIST ORGANIZATION
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> WTF are you blabbing about ?
Click to expand...


Toastie,start to read up your origins on the formation of the Jews in Babylon and how you were dispersed by the Assryian Empire after conquering Babylon.then you may have some understanding of WTF I'm talking about.

Moreover how the outcast David(later King David)collaborated with the Philistines to overthrow Saul.

Trouble with you is that you know not your past........time to get educated.steve


----------



## georgephillip

Bloodrock44 said:


> georgephillip said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Bloodrock44 said:
> 
> 
> 
> *Guess what hero? You can whine, bitch, moan, complain, propagandize, lie, spit, shit, pound sand, throw hissy fits, jump up and down, slap your boyfriend and bang your head against the wall. And you've probably done all of that. Your Palestinian friends will come out on the losing end. Every time.  *
> 
> 
> 
> Maybe you should've noticed how inbred reasoning like the above lead directly to:
> 
> "The attacks of September 11, 2001 in the northeast United States were an organized terrorist act carried out by 19 hijackers, and organized by numerous members of al-Qaeda. Motives for the attacks were stated before and after the attacks in several sources, Osama bin Laden's declaration of a holy war against the United States, and a fatw&#257; signed by bin Laden and others calling for the killing of American civilians in 1998, are seen by investigators as evidence of his motivation.[2] In bin Laden's November 2002 "Letter to America",[3][4] he explicitly stated that al-Qaeda's motives for their attacks include: Western support for attacking Muslims in Somalia, supporting Russian atrocities against Muslims in Chechnya, supporting the Indian oppression against Muslims in Kashmir, the Jewish aggression against Muslims in Lebanon, the presence of U.S. troops in Saudi Arabia,[4][5][6] U.S. support of Israel,[7][8] and sanctions against Iraq.[9]"
> 
> Motives for the September 11 attacks - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
> 
> Hired killers who maim, murder, rape, displace, and incarcerate millions of innocent Muslims half-a-world away from their beloved homeland for MONEY will never understand why their abortions failed.
> 
> It's karma, Loser.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> *It's called you're a hate America firster, Comrade.*
Click to expand...

It's called the Golden Rule, Golda:
"Linguist and political theorist Noam Chomsky states that[3]
... we adopt the principle of universality: if an action is right (or wrong) for others, it is right (or wrong) for us. Those who do not rise to the minimal moral level of applying to themselves the standards they apply to others -- more stringent ones, in fact -- plainly cannot be taken seriously when they speak of appropriateness of response; or of right and wrong, good and evil. 

"In fact, one of the, maybe the most, elementary of moral principles is that of universality, that is, If something's right for me, it's right for you; if it's wrong for you, it's wrong for me. *Any moral code that is even worth looking at has that at its core somehow."*
Moral universalism - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
I'll bet you're proud History will put your moral conduct in the same column as Hitler's.


----------



## theliq

Kondor3 said:


> georgephillip said:
> 
> 
> 
> "..._The attacks of September 11, 2001... Motives for the attacks... U.S. support of Israel_..."
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The United States will not bow to others, dictating our foreign policy, and telling us whom we can choose as friends and allies, and whom we may not.
> 
> "_Millions for defense, but *not one cent for tribute*_"
> 
> Never.
> 
> We exacted a terrible price for that attack and killing of our people.
> 
> Knock over two of our buildings, and we'll knock over two of your countries.
> 
> Kill 3,000 of ours, and we'll kill 300,000 of yours.
> 
> Confidence is fairly high that OBL and his minions got the message, before we killed their asses.
> 
> Confidence is fairly high that various national leaders in that part of the world will now think long and hard before allowing anti-US/anti-Western terror bases to operate upon their soil.
> 
> The Muslim world will never dictate our foreign policy and our choices of friends and allies.
> 
> And if they hit us again, on a 9-11 scale or beyond, the retribution will prove far more terrible than that which we exacted the first time - by several orders of magnitude.
> 
> I wouldn't advise trying it a second time.
> 
> And, on the outside chance that any of that is unclear in some way...
> 
> That position may best be distilled down into two words: _Fuck 'em_ !
> 
> Hope that helps.
Click to expand...


Like ALL Empires you will BOW eventually......READ HISTORY and you will see that your ARROGANCE WILL BE DEFEATED.Well economically you are already defeated....China and Japan own America.....if you had to repay your loans back today America would become a 3rd world nation overnight.

Frightening ain't IT.


----------



## theliq

ForeverYoung436 said:


> theliq said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> toastman said:
> 
> 
> 
> Out of all the people you named, which one exist today?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PALESTINIANS
> 
> EGYPTIANS
> 
> ROMANS (ITALIANS)
> 
> The PHILISTINES after helping David overthrow Saul.......the male population were slaughtered and only young male babies,girls and women were absorbed into the general Jewish population.
> 
> The MOABITES and  CAANANITES,I would imagine went the same way as the PHILISTINES.......THEY BECAME JEWS.......but if we go back far enough,JEWS ARE PARTLY DECENDED FROM ARABS.
> 
> So in conclusion, all exist today in some form.....I'm GOOD AINT I,Toastie,BLOODY GOOD.
> 
> And to think some have become a ZIONIST that Viscious,Vindictive TERRORIST ORGANIZATION
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> It says in the Bible that the male Midianites were killed off and the females absorbed into the Hebrew population...but where does it say that that happened to the Philistines?  Chapter and verse please.
Click to expand...


Well there are loads of accounts....for starters try 1 Samuel 28; 31

or Patriarchs and Prophets


----------



## docmauser1

georgephillip said:


> _"The question is not 'Is Israel the same as South Africa?'
> It is 'do Israel's actions meet the international definition of what apartheid is?'_


Drivel.


----------



## Kondor3

theliq said:


> "_...Like ALL Empires you will BOW eventually......READ HISTORY and you will see that your ARROGANCE WILL BE DEFEATED.Well economically you are already defeated....China and Japan own America.....if you had to repay your loans back today America would become a 3rd world nation overnight. Frightening ain't IT._"



Oh, there will come a day when America will fall, no doubt...

But neither you nor I nor our children nor grandchildren nor great-grandchildren nor double-greats will live to see that day...

And, by then, it may be simply a matter of voluntarily merging into something even better, if and when such a thing materializes in the future...

As to being defeated, economically... yes, indeed, we are in trouble at the moment.

Nothing that a default on our International Debt and forcible re-nationalization of all pledged assets on our soil would not fix...

That, too, would make a few folks pee in their Economic Pants...

But, I suspect, we'll find our way out of that trade imbalance in some other and more sane fashion, holding onto solutions like the above as a Final Redoubt, if all else fails...

But, given that you insist on talking about "you will fall", I assume that YOU are NOT one of US?

Who ARE you a part of?

ANd how do YOU compare with US, militarily, or economically?

Are you sure that this isn't a case of ICBM-Envy? 

Oh... and, of course, none of your rant (above) does anything to speak either to the Main Topic nor to the counterpoint-post which I had served-up in the context of the topic, and which you found convenient to use as a half-assed stepping-stone and really bad segue for your non sequitur rant.

But... yes, yes, yes... very nice, I'm sure, and... as always... thank you for playing.


----------



## toastman

theliq is from Australia


----------



## Kondor3

toastman said:


> theliq is from Australia



I wonder if _TheLick_ is another Muslim living in Australia, similar to one or two other colleagues around here...

Brits and Commonwealth Folk would know better about _Falling Empires_ than we would...

First-hand experience... wot?


----------



## RoccoR

docmauser1, georgephillip, _et al,_

It is not necessarily "drivel."  While you and I may see this as a fallacious and frivolous claim, it seems pretty clear that georgephillip may have looked at General Assembly resolution 3068 (XXVIII) of 30 November 1973 (International Convention on the Suppression and Punishment of the Crime of Apartheid) and or Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court.



docmauser1 said:


> georgephillip said:
> 
> 
> 
> _"The question is not 'Is Israel the same as South Africa?'
> It is 'do Israel's actions meet the international definition of what apartheid is?'_
> 
> 
> 
> Drivel.
Click to expand...

*(COMMENT)*

We have yet to hear the specific allegation.  What aspect of these laws _(he needs to specify one)_ does he claim Israel violated by some specific action.

Most Respectfully,
R


----------



## georgephillip

Kondor3 said:


> georgephillip said:
> 
> 
> 
> "..._The attacks of September 11, 2001... Motives for the attacks... U.S. support of Israel_..."
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The United States will not bow to others, dictating our foreign policy, and telling us whom we can choose as friends and allies, and whom we may not.
> 
> "_Millions for defense, but *not one cent for tribute*_"
> 
> Never.
> 
> We exacted a terrible price for that attack and killing of our people.
> 
> Knock over two of our buildings, and we'll knock over two of your countries.
> 
> Kill 3,000 of ours, and we'll kill 300,000 of yours.
> 
> Confidence is fairly high that OBL and his minions got the message, before we killed their asses.
> 
> Confidence is fairly high that various national leaders in that part of the world will now think long and hard before allowing anti-US/anti-Western terror bases to operate upon their soil.
> 
> The Muslim world will never dictate our foreign policy and our choices of friends and allies.
> 
> And if they hit us again, on a 9-11 scale or beyond, the retribution will prove far more terrible than that which we exacted the first time - by several orders of magnitude.
> 
> I wouldn't advise trying it a second time.
> 
> And, on the outside chance that any of that is unclear in some way...
> 
> That position may best be distilled down into two words: _Fuck 'em_ !
> 
> Hope that helps.
Click to expand...

Hope you know how many buildings came down in New York on 911.
That answer distills to one word: three.
Your advice isn't particularly significant since half-a-million Iraqi children were murdered by US terror and UN sanctions before 911 and apparently that terrible price doesn't figure into amateur night analysis.
Anyone remotely familiar with the planning of 911 know many of the details were worked out in Germany and Florida. How many of their children deserve to die?
Confidence is fairly high rich parasites in the "land of the free" and their keyboard minions will continue cheer-leading from a safe distance while the greatest purveyor of violence on the planet continues to murder, maim, incarcerate and displace millions of innocent Muslims all for the greater glory of the petrodollar.
Hope that helps you understand why partisan pablum isn't a message worth getting.


----------



## georgephillip

Bloodrock44 said:


> georgephillip said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Bloodrock44 said:
> 
> 
> 
> *Guess what hero? You can whine, bitch, moan, complain, propagandize, lie, spit, shit, pound sand, throw hissy fits, jump up and down, slap your boyfriend and bang your head against the wall. And you've probably done all of that. Your Palestinian friends will come out on the losing end. Every time.  *
> 
> 
> 
> Maybe you should've noticed how inbred reasoning like the above lead directly to:
> 
> "The attacks of September 11, 2001 in the northeast United States were an organized terrorist act carried out by 19 hijackers, and organized by numerous members of al-Qaeda. Motives for the attacks were stated before and after the attacks in several sources, Osama bin Laden's declaration of a holy war against the United States, and a fatw&#257; signed by bin Laden and others calling for the killing of American civilians in 1998, are seen by investigators as evidence of his motivation.[2] In bin Laden's November 2002 "Letter to America",[3][4] he explicitly stated that al-Qaeda's motives for their attacks include: Western support for attacking Muslims in Somalia, supporting Russian atrocities against Muslims in Chechnya, supporting the Indian oppression against Muslims in Kashmir, the Jewish aggression against Muslims in Lebanon, the presence of U.S. troops in Saudi Arabia,[4][5][6] U.S. support of Israel,[7][8] and sanctions against Iraq.[9]"
> 
> Motives for the September 11 attacks - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
> 
> Hired killers who maim, murder, rape, displace, and incarcerate millions of innocent Muslims half-a-world away from their beloved homeland for MONEY will never understand why their abortions failed.
> 
> It's karma, Loser.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> *It's called you're a hate America firster, Comrade.*
Click to expand...

It's called morality.
Something that those who take money (however little) to murder, maim, and displace civilians are unlikely to ever appreciate, "Hero".


----------



## georgephillip

docmauser1 said:


> georgephillip said:
> 
> 
> 
> _"The question is not 'Is Israel the same as South Africa?'
> It is 'do Israel's actions meet the international definition of what apartheid is?'_
> 
> 
> 
> Drivel.
Click to expand...

"On 17 July 1998, the Rome Statute was adopted by a vote of 120 to 7, with 21 countries abstaining.[10] 

"Because the way each delegation voted was officially unrecorded, there is some dispute over the identity of the seven countries that voted against the treaty.[11] 

"It is certain that the *People's Republic of China, Israel, and the United States* were three of the seven because they have publicly confirmed their negative votes; India, Indonesia, Iraq, Libya, Qatar, Russia, Saudi Arabia, Sudan, and Yemen have been identified by various observers and commentators as possible sources for the other four negative votes, with Iraq, Libya, Qatar, and Yemen being the four most commonly identified.[11]"

Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


----------



## georgephillip

RoccoR said:


> docmauser1, georgephillip, _et al,_
> 
> It is not necessarily "drivel."  While you and I may see this as a fallacious and frivolous claim, it seems pretty clear that georgephillip may have looked at General Assembly resolution 3068 (XXVIII) of 30 November 1973 (International Convention on the Suppression and Punishment of the Crime of Apartheid) and or Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court.
> 
> 
> 
> docmauser1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> georgephillip said:
> 
> 
> 
> _"The question is not 'Is Israel the same as South Africa?'
> It is 'do Israel's actions meet the international definition of what apartheid is?'_
> 
> 
> 
> Drivel.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> We have yet to hear the specific allegation.  What aspect of these laws _(he needs to specify one)_ does he claim Israel violated by some specific action.
> 
> Most Respectfully,
> R
Click to expand...

*How about the Right of Return, Rocco?*

"Law of Return (1950)Grants right of immigration to Jews born anywhere in the world. Amended in 1970 to extend this right to 'a child and a grandchild of a Jew, the spouse of a Jew, the spouse of a child of a Jew and the spouse of a grandchild of a Jew.' A 'Jew' is defined as 'a person who was born of a Jewish mother or has become converted to Judaism and who is not a member of another religion.'

"Non-Jewish native-born Palestinians  most importantly those who fled during the Zionist massacres in 1947 and 1948  are in most cases prevented from returning."

Israel's Apartheid Laws

*"a·part·heid  (-pärtht, -ht)*
n.
1. An official policy of racial segregation formerly practiced in the Republic of South Africa, involving political, legal, and economic discrimination against nonwhites.
*2. A policy or practice of separating or segregating groups.*
3. The condition of being separated from others; segregation."

The "policy or practice of separating or segregating groups" takes place today inside the Green Line in ways similar to those employed by northern Whites toward Blacks in the 1950s and 60s. The apartheid that Israel inflicts on Palestinians in the Occupied Territories more closely resembles that of White South Africans a generation later.


----------



## Kondor3

georgephillip said:


> "...Hope you know how many buildings came down in New York on 911..."



Yes, yes, yes... very nice, I"m sure.

The object lesson there is: "_Don't mess with us again. You will not survive a second attempt._"


----------



## RoccoR

georgephillip,  _et al,_

I have many bones to pick with American Foreign Policy, but your point is too diluted (even for me).



georgephillip said:


> Kondor3 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> georgephillip said:
> 
> 
> 
> "..._The attacks of September 11, 2001... Motives for the attacks... U.S. support of Israel_..."
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The United States will not bow to others, dictating our foreign policy, and telling us whom we can choose as friends and allies, and whom we may not.
> 
> "_Millions for defense, but *not one cent for tribute*_"
> 
> Never.
> 
> We exacted a terrible price for that attack and killing of our people.
> 
> Knock over two of our buildings, and we'll knock over two of your countries.
> 
> Kill 3,000 of ours, and we'll kill 300,000 of yours.
> 
> Confidence is fairly high that OBL and his minions got the message, before we killed their asses.
> 
> Confidence is fairly high that various national leaders in that part of the world will now think long and hard before allowing anti-US/anti-Western terror bases to operate upon their soil.
> 
> The Muslim world will never dictate our foreign policy and our choices of friends and allies.
> 
> And if they hit us again, on a 9-11 scale or beyond, the retribution will prove far more terrible than that which we exacted the first time - by several orders of magnitude.
> 
> I wouldn't advise trying it a second time.
> 
> And, on the outside chance that any of that is unclear in some way...
> 
> That position may best be distilled down into two words: _Fuck 'em_ !
> 
> Hope that helps.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Hope you know how many buildings came down in New York on 911.
> That answer distills to one word: three.
Click to expand...

*(COMMENT)*

What does this have to do with the issue?



georgephillip said:


> Your advice isn't particularly significant since half-a-million Iraqi children were murdered by US terror and UN sanctions before 911 and apparently that terrible price doesn't figure into amateur night analysis.


*(COMMENT)*

What US "terror?"  Let's be specific.  Name one!



georgephillip said:


> Anyone remotely familiar with the planning of 911 know many of the details were worked out in Germany and Florida. How many of their children deserve to die?


*(COMMENT)*

I don't recall the Germans or the Floridians assisting any extremist in the planning or execution of 911.  Please identify them.



georgephillip said:


> Confidence is fairly high rich parasites in the "land of the free" and their keyboard minions will continue cheer-leading from a safe distance while the greatest purveyor of violence on the planet continues to murder, maim, incarcerate and displace millions of innocent Muslims all for the greater glory of the petrodollar.


*(COMMENT)*

There were several reasons that American Oil interests supported the war.  But that doesn't mean that was a primary reason for the war.



georgephillip said:


> Hope that helps you understand why partisan pablum isn't a message worth getting.


*(COMMENT)*

The message isn't getting across for a number of reasons.  The first of which is that there are a number of Americans that were opposed to the conflict and did not get their way.  So they will cling to any conspiratorial plot that makes the Iraq pursuit immoral.  It doesn't mean it is valid or sound.

Most Respectfully,
R


----------



## georgephillip

Kondor3 said:


> georgephillip said:
> 
> 
> 
> "...Hope you know how many buildings came down in New York on 911..."
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Yes, yes, yes... very nice, I"m sure.
> 
> The object lesson there is: "_Don't mess with us again. You will not survive a second attempt._"
Click to expand...

Define "us."
Ask Dick or Dubya if you're not sure.


----------



## Kondor3

georgephillip said:


> Kondor3 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> georgephillip said:
> 
> 
> 
> "...Hope you know how many buildings came down in New York on 911..."
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Yes, yes, yes... very nice, I"m sure.
> 
> The object lesson there is: "_Don't mess with us again. You will not survive a second attempt._"
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Define "us."
> Ask Dick or Dubya if you're not sure.
Click to expand...


You will have to figure-out the meaning of "us" on your own, in this instance...

And the warning still stands... backed by more power than you can possibly handle...


----------



## georgephillip

Kondor3 said:


> georgephillip said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Kondor3 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Yes, yes, yes... very nice, I"m sure.
> 
> The object lesson there is: "_Don't mess with us again. You will not survive a second attempt._"
> 
> 
> 
> Define "us."
> Ask Dick or Dubya if you're not sure.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You will have to figure-out the meaning of "us" on your own, in this instance...
> 
> And the warning still stands... backed by more power than you can possibly handle...
Click to expand...

What warning, the one "standing" anonymously in cyberspace?


----------



## georgephillip

RoccoR said:


> georgephillip,  _et al,_
> 
> I have many bones to pick with American Foreign Policy, but your point is too diluted (even for me).
> 
> 
> 
> georgephillip said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Kondor3 said:
> 
> 
> 
> The United States will not bow to others, dictating our foreign policy, and telling us whom we can choose as friends and allies, and whom we may not.
> 
> "_Millions for defense, but *not one cent for tribute*_"
> 
> Never.
> 
> We exacted a terrible price for that attack and killing of our people.
> 
> Knock over two of our buildings, and we'll knock over two of your countries.
> 
> Kill 3,000 of ours, and we'll kill 300,000 of yours.
> 
> Confidence is fairly high that OBL and his minions got the message, before we killed their asses.
> 
> Confidence is fairly high that various national leaders in that part of the world will now think long and hard before allowing anti-US/anti-Western terror bases to operate upon their soil.
> 
> The Muslim world will never dictate our foreign policy and our choices of friends and allies.
> 
> And if they hit us again, on a 9-11 scale or beyond, the retribution will prove far more terrible than that which we exacted the first time - by several orders of magnitude.
> 
> I wouldn't advise trying it a second time.
> 
> And, on the outside chance that any of that is unclear in some way...
> 
> That position may best be distilled down into two words: _Fuck 'em_ !
> 
> Hope that helps.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Hope you know how many buildings came down in New York on 911.
> That answer distills to one word: three.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> What does this have to do with the issue?
> 
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> What US "terror?"  Let's be specific.  Name one!
> 
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> I don't recall the Germans or the Floridians assisting any extremist in the planning or execution of 911.  Please identify them.
> 
> 
> 
> georgephillip said:
> 
> 
> 
> Confidence is fairly high rich parasites in the "land of the free" and their keyboard minions will continue cheer-leading from a safe distance while the greatest purveyor of violence on the planet continues to murder, maim, incarcerate and displace millions of innocent Muslims all for the greater glory of the petrodollar.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> There were several reasons that American Oil interests supported the war.  But that doesn't mean that was a primary reason for the war.
> 
> 
> 
> georgephillip said:
> 
> 
> 
> Hope that helps you understand why partisan pablum isn't a message worth getting.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> The message isn't getting across for a number of reasons.  The first of which is that there are a number of Americans that were opposed to the conflict and did not get their way.  So they will cling to any conspiratorial plot that makes the Iraq pursuit immoral.  It doesn't mean it is valid or sound.
> 
> Most Respectfully,
> R
Click to expand...

A majority of the human beings on this planet didn't get their way when the US invaded Iraq in 2003, maiming, murdering, and displacing millions of innocent civilians. Just as a majority of human beings did not get their way in '91 when US terror destroyed the electrical grid in Baghdad. You may recall a few of the 15 Saudi nationals who managed to topple three steel framed skyscrapers with two magical airplanes in New York spent a good deal of their time in Germany, Florida, and San Diego prior to giving the greatest purveyor of violence on the planet a taste of its own medicine on 911. By conflating "American oil interests" with the interests of the petrodollar you validate the immorality of the US wars of aggression against Iraq (and Libya, Syria, Lebanon, Sudan, Somalia, and Iran)

"'As I went back through the Pentagon in November 2001, one of the senior military staff officers had time for a chat. Yes, we were still on track for going against Iraq, he said. But there was more. This was being discussed as part of a five-year campaign plan, he said, and there were a total of seven countries, beginning with Iraq, then Syria, Lebanon, Libya, Iran, Somalia and Sudan.'" [147]"

Wesley Clark - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


----------



## Kondor3

georgephillip said:


> Kondor3 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> georgephillip said:
> 
> 
> 
> Define "us."
> Ask Dick or Dubya if you're not sure.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You will have to figure-out the meaning of "us" on your own, in this instance...
> 
> *And the warning still stands... backed by more power than you can possibly handle*...
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> What warning, the one "standing" anonymously in cyberspace?
Click to expand...


*No, the one discernible by two smoking wrecks of countries and 300,000 dead*...

Patently and glaringly obvious to even the worst and simplest dullard...

A little more tangible than a post in cyberspace, don'tcha think?


----------



## georgephillip

Kondor3 said:


> georgephillip said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Kondor3 said:
> 
> 
> 
> You will have to figure-out the meaning of "us" on your own, in this instance...
> 
> *And the warning still stands... backed by more power than you can possibly handle*...
> 
> 
> 
> What warning, the one "standing" anonymously in cyberspace?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> *No, the one discernible by two smoking wrecks of countries and 300,000 dead*...
> 
> Patently and glaringly obvious to even the worst and simplest dullard...
> 
> A little more tangible than a post in cyberspace, don'tcha think?
Click to expand...


Where did cha come up with 300,000 dead?
Care to break it down by age, gender, or skin color?
It should be glaringly obvious to even the simplest centrists that murdering innocents doesn't scare anyone except the dullest trolls.


----------



## Kondor3

georgephillip said:


> Kondor3 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> georgephillip said:
> 
> 
> 
> What warning, the one "standing" anonymously in cyberspace?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *No, the one discernible by two smoking wrecks of countries and 300,000 dead*...
> 
> Patently and glaringly obvious to even the worst and simplest dullard...
> 
> A little more tangible than a post in cyberspace, don'tcha think?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Where did cha come up with 300,000 dead?
> 
> Care to break it down by age, gender, or skin color?
Click to expand...


Nope. Go dig up your own  from Lancet, Body Count and other sources; some of which portray the losses as even heavier.



> "...I_t should be glaringly obvious to even the simplest centrists that murdering innocents doesn't scare anyone except the dullest trolls._"



Indeed. We took that exact same stance on 9-12. As we began taking steps towards that 100-to-1 Kill Ratio; a ratio which your side cannot long tolerate nor sustain.

It is not necessary that you-and-yours be scared.

It is merely necessary that you obey the laws of gravity and fall down when we hit you in retaliation for your next attack.

But the more sane amongst you, in positions of power, will have gotten the unspoken message that we sent post-9-11, and cooler minds will prevail, and it won't come to that.


----------



## docmauser1

Kondor3 said:


> toastman said:
> 
> 
> 
> _theliq is from Australia_
> 
> 
> 
> _I wonder if TheLick is another Muslim living in Australia, ..._
Click to expand...

Haunting the beaches ... ogling infidel girls ... .


----------



## docmauser1

georgephillip said:


> docmauser1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> georgephillip said:
> 
> 
> 
> _"The question is not 'Is Israel the same as South Africa?'
> It is 'do Israel's actions meet the international definition of what apartheid is?'_
> 
> 
> 
> Drivel.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> _"It is certain that the People's Republic of China, Israel, and the United States were three of the seven because they have publicly confirmed their negative votes ..."_
Click to expand...

Respecting and preserving one's national sovereignty is cool, of course.


----------



## docmauser1

georgephillip said:


> _How about the Right of Return, ..._


Ah, that palistanian "return" scam. Palisimians ran from one country, but want to return to another one, while having their own pad, so far. Must be palistanian supremacism. If they aren't welcome on their own pad, then it's time for the enlightened international community to think about a wholesale humanitarian relocation/transfer of this wretched crowd elsewhere, of course.


----------



## RoccoR

georgephillip,  _et al,_

I am not a lawyer, and I do not practice law.  So this answer is from a layman's perspective.  I recommend you contact the Israel Consular Section for clarification.



georgephillip said:


> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> 
> docmauser1, georgephillip, _et al,_
> 
> It is not necessarily "drivel."  While you and I may see this as a fallacious and frivolous claim, it seems pretty clear that georgephillip may have looked at General Assembly resolution 3068 (XXVIII) of 30 November 1973 (International Convention on the Suppression and Punishment of the Crime of Apartheid) and or Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court.
> 
> 
> 
> docmauser1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Drivel.
> 
> 
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> We have yet to hear the specific allegation.  What aspect of these laws _(he needs to specify one)_ does he claim Israel violated by some specific action.
> 
> Most Respectfully,
> R
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> *How about the Right of Return, Rocco?*
Click to expand...

*(PREFACE)*

The "right of return" is an Immigration, Nationality, and Citizenship issue.  Each nation has them.  They are nearly all different.  Some countries are easier to get into than others.  As you know, the US has its own unique set of immigration issues.  Several groups, representing several cultures and ethnic groups have expressed concerns over a number of provisions in the recently passed comprehensive immigration bill passed by the Senate.  The new law, if passed, might provide an opportunity of citizenship to some 11 million illegal immigrants in America.  Israel, (like Lebanon, Jordan, Syria, and Egypt) all have laws pertaining to Immigration, Nationality, and Citizenship; it is not "apartheid."

*(OBSERVATION)*  (Key Reference:  NATIONALITY LAW, 5712-1952

In this case, I will assume we are talking "strictly" about the Palestinian Refugee.  This is mostly a matter of "citizenship."

*Exceptions and Special Circumstances: * _Citizens of Enemy States; known terrorists; those personalities connected with - and/or organizing, instigating, facilitating, participating in, financing, encouraging  terrorist activities; or those exhibiting threats for the preparation or organization of terrorist acts intended to be committed against other States or their citizens._

Most countries, as in the US, have clauses and provision in law that prohibit individuals in this status from entering the country.  Israel is no different.​
_*Preliminary.*_

Israel nationality is acquired-
by return (section 2),
by residence in Israel (section 3),
by birth (section 4) or
by naturalisation (section 5 to 9).
There shall be no Israel nationality save under this Law.


_*Nationality by Return.*_ 


(a) Every 'oleh** under the Law of Return, 5710-1950(1), shall become an Israel national.
(b) Israel nationality by return is acquired-
(1) by a person who came as an 'oleh into, or was born in, the country before the establishment of the State - with effect from the day of the establishment of the State;
(2) by a person having come to Israel as an 'oleh after the establishment of the State - with effect from the day of his 'aliyah**;
(3) by a person born in Israel after the establishment of the State - with effect from the day of his birth;
(4) by a person who has received an 'oleh's certificate under section 3 of the Law of Return, 5710-1950 - with effect from the day of the issue of the certificate.

(c) This section does not apply-
(1) to a person having ceased to be an inhabitant of Israel before the coming into force of this Law;
(2) to a person of full age who, immediately before the day of his 'aliyah or the day of his 'oleh's certificate is a foreign national and who, on or before such day, declares that he does not desire to become an Israel national;
(3) to a minor whose parents have made a declaration under paragraph (2) and included him therein.


_*Nationality by Residence in Israel.*_ 


(a) A person who, immediately before the establishment of the State, was a Palestinian citizen and who does not become a Israel national under section 2, shall become an Israel national with effect from the day of the establishment of the State if -
(1) he was registered on the 4th Adar, 5712 (1st March 1952) as an inhabitant under the Registration of Inhabitants Ordinance, 5709-1949(2); and
(2) he is an inhabitant of Israel on the day of the coming into force of this Law; and
(3) he was in Israel, or in an area which became Israel territory after the establishment of the State, from the day of the establishment of the State to the day of the coming into force of this Law, or entered Israel legally during that period.

(b) A person born after the establishment of the State who is an inhabitant of Israel on the day of the coming into force of this Law, and whose father or mother becomes an Israel national under subsection (a), shall become an Israel national with effect from the day of his birth.

_*Nationality by Birth.*_ 


A person born while his father or mother is an Israel national shall be an Israel national from birth; where a person is born after his father's death, it shall be sufficient that his father was an Israel national at the time of his death.

_*Naturalization.*_ 


(a) A person of full age, not being an Israel national, may obtain Israel nationality by naturalization if -

(1) he is in Israel; and
(2) he has been in Israel for three years out of five years proceeding the day of the submission of his application; and
(3) he is entitled to reside in Israel permanently; and
(4) he has settled, or intends to settle, in Israel, and
(5) he has some knowledge of the Hebrew language, and
(6) he has renounced his prior nationality or has proved that he will cease to be a foreign national upon becoming an Israel national.

(b) Where a person has applied for naturalization, and he meets the requirements of subsection (a), the Minister of the Interior, if he thinks fit to do so, shall grant him Israel nationality by the issue of a certificate of naturalization.
(c) Prior to the grant of nationality, the applicant shall make the following declaration:
"I declare that I will be a loyal national of the State of Israel."​
(d) Nationality is acquired on the day of the declaration.

_*Exemption from conditions of naturalization.*_ 


(a)
(1) A person who has served in the regular service of the Defence Army of Israel or who, after the 16th Kislev, 5708 (29th November 1947) has served in some other service which the Minister of Defence, by declaration published in Reshumot, has declared to be military service for the purpose of this section, and who has been duly discharged from such service; and
(2) a person who has lost a son or daughter in such service, are exempt from the requirements of section 5 (a), except the requirement of section 5 (a) (4).

(b) A person applying for naturalisation after having made a declaration under section 2 (c) (2) is exempt from the requirement of section 5 (a) (2).
(c) A person who immediately before the establishment of the State was a Palestinian citizen is exempt from the requirement of section 5 (a) (5).
(d) The Minister of the Interior may exempt an applicant from all or any of the requirements of section 5 (a) (1), (2), (5) and (6) if there exists in his opinion a special reason justifying such exemption.

_*Naturalization of husband and wife.*_ 


The spouse of a person who is an Israel national or who has applied for Israel nationality and meets or is exempt from the requirements of section 5 (a) may obtain Israel nationality by naturalization even if she or he is a minor or does not meet the requirements of section (5) (a).

*(COMMENT)*

It would appear that, relative to the issue of the "right of return" for Arab Palestinians, there are five sets of laws which may apply, depending on the circumstances.  I have copied just a few that I think are relevant.  I'm sure competent legal advisors or consular officers would be able to provide more accurate and authoritative assistance.

Israeli laws governing Immigration & Citizenship, which are relevant to Arab Family Unity Laws:


Law of Return (1950) - all Jews receive Israeli citizenship who want it, unless they are considered to be a danger to Israel;
Nationality Law (1952) - qualifications for non-Jews who wish to become Israeli citizens;
Entry into Israel Law (1952) - different types of Visas and Permits to stay in Israel for non-Jews;
Prevention of Infiltration (Offences and Jurisdiction) Law (1954) - Arabs who fled the State of Israel during the war of 1948 may not return;
Nationality and Entry into Israel (Temporary Order) Law (2003) and Amendment of 2005 - Arabs, including spouses of Israeli citizens, who reside in the occupied territories may not receive citizenship or the Visas and Permits described in previous laws, with a few exceptions.

It is obvious, but I'll say it anyway, that I cannot speak on behalf of the Israeli Government, but on the face of it, --- it would seem that any Arab Palestinian that actually had some residency at the time Israel Declared Independence, --- OR --- fought on the side of Israeli Independence, has an uncontested "right of return" already in place.

I fail to see the claim of "apartheid" in these laws.  I think everyone understands that if you support Jihadist Action (Article 13 HAMAS) or have allegiance to an Armed Struggle (Article 9 PNA) against Israel, that you are an "enemy" of the State.  I cannot think of a single country that allows an "enemy" of the State free access.

Most Respectfully,
R


----------



## RoccoR

georgephillip,  _et al,_

So what?  This is called contingency planning.  All competent military forces _(with a strategic reach)_ do this.



georgephillip said:


> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> 
> georgephillip,  _et al,_
> 
> I have many bones to pick with American Foreign Policy, but your point is too diluted (even for me).
> 
> 
> 
> georgephillip said:
> 
> 
> 
> Hope you know how many buildings came down in New York on 911.
> That answer distills to one word: three.
> 
> 
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> What does this have to do with the issue?
> 
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> What US "terror?"  Let's be specific.  Name one!
> 
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> I don't recall the Germans or the Floridians assisting any extremist in the planning or execution of 911.  Please identify them.
> 
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> There were several reasons that American Oil interests supported the war.  But that doesn't mean that was a primary reason for the war.
> 
> 
> 
> georgephillip said:
> 
> 
> 
> Hope that helps you understand why partisan pablum isn't a message worth getting.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> The message isn't getting across for a number of reasons.  The first of which is that there are a number of Americans that were opposed to the conflict and did not get their way.  So they will cling to any conspiratorial plot that makes the Iraq pursuit immoral.  It doesn't mean it is valid or sound.
> 
> Most Respectfully,
> R
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> A majority of the human beings on this planet didn't get their way when the US invaded Iraq in 2003, maiming, murdering, and displacing millions of innocent civilians. Just as a majority of human beings did not get their way in '91 when US terror destroyed the electrical grid in Baghdad. You may recall a few of the 15 Saudi nationals who managed to topple three steel framed skyscrapers with two magical airplanes in New York spent a good deal of their time in Germany, Florida, and San Diego prior to giving the greatest purveyor of violence on the planet a taste of its own medicine on 911. By conflating "American oil interests" with the interests of the petrodollar you validate the immorality of the US wars of aggression against Iraq (and Libya, Syria, Lebanon, Sudan, Somalia, and Iran)
> 
> "'As I went back through the Pentagon in November 2001, one of the senior military staff officers had time for a chat. Yes, we were still on track for going against Iraq, he said. But there was more. This was being discussed as part of a five-year campaign plan, he said, and there were a total of seven countries, beginning with Iraq, then Syria, Lebanon, Libya, Iran, Somalia and Sudan.'" [147]"
> 
> Wesley Clark - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Click to expand...

*(COMMENT)*

Yes, and so.  I cannot name a single insurgency that did not last a decade (give or take a year or so).  There is no way that the US could tackle seven countries in five years.  Like I said before, you can read the words, but don't understand their meaning.

The US military is a very big, very damaging, broadsword.  It can kill anything.  But it cannot be everyplace at once.  And, with it limited leadership abilities, it cannot be expected to reassemble what it broke.

As far as the "electrical grid in Baghdad!!!"  Wow, it wasn't much of a grid to start with.  Never the less, it was a strategic infrastructure target.  Wars are like that.

And don't hand out that conspiratorial nonsense about "magical planes" and the 911 junkie theories.  The US is not perfect, yes we know.  But it is not generally suicidal.  If an enemy of the state attempts to strike the US, it is not going to be a case of --- "taste of its own medicine" --- we do not bow to the threat of non-state actors no matter what the nature of the source or point or origin.  I think it is abundantly clear to every nation on Earth --- don't poke the bear.  

Most Respectfully,
R


----------



## georgephillip

The prime example of conspiratorial nonsense in this country today is the suicidal confidence in the moral superiority of the greatest purveyor of violence on this planet, which, I gather, you've proudly served for your entire adult life. Not only do "we not bow" to threats, we murder, maim, displace and incarcerate millions of innocent human beings thousands of miles from our homeland FOR MONEY and MARKET SHARE. As far as 911 is concerned, you have laid out in great detail the ability of the US to monitor communications world-wide, yet on 9/11/2001 the epicenter of that global electronic dragnet was struck by a civilian aircraft; maybe the 19 suicidal Saudis should have targeted the DC electrical grid? Whether or not the US could tackle seven countries in five years, two have been balkanized, two more are on the block, and the Persians are threatening to sell their oil in gold. Your broadsword is even more damaging when its swung by suicidal psychopaths with Rs or Ds behind their names.


----------



## ForeverYoung436

georgephillip said:


> The prime example of conspiratorial nonsense in this country today is the suicidal confidence in the moral superiority of the greatest purveyor of violence on this planet, which, I gather, you've proudly served for your entire adult life. Not only do "we not bow" to threats, we murder, maim, displace and incarcerate millions of innocent human beings thousands of miles from our homeland FOR MONEY and MARKET SHARE. As far as 911 is concerned, you have laid out in great detail the ability of the US to monitor communications world-wide, yet on 9/11/2001 the epicenter of that global electronic dragnet was struck by a civilian aircraft; maybe the 19 suicidal Saudis should have targeted the DC electrical grid? Whether or not the US could tackle seven countries in five years, two have been balkanized, two more are on the block, and the Persians are threatening to sell their oil in gold. Your broadsword is even more damaging when its swung by suicidal psychopaths with Rs or Ds behind their names.



And the internal chaos and fighting among Arabs cannot be blamed on the Arabs themselves, in any way.  To say that Arabs can't be held responsible for their own actions is painting them as sub-human.


----------



## P F Tinmore

RoccoR said:
			
		

> The "right of return" is an Immigration, Nationality, and Citizenship issue.



Returning to one's own home is "immigration?" Other than Israel's apartheid laws, can you back that up with anything?


----------



## Hossfly

P F Tinmore said:


> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The "right of return" is an Immigration, Nationality, and Citizenship issue.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Returning to one's own home is "immigration?" Other than Israel's apartheid laws, can you back that up with anything?
Click to expand...

Immigration *ISSUE* Tinmore. Pay attention.


----------



## toastman

Their homes are not there anymore, Tinmore. Get over it. There will never be right of return. Let the Arab countries absorb the refugees instead of letting them live like animals, like it Jordan, where they refuse to give them citizenship.
The Israeli government will not allow tiny Israel to be flooded with tens of thousands of Palestinians, many of whom are likely very hostile towards Israel. IT will also cause demographic issues. 
Get over it, it ain't happening, and you know it.


----------



## Hossfly

P F Tinmore said:


> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The "right of return" is an Immigration, Nationality, and Citizenship issue.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Returning to one's own home is "immigration?" Other than Israel's apartheid laws, can you back that up with anything?
Click to expand...

Millions and millions of people were displaced because of World War II; and as a result, they settled in many different countries.  Does Tinnie think that they or their descendents can waltz right into the European countries they left and demand citizenship?  Each country can make their own immigration rules.  By the way, Tinnie, how's it going among those "Palestinians" whose roots are in Egypt with regard to heeding the Egyptian's official's call for them to come back to Egypt?  Maybe if there wasn't such turmoil in Egypt, some of them would be heading back.  No doubt they still have relatives living in Egypt who can help them get going there.


----------



## Kondor3

Any Palestinian with an ounce of brains and two shekels to rub together moved away long ago.


----------



## Kondor3

P F Tinmore said:


> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The "right of return" is an Immigration, Nationality, and Citizenship issue.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Returning to one's own home is "immigration?" Other than Israel's apartheid laws, can you back that up with anything?
Click to expand...


You keep looking for Legal Substantiation when it is patently and glaringly obvious that none will be forthcoming, and that because Victory on the Battlefield settles old Legal Arguments.

*Ownership of those lands and structures has changed*, long, long ago; the Israelis now hold Deed and Title to the land; conveyed upon them by Mars, the God of War.

Vae victus.

It is no longer your home.

Some of you abandoned your homes.

Some of you were evicted from your homes.

In any event, it is no longer your home.

Don't like that outcome?

Then you must try to take it back.

But you will be doing it from Lebanon and Jordan and Egypt, soon enough.

Tick... tick... tick.


----------



## toastman

Kondor3 said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The "right of return" is an Immigration, Nationality, and Citizenship issue.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Returning to one's own home is "immigration?" Other than Israel's apartheid laws, can you back that up with anything?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You keep looking for Legal Substantiation when it is patently and glaringly obvious that none will be forthcoming, and that because Victory on the Battlefield settles old Legal Arguments.
> 
> *Ownership of those lands and structures has changed*, long, long ago; the Israelis now hold Deed and Title to the land; conveyed upon them by Mars, the God of War.
> 
> Vae victus.
> 
> It is no longer your home.
> 
> Some of you abandoned your homes.
> 
> Some of you were evicted from your homes.
> 
> In any event, it is no longer your home.
> 
> Don't like that outcome?
> 
> Then you must try to take it back.
> 
> But you will be doing it from Lebanon and Jordan and Egypt, soon enough.
> 
> Tick... tick... tick.
Click to expand...


This is what I've been saying for a while now. If the Palestinians want any of the land, the only way they can get it is through conventional warfare. 
But I'm sure we all know how that would turn out


----------



## P F Tinmore

toastman said:


> Kondor3 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> Returning to one's own home is "immigration?" Other than Israel's apartheid laws, can you back that up with anything?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You keep looking for Legal Substantiation when it is patently and glaringly obvious that none will be forthcoming, and that because Victory on the Battlefield settles old Legal Arguments.
> 
> *Ownership of those lands and structures has changed*, long, long ago; the Israelis now hold Deed and Title to the land; conveyed upon them by Mars, the God of War.
> 
> Vae victus.
> 
> It is no longer your home.
> 
> Some of you abandoned your homes.
> 
> Some of you were evicted from your homes.
> 
> In any event, it is no longer your home.
> 
> Don't like that outcome?
> 
> Then you must try to take it back.
> 
> But you will be doing it from Lebanon and Jordan and Egypt, soon enough.
> 
> Tick... tick... tick.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> This is what I've been saying for a while now. If the Palestinians want any of the land, the only way they can get it is through conventional warfare.
> But I'm sure we all know how that would turn out
Click to expand...


Israel would love to keep this conflict in the military realm, but this is not what is happening.

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w56AP_cjDYw]Rafeef, Ben and Mbuyiseni on Israeli Apartheid Week - 22.2.12 - YouTube[/ame]


----------



## RoccoR

P F Tinmore,  _et al,_

Well, there are a couple things wrong with your question.



P F Tinmore said:


> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The "right of return" is an Immigration, Nationality, and Citizenship issue.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Returning to one's own home is "immigration?" Other than Israel's apartheid laws, can you back that up with anything?
Click to expand...

*(COMMENT)*

One is, I did not use the word "home" once.  So, it is fair to say, that your question is a bit out of context.

Second, I used the phrase "Immigration, Nationality, and Citizenship issue" in a broad and sweeping context.  One of the three may be applicable, or any combination may be applicable.  The term "home" implies a "residency" having been established.  So I outlined how residency - "Nationality by Residence in Israel" - can be used and applied.

I did not tie "home" with "immigration" that I can see.  I did make links available.

You mentioned "Apartheid Laws."  


Which one of the "Immigration, Nationality, and Citizenship" laws is in violation of any provision of Apartheid as a Crime?
Which one of the "Immigration, Nationality, and Citizenship" laws is not rational?
Are you implying that a nation (any nation) is "Apartheid" if it establishes a firm set of Immigration, Nationality, and Citizenship laws?

Similarly, South Africa (SA) has a set of Immigration, Nationality, and Citizenship laws.  You just cannot walk into SA Border Control and say --- you have to let me in because I once lived over there in that house.  

I also understand that even Jordan has recently taken action to remove Jordanian Citizenship from certain Palestinians.  Even the Hashemite Kingdom has Immigration, Nationality, and Citizenship Laws.  Is Jordan also Apartheid?

I understand that Kuwait expelled approximately 250,000 Jordanians of Palestinian during the Operation Desert Storm (1991 Gulf War).  Kuwait has Immigration, Nationality, and Citizenship laws.  Are you suggesting that Kuwait is also Apartheid?

Immigration, Nationality, and Citizenship laws are not necessarily "apartheid."  

Most Respectfully,
R


----------



## Kondor3

P F Tinmore said:


> "..._Israel would love to keep this conflict in the military realm, but this is not what is happening_..."



The last, desperate gasps of a failed, dying proto-State that hasn't got enough land remaining in its possession to build a decent-sized parking lot... far too many Palestinian suicide bombings and rocket attacks to be able to paint the Palestinians as the victims here... far too much history of Palestinian and Arab-Muslim aggression against the Israeli-Jews to be able to paint the Palestinians as the victims here... far too little, too late.

Tick... tick... tick...


----------



## P F Tinmore

Kondor3 said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> "..._Israel would love to keep this conflict in the military realm, but this is not what is happening_..."
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The last, desperate gasps of a failed, dying proto-State that hasn't got enough land remaining in its possession to build a decent-sized parking lot... far too many Palestinian suicide bombings and rocket attacks to be able to paint the Palestinians as the victims here... far too much history of Palestinian and Arab-Muslim aggression against the Israeli-Jews to be able to paint the Palestinians as the victims here... far too little, too late.
> 
> Tick... tick... tick...
Click to expand...


Israel may have mooched enough military to remove Palestinians from their homes but they cannot eliminate the Palestinians or their supporters worldwide.

IAW and BDS are shaping public opinion and changing the frame of the debate.


----------



## Kondor3

P F Tinmore said:


> Kondor3 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> "..._Israel would love to keep this conflict in the military realm, but this is not what is happening_..."
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The last, desperate gasps of a failed, dying proto-State that hasn't got enough land remaining in its possession to build a decent-sized parking lot... far too many Palestinian suicide bombings and rocket attacks to be able to paint the Palestinians as the victims here... far too much history of Palestinian and Arab-Muslim aggression against the Israeli-Jews to be able to paint the Palestinians as the victims here... far too little, too late.
> 
> Tick... tick... tick...
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Israel may have mooched enough military to remove Palestinians from their homes but they cannot eliminate the Palestinians or their supporters worldwide.
> 
> IAW and BDS are shaping public opinion and changing the frame of the debate.
Click to expand...


By the time they have any impact they'll be sponsoring that debate from Lebanon and Jordan and Syria and Egypt, quite probably...


----------



## P F Tinmore

RoccoR said:


> P F Tinmore,  _et al,_
> 
> Well, there are a couple things wrong with your question.
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The "right of return" is an Immigration, Nationality, and Citizenship issue.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Returning to one's own home is "immigration?" Other than Israel's apartheid laws, can you back that up with anything?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> One is, I did not use the word "home" once.  So, it is fair to say, that your question is a bit out of context.
> 
> Second, I used the phrase "Immigration, Nationality, and Citizenship issue" in a broad and sweeping context.  One of the three may be applicable, or any combination may be applicable.  The term "home" implies a "residency" having been established.  So I outlined how residency - "Nationality by Residence in Israel" - can be used and applied.
> 
> I did not tie "home" with "immigration" that I can see.  I did make links available.
> 
> You mentioned "Apartheid Laws."
> 
> 
> Which one of the "Immigration, Nationality, and Citizenship" laws is in violation of any provision of Apartheid as a Crime?
> Which one of the "Immigration, Nationality, and Citizenship" laws is not rational?
> Are you implying that a nation (any nation) is "Apartheid" if it establishes a firm set of Immigration, Nationality, and Citizenship laws?
> 
> Similarly, South Africa (SA) has a set of Immigration, Nationality, and Citizenship laws.  You just cannot walk into SA Border Control and say --- you have to let me in because I once lived over there in that house.
> 
> I also understand that even Jordan has recently taken action to remove Jordanian Citizenship from certain Palestinians.  Even the Hashemite Kingdom has Immigration, Nationality, and Citizenship Laws.  Is Jordan also Apartheid?
> 
> I understand that Kuwait expelled approximately 250,000 Jordanians of Palestinian during the Operation Desert Storm (1991 Gulf War).  Kuwait has Immigration, Nationality, and Citizenship laws.  Are you suggesting that Kuwait is also Apartheid?
> 
> Immigration, Nationality, and Citizenship laws are not necessarily "apartheid."
> 
> Most Respectfully,
> R
Click to expand...




> One is, I did not use the word "home" once. So, it is fair to say, that your question is a bit out of context.



It is Israel's debate and laws that are out of context. 

Palestinian homes are where they historically lived. Israel tries to change that with its apartheid laws.


----------



## RoccoR

P F Tinmore,  _et al,_

Assuming that the Palestinians find a reason to suspend Peace Talks, I think I have a better appreciation for this non-violent approach.

BTW:  I'm hoping something fruitful comes from the talks.



P F Tinmore said:


> Kondor3 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> "..._Israel would love to keep this conflict in the military realm, but this is not what is happening_..."
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The last, desperate gasps of a failed, dying proto-State that hasn't got enough land remaining in its possession to build a decent-sized parking lot... far too many Palestinian suicide bombings and rocket attacks to be able to paint the Palestinians as the victims here... far too much history of Palestinian and Arab-Muslim aggression against the Israeli-Jews to be able to paint the Palestinians as the victims here... far too little, too late.
> 
> Tick... tick... tick...
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Israel may have mooched enough military to remove Palestinians from their homes but they cannot eliminate the Palestinians or their supporters worldwide.
> 
> IAW and BDS are shaping public opinion and changing the frame of the debate.
Click to expand...

*(COMMENT)*

Shaping public opinion is often harder to sustain, when put to the test.  How many nations are willing to invest in any active measure against a lone non-Islamic State surrounded by Article 13 Jihadist and Article 9 Armed Feday'een.   

But I appreciate the fact that it is not an hostile operation.

I've seen this video before.  It is an advertisement for the BDS. 

Most Respectfully,
R


----------



## Hoffstra

Israel has one rule for Arabs and another rule for Jews when it comes to building demolitions, building permits, fences, walls, checkpoints, land confiscation, application of old treaties, and lawsuits for lost lands.

Its the Israeli version of Apartheid.  Its called "Hafrada".


----------



## docmauser1

P F Tinmore said:


> _IAW and BDS are shaping public opinion and changing the frame of the debate._


Indeed, they're ready to fight Israel to the last palistanian, of course.


----------



## Hoffstra

P F Tinmore said:


> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The "right of return" is an Immigration, Nationality, and Citizenship issue.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Returning to one's own home is "immigration?" Other than Israel's apartheid laws, can you back that up with anything?
Click to expand...


The UN Charter and Geneva Conventions clearly state that when a person flees his country or home due to war, he has the immediate and unalienable right to RETURN to that home once it is safe to do so.


----------



## toastman

P F Tinmore said:


> toastman said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Kondor3 said:
> 
> 
> 
> You keep looking for Legal Substantiation when it is patently and glaringly obvious that none will be forthcoming, and that because Victory on the Battlefield settles old Legal Arguments.
> 
> *Ownership of those lands and structures has changed*, long, long ago; the Israelis now hold Deed and Title to the land; conveyed upon them by Mars, the God of War.
> 
> Vae victus.
> 
> It is no longer your home.
> 
> Some of you abandoned your homes.
> 
> Some of you were evicted from your homes.
> 
> In any event, it is no longer your home.
> 
> Don't like that outcome?
> 
> Then you must try to take it back.
> 
> But you will be doing it from Lebanon and Jordan and Egypt, soon enough.
> 
> Tick... tick... tick.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> This is what I've been saying for a while now. If the Palestinians want any of the land, the only way they can get it is through conventional warfare.
> But I'm sure we all know how that would turn out
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Israel would love to keep this conflict in the military realm, but this is not what is happening.
> 
> [ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w56AP_cjDYw]Rafeef, Ben and Mbuyiseni on Israeli Apartheid Week - 22.2.12 - YouTube[/ame]
Click to expand...


You just made up that first sentence


----------



## toastman

P F Tinmore said:


> Kondor3 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> "..._Israel would love to keep this conflict in the military realm, but this is not what is happening_..."
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The last, desperate gasps of a failed, dying proto-State that hasn't got enough land remaining in its possession to build a decent-sized parking lot... far too many Palestinian suicide bombings and rocket attacks to be able to paint the Palestinians as the victims here... far too much history of Palestinian and Arab-Muslim aggression against the Israeli-Jews to be able to paint the Palestinians as the victims here... far too little, too late.
> 
> Tick... tick... tick...
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Israel may have mooched enough military to remove Palestinians from their homes but they cannot eliminate the Palestinians or their supporters worldwide.
> 
> IAW and BDS are shaping public opinion and changing the frame of the debate.
Click to expand...


You made up that last sentence (as you do quite often) . Also, none of what you just said will have any effect on 'Right of Return'
It is a pipe dream.


----------



## P F Tinmore

RoccoR said:


> P F Tinmore,  _et al,_
> 
> Assuming that the Palestinians find a reason to suspend Peace Talks, I think I have a better appreciation for this non-violent approach.
> 
> BTW:  I'm hoping something fruitful comes from the talks.
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Kondor3 said:
> 
> 
> 
> The last, desperate gasps of a failed, dying proto-State that hasn't got enough land remaining in its possession to build a decent-sized parking lot... far too many Palestinian suicide bombings and rocket attacks to be able to paint the Palestinians as the victims here... far too much history of Palestinian and Arab-Muslim aggression against the Israeli-Jews to be able to paint the Palestinians as the victims here... far too little, too late.
> 
> Tick... tick... tick...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Israel may have mooched enough military to remove Palestinians from their homes but they cannot eliminate the Palestinians or their supporters worldwide.
> 
> IAW and BDS are shaping public opinion and changing the frame of the debate.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> Shaping public opinion is often harder to sustain, when put to the test.  How many nations are willing to invest in any active measure against a lone non-Islamic State surrounded by Article 13 Jihadist and Article 9 Armed Feday'een.
> 
> But I appreciate the fact that it is not an hostile operation.
> 
> I've seen this video before.  It is an advertisement for the BDS.
> 
> Most Respectfully,
> R
Click to expand...




> Assuming that the Palestinians find a reason to suspend Peace Talks, I think I have a better appreciation for this non-violent approach.
> 
> BTW: I'm hoping something fruitful comes from the talks.



Fake peace talks...pfffft. Real peace revolves around justice. You won't hear that word in any of these fake peace talks.



> Shaping public opinion is often harder to sustain, when put to the test.



Indeed, IAW and BDS are based on truth and justice. Israel's response is to pile on more crap. We will see where this goes.


----------



## Kondor3

Hoffstra said:


> Israel has one rule for Arabs and another rule for Jews when it comes to building demolitions, building permits, fences, walls, checkpoints, land confiscation, application of old treaties, and lawsuits for lost lands.
> 
> Its the Israeli version of Apartheid.  Its called "Hafrada".



It's called squeezing a mortal enemy off their land and putting more distance between you and them, without actually resorting to slaughtering them... leaning on them hard enough for a few decades where most will finally take the hint, pack up, and move someplace else.

The Israelis did not start-out as hard-asses about such things, but, repeated attacks by neighboring Muslim-Arab nations, and the Palestinians themselves, and years of terrorism on the part of the Palestinians long before the Israelis began hitting them back, hard, have all served to harden the collective Israeli heart, allowing them to recognize the Palestinian viper for the deadly foe that it truly is, and to begin dealing with it in a more practical fashion designed to ensure the long-term safety of Israelis, and the State of Israel.

It took the Israelis a long time to wake up to such a necessity, but they eventually got there, within the past decade, and the Palestinians have such a nasty reputation for terror and Jew-hating that they've brought it upon themselves, and have very little prospect of widespread support sufficient to topple the Israelis or to reverse their present condition.

There's one sure-fire way to end such differences in treatment; pack up and move to some other place where such things do not exist.

After 65 years of mostly self-imposed exile, no Return, and a good 10 years or more of the Israelis playing the ultra-hard-asses with the Palestinians, you would have thought that the Palestinians would have taken the hint by now and vacated the premises.

But, some folks have to be dragged kicking and screaming out of a place that is no longer theirs, and that seems to be the case here; after which, the world will breathe a sigh of relief, and then quickly proceed to forget the whole thing at the speed of light.

Oh well, the world will continue to turn, and the universe will continue to unfold as it should.


----------



## Kondor3

Hoffstra said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The "right of return" is an Immigration, Nationality, and Citizenship issue.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Returning to one's own home is "immigration?" Other than Israel's apartheid laws, can you back that up with anything?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> The UN Charter and Geneva Conventions clearly state that when a person flees his country or home due to war, he has the immediate and unalienable right to RETURN to that home once it is safe to do so.
Click to expand...


_"Mister Marshall has made his decision. Now let him enforce it."_


----------



## P F Tinmore

Kondor3 said:


> Hoffstra said:
> 
> 
> 
> Israel has one rule for Arabs and another rule for Jews when it comes to building demolitions, building permits, fences, walls, checkpoints, land confiscation, application of old treaties, and lawsuits for lost lands.
> 
> Its the Israeli version of Apartheid.  Its called "Hafrada".
> 
> 
> 
> 
> It's called squeezing a mortal enemy off their land and putting more distance between you and them, without actually resorting to slaughtering them... leaning on them hard enough for a few decades where most will finally take the hint, pack up, and move someplace else.
> 
> The Israelis did not start-out as hard-asses about such things, but, repeated attacks by neighboring Muslim-Arab nations, and the Palestinians themselves, and years of terrorism on the part of the Palestinians long before the Israelis began hitting them back, hard, have all served to harden the collective Israeli heart, allowing them to recognize the Palestinian viper for the deadly foe that it truly is, and to begin dealing with it in a more practical fashion designed to ensure the long-term safety of Israelis, and the State of Israel.
> 
> It took the Israelis a long time to wake up to such a necessity, but they eventually got there, within the past decade, and the Palestinians have such a nasty reputation for terror and Jew-hating that they've brought it upon themselves, and have very little prospect of widespread support sufficient to topple the Israelis or to reverse their present condition.
> 
> There's one sure-fire way to end such differences in treatment; pack up and move to some other place where such things do not exist.
> 
> After 65 years of mostly self-imposed exile, no Return, and a good 10 years or more of the Israelis playing the ultra-hard-asses with the Palestinians, you would have thought that the Palestinians would have taken the hint by now and vacated the premises.
> 
> But, some folks have to be dragged kicking and screaming out of a place that is no longer theirs, and that seems to be the case here; after which, the world will breathe a sigh of relief, and then quickly proceed to forget the whole thing at the speed of light.
> 
> Oh well, the world will continue to turn, and the universe will continue to unfold as it should.
Click to expand...




> It's called squeezing a mortal enemy off their land and putting more distance between you and them, without actually resorting to slaughtering them... leaning on them hard enough for a few decades where most will finally take the hint, pack up, and move someplace else.



Ethnic cleansing is the proper terminology.


----------



## Hoffstra

Kondor3 said:


> _"Mister Marshall has made his decision. Now let him enforce it."_


 
Sad, very sad that right wing extremists have so little regard and respect for international law.

Tell me, kind sir, why should the world respect and honor the promise of the right of Jews to settle in Palestine, as stated in the Palestine Mandate and the San Remo Conference, if right wing extremists like you so boldly disregard the protections for refugees stated in the UN Charter and Geneva Conventions?


----------



## RoccoR

Hoffstra,  _et al,_

The separation is for security purposes, not because the Arab is somehow inferior to the Jewish Settler.  Inside Israel, Arab Israeli citizens are not treated differently.



Hoffstra said:


> Israel has one rule for Arabs and another rule for Jews when it comes to building demolitions, building permits, fences, walls, checkpoints, land confiscation, application of old treaties, and lawsuits for lost lands.
> 
> Its the Israeli version of Apartheid.  Its called "Hafrada".


*(COMMENT)*

Hafrada is not another word for Apartheid.  It simply doesn't imply the same thing.

Most Respectfully,
R


----------



## Hoffstra

P F Tinmore said:


> Ethnic cleansing is the proper terminology.



and when faced with the facts of the UN Charter and the Geneva Conventions regarding the rights of refugees, they say "let the world go and try enforcing it".

funny, and sad, huh?


----------



## Hoffstra

RoccoR said:


> Hoffstra,  _et al,_
> 
> The separation is for security purposes, not because the Arab is somehow inferior to the Jewish Settler.  Inside Israel, Arab Israeli citizens are not treated differently.
> 
> 
> 
> Hoffstra said:
> 
> 
> 
> Israel has one rule for Arabs and another rule for Jews when it comes to building demolitions, building permits, fences, walls, checkpoints, land confiscation, application of old treaties, and lawsuits for lost lands.
> 
> Its the Israeli version of Apartheid.  Its called "Hafrada".
> 
> 
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> Hafrada is not another word for Apartheid.  It simply doesn't imply the same thing.
> 
> Most Respectfully,
> R
Click to expand...



LOLOLOL!!!!!  The denial of extremists is hilarious!!

The purpose of the Hafrada wall is two things:  security and land grabs.

Secondly, all of the restrictions, regulations, and double-standards regarding application of Israeli law in the West Bank is tantamount to an Israeli system of Apartheid, known as Hafrada.


----------



## RoccoR

P F Tinmore, Hoffstra, _et al,_

When is it safe?



Kondor3 said:


> Hoffstra said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> Returning to one's own home is "immigration?" Other than Israel's apartheid laws, can you back that up with anything?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The UN Charter and Geneva Conventions clearly state that when a person flees his country or home due to war, he has the immediate and unalienable right to RETURN to that home once it is safe to do so.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> _"Mister Marshall has made his decision. Now let him enforce it."_
Click to expand...

*(COMMENT)*

Remember, they are Article 13 Jihadist and Article 9 Feday'een.  The Palestinian endorse political entities (HAMAS & FATAH) that organize, instigate, facilitate, participate in, finance, encourage or tolerate terrorist activities intended to be committed against other States or their citizens.

What country in the Middle East allows that?

No, it is not safe to do so yet.  Next!

Most Respectfully.
R


----------



## P F Tinmore

RoccoR said:


> P F Tinmore, Hoffstra, _et al,_
> 
> When is it safe?
> 
> 
> 
> Kondor3 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Hoffstra said:
> 
> 
> 
> The UN Charter and Geneva Conventions clearly state that when a person flees his country or home due to war, he has the immediate and unalienable right to RETURN to that home once it is safe to do so.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _"Mister Marshall has made his decision. Now let him enforce it."_
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> Remember, they are Article 13 Jihadist and Article 9 Feday'een.  The Palestinian endorse political entities (HAMAS & FATAH) that organize, instigate, facilitate, participate in, finance, encourage or tolerate terrorist activities intended to be committed against other States or their citizens.
> 
> What country in the Middle East allows that?
> 
> No, it is not safe to do so yet.  Next!
> 
> Most Respectfully.
> R
Click to expand...


Terrorism is an Israeli propaganda campaign. The Palestinians fight inside their own country to defend their own country.


----------



## Hoffstra

right wing extremists have no intention of ever allowing Palestinian refugees return to Israel or return to the West Bank.

they care not for UN laws, the Geneva Conventions, or any other international laws dealing with refugee rights.

they are selfish, just as Truman stated.  They care only about themselves and THEIR needs.

No one else matters.  Nothing else matters.


----------



## ForeverYoung436

Hoffstra said:


> right wing extremists have no intention of ever allowing Palestinian refugees return to Israel or return to the West Bank.
> 
> they care not for UN laws, the Geneva Conventions, or any other international laws dealing with refugee rights.
> 
> they are selfish, just as Truman stated.  They care only about themselves and THEIR needs.
> 
> No one else matters.  Nothing else matters.



Your avatar shows an Israeli hand shaking a Palestinan hand, so you seem to advocate two states.  But former Palestinian refugees coming to Israel would eliminate Israel.  And I deliberately use the word former, because how can ppl still be refugees after 65 years?  My parents were also refugees once, but they didn't wallow in it.


----------



## Hoffstra

ForeverYoung436 said:


> Your avatar shows an Israeli hand shaking a Palestinan hand, so you seem to advocate two states.  But former Palestinian refugees coming to Israel would eliminate Israel.  And I deliberately use the word former, because how can ppl still be refugees after 65 years?  My parents were also refugees once, but they didn't wallow in it.



How would allowing back 200,000 Palestinians above the age of 50 "eliminate" Israel?


----------



## Hossfly

P F Tinmore said:


> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore, Hoffstra, _et al,_
> 
> When is it safe?
> 
> 
> 
> Kondor3 said:
> 
> 
> 
> _"Mister Marshall has made his decision. Now let him enforce it."_
> 
> 
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> Remember, they are Article 13 Jihadist and Article 9 Feday'een.  The Palestinian endorse political entities (HAMAS & FATAH) that organize, instigate, facilitate, participate in, finance, encourage or tolerate terrorist activities intended to be committed against other States or their citizens.
> 
> What country in the Middle East allows that?
> 
> No, it is not safe to do so yet.  Next!
> 
> Most Respectfully.
> R
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Terrorism is an Israeli propaganda campaign. The Palestinians fight inside their own country to defend their own country.
Click to expand...

You don't say, Tinnie.  I guess the cruise ship where that old Jewish man in the wheelchair was thrown off of was flowing in the territorial waters of "Palestine."  And of course the massacre of the Israeli athletes took place in the Olympics being held in "Palestine."  Of course, Tinnie would love for us to believe the Arab propaganda campaign where Israel is so bad, bad, bad while the Arabs are busy not only  killing each other but others for their religious beliefs..


----------



## Hoffstra

Hossfly said:


> You don't say, Tinnie.  I guess the cruise ship where that old Jewish man in the wheelchair was thrown off of was flowing in the territorial waters of "Palestine."  And of course the massacre of the Israeli athletes took place in the Olympics being held in "Palestine."  Of course, Tinnie would love for us to believe the Arab propaganda campaign where Israel is so bad, bad, bad while the Arabs are busy not only  killing each other but others for their religious beliefs..



Zionist political violence - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

read about Zionist terrorism, Horsefly.


----------



## P F Tinmore

Hossfly said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore, Hoffstra, _et al,_
> 
> When is it safe?
> 
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> Remember, they are Article 13 Jihadist and Article 9 Feday'een.  The Palestinian endorse political entities (HAMAS & FATAH) that organize, instigate, facilitate, participate in, finance, encourage or tolerate terrorist activities intended to be committed against other States or their citizens.
> 
> What country in the Middle East allows that?
> 
> No, it is not safe to do so yet.  Next!
> 
> Most Respectfully.
> R
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Terrorism is an Israeli propaganda campaign. The Palestinians fight inside their own country to defend their own country.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> You don't say, Tinnie.  I guess the cruise ship where that old Jewish man in the wheelchair was thrown off of was flowing in the territorial waters of "Palestine."  And of course the massacre of the Israeli athletes took place in the Olympics being held in "Palestine."  Of course, Tinnie would love for us to believe the Arab propaganda campaign where Israel is so bad, bad, bad while the Arabs are busy not only  killing each other but others for their religious beliefs..
Click to expand...


Israel has killed many more Palestinians outside of the arena than the few killed by the Palestinians. So, you don't have anyplace to talk.


----------



## Hoffstra

P F Tinmore said:


> Israel has killed many more Palestinians outside of the arena than the few killed by the Palestinians. So, you don't have anyplace to talk.



Israel has museums and military medals honoring their terrorists.

The elect their terrorists to become Prime Ministers.


----------



## ForeverYoung436

Hoffstra said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> Israel has killed many more Palestinians outside of the arena than the few killed by the Palestinians. So, you don't have anyplace to talk.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Israel has museums and military medals honoring their terrorists.
> 
> The elect their terrorists to become Prime Ministers.
Click to expand...


Arafart won a Nobel Peace Prize and could have become a statesman, but he just couldn't part with this terrorist ways in the end.


----------



## Hoffstra

ForeverYoung436 said:


> Arafart won a Nobel Peace Prize and could have become a statesman, but he just couldn't part with this terrorist ways in the end.



Begin=terrorist


----------



## P F Tinmore

ForeverYoung436 said:


> Hoffstra said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> Israel has killed many more Palestinians outside of the arena than the few killed by the Palestinians. So, you don't have anyplace to talk.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Israel has museums and military medals honoring their terrorists.
> 
> The elect their terrorists to become Prime Ministers.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Arafart won a Nobel Peace Prize and could have become a statesman, but he just couldn't part with this terrorist ways in the end.
Click to expand...


Arafat was brought back to Palestine by Israel to outsource the occupation to a Palestinian face.


----------



## toastman

P F Tinmore said:


> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore, Hoffstra, _et al,_
> 
> When is it safe?
> 
> 
> 
> Kondor3 said:
> 
> 
> 
> _"Mister Marshall has made his decision. Now let him enforce it."_
> 
> 
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> Remember, they are Article 13 Jihadist and Article 9 Feday'een.  The Palestinian endorse political entities (HAMAS & FATAH) that organize, instigate, facilitate, participate in, finance, encourage or tolerate terrorist activities intended to be committed against other States or their citizens.
> 
> What country in the Middle East allows that?
> 
> No, it is not safe to do so yet.  Next!
> 
> Most Respectfully.
> R
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Terrorism is an Israeli propaganda campaign. The Palestinians fight inside their own country to defend their own country.
Click to expand...


You're so full of yourself tinnie. 
There is no country called palestine, only palestinian territorries. And yes the Palestinians have commited many acts of terrorism and today a plot was foiled to bomb a mall during the holidays in Jerusalem. The plot was done by Hamas. Do you consider that defending their country?


----------



## toastman

Oh, and when was their country founded and by whom?


----------



## Hoffstra

P F Tinmore said:


> Arafat was brought back to Palestine by Israel to outsource the occupation to a Palestinian face.



I wouldn't put it past them to pull such bullshit.

The fact is that the occupation of the West Bank still exists 100%, simply with a Palestinian mask on it.


----------



## P F Tinmore

Hoffstra said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> Arafat was brought back to Palestine by Israel to outsource the occupation to a Palestinian face.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I wouldn't put it past them to pull such bullshit.
> 
> The fact is that the occupation of the West Bank still exists 100%, simply with a Palestinian mask on it.
Click to expand...


Indeed, the completely illegitimate "PA" in the West Bank was installed by the US in June of 2007 after the US coup against the elected government.

This coup, however, failed in Gaza leaving parts of the government in place there.


----------



## toastman

P F Tinmore said:


> Hoffstra said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> Arafat was brought back to Palestine by Israel to outsource the occupation to a Palestinian face.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I wouldn't put it past them to pull such bullshit.
> 
> The fact is that the occupation of the West Bank still exists 100%, simply with a Palestinian mask on it.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Indeed, the completely illegitimate "PA" in the West Bank was installed by the US in June of 2007 after the US coup against the elected government.
> 
> This coup, however, failed in Gaza leaving parts of the government in place there.
Click to expand...


Who's the legit government nnow then


----------



## P F Tinmore

toastman said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Hoffstra said:
> 
> 
> 
> I wouldn't put it past them to pull such bullshit.
> 
> The fact is that the occupation of the West Bank still exists 100%, simply with a Palestinian mask on it.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeed, the completely illegitimate "PA" in the West Bank was installed by the US in June of 2007 after the US coup against the elected government.
> 
> This coup, however, failed in Gaza leaving parts of the government in place there.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Who's the legit government nnow then
Click to expand...


Whatever is left in Gaza.


----------



## toastman

Who's the legit government of the West Bank ? And provide a link please


----------



## P F Tinmore

toastman said:


> Who's the legit government of the West Bank ? And provide a link please



It appears that there is not one.



> *Haniyeh was dismissed by Abbas on 14 June 2007 and appointed Fayyad instead. This has been deemed illegal by the Legislative Council, which continues to recognise Haniyeh.
> 
> This appointment has been challenged as illegal, because while the Palestinian Basic Law permits the president to dismiss a sitting prime minister, *the appointment of a replacement requires the approval of the Legislative Council.* The law provides that after removal of the prime minister (in this case, Ismail Haniyeh), the outgoing prime minister heads a caretaker government. The current Legislative Council, in which Hamas holds a majority of seats, *has not approved the appointments of Fayyad or the balance of his new government. Fayyad's appointment was never placed before, or approved by it.*[12] Haniyeh continues to operate as prime minister in Gaza, and is recognized by a large number of Palestinians as the legitimate acting prime minister. *Anis al-Qasem, a constitutional lawyer who drafted the Basic Law, is among those who publicly declared the appointment of Fayyad to be illegal.*[13]
> 
> Salam Fayyad - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia



*Nobody* in the West Bank government has been approved by the PLC as required in their constitution.


----------



## toastman

That's odd. Well if that's the case, then it has to be the PA, regardless of if their term ended. There can't just be no government, can there?


----------



## P F Tinmore

toastman said:


> That's odd. Well if that's the case, then it has to be the PA, regardless of if their term ended. There can't just be no government, can there?



The "PA" is an illegal government that was installed by the US, etc.

That is preventing the legal government from governing that area.


----------



## toastman

But you just said there is no other government. I'm confused.

I've never heard anything about the PA's governing in the West Bank being illegal. I simply don't think it's true, even if you say their term ended .


----------



## P F Tinmore

toastman said:


> But you just said there is no other government. I'm confused.
> 
> I've never heard anything about the PA's governing in the West Bank being illegal. I simply don't think it's true,* even if you say their term ended .*



You must be confused because I never said that.


----------



## toastman

Maybe I misunderstood, but I do recall on several occasions that you said the term of the PA had ended several years ago.


----------



## P F Tinmore

toastman said:


> But you just said there is no other government. I'm confused.
> 
> *I've never heard anything about the PA's governing in the West Bank being illegal.* I simply don't think it's true, even if you say their term ended .



It is all over the place. Sorry you missed it.



> Abbas dismissed Prime Minister Ismail Haniyeh of Hamas and Fayyad was sworn in as Prime Minister of an emergency Palestinian government on June 15, 2007. Though *appointment to the position was never confirmed by the Palestinian Legislative Council, *Abbas reappointed Fayyad as Prime Minister in May 2009.
> 
> Salam Fayyad | Jewish Virtual Library


----------



## toastman

Still nothing in legality .

Not that I really care btw, I just don't agree with you


----------



## P F Tinmore

toastman said:


> Maybe I misunderstood, but I do recall on several occasions that you said the term of the PA had ended several years ago.



Well, Abbas left the government in June of 2007 but his elected term in office ended in January of 2009.

The government in Palestine is considered to be the prime minister and his cabinet. There is no set time for a term in office. They are to serve until legally replaced.


----------



## Kondor3

Hoffstra said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> Ethnic cleansing is the proper terminology.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> and when faced with the facts of the UN Charter and the Geneva Conventions regarding the rights of refugees, they say "let the world go and try enforcing it".
> 
> funny, and sad, huh?
Click to expand...


By Jove, I think you've got it... 
	

	
	
		
		

		
			





Consider it a Population Re-Alignment...

Gerrymandering, on a grand scale...

Like the Poles kicking the Germans out of East Prussia and the Czechs kicking the Germans out of the Sudatenland, both under Allied Control, and shifting them elsewhere...

Beats going in and slaughtering them until there are none left...

So the Palestinians are getting kicked out and forced to move on...

Big deal...

Think of it as pay-back for the thousands upon thousands of Jews being kicked out of so many Muslim-Arab countries during the period 1948-1970, and nobody called THAT 'ethnic cleansing', when the Arabs did it...

When those displaced Jews have a 'Right of Return' and compensation for damages and when they are restored to full citizenship in their countries of origin, then, perhaps, you'll get some reciprocity out of the Israelis...

Goose and Gander and all that...

Until then...

Consolidation and mop-up operations continue...

Tick... tick... tick...


----------



## Hoffstra

Kondor3 said:


> Consider it a Population Re-Alignment...
> 
> Gerrymandering, on a grand scale...
> 
> Like the Poles kicking the Germans out of East Prussia and the Czechs kicking the Germans out of the Sudatenland, both under Allied Control, and shifting them elsewhere...
> 
> Beats going in and slaughtering them until there are none left...
> 
> So the Palestinians are getting kicked out and forced to move on...
> 
> Big deal



All this shows us how the Nazis have brainwashed their victims into thinking just like them.

Adolf Eichmann said that if he was a Jew he would be an extremist Zionist.


----------



## P F Tinmore

toastman said:


> Still nothing in legality .
> 
> Not that I really care btw, I just don't agree with you



Just like an appointed cabinet member in the US cannot be sworn into office without senate approval, the PM and his cabinet in Palestine cannot be sworn in without PLC (parliament) approval.

It is cut and dried. There is no room for interpretation or opinion.


----------



## Kondor3

Hoffstra said:


> Kondor3 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Consider it a Population Re-Alignment...
> 
> Gerrymandering, on a grand scale...
> 
> Like the Poles kicking the Germans out of East Prussia and the Czechs kicking the Germans out of the Sudatenland, both under Allied Control, and shifting them elsewhere...
> 
> Beats going in and slaughtering them until there are none left...
> 
> So the Palestinians are getting kicked out and forced to move on...
> 
> Big deal
> 
> 
> 
> 
> All this shows us how the Nazis have brainwashed their victims into thinking just like them.
> 
> Adolf Eichmann said that if he was a Jew he would be an extremist Zionist.
Click to expand...


After hundreds of suicide bombings and rocket attacks upon innocent Israeli civilians, I'm sure that the Israelis really don't give a frog's fat ass what you call it, or them, so long as their own people are safe...

You (the Muslim-Arabs of the region, and, specifically, the Palestinians), have committed so much mayhem upon the Jews of Israel over the years so as to harden their hearts and bring themselves (and you) to this pretty pass...

If the Jews of Israel were really acting like Nazis, they would be gassing the Palestinians to death by the hundreds of thousands rather than just slowly-but-surely forcing them off their land...

It makes no sense to live alongside a poisonous viper (the Palestinians) if it can be avoided...

And Israel has the muscle to slowly neutralize those vipers and eventually to shove them aside and out of reach, while still leaving them alive...

If you want to call the Jews of Israel (or those who support them and their policies of land-squeeze) Nazis, then, wake me up when they start gassing Palestinians by the hundreds of thousands and cremating the bodies...

Until then, good luck in conjuring up better equivalencies...


----------



## Hoffstra

Kondor3 said:


> You (the Muslim-Arabs of the region, and, specifically, the Palestinians), have committed so much mayhem upon the Jews of Israel over the years so as to harden their hearts and bring themselves (and you) to this pretty pass...



and yet the Zionists committed genocide against the Arabs of Palestine, long before suicide attacks started.  decades in fact.



> ...If the Jews of Israel were really acting like Nazis, they would be gassing the Palestinians to death by the hundreds of thousands rather than just slowly-but-surely forcing them off their land...




this must be your dream every night, to commit mass-murder against the Arabs of Palestine.  You ZioNazi filth!!




> It makes no sense to live alongside a poisonous viper (the Palestinians) if it can be avoided...



The Nazis called Jews rats.  You call Arabs vipers.  Same hatred, different uniform.



> ...And Israel has the muscle to slowly neutralize those vipers and eventually to shove them aside and out of reach, while still leaving them alive...



more Nazi fantasies from the victim of the Nazis.  Ironic huh?


----------



## MHunterB

"....and yet the Zionists committed genocide against the Arabs of Palestine, long before suicide attacks started. decades in fact."

When posters tell big whopping lies like the above BS filth, it severely diminishes their credibility.

Especially when the "new" poster belies his avatar with almost every single post.


----------



## Hossfly

Hoffstra said:


> Kondor3 said:
> 
> 
> 
> You (the Muslim-Arabs of the region, and, specifically, the Palestinians), have committed so much mayhem upon the Jews of Israel over the years so as to harden their hearts and bring themselves (and you) to this pretty pass...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> and yet the Zionists committed genocide against the Arabs of Palestine, long before suicide attacks started.  decades in fact.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ...If the Jews of Israel were really acting like Nazis, they would be gassing the Palestinians to death by the hundreds of thousands rather than just slowly-but-surely forcing them off their land...
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> this must be your dream every night, to commit mass-murder against the Arabs of Palestine.  You ZioNazi filth!!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> It makes no sense to live alongside a poisonous viper (the Palestinians) if it can be avoided...
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> The Nazis called Jews rats.  You call Arabs vipers.  Same hatred, different uniform.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ...And Israel has the muscle to slowly neutralize those vipers and eventually to shove them aside and out of reach, while still leaving them alive...
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> more Nazi fantasies from the victim of the Nazis.  Ironic huh?
Click to expand...

Miss Hoffstra, the NeoNazi or Islamofascist filth (whatever the case might be) gets so excited when she hears that her friends in the Sudan have murdered over 2 million Christians and are still murdering them along with the Black tribes.  Does anyone think that she cares about her friends now killing Christians in Nigeria and Egypt?   Since the Jews are not involved in this, she keeps her excitement over the murders to herself.   By the way,  you NeoNazi filth (since you are throwing out the word "filth" I know you wouldn't mind it describing yourself), why not tell us what Muslims call the Infidels?  As Rocco can see, he has a difficult task telling the facts to those who don't want to believe them, but they certainly are happy to make up their own facts.


----------



## toastman

Hoffstra said:


> Kondor3 said:
> 
> 
> 
> You (the Muslim-Arabs of the region, and, specifically, the Palestinians), have committed so much mayhem upon the Jews of Israel over the years so as to harden their hearts and bring themselves (and you) to this pretty pass...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> and yet the Zionists committed genocide against the Arabs of Palestine, long before suicide attacks started.  decades in fact.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ...If the Jews of Israel were really acting like Nazis, they would be gassing the Palestinians to death by the hundreds of thousands rather than just slowly-but-surely forcing them off their land...
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> this must be your dream every night, to commit mass-murder against the Arabs of Palestine.  You ZioNazi filth!!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> It makes no sense to live alongside a poisonous viper (the Palestinians) if it can be avoided...
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> The Nazis called Jews rats.  You call Arabs vipers.  Same hatred, different uniform.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ...And Israel has the muscle to slowly neutralize those vipers and eventually to shove them aside and out of reach, while still leaving them alive...
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> more Nazi fantasies from the victim of the Nazis.  Ironic huh?
Click to expand...


We get that you're a miserable and hateful human being, but at least don't tell lies. 
You just lost EVERY bit of credibility that you might have just had, and every time you compare Jews of Israel to Nazis, you are spitting on the graves of the millions of dead Jews . 
Also, you constant childish insults really make you and the other pro - Palestinians look bad. I'd calm down if I were you, if you want to stick around, little angry boy.
For fucks sake you've been posting jibberish non stop since this morning, why don't you ask your mom permission if you could go outside for a walk.


----------



## toastman

P F Tinmore said:


> toastman said:
> 
> 
> 
> Still nothing in legality .
> 
> Not that I really care btw, I just don't agree with you
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Just like an appointed cabinet member in the US cannot be sworn into office without senate approval, the PM and his cabinet in Palestine cannot be sworn in without PLC (parliament) approval.
> 
> It is cut and dried. There is no room for interpretation or opinion.
Click to expand...


Still no link saying the PA's governing in the WB is illegal??


----------



## RoccoR

P F Tinmore,  _et al,_

The legitimate government is one that is recognized.



toastman said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> toastman said:
> 
> 
> 
> Still nothing in legality .
> 
> Not that I really care btw, I just don't agree with you
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Just like an appointed cabinet member in the US cannot be sworn into office without senate approval, the PM and his cabinet in Palestine cannot be sworn in without PLC (parliament) approval.
> 
> It is cut and dried. There is no room for interpretation or opinion.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Still no link saying the PA's governing in the WB is illegal??
Click to expand...

*(COMMENT)*

I'm not sure that even the Palestinians understand which government is the real government.



			
				Excerpt from the Status of Palestine in the United Nations said:
			
		

> 1. Reaffirms the right of the Palestinian people to self-determination and to independence in their State of Palestine on the Palestinian territory occupied since 1967;
> 
> 2. *Decides to accord* to Palestine non-member observer State status in the United Nations, without prejudice to the acquired rights, privileges and *role of the Palestine Liberation Organization in the United Nations as the representative of the Palestinian people*, in accordance with the relevant resolutions and practice;
> 
> 3. Expresses the hope that the Security Council will consider favourably the application submitted on 23 September 2011 by the State of Palestine for admission to full membership in the United Nations;8
> 
> 4. Affirms its determination to contribute to the achievement of the inalienable rights of the Palestinian people and the attainment of a peaceful settlement in the Middle East that ends the occupation that began in 1967 and fulfils the vision of two States: an independent, sovereign, democratic, contiguous and viable State of Palestine living side by side in peace and security with Israel on the basis of the pre-1967 borders;
> 
> 5. Expresses the urgent need for the resumption and acceleration of negotiations within the Middle East peace process based on the relevant United Nations resolutions, the terms of reference of the Madrid Conference, including the principle of land for peace, the Arab Peace Initiative5 and the Quartet road map to a permanent two-State solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict9 for the achievement of a just, lasting and comprehensive peace settlement between the Palestinian and Israeli sides that resolves all outstanding core issues, namely the Palestine refugees, Jerusalem, settlements, borders, security and water;
> 
> 6. Urges all States, the specialized agencies and organizations of the United Nations system to continue to support and assist the Palestinian people in the early realization of their right to self-determination, independence and freedom;
> 
> 7. Requests the Secretary-General to take the necessary measures to implement the present resolution and to report to the Assembly within three months on progress made in this regard.
> 
> _*SOURCE: *_ A/67/L.28  26 November 2012



But it would seem that it is not HAMAS.

Most Respectfully,
R


----------



## P F Tinmore

toastman said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> toastman said:
> 
> 
> 
> Still nothing in legality .
> 
> Not that I really care btw, I just don't agree with you
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Just like an appointed cabinet member in the US cannot be sworn into office without senate approval, the PM and his cabinet in Palestine cannot be sworn in without PLC (parliament) approval.
> 
> It is cut and dried. There is no room for interpretation or opinion.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Still no link saying the PA's governing in the WB is illegal??
Click to expand...


Geesh!!!



> *Formation of the Government
> Article 65*
> 
> Once appointed by the President of the Palestinian National Authority, the Prime Minister shall form a government within three weeks of the date of appointment. There shall be a right to an extension of a maximum of two weeks.
> If the Prime Minister fails to form a government within the stated deadline or does not obtain the confidence of the Legislative Council, then the President of the National Authority shall appoint another Prime Minister within two weeks of the passing of the deadline or the date of the confidence session, whichever applies.  Provisions contained in the above paragraph 1 shall apply to the new Prime Minister.
> 
> 
> *Confidence in the Government
> Article 66
> *
> Once the Prime Minister selects the members of the government, the Prime Minister shall submit a request to the Legislative Council to hold a special session for a vote of confidence.  The vote of confidence shall take place after hearing and discussing the written ministerial declaration which specifies the program and policy of the government. The session shall be held no later than one week from the date of submission of the request.
> The vote of confidence shall be cast for the Prime Minister and the members of the government together, unless the absolute majority of the members of the Legislative Council decides otherwise.
> Confidence shall be granted to the government if it obtains the affirmative vote of the absolute majority of the Members of the Palestinian Legislative Council.
> 
> 2003 Amended Basic Law | The Palestinian Basic Law



If the prime minister and his cabinet do not get a vote of confidence, they cannot take office.


----------



## P F Tinmore

RoccoR said:


> P F Tinmore,  _et al,_
> 
> The legitimate government is one that is recognized.
> 
> 
> 
> toastman said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> Just like an appointed cabinet member in the US cannot be sworn into office without senate approval, the PM and his cabinet in Palestine cannot be sworn in without PLC (parliament) approval.
> 
> It is cut and dried. There is no room for interpretation or opinion.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Still no link saying the PA's governing in the WB is illegal??
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> I'm not sure that even the Palestinians understand which government is the real government.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Excerpt from the Status of Palestine in the United Nations said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 1. Reaffirms the right of the Palestinian people to self-determination and to independence in their State of Palestine on the Palestinian territory occupied since 1967;
> 
> 2. *Decides to accord* to Palestine non-member observer State status in the United Nations, without prejudice to the acquired rights, privileges and *role of the Palestine Liberation Organization in the United Nations as the representative of the Palestinian people*, in accordance with the relevant resolutions and practice;
> 
> 3. Expresses the hope that the Security Council will consider favourably the application submitted on 23 September 2011 by the State of Palestine for admission to full membership in the United Nations;8
> 
> 4. Affirms its determination to contribute to the achievement of the inalienable rights of the Palestinian people and the attainment of a peaceful settlement in the Middle East that ends the occupation that began in 1967 and fulfils the vision of two States: an independent, sovereign, democratic, contiguous and viable State of Palestine living side by side in peace and security with Israel on the basis of the pre-1967 borders;
> 
> 5. Expresses the urgent need for the resumption and acceleration of negotiations within the Middle East peace process based on the relevant United Nations resolutions, the terms of reference of the Madrid Conference, including the principle of land for peace, the Arab Peace Initiative5 and the Quartet road map to a permanent two-State solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict9 for the achievement of a just, lasting and comprehensive peace settlement between the Palestinian and Israeli sides that resolves all outstanding core issues, namely the Palestine refugees, Jerusalem, settlements, borders, security and water;
> 
> 6. Urges all States, the specialized agencies and organizations of the United Nations system to continue to support and assist the Palestinian people in the early realization of their right to self-determination, independence and freedom;
> 
> 7. Requests the Secretary-General to take the necessary measures to implement the present resolution and to report to the Assembly within three months on progress made in this regard.
> 
> _*SOURCE: *_ A/67/L.28  26 November 2012
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> But it would seem that it is not HAMAS.
> 
> Most Respectfully,
> R
Click to expand...




> The legitimate government is one that is recognized.



Where does it say that foreigners can decide who is the government of a country?

Link?


----------



## RoccoR

P F Tinmore,  _et al,_

I just gave you the link.



P F Tinmore said:


> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore,  _et al,_
> 
> The legitimate government is one that is recognized.
> 
> 
> 
> toastman said:
> 
> 
> 
> Still no link saying the PA's governing in the WB is illegal??
> 
> 
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> I'm not sure that even the Palestinians understand which government is the real government.
> 
> But it would seem that it is not HAMAS.
> 
> Most Respectfully,
> R
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The legitimate government is one that is recognized.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Where does it say that foreigners can decide who is the government of a country?
> 
> Link?
Click to expand...

*(COMMENT)*

You are obsessed with "foreigners."

There is no universal definition of a "failed state."  But generally, we know it by what we don't see in the state.  A number of characteristics create a "failed state."  One of them is the inability to perform the basic responsibilities of a sovereign government.  One of those basic responsibilities is the ability to enter into productive foreign relations with the other states.

HAMAS is a government that has demonstrated its inability to enter into productive foreign relations with the UN and regional neighbors.  In contrast, the Palestinian Authority has demonstrated the ability to enter into positive foreign relations.  So much so that the eyes of the entire world are on it as it enters into negotiations with Israel.

Yes, the general consensus is that on paper, and steeped in concept, there is a political theory that the creation of a state is independent of international recognition by the other foreign powers and conventions.  However, if no other foreign power recognizes it, the state --- in reality --- becomes _(for all practical purposes)_ invisible and cannot functionally represent its population.  The Palestinian Territories is a quasi-failed state, with a dissociative identity  between HAMAS (failed) and PLO _(marginally functioning but positive)_, FATAH being the largest of the factional members.

In this case, A/67/L.28  26 November 2012, finds that the "role of the Palestine Liberation Organization in the United Nations as the representative of the Palestinian people."  You and other HAMAS followers can believe otherwise, but that leaves you without an international voice; at least for a time.

Most Respectfully,
R


----------



## Kondor3

P F Tinmore said:


> "..._Where does it say that foreigners can decide who is the government of a country?..." _


One needs a 'country' before one can decide who is the government.

The so-called 'country' named 'Palestine' never existed.


----------



## toastman

P F Tinmore said:


> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore,  _et al,_
> 
> The legitimate government is one that is recognized.
> 
> 
> 
> toastman said:
> 
> 
> 
> Still no link saying the PA's governing in the WB is illegal??
> 
> 
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> I'm not sure that even the Palestinians understand which government is the real government.
> 
> 
> 
> But it would seem that it is not HAMAS.
> 
> Most Respectfully,
> R
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The legitimate government is one that is recognized.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Where does it say that foreigners can decide who is the government of a country?
> 
> Link?
Click to expand...


Still nothing, eh?
I have never heard ANYONE suggest the PA's governing in the WB is illegal. They are recognized by the U.S, Israel and the PAlestinians, yes or no ?


----------



## docmauser1

Hoffstra said:


> _Israel has one rule for Arabs and another rule for Jews when it comes to building demolitions, building permits, fences, walls, checkpoints, land confiscation, application of old treaties, and lawsuits for lost lands. Its the Israeli version of Apartheid. Its called "Hafrada"._


It's called *drivel*.


----------



## P F Tinmore

RoccoR said:


> P F Tinmore,  _et al,_
> 
> I just gave you the link.
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore,  _et al,_
> 
> The legitimate government is one that is recognized.
> 
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> I'm not sure that even the Palestinians understand which government is the real government.
> 
> But it would seem that it is not HAMAS.
> 
> Most Respectfully,
> R
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The legitimate government is one that is recognized.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Where does it say that foreigners can decide who is the government of a country?
> 
> Link?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> You are obsessed with "foreigners."
Click to expand...


Take away foreign interference and what problems would the Palestinians have?



> There is no universal definition of a "failed state."  But generally, we know it by what we don't see in the state.  A number of characteristics create a "failed state."  One of them is the inability to perform the basic responsibilities of a sovereign government.  One of those basic responsibilities is the ability to enter into productive foreign relations with the other states.



How much of this has to do with Israel's occupation? It looks liker you are blaming the victim.



> HAMAS is a government that has demonstrated its inability to enter into productive foreign relations with the UN and regional neighbors.  In contrast, the Palestinian Authority has demonstrated the ability to enter into positive foreign relations.  So much so that the eyes of the entire world are on it as it enters into negotiations with Israel.



Hamas is a product of Israel.

The Palestinian Authority (the illegal government) engages in the dog and pony show called the peace process that always leaves the Palestinians further behind. Hamas fails to take part in that charade.



> Yes, the general consensus is that on paper, and steeped in concept, there is a political theory that the creation of a state is independent of international recognition by the other foreign powers and conventions.  However, if no other foreign power recognizes it, the state --- in reality --- becomes _(for all practical purposes)_ invisible and cannot functionally represent its population.  The Palestinian Territories is a quasi-failed state, with a dissociative identity  between HAMAS (failed) and PLO _(marginally functioning but positive)_, FATAH being the largest of the factional members.
> 
> In this case, A/67/L.28  26 November 2012, finds that the "role of the Palestine Liberation Organization in the United Nations as the representative of the Palestinian people."  You and other HAMAS followers can believe otherwise, but that leaves you without an international voice; at least for a time.



For some odd reason the UN and others recognize the PLO as representing the Palestinian people. The PLO has become more irrelevant and less representative of the people since the Oslo fiasco. The Palestinians formed a new form of government with the adoption of their constitution in 2002. (and amended in 2003) The PLO plays no part in the new government.

Who represents the Palestinians? FYI

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WKcxj7ZASCA]The Stream - Palestinians: Lost in representation - YouTube[/ame]


> Most Respectfully,
> R


----------



## docmauser1

P F Tinmore said:


> _The Palestinians fight inside their own country to defend their own country._


So, who was that effendi, shakh, emir, sultan, prime-minister, president of that palistanian country of theirs to support the contention?


----------



## P F Tinmore

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wi_0lTKPttM]Negation talks - YouTube[/ame]


----------



## docmauser1

P F Tinmore said:


> _Negation talks - YouTube_


Do they say who was that effendi, shakh, emir, sultan, prime-minister, president of that palistanian country of theirs to support the contention that palistanians _fight inside their own country to defend their own country_?


----------



## toastman

P F Tinmore said:


> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore,  _et al,_
> 
> I just gave you the link.
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> Where does it say that foreigners can decide who is the government of a country?
> 
> Link?
> 
> 
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> You are obsessed with "foreigners."
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Take away foreign interference and what problems would the Palestinians have?
> 
> 
> 
> How much of this has to do with Israel's occupation? It looks liker you are blaming the victim.
> 
> 
> 
> Hamas is a product of Israel.
> 
> The Palestinian Authority (the illegal government) engages in the dog and pony show called the peace process that always leaves the Palestinians further behind. Hamas fails to take part in that charade.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Yes, the general consensus is that on paper, and steeped in concept, there is a political theory that the creation of a state is independent of international recognition by the other foreign powers and conventions.  However, if no other foreign power recognizes it, the state --- in reality --- becomes _(for all practical purposes)_ invisible and cannot functionally represent its population.  The Palestinian Territories is a quasi-failed state, with a dissociative identity  between HAMAS (failed) and PLO _(marginally functioning but positive)_, FATAH being the largest of the factional members.
> 
> In this case, A/67/L.28  26 November 2012, finds that the "role of the Palestine Liberation Organization in the United Nations as the representative of the Palestinian people."  You and other HAMAS followers can believe otherwise, but that leaves you without an international voice; at least for a time.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> For some odd reason the UN and others recognize the PLO as representing the Palestinian people. The PLO has become more irrelevant and less representative of the people since the Oslo fiasco. The Palestinians formed a new form of government with the adoption of their constitution in 2002. (and amended in 2003) The PLO plays no part in the new government.
> 
> Who represents the Palestinians? FYI
> 
> [ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WKcxj7ZASCA]The Stream - Palestinians: Lost in representation - YouTube[/ame]
> 
> 
> 
> Most Respectfully,
> R
> 
> Click to expand...
Click to expand...


Territory, not country ...


----------



## georgephillip

ForeverYoung436 said:


> georgephillip said:
> 
> 
> 
> The prime example of conspiratorial nonsense in this country today is the suicidal confidence in the moral superiority of the greatest purveyor of violence on this planet, which, I gather, you've proudly served for your entire adult life. Not only do "we not bow" to threats, we murder, maim, displace and incarcerate millions of innocent human beings thousands of miles from our homeland FOR MONEY and MARKET SHARE. As far as 911 is concerned, you have laid out in great detail the ability of the US to monitor communications world-wide, yet on 9/11/2001 the epicenter of that global electronic dragnet was struck by a civilian aircraft; maybe the 19 suicidal Saudis should have targeted the DC electrical grid? Whether or not the US could tackle seven countries in five years, two have been balkanized, two more are on the block, and the Persians are threatening to sell their oil in gold. Your broadsword is even more damaging when its swung by suicidal psychopaths with Rs or Ds behind their names.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> And the internal chaos and fighting among Arabs cannot be blamed on the Arabs themselves, in any way.  To say that Arabs can't be held responsible for their own actions is painting them as sub-human.
Click to expand...

Sykes-Picot is where sub-human Europeans created the conditions for today's internal chaos and fighting among Arabs:

"The SykesPicot Agreement, officially known as the Asia Minor Agreement, was a secret agreement between the governments of the United Kingdom and France,[1] with the assent of Russia, defining their proposed spheres of influence and control in the Middle East should the Triple Entente succeed in defeating the Ottoman Empire during World War I. 

"The negotiation of the treaty occurred between November 1915 and March 1916.[2] 

"The agreement was concluded on 16 May 1916.[3]

Ninety-seven years later sub-human Americans have maimed, murdered, displaced, and incarcerated millions of innocent Arabs in order to bring democracy to the Middle East.
Or maybe it's the OIL?


----------



## antique4xpu

whatever you wish to call the current  situation , it remains obvious that hitler took away land and businesses that belonged to those of jewish faith 
in 1949 the jewish people took away land and businesses that belonged to the people of palestine 

jews were taken to concentrations camps , millions were killed 
palestinians were forced into refugee camps , but many less were killed 

jews received billions of dollars in reparations from the government of germany for the crimes they committed
palestianians are not paid for the stolen lands 

it would seem that the nazi system of government is alive and well ........ in israel


----------



## Hossfly

antique4xpu said:


> whatever you wish to call the current  situation , it remains obvious that hitler took away land and businesses that belonged to those of jewish faith
> in 1949 the jewish people took away land and businesses that belonged to the people of palestine
> 
> jews were taken to concentrations camps , millions were killed
> palestinians were forced into refugee camps , but many less were killed
> 
> jews received billions of dollars in reparations from the government of germany for the crimes they committed
> palestianians are not paid for the stolen lands
> 
> it would seem that the nazi system of government is alive and well ........ in israel


Un-adulterated drivel. Where do these creatures spring from like mushrooms?


----------



## toastman

antique4xpu said:


> whatever you wish to call the current  situation , it remains obvious that hitler took away land and businesses that belonged to those of jewish faith
> in 1949 the jewish people took away land and businesses that belonged to the people of palestine
> 
> jews were taken to concentrations camps , millions were killed
> palestinians were forced into refugee camps , but many less were killed
> 
> jews received billions of dollars in reparations from the government of germany for the crimes they committed
> palestianians are not paid for the stolen lands
> 
> it would seem that the nazi system of government is alive and well ........ in israel



Nazi comparisons are for deadbeats who know little to nothing about the conflict. Or anti - semites.

You did an EXCELLENT job of making a fool of yourself


----------



## Lipush

What B'tselem won't show you....


----------



## toastman

This video is from a few days ago.

IDF soldier dancing at a club in Hebron with Palestinians
It's always nice to forget political differences !

If the two governments can't make peace, then maybe one day the people can !


----------



## toastman

Whoops. forgot to link the video:


[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WOnP9mT3v6k]IDF troops dance Gangnam Style with Hamas - Truthloader - YouTube[/ame]


----------



## Lipush

Specifically _that_ is not good karma, but ok.


----------



## docmauser1

antique4xpu said:


> _in 1949 the jewish people took away land and businesses that belonged to the people of palestine._


What distinct group is this people of palestine?


antique4xpu said:


> _it would seem that the nazi system of government is alive and well ........ in israel_


Must be a cool one, if arabs do winging and lowing trying to get a piece of that _nazi system_, of course.


----------



## docmauser1

georgephillip said:


> _Ninety-seven years later sub-human Americans have maimed, murdered, displaced, and incarcerated millions of innocent Arabs in order to bring democracy to the Middle East. Or maybe it's the OIL?_


Or maybe it's the drivel?


----------



## Bloodrock44

Hossfly said:


> antique4xpu said:
> 
> 
> 
> whatever you wish to call the current  situation , it remains obvious that hitler took away land and businesses that belonged to those of jewish faith
> in 1949 the jewish people took away land and businesses that belonged to the people of palestine
> 
> jews were taken to concentrations camps , millions were killed
> palestinians were forced into refugee camps , but many less were killed
> 
> jews received billions of dollars in reparations from the government of germany for the crimes they committed
> palestianians are not paid for the stolen lands
> 
> it would seem that the nazi system of government is alive and well ........ in israel
> 
> 
> 
> Un-adulterated drivel. Where do these creatures spring from like mushrooms?
Click to expand...


*And their first posts aimed straight at the Jooooooooos.*


----------



## Hossfly

georgephillip said:


> ForeverYoung436 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> georgephillip said:
> 
> 
> 
> The prime example of conspiratorial nonsense in this country today is the suicidal confidence in the moral superiority of the greatest purveyor of violence on this planet, which, I gather, you've proudly served for your entire adult life. Not only do "we not bow" to threats, we murder, maim, displace and incarcerate millions of innocent human beings thousands of miles from our homeland FOR MONEY and MARKET SHARE. As far as 911 is concerned, you have laid out in great detail the ability of the US to monitor communications world-wide, yet on 9/11/2001 the epicenter of that global electronic dragnet was struck by a civilian aircraft; maybe the 19 suicidal Saudis should have targeted the DC electrical grid? Whether or not the US could tackle seven countries in five years, two have been balkanized, two more are on the block, and the Persians are threatening to sell their oil in gold. Your broadsword is even more damaging when its swung by suicidal psychopaths with Rs or Ds behind their names.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> And the internal chaos and fighting among Arabs cannot be blamed on the Arabs themselves, in any way.  To say that Arabs can't be held responsible for their own actions is painting them as sub-human.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Sykes-Picot is where sub-human Europeans created the conditions for today's internal chaos and fighting among Arabs:
> 
> "The SykesPicot Agreement, officially known as the Asia Minor Agreement, was a secret agreement between the governments of the United Kingdom and France,[1] with the assent of Russia, defining their proposed spheres of influence and control in the Middle East should the Triple Entente succeed in defeating the Ottoman Empire during World War I.
> 
> "The negotiation of the treaty occurred between November 1915 and March 1916.[2]
> 
> "The agreement was concluded on 16 May 1916.[3]
> 
> Ninety-seven years later sub-human Americans have maimed, murdered, displaced, and incarcerated millions of innocent Arabs in order to bring democracy to the Middle East.
> Or maybe it's the OIL?
Click to expand...

It looks like Georgie Boy is so, so obsessed with demonizing Israel and America, and doesn't even concern himself with what is happening in Libya (we realize that he has no concern for the Black tribes being murdered in the Sudan since the Jews are not involved..  What a great dhimmi he is showing us he has become when he can't even be concerned for his own.  Perhaps Georgie Boy, to continue his dhimmitude should move to some Muslim country and maybe they too will set him up with a subsidized apartment.

More Sunni ?rebels?: Libya Blacks Treated Like Apes In The Zoo By Racist Rebels |


----------



## toastman

Lipush said:


> Specifically _that_ is not good karma, but ok.



??


----------



## Hossfly

Lipush said:


> Specifically _that_ is not good karma, but ok.


What?


----------



## Lipush

toastman said:


> Lipush said:
> 
> 
> 
> Specifically _that_ is not good karma, but ok.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ??
Click to expand...


What I meant is, that in Israel doesn't see the incident with the soldiers in a good way. Those Palestinians are people of Hamas, not civilians, and therefor the soldiers' actions, were deeply wrong and disturbing. He could have been killed or kidnapped by them.

This is not the same case as a soldier dancing with civilians, which can be seen in a good peaceful manner.

Those people, specifically, the ones he danced with, were the enemy.

He is to be punished, and he deserves it.


----------



## georgephillip

Hossfly said:


> georgephillip said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ForeverYoung436 said:
> 
> 
> 
> And the internal chaos and fighting among Arabs cannot be blamed on the Arabs themselves, in any way.  To say that Arabs can't be held responsible for their own actions is painting them as sub-human.
> 
> 
> 
> Sykes-Picot is where sub-human Europeans created the conditions for today's internal chaos and fighting among Arabs:
> 
> "The SykesPicot Agreement, officially known as the Asia Minor Agreement, was a secret agreement between the governments of the United Kingdom and France,[1] with the assent of Russia, defining their proposed spheres of influence and control in the Middle East should the Triple Entente succeed in defeating the Ottoman Empire during World War I.
> 
> "The negotiation of the treaty occurred between November 1915 and March 1916.[2]
> 
> "The agreement was concluded on 16 May 1916.[3]
> 
> Ninety-seven years later sub-human Americans have maimed, murdered, displaced, and incarcerated millions of innocent Arabs in order to bring democracy to the Middle East.
> Or maybe it's the OIL?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> It looks like Georgie Boy is so, so obsessed with demonizing Israel and America, and doesn't even concern himself with what is happening in Libya (we realize that he has no concern for the Black tribes being murdered in the Sudan since the Jews are not involved..  What a great dhimmi he is showing us he has become when he can't even be concerned for his own.  Perhaps Georgie Boy, to continue his dhimmitude should move to some Muslim country and maybe they too will set him up with a subsidized apartment.
> 
> More Sunni ?rebels?: Libya Blacks Treated Like Apes In The Zoo By Racist Rebels |
Click to expand...

"The agreement effectively divided the Arab provinces of the Ottoman Empire outside the Arabian peninsula into areas of future British and French control or influence.[4] 

"The terms were negotiated by the French diplomat François Georges-Picot and British Sir Mark Sykes. 

"The Russian Tsarist government was a minor party to the SykesPicot agreement, and when, following the Russian Revolution of October 1917, the Bolsheviks exposed the agreement, 'the British were embarrassed, the Arabs dismayed and the Turks delighted.'"

*No mention of the Libyans or which white parasites drew their borders?*

Sykes?Picot Agreement - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


----------



## RoccoR

georgephillip,  _et al,_

Wow, what a negative attitude.



georgephillip said:


> Hossfly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> georgephillip said:
> 
> 
> 
> Sykes-Picot is where sub-human Europeans created the conditions for today's internal chaos and fighting among Arabs:
> 
> "The Sykes&#8211;Picot Agreement, officially known as the Asia Minor Agreement, was a secret agreement between the governments of the United Kingdom and France,[1] with the assent of Russia, defining their proposed spheres of influence and control in the Middle East should the Triple Entente succeed in defeating the Ottoman Empire during World War I.
> 
> "The negotiation of the treaty occurred between November 1915 and March 1916.[2]
> 
> "The agreement was concluded on 16 May 1916.[3]
> 
> Ninety-seven years later sub-human Americans have maimed, murdered, displaced, and incarcerated millions of innocent Arabs in order to bring democracy to the Middle East.
> Or maybe it's the OIL?
> 
> 
> 
> It looks like Georgie Boy is so, so obsessed with demonizing Israel and America, and doesn't even concern himself with what is happening in Libya (we realize that he has no concern for the Black tribes being murdered in the Sudan since the Jews are not involved..  What a great dhimmi he is showing us he has become when he can't even be concerned for his own.  Perhaps Georgie Boy, to continue his dhimmitude should move to some Muslim country and maybe they too will set him up with a subsidized apartment.
> 
> More Sunni ?rebels?: Libya Blacks Treated Like Apes In The Zoo By Racist Rebels |
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> "The agreement effectively divided the Arab provinces of the Ottoman Empire outside the Arabian peninsula into areas of future British and French control or influence.[4]
> 
> "The terms were negotiated by the French diplomat François Georges-Picot and British Sir Mark Sykes.
> 
> "The Russian Tsarist government was a minor party to the Sykes&#8211;Picot agreement, and when, following the Russian Revolution of October 1917, the Bolsheviks exposed the agreement, 'the British were embarrassed, the Arabs dismayed and the Turks delighted.'"
> 
> *No mention of the Libyans or which white parasites drew their borders?*
> 
> Sykes?Picot Agreement - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Click to expand...

*(COMMENT)*

The Sykes-Picot Agreement (16 May 1916) did not involved Libya. _(Maybe you were thinking of Lebanon!) _

Libya was an Italian Colony with limited autonomy prior to the outbreak of WWII.  While Italy sided with Germany, the Emir of Tripolitania sided with the Allied Powers and actively cooperated with the British 8th Army.  Libya was to remain an Italian possession under Britain and French administration until the Potsdam Conference in 1945, when the territory was formally ceased by the Allied Powers.  Later, the Allied Council of Foreign Ministers brought Libya under UN trusteeship, effective in October 1945, in preparation for self-rule.  The UN accepted the Declaration of Independence from the Kingdom of Libya on 24 December 1951; with the Emir of Tripolitania (Muhammad Idris) assuming the throne.

The boundaries were originally surveyed by Italy and reconfirmed by the Allied Powers in 1950 by the UN Commissioner for Libya, Adrian Pelt of the Netherlands.

Oil was not discovered in Libya until the mid 1950's.  To protect its resources, the Libyan Petroleum Law of 1955 was enacted; which specifically prevented any one single Oil Company from controlling all the oil production.  By 1965, Libya was the 6th largest oil exporter in the world.  In late 1969, Libyan Army Colonel Mu&#8217;ammar al-Qadhaffi lead a _coup d&#8217;état_ against King Idris. 

Most Respectfully,
R


----------



## Kondor3

georgephillip said:


> "..._No mention of the Libyans or which *white parasites* drew their borders?_"








*Ummmmm.... having a Racist kinda day, are we?*

Gotta save this one for future reference, as counterpoint against charges of racism...


----------



## Hossfly

georgephillip said:


> Hossfly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> georgephillip said:
> 
> 
> 
> Sykes-Picot is where sub-human Europeans created the conditions for today's internal chaos and fighting among Arabs:
> 
> "The SykesPicot Agreement, officially known as the Asia Minor Agreement, was a secret agreement between the governments of the United Kingdom and France,[1] with the assent of Russia, defining their proposed spheres of influence and control in the Middle East should the Triple Entente succeed in defeating the Ottoman Empire during World War I.
> 
> "The negotiation of the treaty occurred between November 1915 and March 1916.[2]
> 
> "The agreement was concluded on 16 May 1916.[3]
> 
> Ninety-seven years later sub-human Americans have maimed, murdered, displaced, and incarcerated millions of innocent Arabs in order to bring democracy to the Middle East.
> Or maybe it's the OIL?
> 
> 
> 
> It looks like Georgie Boy is so, so obsessed with demonizing Israel and America, and doesn't even concern himself with what is happening in Libya (we realize that he has no concern for the Black tribes being murdered in the Sudan since the Jews are not involved..  What a great dhimmi he is showing us he has become when he can't even be concerned for his own.  Perhaps Georgie Boy, to continue his dhimmitude should move to some Muslim country and maybe they too will set him up with a subsidized apartment.
> 
> More Sunni ?rebels?: Libya Blacks Treated Like Apes In The Zoo By Racist Rebels |
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> "The agreement effectively divided the Arab provinces of the Ottoman Empire outside the Arabian peninsula into areas of future British and French control or influence.[4]
> 
> "The terms were negotiated by the French diplomat François Georges-Picot and British Sir Mark Sykes.
> 
> "The Russian Tsarist government was a minor party to the SykesPicot agreement, and when, following the Russian Revolution of October 1917, the Bolsheviks exposed the agreement, 'the British were embarrassed, the Arabs dismayed and the Turks delighted.'"
> 
> *No mention of the Libyans or which white parasites drew their borders?*
> 
> Sykes?Picot Agreement - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Click to expand...

We get you, Georgie Boy.  You are not interested in the Blacks being treated like apes in a zoo in Libya (nor are you interested in the Blacks who have been killed there during the uprising).  Of course, you are not interested in the Black tribes being eliminated in the Sudan.  In your mind, the "White Parasites" did you in so you get back at them on forums.  How nice that you are able to use the Arabs as pawns in your fight against the "White Parasites."  Oh, by the way, Georgie Boy, Wikipedia is trying to raise funds; and since you use that site repeatedly, why not send them a few bucks to keep them going.  What, oh what, would Georgie Boy do if he didn't have Wikipedia to run to.


----------



## toastman

Bloodrock44 said:


> Hossfly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> antique4xpu said:
> 
> 
> 
> whatever you wish to call the current  situation , it remains obvious that hitler took away land and businesses that belonged to those of jewish faith
> in 1949 the jewish people took away land and businesses that belonged to the people of palestine
> 
> jews were taken to concentrations camps , millions were killed
> palestinians were forced into refugee camps , but many less were killed
> 
> jews received billions of dollars in reparations from the government of germany for the crimes they committed
> palestianians are not paid for the stolen lands
> 
> it would seem that the nazi system of government is alive and well ........ in israel
> 
> 
> 
> Un-adulterated drivel. Where do these creatures spring from like mushrooms?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> *And their first posts aimed straight at the Jooooooooos.*
Click to expand...


They are usually former posters who are disgruntled


----------



## antique4xpu

odd how many will ignore historical facts and substitute them with the rants of rush and glenn beck 

iran may or may not wish to develop a nuclear weapon. that would be in violation of international law. 

on the other hand , israel has some 125 or 130 nuclear weapons now and also in violation of the same international law 

how can the us claim to be a fair power broker in the middle east?

perhaps no one remembers that the nation of israel was founded on acts of terrorism , i remind you that menachem begin was wanted for terrorist crimes against the british. can you not see the similarity of the king david hotel massacre by the jews  and acts or terrorism committed by hezbollah ?

sorry , just kidding ..... i know that you can not see anything like i have tried to explain 

it is not your fault , you simply lack the ability to comprehend simple facts


----------



## Kat3eWhit

What races are involved? (one racial group over any other racial group)


----------



## docmauser1

antique4xpu said:


> _iran may or may not wish to develop a nuclear weapon. that would be in violation of international law. on the other hand , israel has some 125 or 130 nuclear weapons now and also in violation of the same international law_


And what might that _international law_ be?


----------



## RoccoR

antique4xpu,  _et al,_

I thought the "International Law" in question was governed by the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT).  



			
				THE TREATY ON THE NON-PROLIFERATION OF NUCLEAR WEAPONS ( NPT ) said:
			
		

> *Article IX*
> 
> 3. This Treaty shall enter into force after its ratification by the States, the Governments of which are designated Depositaries of the Treaty, and forty other States signatory to this Treaty and the deposit of their instruments of ratification. For the purposes of this Treaty, a nuclear-weapon State is one which has manufactured and exploded a nuclear weapon or other nuclear explosive device prior to 1 January 1967.




			
				Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties 
1969 said:
			
		

> *Article 12  Consent to be bound by a treaty expressed by signature *
> 
> 1. The consent of a State to be bound by a treaty is expressed by the signature of its representative when:
> 
> (a) the treaty provides that signature shall have that effect;
> 
> (b) it is otherwise established that the negotiating States were agreed that signature should have that effect; or
> 
> (c) the intention of the State to give that effect to the signature appears from the full powers of its representative or was expressed during the negotiation.
> 
> _*SOURCE:*_ Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties Done at Vienna on 23 May 1969





antique4xpu said:


> odd how many will ignore historical facts and substitute them with the rants of rush and glenn beck
> 
> iran may or may not wish to develop a nuclear weapon. that would be in violation of international law.
> 
> on the other hand , israel has some 125 or 130 nuclear weapons now and also in violation of the same international law


*(OBSERVATION)*


IRAN (ISLAMIC REPUBLIC OF):  Is a signatory to the NPT:  Page 34 of NPT 
Address: Permanent Mission of the Islamic Republic of Iran to the United Nations
622 Third Avenue, New York, N.Y. 10017
Telephone: (212) 687-2020​


ISRAEL (STATE OF): Is NOT a signatory to the NPT

*(QUESTION)*

Is the STATE of ISRAEL, which is not a party to the NPT, subject to the same requirements as the ISLAMIC REPUBLIC of IRAN, which is a party to the NPT?



antique4xpu said:


> how can the us claim to be a fair power broker in the middle east?


*(COMMENT)*

All states, especially the US, operated in their own best interest.  Fairness and international politics rarely have an intercept point.



antique4xpu said:


> perhaps no one remembers that the nation of israel was founded on acts of terrorism , i remind you that menachem begin was wanted for terrorist crimes against the british. can you not see the similarity of the king david hotel massacre by the jews  and acts or terrorism committed by hezbollah ?


*(OBSERVATION)*



			
				The Universality of the Islamic Resistance Movement: said:
			
		

> *Article Seven:*
> 
> The Islamic Resistance Movement is one of the links in the chain of the struggle against the Zionist invaders. It goes back to 1939, to the emergence of the martyr Izz al-Din al Kissam and his brethren the fighters, members of Moslem Brotherhood. It goes on to reach out and become one with another chain that includes the struggle of the Palestinians and Moslem Brotherhood in the 1948 war and the Jihad operations of the Moslem Brotherhood in 1968 and after.​
> *SOURCE:* The Covenant of the Islamic Resistance Movement



*(COMMENT)*

I have stated several times that neither side has clean hands.  But some hands are a bit more dirty than others.

"Izz al-Din al-Qissam was killed by British Police in Palestine on November 20, 1935; after a decade (plus) of anti-Jewish/Zionist and anti-Mandate terrorism operations. In 1930 al-Qassam formed the Palestinian Black Hand after the 1929 Palestine Western Wall Uprising riot.

Arguments suggest that the Israelis started the (alleged) ethnic cleansing "before the war." Yet the first engagement was Hebron (1929) and 1929 Safed riots (1929); not excluding the Palestinian namesake today recognizes Izz ad-Din al-Qassam as well as Haj Amin Al-Husseini (the Grand Mufti of Jerusalem). 

But even before then, one of the major incidents that triggered regimentation of Jewish Defense Forces was the inflammatory anti-Zionist rhetoric of Amin al-Husseini which instigated the April 1920, uprising in the Old City (Nebi Musa riots) that caused 50,000 Arabs to attack Jews. It was after these attacks that the Haganah (1920) emerged as a defense force. The Irgun (1931) did not emerge until the Black Hand of al-Qassam began operations.

Yes, eight decades ago, both side employed terrorism.  One side evolved beyond that tactic, while the other side still endorses it today.  

In this argument, it must be remembered that the Hostile Arab Palestinians (HoAP) attempted to bring forth an Islamic State through terrorism and aggression; but failed.  You cannot (with any dignity) claim foul just because you are weaker than your adversary which beat you at your own game.

While Israel does not have any terrorist organizations today, the HoAP pledges to violate law:


"There is no solution for the Palestinian question except through Jihad."

"Armed struggle is the only way to liberate Palestine." ...   ...   ...   the "Commando (Feday'ee) action constitutes the nucleus of the Palestinian popular liberation war."

Most Respectfully,
R


----------



## P F Tinmore

RoccoR said:


> antique4xpu,  _et al,_
> 
> I thought the "International Law" in question was governed by the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT).
> 
> 
> 
> 
> THE TREATY ON THE NON-PROLIFERATION OF NUCLEAR WEAPONS ( NPT ) said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *Article IX*
> 
> 3. This Treaty shall enter into force after its ratification by the States, the Governments of which are designated Depositaries of the Treaty, and forty other States signatory to this Treaty and the deposit of their instruments of ratification. For the purposes of this Treaty, a nuclear-weapon State is one which has manufactured and exploded a nuclear weapon or other nuclear explosive device prior to 1 January 1967.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties
> 1969 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *Article 12  Consent to be bound by a treaty expressed by signature *
> 
> 1. The consent of a State to be bound by a treaty is expressed by the signature of its representative when:
> 
> (a) the treaty provides that signature shall have that effect;
> 
> (b) it is otherwise established that the negotiating States were agreed that signature should have that effect; or
> 
> (c) the intention of the State to give that effect to the signature appears from the full powers of its representative or was expressed during the negotiation.
> 
> _*SOURCE:*_ Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties Done at Vienna on 23 May 1969
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> *(OBSERVATION)*
> 
> 
> IRAN (ISLAMIC REPUBLIC OF):  Is a signatory to the NPT:  Page 34 of NPT
> Address: Permanent Mission of the Islamic Republic of Iran to the United Nations
> 622 Third Avenue, New York, N.Y. 10017
> Telephone: (212) 687-2020​
> 
> 
> ISRAEL (STATE OF): Is NOT a signatory to the NPT
> 
> *(QUESTION)*
> 
> Is the STATE of ISRAEL, which is not a party to the NPT, subject to the same requirements as the ISLAMIC REPUBLIC of IRAN, which is a party to the NPT?
> 
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> All states, especially the US, operated in their own best interest.  Fairness and international politics rarely have an intercept point.
> 
> 
> 
> antique4xpu said:
> 
> 
> 
> perhaps no one remembers that the nation of israel was founded on acts of terrorism , i remind you that menachem begin was wanted for terrorist crimes against the british. can you not see the similarity of the king david hotel massacre by the jews  and acts or terrorism committed by hezbollah ?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> *(OBSERVATION)*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Universality of the Islamic Resistance Movement: said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *Article Seven:*
> 
> The Islamic Resistance Movement is one of the links in the chain of the struggle against the Zionist invaders. It goes back to 1939, to the emergence of the martyr Izz al-Din al Kissam and his brethren the fighters, members of Moslem Brotherhood. It goes on to reach out and become one with another chain that includes the struggle of the Palestinians and Moslem Brotherhood in the 1948 war and the Jihad operations of the Moslem Brotherhood in 1968 and after.​
> *SOURCE:* The Covenant of the Islamic Resistance Movement
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> I have stated several times that neither side has clean hands.  But some hands are a bit more dirty than others.
> 
> "Izz al-Din al-Qissam was killed by British Police in Palestine on November 20, 1935; after a decade (plus) of anti-Jewish/Zionist and anti-Mandate terrorism operations. In 1930 al-Qassam formed the Palestinian Black Hand after the 1929 Palestine Western Wall Uprising riot.
> 
> Arguments suggest that the Israelis started the (alleged) ethnic cleansing "before the war." Yet the first engagement was Hebron (1929) and 1929 Safed riots (1929); not excluding the Palestinian namesake today recognizes Izz ad-Din al-Qassam as well as Haj Amin Al-Husseini (the Grand Mufti of Jerusalem).
> 
> But even before then, one of the major incidents that triggered regimentation of Jewish Defense Forces was the inflammatory anti-Zionist rhetoric of Amin al-Husseini which instigated the April 1920, uprising in the Old City (Nebi Musa riots) that caused 50,000 Arabs to attack Jews. It was after these attacks that the Haganah (1920) emerged as a defense force. The Irgun (1931) did not emerge until the Black Hand of al-Qassam began operations.
> 
> Yes, eight decades ago, both side employed terrorism.  One side evolved beyond that tactic, while the other side still endorses it today.
> 
> In this argument, it must be remembered that the Hostile Arab Palestinians (HoAP) attempted to bring forth an Islamic State through terrorism and aggression; but failed.  You cannot (with any dignity) claim foul just because you are weaker than your adversary which beat you at your own game.
> 
> *While Israel does not have any terrorist organizations today, the HoAP pledges to violate law:
> *
> 
> "There is no solution for the Palestinian question except through Jihad."
> 
> "Armed struggle is the only way to liberate Palestine." ...   ...   ...   the "Commando (Feday'ee) action constitutes the nucleus of the Palestinian popular liberation war."
> 
> Most Respectfully,
> R
Click to expand...


Interested in reading what law you are talking about.

Copy/paste the relevant passages.


----------



## RoccoR

P F Tinmore,  _et al,_

I did!



P F Tinmore said:


> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> 
> antique4xpu,  _et al,_
> 
> I thought the "International Law" in question was governed by the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT).
> 
> 
> 
> 
> THE TREATY ON THE NON-PROLIFERATION OF NUCLEAR WEAPONS ( NPT ) said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *Article IX*
> 
> 3. This Treaty shall enter into force after its ratification by the States, the Governments of which are designated Depositaries of the Treaty, and forty other States signatory to this Treaty and the deposit of their instruments of ratification. For the purposes of this Treaty, a nuclear-weapon State is one which has manufactured and exploded a nuclear weapon or other nuclear explosive device prior to 1 January 1967.
> 
> 
> 
> ​
> *(OBSERVATION)*
> 
> 
> IRAN (ISLAMIC REPUBLIC OF):  Is a signatory to the NPT:  Page 34 of NPT
> Address: Permanent Mission of the Islamic Republic of Iran to the United Nations
> 622 Third Avenue, New York, N.Y. 10017
> Telephone: (212) 687-2020​
> 
> 
> ISRAEL (STATE OF): Is NOT a signatory to the NPT
> 
> *(QUESTION)*
> 
> Is the STATE of ISRAEL, which is not a party to the NPT, subject to the same requirements as the ISLAMIC REPUBLIC of IRAN, which is a party to the NPT?
> 
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> All states, especially the US, operated in their own best interest.  Fairness and international politics rarely have an intercept point.
> 
> 
> *(OBSERVATION)*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Universality of the Islamic Resistance Movement: said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *Article Seven:*
> 
> The Islamic Resistance Movement is one of the links in the chain of the struggle against the Zionist invaders. It goes back to 1939, to the emergence of the martyr Izz al-Din al Kissam and his brethren the fighters, members of Moslem Brotherhood. It goes on to reach out and become one with another chain that includes the struggle of the Palestinians and Moslem Brotherhood in the 1948 war and the Jihad operations of the Moslem Brotherhood in 1968 and after.​
> *SOURCE:* The Covenant of the Islamic Resistance Movement
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> I have stated several times that neither side has clean hands.  But some hands are a bit more dirty than others.
> 
> "Izz al-Din al-Qissam was killed by British Police in Palestine on November 20, 1935; after a decade (plus) of anti-Jewish/Zionist and anti-Mandate terrorism operations. In 1930 al-Qassam formed the Palestinian Black Hand after the 1929 Palestine Western Wall Uprising riot.
> 
> Arguments suggest that the Israelis started the (alleged) ethnic cleansing "before the war." Yet the first engagement was Hebron (1929) and 1929 Safed riots (1929); not excluding the Palestinian namesake today recognizes Izz ad-Din al-Qassam as well as Haj Amin Al-Husseini (the Grand Mufti of Jerusalem).
> 
> But even before then, one of the major incidents that triggered regimentation of Jewish Defense Forces was the inflammatory anti-Zionist rhetoric of Amin al-Husseini which instigated the April 1920, uprising in the Old City (Nebi Musa riots) that caused 50,000 Arabs to attack Jews. It was after these attacks that the Haganah (1920) emerged as a defense force. The Irgun (1931) did not emerge until the Black Hand of al-Qassam began operations.
> 
> Yes, eight decades ago, both side employed terrorism.  One side evolved beyond that tactic, while the other side still endorses it today.
> 
> In this argument, it must be remembered that the Hostile Arab Palestinians (HoAP) attempted to bring forth an Islamic State through terrorism and aggression; but failed.  You cannot (with any dignity) claim foul just because you are weaker than your adversary which beat you at your own game.
> 
> *While Israel does not have any terrorist organizations today, the HoAP pledges to violate law:
> *
> 
> "There is no solution for the Palestinian question except through Jihad."
> 
> "Armed struggle is the only way to liberate Palestine." ...   ...   ...   the "Commando (Feday'ee) action constitutes the nucleus of the Palestinian popular liberation war."
> 
> Most Respectfully,
> R
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Interested in reading what law you are talking about.
> 
> Copy/paste the relevant passages.
Click to expand...

*(COMMENT)*

See above.  http://www.usmessageboard.com/israe...-the-same-as-south-africa-43.html#post7778299


Most Respectfully,
R


----------



## P F Tinmore

RoccoR said:


> P F Tinmore,  _et al,_
> 
> I did!
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> 
> antique4xpu,  _et al,_
> 
> I thought the "International Law" in question was governed by the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT).
> 
> ​​
> *(OBSERVATION)*
> 
> 
> IRAN (ISLAMIC REPUBLIC OF):  Is a signatory to the NPT:  Page 34 of NPT
> Address: Permanent Mission of the Islamic Republic of Iran to the United Nations
> 622 Third Avenue, New York, N.Y. 10017
> Telephone: (212) 687-2020​
> 
> 
> ISRAEL (STATE OF): Is NOT a signatory to the NPT
> 
> *(QUESTION)*
> 
> Is the STATE of ISRAEL, which is not a party to the NPT, subject to the same requirements as the ISLAMIC REPUBLIC of IRAN, which is a party to the NPT?
> 
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> All states, especially the US, operated in their own best interest.  Fairness and international politics rarely have an intercept point.
> 
> 
> *(OBSERVATION)*
> 
> 
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> I have stated several times that neither side has clean hands.  But some hands are a bit more dirty than others.
> 
> "Izz al-Din al-Qissam was killed by British Police in Palestine on November 20, 1935; after a decade (plus) of anti-Jewish/Zionist and anti-Mandate terrorism operations. In 1930 al-Qassam formed the Palestinian Black Hand after the 1929 Palestine Western Wall Uprising riot.
> 
> Arguments suggest that the Israelis started the (alleged) ethnic cleansing "before the war." Yet the first engagement was Hebron (1929) and 1929 Safed riots (1929); not excluding the Palestinian namesake today recognizes Izz ad-Din al-Qassam as well as Haj Amin Al-Husseini (the Grand Mufti of Jerusalem).
> 
> But even before then, one of the major incidents that triggered regimentation of Jewish Defense Forces was the inflammatory anti-Zionist rhetoric of Amin al-Husseini which instigated the April 1920, uprising in the Old City (Nebi Musa riots) that caused 50,000 Arabs to attack Jews. It was after these attacks that the Haganah (1920) emerged as a defense force. The Irgun (1931) did not emerge until the Black Hand of al-Qassam began operations.
> 
> Yes, eight decades ago, both side employed terrorism.  One side evolved beyond that tactic, while the other side still endorses it today.
> 
> In this argument, it must be remembered that the Hostile Arab Palestinians (HoAP) attempted to bring forth an Islamic State through terrorism and aggression; but failed.  You cannot (with any dignity) claim foul just because you are weaker than your adversary which beat you at your own game.
> 
> *While Israel does not have any terrorist organizations today, the HoAP pledges to violate law:
> *
> 
> "There is no solution for the Palestinian question except through Jihad."
> 
> "Armed struggle is the only way to liberate Palestine." ...   ...   ...   the "Commando (Feday'ee) action constitutes the nucleus of the Palestinian popular liberation war."
> 
> Most Respectfully,
> R
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Interested in reading what law you are talking about.
> 
> Copy/paste the relevant passages.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> See above.
> 
> Most Respectfully,
> R
Click to expand...


OK???


----------



## RoccoR

P F Tinmore,  _et al,_

Sorry, I misunderstood what you wanted.



P F Tinmore said:


> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore,  _et al,_
> 
> I did!
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> Interested in reading what law you are talking about.
> 
> Copy/paste the relevant passages.
> 
> 
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> See above.
> 
> Most Respectfully,
> R
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> OK???
Click to expand...





			
				The United Nations Global Counter-Terrorism Strategy was adopted by Member States on 8 September 2006. The strategy said:
			
		

> We resolve to undertake the following measures to prevent and combat terrorism, in particular by denying terrorists access to the means to carry out their attacks, to their targets and to the desired impact of their attacks:
> 
> To refrain from organizing, instigating, facilitating, participating in, financing, encouraging or tolerating terrorist activities and to take appropriate practical measures to ensure that our respective territories are not used for terrorist installations or training camps, or for the preparation or organization of terrorist acts intended to be committed against other States or their citizens.
> 
> To cooperate fully in the fight against terrorism, in accordance with our obligations under international law, in order to find, deny safe haven and bring to justice, on the basis of the principle of extradite or prosecute, any person who supports, facilitates, participates or attempts to participate in the financing, planning, preparation or perpetration of terrorist acts or provides safe havens.​
> _*SOURCE:*_ United Nations General Assembly Adopts Global Counter Terrorism Strategy



v/r
R


----------



## P F Tinmore

RoccoR said:


> P F Tinmore,  _et al,_
> 
> Sorry, I misunderstood what you wanted.
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore,  _et al,_
> 
> I did!
> 
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> See above.
> 
> Most Respectfully,
> R
> 
> 
> 
> 
> OK???
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The United Nations Global Counter-Terrorism Strategy was adopted by Member States on 8 September 2006. The strategy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> We resolve to undertake the following measures to prevent and combat terrorism, in particular by denying terrorists access to the means to carry out their attacks, to their targets and to the desired impact of their attacks:
> 
> To refrain from organizing, instigating, facilitating, participating in, financing, encouraging or tolerating terrorist activities and to take appropriate practical measures to ensure that our respective territories are not used for terrorist installations or training camps, or for the preparation or organization of terrorist acts intended to be committed against other States or their citizens.
> 
> To cooperate fully in the fight against terrorism, in accordance with our obligations under international law, in order to find, deny safe haven and bring to justice, on the basis of the principle of extradite or prosecute, any person who supports, facilitates, participates or attempts to participate in the financing, planning, preparation or perpetration of terrorist acts or provides safe havens.​
> _*SOURCE:*_ United Nations General Assembly Adopts Global Counter Terrorism Strategy
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> v/r
> R
Click to expand...


OK, so how is that applicable to the Palestinians?


----------



## toastman

Rocco, don't fall for Tinmore's questions. He's just playing stupid


----------



## Kondor3

docmauser1 said:


> antique4xpu said:
> 
> 
> 
> _iran may or may not wish to develop a nuclear weapon. that would be in violation of international law. on the other hand , israel has some 125 or 130 nuclear weapons now and also in violation of the same international law_
> 
> 
> 
> And what might that _international law_ be?
Click to expand...

Seconded... I, too, would like to know what 'international law' we are talking about here...


----------



## P F Tinmore

toastman said:


> Rocco, don't fall for Tinmore's questions. He's just playing stupid



Not to worry, that question is never answered.


----------



## Hossfly

P F Tinmore said:


> toastman said:
> 
> 
> 
> Rocco, don't fall for Tinmore's questions. He's just playing stupid
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Not to worry, that question is never answered.
Click to expand...

What question is that, O Keeper of the Lamp?


----------



## antique4xpu

i guess i did not know that israel never signed the nuclear non proliferation treaty 

i am not surprised 

they lied to france and the rest of the world when they claimed their nuclear research was not connected to building weapons ..... ( sounds familiar )

the US should make it clear that any nation that uses such weapons of mass destruction will be dealt in kind by the american military.

failing to get american guarantees for the safety of the middle east from all parties , we should end all monetary support for israel .... just as we have done for iran


----------



## Hossfly

antique4xpu said:


> i guess i did not know that israel never signed the nuclear non proliferation treaty
> 
> i am not surprised
> 
> they lied to france and the rest of the world when they claimed their nuclear research was not connected to building weapons ..... ( sounds familiar )
> 
> the US should make it clear that any nation that uses such weapons of mass destruction will be dealt in kind by the american military.
> 
> failing to get american guarantees for the safety of the middle east from all parties , we should end all monetary support for israel .... just as we have done for iran


I nominate antique4xpu for US Ambassador to the UM. All in favor say Aye.


----------



## docmauser1

antique4xpu said:


> _i guess i did not know that israel never signed the nuclear non proliferation treaty i am not surprised they lied to france and the rest of the world when they claimed their nuclear research was not connected to building weapons ..... ( sounds familiar ) the US should make it clear that any nation that uses such weapons of mass destruction will be dealt in kind by the american military. failing to get american guarantees for the safety of the middle east from all parties , we should end all monetary support for israel .... just as we have done for iran_


Drivel.


----------



## toastman

Hossfly said:


> antique4xpu said:
> 
> 
> 
> i guess i did not know that israel never signed the nuclear non proliferation treaty
> 
> i am not surprised
> 
> they lied to france and the rest of the world when they claimed their nuclear research was not connected to building weapons ..... ( sounds familiar )
> 
> the US should make it clear that any nation that uses such weapons of mass destruction will be dealt in kind by the american military.
> 
> failing to get american guarantees for the safety of the middle east from all parties , we should end all monetary support for israel .... just as we have done for iran
> 
> 
> 
> I nominate antique4xpu for US Ambassador to the UM. All in favor say Aye.
Click to expand...


Aye !


Oh, and his post is drivel


----------



## Kondor3

Ambassador to the U*M*?

University of Minnesota?


----------



## RoccoR

antique4xpu,  _et al,_

Interesting!



antique4xpu said:


> i guess i did not know that israel never signed the nuclear non proliferation treaty


*(COMMENT)*

Nor, is there a requirement to sign the NPT.  Plus, even if it had --- within the Treaty, there is an escape clause. 



			
				 THE TREATY ON THE NON-PROLIFERATION OF NUCLEAR WEAPONS( NPT ) said:
			
		

> *Article X*
> 
> 1. Each Party shall in exercising its national sovereignty have the *right to withdraw from the Treaty* if it decides that extraordinary events, related to the subject matter of this Treaty, have jeopardized the supreme interests of its country. It shall give notice of such withdrawal to all other Parties to the Treaty and to the United Nations Security Council three months in advance. Such notice shall include a statement of the extraordinary events it regards as having jeopardized its supreme interests.
> 
> _*SOURCE:*_ NPT Treaty



Whether or not Israel has a nuclear weapons capability is an unknown.  While there is evidence that in early November 1966, Israel most probably conducted a "zero yield test," (sometimes called an "implosion test"), there has been no real evidence of Israel  ever carrying out an actual nuclear test.  There were rumors of a possible joint test _(with South Africa)_ in the in the southern Indian Ocean in 1979; but in the last three decades, that was never verified and no additional information has ever clarified the nature of the test _(if it indeed happened)_.



antique4xpu said:


> they lied to france and the rest of the world when they claimed their nuclear research was not connected to building weapons ..... ( sounds familiar )


*(COMMENT)*

No nuclear weapons state discloses the entire character of their weapons program.

However since France was an original nuclear research partner with Israel.  "Israeli scientists probably helped construct the G-1 plutonium production reactor and UP-1 reprocessing plant at Marcoule.  France made significant advances in Nuclear Weapons Development from two Israeli patents on heavy water production and low-grade uranium enrichment."  (See:  FAS Israeli Nuke Research )  There is no reason to assume that France really did not understand the weapons research potential of Israeli Scientists.  



antique4xpu said:


> the US should make it clear that any nation that uses such weapons of mass destruction will be dealt in kind by the american military.


*(COMMENT)*

Two points here.


First is, this is a United States World Police concept, wherein, you advocate that the US unilaterally become involved in the enforcement of certain proscribed behaviors.  This is the very thing that many nations find unacceptable about the US.

Second, there is a very grave difference between the offensive use of Nuclear Weapons and the use of such weapons in the defense of their nation.  It must be remembered that in the last three Middle East Wars, when Israel faced aggression from the Arab League, it was 5 Armies against 1 Army.  The world did not come to the defense of Israel in 1948, 1967, or the sneak attack of 1973.  Israel has no reasonable expectation that any nation will come to its aid in any future attack by the Arab League.  Therefore, Chapter VII, Article 51 applies.



> *Article 51*
> 
> Nothing in the present Charter shall impair the* inherent right of individual or collective self-defence if an armed attack occurs* against a Member of the United Nations, until the Security Council has taken measures necessary to maintain international peace and security.​
> _*SOURCE:*_ CHAPTER VII: ACTION WITH RESPECT TO THREATS TO THE PEACE, BREACHES OF THE PEACE, AND ACTS OF AGGRESSION



If the US is not going to actively defend Israel, then it has no business interfering with Israel's active defense.  It is then up to the aggressor if they want to risk the possibility of triggering the Samson Option.



antique4xpu said:


> failing to get american guarantees for the safety of the middle east from all parties , we should end all monetary support for israel .... just as we have done for iran


*(COMMENT)*

This is not a totally unreasonable position to take.  The US can cut-off the monetary flow to the Palestinians that they have been using to make payroll and the current US Aid Programs in progress, as well.  That might trigger a reaction.

I am not opposed to such consideration.  Israel, in turn, would not share any of the exports from Levant Basin Gas and Oil finds with the EU or the US.   Nor, would Israel participate in any joint efforts on regional security or intelligence sharing.   

We should, as part of this strategy, completely pull-out of the Persian Gulf.  That would balance out the policy of playing defender for any of the Arab States.

I'm sure the Russian would not mind at all.  They would probably help us move out of the region and present send-off gifts.  

This seems fair.  All we have to do is remember and accept the consequence of our actions.  Otherwise, it is a perfectly acceptable position to open up for national debate. 

Most Respectfully,
R


----------



## Hossfly

Kondor3 said:


> Ambassador to the U*M*?
> 
> University of Minnesota?


United Muslims. Pay attention!


----------



## Kondor3

Hossfly said:


> Kondor3 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Ambassador to the U*M*?
> 
> University of Minnesota?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> United Muslims. Pay attention!
Click to expand...


I am properly chastised, and offer thanks for remedying my ignorance...


----------



## georgephillip

Hossfly said:


> georgephillip said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Hossfly said:
> 
> 
> 
> It looks like Georgie Boy is so, so obsessed with demonizing Israel and America, and doesn't even concern himself with what is happening in Libya (we realize that he has no concern for the Black tribes being murdered in the Sudan since the Jews are not involved..  What a great dhimmi he is showing us he has become when he can't even be concerned for his own.  Perhaps Georgie Boy, to continue his dhimmitude should move to some Muslim country and maybe they too will set him up with a subsidized apartment.
> 
> More Sunni ?rebels?: Libya Blacks Treated Like Apes In The Zoo By Racist Rebels |
> 
> 
> 
> "The agreement effectively divided the Arab provinces of the Ottoman Empire outside the Arabian peninsula into areas of future British and French control or influence.[4]
> 
> "The terms were negotiated by the French diplomat François Georges-Picot and British Sir Mark Sykes.
> 
> "The Russian Tsarist government was a minor party to the SykesPicot agreement, and when, following the Russian Revolution of October 1917, the Bolsheviks exposed the agreement, 'the British were embarrassed, the Arabs dismayed and the Turks delighted.'"
> 
> *No mention of the Libyans or which white parasites drew their borders?*
> 
> Sykes?Picot Agreement - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> We get you, Georgie Boy.  You are not interested in the Blacks being treated like apes in a zoo in Libya (nor are you interested in the Blacks who have been killed there during the uprising).  Of course, you are not interested in the Black tribes being eliminated in the Sudan.  In your mind, the "White Parasites" did you in so you get back at them on forums.  How nice that you are able to use the Arabs as pawns in your fight against the "White Parasites."  Oh, by the way, Georgie Boy, Wikipedia is trying to raise funds; and since you use that site repeatedly, why not send them a few bucks to keep them going.  What, oh what, would Georgie Boy do if he didn't have Wikipedia to run to.
Click to expand...

Cotesia glomerata - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


----------



## georgephillip

RoccoR said:


> antique4xpu,  _et al,_
> 
> I thought the "International Law" in question was governed by the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT).
> 
> 
> 
> 
> THE TREATY ON THE NON-PROLIFERATION OF NUCLEAR WEAPONS ( NPT ) said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *Article IX*
> 
> 3. This Treaty shall enter into force after its ratification by the States, the Governments of which are designated Depositaries of the Treaty, and forty other States signatory to this Treaty and the deposit of their instruments of ratification. For the purposes of this Treaty, a nuclear-weapon State is one which has manufactured and exploded a nuclear weapon or other nuclear explosive device prior to 1 January 1967.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties
> 1969 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *Article 12  Consent to be bound by a treaty expressed by signature *
> 
> 1. The consent of a State to be bound by a treaty is expressed by the signature of its representative when:
> 
> (a) the treaty provides that signature shall have that effect;
> 
> (b) it is otherwise established that the negotiating States were agreed that signature should have that effect; or
> 
> (c) the intention of the State to give that effect to the signature appears from the full powers of its representative or was expressed during the negotiation.
> 
> _*SOURCE:*_ Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties Done at Vienna on 23 May 1969
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> *(OBSERVATION)*
> 
> 
> IRAN (ISLAMIC REPUBLIC OF):  Is a signatory to the NPT:  Page 34 of NPT
> Address: Permanent Mission of the Islamic Republic of Iran to the United Nations
> 622 Third Avenue, New York, N.Y. 10017
> Telephone: (212) 687-2020​
> 
> 
> ISRAEL (STATE OF): Is NOT a signatory to the NPT
> 
> *(QUESTION)*
> 
> Is the STATE of ISRAEL, which is not a party to the NPT, subject to the same requirements as the ISLAMIC REPUBLIC of IRAN, which is a party to the NPT?
> 
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> All states, especially the US, operated in their own best interest.  Fairness and international politics rarely have an intercept point.
> 
> 
> 
> antique4xpu said:
> 
> 
> 
> perhaps no one remembers that the nation of israel was founded on acts of terrorism , i remind you that menachem begin was wanted for terrorist crimes against the british. can you not see the similarity of the king david hotel massacre by the jews  and acts or terrorism committed by hezbollah ?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> *(OBSERVATION)*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Universality of the Islamic Resistance Movement: said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *Article Seven:*
> 
> The Islamic Resistance Movement is one of the links in the chain of the struggle against the Zionist invaders. It goes back to 1939, to the emergence of the martyr Izz al-Din al Kissam and his brethren the fighters, members of Moslem Brotherhood. It goes on to reach out and become one with another chain that includes the struggle of the Palestinians and Moslem Brotherhood in the 1948 war and the Jihad operations of the Moslem Brotherhood in 1968 and after.​
> *SOURCE:* The Covenant of the Islamic Resistance Movement
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> I have stated several times that neither side has clean hands.  But some hands are a bit more dirty than others.
> 
> "Izz al-Din al-Qissam was killed by British Police in Palestine on November 20, 1935; after a decade (plus) of anti-Jewish/Zionist and anti-Mandate terrorism operations. In 1930 al-Qassam formed the Palestinian Black Hand after the 1929 Palestine Western Wall Uprising riot.
> 
> Arguments suggest that the Israelis started the (alleged) ethnic cleansing "before the war." Yet the first engagement was Hebron (1929) and 1929 Safed riots (1929); not excluding the Palestinian namesake today recognizes Izz ad-Din al-Qassam as well as Haj Amin Al-Husseini (the Grand Mufti of Jerusalem).
> 
> But even before then, one of the major incidents that triggered regimentation of Jewish Defense Forces was the inflammatory anti-Zionist rhetoric of Amin al-Husseini which instigated the April 1920, uprising in the Old City (Nebi Musa riots) that caused 50,000 Arabs to attack Jews. It was after these attacks that the Haganah (1920) emerged as a defense force. The Irgun (1931) did not emerge until the Black Hand of al-Qassam began operations.
> 
> Yes, eight decades ago, both side employed terrorism.  One side evolved beyond that tactic, while the other side still endorses it today.
> 
> In this argument, it must be remembered that the Hostile Arab Palestinians (HoAP) attempted to bring forth an Islamic State through terrorism and aggression; but failed.  You cannot (with any dignity) claim foul just because you are weaker than your adversary which beat you at your own game.
> 
> While Israel does not have any terrorist organizations today, the HoAP pledges to violate law:
> 
> 
> "There is no solution for the Palestinian question except through Jihad."
> 
> "Armed struggle is the only way to liberate Palestine." ...   ...   ...   the "Commando (Feday'ee) action constitutes the nucleus of the Palestinian popular liberation war."
> 
> Most Respectfully,
> R
Click to expand...

*The biggest difference between terror inflicted by Jews with that repaid by their victims is simply the star-spangled skirts one side hides behind:*

"It has been suggested that a striking similarity between the Jewish groups, and jihad networks in Western democracies is their alienation and isolation from the values of the majority, mainstream culture, which they view as an existential threat to their own community. 

"Other similarities between these groups are that their terrorist ideology is not exclusively religious, as it attempts to achieve political, territorial and nationalistic goals as well, e.g. the disruption of the Camp David accords. 

"However, the newer of these Jewish groups have tended to emphasise religious motives for their actions at the expense of secular ones. 

"In the case of Jewish terrorism most networks consist of religious Zionists and ultra-orthodox Jews living in isolated, homogenous communities.[9]

"The following groups have been considered religious terrorist organizations in Israel:

"Gush Emunim Underground (197984): formed by members of the Israeli political movement Gush Emunim.[10] This group is most well known for two actions. Firstly, for bomb attacks on the mayors of West Bank cities on June 2, 1980, and secondly, an abandoned plot to blow up the Temple Mount mosques. 

"The Israeli Judge Zvi Cohen, heading the sentencing panel at the groups trial, stated that they had three motives, not necessarily shared by all the defendants. The first motive, at the heart of the Temple Mount conspiracy, is religious.[11]

"Keshet (Kvutza Shelo Titpasher) (19811989): A Tel Aviv anti-Zionist haredi group focused on bombing property without loss of life.[12][13]:101 Yigal Marcus, Tel Aviv District Police commander, said that he considered the group a gang of criminals, not a terrorist group."

Jewish religious terrorism - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


----------



## P F Tinmore

P F Tinmore said:


> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore,  _et al,_
> 
> Sorry, I misunderstood what you wanted.
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> OK???
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The United Nations Global Counter-Terrorism Strategy was adopted by Member States on 8 September 2006. The strategy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> We resolve to undertake the following measures to prevent and combat terrorism, in particular by denying terrorists access to the means to carry out their attacks, to their targets and to the desired impact of their attacks:
> 
> To refrain from organizing, instigating, facilitating, participating in, financing, encouraging or tolerating terrorist activities and to take appropriate practical measures to ensure that our respective territories are not used for terrorist installations or training camps, or for the preparation or organization of terrorist acts intended to be committed against other States or their citizens.
> 
> To cooperate fully in the fight against terrorism, in accordance with our obligations under international law, in order to find, deny safe haven and bring to justice, on the basis of the principle of extradite or prosecute, any person who supports, facilitates, participates or attempts to participate in the financing, planning, preparation or perpetration of terrorist acts or provides safe havens.​
> _*SOURCE:*_ United Nations General Assembly Adopts Global Counter Terrorism Strategy
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> v/r
> R
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> OK, so how is that applicable to the Palestinians?
Click to expand...


Still nothing, huh?


----------



## Hossfly

georgephillip said:


> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> 
> antique4xpu,  _et al,_
> 
> I thought the "International Law" in question was governed by the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT).
> 
> 
> 
> 
> THE TREATY ON THE NON-PROLIFERATION OF NUCLEAR WEAPONS ( NPT ) said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *Article IX*
> 
> 3. This Treaty shall enter into force after its ratification by the States, the Governments of which are designated Depositaries of the Treaty, and forty other States signatory to this Treaty and the deposit of their instruments of ratification. For the purposes of this Treaty, a nuclear-weapon State is one which has manufactured and exploded a nuclear weapon or other nuclear explosive device prior to 1 January 1967.
> 
> 
> 
> ​
> *(OBSERVATION)*
> 
> 
> IRAN (ISLAMIC REPUBLIC OF):  Is a signatory to the NPT:  Page 34 of NPT
> Address: Permanent Mission of the Islamic Republic of Iran to the United Nations
> 622 Third Avenue, New York, N.Y. 10017
> Telephone: (212) 687-2020​
> 
> 
> ISRAEL (STATE OF): Is NOT a signatory to the NPT
> 
> *(QUESTION)*
> 
> Is the STATE of ISRAEL, which is not a party to the NPT, subject to the same requirements as the ISLAMIC REPUBLIC of IRAN, which is a party to the NPT?
> 
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> All states, especially the US, operated in their own best interest.  Fairness and international politics rarely have an intercept point.
> 
> 
> *(OBSERVATION)*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Universality of the Islamic Resistance Movement: said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *Article Seven:*
> 
> The Islamic Resistance Movement is one of the links in the chain of the struggle against the Zionist invaders. It goes back to 1939, to the emergence of the martyr Izz al-Din al Kissam and his brethren the fighters, members of Moslem Brotherhood. It goes on to reach out and become one with another chain that includes the struggle of the Palestinians and Moslem Brotherhood in the 1948 war and the Jihad operations of the Moslem Brotherhood in 1968 and after.​
> *SOURCE:* The Covenant of the Islamic Resistance Movement
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> I have stated several times that neither side has clean hands.  But some hands are a bit more dirty than others.
> 
> "Izz al-Din al-Qissam was killed by British Police in Palestine on November 20, 1935; after a decade (plus) of anti-Jewish/Zionist and anti-Mandate terrorism operations. In 1930 al-Qassam formed the Palestinian Black Hand after the 1929 Palestine Western Wall Uprising riot.
> 
> Arguments suggest that the Israelis started the (alleged) ethnic cleansing "before the war." Yet the first engagement was Hebron (1929) and 1929 Safed riots (1929); not excluding the Palestinian namesake today recognizes Izz ad-Din al-Qassam as well as Haj Amin Al-Husseini (the Grand Mufti of Jerusalem).
> 
> But even before then, one of the major incidents that triggered regimentation of Jewish Defense Forces was the inflammatory anti-Zionist rhetoric of Amin al-Husseini which instigated the April 1920, uprising in the Old City (Nebi Musa riots) that caused 50,000 Arabs to attack Jews. It was after these attacks that the Haganah (1920) emerged as a defense force. The Irgun (1931) did not emerge until the Black Hand of al-Qassam began operations.
> 
> Yes, eight decades ago, both side employed terrorism.  One side evolved beyond that tactic, while the other side still endorses it today.
> 
> In this argument, it must be remembered that the Hostile Arab Palestinians (HoAP) attempted to bring forth an Islamic State through terrorism and aggression; but failed.  You cannot (with any dignity) claim foul just because you are weaker than your adversary which beat you at your own game.
> 
> While Israel does not have any terrorist organizations today, the HoAP pledges to violate law:
> 
> 
> "There is no solution for the Palestinian question except through Jihad."
> 
> "Armed struggle is the only way to liberate Palestine." ...   ...   ...   the "Commando (Feday'ee) action constitutes the nucleus of the Palestinian popular liberation war."
> 
> Most Respectfully,
> R
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> *The biggest difference between terror inflicted by Jews with that repaid by their victims is simply the star-spangled skirts one side hides behind:*
> 
> "It has been suggested that a striking similarity between the Jewish groups, and jihad networks in Western democracies is their alienation and isolation from the values of the majority, mainstream culture, which they view as an existential threat to their own community.
> 
> "Other similarities between these groups are that their terrorist ideology is not exclusively religious, as it attempts to achieve political, territorial and nationalistic goals as well, e.g. the disruption of the Camp David accords.
> 
> "However, the newer of these Jewish groups have tended to emphasise religious motives for their actions at the expense of secular ones.
> 
> "In the case of Jewish terrorism most networks consist of religious Zionists and ultra-orthodox Jews living in isolated, homogenous communities.[9]
> 
> "The following groups have been considered religious terrorist organizations in Israel:
> 
> "Gush Emunim Underground (197984): formed by members of the Israeli political movement Gush Emunim.[10] This group is most well known for two actions. Firstly, for bomb attacks on the mayors of West Bank cities on June 2, 1980, and secondly, an abandoned plot to blow up the Temple Mount mosques.
> 
> "The Israeli Judge Zvi Cohen, heading the sentencing panel at the groups trial, stated that they had three motives, not necessarily shared by all the defendants. The first motive, at the heart of the Temple Mount conspiracy, is religious.[11]
> 
> "Keshet (Kvutza Shelo Titpasher) (19811989): A Tel Aviv anti-Zionist haredi group focused on bombing property without loss of life.[12][13]:101 Yigal Marcus, Tel Aviv District Police commander, said that he considered the group a gang of criminals, not a terrorist group."
> 
> Jewish religious terrorism - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Click to expand...

At least we "White Parasites" (as Georgie Boy has called us) can be aghast at what is happening to the Blacks by the Muslims, but Georgie Boy is still fixated on the Jews and Israel.   The viewers can see the hypocrisy here when there is so much terrorism going on in so many different areas of the world and some posters want you to believe that Israel and America are the most evil countries in the world.  Meanwhile, every poster whose roots are in Africa should be sick about things like this.  By the way, regarding your previous post, I guess you are not going to throw Wikipedia a couple of bucks for your constant use of that site when they are calling for some help.  It shows you that there are parasites which come in every color.
BosNewsLife ? Christian News Agency » Blog Archive » Islamists Kill Five Nigeria Christians In Roadside Attack


----------



## toastman

georgephillip said:


> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> 
> antique4xpu,  _et al,_
> 
> I thought the "International Law" in question was governed by the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT).
> 
> 
> 
> 
> THE TREATY ON THE NON-PROLIFERATION OF NUCLEAR WEAPONS ( NPT ) said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *Article IX*
> 
> 3. This Treaty shall enter into force after its ratification by the States, the Governments of which are designated Depositaries of the Treaty, and forty other States signatory to this Treaty and the deposit of their instruments of ratification. For the purposes of this Treaty, a nuclear-weapon State is one which has manufactured and exploded a nuclear weapon or other nuclear explosive device prior to 1 January 1967.
> 
> 
> 
> ​
> *(OBSERVATION)*
> 
> 
> IRAN (ISLAMIC REPUBLIC OF):  Is a signatory to the NPT:  Page 34 of NPT
> Address: Permanent Mission of the Islamic Republic of Iran to the United Nations
> 622 Third Avenue, New York, N.Y. 10017
> Telephone: (212) 687-2020​
> 
> 
> ISRAEL (STATE OF): Is NOT a signatory to the NPT
> 
> *(QUESTION)*
> 
> Is the STATE of ISRAEL, which is not a party to the NPT, subject to the same requirements as the ISLAMIC REPUBLIC of IRAN, which is a party to the NPT?
> 
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> All states, especially the US, operated in their own best interest.  Fairness and international politics rarely have an intercept point.
> 
> 
> *(OBSERVATION)*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Universality of the Islamic Resistance Movement: said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *Article Seven:*
> 
> The Islamic Resistance Movement is one of the links in the chain of the struggle against the Zionist invaders. It goes back to 1939, to the emergence of the martyr Izz al-Din al Kissam and his brethren the fighters, members of Moslem Brotherhood. It goes on to reach out and become one with another chain that includes the struggle of the Palestinians and Moslem Brotherhood in the 1948 war and the Jihad operations of the Moslem Brotherhood in 1968 and after.​
> *SOURCE:* The Covenant of the Islamic Resistance Movement
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> I have stated several times that neither side has clean hands.  But some hands are a bit more dirty than others.
> 
> "Izz al-Din al-Qissam was killed by British Police in Palestine on November 20, 1935; after a decade (plus) of anti-Jewish/Zionist and anti-Mandate terrorism operations. In 1930 al-Qassam formed the Palestinian Black Hand after the 1929 Palestine Western Wall Uprising riot.
> 
> Arguments suggest that the Israelis started the (alleged) ethnic cleansing "before the war." Yet the first engagement was Hebron (1929) and 1929 Safed riots (1929); not excluding the Palestinian namesake today recognizes Izz ad-Din al-Qassam as well as Haj Amin Al-Husseini (the Grand Mufti of Jerusalem).
> 
> But even before then, one of the major incidents that triggered regimentation of Jewish Defense Forces was the inflammatory anti-Zionist rhetoric of Amin al-Husseini which instigated the April 1920, uprising in the Old City (Nebi Musa riots) that caused 50,000 Arabs to attack Jews. It was after these attacks that the Haganah (1920) emerged as a defense force. The Irgun (1931) did not emerge until the Black Hand of al-Qassam began operations.
> 
> Yes, eight decades ago, both side employed terrorism.  One side evolved beyond that tactic, while the other side still endorses it today.
> 
> In this argument, it must be remembered that the Hostile Arab Palestinians (HoAP) attempted to bring forth an Islamic State through terrorism and aggression; but failed.  You cannot (with any dignity) claim foul just because you are weaker than your adversary which beat you at your own game.
> 
> While Israel does not have any terrorist organizations today, the HoAP pledges to violate law:
> 
> 
> "There is no solution for the Palestinian question except through Jihad."
> 
> "Armed struggle is the only way to liberate Palestine." ...   ...   ...   the "Commando (Feday'ee) action constitutes the nucleus of the Palestinian popular liberation war."
> 
> Most Respectfully,
> R
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> *The biggest difference between terror inflicted by Jews with that repaid by their victims is simply the star-spangled skirts one side hides behind:*
> 
> "It has been suggested that a striking similarity between the Jewish groups, and jihad networks in Western democracies is their alienation and isolation from the values of the majority, mainstream culture, which they view as an existential threat to their own community.
> 
> "Other similarities between these groups are that their terrorist ideology is not exclusively religious, as it attempts to achieve political, territorial and nationalistic goals as well, e.g. the disruption of the Camp David accords.
> 
> "However, the newer of these Jewish groups have tended to emphasise religious motives for their actions at the expense of secular ones.
> 
> "In the case of Jewish terrorism most networks consist of religious Zionists and ultra-orthodox Jews living in isolated, homogenous communities.[9]
> 
> "The following groups have been considered religious terrorist organizations in Israel:
> 
> "Gush Emunim Underground (197984): formed by members of the Israeli political movement Gush Emunim.[10] This group is most well known for two actions. Firstly, for bomb attacks on the mayors of West Bank cities on June 2, 1980, and secondly, an abandoned plot to blow up the Temple Mount mosques.
> 
> "The Israeli Judge Zvi Cohen, heading the sentencing panel at the groups trial, stated that they had three motives, not necessarily shared by all the defendants. The first motive, at the heart of the Temple Mount conspiracy, is religious.[11]
> 
> "Keshet (Kvutza Shelo Titpasher) (19811989): A Tel Aviv anti-Zionist haredi group focused on bombing property without loss of life.[12][13]:101 Yigal Marcus, Tel Aviv District Police commander, said that he considered the group a gang of criminals, not a terrorist group."
> 
> Jewish religious terrorism - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Click to expand...


I think Rocco really nailed it on the head. One group evolved, developed a modern country and evolved their militias into a modern army, while the other group....well....you know


----------



## P F Tinmore

toastman said:


> georgephillip said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> 
> antique4xpu,  _et al,_
> 
> I thought the "International Law" in question was governed by the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT).
> 
> ​​
> *(OBSERVATION)*
> 
> 
> IRAN (ISLAMIC REPUBLIC OF):  Is a signatory to the NPT:  Page 34 of NPT
> Address: Permanent Mission of the Islamic Republic of Iran to the United Nations
> 622 Third Avenue, New York, N.Y. 10017
> Telephone: (212) 687-2020​
> 
> 
> ISRAEL (STATE OF): Is NOT a signatory to the NPT
> 
> *(QUESTION)*
> 
> Is the STATE of ISRAEL, which is not a party to the NPT, subject to the same requirements as the ISLAMIC REPUBLIC of IRAN, which is a party to the NPT?
> 
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> All states, especially the US, operated in their own best interest.  Fairness and international politics rarely have an intercept point.
> 
> 
> *(OBSERVATION)*
> 
> 
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> I have stated several times that neither side has clean hands.  But some hands are a bit more dirty than others.
> 
> "Izz al-Din al-Qissam was killed by British Police in Palestine on November 20, 1935; after a decade (plus) of anti-Jewish/Zionist and anti-Mandate terrorism operations. In 1930 al-Qassam formed the Palestinian Black Hand after the 1929 Palestine Western Wall Uprising riot.
> 
> Arguments suggest that the Israelis started the (alleged) ethnic cleansing "before the war." Yet the first engagement was Hebron (1929) and 1929 Safed riots (1929); not excluding the Palestinian namesake today recognizes Izz ad-Din al-Qassam as well as Haj Amin Al-Husseini (the Grand Mufti of Jerusalem).
> 
> But even before then, one of the major incidents that triggered regimentation of Jewish Defense Forces was the inflammatory anti-Zionist rhetoric of Amin al-Husseini which instigated the April 1920, uprising in the Old City (Nebi Musa riots) that caused 50,000 Arabs to attack Jews. It was after these attacks that the Haganah (1920) emerged as a defense force. The Irgun (1931) did not emerge until the Black Hand of al-Qassam began operations.
> 
> Yes, eight decades ago, both side employed terrorism.  One side evolved beyond that tactic, while the other side still endorses it today.
> 
> In this argument, it must be remembered that the Hostile Arab Palestinians (HoAP) attempted to bring forth an Islamic State through terrorism and aggression; but failed.  You cannot (with any dignity) claim foul just because you are weaker than your adversary which beat you at your own game.
> 
> While Israel does not have any terrorist organizations today, the HoAP pledges to violate law:
> 
> 
> "There is no solution for the Palestinian question except through Jihad."
> 
> "Armed struggle is the only way to liberate Palestine." ...   ...   ...   the "Commando (Feday'ee) action constitutes the nucleus of the Palestinian popular liberation war."
> 
> Most Respectfully,
> R
> 
> 
> 
> *The biggest difference between terror inflicted by Jews with that repaid by their victims is simply the star-spangled skirts one side hides behind:*
> 
> "It has been suggested that a striking similarity between the Jewish groups, and jihad networks in Western democracies is their alienation and isolation from the values of the majority, mainstream culture, which they view as an existential threat to their own community.
> 
> "Other similarities between these groups are that their terrorist ideology is not exclusively religious, as it attempts to achieve political, territorial and nationalistic goals as well, e.g. the disruption of the Camp David accords.
> 
> "However, the newer of these Jewish groups have tended to emphasise religious motives for their actions at the expense of secular ones.
> 
> "In the case of Jewish terrorism most networks consist of religious Zionists and ultra-orthodox Jews living in isolated, homogenous communities.[9]
> 
> "The following groups have been considered religious terrorist organizations in Israel:
> 
> "Gush Emunim Underground (197984): formed by members of the Israeli political movement Gush Emunim.[10] This group is most well known for two actions. Firstly, for bomb attacks on the mayors of West Bank cities on June 2, 1980, and secondly, an abandoned plot to blow up the Temple Mount mosques.
> 
> "The Israeli Judge Zvi Cohen, heading the sentencing panel at the groups trial, stated that they had three motives, not necessarily shared by all the defendants. The first motive, at the heart of the Temple Mount conspiracy, is religious.[11]
> 
> "Keshet (Kvutza Shelo Titpasher) (19811989): A Tel Aviv anti-Zionist haredi group focused on bombing property without loss of life.[12][13]:101 Yigal Marcus, Tel Aviv District Police commander, said that he considered the group a gang of criminals, not a terrorist group."
> 
> Jewish religious terrorism - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I think Rocco really nailed it on the head. One group evolved, developed a modern country and evolved their militias into a modern army, while the other group....well....you know
Click to expand...


Indeed, Israel could steal, kill, lie, and mooch at exceptional levels.

The Palestinians lacked those skills.


----------



## docmauser1

georgephillip said:


> _The biggest difference between terror inflicted by Jews with that repaid by their victims is simply the star-spangled skirts one side hides behind_


Drivel.


----------



## toastman

P F Tinmore said:


> toastman said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> georgephillip said:
> 
> 
> 
> *The biggest difference between terror inflicted by Jews with that repaid by their victims is simply the star-spangled skirts one side hides behind:*
> 
> "It has been suggested that a striking similarity between the Jewish groups, and jihad networks in Western democracies is their alienation and isolation from the values of the majority, mainstream culture, which they view as an existential threat to their own community.
> 
> "Other similarities between these groups are that their terrorist ideology is not exclusively religious, as it attempts to achieve political, territorial and nationalistic goals as well, e.g. the disruption of the Camp David accords.
> 
> "However, the newer of these Jewish groups have tended to emphasise religious motives for their actions at the expense of secular ones.
> 
> "In the case of Jewish terrorism most networks consist of religious Zionists and ultra-orthodox Jews living in isolated, homogenous communities.[9]
> 
> "The following groups have been considered religious terrorist organizations in Israel:
> 
> "Gush Emunim Underground (197984): formed by members of the Israeli political movement Gush Emunim.[10] This group is most well known for two actions. Firstly, for bomb attacks on the mayors of West Bank cities on June 2, 1980, and secondly, an abandoned plot to blow up the Temple Mount mosques.
> 
> "The Israeli Judge Zvi Cohen, heading the sentencing panel at the groups trial, stated that they had three motives, not necessarily shared by all the defendants. The first motive, at the heart of the Temple Mount conspiracy, is religious.[11]
> 
> "Keshet (Kvutza Shelo Titpasher) (19811989): A Tel Aviv anti-Zionist haredi group focused on bombing property without loss of life.[12][13]:101 Yigal Marcus, Tel Aviv District Police commander, said that he considered the group a gang of criminals, not a terrorist group."
> 
> Jewish religious terrorism - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I think Rocco really nailed it on the head. One group evolved, developed a modern country and evolved their militias into a modern army, while the other group....well....you know
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Indeed, Israel could steal, kill, lie, and mooch at exceptional levels.
> 
> The Palestinians lacked those skills.
Click to expand...


Typical drivel propaganda.
Do you disagree with what I said ?


----------



## docmauser1

P F Tinmore said:


> _Indeed, Israel could steal, kill, lie, and mooch at exceptional levels. The Palestinians lacked those skills._


It's typical of palistanians to overdo things, false modesty and lying like a pornstar is one of them, of course.


----------



## P F Tinmore

toastman said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> toastman said:
> 
> 
> 
> I think Rocco really nailed it on the head. One group evolved, developed a modern country and evolved their militias into a modern army, while the other group....well....you know
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeed, Israel could steal, kill, lie, and mooch at exceptional levels.
> 
> The Palestinians lacked those skills.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Typical drivel propaganda.
> Do you disagree with what I said ?
Click to expand...


Not at all. I was merely clarifying how that happened.


----------



## docmauser1

P F Tinmore said:


> _Not at all. I was merely clarifying how that happened._


Clarifying how that didn't happen happened is an ungrateful occupation, of course.


----------



## ForeverYoung436

P F Tinmore said:


> toastman said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> georgephillip said:
> 
> 
> 
> *The biggest difference between terror inflicted by Jews with that repaid by their victims is simply the star-spangled skirts one side hides behind:*
> 
> "It has been suggested that a striking similarity between the Jewish groups, and jihad networks in Western democracies is their alienation and isolation from the values of the majority, mainstream culture, which they view as an existential threat to their own community.
> 
> "Other similarities between these groups are that their terrorist ideology is not exclusively religious, as it attempts to achieve political, territorial and nationalistic goals as well, e.g. the disruption of the Camp David accords.
> 
> "However, the newer of these Jewish groups have tended to emphasise religious motives for their actions at the expense of secular ones.
> 
> "In the case of Jewish terrorism most networks consist of religious Zionists and ultra-orthodox Jews living in isolated, homogenous communities.[9]
> 
> "The following groups have been considered religious terrorist organizations in Israel:
> 
> "Gush Emunim Underground (1979&#8211;84): formed by members of the Israeli political movement Gush Emunim.[10] This group is most well known for two actions. Firstly, for bomb attacks on the mayors of West Bank cities on June 2, 1980, and secondly, an abandoned plot to blow up the Temple Mount mosques.
> 
> "The Israeli Judge Zvi Cohen, heading the sentencing panel at the group&#8217;s trial, stated that they had three motives, &#8216;not necessarily shared by all the defendants. The first motive, at the heart of the Temple Mount conspiracy, is religious.&#8217;[11]
> 
> "Keshet (Kvutza Shelo Titpasher) (1981&#8211;1989): A Tel Aviv anti-Zionist haredi group focused on bombing property without loss of life.[12][13]:101 Yigal Marcus, Tel Aviv District Police commander, said that he considered the group a gang of criminals, not a terrorist group."
> 
> Jewish religious terrorism - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I think Rocco really nailed it on the head. One group evolved, developed a modern country and evolved their militias into a modern army, while the other group....well....you know
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Indeed, Israel could steal, kill, lie, and mooch at exceptional levels.
> 
> The Palestinians lacked those skills.
Click to expand...


Lacked those skills?
1)  Arafart and his cohorts stole from their own ppl, to fill their Swiss bank accounts.
2)  Palestinians slit the throats of infants.
3)  Pallywood is exceptional lying.
4)  Palestinians mooch from many donor nations.


----------



## P F Tinmore

ForeverYoung436 said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> toastman said:
> 
> 
> 
> I think Rocco really nailed it on the head. One group evolved, developed a modern country and evolved their militias into a modern army, while the other group....well....you know
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeed, Israel could steal, kill, lie, and mooch at exceptional levels.
> 
> The Palestinians lacked those skills.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Lacked those skills?
> 1)  Arafart and his cohorts stole from their own ppl, to fill their Swiss bank accounts.
> 2?  Palestinians slit the throats of infants.
> 3)  Pallywood is exceptional lying.
> 4)  Palestinians mooch from many donor nations.
Click to expand...


Arafat was brought back from exile by Israel to outsource the occupation. He was paid well.


----------



## toastman

P F Tinmore said:


> ForeverYoung436 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> Indeed, Israel could steal, kill, lie, and mooch at exceptional levels.
> 
> The Palestinians lacked those skills.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Lacked those skills?
> 1)  Arafart and his cohorts stole from their own ppl, to fill their Swiss bank accounts.
> 2?  Palestinians slit the throats of infants.
> 3)  Pallywood is exceptional lying.
> 4)  Palestinians mooch from many donor nations.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Arafat was brought back from exile by Israel to outsource the occupation. He was paid well.
Click to expand...


What is your opinion on Arafat,


----------



## Hossfly

toastman said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ForeverYoung436 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Lacked those skills?
> 1)  Arafart and his cohorts stole from their own ppl, to fill their Swiss bank accounts.
> 2?  Palestinians slit the throats of infants.
> 3)  Pallywood is exceptional lying.
> 4)  Palestinians mooch from many donor nations.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Arafat was brought back from exile by Israel to outsource the occupation. He was paid well.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> What is your opinion on Arafat,
Click to expand...

You have to give Tinny credit for his animosity toward Arafart. He's a Hamas man from his boots to his neck.


----------



## P F Tinmore

toastman said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ForeverYoung436 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Lacked those skills?
> 1)  Arafart and his cohorts stole from their own ppl, to fill their Swiss bank accounts.
> 2?  Palestinians slit the throats of infants.
> 3)  Pallywood is exceptional lying.
> 4)  Palestinians mooch from many donor nations.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Arafat was brought back from exile by Israel to outsource the occupation. He was paid well.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> What is your opinion on Arafat,
Click to expand...


I think he sold out or was duped or both.

Abbas is just a sell out. He is rich too.


----------



## ForeverYoung436

P F Tinmore said:


> toastman said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> Arafat was brought back from exile by Israel to outsource the occupation. He was paid well.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> What is your opinion on Arafat,
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I think he sold out or was duped or both.
> 
> Abbas is just a sell out. He is rich too.
Click to expand...


I don't think Abbas is a sell-out, or else he would have come to an agreement with Israel long ago.


----------



## P F Tinmore

ForeverYoung436 said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> toastman said:
> 
> 
> 
> What is your opinion on Arafat,
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I think he sold out or was duped or both.
> 
> Abbas is just a sell out. He is rich too.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I don't think Abbas is a sell-out, or else he would have come to an agreement with Israel long ago.
Click to expand...


Israel does not want an agreement. Abbas is no threat there.


----------



## toastman

P F Tinmore said:


> ForeverYoung436 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> I think he sold out or was duped or both.
> 
> Abbas is just a sell out. He is rich too.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I don't think Abbas is a sell-out, or else he would have come to an agreement with Israel long ago.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Israel does not want an agreement. Abbas is no threat there.
Click to expand...


Just because Israel won't kneel down to the outrageous demands of the Palestinians, doesn't mean they don't want a deal.


----------



## docmauser1

P F Tinmore said:


> _Arafat was brought back from exile by Israel to outsource the occupation. He was paid well._


A rare misconception, ie. drivel is that, says Yoda. Bush and Baker in their peace frenzy twisted Shamir's arms by suspending $400 mln. in loan guarantees, refusing to provide $10 bln. in other loan guarantees, freezing legislative moves aimed at expanding the US-Israeli cooperation strategically and smearing AIPAC and Shamir through deliberate leaks and innuendo. That's what brought Arafat to palistan and he got "paid" well by the United States of America, of course.


----------



## P F Tinmore

P F Tinmore said:


> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore,  _et al,_
> 
> Sorry, I misunderstood what you wanted.
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> OK???
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The United Nations Global Counter-Terrorism Strategy was adopted by Member States on 8 September 2006. The strategy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> We resolve to undertake the following measures to prevent and combat terrorism, in particular by denying terrorists access to the means to carry out their attacks, to their targets and to the desired impact of their attacks:
> 
> To refrain from organizing, instigating, facilitating, participating in, financing, encouraging or tolerating terrorist activities and to take appropriate practical measures to ensure that our respective territories are not used for terrorist installations or training camps, or for the preparation or organization of terrorist acts intended to be committed against other States or their citizens.
> 
> To cooperate fully in the fight against terrorism, in accordance with our obligations under international law, in order to find, deny safe haven and bring to justice, on the basis of the principle of extradite or prosecute, any person who supports, facilitates, participates or attempts to participate in the financing, planning, preparation or perpetration of terrorist acts or provides safe havens.​
> _*SOURCE:*_ United Nations General Assembly Adopts Global Counter Terrorism Strategy
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> v/r
> R
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> OK, so how is that applicable to the Palestinians?
Click to expand...


Like I say:



> Not to worry, that question is never answered.


----------



## toastman

Tinmore, how do YOU think Rocco applies it to the Palestinians ?


----------



## P F Tinmore

toastman said:


> Tinmore, how do YOU think Rocco applies it to the Palestinians ?



Good question.

He seems to believe the Israeli version.


----------



## theliq

toastman said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ForeverYoung436 said:
> 
> 
> 
> I don't think Abbas is a sell-out, or else he would have come to an agreement with Israel long ago.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Israel does not want an agreement. Abbas is no threat there.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Just because Israel won't kneel down to the outrageous demands of the Palestinians, doesn't mean they don't want a deal.
Click to expand...


I think you are wrong there Toasty,the majority of Israelis want a two nation solution.....why am I the only fair and Pragmatic person on here. I know because I am theliq


----------



## RoccoR

P F Tinmore,  _et al,_

I know how this plays out with you.  You're going to argue that Israel is in Palestine.



P F Tinmore said:


> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The United Nations Global Counter-Terrorism Strategy was adopted by Member States on 8 September 2006. The strategy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> We resolve to undertake the following measures to prevent and combat terrorism, in particular by denying terrorists access to the means to carry out their attacks, to their targets and to the desired impact of their attacks:
> 
> To refrain from organizing, instigating, facilitating, participating in, financing, encouraging or tolerating terrorist activities and to take appropriate practical measures to ensure that our respective territories are not used for terrorist installations or training camps, or for the preparation or organization of terrorist acts intended to be committed against other States or their citizens.
> 
> To cooperate fully in the fight against terrorism, in accordance with our obligations under international law, in order to find, deny safe haven and bring to justice, on the basis of the principle of extradite or prosecute, any person who supports, facilitates, participates or attempts to participate in the financing, planning, preparation or perpetration of terrorist acts or provides safe havens.​
> _*SOURCE:*_ United Nations General Assembly Adopts Global Counter Terrorism Strategy
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> OK, so how is that applicable to the Palestinians?
Click to expand...

*(COMMENT)*

You're argument follows:

Article 13 HAMAS Covenant contention that:  "Initiatives, and so-called peaceful solutions and international conferences, are in contradiction to the principles of the Islamic Resistance Movement."

Article 20 PNA Charter contention that:  "The Balfour Declaration, the Palestine Mandate, and everything that has been based on them, are deemed null and void."

Article 21 PNA Charter contention that:  "The Arab Palestinian people, expressing themselves by armed Palestinian revolution, reject all solutions which are substitutes for the total liberation of Palestine and reject all proposals aimed at the liquidation of the Palestinian cause, or at its internationalization."​
You don't recognize the evolution of the territorial control.  So, there is no need to pursue it.

Most Respectfully,
R


----------



## Hoffstra

theliq said:


> I think you are wrong there Toasty,the majority of Israelis want a two nation solution.....why am I the only fair and Pragmatic person on here. I know because I am theliq



majority of Israelis want a final peace accord that includes a Palestinian State on the West Bank.

Im not sure if that includes the Palestinians having a chunk of East Jerusalem or a hundred thousand or so middle aged refugees returning to Israel.


----------



## P F Tinmore

RoccoR said:


> P F Tinmore,  _et al,_
> 
> I know how this plays out with you.  You're going to argue that Israel is in Palestine.
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> OK, so how is that applicable to the Palestinians?
> 
> 
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> You're argument follows:
> 
> Article 13 HAMAS Covenant contention that:  "Initiatives, and so-called peaceful solutions and international conferences, are in contradiction to the principles of the Islamic Resistance Movement."
> 
> Article 20 PNA Charter contention that:  "The Balfour Declaration, the Palestine Mandate, and everything that has been based on them, are deemed null and void."
> 
> Article 21 PNA Charter contention that:  "The Arab Palestinian people, expressing themselves by armed Palestinian revolution, reject all solutions which are substitutes for the total liberation of Palestine and reject all proposals aimed at the liquidation of the Palestinian cause, or at its internationalization."​
> You don't recognize the evolution of the territorial control.  So, there is no need to pursue it.
> 
> Most Respectfully,
> R
Click to expand...


I'm sorry. I don't see how that relates to my question.


----------



## toastman

theliq said:


> toastman said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> Israel does not want an agreement. Abbas is no threat there.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Just because Israel won't kneel down to the outrageous demands of the Palestinians, doesn't mean they don't want a deal.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I think you are wrong there Toasty,the majority of Israelis want a two nation solution.....why am I the only fair and Pragmatic person on here. I know because I am theliq
Click to expand...


Ok, but I never suggested otherwise ...


----------



## toastman

P F Tinmore said:


> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore,  _et al,_
> 
> I know how this plays out with you.  You're going to argue that Israel is in Palestine.
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> OK, so how is that applicable to the Palestinians?
> 
> 
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> You're argument follows:
> 
> Article 13 HAMAS Covenant contention that:  "Initiatives, and so-called peaceful solutions and international conferences, are in contradiction to the principles of the Islamic Resistance Movement."
> 
> Article 20 PNA Charter contention that:  "The Balfour Declaration, the Palestine Mandate, and everything that has been based on them, are deemed null and void."
> 
> Article 21 PNA Charter contention that:  "The Arab Palestinian people, expressing themselves by armed Palestinian revolution, reject all solutions which are substitutes for the total liberation of Palestine and reject all proposals aimed at the liquidation of the Palestinian cause, or at its internationalization."​
> You don't recognize the evolution of the territorial control.  So, there is no need to pursue it.
> 
> Most Respectfully,
> R
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I'm sorry. I don't see how that relates to my question.
Click to expand...


He was thinking two steps ahead of you


----------



## P F Tinmore

toastman said:


> theliq said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> toastman said:
> 
> 
> 
> Just because Israel won't kneel down to the outrageous demands of the Palestinians, doesn't mean they don't want a deal.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I think you are wrong there Toasty,the majority of Israelis want a two nation solution.....why am I the only fair and Pragmatic person on here. I know because I am theliq
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Ok, but I never suggested otherwise ...
Click to expand...


Israel's version of a two state solution.

Israel and Jordan.


----------



## Hoffstra

P F Tinmore said:


> Israel's version of a two state solution.
> 
> Israel and Jordan.



well, not all Israelis.

the hateful & bigoted Israelis, yes.


----------



## toastman

P F Tinmore said:


> toastman said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> theliq said:
> 
> 
> 
> I think you are wrong there Toasty,the majority of Israelis want a two nation solution.....why am I the only fair and Pragmatic person on here. I know because I am theliq
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Ok, but I never suggested otherwise ...
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Israel's version of a two state solution.
> 
> Israel and Jordan.
Click to expand...


They offered 97% of the West Bank to the Palestinians in 2000 and 95% in 2008. 

Hamas and many Gazans do't want peace, they want victory


----------



## Hoffstra

toastman said:


> They offered 97% of the West Bank to the Palestinians in 2000 and 95% in 2008.
> 
> Hamas and many Gazans do't want peace, they want victory



Liar.

Israel was to hold the Jordan Valley for more than a decade under the 2000 offer.

giving the Palestinians much less than 97%.


----------



## Hossfly

P F Tinmore said:


> toastman said:
> 
> 
> 
> Tinmore, how do YOU think Rocco applies it to the Palestinians ?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Good question.
> 
> He seems to believe the Israeli version.
Click to expand...

But, Tinnie, you believe the Arab version, which is very understandable.  However, I think many of the posters and viewers appreciate the lessons that Rocco is giving us because it is obvious that he has been studying this issue a long time and if we all are honest, we will admit that we never studied this as in depth as he has.  I think the viewers realize by now that you don't like to hear what he says, which also is understandable.  I think the only thing that will make you happy is that if Israel ceases to exist, and the Arabs will be in charge of the entire territory which would be called the country of Palestine..


----------



## P F Tinmore

toastman said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> toastman said:
> 
> 
> 
> Ok, but I never suggested otherwise ...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Israel's version of a two state solution.
> 
> Israel and Jordan.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> They offered 97% of the West Bank to the Palestinians in 2000 and 95% in 2008.
> 
> Hamas and many Gazans do't want peace, they want victory
Click to expand...


The inmates get 97% of prisons too. The other 3% is the walls and doors. Were the Palestinians going to get the Jordan valley?


----------



## P F Tinmore

Hossfly said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> toastman said:
> 
> 
> 
> Tinmore, how do YOU think Rocco applies it to the Palestinians ?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Good question.
> 
> He seems to believe the Israeli version.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> But, Tinnie, you believe the Arab version, which is very understandable.  However, I think many of the posters and viewers appreciate the lessons that Rocco is giving us because it is obvious that *he has been studying this issue a long time* and if we all are honest, we will admit that we never studied this as in depth as he has.  I think the viewers realize by now that you don't like to hear what he says, which also is understandable.  I think the only thing that will make you happy is that if Israel ceases to exist, and the Arabs will be in charge of the entire territory which would be called the country of Palestine..
Click to expand...


Indeed, he has the Israeli version down pat.

Sorry Rocco, nothing personal.


----------



## RoccoR

P F Tinmore,  _et al,_

The Palestinians are terrorists.



P F Tinmore said:


> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> 
> I know how this plays out with you.  You're going to argue that Israel is in Palestine.
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> OK, so how is that applicable to the Palestinians?
> 
> 
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> You're argument follows:
> 
> Article 13 HAMAS Covenant contention that:  "Initiatives, and so-called peaceful solutions and international conferences, are in contradiction to the principles of the Islamic Resistance Movement."
> 
> Article 20 PNA Charter contention that:  "The Balfour Declaration, the Palestine Mandate, and everything that has been based on them, are deemed null and void."
> 
> Article 21 PNA Charter contention that:  "The Arab Palestinian people, expressing themselves by armed Palestinian revolution, reject all solutions which are substitutes for the total liberation of Palestine and reject all proposals aimed at the liquidation of the Palestinian cause, or at its internationalization."​
> You don't recognize the evolution of the territorial control.  So, there is no need to pursue it.
> 
> Most Respectfully,
> R
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I'm sorry. I don't see how that relates to my question.
Click to expand...

*(COMMENT)*

Your question was:

While Israel does not have any terrorist organizations today, the HoAP pledges to violate law:
"There is no solution for the Palestinian question except through Jihad."
"Armed struggle is the only way to liberate Palestine." ... ... ... the "Commando (Feday'ee) action constitutes the nucleus of the Palestinian popular liberation war."​
*Q:  OK, so how is that applicable to the Palestinians?* _(P F Tinmore)_

The list of terrorist acts is well documented.  They have a complete history of past behaviors that is indisputable, internationally and territorially; against the sovereignty of the State of Israel, on the High Seas and actions involving air piracy.  They also have a history of indiscriminate rocket fire.  

Both the Izz al-Din al-Qassem (terrorist wing of Hamas) and PIJ (Palestinian Islamic Jihad) are designated terrorist groups by the EU.  HAMAS supports and controls the Izz al-Din al-Qassem Brigade, and the PIJ freely operated from HAMAS controlled territory; and HAMAS provides safe havens.

Most Respectfully,
R


----------



## Hossfly

P F Tinmore said:


> Hossfly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> Good question.
> 
> He seems to believe the Israeli version.
> 
> 
> 
> But, Tinnie, you believe the Arab version, which is very understandable.  However, I think many of the posters and viewers appreciate the lessons that Rocco is giving us because it is obvious that *he has been studying this issue a long time* and if we all are honest, we will admit that we never studied this as in depth as he has.  I think the viewers realize by now that you don't like to hear what he says, which also is understandable.  I think the only thing that will make you happy is that if Israel ceases to exist, and the Arabs will be in charge of the entire territory which would be called the country of Palestine..
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Indeed, he has the Israeli version down pat.
> 
> Sorry Rocco, nothing personal.
Click to expand...

Tinnmore, you're being unrealistic as well as childlike. If you paid attention to Rocco you could pass 3d grade easily.


----------



## P F Tinmore

RoccoR said:


> P F Tinmore,  _et al,_
> 
> The Palestinians are terrorists.
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> 
> I know how this plays out with you.  You're going to argue that Israel is in Palestine.
> 
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> You're argument follows:
> 
> Article 13 HAMAS Covenant contention that:  "Initiatives, and so-called peaceful solutions and international conferences, are in contradiction to the principles of the Islamic Resistance Movement."
> 
> Article 20 PNA Charter contention that:  "The Balfour Declaration, the Palestine Mandate, and everything that has been based on them, are deemed null and void."
> 
> Article 21 PNA Charter contention that:  "The Arab Palestinian people, expressing themselves by armed Palestinian revolution, reject all solutions which are substitutes for the total liberation of Palestine and reject all proposals aimed at the liquidation of the Palestinian cause, or at its internationalization."​
> You don't recognize the evolution of the territorial control.  So, there is no need to pursue it.
> 
> Most Respectfully,
> R
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I'm sorry. I don't see how that relates to my question.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> Your question was:
> 
> While Israel does not have any terrorist organizations today, the HoAP pledges to violate law:
> "There is no solution for the Palestinian question except through Jihad."
> "Armed struggle is the only way to liberate Palestine." ... ... ... the "Commando (Feday'ee) action constitutes the nucleus of the Palestinian popular liberation war."​
> *Q:  OK, so how is that applicable to the Palestinians?* _(P F Tinmore)_
> 
> The list of terrorist acts is well documented.  They have a complete history of past behaviors that is indisputable, internationally and territorially; against the sovereignty of the State of Israel, on the High Seas and actions involving air piracy.  They also have a history of indiscriminate rocket fire.
> 
> Both the Izz al-Din al-Qassem (terrorist wing of Hamas) and PIJ (Palestinian Islamic Jihad) are designated terrorist groups by the EU.  HAMAS supports and controls the Izz al-Din al-Qassem Brigade, and the PIJ freely operated from HAMAS controlled territory; and HAMAS provides safe havens.
> 
> Most Respectfully,
> R
Click to expand...


Without having to go back 40 years, what terrorist acts have the Palestinians committed.

They do not attack outside their own territory.

They do not terrorize their people to influence their government's policies.

They do not attack protected persons (commonly called civilians) as defined by the Fourth Geneva Convention.

So give me a few examples.


----------



## Hossfly

P F Tinmore said:


> Hossfly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> Good question.
> 
> He seems to believe the Israeli version.
> 
> 
> 
> But, Tinnie, you believe the Arab version, which is very understandable.  However, I think many of the posters and viewers appreciate the lessons that Rocco is giving us because it is obvious that *he has been studying this issue a long time* and if we all are honest, we will admit that we never studied this as in depth as he has.  I think the viewers realize by now that you don't like to hear what he says, which also is understandable.  I think the only thing that will make you happy is that if Israel ceases to exist, and the Arabs will be in charge of the entire territory which would be called the country of Palestine..
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Indeed, he has the Israeli version down pat.
> 
> Sorry Rocco, nothing personal.
Click to expand...

But, Tinnie, you have the Arab version down pat.  Perhaps you were taught this in a madrassa.  I still think the viewers can ascertain how much Rocco has studied this and you parrot what your other Arab friends and relatives say about Israel and the Jews.  It is obvious that people like you can't bear to see an inch of land in the Middle East governed by Jews.  Geez, even Mohammed said that Israel is for the Jews.


----------



## RoccoR

P F Tinmore,  _et al,_

Oh, I don't take it personally.



P F Tinmore said:


> Indeed, he has the Israeli version down pat.
> 
> Sorry Rocco, nothing personal.


*(COMMENT)*

I suppose, if you search hard enough, you'll be able to find a Posting where I might have cited a pro-Israeli site.  But 98% of the time, I use neutral citations and documents.  Relative to this discussion _(pertaining to Israeli Sovereignty or borders and Palestinian Terrorism)_, I have never used a pro-Israel approach or citation.  I have used, almost exclusively, UN documents or official documents from a member of the Arab League or web site; and occasionally something from the open source media.

I'm not at all concerned that someone might challenge my integrity.

Most Respectfully,
R


----------



## P F Tinmore

RoccoR said:


> P F Tinmore,  _et al,_
> 
> Oh, I don't take it personally.
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> Indeed, he has the Israeli version down pat.
> 
> Sorry Rocco, nothing personal.
> 
> 
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> I suppose, if you search hard enough, you'll be able to find a Posting where I might have cited a pro-Israeli site.  But 98% of the time, *I use neutral citations and documents.  Relative to this discussion *_(pertaining to Israeli Sovereignty or borders and Palestinian Terrorism)_, I have never used a pro-Israel approach or citation.  I have used, almost exclusively, UN documents or official documents from a member of the Arab League or web site; and occasionally something from the open source media.
> 
> I'm not at all concerned that someone might challenge my integrity.
> 
> Most Respectfully,
> R
Click to expand...


I am not questioning your sources. I question the relevancy.

Your last UN link ( United Nations General Assembly Adopts Global Counter-Terrorism Strategy - United Nations Action to Counter Terrorism ) was about international terrorism. How does that apply to the Palestinians who have not attacked outside their own territory for 40 years?


----------



## RoccoR

P F Tinmore, _et al,_

And here is the circle I was telling you about.



P F Tinmore said:


> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore,  _et al,_
> 
> Oh, I don't take it personally.
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> Indeed, he has the Israeli version down pat.
> 
> Sorry Rocco, nothing personal.
> 
> 
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> I suppose, if you search hard enough, you'll be able to find a Posting where I might have cited a pro-Israeli site.  But 98% of the time, *I use neutral citations and documents.  Relative to this discussion *_(pertaining to Israeli Sovereignty or borders and Palestinian Terrorism)_, I have never used a pro-Israel approach or citation.  I have used, almost exclusively, UN documents or official documents from a member of the Arab League or web site; and occasionally something from the open source media.
> 
> I'm not at all concerned that someone might challenge my integrity.
> 
> Most Respectfully,
> R
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I am not questioning your sources. I question the relevancy.
> 
> Your last UN link ( United Nations General Assembly Adopts Global Counter-Terrorism Strategy - United Nations Action to Counter Terrorism ) was about international terrorism. How does that apply to the Palestinians who have not attacked outside their own territory for 40 years?
Click to expand...

*(COMMENT)*

You don't recognize Israel as an Independent sovereign state.  You still think it is Palestine.

So we end the discussion here; as I said in Post # 686.  You are following HAMAS and PNA doctrine.



			
				DECLARATION ON PRINCIPLES OF INTERNATIONAL LAW FRIENDLY RELATIONS AND CO-OPERATION AMONG STATES IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE CHARTER OF THE UNITED NATIONS  said:
			
		

> Every State likewise has the duty to refrain from the threat or *use of force to violate international lines of demarcation*, such as armistice lines, established by or pursuant to an international agreement to which it is a party or which it is otherwise bound to respect. Nothing in the foregoing shall be construed as prejudicing the positions of the parties concerned with regard to the status and effects of such lines under their special regimes or as affecting their temporary character.
> 
> _*SOURCE:*_ Rule of Law -----------> or ----------->  General Assembly resolution 2625 (XXXV) of 24 October 1970



I think it depends on whether you read and understand the law, or, HAMAS.  But any attack on Israel is "international."  This is why the Palestinians need contained and quarantined.

Most Respectfully,
R


----------



## P F Tinmore

RoccoR said:


> P F Tinmore, _et al,_
> 
> And here is the circle I was telling you about.
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore,  _et al,_
> 
> Oh, I don't take it personally.
> 
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> I suppose, if you search hard enough, you'll be able to find a Posting where I might have cited a pro-Israeli site.  But 98% of the time, *I use neutral citations and documents.  Relative to this discussion *_(pertaining to Israeli Sovereignty or borders and Palestinian Terrorism)_, I have never used a pro-Israel approach or citation.  I have used, almost exclusively, UN documents or official documents from a member of the Arab League or web site; and occasionally something from the open source media.
> 
> I'm not at all concerned that someone might challenge my integrity.
> 
> Most Respectfully,
> R
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I am not questioning your sources. I question the relevancy.
> 
> Your last UN link ( United Nations General Assembly Adopts Global Counter-Terrorism Strategy - United Nations Action to Counter Terrorism ) was about international terrorism. How does that apply to the Palestinians who have not attacked outside their own territory for 40 years?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> You don't recognize Israel as an Independent sovereign state.  You still think it is Palestine.
> 
> So we end the discussion here; as I said in Post # 686.  You are following HAMAS and PNA doctrine.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> DECLARATION ON PRINCIPLES OF INTERNATIONAL LAW FRIENDLY RELATIONS AND CO-OPERATION AMONG STATES IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE CHARTER OF THE UNITED NATIONS  said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Every State likewise has the duty to refrain from the threat or *use of force to violate international lines of demarcation*, such as armistice lines, established by or pursuant to an international agreement to which it is a party or which it is otherwise bound to respect. Nothing in the foregoing shall be construed as prejudicing the positions of the parties concerned with regard to the status and effects of such lines under their special regimes or as affecting their temporary character.
> 
> _*SOURCE:*_ Rule of Law -----------> or ----------->  General Assembly resolution 2625 (XXXV) of 24 October 1970
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I think it depends on whether you read and understand the law, or, HAMAS.  But any attack on Israel is "international."  This is why the Palestinians need contained and quarantined.
> 
> Most Respectfully,
> R
Click to expand...




> You don't recognize Israel as an Independent sovereign state. You still think it is Palestine.



You are good at documents, Rocco, but you have never posted one showing where Israel has ever legally acquired any territory inside Palestine's international borders.


----------



## Hoffstra

P F Tinmore said:


> You are good at documents, Rocco, but you have never posted one showing where Israel has ever legally acquired any territory inside Palestine's international borders.



The UN recognizes Israel acquisition of land during the 1948 War.


----------



## P F Tinmore

Hoffstra said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> You are good at documents, Rocco, but you have never posted one showing where Israel has ever legally acquired any territory inside Palestine's international borders.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The UN recognizes Israel acquisition of land during the 1948 War.
Click to expand...


The 1949 UN armistice agreements divided Palestine into three areas of occupation. No Palestinian territory was transferred to Egypt, Jordan, or Israel.


----------



## Hoffstra

P F Tinmore said:


> Hoffstra said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> You are good at documents, Rocco, but you have never posted one showing where Israel has ever legally acquired any territory inside Palestine's international borders.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The UN recognizes Israel acquisition of land during the 1948 War.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> The 1949 UN armistice agreements divided Palestine into three areas of occupation. No Palestinian territory was transferred to Egypt, Jordan, or Israel.
Click to expand...


I say again, in 1949 the UN recognized Israel as a member state, within the 1949 armistice lines.


----------



## P F Tinmore

Hoffstra said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Hoffstra said:
> 
> 
> 
> The UN recognizes Israel acquisition of land during the 1948 War.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The 1949 UN armistice agreements divided Palestine into three areas of occupation. No Palestinian territory was transferred to Egypt, Jordan, or Israel.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I say again, in 1949 the UN recognized Israel as a member state, within the 1949 armistice lines.
Click to expand...


On the UN's own map of Israel they have a disclaimer on the validity of territory and borders.


----------



## RoccoR

P F Tinmore, _et al,_

I understand that you don't recognize GA/RES/181(II) or any of the Treaties or Armistice Lines.  After all, it is part of HAMAS and Palestinian Policy.



P F Tinmore said:


> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore, _et al,_
> 
> And here is the circle I was telling you about.
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> I am not questioning your sources. I question the relevancy.
> 
> Your last UN link ( United Nations General Assembly Adopts Global Counter-Terrorism Strategy - United Nations Action to Counter Terrorism ) was about international terrorism. How does that apply to the Palestinians who have not attacked outside their own territory for 40 years?
> 
> 
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> You don't recognize Israel as an Independent sovereign state.  You still think it is Palestine.
> 
> So we end the discussion here; as I said in Post # 686.  You are following HAMAS and PNA doctrine.
> 
> I think it depends on whether you read and understand the law, or, HAMAS.  But any attack on Israel is "international."  This is why the Palestinians need contained and quarantined.
> 
> Most Respectfully,
> R
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You don't recognize Israel as an Independent sovereign state. You still think it is Palestine.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You are good at documents, Rocco, but you have never posted one showing where Israel has ever legally acquired any territory inside Palestine's international borders.
Click to expand...

*(OBSERVATION)*



			
				Security CouncilResolution 242 (1967) said:
			
		

> 1.	Affirms that the fulfilment of Charter principles requires the establishment of a just and lasting peace in the Middle East which should include the application of both the following principles:
> 
> 
> (i)	Withdrawal of Israel armed forces from territories occupied in the recent conflict;
> 
> (ii)	Termination of all claims or states of belligerency and respect for and acknowledgment of the sovereignty, territorial integrity and political independence of every State in the area and their right to live in peace within secure and recognized boundaries free from threats or acts of force;​
> _*SOURCE:*_ S/RES/242  22 November 1967


*(COMMENT)*

FIRST:
If you go to the Web Site for the document, you will find the UN linked the Map for S/RES/242 (1967) to the word "territories;" just as I have, _supra_.​
*NOTE:* _And please, don't use that lame excuse about the Secretariat's disclaimer.  The Secretariat is only saying the map is not their product, and that they are not the proponent (the Security Council).  The map resolution is not sufficient enough to make exact boundaries calls.  _​
SECOND:
Palestine _(The State of)_ only acquired territory on 16 November 1988 when it Declared Independence through the PLO.  Prior to that, Palestine _(The State of)_ did not exist and had no boundaries.​
While it is true that the Territory covered by the Former Mandate of Palestine had boundaries made at the discretion of the Allied Powers _(treaty authority - Article 95)_, the Palestinian had no sovereignty over that territory in trust.  The Palestinian of today has no claim - such as you make - to international boundaries beyond the scope of GA/RES/181(II) as recognized by the PLO in the 1988 Declaration of Independence, and reaffirmed by the Permanent Observer Mission of the State of Palestine to the United Nations; and subsequently modified by wars as documented by S/RES/242 (1967) and the associated map.

Since you frivolously challenge every single document; which documents do you use to substantiate your claims?

Most Respectfully,
R


----------



## P F Tinmore

RoccoR said:


> P F Tinmore, _et al,_
> 
> I understand that you don't recognize GA/RES/181(II) or any of the Treaties or Armistice Lines.  After all, it is part of HAMAS and Palestinian Policy.
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore, _et al,_
> 
> And here is the circle I was telling you about.
> 
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> You don't recognize Israel as an Independent sovereign state.  You still think it is Palestine.
> 
> So we end the discussion here; as I said in Post # 686.  You are following HAMAS and PNA doctrine.
> 
> I think it depends on whether you read and understand the law, or, HAMAS.  But any attack on Israel is "international."  This is why the Palestinians need contained and quarantined.
> 
> Most Respectfully,
> R
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You are good at documents, Rocco, but you have never posted one showing where Israel has ever legally acquired any territory inside Palestine's international borders.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> *(OBSERVATION)*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Security CouncilResolution 242 (1967) said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 1.	Affirms that the fulfilment of Charter principles requires the establishment of a just and lasting peace in the Middle East which should include the application of both the following principles:
> 
> 
> (i)	Withdrawal of Israel armed forces from territories occupied in the recent conflict;
> 
> (ii)	Termination of all claims or states of belligerency and respect for and acknowledgment of the sovereignty, territorial integrity and political independence of every State in the area and their right to live in peace within secure and recognized boundaries free from threats or acts of force;​
> _*SOURCE:*_ S/RES/242  22 November 1967
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> FIRST:
> If you go to the Web Site for the document, you will find the UN linked the Map for S/RES/242 (1967) to the word "territories;" just as I have, _supra_.​
> *NOTE:* _And please, don't use that lame excuse about the Secretariat's disclaimer.  The Secretariat is only saying the map is not their product, and that they are not the proponent (the Security Council).  The map resolution is not sufficient enough to make exact boundaries calls.  _​
> SECOND:
> Palestine _(The State of)_ only acquired territory on 16 November 1988 when it Declared Independence through the PLO.  Prior to that, Palestine _(The State of)_ did not exist and had no boundaries.​
> While it is true that the Territory covered by the Former Mandate of Palestine had boundaries made at the discretion of the Allied Powers _(treaty authority - Article 95)_, the Palestinian had no sovereignty over that territory in trust.  The Palestinian of today has no claim - such as you make - to international boundaries beyond the scope of GA/RES/181(II) as recognized by the PLO in the 1988 Declaration of Independence, and reaffirmed by the Permanent Observer Mission of the State of Palestine to the United Nations; and subsequently modified by wars as documented by S/RES/242 (1967) and the associated map.
> 
> Since you frivolously challenge every single document; which documents do you use to substantiate your claims?
> 
> Most Respectfully,
> R
Click to expand...




> You are good at documents, Rocco, but *you have never posted one showing where Israel has ever legally acquired any territory inside Palestine's international borders.*



Could you point out the document showing where Israel legally acquired any territory inside Palestine's international borders. I think I missed it.


----------



## RoccoR

P F Tinmore, _et al,_

Israeli Declaration of Independence and GA/RES/181(II).



> You are good at documents, Rocco, but *you have never posted one showing where Israel has ever legally acquired any territory inside Palestine's international borders.*





> Could you point out the document showing where Israel legally acquired any territory inside Palestine's international borders. I think I missed it.


*(COMMENT)*

There were no Palestinian Borders to consider.  Israel was not created "inside Palestine's international borders."  The Trust Territory was partitioned and Independence was declared under that boundaries allocated by the Partition Plan.

Most Respectfully,
R


----------



## P F Tinmore

RoccoR said:


> P F Tinmore, _et al,_
> 
> Israeli Declaration of Independence and GA/RES/181(II).
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You are good at documents, Rocco, but *you have never posted one showing where Israel has ever legally acquired any territory inside Palestine's international borders.*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Could you point out the document showing where Israel legally acquired any territory inside Palestine's international borders. I think I missed it.
Click to expand...

*(COMMENT)*

There were no Palestinian Borders to consider.  Israel was not created "inside Palestine's international borders."  The Trust Territory was partitioned and Independence was declared under that boundaries allocated by the Partition Plan.

Most Respectfully,
R

v/r
R[/QUOTE]

Could you quote the passage where Israel acquired territory.


----------



## RoccoR

P F Tinmore, _et al,_

What game are you playing?



P F Tinmore said:


> Could you quote the passage where Israel acquired territory.


*(COMMENT)*

"UNDER PART ONE B FOUR OF RESOLUTION OF GENERAL ASSEMBLY ON NOVEMBER 29TH 1947"

v/r
R


----------



## toastman

Could you quote where it says that Israel needs to 'acquire' territory from the Palestinians (even though they had no sovereignty over the land) in order for the land in which they declared Israel to be in  in 1948 to be legit ?


----------



## P F Tinmore

RoccoR said:


> P F Tinmore, _et al,_
> 
> Israeli Declaration of Independence and GA/RES/181(II).
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You are good at documents, Rocco, but *you have never posted one showing where Israel has ever legally acquired any territory inside Palestine's international borders.*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Could you point out the document showing where Israel legally acquired any territory inside Palestine's international borders. I think I missed it.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> There were no Palestinian Borders to consider.  Israel was not created "inside Palestine's international borders."  The Trust Territory was partitioned and Independence was declared under that boundaries allocated by the Partition Plan.
> 
> Most Respectfully,
> R
Click to expand...


The UN and the partition plan had nothing to do with the creation of Israel. It was a unilateral move.


----------



## toastman

P F Tinmore said:


> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore, _et al,_
> 
> Israeli Declaration of Independence and GA/RES/181(II).
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You are good at documents, Rocco, but *you have never posted one showing where Israel has ever legally acquired any territory inside Palestine's international borders.*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Could you point out the document showing where Israel legally acquired any territory inside Palestine's international borders. I think I missed it.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> There were no Palestinian Borders to consider.  Israel was not created "inside Palestine's international borders."  The Trust Territory was partitioned and Independence was declared under that boundaries allocated by the Partition Plan.
> 
> Most Respectfully,
> R
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> The UN and the partition plan had nothing to do with the creation of Israel. It was a unilateral move.
Click to expand...


The U.N recognized Israel's declaration of independence inside the land allotted to them in the partition plan (among many other countries). Why would the U.N recognize and accept it, if it wasn't legit ?


----------



## P F Tinmore

toastman said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore, _et al,_
> 
> Israeli Declaration of Independence and GA/RES/181(II).
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> There were no Palestinian Borders to consider.  Israel was not created "inside Palestine's international borders."  The Trust Territory was partitioned and Independence was declared under that boundaries allocated by the Partition Plan.
> 
> Most Respectfully,
> R
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The UN and the partition plan had nothing to do with the creation of Israel. It was a unilateral move.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> The U.N recognized Israel's declaration of independence inside the land allotted to them in the partition plan (among many other countries). Why would the U.N recognize and accept it, if it wasn't legit ?
Click to expand...


No they didn't.


----------



## RoccoR

P F Tinmore,  _et al,_

I don't understand.



P F Tinmore said:


> toastman said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> The UN and the partition plan had nothing to do with the creation of Israel. It was a unilateral move.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The U.N recognized Israel's declaration of independence inside the land allotted to them in the partition plan (among many other countries). Why would the U.N recognize and accept it, if it wasn't legit ?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> No they didn't.
Click to expand...

*(QUESTION)*

Who didn't do what?

v/r
R


----------



## toastman

Rocco, did the U.N not recognize Israel's declaration of independence in 1948 ?


----------



## P F Tinmore

RoccoR said:


> P F Tinmore,  _et al,_
> 
> I don't understand.
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> toastman said:
> 
> 
> 
> The U.N recognized Israel's declaration of independence inside the land allotted to them in the partition plan (among many other countries). Why would the U.N recognize and accept it, if it wasn't legit ?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> No they didn't.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> *(QUESTION)*
> 
> Who didn't do what?
> 
> v/r
> R
Click to expand...




> The U.N recognized Israel's declaration of independence inside the land allotted to them in the partition plan...



No they didn't.


----------



## theHawk

What the fuck does it matter what is "legal" as far as the territories goes?

Israel holds it.  If the muslims don't like it, then take it back by force.  So far they haven't.

Israel is hardly the only country to hold territory taken "illegally".


----------



## theliq

theHawk said:


> What the fuck does it matter what is "legal" as far as the territories goes?
> 
> Israel holds it.  If the muslims don't like it, then take it back by force.  So far they haven't.
> 
> Israel is hardly the only country to hold territory taken "illegally".



Correct and you should know Hawk,America is another.


----------



## theHawk

theliq said:


> theHawk said:
> 
> 
> 
> What the fuck does it matter what is "legal" as far as the territories goes?
> 
> Israel holds it.  If the muslims don't like it, then take it back by force.  So far they haven't.
> 
> Israel is hardly the only country to hold territory taken "illegally".
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Correct and you should know Hawk,America is another.
Click to expand...


That's my point.  Every country at one point or another took land from other people.


----------



## docmauser1

P F Tinmore said:


> _Could you point out the document showing where Israel legally acquired any territory inside Palestine's international borders. I think I missed it._


So, who was that sheikh, shakh, emir, pasha, sultan, president, prime-minister of that "state of palestine" to have _international borders_? That info thoroughly we miss.


----------



## theliq

Hossfly said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Hossfly said:
> 
> 
> 
> But, Tinnie, you believe the Arab version, which is very understandable.  However, I think many of the posters and viewers appreciate the lessons that Rocco is giving us because it is obvious that *he has been studying this issue a long time* and if we all are honest, we will admit that we never studied this as in depth as he has.  I think the viewers realize by now that you don't like to hear what he says, which also is understandable.  I think the only thing that will make you happy is that if Israel ceases to exist, and the Arabs will be in charge of the entire territory which would be called the country of Palestine..
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeed, he has the Israeli version down pat.
> 
> Sorry Rocco, nothing personal.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Tinnmore, you're being unrealistic as well as childlike. If you paid attention to Rocco you could pass 3d grade easily.
Click to expand...


Really Hoss my friend...you are being somewhat disingenuous towards my friend Tinnie,you,the Rocc (who I enjoy his postings)and others...hark from the Israeli/Zionist song book which we all know is slanted.(kind word for often,Terrorist and Criminal Acts)

Some feel that 60 years of Murder,Repression and Vilification of the Palestinian People..MEANS NOTHING........IT DOES and it's spurious to say otherwise....you of all people know of the continued degregation sic of the Palestinians,I ,Tinnie and many others have explained this ad-nausum to you and others.

Despite all the negative situations the Palestinians have found themselves in,they more than anyone deserve "A PALESTINE" There is much similarity of the Jews and Palestinians in history.

steven........Shee's I like(love) you all but Fuck I'd like sometimes to crack your heads together,or as a friend would say..."Stick my Prick in your ears and Fuck some sense into you all"

Cut all the Shit and Soon Forward to a Solution....Palestinians have survived.....and like the Jews demand and rightly should have their own Country


----------



## docmauser1

theliq said:


> _...you are being somewhat disingenuous towards my friend Tinnie,you,the Rocc (who I enjoy his postings)and others...hark from the Israeli/Zionist song book which we all know is slanted.(kind word for often,Terrorist and Criminal Acts) Some feel that 60 years of Murder,Repression and Vilification of the Palestinian People..MEANS NOTHING........IT DOES and it's spurious to say otherwise....you of all people know of the continued degregation sic of the Palestinians,I ,Tinnie and many others have explained this ad-nausum to you and others._


Drivel.


----------



## theliq

docmauser1 said:


> theliq said:
> 
> 
> 
> _...you are being somewhat disingenuous towards my friend Tinnie,you,the Rocc (who I enjoy his postings)and others...hark from the Israeli/Zionist song book which we all know is slanted.(kind word for often,Terrorist and Criminal Acts) Some feel that 60 years of Murder,Repression and Vilification of the Palestinian People..MEANS NOTHING........IT DOES and it's spurious to say otherwise....you of all people know of the continued degregation sic of the Palestinians,I ,Tinnie and many others have explained this ad-nausum to you and others._
> 
> 
> 
> Drivel.
Click to expand...


Look Doc,I know you carry Tonnes of Guilt and a Big Chip on your shoulder but your DRIVEL is a reflection of you Sorry,Sad Mind.

Let Us All Pray For THE DOC


----------



## RoccoR

P F Tinmore,  _et al,_

Well, there are views on this.  So, I thought I would drop a couple items.



P F Tinmore said:


> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore,  _et al,_
> 
> I don't understand.
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> No they didn't.
> 
> 
> 
> *(QUESTION)*
> 
> Who didn't do what?
> 
> v/r
> R
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The U.N recognized Israel's declaration of independence inside the land allotted to them in the partition plan...
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> No they didn't.
Click to expand...

*(OBSERVATION)*



			
				UN Recognition of Israel said:
			
		

> Israel became a member of the United Nations on 11 May 1949]
> The preamble to the resolution admitting Israel to United Nations membership specifically referred to Israels undertakings to implement General Assembly resolutions 181 (II) and 194 (III), the two resolutions that formed the centre of the Palestine issue in the United Nations:
> 
> Having received the report of the Security Council on the application of Israel for membership in the United Nations,
> Noting that in the judgement of the Security Council, Israel is a peace-loving State and is able and willing to carry out the obligations contained in the Charter,
> Noting that the Security Council has recommended to the General Assembly that it admit Israel to membership in the United Nations,
> Noting furthermore the declaration by the State of Israel that it unreservedly accepts the obligations of the United Nations Charter and undertakes to honour them from the day when it becomes a Member of the United Nations,
> Recalling its resolutions of 29 November 1947 and 11 December 1948 and taking note of the declarations and explanations made by the representative of the Government of Israel before the ad hoc Political Committee in respect of the implementation of the
> said resolutions,
> 
> The General Assembly,
> 
> Acting in discharge of its functions under Article 4 of the Charter and rule 125 of its rules of procedure,
> 
> 1. Decides that Israel is a peace-loving State which accepts the obligations contained in the Charter and is able and willing to carry out those obligations;
> 
> 2. *Decides to admit Israel to membership in the United Nations.*​
> Source: The Origins and Evolution of the Palestine Problem, 1917-1988,
> United Nations, 1990, p. 144. 1
> 
> *SOURCE:* Page 13 - Chapter 2: The Partition Plan and the end of the British mandate


*(COMMENT)*



			
				Excerpt:  YEARBOOK OF THE UNITED NATIONS 1947-48  On September 16 said:
			
		

> I am convinced, however, that it is possible at this stage to formulate a proposal which, if firmly approved and strongly backed by the General Assembly, would not be forcibly resisted by either side, confident as I am, of course, that the Security Council stands firm in its resolution of 15 July that military action shall not be employed by either party in the Palestine dispute. It cannot be ignored that the vast difference between now and last November is that a war has been started and stopped and that in the intervening months decisive events have occurred.
> *SEVEN BASIC PREMISES*​
> "3. The following seven basic premises form the basis for my conclusions:
> 
> Return to peace
> 
> "(a) Peace must return to Palestine and every feasible measure should be taken to ensure that hostilities will not be resumed and that harmonious relations between Arab and Jew will ultimately be restored.​
> The Jewish State
> 
> *"(b) A Jewish State called Israel exists in Palestine and there are no sound reasons for assuming that it will not continue to do so.*​
> Boundary determination
> 
> "(c) The boundaries of this new State must finally be fixed either by formal agreement between the parties concerned or failing that, by the United Nations.​
> Continuous frontiers
> 
> "(d) Adherence to the principle of geographical homogeneity and integration, which should be the major objective of the boundary arrangements, should apply equally to Arab and Jewish territories, whose frontiers should not, therefore, be rigidly controlled by the territorial arrangements envisaged in the resolution of 29 November.​
> _*SOURCE:*_ 1949.I.13  31 December 1948



The United Nations Mediator on Palestine, Count Folke Bernadotte, recognized Israel.

Most Respectfully,
R


----------



## docmauser1

theliq said:


> docmauser1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> theliq said:
> 
> 
> 
> _...you are being somewhat disingenuous towards my friend Tinnie,you,the Rocc (who I enjoy his postings)and others...hark from the Israeli/Zionist song book which we all know is slanted.(kind word for often,Terrorist and Criminal Acts) Some feel that 60 years of Murder,Repression and Vilification of the Palestinian People..MEANS NOTHING........IT DOES and it's spurious to say otherwise....you of all people know of the continued degregation sic of the Palestinians,I ,Tinnie and many others have explained this ad-nausum to you and others._
> 
> 
> 
> Drivel.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> _Look Doc,I know you carry Tonnes of Guilt and a Big Chip on your shoulder but your DRIVEL is a reflection of you Sorry,Sad Mind. Let Us All Pray For THE DOC_
Click to expand...

Drivel.


----------



## RoccoR

theliq,  _et al,_

You make a number of good points.



theliq said:


> (kind word for often,Terrorist and Criminal Acts)


*(COMMENT)*

I'm not sure you heard this; but I'll say it again:  Neither party has clean hands.  But seriously, there is a history that you cannot deny.  And it is not just Israel and the US that sees the Palestinian Jihadist and the Feday'een in this.  It is documented in both the Covenant and the Charter.  I would hope you are not denying this.

Additionally, I hope you are not suggesting that the PIJ and al-Qassam Brigades are not terrorist.  The entire EU recognizes this.

I don't think anything was said, that isn't documented.



theliq said:


> Some feel that 60 years of Murder,Repression and Vilification of the Palestinian People..MEANS NOTHING........IT DOES and it's spurious to say otherwise....you of all people know of the continued degregation sic of the Palestinians,I ,Tinnie and many others have explained this ad-nausum to you and others.


*(COMMENT)*

As is said, during that 60 years (not all of which has the West Bank and Gaza been under Occupation), the Palestinian established a history and an established pattern of behaviors.  And as has been said:  "Nothing can justify terrorism  ever.  No grievance, no goal, no cause can excuse terrorist acts." _(UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon)_ 

If a Palestinian endorses Jihad and Armed Conflict, they are in effect, encouraging  terrorist acts intended to be committed against other States or their citizens (counter (A/RES/60/288).



theliq said:


> Despite all the negative situations the Palestinians have found themselves in,they more than anyone deserve "A PALESTINE" There is much similarity of the Jews and Palestinians in history.


*(COMMENT)*

I don't think anyone disagrees with this.  The Partition Plan offered that opportunity and the Arab Palestinian and Arab League rejected the plan; opting for war _(trial by combat)_ and lost.

Palestine's Declaration of Independence.  It didn't go unnoticed.

Most Respectfully,
R


----------



## theliq

docmauser1 said:


> theliq said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> docmauser1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Drivel.
> 
> 
> 
> _Look Doc,I know you carry Tonnes of Guilt and a Big Chip on your shoulder but your DRIVEL is a reflection of you Sorry,Sad Mind. Let Us All Pray For THE DOC_
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Drivel.
Click to expand...


Look Doc,I know you carry tonnes etc.,

Let Us All Drivel for the DOC


----------



## toastman

P F Tinmore said:


> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore,  _et al,_
> 
> I don't understand.
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> No they didn't.
> 
> 
> 
> *(QUESTION)*
> 
> Who didn't do what?
> 
> v/r
> R
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The U.N recognized Israel's declaration of independence inside the land allotted to them in the partition plan...
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> No they didn't.
Click to expand...


They became a full member of the UN one year after declaring independence. That's all the recognition they need, in my opinion


----------



## toastman

Hoffstra said:


> toastman said:
> 
> 
> 
> They offered 97% of the West Bank to the Palestinians in 2000 and 95% in 2008.
> 
> Hamas and many Gazans do't want peace, they want victory
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Liar.
> 
> Israel was to hold the Jordan Valley for more than a decade under the 2000 offer.
> 
> giving the Palestinians much less than 97%.
Click to expand...


Irrelevant, because when Arafat declined the offer , he said nothing about the Jordan Valley not being part of the deal.


----------



## toastman

P F Tinmore said:


> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore, _et al,_
> 
> Israeli Declaration of Independence and GA/RES/181(II).
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You are good at documents, Rocco, but *you have never posted one showing where Israel has ever legally acquired any territory inside Palestine's international borders.*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Could you point out the document showing where Israel legally acquired any territory inside Palestine's international borders. I think I missed it.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> There were no Palestinian Borders to consider.  Israel was not created "inside Palestine's international borders."  The Trust Territory was partitioned and Independence was declared under that boundaries allocated by the Partition Plan.
> 
> Most Respectfully,
> R
> 
> v/r
> R
Click to expand...


Could you quote the passage where Israel acquired territory.[/QUOTE]

Could you quote where it says that Israel needs to 'acquire' territory from the Palestinians (even though they had no sovereignty over the land) in order for the land in which they declared Israel to be in in 1948 to be legit ?
Edit/Delete Message


----------



## toastman

P F Tinmore said:


> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore,  _et al,_
> 
> The Palestinians are terrorists.
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> I'm sorry. I don't see how that relates to my question.
> 
> 
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> Your question was:
> 
> While Israel does not have any terrorist organizations today, the HoAP pledges to violate law:
> "There is no solution for the Palestinian question except through Jihad."
> "Armed struggle is the only way to liberate Palestine." ... ... ... the "Commando (Feday'ee) action constitutes the nucleus of the Palestinian popular liberation war."​
> *Q:  OK, so how is that applicable to the Palestinians?* _(P F Tinmore)_
> 
> The list of terrorist acts is well documented.  They have a complete history of past behaviors that is indisputable, internationally and territorially; against the sovereignty of the State of Israel, on the High Seas and actions involving air piracy.  They also have a history of indiscriminate rocket fire.
> 
> Both the Izz al-Din al-Qassem (terrorist wing of Hamas) and PIJ (Palestinian Islamic Jihad) are designated terrorist groups by the EU.  HAMAS supports and controls the Izz al-Din al-Qassem Brigade, and the PIJ freely operated from HAMAS controlled territory; and HAMAS provides safe havens.
> 
> Most Respectfully,
> R
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Without having to go back 40 years, what terrorist acts have the Palestinians committed.
> 
> They do not attack outside their own territory.
> 
> They do not terrorize their people to influence their government's policies.
> 
> They do not attack protected persons (commonly called civilians) as defined by the Fourth Geneva Convention.
> 
> So give me a few examples.
Click to expand...


Very disgusting


----------



## P F Tinmore

RoccoR said:


> P F Tinmore, _et al,_
> 
> And here is the circle I was telling you about.
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore,  _et al,_
> 
> Oh, I don't take it personally.
> 
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> I suppose, if you search hard enough, you'll be able to find a Posting where I might have cited a pro-Israeli site.  But 98% of the time, *I use neutral citations and documents.  Relative to this discussion *_(pertaining to Israeli Sovereignty or borders and Palestinian Terrorism)_, I have never used a pro-Israel approach or citation.  I have used, almost exclusively, UN documents or official documents from a member of the Arab League or web site; and occasionally something from the open source media.
> 
> I'm not at all concerned that someone might challenge my integrity.
> 
> Most Respectfully,
> R
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I am not questioning your sources. I question the relevancy.
> 
> Your last UN link ( United Nations General Assembly Adopts Global Counter-Terrorism Strategy - United Nations Action to Counter Terrorism ) was about international terrorism. How does that apply to the Palestinians who have not attacked outside their own territory for 40 years?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> You don't recognize Israel as an Independent sovereign state.  You still think it is Palestine.
> 
> So we end the discussion here; as I said in Post # 686.  You are following HAMAS and PNA doctrine.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> DECLARATION ON PRINCIPLES OF INTERNATIONAL LAW FRIENDLY RELATIONS AND CO-OPERATION AMONG STATES IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE CHARTER OF THE UNITED NATIONS  said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Every State likewise has the duty to refrain from the threat or *use of force to violate international lines of demarcation*, such as armistice lines, established by or pursuant to an international agreement to which it is a party or which it is otherwise bound to respect. Nothing in the foregoing shall be construed as prejudicing the positions of the parties concerned with regard to the status and effects of such lines under their special regimes or as affecting their temporary character.
> 
> _*SOURCE:*_ Rule of Law -----------> or ----------->  General Assembly resolution 2625 (XXXV) of 24 October 1970
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I think it depends on whether you read and understand the law, or, HAMAS.  But any attack on Israel is "international."  This is why the Palestinians need contained and quarantined.
> 
> Most Respectfully,
> R
Click to expand...


Rocco, you keep dancing around this issue. From* your* link:



> The Jewish State
> 
> "(b) A Jewish State called Israel exists *in Palestine* and there are no sound reasons for assuming that it will not continue to do so.
> 
> Boundary determination
> 
> "(c) The boundaries of this new State must finally be fixed either by *formal agreement between the parties concerned *or failing that, by the United Nations.
> 
> _*SOURCE:*_ 1949.I.13  31 December 1948



The "state" of Israel exists *in Palestine*. The only thing that can change that is a *formal agreement between Israel and Palestine.*

Until such an agreement is made, Israel will continue to sit inside Palestine on Palestinian land by military force.

Now explain how attacks on Israel can be considered international terrorism.


----------



## toastman

Where did you read that it can only change with a formal agreement with Palestine and Israel ?


----------



## Hossfly

toastman said:


> Where did you read that it can only change with a formal agreement with Palestine and Israel ?


I think Tinmore has the rules of this game confused with the UN Resolutions.

Play Imagination: The Game, a free online game on Kongregate


----------



## toastman

I'm still waiting for an answer. I've been asking this question for months now.


----------



## P F Tinmore

toastman said:


> Where did you read that it can only change with a formal agreement with Palestine and Israel ?





> The Jewish State
> 
> "(b) A Jewish State called *Israel *exists *in Palestine* and there are no sound reasons for assuming that it will not continue to do so.
> 
> Boundary determination
> 
> "(c) The boundaries of this new State must finally be fixed either by* formal agreement between the parties concerned* or failing that, by the United Nations.
> 
> 1949.I.13 of 31 December 1948



Please try to keep up.


----------



## toastman

P F Tinmore said:


> toastman said:
> 
> 
> 
> Where did you read that it can only change with a formal agreement with Palestine and Israel ?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Jewish State
> 
> "(b) A Jewish State called *Israel *exists *in Palestine* and there are no sound reasons for assuming that it will not continue to do so.
> 
> Boundary determination
> 
> "(c) The boundaries of this new State must finally be fixed either by* formal agreement between the parties concerned* or failing that, by the United Nations.
> 
> 1949.I.13 of 31 December 1948
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Please try to keep up.
Click to expand...


Interesting. Now read my question again, becasue you didn't answer it. I asked about land, not boundaries


----------



## P F Tinmore

toastman said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> toastman said:
> 
> 
> 
> Where did you read that it can only change with a formal agreement with Palestine and Israel ?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Jewish State
> 
> "(b) A Jewish State called *Israel *exists *in Palestine* and there are no sound reasons for assuming that it will not continue to do so.
> 
> Boundary determination
> 
> "(c) The boundaries of this new State must finally be fixed either by* formal agreement between the parties concerned* or failing that, by the United Nations.
> 
> 1949.I.13 of 31 December 1948
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Please try to keep up.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Interesting. Now read my question again, becasue you didn't answer it. I asked about land, not boundaries
Click to expand...


I answered the one you asked. Which other question was it?

Boundaries define the location of land. Duh!


----------



## toastman

You said 'Palestine' has to transfer land to Israel in order for Israel to acquire land.


----------



## P F Tinmore

toastman said:


> You said 'Palestine' has to transfer land to Israel in order for Israel to acquire land.



Indeed, that is standard international law.


----------



## toastman

P F Tinmore said:


> toastman said:
> 
> 
> 
> You said 'Palestine' has to transfer land to Israel in order for Israel to acquire land.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeed, that is standard international law.
Click to expand...


What law would that be ? 

Also, how could that be true if the Palestinians had no sovereignty over the land. They owned land and lived on it, that's it.


----------



## P F Tinmore

toastman said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> toastman said:
> 
> 
> 
> You said 'Palestine' has to transfer land to Israel in order for Israel to acquire land.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeed, that is standard international law.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> What law would that be ?
> 
> Also, how could that be true if the Palestinians had no sovereignty over the land. They owned land and lived on it, that's it.
Click to expand...


Resolution 181 was a plan to have Palestine give half of its land to Israel. The Palestinians rejected the plan. Case closed. Resolution 181 didn't happen.

Where did the Palestinians get the authority to reject the plan?

You are not a deep thinker, are you?


----------



## toastman

P F Tinmore said:


> toastman said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> Indeed, that is standard international law.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> What law would that be ?
> 
> Also, how could that be true if the Palestinians had no sovereignty over the land. They owned land and lived on it, that's it.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Resolution 181 was a plan to have Palestine give half of its land to Israel. The Palestinians rejected the plan. Case closed. Resolution 181 didn't happen.
> 
> Where did the Palestinians get the authority to reject the plan?
> 
> You are not a deep thinker, are you?
Click to expand...


Holy deflection batman !
The Jews accepted, and the day after the mandate ended, they declared independence, which was recognized by many countries, including the U.S

Anyway, back to my question, what international law were you talking about two posts ago ?


----------



## P F Tinmore

toastman said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> toastman said:
> 
> 
> 
> What law would that be ?
> 
> Also, how could that be true if the Palestinians had no sovereignty over the land. They owned land and lived on it, that's it.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Resolution 181 was a plan to have Palestine give half of its land to Israel. The Palestinians rejected the plan. Case closed. Resolution 181 didn't happen.
> 
> Where did the Palestinians get the authority to reject the plan?
> 
> You are not a deep thinker, are you?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Holy deflection batman !
> The Jews accepted, and the day after the mandate ended, they declared independence, which was recognized by many countries, including the U.S
> 
> Anyway, back to my question, what international law were you talking about two posts ago ?
Click to expand...


Israel declared independence without any land.

The Palestinians declared independence in its own territory in 1948 and was recognized by five states.

Do you have a point?


----------



## toastman

P F Tinmore said:


> toastman said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> Resolution 181 was a plan to have Palestine give half of its land to Israel. The Palestinians rejected the plan. Case closed. Resolution 181 didn't happen.
> 
> Where did the Palestinians get the authority to reject the plan?
> 
> You are not a deep thinker, are you?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Holy deflection batman !
> The Jews accepted, and the day after the mandate ended, they declared independence, which was recognized by many countries, including the U.S
> 
> Anyway, back to my question, what international law were you talking about two posts ago ?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Israel declared independence without any land.
> 
> The Palestinians declared independence in its own territory in 1948 and was recognized by five states.
> 
> Do you have a point?
Click to expand...


how about answering my question, and then we can discuss declaring independence. 
Stop, as you say, dancing around the issue


----------



## P F Tinmore

toastman said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> toastman said:
> 
> 
> 
> Holy deflection batman !
> The Jews accepted, and the day after the mandate ended, they declared independence, which was recognized by many countries, including the U.S
> 
> Anyway, back to my question, what international law were you talking about two posts ago ?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Israel declared independence without any land.
> 
> The Palestinians declared independence in its own territory in 1948 and was recognized by five states.
> 
> Do you have a point?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> how about answering my question, and then we can discuss declaring independence.
> Stop, as you say, dancing around the issue
Click to expand...


It is inadmissible to acquire land through the threat or use of force.

The right to self determination includes the right to territorial integrity.


----------



## toastman

P F Tinmore said:


> toastman said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> Israel declared independence without any land.
> 
> The Palestinians declared independence in its own territory in 1948 and was recognized by five states.
> 
> Do you have a point?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> how about answering my question, and then we can discuss declaring independence.
> Stop, as you say, dancing around the issue
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> It is inadmissible to acquire land through the threat or use of force.
> 
> The right to self determination includes the right to territorial integrity.
Click to expand...


There was no use of force when Israel declared independence .

You still didn't answer my question . If you can;t answer it, just say so, I don't care. I'm not gonna make fun of you or anything . 
I've admitted to you several times in the past that I was unable to provide a link for my claim. No big deal ffs!


----------



## P F Tinmore

toastman said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> toastman said:
> 
> 
> 
> how about answering my question, and then we can discuss declaring independence.
> Stop, as you say, dancing around the issue
> 
> 
> 
> 
> It is inadmissible to acquire land through the threat or use of force.
> 
> The right to self determination includes the right to territorial integrity.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> *There was no use of force when Israel declared independence .*
> 
> You still didn't answer my question . If you can;t answer it, just say so, I don't care. I'm not gonna make fun of you or anything .
> I've admitted to you several times in the past that I was unable to provide a link for my claim. No big deal ffs!
Click to expand...


Sure, 750,000 Palestinians left the key in the door and flowers and candy on the pillow when Israel peacefully requested that they leave their homes.


----------



## toastman

P F Tinmore said:


> toastman said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> It is inadmissible to acquire land through the threat or use of force.
> 
> The right to self determination includes the right to territorial integrity.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *There was no use of force when Israel declared independence .*
> 
> You still didn't answer my question . If you can;t answer it, just say so, I don't care. I'm not gonna make fun of you or anything .
> I've admitted to you several times in the past that I was unable to provide a link for my claim. No big deal ffs!
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Sure, 750,000 Palestinians left the key in the door and flowers and candy on the pillow when Israel peacefully requested that they leave their homes.
Click to expand...


You know full well that Israel did not expel all of them. 

SO back to that international law you were talking about.... Anything ???!??!


----------



## P F Tinmore

toastman said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> toastman said:
> 
> 
> 
> *There was no use of force when Israel declared independence .*
> 
> You still didn't answer my question . If you can;t answer it, just say so, I don't care. I'm not gonna make fun of you or anything .
> I've admitted to you several times in the past that I was unable to provide a link for my claim. No big deal ffs!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sure, 750,000 Palestinians left the key in the door and flowers and candy on the pillow when Israel peacefully requested that they leave their homes.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You know full well that Israel did expel all of them.
> 
> SO back to that international law you were talking about.... Anything ???!??!
Click to expand...


Cognitive dissonance extraordinaire.


----------



## toastman

Figures. You got nothing. 

BTW, how did the Palestinians acquire land ?


----------



## toastman

Whoops, I wrote Israel did expel all of them lol.

Corrected


----------



## P F Tinmore

toastman said:


> Figures. You got nothing.
> 
> BTW, how did the Palestinians acquire land ?



All of the people whose normal residence was inside the territories defined after WWI became citizens of their respective territories.


----------



## docmauser1

P F Tinmore said:


> _The "state" of Israel exists in Palestine. The only thing that can change that is a formal agreement between Israel and Palestine._


So, who was that sheikh, shakh, emir, pasha, sultan, president, prime-minister of that "state of palestine"? That info thoroughly we miss.


----------



## RoccoR

P F Tinmore,  _et al,_

I think you misread that.



P F Tinmore said:


> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore, _et al,_
> 
> And here is the circle I was telling you about.
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> I am not questioning your sources. I question the relevancy.
> 
> Your last UN link ( United Nations General Assembly Adopts Global Counter-Terrorism Strategy - United Nations Action to Counter Terrorism ) was about international terrorism. How does that apply to the Palestinians who have not attacked outside their own territory for 40 years?
> 
> 
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> You don't recognize Israel as an Independent sovereign state.  You still think it is Palestine.
> 
> So we end the discussion here; as I said in Post # 686.  You are following HAMAS and PNA doctrine.
> 
> I think it depends on whether you read and understand the law, or, HAMAS.  But any attack on Israel is "international."  This is why the Palestinians need contained and quarantined.
> 
> Most Respectfully,
> R
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Rocco, you keep dancing around this issue. From* your* link:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Jewish State
> 
> "(b) A Jewish State called Israel exists *in Palestine* and there are no sound reasons for assuming that it will not continue to do so.
> 
> Boundary determination
> 
> "(c) The boundaries of this new State must finally be fixed either by *formal agreement between the parties concerned *or failing that, by the United Nations.
> 
> _*SOURCE:*_ 1949.I.13  31 December 1948
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> The "state" of Israel exists *in Palestine*. The only thing that can change that is a *formal agreement between Israel and Palestine.*
Click to expand...

*(COMMENT)*

Clear it implies a "Jewish State."  It does not imply a "Palestinian State;" nor did it intend to.  The Armistice Arrangements were made with Lebanon, Syria, Jordan, and Egypt.  There was no Armistice with the Palestinians because there was no State of Palestine to have a government.



P F Tinmore said:


> Until such an agreement is made, Israel will continue to sit inside Palestine on Palestinian land by military force.


*(COMMENT)*

Israel sits on top of what was known as the Territory under the former Mandate of Palestine.  At the time of the 1948 War, the 1967 War and even the 1973 War, there was no "State of Palestine."



P F Tinmore said:


> Now explain how attacks on Israel can be considered international terrorism.


*(COMMENT)*

Easy, there is a State of Israel.  There is no State of Palestine except for the 1988 Declaration made by the PLO.  Israel was already established as a State.

Most Respectfully,
R


----------



## toastman

Tinmore, what is your definition  of Terrorism


----------



## toastman

Saying that Israel doesn't exist is for Nazis. That simple.


----------



## Coyote

*Thread has been reopened.  Please try to discuss the topic and not each other.  We are serious about maintaining civil discourse here - further violations will be handled on a case by case basis.*


----------



## RoccoR

toastman,  _et al,_

This is not a criticism; but, I'm not sure this is a fair question.  To the Western World it is a Catch 22.



toastman said:


> Tinmore, what is your definition  of Terrorism


*(OBSERVATION)*



			
				THE ARAB CONVENTION FOR THE SUPPRESSION OF TERRORISM said:
			
		

> *Preamble*
> 
> Affirming the right of peoples to combat foreign occupation and aggression by whatever means, including armed struggle, in order to liberate their territories and secure their right to self-determination, and independence and to do so in such a manner as to preserve the territorial integrity of each Arab country, of the foregoing being in accordance with the purposes and principles of the Charter of the United Nations and with the Organization's resolutions.​
> *2. Terrorism*
> 
> Any act or threat of violence, whatever its motives or purposes, that occurs in the advancement of an individual or collective criminal agenda and seeking to sow panic among people, causing fear by harming them, or placing their lives, liberty or security in danger, or seeking to cause damage to the environment or to public or private installations or property or to occupying or seizing them, or seeking to jeopardize a national resources.​
> _*SOURCE:*_ The Arab Convention for the Suppression of Terrorism, adopted by the Council of Arab Ministers of the Interior and the Council of Arab Ministers of Justice. Cairo, April 1998.



*(COMMENT)*

The Arabs have their own ideas on terrorism.  They specifically made it ambiguous enough that it appears to ruled-out the Palestinian Conflict.  They have an agenda to see a continuation of violence localized to that theater.  It is an effective means of concentrating hostile elements that might otherwise create roam astray and initiate internal security problems outside the local and regional area.  None of the Kingdoms wants that.

Technically, the Arab convention approved of "armed struggle" in the "counter-Occupation Movements," which is not the same as clearing the way for terrorism tactics.  It does imply that the "armed struggle" must be IAW the purposes and principles of the Charter and resolutions.

In general, the Arab Convention and the European Union Council Framework Decision of 13 June 2002 on combating terrorism (2002/475/JHA) are not in conflict.  The EU is merely a bit more comprehensive and focused.



			
				Council Framework Decision of 13 June 2002 on combating terrorism said:
			
		

> *Article 1:*  Terrorist offences and fundamental rights and principles
> 
> 1. Each Member State shall take the necessary measures to ensure that the intentional acts referred to below in points (a) to (i), as defined as offences under national law, which, given their nature or context, may seriously damage a country or an international organisation where committed with the aim of:
> 
> 
> - seriously intimidating a population, or
> 
> - unduly compelling a Government or international organisation to perform or abstain from performing any act, or
> 
> - seriously destabilising or destroying the fundamental political, constitutional, economic or social structures of a country or an international organisation,
> shall be deemed to be terrorist offences:
> 
> (a) attacks upon a person's life which may cause death;
> 
> (b) attacks upon the physical integrity of a person;
> 
> (c) kidnapping or hostage taking;
> 
> (d) causing extensive destruction to a Government or public facility, a transport system, an infrastructure facility, including an information system, a fixed platform located on the continental shelf, a public place or private property likely to endanger human life or result in major economic loss;
> 
> (e) seizure of aircraft, ships or other means of public or goods transport;
> 
> (f) manufacture, possession, acquisition, transport, supply or use of weapons, explosives or of nuclear, biological or chemical weapons, as well as research into, and development of, biological and chemical weapons;
> 
> (g) release of dangerous substances, or causing fires, floods or explosions the effect of which is to endanger human life;
> 
> (h) interfering with or disrupting the supply of water, power or any other fundamental natural resource the effect of which is to endanger human life;
> 
> (i) threatening to commit any of the acts listed in (a) to (h).​
> _*SOURCE:*_ Council Framework Decision of 13 June 2002 on combating terrorism



This again, comes in conflict with the HAMAS Covenant and Palestinian National Charter.  It is also in conflict with a Senior Hamas Official explanation: The Resistance Is Entitled To Attack Israel's Embassies, Interests, And Officials Worldwide - And The Interests Of Its Allies, Headed By The U.S. MEMRI.

Most Respectfully,
R


----------



## theliq

RoccoR said:


> toastman,  _et al,_
> 
> This is not a criticism; but, I'm not sure this is a fair question.  To the Western World it is a Catch 22.
> 
> 
> 
> toastman said:
> 
> 
> 
> Tinmore, what is your definition  of Terrorism
> 
> 
> 
> *(OBSERVATION)*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> THE ARAB CONVENTION FOR THE SUPPRESSION OF TERRORISM said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *Preamble*
> 
> Affirming the right of peoples to combat foreign occupation and aggression by whatever means, including armed struggle, in order to liberate their territories and secure their right to self-determination, and independence and to do so in such a manner as to preserve the territorial integrity of each Arab country, of the foregoing being in accordance with the purposes and principles of the Charter of the United Nations and with the Organization's resolutions.​
> *2. Terrorism*
> 
> Any act or threat of violence, whatever its motives or purposes, that occurs in the advancement of an individual or collective criminal agenda and seeking to sow panic among people, causing fear by harming them, or placing their lives, liberty or security in danger, or seeking to cause damage to the environment or to public or private installations or property or to occupying or seizing them, or seeking to jeopardize a national resources.​
> _*SOURCE:*_ The Arab Convention for the Suppression of Terrorism, adopted by the Council of Arab Ministers of the Interior and the Council of Arab Ministers of Justice. Cairo, April 1998.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> The Arabs have their own ideas on terrorism.  They specifically made it ambiguous enough that it appears to ruled-out the Palestinian Conflict.  They have an agenda to see a continuation of violence localized to that theater.  It is an effective means of concentrating hostile elements that might otherwise create roam astray and initiate internal security problems outside the local and regional area.  None of the Kingdoms wants that.
> 
> Technically, the Arab convention approved of "armed struggle" in the "counter-Occupation Movements," which is not the same as clearing the way for terrorism tactics.  It does imply that the "armed struggle" must be IAW the purposes and principles of the Charter and resolutions.
> 
> In general, the Arab Convention and the European Union Council Framework Decision of 13 June 2002 on combating terrorism (2002/475/JHA) are not in conflict.  The EU is merely a bit more comprehensive and focused.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Council Framework Decision of 13 June 2002 on combating terrorism said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *Article 1:*  Terrorist offences and fundamental rights and principles
> 
> 1. Each Member State shall take the necessary measures to ensure that the intentional acts referred to below in points (a) to (i), as defined as offences under national law, which, given their nature or context, may seriously damage a country or an international organisation where committed with the aim of:
> 
> 
> - seriously intimidating a population, or
> 
> - unduly compelling a Government or international organisation to perform or abstain from performing any act, or
> 
> - seriously destabilising or destroying the fundamental political, constitutional, economic or social structures of a country or an international organisation,
> shall be deemed to be terrorist offences:
> 
> (a) attacks upon a person's life which may cause death;
> 
> (b) attacks upon the physical integrity of a person;
> 
> (c) kidnapping or hostage taking;
> 
> (d) causing extensive destruction to a Government or public facility, a transport system, an infrastructure facility, including an information system, a fixed platform located on the continental shelf, a public place or private property likely to endanger human life or result in major economic loss;
> 
> (e) seizure of aircraft, ships or other means of public or goods transport;
> 
> (f) manufacture, possession, acquisition, transport, supply or use of weapons, explosives or of nuclear, biological or chemical weapons, as well as research into, and development of, biological and chemical weapons;
> 
> (g) release of dangerous substances, or causing fires, floods or explosions the effect of which is to endanger human life;
> 
> (h) interfering with or disrupting the supply of water, power or any other fundamental natural resource the effect of which is to endanger human life;
> 
> (i) threatening to commit any of the acts listed in (a) to (h).​
> _*SOURCE:*_ Council Framework Decision of 13 June 2002 on combating terrorism
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> This again, comes in conflict with the HAMAS Covenant and Palestinian National Charter.  It is also in conflict with a Senior Hamas Official explanation: The Resistance Is Entitled To Attack Israel's Embassies, Interests, And Officials Worldwide - And The Interests Of Its Allies, Headed By The U.S. MEMRI.
> 
> Most Respectfully,
> R
Click to expand...


R,sure you are not talking about Israel.....they have a habit and history of going into other Countries to Murder and Abduct people they wish to eliminate.....???? with no compunction

Anyway your comments are becoming irrelevant as both sides will compromise when peace talks become finalized in the future. steve...let us hope so


----------



## P F Tinmore

RoccoR said:


> P F Tinmore,  _et al,_
> 
> I think you misread that.



I don't think so.



> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore, _et al,_
> 
> And here is the circle I was telling you about.
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> You don't recognize Israel as an Independent sovereign state.  You still think it is Palestine.
> 
> So we end the discussion here; as I said in Post # 686.  You are following HAMAS and PNA doctrine.
> 
> I think it depends on whether you read and understand the law, or, HAMAS.  But any attack on Israel is "international."  This is why the Palestinians need contained and quarantined.
> 
> Most Respectfully,
> R
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Rocco, you keep dancing around this issue. From* your* link:
> 
> The "state" of Israel exists *in Palestine*. The only thing that can change that is a *formal agreement between Israel and Palestine.*
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> Clear it implies a "Jewish State."  *It does not imply a "Palestinian State;" nor did it intend to.*  The Armistice Arrangements were made with Lebanon, Syria, Jordan, and Egypt.  There was no Armistice with the Palestinians because there was no State of Palestine to have a government.
Click to expand...


Nor is it relevant to do so.



> *ARTICLE 3*
> 
> The political existence of the state is independent of recognition by the other states. Even before recognition the state has the right to defend its integrity and independence,...
> 
> The Avalon Project : Convention on Rights and Duties of States (inter-American); December 26, 1933



That said, the right to self determination, the right to sovereignty, and the right to territorial integrity predate statehood.



> A people can be said to have *realised its right to self-determination* when they have either (1) established a sovereign and independent state; (2) freely associated with another state or (3) integrated with another state after freely having expressed their will to do so . The definition of realisation of self-determination was confirmed in the Declaration of Friendly Relations .
> 
> The right to self-determination - IHL





> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> Until such an agreement is made, Israel will continue to sit inside Palestine on Palestinian land by military force.
> 
> 
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> Israel sits on top of what was known as the *Territory under the former Mandate of Palestine. * At the time of the 1948 War, the 1967 War and even the 1973 War, there was no "State of Palestine."
Click to expand...


"The former Mandate of Palestine" is a meaningless propaganda term. The mandate was assigned to Palestine and had no land or borders of its own. When the mandate left, Palestine was still there inside its international borders.



> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> Now explain how attacks on Israel can be considered international terrorism.
> 
> 
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> Easy, there is a State of Israel.  There is no State of Palestine except for the 1988 Declaration made by the PLO.  Israel was already established as a State.
Click to expand...


Israel is a foreign state that was created inside Palestine by military force. The Palestinians have the right to defend themselves from such an entity.



> Most Respectfully,
> R


----------



## RoccoR

theliq, _et al,_

In some respects, I think you are correct; although my expectations are not as high as yours.



theliq said:


> R,sure you are not talking about Israel.....they have a habit and history of going into other Countries to Murder and Abduct people they wish to eliminate.....???? with no compunction.


*(COMMENT)*

There are a number of significant powers that have exercised "Extraordinary Rendition" and "Extraterritorial Jurisdiction."  Israel, if they had done such a thing, as is claimed in the post-Massacre Investigation of the Palestinian Terrorist Attack of the 1972 Munich Olympic Team, it is not alone.

Essentially, the US, in the pursuit of justice, ended Osama bin Laden, in the post-911 Investigation, using "Extraterritorial Jurisdiction."  



theliq said:


> Anyway your comments are becoming irrelevant as both sides will compromise when peace talks become finalized in the future. steve...let us hope so


*(COMMENT)*

Yes, my expectations are different.  I too agree that "IF" the current talks are successful, many of the decades old arguments, finger-pointing, and accusations, will be vacated.  In most instances, many of the arguments have been overtaken by events.

I think ALL of us hope that a peaceful solution will be arrived at.  But, the entropy that has been behind the conflict for six decades, will not stop or diminish overnight; even after a peaceful solution is agreed upon.  "Leaving the circle of struggle with Zionism is high treason...   ...   ..."

v/r
R


----------



## docmauser1

P F Tinmore said:


> _The former Mandate of Palestine" is a meaningless propaganda term. The mandate was assigned to Palestine and had no land or borders of its own. When the mandate left, Palestine was still there inside its international borders._


So, who was that sheikh, shakh, emir, pasha, sultan, president, prime-minister of that "state of palestine" to have _international borders_? That info thoroughly we miss.


----------



## P F Tinmore

RoccoR said:
			
		

> THE ARAB CONVENTION FOR THE SUPPRESSION OF TERRORISM said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *Preamble*
> 
> Affirming the right of peoples to combat foreign occupation and aggression by whatever means, including armed struggle, in order to liberate their territories and secure their right to self-determination, and independence and to do so in such a manner as to preserve the territorial integrity of each Arab country, of the foregoing being in accordance with the purposes and principles of the Charter of the United Nations and with the Organization's resolutions.​
Click to expand...


Exactamundo!

This is in complete compliance with international law.


----------



## toastman

P F Tinmore said:


> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore,  _et al,_
> 
> I think you misread that.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I don't think so.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> Clear it implies a "Jewish State."  *It does not imply a "Palestinian State;" nor did it intend to.*  The Armistice Arrangements were made with Lebanon, Syria, Jordan, and Egypt.  There was no Armistice with the Palestinians because there was no State of Palestine to have a government.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Nor is it relevant to do so.
> 
> 
> 
> That said, the right to self determination, the right to sovereignty, and the right to territorial integrity predate statehood.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> "The former Mandate of Palestine" is a meaningless propaganda term. The mandate was assigned to Palestine and had no land or borders of its own. When the mandate left, Palestine was still there inside its international borders.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> Easy, there is a State of Israel.  There is no State of Palestine except for the 1988 Declaration made by the PLO.  Israel was already established as a State.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Israel is a foreign state that was created inside Palestine by military force. The Palestinians have the right to defend themselves from such an entity.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Most Respectfully,
> R
> 
> Click to expand...
Click to expand...


Each of your responses has nothing to do with what Rocco said. It's almost as if you're reading another post lol.

All you're doing is repeating the same shit over and over and over and over and over, thinking you're right.
I think it's time you came up with some new Palestinian propaganda.


----------



## toastman

P F Tinmore said:


> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore,  _et al,_
> 
> I think you misread that.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I don't think so.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> Clear it implies a "Jewish State."  *It does not imply a "Palestinian State;" nor did it intend to.*  The Armistice Arrangements were made with Lebanon, Syria, Jordan, and Egypt.  There was no Armistice with the Palestinians because there was no State of Palestine to have a government.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Nor is it relevant to do so.
> 
> *It is relevant. *
> 
> That said, the right to self determination, the right to sovereignty, and the right to territorial integrity predate statehood.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> "The former Mandate of Palestine" is a meaningless propaganda term. The mandate was assigned to Palestine and had no land or borders of its own. When the mandate left, Palestine was still there inside its international borders.
> *
> How is it a propaganda term ? The British Mandate of Palestine was really there, it really existed. The British won the land over the Ottoman empire during WW1, not the 'Palestinians'. They merely owned land and lived there, but had no sovereignty over their land.*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> Easy, there is a State of Israel.  There is no State of Palestine except for the 1988 Declaration made by the PLO.  Israel was already established as a State.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Israel is a foreign state that was created inside Palestine by military force. The Palestinians have the right to defend themselves from such an entity.
> *
> Show me a link that says 'Israel is a foreign state'. That makes no sense at all. Israel is a globally recognized country and full member of the U.N . Weather you like it or not , Israel is a real country that really exists.
> As for the second sentence, spoken like a true Palestinian propagandist  . They sure have an odd way of defending themselves. *
Click to expand...


----------



## docmauser1

P F Tinmore said:


> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _
> 
> 
> 
> THE ARAB CONVENTION FOR THE SUPPRESSION OF TERRORISM said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Affirming the right of peoples to combat foreign occupation and aggression by whatever means, including armed struggle, in order to liberate their territories and secure their right to self-determination, and independence and to do so in such a manner as to preserve the territorial integrity of each Arab country, of the foregoing being in accordance with the purposes and principles of the Charter of the United Nations and with the Organization's resolutions.​
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> _
> 
> 
> 
> _Exactamundo! This is in complete compliance with international law._
Click to expand...

So, who was that sheikh, shakh, emir, pasha, sultan, president, prime-minister of that "state of palestine" _to liberate their territories_ to have _territorial integrity_? That info exactamundo thoroughly we miss.


----------



## P F Tinmore

Toastman said:
			
		

> Show me a link that says 'Israel is a foreign state'.



Israel was declared inside Palestinian territory by the foreign Jewish Agency that was created in Zurich by the foreign World Zionist Organization. Of the 37 people who signed Israel's declaration of independence, only one was born in Palestine and he was the son of immigrants. The entire planned population were foreign settlers who were imported by the Zionists to populate their planned state.

If you do not agree, show me where I am wrong.


----------



## toastman

P F Tinmore said:


> Toastman said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Show me a link that says 'Israel is a foreign state'.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Israel was declared inside Palestinian territory by the foreign Jewish Agency that was created in Zurich by the foreign World Zionist Organization. Of the 37 people who signed Israel's declaration of independence, only one was born in Palestine and he was the son of immigrants. The entire planned population were foreign settlers who were imported by the Zionists to populate their planned state.
> 
> If you do not agree, show me where I am wrong.
Click to expand...


Ok, show me where it says because of that, Israel is a foreign country.

YOU need to show me a link that suggest this


----------



## P F Tinmore

toastman said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Toastman said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Show me a link that says 'Israel is a foreign state'.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Israel was declared inside Palestinian territory by the foreign Jewish Agency that was created in Zurich by the foreign World Zionist Organization. Of the 37 people who signed Israel's declaration of independence, only one was born in Palestine and he was the son of immigrants. The entire planned population were foreign settlers who were imported by the Zionists to populate their planned state.
> 
> If you do not agree, show me where I am wrong.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Ok, show me where it says because of that, Israel is a foreign country.
> 
> YOU need to show me a link that suggest this
Click to expand...


Do your own homework. It is all a matter of history. Look it up.


----------



## toastman

Figures, you have no link. You based your claim on research you have done. You came up with the conclusion. It is your opinion, not a fact. 
If Israel is a foreign country (which to me makes no sense), then I would imagine there would be prerequisites for them to be one. But with no link to back it up, it's just your opinion.


----------



## P F Tinmore

toastman said:


> Figures, you have no link. You based your claim on research you have done. You came up with the conclusion. It is your opinion, not a fact.
> If Israel is a foreign country (which to me makes no sense), then I would imagine there would be prerequisites for them to be one. But with no link to back it up, it's just your opinion.



When I refute a post, I look up my own material.

You are an adult. You do the same. It is not my job to educate you.


----------



## toastman

P F Tinmore said:


> toastman said:
> 
> 
> 
> Figures, you have no link. You based your claim on research you have done. You came up with the conclusion. It is your opinion, not a fact.
> If Israel is a foreign country (which to me makes no sense), then I would imagine there would be prerequisites for them to be one. But with no link to back it up, it's just your opinion.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> When I refute a post, I look up my own material.
> 
> You are an adult. You do the same. It is not my job to educate you.
Click to expand...


All I did was ask for a link to back up your claim. You do it all the time


----------



## P F Tinmore

toastman said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> toastman said:
> 
> 
> 
> Figures, you have no link. You based your claim on research you have done. You came up with the conclusion. It is your opinion, not a fact.
> If Israel is a foreign country (which to me makes no sense), then I would imagine there would be prerequisites for them to be one. But with no link to back it up, it's just your opinion.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> When I refute a post, I look up my own material.
> 
> You are an adult. You do the same. It is not my job to educate you.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> All I did was ask for a link to back up your claim. You do it all the time
Click to expand...




> David Ben-Gurion, the Executive Head of the World Zionist Organization[2][3] and the chairman of the Jewish Agency for Palestine,[4] declared the establishment of a Jewish state in Eretz-Israel, to be known as the State of Israel.[5]
> 
> Israeli Declaration of Independence - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia





> In 1929, the Jewish Agency for Palestine was officially created by the 16th Zionist Congress, held in Zurich, Switzerland.
> 
> Jewish Agency for Israel - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia



Learn to use Google. Geesh!


----------



## docmauser1

P F Tinmore said:


> Toastman said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _Show me a link that says 'Israel is a foreign state'._
> 
> 
> 
> _Israel was declared inside Palestinian territory by the foreign Jewish Agency that was created in Zurich by the foreign World Zionist Organization._
Click to expand...

So, who was that sheikh, shakh, emir, pasha, sultan, president, prime-minister of that "state of palestine" to have territory as its own? That info exactamundo thoroughly we miss.


P F Tinmore said:


> _Of the 37 people who signed Israel's declaration of independence, only one was born in Palestine and he was the son of immigrants. The entire planned population were foreign settlers who were imported by the Zionists to populate their planned state._


"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." Winnie Churchill.
Major immigrant arab settlers calling others settlers, of course.


----------



## P F Tinmore

docmauser1 said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Toastman said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _Show me a link that says 'Israel is a foreign state'._
> 
> 
> 
> _Israel was declared inside Palestinian territory by the foreign Jewish Agency that was created in Zurich by the foreign World Zionist Organization._
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> So, who was that sheikh, shakh, emir, pasha, sultan, president, prime-minister of that "state of palestine" to have territory as its own? That info exactamundo thoroughly we miss.
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> _Of the 37 people who signed Israel's declaration of independence, only one was born in Palestine and he was the son of immigrants. The entire planned population were foreign settlers who were imported by the Zionists to populate their planned state._
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> "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." Winnie Churchill.
> Major immigrant arab settlers calling others settlers, of course.
Click to expand...


The Arab population *declined *from about 93% at the turn of the century to about 65% by 1948.

Old Winney was full of shit.

After WWII the voters soundly bounced his dumb ass.


----------



## docmauser1

P F Tinmore said:


> docmauser1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> Israel was declared inside Palestinian territory by the foreign Jewish Agency that was created in Zurich by the foreign World Zionist Organization.[/i]
> 
> 
> 
> So, who was that sheikh, shakh, emir, pasha, sultan, president, prime-minister of that "state of palestine" to have territory as its own? That info exactamundo thoroughly we miss.
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> _Of the 37 people who signed Israel's declaration of independence, only one was born in Palestine and he was the son of immigrants. The entire planned population were foreign settlers who were imported by the Zionists to populate their planned state._
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> "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." Winnie Churchill.
> Major immigrant arab settlers calling others settlers, of course.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> _The Arab population declined from about 93% at the turn of the century to about 65% by 1948._
Click to expand...


"The lowest estimates claim there were about 410,000 Arab Muslims and Christians in Palestine in 1893. A Zionist estimate claimed there were over 600,000 Arabs in Palestine."
"Every indication is that there was net Arab immigration into Palestine in this period, and that the economic situation of Palestinian Arabs improved tremendously under the British Mandate relative to surrounding countries. By 1948, there were approximately 1.35 million Arabs and 650,000 Jews living between the Jordan and the Mediterranean, more Arabs than had ever lived in Palestine before, and more Jews than had lived there since Roman times."
Ami Isseroff can be trusted on this, of course.


P F Tinmore said:


> _Old Winney was full of shit._


Exposing major immigrant nature of palistanians is politically incorrect, indeed.


P F Tinmore said:


> _After WWII the voters soundly bounced his dumb ass._


A bit of history for the ignorant arab sector on it


----------



## Hossfly

The title of the OP is: Is Israel The Same As South Africa

The OP is based on an anti-Zionist propaganda site

Let us get back to the subject of the OP

Play by the rules and mind your manners

Now, why is Israel the same as South Africa?  Anyone?


----------



## Sweet_Caroline

Hossfly said:


> The title of the OP is: Is Israel The Same As South Africa
> 
> The OP is based on an anti-Zionist propaganda site
> 
> Let us get back to the subject of the OP
> 
> Play by the rules and mind your manners
> 
> Now, why is Israel the same as South Africa?  Anyone?



Umm,

Nice weather?


----------



## Coyote

Israel is not "the same" as South Africa, but there are similarities in that there are genuine inequities based solely on ethnic identity and those include the distribution of infrastructure, process of granting permits for expansion or new settlements, the judicial system where crimes against Palestinians are seldom rigorously prosecuted and culprits brought to justice as well as abusive practices towards Palestinian children who end up incarcerated.  When you add to that the attitudes of many Israeli's towards Palestinians - attitudes that have resulted in violent attacks recently and a serious alarm from Israeli leading figures - you can see why some call it "apartheid".  

Israel is recognizing that it does have real concerns here and taking action to try and resolve them.  That speaks volumes about it's overall society and puts it ahead of it's neighbors.  I hope we see change towards greater equality for all continue.


----------



## RoccoR

P F Tinmore,  _et al,_

Yes, this is often latched-on to by regional terrorists.



P F Tinmore said:


> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> THE ARAB CONVENTION FOR THE SUPPRESSION OF TERRORISM said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *Preamble*
> 
> Affirming the right of peoples to combat foreign occupation and aggression by whatever means, including armed struggle, in order to liberate their territories and secure their right to self-determination, and independence and to do so in such a manner as to preserve the territorial integrity of each Arab country, of the foregoing being in accordance with the purposes and principles of the Charter of the United Nations and with the Organization's resolutions.​
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Exactamundo!
> 
> This is in complete compliance with international law.
Click to expand...

*(COMMENT)*

While the "Preamble" is in compliance, the "Preamble" does not authorize "terrorism."  That is because the "purposes and principles of the Charter of the United Nations and with the Organization's resolutions" do not authorize "terrorism."



			
				UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon said:
			
		

> Nothing can justify terrorism  ever.  No grievance, no goal, no cause can excuse terrorist acts.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Resolution adopted by the General Assembly 60/288. The United Nations Global Counter-Terrorism Strategy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Guided by the *purposes and principles of the Charter of the United Nations*, and reaffirming its role under the Charter, including on questions related to international peace and security,
> 
> Reiterating its strong condemnation of terrorism in all its forms and manifestations, committed by whomever, wherever and for whatever purposes, as it constitutes one of the most serious threats to international peace and security,
> 
> _*SOURCE:*_ A/RES/60/288
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _*SOURCE:*_ Secretary-General  SG/SM/14764  SC/10883
Click to expand...


I also found it interesting that you would try to bind the Middle East to a marginalized Western Hemisphere Regional Treaty Law (CONVENTION ON RIGHTS AND DUTIES OF STATES); of which 15 of 35 (nearly half of the Americas) did not sign (plus Paraguay and Peru - original signatories - did not ratify or ultimately accept).  But even it says that a state must have certain characteristics and duties: 


Must have the capacity to enter into relations with the other states.

The Arab Higher Committee was disbanded and reconstituted by the Arab League.  It was then that the Arab Palestinian, through the Arab League puppet of the Arab Higher Committee, rejected the GA/RES/181(II).  The Arab Palestinian had no other independent voice of its own through which it could enter into relations with the other states.​


The exercise of these rights has no other limitation than the exercise of the rights of other states according to international law.

Israel, exercising its right to self-determination, cannot be limited by the Arab Higher Committee _(an instrumentality of foreign powers)_ that would prevent it from becoming its own state.
"In November 1945, *the Arab League reconstituted the Arab Higher Committee* comprising twelve members as the supreme executive body of Palestinian Arabs in the territory of the British Mandate of Palestine."  "SOURCE #1"
The covenant of the League of Arab States, or Arab League, formed in March 1945, contained an annex emphasizing the Arab character of Palestine. The Arab League appointed an Arab Higher Executive for Palestine (the Arab Higher Committee).  SOURCE #2​


The political existence of the state is independent of recognition by the other states.
Even before recognition the state has the right to defend its integrity and independence.

Israel, even before it was declared, had the right to exist and defend its sovereignty under the Convention.  The War of Independence in which the integrity and independence were challenged by external forces, effectively solidified the establishment of the state.​

I could go on, but I see no need.  Under the PNA Charter, and the HAMAS Covenant, this is contrary doctrine.  

Remember, the State of Palestine was not declared until 1988, by the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO).  One of the controversies today about the ability of the State of Palestine and the Arab Palestinians is (again) the "capacity to enter into relations with the other states."  While the PLO acknowledged General Assembly resolution 181 (II) of 1947,  saying "that resolution nevertheless continues to attach conditions to international legitimacy that guarantee the Palestinian Arab people the right to sovereignty and national independence;" there are still Arab Palestinian that insist that the Arab Palestinian have some claim over a "Palestine, with the boundaries it had during the British Mandate" and use it as a basis and justification for over six decades of conflict.  Indeed, the PNA Charter and the HAMAS Covenant say as much.  It is a situation in which the Arab Palestinian people demonstrate that they have no single governmental voice.  

Most Respectfully,
R


----------



## Hossfly

P F Tinmore said:


> docmauser1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> Israel was declared inside Palestinian territory by the foreign Jewish Agency that was created in Zurich by the foreign World Zionist Organization.[/i]
> 
> 
> 
> So, who was that sheikh, shakh, emir, pasha, sultan, president, prime-minister of that "state of palestine" to have territory as its own? That info exactamundo thoroughly we miss.
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> _Of the 37 people who signed Israel's declaration of independence, only one was born in Palestine and he was the son of immigrants. The entire planned population were foreign settlers who were imported by the Zionists to populate their planned state._
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> "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." Winnie Churchill.
> Major immigrant arab settlers calling others settlers, of course.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> The Arab population *declined *from about 93% at the turn of the century to about 65% by 1948.
> 
> Old Winney was full of shit.
> 
> After WWII the voters soundly bounced his dumb ass.
Click to expand...

Tinmore, what does your post have to do with the OP? We're talking about Israel-South Africa here. Take your off-topic discussions to the Conspiricy Theory segment.


----------



## P F Tinmore

RoccoR said:
			
		

> While the "Preamble" is in compliance, the "Preamble" does not authorize "terrorism." That is because the "purposes and principles of the Charter of the United Nations and with the Organization's resolutions" do not authorize "terrorism."



That is true but I am still unclear on how the terrorist label applies to Palestine. You seem to hinge much of your posts on that without being clear on your premise.

Like how can they be labeled international terrorists when they do not leave their own territory? That, on its face, does not make any sense.


----------



## P F Tinmore

> One of the controversies today about the ability of the State of Palestine and the Arab Palestinians is (again) the "capacity to enter into relations with the other states."



You think this is important. BTW, how about a link?

But you think this is irrelevant.



> *ARTICLE 1*
> 
> The state as a person of international law should possess the following qualifications: a ) a permanent population;* b ) a defined territory;* c ) government; and d) capacity to enter into relations with the other states.



edit:



> the "capacity to enter into relations with the other states."


----------



## toastman

P F Tinmore said:


> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> While the "Preamble" is in compliance, the "Preamble" does not authorize "terrorism." That is because the "purposes and principles of the Charter of the United Nations and with the Organization's resolutions" do not authorize "terrorism."
> 
> 
> 
> 
> That is true but I am still unclear on how the terrorist label applies to Palestine. You seem to hinge much of your posts on that without being clear on your premise.
> 
> Like how can they be labeled international terrorists when they do not leave their own territory? That, on its face, does not make any sense.
Click to expand...


Are you saying that Palestinians, weather from Gaza or the West Bank, never commited acts of terrorism ?


----------



## P F Tinmore

toastman said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> While the "Preamble" is in compliance, the "Preamble" does not authorize "terrorism." That is because the "purposes and principles of the Charter of the United Nations and with the Organization's resolutions" do not authorize "terrorism."
> 
> 
> 
> 
> That is true but I am still unclear on how the terrorist label applies to Palestine. You seem to hinge much of your posts on that without being clear on your premise.
> 
> Like how can they be labeled international terrorists when they do not leave their own territory? That, on its face, does not make any sense.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Are you saying that Palestinians, weather from Gaza or the West Bank, never commited acts of terrorism ?
Click to expand...


No, I am asking a question.


----------



## toastman

Oh, alright


----------



## RoccoR

P F Tinmore,  _et al,_

You commit terrorism when you:  "violate international lines of demarcation, such as armistice lines, established by or pursuant to an international agreement to which it is a 
party or which it is otherwise bound to respect."



P F Tinmore said:


> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> While the "Preamble" is in compliance, the "Preamble" does not authorize "terrorism." That is because the "purposes and principles of the Charter of the United Nations and with the Organization's resolutions" do not authorize "terrorism."
> 
> 
> 
> 
> That is true but I am still unclear on how the terrorist label applies to Palestine. You seem to hinge much of your posts on that without being clear on your premise.
> 
> Like how can they be labeled international terrorists when they do not leave their own territory? That, on its face, does not make any sense.
Click to expand...

*(REFERENCE)*

Application of Palestine for admission to membership in the United Nations 23 September 2011

General Assembly of this Declaration in resolution 43/177 of 15 December 1988

Declaration of Independence of the State of Palestine of 15 November 1988

United Nations General Assembly resolution 181 (II) of 29 November 1947
*(SUMMARY)*

After the Jewish Agency accepted the apportionment allocated in GA/RES/181(II), hostilities immediately ensued.   A series of war were fought and Armistice Lines were drawn.  In two cases, Israel concluded treaties with Egypt and Jordan; while 1949 Armistice Line held with Lebanon and Syria.

In November 1988, invoking GA/RES/181(II), the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO) Declared Independence for the State of Palestine and demanded:


(b)	Israel's withdrawal from all the Palestinian and Arab territories which it has occupied since 1967, including Arab Jerusalem;

(c)	Cancellation of all measures of attachment and annexation and removal of the settlements established by Israel in the Palestinian and Arab territories since the year 1967;

In effect, the State of Palestine was confined to Arab territories which were occupied since 1967, and Arab Jerusalem.  In December 1988, the UN Acknowledges the proclamation of the State of Palestine by the Palestine National Council on 15 November 1988; and decides that, effective as of 15 December 1988, the designation "Palestine" should be used in place of the designation "Palestine Liberation Organization."

On 23 September 2011, Mahmoud Abbas, President of the State of Palestine, recalling the 1988 Declaration of Independence, and invoking Part I, Section F (Admission to Membership in the UN), GA/RES/181(II), appealed to the UN for sympathetic consideration for the application of the State of Palestine for admission to the United Nations.  President Abbas asked that bilateral recognition for the State of Palestine be given on the basis of the 4 June 1967 borders, with East Jerusalem as its capital, and the number of such recognitions continues to rise with each passing day.



			
				Declaration on principles of international law concerning friendly relations and cooperation among States in accordance with the Charter of the United Nations) said:
			
		

> Every State likewise has the duty to refrain from the threat or use of force to violate international lines of demarcation, such as armistice lines, established by or pursuant to an international agreement to which it is a party or which it is otherwise bound to respect. Nothing in the foregoing shall be construed as prejudicing the positions of the parties concerned with regard to the status and effects of such lines under their special regimes or as affecting their temporary character.
> 
> *SOURCE:* General Assembly resolution 2625 (XXXV) of 24 October 1970



*(COMMENT)*

Prior to the 1988 Palestinian Declaration of Independence, the Palestinian Terrorist were non-state actors.  After 1988, they became state sponsored terrorist actors; and still are today via the pledges made by the HAMAS Covenant and the Palestinian National Charter.  Neither the Covenant or the Charter recognized the territorial limitation of the State of Palestine as Declared in 1988 and reaffirmed in 2011 in the Application for Admission.  

However, the sovereignty of the State of Israel, with respect to the sovereignty declared by the PLO for the State of Palestine are recognized by international lines of demarcation of one sort or another.  Nor did they respect the Treaty Lines or the Armistice Lines from the previous period.  They are, unquestionably, terrorist that "act or threat of violence, whatever its motives or purposes, that occurs in the advancement of an individual or collective criminal agenda and seeking to sow panic among people, causing fear by harming them, or placing their lives, liberty or security in danger, or seeking to cause damage to the environment or to public or private installations or property or to occupying or seizing them, or seeking to jeopardize a national resources."  Their previous history of past criminal behaviors included (not limited to) while crossing international lines of demarcation:


attacks upon a person's life which may cause death;

attacks upon the physical integrity of a person;

kidnapping or hostage taking;

causing extensive destruction to a Government or public facility, a transport system, an infrastructure facility, including an information system, a fixed platform located on the continental shelf, a public place or private property likely to endanger human life or result in major economic loss;

seizure of aircraft, ships or other means of public or goods transport.

Most Respectfully,
R


----------



## P F Tinmore

Rocco,

Show me where the UN transferred land to Israel under resolution 181.


----------



## P F Tinmore

Rocco,

Are you saying that the West Bank, Gaza, and East Jerusalem is sovereign Palestinian territory?


----------



## RoccoR

P F Tinmore,  _et al,_

Oh!



P F Tinmore said:


> Rocco,
> 
> Show me where the UN transferred land to Israel under resolution 181.
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> Rocco,
> 
> Are you saying that the West Bank, Gaza, and East Jerusalem is sovereign Palestinian territory?
Click to expand...

*(COMMENT)*

These are not real estate deals.  Land transfers are done by sale and treaty.  The creation of a sovereign state is done by declaration under the right of self-determination.  There is no "transfer" --- not for any of the nine Arab States that were created.  The Hejaz was absorb by (eventually) several nations including Egypt, Jordan and (of course Saudi Arabia (which got the lion's share).

Holy Cow, Yes!  The State of Palestine (West Bank, Gaza, and Arab Jerusalem) has been sovereign since 1988.  Where have you been?  However, "Arab Jerusalem" is still up under the ambiguous category.

Please take a moment and read:  Status of Palestine in the United Nations A/RES/67/19 4 December 2012.

Highlights:


Recalling its resolution 181 (II) of 29 November 1947,
Reaffirming ... the right of the Palestinian people to self-determination, including the right to their independent State of Palestine,
Recalling also its resolution 43/177 of 15 December 1988, by which it, inter alia, acknowledged the proclamation of the State of Palestine by the Palestine National Council on 15 November 1988 and decided that the designation Palestine should be used in place of the designation Palestine Liberation Organization in the United Nations system, without prejudice to the observer status and functions of the Palestine Liberation Organization within the United Nations system,
Reaffirms the right of the Palestinian people to self-determination and to independence in their State of Palestine on the Palestinian territory occupied since 1967;

Now I did say that Jerusalem was an ambiguous case:


Reaffirming further its resolution 66/18 of 30 November 2011 and all relevant resolutions regarding the status of Jerusalem, *bearing in mind that the annexation of East Jerusalem is not recognized by the international community*, and emphasizing the need for a way to be found through negotiations to resolve the status of Jerusalem as the capital of two States,

Most Respectfully,
R


----------



## P F Tinmore

RoccoR said:
			
		

> Holy Cow, Yes! The State of Palestine (West Bank, Gaza, and Arab Jerusalem) has been sovereign since 1988. Where have you been? However, "Arab Jerusalem" is still up under the ambiguous category.



What is different about Palestine's declaration of 1988 and its declaration of 1948?

Why is one mentioned and not the other?


----------



## toastman

P F Tinmore said:


> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Holy Cow, Yes! The State of Palestine (West Bank, Gaza, and Arab Jerusalem) has been sovereign since 1988. Where have you been? However, "Arab Jerusalem" is still up under the ambiguous category.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> What is different about Palestine's declaration of 1988 and its declaration of 1948?
> 
> Why is one mentioned and not the other?
Click to expand...


You just answered your own question. There was no officially recognized declaration of independence by the Palestinians in 1948.


----------



## P F Tinmore

RoccoR said:
			
		

> Recalling its resolution 181 (II) of 29 November 1947,



Then:



> Reaffirming further its resolution 66/18 of 30 November 2011 and all relevant resolutions regarding the status of Jerusalem, bearing in mind that the annexation of East Jerusalem is not recognized by the international community, and emphasizing the need for a way to be found through negotiations to resolve the status of Jerusalem as the capital of two States,



1) If there really was a resolution 181, wouldn't Jerusalem be occupied UN territory?

2) If E. Jerusalem is Palestinian territory, what is there to negotiate?


----------



## P F Tinmore

Rocco, from your link A/RES/67/19 of 4 December 2012



> Reaffirming the principle, set out in the Charter, of the inadmissibility of the acquisition of territory by force,



Why do they mention the territory acquired by force in 1967 and not the territory acquired by force in 1948?


----------



## RoccoR

P F Tinmore,  _et al,_

There are a few reasons for that.



P F Tinmore said:


> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Holy Cow, Yes! The State of Palestine (West Bank, Gaza, and Arab Jerusalem) has been sovereign since 1988. Where have you been? However, "Arab Jerusalem" is still up under the ambiguous category.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> What is different about Palestine's declaration of 1988 and its declaration of 1948?
> 
> Why is one mentioned and not the other?
Click to expand...

*(COMMENT)*

First, GA/RES/181(II) was still active and on the table.  Israel had accepted, the newly reconstituted Arab Higher Committee (Arab League) rejected.

Second, with the territory in trusteeship, the trustee would not entertain a second declaration covering the same territory as covered by the GA/RES/181(II) apportionment.

Third, on the Declaration of Independence for the State of Israel (MAY), War broke-out and the Partition Plan was held in abeyance.   By the time of the Armistice, territorial lines had changed and the Israeli areas of control had expanded.  This outcome then took precedence over the Arab SEPTEMBER declaration and war of aggression.  The Arab's were not to be rewarded for their defiance of the UN Trusteeship in their attempt to take by military force _(acquisition by conquest)_ what was beyond the GA/RES/181(II) apportionment. 

Most Respectfully,
R


----------



## RoccoR

P F Tinmore,  _et al,_

You are very close.



P F Tinmore said:


> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Recalling its resolution 181 (II) of 29 November 1947,
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Then:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Reaffirming further its resolution 66/18 of 30 November 2011 and all relevant resolutions regarding the status of Jerusalem, bearing in mind that the annexation of East Jerusalem is not recognized by the international community, and emphasizing the need for a way to be found through negotiations to resolve the status of Jerusalem as the capital of two States,
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 1) If there really was a resolution 181, wouldn't Jerusalem be occupied UN territory?
> 
> 2) If E. Jerusalem is Palestinian territory, what is there to negotiate?
Click to expand...

*(COMMENT)*

GA/RES/181(II) did exist _(and to a degree still active)_.  And Jerusalem _(technically UN Trusteeship territory)_ was occupied from 1948-to-1967 by the Arab Legion of Jordan.  In 1967, Jerusalem was quasi-Liberated but not relinquished by Israeli forces.

It appears that East Jerusalem is not recognized as Palestinian territory.  However, the wording suggest that the finality is in abeyance (some what ambiguous); possibly waiting negotiated outcomes.

Most Respectfully,
R


----------



## P F Tinmore

RoccoR said:


> P F Tinmore,  _et al,_
> 
> There are a few reasons for that.
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Holy Cow, Yes! The State of Palestine (West Bank, Gaza, and Arab Jerusalem) has been sovereign since 1988. Where have you been? However, "Arab Jerusalem" is still up under the ambiguous category.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> What is different about Palestine's declaration of 1988 and its declaration of 1948?
> 
> Why is one mentioned and not the other?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> First, GA/RES/181(II) was still active and on the table.  Israel had accepted, the newly reconstituted Arab Higher Committee (Arab League) rejected.
Click to expand...


Resolution 181 had to be recognized by both sides. If only one side accepts an agreement, there is no agreement. Your reason is false.



> Second, with the territory in trusteeship, the trustee would not entertain a second declaration covering the same territory as covered by the GA/RES/181(II) apportionment.



Do you have a link for that? The UN did not recognize Israel in the 1949 armistice agreements which were 6 months after the Palestinian declaration. Even when the UN did recognize Israel it was not on the 181 proposed territory and Jerusalem was not the international city. More evidence that there was no resolution 181.



> Third, on the Declaration of Independence for the State of Israel (MAY), War broke-out and the Partition Plan was held in abeyance.   By the time of the Armistice, territorial lines had changed and the Israeli areas of control had expanded.  This outcome then took precedence over the Arab SEPTEMBER declaration and war of aggression.  The Arab's were not to be rewarded for their defiance of the UN Trusteeship in their attempt to take by military force _(acquisition by conquest)_ what was beyond the GA/RES/181(II) apportionment.



Here again you are talking about the resolution that wasn't.

You need to rethink that war of aggression, Israeli propaganda schtick.



> Most Respectfully,
> R


----------



## P F Tinmore

RoccoR said:


> P F Tinmore,  _et al,_
> 
> You are very close.
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Recalling its resolution 181 (II) of 29 November 1947,
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Then:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Reaffirming further its resolution 66/18 of 30 November 2011 and all relevant resolutions regarding the status of Jerusalem, bearing in mind that the annexation of East Jerusalem is not recognized by the international community, and emphasizing the need for a way to be found through negotiations to resolve the status of Jerusalem as the capital of two States,
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 1) If there really was a resolution 181, wouldn't Jerusalem be occupied UN territory?
> 
> 2) If E. Jerusalem is Palestinian territory, what is there to negotiate?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> GA/RES/181(II) did exist _(and to a degree still active)_.  And Jerusalem _(technically UN Trusteeship territory)_ was occupied from 1948-to-1967 by the Arab Legion of Jordan.  In 1967, Jerusalem was quasi-Liberated but not relinquished by Israeli forces.
Click to expand...


That would mean that Israel has been occupying West Jerusalem since 1948.



> It appears that *East Jerusalem is not recognized as Palestinian territory*.  However, the wording suggest that the finality is in abeyance (some what ambiguous); possibly waiting negotiated outcomes.



It is not?



> ...stress the need for the withdrawal of Israel from the* Palestinian territory *occupied since 1967, *including East Jerusalem,...*



Perhaps you should read your own link.



> Most Respectfully,
> R


----------



## Hoffstra

East Jerusalem was "liberated" in 1967?

you cannot liberate something that is not legally yours to begin with.


----------



## MHunterB

Hoffsra, you seem to have forgotten the Jordanian Army shelling civilian neigborhoods in EJ - and forcing out the Jewish residents of those EJ neighborhoods when the fighting stopped, in a well-document (LIFE magazine) instance of ethnic cleansing.

EJ was indeed captured by the Jordanians and remained under *illegal* Jordanian occupation for 19 years - during which time Jews from everywhere in the world were denied access to the Western Wall.

So EJ wasn't really "Palestinian" because the Jordanians controlled it.


----------



## Hoffstra

MHunterB said:


> Hoffsra, you seem to have forgotten the Jordanian Army shelling civilian neigborhoods in EJ - and forcing the J residents of those EJ neighborhoods when the fighting stopped.
> 
> EJ was indeed captured by the Jordanians and remained under *illegal* Jordanian occupation for 19years - during which time Jews from everywhere in the world were denied access to the Western Wall.
> 
> So EJ wasn't really "Palestinian" because the Jordanians controlled it.



the Jordanian occupiation of Arab Palestine was totally legal.

not once did anyone ever accuse Jordan of illegally occupying the West Bank.


----------



## RoccoR

PF Tinmore, _et al,_

Well, this is up to you to read and interpret.



P F Tinmore said:


> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore,  _et al,_
> 
> There are a few reasons for that.
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> What is different about Palestine's declaration of 1988 and its declaration of 1948?
> 
> Why is one mentioned and not the other?
> 
> 
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> First, GA/RES/181(II) was still active and on the table.  Israel had accepted, the newly reconstituted Arab Higher Committee (Arab League) rejected.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Resolution 181 had to be recognized by both sides. If only one side accepts an agreement, there is no agreement. Your reason is false.
Click to expand...

*(COMMENT)*

Not "both" BUT rather "either."  False!  Not likely.



			
				PART I said:
			
		

> F. ADMISSION TO MEMBERSHIP IN THE UNITED NATIONS
> 
> When the independence of *either the Arab or the Jewish State *as envisaged in this plan has become effective and the declaration and undertaking, as envisaged in this plan, have been *signed by either of them*, sympathetic consideration should be given to its application for admission to membership in the United Nations in accordance with Article 4 of the Charter of the United Nations.
> 
> _*SOURCE:*_  GA/RES/181(II)





P F Tinmore said:


> Do you have a link for that? The UN did not recognize Israel in the 1949 armistice agreements which were 6 months after the Palestinian declaration. Even when the UN did recognize Israel it was not on the 181 proposed territory and Jerusalem was not the international city. More evidence that there was no resolution 181.


*(COMMENT)*

References


CABLEGRAM DATED 15 MAY 1948 ADDRESSED TO THE SECRETARY-GENERAL BY FOREIGN SECRETARY OF THE PROVISIONAL GOVERNMENT OF ISRAEL

FOR RECOGNITION AS PROVISIONAL COUNCIL GOVERNMENT UNDER PART ONE B FOUR OF RESOLUTION OF GENERAL ASSEMBLY ON NOVEMBER 29TH 1947 MET YESTERDAY MAY 14TH AND ISSUED PROCLAMATION DECLARING FOLLOWING &#8220;ON NOVEMBER 29 1947 GENERAL ASSEMBLY OF UNITED NATIONS ADOPTED RESOLUTION FOR ESTABLISHMENT OF INDEPENDENT JEWISH STATE IN PALESTINE AND CALLED UPON INHABITANTS OF COUNTRY TO TAKE SUCH STEPS AS MAY BE NECESSARY ON THEIR PART TO PUT THE PLAN INTO EFFECT.​

APPLICATION FOR ADMISSION TO MEMBERSHIP OF THE UNITED NATIONS AND DECLARATION ACCEPTING OBLIGATIONS UNDER THE CHARTER

On May 14 1948, the independence of the State of Israel was proclaimed by the National Council of the Jewish people in Palestine by virtue of the natural and historic right of the Jewish people to independence in its own sovereign State and in pursuance of the General Assembly resolution of November 29, 1947.
...   ...   ...
On behalf of the Provisional Government of Israel, I have now the honour to request the admission of Israel as a Member of the United Nations in accordance with Article 4 of the Charter.​

69 (1949). Resolution of 4 March 1949

Recommends to the General Assembly that it admit Israel to membership in the United Nations,​

Admission of Israel to membership in the United Nations

Decides to admit Israel to membership in the United Nations.​


P F Tinmore said:


> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> 
> Third, on the Declaration of Independence for the State of Israel (MAY), War broke-out and the Partition Plan was held in abeyance.   By the time of the Armistice, territorial lines had changed and the Israeli areas of control had expanded.  This outcome then took precedence over the Arab SEPTEMBER declaration and war of aggression.  The Arab's were not to be rewarded for their defiance of the UN Trusteeship in their attempt to take by military force _(acquisition by conquest)_ what was beyond the GA/RES/181(II) apportionment.
> 
> 
> 
> Here again you are talking about the resolution that wasn't.
> 
> You need to rethink that war of aggression, Israeli propaganda schtick.
Click to expand...

*(COMMENT)*

OK, you can believe what you want to believe.  But it doesn't make you correct.  Documentation is all here, in timeline order.

As far as GA/RES/181(II), I'm sure that President Abbas would cite a Resolution that doesn't matter and ask for admission into the UN under the provisional of this resolution that doesn't matter.  Yeah, that makes sense that in every major document cites this same resolution.

History is what it is.



			
				 UN Document: Part I - History said:
			
		

> *The first Arab-Israeli war, 1948-1949*
> 
> On 14 May 1948, Britain relinquished its Mandate over Palestine and disengaged its forces. On the same day, the Jewish Agency proclaimed the establishment of the State of Israel on the territory allotted to it by the partition plan. Fierce hostilities immediately broke out between the Arab and Jewish communities. The next day, regular troops of the neighbouring Arab States entered the territory to assist the Palestinian Arabs.​
> Between February and July 1949, under United Nations auspices, *armistice  agreements* were signed between Israel, on the one hand, and Egypt, Jordan,  Lebanon and Syria on the other. The agreements, which were similar in general  content, accepted the establishment of the armistice as an indispensable step towards the restoration of peace in Palestine.​
> _*SOURCE:*_ The Question of Palestine and the United Nations



Most Respectfully,
R


----------



## toastman

Tinmore, was there a clause in the 1947 partition plan that said if one side rejects the proposal, then the other side can't establish a country?


----------



## P F Tinmore

RoccoR said:
			
		

> On the same day, the Jewish Agency proclaimed the establishment of the State of Israel on the territory allotted to it by the partition plan.



Israel was ethnic cleansing Palestinians from outside the proposed territory including Jerusalem *before* the 1948 war.

Israel violated three components of resolution 181 before it was mentioned in its declaration.


----------



## toastman

P F Tinmore said:


> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> On the same day, the Jewish Agency proclaimed the establishment of the State of Israel on the territory allotted to it by the partition plan.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Israel was ethnic cleansing Palestinians from outside the proposed territory including Jerusalem *before* the 1948 war.
> 
> Israel violated three components of resolution 181 before it was mentioned in its declaration.
Click to expand...


What you call ethnic cleansing, was actually a civil war. 

1947?48 Civil War in Mandatory Palestine - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

How convenient that you always forget to mention the attacks by the Palestinian Arabs against Jews in their districts


----------



## P F Tinmore

toastman said:


> Tinmore, was there a clause in the 1947 partition plan that said if one side rejects the proposal, then the other side can't establish a country?



I don't recall. I don't think so, but I think it was covered under existing law. The mandate said it did not have the authority to cede land to Israel without Palestinian approval. The Security Council said that they could not enforce the resolution without Palestinian approval.


----------



## toastman

P F Tinmore said:


> toastman said:
> 
> 
> 
> Tinmore, was there a clause in the 1947 partition plan that said if one side rejects the proposal, then the other side can't establish a country?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I don't recall. I don't think so, but I think it was covered under existing law. The mandate said it did not have the authority to cede land to Israel without Palestinian approval. The Security Council said that they could not enforce the resolution without Palestinian approval.
Click to expand...


Hmmm are you sure about that ? Provide the link so we can have a look.


----------



## P F Tinmore

toastman said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> toastman said:
> 
> 
> 
> Tinmore, was there a clause in the 1947 partition plan that said if one side rejects the proposal, then the other side can't establish a country?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I don't recall. I don't think so, but I think it was covered under existing law. The mandate said it did not have the authority to cede land to Israel without Palestinian approval. The Security Council said that they could not enforce the resolution without Palestinian approval.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Hmmm are you sure about that ? Provide the link so we can have a look.
Click to expand...


However, the British did "not feel able to implement" any agreement unless it was acceptable to both the Arabs and the Jews, and asked that the General Assembly provide an alternative implementing authority if that proved to be the case.

When Bevin received the partition proposal, he promptly ordered for it not to be imposed on the Arabs.[53][qt 10] The plan was vigorously debated in the British parliament. Britain ultimately announced that it would accept the partition plan, but refused to implement the plan by force because it was not acceptable to both sides.

United Nations Partition Plan for Palestine - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


----------



## RoccoR

P F Tinmore,  _et al,_

Here again, you are making a mistake in understanding how a state is created.



P F Tinmore said:


> toastman said:
> 
> 
> 
> Tinmore, was there a clause in the 1947 partition plan that said if one side rejects the proposal, then the other side can't establish a country?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I don't recall. I don't think so, but I think it was covered under existing law. The mandate said it did not have the authority to cede land to Israel without Palestinian approval. The Security Council said that they could not enforce the resolution without Palestinian approval.
Click to expand...

*(COMMENT)*

The Mandate to the Mandatory was written by the League of Nations and inherited by the Trustee System of the UN.  While the Mandatory had that limitation, the LoN and UN did not.  By resolution, they could do any number of actions.

However, in this case, the creation of the State of Israel was affected by the right of self-determination.  They declared independence.  The LoN, the UN, or the Mandatory (UK) did not cede any territory.  It went through the process.

Where did the Security Council say they could not enforce the resolution.  They certainly recommended positive action.  



			
				Security Council Resolution 69 of 4 March 1949 said:
			
		

> The Security Council,
> 
> Having received and considered the application of Israel for membership in the United Nations,
> 
> 1.	Decides in its judgement that Israel is a peace-loving State and is able and willing to carry out the obligations contained in the Charter, and accordingly,
> 
> 2.	Recommends to the General Assembly that it admit Israel to membership in the United Nations.​
> _*SOURCE:*_ S/RES/69 (1949) S/1277 4 March 1949



Most Respectfully,
R


----------



## P F Tinmore

RoccoR said:
			
		

> The next day, regular troops of the neighbouring Arab States entered the territory to assist the Palestinian Arabs.



The Arab states entered Palestine to assist the Palestinians in Palestine.

That is a clear cut case of defense.


----------



## P F Tinmore

RoccoR said:
			
		

> However, in this case, the creation of the State of Israel was affected by the right of self-determination. They declared independence.



You have never posted anything that states how foreigners going to another country with the stated goal of taking over that country claim self determination.

Got a link?


----------



## Hossfly

P F Tinmore said:


> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> However, in this case, the creation of the State of Israel was affected by the right of self-determination. They declared independence.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You have never posted anything that states how foreigners going to another country with the stated goal of taking over that country claim self determination.
> 
> Got a link?
Click to expand...

So, in other words, Israel is *not* the same as South Africa? I knew it all the time.


----------



## P F Tinmore

Hossfly said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> However, in this case, the creation of the State of Israel was affected by the right of self-determination. They declared independence.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You have never posted anything that states how foreigners going to another country with the stated goal of taking over that country claim self determination.
> 
> Got a link?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> So, in other words, Israel is *not* the same as South Africa? I knew it all the time.
Click to expand...


Foreigners came and took over the country in both instances.


----------



## toastman

P F Tinmore said:


> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The next day, regular troops of the neighbouring Arab States entered the territory to assist the Palestinian Arabs.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Arab states entered Palestine to assist the Palestinians in Palestine.
> 
> That is a clear cut case of defense.
Click to expand...


That is a BIG load of crap. 

Defense my ass. The Jews created their country legally. 

The Arabs had NO right to come in and start a war of , and I quote, "extermination"


----------



## P F Tinmore

toastman said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The next day, regular troops of the neighbouring Arab States entered the territory to assist the Palestinian Arabs.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Arab states entered Palestine to assist the Palestinians in Palestine.
> 
> That is a clear cut case of defense.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> That is a BIG load of crap.
> 
> Defense my ass. The Jews created their country legally.
> 
> The Arabs had NO right to come in and start a war of , and I quote, "extermination"
Click to expand...


The Arab armies never entered Israel. They fought Israeli troops in Palestine.


----------



## toastman

P F Tinmore said:


> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> However, in this case, the creation of the State of Israel was affected by the right of self-determination. They declared independence.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You have never posted anything that states how foreigners going to another country with the stated goal of taking over that country claim self determination.
> 
> Got a link?
Click to expand...


Palestine was not (and I still don't believe is now) a country in 1948. Why can you not accept this incredibly simple fact ????

If Palestine was already a country, then what the hell was the partition plan for ??? 

The whole point of the 1947 partition plan was to CREATE a country for both Jews and Palestinian Arabs.


----------



## P F Tinmore

toastman said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> However, in this case, the creation of the State of Israel was affected by the right of self-determination. They declared independence.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You have never posted anything that states how foreigners going to another country with the stated goal of taking over that country claim self determination.
> 
> Got a link?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Palestine was not (and I still don't believe is now) a country in 1948. Why can you not accept this incredibly simple fact ????
> 
> If Palestine was already a country, then what the hell was the partition plan for ???
> 
> The whole point of the 1947 partition plan was to CREATE a country for both Jews and Palestinian Arabs.
Click to expand...


As it says. The partition plan was partition Palestine and give half of it to Israel.


----------



## toastman

P F Tinmore said:


> toastman said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> You have never posted anything that states how foreigners going to another country with the stated goal of taking over that country claim self determination.
> 
> Got a link?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Palestine was not (and I still don't believe is now) a country in 1948. Why can you not accept this incredibly simple fact ????
> 
> If Palestine was already a country, then what the hell was the partition plan for ???
> 
> The whole point of the 1947 partition plan was to CREATE a country for both Jews and Palestinian Arabs.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> As it says. The partition plan was partition Palestine and give half of it to Israel.
Click to expand...


You are saying Palestine became a country even though they rejected the proposal?? 
If Palestine was an actual country, then the British obviously not suggest it be divided in two. That would be ridiculous . It was a territory. I don't understand why you cannot accept that. 

Now look what you did, we were having a good debate, and you made us go backwards


----------



## P F Tinmore

toastman said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> toastman said:
> 
> 
> 
> Palestine was not (and I still don't believe is now) a country in 1948. Why can you not accept this incredibly simple fact ????
> 
> If Palestine was already a country, then what the hell was the partition plan for ???
> 
> The whole point of the 1947 partition plan was to CREATE a country for both Jews and Palestinian Arabs.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> As it says. The partition plan was partition Palestine and give half of it to Israel.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You are saying Palestine became a country even though they rejected the proposal??
> If Palestine was an actual country,* then the British obviously not suggest it be divided in two.* That would be ridiculous . It was a territory. I don't understand why you cannot accept that.
> 
> Now look what you did, we were having a good debate, and you made us go backwards
Click to expand...


Indeed, and they would not divide Palestinian land without the approval of the Palestinians.


----------



## RoccoR

P F Tinmore;  _et al,_

Just two points.



P F Tinmore said:


> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The next day, regular troops of the neighbouring Arab States entered the territory to assist the Palestinian Arabs.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Arab states entered Palestine to assist the Palestinians in Palestine.
> 
> That is a clear cut case of defense.
Click to expand...

*(PERSONAL OPINION)*

I don't think this is a clear case at all.  But that is just my opinion.

I believe that it (defending Arab Palestinians) was merely an excuse.  It is apparent to me that five Arab countries decided that they did not like the UN solution (Partition)[GA/RES/181(II)].  So they decided to defy the UN and militarily overwhelm Israel and take by force what they could not win in the General Assembly.  Unfortunately, the task was easier said than done.



			
				3314 (XXIX) Definition of Aggression said:
			
		

> *Article 2*
> 
> The first use of armed force by a State in contravention of the Charter shall constitute prima facie evidence of an act of aggression although the Security Council may, in conformity with the Charter, conclude that a determination that an act of aggression has been committed would not be justified in the light of other relevant circumstances, including the fact that the acts concerned or their consequences are not of sufficient gravity.​
> _*SOURCE:*_ Special Committee on the Question of Defining Aggression



You can believe what you want.

Most Respectfully,
R


----------



## P F Tinmore

RoccoR said:


> P F Tinmore;  _et al,_
> 
> Just two points.
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The next day, regular troops of the neighbouring Arab States entered the territory to assist the Palestinian Arabs.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Arab states entered Palestine to assist the Palestinians in Palestine.
> 
> That is a clear cut case of defense.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> *(PERSONAL OPINION)*
> 
> I don't think this is a clear case at all.  But that is just my opinion.
> 
> I believe that it (defending Arab Palestinians) was merely an excuse.  It is apparent to me that five Arab countries decided that they did not like the UN solution (Partition)[GA/RES/181(II)].  So they decided to defy the UN and militarily overwhelm Israel and take by force what they could not win in the General Assembly.  Unfortunately, the task was easier said than done.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 3314 (XXIX) Definition of Aggression said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *Article 2*
> 
> The first use of armed force by a State in contravention of the Charter shall constitute prima facie evidence of an act of aggression although the Security Council may, in conformity with the Charter, conclude that a determination that an act of aggression has been committed would not be justified in the light of other relevant circumstances, including the fact that the acts concerned or their consequences are not of sufficient gravity.​
> _*SOURCE:*_ Special Committee on the Question of Defining Aggression
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You can believe what you want.
> 
> Most Respectfully,
> R
Click to expand...


Fighting Israeli forces in Palestine can be nothing but defensive.


----------



## toastman

P F Tinmore said:


> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore;  _et al,_
> 
> Just two points.
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> The Arab states entered Palestine to assist the Palestinians in Palestine.
> 
> That is a clear cut case of defense.
> 
> 
> 
> *(PERSONAL OPINION)*
> 
> I don't think this is a clear case at all.  But that is just my opinion.
> 
> I believe that it (defending Arab Palestinians) was merely an excuse.  It is apparent to me that five Arab countries decided that they did not like the UN solution (Partition)[GA/RES/181(II)].  So they decided to defy the UN and militarily overwhelm Israel and take by force what they could not win in the General Assembly.  Unfortunately, the task was easier said than done.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 3314 (XXIX) Definition of Aggression said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *Article 2*
> 
> The first use of armed force by a State in contravention of the Charter shall constitute prima facie evidence of an act of aggression although the Security Council may, in conformity with the Charter, conclude that a determination that an act of aggression has been committed would not be justified in the light of other relevant circumstances, including the fact that the acts concerned or their consequences are not of sufficient gravity.​
> _*SOURCE:*_ Special Committee on the Question of Defining Aggression
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You can believe what you want.
> 
> Most Respectfully,
> R
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Fighting Israeli forces in Palestine can be nothing but defensive.
Click to expand...


Completely false. How can it be defensive when 5 Arab armies much attack a tiny army that is like 2 years old. 
The Arab armies were on the offense, not defense. This is not one of those issues that is a matter of opinion. This is a fact. 



















Some defensive war it was


----------



## toastman

Then there are these documented quotes:


Understanding the Arab-Israeli Conflict



&#8220;If the Jewish state becomes a fact, and this is realized by the Arab peoples, they will drive the Jews who live in their midst into the sea&#8230; Even if we are beaten now in Palestine, we will never submit. We will never accept the Jewish state... But for politics, the Egyptian army alone, or volunteers of the Muslim Brotherhood, could have destroyed the Jews.&#8221;
- Hassan al-Banna, Muslim Brotherhood founder


&#8220;In demanding the return of the Palestinian refugees the Arabs mean their return as masters, not slaves, or to put it more clearly &#8211; the intention is the extermination of Israel.&#8221;
- Salah al-Din, Egyptian Foreign Minister
(Al-Misri, Egypt, October 11, 1949; quoted in Harris O. Schoenberg, A Mandate for Terror: The United Nations and the PLO [Shapolsky Books, 1989], p. 239)


&#8220;I personally wish that the Jews do not drive us to this war, as this will be a war of extermination and momentous massacre which will be spoken of like the Tartar massacre or the Crusader wars.&#8221;
- Azzam Pasha, Secretary-General of the Arab League
(Akhbar al-Yom, Egypt, October 11, 1947; quoted in David Barnett and Efraim Karsh, &#8220;Azzam&#8217;s Genocidal Threat,&#8221; Middle East Quarterly, Fall 2011)


----------



## P F Tinmore

toastman said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore;  _et al,_
> 
> Just two points.
> 
> 
> *(PERSONAL OPINION)*
> 
> I don't think this is a clear case at all.  But that is just my opinion.
> 
> I believe that it (defending Arab Palestinians) was merely an excuse.  It is apparent to me that five Arab countries decided that they did not like the UN solution (Partition)[GA/RES/181(II)].  So they decided to defy the UN and militarily overwhelm Israel and take by force what they could not win in the General Assembly.  Unfortunately, the task was easier said than done.
> 
> 
> 
> You can believe what you want.
> 
> Most Respectfully,
> R
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Fighting Israeli forces in Palestine can be nothing but defensive.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Completely false. How can it be defensive when 5 Arab armies much attack a tiny army that is like 2 years old.
> The Arab armies were on the offense, not defense. This is not one of those issues that is a matter of opinion. This is a fact.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Some defensive war it was
Click to expand...


Israeli forces were inside Palestine defending themselves?


----------



## toastman

P F Tinmore said:


> toastman said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> Fighting Israeli forces in Palestine can be nothing but defensive.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Completely false. How can it be defensive when 5 Arab armies much attack a tiny army that is like 2 years old.
> The Arab armies were on the offense, not defense. This is not one of those issues that is a matter of opinion. This is a fact.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Some defensive war it was
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Israeli forces were inside Palestine defending themselves?
Click to expand...


Call it whatever you want Tinmore, but yes, they were defending themselves against the hostile Arab armies. 
You have got to be the only person in the world who believes that the 5 Arab armies were on the defensive side lol. Look at the size of their countries, the size of their armies, the amount of infantry and amount of weaponry they had compared to the Jews.


----------



## toastman

Oh, and yes, the Israelis were defending themselves against foreigners, the word you love to use. Who gave the right to those 5 countries to invade ???


----------



## P F Tinmore

toastman said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> toastman said:
> 
> 
> 
> Completely false. How can it be defensive when 5 Arab armies much attack a tiny army that is like 2 years old.
> The Arab armies were on the offense, not defense. This is not one of those issues that is a matter of opinion. This is a fact.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Some defensive war it was
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Israeli forces were inside Palestine defending themselves?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Call it whatever you want Tinmore, but yes, they were defending themselves against the hostile Arab armies.
> You have got to be the only person in the world who believes that the 5 Arab armies were on the defensive side lol. Look at the size of their countries, the size of their armies, the amount of infantry and amount of weaponry they had compared to the Jews.
Click to expand...


Irrelevant!

Israel forces were inside Palestine.


----------



## P F Tinmore

toastman said:


> Oh, and yes, the Israelis were defending themselves against foreigners, the word you love to use. Who gave the right to those 5 countries to invade ???



The Arab armies entered Palestine. How is that aggressive?


----------



## RoccoR

P F Tinmore,  _et al,_

Here we go.



P F Tinmore said:


> Israeli forces were inside Palestine defending themselves?


*(COMMENT)*

Yes, the IDF was in Israel that had Declared Independence.  Defending itself from Arab attack.

Most Respectfully,
R


----------



## toastman

P F Tinmore said:


> toastman said:
> 
> 
> 
> Oh, and yes, the Israelis were defending themselves against foreigners, the word you love to use. Who gave the right to those 5 countries to invade ???
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Arab armies entered Palestine. How is that aggressive?
Click to expand...


What was their intent ?


----------



## P F Tinmore

RoccoR said:


> P F Tinmore,  _et al,_
> 
> Here we go.
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> Israeli forces were inside Palestine defending themselves?
> 
> 
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> Yes, the IDF was in Israel that had Declared Independence.  Defending itself from Arab attack.
> 
> Most Respectfully,
> R
Click to expand...


Where was that?


----------



## toastman

RoccoR said:


> P F Tinmore,  _et al,_
> 
> Here we go.
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> Israeli forces were inside Palestine defending themselves?
> 
> 
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> Yes, the IDF was in Israel that had Declared Independence.  Defending itself from Arab attack.
> 
> Most Respectfully,
> R
Click to expand...


I don't know how you put up with Tinmore as much as you do. You have the patience of a ....something... I'm actually not sure how the sentence ends...Saint maybe ?


----------



## P F Tinmore

toastman said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> toastman said:
> 
> 
> 
> Oh, and yes, the Israelis were defending themselves against foreigners, the word you love to use. Who gave the right to those 5 countries to invade ???
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Arab armies entered Palestine. How is that aggressive?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> What was their intent ?
Click to expand...


To defend the Palestinians inside Palestine.


----------



## RoccoR

_et al,_

This is insane.



P F Tinmore said:


> toastman said:
> 
> 
> 
> Oh, and yes, the Israelis were defending themselves against foreigners, the word you love to use. Who gave the right to those 5 countries to invade ???
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Arab armies entered Palestine. How is that aggressive?
Click to expand...

*(COMMENT)*

I'm done with your circular disinformation.

Most Respectfully,
R


----------



## toastman

P F Tinmore said:


> toastman said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> The Arab armies entered Palestine. How is that aggressive?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> What was their intent ?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> To defend the Palestinians inside Palestine.
Click to expand...



That's a very vague way of saying it

How did they plan on defending the Palestinian Arabs ? (They were not referred to as Palestinians back then)


----------



## Hossfly

MHunterB said:


> Hoffsra, you seem to have forgotten the Jordanian Army shelling civilian neigborhoods in EJ - and forcing out the Jewish residents of those EJ neighborhoods when the fighting stopped, in a well-document (LIFE magazine) instance of ethnic cleansing.
> 
> EJ was indeed captured by the Jordanians and remained under *illegal* Jordanian occupation for 19 years - during which time Jews from everywhere in the world were denied access to the Western Wall.
> 
> So EJ wasn't really "Palestinian" because the Jordanians controlled it.


There used to be a poster with the screen name of Nonawill who actually lived through the Siege of Jerusalem, and she related the hardships the Jews had to go through.  The following will give you some idea.

The Siege of Jerusalem | World Machal


----------



## Hossfly

toastman said:


> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore,  _et al,_
> 
> Here we go.
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> Israeli forces were inside Palestine defending themselves?
> 
> 
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> Yes, the IDF was in Israel that had Declared Independence.  Defending itself from Arab attack.
> 
> Most Respectfully,
> R
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I don't know how you put up with Tinmore as much as you do. You have the patience of a ....something... I'm actually not sure how the sentence ends...Saint maybe ?
Click to expand...

Yes, Rocco has the patience of a Saint; and I think everyone can see just from reading Tinnie's posts why the "Palestinian" Arabs will never accept Israel.  How can anyone make peace when the other "Palestinian" Arabs no doubt have the same mind set as Tinnie?


----------



## Coyote

Hossfly said:


> toastman said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore,  _et al,_
> 
> Here we go.
> 
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> Yes, the IDF was in Israel that had Declared Independence.  Defending itself from Arab attack.
> 
> Most Respectfully,
> R
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I don't know how you put up with Tinmore as much as you do. You have the patience of a ....something... I'm actually not sure how the sentence ends...Saint maybe ?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Yes, Rocco has the patience of a Saint; and *I think everyone can see just from reading Tinnie's posts why the "Palestinian" Arabs will never accept Israel.  *How can anyone make peace when the other "Palestinian" Arabs no doubt have the same mind set as Tinnie?
Click to expand...


Actually, according to Palestinian public opinion polls the majority DO accept the existance of Israel.


----------



## Hossfly

Coyote said:


> Hossfly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> toastman said:
> 
> 
> 
> I don't know how you put up with Tinmore as much as you do. You have the patience of a ....something... I'm actually not sure how the sentence ends...Saint maybe ?
> 
> 
> 
> Yes, Rocco has the patience of a Saint; and *I think everyone can see just from reading Tinnie's posts why the "Palestinian" Arabs will never accept Israel.  *How can anyone make peace when the other "Palestinian" Arabs no doubt have the same mind set as Tinnie?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Actually, according to Palestinian public opinion polls the majority DO accept the existance of Israel.
Click to expand...

Would you mind showing us the polls and how many people were polled?  Give us the results from both Gaza and the West Bank. I think they were posted some time ago but I don't remember the results.


----------



## RoccoR

Coyote,  _et al,_

This would be a very positive first step.



Coyote said:


> Actually, according to Palestinian public opinion polls the majority DO accept the existence of Israel.


*(COMMENT)*

(Assuming this is true...)

Now, if there were some way that this could be amplified and used to kick-start a genuinely reciprocal response from Israel, then we might have something.

Someone has to take the first step towards peace.  In many respects, logically, that would be Israel.  They are the risk-takers, they need to make a significant gesture in response.

Most Respectfully,
R

*PS:* _No, I can say, without reservation, that I am not a Saint.  Just a poor old Sicilian Boy trying to make his way through the world.  BUT!  I'll take the canonization anyway.  With that, and my Senior Citizen Card, I might get a free lunch at Saint Vincent de Paul's  Soup Kitchen._


----------



## toastman

RoccoR said:


> Coyote,  _et al,_
> 
> This would be a very positive first step.
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> Actually, according to Palestinian public opinion polls the majority DO accept the existence of Israel.
> 
> 
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> (Assuming this is true...)
> 
> Now, if there were some way that this could be amplified and used to kick-start a genuinely reciprocal response from Israel, then we might have something.
> 
> Someone has to take the first step towards peace.  In many respects, logically, that would be Israel.  They are the risk-takers, they need to make a significant gesture in response.
> 
> Most Respectfully,
> R
> 
> *PS:* _No, I can say, without reservation, that I am not a Saint.  Just a poor old Sicilian Boy trying to make his way through the world.  BUT!  I'll take the canonization anyway.  With that, and my Senior Citizen Card, I might get a free lunch at Saint Vincent de Paul's  Soup Kitchen._
Click to expand...


What about the recent release of prisoners? Isn't that a gesture


----------



## RoccoR

toastman,  _et al,_

Yes, it is a gesture, but a "gesture on demand" and not a spontaneous and unsolicited response to positive events.



toastman said:


> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote,  _et al,_
> 
> This would be a very positive first step.
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> Actually, according to Palestinian public opinion polls the majority DO accept the existence of Israel.
> 
> 
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> (Assuming this is true...)
> 
> Now, if there were some way that this could be amplified and used to kick-start a genuinely reciprocal response from Israel, then we might have something.
> 
> Someone has to take the first step towards peace.  In many respects, logically, that would be Israel.  They are the risk-takers, they need to make a significant gesture in response.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> What about the recent release of prisoners? Isn't that a gesture
Click to expand...

*(COMMENT)*

I'm talking about something that will impact a wide cross-section of West Bank inhabitance.  Something like lift the roadblocks and checkpoints; or building a huge, first class, emergency medical center; or solving the fresh water shortage issue.

These are thing that can be done to change the face of the Occupation and the two parties in conflict.

Most Respectfully,
R


----------



## MHunterB

"building a huge, first class, emergency medical center"  

Health care in Israel - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Hadassah medical convoy massacre - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


Just a bit of background information......

Basicallly, it sounds like Rocco is advocating the Israelis expand their health care system -paid for by Israelis - to the WB 'Palestinians'.  Does anyone want to place a bet on how long would be the time before a repeat of events akin to my second link above were to take place?


----------



## RoccoR

MHunterB,  _et al,_

It is a suggestion.



MHunterB said:


> "building a huge, first class, emergency medical center"
> 
> Health care in Israel - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
> 
> Hadassah medical convoy massacre - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
> 
> 
> Just a bit of background information......
> 
> Basicallly, it sounds like Rocco is advocating the Israelis expand their health care system -paid for by Israelis - to the WB 'Palestinians'.  Does anyone want to place a bet on how long would be the time before a repeat of events akin to my second link above were to take place?


*(COMMENT)*

In everything the Israeli's do, there will be a calculated "risk" involved.  And someone has to seriously look at the risk and do a cost-benefit analysis.  But if the image, face and reputation is going to change, one side or the other is going to have to step outside the box to alter the current paradigm.  No question, it would be a bold move, requiring a dedication to purpose and a measure of bravery. 

Such a strategy is not unheard of in the region.  



			
				Hezbollah social services said:
			
		

> Hezbollah social services are social development programs, hospitals, news services, and educational facilities organized by the Lebanese paramilitary group, Hezbollah. Social services have a central role in the party's programs. Most experts believe that Hezbollah's social and health programs are worth hundreds of millions of dollars annually.  The American think tank Council on Foreign Relations also said that Hezbollah "is a major provider of social services, operating schools, hospitals, and agricultural services for thousands of Lebanese Shiites."
> 
> _*SOURCE:*_ From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia



What would be even more amazing, and throw everyone off balance, is if the Israelis were to build a Mosque _(something spectacular)_ in Ramallah.  When I was in Yemen, I saw the Grand Mosque the Saudi's built for the people in Sanaa.  Truly amazing.   

It would at least get people talking.  It would be something other than a security measure; yet, make a positive contribution towards the security of the two peoples.

Most Respectfully,
R


----------



## docmauser1

P F Tinmore said:


> _The Arab states entered Palestine to assist the Palestinians in Palestine._


In their attempts to redistribute jewish property and holdings, of course.


P F Tinmore said:


> _That is a clear cut case of defense._


Whatever the excuse of the day.


----------



## docmauser1

P F Tinmore said:


> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _However, in this case, the creation of the State of Israel was affected by the right of self-determination. They declared independence._
> 
> 
> 
> _You have never posted anything that states how foreigners going to another country with the stated goal of taking over that country claim self determination._
Click to expand...

I did. Goes this way:
"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." Winnie Churchill.


----------



## docmauser1

Coyote said:


> _Actually, according to Palestinian public opinion polls the majority DO accept the existance of Israel._


Of course! One can't dream of plundering something nonexistent.


----------



## docmauser1

RoccoR said:


> _I'm talking about something that will impact a wide cross-section of West Bank inhabitance.  Something like lift the roadblocks and checkpoints;_


So that Israel has an "illegal mexican" problem of its own?


RoccoR said:


> _or building a huge, first class, emergency medical center;_


Well, they're building a Red Crescent one in Ramallah.


RoccoR said:


> _or solving the fresh water shortage issue._


Well, they have their "Palestinian Water Authority" for dr. Dr. Shaddad Attili to run, let him excercise his issue-solving powers.


RoccoR said:


> _These are thing that can be done to change the face of the Occupation and the two parties in conflict._


There's no _occupation_, of course. Forget it.


----------



## Hoffstra

Hafrada is similar to Apartheid.


----------



## Hossfly

Hoffstra said:


> Hafrada is similar to Apartheid.


Hafrada () is the English transliteration of the Hebrew word for separation.
In Israel, the term is used to refer to the concept of separation, and to the general policy of separation the Israeli
government has adopted and implemented over the Palestinians in the West Bank and Gaza Strip.
The Israeli West Bank barrier, (in Hebrew, Geder Ha'hafrada or "separation fence") and from Gaza have been cited as
examples of hafrada.
Other names for hafrada when discussed in English include unilateral separation or unilateral disengagement.
Since its first public introductions, the concept-turned-policy or paradigm has dominated Israeli political and cultural
discourse and debate.


http://wikibin.org/index2.php?option=com_content&do_pdf=1&id=33351


----------



## Hossfly

Hoffstra said:


> Hafrada is similar to Apartheid.


It is obvious that Miss Hoffstra is reading Mondoweiss.  Maybe Miss Hoffstra can arrange for that group, Muslims for Israel, to debate with Mr. Weiss.


----------



## Hossfly

RoccoR said:


> docmauser1, georgephillip, _et al,_
> 
> It is not necessarily "drivel."  While you and I may see this as a fallacious and frivolous claim, it seems pretty clear that georgephillip may have looked at General Assembly resolution 3068 (XXVIII) of 30 November 1973 (International Convention on the Suppression and Punishment of the Crime of Apartheid) and or Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court.
> 
> 
> 
> docmauser1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> georgephillip said:
> 
> 
> 
> _"The question is not 'Is Israel the same as South Africa?'
> It is 'do Israel's actions meet the international definition of what apartheid is?'_
> 
> 
> 
> Drivel.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> We have yet to hear the specific allegation.  What aspect of these laws _(he needs to specify one)_ does he claim Israel violated by some specific action.
> 
> Most Respectfully,
> R
Click to expand...

Listen, Georgie Boy will never even take time to write the daughter of South Africa's leader.  
Israel is NOT apartheid state, says South African leader's daughter - Israel Today | Israel News


----------



## Hoffstra

No, South Africa is now a democracy that gives equal rights to all citizens.

Unlike Israel.


----------



## RoccoR

Hoffstra,  _et al,_

So, your allegation is that there are two different sets of laws in Israel for citizens.



Hoffstra said:


> No, South Africa is now a democracy that gives equal rights to all citizens.
> 
> Unlike Israel.


*(COMMENT)*

What are the two classes of citizen?  And please give me an example of how the Israeli Law treats them differently.  It will help me understand better.

Most Respectfully,
R


----------



## Kondor3

Hoffstra said:


> No, South Africa is now a democracy that gives equal rights to all citizens.
> 
> Unlike Israel.



True...

Israel gave equal rights to everyone who was willing to live in peace under the Israeli government...

Israel gave short shrift and exile to those who sided with their Arab-Muslim neighbor countries in multiple failed attempts to drown the Jews in the Mediterranean and to suicide-bomb and rocket-attack innocent Israeli civilians...

An understandable and logical distinction...


----------



## ForeverYoung436

RoccoR said:


> Hoffstra,  _et al,_
> 
> So, your allegation is that there are two different sets of laws in Israel for citizens.
> 
> 
> 
> Hoffstra said:
> 
> 
> 
> No, South Africa is now a democracy that gives equal rights to all citizens.
> 
> Unlike Israel.
> 
> 
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> What are the two classes of citizen?  And please give me an example of how the Israeli Law treats them differently.  It will help me understand better.
> 
> Most Respectfully,
> R
Click to expand...


I think Hoffstra is referring to Arabs who live in the West Bank, under Israeli military rule, pending a final agreement.  Arabs who live in Israel proper have full equal rights.


----------



## RoccoR

ForeverYoung436,  _et al,_

If this is true, then the allegation doesn't make sense.



ForeverYoung436 said:


> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> 
> Hoffstra,  _et al,_
> 
> So, your allegation is that there are two different sets of laws in Israel for citizens.
> 
> 
> 
> Hoffstra said:
> 
> 
> 
> No, South Africa is now a democracy that gives equal rights to all citizens.
> 
> Unlike Israel.
> 
> 
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> What are the two classes of citizen?  And please give me an example of how the Israeli Law treats them differently.  It will help me understand better.
> 
> Most Respectfully,
> R
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I think Hoffstra is referring to Arabs who live in the West Bank, under Israeli military rule, pending a final agreement.  Arabs who live in Israel proper have full equal rights.
Click to expand...

*(COMMENT)*

Most "Arabs who live in the West Bank" are not citizens of Israel.

That's why I asked the question.  Non-citizen "Arabs who live in the West Bank" would not normally be treated the same as Israeli citizens.

Most Respectfully,
R


----------



## Kondor3

RoccoR said:


> "_*...Most "Arabs who live in the West Bank" are not citizens of Israel... Non-citizen "Arabs who live in the West Bank" would not normally be treated the same as Israeli citizens...*_"









*And it was their choice, back in 1948, to be Israeli citizens, or to try to kill the new Jewish State, alongside their Arab-Muslim neighbors...

They chose poorly...
*





*Choices have consequences...*


----------



## docmauser1

Hoffstra said:


> _Hafrada is similar to Apartheid._


If palistanians can't enjoy a piece of free apartheid - it is apartheid, of course. It's old news.


----------



## P F Tinmore

P F Tinmore said:


> toastman said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> Israeli forces were inside Palestine defending themselves?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Call it whatever you want Tinmore, but yes, they were defending themselves against the hostile Arab armies.
> You have got to be the only person in the world who believes that the 5 Arab armies were on the defensive side lol. Look at the size of their countries, the size of their armies, the amount of infantry and amount of weaponry they had compared to the Jews.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Irrelevant!
> 
> Israel forces were inside Palestine.
Click to expand...


So the question should be:

What were Israeli forces doing in Palestine?


----------



## docmauser1

P F Tinmore said:


> _So the question should be: What were Israeli forces doing in Palestine?_


Protecting jews from armed major arab immigrants and other armed arabs from the hood, of course.


----------



## RoccoR

P F Tinmore,  _et al,_

The IDF was, after 15 MAY 1948, defending Israeli Sovereignty against Arab Aggression and insurgent activity.



P F Tinmore said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> toastman said:
> 
> 
> 
> Call it whatever you want Tinmore, but yes, they were defending themselves against the hostile Arab armies.
> You have got to be the only person in the world who believes that the 5 Arab armies were on the defensive side lol. Look at the size of their countries, the size of their armies, the amount of infantry and amount of weaponry they had compared to the Jews.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Irrelevant!
> 
> Israel forces were inside Palestine.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> So the question should be:
> 
> What were Israeli forces doing in Palestine?
Click to expand...

*(COMMENT)*

There is no question --- the Arab Higher Committee (AHC) argued that the five Arab States which contributed the Arab armed forces in 1948 were not invaders in "Palestine."  The AHC claimed that the five Arab States were asked for military assistance _[Arab Liberation Army (ALA)]_ "in the face of mounting Jewish aggression."

The key to understanding this is to understand who the AHC really is!



			
				Who is the Arab Higher Committee (AHC)? said:
			
		

> Reconstituted Committee - 1945-1948 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> In November 1945, the *Arab League reconstituted the Arab Higher Committee *comprising twelve members as the supreme executive body of Palestinian Arabs in the territory of the British Mandate of Palestine.
> 
> _*SOURCE:*_
> From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Partitioning Palestine said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> What the Palestinian and Arab leadership had not fully grasped was the shift of power during the Second World War. The *Arab League reconstituted the Arab Higher Committee (AHC)* with the totally discredited Mufti Haj Amin Al Husseini at its head but with Jamal Al Husseini actually responsible for it in Palestine.
> 
> _*SOURCE:*_ Legal Fundamentalism in the Palestinian-Israeli Conflict, Pluto, London-New York 2010, 253 p,
> 
> Click to expand...
Click to expand...


As you can see, there is a direct relationship between the Arab Higher Committee _(claiming to represent Arab Palestinians)_ and the Arab League _(five Arab States and their Armies)_.  In effect the Arab League (AL), via their creation - the AHC, invited themselves and the ALA.  It is a political slight of hand.  Most people think the AHC was an independent representative of the Hostile Arab Palestinians (HoAP).  Nothing could be further from the truth.

The HAC/AL and now the HoAP, both then and now, justified their actions because they believe that the territory, under the former Mandate of Palestine (with the boundaries it had during the British Mandate), is the homeland of the Arab Palestinian people; it is an indivisible territorial unit that belongs to the Arab Palestinian.  Thus, they claim the Jewish Agency and the immigration, under the Fiasal Agreement, under the Convention, Treaty Agreement, and the Mandate, was a foreign invasion.  This position was promulgated by Arabs to justify the defiance of the _(first the League of Nations)_ UN and the establishment of the Jewish National Home in the shadow of the Holocaust.  The AL believed that a quick and decisive battle would be fought and a new Arab Kingdom would be established; with Jordan assuming control over the West Bank and Jerusalem.  

Most Respectfully,
R


----------



## Hossfly

RoccoR said:


> P F Tinmore,  _et al,_
> 
> The IDF was, after 15 MAY 1948, defending Israeli Sovereignty against Arab Aggression and insurgent activity.
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> Irrelevant!
> 
> Israel forces were inside Palestine.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> So the question should be:
> 
> What were Israeli forces doing in Palestine?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> There is no question --- the Arab Higher Committee (AHC) argued that the five Arab States which contributed the Arab armed forces in 1948 were not invaders in "Palestine."  The AHC claimed that the five Arab States were asked for military assistance _[Arab Liberation Army (ALA)]_ "in the face of mounting Jewish aggression."
> 
> The key to understanding this is to understand who the AHC really is!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Who is the Arab Higher Committee (AHC)? said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Partitioning Palestine said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> What the Palestinian and Arab leadership had not fully grasped was the shift of power during the Second World War. The *Arab League reconstituted the Arab Higher Committee (AHC)* with the totally discredited Mufti Haj Amin Al Husseini at its head but with Jamal Al Husseini actually responsible for it in Palestine.
> 
> _*SOURCE:*_ Legal Fundamentalism in the Palestinian-Israeli Conflict, Pluto, London-New York 2010, 253 p,
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> As you can see, there is a direct relationship between the Arab Higher Committee _(claiming to represent Arab Palestinians)_ and the Arab League _(five Arab States and their Armies)_.  In effect the Arab League (AL), via their creation - the AHC, invited themselves and the ALA.  It is a political slight of hand.  Most people think the AHC was an independent representative of the Hostile Arab Palestinians (HoAP).  Nothing could be further from the truth.
> 
> The HAC/AL and now the HoAP, both then and now, justified their actions because they believe that the territory, under the former Mandate of Palestine (with the boundaries it had during the British Mandate), is the homeland of the Arab Palestinian people; it is an indivisible territorial unit that belongs to the Arab Palestinian.  Thus, they claim the Jewish Agency and the immigration, under the Fiasal Agreement, under the Convention, Treaty Agreement, and the Mandate, was a foreign invasion.  This position was promulgated by Arabs to justify the defiance of the _(first the League of Nations)_ UN and the establishment of the Jewish National Home in the shadow of the Holocaust.  The AL believed that a quick and decisive battle would be fought and a new Arab Kingdom would be established; with Jordan assuming control over the West Bank and Jerusalem.
> 
> Most Respectfully,
> R
Click to expand...

So in other words, the AL, without checking, climbed onto the back of a tiger and wound up with clawed balls.


----------



## georgephillip

Kondor3 said:


> Hoffstra said:
> 
> 
> 
> No, South Africa is now a democracy that gives equal rights to all citizens.
> 
> Unlike Israel.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> True...
> 
> Israel gave equal rights to everyone who was willing to live in peace under the Israeli government...
> 
> Israel gave short shrift and exile to those who sided with their Arab-Muslim neighbor countries in multiple failed attempts to drown the Jews in the Mediterranean and to suicide-bomb and rocket-attack innocent Israeli civilians...
> 
> An understandable and logical distinction...
Click to expand...

*What's the distinction between citizenship and nationality in Israel?*

"Israel's Apartheid Laws


"1. Identity and Citizenship

"Law of Return (1950)Grants right of immigration to Jews born anywhere in the world. Amended in 1970 to extend this right to 'a child and a grandchild of a Jew, the spouse of a Jew, the spouse of a child of a Jew and the spouse of a grandchild of a Jew.' 

"A Jew is defined as 'a person who was born of a Jewish mother or has become converted to Judaism and who is not a member of another religion.'

"Non-Jewish native-born Palestinians  most importantly those who fled during the Zionist massacres in 1947 and 1948  are in most cases prevented from returning."

*What kind of democracy divides its citizens into two unequal classes?
The same kind Chicago enjoyed in the 1950s?*

Israel's Apartheid Laws


----------



## P F Tinmore

RoccoR said:
			
		

> Hostile Arab Palestinians (HoAP)



Do you have a link to that?


----------



## toastman

P F Tinmore said:


> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Hostile Arab Palestinians (HoAP)
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Do you have a link to that?
Click to expand...


A link to what Tinmore ? What are you even asking him ?????


----------



## P F Tinmore

RoccoR said:
			
		

> There is no question --- the Arab Higher Committee (AHC) argued that the five Arab States which contributed the Arab armed forces in 1948 were not invaders in "Palestine."



Did they enter Palestine to attack the Palestinians?

If not, "invaders" would not be an applicable term.


----------



## P F Tinmore

toastman said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Hostile Arab Palestinians (HoAP)
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Do you have a link to that?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> A link to what Tinmore ? What are you even asking him ?????
Click to expand...


The source of that term.


----------



## docmauser1

georgephillip said:


> _"Non-Jewish native-born Palestinians  most importantly those who fled during the Zionist massacres in 1947 and 1948  are in most cases prevented from returning."_


They are in "Palestine", as their palistan is being called, so, no worries about returning, they're home. Bth., _Zionist massacres_, is it fresh drivel, or an old one?


----------



## P F Tinmore

RoccoR said:
			
		

> The HAC/AL and now the HoAP, both then and now, justified their actions because they believe that the territory, under the former Mandate of Palestine (with the boundaries it had during the British Mandate), is the homeland of the Arab Palestinian people; it is an indivisible territorial unit that belongs to the Arab Palestinian.



A country belongs to the people who normally live there

WOW, what a bizarre concept!


----------



## P F Tinmore

RoccoR said:
			
		

> Thus, they claim the Jewish Agency and the immigration, under the Fiasal Agreement, under the Convention, Treaty Agreement, and the Mandate, was a foreign invasion.



How many of those were Palestinian and how many were foreigners?


----------



## docmauser1

P F Tinmore said:


> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _Thus, they claim the Jewish Agency and the immigration, under the Fiasal Agreement, under the Convention, Treaty Agreement, and the Mandate, was a foreign invasion._
> 
> 
> 
> _How many of those were Palestinian and how many were foreigners?_
Click to expand...

"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." Winnie Churchill knew the answer.


----------



## RoccoR

P F Tinmore,  _et al,_

No!



P F Tinmore said:


> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> There is no question --- the Arab Higher Committee (AHC) argued that the five Arab States which contributed the Arab armed forces in 1948 were not invaders in "Palestine."
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Did they enter Palestine to attack the Palestinians?
> 
> If not, "invaders" would not be an applicable term.
Click to expand...

*(COMMENT)*

They (ALAs) entered the newly declared State of Israel to attack the Jewish People.  

The ALA demonstrated the "first use of force" _(first evidence of prima facie aggressors)_ and crossed into the boundaries accepted by the Jewish Agency out of GA/RES/181(II) _(second evidence of prima facie aggressors)_.

Most Respectfully,
R


----------



## P F Tinmore

RoccoR said:


> P F Tinmore,  _et al,_
> 
> No!
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> There is no question --- the Arab Higher Committee (AHC) argued that the five Arab States which contributed the Arab armed forces in 1948 were not invaders in "Palestine."
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Did they enter Palestine to attack the Palestinians?
> 
> If not, "invaders" would not be an applicable term.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> They (ALAs) entered the newly declared State of Israel to attack the Jewish People.
> 
> The ALA demonstrated the "first use of force" _(first evidence of prima facie aggressors)_ and crossed into the boundaries accepted by the Jewish Agency out of GA/RES/181(II) _(second evidence of prima facie aggressors)_.
> 
> Most Respectfully,
> R
Click to expand...


No they didn't.


----------



## Hoffstra

RoccoR said:


> They (ALAs) entered the newly declared State of Israel to attack the Jewish People.,..



The Arabs entered Israel because their goal was to attack Jewish people?

they were hundreds of thousands of Jews in the Arab world.  If they wanted to kill Jews they didn't have to look any further than their neighbors.

Clearly, "attacking the Jews" wasn't their motive.


----------



## RoccoR

Hoffstra,  _et al,_

I didn't imply motive or goal.  I was answering the question as to who attacked whom.



Hoffstra said:


> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> 
> They (ALAs) entered the newly declared State of Israel to attack the Jewish People.,..
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Arabs entered Israel because their goal was to attack Jewish people?
> 
> they were hundreds of thousands of Jews in the Arab world.  If they wanted to kill Jews they didn't have to look any further than their neighbors.
> 
> Clearly, "attacking the Jews" wasn't their motive.
Click to expand...

*(COMMENT)*

As I said in Post #731:  The Partition Plan offered that opportunity and the Arab Palestinian and Arab League rejected the plan; opting for war (trial by combat) and lost.

The idea and motive was to overturn the Jewish independence of the State of Israel.

Most Respectfully,
R


----------



## P F Tinmore

RoccoR said:


> Hoffstra,  _et al,_
> 
> I didn't imply motive or goal.  I was answering the question as to who attacked whom.
> 
> 
> 
> Hoffstra said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> 
> They (ALAs) entered the newly declared State of Israel to attack the Jewish People.,..
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Arabs entered Israel because their goal was to attack Jewish people?
> 
> they were hundreds of thousands of Jews in the Arab world.  If they wanted to kill Jews they didn't have to look any further than their neighbors.
> 
> Clearly, "attacking the Jews" wasn't their motive.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> As I said in Post #731:  The Partition Plan offered that opportunity and the Arab Palestinian and Arab League rejected the plan; *opting for war (trial by combat) and lost.*
> 
> The idea and motive was to overturn the Jewish independence of the State of Israel.
> 
> Most Respectfully,
> R
Click to expand...


No they didn't.


----------



## toastman

P F Tinmore said:


> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> 
> Hoffstra,  _et al,_
> 
> I didn't imply motive or goal.  I was answering the question as to who attacked whom.
> 
> 
> 
> Hoffstra said:
> 
> 
> 
> The Arabs entered Israel because their goal was to attack Jewish people?
> 
> they were hundreds of thousands of Jews in the Arab world.  If they wanted to kill Jews they didn't have to look any further than their neighbors.
> 
> Clearly, "attacking the Jews" wasn't their motive.
> 
> 
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> As I said in Post #731:  The Partition Plan offered that opportunity and the Arab Palestinian and Arab League rejected the plan; *opting for war (trial by combat) and lost.*
> 
> The idea and motive was to overturn the Jewish independence of the State of Israel.
> 
> Most Respectfully,
> R
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> No they didn't.
Click to expand...


Excellent argument !


----------



## P F Tinmore

toastman said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> 
> Hoffstra,  _et al,_
> 
> I didn't imply motive or goal.  I was answering the question as to who attacked whom.
> 
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> As I said in Post #731:  The Partition Plan offered that opportunity and the Arab Palestinian and Arab League rejected the plan; *opting for war (trial by combat) and lost.*
> 
> The idea and motive was to overturn the Jewish independence of the State of Israel.
> 
> Most Respectfully,
> R
> 
> 
> 
> 
> No they didn't.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Excellent argument !
Click to expand...


Indeed, because it is true.


----------



## Hoffstra

Israel is MUCH worse than South Africa.

all adults in SA have the right to vote.

there are millions of people in Israel who have no right to vote in Israeli elections.


----------



## MHunterB

Hoffstra said:


> Israel is MUCH worse than South Africa.
> 
> all adults in SA have the right to vote.
> 
> there are millions of people in Israel who have no right to vote in Israeli elections.



According to what Hoffy posted - if Rocco and Hoffy and I hop a plane to Jo'burg - we'd all get to vote in the elections.......well, Rocco and I would.

And the 'millions' in Israel who can't vote in elections are the tourists.


----------



## ForeverYoung436

Hoffstra said:


> Israel is MUCH worse than South Africa.
> 
> all adults in SA have the right to vote.
> 
> there are millions of people in Israel who have no right to vote in Israeli elections.



This statement is not true.  Since Israel never annexed the West Bank, every adult within Israel is eligible to vote.


----------



## georgephillip

ForeverYoung436 said:


> Hoffstra said:
> 
> 
> 
> Israel is MUCH worse than South Africa.
> 
> all adults in SA have the right to vote.
> 
> there are millions of people in Israel who have no right to vote in Israeli elections.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> This statement is not true.  Since Israel never annexed the West Bank, every adult within Israel is eligible to vote.
Click to expand...

And every Arab living under Israeli law is not entitled to vote for those who write the laws.
Jewish state or democratic state?


----------



## Hoffstra

ForeverYoung436 said:


> This statement is not true.  Since Israel never annexed the West Bank, every adult within Israel is eligible to vote.



If the West Bank isn't part of Israel, then what the hell is Israel doing settling hundreds of thousands of its citizens there, building schools there, building roads and civilian infrastructure there?????????????????

wtf is Israel doing applying civilian law in territory that is not part of their state????????????


----------



## georgephillip

Hoffstra said:


> ForeverYoung436 said:
> 
> 
> 
> This statement is not true.  Since Israel never annexed the West Bank, every adult within Israel is eligible to vote.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> If the West Bank isn't part of Israel, then what the hell is Israel doing settling hundreds of thousands of its citizens there, building schools there, building roads and civilian infrastructure there?????????????????
> 
> wtf is Israel doing applying civilian law in territory that is not part of their state????????????
Click to expand...

Ready for that bad news?
The Nile to the Euphrates!
Jews of the world...unite.


----------



## Hoffstra

georgephillip said:


> Ready for that bad news?
> The Nile to the Euphrates!
> Jews of the world...unite.



so you embrace Fascism and the conquest of land fur Lebensraum.


----------



## toastman

Hoffstra said:


> georgephillip said:
> 
> 
> 
> Ready for that bad news?
> The Nile to the Euphrates!
> Jews of the world...unite.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> so you embrace Fascism and the conquest of land fur Lebensraum.
Click to expand...


are you that stupid that you think George supports that ?

Seriously, stop smoking pot or whatever it is you do.


----------



## Hoffstra

toastman said:


> are you that stupid that you think George supports that ?
> 
> Seriously, stop smoking pot or whatever it is you do.



wow, you are really retarded.

he said "from the Nile to the Euprates".

he supports Fascism and mass land conquest.


----------



## toastman

Hoffstra said:


> toastman said:
> 
> 
> 
> are you that stupid that you think George supports that ?
> 
> Seriously, stop smoking pot or whatever it is you do.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> wow, you are really retarded.
> 
> he said "from the Nile to the Euprates".
> 
> he supports Fascism and mass land conquest.
Click to expand...


No he doesn't. He is saying that some Israeli Jews support that ! (which is false of course)


----------



## RoccoR

georgephillip, ForeverYoung436, Hoffstra, _et al,_

Thanks to all.  I needed a laugh this morning.



georgephillip said:


> ForeverYoung436 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Hoffstra said:
> 
> 
> 
> Israel is MUCH worse than South Africa.
> 
> all adults in SA have the right to vote.  Sometimes I think you all have lost your mind.
> 
> there are millions of people in Israel who have no right to vote in Israeli elections.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> This statement is not true.  Since Israel never annexed the West Bank, every adult within Israel is eligible to vote.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> And every Arab living under Israeli law is not entitled to vote for those who write the laws.
> Jewish state or democratic state?
Click to expand...

*(OBSERVATION)*

First off, there is hardly any country that allows a non-citizen to vote in local or national elections.

*(COMMENT)*

It should be noted that, every citizen of the State of Israel over the age of 18 years has the right to participate in elections.

Just like me, in Ohio, I must be a citizen and I have must be registered.  Just like me, you need a form of valid identification.

*(CLARIFICATION)*

The law is very similar to South Africa.  There is an age difference.



			
				How do I register? (In South Africa) said:
			
		

> *Who can register?*
> 
> You must:
> 
> be a South African citizen;
> be at least 16 years old; and
> have a green, bar-coded ID book.
> 
> *SOURCE:* IEC SOUTH AFRICA



Most Respectfully,
R


----------



## P F Tinmore

RoccoR said:


> georgephillip, ForeverYoung436, Hoffstra, _et al,_
> 
> Thanks to all.  I needed a laugh this morning.
> 
> 
> 
> georgephillip said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ForeverYoung436 said:
> 
> 
> 
> This statement is not true.  Since Israel never annexed the West Bank, every adult within Israel is eligible to vote.
> 
> 
> 
> And every Arab living under Israeli law is not entitled to vote for those who write the laws.
> Jewish state or democratic state?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> *(OBSERVATION)*
> 
> First off, there is hardly any country that allows a non-citizen to vote in local or national elections.
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> It should be noted that, every citizen of the State of Israel over the age of 18 years has the right to participate in elections.
> 
> Just like me, in Ohio, I must be a citizen and I have must be registered.  Just like me, you need a form of valid identification.
> 
> *(CLARIFICATION)*
> 
> The law is very similar to South Africa.  There is an age difference.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> How do I register? (In South Africa) said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *Who can register?*
> 
> You must:
> 
> be a South African citizen;
> be at least 16 years old; and
> have a green, bar-coded ID book.
> 
> *SOURCE:* IEC SOUTH AFRICA
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Most Respectfully,
> R
Click to expand...


Can West Bank settlers vote? They do not live in Israel.


----------



## RoccoR

_et al,_

The West Bank is part of the State of Palestine (since 1988).  It cannot be annexed.


Palestinian Declaration of Independence
UN Recognition of the State of Palestine
Application of Palestine for admission to membership in the United Nations



Hoffstra said:


> ForeverYoung436 said:
> 
> 
> 
> This statement is not true.  Since Israel never annexed the West Bank, every adult within Israel is eligible to vote.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> If the West Bank isn't part of Israel, then what the hell is Israel doing settling hundreds of thousands of its citizens there, building schools there, building roads and civilian infrastructure there?????????????????
> 
> wtf is Israel doing applying civilian law in territory that is not part of their state????????????
Click to expand...

*(OBSERVATION)*

Administrative divisions of the Oslo II Accords:

Area A:  Palestinian Authority has complete control over all civilian administration, and its paramilitary police force is in charge of security.

Area B: Palestinian Authority (PA) has full civilian authority but it shares security responsibility with Israel. Joint Israel-PA patrols operate here. 

Area C:  All Jewish communities and Israeli military bases are also part of Area C, as enclaves. Furthermore, Area C includes all the main roads between Jewish communities and also between the Arab towns in Areas A and B.​
More Information From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

*(COMMENT)*

Yes, the settlements are troublesome.  I suspect that the settlements are temporary and to be used as non-violent political pressure to bring the Palestinians to the Peace arrangements.  I am not totally clear on the strategy.

Most Respectfully,
R


----------



## P F Tinmore

RoccoR said:


> _et al,_
> 
> The West Bank is part of the State of Palestine (since 1988).  It cannot be annexed.
> 
> 
> Palestinian Declaration of Independence
> UN Recognition of the State of Palestine
> Application of Palestine for admission to membership in the United Nations
> 
> 
> 
> Hoffstra said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ForeverYoung436 said:
> 
> 
> 
> This statement is not true.  Since Israel never annexed the West Bank, every adult within Israel is eligible to vote.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> If the West Bank isn't part of Israel, then what the hell is Israel doing settling hundreds of thousands of its citizens there, building schools there, building roads and civilian infrastructure there?????????????????
> 
> wtf is Israel doing applying civilian law in territory that is not part of their state????????????
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> *(OBSERVATION)*
> 
> Administrative divisions of the Oslo II Accords:
> 
> Area A:  Palestinian Authority has complete control over all civilian administration, and its paramilitary police force is in charge of security.
> 
> Area B: Palestinian Authority (PA) has full civilian authority but it shares security responsibility with Israel. Joint Israel-PA patrols operate here.
> 
> Area C:  All Jewish communities and Israeli military bases are also part of Area C, as enclaves. Furthermore, Area C includes all the main roads between Jewish communities and also between the Arab towns in Areas A and B.​
> More Information From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> Yes, the settlements are troublesome.  I suspect that the settlements are temporary and to be used as non-violent political pressure to bring the Palestinians to the Peace arrangements.  *I am not totally clear on the strategy.*
> 
> Most Respectfully,
> R
Click to expand...


It is to steal as much land as possible before making any peace agreement. I thought everybody knew that. 67 borders? Pffft!

Oslo?

How did Arafat get suckered into signing that piece of shit? (without the approval of the people) What was his price?


----------



## RoccoR

P F Tinmore,  _et al,_

Yes, they are citizens.  They must go to an authorized polling station.



P F Tinmore said:


> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> 
> georgephillip, ForeverYoung436, Hoffstra, _et al,_
> 
> Thanks to all.  I needed a laugh this morning.
> 
> 
> 
> georgephillip said:
> 
> 
> 
> And every Arab living under Israeli law is not entitled to vote for those who write the laws.
> Jewish state or democratic state?
> 
> 
> 
> *(OBSERVATION)*
> 
> First off, there is hardly any country that allows a non-citizen to vote in local or national elections.
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> It should be noted that, every citizen of the State of Israel over the age of 18 years has the right to participate in elections.
> 
> Just like me, in Ohio, I must be a citizen and I have must be registered.  Just like me, you need a form of valid identification.
> 
> *(CLARIFICATION)*
> 
> The law is very similar to South Africa.  There is an age difference.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> How do I register? (In South Africa) said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *Who can register?*
> 
> You must:
> 
> be a South African citizen;
> be at least 16 years old; and
> have a green, bar-coded ID book.
> 
> *SOURCE:* IEC SOUTH AFRICA
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Most Respectfully,
> R
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Can West Bank settlers vote? They do not live in Israel.
Click to expand...

*(OBSERVATION)*

"Surprising as it may be, overall, only 19 percent of the settlers vote went to Likud-Beiteinu, compared to 23 percent of the overall Israeli national vote, according to official Israeli data."

Read more: Who Did the Jewish Settlers Vote For? ? Forward.com

Most Respectfully,
R


----------



## P F Tinmore

RoccoR said:


> P F Tinmore,  _et al,_
> 
> Yes, they are citizens.  They must go to an authorized polling station.
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> 
> georgephillip, ForeverYoung436, Hoffstra, _et al,_
> 
> Thanks to all.  I needed a laugh this morning.
> 
> 
> *(OBSERVATION)*
> 
> First off, there is hardly any country that allows a non-citizen to vote in local or national elections.
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> It should be noted that, every citizen of the State of Israel over the age of 18 years has the right to participate in elections.
> 
> Just like me, in Ohio, I must be a citizen and I have must be registered.  Just like me, you need a form of valid identification.
> 
> *(CLARIFICATION)*
> 
> The law is very similar to South Africa.  There is an age difference.
> 
> 
> 
> Most Respectfully,
> R
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Can West Bank settlers vote? They do not live in Israel.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> *(OBSERVATION)*
> 
> "Surprising as it may be, overall, only 19 percent of the settlers vote went to Likud-Beiteinu, compared to 23 percent of the overall Israeli national vote, according to official Israeli data."
> 
> Read more: Who Did the Jewish Settlers Vote For? ? Forward.com
> 
> Most Respectfully,
> R
Click to expand...


Can I take that as a yes?

How does that work? Absentee ballots? Voting booths outside of Israel?


----------



## RoccoR

P F Tinmore said:


> Haven't you heard!
> 
> How did Arafat get suckered into signing that piece of shit? (without the approval of the people) What was his price?


*SARCASM*

They gave him a Rolls Royce, Phantom II - 7.7 L,  pushrod-OHV straight-6 engine, 40/50 hp, 4-speed manual transmission; black with a yellow pin-stripe.

v/r
R


----------



## P F Tinmore

RoccoR said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> Haven't you heard!
> 
> How did Arafat get suckered into signing that piece of shit? (without the approval of the people) What was his price?
> 
> 
> 
> *SARCASM*
> 
> They gave him a Rolls Royce, Phantom II - 7.7 L,  pushrod-OHV straight-6 engine, 40/50 hp, 4-speed manual transmission; black with a yellow pin-stripe.
> 
> v/r
> R
Click to expand...


It must have been a good price. Arafat died a very rich man.

It makes you wonder because he was the president of a country that does not have two cents to rub together.

BTW, Abbas is a rich man also.


----------



## docmauser1

P F Tinmore said:


> _It is to steal as much land as possible before making any peace agreement._


Palistanians have to have land first to cry theft, of course.


P F Tinmore said:


> _I thought everybody knew that._


Dupes do, of course.


P F Tinmore said:


> _67 borders?_


What borders?


P F Tinmore said:


> _Pffft!_


Pffft.


P F Tinmore said:


> _Oslo?How did Arafat get suckered into signing that piece of shit? (without the approval of the people)_


Prospects of having his own plantation to run, stealing foreign aid of all sorts, while keeping on pestering jews and spreading bombastic islamo-socialist drivel around had been irresistible, of course. hehe


----------



## P F Tinmore

docmauser1 said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> _It is to steal as much land as possible before making any peace agreement._
> 
> 
> 
> Palistanians have to have land first to cry theft, of course.
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> _I thought everybody knew that._
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Dupes do, of course.What borders?
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> _Pffft!_
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Pffft.
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> _Oslo?How did Arafat get suckered into signing that piece of shit? (without the approval of the people)_
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Prospects of having his own plantation to run, stealing foreign aid of all sorts, while keeping on pestering jews and spreading bombastic islamo-socialist drivel around had been irresistible, of course. hehe
Click to expand...




> What borders?



Fake peace process propaganda term.


----------



## docmauser1

P F Tinmore said:


> docmauser1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Prospects of having his own plantation to run, stealing foreign aid of all sorts, while keeping on pestering jews and spreading bombastic islamo-socialist drivel around had been irresistible, of course. hehe
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> What borders?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> _Fake peace process propaganda term._
Click to expand...

Bravo! Leftoids and diverse other drivelists are full of them like fecal matter. We despise them all, don't we?


----------



## georgephillip

RoccoR said:


> georgephillip, ForeverYoung436, Hoffstra, _et al,_
> 
> Thanks to all.  I needed a laugh this morning.
> 
> 
> 
> georgephillip said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ForeverYoung436 said:
> 
> 
> 
> This statement is not true.  Since Israel never annexed the West Bank, every adult within Israel is eligible to vote.
> 
> 
> 
> And every Arab living under Israeli law is not entitled to vote for those who write the laws.
> Jewish state or democratic state?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> *(OBSERVATION)*
> 
> First off, there is hardly any country that allows a non-citizen to vote in local or national elections.
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> It should be noted that, every citizen of the State of Israel over the age of 18 years has the right to participate in elections.
> 
> Just like me, in Ohio, I must be a citizen and I have must be registered.  Just like me, you need a form of valid identification.
> 
> *(CLARIFICATION)*
> 
> The law is very similar to South Africa.  There is an age difference.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> How do I register? (In South Africa) said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *Who can register?*
> 
> You must:
> 
> be a South African citizen;
> be at least 16 years old; and
> have a green, bar-coded ID book.
> 
> *SOURCE:* IEC SOUTH AFRICA
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Most Respectfully,
> R
Click to expand...

Rocco...bust a gut...imagine that evil imperialistic Detroit invaded peace-loving Columbus 65 years ago and imposed a Maize and Blue (no Star of David) occupation on Reynoldsburgh. You are still allowed to vote for your local town council (with or without ID) BUT you have no say over who writes the laws that control thousands of heavily armed teen-aged Wolverine terrorists manning numerous checkpoints between you and the Horseshoe. Surely, that would get on your last nerve every other Thanksgiving, right?


----------



## Hoffstra

The West Bank isn't part of Israel.

But..the Israelis steal private property in the West Bank, declare it a "closed" military zone, and let Israeli settlers farm the land without any rent or lease payments to the true owner.

This is why people HATE Israel!!


----------



## georgephillip

Hoffstra said:


> The West Bank isn't part of Israel.
> 
> But..the Israelis steal private property in the West Bank, declare it a "closed" military zone, and let Israeli settlers farm the land without any rent or lease payments to the true owner.
> 
> This is why people HATE Israel!!


The GOD of the Jews gave them that land.
Have you not been paying attention, Hater?


----------



## Hoffstra

georgephillip said:


> The GOD of the Jews gave them that land.
> Have you not been paying attention, Hater?



mixing politics with religion, is dangerous.

The Bible says that the Jews will be banished from their land and scattered to all corners of the Earth, until when the Messiah comes and brings the Jews back.

The Bible also says that all the suffering of the Jews is due to their disobeying God.

So you believe the Holocaust was God's punishment?

You believe the Jews cannot come back to Israel in mass and have soveriegnity until the Messiah comes?

Cause thats what the Bible says, asshole.


----------



## P F Tinmore

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UjfzfGcZlXo]84 b Sleepless Gaza Jerusalem.divx - YouTube[/ame]


----------



## RoccoR

georgephillip,  _et al,_

Wow, great story.  Toledo War: Battle Between Michigan And Ohio

_"The most bizarre war in American history was the Toledo War that had no mortal casualties because the militias could not find each other."_​


georgephillip said:


> Rocco...bust a gut...imagine that evil imperialistic Michigan invaded peace-loving Columbus 65 years ago and imposed a Maize and Blue (no Star of David) occupation on Reynoldsburgh. You are still allowed to vote for your local town council (with or without ID) BUT you have no say over who writes the laws that control thousands of heavily armed teen-aged Wolverine terrorists manning numerous checkpoints between you and the Horseshoe. Surely, that would get on your last nerve every other Thanksgiving, right?


*(COMMENT)*

I suppose that means that the Ohioans called in Wisconsin, Illinois, Indiana, Kentucky, and Pennsylvania to invade Michigan to take it over; but lost.  Then Michigan, in pursuit of the Midwest Militia, overran Ohio.  In order to keep the Ohioans from creating a rear area security threat, armed teen-aged Wolverine Militia to setup numerous checkpoints to prevent an insurgency from getting out of hand.

Most Respectfully,
R


----------



## P F Tinmore

Hoffstra said:


> georgephillip said:
> 
> 
> 
> The GOD of the Jews gave them that land.
> Have you not been paying attention, Hater?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> mixing politics with religion, is dangerous.
> 
> The Bible says that the Jews will be banished from their land and scattered to all corners of the Earth, until when the Messiah comes and brings the Jews back.
> 
> The Bible also says that all the suffering of the Jews is due to their disobeying God.
> 
> So you believe the Holocaust was God's punishment?
> 
> You believe the Jews cannot come back to Israel in mass and have soveriegnity until the Messiah comes?
> 
> Cause thats what the Bible says, asshole.
Click to expand...


Indeed, that is true. The Messiah is to call his people to the promised land, not a bunch of criminals out of Europe.


----------



## toastman

P F Tinmore said:


> Hoffstra said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> georgephillip said:
> 
> 
> 
> The GOD of the Jews gave them that land.
> Have you not been paying attention, Hater?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> mixing politics with religion, is dangerous.
> 
> The Bible says that the Jews will be banished from their land and scattered to all corners of the Earth, until when the Messiah comes and brings the Jews back.
> 
> The Bible also says that all the suffering of the Jews is due to their disobeying God.
> 
> So you believe the Holocaust was God's punishment?
> 
> You believe the Jews cannot come back to Israel in mass and have soveriegnity until the Messiah comes?
> 
> Cause thats what the Bible says, asshole.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Indeed, that is true. The Messiah is to call his people to the promised land, not a bunch of criminals out of Europe.
Click to expand...


Very nice of you to call a bunch of persecuted Jews , who had JUST lost 6 000 000 of their family members, a bunch of criminals. I don't ever bring up the Holocaust or play the victim card, but this comment was just disgusting.
You should take it back please.


----------



## P F Tinmore

toastman said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Hoffstra said:
> 
> 
> 
> mixing politics with religion, is dangerous.
> 
> The Bible says that the Jews will be banished from their land and scattered to all corners of the Earth, until when the Messiah comes and brings the Jews back.
> 
> The Bible also says that all the suffering of the Jews is due to their disobeying God.
> 
> So you believe the Holocaust was God's punishment?
> 
> You believe the Jews cannot come back to Israel in mass and have soveriegnity until the Messiah comes?
> 
> Cause thats what the Bible says, asshole.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeed, that is true. The Messiah is to call his people to the promised land, not a bunch of criminals out of Europe.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Very nice of you to call a bunch of persecuted Jews , who had JUST lost 6 000 000 of their family members, a bunch of criminals. I don't ever bring up the Holocaust or play the victim card, but this comment was just disgusting.
> You should take it back please.
Click to expand...


They lost 6,000,000 members in 1917?


----------



## Tank

georgephillip said:


> "The question is not 'Is Israel the same as South Africa?'
> It is 'do Israel's actions meet the international definition of what apartheid is?'


Both are trying to save their cultures from being destroyed by a lesser people.


----------



## P F Tinmore

Tank said:


> georgephillip said:
> 
> 
> 
> "The question is not 'Is Israel the same as South Africa?'
> It is 'do Israel's actions meet the international definition of what apartheid is?'
> 
> 
> 
> Both are trying to save their cultures from being destroyed by a lesser people.
Click to expand...


And both are doing that inside Palestine.


----------



## Tank

Palestine people are a worthless people


----------



## Sweet_Caroline

P F Tinmore said:


> Tank said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> georgephillip said:
> 
> 
> 
> "The question is not 'Is Israel the same as South Africa?'
> It is 'do Israel's actions meet the international definition of what apartheid is?'
> 
> 
> 
> Both are trying to save their cultures from being destroyed by a lesser people.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> And both are doing that inside Palestine.
Click to expand...


And you are still calling the land "Palestine."


----------



## P F Tinmore

Sweet_Caroline said:
			
		

> And you are still calling it "Palestine."



According to what I have seen, that would be correct


----------



## Sweet_Caroline

P F Tinmore said:


> Sweet_Caroline said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> And you are still calling it "Palestine."
> 
> 
> 
> 
> According to what I have seen, that would be correct
Click to expand...


The land is called Israel now and has been called that for many years.


----------



## P F Tinmore

Sweet_Caroline said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sweet_Caroline said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> And you are still calling it "Palestine."
> 
> 
> 
> 
> According to what I have seen, that would be correct
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> The land is called Israel now and has been called that for many years.
Click to expand...


Indeed, it is "called" that by some.


----------



## Sweet_Caroline

P F Tinmore said:


> Sweet_Caroline said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> According to what I have seen, that would be correct
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The land is called Israel now and has been called that for many years.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Indeed, it is "called" that by some.
Click to expand...


Great.  So you calling it Palestine is incorrect.


----------



## theliq

Tank said:


> georgephillip said:
> 
> 
> 
> "The question is not 'Is Israel the same as South Africa?'
> It is 'do Israel's actions meet the international definition of what apartheid is?'
> 
> 
> 
> Both are trying to save their cultures from being destroyed by a lesser people.
Click to expand...


Both are scum/racist cultures,when you use a term like "LESSER PEOPLE"


----------



## theliq

Sweet_Caroline said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sweet_Caroline said:
> 
> 
> 
> The land is called Israel now and has been called that for many years.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeed, it is "called" that by some.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Great.  So you calling it Palestine is incorrect.
Click to expand...


That is not what Tinnie said.....Moron


----------



## theliq

Sweet_Caroline said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Tank said:
> 
> 
> 
> Both are trying to save their cultures from being destroyed by a lesser people.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> And both are doing that inside Palestine.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> And you are still calling the land "Palestine."
Click to expand...


Are you really that stupid..........more countries in the world support the Palestinians than Israel(the Jewish name for Palestine)Now,your prose is  ?????


----------



## Sweet_Caroline

theliq said:


> Sweet_Caroline said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> Indeed, it is "called" that by some.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Great.  So you calling it Palestine is incorrect.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> That is not what Tinnie said.....Moron
Click to expand...


He should not be calling it Palestine.  I corrected him.  Tinnie does have difficulty grasping simple facts.


----------



## theliq

Tank said:


> Palestine people are a worthless people



What a DICKHEAD......obviously you haven't met any.

Typical American should put their Brain into GEAR before OPENING THEIR MOUTHS

But TANK IS JUST A PUTRID LITTLE SOUTHERN RACIST MORON


----------



## theliq

Sweet_Caroline said:


> theliq said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sweet_Caroline said:
> 
> 
> 
> Great.  So you calling it Palestine is incorrect.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> That is not what Tinnie said.....Moron
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> He should not be calling it Palestine.  I corrected him.  Tinnie does have difficulty grasping simple facts.
Click to expand...


Why


----------



## P F Tinmore

Sweet_Caroline said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sweet_Caroline said:
> 
> 
> 
> The land is called Israel now and has been called that for many years.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeed, it is "called" that by some.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Great.  So you calling it Palestine is incorrect.
Click to expand...


No, I am correct. One of the final status issues in the current peace process is for Palestine to cede "Israeli land" to Israel.


----------



## Sweet_Caroline

theliq said:


> Sweet_Caroline said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> theliq said:
> 
> 
> 
> That is not what Tinnie said.....Moron
> 
> 
> 
> 
> He should not be calling it Palestine.  I corrected him.  Tinnie does have difficulty grasping simple facts.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Why
Click to expand...




Upon Independence the land was named Israel, that's why.


----------



## P F Tinmore

Sweet_Caroline said:


> theliq said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sweet_Caroline said:
> 
> 
> 
> He should not be calling it Palestine.  I corrected him.  Tinnie does have difficulty grasping simple facts.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Why
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Upon Independence the land was named Israel, that's why.
Click to expand...


Independence from whom?


----------



## Sweet_Caroline

P F Tinmore said:


> Sweet_Caroline said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> theliq said:
> 
> 
> 
> Why
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Upon Independence the land was named Israel, that's why.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Independence from whom?
Click to expand...


Oh please.  Read up on history.


----------



## P F Tinmore

Sweet_Caroline said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sweet_Caroline said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Upon Independence the land was named Israel, that's why.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Independence from whom?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Oh please.  Read up on history.
Click to expand...


I heard that Israel declared independence from the mandate.

The problem with that is that the mandate did not own any land. The mandate left Palestine without ceding any land to Israel because it had no land to cede.


----------



## Sweet_Caroline

P F Tinmore said:


> Sweet_Caroline said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> Independence from whom?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Oh please.  Read up on history.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I heard that Israel declared independence from the mandate.
> 
> The problem with that is that the mandate did not own any land. The mandate left Palestine without ceding any land to Israel because it had no land to cede.
Click to expand...


I think you ought to read this.
Israeli Declaration of Independence - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


----------



## P F Tinmore

Sweet_Caroline said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sweet_Caroline said:
> 
> 
> 
> Oh please.  Read up on history.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I heard that Israel declared independence from the mandate.
> 
> The problem with that is that the mandate did not own any land. The mandate left Palestine without ceding any land to Israel because it had no land to cede.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I think you ought to read this.
> Israeli Declaration of Independence - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Click to expand...


OK, I did.

The Avalon Project : Declaration of Israel's Independence 1948

There is nothing in either of those that mention any acquisition of land or defining any borders.


----------



## Sweet_Caroline

P F Tinmore said:


> Sweet_Caroline said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> I heard that Israel declared independence from the mandate.
> 
> The problem with that is that the mandate did not own any land. The mandate left Palestine without ceding any land to Israel because it had no land to cede.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I think you ought to read this.
> Israeli Declaration of Independence - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> OK, I did.
> 
> The Avalon Project : Declaration of Israel's Independence 1948
> 
> There is nothing in either of those that mention any acquisition of land or defining any borders.
Click to expand...


The Avalon Project?


----------



## georgephillip

RoccoR said:


> georgephillip,  _et al,_
> 
> Wow, great story.  Toledo War: Battle Between Michigan And Ohio
> 
> _"The most bizarre war in American history was the Toledo War that had no mortal casualties because the militias could not find each other."_​
> 
> 
> georgephillip said:
> 
> 
> 
> Rocco...bust a gut...imagine that evil imperialistic Michigan invaded peace-loving Columbus 65 years ago and imposed a Maize and Blue (no Star of David) occupation on Reynoldsburgh. You are still allowed to vote for your local town council (with or without ID) BUT you have no say over who writes the laws that control thousands of heavily armed teen-aged Wolverine terrorists manning numerous checkpoints between you and the Horseshoe. Surely, that would get on your last nerve every other Thanksgiving, right?
> 
> 
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> I suppose that means that the Ohioans called in Wisconsin, Illinois, Indiana, Kentucky, and Pennsylvania to invade Michigan to take it over; but lost.  Then Michigan, in pursuit of the Midwest Militia, overran Ohio.  In order to keep the Ohioans from creating a rear area security threat, armed teen-aged Wolverine Militia to setup numerous checkpoints to prevent an insurgency from getting out of hand.
> 
> Most Respectfully,
> R
Click to expand...

"The dispute between Ohio and Michigan was resolved the following year when Congress, as a condition for Michigan statehood made that territory give up its claim to the Toledo Strip. As compensation for its loss of Toledo, Congress awarded Michigan the Upper Peninsula. At the time, Michigan was enraged by this outcome and Ohio was considered the winner since it was given Toledo. However, nowadays Michigan considers itself the winner of that War since they got the Upper Peninsula *while Ohio ended up with Toledo.'*

*So... when are the Jewish Wolverines leaving Jerusalem?*

Toledo War: Battle Between Michigan And Ohio


----------



## georgephillip

Tank said:


> georgephillip said:
> 
> 
> 
> "The question is not 'Is Israel the same as South Africa?'
> It is 'do Israel's actions meet the international definition of what apartheid is?'
> 
> 
> 
> Both are trying to save their cultures from being destroyed by a lesser people.
Click to expand...

*Both are pawns on the Grand Chessboard:*

"There is great division of opinion regarding potential U.S. military action in Syria. However, one group is ecstatic over President Obamas endorsement of a military attack on Damascus. These are the Neconservatives who dominated the George W. Bush administration, and who still hold tremendous influence in Washington. An attack on Syria would be one step in fulfilling 'stage two' of a longstanding neoconservative plan to bring about regime change throughout the Middle East in three stages: Iraq, Syria and finally Iran." 

http://newamericamedia.org/2013/09/war-with-syria-would-fulfill-neoconservative


----------



## docmauser1

P F Tinmore said:


> _There is nothing in either of those that mention any acquisition of land or defining any borders._


Palistanians have had neither land, nor borders, of course.


----------



## docmauser1

georgephillip said:


> _So... when are the Jewish Wolverines leaving Jerusalem?_


When occupied California is returned to Mexico.


----------



## Kondor3

P F Tinmore said:


> Sweet_Caroline said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> theliq said:
> 
> 
> 
> Why
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Upon Independence the land was named Israel, that's why.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> *Independence from whom?*
Click to expand...


*From any other power on earth - or any claimant to the land they held.*


----------



## Kondor3

docmauser1 said:


> georgephillip said:
> 
> 
> 
> _So... when are the Jewish Wolverines leaving Jerusalem?_
> 
> 
> 
> _When occupied California is returned to Mexico._
Click to expand...

Which happens right after Manhattan Island is returned to its Lenape native owners...


----------



## RoccoR

Sweet_Caroline, P F Tinmore, _et al,_

This is the big Palestinian circle.  It is a frivolous argument they use in support of their Covenant and Charter to alter or discredit historical facts as a means to justify Jihad and armed insurrection.


Article 13 of Covenant:  Initiatives, and so-called peaceful solutions and international conferences, are in contradiction to the principles of the Islamic Resistance Movement. 
Article 20 of Charter:  The Balfour Declaration, the Palestine Mandate, and everything that has been based on them, are deemed null and void.



Sweet_Caroline said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sweet_Caroline said:
> 
> 
> 
> I think you ought to read this.
> Israeli Declaration of Independence - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
> 
> 
> 
> 
> OK, I did.
> 
> The Avalon Project : Declaration of Israel's Independence 1948
> 
> There is nothing in either of those that mention any acquisition of land or defining any borders.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> The Avalon Project?
Click to expand...

*(REFERENCES)*


UN Security Council Resolution 242
Map to UN Security Council Resolution 242
General Assembly Resolution 181(II)
Map to General Assembly 181(II)
Israeli Declaration of Independence
*(COMMENT)*

This is a fruitless argument.  It cannot by discussed in good faith with Palestinians.  Both the Covenant and the Charter stipulate that the process by which the State of Israel _(or any of the other surrounding Arab States)_ is unsound and invalid.

The boundary issue was a dilemma created by the Palestinian and the Arab League armies.  The Arab League attacked the newly declared State of Israel immediately upon its Declaration of Independence.  In the ensuing struggle _(an elective trial by combat initiated upon the aggression of the five participating Arab States)_ with some of the territory annotated as being allotted to the future Arab State [Part II, Section A, GA/RES/181(II)] being overrun by Israeli forces in pursuit of retreating Arab forces beaten back by defenders.  Thus, the original allocation for the Jewish State [outlined in Part II, Section B, GA/RES/181(II)] was expanded under Israeli control.  This was to set by the Armistice Lines.

All this Palestinian rhetoric about borders and boundaries is merely subterfuge and quibbling to give them some justification for the Jihad, which by their own admission starts with the "emergence of the martyr Izz al-Din al Qassam _[(1882  20 November 1935)( leader in the fight against British, French, and Zionist organizations in the Levant in the 1920s and 1930s and his brethren the fighters, members of Moslem Brotherhood")]_ _(Article 7, of the Covenant)_.  If the Hostile Arab Palestinian had not opened the conflict, it would not even be an issue.  Their claim that all of Palestine _(which they define as within "the boundaries it had during the British Mandate") "_is the homeland of the Arab Palestinian people; it is an indivisible part of the greater Arab homeland," is the cornerstone to their pursuit of conflict _(Articles 1 & 2 of Charter)_.  This is in direct defiance of the General Assembly - in contravention of the Jewish right to self-determination, and ignores the original intention for the establishment of a Jewish National Home.  It has been further used consistently to justify terrorist activity for more the half a century.

All this nonsense about an invasion by foreigners from Europe, is again, in direct defiance of the intention of lawful immigration processes established by the League of Nations and the Allied Powers (successors under treaty) to the establishment of a Jewish Nation Home.  

Oddly enough, both Yassar Arafat and Abu Mazen recognized and used GA/RES/181(II) to, first establish the State of Palestine, and then to request admission to the UN, which they, by means of direct action and policy _(Charter and Covenant)_ openly defy.

This is a no-win argument.  You cannot intelligently discuss the merits of the situation, and the conditions on the ground, if you cannot even get the Palestinians to agree on the basics beyond the chaotic and frivolous claims about borders and maps; or even, who is the legitimate government for the Palestinian people.

Most Respectfully,
R


----------



## Sweet_Caroline

RoccoR said:


> Sweet_Caroline, P F Tinmore, _et al,_
> 
> This is the big Palestinian circle.  It is a frivolous argument they use in support of their Covenant and Charter to alter or discredit historical facts as a means to justify Jihad and armed insurrection.
> 
> 
> Article 13 of Covenant:  Initiatives, and so-called peaceful solutions and international conferences, are in contradiction to the principles of the Islamic Resistance Movement.
> Article 20 of Charter:  The Balfour Declaration, the Palestine Mandate, and everything that has been based on them, are deemed null and void.
> 
> 
> 
> Sweet_Caroline said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> OK, I did.
> 
> The Avalon Project : Declaration of Israel's Independence 1948
> 
> There is nothing in either of those that mention any acquisition of land or defining any borders.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Avalon Project?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> *(REFERENCES)*
> 
> 
> UN Security Council Resolution 242
> Map to UN Security Council Resolution 242
> General Assembly Resolution 181(II)
> Map to General Assembly 181(II)
> Israeli Declaration of Independence
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> This is a fruitless argument.  It cannot by discussed in good faith with Palestinians.  Both the Covenant and the Charter stipulate that the process by which the State of Israel _(or any of the other surrounding Arab States)_ is unsound and invalid.
> 
> The boundary issue was a dilemma created by the Palestinian and the Arab League armies.  The Arab League attacked the newly declared State of Israel immediately upon its Declaration of Independence.  In the ensuing struggle _(an elective trial by combat initiated upon the aggression of the five participating Arab States)_ with some of the territory annotated as being allotted to the future Arab State [Part II, Section A, GA/RES/181(II)] being overrun by Israeli forces in pursuit of retreating Arab forces beaten back by defenders.  Thus, the original allocation for the Jewish State [outlined in Part II, Section B, GA/RES/181(II)] was expanded under Israeli control.  This was to set by the Armistice Lines.
> 
> All this Palestinian rhetoric about borders and boundaries is merely subterfuge and quibbling to give them some justification for the Jihad, which by their own admission starts with the "emergence of the martyr Izz al-Din al Qassam _[(1882  20 November 1935)( leader in the fight against British, French, and Zionist organizations in the Levant in the 1920s and 1930s and his brethren the fighters, members of Moslem Brotherhood")]_ _(Article 7, of the Covenant)_.  If the Hostile Arab Palestinian had not opened the conflict, it would not even be an issue.  Their claim that all of Palestine _(which they define as within "the boundaries it had during the British Mandate") "_is the homeland of the Arab Palestinian people; it is an indivisible part of the greater Arab homeland," is the cornerstone to their pursuit of conflict _(Articles 1 & 2 of Charter)_.  This is in direct defiance of the General Assembly - in contravention of the Jewish right to self-determination, and ignores the original intention for the establishment of a Jewish National Home.  It has been further used consistently to justify terrorist activity for more the half a century.
> 
> All this nonsense about an invasion by foreigners from Europe, is again, in direct defiance of the intention of lawful immigration processes established by the League of Nations and the Allied Powers (successors under treaty) to the establishment of a Jewish Nation Home.
> 
> Oddly enough, both Yassar Arafat and Abu Mazen recognized and used GA/RES/181(II) to, first establish the State of Palestine, and then to request admission to the UN, which they, by means of direct action and policy _(Charter and Covenant)_ openly defy.
> 
> This is a no-win argument.  You cannot intelligently discuss the merits of the situation, and the conditions on the ground, if you cannot even get the Palestinians to agree on the basics beyond the chaotic and frivolous claims about borders and maps; or even, who is the legitimate government for the Palestinian people.
> 
> Most Respectfully,
> R
Click to expand...


I fear that will be too complicated for Tinmore to understand and yet again we will be going round in circles.


----------



## georgephillip

docmauser1 said:


> georgephillip said:
> 
> 
> 
> _So... when are the Jewish Wolverines leaving Jerusalem?_
> 
> 
> 
> When occupied California is returned to Mexico.
Click to expand...

Point out the Apartheid Wall in California and practice your back-stroke.


----------



## Kondor3

Sweet_Caroline said:


> "..._I fear that will be too complicated for Tinmore to understand and yet again we will be going round in circles._"


Even if he IS capable of absorbing the complexities of the case, he will reject the case, because it conflicts with the multi-generational delusion under which so-called Palestinians operate in their Alternative Universe.


----------



## docmauser1

georgephillip said:


> docmauser1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> georgephillip said:
> 
> 
> 
> _So... when are the Jewish Wolverines leaving Jerusalem?_
> 
> 
> 
> When occupied California is returned to Mexico.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> _
> Point out the Apartheid Wall in California and practice your back-stroke._
Click to expand...

So, when is occupied California, which our honorable georgephillip occupies without paying rent to the govt. of Mexico, being returned to the latter?


----------



## Kondor3

georgephillip said:


> docmauser1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> georgephillip said:
> 
> 
> 
> _So... when are the Jewish Wolverines leaving Jerusalem?_
> 
> 
> 
> When occupied California is returned to Mexico.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Point out the Apartheid Wall in California and practice your back-stroke.
Click to expand...

That's not an Apartheid Wall.

That's an Anti-Suicide-Bomber Wall...

And Pest-Control Barrier...


----------



## Hoffstra

Kondor3 said:


> That's not an Apartheid Wall.
> 
> That's an Anti-Suicide-Bomber Wall...
> 
> And Pest-Control Barrier...



Just like how the Nazis used a pesticide, Zyklon B, to kill Jews.

birds of a feather flock together, huh Kondor?


----------



## Kondor3

Hoffstra said:


> Kondor3 said:
> 
> 
> 
> That's not an Apartheid Wall.
> 
> That's an Anti-Suicide-Bomber Wall...
> 
> And Pest-Control Barrier...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Just like how the Nazis used a pesticide, Zyklon B, to kill Jews.
> 
> birds of a feather flock together, huh Kondor?
Click to expand...


As I recall, the Jews were not suicide-bombing the Nazis and lobbing rockets at them...

And, as I recall, the Jews were not free to leave for greener pastures, like the Palestinians are...

Wake me up when the Jews start packing-off Palestinians to Extermination Camps and gassing them and cremating them by the hundreds of thousands...

Until then, you're going to have a hard time, selling that sort of faux analogy...

You'll have to do better than that...


----------



## georgephillip

Kondor3 said:


> georgephillip said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> docmauser1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> When occupied California is returned to Mexico.
> 
> 
> 
> Point out the Apartheid Wall in California and practice your back-stroke.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> That's not an Apartheid Wall.
> 
> That's an Anti-Suicide-Bomber Wall...
> 
> And Pest-Control Barrier...
Click to expand...

If 650,000 pests don't inflict their nation upon twice as many Arabs in 1948, there's no wall or apartheid in Palestine today.


----------



## Kondor3

georgephillip said:


> "..._If 650,000 pests don't inflict their nation upon twice as many Arabs in 1948, there's no wall or apartheid in Palestine today._"



Not to worry...






According to the Palestinian's own propaganda maps, there won't *BE* a 'Palestine' in a few years...

And then all this goes away...

As the so-called 'Palestinians' disperse into Jordan, Lebanon, etc., forevermore...

Vae victus...

Problem solved...


----------



## docmauser1

georgephillip said:


> _If 650,000 pests don't inflict their nation upon twice as many Arabs in 1948, there's no wall or apartheid in Palestine today._


_twice as many Arabs_! Damn, palistanians are such major immigrants.


----------



## georgephillip

Kondor3 said:


> georgephillip said:
> 
> 
> 
> "..._If 650,000 pests don't inflict their nation upon twice as many Arabs in 1948, there's no wall or apartheid in Palestine today._"
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Not to worry...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> According to the Palestinian's own propaganda maps, there won't *BE* a 'Palestine' in a few years...
> 
> And then all this goes away...
> 
> As the so-called 'Palestinians' disperse into Jordan, Lebanon, etc., forevermore...
> 
> Vae victus...
> 
> Problem solved...
Click to expand...

Hitler would approve.


----------



## Kondor3

georgephillip said:


> "..._Hitler would approve._"



So would Muhammed, or Suleiman or Salah al din or Tariq ibn-Ziyad or Mehmed II or any of scores (hundreds) of other Muslim and Arab military conquerors of other peoples' lands...

Fun, ain't it?

None of which addresses the very real premise that your side is running out of land, and out of time...

Tick, tick, tick...


----------



## P F Tinmore

RoccoR said:
			
		

> The boundary issue was a dilemma created by the Palestinian and the Arab League armies. The Arab League attacked the newly declared State of Israel immediately upon its Declaration of Independence. In the ensuing struggle (an elective trial by combat initiated upon the aggression of the five participating Arab States)* with some of the territory annotated as being allotted to the future Arab State* [Part II, Section A, GA/RES/181(II)]* being overrun by Israeli forces in pursuit of retreating Arab forces *beaten back by defenders. Thus, the original allocation for the Jewish State [outlined in Part II, Section B, GA/RES/181(II)] was expanded under Israeli control. This was to set by the Armistice Lines.



Just another Israeli lie.

Israel was grabbing land beyond the proposed borders* before *any Arab country entered Palestine.

You should know that already, Rocco.


----------



## Bloodrock44

A double curse on this thread! 950 responses and not one thing accomplished nor has Israel given up one inch of ground. Let it die already for Chrissakes!


----------



## toastman

P F Tinmore said:


> toastman said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> Indeed, that is true. The Messiah is to call his people to the promised land, not a bunch of criminals out of Europe.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Very nice of you to call a bunch of persecuted Jews , who had JUST lost 6 000 000 of their family members, a bunch of criminals. I don't ever bring up the Holocaust or play the victim card, but this comment was just disgusting.
> You should take it back please.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> They lost 6,000,000 members in 1917?
Click to expand...


Obviously I was talking about the Zionist immigration post WW 2. I guess you weren't


----------



## Kondor3

P F Tinmore said:


> "..._Just another Israeli lie_..."


Or another _Palestinian_ one, which seems just as likely, if not more...


----------



## P F Tinmore

> Oddly enough, both Yassar Arafat and Abu Mazen recognized and used GA/RES/181(II)...



Both were installed in Palestine by foreign powers to be the leaders of Palestine.


----------



## P F Tinmore

Kondor3 said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> "..._Just another Israeli lie_..."
> 
> 
> 
> Or another _Palestinian_ one, which seems just as likely, if not more...
Click to expand...


My post is true. It is a matter of history.

Look it up.


----------



## toastman

Anybody who thinks Israel is actually Palestine is delusional..its really that simple


----------



## toastman

P F Tinmore said:


> Kondor3 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> "..._Just another Israeli lie_..."
> 
> 
> 
> Or another _Palestinian_ one, which seems just as likely, if not more...
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> My post is true. It is a matter of history.
> 
> Look it up.
Click to expand...


Funny, so you're saying a full member of the UN called Israel is actually Palestine.. have you notified the UN about this mistake of theirs? This is a huge breakthrough!


----------



## docmauser1

P F Tinmore said:


> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The boundary issue was a dilemma created by the Palestinian and the Arab League armies. The Arab League attacked the newly declared State of Israel immediately upon its Declaration of Independence. In the ensuing struggle (an elective trial by combat initiated upon the aggression of the five participating Arab States)* with some of the territory annotated as being allotted to the future Arab State* [Part II, Section A, GA/RES/181(II)]* being overrun by Israeli forces in pursuit of retreating Arab forces *beaten back by defenders. Thus, the original allocation for the Jewish State [outlined in Part II, Section B, GA/RES/181(II)] was expanded under Israeli control. This was to set by the Armistice Lines.
> 
> 
> 
> _Just another Israeli lie. Israel was grabbing land beyond the proposed borders before any Arab country entered Palestine._
Click to expand...

Let's review the factual timeline:
May 15, 1947 - The General Assembly established a Special Committee on Palestine (UNSCOP).
August 31 - The UNSCOP recommended partition of Palestine with an internationalised Jerusalem, a minority report recommended a federation.
September 29 - The arab Higher committee rejected the UNSCOP recommendation formally.
October 2 - The Jewish agency accepted the UNSCOP recommendation formally.
November 29 - The UN approved the partition.
November 30 - Arab mobs attacked jews in Jerusalem, arab armed thugs began operations against jews everywhere.
March 19, 1948 - The US proposed a partition suspension and called for a special session of the General Assembly to discuss trusteeship.
April 1 - The Security Council called for a truce and a special session of the General Assembly to reconsider future of Palestine.
May 13 - Rapacious Jaffa arabs got kicked by the Hagana.
May 14 - Declaration of Independence. The US recognized Israel de facto.
May 14 - The British mandate ended. Arab armies invaded Israel.
May 17 - The USSR recognized Israel.
May 19 - Jerusalem cut off by arabs.
May 1948 - July 1949 - War.
We may now happily dispense with arab habitual lies and agitprop, of course. And still there's been no "arab state of palestine".


----------



## P F Tinmore

toastman said:


> Anybody who thinks Israel is actually Palestine is delusional..its really that simple



Source: The Avalon Project : Jordanian-Israeli General Armistice Agreement, April 3, 1949



> Responding to the Security Council resolution of 16 November 1948,(2) calling upon them, as a further provisional measure under Article 40 of the Charter of the United Nations and in order to facilitate the transition from the present truce to permanent peace *in Palestine,* to negotiate an armistice;



The term "in Palestine" is used regularly in all of the armistice agreements. The term "in Israel" is completely absent.



> (d) In the sector from a point on the Dead Sea (MR 1925-0958) to the *southernmost tip of Palestine*, the Armistice Demarcation Line shall be determined by...



That agreement, that Israel signed, calls that territory Palestine. Before the ink was dry, Israel started calling that land Israel.

This proves an old adage to be true: Tell a lie often enough and people will believe it.


----------



## docmauser1

P F Tinmore said:


> _The term "in Palestine" is used regularly in all of the armistice agreements._


Geographic area, who cares.


----------



## Kondor3

docmauser1 said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> _The term "in Palestine" is used regularly in all of the armistice agreements._
> 
> 
> 
> *Geographic area, who cares.*
Click to expand...








True, but, when your back is against the wall and you've been losing for 65 years and when you come to the conclusion that the party is almost over, well, you get even more desperate and grasp at straws and play word-games; mostly because that's all that is left that you CAN do, and habits of resistance die hard, even amongst such a disjointed and loosely-knitted pack of diverse elements as that bunch which has temporarily banded-together under the label 'Palestinians'...


----------



## toastman

P F Tinmore said:


> toastman said:
> 
> 
> 
> Anybody who thinks Israel is actually Palestine is delusional..its really that simple
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Source: The Avalon Project : Jordanian-Israeli General Armistice Agreement, April 3, 1949
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Responding to the Security Council resolution of 16 November 1948,(2) calling upon them, as a further provisional measure under Article 40 of the Charter of the United Nations and in order to facilitate the transition from the present truce to permanent peace *in Palestine,* to negotiate an armistice;
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> The term "in Palestine" is used regularly in all of the armistice agreements. The term "in Israel" is completely absent.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> (d) In the sector from a point on the Dead Sea (MR 1925-0958) to the *southernmost tip of Palestine*, the Armistice Demarcation Line shall be determined by...
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> That agreement, that Israel signed, calls that territory Palestine. Before the ink was dry, Israel started calling that land Israel.
> 
> This proves an old adage to be true: Tell a lie often enough and people will believe it.
Click to expand...


Completely irrelevant. 
What I'm trying to say is that when you look at a map, and you find Israel, then the land marked as Israel, is actually Israel. And nobody can dispute that.
No matter how hateful a person is towards Israel, Israel is here. Deal with it


----------



## georgephillip

toastman said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> toastman said:
> 
> 
> 
> Anybody who thinks Israel is actually Palestine is delusional..its really that simple
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Source: The Avalon Project : Jordanian-Israeli General Armistice Agreement, April 3, 1949
> 
> 
> 
> The term "in Palestine" is used regularly in all of the armistice agreements. The term "in Israel" is completely absent.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> (d) In the sector from a point on the Dead Sea (MR 1925-0958) to the *southernmost tip of Palestine*, the Armistice Demarcation Line shall be determined by...
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> That agreement, that Israel signed, calls that territory Palestine. Before the ink was dry, Israel started calling that land Israel.
> 
> This proves an old adage to be true: Tell a lie often enough and people will believe it.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Completely irrelevant.
> What I'm trying to say is that when you look at a map, and you find Israel, then the land marked as Israel, is actually Israel. And nobody can dispute that.
> No matter how hateful a person is towards Israel, Israel is here. Deal with it
Click to expand...


Which Israel and which maps are you talking about?
The maps of "Israel" devoid of any Green Lines?
If so, you are talking about an Israel that's sovereign from the River to the sea.
Is that the "Israel" you believe exists?


----------



## Kondor3

georgephillip said:


> "..._you are talking about an Israel that's sovereign from the River to the sea. Is that the "Israel" you believe exists?_"


My guess is that nobody believes that Israel exists in such a monolithic state, yet, however...

That is the Israel which we will probably see in or lifetimes, as the net continues to tighten, and the remaining Palestinians are squeezed off their last few scraps of land, and scattered into Jordan and Lebanon and the rest...

Palestinians with the means to do so are better off packing-up and moving to another country now, before the worst of the squeezing and evictions and deportations begin...

Israel cannot exist with the Palestinians in their midst as a large bloc of population, so the remaining Palestinians will be forced to move someplace else...

The world will put up a squawk for all of about 10 seconds, then breathe a sign of relief after six or seven decades of this shit, begin to forget about it at the speed of light, and move on with more important things...

Consolidations and mop-up operations continue...


----------



## Hoffstra

Does South Africa still steal black peoples' land and just give it away to whites?

Nope.

But Israel does steal Arab land and simply give it to Jews.


----------



## Kondor3

Hoffstra said:


> _Does South Africa still steal black peoples' land and just give it away to whites? Nope. But Israel does steal Arab land and simply give it to Jews._


You don't know much about the history of Apartheid in South Africa, do you?

In the case of the Jews, you may consider it the spoils of victory in war, and forcing an antagonistic native contingent away rather than just slaughtering them.

Perhaps the Muslim-Arabs of the so-called Occupied Territories should not have opposed Israel back in 1948 and afterwards...

They chose sides poorly...

And now they (and their descendants) are dealing with the consequences of their bad decision...

Nations and Peoples steal land all the time.

Victory on the battlefield tends to settle disputes over land-title.

Besides, the Arabs stole it from somebody else a few hundred years ago, anyway.

It's simply their turn in the barrel. 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




Heck, the Arabs have that entire big sandbox to play in...

The least they can do is let the little poor kid down the block who goes to a different church, to have a little scoop of sand of their own that really won't be missed anyway, and to move-over just a skosh, to make room...


----------



## Trajan

georgephillip said:


> "The question is not 'Is Israel the same as South Africa?'
> It is 'do Israel's actions meet the international definition of what apartheid is?'
> 
> The crime of apartheid is defined by the 2002 Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court as inhumane acts of a character similar to other crimes against humanity 'committed in the context of an institutionalized regime of systematic oppression and domination by one racial group over any other racial group or groups and committed with the intention of maintaining that regime.'"
> 
> A couple of other relevant questions include did Israel sign the 2002 Rome Statute, if not;why not, and does it even matter?
> 
> Is Israel an Apartheid State?



*
 Is Israel the Same as South Africa?*

No.

Next?


----------



## Hoffstra

Kondor3 said:


> You don't know much about the history of Apartheid in South Africa, do you?
> 
> In the case of the Jews, you may consider it the spoils of victory in war, and forcing an antagonistic native contingent away rather than just slaughtering them.
> 
> Perhaps the Muslim-Arabs of the so-called Occupied Territories should not have opposed Israel back in 1948 and afterwards...
> 
> They chose sides poorly...
> 
> And now they (and their descendants) are dealing with the consequences of their bad decision...
> 
> Nations and Peoples steal land all the time.
> 
> Victory on the battlefield tends to settle disputes over land-title.
> 
> Besides, the Arabs stole it from somebody else a few hundred years ago, anyway.
> 
> It's simply their turn in the barrel.



translation:   Yes, Israel is just like Apartheid South Africa, and its all good!!!!!

and btw, if its ok for Israel to do what its doing to the Arabs, then Israel must also accept the consequences of such actions.


----------



## Kondor3

Hoffstra said:


> "...translation:   Yes, Israel is just like Apartheid South Africa, and its all good!!!!!..."


Nope. Very few similarities, actually. Palestinians are not Israeli citizens and are living in largely autonomous areas that are slowing being reduced in size to force them elsewhere.



> "..._if its ok for Israel to do what its doing to the Arabs, then Israel must also accept the consequences of such actions._"



Bahhhhhh... suicide bombings and rocket attacks that are more pussy than balls... and, of course, when things get out of hand, the IDF just sends in the tanks and planes and troops, to burn-out the nest-of-vipers du jour.

They've been at this for decades but they're nearly done now and none of us will have to worry about this within the next 20 years or so.


----------



## georgephillip

Kondor3 said:


> georgephillip said:
> 
> 
> 
> "..._you are talking about an Israel that's sovereign from the River to the sea. Is that the "Israel" you believe exists?_"
> 
> 
> 
> My guess is that nobody believes that Israel exists in such a monolithic state, yet, however...
> 
> That is the Israel which we will probably see in or lifetimes, as the net continues to tighten, and the remaining Palestinians are squeezed off their last few scraps of land, and scattered into Jordan and Lebanon and the rest...
> 
> Palestinians with the means to do so are better off packing-up and moving to another country now, before the worst of the squeezing and evictions and deportations begin...
> 
> Israel cannot exist with the Palestinians in their midst as a large bloc of population, so the remaining Palestinians will be forced to move someplace else...
> 
> The world will put up a squawk for all of about 10 seconds, then breathe a sign of relief after six or seven decades of this shit, begin to forget about it at the speed of light, and move on with more important things...
> 
> Consolidations and mop-up operations continue...
Click to expand...

*Really?*

"According to Israel's Central Bureau of Statistics, as of May 2006, of Israel's 7 million people, 77% were Jews, 18.5% Arabs, and 4.3% 'others'..."

"According to Palestinian evaluations, The West Bank is inhabited by approximately 2.4 million Palestinians and the Gaza Strip by another 1.4 million. According to a study presented at The Sixth Herzliya Conference on The Balance of Israel's National Security[65] there are 1.4 million Palestinians in the West Bank. 

"This study was criticised by demographer Sergio DellaPergola, who estimated 3.33 million Palestinians in the West Bank and Gaza Strip combined at the end of 2005.[66]

"According to these Israeli and Palestinian estimates, the population in Israel and the Palestinian Territories stands at 9.810.8 million."

*Roughly equal numbers of Jews and Arabs currently live under Jewish civil and military laws between the River and the sea. Arab birthrates outpace Jewish rates of reproduction.
Maybe Jews should call up Samson and his Shit?*

Demographics of Palestine - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


----------



## Hoffstra

Kondor3 said:


> Nope. Very few similarities, actually. Palestinians are not Israeli citizens and are living in largely autonomous areas that are slowing being reduced in size to force them elsewhere....



yes, its called ethnic cleansing.

Milosevic would be proud of Israel.


----------



## Kondor3

georgephillip said:


> "..._birthrates_..."


Birthrates?

Really?

What-in-the-world leads you to believe that the Palestinians will be allowed to *REMAIN* in the West Bank and Gaza long enough to overwhelm the Jews by sheer numbers?

Never gonna happen.

They'll be kicked-out by force long before that happens.

And the world won't lift a finger, as the Palestinians are scattered and neutralized.

As a matter of fact, most of the rest of the world will breathe a sigh of relief that it's finally over.

They won't be killed... they'll just be quickly and decisively overwhelmed by the IDF...

Then evicted and deported; put on the road to Amman and Beirut and Damascus and the like...

Luggage on top, kids in the back seat, with some Israeli compensation money in their pockets for their trouble, destination: new and happier lives...

Those who aren't smart enough to '_get out of Dodge_' before that happens, anyway...

And the world will forget all about it with blinding speed.


----------



## Hoffstra

Kondor3 said:


> Birthrates?
> 
> Really?
> 
> What-in-the-world leads you to believe that the Palestinians will be allowed to REMAIN in the West Bank and Gaza long enough to overwhelm the Jews by sheer numbers?
> 
> Never gonna happen...



when you and other Uber-Zionists make statements like this, I suddenly lose enough tears to cry over terrorist attacks against Israel.


----------



## Kondor3

Hoffstra said:


> Kondor3 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Nope. Very few similarities, actually. Palestinians are not Israeli citizens and are living in largely autonomous areas that are slowing being reduced in size to force them elsewhere....
> 
> 
> 
> 
> yes, its called ethnic cleansing.
Click to expand...


Consider it both retaliatory and preemptive in nature.

The Arabs (including the Palestinians) have repeatedly threatened to clear the land of Jews and to drown them in the Mediterranean...

If that's not ethnic cleansing, I don't know what is...

But the Palestinians lost their bid for a viable State, so they never got the chance to put into practice what their mouths salivate about and what their minds fantasize about doing...

For the Jews of Israel, it's an "Us or Them" choice.

They chose "us" - from their perspective - big surprise.

Under identical circumstances, most of us would make the same choice.

I would rather that my enemy and his family be driven from the land into exile and forced to begin new lives someplace else, then lie down and wait for me-and-mine to be slaughtered and drowned and enslaved and scattered.

Good on the Jews... after centuries of oppression, they finally found their backbone as a People again... and man-oh-man, have they been kicking some major ass; most excellently.


----------



## Kondor3

Hoffstra said:


> "..._when you and other Uber-Zionists make statements like this, I suddenly lose enough tears to cry over terrorist attacks against Israel._"



How charming... but that doesn't change the facts on the ground, nor trends, nor the predictable future... ain't that a bitch?


----------



## P F Tinmore

Kondor3 said:


> Hoffstra said:
> 
> 
> 
> _Does South Africa still steal black peoples' land and just give it away to whites? Nope. But Israel does steal Arab land and simply give it to Jews._
> 
> 
> 
> You don't know much about the history of Apartheid in South Africa, do you?
> 
> In the case of the Jews, you may consider it the spoils of victory in war, and forcing an antagonistic native contingent away rather than just slaughtering them.
> 
> Perhaps the Muslim-Arabs of the so-called Occupied Territories should not have opposed Israel back in 1948 and afterwards...
> 
> They chose sides poorly...
> 
> And now they (and their descendants) are dealing with the consequences of their bad decision...
> 
> Nations and Peoples steal land all the time.
> 
> Victory on the battlefield tends to settle disputes over land-title.
> 
> Besides, the Arabs stole it from somebody else a few hundred years ago, anyway.
> 
> It's simply their turn in the barrel.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Heck, the Arabs have that entire big sandbox to play in...
> 
> The least they can do is let the little poor kid down the block who goes to a different church, to have a little scoop of sand of their own that really won't be missed anyway, and to move-over just a skosh, to make room...
Click to expand...




> Victory on the battlefield tends to settle disputes over land-title.



But the Palestinians did not lose a war to Israel.


----------



## Hoffstra

Kondor3 said:


> How charming... but that doesn't change the facts on the ground, nor trends, nor the predictable future... ain't that a bitch?



you know what's a real bitch?

hatred of Israel & Israelis.  Too bad they deserve it.


----------



## Kondor3

Hoffstra said:


> Kondor3 said:
> 
> 
> 
> How charming... but that doesn't change the facts on the ground, nor trends, nor the predictable future... ain't that a bitch?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _you know what's a real bitch? hatred of Israel & Israelis.  Too bad they deserve it._
Click to expand...


Very nice, I"m sure.

Now...

Please fork-over your tax-money so that we can send more military aid to Israel.

Thank you for your generous contribution on behalf of the Nation and its Best Friends.

Sincerely,

The U.S. Government


----------



## Hoffstra

Kondor3 said:


> Very nice, I"m sure.
> 
> Now...
> 
> Please fork-over your tax-money so that we can send more military aid to Israel.
> 
> Thank you for your generous contribution on behalf of the Nation and its Best Friends.
> 
> Sincerely,
> 
> The U.S. Government



Someday, assholes like you will not be able to unfairly and unjustly manipulate MY government into giving Israel undue and undeserved support and aid.

I pray and long, for that great day.

I suspect there will be a massive run on El Al tickets, when that day comes.


----------



## toastman

Hoffstra said:


> Kondor3 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Very nice, I"m sure.
> 
> Now...
> 
> Please fork-over your tax-money so that we can send more military aid to Israel.
> 
> Thank you for your generous contribution on behalf of the Nation and its Best Friends.
> 
> Sincerely,
> 
> The U.S. Government
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Someday, assholes like you will not be able to unfairly and unjustly manipulate MY government into giving Israel undue and undeserved support and aid.
> 
> I pray and long, for that great day.
> 
> I suspect there will be a massive run on El Al tickets, when that day comes.
Click to expand...


You go ahead and keep waiting for that day, while the rest of us enjoy reality.


----------



## georgephillip

Kondor3 said:


> georgephillip said:
> 
> 
> 
> "..._birthrates_..."
> 
> 
> 
> Birthrates?
> 
> Really?
> 
> What-in-the-world leads you to believe that the Palestinians will be allowed to *REMAIN* in the West Bank and Gaza long enough to overwhelm the Jews by sheer numbers?
> 
> Never gonna happen.
> 
> They'll be kicked-out by force long before that happens.
> 
> And the world won't lift a finger, as the Palestinians are scattered and neutralized.
> 
> As a matter of fact, most of the rest of the world will breathe a sigh of relief that it's finally over.
> 
> They won't be killed... they'll just be quickly and decisively overwhelmed by the IDF...
> 
> Then evicted and deported; put on the road to Amman and Beirut and Damascus and the like...
> 
> Luggage on top, kids in the back seat, with some Israeli compensation money in their pockets for their trouble, destination: new and happier lives...
> 
> Those who aren't smart enough to '_get out of Dodge_' before that happens, anyway...
> 
> And the world will forget all about it with blinding speed.
Click to expand...

*Ethnic Cleansing,
Really?*

"Ethnic cleansing is a the process or policy of eliminating unwanted ethnic or religious groups by deportation, forcible displacement, mass murder, or by threats of such acts, with the intent of creating a territory inhabited by people of a homogeneous or pure ethnicity, religion, culture, and history. Ethnic cleansing usually involves attempts to remove physical and cultural evidence of the targeted group in the territory through the destruction of homes, social centers, farms, and infrastructure, and by the desecration of monuments, cemeteries, and places of worship."

Ethnic cleansing - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

*Jews of the world, Unite!
What do you have to lose?*


----------



## Kondor3

Hoffstra said:


> Kondor3 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Very nice, I"m sure.
> 
> Now...
> 
> Please fork-over your tax-money so that we can send more military aid to Israel.
> 
> Thank you for your generous contribution on behalf of the Nation and its Best Friends.
> 
> Sincerely,
> 
> The U.S. Government
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _Someday, assholes like you will not be able to unfairly and unjustly manipulate MY government into giving Israel undue and undeserved support and aid.
> 
> I pray and long, for that great day.
> 
> I suspect there will be a massive run on El Al tickets, when that day comes._
Click to expand...


Yer barkin' up the wrong American (Irish-German/Roman Catholic) tree, me bucko... 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




Now hush... don't worry your pretty head over this... just fork over your tax money... thank you.


----------



## Kondor3

georgephillip said:


> "..._Ethnic Cleansing, Really?_..."


Yeppers... although the Jews might possibly view it as a _Gang Mikva_ for purification purposes, instead.

Consider it preemptive and precautionary...

The Arab-Muslim Palestinians and their Arab-Muslim neighbors have sworn to 'cleanse' so-called Palestine of Jews and to make so-called Palestine sovereign from river to sea, and to drown the Jews in the Mediterranean.

And they've been threatening to do that since 1948, at least.

If that's not a threat to undertake Ethnic Cleansing, then I don't know what is.

Goose, meet gander.

"Do unto others, before they do unto you."

It's a choice between the ragtag Palestinians and themselves.

They chose themselves.

Big surprise.

Under similar us-or-them circumstances, 99.99% of the world's population would make the same choice.

The Palestinians are being slowly-but-surely squeezed off the last few scraps of land remaining to them, so that they'll take-the-hint and move to Jordan or Lebanon or Syria or Egypt of their own volition...

At some point, those who don't take the hint, will be forcibly evicted...

_Eretz Yisrael_ will be 'whole' once again for the first time in 2,000 years...

And the rattlesnakes (_suicide bombers and rocketeers and militias, sworn to destroy the Jews_) in their midst will be nothing more than a quickly fading bad memory, as the so-called Palestinians scatter and assimilate and quickly lose their newfound and temporary cohesion...

Population shifts happen all the time...

Several of them within living memory, including some large-scale ones in Europe after the Allies had won WWII...

This will be nothing different, and that particular Road Show is almost ready to begin...

A quick look at the Palestinians own propaganda maps of their shrinking land under their control will serve-up a definitive clue to all but the dullest of partisan observers...

Any _sane_ Palestinian with two shekels to rub together and an ounce of brains would be well-advised to get his family and his own ass out of Rump Palestine and to move to Jordan or Lebanon or Syria or Egypt or Saudi Arabia or wherever, to avoid Eviction Day...


----------



## Hoffstra

Kondor3 said:


> At some point, those who don't take the hint, will be forcibly evicted...
> 
> _Eretz Yisrael_ will be 'whole' once again for the first time in 2,000 years....



If the Israeli Jews dare attempt to kick out the Arabs, they will be destroyed.

Utterly and totally destroyed.

and the Jews of the world will also suffer due to their brethren's Fascism.


.....but something tells me you're too stupid and arrogant to realize that.


----------



## Kondor3

Hoffstra said:


> Kondor3 said:
> 
> 
> 
> At some point, those who don't take the hint, will be forcibly evicted...
> 
> _Eretz Yisrael_ will be 'whole' once again for the first time in 2,000 years....
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *If the Israeli Jews dare attempt to kick out the Arabs, they will be destroyed.
> *
> Utterly and totally destroyed.
> 
> and the Jews of the world will also suffer due to their brethren's Fascism.
> 
> .....but something tells me you're too stupid and arrogant to realize that.
Click to expand...







Most Arab Militaries couldn't find their asses with both hands in a well-lit room surrounded by mirrors...

Their general staffs piss their pants when they contemplate going up against the Israelis...

And there's no way in hell that the _Palestinians_ are going to destroy the Jews of Israel, so...

I'm not sure who remains, beyond those folk, to do all this 'destroying'...

Do you have some kind of Avenging Force in mind that doesn't exist yet?

Still... it's an amusing thought...

Mebbe you can make a video game out of it...


----------



## P F Tinmore

toastman said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> toastman said:
> 
> 
> 
> Anybody who thinks Israel is actually Palestine is delusional..its really that simple
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Source: The Avalon Project : Jordanian-Israeli General Armistice Agreement, April 3, 1949
> 
> 
> 
> The term "in Palestine" is used regularly in all of the armistice agreements. The term "in Israel" is completely absent.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> (d) In the sector from a point on the Dead Sea (MR 1925-0958) to the *southernmost tip of Palestine*, the Armistice Demarcation Line shall be determined by...
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> That agreement, that Israel signed, calls that territory Palestine. Before the ink was dry, Israel started calling that land Israel.
> 
> This proves an old adage to be true: Tell a lie often enough and people will believe it.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Completely irrelevant.
> What I'm trying to say is that when you look at a map, and you find Israel, then the land marked as Israel, is actually Israel. And nobody can dispute that.
> No matter how hateful a person is towards Israel, Israel is here. Deal with it
Click to expand...


Israel is the only country I have seen where its map has a disclaimer on territory, legal status and boundaries.


----------



## Hoffstra

Kondor3 said:


> Most Arab Militaries couldn't find their asses with both hands in a well-lit room surrounded by mirrors...
> 
> And their general staffs piss their pants when they contemplate going up against the Israelis...
> 
> And there's no way in hell that the Palestinians are going to destroy the Jews of Israel, so...
> 
> I'm not sure who remains, beyond those folk, to do all this 'destroying'...
> 
> But it's an amusing thought...



hey asshole, put on your reading glasses if you can't read.

if Israel tries to commit ethnic cleansing/genocide against the Arabs of Palestine, the Arab world, the Muslim world, and Russia will make sure that Israel is wiped off the Earth.

and the Jews of the West will suffer too.


----------



## P F Tinmore

Kondor3 said:


> Hoffstra said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Kondor3 said:
> 
> 
> 
> At some point, those who don't take the hint, will be forcibly evicted...
> 
> _Eretz Yisrael_ will be 'whole' once again for the first time in 2,000 years....
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *If the Israeli Jews dare attempt to kick out the Arabs, they will be destroyed.
> *
> Utterly and totally destroyed.
> 
> and the Jews of the world will also suffer due to their brethren's Fascism.
> 
> .....but something tells me you're too stupid and arrogant to realize that.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Most Arab Militaries couldn't find their asses with both hands in a well-lit room surrounded by mirrors...
> 
> Their general staffs piss their pants when they contemplate going up against the Israelis...
> 
> And there's no way in hell that the _Palestinians_ are going to destroy the Jews of Israel, so...
> 
> I'm not sure who remains, beyond those folk, to do all this 'destroying'...
> 
> Do you have some kind of Avenging Force in mind that doesn't exist yet?
> 
> Still... it's an amusing thought...
> 
> Mebbe you can make a video game out of it...
Click to expand...


That is not how it is going to go down.


----------



## Hoffstra

Israel would never try to kick out the Arabs.

It would lead to a nuclear war.

The Palestinians and Israelis will have to learn to share the land.

cause if they can't share it, no one will have it.


----------



## Kondor3

Hoffstra said:


> "..._hey asshole, put on your reading glasses if you can't read_..."



My, my, my... such keyboard-warrior passion... 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	






> "..._if Israel tries to commit ethnic cleansing/genocide against the Arabs of Palestine, the Arab world, the Muslim world... will make sure that Israel is wiped off the Earth_..."








It won't be genocide... just ethnic cleansing... more like Preemptive Eviction and Resumption of Title...

Better tell your Avengers to hurry though...not much time left... tick, tick, tick...

Oh, and, BTW...

The Arab World and the Muslim World have ganged-up on Israel before...

Repeatedly...

And gotten their asses kicked for their trouble...

Repeatedly...

Yeah...

The Arabs are gonna wipe-out the Jews of Israel...






The Israelis have been tearing the Arabs a new asshole for 65 years...

With most of that BEFORE Israel built a 200+ warhead nuclear arsenal, complete with long-range delivery systems...

You've got a great sense of humor, kid...



> "..._and Russia will make sure that Israel is wiped off the Earth_..."



The Russians do not want to go to war with the United States over the issue of Israel.

Russia is only able to threaten _nuclear_ war at this juncture in history.

Russia cannot project conventional power far-abroad; it was never very good at it in the past, beyond Eastern Europe and long supply and communication lines, and they'll have Turkey and NATO to contend with, if it comes to that.

No... we won't see Russia going to war with Israel and the US over something as unimportant as kicking a couple of million Palestinians out of the country and shipping them off to the safety of Jordan or Lebanon or Syria or Egypt and the like.

The Russians are far too intelligent and pragmatic for that; besides, in their heart-of-hearts, the Russians don't like the Muslims very much either (_see Chechnya_).

But I'm sure they'll be happy to sell you some more AK-47s and RPGs and SAM batteries and ground radars and 30-year-old jet fighters and such... hard currency only, of course... 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




And, if they don't _Go Conventional_, then they *SURE*-as-hell don't want to start a _nuclear_ war over a bunch of lost-cause Muslim loser-types whom they don't like nor trust very much anyway.



> "..._and the Jews of the West will suffer too._"



I don't know from *WHOM*, but I'm sure we can take your word for that... 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




Have a pleasant evening, dreaming sugar-plum visions of Jihad, mine good colleague...


----------



## Kondor3

P F Tinmore said:


> "..._That is not how it is going to go down._"


True, Tinny...

It will end with a flurry of financial and logistics and military preparations, a swift, decisive and brutal military campaign that completely overwhelms them and forces them to surrender, then they will be patched-up, packed-up, given some moving and starting-over money, and packed-off to Lebanon and Jordan and such... and that in the not-too-distant future. You can smell it in the air now, metaphorically speaking, and your own propaganda maps tell the same tale for anyone who has an ounce of brains to read between the lines.


----------



## P F Tinmore

Kondor3 said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> "..._That is not how it is going to go down._"
> 
> 
> 
> True, Tinny...
> 
> It will end with a flurry of financial and logistics and military preparations, a swift, decisive and brutal military campaign that completely overwhelms them and forces them to surrender, then they will be patched-up, packed-up, given some moving and starting-over money, and packed-off to Lebanon and Jordan and such... and that in the not-too-distant future. You can smell it in the air now, metaphorically speaking, and your own propaganda maps tell the same tale for anyone who has an ounce of brains to read between the lines.
Click to expand...


I don't think so. Israel will rot out from the inside like a bad tooth.

Israel is losing popular support around the world and governments that support Israel are starting to wobble. Of course IAW, BDS, and others are pushing this right along.

The US is in its waning years as a superpower. It will go broke and collapse like all other empires have.


----------



## Kondor3

P F Tinmore said:


> "..._I don't think so. Israel will rot out from the inside like a bad tooth. Israel is losing popular support around the world and governments that support Israel are starting to wobble. Of course IAW, BDS, and others are pushing this right along. The US is in its waning years as a superpower. It will go broke and collapse like all other empires have._"


BDS is a joke; the last desperate gasp of a dying, failed-state Rump Palestine; which will soon be a government-in-exile; degenerating at last into a short-lived fraternal organization; it's a circus flea.

Oh, and, America will, indeed, collapse at some point, but the Palestinians own *Eviction Day* will come many years before that, so, don't count too much on that.


----------



## Hoffstra

South Africa is trying to right the wrongs of Apartheid.

Meanwhile Israel is stealing more Arab land.


----------



## Kondor3

Hoffstra said:


> "..._Meanwhile Israel is stealing more Arab land._"



Fun, ain't it, Kareem?


----------



## P F Tinmore

Kondor3 said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> "..._I don't think so. Israel will rot out from the inside like a bad tooth. Israel is losing popular support around the world and governments that support Israel are starting to wobble. Of course IAW, BDS, and others are pushing this right along. The US is in its waning years as a superpower. It will go broke and collapse like all other empires have._"
> 
> 
> 
> *BDS is a joke;* the last desperate gasp of a dying, failed-state Rump Palestine; which will soon be a government-in-exile; degenerating at last into a short-lived fraternal organization; it's a circus flea.
> 
> Oh, and, America will, indeed, collapse at some point, but the Palestinians own *Eviction Day* will come many years before that, so, don't count too much on that.
Click to expand...


Israel is not laughing. They call it an existential threat. Israel is putting considerable resources in combating BDS,


----------



## RoccoR

P F Tinmore,  _et al,_

This is what I mean when I talk about frivolous claims.



P F Tinmore said:


> toastman said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> Source: The Avalon Project : Jordanian-Israeli General Armistice Agreement, April 3, 1949
> 
> 
> 
> The term "in Palestine" is used regularly in all of the armistice agreements. The term "in Israel" is completely absent.
> 
> 
> 
> That agreement, that Israel signed, calls that territory Palestine. Before the ink was dry, Israel started calling that land Israel.
> 
> This proves an old adage to be true: Tell a lie often enough and people will believe it.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Completely irrelevant.
> What I'm trying to say is that when you look at a map, and you find Israel, then the land marked as Israel, is actually Israel. And nobody can dispute that.
> No matter how hateful a person is towards Israel, Israel is here. Deal with it
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Israel is the only country I have seen where its map has a disclaimer on territory, legal status and boundaries.
Click to expand...

*(COMMENT)*

The disclaimer doesn't mean what you claim it means.

The disclaimer is in two parts.

First, the Secretariat is an Administrative Office.  It made the map to specifications.  It is not the proponent for the Map.  The Security Council is the proponent.

Second, it is a very big map.  The resolution of this map, and the lines used to draw the map make the boundaries of limited use.  

Your trying to say that there is a question on the type and kind of boundaries marked on the map.  That is false and misleading.  The Map can be used used for the general purpose for which it was drawn; boundary approximations.

Most Respectfully,
R


----------



## P F Tinmore

RoccoR said:


> P F Tinmore,  _et al,_
> 
> This is what I mean when I talk about frivolous claims.
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> toastman said:
> 
> 
> 
> Completely irrelevant.
> What I'm trying to say is that when you look at a map, and you find Israel, then the land marked as Israel, is actually Israel. And nobody can dispute that.
> No matter how hateful a person is towards Israel, Israel is here. Deal with it
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Israel is the only country I have seen where its map has a disclaimer on territory, legal status and boundaries.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> The disclaimer doesn't mean what you claim it means.
> 
> The disclaimer is in two parts.
> 
> First, the Secretariat is an Administrative Office.  It made the map to specifications.  It is not the proponent for the Map.  The Security Council is the proponent.
> 
> Second, it is a very big map.  The resolution of this map, and the lines used to draw the map make the boundaries of limited use.
> 
> Your trying to say that there is a question on the type and kind of boundaries marked on the map.  That is false and misleading.  The Map can be used used for the general purpose for which it was drawn; boundary approximations.
> 
> Most Respectfully,
> R
Click to expand...


Lame, who else has disclaimers on territory, legal status, and boundaries?


----------



## toastman

P F Tinmore said:


> toastman said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> Source: The Avalon Project : Jordanian-Israeli General Armistice Agreement, April 3, 1949
> 
> 
> 
> The term "in Palestine" is used regularly in all of the armistice agreements. The term "in Israel" is completely absent.
> 
> 
> 
> That agreement, that Israel signed, calls that territory Palestine. Before the ink was dry, Israel started calling that land Israel.
> 
> This proves an old adage to be true: Tell a lie often enough and people will believe it.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Completely irrelevant.
> What I'm trying to say is that when you look at a map, and you find Israel, then the land marked as Israel, is actually Israel. And nobody can dispute that.
> No matter how hateful a person is towards Israel, Israel is here. Deal with it
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Israel is the only country I have seen where its map has a disclaimer on territory, legal status and boundaries.
Click to expand...


Palestine is the only .... well ,there really isn't a 'Palestine', just Palestinian Territories


----------



## RoccoR

toastman,  _et al,_

Where is the boundary for Palestine on the map?



toastman said:


>



I cannot find the name "Palestine."

v/r
R


----------



## toastman

P F Tinmore said:


> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore,  _et al,_
> 
> This is what I mean when I talk about frivolous claims.
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> Israel is the only country I have seen where its map has a disclaimer on territory, legal status and boundaries.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> The disclaimer doesn't mean what you claim it means.
> 
> The disclaimer is in two parts.
> 
> First, the Secretariat is an Administrative Office.  It made the map to specifications.  It is not the proponent for the Map.  The Security Council is the proponent.
> 
> Second, it is a very big map.  The resolution of this map, and the lines used to draw the map make the boundaries of limited use.
> 
> Your trying to say that there is a question on the type and kind of boundaries marked on the map.  That is false and misleading.  The Map can be used used for the general purpose for which it was drawn; boundary approximations.
> 
> Most Respectfully,
> R
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Lame, who else has disclaimers on territory, legal status, and boundaries?
Click to expand...


What does that have to do with anything ?
and what does it have to do with the fact Israel has enjoyed 65 years of statehood and counting ??








Absolutely nothing


----------



## P F Tinmore

RoccoR said:


> toastman,  _et al,_
> 
> Where is the boundary for Palestine on the map?
> 
> 
> 
> toastman said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I cannot find the name "Palestine."
> 
> v/r
> R
Click to expand...




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





> Where the existing truce lines run along the international boundary between Syria and Palestine, the Armistice Demarcation Line shall follow the boundary line
> 
> The Avalon Project : Israeli-Syrian General Armistice Agreement, July 20, 1949



And on around. Of course Israel signed those agreements then started calling those Israel's borders.

This proves an old adage: Tell a lie often enough and people will believe it.


----------



## toastman

What lie would that be ?


----------



## toastman

RoccoR said:


> toastman,  _et al,_
> 
> Where is the boundary for Palestine on the map?
> 
> 
> 
> toastman said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I cannot find the name "Palestine."
> 
> v/r
> R
Click to expand...


It's non-existant.


----------



## toastman

P F Tinmore said:


> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> 
> toastman,  _et al,_
> 
> Where is the boundary for Palestine on the map?
> 
> 
> 
> toastman said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I cannot find the name "Palestine."
> 
> v/r
> R
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 1. The Armistice Demarcation Line shall follow the international boundary between the Lebanon and Palestine.
> 
> The Avalon Project : Lebanese-Israeli General Armistice Agreement, March 23, 1949
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Where the existing truce lines run along the international boundary between Syria and Palestine, the Armistice Demarcation Line shall follow the boundary line
> 
> The Avalon Project : Israeli-Syrian General Armistice Agreement, July 20, 1949
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> And on around. Of course Israel signed those agreements then started calling those Israel's borders.
> 
> This proves an old adage: Tell a lie often enough and people will believe it.
Click to expand...


And of course the golden question is:

What does ANY of this have to do with the fact that Israel has enjoyed 65 years of statehood in their growing and thriving country, while Palestine has not anjoyed a minute of statehood ????? Please tell me


----------



## toastman

United Nations Member States

I see Israel, but no Palestine ???

What's going on here Tinmore ?


----------



## Kondor3

toastman said:


> United Nations Member States
> 
> I see Israel, but no Palestine ???
> 
> What's going on here Tinmore ?








Ruh-roe...

No 'Palestine'?


----------



## Kondor3

P F Tinmore said:


> Kondor3 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> "..._I don't think so. Israel will rot out from the inside like a bad tooth. Israel is losing popular support around the world and governments that support Israel are starting to wobble. Of course IAW, BDS, and others are pushing this right along. The US is in its waning years as a superpower. It will go broke and collapse like all other empires have._"
> 
> 
> 
> *BDS is a joke;* the last desperate gasp of a dying, failed-state Rump Palestine; which will soon be a government-in-exile; degenerating at last into a short-lived fraternal organization; it's a circus flea.
> 
> Oh, and, America will, indeed, collapse at some point, but the Palestinians own *Eviction Day* will come many years before that, so, don't count too much on that.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Israel is not laughing. They call it an existential threat. Israel is putting considerable resources in combating BDS,
Click to expand...


Wake us up when BDS achieves more than a boycott on Israeli West-Bank Olives in a British grocery-store chain...


----------



## theliq

Sweet_Caroline said:


> theliq said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sweet_Caroline said:
> 
> 
> 
> He should not be calling it Palestine.  I corrected him.  Tinnie does have difficulty grasping simple facts.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Why
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Upon Independence the land was named Israel, that's why.
Click to expand...


BUT WHY ARE THE OCCUPIED TERRITORIES OF PALESTINE CALLED ISRAEL..Dumbo


----------



## RoccoR

theliq,  _et al,_

What are you talking about???



theliq said:


> Sweet_Caroline said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> theliq said:
> 
> 
> 
> Why
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Upon Independence the land was named Israel, that's why.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> BUT WHY ARE THE OCCUPIED TERRITORIES OF PALESTINE CALLED ISRAEL..Dumbo
Click to expand...

*(COMMENT)*

The West Bank and Gaza Strip compose the State of Palestine.  The "Occupation" does not change that status.

Most Respectfully,
R


----------



## P F Tinmore

toastman said:


> United Nations Member States
> 
> I see Israel, but no Palestine ???
> 
> What's going on here Tinmore ?



Membership in the UN is irrelevant. Switzerland became a member in 2002. Does that mean it was not a state before then?


----------



## docmauser1

georgephillip said:


> _Roughly equal numbers of Jews and Arabs currently live under Jewish civil and military laws between the River and the sea. Arab birthrates outpace Jewish rates of reproduction._


Drivel. Pergola and Sofer used palistanian CBS data laced with double-counting intifadism, of course.


georgephillip said:


> _Maybe Jews should call up Samson and his Shit._


Maybe the US should return occupied California to Mexico.


----------



## docmauser1

P F Tinmore said:


> _But the Palestinians did not lose a war to Israel._


We knew that palistanian bitter bitching about some "occupation" has always been just a palistanian agitprop ploy to pester jews and to defraud the international community of millions upon millions of aid money, of course.


----------



## RoccoR

docmauser1, P F Tinmore,  _et al,_

In the strict sense, no side ever wins a conflict.  Just one side suffers greater losses.  The terms winning and losing are athletic terms, a mentality that hardly understand the carnage of true combat outcomes.



docmauser1 said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> _But the Palestinians did not lose a war to Israel._
> 
> 
> 
> We knew that palistanian bitter bitching about some "occupation" has always been just a palistanian agitprop ploy to pester jews and to defraud the international community of millions upon millions of aid money, of course.
Click to expand...

*(COMMENT)*

In the more traditional sense, it is a comparative analysis.  At the cessation of hostilities, which side has the better position and the greater control then the other?

From a practical sense, the side that is "occupied" is not a winner, and doesn't have the greater control.  Yes, you can fall back on the idea that an "Armistice" is a draw (no winner  or loser); but then if that were true, neither side would have cause for complaint.  Clearly, the Arab Palestinian is always complaining about the restrictive controls that they are under.

Most Respectfully,
R


----------



## P F Tinmore

RoccoR said:


> docmauser1, P F Tinmore,  _et al,_
> 
> In the strict sense, no side ever wins a conflict.  Just one side suffers greater losses.  The terms winning and losing are athletic terms, a mentality that hardly understand the carnage of true combat outcomes.
> 
> 
> 
> docmauser1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> _But the Palestinians did not lose a war to Israel._
> 
> 
> 
> We knew that palistanian bitter bitching about some "occupation" has always been just a palistanian agitprop ploy to pester jews and to defraud the international community of millions upon millions of aid money, of course.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> *In the more traditional sense, it is a comparative analysis.  At the cessation of hostilities, which side has the better position and the greater control then the other?*
> 
> From a practical sense, the side that is "occupied" is not a winner, and doesn't have the greater control.  Yes, you can fall back on the idea that an "Armistice" is a draw (no winner  or loser); but then if that were true, neither side would have cause for complaint.  Clearly, the Arab Palestinian is always complaining about the restrictive controls that they are under.
> 
> Most Respectfully,
> R
Click to expand...


Let me know when that cessation of hostilities occurs.

The armistice agreements, where nobody lost, are irrelevant to Israel's war against the Palestinians. That is a different war and it continues today.


----------



## Kondor3

P F Tinmore said:


> "..._Israel's war against the Palestinians. That is a different war and it continues today._"


One that is fast drawing towards a conclusion in favor of Israel, as they continuing herding you into smaller and smaller pockets designed to facilitate Eviction Day.


----------



## RoccoR

P F Tinmore,  _et al,_

There in lays the problem with dedicated insurgencies and prolonged conflicts.  HAMAS is a proponent of an extended conflict; thus --- by extension --- no settlement arrangements.



P F Tinmore said:


> Let me know when that cessation of hostilities occurs.
> 
> The armistice agreements, where nobody lost, are irrelevant to Israel's war against the Palestinians. That is a different war and it continues today.


*(OBSERVATION)*



			
				Article 15 HAMAS Covenant said:
			
		

> The day that enemies usurp part of Moslem land, *Jihad becomes the individual duty of every Moslem*. In face of the Jews' usurpation of Palestine, it is compulsory that the banner of Jihad be raised. To do this requires the diffusion of Islamic consciousness among the masses, both on the regional, Arab and Islamic levels. It is necessary to instill the spirit of Jihad in the heart of the nation so that they would confront the enemies and join the ranks of the fighters.
> 
> It is necessary that scientists, educators and teachers, information and media people, as well as the educated masses, especially the youth and sheikhs of the Islamic movements, should take part in the operation of awakening (the masses). It is important that basic changes be made in the school curriculum, to cleanse it of the traces of ideological invasion that affected it as a result of the orientalists and missionaries who infiltrated the region following the defeat of the Crusaders at the hands of Salah el-Din (Saladin).
> 
> _*SOURCE:*_ The Jihad for the Liberation of Palestine is an Individual Duty:



To certain segments of the population, it becomes as inspiring as any theme rolving around patriotism can be.

PERSONAL NOTE:  Invoking the name "Saladin," universally recognized as one of the greatest military and political leaders of the 12th Century _(Third Crusade)_, Liberator of Jerusalem, Hero at the Battle of Hattin, and first in the line of the Ayy&#363;bid Dynasty; he became the Sultan of The Levant _(Lebanon, the Hejaz, Jordan, Palestine, Syria)_, Egypt and Yemen.  Oddly enough, he is remembered for being benevolent even to his opponents.  His forces were not permitted to rob, terrorize, or kill non-combatants; nor were they allowed pillage and plunder cities; especially sites of religious significants.  These are characteristics that did not make it into the 21st Century of Islamic leaders.  What is odd, the Covenant immortalizes Izz Al-Din al-Qassam, who has the exact opposite reputation and esteem of that held by "Saladin."​
*(COMMENT) *

Today and days gone by, we largely deal with Article 13 Jihadist _("There is no solution for the Palestinian question except through Jihad.")_ and those that further promote the idea that Peace Talks between Israel and the Palestinian are inappropriate _("Initiatives, and so-called peaceful solutions and international conferences, are in contradiction to the principles of the Islamic Resistance Movement.")_.  But, as noted in the observation, we will be soon dealing with the next generation of indoctrinated insurgents _(Article 15 Jihadist)_.  These are the kids you see dressed as suicide bombers by their parents and marching with AK-47s with the al-Qassam Brigade.  This is what will be the legacy --- with the Middle East for several generations to come.  A time bomb that will pose obstacles and obstructions to the implementation of peace and the processes that further peace.  There lays the next generation of latent Fedayeen that will continue the struggle for control of the place called "Palestine, with the boundaries it had during the British Mandate."

*QUESTION:*  "Let me know when that cessation of hostilities occurs."

_ANSWER:_  Unfortunately, I will not see it in my lifetime.  There are at least two generations of Feday'een _(Article 15 Jihadist)_ in the pipeline; one coming off the conveyor now and one in the making.  They will be difficult to suppress.​
Insurgencies end with the fade of indigenous support, with a lack of faith in the cause, and with the evolution of a new economic paradigm.  And the State of Palestine will be a difficult task to drag into the 21st Century for peace.

Most Respectfully,
R


----------



## Hoffstra

Kondor3 said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> "..._Israel's war against the Palestinians. That is a different war and it continues today._"
> 
> 
> 
> One that is fast drawing towards a conclusion in favor of Israel, as they continuing herding you into smaller and smaller pockets designed to facilitate Eviction Day.
Click to expand...


Ironic how children of the Holocaust plan to ship an unwanted minority to "The East".

is this your Final Solution to the Palestinian Problem?


----------



## Kondor3

Hoffstra said:


> Kondor3 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> "..._Israel's war against the Palestinians. That is a different war and it continues today._"
> 
> 
> 
> One that is fast drawing towards a conclusion in favor of Israel, as they continuing herding you into smaller and smaller pockets designed to facilitate Eviction Day.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Ironic how children of the Holocaust plan to ship an unwanted minority to "The East".
> 
> is this your Final Solution to the Palestinian Problem?
Click to expand...


At least there's no Gas Chambers at the end of the road.

Eviction and Expulsion is much more civilized then simply slaughtering them.

And it's far more merciful than the Arabs have in-mind (and have publicly vowed) for the Jews of Israel, if they're foolish enough to allow the Palestinians to remain on the West Bank and Gaza over time, and to get breathing space to join with their Arab brethren for another try at drowning the Jews in the Mediterranean...

For the Jews, it's a simple choice: Us or Them.

They choose 'Us'.

Quite understandable.

As to your Nazi analogy... it's another juvenile, amateur-hour, failed, faux analogy... and nothing more.


----------



## georgephillip

Trajan said:


> georgephillip said:
> 
> 
> 
> "The question is not 'Is Israel the same as South Africa?'
> It is '*do Israel's actions meet the international definition of what apartheid is?*'
> 
> The crime of apartheid is defined by the 2002 Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court as inhumane acts of a character similar to other crimes against humanity 'committed in the context of an institutionalized regime of systematic oppression and domination by one racial group over any other racial group or groups and committed with the intention of maintaining that regime.'"
> 
> A couple of other relevant questions include did Israel sign the 2002 Rome Statute, if not;why not, and does it even matter?
> 
> Is Israel an Apartheid State?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *
> Is Israel the Same as South Africa?*
> 
> No.
> 
> Next?
Click to expand...


*Do Israel's actions qualify as apartheid?* 

"The crime of apartheid is defined by the 2002 Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court as inhumane acts of a character similar to other crimes against humanity "committed in the context of an institutionalized regime of systematic oppression and domination by one racial group over any other racial group or groups and committed with the intention of maintaining that regime."

Is Israel an Apartheid State?

*Yes.*


----------



## georgephillip

Kondor3 said:


> georgephillip said:
> 
> 
> 
> "..._Ethnic Cleansing, Really?_..."
> 
> 
> 
> Yeppers... although the Jews might possibly view it as a _Gang Mikva_ for purification purposes, instead.
> 
> Consider it preemptive and precautionary...
> 
> The Arab-Muslim Palestinians and their Arab-Muslim neighbors have sworn to 'cleanse' so-called Palestine of Jews and to make so-called Palestine sovereign from river to sea, and to drown the Jews in the Mediterranean.
> 
> And they've been threatening to do that since 1948, at least.
> 
> If that's not a threat to undertake Ethnic Cleansing, then I don't know what is.
> 
> Goose, meet gander.
> 
> "Do unto others, before they do unto you."
> 
> It's a choice between the ragtag Palestinians and themselves.
> 
> They chose themselves.
> 
> Big surprise.
> 
> Under similar us-or-them circumstances, 99.99% of the world's population would make the same choice.
> 
> The Palestinians are being slowly-but-surely squeezed off the last few scraps of land remaining to them, so that they'll take-the-hint and move to Jordan or Lebanon or Syria or Egypt of their own volition...
> 
> At some point, those who don't take the hint, will be forcibly evicted...
> 
> _Eretz Yisrael_ will be 'whole' once again for the first time in 2,000 years...
> 
> And the rattlesnakes (_suicide bombers and rocketeers and militias, sworn to destroy the Jews_) in their midst will be nothing more than a quickly fading bad memory, as the so-called Palestinians scatter and assimilate and quickly lose their newfound and temporary cohesion...
> 
> Population shifts happen all the time...
> 
> Several of them within living memory, including some large-scale ones in Europe after the Allies had won WWII...
> 
> This will be nothing different, and that particular Road Show is almost ready to begin...
> 
> A quick look at the Palestinians own propaganda maps of their shrinking land under their control will serve-up a definitive clue to all but the dullest of partisan observers...
> 
> Any _sane_ Palestinian with two shekels to rub together and an ounce of brains would be well-advised to get his family and his own ass out of Rump Palestine and to move to Jordan or Lebanon or Syria or Egypt or Saudi Arabia or wherever, to avoid Eviction Day...
Click to expand...

*More details for the ethnic cleansing roadshow about to begin (again)*

"The crimes committed during an ethnic cleansing is similar to that of genocide, but while genocide includes complete extermination of the target group as the stated goal, *ethnic cleansing may involve murder only to the point of mobilizing the target group out of the territory.* 

"Hence there may be varied degrees of mass murder in an ethnic cleansing, often subsiding when the target group appears to be leaving the desired territory, while during genocide the mass murder is ubiquitous and constant throughout the process, continuing even while the target group tries to flee.[1][2]

*The "chosen" are returning to the land their rump-god promised them three thousand years ago. Stay tuned for their chosen eastern border(s).*

Ethnic cleansing - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


----------



## georgephillip

Hoffstra said:


> Israel would never try to kick out the Arabs.
> 
> It would lead to a nuclear war.
> 
> The Palestinians and Israelis will have to learn to share the land.
> 
> cause if they can't share it, no one will have it.


Among Palestinians and Jews only Jews currently possess nuclear weapons.
Whose nukes do you imagine raining down upon Israel?
Jerusalem?


----------



## Kondor3

georgephillip said:


> "..._More details for the ethnic cleansing roadshow about to begin (again)_..."


Vae victus...

Maybe they should have chosen to live peacefully as Israeli citizens back in 1948, when they still had the chance, rather than taking a path in which they have sworn to (1) destroy Israel, (2) drown the Jews in the Mediterranean, and (3) establish Palestine from river to sea.

Better luck in making better choices in the next life.

'Cause they don't get a Do-Over in this one.

Choices have consequences.

They are now reaping theirs.

From the Israeli perspective: "Better to ethnically cleanse the Palestinians and expel them from Greater Israel and give them a chance for a new life elsewhere, than to sit idly by while they grow and gain strength and commit a full-blown slaughter-caliber genocide against us.

That would be a very sensible choice.

The Palestinians have proven themselves Collectively Insane, and unreliable and untrustworthy and savage as a People, and their supply of Chances to Make Nice has been exhausted.

No more chances.

Nothing left to do now but cut the Gordian Knot.

Better to do it by kicking them out than by slaughtering them.


----------



## toastman

toastman said:


> What lie would that be ?



Still no answer, eh ??


----------



## Connery

*Violative posts removed.

The Administration and the Moderation Team are serious in their efforts to have a civil discourse as it pertains to the OP and any further posts which violate Zone 2 rules will be viewed in a more serious manner where infractions will be administered on a case by case basis.*


----------



## P F Tinmore

toastman said:


> toastman said:
> 
> 
> 
> What lie would that be ?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Still no answer, eh ??
Click to expand...


The lie that Palestine has no borders.


----------



## Kondor3

P F Tinmore said:


> toastman said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> toastman said:
> 
> 
> 
> What lie would that be ?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Still no answer, eh ??
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> The lie that Palestine has no borders.
Click to expand...


Refresh our memories, Tinny...

What are the borders of the minimum land mass - under exclusive Palestinian control - that the Palestinians will accept in return for everlasting peace with the Jews of Israel-Palestine?


----------



## georgephillip

Kondor3 said:


> georgephillip said:
> 
> 
> 
> "..._More details for the ethnic cleansing roadshow about to begin (again)_..."
> 
> 
> 
> Vae victus...
> 
> Maybe they should have chosen to live peacefully as Israeli citizens back in 1948, when they still had the chance, rather than taking a path in which they have sworn to (1) destroy Israel, (2) drown the Jews in the Mediterranean, and (3) establish Palestine from river to sea.
> 
> Better luck in making better choices in the next life.
> 
> 'Cause they don't get a Do-Over in this one.
> 
> Choices have consequences.
> 
> They are now reaping theirs.
> 
> From the Israeli perspective: "Better to ethnically cleanse the Palestinians and expel them from Greater Israel and give them a chance for a new life elsewhere, than to sit idly by while they grow and gain strength and commit a full-blown slaughter-caliber genocide against us.
> 
> That would be a very sensible choice.
> 
> The Palestinians have proven themselves Collectively Insane, and unreliable and untrustworthy and savage as a People, and their supply of Chances to Make Nice has been exhausted.
> 
> No more chances.
> 
> Nothing left to do now but cut the Gordian Knot.
> 
> Better to do it by kicking them out than by slaughtering them.
Click to expand...

Better yet to conform to international law and avoid ethnic cleansing and genocide.
Since 650,000 Jews inflicted their nation on 1.35 million Arabs in 1948 today's Jews can renounce 65 years of apartheid by calling for free and fair elections for all Semites living under Jewish laws between the River and the sea, unless Jews have a devout fear of democracy.


----------



## P F Tinmore

RoccoR said:
			
		

> There in lays the problem with dedicated insurgencies and prolonged conflicts.



I looked up insurgent in the dictionary.

The Palestinians do not fit the description.


----------



## Kondor3

georgephillip said:


> "..._free and fair elections for all Semites living under Jewish laws between the River and the sea_..."


You should have thought of that in 1948.

Or any time, prior to the 1967 War, before "you" proved yourselves forevermore untrustworthy and collectively insane, and forced the Israelis to harden their hearts, in order to survive.

Too late now.

Forty-six years too late.

Hell, the Palestinians aren't even Israeli citizens... by their own poor choice.

And now, with their tails between their legs, and having had their raggedy asses kicked time and again, after stupidly suicide-bombing and rocketing Israel to no substantive avail, and with your land-pockets shrinking down to nothingness at the speed of light...

All of a sudden, you're _soooooooo_ interested in becoming Good Citizens and getting The Vote?

In the Israelis' shoes, I'd be inclined to say: "No chance" .

Better luck in an Alternative Universe or another life.

No means no.

Next slide, please...


----------



## Hoffstra

Kondor3 said:


> At least there's no Gas Chambers at the end of the road....



yeah, that's what the Nazis said.

until we learned better.


----------



## Kondor3

Hoffstra said:


> Kondor3 said:
> 
> 
> 
> At least there's no Gas Chambers at the end of the road....
> 
> 
> 
> 
> yeah, that's what the Nazis said.
> 
> until we learned better.
Click to expand...

Well, when you spot an Israeli Extermination Camp that is gassing Palestinians by the hundreds of thousands and then cremating the remains, ya'll be sure to wake us all up and tell us all about it, eh?


----------



## Hossfly

georgephillip said:


> Kondor3 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Hoffstra said:
> 
> 
> 
> No, South Africa is now a democracy that gives equal rights to all citizens.
> 
> Unlike Israel.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> True...
> 
> Israel gave equal rights to everyone who was willing to live in peace under the Israeli government...
> 
> Israel gave short shrift and exile to those who sided with their Arab-Muslim neighbor countries in multiple failed attempts to drown the Jews in the Mediterranean and to suicide-bomb and rocket-attack innocent Israeli civilians...
> 
> An understandable and logical distinction...
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> *What's the distinction between citizenship and nationality in Israel?*
> 
> "Israel's Apartheid Laws
> 
> 
> "1. Identity and Citizenship
> 
> "Law of Return (1950)Grants right of immigration to Jews born anywhere in the world. Amended in 1970 to extend this right to 'a child and a grandchild of a Jew, the spouse of a Jew, the spouse of a child of a Jew and the spouse of a grandchild of a Jew.'
> 
> "A Jew is defined as 'a person who was born of a Jewish mother or has become converted to Judaism and who is not a member of another religion.'
> 
> "Non-Jewish native-born Palestinians  most importantly those who fled during the Zionist massacres in 1947 and 1948  are in most cases prevented from returning."
> 
> *What kind of democracy divides its citizens into two unequal classes?
> The same kind Chicago enjoyed in the 1950s?*
> 
> Israel's Apartheid Laws
Click to expand...

Since the laws in Israel apply equality to all groups, I don't know why Georgie Boy is so hot about it, especially when a Black person like the leader of South Africa's  daughter says there is no apartheid in Israel.  Are you calling a fellow Black like she is a liar, Georgie Boy?  Meanwhile, of course, you will never find Georgie Boy complaining about the actual apartheid in the Muslim world.  Evidently he has no problem with the lighter-skinned Arabs in Libya keeping the Blacks in cages like in a zoo or with the President of Sudan saying he wants to rid his country of Black tribes.  No Jews are involved, so Georgie Boy can't be bothered with what is happening to Blacks in various places.  And, Georgie Boy, even someone like you has to be aware that each country can make up their own immigration laws.  I am sure you would not be happy with some of the laws elsewhere either.

Israel is NOT apartheid state, says South African leader's daughter - Israel Today | Israel News


----------



## RoccoR

P F Tinmore,  _et al,_

Of course not, and you don't see themselves as terrorist either.  It doesn't make your interpretation true.



P F Tinmore said:


> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> There in lays the problem with dedicated insurgencies and prolonged conflicts.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I looked up insurgent in the dictionary.
> 
> The Palestinians do not fit the description.
Click to expand...

*(OBSERVATION)*



			
				Counterinsurgency (COIN) Operations said:
			
		

> Insurgents seek to gain power to overthrow or force change of a governing authority.
> 
> Insurgency is an internal threat that uses subversion and violence to reach political ends. Conversely, counterinsurgents seek to defeat insurgents and address core grievances to prevent insurgencys expansion or Executive Summary regeneration. Typically the insurgents will solicit or be offered some type of support from state or non-state actors,
> which can include transnational terrorists who take advantage of the situation for their own benefit. Affected nations may request United States support in countering an insurgency, which is typically the circumstances under which US forces become involved in counterinsurgency (COIN) operations.
> 
> _*SOURCE:*_ Foundation for Counterinsurgency



The Occupation Force (Israel) and the State of Israel are "governing authorities." 

Most Respectfully,
R


----------



## toastman

P F Tinmore said:


> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> There in lays the problem with dedicated insurgencies and prolonged conflicts.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I looked up insurgent in the dictionary.
> 
> The Palestinians do not fit the description.
Click to expand...


Didn't I tell you to stop buying your dictionaries at the Palestine Book Store??


----------



## Hoffstra

Kondor3 said:


> Well, when you spot an Israeli Extermination Camp that is gassing Palestinians by the hundreds of thousands and then cremating the remains, ya'll be sure to wake us all up and tell us all about it, eh?



you do know that the day Israel starts trying to force Palestinians from the West Bank, its open season on Israelis and their supporters all over the Earth, right?


----------



## toastman

Hoffstra said:


> Kondor3 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Well, when you spot an Israeli Extermination Camp that is gassing Palestinians by the hundreds of thousands and then cremating the remains, ya'll be sure to wake us all up and tell us all about it, eh?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> you do know that the day Israel starts trying to force Palestinians from the West Bank, its open season on Israelis and their supporters all over the Earth, right?
Click to expand...


As far as I know, it has always been open season on Israelis


----------



## Kondor3

Hoffstra said:


> Kondor3 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Well, when you spot an Israeli Extermination Camp that is gassing Palestinians by the hundreds of thousands and then cremating the remains, ya'll be sure to wake us all up and tell us all about it, eh?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> you do know that the day Israel starts trying to force Palestinians from the West Bank, its open season on Israelis and their supporters all over the Earth, right?
Click to expand...

Tee-hee... you're a _funny_ ol' bird...


----------



## theliq

Kondor3 said:


> georgephillip said:
> 
> 
> 
> "..._free and fair elections for all Semites living under Jewish laws between the River and the sea_..."
> 
> 
> 
> You should have thought of that in 1948.
> 
> Or any time, prior to the 1967 War, before "you" proved yourselves forevermore untrustworthy and collectively insane, and forced the Israelis to harden their hearts, in order to survive.
> 
> Too late now.
> 
> Forty-six years too late.
> 
> Hell, the Palestinians aren't even Israeli citizens... by their own poor choice.
> 
> And now, with their tails between their legs, and having had their raggedy asses kicked time and again, after stupidly suicide-bombing and rocketing Israel to no substantive avail, and with your land-pockets shrinking down to nothingness at the speed of light...
> 
> All of a sudden, you're _soooooooo_ interested in becoming Good Citizens and getting The Vote?
> 
> In the Israelis' shoes, I'd be inclined to say: "No chance" .
> 
> Better luck in an Alternative Universe or another life.
> 
> No means no.
> 
> Next slide, please...
Click to expand...


What!!!!!!???????? Of course some Palestinians are Israeli citizens,you fool


----------



## Hoffstra

Kondor3 said:


> Tee-hee... you're a _funny_ ol' bird...



try it, and see what happens.


----------



## Kondor3

theliq said:


> "..._Of course some Palestinians are Israeli citizens,you fool._"


No shit, Sherlock... thank you, Captain Obvious.

The phrase was utilized in its commonplace context, to denote the large numbers who chose NOT to live peacefully alongside the Jews as Israeli citizens.

Any other helpful Ultra-Literalist observations to share with the class?


----------



## Kondor3

Hoffstra said:


> Kondor3 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Tee-hee... you're a _funny_ ol' bird...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> try it, and see what happens.
Click to expand...


If you say so...

The Arabs have tried to wipe-out Israel three times... 1948, 1967 and 1973...

And had their asses kicked good-and-proper by the Israelis - only a fraction your size - to the eternal shame of you and your brethren, and the laughter and scorn of much of the rest of the world...

The Israelis don't sweat you clowns any longer...

But they will kick your brethren's nasty asses out of the West Bank and Gaza within the next decade or two...

And laugh in your faces while they're doing it...

Try to take them on and they'll burn you down, on the ground, the sea and the air...

And the US and much of The West will just sit back and watch it happen, unless the Israelis get into trouble, in which case, we've got their backs...

Courtesy of your tax money, of course...

Thanks for that...


----------



## Hoffstra

Kondor3 said:


> And the US and much of The West will just sit back and watch it happen, unless the Israelis get into trouble, in whch case, we've got their backs...
> 
> *Courtesy of your tax money*, of course...
> 
> Thanks for that...



Attitudes like this led to the Holocaust. 

Watch your tongue.


----------



## theliq

Kondor3 said:


> theliq said:
> 
> 
> 
> "..._Of course some Palestinians are Israeli citizens,you fool._"
> 
> 
> 
> No shit, Sherlock... thank you, Captain Obvious.
> 
> The phrase was utilized in its commonplace context, to denote the large numbers who chose NOT to live peacefully alongside the Jews as Israeli citizens.
> 
> Any other helpful Ultra-Literalist observations to share with the class?
Click to expand...


Well the most obvious one Sherlock,thank you Captain Oblivious, is the large number of Jews who choose NOT TO LIVE PEACEFULLY ALONGSIDE THE PALESTINIANS.

OFF TO THE NAUGHTY CORNER FOR YOU,WHY........?......because again YOU forgot to put your Brain into Gear Before Opening YOUR Mouth.

I know it's hard for you to Talk Sense to a PEER.....but as you stumble along,we can feel for you Kondor.....look if you cannot adjust your mind and deal with changing and piquant situations,you do end up becoming a bit of a BORE.

The ever living,ever faithful,ever sure,theliq.


----------



## Hoffstra

In many ways, Israel is WORSE than Apartheid South Afrika.


----------



## Hoffstra

South Africa came to terms with its crimes, and gave equality to the blacks.

while Israel continues to strengthen its brutality and hold upon the Arabs of Palestine.


----------



## theliq

Hoffstra said:


> South Africa came to terms with its crimes, and gave equality to the blacks.
> 
> while Israel continues to strengthen its brutality and hold upon the Arabs of Palestine.



They will never defeat the Palestinians


----------



## Hoffstra

theliq said:


> They will never defeat the Palestinians



they might try to buy them out.


----------



## theliq

Hoffstra said:


> theliq said:
> 
> 
> 
> They will never defeat the Palestinians
> 
> 
> 
> 
> they might try to buy them out.
Click to expand...


Nope (But they will try no doubt......WITH AMERICAN TAXPAYERS MONEY OF COURSE)


----------



## Kondor3

Well, it's turning into a self-reinforcing Pro-Palestinians love-fest, Late Night, so, enjoy...


----------



## theliq

Kondor3 said:


> Well, it's turning into a self-reinforcing Pro-Palestinians love-fest, Late Night, so, enjoy...



Which has lasted 60 years so far...............


----------



## Kondor3

theliq said:


> Kondor3 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Well, it's turning into a self-reinforcing Pro-Palestinians love-fest, Late Night, so, enjoy...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Which has lasted 60 years so far...............
Click to expand...

Within your own narrow little universe, I have no doubt...

But, abroad in the rest of the world, not so much...

And, in the long run, the broader world is what actually matters...

G'nite...


----------



## docmauser1

Hoffstra said:


> _South Africa came to terms with its crimes, and gave equality to the blacks. while Israel continues to strengthen its brutality and hold upon the Arabs of Palestine._


Well, there's no _palestine_, and noone's _holding_ arabs wherever they are, of course.


----------



## docmauser1

theliq said:


> _They will never defeat the Palestinians_


Palistanians are defeating themselves by sitting in shitt to make jews look bad, of course.


----------



## P F Tinmore

RoccoR said:


> P F Tinmore,  _et al,_
> 
> Of course not, and you don't see themselves as terrorist either.  It doesn't make your interpretation true.
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> There in lays the problem with dedicated insurgencies and prolonged conflicts.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I looked up insurgent in the dictionary.
> 
> The Palestinians do not fit the description.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> *(OBSERVATION)*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Counterinsurgency (COIN) Operations said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Insurgents seek to gain power to overthrow or force change of a governing authority.
> 
> Insurgency is an internal threat that uses subversion and violence to reach political ends. Conversely, counterinsurgents seek to defeat insurgents and address core grievances to prevent insurgency&#8217;s expansion or Executive Summary regeneration. Typically the insurgents will solicit or be offered some type of support from state or non-state actors,
> which can include transnational terrorists who take advantage of the situation for their own benefit. Affected nations may request United States support in countering an insurgency, which is typically the circumstances under which US forces become involved in counterinsurgency (COIN) operations.
> 
> _*SOURCE:*_ Foundation for Counterinsurgency
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> The Occupation Force (Israel) and the State of Israel are "governing authorities."
> 
> Most Respectfully,
> R
Click to expand...


You are a hoot, Rocco.


> The Occupation Force (Israel) and the State of Israel are "governing authorities."



 Calling an occupation an authority.  

BTW, you have never explained how Hamas fits the definition of international terrorists.


----------



## docmauser1

P F Tinmore said:


> _Calling an occupation an authority._


Than what palistanian authority is, if not the palistanian occupation?


----------



## RoccoR

P F Tinmore,  _et al,_

No, I believe you are mistaken.  I have explained it several times.



P F Tinmore said:


> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore,  _et al,_
> 
> Of course not, and you don't see themselves as terrorist either.  It doesn't make your interpretation true.
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> I looked up insurgent in the dictionary.
> 
> The Palestinians do not fit the description.
> 
> 
> 
> *(OBSERVATION)*
> 
> 
> 
> The Occupation Force (Israel) and the State of Israel are "governing authorities."
> 
> Most Respectfully,
> R
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You are a hoot, Rocco.
> 
> 
> 
> The Occupation Force (Israel) and the State of Israel are "governing authorities."
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Calling an occupation an authority.
> 
> BTW, you have never explained how Hamas fits the definition of international terrorists.
Click to expand...

*(COMMENT)*

In some cases, you can't have your cake and eat it to.  

If Israel, as the Occupying Power, is not an authority, then ---- of course, it cannot be held to any standard under the Geneva Convention.  It is either an authority, responsible for certain actions and conditions, or it is not.  You cannot claim both.

Second, I've copied this section of General Assembly Resolution 2625 (XXXV) many times, where Palestine must "refrain from the threat or use of force to violate international lines of demarcation, such as armistice lines."  When Hostile Arab Palestinians (HoAP) cross a demarcation line to conduct Article 13 Jihadist activities (Covenant) or Article Article 9 Feday'een Activities (Charter), they move from the realm of domestic terrorism to international terrorism.​
You are arguing the border issue, and it doesn't hold water.  It is subterfuge to try and claim some justification as to why a Palestinian Organizations, known to hijack aircraft, conduct piracy on the his seas, perform suicide bombings, and initiate indiscriminate ambush and rocket attacks, should not be considered terrorists.  

Either the State of Palestine is a "State" as declared by the PLO in 1988, with the Armistice Lines as demarcation;  --- OR ---  there is no legitimate State of Palestine.  And if there is a "State of Palestine," then it has boundaries.  But they are not the territorial boundaries with the demarcations it had during the former British Mandate.  The State of Israel may be in territory formerly known as Palestine, but it is a sovereignty unto itself and not subject to any claim by the Palestinian.

Most Respectfully,
R


----------



## Kondor3

Oh, and, Tinny...

Do you have a map of the boundaries of a Palestinian State, that you and your brethren perceive as minimally acceptable with respect to land-mass controlled by the Palestinians, in order to secure permanent peace with the Jews of the region?


----------



## theliq

RoccoR said:


> P F Tinmore,  _et al,_
> 
> No, I believe you are mistaken.  I have explained it several times.
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore,  _et al,_
> 
> Of course not, and you don't see themselves as terrorist either.  It doesn't make your interpretation true.
> 
> 
> *(OBSERVATION)*
> 
> 
> 
> The Occupation Force (Israel) and the State of Israel are "governing authorities."
> 
> Most Respectfully,
> R
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You are a hoot, Rocco.
> 
> 
> 
> The Occupation Force (Israel) and the State of Israel are "governing authorities."
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Calling an occupation an authority.
> 
> BTW, you have never explained how Hamas fits the definition of international terrorists.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> In some cases, you can't have your cake and eat it to.
> 
> If Israel, as the Occupying Power, is not an authority, then ---- of course, it cannot be held to any standard under the Geneva Convention.  It is either an authority, responsible for certain actions and conditions, or it is not.  You cannot claim both.
> 
> Second, I've copied this section of General Assembly Resolution 2625 (XXXV) many times, where Palestine must "refrain from the threat or use of force to violate international lines of demarcation, such as armistice lines."  When Hostile Arab Palestinians (HoAP) cross a demarcation line to conduct Article 13 Jihadist activities (Covenant) or Article Article 9 Feday'een Activities (Charter), they move from the realm of domestic terrorism to international terrorism.​
> You are arguing the border issue, and it doesn't hold water.  It is subterfuge to try and claim some justification as to why a Palestinian Organizations, known to hijack aircraft, conduct piracy on the his seas, perform suicide bombings, and initiate indiscriminate ambush and rocket attacks, should not be considered terrorists.
> 
> Either the State of Palestine is a "State" as declared by the PLO in 1988, with the Armistice Lines as demarcation;  --- OR ---  there is no legitimate State of Palestine.  And if there is a "State of Palestine," then it has boundaries.  But they are not the territorial boundaries with the demarcations it had during the former British Mandate.  The State of Israel may be in territory formerly known as Palestine, but it is a sovereignty unto itself and not subject to any claim by the Palestinian.
> 
> Most Respectfully,
> R
Click to expand...


Time will ultimately tell R,thanks for your excellent prose....Unlike those wretches Doc and Kondope.


----------



## OldUSAFSniper

Well, let's see, the question was, "Is Israel like South Africa?"

In the OP, the definition of apartheid as defined in some 'conference' is trotted out and the OP makes the very lame case that what the Israeli's are doing to the Palestinians is in the same vein as what the whites did to the blacks in South Africa.

Jerry Lewis?  Jew.  Sammy Davis Jr?  Jew.  Leonard Nimoy?  Jew.  Adam Sandler?  Jew.  Drake?  Jew.  And how many Jews in Ethiopia (black) where they say the Ark of the Covenant has been resting inside a temple for the last 3,000 years?  Last count, about 1 Million.

The last gasp of trying to point a boney finger at someone and label them as "EVIL!" is to try and also label them as RACIST!  Thus the completely bankrupt exercise in trying to equate the state of Israel with the South African regime.

This exercise is a complete and total failure.  I'm embarrassed FOR the Op and remind everyone, that if the Palestinians simply gave up their weapons, publicly stated that Israel has the RIGHT TO EXIST, and sat down in earnest with the Israeli government, they could have an internationally recognized state of Palestine in less than 6 months.

But of course they won't.  I mean it's so important that the Palestinians try to keep their space program going.  Launching hundred of rockets, with a goal to get to the moon, but they always unfortunately fall into Israeli villages and blow up women and children.  And of course, the Palestinian Olympic sport of seeing how many Israeli border guards you can blow up by strapping an explosive vest to 8 year old children.  And what about that unique sport of executing women and children on deserted Israeli streets in the middle of the night?  Yeah, that is MUCH more important that seeking a peaceful, SANE solution...


----------



## Coyote

*Thread has been cleaned of litter and spitballs (17 posts guys in just one night!).  Hopefully, folks have cooled off a little now and can remember that IP is a Zone 2 forum, some insults are ok but you must provide content that addresses the discussion.  

We are serious about maintaining a civil debate here and further violations will be met with creativity and the virtual equivalent of sitting in a chair for a time out and no TV.

*


----------



## P F Tinmore

RoccoR said:


> P F Tinmore,  _et al,_
> 
> No, I believe you are mistaken.  I have explained it several times.
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore,  _et al,_
> 
> Of course not, and you don't see themselves as terrorist either.  It doesn't make your interpretation true.
> 
> *(OBSERVATION)*
> 
> The Occupation Force (Israel) and the State of Israel are "governing authorities."
> 
> Most Respectfully,
> R
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You are a hoot, Rocco.
> 
> 
> 
> The Occupation Force (Israel) and the State of Israel are "governing authorities."
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Calling an occupation an authority.
> 
> BTW, you have never explained how Hamas fits the definition of international terrorists.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> In some cases, you can't have your cake and eat it to.
> 
> If Israel, as the Occupying Power, is not an authority, then ---- of course, it cannot be held to any standard under the Geneva Convention.  It is either an authority, responsible for certain actions and conditions, or it is not.  You cannot claim both..​
Click to expand...

I think you are misusing terms. You classify some Palestinians as insurgents



> in·sur·gent [in súrj&#601;nt]
> n (plural in·sur·gents)
> 1.  rebel: somebody who rebels against authority or leadership, especially somebody who belongs to a group involved in an uprising
> 2.  political rebel: a member of a political party who rebels against the party leaders or policies



It appears that insurgents are opposed to their* own* government and policies. I don't see where this would apply to a foreign military occupation.



> Second, I've copied this section of General Assembly Resolution 2625 (XXXV) many times, where *Palestine must "refrain* from the threat or use of force to* violate international lines of demarcation, such as armistice lines.*"  When Hostile Arab Palestinians (HoAP) cross a demarcation line to conduct Article 13 Jihadist activities (Covenant) or Article Article 9 Feday'een Activities (Charter), they move from the realm of domestic terrorism to international terrorism.​



Resolution 2625 does not mention Palestine.

The armistice lines (that are specifically not to be political or territorial boundaries) run *through* Palestine. Please explain how the Palestinians can violate a line that is* Palestine on both sides.*



> You are arguing the border issue, and it doesn't hold water.  It is subterfuge to try and claim some justification as to why a Palestinian Organizations, known to hijack aircraft, conduct piracy on the his seas, perform suicide bombings, and initiate indiscriminate ambush and rocket attacks, should not be considered terrorists.
> 
> Either the State of Palestine is a "State" as declared by the PLO in 1988, with the Armistice Lines as demarcation;  --- OR ---  there is no legitimate State of Palestine.  And if there is a "State of Palestine," then it has boundaries.  But they are not the territorial boundaries with the demarcations it had during the former British Mandate.  The State of Israel may be in territory formerly known as Palestine, but it is a sovereignty unto itself and not subject to any claim by the Palestinian.


Bot of these are complicated issues. If you would like to discuss them, post them as separate items.



> Most Respectfully,
> R


----------



## Kondor3

Tinny...

Do you have a map of the boundaries of a Palestinian State, that you and your brethren perceive as minimally acceptable with respect to land-mass controlled by the Palestinians, in order to secure permanent peace with the Jews of the region?


----------



## toastman

I have typed in 'Current Palestine Borders' on google and can't fine anything. 
I found Israels current borders quite easily however. Weird...I learned through Tinnie that Israel doesnt have any borders


----------



## Kondor3

toastman said:


> I have typed in 'Current Palestine Borders' on google and can't fine anything.
> I found Israels current borders quite easily however. Weird...I learned through Tinnie that Israel doesnt have any borders


Yeah...

But it would be a big help to the rest of the audience who follows some of these discussions if Tinny... one of the more prolific pro-Palestinian advocates around here... would supply the appropriate visual aid to discussion, and show us his idea of what the borders of Palestine must look like, in order for the Jews of the region to have permanent peace.

Words are one thing... cut-and-dry... but images are quite another; much easier for the human mind to grasp; for clarification's sake.

I'm sure that Tinny has in-mind, any of several maps of HIS (and the Palestinians) vision of Palestine, in its final configuration; the minimum that they would be happy with; the minimum required by them, to make peace with the Jews of the region.

So, it's just a matter of Tinny favoring us with his (and the Palestinian's) vision, as an aid to discussion.


----------



## ForeverYoung436

Kondor3 said:


> toastman said:
> 
> 
> 
> I have typed in 'Current Palestine Borders' on google and can't fine anything.
> I found Israels current borders quite easily however. Weird...I learned through Tinnie that Israel doesnt have any borders
> 
> 
> 
> Yeah...
> 
> But it would be a big help to the rest of the audience who follows some of these discussions if Tinny... one of the more prolific pro-Palestinian advocates around here... would supply the appropriate visual aid to discussion, and show us his idea of what the borders of Palestine must look like, in order for the Jews of the region to have permanent peace.
> 
> Words are one thing... cut-and-dry... but images are quite another; much easier for the human mind to grasp; for clarification's sake.
> 
> I'm sure that Tinny has in-mind, any of several maps of HIS (and the Palestinians) vision of Palestine, in its final configuration; the minimum that they would be happy with; the minimum required by them, to make peace with the Jews of the region.
> 
> So, it's just a matter of Tinny favoring us with his (and the Palestinian's) vision, as an aid to discussion.
Click to expand...


His map would include all of what is now called Israel, together with the West Bank and Gaza.


----------



## P F Tinmore

ForeverYoung436 said:


> Kondor3 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> toastman said:
> 
> 
> 
> I have typed in 'Current Palestine Borders' on google and can't fine anything.
> I found Israels current borders quite easily however. Weird...I learned through Tinnie that Israel doesnt have any borders
> 
> 
> 
> Yeah...
> 
> But it would be a big help to the rest of the audience who follows some of these discussions if Tinny... one of the more prolific pro-Palestinian advocates around here... would supply the appropriate visual aid to discussion, and show us his idea of what the borders of Palestine must look like, in order for the Jews of the region to have permanent peace.
> 
> Words are one thing... cut-and-dry... but images are quite another; much easier for the human mind to grasp; for clarification's sake.
> 
> I'm sure that Tinny has in-mind, any of several maps of HIS (and the Palestinians) vision of Palestine, in its final configuration; the minimum that they would be happy with; the minimum required by them, to make peace with the Jews of the region.
> 
> So, it's just a matter of Tinny favoring us with his (and the Palestinian's) vision, as an aid to discussion.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> His map would include all of what is now called Israel, together with the West Bank and Gaza.
Click to expand...


I have always said that everything inside Israel's borders goes to Israel and everything inside Palestine's borders goes to Palestine.

Problem solved.


----------



## toastman

P F Tinmore said:


> ForeverYoung436 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Kondor3 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Yeah...
> 
> But it would be a big help to the rest of the audience who follows some of these discussions if Tinny... one of the more prolific pro-Palestinian advocates around here... would supply the appropriate visual aid to discussion, and show us his idea of what the borders of Palestine must look like, in order for the Jews of the region to have permanent peace.
> 
> Words are one thing... cut-and-dry... but images are quite another; much easier for the human mind to grasp; for clarification's sake.
> 
> I'm sure that Tinny has in-mind, any of several maps of HIS (and the Palestinians) vision of Palestine, in its final configuration; the minimum that they would be happy with; the minimum required by them, to make peace with the Jews of the region.
> 
> So, it's just a matter of Tinny favoring us with his (and the Palestinian's) vision, as an aid to discussion.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> His map would include all of what is now called Israel, together with the West Bank and Gaza.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I have always said that everything inside Israel's borders goes to Israel and everything inside Palestine's borders goes to Palestine.
> 
> Problem solved.
Click to expand...








Take a look at this map. Everything that is white is ISRAEL. This is not up for debate. no matter how hard you try, it will not change the fact. No matter how hateful you are towards Israel, it will not change. 
So, if the Palestinians want any piece of that land, they would have to do so by conventional warfare. Until then, nothing will change in the sense that Israeli land that is clearly marked on this map is ISRAEL'S LAND.

DEAL WITH IT


----------



## Kondor3

P F Tinmore said:


> ForeverYoung436 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Kondor3 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Yeah...
> 
> But it would be a big help to the rest of the audience who follows some of these discussions if Tinny... one of the more prolific pro-Palestinian advocates around here... would supply the appropriate visual aid to discussion, and show us his idea of what the borders of Palestine must look like, in order for the Jews of the region to have permanent peace.
> 
> Words are one thing... cut-and-dry... but images are quite another; much easier for the human mind to grasp; for clarification's sake.
> 
> I'm sure that Tinny has in-mind, any of several maps of HIS (and the Palestinians) vision of Palestine, in its final configuration; the minimum that they would be happy with; the minimum required by them, to make peace with the Jews of the region.
> 
> So, it's just a matter of Tinny favoring us with his (and the Palestinian's) vision, as an aid to discussion.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> His map would include all of what is now called Israel, together with the West Bank and Gaza.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I have always said that everything inside Israel's borders goes to Israel and everything inside Palestine's borders goes to Palestine.
> 
> Problem solved.
Click to expand...


No, Tinny, don't do it with words...

Do it with imagery...

Please...

Show us where you (the Palestinians) consider Israel's borders to be...

Show us where you (the Palestinians) consider Palestine's borders to be...

Borders guaranteed to make peace with the Jews of the Region...

There are plenty of maps handy...

Please favor us with imagery, rather than words, to clarify those words...

Thank you...


----------



## toastman

He's going to bring up some documents from 1922, I just know it


----------



## Kondor3

toastman said:


> He's going to bring up some documents from 1922, I just know it


That's OK... just so long as we get an honest and understandable 'visual' of his (their) position on the matter, as a point of departure...

Given past pronouncements about 'borders' and 'no borders' and retrograde understandings...

It's absolutely *critical* to have *clarification* of those words...

Which, by itself, might very well prove to be a 'first'...

Don't DESCRIBE the vision, because words can be re-interpreted and re-spun at any time...

SHOW US with the absolute precision of imagery...


----------



## Kondor3

*Here, Tinny, let me help you to get started...*






*Is THIS the sort of map that you (the Palestinians) have in mind?*


----------



## georgephillip

Kondor3 said:


> georgephillip said:
> 
> 
> 
> "..._free and fair elections for all Semites living under Jewish laws between the River and the sea_..."
> 
> 
> 
> You should have thought of that in 1948.
> 
> Or any time, prior to the 1967 War, before "you" proved yourselves forevermore untrustworthy and collectively insane, and forced the Israelis to harden their hearts, in order to survive.
> 
> Too late now.
> 
> Forty-six years too late.
> 
> Hell, the Palestinians aren't even Israeli citizens... by their own poor choice.
> 
> And now, with their tails between their legs, and having had their raggedy asses kicked time and again, after stupidly suicide-bombing and rocketing Israel to no substantive avail, and with your land-pockets shrinking down to nothingness at the speed of light...
> 
> All of a sudden, you're _soooooooo_ interested in becoming Good Citizens and getting The Vote?
> 
> In the Israelis' shoes, I'd be inclined to say: "No chance" .
> 
> Better luck in an Alternative Universe or another life.
> 
> No means no.
> 
> Next slide, please...
Click to expand...

*It's never too late*

"SOME MONTHS before the outbreak of the Six-Day War, I (Uri Avnery) met a high-ranking member of the Egyptian regime. The meeting took place in Paris through the auspices of a mutual friend. Throughout the years, I have met many leaders of the different Arab states, exchanging opinions and trading ideas for a settlement. But this meeting was different.

"At the outset, I said to my new-found friend: 'Let's make a list of all possible solutions to the Israeli-Arab conflict. Let's analyze every solution in turn and see where we get.'

"Taking a pen, we wrote the following list on the paper cloth on our table in the Paris restaurant:

(A) Annihilation by war
(B) The destruction of Israel by political and economic isolation
(C) Status quo
(D) A Semitic federation.'"

Pax Semitica by Uri Avnery


----------



## Hossfly

toastman said:


> He's going to bring up some documents from 1922, I just know it


I was gonna say that, killjoy!


----------



## toastman

I kind of feel bad, we kind of ganged up on Tinmore and he stopped posting...

Tinmore, you still there???


----------



## georgephillip

Hossfly said:


> georgephillip said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Kondor3 said:
> 
> 
> 
> True...
> 
> Israel gave equal rights to everyone who was willing to live in peace under the Israeli government...
> 
> Israel gave short shrift and exile to those who sided with their Arab-Muslim neighbor countries in multiple failed attempts to drown the Jews in the Mediterranean and to suicide-bomb and rocket-attack innocent Israeli civilians...
> 
> An understandable and logical distinction...
> 
> 
> 
> *What's the distinction between citizenship and nationality in Israel?*
> 
> "Israel's Apartheid Laws
> 
> 
> "1. Identity and Citizenship
> 
> "Law of Return (1950)Grants right of immigration to Jews born anywhere in the world. Amended in 1970 to extend this right to 'a child and a grandchild of a Jew, the spouse of a Jew, the spouse of a child of a Jew and the spouse of a grandchild of a Jew.'
> 
> "A &#8220;Jew&#8221; is defined as 'a person who was born of a Jewish mother or has become converted to Judaism and who is not a member of another religion.'
> 
> "Non-Jewish native-born Palestinians &#8211; most importantly those who fled during the Zionist massacres in 1947 and 1948 &#8211; are in most cases prevented from returning."
> 
> *What kind of democracy divides its citizens into two unequal classes?
> The same kind Chicago enjoyed in the 1950s?*
> 
> Israel's Apartheid Laws
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Since the laws in Israel apply equality to all groups, I don't know why Georgie Boy is so hot about it, especially when a Black person like the leader of South Africa's  daughter says there is no apartheid in Israel.  Are you calling a fellow Black like she is a liar, Georgie Boy?  Meanwhile, of course, you will never find Georgie Boy complaining about the actual apartheid in the Muslim world.  Evidently he has no problem with the lighter-skinned Arabs in Libya keeping the Blacks in cages like in a zoo or with the President of Sudan saying he wants to rid his country of Black tribes.  No Jews are involved, so Georgie Boy can't be bothered with what is happening to Blacks in various places.  And, Georgie Boy, even someone like you has to be aware that each country can make up their own immigration laws.  I am sure you would not be happy with some of the laws elsewhere either.
> 
> Israel is NOT apartheid state, says South African leader's daughter - Israel Today | Israel News
Click to expand...

*"Equality to all groups under the laws of Israel, really?*

"Judicial Practice: Equal Protection Cases

"The Israeli courts &#8211; guided by the Supreme Court &#8211; have consistently decided that discrimination between Arabs and Jews is legitimate based on the founding principles of Israel as a state for the Jewish people; 'nationality' is considered a legitimate basis for discrimination.

"In the State of Israel vs. Ashgoyev (1988), an Israeli settler was convicted by the Tel Aviv District Court of shooting a Palestinian child. The judge sentenced him to a suspended jail term of six months and community service. 

"When challenged by critics, the trial judge, Uri Shtruzman, said: 'It is wrong to demand in the name of equality, equal bearing and equal sentences to two offenders who have different nationalities who break the laws of the State. The sentence that deters the one and his audience, does not deter the other and his community.'&#8221;

*Since Israel is defined as a state of the Jewish nation world-wide, nationality will always trump citizenship among the "chosen community."*


----------



## georgephillip

toastman said:


> I kind of feel bad, we kind of ganged up on Tinmore and he stopped posting...
> 
> Tinmore, you still there???[/QUOTE
> Tinmore will be here long after you're surfing with the sharks.


----------



## P F Tinmore

georgephillip said:


> toastman said:
> 
> 
> 
> I kind of feel bad, we kind of ganged up on Tinmore and he stopped posting...
> 
> Tinmore, you still there???[/QUOTE
> Tinmore will be here long after you're surfing with the sharks.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeed, I was trying to choose which Palestinian map to post. Here in one from 1948.
> 
> Since Israel was founded in 1948 surely one of y'all can post a 1948 map of Israel.
Click to expand...


----------



## Kondor3

georgephillip said:


> "..._Tinmore will be here long after you're surfing with the sharks._"


Unless he decides to take-up Jihad and head to Gaza or the West Bank to help man the barricades on Eviction Day...


----------



## Kondor3

P F Tinmore said:


> georgephillip said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> toastman said:
> 
> 
> 
> I kind of feel bad, we kind of ganged up on Tinmore and he stopped posting...
> 
> Tinmore, you still there???[/QUOTE
> Tinmore will be here long after you're surfing with the sharks.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeed, I was trying to choose which Palestinian map to post. Here in one from 1948.
> 
> Since Israel was founded in 1948 surely one of y'all can post a 1948 map of Israel.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> *Thank you, Tinny...
> 
> Just to be entirely clear...
> 
> Assuming that the beige-colored areas are all Palestinian-controlled...
> 
> Is this what you (the Palestinians) need, Tinny, in order to make peace with the Jews of the region?
> *
Click to expand...


----------



## P F Tinmore

Kondor3 said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> georgephillip said:
> 
> 
> 
> Indeed, I was trying to choose which Palestinian map to post. Here in one from 1948.
> 
> Since Israel was founded in 1948 surely one of y'all can post a 1948 map of Israel.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *Thank you, Tinny...
> 
> Just to be entirely clear...
> 
> Assuming that the beige-colored areas are all Palestinian-controlled...
> 
> Is this what you (the Palestinians) need, Tinny, in order to make peace with the Jews of the region?
> *
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> And after resolution 181, after the end of the mandate, after foreigners declared themselves to be the state of Israel, and after the 1948 war, all of Palestine was still there.
Click to expand...


----------



## RoccoR

P F Tinmore,  _et al,_

From time to time, I do make mistakes.  And from time to time, your arguments are sound and persuasive.  But not this time.



P F Tinmore said:


> I think you are misusing terms. You classify some Palestinians as insurgents


*(COMMENT)*

Insurgents can be foreign in origin, domestic, or even a combination.  The key element is that it operates in opposition to the establish authority (no matter the source of that authority).  There is no question that certain Palestinian activities are behind insurgency movements; to include the Palestinian Islamic Jihad and the al-Qassam Brigade (HAMAS).



P F Tinmore said:


> It appears that insurgents are opposed to their* own* government and policies. I don't see where this would apply to a foreign military occupation.


*(COMMENT)*

This is not a prerequisite to the definition.  While in general, we say an "insurgency is an internal threat that uses subversion and violence to reach political ends;" in the case of an occupation, you view the insurgency from the perspective of the "Occupation Power."  And from the view of the "Occupation Power," the Hostile Arab Palestinian (HoAP) is an internal threat to the "Occupation Force" and the adjacent sovereignty from which the occupation originates.



P F Tinmore said:


> Resolution 2625 does not mention Palestine.
> 
> The armistice lines (that are specifically not to be political or territorial boundaries) run *through* Palestine. Please explain how the Palestinians can violate a line that is* Palestine on both sides.*​


*(COMMENT)*

Of course it did not mention "Palestine" (State of or the Territory) specifically.  It is a generalized concept that is universally applied.

BTW:  The State of Palestine is not on both sides of the Demarcation Line.  The State of Palestine (_alla_ 1988) is on one side and the State of Israel (_alla_ 1948) is on the other.  While the HAMAS Covenant and the PNC Charter stipulate otherwise, I assure you it is not the case.​


P F Tinmore said:


> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Either the State of Palestine is a "State" as declared by the PLO in 1988, with the Armistice Lines as demarcation;  --- OR ---  there is no legitimate State of Palestine.  And if there is a "State of Palestine," then it has boundaries.  But they are not the territorial boundaries with the demarcations it had during the former British Mandate.  The State of Israel may be in territory formerly known as Palestine, but it is a sovereignty unto itself and not subject to any claim by the Palestinian.
> 
> 
> 
> Bot(h) of these are complicated issues. If you would like to discuss them, post them as separate items.
Click to expand...

*(COMMENT)*

I don't think these are that complicated at all:

If you cross a "demarcation line" either in Korea or the Middle East, you have violated the international law concept.

If you are part of a Hostile activity that operates against the sovereignty of the State of Israel, then you are in violated the international law concept.

*(SIDEBAR)*

It is understood that a "claim" made by the Palestinians is still outstanding and requires wither litigations or settlement; towit:

That the territory of a State shall not be violated by being the object, even temporarily, of military occupation or of other measures of force taken by another State in contravention of the Charter, and that it shall not be the object of acquisition by another State resulting from such measures or the threat thereof.​
This is a question on two points:

Defensible Borders; multiple Wars initiated, instigated by, or provoked by, foreign Arab Armies.
The active threat and demonstrated attempts to undermine the sovereignty of Israel.

The State of Israel has not yet been afforded the opportunity to openly defend itself in litigation over the two decades of terrorism it was subject to before occupation, and the following 40 years of terrorism _(albeit diminished)_ after occupation.

Most Respectfully,
R


----------



## Kondor3

P F Tinmore said:


> "..._And after resolution 181, after the end of the mandate, after foreigners declared themselves to be the state of Israel, and after the 1948 war, all of Palestine was still there._"



Forgive me, Tinny, but I did not ask for a history lesson nor the basis for the dispute.

What I asked was...

"Is this (_Palestinian-controlled areas marked as beige-colored, in the map_) what you (_the Palestinians_) require, in order to make permanent peace with the Jews of the region?"

It's your basic 'Yes/No' question.

You can always add qualifiers afterwards.

But your words, coupled with the image, should inform your colleagues as to exactly what it is that you-and-yours seek.

Please answer the question.

Thanks.


----------



## toastman

P F Tinmore said:


> Kondor3 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> *Thank you, Tinny...
> 
> Just to be entirely clear...
> 
> Assuming that the beige-colored areas are all Palestinian-controlled...
> 
> Is this what you (the Palestinians) need, Tinny, in order to make peace with the Jews of the region?
> *
> 
> 
> 
> 
> And after resolution 181, after the end of the mandate, after foreigners declared themselves to be the state of Israel, and after the 1948 war, all of Palestine was still there.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> In the area that Israel declared to be Israel in 1948, there was no more Palestine there anymore.
> Remember, the Palestinians rejected the partition plan, expecting things to work out in their favor.
> I think it goes without saying that it did NOT work in their favor, and they have Syria, Jordan and Egypt to thank for that
Click to expand...


----------



## P F Tinmore

RoccoR said:


> P F Tinmore,  _et al,_
> 
> From time to time, I do make mistakes.  And from time to time, your arguments are sound and persuasive.  But not this time.
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> I think you are misusing terms. You classify some Palestinians as insurgents
> 
> 
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> Insurgents can be foreign in origin, domestic, or even a combination.  The key element is that it operates in opposition to the establish authority (no matter the source of that authority).  There is no question that certain Palestinian activities are behind insurgency movements; to include the Palestinian Islamic Jihad and the al-Qassam Brigade (HAMAS).
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> It appears that insurgents are opposed to their* own* government and policies. I don't see where this would apply to a foreign military occupation.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> This is not a prerequisite to the definition.  While in general, we say an "insurgency is an internal threat that uses subversion and violence to reach political ends;" in the case of an occupation, *you view the insurgency from the perspective of the "Occupation Power." * And from the view of the "Occupation Power," the Hostile Arab Palestinian (HoAP) is an internal threat to the "Occupation Force" and the adjacent sovereignty from which the occupation originates.
Click to expand...


That could be true if you look at it from the criminal's perspective. I don't view a military occupation as an authority. It is just force at the point of a gun.



> Most Respectfully,
> R


----------



## P F Tinmore

toastman said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Kondor3 said:
> 
> 
> 
> And after resolution 181, after the end of the mandate, after foreigners declared themselves to be the state of Israel, and after the 1948 war, all of Palestine was still there.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *In the area that Israel declared to be Israel in 1948, there was no more Palestine there anymore. *
> Remember, the Palestinians rejected the partition plan, expecting things to work out in their favor.
> I think it goes without saying that it did NOT work in their favor, and they have Syria, Jordan and Egypt to thank for that
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Israel never declared any territory. Israel has no defined territory.
Click to expand...


----------



## toastman

The problem with you Tinmore is that you constantly try to portray' YOUR' view, as factual information.


----------



## toastman

P F Tinmore said:


> toastman said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> *In the area that Israel declared to be Israel in 1948, there was no more Palestine there anymore. *
> Remember, the Palestinians rejected the partition plan, expecting things to work out in their favor.
> I think it goes without saying that it did NOT work in their favor, and they have Syria, Jordan and Egypt to thank for that
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Israel never declared any territory. Israel has no defined territory.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Of course they don't
Click to expand...


----------



## Kondor3

What do *YOU* claim for territory, Tinny?

Is it the beige-colored portion of the map that you showed to us?

*Is that what you need, in order to make peace with the Jews of the region?*

A simple 'Yes' or 'No'? will do nicely.

Thank you.


----------



## toastman

All the territory in white is ISRAELI TERRITORY. Deal with it


----------



## Kondor3

But Tinny gets to have his say as well...

And nuthin-says-lovin' like full disclosure...

Tinny continually advocates for the return of Palestinian territories 'stolen' by Israel...

In order to have that conversation, we need to know the EXTENT of those territories...

A simple 'Yes/No' answer to the earlier question will put to rest any concerns on the part of the audience, pertaining to Tinny's expectations and those of his brethren for whom he advocates...

Let's give him a chance to show us what he wants, by imagery, and to confirm that, using the written word...

That way, we all have a basis and point-of-departure and understanding, for future discussion...

C'mon, Tinny, your audience of colleagues awaits...


----------



## toastman

Get ready to take a trip back to 1922 !


----------



## P F Tinmore

toastman said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> toastman said:
> 
> 
> 
> Israel never declared any territory. Israel has no defined territory.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Of course they don't
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Why don't you post an agreement showing where Israel legally acquired any Palestinian territory?
Click to expand...


----------



## toastman

Again with this Jibberish ??

Show me where you read that Israel needed permission from the Palestinians in order to declare independence in the area allotted to them in the partition plan
Show me where is says that if the Arabs rejected the partition plan, then ISrael would have no right to create a state in that area.

I don't need documents to prov anything. I have reality on my side. 
Go on google, look for yourself. Type in 'Map of ISrael' and you will find an endless amount of websites with a clearly defined map of the State of Israel.

Also, Israel is a FULL member of the U.N  Do you really think the U.N would give full membership to a country with no territory ? 
Get real now


----------



## toastman

Better yet, show me ONE article that says 'Israel has no territory'. Preferably not from mondoweiss or electronicintifada


----------



## Hossfly

georgephillip said:


> toastman said:
> 
> 
> 
> I kind of feel bad, we kind of ganged up on Tinmore and he stopped posting...
> 
> Tinmore, you still there???[/QUOTE
> Tinmore will be here long after you're surfing with the sharks.
> 
> 
> 
> Really, Georgie Boy???  Perhaps it will be you  (more likely your ashes) who is surfing with the sharks off of Dockweiler Beach.  Toastman is young enough that he can be having fun playing with the dolphins off of Malibu.  Don't you feel that Hamas' man on these forums like Tinnie deserves a dinner break?  After all, he appears to be on duty practically all the time.  As an aside, in the real world and not on forums, no doubt Tinnie would consider Georgie Boy an abd.  However, on forums it is "the enemy of my enemy is my friend" shtick.
Click to expand...


----------



## Hossfly

georgephillip said:


> Hossfly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> georgephillip said:
> 
> 
> 
> *What's the distinction between citizenship and nationality in Israel?*
> 
> "Israel's Apartheid Laws
> 
> 
> "1. Identity and Citizenship
> 
> "Law of Return (1950)Grants right of immigration to Jews born anywhere in the world. Amended in 1970 to extend this right to 'a child and a grandchild of a Jew, the spouse of a Jew, the spouse of a child of a Jew and the spouse of a grandchild of a Jew.'
> 
> "A &#8220;Jew&#8221; is defined as 'a person who was born of a Jewish mother or has become converted to Judaism and who is not a member of another religion.'
> 
> "Non-Jewish native-born Palestinians &#8211; most importantly those who fled during the Zionist massacres in 1947 and 1948 &#8211; are in most cases prevented from returning."
> 
> *What kind of democracy divides its citizens into two unequal classes?
> The same kind Chicago enjoyed in the 1950s?*
> 
> Israel's Apartheid Laws
> 
> 
> 
> Since the laws in Israel apply equality to all groups, I don't know why Georgie Boy is so hot about it, especially when a Black person like the leader of South Africa's  daughter says there is no apartheid in Israel.  Are you calling a fellow Black like she is a liar, Georgie Boy?  Meanwhile, of course, you will never find Georgie Boy complaining about the actual apartheid in the Muslim world.  Evidently he has no problem with the lighter-skinned Arabs in Libya keeping the Blacks in cages like in a zoo or with the President of Sudan saying he wants to rid his country of Black tribes.  No Jews are involved, so Georgie Boy can't be bothered with what is happening to Blacks in various places.  And, Georgie Boy, even someone like you has to be aware that each country can make up their own immigration laws.  I am sure you would not be happy with some of the laws elsewhere either.
> 
> Israel is NOT apartheid state, says South African leader's daughter - Israel Today | Israel News
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> *"Equality to all groups under the laws of Israel, really?*
> 
> "Judicial Practice: Equal Protection Cases
> 
> "The Israeli courts &#8211; guided by the Supreme Court &#8211; have consistently decided that discrimination between Arabs and Jews is legitimate based on the founding principles of Israel as a state for the Jewish people; 'nationality' is considered a legitimate basis for discrimination.
> 
> "In the State of Israel vs. Ashgoyev (1988), an Israeli settler was convicted by the Tel Aviv District Court of shooting a Palestinian child. The judge sentenced him to a suspended jail term of six months and community service.
> 
> "When challenged by critics, the trial judge, Uri Shtruzman, said: 'It is wrong to demand in the name of equality, equal bearing and equal sentences to two offenders who have different nationalities who break the laws of the State. The sentence that deters the one and his audience, does not deter the other and his community.'&#8221;
> 
> *Since Israel is defined as a state of the Jewish nation world-wide, nationality will always trump citizenship among the "chosen community."*
Click to expand...

Georgie Boy seems to have no problem with the immigration laws of other countries.  He only has a problem with Israel because the Jews are involved.  Try getting citizenship in many other countries, Georgie Boy, and then come back and tell us what happened.  What is pathetic here is that Georgie Boy keeps on bringing up the same stuff over and over and over like some one-trick pony, when there is so much worse going on in the world, but of course this worse stuff doesn't have anything to do with the Jews so Georgie Boy isn't interested.  You don't think that intelligent viewers can see right through you, Georgie Boy, to realize what you are all about?


----------



## Kondor3

P F Tinmore said:


> georgephillip said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> toastman said:
> 
> 
> 
> I kind of feel bad, we kind of ganged up on Tinmore and he stopped posting...
> 
> Tinmore, you still there???[/QUOTE
> Tinmore will be here long after you're surfing with the sharks.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeed, I was trying to choose which Palestinian map to post. Here in one from 1948.
> 
> Since Israel was founded in 1948 surely one of y'all can post a 1948 map of Israel.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> *Tinny...
> 
> Assuming that the beige-colored area on the map which you supplied (above) is all Palestinian-controlled territory...
> 
> Is this what you (the Palestinians) need - the minimum that you will accept - in order to make permanent peace with the Jews of the region?
> 
> A simple 'Yes' or 'No' would do nicely...
> 
> Thank you...*
Click to expand...


----------



## toastman

Looks like he conveniently disappeared


----------



## Kondor3

toastman said:


> Looks like he conveniently disappeared



That's alright... I'll ask the question again later... but I'm sure Tinny will favor us with a straight answer...

After all... if he cannot precisely tell us what he wants, he cannot effectively advocate for that same thing...


----------



## P F Tinmore

toastman said:


> Again with this Jibberish ??
> 
> Show me where you read that Israel needed permission from the Palestinians in order to *declare independence in the area allotted to them in the partition plan*
> Show me where is says that if the Arabs rejected the partition plan, then ISrael would have no right to create a state in that area.
> 
> I don't need documents to prov anything. I have reality on my side.
> Go on google, look for yourself. Type in 'Map of ISrael' and you will find an endless amount of websites with a clearly defined map of the State of Israel.
> 
> Also, Israel is a FULL member of the U.N * Do you really think the U.N would give full membership to a country with no territory ? *
> Get real now



The partition plan transferred no land to Israel.

They did. The UN recognizes Israel inside the UN armistice lines that the UN itself stated were not to be political or territorial boundaries.


----------



## Kondor3

Tell us what you want, Tinny, in connection with the map...

A straight 'Yes' or 'No' answer to the question would do nicely...


----------



## toastman

P F Tinmore said:


> toastman said:
> 
> 
> 
> Again with this Jibberish ??
> 
> Show me where you read that Israel needed permission from the Palestinians in order to *declare independence in the area allotted to them in the partition plan*
> Show me where is says that if the Arabs rejected the partition plan, then ISrael would have no right to create a state in that area.
> 
> I don't need documents to prov anything. I have reality on my side.
> Go on google, look for yourself. Type in 'Map of ISrael' and you will find an endless amount of websites with a clearly defined map of the State of Israel.
> 
> Also, Israel is a FULL member of the U.N * Do you really think the U.N would give full membership to a country with no territory ? *
> Get real now
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The partition plan transferred no land to Israel.
> 
> They did. *The UN recognizes Israel inside the UN armistice lines that the UN itself stated were not to be political or territorial boundaries*.
Click to expand...


Uhh, you need a link for the bold.


----------



## toastman

You havent provided a link for anything that I've asked, as a matter of fact


----------



## toastman

Israel - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

No mention of Israel not having territory here


----------



## Kondor3

quote=P F Tinmore;7825739]





georgephillip said:


> toastman said:
> 
> 
> 
> I kind of feel bad, we kind of ganged up on Tinmore and he stopped posting...
> 
> Tinmore, you still there???[/QUOTE
> Tinmore will be here long after you're surfing with the sharks.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeed, I was trying to choose which Palestinian map to post. Here in one from 1948.
> 
> Since Israel was founded in 1948 surely one of y'all can post a 1948 map of Israel.
Click to expand...


*Sorry to continue to trouble you about this, Tinny, but many of your colleagues in the audience would benefit from some clarification on your part...

Assuming that the beige-colored area on the map which you supplied (above) is all Palestinian-controlled territory...

Is this what you (the Palestinians) need - the minimum that you will accept - in order to make permanent peace with the Jews of the region?

A simple 'Yes' or 'No' would do nicely...

Thank you...*


----------



## theliq

Kondor3 said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> georgephillip said:
> 
> 
> 
> Indeed, I was trying to choose which Palestinian map to post. Here in one from 1948.
> 
> Since Israel was founded in 1948 surely one of y'all can post a 1948 map of Israel.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *Tinny...
> 
> Assuming that the beige-colored area on the map which you supplied (above) is all Palestinian-controlled territory...
> 
> Is this what you (the Palestinians) need - the minimum that you will accept - in order to make permanent peace with the Jews of the region?
> 
> A simple 'Yes' or 'No' would do nicely...
> 
> Thank you...*
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Kondor,Interesting Map,I never realized the Palestinians had such a Rail Network,I have never seen this whilst in Israel,methinks it must have been blown up at some stage circa 1947/48.
> 
> It would have been built by the Turks or British(or both)
> 
> steve
Click to expand...


----------



## theliq

Kondor3 said:


> quote=P F Tinmore;7825739]
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> georgephillip said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> toastman said:
> 
> 
> 
> I kind of feel bad, we kind of ganged up on Tinmore and he stopped posting...
> 
> Tinmore, you still there???[/QUOTE
> Tinmore will be here long after you're surfing with the sharks.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeed, I was trying to choose which Palestinian map to post. Here in one from 1948.
> 
> Since Israel was founded in 1948 surely one of y'all can post a 1948 map of Israel.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> *Sorry to continue to trouble you about this, Tinny, but many of your colleagues in the audience would benefit from some clarification on your part...
> 
> Assuming that the beige-colored area on the map which you supplied (above) is all Palestinian-controlled territory...
> 
> Is this what you (the Palestinians) need - the minimum that you will accept - in order to make permanent peace with the Jews of the region?
> 
> A simple 'Yes' or 'No' would do nicely...
> 
> Thank you...*
Click to expand...


Well from my point of view NO,I am pragmatic enough to say that Israel is here to stay,and rightly so.......despite how the Jews got the land,the history of Israel over the Palestinians over the past 60 years or so, has changed the dynamic of this area......but the Palestinian nation have the right,in fairness and justice to have a proportion of their land returned,including part of J'slem and all of the West Bank.....and this is the majority though of the Jewish Israelis themselves,and peoples worldwide

There is a track record in recent history in much of the world,where land is returned to the previous and/or the ethnic people of that region(Russia is a good example,with the emergence of Kazakstan,Uzbekistan,Azerbijan ect,.......and the break up of Yugoslavia...which now encompasses the Countries of Slovenia,Croatia,Boz-Hertz,Macedonia and all.) and all the previous Colonial Countries of the British ect,.

So Israel can if it wished,resolve this on going schism,and the benefits for both peoples would be terrific.

As an advocate of a 2 state solution.........which some on here would never or could contemplate,in my opinion,you will be overtaken by the future.

Viva Palestine,Viva Israel.....and most importantly too.......For Peace 

steven


----------



## toastman

theliq said:


> Kondor3 said:
> 
> 
> 
> quote=P F Tinmore;7825739]
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> georgephillip said:
> 
> 
> 
> Indeed, I was trying to choose which Palestinian map to post. Here in one from 1948.
> 
> Since Israel was founded in 1948 surely one of y'all can post a 1948 map of Israel.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *Sorry to continue to trouble you about this, Tinny, but many of your colleagues in the audience would benefit from some clarification on your part...
> 
> Assuming that the beige-colored area on the map which you supplied (above) is all Palestinian-controlled territory...
> 
> Is this what you (the Palestinians) need - the minimum that you will accept - in order to make permanent peace with the Jews of the region?
> 
> A simple 'Yes' or 'No' would do nicely...
> 
> Thank you...*
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Well from my point of view NO,I am pragmatic enough to say that Israel is here to stay,and rightly so.......despite how the Jews got the land,the history of Israel over the Palestinians over the past 60 years or so, has changed the dynamic of this area......but the Palestinian nation have the right,in fairness and justice to have a proportion of their land returned,including part of J'slem and all of the West Bank.....and this is the majority though of the Jewish Israelis themselves,and peoples worldwide
> 
> There is a track record in recent history in much of the world,where land is returned to the previous and/or the ethnic people of that region(Russia is a good example,with the emergence of Kazakstan,Uzbekistan,Azerbijan ect,.......and the break up of Yugoslavia...which now encompasses the Countries of Slovenia,Croatia,Boz-Hertz,Macedonia and all.) and all the previous Colonial Countries of the British ect,.
> 
> So Israel can if it wished,resolve this on going schism,and the benefits for both peoples would be terrific.
> 
> As an advocate of a 2 state solution.........which some on here would never or could contemplate,in my opinion,you will be overtaken by the future.
> 
> Viva Palestine,Viva Israel.....and most importantly too.......For Peace
> 
> steven
Click to expand...


For Peace !


----------



## RoccoR

toastman, _et al,_ 

Let's not get catch-up in this nonsense.



toastman said:


> Israel - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
> 
> No mention of Israel not having territory here


*(COMMENT)*

HAMAS does not allow for any Jewish control of Palestine.  



Article 15 said:


> The day that enemies usurp part of Moslem land, Jihad becomes the individual duty of every Moslem. In face of the Jews' usurpation of Palestine, it is compulsory that the banner of Jihad be raised.
> 
> _*SOURCE:*_ The Jihad for the Liberation of Palestine is an Individual Duty



They don't recognize anything that contradicts HAMAS objectives.  It will be an endless cycle of no recognition.

Most Respectfully,
R


----------



## theliq

toastman said:


> theliq said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Kondor3 said:
> 
> 
> 
> quote=P F Tinmore;7825739]
> 
> *Sorry to continue to trouble you about this, Tinny, but many of your colleagues in the audience would benefit from some clarification on your part...
> 
> Assuming that the beige-colored area on the map which you supplied (above) is all Palestinian-controlled territory...
> 
> Is this what you (the Palestinians) need - the minimum that you will accept - in order to make permanent peace with the Jews of the region?
> 
> A simple 'Yes' or 'No' would do nicely...
> 
> Thank you...*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Well from my point of view NO,I am pragmatic enough to say that Israel is here to stay,and rightly so.......despite how the Jews got the land,the history of Israel over the Palestinians over the past 60 years or so, has changed the dynamic of this area......but the Palestinian nation have the right,in fairness and justice to have a proportion of their land returned,including part of J'slem and all of the West Bank.....and this is the majority though of the Jewish Israelis themselves,and peoples worldwide
> 
> There is a track record in recent history in much of the world,where land is returned to the previous and/or the ethnic people of that region(Russia is a good example,with the emergence of Kazakstan,Uzbekistan,Azerbijan ect,.......and the break up of Yugoslavia...which now encompasses the Countries of Slovenia,Croatia,Boz-Hertz,Macedonia and all.) and all the previous Colonial Countries of the British ect,.
> 
> So Israel can if it wished,resolve this on going schism,and the benefits for both peoples would be terrific.
> 
> As an advocate of a 2 state solution.........which some on here would never or could contemplate,in my opinion,you will be overtaken by the future.
> 
> Viva Palestine,Viva Israel.....and most importantly too.......For Peace
> 
> steven
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> For Peace !
Click to expand...


Look Toasty this situation between either side and the tit for tat killings/murders are for both peoples and families  an abomination......no one wants to live like this....I think that with an agreement things will settle down into a peaceful situation....the Palestinians are smart people and despite their difficulties over the past 60 years have one of the highest University entrants in the world......it will be this generation that will benefit into the future,and the Jews likewise.

Both these peoples can and will make a great contribution to the world.

It is the small number of Fundoes on either side that are the flies in the ointment.steven

Yes for Future Peace


----------



## docmauser1

theliq said:


> _I never realized the Palestinians had such a Rail Network,I have never seen this whilst in Israel,methinks it must have been blown up at some stage circa 1947/48. It would have been built by the Turks or British(or both)_


Ah, major development projects mean major arab immigrants from the hood, of course.


----------



## P F Tinmore

RoccoR said:


> toastman, _et al,_
> 
> Let's not get catch-up in this nonsense.
> 
> 
> 
> toastman said:
> 
> 
> 
> Israel - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
> 
> No mention of Israel not having territory here
> 
> 
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> HAMAS does not allow for any Jewish control of Palestine.
> 
> 
> 
> Article 15 said:
> 
> 
> 
> The day that enemies usurp part of Moslem land, Jihad becomes the individual duty of every Moslem. In face of the Jews' usurpation of Palestine, it is compulsory that the banner of Jihad be raised.
> 
> _*SOURCE:*_ The Jihad for the Liberation of Palestine is an Individual Duty
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> They don't recognize anything that contradicts HAMAS objectives.  It will be an endless cycle of no recognition.
> 
> Most Respectfully,
> R
Click to expand...


Indeed, Hamas has consistently said that they would never recognize the occupation of Palestine.

I think your average American would feel the same way about the US.


----------



## RoccoR

P F Tinmore,  _et al,_

I think the Israeli feel the same way.



P F Tinmore said:


> Indeed, Hamas has consistently said that they would never recognize the occupation of Palestine.
> 
> I think your average American would feel the same way about the US.


*(COMMENT)*

As I asked in Post 182 in thread "Document confirms World Zionist Organization allocates land to settlers in Jordan:"  "What has HAMAS done for the Palestinian People that was not ultimately discretionary at the hands of the State of Israel? What has HAMAS ever done other then to deny the Palestinian peace and prosperity in lieu of a conflict that they have no hope of ever achieving?"

HAMAS is an obstruction to both local and regional peace and prosperity.  There is no reasonable expectation that the Hostile Arab Palestinian is ever going to gain control of the State of Israel.  The best it can hope for, without a peace settlement, is that its people don't starve to death.



			
				Gaza --- A Dysfunctional Government in Gaza said:
			
		

> Gaza shortages worsen as Egyptian government destroys tunnels said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> RAFAH, Gaza Strip  As part of a crackdown against Sinai militants, Egypts military-led government destroyed at least 40 smuggling tunnels over the last two weeks, according to officials in the Gaza Strip.
> 
> The move has exacerbated shortages in Gaza of construction materials and cheap Egyptian-produced gasoline, which are the primary products delivered through the tunnels.
> 
> Food, clothing and other consumer goods enter Gaza via Israel, supplying about 40% of the basic needs of Gaza, said Hatem Eweda, director general of Gazas Ministry of National Economy.
> 
> But he said the recent disruptions have put at risk about 60% of the territorys daily commerce.
> 
> _*SOURCE:*_ Abu Alouf is a special correspondent.  Copyright © 2013, Los Angeles Times
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Fuel shortage risks environmental disaster in Gaza said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> GAZA, Sept. 10 (Xinhua) -- As most of sewage pumping stations stop working due to lack of fuel, the fuel shortage in the Hamas- ruled Gaza Strip risks environmental disaster, environment officials in Gaza said on Tuesday.
> 
> Bahaoldin al-Agha, director of the environment protection authorities in Gaza, told Xinhua that if the fuel shortage keeps growing, the sewage pumping stations in the Gaza Strip will completely stop working, "and the entire Gaza Strip will be flooded with sewage water."
> 
> Israel imposed a tight blockade on the Palestinian coastal enclave after Islamic Hamas movement violently seized control of it in June 2007. It allowed insufficient amounts of expensive gasoline and diesel into Gaza, but the population here couldn't afford purchasing it.
> 
> To resolve the fuel shortage, the Palestinians dug thousands of smuggling tunnels under the borders between the Gaza Strip and Egypt to get not only fuel, but also food and other goods. However, Egypt destroyed most of these tunnels since the fall of President Mohamed Morsi on July 3.
> 
> The Gaza Strip, with 1.7 million people, produces 120,000 cubic meter of waste and sewage water, according to the environment officials in Gaza, who added that there are 57 sewage pumping stations in the Gaza Strip operated by fuel that used to be smuggled from Egypt.
> 
> The fuel shortage is not only threatening to paralyze the 57 sewage pumping stations, but also increased blackout.
> 
> _*SOURCE:*_ Xinhua News Service ---English.news.cn
> 
> Click to expand...
Click to expand...


At what point will the Palestinian say, enough is enough?

Most Respectfully,
R


----------



## P F Tinmore

RoccoR said:


> P F Tinmore,  _et al,_
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Resolution 2625 does not mention Palestine.
> 
> The armistice lines (that are specifically not to be political or territorial boundaries) run *through* Palestine. Please explain how the Palestinians can violate a line that is *Palestine on both sides.*
> 
> 
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> Of course it did not mention "Palestine" (State of or the Territory) specifically.  It is a generalized concept that is universally applied.
Click to expand...


I don't see how you can universally apply a concept to a very unusual situation. Palestine was divided into three areas of occupation by armistice lines that were specifically not to be political or territorial boundaries. There are no borders inside Palestine. The area inside all of those lines was still Palestine.



> BTW:  The State of Palestine is not on both sides of the Demarcation Line.  The State of Palestine (_alla_ 1988) is on one side and the State of Israel (_alla_ 1948) is on the other.  While the HAMAS Covenant and the PNC Charter stipulate otherwise, I assure you it is not the case.​
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Either the State of Palestine is a "State" as declared by the PLO in 1988, with the Armistice Lines as demarcation;  --- OR ---  there is no legitimate State of Palestine.  And if there is a "State of Palestine," then it has boundaries.  But they are not the territorial boundaries with the demarcations it had during the former British Mandate.  The State of Israel may be in territory formerly known as Palestine, but it is a sovereignty unto itself and not subject to any claim by the Palestinian.
> 
> 
> 
> Bot(h) of these are complicated issues. If you would like to discuss them, post them as separate items.
> 
> Click to expand...
Click to expand...


When you say " But they are not the territorial boundaries with the demarcations it had *during *the former British Mandate." the mandate was not Palestine. It was merely a period of time in Palestine's history. Palestine's international borders were still there after the mandate left Palestine.



> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> I don't think these are that complicated at all:
> 
> If you cross a "demarcation line" either in Korea or the Middle East, you have violated the international law concept.
> 
> If you are part of a Hostile activity that operates against the sovereignty of the State of Israel, then you are in violated the international law concept.



Like I said, this is complicated.

The League of Nations determined that Palestine and Transjordan were newly created states according to post war treaties.

The Palestinians fought for their rights to defend their country and gain independence all during the mandate period. Britain, who was supposed to assist the people to independence, violated the LoN charter and the rights of the Palestinians by trampling their initiatives toward independence.

Britain realized that its stupid plans were unworkable when they blew up in its face so they shoved the problem onto the UN.

The UN devised a plan that had already been rejected ten years earlier, and they knew it would be rejected again, but they did it anyway. Of course it was rejected again and was never implemented. No borders were defined, no land was transferred, and no states were created. The land remained Palestinian.

In May of 1948 Britain cut and ran. Foreigners declared themselves to be a state inside Palestine without the legal possession of any land and without defining any borders. Five Arab countries attacked the new state of Israel. (Not really but that is the way the story goes.)

In September of 1948 The Palestinians declared independence on their own land and inside their own international borders that they had since 1922. Five countries recognized the state of Palestine. They sent their declaration of independence to the UN. A state exists and has the right to defend itself without the recognition of other states.

In 1949 the UN Security Council called for an armistice to end the 1948 war. nobody won or lost that war. The armistice agreements, that the Israeli government signed, specifically called the place Palestine and referenced Palestine's international borders. No state of Israel was mentioned. No land or borders for Israel were mentioned.

The agreements divided Palestine into three areas of occupation claiming that the Palestine question be addressed at a later date.

That date has yet to come.



> *(SIDEBAR)*
> 
> It is understood that a "claim" made by the Palestinians is still outstanding and requires wither litigations or settlement; towit:
> 
> That the territory of a State shall not be violated by being the object, even temporarily, of military occupation or of other measures of force taken by another State in contravention of the Charter, and that it shall not be the object of acquisition by another State resulting from such measures or the threat thereof.​
> This is a question on two points:
> 
> Defensible Borders; multiple Wars initiated, instigated by, or provoked by, foreign Arab Armies.
> The active threat and demonstrated attempts to undermine the sovereignty of Israel.
> 
> The State of Israel has not yet been afforded the opportunity to openly defend itself in litigation over the two decades of terrorism it was subject to before occupation, and the following 40 years of terrorism _(albeit diminished)_ after occupation.
> 
> Most Respectfully,
> R


----------



## P F Tinmore

RoccoR said:


> P F Tinmore,  _et al,_
> 
> I think the Israeli feel the same way.
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> Indeed, Hamas has consistently said that they would never recognize the occupation of Palestine.
> 
> I think your average American would feel the same way about the US.
> 
> 
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> As I asked in Post 182 in thread "Document confirms World Zionist Organization allocates land to settlers in Jordan:"  "What has HAMAS done for the Palestinian People that was not ultimately discretionary at the hands of the State of Israel? What has HAMAS ever done other then to deny the Palestinian peace and prosperity in lieu of a conflict that they have no hope of ever achieving?"
> 
> HAMAS is an obstruction to both local and regional peace and prosperity.  There is no reasonable expectation that the Hostile Arab Palestinian is ever going to gain control of the State of Israel.  The best it can hope for, without a peace settlement, is that its people don't starve to death.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Gaza --- A Dysfunctional Government in Gaza said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Fuel shortage risks environmental disaster in Gaza said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> GAZA, Sept. 10 (Xinhua) -- As most of sewage pumping stations stop working due to lack of fuel, the fuel shortage in the Hamas- ruled Gaza Strip risks environmental disaster, environment officials in Gaza said on Tuesday.
> 
> Bahaoldin al-Agha, director of the environment protection authorities in Gaza, told Xinhua that if the fuel shortage keeps growing, the sewage pumping stations in the Gaza Strip will completely stop working, "and the entire Gaza Strip will be flooded with sewage water."
> 
> Israel imposed a tight blockade on the Palestinian coastal enclave after Islamic Hamas movement violently seized control of it in June 2007. It allowed insufficient amounts of expensive gasoline and diesel into Gaza, but the population here couldn't afford purchasing it.
> 
> To resolve the fuel shortage, the Palestinians dug thousands of smuggling tunnels under the borders between the Gaza Strip and Egypt to get not only fuel, but also food and other goods. However, Egypt destroyed most of these tunnels since the fall of President Mohamed Morsi on July 3.
> 
> The Gaza Strip, with 1.7 million people, produces 120,000 cubic meter of waste and sewage water, according to the environment officials in Gaza, who added that there are 57 sewage pumping stations in the Gaza Strip operated by fuel that used to be smuggled from Egypt.
> 
> The fuel shortage is not only threatening to paralyze the 57 sewage pumping stations, but also increased blackout.
> 
> _*SOURCE:*_ Xinhua News Service ---English.news.cn
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> At what point will the Palestinian say, enough is enough?
> 
> Most Respectfully,
> R
Click to expand...


It is hard to say. The Palestinians are not the surrender type.


----------



## P F Tinmore

toastman said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> Of course they don't
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I have asked many times for documents showing when Israel legally acquired any land.
> 
> All I got was a song and dance.
Click to expand...


----------



## ForeverYoung436

P F Tinmore said:


> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore,  _et al,_
> 
> I think the Israeli feel the same way.
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> Indeed, Hamas has consistently said that they would never recognize the occupation of Palestine.
> 
> I think your average American would feel the same way about the US.
> 
> 
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> As I asked in Post 182 in thread "Document confirms World Zionist Organization allocates land to settlers in Jordan:"  "What has HAMAS done for the Palestinian People that was not ultimately discretionary at the hands of the State of Israel? What has HAMAS ever done other then to deny the Palestinian peace and prosperity in lieu of a conflict that they have no hope of ever achieving?"
> 
> HAMAS is an obstruction to both local and regional peace and prosperity.  There is no reasonable expectation that the Hostile Arab Palestinian is ever going to gain control of the State of Israel.  The best it can hope for, without a peace settlement, is that its people don't starve to death.
> 
> 
> At what point will the Palestinian say, enough is enough?
> 
> Most Respectfully,
> R
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> It is hard to say. The Palestinians are not the surrender type.
Click to expand...


If compromise meant surrender, no one would ever stay married.  Don't you think Israelis/Jews compromise by giving away the heartland of Eretz Yisrael, their most holy cities?


----------



## ForeverYoung436

ForeverYoung436 said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore,  _et al,_
> 
> I think the Israeli feel the same way.
> 
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> As I asked in Post 182 in thread "Document confirms World Zionist Organization allocates land to settlers in Jordan:"  "What has HAMAS done for the Palestinian People that was not ultimately discretionary at the hands of the State of Israel? What has HAMAS ever done other then to deny the Palestinian peace and prosperity in lieu of a conflict that they have no hope of ever achieving?"
> 
> HAMAS is an obstruction to both local and regional peace and prosperity.  There is no reasonable expectation that the Hostile Arab Palestinian is ever going to gain control of the State of Israel.  The best it can hope for, without a peace settlement, is that its people don't starve to death.
> 
> 
> 
> At what point will the Palestinian say, enough is enough?
> 
> Most Respectfully,
> R
> 
> 
> 
> 
> It is hard to say. The Palestinians are not the surrender type.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> If compromise meant surrender, no one would ever stay married.  Don't you think Israelis/Jews compromise by giving away the heartland of Eretz Yisrael, their most holy cities?
Click to expand...


Also, if you feel so strongly about your Palestinian brethren, why don't you leave your comfortable American home, and go to Gaza to live and fight, since you're not the "surrendering type"?


----------



## P F Tinmore

ForeverYoung436 said:


> ForeverYoung436 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> It is hard to say. The Palestinians are not the surrender type.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> If compromise meant surrender, no one would ever stay married.  Don't you think Israelis/Jews compromise by giving away the heartland of Eretz Yisrael, their most holy cities?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Also, if you feel so strongly about your Palestinian brethren, why don't you leave your comfortable American home, and go to Gaza to live and fight, since you're not the "surrendering type"?
Click to expand...


Israel would love to keep the battle in its home court.

Sorry, that is not going to happen.


----------



## ForeverYoung436

Kondor3 said:


> quote=P F Tinmore;7825739]
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> georgephillip said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> toastman said:
> 
> 
> 
> I kind of feel bad, we kind of ganged up on Tinmore and he stopped posting...
> 
> Tinmore, you still there???[/QUOTE
> Tinmore will be here long after you're surfing with the sharks.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeed, I was trying to choose which Palestinian map to post. Here in one from 1948.
> 
> Since Israel was founded in 1948 surely one of y'all can post a 1948 map of Israel.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> *Sorry to continue to trouble you about this, Tinny, but many of your colleagues in the audience would benefit from some clarification on your part...
> 
> Assuming that the beige-colored area on the map which you supplied (above) is all Palestinian-controlled territory...
> 
> Is this what you (the Palestinians) need - the minimum that you will accept - in order to make permanent peace with the Jews of the region?
> 
> A simple 'Yes' or 'No' would do nicely...
> 
> Thank you...*
Click to expand...


Kondor, by posting that map, Tinmore is advocating for the destruction of a vibrant country called Israel.  According to him, North and South Korea also don't exist, since they are separated by an armistice line.  Maybe Tinmore can teach a class in abstract philosophy, but I would never put him on a Palestinian negotiating team.


----------



## toastman

P F Tinmore said:


> toastman said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> Of course they don't
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I have asked many times for documents showing when Israel legally acquired any land.
> 
> All I got was a song and dance.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You act as if without that question being answered, then you win the argument or something. Not to mention we've been through this so many times !
Click to expand...


----------



## P F Tinmore

toastman said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> toastman said:
> 
> 
> 
> Of course they don't
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I have asked many times for documents showing when Israel legally acquired any land.
> 
> All I got was a song and dance.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You act as if without that question being answered, then you win the argument or something. Not to mention we've been through this so many times !
Click to expand...


Indeed, I feel like a theatrical agent.


----------



## toastman

I have a suggestion for you Tinmore. For your next vacation, got to Israel. I have tons of family there, you can stay with them.


----------



## P F Tinmore

toastman said:


> I have a suggestion for you Tinmore. For your next vacation, got to Israel. I have tons of family there, you can stay with them.



Israel is like anywhere else. A lot of nice people and a government full of assholes.


----------



## toastman

P F Tinmore said:


> toastman said:
> 
> 
> 
> I have a suggestion for you Tinmore. For your next vacation, got to Israel. I have tons of family there, you can stay with them.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Israel is like anywhere else. A lot of nice people and a government full of assholes.
Click to expand...


So you're gonna go ?


----------



## Kondor3

P F Tinmore said:


> toastman said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> Israel never declared any territory. Israel has no defined territory.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Of course they don't
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I have asked many times for documents showing when Israel legally acquired any land.
> 
> *All I got was a song and dance.*
Click to expand...


*That's OK..*.

*You were asked a simple and courteous question..*.

_Is the map you provided a visual image of the minimum Palestinian-controlled land-mass that you (the Palestinians) would accept, in order to make peace with the Jews of the Region?
_

*And all YOU have served-up so far is a sullen and deficient silence...*

*Goose... meet gander.*

Or would you care to change things and actually answer the question...

That would seem to make more sense than letting folks assume the worst...

Unless, of course, 'the worst' (the most extreme) is what you actually have in-mind...

Unless, of course, you fear saying the words, in order to confirm such a stance...

Otherwise, in light of your silence, it seems sensible to articulate your likely ultimate position *FOR* you; namely...

*"P.F. Tinmore's presumed (and silence-confirmed) stance on control of the lands of Palestine:**

The beige-colored areas on the map, below, indicate Palestinian -controlled territory, and that, in turn, expresses my own (and my Palestinian brethren's) own position regarding the minimum amount of Palestinian-controlled territory that we will settle for, in order to make our peace with the Jews of the region.

There may very well be other issues to be resolved before such peace can actually be effected, and time will sort that out, but, with respect to land-ownership and control, the map, below, shows the full extent of our claims, demands, goals and expectations.

In short. we want it all, and we will not settle for less, faithful to that goal even unto death." *






You are certainly welcome to amend such a statement, or to sweep it aside with something *clear and concise* related to the map *you* provided, by taking responsibility for your own declaration, but, in the wake of your continued and obstinate silence on the subject, and your inability or unwillingness to deliver a straight answer that clarifies the map you provided...

The _presumed-stance_ declaration on your behalf may be utilized with a high likelihood of accuracy, given your posting history and your fervent and highly persistent advocacy on behalf of the Palestinians and your manifest hostility against the State of Israel.

It seems best, going forward, to operate upon the ancient legal principle of "qui tacet consentire videtur" ...

"_He who remains silent is understood to consent._"

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

Then again, you can always set the record straight, on your own, by providing your colleagues with a straight answer to the following, or something quite similar designed to facilitate a simple, concise, easy-to-understand answer:

----------

"Assuming that the beige-colored area on the map which you supplied (above) is all Palestinian-controlled territory...

Is this what you (the Palestinians) need - the minimum that you will accept - in order to make permanent peace with the Jews of the region?

A simple 'Yes' or 'No' would do nicely, and you can certainly qualify that Yes/No answer with any other commentary that you believe to be appropriate."

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

*Qui tacet consentire videtur.

"He who remains silent is understood to consent."*

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

This is probably all that needs to be done in order to put the matter to rest, having extended every possible opportunity for correction, so, I'm done with it, unless you'd care to correct my assessment of your ultimate stance, after all.


----------



## Kondor3

ForeverYoung436 said:


> "..._Kondor, by posting that map, Tinmore is advocating for the destruction of a vibrant country called Israel. According to him, North and South Korea also don't exist, since they are separated by an armistice line.  Maybe Tinmore can teach a class in abstract philosophy, but I would never put him on a Palestinian negotiating team._"


He seems caught between obliquely but strongly hinting at his Map, as the ultimate goal of the Palestinians, and not wanting to explicitly say so, so as not to sabotage (in a conversational and speculative context) the negotiating position of those for whom he advocates. Perhaps I'm wrong.


----------



## P F Tinmore

Kondor3 said:


> ForeverYoung436 said:
> 
> 
> 
> "..._Kondor, by posting that map, Tinmore is advocating for the destruction of a vibrant country called Israel. According to him, North and South Korea also don't exist, since they are separated by an armistice line.  Maybe Tinmore can teach a class in abstract philosophy, but I would never put him on a Palestinian negotiating team._"
> 
> 
> 
> He seems caught between obliquely but strongly hinting at his Map, as the ultimate goal of the Palestinians, and not wanting to explicitly say so, so as not to sabotage (in a conversational and speculative context) the negotiating position of those for whom he advocates. Perhaps I'm wrong.
Click to expand...


It is not up to me to determine any peace agreement. I was asked to post a map with Palestine's international borders so I did.

BTW, did anyone find a 1948 map of Israel?


----------



## Kondor3

theliq said:


> "..._Kondor,Interesting Map,I never realized the Palestinians had such a Rail Network,I have never seen this whilst in Israel,methinks it must have been blown up at some stage circa 1947/48. It would have been built by the Turks or British(or both) steve"_


Actually, *Tinny* supplied the map, some hours ago, a bit earlier in this thread... and, I agree about the Turks and the Brits being (quite probably, jointly, with the Brits building upon what the Turks did, and beyond) responsible for whatever modest rail and similar infrastructure existed there in 1948... there's no way that the rag-tag collection of villagers and shepherds and semi-nomadic and diverse collection of population fragments living there at the time were responsible for much or any of that - beyond the manual labor level, anyway...


----------



## Kondor3

P F Tinmore said:


> "..._It is not up to me to determine any peace agreement_..."



A minor detail at best; we deal in the speculative here, and all of the entanglements that go along with that, and there is no harm done out-and-about in the Real World by sharing your own personal perceptions of what constitutes the minimal acceptable control of land, in a message-board setting.

Frankly, it seems pointless to engage in dialogue and argument here or anyplace similar, on a regular basis, unless you can articulate just what it is, that you are advocating *FOR*.

*How can you tell us what you want, if you cannot tell us what you want?*

In clear, concise and certain terms that everyone can understand.

Is that not an entirely logical progression?



> "..._I was asked to post a map with Palestine's international borders so I did_..."



Actually you were asked the following...

----------

* (*) "Tinny...

Do you have a map of the boundaries of a Palestinian State, that you and your brethren perceive as minimally acceptable with respect to land-mass controlled by the Palestinians, in order to secure permanent peace with the Jews of the region?"...*

----------

...in post No. 1070 ( http://www.usmessageboard.com/israel-and-palestine/305058-is-israel-the-same-as-south-africa-72.html#post7822578 ) yesterday...

And you posted your map in response to that question.

Assuming that you did understand the question, and what was being asked of you (_and, given your obvious intelligence, I'm fairly confident that you did, indeed, understand_), *your response can only be construed in one way... you want it all*.
*
But it is always best to* attempt to work with folks to *clarify* and be certain rather than resorting to 'construing'...

Even though 'construing' is a perfectly legitimate and viable and likely-accurate alternative solution, in light of the silence which accompanies a _*precise visual aid*_ such as the map *you* supplied in response to the original question *(*)*.

Hope that helps you to understand the concern.


----------



## toastman

P F Tinmore said:


> Kondor3 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ForeverYoung436 said:
> 
> 
> 
> "..._Kondor, by posting that map, Tinmore is advocating for the destruction of a vibrant country called Israel. According to him, North and South Korea also don't exist, since they are separated by an armistice line.  Maybe Tinmore can teach a class in abstract philosophy, but I would never put him on a Palestinian negotiating team._"
> 
> 
> 
> He seems caught between obliquely but strongly hinting at his Map, as the ultimate goal of the Palestinians, and not wanting to explicitly say so, so as not to sabotage (in a conversational and speculative context) the negotiating position of those for whom he advocates. Perhaps I'm wrong.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> It is not up to me to determine any peace agreement. I was asked to post a map with Palestine's international borders so I did.
> 
> BTW, did anyone find a 1948 map of Israel?
Click to expand...







The first map is Israel before the 1948 Arab Israeli war (the purple)
The second map is Israel after the 1948 Arab Israeli war


----------



## P F Tinmore

toastman said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Kondor3 said:
> 
> 
> 
> He seems caught between obliquely but strongly hinting at his Map, as the ultimate goal of the Palestinians, and not wanting to explicitly say so, so as not to sabotage (in a conversational and speculative context) the negotiating position of those for whom he advocates. Perhaps I'm wrong.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> It is not up to me to determine any peace agreement. I was asked to post a map with Palestine's international borders so I did.
> 
> BTW, did anyone find a 1948 map of Israel?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The first map is Israel before the 1948 Arab Israeli war (the purple)
> The second map is Israel after the 1948 Arab Israeli war
Click to expand...


Left map - proposed 1947 resolution 181 borders that never became borders.
Right map - add 1949 armistice lines that were specifically not to be political or territorial borders.

There are no Israeli borders on either of those maps. Why did they skip over the 1948 map?


----------



## toastman

P F Tinmore said:


> toastman said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> It is not up to me to determine any peace agreement. I was asked to post a map with Palestine's international borders so I did.
> 
> BTW, did anyone find a 1948 map of Israel?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The first map is Israel before the 1948 Arab Israeli war (the purple)
> The second map is Israel after the 1948 Arab Israeli war
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Left map - proposed 1947 resolution 181 borders that never became borders.
> Right map - add 1949 armistice lines that were specifically not to be political or territorial borders.
> 
> There are no Israeli borders on either of those maps. Why did they skip over the 1948 map?
Click to expand...


The first map is the proposed U.N partition plan. When Israel declared independence, she did so in the land allotted to her in the partition plan. Which is the same as the first map.


----------



## P F Tinmore

toastman said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> toastman said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The first map is Israel before the 1948 Arab Israeli war (the purple)
> The second map is Israel after the 1948 Arab Israeli war
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Left map - proposed 1947 resolution 181 borders that never became borders.
> Right map - add 1949 armistice lines that were specifically not to be political or territorial borders.
> 
> There are no Israeli borders on either of those maps. Why did they skip over the 1948 map?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> The first map is the proposed U.N partition plan. When Israel declared independence, *she did so in the land allotted to her in the partition plan.* Which is the same as the first map.
Click to expand...


Not true. The partition plan transferred no land to Israel. Israel blew past the proposed borders to attack Palestinians before they declared independence.


----------



## Kondor3

P F Tinmore said:


> "..._There are no Israeli borders on either of those maps_..."


That is, of course, because Israel did not exist, prior to May 1948, and because its borders remained uncertain during its earliest months of existence, as it fought-off the armies of Egypt, Syria, Jordan, Lebanon and Iraq, et al.

The existence or non-existence of borders for the State of Israel in 1948 are unimportant.

You can think of Palestine in 1948 as an 'Unincorporated Territory', formerly owned by the Ottoman Turkish Empire, and managed by the British after the Turkish Empire collapsed in the wake of WWI, continuing as an 'Unincorporated Territory'.

If you live in an American State and a County within that State which has any appreciable size and still-open land, you understand first-hand the concept of 'Unincorporated' - only loosely organized, if at all, dependent upon others for its protection and services, and subject to annexation or full or partial Incorporation at any time, all of it legal.

And then, one day, City or Town A or B decides to annex all or part of the Unincorporated Land into their municipality..

*OR* some or all of the people of the Unincorporated Land decide to incorporate, and apply to the State Capital, for a Charter for their *own* Incorporation.

State Capitals will oftentimes grant such Charters, even over the objections of some (in the case of a new incorporation) or some-or-all (in the case of an annexation) of the residents of such disorganized lands.

Look at it this way...

The Jews of Palestine applied to the 'State Capital' (the United Nations) for a Charter for their Incorporation, and the 'State Capital', after some delays and quibbling, granted it.

The Charter did specify boundaries or a land-survey because a hard-won armistice had just gone into effect and it was understood de facto ir not de jure that wherever the Jews controlled the land, there was Israel, and wherever the Muslim-Arabs controlled the land, there was the remainder of Unincorporated Palestinian Territory; sufficient unto the day.

The only difference between the Jewish position and the UN position was that the UN viewed the Armistice Lines as de facto, whereas the Jews viewed the Armistice Lines as de jure.

And, given that victory on the battlefield sorts-out old claims and titles, the Jewish position of de jure eventually became operative and extant as de jure as well as de facto.


----------



## Kondor3

P F Tinmore said:


> "..._Not true. The partition plan transferred no land to Israel_..."


Doesn't matter. Victory on the battlefield resulted in a permanent change of ownership. It belongs to the Jews now. They hold the deed.


----------



## P F Tinmore

Kondor3 said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> "..._There are no Israeli borders on either of those maps_..."
> 
> 
> 
> That is, of course, because Israel did not exist, prior to May 1948, and because its borders remained uncertain during its earliest months of existence, as it fought-off the armies of Egypt, Syria, Jordan, Lebanon and Iraq, et al.
> 
> The existence or non-existence of borders for the State of Israel in 1948 are unimportant.
> 
> You can think of Palestine in 1948 as an 'Unincorporated Territory', formerly owned by the Ottoman Turkish Empire, and managed by the British after the Turkish Empire collapsed in the wake of WWI, continuing as an 'Unincorporated Territory'.
> 
> If you live in an American State and a County within that State which has any appreciable size and still-open land, you understand first-hand the concept of 'Unincorporated' - only loosely organized, if at all, dependent upon others for its protection and services, and subject to annexation or full or partial Incorporation at any time, all of it legal.
> 
> And then, one day, City or Town A or B decides to annex all or part of the Unincorporated Land into their municipality, or some or all of the people of the Unincorporated Land decide to incorporate, and apply to the State Capital, for a Charter for their Incorporation.
> 
> Look at it this way...
> 
> The Jews of Palestine applied to the State Capital (the United Nations) for a Charter for their Incorporation, and the State Capital, after some delays and quibbling, granted it.
> 
> The Charter did specify boundaries or a land-survey because a hard-won armistice had just gone into effect and it was understood de facto ir not de jure that wherever the Jews controlled the land, there was Israel, and wherever the Muslim-Arabs controlled the land, there was the remainder of Unincorporated Palestinian Territory; sufficient unto the day.
> 
> The only difference between the Jewish position and the UN position was that the UN viewed the Armistice Lines as de facto, whereas the Jews viewed the Armistice Lines as de jure.
> 
> And, given that victory on the battlefield sorts-out old claims and titles, the Jewish position of de jure eventually became operative and extent de jure as well as de facto.
Click to expand...


Israel still only has de facto borders. It is impossible to have land and not to have borders.

And Israel has no borders.


----------



## ForeverYoung436

toastman said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Kondor3 said:
> 
> 
> 
> He seems caught between obliquely but strongly hinting at his Map, as the ultimate goal of the Palestinians, and not wanting to explicitly say so, so as not to sabotage (in a conversational and speculative context) the negotiating position of those for whom he advocates. Perhaps I'm wrong.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> It is not up to me to determine any peace agreement. I was asked to post a map with Palestine's international borders so I did.
> 
> BTW, did anyone find a 1948 map of Israel?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The first map is Israel before the 1948 Arab Israeli war (the purple)
> The second map is Israel after the 1948 Arab Israeli war
Click to expand...


The map Toastman posted appears to be a French one, so it would be reflective of the European stance on the issue.  The French have, in the past, called Israel "a shitty little country", but they still recognize its existence.


----------



## P F Tinmore

Kondor3 said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> "..._Not true. The partition plan transferred no land to Israel_..."
> 
> 
> 
> Doesn't matter. Victory on the battlefield resulted in a permanent change of ownership. It belongs to the Jews now. They hold the deed.
Click to expand...


1) Israel has not won its war against the Palestinians.

2) It is inadmissible to acquire land through the threat or use of force.


----------



## Kondor3

P F Tinmore said:


> _Israel still only has de facto borders. It is impossible to have land and not to have borders. And Israel has no borders._


We have been down this road before. 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




You really DO have to get some new material. 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




This twisting and squirming on the hook will do you no good.

You are making reliance upon old, overturned understandings.


----------



## Kondor3

P F Tinmore said:


> Kondor3 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> "..._Not true. The partition plan transferred no land to Israel_..."
> 
> 
> 
> Doesn't matter. Victory on the battlefield resulted in a permanent change of ownership. It belongs to the Jews now. They hold the deed.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 1) Israel has not won its war against the Palestinians.
Click to expand...


It's not really a war... it's an ongoing and sputtering collection of individual flare-ups and retaliations, and they kick your ass, every time.

Israel won it's wars against worthy opponents... the Egyptians, the Syrians, the Jordanians, the Lebanese, and the Iraqis... who were, at the time, fighting on behalf of their weak Palestinian brethren.

Ya'll are just the sideshow clueless village-people haunting the fringes of real combat challenges.



> "..._2) It is inadmissible to acquire land through the threat or use of force._"



How's that naive perspective been workin' out for ya in the past 65 years?


----------



## P F Tinmore

Kondor3 said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Kondor3 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Doesn't matter. Victory on the battlefield resulted in a permanent change of ownership. It belongs to the Jews now. They hold the deed.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 1) Israel has not won its war against the Palestinians.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> It's not really a war... it's an ongoing and sputtering collection of individual flare-ups and retaliations, and they kick your ass, every time.
> 
> Israel won it's wars against worthy opponents... the Egyptians, the Syrians, the Jordanians, the Lebanese, and the Iraqis... who were, at the time, fighting on behalf of their weak Palestinian brethren.
Click to expand...


Cool, how much of their land does Israel have?



> Ya'll are just the sideshow clueless village-people haunting the fringes of real combat challenges.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> "..._2) It is inadmissible to acquire land through the threat or use of force._"
> 
> 
> 
> 
> How's that naive perspective been workin' out for ya in the past 65 years?
Click to expand...


Not too bad. Israel still has no land.


----------



## Kondor3

P F Tinmore said:


> Kondor3 said:
> 
> 
> 
> "...How's that naive perspective been workin' out for ya in the past 65 years?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Not too bad. Israel still has no land.
Click to expand...






Funny... your own propaganda websites see that differently... de facto.


----------



## P F Tinmore

Kondor3 said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Kondor3 said:
> 
> 
> 
> "...How's that naive perspective been workin' out for ya in the past 65 years?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Not too bad. Israel still has no land.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Funny... your own propaganda websites see that differently... de facto.
Click to expand...


Everything Israel is de facto. There is nothing legal about it.


----------



## toastman

P F Tinmore said:


> Kondor3 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> "..._There are no Israeli borders on either of those maps_..."
> 
> 
> 
> That is, of course, because Israel did not exist, prior to May 1948, and because its borders remained uncertain during its earliest months of existence, as it fought-off the armies of Egypt, Syria, Jordan, Lebanon and Iraq, et al.
> 
> The existence or non-existence of borders for the State of Israel in 1948 are unimportant.
> 
> You can think of Palestine in 1948 as an 'Unincorporated Territory', formerly owned by the Ottoman Turkish Empire, and managed by the British after the Turkish Empire collapsed in the wake of WWI, continuing as an 'Unincorporated Territory'.
> 
> If you live in an American State and a County within that State which has any appreciable size and still-open land, you understand first-hand the concept of 'Unincorporated' - only loosely organized, if at all, dependent upon others for its protection and services, and subject to annexation or full or partial Incorporation at any time, all of it legal.
> 
> And then, one day, City or Town A or B decides to annex all or part of the Unincorporated Land into their municipality, or some or all of the people of the Unincorporated Land decide to incorporate, and apply to the State Capital, for a Charter for their Incorporation.
> 
> Look at it this way...
> 
> The Jews of Palestine applied to the State Capital (the United Nations) for a Charter for their Incorporation, and the State Capital, after some delays and quibbling, granted it.
> 
> The Charter did specify boundaries or a land-survey because a hard-won armistice had just gone into effect and it was understood de facto ir not de jure that wherever the Jews controlled the land, there was Israel, and wherever the Muslim-Arabs controlled the land, there was the remainder of Unincorporated Palestinian Territory; sufficient unto the day.
> 
> The only difference between the Jewish position and the UN position was that the UN viewed the Armistice Lines as de facto, whereas the Jews viewed the Armistice Lines as de jure.
> 
> And, given that victory on the battlefield sorts-out old claims and titles, the Jewish position of de jure eventually became operative and extent de jure as well as de facto.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Israel still only has de facto borders. It is impossible to have land and not to have borders.
> 
> And Israel has no borders.
Click to expand...


Israel has INTERNATIONALLY recognized borders with Egypt and Jordan. 
Why do you continue to spew the same lie ??


----------



## toastman

P F Tinmore said:


> Kondor3 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> Not too bad. Israel still has no land.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Funny... your own propaganda websites see that differently... de facto.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Everything Israel is de facto. There is nothing legal about it.
Click to expand...


Got a link that says "Everything Israel is de facto " ?

My guess is no


----------



## toastman

P F Tinmore said:


> Kondor3 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 1) Israel has not won its war against the Palestinians.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> It's not really a war... it's an ongoing and sputtering collection of individual flare-ups and retaliations, and they kick your ass, every time.
> 
> Israel won it's wars against worthy opponents... the Egyptians, the Syrians, the Jordanians, the Lebanese, and the Iraqis... who were, at the time, fighting on behalf of their weak Palestinian brethren.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Cool, how much of their land does Israel have?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Ya'll are just the sideshow clueless village-people haunting the fringes of real combat challenges.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> "..._2) It is inadmissible to acquire land through the threat or use of force._"
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> How's that naive perspective been workin' out for ya in the past 65 years?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> *Not too bad. Israel still has no land*.
Click to expand...


Got a link that says "Israel has no land" ??


----------



## ForeverYoung436

toastman said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Kondor3 said:
> 
> 
> 
> It's not really a war... it's an ongoing and sputtering collection of individual flare-ups and retaliations, and they kick your ass, every time.
> 
> Israel won it's wars against worthy opponents... the Egyptians, the Syrians, the Jordanians, the Lebanese, and the Iraqis... who were, at the time, fighting on behalf of their weak Palestinian brethren.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Cool, how much of their land does Israel have?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Ya'll are just the sideshow clueless village-people haunting the fringes of real combat challenges.
> 
> 
> 
> How's that naive perspective been workin' out for ya in the past 65 years?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> *Not too bad. Israel still has no land*.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Got a link that says "Israel has no land" ??
Click to expand...


I wonder what I was walking on while I was there.


----------



## Kondor3

P F Tinmore said:


> Kondor3 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> Not too bad. Israel still has no land.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Funny... your own propaganda websites see that differently... de facto.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Everything Israel is de facto. There is nothing legal about it.
Click to expand...


There comes a time when de facto *BECOMES* de jure.

See: Common-Law Marriage

See: Squatters' RIghts

...and we passed that Transition Time, long ago.

It's just that you - the makers of poor choices in 1948 - can't do anything about it, and you don't get a do-over.

So you kvetch and bellyache and piss and moan and whine interminably, and lean on old, obsolete, overturned understandings and status, to the irritation and amusement of much of the rest of the world.

While the 'green' part of that land-loss map continues to shrink to downright microscopic proportions.

Perhaps if your brethren had been more realistic and pragmatic and less like you, during the period 1948-1967, you would not find yourselves in such a desperate end-game position now.

But you can't go back and un-do your choices.

The time for that is past.

You have no one to blame for that but yourselves, and your poor choices, and your incompetence on the battlefield, to make those choices operative.

The Jews of Israel are the new owners.

By victory on the battlefield - and, if you like, by squatters' rights.

Consider it a foreclosure and sheriff's sale, with an eviction and a changing of the locks, afterwards, with the keys given to the new owners.

'Your' presence in Greater Israel is no longer required.


----------



## toastman

ForeverYoung436 said:


> toastman said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> Cool, how much of their land does Israel have?
> 
> 
> 
> *Not too bad. Israel still has no land*.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Got a link that says "Israel has no land" ??
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I wonder what I was walking on while I was there.
Click to expand...


According to Tinnie, it's Palestinian land


----------



## ForeverYoung436

Kondor3 said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Kondor3 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Funny... your own propaganda websites see that differently... de facto.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Everything Israel is de facto. There is nothing legal about it.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> There comes a time when de facto *BECOMES* de jure.
> 
> See: Common-Law Marriage
> 
> See: Squatters' RIghts
> 
> ...and we passed that Transition Time, long ago.
> 
> It's just that you - the makers of poor choices in 1948 - can't do anything about it, and you don't get a do-over.
> 
> So you kvetch and bellyache and moan and whine interminably, and lean on old, obsolete, overturned understandings and status, to the irritation and amusement of much of the rest of the world.
> 
> While the 'green' part of that land-loss map continues to downright microscopic proportions.
> 
> Perhaps if your brethren had been more realistic and pragmatic and less like you, during the period 1948-1967, you would not find yourselves in such an end-game position now.
> 
> But you can't go back and un-do your choices.
> 
> The time for that is past.
> 
> The Jews of Israel are the new owners.
> 
> By victory on the battlefield - and, if you like, by squatters' rights.
> 
> 'Your' presence in Greater Israel is no longer required.
Click to expand...


While the situation on the ground is not quite as dire as Kondor's map represents for the Palestinians, it could be that way in just a few short years.  I would suggest to the Palestinians that they strike a deal immediately--I mean, like, yesterday.


----------



## RoccoR

P F Tinmore,  _et al,_

Let's go over this.



P F Tinmore said:


> I don't see how you can universally apply a concept to a very unusual situation. Palestine was divided into three areas of occupation by armistice lines that were specifically not to be political or territorial boundaries. There are no borders inside Palestine. The area inside all of those lines was still Palestine.


*(COMMENT)*

The description "Palestine" was referring to a territory, not a "state."  There was no State of Palestine."  The armistice agreement (as an example) was between two states (Egypt and Israel) as signed this morning, 24 February at Rhodes.  You are correct, at that time, there were no borders set.  But the UN Security Council does not draw Armistice Lines that have no meaning.  Please note:



			
				EGYPTIAN-ISRAELI GENERAL ARMISTICE AGREEMENT said:
			
		

> *ARTICLE II*
> 
> 2.	No element of the land, sea or air military or para-military forces of either Part, including non-regular forces, shall commit any warlike or hostile act against the military or para-military forces of the other Party, or against civilians in territory under the control of that Party; *or shall advance beyond or pass over for any purpose whatsoever the Armistice Demarcation Line* set forth in Article VI of this Agreement except as provided in Article III of this Agreement; and elsewhere shall not violate the international frontier; or enter into or pass through the air space of the other Party or through the waters within three miles of the coastline of the other Party.
> 
> _*SOURCE:*_ EGYPTIAN-ISRAELI GENERAL ARMISTICE AGREEMENT





			
				LEBANESE-ISRAELI GENERAL ARMISTICE AGREEMENT said:
			
		

> *ARTICLE III*
> 
> 2.	No element of the land, sea or air military or para-military forces of either Party, including non-regular forces, shall commit any warlike or hostile act against the military or para-military forces of the other Party, or against civilians in territory under the control of that Party; *or shall advance beyond or pass over for any purpose whatsoever the Armistice Demarcation Line* set forth in Article V of this Agreement; or enter into or pass through the air space of the other Party or through the waters within three miles of the coastline of the other Party.
> 
> _*SOURCE:*_ LEBANESE-ISRAELI GENERAL ARMISTICE AGREEMENT





			
				HASHEMITE JORDAN KINGDOM - ISRAEL:  GENERAL ARMISTICE AGREEMENT said:
			
		

> *ARTICLE III*
> 
> 2.	No element of the land, sea or air military or para-military forces of either Party, including non-regular forces, shall commit any warlike or hostile act against the military or para-military forces of the other Party, or against civilians in territory under the control of that Party; *or shall advance beyond or pass over for any purpose whatsoever the Armistice Demarcation Lines* set forth in articles V and VI of this Agreement; or enter into or pass through the air space of the other Party.
> 
> _*SOURCE:*_ HASHEMITE JORDAN KINGDOM - ISRAEL:  GENERAL ARMISTICE AGREEMENT



BTW:  Just as a side note, each of the Armistice arrangements, as you can see in the text of each agreement, refers to a specific MAP.   In the case of the West Bank and the associated Armistice Agreement between Israel and the Hashemite Kingdom, the Map is a 1:250,000 scale map sheet; signed in the upper left hand corner by Lieutenant-Colonel Moshe DAYAN (Israel) and Colonel Ahmed Sudki EL-JUNDI (Jordan).



			
				ISRAELI-SYRIAN GENERAL ARMISTICE AGREEMENT said:
			
		

> *LETTERS JOINED TO THE ISRAELI-SYRIAN GENERAL ARMISTICE AGREEMENT*
> 
> I confirm that the two Parties are agreed that their forces shall not advance beyond the existing truce lines, as certified by the United Nations Truce Supervision Organization.
> 
> _*SOURCE:*_ ISRAELI-SYRIAN GENERAL ARMISTICE AGREEMENT



Each Armistice Arrangement spells out the restriction.  General Assembly Resolution 2625 (XXXV) merely codifies (making it universal) the (nearly) exact same language used in Armistice Agreements since the First World War (almost a century ago).  It is a mistake to think the Question of Palestine is somehow special and unique.  If anything is special and unique is that the conflict is fought over and over again with the same results.



P F Tinmore said:


> When you say " But they are not the territorial boundaries with the demarcations it had *during *the former British Mandate." the mandate was not Palestine. It was merely a period of time in Palestine's history. Palestine's international borders were still there after the mandate left Palestine.


*(COMMENT)*

Subterfuge.  The MANDATE FOR PALESTINE was to entrust to a Mandatory (the UK) selected by the Allied Powers, the administration of the "territory of Palestine," which formerly belonged to the Turkish Empire _(successor nation to the Ottoman Empire)_, within such boundaries as may be fixed by them.  Palestine was not a "state" or even a defined territory.  The boundaries were set, not by Palestinians, but by the Allied Power in accordance with the Part III, Section VII, Article 95 of the Treaty of Sevres; which uses the same language as the San Remo Convention. 

I REPEAT:  The boundaries associated with the "Territory of Palestine" were arbitrary boundaries established by the Allied Powers and not the Arab or the Palestinians.



P F Tinmore said:


> Like I said, this is complicated.


*(COMMENT)*

No, it is rather straight forward.



P F Tinmore said:


> The League of Nations determined that Palestine and Transjordan were newly created states according to post war treaties.


*(COMMENT)*

No.  Part III, Section VII, Articles 94 thru 97, of the Treaty of Sevres says no such thing.  It doesn't even specific Palestine by boundaries or borders.  In fact, the treaty doesn't even mention Lebanon or Trans-Jordan.  The were both carve-outs by the Allied Powers [(Lebanon out of Syria) and (Trans-Jordan out of Palestine)].



P F Tinmore said:


> The Palestinians fought for their rights to defend their country and gain independence all during the mandate period. Britain, who was supposed to assist the people to independence, violated the LoN charter and the rights of the Palestinians by trampling their initiatives toward independence.


*(COMMENT)*

That is a perspective.  But not totally truthful to the events of the day.  While it is true that the Arab King of the HEJAZ made it clear in the Faisal-Weizmann Agreement (1919) that the Arabs had national aspirations in the region, it is just as true that HM understood that the Jewish State was also very much a nationalistic concern; and that it was to be a "collaboration in the development of the Arab State and Palestine.  Both the HRH Emir Faisal and Chairman Weizmann came away understanding "that Palestine shall be placed under such political, administrative and economic conditions as will secure the establishment there of the Jewish National Home and ultimately render possible the creation of an autonomous Commonwealth." 



P F Tinmore said:


> Britain realized that its stupid plans were unworkable when they blew up in its face so they shoved the problem onto the UN.


*(COMMENT)*

This is a giant leap in time.  We go from 1919 to 1947.



			
				This decision was announced to the House of Commons by the Foreign Secretary on the 18th February 1947. In the course of his speech he said: said:
			
		

> His Majestys Government have been faced with an irreconcilable conflict of principles. There are in Palestine about 1,200,000 Arabs and 600,000 Jews. *For the Jews the essential point of principle is the creation of sovereign Jewish State. For the Arabs, the essential point of principle is to resist to the last the establishment of Jewish sovereignty in any part of Palestine.* The discussions of the last moth have quite clearly shown that there is no prospect of resolving this conflict by any settlement negotiated between the parties.
> 
> ...   ...   ...   ...   We shall then ask the United Nations to consider our report, and to recommend a settlement of the problem. We do not intend ourselves to recommend any particular solution.
> 
> _*SOURCE:*_ A/AC.14/8  2 October 1947



An irreconcilable conflict of principles. 



P F Tinmore said:


> The UN devised a plan that had already been rejected ten years earlier, and they knew it would be rejected again, but they did it anyway. Of course it was rejected again and was never implemented. No borders were defined, no land was transferred, and no states were created. The land remained Palestinian.


*(COMMENT)*

Again, a very biased slant on what actually happened.

There are no land transfers in the Declaration of Independence, not for Lebanon, Syria, Jordan, or Israel.  And when the State of Palestine was recognized, there was no land transfers then.  Land transfers are a real estate term and action used in purchasing or reparation.  Sovereignty is an entirely different matter.

The land, for many decades to come, will be also be known as the "former mandated territory of Palestine."  But the State of Palestine, is something entirely different.

The borders were defined in Part II, Section B, The Jewish State, in General Assembly Resolution 181(II), and the associated Map of the Partition, as recommended by the United Nations Special Committee on Palestine (UNCOP).



			
				Mandate of Destiny said:
			
		

> On November 29, 1947, the United Nations General Assembly approved a resolution to accept the UNSCOP and Ad Hoc Committee recommendations to partition Palestine into two states, one Arab and one Jewish, and declare Jerusalem an international territory. The Assembly approved the slightly revised partition plan by a vote of 33-13 with 10 abstentions, reaching a two-thirds vote in favor of the plan.[See Document 11: UN General Assembly Resolution 181(II) (November 29, 1947).]
> 
> In speeches following the General Assembly vote, the Arab states expressed their opinions of UN Resolution 181. Amir Arslan of Syria called the Charter dead, while the Saudi Arabian delegate said that they were not bound by the decision. Arab spokesmen claimed the resolution had destroyed the United Nations. [See Document 12: Verbatim Provisional Records, UN General Assembly (November 29, 1947).] The UN Palestine Commission was then created to oversee implementation of Resolution 181. Its first special reporton security issues in Palestinewas deliv-ered to the Security Council in February 1948. The Commission warned: PowerfulArab interests, both inside and outside Palestine, are defying the resolution of theGeneral Assembly and are engaged in a deliberate effort to alter by force the settlement envisaged therein. Included in this special report were excerpts of a communication to the Commission from the Arab Higher Committee. The Committee states it will never accept partition or the idea of a Jewish state. [See Document 13:Report of UN Palestine Commission: First Special Report to the Security Council: The Problem of Security in Palestine, Document A/AC.219 (16 February 1948).]
> 
> _*SOURCE:*_ Introduction XI:   The 1947 United Nations Decision to Partition Palestine





P F Tinmore said:


> In May of 1948 Britain cut and ran. Foreigners declared themselves to be a state inside Palestine without the legal possession of any land and without defining any borders. Five Arab countries attacked the new state of Israel. (Not really but that is the way the story goes.)


*(COMMENT)*

That is an opinion.  Five Arab countries attacked the new state of Israel. 



			
				Arab Higher Committee said:
			
		

> Needless to say, I should have been delighted to have an equally inti-mate collaboration with the Arab Higher Committee in implementing theresolution by which I was unreservedly bound as Secretary-General.Instead, the Arabs employed open threats. On February 6 the Higher Committee representative wrote to me: The Arabs of Palestine  will never submit or yield to any Power going to Palestine to enforce partition. The only way to establish partition is first to wipe them outman, woman and child.
> 
> The Arab states launched their invasion of Palestine with the end of the Mandate. This was armed defiance of the United Nations, and they openly pro-claimed their aggression by telegraphing news of it to United Nations headquarters. The Security Council, when it met on May 15, had before it a cable from the Egyptian Minister of Foreign Affairs, which brazenly announced, Egyptian armed forces have started to enter Palestine to establish security and order.
> 
> _*SOURCE:*_    The 1947 United Nations Decision to Partition Palestine





P F Tinmore said:


> In September of 1948 The Palestinians declared independence on their own land and inside their own international borders that they had since 1922. Five countries recognized the state of Palestine. They sent their declaration of independence to the UN. A state exists and has the right to defend itself without the recognition of other states.


*(COMMENT)*

Israel had already declared independence on 15 May, 1948.



P F Tinmore said:


> In 1949 the UN Security Council called for an armistice to end the 1948 war. nobody won or lost that war. The armistice agreements, that the Israeli government signed, specifically called the place Palestine and referenced Palestine's international borders. No state of Israel was mentioned. No land or borders for Israel were mentioned.


*(COMMENT)*

Subterfuge.  The Armistice was with the State of Israel.  There was no State of Palestine mentioned.

Yes, correct.  Armistice Arrangement do not declare outcome.  The outcomes are self-evident.  "The basic purpose of the Armistice Demarcation Line is to delineate the line beyond which the armed forces of the respective Parties shall not move except as provided in Article III of this Agreement."



P F Tinmore said:


> The agreements divided Palestine into three areas of occupation claiming that the Palestine question be addressed at a later date.
> 
> That date has yet to come.


*(COMMENT)*

No, this is wrong.  The Armistice did not declare any occupation.

The word "occupation" is not even used once in the EGYPTIAN-ISRAELI GENERAL ARMISTICE AGREEMENT, or the ARMISTICE AGREEMENT BETWEEN LEBANON AND ISRAEL, or the HASHEMITE JORDAN KINGDOM - ISRAEL:  GENERAL ARMISTICE AGREEMENT, or the ISRAELI-SYRIAN GENERAL ARMISTICE AGREEMENT.

Out of curiosity I also checked the two Treaties.

Treaty of Peace between The State of Israel and The Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan 26 October 1994:  The word "occupation" or "occupied" is not used once.



			
				Treaty of Peace between The State of Israel and The Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan said:
			
		

> *Article 3 - International Boundary*
> 
> 1.	The international boundary between Israel and Jordan is delimited with reference to the boundary definition under the Mandate as is shown in Annex I(a), on the mapping materials attached thereto and co-ordinates specified therein.
> 2.	The boundary, as set out in Annex I (a), is the permanent, secure and recognised international boundary between Israel and Jordan, without prejudice to the status of any territories that came under Israeli military government control in 1967.
> 3.	The parties recognise the international boundary, as well as each other's territory, territorial waters and airspace, as inviolable, and will respect and comply with them.
> 4.	The demarcation of the boundary will take place as set forth in Appendix (I) to Annex I and will be concluded not later than nine months after the signing of the Treaty.
> 5.	It is agreed that where the boundary follows a river, in the event of natural changes in the course of the flow of the river as described in Annex I (a), the boundary shall follow the new course of the flow. In the event of any other changes the boundary shall not be affected unless otherwise agreed.
> 6.	Immediately upon the exchange of the instruments of ratification of this Treaty, each Party will deploy on its side of the international boundary as defined in Annex I (a).
> 7.	The Parties shall, upon the signature of the Treaty, enter into negotiations to conclude, within 9 months, an agreement on the delimitation of their maritime boundary in the Gulf of Aqaba.
> 8.	Taking into account the special circumstances of the Naharayim/Baqura area, which is under Jordanian sovereignty, with Israeli private ownership rights, the Parties agreed to apply the provisions set out in Annex I (b).
> 9.	With respect to the Zofar/Al-Ghamr area, the provisions set out in Annex I (c) will apply.



The same is true for the Treaty of Peace between the Arab Republic of Egypt and the State of Israel, 26 March 1979



			
				Treaty of Peace between the Arab Republic of Egypt and the State of Israel said:
			
		

> *Article II*
> 
> The permanent boundary between Egypt and Israel is the recognized international boundary between Egypt and the* former mandated territory of Palestine*, as shown on the map at Annex II, without prejudice to the issue of the status of the Gaza Strip. The Parties recognize this boundary as inviolable. Each will respect the territorial integrity of the other, including their territorial waters and airspace.





Most Respectfully,
R


----------



## Kondor3

ForeverYoung436 said:


> "_While the situation on the ground is not quite as dire as Kondor's map represents for the Palestinians, it could be that way in just a few short years. I would suggest to the Palestinians that they strike a deal immediately--I mean, like, yesterday._"


It *is* an imaginative way to turn the Palestinians' own propaganda maps against them...

And, if there *IS* still a narrow window of opportunity to cut a deal, they would be wise to jump through that window, immediately, if not sooner...

Then again, when have the Palestinians ever manifested substantive wisdom, in the past 65 years?

Translation: we probably should not hold our breath, waiting for that to materialize.


----------



## ForeverYoung436

RoccoR said:


> P F Tinmore,  _et al,_
> 
> Let's go over this.
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> I don't see how you can universally apply a concept to a very unusual situation. Palestine was divided into three areas of occupation by armistice lines that were specifically not to be political or territorial boundaries. There are no borders inside Palestine. The area inside all of those lines was still Palestine.
> 
> 
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> The description "Palestine" was referring to a territory, not a "state."  There was no State of Palestine."  The armistice agreement (as an example) was between two states (Egypt and Israel) as signed this morning, 24 February at Rhodes.  You are correct, at that time, there were no borders set.  But the UN Security Council does not draw Armistice Lines that have no meaning.  Please note:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> EGYPTIAN-ISRAELI GENERAL ARMISTICE AGREEMENT said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *ARTICLE II*
> 
> 2.	No element of the land, sea or air military or para-military forces of either Part, including non-regular forces, shall commit any warlike or hostile act against the military or para-military forces of the other Party, or against civilians in territory under the control of that Party; *or shall advance beyond or pass over for any purpose whatsoever the Armistice Demarcation Line* set forth in Article VI of this Agreement except as provided in Article III of this Agreement; and elsewhere shall not violate the international frontier; or enter into or pass through the air space of the other Party or through the waters within three miles of the coastline of the other Party.
> 
> _*SOURCE:*_ EGYPTIAN-ISRAELI GENERAL ARMISTICE AGREEMENT
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> BTW:  Just as a side note, each of the Armistice arrangements, as you can see in the text of each agreement, refers to a specific MAP.   In the case of the West Bank and the associated Armistice Agreement between Israel and the Hashemite Kingdom, the Map is a 1:250,000 scale map sheet; signed in the upper left hand corner by Lieutenant-Colonel Moshe DAYAN (Israel) and Colonel Ahmed Sudki EL-JUNDI (Jordan).
> 
> 
> 
> Each Armistice Arrangement spells out the restriction.  General Assembly Resolution 2625 (XXXV) merely codifies (making it universal) the (nearly) exact same language used in Armistice Agreements since the First World War (almost a century ago).  It is a mistake to think the Question of Palestine is somehow special and unique.  If anything is special and unique is that the conflict is fought over and over again with the same results.
> 
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> Subterfuge.  The MANDATE FOR PALESTINE was to entrust to a Mandatory (the UK) selected by the Allied Powers, the administration of the "territory of Palestine," which formerly belonged to the Turkish Empire _(successor nation to the Ottoman Empire)_, within such boundaries as may be fixed by them.  Palestine was not a "state" or even a defined territory.  The boundaries were set, not by Palestinians, but by the Allied Power in accordance with the Part III, Section VII, Article 95 of the Treaty of Sevres; which uses the same language as the San Remo Convention.
> 
> I REPEAT:  The boundaries associated with the "Territory of Palestine" were arbitrary boundaries established by the Allied Powers and not the Arab or the Palestinians.
> 
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> No, it is rather straight forward.
> 
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> No.  Part III, Section VII, Articles 94 thru 97, of the Treaty of Sevres says no such thing.  It doesn't even specific Palestine by boundaries or borders.  In fact, the treaty doesn't even mention Lebanon or Trans-Jordan.  The were both carve-outs by the Allied Powers [(Lebanon out of Syria) and (Trans-Jordan out of Palestine)].
> 
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> That is a perspective.  But not totally truthful to the events of the day.  While it is true that the Arab King of the HEJAZ made it clear in the Faisal-Weizmann Agreement (1919) that the Arabs had national aspirations in the region, it is just as true that HM understood that the Jewish State was also very much a nationalistic concern; and that it was to be a "collaboration in the development of the Arab State and Palestine.  Both the HRH Emir Faisal and Chairman Weizmann came away understanding "that Palestine shall be placed under such political, administrative and economic conditions as will secure the establishment there of the Jewish National Home and ultimately render possible the creation of an autonomous Commonwealth."
> 
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> This is a giant leap in time.  We go from 1919 to 1947.
> 
> 
> 
> An irreconcilable conflict of principles.
> 
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> Again, a very biased slant on what actually happened.
> 
> There are no land transfers in the Declaration of Independence, not for Lebanon, Syria, Jordan, or Israel.  And when the State of Palestine was recognized, there was no land transfers then.  Land transfers are a real estate term and action used in purchasing or reparation.  Sovereignty is an entirely different matter.
> 
> The land, for many decades to come, will be also be known as the "former mandated territory of Palestine."  But the State of Palestine, is something entirely different.
> 
> The borders were defined in Part II, Section B, The Jewish State, in General Assembly Resolution 181(II), and the associated Map of the Partition, as recommended by the United Nations Special Committee on Palestine (UNCOP).
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> That is an opinion.  Five Arab countries attacked the new state of Israel.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> Israel had already declared independence on 15 May, 1948.
> 
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> Subterfuge.  The Armistice was with the State of Israel.  There was no State of Palestine mentioned.
> 
> Yes, correct.  Armistice Arrangement do not declare outcome.  The outcomes are self-evident.  "The basic purpose of the Armistice Demarcation Line is to delineate the line beyond which the armed forces of the respective Parties shall not move except as provided in Article III of this Agreement."
> 
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> No, this is wrong.  The Armistice did not declare any occupation.
> 
> The word "occupation" is not even used once in the EGYPTIAN-ISRAELI GENERAL ARMISTICE AGREEMENT, or the ARMISTICE AGREEMENT BETWEEN LEBANON AND ISRAEL, or the HASHEMITE JORDAN KINGDOM - ISRAEL:  GENERAL ARMISTICE AGREEMENT, or the ISRAELI-SYRIAN GENERAL ARMISTICE AGREEMENT.
> 
> Out of curiosity I also checked the two Treaties.
> 
> Treaty of Peace between The State of Israel and The Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan 26 October 1994:  The word "occupation" or "occupied" is not used once.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Treaty of Peace between The State of Israel and The Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *Article 3 - International Boundary*
> 
> 1.	The international boundary between Israel and Jordan is delimited with reference to the boundary definition under the Mandate as is shown in Annex I(a), on the mapping materials attached thereto and co-ordinates specified therein.
> 2.	The boundary, as set out in Annex I (a), is the permanent, secure and recognised international boundary between Israel and Jordan, without prejudice to the status of any territories that came under Israeli military government control in 1967.
> 3.	The parties recognise the international boundary, as well as each other's territory, territorial waters and airspace, as inviolable, and will respect and comply with them.
> 4.	The demarcation of the boundary will take place as set forth in Appendix (I) to Annex I and will be concluded not later than nine months after the signing of the Treaty.
> 5.	It is agreed that where the boundary follows a river, in the event of natural changes in the course of the flow of the river as described in Annex I (a), the boundary shall follow the new course of the flow. In the event of any other changes the boundary shall not be affected unless otherwise agreed.
> 6.	Immediately upon the exchange of the instruments of ratification of this Treaty, each Party will deploy on its side of the international boundary as defined in Annex I (a).
> 7.	The Parties shall, upon the signature of the Treaty, enter into negotiations to conclude, within 9 months, an agreement on the delimitation of their maritime boundary in the Gulf of Aqaba.
> 8.	Taking into account the special circumstances of the Naharayim/Baqura area, which is under Jordanian sovereignty, with Israeli private ownership rights, the Parties agreed to apply the provisions set out in Annex I (b).
> 9.	With respect to the Zofar/Al-Ghamr area, the provisions set out in Annex I (c) will apply.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> The same is true for the Treaty of Peace between the Arab Republic of Egypt and the State of Israel, 26 March 1979
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Treaty of Peace between the Arab Republic of Egypt and the State of Israel said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *Article II*
> 
> The permanent boundary between Egypt and Israel is the recognized international boundary between Egypt and the* former mandated territory of Palestine*, as shown on the map at Annex II, without prejudice to the issue of the status of the Gaza Strip. The Parties recognize this boundary as inviolable. Each will respect the territorial integrity of the other, including their territorial waters and airspace.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Most Respectfully,
> R
Click to expand...


There is an important point that was made in the documents of that time.  The British said that most important principle for the Jews is to create a sovereign Jewish state.  The most important principle for the Arabs is to prevent that from happening, but not to create a sovereign state of their own.  It's too bad that the Kurds and Tibetans' situations are ignored, while the Palestinians stubbornly refuse to create their own state in the West Bank, and only concentrate their efforts on destroying Israel.


----------



## P F Tinmore

RoccoR said:


> P F Tinmore,  _et al,_
> 
> Let's go over this.
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> I don't see how you can universally apply a concept to a very unusual situation. Palestine was divided into three areas of occupation by armistice lines that were specifically not to be political or territorial boundaries. There are no borders inside Palestine. The area inside all of those lines was still Palestine.
> 
> 
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> *The description "Palestine" was referring to a territory, not a "state."  There was no State of Palestine."*
Click to expand...


WOW, so much smoke! I will cut this into segments.

Where do the armistice agreements say that?

Where is the question of Palestine being on both sides of the armistice lines?



> Most Respectfully,
> R


----------



## RoccoR

P F Tinmore,  _et al,_

They write about things that don't exist.



P F Tinmore said:


> Where do the armistice agreements say that?


*(COMMENT)*


Where does it say "State of Palestine?"
Where is the Armistice for the "State of Palestine?"  Every sovereignty involved has a Armistice.  Where is the one for Palestine?

It is because there was no sovereignty called Palestine.



P F Tinmore said:


> Where is the question of Palestine being on both sides of the armistice lines?


*(COMMENT)*

The entire region is called the "former mandated territory of Palestine."  But there is no Armistice Line with the same sovereignty on both sides.  Armistice Lines are lines of separation.

Most Respectfully,
R


----------



## Kondor3

RoccoR said:


> "..._It is because there was no sovereignty called Palestine_..."


Exactly.

All of it 'Unincorporated' and entirely up-for-grabs and divisible, the very nanosecond that the British Mandate expired.


----------



## P F Tinmore

RoccoR said:


> P F Tinmore,  _et al,_
> 
> They write about things that don't exist.
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> Where do the armistice agreements say that?
> 
> 
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> 
> Where does it say "State of Palestine?"
> Where is the Armistice for the "State of Palestine?"  Every sovereignty involved has a Armistice.  Where is the one for Palestine?
Click to expand...


Where does it say state of Israel, state of Egypt...?



> It is because there was no sovereignty called Palestine.
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> Where is the question of Palestine being on both sides of the armistice lines?
> 
> 
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> The entire region is called the "former mandated territory of Palestine."  But there is no Armistice Line with the same sovereignty on both sides.  Armistice Lines are lines of separation.
Click to expand...


The only time "territory of Palestine" was mentioned in the mandate was in the first paragraph before its international borders were defined. After that it was called Palestine and ten times it was referred to as a country.

The armistice agreements, that took place almost a year after the mandate left Palestine, never used the term "former mandated territory of Palestine." Palestine was mentioned many times and it was always called Palestine.

Funny, a place called Israel was not mentioned.



> Most Respectfully,
> R


----------



## P F Tinmore

RoccoR said:


> P F Tinmore,  _et al,_
> 
> Let's go over this.
> 
> The armistice agreement (as an example) was between two states (Egypt and Israel) as signed this morning, 24 February at Rhodes.  You are correct, at that time, there were no borders set.  But the UN Security Council does not draw Armistice Lines that have no meaning.  Please note:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> EGYPTIAN-ISRAELI GENERAL ARMISTICE AGREEMENT said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *ARTICLE II*
> 
> 2.	No element of the land, sea or air military or para-military forces of either Part, including non-regular forces, shall commit any warlike or hostile act against the military or para-military forces of the other Party, or against civilians in territory under the control of that Party; *or shall advance beyond or pass over for any purpose whatsoever the Armistice Demarcation Line* set forth in Article VI of this Agreement except as provided in Article III of this Agreement; and elsewhere shall not violate the international frontier; or enter into or pass through the air space of the other Party or through the waters within three miles of the coastline of the other Party.
> 
> _*SOURCE:*_ EGYPTIAN-ISRAELI GENERAL ARMISTICE AGREEMENT
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> BTW:  Just as a side note, each of the Armistice arrangements, as you can see in the text of each agreement, refers to a specific MAP.   In the case of the West Bank and the associated Armistice Agreement between Israel and the Hashemite Kingdom, the Map is a 1:250,000 scale map sheet; signed in the upper left hand corner by Lieutenant-Colonel Moshe DAYAN (Israel) and Colonel Ahmed Sudki EL-JUNDI (Jordan).
> 
> 
> 
> Each Armistice Arrangement spells out the restriction.  General Assembly Resolution 2625 (XXXV) merely codifies (making it universal) the (nearly) exact same language used in Armistice Agreements since the First World War (almost a century ago).  It is a mistake to think the Question of Palestine is somehow special and unique.  If anything is special and unique is that the conflict is fought over and over again with the same results.
Click to expand...



OK...uhhh...what are you trying to say here? That neither of the two sides can attack the other? I knew that.

What is unique? How many other countries have been divided into three pieces each under a different foreign military power?

Which side of the lines are Palestinians allowed to be on?



> Most Respectfully,
> R


----------



## Kondor3

Fine counterpoints, Tinny, on the existence or mention of Israel or borders or any of that, even if many of them are suspect.

Trouble is, none of them mean a damn in today's Real World.

None of them signify.

None of them are going to yield anything good for 'you'; there's no point in clinging to the past when its obsolete factors no longer carry any weight with the wider world.

Best to recover 'your' collective sanity and figure out where to go from here, with far more pragmatism than 'you' have managed to demonstrate to date.


----------



## P F Tinmore

Kondor3 said:


> Fine counterpoints, Tinny, on the existence or mention of Israel or borders or any of that, even if many of them are suspect.
> 
> Trouble is, none of them mean a damn in today's Real World.
> 
> None of them signify.
> 
> None of them are going to yield anything good for 'you'; there's no point in clinging to the past when its obsolete factors no longer carry any weight with the wider world.
> 
> Best to recover 'your' collective sanity and figure out where to go from here, with far more pragmatism than 'you' have managed to demonstrate to date.



The wider world is changing.

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w56AP_cjDYw]Rafeef, Ben and Mbuyiseni on Israeli Apartheid Week - 22.2.12 - YouTube[/ame]


----------



## Kondor3

Not really...

We've been over THIS ground before, as well...

BDS has been around since 2005...

The Boycott is a circus flea, and will have very little substantive and enduring impact upon the Israelis...

And, of course, whatever harm is inflicted upon them by the Boycott, the United States will make-up for, as loans and grants, to ensure the survival of our friend and ally Israel, using your tax money and mine...

Until the Euro-Liberal energy-burst is spent, and things go back to normal, as the Euro-courts rule against it...

Don't pin your hopes on BDS, Tinny, 'cause, in the Real World, that's far-too-little... far-too-late in the game...


----------



## toastman

Tinmore, Kondor is absolutely right. none of what you say has any relevance today. 
Even if what you said was true, it would still not have any relevance . And you know that full well.


----------



## P F Tinmore

toastman said:


> Tinmore, Kondor is absolutely right. none of what you say has any relevance today.
> Even if what you said was true, it would still not have any relevance . And you know that full well.



It does not take a majority to prevail... but rather an irate, tireless minority, keen on setting brushfires of freedom in the minds of men. ~ Samuel Adams


----------



## Kondor3

P F Tinmore said:


> toastman said:
> 
> 
> 
> Tinmore, Kondor is absolutely right. none of what you say has any relevance today.
> Even if what you said was true, it would still not have any relevance . And you know that full well.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> It does not take a majority to prevail... but rather an irate, tireless minority, keen on setting brushfires of freedom in the minds of men. ~ Samuel Adams
Click to expand...

Yes...

Of course...

And your brethren will be doing just that...

In Amman... and Beirut... and Damascus... and Cairo...

Because they could not bring themselves to dwell in the Real World, and continued to delude themselves, until they lost the last few scraps of land that they still possessed...


----------



## P F Tinmore

Kondor3 said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> toastman said:
> 
> 
> 
> Tinmore, Kondor is absolutely right. none of what you say has any relevance today.
> Even if what you said was true, it would still not have any relevance . And you know that full well.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> It does not take a majority to prevail... but rather an irate, tireless minority, keen on setting brushfires of freedom in the minds of men. ~ Samuel Adams
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Yes...
> 
> Of course...
> 
> And your brethren will be doing just that...
> 
> In Amman... and Beirut... and Damascus... and Cairo...
> 
> Because they could not bring themselves to dwell in the Real World, and continued to delude themselves, until they lost the last few scraps of land that they still possessed...
Click to expand...


Just because they may be out of the country does not mean they will be out of your hair.


----------



## Kondor3

P F Tinmore said:


> Kondor3 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> It does not take a majority to prevail... but rather an irate, tireless minority, keen on setting brushfires of freedom in the minds of men. ~ Samuel Adams
> 
> 
> 
> Yes...
> 
> Of course...
> 
> And your brethren will be doing just that...
> 
> In Amman... and Beirut... and Damascus... and Cairo...
> 
> Because they could not bring themselves to dwell in the Real World, and continued to delude themselves, until they lost the last few scraps of land that they still possessed...
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Just because they may be out of the country does not mean they will be out of your hair.
Click to expand...


1. It's not my hair.

2. Once they're out of the country they will disperse and energies will dissipate.

Within two or three generations even the Movement will be nothing more than a dusty and meaningless footnote in the history books.

The rest of the world will forget at the speed of light.

Your brethren will forget more slowly, while they are busy scattering, but quickly enough, as history measures time, and the moment and the rancid dream will be lost forevermore.


----------



## P F Tinmore

Kondor3 said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Kondor3 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Yes...
> 
> Of course...
> 
> And your brethren will be doing just that...
> 
> In Amman... and Beirut... and Damascus... and Cairo...
> 
> Because they could not bring themselves to dwell in the Real World, and continued to delude themselves, until they lost the last few scraps of land that they still possessed...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Just because they may be out of the country does not mean they will be out of your hair.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 1. It's not my hair.
> 
> 2. Once they're out of the country they will disperse and energies will dissipate.
> 
> Within two or three generations even the Movement will be nothing more than a dusty and meaningless footnote in the history books.
> 
> The rest of the world will forget at the speed of light.
> 
> Your brethren will forget more slowly, while they are busy scattering, but quickly enough, as history measures time, and the moment and the rancid dream will be lost forevermore.
Click to expand...


The old will die and the young will forget.

How many generations ago was that?

How many diaspora Palestinians have taken up the cause in the last ten years or so?


----------



## Kondor3

P F Tinmore said:


> Kondor3 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> Just because they may be out of the country does not mean they will be out of your hair.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 1. It's not my hair.
> 
> 2. Once they're out of the country they will disperse and energies will dissipate.
> 
> Within two or three generations even the Movement will be nothing more than a dusty and meaningless footnote in the history books.
> 
> The rest of the world will forget at the speed of light.
> 
> Your brethren will forget more slowly, while they are busy scattering, but quickly enough, as history measures time, and the moment and the rancid dream will be lost forevermore.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> The old will die and the young will forget.
> 
> How many generations ago was that?
> 
> How many diaspora Palestinians have taken up the cause in the last ten years or so?
Click to expand...


It's a little hard to forget when you're living in the same shithole refugee camp or refugee town that your grandfather lived in when he chose to fight the Jews rather than to live peacefully alongside them.

It's a little easier to forget when you're living a good life someplace else, with peace, freedom, good food, clean water, good schools, a job, and prospects for a long and peaceful and happy life.

Which is what they'll find, once they leave.

Time to help them to make themselves happy.

So that they can begin to forget, and to move on with life.


----------



## toastman

P F Tinmore said:


> Kondor3 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> Just because they may be out of the country does not mean they will be out of your hair.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 1. It's not my hair.
> 
> 2. Once they're out of the country they will disperse and energies will dissipate.
> 
> Within two or three generations even the Movement will be nothing more than a dusty and meaningless footnote in the history books.
> 
> The rest of the world will forget at the speed of light.
> 
> Your brethren will forget more slowly, while they are busy scattering, but quickly enough, as history measures time, and the moment and the rancid dream will be lost forevermore.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> The old will die and the young will forget.
> 
> How many generations ago was that?
> 
> How many diaspora Palestinians have taken up the cause in the last ten years or so?
Click to expand...


Right of return is not going to happen. You know that just as well as I do. The surrounding Arab countries need to absorb the Palestinian refugees, not tiny little Israel.


----------



## toastman

If I were the leader of the PA, I would start making a deal right now.


----------



## Hoffstra

Israel offered to allow back 100,000 Palestinian refugees before and they can do it again.


----------



## Kondor3

Hoffstra said:


> _Israel offered to allow back 100,000 Palestinian refugees before and they can do it again._


Just because they did it before does not mean that they'll want to try it again - nor are they obliged to.


----------



## Hoffstra

Kondor3 said:


> Hoffstra said:
> 
> 
> 
> _Israel offered to allow back 100,000 Palestinian refugees before and they can do it again._
> 
> 
> 
> Just because they did it before does not mean that they'll want to try it again - nor are they obliged to.
Click to expand...


they offered to take back 100,000 refugees back in the early 1950s.

if they could take back 100,000 then...they can certainly take back 100,000 now.

it would be much easier to bring them in and care for them, and assimilate them now.


----------



## Kondor3

Hoffstra said:


> Kondor3 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Hoffstra said:
> 
> 
> 
> _Israel offered to allow back 100,000 Palestinian refugees before and they can do it again._
> 
> 
> 
> Just because they did it before does not mean that they'll want to try it again - nor are they obliged to.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> they offered to take back 100,000 refugees back in the early 1950s.
> 
> if they could take back 100,000 then...they can certainly take back 100,000 now.
> 
> it would be much easier to bring them in and care for them, and assimilate them now.
Click to expand...

Whatever for?


----------



## Hoffstra

Kondor3 said:


> Whatever for?



for the same reason the Palestinians should pledge peace with Israel.


----------



## toastman

Israel also offered 97% of the West Bank to the Palestinians in 2000. Doesn't mean they'll do it again


----------



## Kondor3

Too much blood has flowed on both sides for the Right of Return to ever be operative again.

Intifada I and II, and scores of suicide bombings, and thousands of rockets fired indiscriminately upon Israeli population centers from both Lebanon and Gaza, and the retaliatory Gaza War, and a thousand and one other incidents of violence on both sides, have seen to that.

The two sides can never again trust each other, and should continue to be separated, for their own safety's sake and peace of mind and emotional well-being.

And, because they must remain separated, and because the Palestinians have forevermore - by their behavior - discarded their legacy negotiating point of Right-of-Return, the Palestinians will continue to attack the Israelis for generations to come, if the Israelis are foolish enough to allow them to remain within such close proximity and easy striking distance.

This requires the removal of the Palestinians beyond the reach of their cheap home-made and bargain-basement rocketry, and so that the Israelis have more time to detect and respond to launches in the future, in the event that Palestinian rockets continue to fall upon Israel from more distant adjacent countrysides.

This is a survival requirement of the Israelis - a difficult but necessary '_us or them_' decision forced upon them by six decades and more of bloodthirsty behaviors on the part of the Palestinians and their ethnic brethren in nearby countries.

Why should it be the Palestinians that are moved, rather than the Israelis?

Because the Israelis now occupy an overwhelming majority of the old land formerly known as the unincorporated province of Palestine, and because possession is nine-tenths of the law, and because the Israelis are much stronger, and impossible now to move; leaving the far weaker Palestinians as the only viable candidates for such a move.

In the end, like the Sudatenland Germans of Czechoslovakia or the East Prussian Germans after the defeat of the Axis of WWII - and in lands under control of the victorious Allies - just like the defeated Germans - and just like the massive shifts of Hindus and Muslims as India and Pakistan prepared to separate... the defeated Palestinians will be uprooted and moved elsewhere, to live happier lives alongside their ethnic brethren and co-religionists in other nearby countries.

It doesn't matter what label one uses in discussing such en masse population shifts.

The present state of affairs must be brought to an end, and that fairly soon, as history measures time.

Every so often - in an otherwise impossible set of circumstances and deadlock - in order to cut such a Gordian Knot - massive relocations of populations are necessary.

In all likelihood, the Palestinians represent the next sad but all-too-necessary exercise along those lines.


----------



## Hoffstra

Kondor3 said:


> ..*This requires the removal of the Palestinians *beyond the reach of their cheap home-made and bargain-basement rocketry, and so that the Israelis have more time to detect and respond to launches in the future, in the event that Palestinian rockets continue to fall upon Israel from more distant adjacent countrysides.
> 
> *This is a survival requirement of the Israelis - a difficult but necessary 'us or them' *decision forced upon them by six decades and more of bloodthirsty behaviors on the part of the Palestinians and their ethnic brethren in nearby countries.
> 
> Why should it be the Palestinians that are moved, rather than the Israelis?
> 
> Because the Israelis now occupy an overwhelming majority of the old land formerly known as the unincorporated province of Palestine, and *because possession is nine-tenths of the law, and because the Israelis are much stronger*, and impossible now to move; *leaving the far weaker Palestinians as the only viable candidates for such a move*.
> 
> In the end, like the Sudatenland Germans of Czechoslovakia or the East Prussian Germans after the defeat of the Axis of WWII - and in lands under control of the victorious Allies - just like the defeated Germans - and just like the massive shifts of Hindus and Muslims as India and Pakistan prepared to separate... *the defeated Palestinians will be uprooted and moved elsewhere*, to live happier lives alongside their ethnic brethren and co-religionists in other nearby countries...



It is very sad when children of the Holocaust seek to act just like Nazis.

The 6 Million roll in their graves when they see statements like this from Jews.


----------



## Hoffstra

toastman said:


> Israel also offered 97% of the West Bank to the Palestinians in 2000. Doesn't mean they'll do it again



You know very well that this is a total lie.

Israel offered much less than 97% of the West Bank and Arafat was right to refuse such a horrible deal.


----------



## Kondor3

Hoffstra said:


> "...It is very sad when children of the Holocaust seek to act just like Nazis..."



I was not aware that the Czechs nor Poles (who drove-out ethnic Germans) nor the Indians nor Pakistanis (who both forcibly shifted population elements) could be classified as Nazis.

There were no Extermination Camps nor Gas Chambers nor Cremation Pits at the end of the line for those ethnic Germans and Hindus and Muslims, and there will be no such things at the end of the line for Palestinians, either, if-and-when Eviction Day ever comes.



> "..._The 6 Million roll in their graves when they see statements like this from Jews._"



They would roll in their graves even longer and harder if their 6,000,000 -some-odd descendants and surviving fellow Jews were overrun in Israel and drowned in the Mediterranean and the dream of a Restored Israel hacked to death on its shores.

Somehow, methinks not.

Faux analogy and over-dramatization by a pro-Palestinian advocate and sympathizer.

Don't shoot the messenger.

I tell you what is needed in order for there to be long-lasting peace.

There is no very little chance of any other solution succeeding.

I show you the future.


----------



## Hoffstra

Kondor3 said:


> They would roll in their graves even longer and harder if their 6,000,000 -some-odd descendants and surviving fellow Jews were overrun in Israel and drowned in the Mediterranean and the dream of a Restored Israel hacked to death on its shores.
> 
> Somehow, methinks not.
> 
> Faux analogy and over-dramatization by a pro-Palestinian advocate and sympathizer.
> 
> Don't shoot the messenger.
> 
> I tell you what is needed in order for there to be long-lasting peace.
> 
> There is no very little chance of any other solution succeeding.
> 
> I show you the future.



The future will not be your Nazi dream.

If you try to commit another Nakba, you will not see the Arabs of Palestine forced out of their homelands, but the annihilation of the State of Israel.

There are only two possible options:  the two state solution or Palestine turns back to sand.


----------



## Kondor3

Hoffstra said:


> "...The future will not be your Nazi dream..."



Nothing 'Nazi' about it.

Since WWII...

The Czechs have undertaken a mass-shift of ethnic populations in order to maintain the peace...

The Poles had undertaken a mass-shift of ethnic populations in order to maintain the peace...

The Indians have undertaken a mass-shift of ethnic populations in order to maintain the peace...

The Pakistanis have undertaken a mass-shift of ethnic populations in order to maintain the peace...

If the Israelis decide to do the same, then it will happen...

And it is becoming increasingly clear to anyone with a head for macro-level survival strategies that such a shift of Palestinians is becoming increasingly necessary and likely...



> "..._If you try to commit another Nakba, you will not see the Arabs of Palestine forced out of their homelands, but the annihilation of the State of Israel_..."



Brave words, my little Internet Jihadist.

The Arab-Muslim neighbors of Israel - Egypt, Syria, Jordan, Lebanon, and Iraq - with logistics and financial and manpower support from all over the Muslim world - have tried to kill the State of Israel three different times... 1948, 1967 and 1973...

And they've had their butts kicked all three times... badly... to their eternal shame, and to the surprise and general amusement of much of the rest of the world...

And all of that before the Israelis developed a nuclear arsenal with highly effective mid-range delivery systems...

Metaphorically speaking - as a condemnation of efficiency and competency...

Most Muslim-Arab armies could not find their butts with both hands in a well-lit room surrounded by mirrors, and most Muslim-Arab general staffs pee their pants at the very thought of war with Israel.

No. They've tried and failed three times. Three times is enough for them. There is no metaphorical Arab Cavalry coming over the hill to your rescue this time. Your Muslim-Arab brethren have largely abandoned you and fenced you off and don't even want to take you in themselves, although they'll grudgingly send you a few billions here and there for appearances' sake.

There is no Mighty Army of United Islam coming to your rescue, nor to burn Israel down to the ground, in the event that they decide to expel the Palestinians from the West Bank and Gaza, as now seems increasingly likely; given the 65-year-old stalemate and an increasing sense of urgency on the part of the Israelis to complete the process of securing the lands and borders of a restored Eretz Yisrael in order to secure their interior and their people.



> "..._There are only two possible options:  the two state solution_..."



The two-state solution is now dead.

You have been suicide-bombing and rocket-bombing innocent Israelis for far too long for them to ever trust you again, and...

You do not have sufficient land-mass remaining in order to construct and sustain a viable State of your own. You are going to have to leave and live someplace else, I'm afraid.

You are now a Failed State That Never Was... a dream that ended-up as stillborn.



> "..._or Palestine turns back to sand._"



Good luck in doing that yourselves, because nobody else is coming to help you on any kind of scale that might swing the balance in your favor.

This is doubly true because, nowadays, the US has Israel's back, in the event that they ever get into real trouble on the battlefield.

The entire Muslim-Arab combined military is not on a par with Israel, and they would only be able to bring a fraction of that to bear upon Israel at any given time.

And, if the combined militaries of Islam are not up to the challenge of tackling Israel, I can assure you that they are not up to the challenge of Israel backed by combat forces of the United States... on whatever scale is required to tip the scales back in favor of our friends.

I understand your emotional investment in the cause of your brethren (or you own folks?).

You need to understand that the Arab Cavalry is not coming over the hill to rescue you this time.

You are now largely and in the main - on your own now.

And you are not up to the challenge.

Consequently, if Israel (as seems likely) concludes that it is time to expel the Palestinians from the West Bank and Gaza, there is very little that you will be able to do to stop them.

And, given that your own behaviors have left them with very little choice other than to proceed, well, it seems clear that you would be better off packing-up and moving soon, before the shit begins to hit the fan, so that you and your family have a chance at a long and happy life someplace else, rather than dying on the barricades in a doomed and dying cause.


----------



## Hoffstra

kondor3 said:


> nothing 'nazi' about it.
> 
> Since wwii...
> 
> The czechs have undertaken a mass-shift of ethnic populations in order to maintain the peace....



Never Again!!!!!!!!


----------



## Kondor3

A very cogent intellectual response to the logic previously served...

Although you are correct that the Jews will never again allow their people to be slaughtered...

Which, in the end, will be part of the reason why they are likely to expel you, to avoid such a thing in the future...

You are now alone...

And there is no Arab Cavalry coming over the hill to the Rescue...

But not to worry...

If the Israelis go through with it...

You're merely being kicked out...

Not slaughtered...

And you'll be much happier once you get out of those 65-year-old camps and shithole refugee towns, as you scatter to the four winds and migrate to the various surrounding countries of the region, to be assimilated into their better-established polities...


----------



## theliq

Kondor3 said:


> Too much blood has flowed on both sides for the Right of Return to ever be operative again.
> 
> Intifada I and II, and scores of suicide bombings, and thousands of rockets fired indiscriminately upon Israeli population centers from both Lebanon and Gaza, and the retaliatory Gaza War, and a thousand and one other incidents of violence on both sides, have seen to that.
> 
> The two sides can never again trust each other, and should continue to be separated, for their own safety's sake and peace of mind and emotional well-being.
> 
> And, because they must remain separated, and because the Palestinians have forevermore - by their behavior - discarded their legacy negotiating point of Right-of-Return, the Palestinians will continue to attack the Israelis for generations to come, if the Israelis are foolish enough to allow them to remain within such close proximity and easy striking distance.
> 
> This requires the removal of the Palestinians beyond the reach of their cheap home-made and bargain-basement rocketry, and so that the Israelis have more time to detect and respond to launches in the future, in the event that Palestinian rockets continue to fall upon Israel from more distant adjacent countrysides.
> 
> This is a survival requirement of the Israelis - a difficult but necessary '_us or them_' decision forced upon them by six decades and more of bloodthirsty behaviors on the part of the Palestinians and their ethnic brethren in nearby countries.
> 
> Why should it be the Palestinians that are moved, rather than the Israelis?
> 
> Because the Israelis now occupy an overwhelming majority of the old land formerly known as the unincorporated province of Palestine, and because possession is nine-tenths of the law, and because the Israelis are much stronger, and impossible now to move; leaving the far weaker Palestinians as the only viable candidates for such a move.
> 
> In the end, like the Sudatenland Germans of Czechoslovakia or the East Prussian Germans after the defeat of the Axis of WWII - and in lands under control of the victorious Allies - just like the defeated Germans - and just like the massive shifts of Hindus and Muslims as India and Pakistan prepared to separate... the defeated Palestinians will be uprooted and moved elsewhere, to live happier lives alongside their ethnic brethren and co-religionists in other nearby countries.
> 
> It doesn't matter what label one uses in discussing such en masse population shifts.
> 
> The present state of affairs must be brought to an end, and that fairly soon, as history measures time.
> 
> Every so often - in an otherwise impossible set of circumstances and deadlock - in order to cut such a Gordian Knot - massive relocations of populations are necessary.
> 
> In all likelihood, the Palestinians represent the next sad but all-too-necessary exercise along those lines.



It is not right that you say that Palestinians and Jews can never trust each other,completely untrue.....infact much good is being done in business,education and health ect.,between them.

Also Israel now trust the Germans today...the very people who tried to exterminate your race.

You put out a stall of Red Herrings so I have to pull you up on that discrepancy in your post above.

Come on Kondy you can do better than that.steve


----------



## theliq

Kondor3 said:


> A very cogent intellectual response to the logic previously served...
> 
> Although you are correct that the Jews will never again allow their people to be slaughtered...
> 
> Which, in the end, will be part of the reason why they are likely to expel you, to avoid such a thing in the future...
> 
> You are now alone...
> 
> And there is no Arab Cavalry coming over the hill to the Rescue...
> 
> But not to worry...
> 
> If the Israelis go through with it...
> 
> You're merely being kicked out...
> 
> Not slaughtered...
> 
> And you'll be much happier once you get out of those 65-year-old camps and shithole refugee towns, as you scatter to the four winds and migrate to the various surrounding countries of the region, to be assimilated into their better-established polities...



This is a silly post Kondy......The Jews are going nowhere and the Palestinians are going nowhere else but Palestine.They both have to compromise..that's it.steve


----------



## Kondor3

theliq said:


> "_It is not right that you say that Palestinians and Jews can never trust each other,completely untrue.....in fact much good is being done in business,education and health ect.,between them_..."



I perceive that a Tipping Point was reached long ago in that respect, while you see it otherwise. Time will tell us which of the two perceptions was the more accurate.



> "..._Also Israel now trust the Germans today...the very people who tried to exterminate your race_..."



Perhaps in another 65 years, with great distances separating them, as well, the Jews and Arabs of Palestine might reach such an understanding; however, they need both time and distance, with distance being the operative keyword in this particular exchange.



> "...You put out a stall of Red Herrings so I have to pull you up on that discrepancy in your post above..."



You see Red Herrings.

I see Realistic Assessment.

Again, time will tell.



> "..._Come on Kondy you can do better than that.steve_"



Actually, the concepts expressed above can stand or fall on their own merits.

If I've adequately expressed the concepts, then I'm content to let it be judged by others.

I'll mark you down as a "No"...


----------



## Kondor3

theliq said:


> "..._This is a silly post Kondy......The Jews are going nowhere and the Palestinians are going nowhere else but Palestine.They both have to compromise..that's it.steve_"


You or I declaring it thus does not render it thus.

I have defined the problem: impasse or roadblock.

I have defined the security stakes: the survival of Israel with malevolent forces in its midst.

I have defined the alternative: land-deals, with the Israelis now unlikely to participate.

I have defined the only remaining means to break the impasse: relocation.

Whether that holds true over time and actually manifests is anybody's guess.


----------



## Hoffstra

theliq said:


> This is a silly post Kondy......The Jews are going nowhere and the Palestinians are going nowhere else but Palestine.They both have to compromise..that's it.steve



he's just playing with nonesense dreams of committing genocide against the Arabs of Palestine.

he knows fully well that it will never happen.


----------



## Hossfly

P F Tinmore said:


> toastman said:
> 
> 
> 
> Tinmore, Kondor is absolutely right. none of what you say has any relevance today.
> Even if what you said was true, it would still not have any relevance . And you know that full well.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> It does not take a majority to prevail... but rather an irate, tireless minority, keen on setting brushfires of freedom in the minds of men. ~ Samuel Adams
Click to expand...

Sam Adams wasn't likening revolutionaries to murdering terrorists, like Hamas. Now was he?


----------



## Kondor3

Hoffstra said:


> theliq said:
> 
> 
> 
> This is a silly post Kondy......The Jews are going nowhere and the Palestinians are going nowhere else but Palestine.They both have to compromise..that's it.steve
> 
> 
> 
> 
> he's just playing with nonesense dreams of committing genocide against the Arabs of Palestine.
> 
> he knows fully well that it will never happen.
Click to expand...

Feel free to continue deluding yourself in such terms...

This way, you won't have to worry about it until Eviction Day...

No skin off my nose...


----------



## Hoffstra

Kondor3 said:


> Feel free to continue deluding yourself in such terms...
> 
> This way, you won't have to worry about it until Eviction Day...



"Eviction Day"?

you're the one in a delusion.


----------



## P F Tinmore

Hossfly said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> toastman said:
> 
> 
> 
> Tinmore, Kondor is absolutely right. none of what you say has any relevance today.
> Even if what you said was true, it would still not have any relevance . And you know that full well.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> It does not take a majority to prevail... but rather an irate, tireless minority, keen on setting brushfires of freedom in the minds of men. ~ Samuel Adams
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Sam Adams wasn't likening revolutionaries to murdering terrorists, like Hamas. Now was he?
Click to expand...


Is playing the terrorist card all you got?

Sad.


----------



## Kondor3

P F Tinmore said:


> Hossfly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> It does not take a majority to prevail... but rather an irate, tireless minority, keen on setting brushfires of freedom in the minds of men. ~ Samuel Adams
> 
> 
> 
> Sam Adams wasn't likening revolutionaries to murdering terrorists, like Hamas. Now was he?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Is playing the terrorist card all you got?
> 
> Sad.
Click to expand...

In this day-and-age, it's enough...

And it has the added strength of 'truth'...


----------



## Kondor3

Hoffstra said:


> Kondor3 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Feel free to continue deluding yourself in such terms...
> 
> This way, you won't have to worry about it until Eviction Day...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> "Eviction Day"?
> 
> you're the one in a delusion.
Click to expand...


As you like...

Look at your own propaganda maps concerning shrinking territories, and barrier walls, and settlements, and the like...

How much longer do you think it's going to be before you're simply shoved aside altogether?

That will be Eviction Day...

And it's-a-comin'... just as sure as Christmas...

The metaphorical two-minute end-of-game-clock is already in motion...

And you don't even understand the game, never mind that it's almost over...

Tick, tick, tick...


----------



## Hossfly

P F Tinmore said:


> Hossfly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> It does not take a majority to prevail... but rather an irate, tireless minority, keen on setting brushfires of freedom in the minds of men. ~ Samuel Adams
> 
> 
> 
> Sam Adams wasn't likening revolutionaries to murdering terrorists, like Hamas. Now was he?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Is playing the terrorist card all you got?
> 
> Sad.
Click to expand...

Sad, you say? Thats what the game is about these days. Terrorists against peaceful people.


----------



## Hoffstra

Kondor3 said:


> As you like...
> 
> Look at your own propaganda maps concerning shrinking territories, and barrier walls, and settlements, and the like.....



walls can be easily torn down.

houses can be easily demolished.

God has something very special coming for his Chosen but defiant children.


----------



## Hoffstra

Hossfly said:


> Sad, you say? Thats what the game is about these days. Terrorists against peaceful people.



peaceful?

you mean thieves, racists, and murderers.


----------



## Kondor3

Hoffstra said:


> Kondor3 said:
> 
> 
> 
> As you like...
> 
> Look at your own propaganda maps concerning shrinking territories, and barrier walls, and settlements, and the like.....
> 
> 
> 
> 
> walls can be easily torn down.
> 
> houses can be easily demolished.
> 
> God has something very special coming for his Chosen but defiant children.
Click to expand...


Of course.

Now, all you need is the muscle to cause that to materialize.

And, as I said, there is no Arab Cavalry coming over the hill next time.

One way or the other, we are probably going to find out fairly soon, as history measures time.


----------



## Hoffstra

Kondor3 said:


> Of course.
> 
> Now, all you need is the muscle to cause that to materialize.
> 
> And, as I said, there is no Arab Cavalry coming over the hill next time.
> 
> One way or the other, we are probably going to find out fairly soon, as history measures time.



The Crusades.

The Inquisition.

The Pogroms.

The Holocaust.


The Lord works in mysterious ways.    Keep doing as they do and the next punishment will be a bad one.


----------



## Kondor3

Hoffstra said:


> Kondor3 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Of course.
> 
> Now, all you need is the muscle to cause that to materialize.
> 
> And, as I said, there is no Arab Cavalry coming over the hill next time.
> 
> One way or the other, we are probably going to find out fairly soon, as history measures time.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Crusades.
> 
> The Inquisition.
> 
> The Pogroms.
> 
> The Holocaust.
> 
> 
> The Lord works in mysterious ways.    Keep doing as they do and the next punishment will be a bad one.
Click to expand...


We (The West) are done picking on them for a few thousand years.

We've apologized - we've made-nice - we've given ourselves a guilt-trip and a penance - and we've got their backs now.

Which means we won't let you start picking on them, now that we've stopped.

They'll be fine.

And, finally, they're in a position to guarantee that for themselves, rather than 'relying upon the kindness of strangers', as they've been obliged to do, for much of the past 2,000 years.

It's your bad luck to be standing on their old ancestral and spiritual homeland at the moment in time when they regained their strength and ability to carve-out their own destiny.

Your collective delusion is rather like a kid playing chicken with oncoming high-speed locomotives, day after day...

Sooner or later, you're gonna get run over, and that'll be the end of it...

Better to get out of the way, first...

If not for yourselves, then for your children...

No point in condemning them to another generation in their shitholes and on the barricades and the rocket-launchers, for no good reason that will ever come to fruition...

Your time in that land is over...

Time to leave...

It's the Jews' turn for a while...


----------



## Hossfly

Hoffstra said:


> Hossfly said:
> 
> 
> 
> Sad, you say? Thats what the game is about these days. Terrorists against peaceful people.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> peaceful?
> 
> you mean thieves, racists, and murderers.
Click to expand...

Oh, Miss, Hoffstra, you certainly are a funny duck.  You are so obsessed with the Jews that  you completely overlook what the Muslims are doing to so many innocent people.  What do you care how many they are killing if the Jews are not involved?  I don't think you really realize how silly you sound.  I bet you don't even know what is going on in the Philippines with regard to your friends.
Muslim rebels tie up civilians with rope in human shield standoff in Philippines - World News


----------



## theliq

Hossfly said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Hossfly said:
> 
> 
> 
> Sam Adams wasn't likening revolutionaries to murdering terrorists, like Hamas. Now was he?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Is playing the terrorist card all you got?
> 
> Sad.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Sad, you say? Thats what the game is about these days. Terrorists against peaceful people.
Click to expand...


You should have said...ZIONIST TERRORISTS


----------



## theliq

Kondor3 said:


> Hoffstra said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Kondor3 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Of course.
> 
> Now, all you need is the muscle to cause that to materialize.
> 
> And, as I said, there is no Arab Cavalry coming over the hill next time.
> 
> One way or the other, we are probably going to find out fairly soon, as history measures time.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Crusades.
> 
> The Inquisition.
> 
> The Pogroms.
> 
> The Holocaust.
> 
> 
> The Lord works in mysterious ways.    Keep doing as they do and the next punishment will be a bad one.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> We (The West) are done picking on them for a few thousand years.
> 
> We've apologized - we've made-nice - we've given ourselves a guilt-trip and a penance - and we've got their backs now.
> 
> Which means we won't let you start picking on them, now that we've stopped.
> 
> They'll be fine.
> 
> And, finally, they're in a position to guarantee that for themselves, rather than 'relying upon the kindness of strangers', as they've been obliged to do, for much of the past 2,000 years.
> 
> It's your bad luck to be standing on their old ancestral and spiritual homeland at the moment in time when they regained their strength and ability to carve-out their own destiny.
> 
> Your collective delusion is rather like a kid playing chicken with oncoming high-speed locomotives, day after day...
> 
> Sooner or later, you're gonna get run over, and that'll be the end of it...
> 
> Better to get out of the way, first...
> 
> If not for yourselves, then for your children...
> 
> No point in condemning them to another generation in their shitholes and on the barricades and the rocket-launchers, for no good reason that will ever come to fruition...
> 
> Your time in that land is over...
> 
> Time to leave...
> 
> It's the Jews' turn for a while...
Click to expand...


Jews for a While.....Says it ALL


----------



## docmauser1

P F Tinmore said:


> _I have asked many times for documents showing when Israel legally acquired any land._


So, who was that shakh, emir, pasha, sultan, effendi, president, prime-minister of that "palestine" to legally have any land in support of that "illegal land acquisition" allegation understatement?


----------



## Kondor3

theliq said:


> Kondor3 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Hoffstra said:
> 
> 
> 
> It's the Jews' turn for a while...
> 
> 
> 
> Jews for a While.....Says it ALL
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> That could be interpreted any of several ways.
> 
> You're welcome to clarify, if you like.
Click to expand...


----------



## RoccoR

P F Tinmore,  _et al,_

And the question has been answered many times.  It is a nonsensical question.



P F Tinmore said:


> _I have asked many times for documents showing when Israel legally acquired any land._


*(COMMENT)*

Under HAMAS philosophy, you deny the validity of of anything presented that doesn't agree with your predetermined outcome.

You know very well that General Assembly Resolution 181(II) was the foundational document.  Hell, even the Palestinians use it when it is to their advantage.


You already know that PART II - Boundaries, Section A, set the original boundaries for the Arab State. 
You already know that PART II - Boundaries, Section B, set the original boundaries for the Jewish State. 
You already know that PART II - Boundaries, Section C, and PART III, Sections A thru D, and MAP in Annex B, set the original boundaries for the internationalization of Jerusalem.
You already know that the MAP in Annex A, attached to the Resolution outlines the original boundaries for the Arab State.

You know all this, yet you always find some frivolous reasoning to deny the validity of these documents.  Conversely, you also know that land acquisition _(real estate purchasing and assignment of property rights)_ have nothing to do with sovereignty.  You know that there are no such documents for any of the other Middle Eastern countries.  You know that sovereignty is based on the declaration of independence by the people.


You know that Israel Declared Independence on 15 May 1948, citing the action under the provisions of GA/RES/181(II).
You know that Palestine Declared Independence on 16 November 1988, citing the action under the provisions of GA/RES/181(II).
You also know that the armies of five Arab Nations, in collaboration with Arab Palestinian fifth columnists living in the region, immediately crossed the borders outlined in GA/RES/181(II) in open hostility and engaged Israeli Forces.  And you know that the Armistice Lines were established based on the outcome of those military engagements and that areas of control shifted in favor of the newly formed State of Israel.








You have already been presented with the facts and we already know that you deny all these facts.  What more is there to say?

Most Respectfully,
R


----------



## georgephillip

http://www.onepalestine.org/resources/Israeli_Apartheid_Laws.html

*"Absentee Property Law (1950)*

"Classifies the personal property of Palestinians who fled during the Zionist terror campaign of 1947/48 as 'absentee property' and places it within the power of the Custodian of Absentee Property. 

"According to the law, even the property of Palestinians who are present within the newly created state of Israel, but are not physically present on their property ('internal refugees'), becomes 'absentee property.' This creates the category of 'present absentees.'

*"Land Acquisition (Validity of Acts and Compensation) Law (1953)
*
"Confiscates the land of more than 400 Palestinian villages; "validates" retroactively their use for military purposes and for Jewish settlements.

*"Development Authority (Transfer of Property Law) (1950)*

"Transfers confiscated Palestinian villages and private property to the Development Authority, which is empowered to dispose of it in the interests of the State, giving priority to the Jewish National Fund - a Zionist organization aimed at settling Jewish immigrants to Israel. 

"Both the JNF and the Jewish Agency - organizations that act exclusively in the interest of Jews - take on the status of quasi-governmental organizations within the framework of the Development Authority Law."

*Racist Europeans transfer land taken by force of arms from indigenous Arabs to Jews from Poland and then blame the Arabs for resisting the "only democracy in the Middle East."

For a while.*


----------



## Kondor3

Fun, ain't it?


----------



## RoccoR

georgephillip,  _et al,_

This is clearly a "anti-Zionist" and "anti-Jewish" web site that uses inflammatory language.



georgephillip said:


> http://www.onepalestine.org/resources/Israeli_Apartheid_Laws.html
> 
> *"Absentee Property Law (1950)*
> 
> "Classifies the personal property of Palestinians who fled during the Zionist terror campaign of 1947/48 as 'absentee property' and places it within the power of the Custodian of Absentee Property.
> 
> "According to the law, even the property of Palestinians who are present within the newly created state of Israel, but are not physically present on their property ('internal refugees'), becomes 'absentee property.' This creates the category of 'present absentees.'
> 
> *"Land Acquisition (Validity of Acts and Compensation) Law (1953)
> *
> "Confiscates the land of more than 400 Palestinian villages; "validates" retroactively their use for military purposes and for Jewish settlements.
> 
> *"Development Authority (Transfer of Property Law) (1950)*
> 
> "Transfers confiscated Palestinian villages and private property to the Development Authority, which is empowered to dispose of it in the interests of the State, giving priority to the Jewish National Fund - a Zionist organization aimed at settling Jewish immigrants to Israel.
> 
> "Both the JNF and the Jewish Agency - organizations that act exclusively in the interest of Jews - take on the status of quasi-governmental organizations within the framework of the Development Authority Law."
> 
> *Racist Europeans transfer land taken by force of arms from indigenous Arabs to Jews from Poland and then blame the Arabs for resisting the "only democracy in the Middle East."
> 
> For a while.*


*(OBSERVATION)*

The presentation suggests that nowhere else in the world are there laws on the abandonment of property; when clearly there are.

Embedded in the link itself, it tells you the agenda:  "Israeli_Apartheid_Laws"

*(COMMENT - Some Common Sense)*

HAMAS tells use that consider the start of the Arab-Jewish Conflict to have begun with Izz ad-Din al-Qassam _("Muslim preacher who was a leader in the fight against British, French, and Zionist organizations in the Levant in the 1920s and 1930s. Born in Syria, he later immigrated to British Mandate Palestine where he eventually found his death in a violent confrontation with the British authorities." From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia)_ co-founder of the Palestinian Black Hand.



			
				Article 7 HAMAS Covenant said:
			
		

> The Islamic Resistance Movement is one of the links in the chain of the struggle against the Zionist invaders. It goes back to 1939, to the emergence of the martyr Izz al-Din al Kissam and his brethren the fighters, members of Moslem Brotherhood. It goes on to reach out and become one with another chain that includes the struggle of the Palestinians and Moslem Brotherhood in the 1948 war and the Jihad operations of the Moslem Brotherhood in 1968 and after.
> 
> _*SOURCE:*_ The Universality of the Islamic Resistance Movement:



Since that time, the Hostile Arab Palestinian (HoAP) and the regional Jewish have been in nearly constant conflict.  As HAMAS implies, it did not just suddenly start either with the passage of GA/RES/181(II) (1947) or the Israeli Declaration of Independence (1948).  Not uncommon with such struggles is the emergence of refugees.  And with refugees comes property abandonment.  It is not unique to the Arab-Israeli conflicts.  In every major conflict of the 19th and 20th Century, there was property (personal and real) abandonment associated with refugee movement to safer areas.  What is unique  --- is the degree to which the Arab Palestinian whines about it.  Hell they even whine about lost library books in the middle of the conflict.  There is nothing that the HoAP will not whine and complain about in the aftermath of the failed Arab-Palestinian attempt to dismantle the Jewish State.

*(ABANDON PROPERTY)*

"Abandoned property is one to which the owner has relinquished all rights including reasonable expectation of privacy.  Generally, abandoned property becomes the property of person who finds it and takes possession of it first.   Examples of abandoned property are possessions left in a house after the tenant has moved out, vehicles left beside a road for a long period of time and or patent rights of an inventor who does not apply for a patent and allows others to use his/her  invention without protest.  However, an easement and other land rights are not abandoned property just because of non-use." 

- See more at: Abandoned Property - Abandoned Property​
Most Respectfully,
R


----------



## Hoffstra

georgephillip said:


> http://www.onepalestine.org/resources/Israeli_Apartheid_Laws.html
> 
> *"Absentee Property Law (1950)*
> 
> "Classifies the personal property of Palestinians who fled during the Zionist terror campaign of 1947/48 as 'absentee property' and places it within the power of the Custodian of Absentee Property.
> 
> "According to the law, even the property of Palestinians who are present within the newly created state of Israel, but are not physically present on their property ('internal refugees'), becomes 'absentee property.' This creates the category of 'present absentees.'
> 
> *"Land Acquisition (Validity of Acts and Compensation) Law (1953)
> *
> "Confiscates the land of more than 400 Palestinian villages; "validates" retroactively their use for military purposes and for Jewish settlements.
> 
> *"Development Authority (Transfer of Property Law) (1950)*
> 
> "Transfers confiscated Palestinian villages and private property to the Development Authority, which is empowered to dispose of it in the interests of the State, giving priority to the Jewish National Fund - a Zionist organization aimed at settling Jewish immigrants to Israel.
> 
> "Both the JNF and the Jewish Agency - organizations that act exclusively in the interest of Jews - take on the status of quasi-governmental organizations within the framework of the Development Authority Law."
> 
> *Racist Europeans transfer land taken by force of arms from indigenous Arabs to Jews from Poland and then blame the Arabs for resisting the "only democracy in the Middle East."
> 
> For a while.*



that's Jewish democracy for ya.


----------



## georgephillip

Hoffstra said:


> georgephillip said:
> 
> 
> 
> http://www.onepalestine.org/resources/Israeli_Apartheid_Laws.html
> 
> *"Absentee Property Law (1950)*
> 
> "Classifies the personal property of Palestinians who fled during the Zionist terror campaign of 1947/48 as 'absentee property' and places it within the power of the Custodian of Absentee Property.
> 
> "According to the law, even the property of Palestinians who are present within the newly created state of Israel, but are not physically present on their property ('internal refugees'), becomes 'absentee property.' This creates the category of 'present absentees.'
> 
> *"Land Acquisition (Validity of Acts and Compensation) Law (1953)
> *
> "Confiscates the land of more than 400 Palestinian villages; "validates" retroactively their use for military purposes and for Jewish settlements.
> 
> *"Development Authority (Transfer of Property Law) (1950)*
> 
> "Transfers confiscated Palestinian villages and private property to the Development Authority, which is empowered to dispose of it in the interests of the State, giving priority to the Jewish National Fund - a Zionist organization aimed at settling Jewish immigrants to Israel.
> 
> "Both the JNF and the Jewish Agency - organizations that act exclusively in the interest of Jews - take on the status of quasi-governmental organizations within the framework of the Development Authority Law."
> 
> *Racist Europeans transfer land taken by force of arms from indigenous Arabs to Jews from Poland and then blame the Arabs for resisting the "only democracy in the Middle East."
> 
> For a while.*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> that's Jewish democracy for ya.
Click to expand...

The best democracy those with more than two shekels to rub together can buy!


----------



## georgephillip

RoccoR said:


> georgephillip,  _et al,_
> 
> This is clearly a "anti-Zionist" and "anti-Jewish" web site that uses inflammatory language.
> 
> 
> 
> georgephillip said:
> 
> 
> 
> http://www.onepalestine.org/resources/Israeli_Apartheid_Laws.html
> 
> *"Absentee Property Law (1950)*
> 
> "Classifies the personal property of Palestinians who fled during the Zionist terror campaign of 1947/48 as 'absentee property' and places it within the power of the Custodian of Absentee Property.
> 
> "According to the law, even the property of Palestinians who are present within the newly created state of Israel, but are not physically present on their property ('internal refugees'), becomes 'absentee property.' This creates the category of 'present absentees.'
> 
> *"Land Acquisition (Validity of Acts and Compensation) Law (1953)
> *
> "Confiscates the land of more than 400 Palestinian villages; "validates" retroactively their use for military purposes and for Jewish settlements.
> 
> *"Development Authority (Transfer of Property Law) (1950)*
> 
> "Transfers confiscated Palestinian villages and private property to the Development Authority, which is empowered to dispose of it in the interests of the State, giving priority to the Jewish National Fund - a Zionist organization aimed at settling Jewish immigrants to Israel.
> 
> "Both the JNF and the Jewish Agency - organizations that act exclusively in the interest of Jews - take on the status of quasi-governmental organizations within the framework of the Development Authority Law."
> 
> *Racist Europeans transfer land taken by force of arms from indigenous Arabs to Jews from Poland and then blame the Arabs for resisting the "only democracy in the Middle East."
> 
> For a while.*
> 
> 
> 
> *(OBSERVATION)*
> 
> The presentation suggests that nowhere else in the world are there laws on the abandonment of property; when clearly there are.
> 
> Embedded in the link itself, it tells you the agenda:  "Israeli_Apartheid_Laws"
> 
> *(COMMENT - Some Common Sense)*
> 
> HAMAS tells use that consider the start of the Arab-Jewish Conflict to have begun with Izz ad-Din al-Qassam _("Muslim preacher who was a leader in the fight against British, French, and Zionist organizations in the Levant in the 1920s and 1930s. Born in Syria, he later immigrated to British Mandate Palestine where he eventually found his death in a violent confrontation with the British authorities." From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia)_ co-founder of the Palestinian Black Hand.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Article 7 HAMAS Covenant said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Islamic Resistance Movement is one of the links in the chain of the struggle against the Zionist invaders. It goes back to 1939, to the emergence of the martyr Izz al-Din al Kissam and his brethren the fighters, members of Moslem Brotherhood. It goes on to reach out and become one with another chain that includes the struggle of the Palestinians and Moslem Brotherhood in the 1948 war and the Jihad operations of the Moslem Brotherhood in 1968 and after.
> 
> _*SOURCE:*_ The Universality of the Islamic Resistance Movement:
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Since that time, the Hostile Arab Palestinian (HoAP) and the regional Jewish have been in nearly constant conflict.  As HAMAS implies, it did not just suddenly start either with the passage of GA/RES/181(II) (1947) or the Israeli Declaration of Independence (1948).  Not uncommon with such struggles is the emergence of refugees.  And with refugees comes property abandonment.  It is not unique to the Arab-Israeli conflicts.  In every major conflict of the 19th and 20th Century, there was property (personal and real) abandonment associated with refugee movement to safer areas.  What is unique  --- is the degree to which the Arab Palestinian whines about it.  Hell they even whine about lost library books in the middle of the conflict.  There is nothing that the HoAP will not whine and complain about in the aftermath of the failed Arab-Palestinian attempt to dismantle the Jewish State.
> 
> *(ABANDON PROPERTY)*
> 
> "Abandoned property is one to which the owner has relinquished all rights including reasonable expectation of privacy.  Generally, abandoned property becomes the property of person who finds it and takes possession of it first.   Examples of abandoned property are possessions left in a house after the tenant has moved out, vehicles left beside a road for a long period of time and or patent rights of an inventor who does not apply for a patent and allows others to use his/her  invention without protest.  However, an easement and other land rights are not abandoned property just because of non-use."
> 
> - See more at: Abandoned Property - Abandoned Property​
> Most Respectfully,
> R
Click to expand...

"His Majesty's government view with favour the establishment in Palestine of a national home for the Jewish people, and will use their best endeavours to facilitate the achievement of this object, it being clearly understood that *nothing shall be done which may prejudice the civil and religious rights of existing non-Jewish communities in Palestine*, or the rights and political status enjoyed by Jews in any other country."

*Some would think being evicted from property one's ancestors had occupied for generations at the tip of a Zionazi bayonet might qualify as prejudice, no?*

Balfour Declaration - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


----------



## RoccoR

georgephillip,  _et al,_

You have it backwards.



georgephillip said:


> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> 
> georgephillip,  _et al,_
> 
> This is clearly a "anti-Zionist" and "anti-Jewish" web site that uses inflammatory language.
> 
> 
> 
> georgephillip said:
> 
> 
> 
> http://www.onepalestine.org/resources/Israeli_Apartheid_Laws.html
> 
> *"Absentee Property Law (1950)*
> 
> "Classifies the personal property of Palestinians who fled during the Zionist terror campaign of 1947/48 as 'absentee property' and places it within the power of the Custodian of Absentee Property.
> 
> "According to the law, even the property of Palestinians who are present within the newly created state of Israel, but are not physically present on their property ('internal refugees'), becomes 'absentee property.' This creates the category of 'present absentees.'
> 
> *"Land Acquisition (Validity of Acts and Compensation) Law (1953)
> *
> "Confiscates the land of more than 400 Palestinian villages; "validates" retroactively their use for military purposes and for Jewish settlements.
> 
> *"Development Authority (Transfer of Property Law) (1950)*
> 
> "Transfers confiscated Palestinian villages and private property to the Development Authority, which is empowered to dispose of it in the interests of the State, giving priority to the Jewish National Fund - a Zionist organization aimed at settling Jewish immigrants to Israel.
> 
> "Both the JNF and the Jewish Agency - organizations that act exclusively in the interest of Jews - take on the status of quasi-governmental organizations within the framework of the Development Authority Law."
> 
> *Racist Europeans transfer land taken by force of arms from indigenous Arabs to Jews from Poland and then blame the Arabs for resisting the "only democracy in the Middle East."
> 
> For a while.*
> 
> 
> 
> *(OBSERVATION)*
> 
> The presentation suggests that nowhere else in the world are there laws on the abandonment of property; when clearly there are.
> 
> Embedded in the link itself, it tells you the agenda:  "Israeli_Apartheid_Laws"
> 
> *(COMMENT - Some Common Sense)*
> 
> HAMAS tells use that consider the start of the Arab-Jewish Conflict to have begun with Izz ad-Din al-Qassam _("Muslim preacher who was a leader in the fight against British, French, and Zionist organizations in the Levant in the 1920s and 1930s. Born in Syria, he later immigrated to British Mandate Palestine where he eventually found his death in a violent confrontation with the British authorities." From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia)_ co-founder of the Palestinian Black Hand.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Article 7 HAMAS Covenant said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Islamic Resistance Movement is one of the links in the chain of the struggle against the Zionist invaders. It goes back to 1939, to the emergence of the martyr Izz al-Din al Kissam and his brethren the fighters, members of Moslem Brotherhood. It goes on to reach out and become one with another chain that includes the struggle of the Palestinians and Moslem Brotherhood in the 1948 war and the Jihad operations of the Moslem Brotherhood in 1968 and after.
> 
> _*SOURCE:*_ The Universality of the Islamic Resistance Movement:
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Since that time, the Hostile Arab Palestinian (HoAP) and the regional Jewish have been in nearly constant conflict.  As HAMAS implies, it did not just suddenly start either with the passage of GA/RES/181(II) (1947) or the Israeli Declaration of Independence (1948).  Not uncommon with such struggles is the emergence of refugees.  And with refugees comes property abandonment.  It is not unique to the Arab-Israeli conflicts.  In every major conflict of the 19th and 20th Century, there was property (personal and real) abandonment associated with refugee movement to safer areas.  What is unique  --- is the degree to which the Arab Palestinian whines about it.  Hell they even whine about lost library books in the middle of the conflict.  There is nothing that the HoAP will not whine and complain about in the aftermath of the failed Arab-Palestinian attempt to dismantle the Jewish State.
> 
> *(ABANDON PROPERTY)*
> 
> "Abandoned property is one to which the owner has relinquished all rights including reasonable expectation of privacy.  Generally, abandoned property becomes the property of person who finds it and takes possession of it first.   Examples of abandoned property are possessions left in a house after the tenant has moved out, vehicles left beside a road for a long period of time and or patent rights of an inventor who does not apply for a patent and allows others to use his/her  invention without protest.  However, an easement and other land rights are not abandoned property just because of non-use."
> 
> - See more at: Abandoned Property - Abandoned Property​
> Most Respectfully,
> R
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> "His Majesty's government view with favour the establishment in Palestine of a national home for the Jewish people, and will use their best endeavours to facilitate the achievement of this object, it being clearly understood that *nothing shall be done which may prejudice the civil and religious rights of existing non-Jewish communities in Palestine*, or the rights and political status enjoyed by Jews in any other country."
> 
> *Some would think being evicted from property one's ancestors had occupied for generations at the tip of a Zionazi bayonet might qualify as prejudice, no?*
> 
> Balfour Declaration - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Click to expand...

*(COMMENT)*

*"nothing shall be done which may prejudice the civil and religious rights of existing non-Jewish communities in Palestine"*,​
The Jewish people, in the 1920's and 1930's, when the Hero of HAMAS (Izz ad-Din al-Qassam) began the Black Hand, there was no issue of "prejudice the civil and religious rights of existing non-Jewish communities in Palestine."   That began as the Arabs in the majority began to quibble with the Jewish minority.


Just when did the minority create a "prejudice" against the civil rights of the majority?
Just when did the minority create a "prejudice" against the religious rights of the Majority?

I believe that happened after the Arabs begin it campaign against the minority of Jews.  It is only when you see the various Hostile Arab Palestinian campaigns and wars fail, that you the see the majority start to complain.

Most Respectfully,
R


----------



## Hoffstra

georgephillip said:


> "His Majesty's government view with favour the establishment in Palestine of a national home for the Jewish people, and will use their best endeavours to facilitate the achievement of this object, it being clearly understood that *nothing shall be done which may prejudice the civil and religious rights of existing non-Jewish communities in Palestine*, or the rights and political status enjoyed by Jews in any other country."
> 
> *Some would think being evicted from property one's ancestors had occupied for generations at the tip of a Zionazi bayonet might qualify as prejudice, no?*
> 
> Balfour Declaration - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia



by not honoring and respecting the civil and human rights of non-Jews in Palestine, Israel has violated the conditions of the Balfour Declaration, San Remo Conference, and PAlestine Mandate, which allowed a Jewish state to be created.


----------



## Kondor3

georgephillip said:


> "..._Some would think being evicted from property one's ancestors had occupied for generations at the tip of a Zionazi bayonet might qualify as prejudice, no?_..."



The truth of the matter is, that both Jews and Arabs chased each other out of parts of Palestine, during the period approaching and the period following the Israeli declaration of Statehood, and each was responsible for 'firing first' and 'evicting by bayonet' in various villages and settlements in which they were already dominant when hostilities broke out.

It's just that the Jews were the more successful at the time, and those early successes gave them the basis for a viable State, while the less successful (the Arabs) found themselves increasingly pushed back into smaller enclaves than they started with.

Of course, the losers are manifesting a case of sour grapes, and whining about how unfair it all is.

A case of sour grapes that - after sixty-five friggin' years - has become a crashing bore to most of the outside world and which is largely ignored now even by their former comrades-in-arms who bled (unsuccessfully) repeatedly to try to help them in earlier times.

It's an old story, and a stale one.

The truth of the matter is that the Palestinians themselves ALSO have a great deal of blood on their hands from those days, in the form of unprovoked attacks-upon and drivings-out of Jews in their midst.

There are no wide-eyed virgin innocents regarding those earlier times - and that holds just as true for the Palestinians as it does for the Jews - more so, maybe, because the Jews were hunkered-down, trying to simply hold-on, while the Arabs felt the need to push the Jews even harder.

And that doesn't even count the huge numbers of Palestinians who choose poorly, after being suckered into unnecessarily and voluntarily abandoning their homes at the instigation of their Muslim-Arab Neighbor-Countries (Egypt, Jordan, Syria, Lebanon and Iraq), who promised to (1) drown the Jews in the Mediterranean and (2) secure all of Palestine for the Arabs; Palestinians who oftentimes chose to fight alongside those Muslim-Arab Neighbor-Countries; with an eye towards returning home in a few weeks, after Victory Over the Jews had been achieved.

...rather than choosing to live peacefully within the new Jewish State and later enjoying the rights that those Arabs who remained behind now enjoy as enfranchised Israeli citizens.

The Palestinians who have been holed-up in those shit-hole refugee camps and towns for the past 65 years (65 years!!!) are the ones - and the descendants of the ones - who chose poorly, who chose NOT to become Israeli citizens - and who were on the losing side that is no longer trusted - and who have, by now, overplayed that old, stale poker-hand of theirs; to the point where few take them seriously any longer.


----------



## RoccoR

georgephillip,  _et al,_

Yes, there we are.



georgephillip said:


> Some would think being evicted from property one's ancestors had occupied for generations at the tip of a *Zionazi* bayonet might qualify as prejudice, no?


*(COMMENT)*

When the Jewish were establishing their "national home," they were faced with a very large hostile Arab population.

The "Zionazi" argument is merely name calling.  Eviction is a reaction to hostile activity.  Together your argument is just inflammatory, but not persuasive.

For more than 20 years prior to the end of WWII, the Arabs had been carrying out a sweeping campaign of prejudice and hardship against the Jewish Settlers.  And the major objective of the Mandate was immigration of Jewish Settlers and the establishment of the Jewish Home.  It was understood to be so when HRH Faisal and Chairman Weizmann met in 1919.  It was still an objective in 1946.  Had the Arab Populations embraced it, instead of campaigning against it, there would have been no refugee problem; because there would have been no wars.  However, the arrogant Hostile Arab Palestinian almost immediately launched a long-term campaign.  

The HoAP chose their fate.



			
				Sir Thomas Haycraft said:
			
		

> The fundamental cause of the Jaffa riots and the subsequent acts of violence was a feeling among the Arabs of discontent with, and hostility to, the Jews, due to political and economic causes, and connected with Jewish immigration, and with their conception of Zionist policy as derived from Jewish exponents.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Mandates Commission expressed the view that: said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> the resentment which caused the Arabs to commit these excesses was ultimately due to political disappointments which they attributed to the parties concerned in the mandate, and primarily to the British Government.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Arab Rebellion said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> In October, a large scale military operation was necessary in order to restore the governments authority in the Old City of Jerusalem. The total of known deaths resulting from terrorist and gang activities in 1938 was 835. In addition it was estimated that 1,000 Arab insurgents were killed in actions with the military and police.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> _*SOURCE: *_ A/AC.14/8  2 October 1947
Click to expand...


No, the prejudice and hostility was not (primarily) caused by the Jewish Settlers.  The Arabs were unwilling to share.

Most Respectfully,
R


----------



## toastman

Kondor3 said:


> georgephillip said:
> 
> 
> 
> "..._Some would think being evicted from property one's ancestors had occupied for generations at the tip of a Zionazi bayonet might qualify as prejudice, no?_..."
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The truth of the matter is, that both Jews and Arabs chased each other out of parts of Palestine, during the period approaching and the period following the Israeli declaration of Statehood, and each was responsible for 'firing first' and 'evicting by bayonet' in various villages and settlements in which they were already dominant when hostilities broke out.
> 
> It's just that the Jews were the more successful at the time, and those early successes gave them the basis for a viable State, while the less successful (the Arabs) found themselves increasingly pushed back into smaller enclaves than they started with.
> 
> Of course, the losers are manifesting a case of sour grapes, and whining about how unfair it all is.
> 
> A case of sour grapes that - after sixty-five friggin' years - has become a crashing bore to most of the outside world and which is largely ignored now even by their former comrades-in-arms who bled (unsuccessfully) repeatedly to try to help them in earlier times.
> 
> It's an old story, and a stale one.
> 
> The truth of the matter is that the Palestinians themselves ALSO have a great deal of blood on their hands from those days, in the form of unprovoked attacks-upon and drivings-out of Jews in their midst.
> 
> There are no wide-eyed virgin innocents regarding those earlier times - and that holds just as true for the Palestinians as it does for the Jews - more so, maybe, because the Jews were hunkered-down, trying to simply hold-on, while the Arabs felt the need to push the Jews even harder.
> 
> And that doesn't even count the huge numbers of Palestinians who choose poorly, after being suckered into unnecessarily and voluntarily abandoning their homes at the instigation of their Muslim-Arab Neighbor-Countries (Egypt, Jordan, Syria, Lebanon and Iraq), who promised to (1) drown the Jews in the Mediterranean and (2) secure all of Palestine for the Arabs; Palestinians who oftentimes chose to fight alongside those Muslim-Arab Neighbor-Countries; with an eye towards returning home in a few weeks, after Victory Over the Jews had been achieved.
> 
> ...rather than choosing to live peacefully within the new Jewish State and later enjoying the rights that those Arabs who remained behind now enjoy as enfranchised Israeli citizens.
> 
> The Palestinians who have been holed-up in those shit-hole refugee camps and towns for the past 65 years (65 years!!!) are the ones - and the descendants of the ones - who chose poorly, who chose NOT to become Israeli citizens - and who were on the losing side that is no longer trusted - and who have, by now, overplayed that old, stale poker-hand of theirs; to the point where few take them seriously any longer.
Click to expand...




RoccoR said:


> georgephillip,  _et al,_
> 
> Yes, there we are.
> 
> 
> 
> georgephillip said:
> 
> 
> 
> Some would think being evicted from property one's ancestors had occupied for generations at the tip of a *Zionazi* bayonet might qualify as prejudice, no?
> 
> 
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> When the Jewish were establishing their "national home," they were faced with a very large hostile Arab population.
> 
> The "Zionazi" argument is merely name calling.  Eviction is a reaction to hostile activity.  Together your argument is just inflammatory, but not persuasive.
> 
> For more than 20 years prior to the end of WWII, the Arabs had been carrying out a sweeping campaign of prejudice and hardship against the Jewish Settlers.  And the major objective of the Mandate was immigration of Jewish Settlers and the establishment of the Jewish Home.  It was understood to be so when HRH Faisal and Chairman Weizmann met in 1919.  It was still an objective in 1946.  Had the Arab Populations embraced it, instead of campaigning against it, there would have been no refugee problem; because there would have been no wars.  However, the arrogant Hostile Arab Palestinian almost immediately launched a long-term campaign.
> 
> The HoAP chose their fate.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sir Thomas Haycraft said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The fundamental cause of the Jaffa riots and the subsequent acts of violence was a feeling among the Arabs of discontent with, and hostility to, the Jews, due to political and economic causes, and connected with Jewish immigration, and with their conception of Zionist policy as derived from Jewish exponents.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Mandates Commission expressed the view that: said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> the resentment which caused the Arabs to commit these excesses was ultimately due to political disappointments which they attributed to the parties concerned in the mandate, and primarily to the British Government.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> _*SOURCE: *_ A/AC.14/8  2 October 1947
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> No, the prejudice and hostility was not (primarily) caused by the Jewish Settlers.  The Arabs were unwilling to share.
> 
> Most Respectfully,
> R
Click to expand...



Kondor and Rocco, I simply could not have worded it better than you guys. It goes without saying that you guys both really hit the nail on the head !
Excellent posts, both of you. 

Kondor, your comment about sour grapes is something I've been saying for a long time now. The Muslims have lost every war/conflict/altercation with the Jews since 1947, and so they chose to play the victim instead of admitting defeat. They have taken these 'losses' and morphed themselves into victims while making the Jews to be the agressors. And I must say, they have done an excellent job at doing so


----------



## P F Tinmore

RoccoR said:


> P F Tinmore,  _et al,_
> 
> And the question has been answered many times.  It is a nonsensical question.
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> _I have asked many times for documents showing when Israel legally acquired any land._
> 
> 
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> Under HAMAS philosophy, you deny the validity of of anything presented that doesn't agree with your predetermined outcome.
> 
> You know very well that General Assembly Resolution 181(II) was the foundational document.  Hell, even the Palestinians use it when it is to their advantage.
> 
> 
> You already know that PART II - Boundaries, Section A, set the original boundaries for the Arab State.
> You already know that PART II - Boundaries, Section B, set the original boundaries for the Jewish State.
> You already know that PART II - Boundaries, Section C, and PART III, Sections A thru D, and MAP in Annex B, set the original boundaries for the internationalization of Jerusalem.
> You already know that the MAP in Annex A, attached to the Resolution outlines the original boundaries for the Arab State.
> 
> You know all this, yet you always find some frivolous reasoning to deny the validity of these documents.  Conversely, you also know that land acquisition _(real estate purchasing and assignment of property rights)_ have nothing to do with sovereignty.  You know that there are no such documents for any of the other Middle Eastern countries.  You know that sovereignty is based on the declaration of independence by the people.
> 
> 
> You know that Israel Declared Independence on 15 May 1948, citing the action under the provisions of GA/RES/181(II).
> You know that Palestine Declared Independence on 16 November 1988, citing the action under the provisions of GA/RES/181(II).
> You also know that the armies of five Arab Nations, in collaboration with Arab Palestinian fifth columnists living in the region, immediately crossed the borders outlined in GA/RES/181(II) in open hostility and engaged Israeli Forces.  And you know that the Armistice Lines were established based on the outcome of those military engagements and that areas of control shifted in favor of the newly formed State of Israel.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You have already been presented with the facts and we already know that you deny all these facts.  What more is there to say?
> 
> Most Respectfully,
> R
Click to expand...


Indeed, you have mentioned resolution 181 many times and at great length to prove your point. However, you continuously avoid some important facts.

1) Resolution 181 flopped. It was rejected and was never implemented.
2) Resolution 181 did not create or change any borders.
3) Resolution 181 did not transfer any Palestinian land to Israel.
4) Resolution 181 did no create, or authorize the creation of, any states.

Invoking Resolution 181 is a non answer. There is nothing there.


----------



## georgephillip

RoccoR said:


> georgephillip,  _et al,_
> 
> You have it backwards.
> 
> 
> 
> georgephillip said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> 
> georgephillip,  _et al,_
> 
> This is clearly a "anti-Zionist" and "anti-Jewish" web site that uses inflammatory language.
> 
> 
> *(OBSERVATION)*
> 
> The presentation suggests that nowhere else in the world are there laws on the abandonment of property; when clearly there are.
> 
> Embedded in the link itself, it tells you the agenda:  "Israeli_Apartheid_Laws"
> 
> *(COMMENT - Some Common Sense)*
> 
> HAMAS tells use that consider the start of the Arab-Jewish Conflict to have begun with Izz ad-Din al-Qassam _("Muslim preacher who was a leader in the fight against British, French, and Zionist organizations in the Levant in the 1920s and 1930s. Born in Syria, he later immigrated to British Mandate Palestine where he eventually found his death in a violent confrontation with the British authorities." From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia)_ co-founder of the Palestinian Black Hand.
> 
> 
> 
> Since that time, the Hostile Arab Palestinian (HoAP) and the regional Jewish have been in nearly constant conflict.  As HAMAS implies, it did not just suddenly start either with the passage of GA/RES/181(II) (1947) or the Israeli Declaration of Independence (1948).  Not uncommon with such struggles is the emergence of refugees.  And with refugees comes property abandonment.  It is not unique to the Arab-Israeli conflicts.  In every major conflict of the 19th and 20th Century, there was property (personal and real) abandonment associated with refugee movement to safer areas.  What is unique  --- is the degree to which the Arab Palestinian whines about it.  Hell they even whine about lost library books in the middle of the conflict.  There is nothing that the HoAP will not whine and complain about in the aftermath of the failed Arab-Palestinian attempt to dismantle the Jewish State.
> 
> *(ABANDON PROPERTY)*
> 
> "Abandoned property is one to which the owner has relinquished all rights including reasonable expectation of privacy.  Generally, abandoned property becomes the property of person who finds it and takes possession of it first.   Examples of abandoned property are possessions left in a house after the tenant has moved out, vehicles left beside a road for a long period of time and or patent rights of an inventor who does not apply for a patent and allows others to use his/her  invention without protest.  However, an easement and other land rights are not abandoned property just because of non-use."
> 
> - See more at: Abandoned Property - Abandoned Property​
> Most Respectfully,
> R
> 
> 
> 
> "His Majesty's government view with favour the establishment in Palestine of a national home for the Jewish people, and will use their best endeavours to facilitate the achievement of this object, it being clearly understood that *nothing shall be done which may prejudice the civil and religious rights of existing non-Jewish communities in Palestine*, or the rights and political status enjoyed by Jews in any other country."
> 
> *Some would think being evicted from property one's ancestors had occupied for generations at the tip of a Zionazi bayonet might qualify as prejudice, no?*
> 
> Balfour Declaration - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> *"nothing shall be done which may prejudice the civil and religious rights of existing non-Jewish communities in Palestine"*,​
> The Jewish people, in the 1920's and 1930's, when the Hero of HAMAS (Izz ad-Din al-Qassam) began the Black Hand, there was no issue of "prejudice the civil and religious rights of existing non-Jewish communities in Palestine."   That began as the Arabs in the majority began to quibble with the Jewish minority.
> 
> 
> Just when did the minority create a "prejudice" against the civil rights of the majority?
> Just when did the minority create a "prejudice" against the religious rights of the Majority?
> 
> I believe that happened after the Arabs begin it campaign against the minority of Jews.  It is only when you see the various Hostile Arab Palestinian campaigns and wars fail, that you the see the majority start to complain.
> 
> Most Respectfully,
> R
Click to expand...

*Qassam began the Black Hand as a self-defense response to thousands of Zionists flooding Palestine from all corners of Europe; many Zionists were not secretive about their plans for Palestine*:

/www.thirdworldtraveler.com/Israel/Hidden_Roots_Zionism.html

"Vladimir Jabotinsky, one of the founding fathers of the Zionist movement, wrote in 1923:

"[It is the] iron law of every colonizing movement, a law which knows of no exceptions, a law which existed in all times and under all circumstances. 

"If you wish to colonize a land in which people are already living, you must provide a garrison on your behalf Or else-or else, give up your colonization, for without an armed force which will render physically impossible any attempts to destroy or prevent this colonization, colonization is impossible, not 'difficult,' not 'dangerous' but impossible!... 

*"Zionism is a colonizing adventure and therefore it stands or falls by the question of armed force..."*


----------



## P F Tinmore

RoccoR said:


> georgephillip,  _et al,_
> 
> Yes, there we are.
> 
> 
> 
> georgephillip said:
> 
> 
> 
> Some would think being evicted from property one's ancestors had occupied for generations at the tip of a *Zionazi* bayonet might qualify as prejudice, no?
> 
> 
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> When the Jewish were establishing their "national home," they were faced with a very large hostile Arab population.
> 
> The "Zionazi" argument is merely name calling.  Eviction is a reaction to hostile activity.  Together your argument is just inflammatory, but not persuasive.
> 
> For more than 20 years prior to the end of WWII, the Arabs had been carrying out a sweeping campaign of prejudice and hardship against the Jewish Settlers.  And the major objective of the Mandate was immigration of Jewish Settlers and the establishment of the Jewish Home.  It was understood to be so when HRH Faisal and Chairman Weizmann met in 1919.  It was still an objective in 1946.  Had the Arab Populations embraced it, instead of campaigning against it, there would have been no refugee problem; because there would have been no wars.  However, the arrogant Hostile Arab Palestinian almost immediately launched a long-term campaign.
> 
> The HoAP chose their fate.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sir Thomas Haycraft said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The fundamental cause of the Jaffa riots and the subsequent acts of violence was a feeling among the Arabs of discontent with, and hostility to, the Jews, due to political and economic causes, and connected with Jewish immigration, and with their conception of Zionist policy as derived from Jewish exponents.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Mandates Commission expressed the view that: said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> the resentment which caused the Arabs to commit these excesses was ultimately due to political disappointments which they attributed to the parties concerned in the mandate, and primarily to the British Government.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> _*SOURCE: *_ A/AC.14/8  2 October 1947
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> *No, the prejudice and hostility was not (primarily) caused by the Jewish Settlers.  The Arabs were unwilling to share.
> *
> Most Respectfully,
> R
Click to expand...


*Not true.*

The Palestinians consistently called for a state with equal rights for all.

It was the Zionists who wanted an exclusive Jewish state. This was rejected by the native population including the native Jews.


----------



## theliq

RoccoR said:


> P F Tinmore,  _et al,_
> 
> And the question has been answered many times.  It is a nonsensical question.
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> _I have asked many times for documents showing when Israel legally acquired any land._
> 
> 
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> Under HAMAS philosophy, you deny the validity of of anything presented that doesn't agree with your predetermined outcome.
> 
> You know very well that General Assembly Resolution 181(II) was the foundational document.  Hell, even the Palestinians use it when it is to their advantage.
> 
> 
> You already know that PART II - Boundaries, Section A, set the original boundaries for the Arab State.
> You already know that PART II - Boundaries, Section B, set the original boundaries for the Jewish State.
> You already know that PART II - Boundaries, Section C, and PART III, Sections A thru D, and MAP in Annex B, set the original boundaries for the internationalization of Jerusalem.
> You already know that the MAP in Annex A, attached to the Resolution outlines the original boundaries for the Arab State.
> 
> You know all this, yet you always find some frivolous reasoning to deny the validity of these documents.  Conversely, you also know that land acquisition _(real estate purchasing and assignment of property rights)_ have nothing to do with sovereignty.  You know that there are no such documents for any of the other Middle Eastern countries.  You know that sovereignty is based on the declaration of independence by the people.
> 
> 
> You know that Israel Declared Independence on 15 May 1948, citing the action under the provisions of GA/RES/181(II).
> You know that Palestine Declared Independence on 16 November 1988, citing the action under the provisions of GA/RES/181(II).
> You also know that the armies of five Arab Nations, in collaboration with Arab Palestinian fifth columnists living in the region, immediately crossed the borders outlined in GA/RES/181(II) in open hostility and engaged Israeli Forces.  And you know that the Armistice Lines were established based on the outcome of those military engagements and that areas of control shifted in favor of the newly formed State of Israel.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You have already been presented with the facts and we already know that you deny all these facts.  What more is there to say?
> 
> Most Respectfully,
> R
Click to expand...

 
Well the UN had no right to grant the Jews any land because it was a corrupted vote. The Jews/Zionists through Bribery to the UN members who they garnered support through CASH payments and Stealth and by Terrorist  Violence and Murder moreover Europe and the USA not wanting a huge influx of Jews into their Countries.

But of course NO sensible people would accept these terms and the Palestinians were correct in their condemnation and rejection of this plan.

Israel was created by Jewish/Zionist Terrorists  Violence and Corruption,Murder,Intimidation,Banishment and Degregation of the indegenious Palestinians.

These are the facts,the Jews stop at nothing to get the sympathy vote,trolling these Holacaust shows around the world for the past 60 years......I hasn't worked,the thinking world say "Hold on a Minute"...Yes it was disgraceful and wicked,the confronting images make our gut churn....... but hey one would have thought you would be the last people to treat a peoples (PALESTINIANS) in a similar matter(apart from the Final Solution of course,even though there are some on both sides,who would like to see the end of each other..these are mad people,thankfully a very small minority),even to the extent to tell your children that no one existed in Israel prior to the take over in 1948...certainly NOT PALESTINIANS.

The Israelis and Palestinians are good people and a 2 state solution is the answer.....and it is what the majority on both sides desire.

It's the Mad and Hateful on both sides that should be cast asunder.........And the strange Bible Bashers mainly from America and a few on here ... who through total Guilt support Israel,and demonize the Palestinians of who they know nothing... in the most evil way. You are peculiar and seek refuge between yourselves....a CULT MENTALITY


----------



## Kondor3

P F Tinmore said:


> "..._The Arabs were unwilling to share_..."
> 
> 
> 
> "..._Not true. The Palestinians consistently called for a state with equal rights for all. It was the Zionists who wanted an exclusive Jewish state_..."
Click to expand...

Rocco's reference to 'sharing' did not refer to co-habitation on the same land; it referred to dividing-up the land between the two parties.

From that perspective, he's absolutely correct.

It was a deal that the Palestinians should have taken, to avoid 65 years in refugee camps and towns, and being squeezed into continually-shrinking postage-stamp -sized parcels of land.

But they cannot time-warp back to 1948 for a Do-Over.

Their present failed/dying State condition is a long-term consequence of the very poor choices they made back in 1948.



> "..._This was rejected by the native population_..."



Well, it was certainly rejected by whatever half-assed Grand Poobah and Council that jokingly passed for effective leadership of the Muslim-Arab population of Mandatory Palestine at the time, anyway.



> "..._including the native Jews_."



Somehow, I'm finding that one a wee-bit difficult to believe.

Was there a popular plebiscite at the time of The Separation, with demographics tracking done on the Religious Data Point, which demonstrates a statistically defensible projection overall Sabra (native-born Jews) preferences, relative to partitioning the land?

Somehow, I doubt it, but you're welcome to prove differently, utilizing a credible source.


----------



## P F Tinmore

RoccoR said:


> georgephillip,  _et al,_
> 
> You have it backwards.
> 
> 
> 
> georgephillip said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> 
> georgephillip,  _et al,_
> 
> This is clearly a "anti-Zionist" and "anti-Jewish" web site that uses inflammatory language.
> 
> 
> *(OBSERVATION)*
> 
> The presentation suggests that nowhere else in the world are there laws on the abandonment of property; when clearly there are.
> 
> Embedded in the link itself, it tells you the agenda:  "Israeli_Apartheid_Laws"
> 
> *(COMMENT - Some Common Sense)*
> 
> HAMAS tells use that consider the start of the Arab-Jewish Conflict to have begun with Izz ad-Din al-Qassam _("Muslim preacher who was a leader in the fight against British, French, and Zionist organizations in the Levant in the 1920s and 1930s. Born in Syria, he later immigrated to British Mandate Palestine where he eventually found his death in a violent confrontation with the British authorities." From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia)_ co-founder of the Palestinian Black Hand.
> 
> 
> 
> Since that time, the Hostile Arab Palestinian (HoAP) and the regional Jewish have been in nearly constant conflict.  As HAMAS implies, it did not just suddenly start either with the passage of GA/RES/181(II) (1947) or the Israeli Declaration of Independence (1948).  Not uncommon with such struggles is the emergence of refugees.  And with refugees comes property abandonment.  It is not unique to the Arab-Israeli conflicts.  In every major conflict of the 19th and 20th Century, there was property (personal and real) abandonment associated with refugee movement to safer areas.  What is unique  --- is the degree to which the Arab Palestinian whines about it.  Hell they even whine about lost library books in the middle of the conflict.  There is nothing that the HoAP will not whine and complain about in the aftermath of the failed Arab-Palestinian attempt to dismantle the Jewish State.
> 
> *(ABANDON PROPERTY)*
> 
> "Abandoned property is one to which the owner has relinquished all rights including reasonable expectation of privacy.  Generally, abandoned property becomes the property of person who finds it and takes possession of it first.   Examples of abandoned property are possessions left in a house after the tenant has moved out, vehicles left beside a road for a long period of time and or patent rights of an inventor who does not apply for a patent and allows others to use his/her  invention without protest.  However, an easement and other land rights are not abandoned property just because of non-use."
> 
> - See more at: Abandoned Property - Abandoned Property​
> Most Respectfully,
> R
> 
> 
> 
> "His Majesty's government view with favour the establishment in Palestine of a national home for the Jewish people, and will use their best endeavours to facilitate the achievement of this object, it being clearly understood that *nothing shall be done which may prejudice the civil and religious rights of existing non-Jewish communities in Palestine*, or the rights and political status enjoyed by Jews in any other country."
> 
> *Some would think being evicted from property one's ancestors had occupied for generations at the tip of a Zionazi bayonet might qualify as prejudice, no?*
> 
> Balfour Declaration - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> *"nothing shall be done which may prejudice the civil and religious rights of existing non-Jewish communities in Palestine"*,​
> The Jewish people, in the 1920's and 1930's, when the Hero of HAMAS (Izz ad-Din al-Qassam) began the Black Hand, there was no issue of "prejudice the civil and religious rights of existing non-Jewish communities in Palestine."   That began as the Arabs in the majority began to quibble with the Jewish minority.
> 
> 
> Just when did the minority create a "prejudice" against the civil rights of the majority?
> Just when did the minority create a "prejudice" against the religious rights of the Majority?
> 
> *I believe that happened after the Arabs begin it campaign against the minority of Jews*.  It is only when you see the various Hostile Arab Palestinian campaigns and wars fail, that you the see the majority start to complain.
> 
> Most Respectfully,
> R
Click to expand...


The Zionists started all the hostilities when they went to Palestine to take over the country.


----------



## Kondor3

P F Tinmore said:


> "..._The Zionists started all the hostilities when they went to Palestine to take over the country._"


*Ahhhhh... now we get to the gist of it.*


----------



## P F Tinmore

Kondor3 said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> "..._The Arabs were unwilling to share_..."
> 
> 
> 
> "..._Not true. The Palestinians consistently called for a state with equal rights for all. It was the Zionists who wanted an exclusive Jewish state_..."
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Rocco's reference to 'sharing' did not refer to co-habitation on the same land; it referred to dividing-up the land between the two parties.
> 
> From that perspective, he's absolutely correct.
> 
> It was a deal that the Palestinians should have taken, to avoid 65 years in refugee camps and towns, and being squeezed into continually-shrinking postage-stamp -sized parcels of land.
> 
> But they cannot time-warp back to 1948 for a Do-Over.
> 
> Their present failed/dying State condition is a long-term consequence of the very poor choices they made back in 1948.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> "..._This was rejected by the native population_..."
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Well, it was certainly rejected by whatever half-assed Grand Poobah and Council that jokingly passed for effective leadership of the Muslim-Arab population of Mandatory Palestine at the time, anyway.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> "..._including the native Jews_."
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Somehow, I'm finding that one a wee-bit difficult to believe.
> 
> Was there a popular plebiscite at the time of The Separation, with demographics tracking done on the Religious Data Point, which demonstrates a statistically defensible projection overall Sabra (native-born Jews) preferences, relative to partitioning the land?
> 
> Somehow, I doubt it, but you're welcome to prove differently, utilizing a credible source.
Click to expand...




> *Somehow, I'm finding that one a wee-bit difficult to believe.*



No surprise. You believe nothing but Israeli propaganda.



> *It was a deal that the Palestinians should have taken*,



The deal was for the Palestinians to give half of their country to foreigners.

Name some other country who would accept such a deal.

I await your response.


----------



## P F Tinmore

theliq said:


> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore,  _et al,_
> 
> And the question has been answered many times.  It is a nonsensical question.
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> _I have asked many times for documents showing when Israel legally acquired any land._
> 
> 
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> Under HAMAS philosophy, you deny the validity of of anything presented that doesn't agree with your predetermined outcome.
> 
> You know very well that General Assembly Resolution 181(II) was the foundational document.  Hell, even the Palestinians use it when it is to their advantage.
> 
> 
> You already know that PART II - Boundaries, Section A, set the original boundaries for the Arab State.
> You already know that PART II - Boundaries, Section B, set the original boundaries for the Jewish State.
> You already know that PART II - Boundaries, Section C, and PART III, Sections A thru D, and MAP in Annex B, set the original boundaries for the internationalization of Jerusalem.
> You already know that the MAP in Annex A, attached to the Resolution outlines the original boundaries for the Arab State.
> 
> You know all this, yet you always find some frivolous reasoning to deny the validity of these documents.  Conversely, you also know that land acquisition _(real estate purchasing and assignment of property rights)_ have nothing to do with sovereignty.  You know that there are no such documents for any of the other Middle Eastern countries.  You know that sovereignty is based on the declaration of independence by the people.
> 
> 
> You know that Israel Declared Independence on 15 May 1948, citing the action under the provisions of GA/RES/181(II).
> You know that Palestine Declared Independence on 16 November 1988, citing the action under the provisions of GA/RES/181(II).
> You also know that the armies of five Arab Nations, in collaboration with Arab Palestinian fifth columnists living in the region, immediately crossed the borders outlined in GA/RES/181(II) in open hostility and engaged Israeli Forces.  And you know that the Armistice Lines were established based on the outcome of those military engagements and that areas of control shifted in favor of the newly formed State of Israel.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You have already been presented with the facts and we already know that you deny all these facts.  What more is there to say?
> 
> Most Respectfully,
> R
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Well the UN had no right to grant the Jews any land because it was a corrupted vote. The Jews/Zionists through Bribery to the UN members who they garnered support through CASH payments and Stealth and by Terrorist  Violence and Murder moreover Europe and the USA not wanting a huge influx of Jews into their Countries.
> 
> But of course NO sensible people would accept these terms and the Palestinians were correct in their condemnation and rejection of this plan.
> 
> Israel was created by Jewish/Zionist Terrorists  Violence and Corruption,Murder,Intimidation,Banishment and Degregation of the indegenious Palestinians.
> 
> These are the facts,the Jews stop at nothing to get the sympathy vote,trolling these Holacaust shows around the world for the past 60 years......I hasn't worked,the thinking world say "Hold on a Minute"...Yes it was disgraceful and wicked,the confronting images make our gut churn....... but hey one would have thought you would be the last people to treat a peoples (PALESTINIANS) in a similar matter(apart from the Final Solution of course,even though there are some on both sides,who would like to see the end of each other..these are mad people,thankfully a very small minority),even to the extent to tell your children that no one existed in Israel prior to the take over in 1948...certainly NOT PALESTINIANS.
> 
> The Israelis and Palestinians are good people and a 2 state solution is the answer.....and it is what the majority on both sides desire.
> 
> It's the Mad and Hateful on both sides that should be cast asunder.........And the strange Bible Bashers mainly from America and a few on here ... who through total Guilt support Israel,and demonize the Palestinians of who they know nothing... in the most evil way. You are peculiar and seek refuge between yourselves....a CULT MENTALITY
Click to expand...




> *But of course NO sensible people would accept these terms and the Palestinians were correct in their condemnation and rejection of this plan.*


----------



## Kondor3

P F Tinmore said:


> Kondor3 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Somehow, I'm finding that one a wee-bit difficult to believe.
> 
> 
> 
> _No surprise. You believe nothing but Israeli propaganda._
Click to expand...

Fine.

Educate me.

Produce your evidence.

Polling or plebiscite results showing Sabra preferences, from an objective and credible source, dating back to the 1947-1948 timeframe.

Here's your chance to prove 'Israeli propaganda' wrong in the context of Sabra preferences, as you previously claimed.



> "...It was a deal that the Palestinians should have taken..."
> 
> 
> 
> 
> "..._The deal was for the Palestinians to give half of their country to foreigners. Name some other country who would accept such a deal. I await your response_."
Click to expand...


If your choices are:

1. Agree to a division of the land and a separation of peoples, or...

2. Be defeated and slowly die (as a prospective polity) over 65 years in refugee shit-holes

...then, most sane folks would conclude that they chose poorly.


----------



## P F Tinmore

Kondor3 said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Kondor3 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Somehow, I'm finding that one a wee-bit difficult to believe.
> 
> 
> 
> _No surprise. You believe nothing but Israeli propaganda._
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Fine.
> 
> Educate me.
> 
> Produce your evidence.
> 
> Polling or plebiscite results showing Sabra preferences, from an objective and credible source, dating back to the 1947-1948 timeframe.
> 
> Here's your chance to prove 'Israeli propaganda' wrong in the context of Sabra preferences, as you previously claimed.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> "...It was a deal that the Palestinians should have taken..."
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> "..._The deal was for the Palestinians to give half of their country to foreigners. Name some other country who would accept such a deal. I await your response_."
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> If your choices are:
> 
> 1. Agree to a division of the land and a separation of peoples, or...
> 
> 2. Be defeated and slowly die (as a prospective polity) over 65 years in refugee shit-holes
> 
> ...then, most sane folks would conclude that they chose poorly.
Click to expand...


*Rabbi Yosef Tzvi Dushinsky, Chief Rabbi of Jerusalem (1867-1948)*

With the occupation of Palestine by His Britannic Majesty's Forces and after the confirmation of the Mandate over Palestine by the League of Nations, which incorporated the Balfour Declaration of 1917 a new era opened in the history of the Holy Land. We Orthodox Jews whose forefathers promoted the development of the Jewish Yishuv throughout the generations, who for many centuries constituted the most important element of the Yishuv in the Holy Land, were always on the very best of terms with all sections of the Community. We had hoped that the real purpose of the Mandate would be the promotion of a "Home" to which Jews who lived in the Diaspora might be able to return as their Home Land in order to live here in accordance with the Commandments of the Almighty. It was upon the first appearance of the Zionist organization as a political entity, created in and by the spirit of reform, a spirit to which Orthodox Jewry is so utterly opposed that the idea of the foundation of a Jewish state in the Holy Land was first advanced.

We furthermore wish to express our definite opposition to a Jewish state in any part of Palestine.

Rabbi Yosef Tzvi Dushinsky, Chief Rabbi of Jerusalem (1867-1948) | True Torah Jews


----------



## theliq

p f tinmore said:


> kondor3 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> p f tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> _no surprise. You believe nothing but israeli propaganda._
> 
> 
> 
> fine.
> 
> Educate me.
> 
> Produce your evidence.
> 
> Polling or plebiscite results showing sabra preferences, from an objective and credible source, dating back to the 1947-1948 timeframe.
> 
> Here's your chance to prove 'israeli propaganda' wrong in the context of sabra preferences, as you previously claimed.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> "..._the deal was for the palestinians to give half of their country to foreigners. Name some other country who would accept such a deal. I await your response_."
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> if your choices are:
> 
> 1. Agree to a division of the land and a separation of peoples, or...
> 
> 2. Be defeated and slowly die (as a prospective polity) over 65 years in refugee shit-holes
> 
> ...then, most sane folks would conclude that they chose poorly.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> *rabbi yosef tzvi dushinsky, chief rabbi of jerusalem (1867-1948)*
> 
> with the occupation of palestine by his britannic majesty's forces and after the confirmation of the mandate over palestine by the league of nations, which incorporated the balfour declaration of 1917 a new era opened in the history of the holy land. We orthodox jews whose forefathers promoted the development of the jewish yishuv throughout the generations, who for many centuries constituted the most important element of the yishuv in the holy land, were always on the very best of terms with all sections of the community. We had hoped that the real purpose of the mandate would be the promotion of a "home" to which jews who lived in the diaspora might be able to return as their home land in order to live here in accordance with the commandments of the almighty. It was upon the first appearance of the zionist organization as a political entity, created in and by the spirit of reform, a spirit to which orthodox jewry is so utterly opposed that the idea of the foundation of a jewish state in the holy land was first advanced.
> 
> We furthermore wish to express our definite opposition to a jewish state in any part of palestine.
> 
> rabbi yosef tzvi dushinsky, chief rabbi of jerusalem (1867-1948) | true torah jews
Click to expand...


please note..balfour was a jew


----------



## toastman

P F Tinmore said:


> Kondor3 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> "..._Not true. The Palestinians consistently called for a state with equal rights for all. It was the Zionists who wanted an exclusive Jewish state_..."
> 
> 
> 
> Rocco's reference to 'sharing' did not refer to co-habitation on the same land; it referred to dividing-up the land between the two parties.
> 
> From that perspective, he's absolutely correct.
> 
> It was a deal that the Palestinians should have taken, to avoid 65 years in refugee camps and towns, and being squeezed into continually-shrinking postage-stamp -sized parcels of land.
> 
> But they cannot time-warp back to 1948 for a Do-Over.
> 
> Their present failed/dying State condition is a long-term consequence of the very poor choices they made back in 1948.
> 
> 
> 
> Well, it was certainly rejected by whatever half-assed Grand Poobah and Council that jokingly passed for effective leadership of the Muslim-Arab population of Mandatory Palestine at the time, anyway.
> 
> 
> 
> Somehow, I'm finding that one a wee-bit difficult to believe.
> 
> Was there a popular plebiscite at the time of The Separation, with demographics tracking done on the Religious Data Point, which demonstrates a statistically defensible projection overall Sabra (native-born Jews) preferences, relative to partitioning the land?
> 
> Somehow, I doubt it, but you're welcome to prove differently, utilizing a credible source.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *Somehow, I'm finding that one a wee-bit difficult to believe.*
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> *No surprise. You believe nothing but Israeli propaganda.*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *It was a deal that the Palestinians should have taken*,
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> The deal was for the Palestinians to give half of their country to foreigners.
> 
> Name some other country who would accept such a deal.
> 
> I await your response.
Click to expand...


Says the biggest Arab propaganda whore on USMB


----------



## toastman

P F Tinmore said:


> Kondor3 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> "..._Not true. The Palestinians consistently called for a state with equal rights for all. It was the Zionists who wanted an exclusive Jewish state_..."
> 
> 
> 
> Rocco's reference to 'sharing' did not refer to co-habitation on the same land; it referred to dividing-up the land between the two parties.
> 
> From that perspective, he's absolutely correct.
> 
> It was a deal that the Palestinians should have taken, to avoid 65 years in refugee camps and towns, and being squeezed into continually-shrinking postage-stamp -sized parcels of land.
> 
> But they cannot time-warp back to 1948 for a Do-Over.
> 
> Their present failed/dying State condition is a long-term consequence of the very poor choices they made back in 1948.
> 
> 
> 
> Well, it was certainly rejected by whatever half-assed Grand Poobah and Council that jokingly passed for effective leadership of the Muslim-Arab population of Mandatory Palestine at the time, anyway.
> 
> 
> 
> Somehow, I'm finding that one a wee-bit difficult to believe.
> 
> Was there a popular plebiscite at the time of The Separation, with demographics tracking done on the Religious Data Point, which demonstrates a statistically defensible projection overall Sabra (native-born Jews) preferences, relative to partitioning the land?
> 
> Somehow, I doubt it, but you're welcome to prove differently, utilizing a credible source.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *Somehow, I'm finding that one a wee-bit difficult to believe.*
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> No surprise. You believe nothing but Israeli propaganda.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *It was a deal that the Palestinians should have taken*,
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> The deal was for the Palestinians to give half of their country to foreigners.
> 
> Name some other country who would accept such a deal.
> 
> I await your response.
Click to expand...


What country are we talking about here??


----------



## Hossfly

P F Tinmore said:


> Kondor3 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> _No surprise. You believe nothing but Israeli propaganda._
> 
> 
> 
> Fine.
> 
> Educate me.
> 
> Produce your evidence.
> 
> Polling or plebiscite results showing Sabra preferences, from an objective and credible source, dating back to the 1947-1948 timeframe.
> 
> Here's your chance to prove 'Israeli propaganda' wrong in the context of Sabra preferences, as you previously claimed.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> "..._The deal was for the Palestinians to give half of their country to foreigners. Name some other country who would accept such a deal. I await your response_."
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> If your choices are:
> 
> 1. Agree to a division of the land and a separation of peoples, or...
> 
> 2. Be defeated and slowly die (as a prospective polity) over 65 years in refugee shit-holes
> 
> ...then, most sane folks would conclude that they chose poorly.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> *Rabbi Yosef Tzvi Dushinsky, Chief Rabbi of Jerusalem (1867-1948)*
> 
> With the occupation of Palestine by His Britannic Majesty's Forces and after the confirmation of the Mandate over Palestine by the League of Nations, which incorporated the Balfour Declaration of 1917 a new era opened in the history of the Holy Land. We Orthodox Jews whose forefathers promoted the development of the Jewish Yishuv throughout the generations, who for many centuries constituted the most important element of the Yishuv in the Holy Land, were always on the very best of terms with all sections of the Community. We had hoped that the real purpose of the Mandate would be the promotion of a "Home" to which Jews who lived in the Diaspora might be able to return as their Home Land in order to live here in accordance with the Commandments of the Almighty. It was upon the first appearance of the Zionist organization as a political entity, created in and by the spirit of reform, a spirit to which Orthodox Jewry is so utterly opposed that the idea of the foundation of a Jewish state in the Holy Land was first advanced.
> 
> We furthermore wish to express our definite opposition to a Jewish state in any part of Palestine.
> 
> Rabbi Yosef Tzvi Dushinsky, Chief Rabbi of Jerusalem (1867-1948) | True Torah Jews
Click to expand...

Don't tell us that Tinnie reads the NeoNazi/Islamofascist hate sites!!!  These True Torah Jews are some of the favorite Jews of the hate site, and I can't begin to tell you how many times the anti-Semites have dug them out.  Tinnie, why not tell us how large a group these True Torah Jews are?  I heard their number is very small.  Maybe if Tinnie grows a beard, he can go with these True Torah Jews when they visit those crazies in Iran again.  Meanwhile, since these True Torah Jews believe that when the Messiah comes, the only ones left in Israel will be the Jews.  Perhaps when Tinnie accompanies them to Iran, while on the plane he can ask them where all the other people in Israel are going to disappear to.


----------



## P F Tinmore

Hossfly said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Kondor3 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Fine.
> 
> Educate me.
> 
> Produce your evidence.
> 
> Polling or plebiscite results showing Sabra preferences, from an objective and credible source, dating back to the 1947-1948 timeframe.
> 
> Here's your chance to prove 'Israeli propaganda' wrong in the context of Sabra preferences, as you previously claimed.
> 
> 
> 
> If your choices are:
> 
> 1. Agree to a division of the land and a separation of peoples, or...
> 
> 2. Be defeated and slowly die (as a prospective polity) over 65 years in refugee shit-holes
> 
> ...then, most sane folks would conclude that they chose poorly.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *Rabbi Yosef Tzvi Dushinsky, Chief Rabbi of Jerusalem (1867-1948)*
> 
> With the occupation of Palestine by His Britannic Majesty's Forces and after the confirmation of the Mandate over Palestine by the League of Nations, which incorporated the Balfour Declaration of 1917 a new era opened in the history of the Holy Land. We Orthodox Jews whose forefathers promoted the development of the Jewish Yishuv throughout the generations, who for many centuries constituted the most important element of the Yishuv in the Holy Land, were always on the very best of terms with all sections of the Community. We had hoped that the real purpose of the Mandate would be the promotion of a "Home" to which Jews who lived in the Diaspora might be able to return as their Home Land in order to live here in accordance with the Commandments of the Almighty. It was upon the first appearance of the Zionist organization as a political entity, created in and by the spirit of reform, a spirit to which Orthodox Jewry is so utterly opposed that the idea of the foundation of a Jewish state in the Holy Land was first advanced.
> 
> We furthermore wish to express our definite opposition to a Jewish state in any part of Palestine.
> 
> Rabbi Yosef Tzvi Dushinsky, Chief Rabbi of Jerusalem (1867-1948) | True Torah Jews
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Don't tell us that Tinnie reads the NeoNazi/Islamofascist hate sites!!!  These True Torah Jews are some of the favorite Jews of the hate site, and I can't begin to tell you how many times the anti-Semites have dug them out.  Tinnie, why not tell us how large a group these True Torah Jews are?  I heard their number is very small.  Maybe if Tinnie grows a beard, he can go with these True Torah Jews when they visit those crazies in Iran again.  Meanwhile, since these True Torah Jews believe that when the Messiah comes, the only ones left in Israel will be the Jews.  Perhaps when Tinnie accompanies them to Iran, while on the plane he can ask them where all the other people in Israel are going to disappear to.
Click to expand...


Rabbi Yosef Tzvi Dushinsky, Chief Rabbi of Jerusalem hated Jews?


----------



## Hossfly

P F Tinmore said:


> Hossfly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> *Rabbi Yosef Tzvi Dushinsky, Chief Rabbi of Jerusalem (1867-1948)*
> 
> With the occupation of Palestine by His Britannic Majesty's Forces and after the confirmation of the Mandate over Palestine by the League of Nations, which incorporated the Balfour Declaration of 1917 a new era opened in the history of the Holy Land. We Orthodox Jews whose forefathers promoted the development of the Jewish Yishuv throughout the generations, who for many centuries constituted the most important element of the Yishuv in the Holy Land, were always on the very best of terms with all sections of the Community. We had hoped that the real purpose of the Mandate would be the promotion of a "Home" to which Jews who lived in the Diaspora might be able to return as their Home Land in order to live here in accordance with the Commandments of the Almighty. It was upon the first appearance of the Zionist organization as a political entity, created in and by the spirit of reform, a spirit to which Orthodox Jewry is so utterly opposed that the idea of the foundation of a Jewish state in the Holy Land was first advanced.
> 
> We furthermore wish to express our definite opposition to a Jewish state in any part of Palestine.
> 
> Rabbi Yosef Tzvi Dushinsky, Chief Rabbi of Jerusalem (1867-1948) | True Torah Jews
> 
> 
> 
> Don't tell us that Tinnie reads the NeoNazi/Islamofascist hate sites!!!  These True Torah Jews are some of the favorite Jews of the hate site, and I can't begin to tell you how many times the anti-Semites have dug them out.  Tinnie, why not tell us how large a group these True Torah Jews are?  I heard their number is very small.  Maybe if Tinnie grows a beard, he can go with these True Torah Jews when they visit those crazies in Iran again.  Meanwhile, since these True Torah Jews believe that when the Messiah comes, the only ones left in Israel will be the Jews.  Perhaps when Tinnie accompanies them to Iran, while on the plane he can ask them where all the other people in Israel are going to disappear to.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Rabbi Yosef Tzvi Dushinsky, Chief Rabbi of Jerusalem hated Jews?
Click to expand...

Did I say that, Tinnie? I was talking about the website. This is how you get your facts all screwed up when you talk about the mythical country of Palestine with it's mythical borders and it's mythical people. You assume things because you don't comprehend facts and then proceed to make an ass out of yourself.


----------



## P F Tinmore

Hossfly said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Hossfly said:
> 
> 
> 
> Don't tell us that Tinnie reads the NeoNazi/Islamofascist hate sites!!!  These True Torah Jews are some of the favorite Jews of the hate site, and I can't begin to tell you how many times the anti-Semites have dug them out.  Tinnie, why not tell us how large a group these True Torah Jews are?  I heard their number is very small.  Maybe if Tinnie grows a beard, he can go with these True Torah Jews when they visit those crazies in Iran again.  Meanwhile, since these True Torah Jews believe that when the Messiah comes, the only ones left in Israel will be the Jews.  Perhaps when Tinnie accompanies them to Iran, while on the plane he can ask them where all the other people in Israel are going to disappear to.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Rabbi Yosef Tzvi Dushinsky, Chief Rabbi of Jerusalem hated Jews?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Did I say that, Tinnie? I was talking about the website. This is how you get your facts all screwed up when you talk about the mythical country of Palestine with it's mythical borders and it's mythical people. You assume things because you don't comprehend facts and then proceed to make an ass out of yourself.
Click to expand...


Palestine was called a country ten times in the Mandate for Palestine document.

One would think that they would know.

Here is a map of Palestine. Note the international borders.


----------



## Hossfly

P F Tinmore said:


> Hossfly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> Rabbi Yosef Tzvi Dushinsky, Chief Rabbi of Jerusalem hated Jews?
> 
> 
> 
> Did I say that, Tinnie? I was talking about the website. This is how you get your facts all screwed up when you talk about the mythical country of Palestine with it's mythical borders and it's mythical people. You assume things because you don't comprehend facts and then proceed to make an ass out of yourself.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Palestine was called a country ten times in the Mandate for Palestine document.
> 
> One would think that they would know.
> 
> Here is a map of Palestine. Note the international borders.
Click to expand...

What happened then? Who dropped the ball. Who missed an opportunity?


----------



## toastman

Tinmore, thatis a map of the proposed partition plan..

Show us the treaties or agreements that gave Palestine international borders


----------



## Kondor3

P F Tinmore said:


> "..._We furthermore wish to express our definite opposition to a Jewish state in any part of Palestine. Rabbi Yosef Tzvi Dushinsky, Chief Rabbi of Jerusalem (1867-1948) | True Torah Jews_"


Well, Tinny, I asked you whether a plebiscite or poll or referendum of the Sabra had been taken during the 1947-1948 timeframe, by an objective and credible source, in order to reinforce your claim that those same Sabra stood against the declaration of a Jewish State.

You come back at me with a Personal Statement from some Chief Rabbi of some faction or another of JUdaism-at-large within the City of Jerusalem.

I do not know enough about the percentage of Sabras represented by this fellow, nor whether he spoke for the majority of his own followers, never mind the majority of Sabra at-large.

Do YOU know what percentage of the total Sabra population that this fellow was speaking for?

Your 'quotation' is a far, far cry from the empirical data that I asked for... results of a poll or referendum or plebiscite regarding Jewish Independence, taken amongst the Sabra themselves and properly tallied and validated by British or other competent authority, and recorded and faithfully preserved for our analysis in the present day.


----------



## Kondor3

P F Tinmore said:


> "..._Palestine was called a country ten times in the Mandate for Palestine document_..."



I can call my cocker spaniel a cow, ten times on a piece of paper, but that does not make her a cow.



> "...One would think that they would know..."



But these were outsiders, with no right to do anything in regard to Palestine - or so you, yourself, have said, scores - hundreds - of times, on these boards.

And yet we are supposed to trust these outsiders, in this context, to define Palestine as a country rather than as an unincorporated, loosely-organized former Ottoman province which was being relaxed from British (LON/UN) control?

How is it that these European Outsiders are not competent for ONE purpose (empowering the Jews to divide-up this unincorporated land) but they ARE authoritatively competent for purposes of labeling Palesine as a so-called 'country', because it advances your agenda?

Goose, meet gander.

A country that has never before experienced autonomy is no country at all... rather, merely the raw material from which provinces and smaller nation-states can be sliced-off and animated.

No sale on the 'country' thing, I'm afraid; certainly not using some flyweight rationale such as the one just served up.

I mean... dude... that was lame... and downright embarrassing... although I understand that in your situation, there's not much left to do but to grasp at straws, and hope that every once-in-a-while you pull one off, with the other side asleep at the switch.


----------



## P F Tinmore

Kondor3 said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> "..._We furthermore wish to express our definite opposition to a Jewish state in any part of Palestine. Rabbi Yosef Tzvi Dushinsky, Chief Rabbi of Jerusalem (1867-1948) | True Torah Jews_"
> 
> 
> 
> Well, Tinny, I asked you whether a plebiscite or poll or referendum of the Sabra had been taken during the 1947-1948 timeframe, by an objective and credible source, in order to reinforce your claim that those same Sabra stood against the declaration of a Jewish State.
> 
> You come back at me with a Personal Statement from some Chief Rabbi of some faction or another of JUdaism-at-large within the City of Jerusalem.
> 
> I do not know enough about the percentage of Sabras represented by this fellow, nor whether he spoke for the majority of his own followers, never mind the majority of Sabra at-large.
> 
> Do YOU know what percentage of the total Sabra population that this fellow was speaking for?
> 
> Your 'quotation' is a far, far cry from the empirical data that I asked for... results of a poll or referendum or plebiscite regarding Jewish Independence, taken amongst the Sabra themselves and properly tallied and validated by British or other competent authority, and recorded and faithfully preserved for our analysis in the present day.
Click to expand...


[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=enTbBx622-8]85 sleepless Gaza Jerusalem.divx - YouTube[/ame]


----------



## toastman

Tinmore, Palestine was NOT a country during the period of time you are talking about (was Palestine EVER a country?)
How the fuck could it be a country if:
The Palestinian Arabs has no autonomy
The region was controlled by the British after defeating the Ottoman Empire in WW1
There was a partition plan in 1947 that was supposed to MAKE a Palestinian country
There were no internationally recognized borders
No recognized declaration of Independence 
and most important of all, no mention of a country called Palestine 

When we tell you that Palestine was not a country, this isn't one of those issues that is up for debate. What's the matter with you , really ??????? Your continuous denial over something so fuckin simple makes you look like a 9 year old


----------



## Kondor3

P F Tinmore said:


> "..."



Just give me the Cliffs' Notes version, Tinny; what are you trying to say by posting that 40-minutes-long video?

Does the video provide an answer to the question of what percentage of Sabra were represented by this Rabbi's personal statement?

...and, carried-over from the previous interaction... the previous question...

Where is your empirical data - results of a plebiscite, referendum or poll of Sabra in 1947-1948 on the subject of an independent Jewish State, in order to substantiate your claim that the Sabra opposed an independent Jewish State?

If you have the answers, produce them, in digestible form.

If you do not have the answers, please stop wasting time, and simply say so.


----------



## P F Tinmore

Kondor3 said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> "..."
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Just give me the Cliffs' Notes version, Tinny; what are you trying to say by posting that 40-minutes-long video?
> 
> Does the video provide an answer to the question of what percentage of Sabra were represented by this Rabbi's personal statement?
> 
> ...and, carried-over from the previous interaction... the previous question...
> 
> Where is your empirical data - results of a plebiscite, referendum or poll of Sabra in 1947-1948 on the subject of an independent Jewish State, in order to substantiate your claim that the Sabra opposed an independent Jewish State?
> 
> If you have the answers, produce them, in digestible form.
> 
> If you do not have the answers, please stop wasting time, and simply say so.
Click to expand...


One thing that is consistent among Israel supporters. *They refuse to learn anything.*


----------



## Kondor3

P F Tinmore said:


> "..._One thing that is consistent among Israel supporters. They refuse to learn anything._"


Your response is non sequitur and entirely inadequate to the task at hand.

You are asked to provide hard, empirical data, as you have so often asked of others...

And, when pressed to produce, in order to substantiate your claim about Sabra rejection in 1948 of the formation of a Jewish State...

Rather than hard data, you serve-up present-day marshmallow fluff...

I expected nothing better and was therefore not disappointed, but you blew your opportunity to substantiate your claim.

As expected.

Epic Fail.


----------



## theliq

Hossfly said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Hossfly said:
> 
> 
> 
> Did I say that, Tinnie? I was talking about the website. This is how you get your facts all screwed up when you talk about the mythical country of Palestine with it's mythical borders and it's mythical people. You assume things because you don't comprehend facts and then proceed to make an ass out of yourself.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Palestine was called a country ten times in the Mandate for Palestine document.
> 
> One would think that they would know.
> 
> Here is a map of Palestine. Note the international borders.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> What happened then? Who dropped the ball. Who missed an opportunity?
Click to expand...


You know why Hoss,"Bribery,Deceit,Deception,Intimidation and Cunning" AND YOU KNOW BY WHOM Hosss.

YOU SHOULD ALL NOT


----------



## RoccoR

P F Tinmore,  _et al,_

Paul, let's be _(at least a little bit)_ honest here.



P F Tinmore said:


> One thing that is consistent among Israel supporters. *They refuse to learn anything.*


*(COMMENT)*

I think that a vast majority of your commentary and opinions are read here.  I believe that a vast majority of sherrimunnerlyn's _(where ever she has gone)_ commentaries and opinions were read here.  In fact, I think that nearly every anti-Israel _(or pro-Palestinian)_ commentary is given credit where credit is due.

Just as neither side of the Arab-Israeli conflict is perfectly correct in everything they have done, --- so it is with the discussion here --- and the presentations.

Learning is as much dependent on the presentation of the facts as it is in the expression of confidence in the material presented.  When that material is tainted, it has an impact on future presentations and the confidence that it holds.  And I will be honest, in that I often try not to let the pro-Palestinian propaganda you often present taint the salient facts you present later; but, it is hard.  AND, I often find it difficult to work through the frivolous points you make _(like on the Map issue and borders/boundaries)_; that sidetrack the discussion.

The suggestion that _(in general)_ the pro-Israel component of the discussion "refuse to learn" is simply inaccurate.  When you mix some minor fact with some significant propaganda - the impact of the propaganda tends to overshadow the relevant fact you present.  Don't mix the two _(propaganda and fact)_.  We are all quite capable of "learning" and are quite interested in what you have to say, if you would just present the facts or point of discussion in a logical order and a coherent way.

Finally, don't confuse analysis and disagreement with a "refuse to learn" mind set.  I have learned that the pro-Palestinian movement has elements within it that firmly believe that Palestine was sovereign to the Arab Palestinian; with some thinking it happened at the fall of the Ottoman Empire, and with some that believe it was sovereign with the end of the British Mandate.  Yes, I have learned this.  But I don't agree with either version.  And that is not the same thing as "refuse to learn."  

I recommend that you reassess that perception of your opinion _(refuse to learn)_.  I also recommend that you adjust your dependence on the use of inflammatory language (apartheid, racism, nazi, etc) as it changes the confidence interval in the presentation of your commentary and opinion.  As an example, when I use the words "insurgent" or "terrorism" --- I use them based on the basis that either the organization, event or action fits a definition or description in a professional guide, manual, publication, law, etc, and not some layman's dictionary.  I don't hunt for a specific interpretation that I can cherry-pick to fit the argument.  Since you were in South Africa in the pre-Mandela era, you know very damn well that "apartheid" was something totally different from the conditions and relations that exist between the non-Israel and Israel.  So, when we talk about "learning" --- let's apply it equally to both sides.

Just My Opinion, Very Respectfully,
R


----------



## RoccoR

theliq, _et al,_

Let's see.



theliq said:


> Hossfly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> Palestine was called a country ten times in the Mandate for Palestine document.
> 
> One would think that they would know.
> 
> Here is a map of Palestine. Note the international borders.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> What happened then? Who dropped the ball. Who missed an opportunity?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You know why Hoss,"Bribery,Deceit,Deception,Intimidation and Cunning" AND YOU KNOW BY WHOM Hosss.
> 
> YOU SHOULD ALL NOT
Click to expand...

*(OBSERVATION)*



			
				UNITED NATIONS PALESTINE COMMISSION FIRST MONTHLY PROGRESS REPORT TO THE SECURITY COUNCIL said:
			
		

> The representative designated by the Government of the United Kingdom was Sir Alexander Cadogan. The representative designated by the Jewish Agency for Palestine was Mr. Moshe Shertok. As regards the Arab Higher Committee, the following telegraphic response was received by the Secretary-General on 19 January:
> ARAB HIGHER COMMITTEE IS DETERMINED PERSIST IN REJECTION PARTITION AND IN REFUSAL RECOGNIZE UNO RESOLUTION THIS RESPECT AND ANYTHING DERIVING THEREFROM. FOR THESE REASONS IT IS UNABLE ACCEPT INVITATION​No further communication has been addressed to or received from the Arab Higher Committee by the Commission. The Commission will, at the appropriate time, set forth in a separate document its views with regard to the implementations of this refusal by the Arab Higher Committee.
> 
> _*SOURCE:*_ A/AC.21/7  29 January 1948


This was the beginning of what most people refer to as the 65 years of conflict.

In fairness (my internet version of equal time and full disclosure) there is a document that is little appreciated and seldom read that must be shared at this point.  I have used it before, but not in a while.

Letter and Statement Submitted 
to the 
Secretary-General of the United Nations by the Delegation of the Arab Higher Committee for Palestine 
and
Transmitted for the Information of the 
Conciliation Commission​


			
				Two Excerpts from:  Delegation of the Arab Higher Committee for Palestine said:
			
		

> On the 29th of November 1947, the General Assembly of the United Nations passed a resolution recommending the partitioning of Palestine, and the establishment of a Jewish State therein. That resolution disappointed the Arabs, and destroyed the hope and faith which they had put in the United Nations. They saw that the recommendations to partition Palestine was contrary to the aims, principles, and spirit of the United Nations charter, and their reaction was one of deep concern and anxiety. *They therefore rejected the resolution, and declared their refusal to be bound by it, or by anything deriving therefrom.* The said resolution not only failed to respect Arab demands, but was in complete violation of the spirit of the charter, contrary to the principle of self-determination, and embodied the elements of aggression and injustice. For the Arabs of Palestine are the real owners the country, and they compose by far the greatest majority of its lawful inhabitants.
> 
> *-----     @     -----​*
> The Arabs believe that the *United Nations Organization* which is the author of the partition plan, *is responsible for the catastrophe* that has befallen the Palestinian refugees. As such it is the duty of the United Nations to remove the injustice done to the Arabs. We submit that by removing the cause of the problem of the refugees, the United Nations will have substantially solved their serious problem, and the only and sure way to solve the problem, and remove its causes, is to permit the return of the refugees to their homes where they should be guaranteed to live freely in peace and in prosperity. On their return, they must immediately be given back all their properties, whether movable or immovable, and for such damage or loss as may have resulted from Jewish terrorism and violence adequate indemnity must be paid to them.
> 
> *SOURCE:* A/AC.25/Org/9  4 May 1949



I believe that, in the history yet to be written, this document will play prominently in the evaluation of the subsequent War that was to follow, AND the six decades (plus) of conflict that that ensued.  It is a unique perspective presented by the Arab League via the reconstituted Arab Higher Committee.

Most Respectfully,
R


----------



## docmauser1

P F Tinmore said:


> _Rabbi Yosef Tzvi Dushinsky, Chief Rabbi of Jerusalem (1867-1948) With the occupation of Palestine by His Britannic Majesty's Forces and after the confirmation of the Mandate over Palestine by the League of Nations, which incorporated the Balfour Declaration of 1917 a new era opened in the history of the Holy Land. We Orthodox Jews whose forefathers promoted the development of the Jewish Yishuv throughout the generations, who for many centuries constituted the most important element of the Yishuv in the Holy Land, were always on the very best of terms with all sections of the Community. We had hoped that the real purpose of the Mandate would be the promotion of a "Home" to which Jews who lived in the Diaspora might be able to return as their Home Land in order to live here in accordance with the Commandments of the Almighty. It was upon the first appearance of the Zionist organization as a political entity, created in and by the spirit of reform, a spirit to which Orthodox Jewry is so utterly opposed that the idea of the foundation of a Jewish state in the Holy Land was first advanced. We furthermore wish to express our definite opposition to a Jewish state in any part of Palestine._


Cool. Is it the same rabbi Yosef Tzvi Dushinsky, who stated in his written presentation to the United Nations special committee in Palestine in 1947
_The ancient right of the People of Israel to the land of Israel._
_Unbroken settlement by Jews throughout the ages._
_From the time of King Solomon to our very days the Holy Land was either united with Trans-Jordan or attached to Syria or Turkey. Western Palestine was never a single and independent entity and certainly a part of that cannot possibly constitute an independent state, as envisaged in the various plans that are discussed from time to time.
However, the basic reason for our opposition to an Independent Jewish state as that in prevailing circumstances the officially recognised representation of the Jewish people does not consider the authority of the Holy Law as binding in the public affairs of the Jewish people._,
eh?


----------



## Hoffstra

when it comes to civil and human rights, Israel is much WORSE than South Africa.


----------



## toastman

Hoffstra said:


> when it comes to civil and human rights, Israel is much WORSE than South Africa.



What a load of crap !!!!


----------



## RoccoR

docmauser1,  _et al,_

This is a variation on a theme.



docmauser1 said:


> _The ancient right of the People of Israel to the land of Israel._
> _Unbroken settlement by Jews throughout the ages._
> _From the time of King Solomon to our very days the Holy Land was either united with Trans-Jordan or attached to Syria or Turkey. Western Palestine was never a single and independent entity and certainly a part of that cannot possibly constitute an independent state, as envisaged in the various plans that are discussed from time to time.
> However, the basic reason for our opposition to an Independent Jewish state as that in prevailing circumstances the officially recognised representation of the Jewish people does not consider the authority of the Holy Law as binding in the public affairs of the Jewish people._,
> eh?


*(COMMENT)*

The theme, of course, is the "concept of secularism" wherein both the government and religious sect agree to be officially neutral in matters outside the domain of the other.  The state is neutral on religious matters and the religious sect remains neutral on matters of state.

It is actually a very ancient theme, dating back to a time before the crucification.



> *Matthew 22:21*
> "Caesar's," they replied. Then he said to them, "So give back to Caesar what is Caesar's, and to God what is God's."​*Luke 20:25*
> He said to them, "Then give back to Caesar what is Caesar's, and to God what is God's."​



It is the idea that ancient religious based claims cannot be used to establish matters of state.

Most Respectfully,
R


----------



## RoccoR

Hoffstra,  _et al,_

When evaluating this, it must be done on two levels:

Comparative analysis:
The evaluation of Law (civil and human rights) with respect to Israeli Citizens of Arab Decent living in Israel.
The evaluation of Law (civil and human rights) with respect to non-Israeli Citizens of Arab Decent living in Israel.
The evaluation of Law (civil and human rights) with respect to non-Israeli Citizens of Arab Decent living in Israel.

The Elements of Crime of "Apartheid"  must be consistent with this Statute.



Hoffstra said:


> when it comes to civil and human rights, Israel is much WORSE than South Africa.


*(OBSERVATION)*



			
				Article 7 said:
			
		

> "The crime of apartheid" means inhumane acts of a character similar to those referred to in paragraph 1, committed in the context of an institutionalized regime of systematic oppression and domination by one racial group over any other racial group or groups and committed with the intention of maintaining that regime;
> 
> _*SOURCE:*_ PART 2. JURISDICTION, ADMISSIBILITY AND APPLICABLE LAW  RS-ICC



Inhumane acts of a character similar to those referred to in paragraph 1:

(a)     Murder;
(b)     Extermination;
(c)     Enslavement;
(d)     Deportation or forcible transfer of population;
(e)     Imprisonment or other severe deprivation of physical liberty in violation of fundamental rules of international law;
(f)     Torture;
(g)     Rape, sexual slavery, enforced prostitution, forced pregnancy, enforced sterilization, or any other form of sexual violence of comparable gravity;
(h)     Persecution against any identifiable group or collectivity on political, racial, national, ethnic, cultural, religious, gender as defined in paragraph 3, or other grounds that are universally recognized as impermissible under international law, in connection with any act referred to in this paragraph or any crime within the jurisdiction of the Court;
(i)     Enforced disappearance of persons;
(j)     The crime of apartheid;
(k)     Other inhumane acts of a similar character intentionally causing great suffering, or serious injury to body or to mental or physical health.
Committed in the context of an institutionalized regime of systematic oppression and domination;

Oppression and domination by one racial group over any other racial group or groups;
*-------------------->  AND  <--------------------*
Committed with the intention of maintaining that regime;
*(COMMENT)*

Domestic Considerations as a comparison.

First, I don't subscribed to the Arab-Palestinian position that there is any form of discrimination based on race _(one racial group over any other racial group)_.  There is no substantive evidence that there is any discrimination with respect to Israeli Citizens of Jewish Decent and that of Israeli Citizens Arab Decent, living in Israel.

Second, I don't subscribed to the Arab-Palestinian position that there is any form of oppression and domination by one racial group over any other racial group with respect to Israeli Citizens of Jewish Decent and that of Israeli Citizens Arab Decent, living in Israel.

Third, I don't subscribed to the Arab-Palestinian position that there is any substantive evidence of segregation or legal subjugation committed with respect to Israeli Citizens of Jewish Decent oppressing Israeli Citizens Arab Decent, living in Israel; with the intention of maintaining a regime Jewish supremacy or dominance.​
The allegation of "apartheid" is based primarily on the regiment of security concerns based on the Administration of the Occupied Territories.  Thus, the complaint is that
there is substantive evidence of segregation or legal subjugation committed with respect to *non-Israeli Citizens* of Arab Decent that are NOT living in Israel _(ie: The Occupied Territories)_.  The argument theme is that the oppression and domination by the Occupation Force over the Arab Palestinian of the Occupied Territories is the equivalent of the oppression and domination by one racial group over any other racial group to maintain supremacy or dominance.

*(PRIMA FACIE EVIDENCE)*

*General Policy:*

Article 9 Palestine National Charter of 1968: Armed struggle is the only way to liberate Palestine.
Article 10 Palestine National Charter of 1968: Commando (Feday'ee) action constitutes the nucleus of the Palestinian popular liberation war. 
Article 13 The Covenant of the Islamic Resistance Movement (HAMAS) 18 August 1988: There is no solution for the Palestinian question except through Jihad.
Article 15 The Covenant of the Islamic Resistance Movement (HAMAS) 18 August 1988:  The day that enemies usurp part of Moslem land, Jihad becomes the individual duty of every Moslem.
*Specific Policy:*



			
				Jibril Rajoub said:
			
		

> for Fatah, resistance to Israel remains on our agenda.
> 
> I mean resistance in all of its forms, he elaborated. At this stage, we believe that popular resistance  with all that it entails  is effective and costly to the other side [Israel], Rajoub said in the hour-long interview, which was highlighted by the watchdog group Palestinian Media Watch on Tuesday.
> 
> _*SOURCE:*_ Top PA official: Israel is our main enemy, resistance is still our agenda





			
				Dr 'Issam 'Adwan said:
			
		

> "The resistance may find itself forced to attack the enemy's interests and senior officials outside the occupied territory. It is incumbent upon the honorable countries to stand alongside the occupied Palestinian people and assist it in removing the obstacles that stand in its way. By doing so, they [will be acting] in accordance with the principle of the right of peoples to self-determination, and in accordance with international decisions condemning the occupation and encouraging resistance to it by all means.
> 
> "It is the right of the Palestinian resistance [to request that] the friendly Arab and Islamic peoples and governments open liaison offices in these arenas in order to recruit support, material and moral assistance, and even manpower assistance. Anyone claiming that he supports the Palestinian people while at the same time denying the resistance this right is making a specious argument.
> 
> "The Palestinian resistance may find at a certain stage that the path of martyrdom operations is more effective, and it must not rule out the use of any method that can inflict pain on the enemy and deter it. Friendly nations and countries must support the action of the resistance and must condemn the occupation. The resistance may find itself at a certain stage forced to damage the interests of the [Israeli] occupation's allies, and the parties that provide it with funds, arms, and media support. It is the resistance that will decide when to adopt this path, and how, when, and where.
> 
> _*SOURCE:*_ SENIOR HAMAS OFFICIAL: THE RESISTANCE IS ENTITLED TO ATTACK ISRAEL'S EMBASSIES, INTERESTS, AND OFFICIALS WORLDWIDE -- AND THE INTERESTS OF ITS ALLIES, HEADED BY THE U.S.


*(Supporting EVIDENCE)*



			
				UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moons remarks to the Security Council said:
			
		

> Nothing can justify terrorism  ever.  No grievance, no goal, no cause can excuse terrorist acts.
> 
> _*SOURCE:*_   Secretary-General  SG/SM/14764 SC/10883





			
				3314 (XXIX) Definition of Aggression said:
			
		

> *Article 2*
> 
> The first use of armed force by a State in contravention of the Charter shall constitute prima facie evidence of an act of aggression although the Security Council may, in conformity with the Charter, conclude that a determination that an act of aggression has been committed would not be justified in the light of other relevant circumstances, including the fact that the acts concerned or their consequences are not of sufficient gravity.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ANNEX said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Every State likewise has the duty to refrain from the threat or use of force to violate international lines of demarcation, such as armistice lines, established by or pursuant to an international agreement to which it is a party or which it is otherwise bound to respect. Nothing in the foregoing shall be construed as prejudicing the
> positions of the parties concerned with regard to the status and effects of such lines under their special regimes or as affecting their temporary character.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _*SOURCE:*_ A/RES/3314(XXIX) 14 December 1974
Click to expand...




II. Measures to prevent and combat terrorism said:


> To refrain from *organizing, instigating, facilitating, participating in, financing, encouraging or tolerating terrorist activities* and to take appropriate practical measures to ensure that our respective territories are not used for terrorist installations or training camps, or for the preparation or organization of terrorist acts intended to be committed against other States or their citizens.
> 
> _*SOURCE:*_ Plan of Action (A/RES/60/288)


*(COMMENT)*

What the Hostile Arab Palestinian (HoAP) calls "apartheid," is the active suppression and quarantine of elements that pledged in the past, have demonstrated in the past and present, and continue in organizing, instigating, facilitating, participating in, financing, encouraging or tolerating, activities that threaten regional peace.

In the interest of peace and in the absents of a peace accord, the continued occupation of territory under the influence of HAMAS and FATAH is justified.


To cooperate fully in the fight against terrorism, in accordance with our obligations under international law, in order to find, deny safe haven and bring to justice, on the basis of the principle of extradite or prosecute, any person who supports, facilitates, participates or attempts to participate in the financing, planning, preparation or perpetration of terrorist acts or provides safe havens.

To ensure the apprehension and prosecution or extradition of perpetrators of terrorist acts, in accordance with the relevant provisions of national and international law, in particular human rights law, refugee law and international humanitarian law. We will endeavour to conclude and implement to that effect mutual judicial assistance and extradition agreements, and to strengthen cooperation between law enforcement agencies.

Most Respectfully,
R


----------



## Hoffstra

Israel controls the land from the River to the Sea.

millions of people under their control, face daily discrimination against their civil and human rights.


----------



## Kondor3

Hoffstra said:


> _when it comes to civil and human rights, Israel is much WORSE than South Africa._


Incorrect, or so I believe.

If my own modest reading on the subject serves me well enough in this instance, there seem to be few practical barriers to equality nowadays amongst Israeli citizens of Jewish, Muslim, Christian or other religious or non-religous professions.

Occupants of the West Bank and Gaza are not Israeli citizens, but, rather, citizens of an un-incorporated collection of fragmented territories that the Israelis granted autonomy or semi-autonomy to, some time ago, and which are failing, collectively, as a proto-State.

The Israelis separate themselves from foreigners, not Israeli citizens; foreigners who have been fighting them sporadically and lobbing rockets at them for decades; separating themselves from dangerous adversaries, as any sane people would.

In former times, the South Afrikaaners separated themselves from fellow citizens of another color, based soley upon race, who were not fighting or bombing them.

And, although the Israelis do, indeed, exact a terrible retribution against their Hostile Palestinian neighbors, after rounds of repeated rocket-bombing or suicide-bombing or guerrilla-incursions, this is directed against an unincorporated and extremely hostile foreign pseudo-polity; not their own.

Within the borders of Israel, it pays a very considerable attention in the present age, to striving for equality amongst all of its citizenry; as imperfect as that is, and, from what I hear and read, they appear to do a decent job of it.


----------



## Kondor3

Hoffstra said:


> _Israel controls the land from the River to the Sea. millions of people under their control, face daily discrimination against their civil and human rights._


Those millions could have had their own country and durable peace at any point between 1948 and 1967, had they made sensible and practical and correct choices.


----------



## Hossfly

RoccoR said:


> Hoffstra,  _et al,_
> 
> When evaluating this, it must be done on two levels:
> 
> Comparative analysis:
> The evaluation of Law (civil and human rights) with respect to Israeli Citizens of Arab Decent living in Israel.
> The evaluation of Law (civil and human rights) with respect to non-Israeli Citizens of Arab Decent living in Israel.
> The evaluation of Law (civil and human rights) with respect to non-Israeli Citizens of Arab Decent living in Israel.
> 
> The Elements of Crime of "Apartheid"  must be consistent with this Statute.
> 
> 
> 
> Hoffstra said:
> 
> 
> 
> when it comes to civil and human rights, Israel is much WORSE than South Africa.
> 
> 
> 
> *(OBSERVATION)*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Article 7 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> "The crime of apartheid" means inhumane acts of a character similar to those referred to in paragraph 1, committed in the context of an institutionalized regime of systematic oppression and domination by one racial group over any other racial group or groups and committed with the intention of maintaining that regime;
> 
> _*SOURCE:*_ PART 2. JURISDICTION, ADMISSIBILITY AND APPLICABLE LAW  RS-ICC
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Inhumane acts of a character similar to those referred to in paragraph 1:
> 
> (a)     Murder;
> (b)     Extermination;
> (c)     Enslavement;
> (d)     Deportation or forcible transfer of population;
> (e)     Imprisonment or other severe deprivation of physical liberty in violation of fundamental rules of international law;
> (f)     Torture;
> (g)     Rape, sexual slavery, enforced prostitution, forced pregnancy, enforced sterilization, or any other form of sexual violence of comparable gravity;
> (h)     Persecution against any identifiable group or collectivity on political, racial, national, ethnic, cultural, religious, gender as defined in paragraph 3, or other grounds that are universally recognized as impermissible under international law, in connection with any act referred to in this paragraph or any crime within the jurisdiction of the Court;
> (i)     Enforced disappearance of persons;
> (j)     The crime of apartheid;
> (k)     Other inhumane acts of a similar character intentionally causing great suffering, or serious injury to body or to mental or physical health.
> Committed in the context of an institutionalized regime of systematic oppression and domination;
> 
> Oppression and domination by one racial group over any other racial group or groups;
> *-------------------->  AND  <--------------------*
> Committed with the intention of maintaining that regime;
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> Domestic Considerations as a comparison.
> 
> First, I don't subscribed to the Arab-Palestinian position that there is any form of discrimination based on race _(one racial group over any other racial group)_.  There is no substantive evidence that there is any discrimination with respect to Israeli Citizens of Jewish Decent and that of Israeli Citizens Arab Decent, living in Israel.
> 
> Second, I don't subscribed to the Arab-Palestinian position that there is any form of oppression and domination by one racial group over any other racial group with respect to Israeli Citizens of Jewish Decent and that of Israeli Citizens Arab Decent, living in Israel.
> 
> Third, I don't subscribed to the Arab-Palestinian position that there is any substantive evidence of segregation or legal subjugation committed with respect to Israeli Citizens of Jewish Decent oppressing Israeli Citizens Arab Decent, living in Israel; with the intention of maintaining a regime Jewish supremacy or dominance.​
> The allegation of "apartheid" is based primarily on the regiment of security concerns based on the Administration of the Occupied Territories.  Thus, the complaint is that
> there is substantive evidence of segregation or legal subjugation committed with respect to *non-Israeli Citizens* of Arab Decent that are NOT living in Israel _(ie: The Occupied Territories)_.  The argument theme is that the oppression and domination by the Occupation Force over the Arab Palestinian of the Occupied Territories is the equivalent of the oppression and domination by one racial group over any other racial group to maintain supremacy or dominance.
> 
> *(PRIMA FACIE EVIDENCE)*
> 
> *General Policy:*
> 
> Article 9 Palestine National Charter of 1968: Armed struggle is the only way to liberate Palestine.
> Article 10 Palestine National Charter of 1968: Commando (Feday'ee) action constitutes the nucleus of the Palestinian popular liberation war.
> Article 13 The Covenant of the Islamic Resistance Movement (HAMAS) 18 August 1988: There is no solution for the Palestinian question except through Jihad.
> Article 15 The Covenant of the Islamic Resistance Movement (HAMAS) 18 August 1988:  The day that enemies usurp part of Moslem land, Jihad becomes the individual duty of every Moslem.
> *Specific Policy:*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *(Supporting EVIDENCE)*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 3314 (XXIX) Definition of Aggression said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *Article 2*
> 
> The first use of armed force by a State in contravention of the Charter shall constitute prima facie evidence of an act of aggression although the Security Council may, in conformity with the Charter, conclude that a determination that an act of aggression has been committed would not be justified in the light of other relevant circumstances, including the fact that the acts concerned or their consequences are not of sufficient gravity.
> 
> 
> 
> _*SOURCE:*_ A/RES/3314(XXIX) 14 December 1974
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> II. Measures to prevent and combat terrorism said:
> 
> 
> 
> To refrain from *organizing, instigating, facilitating, participating in, financing, encouraging or tolerating terrorist activities* and to take appropriate practical measures to ensure that our respective territories are not used for terrorist installations or training camps, or for the preparation or organization of terrorist acts intended to be committed against other States or their citizens.
> 
> _*SOURCE:*_ Plan of Action (A/RES/60/288)
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> What the Hostile Arab Palestinian (HoAP) calls "apartheid," is the active suppression and quarantine of elements that pledged in the past, have demonstrated in the past and present, and continue in organizing, instigating, facilitating, participating in, financing, encouraging or tolerating, activities that threaten regional peace.
> 
> In the interest of peace and in the absents of a peace accord, the continued occupation of territory under the influence of HAMAS and FATAH is justified.
> 
> 
> To cooperate fully in the fight against terrorism, in accordance with our obligations under international law, in order to find, deny safe haven and bring to justice, on the basis of the principle of extradite or prosecute, any person who supports, facilitates, participates or attempts to participate in the financing, planning, preparation or perpetration of terrorist acts or provides safe havens.
> 
> To ensure the apprehension and prosecution or extradition of perpetrators of terrorist acts, in accordance with the relevant provisions of national and international law, in particular human rights law, refugee law and international humanitarian law. We will endeavour to conclude and implement to that effect mutual judicial assistance and extradition agreements, and to strengthen cooperation between law enforcement agencies.
> 
> Most Respectfully,
> R
Click to expand...

Just from my observation:

Toastman, Condor, Roudy, I and the rest will absorb and heed your advice.

Theliq, Indofreud, Sunni and others of their stripe are teachable.

Hoffstra and Saigoon know everything under the sun and can't and won't learn anything more.

Tinmore, well, what can I say.


----------



## toastman

Hossfly said:


> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> 
> Hoffstra,  _et al,_
> 
> When evaluating this, it must be done on two levels:
> 
> Comparative analysis:
> The evaluation of Law (civil and human rights) with respect to Israeli Citizens of Arab Decent living in Israel.
> The evaluation of Law (civil and human rights) with respect to non-Israeli Citizens of Arab Decent living in Israel.
> The evaluation of Law (civil and human rights) with respect to non-Israeli Citizens of Arab Decent living in Israel.
> 
> The Elements of Crime of "Apartheid"  must be consistent with this Statute.
> 
> 
> 
> Hoffstra said:
> 
> 
> 
> when it comes to civil and human rights, Israel is much WORSE than South Africa.
> 
> 
> 
> *(OBSERVATION)*
> 
> 
> 
> Inhumane acts of a character similar to those referred to in paragraph 1:
> 
> (a)     Murder;
> (b)     Extermination;
> (c)     Enslavement;
> (d)     Deportation or forcible transfer of population;
> (e)     Imprisonment or other severe deprivation of physical liberty in violation of fundamental rules of international law;
> (f)     Torture;
> (g)     Rape, sexual slavery, enforced prostitution, forced pregnancy, enforced sterilization, or any other form of sexual violence of comparable gravity;
> (h)     Persecution against any identifiable group or collectivity on political, racial, national, ethnic, cultural, religious, gender as defined in paragraph 3, or other grounds that are universally recognized as impermissible under international law, in connection with any act referred to in this paragraph or any crime within the jurisdiction of the Court;
> (i)     Enforced disappearance of persons;
> (j)     The crime of apartheid;
> (k)     Other inhumane acts of a similar character intentionally causing great suffering, or serious injury to body or to mental or physical health.
> Committed in the context of an institutionalized regime of systematic oppression and domination;
> 
> Oppression and domination by one racial group over any other racial group or groups;
> *-------------------->  AND  <--------------------*
> Committed with the intention of maintaining that regime;
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> Domestic Considerations as a comparison.
> 
> First, I don't subscribed to the Arab-Palestinian position that there is any form of discrimination based on race _(one racial group over any other racial group)_.  There is no substantive evidence that there is any discrimination with respect to Israeli Citizens of Jewish Decent and that of Israeli Citizens Arab Decent, living in Israel.
> 
> Second, I don't subscribed to the Arab-Palestinian position that there is any form of oppression and domination by one racial group over any other racial group with respect to Israeli Citizens of Jewish Decent and that of Israeli Citizens Arab Decent, living in Israel.
> 
> Third, I don't subscribed to the Arab-Palestinian position that there is any substantive evidence of segregation or legal subjugation committed with respect to Israeli Citizens of Jewish Decent oppressing Israeli Citizens Arab Decent, living in Israel; with the intention of maintaining a regime Jewish supremacy or dominance.​
> The allegation of "apartheid" is based primarily on the regiment of security concerns based on the Administration of the Occupied Territories.  Thus, the complaint is that
> there is substantive evidence of segregation or legal subjugation committed with respect to *non-Israeli Citizens* of Arab Decent that are NOT living in Israel _(ie: The Occupied Territories)_.  The argument theme is that the oppression and domination by the Occupation Force over the Arab Palestinian of the Occupied Territories is the equivalent of the oppression and domination by one racial group over any other racial group to maintain supremacy or dominance.
> 
> *(PRIMA FACIE EVIDENCE)*
> 
> *General Policy:*
> 
> Article 9 Palestine National Charter of 1968: Armed struggle is the only way to liberate Palestine.
> Article 10 Palestine National Charter of 1968: Commando (Feday'ee) action constitutes the nucleus of the Palestinian popular liberation war.
> Article 13 The Covenant of the Islamic Resistance Movement (HAMAS) 18 August 1988: There is no solution for the Palestinian question except through Jihad.
> Article 15 The Covenant of the Islamic Resistance Movement (HAMAS) 18 August 1988:  The day that enemies usurp part of Moslem land, Jihad becomes the individual duty of every Moslem.
> *Specific Policy:*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *(Supporting EVIDENCE)*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> II. Measures to prevent and combat terrorism said:
> 
> 
> 
> To refrain from *organizing, instigating, facilitating, participating in, financing, encouraging or tolerating terrorist activities* and to take appropriate practical measures to ensure that our respective territories are not used for terrorist installations or training camps, or for the preparation or organization of terrorist acts intended to be committed against other States or their citizens.
> 
> _*SOURCE:*_ Plan of Action (A/RES/60/288)
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> What the Hostile Arab Palestinian (HoAP) calls "apartheid," is the active suppression and quarantine of elements that pledged in the past, have demonstrated in the past and present, and continue in organizing, instigating, facilitating, participating in, financing, encouraging or tolerating, activities that threaten regional peace.
> 
> In the interest of peace and in the absents of a peace accord, the continued occupation of territory under the influence of HAMAS and FATAH is justified.
> 
> 
> To cooperate fully in the fight against terrorism, in accordance with our obligations under international law, in order to find, deny safe haven and bring to justice, on the basis of the principle of extradite or prosecute, any person who supports, facilitates, participates or attempts to participate in the financing, planning, preparation or perpetration of terrorist acts or provides safe havens.
> 
> To ensure the apprehension and prosecution or extradition of perpetrators of terrorist acts, in accordance with the relevant provisions of national and international law, in particular human rights law, refugee law and international humanitarian law. We will endeavour to conclude and implement to that effect mutual judicial assistance and extradition agreements, and to strengthen cooperation between law enforcement agencies.
> 
> Most Respectfully,
> R
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Just from my observation:
> 
> Toastman, Condor, Roudy, I and the rest will absorb and heed your advice.
> 
> Theliq, Indofreud, Sunni and others of their stripe are teachable.
> 
> Hoffstra and Saigoon know everything under the sun and can't and won't learn anything more.
> 
> Tinmore, well, what can I say.
Click to expand...


And Sherri.....well...she has her very own category haha


----------



## Hoffstra

Kondor3 said:


> Those millions could have had their own country and durable peace at any point between 1948 and 1967, had they made sensible and practical and correct choices.



what you and others fail to accept is that the longer Israel stalls in making the Palestinians an acceptable peace offer, the greater jeapordy their Jewish state is in.

eventually the two state solution will become impossible, and the Palestinians will dismantle the PA and all entities of Palestinian self-rule, and that will put the welfare and safety of the Palestinian people in the West Bank once again under the full responsibility of Israel.


----------



## Kondor3

Hoffstra said:


> Kondor3 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Those millions could have had their own country and durable peace at any point between 1948 and 1967, had they made sensible and practical and correct choices.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> what you and others fail to accept is that the longer Israel stalls in making the Palestinians an acceptable peace offer, the greater jeapordy their Jewish state is in.
> 
> eventually the two state solution will become impossible, and the Palestinians will dismantle the PA and all entities of Palestinian self-rule, and that will put the welfare and safety of the Palestinian people in the West Bank once again under the full responsibility of Israel.
Click to expand...


That is one possible future.

There are several others; with two of the more likely including...

1. Eviction Day.

2. Refusal by Israel to re-assume responsibility for the West Bank and Gaza after dismantling, and letting them rot and fester in their shit-holes without further intervention.

And, all the while, the building of The Barrier continues, as does New Settlement Creation...

Resulting in an ever-diminishing rag-tag collection of land-scaps on which the Palestinians can crowd-together and perch...

In that respect, the Israelis have all the time in the world...

The Palestinians are holding a pair of deuces...

And they're out of chips, with which to call, never mind raise...

The Israelis are holding a straight flush, all the chips, and this is the last hand of the game...

There's nothing left for the Palestinians to do but fold...

The only question remaining now is: Are they smart enough to walk away from the table, or will they have to be carried out feet-first?


----------



## Hoffstra

Kondor3 said:


> That is one possible future.
> 
> There are several others; with two of the more likely including...
> 
> 1. Eviction Day.
> 
> 2. Refusal by Israel to re-assume responsibility for the West Bank and Gaza after dismantling, and letting them rot and fester in their shit-holes without further intervention.



Understand that "Eviction Day" would bring upon the Jews a 2nd Holocaust.

Just a warning.  Ignore it if you like.


----------



## toastman

Hoffstra said:


> Kondor3 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Those millions could have had their own country and durable peace at any point between 1948 and 1967, had they made sensible and practical and correct choices.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> what you and others fail to accept is that the longer Israel stalls in making the Palestinians an acceptable peace offer, the greater jeapordy their Jewish state is in.
> 
> eventually the two state solution will become impossible, and the Palestinians will dismantle the PA and all entities of Palestinian self-rule, and that will put the welfare and safety of the Palestinian people in the West Bank once again under the full responsibility of Israel.
Click to expand...


You could not have been more wrong. It is the other way around. It is the Palestinians that need to stop stalling and forget their outrageous and unrealistic demands  (right of return, '67 borders), if they truly wants a state, of course....


----------



## Hoffstra

toastman said:


> You could not have been more wrong. It is the other way around. It is the Palestinians that need to stop stalling and forget their outrageous and unrealistic demands  (right of return, '67 borders), if they truly wants a state, of course....



My dear, you know as well as I that Israel's greatest fear is that the Palestinians will accept a peace deal.

Any peace deal will of course call for at least 100,000 settlers to go home to Israel.

Israel, is scared shitless about what will happen when these 100,000 settlers refuse to leave, and the IDF is forced to remove them by force...with all the massive riots and mutiny this will create.

This is why Israel does everything it can to keep the Palestinians from accepting a deal.


----------



## ForeverYoung436

toastman said:


> Hossfly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> 
> Hoffstra,  _et al,_
> 
> When evaluating this, it must be done on two levels:
> 
> Comparative analysis:
> The evaluation of Law (civil and human rights) with respect to Israeli Citizens of Arab Decent living in Israel.
> The evaluation of Law (civil and human rights) with respect to non-Israeli Citizens of Arab Decent living in Israel.
> The evaluation of Law (civil and human rights) with respect to non-Israeli Citizens of Arab Decent living in Israel.
> 
> The Elements of Crime of "Apartheid"  must be consistent with this Statute.
> 
> *(OBSERVATION)*
> 
> 
> 
> Inhumane acts of a character similar to those referred to in paragraph 1:
> 
> (a)     Murder;
> (b)     Extermination;
> (c)     Enslavement;
> (d)     Deportation or forcible transfer of population;
> (e)     Imprisonment or other severe deprivation of physical liberty in violation of fundamental rules of international law;
> (f)     Torture;
> (g)     Rape, sexual slavery, enforced prostitution, forced pregnancy, enforced sterilization, or any other form of sexual violence of comparable gravity;
> (h)     Persecution against any identifiable group or collectivity on political, racial, national, ethnic, cultural, religious, gender as defined in paragraph 3, or other grounds that are universally recognized as impermissible under international law, in connection with any act referred to in this paragraph or any crime within the jurisdiction of the Court;
> (i)     Enforced disappearance of persons;
> (j)     The crime of apartheid;
> (k)     Other inhumane acts of a similar character intentionally causing great suffering, or serious injury to body or to mental or physical health.
> Committed in the context of an institutionalized regime of systematic oppression and domination;
> 
> Oppression and domination by one racial group over any other racial group or groups;
> *-------------------->  AND  <--------------------*
> Committed with the intention of maintaining that regime;
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> Domestic Considerations as a comparison.
> 
> First, I don't subscribed to the Arab-Palestinian position that there is any form of discrimination based on race _(one racial group over any other racial group)_.  There is no substantive evidence that there is any discrimination with respect to Israeli Citizens of Jewish Decent and that of Israeli Citizens Arab Decent, living in Israel.
> 
> Second, I don't subscribed to the Arab-Palestinian position that there is any form of oppression and domination by one racial group over any other racial group with respect to Israeli Citizens of Jewish Decent and that of Israeli Citizens Arab Decent, living in Israel.
> 
> Third, I don't subscribed to the Arab-Palestinian position that there is any substantive evidence of segregation or legal subjugation committed with respect to Israeli Citizens of Jewish Decent oppressing Israeli Citizens Arab Decent, living in Israel; with the intention of maintaining a regime Jewish supremacy or dominance.​
> The allegation of "apartheid" is based primarily on the regiment of security concerns based on the Administration of the Occupied Territories.  Thus, the complaint is that
> there is substantive evidence of segregation or legal subjugation committed with respect to *non-Israeli Citizens* of Arab Decent that are NOT living in Israel _(ie: The Occupied Territories)_.  The argument theme is that the oppression and domination by the Occupation Force over the Arab Palestinian of the Occupied Territories is the equivalent of the oppression and domination by one racial group over any other racial group to maintain supremacy or dominance.
> 
> *(PRIMA FACIE EVIDENCE)*
> 
> *General Policy:*
> 
> Article 9 Palestine National Charter of 1968: Armed struggle is the only way to liberate Palestine.
> Article 10 Palestine National Charter of 1968: Commando (Feday'ee) action constitutes the nucleus of the Palestinian popular liberation war.
> Article 13 The Covenant of the Islamic Resistance Movement (HAMAS) 18 August 1988: There is no solution for the Palestinian question except through Jihad.
> Article 15 The Covenant of the Islamic Resistance Movement (HAMAS) 18 August 1988:  The day that enemies usurp part of Moslem land, Jihad becomes the individual duty of every Moslem.
> *Specific Policy:*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *(Supporting EVIDENCE)*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> What the Hostile Arab Palestinian (HoAP) calls "apartheid," is the active suppression and quarantine of elements that pledged in the past, have demonstrated in the past and present, and continue in organizing, instigating, facilitating, participating in, financing, encouraging or tolerating, activities that threaten regional peace.
> 
> In the interest of peace and in the absents of a peace accord, the continued occupation of territory under the influence of HAMAS and FATAH is justified.
> 
> 
> To cooperate fully in the fight against terrorism, in accordance with our obligations under international law, in order to find, deny safe haven and bring to justice, on the basis of the principle of extradite or prosecute, any person who supports, facilitates, participates or attempts to participate in the financing, planning, preparation or perpetration of terrorist acts or provides safe havens.
> 
> To ensure the apprehension and prosecution or extradition of perpetrators of terrorist acts, in accordance with the relevant provisions of national and international law, in particular human rights law, refugee law and international humanitarian law. We will endeavour to conclude and implement to that effect mutual judicial assistance and extradition agreements, and to strengthen cooperation between law enforcement agencies.
> 
> Most Respectfully,
> R
> 
> 
> 
> Just from my observation:
> 
> Toastman, Condor, Roudy, I and the rest will absorb and heed your advice.
> 
> Theliq, Indofreud, Sunni and others of their stripe are teachable.
> 
> Hoffstra and Saigoon know everything under the sun and can't and won't learn anything more.
> 
> Tinmore, well, what can I say.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> And Sherri.....well...she has her very own category haha
Click to expand...


Where do I fit in?  and lipush?  ;-)


----------



## Kondor3

Hoffstra said:


> "..._Understand that "Eviction Day" would bring upon the Jews a 2nd Holocaust. Just a warning.  Ignore it if you like._"


There exists today no Muslim-Arab power nor combination of powers capable of projecting that kind of force against a nuclear-armed Israel (not that they've ever needed it in the past, to kick Arab ass, in three separate wars) - at least not without that attacking power committing suicide in the process - nor will any major non-Arab power align with the Muslims and the Palestinians, to take-on Israel, or the combined power of Israel and the United States.

There is no Arab Cavalry coming over the hill to rescue the Palestinians, if Eviction Day ever comes, and Hamas (and Hezbollah, if necessary) would be completely overrun by the IDF within a mere handful of days, if it ever came to full-out, no-holds-barred conflict.

You serve-up brave talk, but there is no Reality behind that talk, to make it Operative.

If Eviction Day ever comes, the Palestinian resistance-situation is doomed before operations even begin, and that quickly.

I fully understand that you do not want this to be so.

But that does not change Reality.


----------



## toastman

Hoffstra said:


> Kondor3 said:
> 
> 
> 
> That is one possible future.
> 
> There are several others; with two of the more likely including...
> 
> 1. Eviction Day.
> 
> 2. Refusal by Israel to re-assume responsibility for the West Bank and Gaza after dismantling, and letting them rot and fester in their shit-holes without further intervention.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Understand that "Eviction Day" would bring upon the Jews a 2nd Holocaust.
> 
> Just a warning.  Ignore it if you like.
Click to expand...


A warning from who, you ?? 

Looks like we got ourselves an internet tough guy


----------



## ForeverYoung436

Hoffstra said:


> Kondor3 said:
> 
> 
> 
> That is one possible future.
> 
> There are several others; with two of the more likely including...
> 
> 1. Eviction Day.
> 
> 2. Refusal by Israel to re-assume responsibility for the West Bank and Gaza after dismantling, and letting them rot and fester in their shit-holes without further intervention.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Understand that "Eviction Day" would bring upon the Jews a 2nd Holocaust.
> 
> Just a warning.  Ignore it if you like.
Click to expand...


This is one time I'd have to agree with Hoffstra.  Unlike the Kurds or the Tibetans, the world is obsessed with the Palestinians because of the Jooos.  If the Israelis evicted almost 3 million Palestinians from the West Bank, the world would not sit idly by.


----------



## Hoffstra

ForeverYoung436 said:


> This is one time I'd have to agree with Hoffstra.  Unlike the Kurds or the Tibetans, the world is obsessed with the Palestinians because of the Jooos.  If the Israelis evicted almost 3 million Palestinians from the West Bank, the world would not sit idly by.



If Israeli evicted more than 3 million Palestinians from the West Bank, there would be another Shoah.

That would be God's punishment for their sinful ways.


----------



## Kondor3

I hear both of you. I disagree about such a possibility, but I hear you.

There comes a time when there is nothing more to do than to kick-out the troublemakers.

Happens every so often, in one part of the world or another.

Given the pace with which old Palestinian lands are being gobbled-up, it seems a logical outcome, and, quite possibly, the only way to cut the Gordian Knot of incessant rocket attacks upon Israeli settlements.

The Palestinians will not be happy until they achieve a complete recovery of all of Old Palestine.

The Israelis cannot endure forevermore alongside a hostile element so dedicated, tucked in alongside them.

Something has to give.

The Israelis are stronger.

It will, therefore, be the weaker Palestinians that give.

It's merely a matter of timing, when conditions are ripe.

It's merely a matter of 'when', IMHO, and how close we are to that 'when'...

Poke a hornet's nest with a stick often enough and you're gonna have to run for your life.

The Palestinians have been poking for 65 years.

Still - right or wrong - accurate or inaccurate - realistic or unrealistic - ethical or not - it's all speculation.


----------



## Hoffstra

Kondor- trying to expel millions of Palestinians, especially not during a large-scale war involving the Palestinians, would lead to another Shoah.

why do you want to see more than six million Jews die?


----------



## RoccoR

Hoffstra,  _et al,_

I had to really think about this one.

Hoffstra is thinking a bit forward here.



Hoffstra said:


> Eventually the two state solution will become impossible, and the Palestinians will dismantle the PA and all entities of Palestinian self-rule, and that will put the welfare and safety of the Palestinian people in the West Bank once again under the full responsibility of Israel.


*(CONSEQUENCES)*

What if the Palestinian Authority Collapses?

Hamas, recognizing the implications of PLO failure to maintain the PA, would seek to gain adherents for its leadership on the West Bank and to sabotage attempts to maintain stability. (On the other hand, it would have to explain to Gazans why financial transfers from the West Bank-based PA had ceased, thereby exacerbating Gaza's economic situation.) Extremist settlers might view the situation as an invitation for a land-grab. Either or both of these developments could oblige the Israel Defense Forces to expand their reach back into all of Area A: Palestinian cities and towns. The Israeli peace camp would justifiably trumpet the government's failure to prevent the PA's collapse and would seek new Israeli elections or heightened international intervention.

Calls would emerge from the Israeli far right and post-Zionist far left and from Palestinians who have lost hope for a two-state solution for Israel to annex the territory. The Palestinians and the post-Zionists would demand full citizenship rights for West Bank Palestinians, thereby jeopardizing Israel's claim to be a Jewish state. The far right would insist on some sort of distinction between Palestinian "personal rights" and Jewish "citizenship rights"--meaning, in effect, apartheid.

Meanwhile, an increasingly Islamist Arab world would find plenty in this situation to accuse Israel of. So would the US and Europe, where voices would be heard suggesting that the emerging crisis offered an opportunity to adopt more forceful policies in favor of two states and against the settlements.​
Kerry: Collapse of Palestinian Authority Would be Worse for Israel and US

"If that experiment is allowed to fail, ask yourselves: What will replace it? What will happen if the Palestinian economy implodes? If the Palestinian security forces dissolve? If the Palestinian Authority fails? Surely something much worse for Israel's interests and for America's and for the region," he said.

Kerry says the failure of the current Palestinian leadership could bring about the same kind of extremism in the West Bank that Israelis are facing from Hamas in Gaza and from Hezbollah in southern Lebanon.​
*(OBSERVATION)*

As in the past, when the Palestinian Authority has been strapped for cash, someone _(or several)_ have always stepped-in to inject monetary assistance; not that they want to, but so no alternative.  Their individual reasons for doing so may be different, but the outcome is the same.


Donors may halt aid to Palestinian Authority if no progress is made in peace talks



			
				Norwegian Foreign Minister said:
			
		

> "The donors will not be ready to keep funding Palestinian state-building much longer if we do not see a political solution on the horizon," said Eide.
> 
> "I think this is important for the Palestinians to know...the comfort of an internationally subsidised state-building endeavour may be wrong," Eide told the newspaper. "And I think that it is important for some people on the Israeli side...to know that this cannot continue forever."
> 
> _*SOURCE:*_ Middle East Monitor (MEM) Thursday, 29 August 2013


*(COMMENT)*

This is one of those cases where everyone has painted themselves into a corner.

There is too much resting on the outcome of the current Peace Negotiations.  The US, having jump-started the talks, has become the deep pocketed _de-facto_ guarantor.  We will have to keep the Palestinian Authority solvent and functioning.  Otherwise, the entire Arab World is going to blame America for the collapse.  And, if the collapse is allowed to happen, what will fill the void?

If Israel remains the "Occupation Authority" for both Gaza and the West Bank, that is going to insure an insurgency the likes of which would rival the problems faced in post-War Iraq.  Nobody wants that; especially the Israelis.

Jordan might be persuaded to take the West Bank back, but then that puts Israeli security back to the pre-1967 conditions.  And it is unlikely that Egypt wants another failed region like the Gaza Strip, unless they get major assistance with the Levant Gas Field.

Clearly, it will be chaos for a bit.  And in chaos, both insurgents and terrorists have the advantage.

So, from the perspective of many, the current peace negotiations might be described as one of those situations where "failure is not an option."

Most Respectfully,
R


----------



## Kondor3

Hoffstra said:


> Kondor- trying to expel millions of Palestinians, especially not during a large-scale war involving the Palestinians, would lead to another Shoah.
> 
> why do you want to see more than six million Jews die?


I am intrigued.

Whom do you believe is going to commit this next Shoah, should the Israelis decide to break this impossible deadlock and Evict and Expel the Palestinians from the West Bank and Gaza?


----------



## Hoffstra

Kondor3 said:


> I am intrigued.
> 
> Whom do you believe is going to commit this next Shoah, should the Israelis decide to break this impossible deadlock and Evict and Expel the Palestinians from the West Bank and Gaza?




If Israel dares to attempt to expel millions of Palestinians, a new Holocaust of the Jews will be committed by the more than 1 billion Muslims throughout the world.


It will be done by the Muslims, but it will be *God's punishment*, just as the Holocaust was.


----------



## Kondor3

Hoffstra said:


> Kondor3 said:
> 
> 
> 
> I am intrigued.
> 
> Whom do you believe is going to commit this next Shoah, should the Israelis decide to break this impossible deadlock and Evict and Expel the Palestinians from the West Bank and Gaza?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> If Israel dares to attempt to expel millions of Palestinians, a new Holocaust of the Jews will be committed by the more than 1 billion Muslims throughout the world.
Click to expand...


Pakistan is too far away to attack Israel.

Indonesia is too far away to attack Israel.

Iran is too far away to attack Israel without risking supply and communications lines that both the Israelis and Americans would shred to tatters in a fortnight or less.

Syria is no longer in a condition to attack Israel.

Lebanon is no longer in a condition to attack Israel.

Jordan is too weak to attack Israel without massive support from its neighbors.

Iraq is no longer in a condition to attack Israel.

Afghanistan never was in a condition to attack Israel.

Egypt is no longer in a condition to attack Israel.

Libya is no longer in a condition to attack Israel.

Saudi Arabia and Yemen and Kuwait and Qatar and Morocco and the UAE and all the rest of that lot are too small to attack Israel without massive support from their neighbors and will not risk it without the Big Guns, which have been largely neutralized.

Turkey is a largely European and largely secular country and will not break with Europe and  America and NATO over a pissant sideshow like the Palestinians.

As I said, there is no Arab Cavalry coming over the hill this time to rescue the Palestinians.



> "..._It will be done by the Muslims_..."



But Islam is the '_Religion of Peace_', isn't it?

Also, slaughtering Jews for merely uprooting and relocating Palestinians (_but allowing them to live_) is a disproportionate response, isn't it?



> "*...it will be God's punishment, just as the Holocaust was.*"



*Your Honor, the Defense rests.*


----------



## Hoffstra

Kondor3 said:


> Also, slaughtering Jews for merely uprooting and relocating Palestinians (_but allowing them to live_) is a disproportionate response, isn't it?



Israel knows all about and totally accepts the concept, of disproportionate responses.

And yes, if Israel dares to event attempt another Nakba, this would justify their immediate and total annihilation.

The Lord works in mysterious ways.


----------



## RoccoR

Kondor3, Hoffstra, _et al,_

There must be a miscommunication here.



Kondor3 said:


> Hoffstra said:
> 
> 
> 
> Kondor- trying to expel millions of Palestinians, especially not during a large-scale war involving the Palestinians, would lead to another Shoah.
> 
> why do you want to see more than six million Jews die?
> 
> 
> 
> I am intrigued.
> 
> Whom do you believe is going to commit this next Shoah, should the Israelis decide to break this impossible deadlock and Evict and Expel the Palestinians from the West Bank and Gaza?
> 
> And keeping in mind that Expulsion is a long way from Slaughter.
Click to expand...

*(COMMENT)*

First, neither side wants to be associated with either:

Another extermination program.
Another eviction resulting in a mass movement of refugees.
In fact, neither of these options would be in the best interest of any of the Arab regional nations, the Palestinians, the Israelis, or the UN _(which the Arabs believe is ultimately responsible for the situation as it evolved)_.

There are a bunch of potential options, but neither of these are acceptable.

Most Respectfully,
R


----------



## Kondor3

Hoffstra said:


> Kondor3 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Also, slaughtering Jews for merely uprooting and relocating Palestinians (_but allowing them to live_) is a disproportionate response, isn't it?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Israel knows all about and totally accepts the concept, of disproportionate responses.
> 
> And yes, if Israel dares to event attempt another Nakba, this would justify their immediate and total annihilation.
> 
> The Lord works in mysterious ways.
Click to expand...

Wow...

Under such circumstances (evict and expel), the *Jews* would merely be undertaking 'technical' Ethnic Cleansing of the milder sort, merely involving uprooting and relocation, rather than killing...

But *you* are advocating... not uprooting and relocation... but killing... and not only killing, but *total annihilation*... interesting.

Well, if it comes down to that, all you need is a collection of countries with sufficient military competency and muscle to *carry out* your full-blown genocide...

And nothing along those lines exists at present, in neither extant form, not as a realistic prospect in the near-to-mid term...

Wake me up when you've got a coalition in-mind that is up to the challenge...

And that's just on the _Conventional Warfare_ level...

Never mind the 200+ nuclear warheads and mid-range delivery systems waiting to be unleashed on the first idiot Arab dictator crazy enough to even seriously try to undertake their 'total annihilation'...

Good luck with that, Hoffstra...

There is no Arab Cavalry coming over the hill this time, and you know that just as well as I do...


----------



## Hoffstra

Kondor3 said:


> Wow...
> 
> Under such circumstances (evict and expel), the *Jews* would merely be undertaking 'technical' Ethnic Cleansing of the milder sort, merely involving uprooting and relocation, rather than killing...
> 
> But *you* are advocating... not uprooting and relocation... but killing... and not only killing, but *total annihilation*... interesting.
> 
> Well, if it comes down to that, all you need is a collection of countries with sufficient military competency and muscle to *carry out* your full-blown genocide...
> 
> And nothing along those lines exists at present, in neither extant form, not as a realistic prospect in the near-to-mid term...
> 
> Wake me up when you've got a coalition in-mind that is up to the challenge...
> 
> And that's just on the _Conventional Warfare_ level...
> 
> Never mind the 200+ nuclear warheads and mid-range delivery systems waiting to be unleashed on the first idiot Arab dictator crazy enough to even seriously try to undertake their 'total annihilation'...
> 
> Good luck with that, Hoffstra...
> 
> There is no Arab Cavalry coming over the hill this time, and you know that just as well as I do...



I am sorry, I really am, but any nation that seeks to expel almost 1/3 of its population by force, has lost the right to exist.

Perhaps an orderly process of dissolution, deconstruction, and devolution can take place to dismantle the State of Israel, but a clean break from the Earth would be more efficient and easier to achieve.

Plus the fact that Israel would refuse to comply with any process of deconstruction of their state, so yes...physical annihilation would simply save us the red tape.


....again, this should ONLY take place if Israel engages in or attempt to engage in a process of ethnic cleansing against millions of Palestinians.


----------



## Kondor3

RoccoR said:


> "..._First, neither side wants_..."


I believe you to be admirably albeit groundlessly optimistic about this next round of talks.

I also believe you to be mistaken about (a) the Israelis being unwilling to expel the Palestinians and (b) the Palestinians not looking to drive the Israelis into the Mediterranean.

And, once the talks fail, that may - this time - very well mark the end of any dialogue between the two sides whatsoever, and forevermore, in their current configuration.

*The Muslim-Arab neighbors of Israel have never been so weak* - relatively speaking vis a vis Israel - as they are now; consequently, *the danger to the Palestinians has never been greater*.

Sea-changes or signal-changes and the cutting of Gordian Knots usually comes like a bolt out of the blue and entirely unexpected by the target(s) and much of the rest of the world.

When you're facing an impossible and intolerable deadlock (_as the Israelis will be once this latest round of talks fails_) you have to begin thinking and acting outside-the-box.

My guess is that the Israelis will then take the road less traveled, and do something radical along the lines of what I"ve just outlined.

It's entirely possible (_the Palestinians had better hope likely_) that I'm wrong, but there is a strong case to be made for jumping through the present *Window of Opportunity for Israel*, soon after The Talks fail, as I believe they will.

As I said before... there will be no Arab Cavalry coming over the hill to the rescue of the Palestinians, this time.

But, of course, time will tell about that, as well.

I think I've pretty-much beaten that scenario into the ground as an _Introductory Concept Piece_, but it was worth the exercise.


----------



## Kondor3

Hoffstra said:


> "...again, this should ONLY take place if Israel..."


Seen. There's not much point in me repeating myself. We see this possibility quite differently.


----------



## theliq

Kondor3 said:


> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> 
> "..._First, neither side wants_..."
> 
> 
> 
> I believe you to be admirably albeit groundlessly optimistic about this next round of talks.
> 
> I also believe you to be mistaken about (a) the Israelis being unwilling to expel the Palestinians and (b) the Palestinians not looking to drive the Israelis into the Mediterranean.
> 
> And, once the talks fail, that may - this time - very well mark the end of any dialogue between the two sides whatsoever, and forevermore, in their current configuration.
> 
> The Muslim-Arab neighbors of Israel have never been so weak - relatively speaking vis a vis Israel - as they are now;l consequently, the danger to the Palestinians has never been greater.
> 
> Sea-changes or signal-changes and the cutting of Gordian Knots usually comes like a bolt out of the blue and entirely unexpected by the target(s) and much of the rest of the world.
> 
> When you're facing an impossible and intolerable deadlock (as the Israelis will be once this latest round of talks fails) you have to begin thinking and acting outside-the-box.
> 
> My guess is that the Israelis will then take the road less traveled, and do something radical along the lines of what I"ve just outlined.
> 
> It's entirely possible (the Palestinians had better hope likely) that I'm wrong, but there is a strong case to be made for jumping through the present Window of Opportunity for Israel.
> 
> As I said before... there will be no Arab Cavalry coming over the hill to the rescue.
> 
> But, of course, time will tell about that, as well.
> 
> I think I've pretty-much beaten that scenario into the ground as an Introductory Concept Piece, but it was worth the exercise.
Click to expand...


Israel has never been in the Box,Silly

They think and do as they Please.......but not all Jews?(if you are one,which I much Doubt)Israelis think like you these days.....history has moved on from your Zionist Terrorist Manifesto......And Hail to the Jewish folk who resist your violent Dogma.

I'm theliq,say NO to Zionism...and YES to a peaceful Israel and Palestine(which is exactly what Zionist Terrorists DO NOT WANT)


----------



## Kondor3

theliq said:


> "..._fool on us_..."


Who is "*us*"?


----------



## Kondor3

theliq said:


> "..._your violent Dogma._"


I spout no dogma.

I show you one likely future.


----------



## Hoffstra

Kondor3 said:


> I spout no dogma.
> 
> I show you one likely future.[/SIZE]



your future that has a massive action of ethnic cleansing of Palestinians would lead to a quick and final destruction of the State of Israel.


----------



## Kondor3

Hoffstra said:


> Kondor3 said:
> 
> 
> 
> I spout no dogma.
> 
> I show you one likely future.[/SIZE]
> 
> 
> 
> 
> your future that has a massive action of ethnic cleansing of Palestinians would lead to a quick and final destruction of the State of Israel.
Click to expand...

Yes.

You've said that before.

I, on the other hand, have served-up the counterpoints of (1) historic Arab weakness and (2) historic Israeli strength.

We are repeating ourselves.


----------



## Hoffstra

Kondor3 said:


> ...It's entirely possible (_the Palestinians had better hope likely_) that I'm wrong, but there is a strong case to be made for jumping through the present *Window of Opportunity for Israel*, soon after The Talks fail, as I believe they will.
> 
> As I said before... there will be no Arab Cavalry coming over the hill to the rescue of the Palestinians, this time.
> 
> But, of course, time will tell about that, as well.
> 
> I think I've pretty-much beaten that scenario into the ground as an _Introductory Concept Piece_, but it was worth the exercise.



I pray, for the existence of Medinat Yisrael, that you are wrong.

If your sick fantasies pan out, more than 6 million Jews will die a horrible death.


----------



## Kondor3

Hoffstra said:


> "..._I pray, for the existence of Medinat Yisrael, that you are wrong_..."


I'm sure they appreciate your prayers.



> "..._If your sick fantasies pan out, more than 6 million Jews will die a horrible death._"



They are not 'mine'. They are not 'sick fantasies'. They are cold, calculated, dispassionate and logical projections of next steps, should this latest (and final?) round of talks fail.


----------



## Hoffstra

Kondor3 said:


> They are not 'mine'. They are not 'sick fantasies'. They are cold, calculated, dispassionate and logical projections of next steps, should this latest (and final?) round of talks fail.



If you really think any party within the current coalition government in Israel is even considering the prospect of planning let alone attempting to carry out a mass expulsion of the Arabs of the West Bank if peace talks fail, you need some serious psychological assistance.

The irony is, some would consider your suggestion that members of Israel's coalition are even considering such an idea, to be *anti-Semitic*.


----------



## toastman

Hoffstra said:


> Kondor3 said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...It's entirely possible (_the Palestinians had better hope likely_) that I'm wrong, but there is a strong case to be made for jumping through the present *Window of Opportunity for Israel*, soon after The Talks fail, as I believe they will.
> 
> As I said before... there will be no Arab Cavalry coming over the hill to the rescue of the Palestinians, this time.
> 
> But, of course, time will tell about that, as well.
> 
> I think I've pretty-much beaten that scenario into the ground as an _Introductory Concept Piece_, but it was worth the exercise.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I pray, for the existence of Medinat Yisrael, that you are wrong.
> 
> If your sick fantasies pan out, more than 6 million Jews will die a horrible death.
Click to expand...


I've already lost count of how many times you said millions of Jews will die. 
You are one sick puppy !


----------



## Coyote

The problem with ethnic cleansing that pretends to be civilized, is this:  there is usually no place to put the people once they are rounded up.

Then what?


----------



## Kondor3

Coyote said:


> _The problem with ethnic cleansing that pretends to be civilized, is this:  there is usually no place to put the people once they are rounded up. Then what?_


That is an excellent point, and, sometimes, there is no good answer.

With respect to those times post-WWII when there were forcible en masse population shifts - ethnic Germans expelled from the Sudentenland in Czechoslovakia and East Prussia in Poland, Hindus expelled from Pakistan and Muslims expelled from India, etc...

Room was found in the Destination Country even though there was some very real loss of life and considerable hardship associated with the act - hardships that were eventually overcome as the New Normal crystallized in those places...

If that sort of thing unfolded with respect to the Palestinians, I suspect those expelled would be split-up and scattered between Jordan, Lebanon and Syria, for starters, and let them fend for themselves - supplied with food and water and compensation money - once they're safely across the border, to let their ethnic brethren and co-religionists worry about them from that point forward, and putting the burden and onus upon those brethren, should they fail to take-in the refugees and to care for them on humanitarian grounds, once the refugees cross onto foreign soil of those brethren.

*It's a nasty business alrigh*t, even when a population (_or some segment thereof_) does *NOT* resist, never mind when some segment *DOES*, and is subsequently defeated and neutralized, but...

If it is a choice between kicking out your hostile neighbors versus making your children and grandchildren safe, and you have that power, well, the aggressive neighbors lose every time, in virtually every scenario, in virtually every corner of the world, in virtually every Age of Man, since Man first climbed down from the trees, and extending all the way to within the range of living memory, by Poles and Czechs and Indians and Pakistanis.

In us-or-them situations... choosing your own over 'the others'... this is the purest and most ancient of logic, I'm afraid, in the context of clashes of civilizations and populations.

And it would not surprise me in the least if we see such a thing unfolding, if this Last Chance round of talks collapses, which I believe will probably happen.

We like to kid ourselves that such things can no longer happen because we live in Modern Times.

Nothing could be further from the truth.

Each time in the past that such things have happened, the people involved were *ALSO* living in Modern Times, from their own perspective.

Ask the ethnic Germans and the Hindus and the Muslims I mentioned who were forcibly relocated in their hundreds of thousands and in their millions AFTER WWII - under Allied or friendly control - many of those forcibly relocated during those times are still alive today.


----------



## Hoffstra

Sickening how Jews, descendents of Holocaust victims and survivors, can actually contemplate committing ethnic cleansing against millions of people.

Sickening because the Palestinians are STONGER than Israel, would never willingly be forced from their homeland, and Israel would have to kill millions of people if they want to rid the West Bank of Arabs.

If that happened, Israel would pay the ultimate price.  An eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth, a hand for a hand, a foot for a foot.




I trust Israel and the Jews are smart enough not to make such a terrible mistake.

The Arab world can survive losing 3 million of their brethren.

The Jews?  The loss of 6 million *more* Jews would be hard to recover from.


----------



## Hoffstra

Kondor3 said:


> That is an excellent point, and, sometimes, there is no good answer.
> 
> With respect to those times post-WWII when there were forcible en masse population shifts - ethnic Germans expelled from the Sudentenland in Czechoslovakia and East Prussia in Poland, Hindus expelled from Pakistan and Muslims expelled from India, etc...
> 
> Room was found in the Destination Country even though there was some very real loss of life and considerable hardship associated with the act - hardships that were eventually overcome as the New Normal crystallized in those places...
> 
> If that sort of thing unfolded with respect to the Palestinians, I suspect those expelled would be split-up and scattered between Jordan, Lebanon and Syria, for starters, and let them fend for themselves - supplied with food and water and compensation money - once they're safely across the border, to let their ethnic brethren and co-religionists worry about them from that point forward, and putting the burden and onus upon those brethren, should they fail to take-in the refugees and to care for them on humanitarian grounds, once the refugees cross onto foreign soil of those brethren.
> 
> *It's a nasty business alrigh*t, even when a population (_or some segment thereof_) does *NOT* resist, never mind when some segment *DOES*, and is subsequently defeated and neutralized, but...
> 
> If it is a choice between kicking out your hostile neighbors versus making your children and grandchildren safe, and you have that power, well, the aggressive neighbors lose every time, in virtually every scenario, in virtually every corner of the world, in virtually every Age of Man, since Man first climbed down from the trees, and extending all the way to within the range of living memory, by Poles and Czechs and Indians and Pakistanis.
> 
> In us-or-them situations... choosing your own over 'the others'... this is the purest and most ancient of logic, I'm afraid, in the context of clashes of civilizations and populations.
> 
> And it would not surprise me in the least if we see such a thing unfolding, if this Last Chance round of talks collapses, which I believe will probably happen.
> 
> We like to kid ourselves that such things can no longer happen because we live in Modern Times.
> 
> Keep in mind that each time in the past that such things have happened, the people involved were *ALSO* living in Modern Times, from their own perspective.
> 
> Ask the ethnic Germans and the Hindus and the Muslims I mentioned who were forcibly relocated in their hundreds of thousands and in their millions AFTER WWII - under Allied or friendly control - many of whom are still alive today.







with all due respect, your ideas and solutions are insane.

I now question your sanity.  No sane person would suggest what you are suggesting.

Israel and the Jews are not as suicidal as you make them out to be.  I find your suggestion that they are, to be terribly anti-Semitic.


----------



## Kondor3

Hoffstra said:


> "..._with all due respect, your ideas and solutions are insane. I now question your sanity.  No sane person would suggest what you are suggesting. Israel and the Jews are not as suicidal as you make them out to be.  I find your suggestion that they are, to be terribly anti-Semitic._"


You are entitled to your opinion; I will not waste keystrokes trying to change your mind.

I will merely observe that you are highly partisan in favor of the Palestinians and that you may be too young or conventional or hopeful or naive to understand that such things can and do happen often enough, as history measures time.

I make no proposals nor suggestions... nor have I said that I concur in whole or in part with such ideas... I am merely predicting the future... and saying that I understand it... indulging in a useful and alarming Crystal Ball exercise.

You also appear to be suffering from Sugar Plum Visions of the One-Billion-Man Jihad against Israel in the event that these latest (final) talks fail and should Israel feel that the time had finally come to break the deadlock in such a fashion.

If Israel does, indeed, make such a move in future, you are destined to be gravely disappointed concerning the effectiveness of the worldwide Muslim military reaction.

As evidenced by your failure to cite a credible Arab power (country, or coalition) capable of annihilating Israel, while continually protesting that such a thing will occur.

No, such a path would not be suicidal; in fact, they are sufficiently strong vis a vis the Arab world that they could Evict and Expel the Palestinians with impunity, and be little-the-worse for wear at the end of the sequence.

Sugar-Plum Visions of Jihad do not win military victories nor avenge expelled co-religionists.

Not to worry, however.

We aren't there just yet, and there still remains at least some chance that it will not come to that.


----------



## RoccoR

Hoffstra,  _et al,_

This is because there is no such plan or program for "ethnic cleansing."  There is no reason to believe that Israel is contemplating any such thing.  It is out of the question.



Hoffstra said:


> Sickening how Jews, descendents of Holocaust victims and survivors, can actually contemplate committing ethnic cleansing against millions of people.


*(COMMENT)*

Without regard to the outcome of the Talks.  

Most Respectfully,
R


----------



## Hoffstra

Kondor3 said:


> You are entitled to your opinion; I will not waste keystrokes trying to change your mind.
> 
> I will merely observe that you are highly partisan in favor of the Palestinians and that you may be too young or conventional or hopeful or naive to understand that such things can and do happen often enough, as history measures time.
> 
> I make no proposals or suggestions... nor have I said that I concur in whole or in part with such ideas... I am merely predicting the future... and saying that I understand it... indulging in a useful and alarming Crystal Ball exercise.
> 
> You also appear to be suffering from Sugar Plum Visions of the One-Billion-Man Jihad against Israel in the event that these latest (final) talks fail and should Israel feel that the time had finally come to break the deadlock in such a fashion.
> 
> If Israel does, indeed, make such a move in future, you are destined to be gravely disappointed concerning the effectiveness of the worldwide Muslim military reaction.
> 
> As evidenced by your failure to cite a credible Arab power (country, or coalition) capable of annihilating Israel, while continually protesting that such a thing will occur.
> 
> Not to worry, however.
> 
> We aren't there just yet, and there still remains at least some chance that it will not come to that.



with all due respect to your insane ideas and personality, Pakistan has nuclear weapons and would surely use them to destroy the State of Israel if they attempt to commit ethnic cleansing and then genocide against millions of their fellow Muslims.


----------



## MHunterB

Hoffstra said:


> Kondor3 said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...It's entirely possible (_the Palestinians had better hope likely_) that I'm wrong, but there is a strong case to be made for jumping through the present *Window of Opportunity for Israel*, soon after The Talks fail, as I believe they will.
> 
> As I said before... there will be no Arab Cavalry coming over the hill to the rescue of the Palestinians, this time.
> 
> But, of course, time will tell about that, as well.
> 
> I think I've pretty-much beaten that scenario into the ground as an _Introductory Concept Piece_, but it was worth the exercise.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I pray, for the existence of Medinat Yisrael, that you are wrong.
> 
> If your sick fantasies pan out, more than 6 million Jews will die a horrible death.
Click to expand...


I do not believe you are sincere, Hoffy - not at all.  I think you feel exactly the opposite about what you've posted above.


----------



## Kondor3

Hoffstra said:


> Kondor3 said:
> 
> 
> 
> You are entitled to your opinion; I will not waste keystrokes trying to change your mind.
> 
> I will merely observe that you are highly partisan in favor of the Palestinians and that you may be too young or conventional or hopeful or naive to understand that such things can and do happen often enough, as history measures time.
> 
> I make no proposals or suggestions... nor have I said that I concur in whole or in part with such ideas... I am merely predicting the future... and saying that I understand it... indulging in a useful and alarming Crystal Ball exercise.
> 
> You also appear to be suffering from Sugar Plum Visions of the One-Billion-Man Jihad against Israel in the event that these latest (final) talks fail and should Israel feel that the time had finally come to break the deadlock in such a fashion.
> 
> If Israel does, indeed, make such a move in future, you are destined to be gravely disappointed concerning the effectiveness of the worldwide Muslim military reaction.
> 
> As evidenced by your failure to cite a credible Arab power (country, or coalition) capable of annihilating Israel, while continually protesting that such a thing will occur.
> 
> Not to worry, however.
> 
> We aren't there just yet, and there still remains at least some chance that it will not come to that.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> with all due respect to your insane ideas and personality, Pakistan has nuclear weapons and would surely use them to destroy the State of Israel if they attempt to commit ethnic cleansing and then genocide against millions of their fellow Muslims.
Click to expand...


Ahhhh, and now we begin the long slide down the slippery slope of ad hominem attack...

Repeated baiting noted... bait not taken.

Now, as to Pakistan...

Pakistan is a long way from Israel.

For the most part, the Pakistanis are a sane, rational, pragmatic people.

Israel has a much larger nuclear arsenal than does Pakistan.

Israel's delivery systems are superior to those of Pakistan.

The Pakistanis cannot afford to expend part of their nuclear munitions and lose ground vis a vis India.

Pakistan will not risk an un-winnable nuclear war with the United States by attacking Israel.

Nobody is 'going nuclear' to avenge a couple of million pain-in-the-ass Palestinians who have overplayed their hand and gotten themselves kicked out for good.

Not gonna happen.

Next slide, please.


----------



## P F Tinmore

RoccoR said:


> Hoffstra,  _et al,_
> 
> I had to really think about this one.
> 
> Hoffstra is thinking a bit forward here.
> 
> 
> 
> Hoffstra said:
> 
> 
> 
> Eventually the two state solution will become impossible, and the Palestinians will dismantle the PA and all entities of Palestinian self-rule, and that will put the welfare and safety of the Palestinian people in the West Bank once again under the full responsibility of Israel.
> 
> 
> 
> *(CONSEQUENCES)*
> 
> What if the Palestinian Authority Collapses?
> 
> Hamas, recognizing the implications of PLO failure to maintain the PA, would seek to gain adherents for its leadership on the West Bank and to sabotage attempts to maintain stability. (On the other hand, it would have to explain to Gazans why financial transfers from the West Bank-based PA had ceased, thereby exacerbating Gaza's economic situation.) Extremist settlers might view the situation as an invitation for a land-grab. Either or both of these developments could oblige the Israel Defense Forces to expand their reach back into all of Area A: Palestinian cities and towns. The Israeli peace camp would justifiably trumpet the government's failure to prevent the PA's collapse and would seek new Israeli elections or heightened international intervention.
> 
> Calls would emerge from the Israeli far right and post-Zionist far left and from Palestinians who have lost hope for a two-state solution for Israel to annex the territory. The Palestinians and the post-Zionists would demand full citizenship rights for West Bank Palestinians, thereby jeopardizing Israel's claim to be a Jewish state. The far right would insist on some sort of distinction between Palestinian "personal rights" and Jewish "citizenship rights"--meaning, in effect, apartheid.
> 
> Meanwhile, an increasingly Islamist Arab world would find plenty in this situation to accuse Israel of. So would the US and Europe, where voices would be heard suggesting that the emerging crisis offered an opportunity to adopt more forceful policies in favor of two states and against the settlements.​
> Kerry: Collapse of Palestinian Authority Would be Worse for Israel and US
> 
> "If that experiment is allowed to fail, ask yourselves: What will replace it? What will happen if the Palestinian economy implodes? If the Palestinian security forces dissolve? If the Palestinian Authority fails? Surely something much worse for Israel's interests and for America's and for the region," he said.
> 
> Kerry says the failure of the current Palestinian leadership could bring about the same kind of extremism in the West Bank that Israelis are facing from Hamas in Gaza and from Hezbollah in southern Lebanon.​
> *(OBSERVATION)*
> 
> As in the past, when the Palestinian Authority has been strapped for cash, someone _(or several)_ have always stepped-in to inject monetary assistance; not that they want to, but so no alternative.  Their individual reasons for doing so may be different, but the outcome is the same.
> 
> 
> Donors may halt aid to Palestinian Authority if no progress is made in peace talks
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Norwegian Foreign Minister said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> "The donors will not be ready to keep funding Palestinian state-building much longer if we do not see a political solution on the horizon," said Eide.
> 
> "I think this is important for the Palestinians to know...the comfort of an internationally subsidised state-building endeavour may be wrong," Eide told the newspaper. "And I think that it is important for some people on the Israeli side...to know that this cannot continue forever."
> 
> _*SOURCE:*_ Middle East Monitor (MEM) Thursday, 29 August 2013
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> This is one of those cases where everyone has painted themselves into a corner.
> 
> There is too much resting on the outcome of the current Peace Negotiations.  The US, having jump-started the talks, has become the deep pocketed _de-facto_ guarantor.  We will have to keep the Palestinian Authority solvent and functioning.  Otherwise, the entire Arab World is going to blame America for the collapse.  And, if the collapse is allowed to happen, what will fill the void?
> 
> If Israel remains the "Occupation Authority" for both Gaza and the West Bank, that is going to insure an insurgency the likes of which would rival the problems faced in post-War Iraq.  Nobody wants that; especially the Israelis.
> 
> Jordan might be persuaded to take the West Bank back, but then that puts Israeli security back to the pre-1967 conditions.  And it is unlikely that Egypt wants another failed region like the Gaza Strip, unless they get major assistance with the Levant Gas Field.
> 
> Clearly, it will be chaos for a bit.  And in chaos, both insurgents and terrorists have the advantage.
> 
> So, from the perspective of many, the current peace negotiations might be described as one of those situations where "failure is not an option."
> 
> Most Respectfully,
> R
Click to expand...


[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T-b6Y_ojOSs]Israel palestine: Is the one state solution the only solution? - YouTube[/ame]


----------



## Kondor3

RoccoR said:


> Hoffstra,  _et al,_
> 
> This is because there is no such plan or program for "ethnic cleansing."  There is no reason to believe that Israel is contemplating any such thing.  It is out of the question.
> 
> 
> 
> Hoffstra said:
> 
> 
> 
> Sickening how Jews, descendents of Holocaust victims and survivors, can actually contemplate committing ethnic cleansing against millions of people.
> 
> 
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> Without regard to the outcome of the Talks.
> 
> Most Respectfully,
> R
Click to expand...


At Hoffstra: Who says the descendants of Holocaust victims are planning to Evict and Expel the Palestinians? Yet.

At Rocco: I agree, either that no such plan exists, *or* that it is not yet been pulled from the archives, dusted-off, and re-examined.

At Rocco: I'm sure that any Draconian Action that we might ever see out of the Israelis would, indeed, be contingent upon the failure of the latest round of talks.

At Rocco: What happens if the latest round of talks *DO* fail, and the Israelis keep taking rocket-hits against their population centers? I'm pretty sure that they've just about 'had it' with such attacks.


----------



## Hoffstra

Kondor3 said:


> Ahhhh, and now we begin the long slide down the slippery slope of ad hominem attack...
> 
> Repeated baiting noted... bait not taken.
> 
> Now, as to Pakistan...
> 
> Pakistan is a long way from Israel.
> 
> For the most part, the Pakistanis are a sane, rational, pragmatic people.
> 
> Israel has a much larger nuclear arsenal than does Pakistan.
> 
> Israel's delivery systems are superior to those of Pakistan.
> 
> The Pakistanis cannot afford to expend part of their nuclear munitions and lose ground vis a vis India.
> 
> Pakistan will not risk an un-winnable nuclear war with the United States by attacking Israel.
> 
> Nobody is 'going nuclear' to avenge a couple of million pain-in-the-ass Palestinians who have overplayed their hand and gotten themselves kicked out for good.
> 
> Not gonna happen.
> 
> Next slide, please.



You think the Muslims won't avenge the deaths of millions of their brethren with a nuclear strike on Israel?

You're more insane than I thought.


----------



## Kondor3

Hoffstra said:


> Kondor3 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Ahhhh, and now we begin the long slide down the slippery slope of ad hominem attack...
> 
> Repeated baiting noted... bait not taken.
> 
> Now, as to Pakistan...
> 
> Pakistan is a long way from Israel.
> 
> For the most part, the Pakistanis are a sane, rational, pragmatic people.
> 
> Israel has a much larger nuclear arsenal than does Pakistan.
> 
> Israel's delivery systems are superior to those of Pakistan.
> 
> The Pakistanis cannot afford to expend part of their nuclear munitions and lose ground vis a vis India.
> 
> Pakistan will not risk an un-winnable nuclear war with the United States by attacking Israel.
> 
> Nobody is 'going nuclear' to avenge a couple of million pain-in-the-ass Palestinians who have overplayed their hand and gotten themselves kicked out for good.
> 
> Not gonna happen.
> 
> Next slide, please.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You think the Muslims won't avenge the deaths of millions of their brethren with a nuclear strike on Israel?
> 
> You're more insane than I thought.
Click to expand...


If the Israelis ever *DO* resort to Evicting and Expelling the Palestinians, whatever makes you think that there will be millions of Palestinian dead?

If it comes to that, it will be a couple of thousand dead Hamas and Hezbollah, some collateral civilian casualties, and millions of survivors, most likely a 99-point-something-percent survival rate - packed-up, paid-off, and packed-off to distant lands, to begin new lives elsewhere.

Every people under siege (most recently, the Berliners) claim that every man, woman and child - in their millions - will be on the barricades to stand against The Enemy, and bravely go down fighting.

In the case of the Palestinians and Hamas - in truth, very few would probably die - a few thousand irregulars here-and-there, quickly and easily overwhelmed once the gloves come off and the IDF is no longer operating under restrictions - but many fighters would end-up surrendering, and the vast majority of the civilian population would come out of that shaken and scared but very much alive.

There would be no 'millions of Muslim dead' to avenge.

You speak very bravely - like most young Berliners probably did in April 1945 - but, in the end, after starting-out bravely and strong, the Berliners sputtered out quickly (_in a fortnight or so_) and, in the case of the Palestinians, they are far worse armed - vis a vis the IDF - than the remnants of the Werhmacht and Volkssturm militia were, in going up against the might of the Red Army... Hamas would not get kill-ratios anywhere near those achieved by Berliners towards the end of that older conflict.

No... if it comes to that, we are talking about Moving Day in the Wild West, accompanied by some considerable gun-play, rather than Armageddon; brave words notwithstanding.

Oh, and, to directly answer your question.

No - I do *NOT* believe that the Muslims would 'go nuclear' against Israel under any circumstance other than to repel invasion of their own national soil.

Not unless they want Israel to turn their cities into sheets of glass.

The Palestinians simply do not mean *THAT* much to *ANY* Muslim-Arab country with even _marginally_ sane leadership, such as that abortion of an Islamic theocracy that we call 'Iran'.

There is no Arab Cavalry coming over the hill to the rescue, if it ever comes to that.

But here we are, repeating ourselves again, with variations.

How boring.


----------



## RoccoR

Kondor3,  _et al,_

Even if talks fail, there are still options.



Kondor3 said:


> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> 
> Hoffstra,  _et al,_
> 
> This is because there is no such plan or program for "ethnic cleansing."  There is no reason to believe that Israel is contemplating any such thing.  It is out of the question.
> 
> 
> 
> Hoffstra said:
> 
> 
> 
> Sickening how Jews, descendents of Holocaust victims and survivors, can actually contemplate committing ethnic cleansing against millions of people.
> 
> 
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> Without regard to the outcome of the Talks.
> 
> Most Respectfully,
> R
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> At Hoffstra: Who says the descendants of Holocaust victims are planning to Evict and Expel the Palestinians? Yet.
> 
> At Rocco: I agree, either that no such plan exists, *or* that it is not yet been pulled from the archives, dusted-off, and re-examined.
> 
> At Rocco: I'm sure that any Draconian Action that we might ever see out of the Israelis would, indeed, be contingent upon the failure of the latest round of talks.
> 
> At Rocco: What happens if the latest round of talks *DO* fail, and the Israelis keep taking rocket-hits against their population centers?
Click to expand...

*(COMMENT)*

Currently, the State of Palestine (SoP), the remainder of the former Mandate of Palestine, is remaining solvent by virtue of the US and other contributors to the cause.



			
				Elliot Abrams said:
			
		

> Abrams believes that the very idea Eide expressed, that the aid to the Palestinians may be halted if progress is not made on the diplomatic front, is counterproductive and dangerous. Abrams believes that the funding of state-building is more important than leaping to final status agreements. He also believes that the international community has not met the challenge of providing adequate political and financial support for state-building.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Norwegian Ministry of Foreign Affairs said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Norway is disbursing the whole amount of its budget support to Palestine for 2013 now because Palestinian public sector employees urgently need to be paid again, said Minister of Foreign Affairs Espen Barth Eide. Norways support is helping to provide education, health services and security to the Palestinian people.
> 
> The budget support provided by Norway, which amounts to USD 43 million, will be used to build and run public institutions in Palestine. These funds are channelled through the World Bank, which ensures that they are used in accordance with the Palestinians own development and reform plans, as well as the World Banks strict requirements.
> 
> Norway chairs the Ad Hoc Liaison Committee (AHLC), which brings together the main donors and coordinates support to the Palestinian Authority. The AHLC will meet again in the middle of March to discuss the financial difficulties that the Palestinians are facing. Donors, the Palestinians and the Israelis must cooperate on effective measures.
> 
> Palestine cannot remain dependent on support from donors for ever. However, a sustainable Palestinian economy cannot be achieved unless progress is made in the political negotiations on ending the occupation and unless the Palestinians gain control of their own resources.
> 
> The current crisis means that it is particularly important that all donors provide substantial contributions in 2013, and I urge all donors to disburse their budget support as early in the year as possible, said Mr Eide.
> 
> _*SOURCE:*_ Norwegian Ministry of Foreign Affairs
> 
> 
> 
> _*SOURCE:*_ Corruption and The Debate Over Funding the Palestinian Authority
Click to expand...


There are (sort of) two lines of thought expressed here.


The first is that the International Community cannot afford to allow the SoP to monetarily collapse, no matter the outcome of the current Peace Talks _[which I discussed in the Post #130 (and others) on the need for a Comprehensive Agreement]_.
The second thought here is a bit tilted in Israeli favor.  It suggests that if the SoP does not cooperate in the successful accomplishment of a Comprehensive Peace Agreement, that it will have an adverse impact on future international funding to keep the SoP solvent and operating.
_*Personal Note**:*  To suggest that Palestine will face adverse monetary funding consequences should Peace Talks fail will be viewed in the Middle East as coercion.  This is the "counterproductive and dangerous" part that Elliot Abrams was addressing._​
The international community (in the eyes of the Arabs) caused the problem; and it will be up to the international community to pick-up the pieces and rebuild SoP to 21st Century Standards.  It will require a comprehensive nation building program with a US hands-off component to it.  Israel will have to withdraw from the occupied territories and establish viable relocations communities for the displaced.  In the mean time, in SoP, a new housing and resource management system will be needed to accommodate refugees.  The international community will have to initiate a nation building program the likes of has not been seen since Dubai.  

The solution is not totally dependent on the outcome of the talks.

Most Respectfully,
R


----------



## Bloodrock44

Over 1300 responses and you haven't settled this yet? OK, I'm going to settle it once and for all. The answer is no, Israel is not the same as South Africa. Two different countries with two different cultures. And Georgie hasn't been to either country where he form an opinion. And Stormfront is not a good reference. Case closed. Now move on with your lives. Nothing to see here.


----------



## georgephillip

Bloodrock44 said:


> Over 1300 responses and you haven't settled this yet? OK, I'm going to settle it once and for all. The answer is no, Israel is not the same as South Africa. Two different countries with two different cultures. And Georgie hasn't been to either country where he form an opinion. And Stormfront is not a good reference. Case closed. Now move on with your lives. Nothing to see here.


*Back to Square One, are we?*

"The question is not 'Is Israel the same as South Africa?'
*It is 'do Israel's actions meet the international definition of what apartheid is?'*

The crime of apartheid is defined by the 2002 Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court as inhumane acts of a character similar to other crimes against humanity 'committed in the context of an institutionalized regime of systematic oppression and domination by one racial group over any other racial group or groups and committed with the intention of maintaining that regime.'"

Is Israel an Apartheid State?

*The last time we were at this point the definition of the term "race" helped obfuscate the facts on the ground in Palestine. Let's assume the haters on both sides, Jew and Arab, are (mistakenly) applying the term "race" to the source of their hatred and ask if Jews have "institutionalized (a) regime of systematic oppression and domination over the Arabs of Palestine?*


----------



## P F Tinmore

RoccoR said:


> P F Tinmore,  _et al,_
> 
> Paul, let's be _(at least a little bit)_ honest here.
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> One thing that is consistent among Israel supporters. *They refuse to learn anything.*
> 
> 
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> I think that a vast majority of your commentary and opinions are read here.  I believe that a vast majority of sherrimunnerlyn's _(where ever she has gone)_ commentaries and opinions were read here.  In fact, I think that nearly every anti-Israel _(or pro-Palestinian)_ commentary is given credit where credit is due.
> 
> Just as neither side of the Arab-Israeli conflict is perfectly correct in everything they have done, --- so it is with the discussion here --- and the presentations.
> 
> Learning is as much dependent on the presentation of the facts as it is in the expression of confidence in the material presented. *(1) When that material is tainted, it has an impact on future presentations and the confidence that it holds.  And I will be honest, in that I often try not to let the pro-Palestinian propaganda you often present taint the salient facts you present later; *but, it is hard. * (2)AND, I often find it difficult to work through the frivolous points you make (like on the Map issue and borders/boundaries); that sidetrack the discussion.*
Click to expand...


(1) Do you have some examples? I don't know what you mean.

(2) These are not frivolous points at all. *These are the root of the conflict.*

Israel says that Israel is Israel and the Palestinians attack Israel because they "hate Jews." Therefore all Israeli attacks on the Palestinians are self defense. This is the currently popular narrative.

The Palestinians say that Israel is Israeli occupied Palestine and they have the right to attack and defend themselves from the occupation. Everything I have found shows that the Palestinians are correct.

If Israel is correct, the present narrative is true.

If the Palestinians are correct, the present narrative is a lie.



> The suggestion that _(in general)_ the pro-Israel component of the discussion "refuse to learn" is simply inaccurate.  When you mix some minor fact with some significant propaganda - the impact of the propaganda tends to overshadow the relevant fact you present.  Don't mix the two _(propaganda and fact)_.  We are all quite capable of "learning" and are quite interested in what you have to say, if you would just present the facts or point of discussion in a logical order and a coherent way.



This was a reference to a particular incident. I stated that the native Palestinian Jews were opposed to a Jewish state. I was asked to prove my point.

I posted a quote from Rabbi Yosef Tzvi Dushinsky, Chief Rabbi of Jerusalem (1867-1948).

I was criticized for not posting a reliable source.

So I posted a youtube of some orthodox Jews discussing the issue. He refused to view the video. Thus my response.

It is common to somehow blow off any information posted.



> Finally, don't confuse analysis and disagreement with a "refuse to learn" mind set.  I have learned that the pro-Palestinian movement has elements within it that firmly believe that Palestine was sovereign to the Arab Palestinian; with some thinking it happened at the fall of the Ottoman Empire, and with some that believe it was sovereign with the end of the British Mandate.  Yes, I have learned this.  But I don't agree with either version.  And that is not the same thing as "refuse to learn."
> 
> I recommend that you reassess that perception of your opinion _(refuse to learn)_.  I also recommend that you adjust your dependence on the use of inflammatory language (apartheid, racism, nazi, etc) as it changes the confidence interval in the presentation of your commentary and opinion.  As an example, when I use the words "insurgent" or "terrorism" --- I use them based on the basis that either the organization, event or action fits a definition or description in a professional guide, manual, publication, law, etc, and not some layman's dictionary.  I don't hunt for a specific interpretation that I can cherry-pick to fit the argument.  Since you were in South Africa in the pre-Mandela era, you know very damn well that "apartheid" was something totally different from the conditions and relations that exist between the non-Israel and Israel.  So, when we talk about "learning" --- let's apply it equally to both sides.



First off, I don't use the term Nazi.

How about all that Israeli name calling?



> Just My Opinion, Very Respectfully,
> R


----------



## Hossfly

P F Tinmore said:


> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore,  _et al,_
> 
> Paul, let's be _(at least a little bit)_ honest here.
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> One thing that is consistent among Israel supporters. *They refuse to learn anything.*
> 
> 
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> I think that a vast majority of your commentary and opinions are read here.  I believe that a vast majority of sherrimunnerlyn's _(where ever she has gone)_ commentaries and opinions were read here.  In fact, I think that nearly every anti-Israel _(or pro-Palestinian)_ commentary is given credit where credit is due.
> 
> Just as neither side of the Arab-Israeli conflict is perfectly correct in everything they have done, --- so it is with the discussion here --- and the presentations.
> 
> Learning is as much dependent on the presentation of the facts as it is in the expression of confidence in the material presented. *(1) When that material is tainted, it has an impact on future presentations and the confidence that it holds.  And I will be honest, in that I often try not to let the pro-Palestinian propaganda you often present taint the salient facts you present later; *but, it is hard. * (2)AND, I often find it difficult to work through the frivolous points you make (like on the Map issue and borders/boundaries); that sidetrack the discussion.*
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> (1) Do you have some examples? I don't know what you mean.
> 
> (2) These are not frivolous points at all. *These are the root of the conflict.*
> 
> Israel says that Israel is Israel and the Palestinians attack Israel because they "hate Jews." Therefore all Israeli attacks on the Palestinians are self defense. This is the currently popular narrative.
> 
> The Palestinians say that Israel is Israeli occupied Palestine and they have the right to attack and defend themselves from the occupation. Everything I have found shows that the Palestinians are correct.
> 
> If Israel is correct, the present narrative is true.
> 
> If the Palestinians are correct, the present narrative is a lie.
> 
> 
> 
> This was a reference to a particular incident. I stated that the native Palestinian Jews were opposed to a Jewish state. I was asked to prove my point.
> 
> I posted a quote from Rabbi Yosef Tzvi Dushinsky, Chief Rabbi of Jerusalem (1867-1948).
> 
> I was criticized for not posting a reliable source.
> 
> So I posted a youtube of some orthodox Jews discussing the issue. He refused to view the video. Thus my response.
> 
> It is common to somehow blow off any information posted.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Finally, don't confuse analysis and disagreement with a "refuse to learn" mind set.  I have learned that the pro-Palestinian movement has elements within it that firmly believe that Palestine was sovereign to the Arab Palestinian; with some thinking it happened at the fall of the Ottoman Empire, and with some that believe it was sovereign with the end of the British Mandate.  Yes, I have learned this.  But I don't agree with either version.  And that is not the same thing as "refuse to learn."
> 
> I recommend that you reassess that perception of your opinion _(refuse to learn)_.  I also recommend that you adjust your dependence on the use of inflammatory language (apartheid, racism, nazi, etc) as it changes the confidence interval in the presentation of your commentary and opinion.  As an example, when I use the words "insurgent" or "terrorism" --- I use them based on the basis that either the organization, event or action fits a definition or description in a professional guide, manual, publication, law, etc, and not some layman's dictionary.  I don't hunt for a specific interpretation that I can cherry-pick to fit the argument.  Since you were in South Africa in the pre-Mandela era, you know very damn well that "apartheid" was something totally different from the conditions and relations that exist between the non-Israel and Israel.  So, when we talk about "learning" --- let's apply it equally to both sides.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> First off, I don't use the term Nazi.
> 
> How about all that Israeli name calling?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Just My Opinion, Very Respectfully,
> R
> 
> Click to expand...
Click to expand...

The lady doth protest too much, methinks


----------



## Kondor3

theliq said:


> Kondor3 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> theliq said:
> 
> 
> 
> "..._your violent Dogma._"
> 
> 
> 
> I spout no dogma.
> 
> I show you one likely future.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Yeah only your own....this in itself bars you from any input. Disqualified by your own mouth
Click to expand...


You may continue to delude yourself that draconian action like that (Eviction and Expulsion) has not been seriously considered in times past, or that the Israeli government and general staff do not have operational plans to undertake such a sweeping action, or that they will hesitate to pull-up those plans from the archives and dust them off and look at them again, should they feel sufficiently motivated or sufficiently threatened in order to do so.

Many of us - good people, all - cannot bring themselves to believe that forcible en masse eviction and deportation is possible, and, based on past history, I really cannot blame anyone for continuing to hold to such mainstream perceptions. I really cannot.

But we, in the comfort of our armchairs here in the US, cannot possibly appreciate what it is like to be under rocket-attack day-in, day-out, for years-on-end, with a viscerally and mortally hostile population within easy grocery-store-run driving distance of our homes, ready to kill us, our children and grandchildren any time we are foolish enough to wander within their reach.

The Palestinians have sworn to destroy Israel and to drown the Jews in the sea and to establish Palestine 'from river to sea' in the process.

Even a two-state solution is merely a stopping-point along the way to this ultimate goal.

Settle for a two-state solution today and you give the Palestinians a larger and seemingly more legitimate platform from which to build military strength and to launch Stage II of their long-term multi-generational agenda, later; genocide, disguised as legitimate warfare between nations.

To allow this would be suicidal madness on the part of Israel; strategically speaking.

Better to eliminate the threat, than to appease and grant concessions that will only be turned against Israel within a decade or two, or a generation at best.

The Muslim-Arab neighbors of Israel have never been weaker than they are now, in the entire 65-year-long history of the State of Israel.

There is nobody in the region capable of standing against them on the battlefield in order to stop them from Evicting and Expelling the Palestinians, should they choose to do so.

Nobody.

Consquently, I see the danger to the Palestinians as far greater at this moment in time - when their traditional rescue-neighbors are at their weakest - than ever before since 1948.

And, frankly, and despite the beliefs of several good and intelligent folk wandering about this and similar threads, I do not believe that the so-called International Community will do anything effective to either stop nor reverse any such en masse population shift.

Especially in light of Israel's formidable nuclear arsenal.

The US will provide political cover at the UN Security Council until it is too late to have any negative effect, and then, for showmanship's sake, pretend a more disapproving stance, once we are approaching the status of fait accompli.

From the Israeli perspective, Evict-and-Expel is the only logical thing to do, looking at the Big Picture, and thinking in multi-generational terms.

A two-state solution is both a dead-end and slow suicide for Israel, as the Palestinians would use their New Country as a staging area for building-up their own and 'allied' military assets  for a Death Blow Strke against Israel.

The Israelis cannot tolerate this hostile presence amongst them for much longer without overreacting and going-in and slaughtering the lot; better to kick 'em out than to kill 'em.

The English expelled the Jews, in medieval times.

The French expelled the Jews, in medieval times.

The Germans expelled the Jews, in medieval times.

The Spaniards expelled the Jews, in Renaissance times.

The Russians expelled the Jews, locally and regionally, repeatedly, in the past two centuries.

The Arabs expelled the Jews from many Muslim countries in the 1948-1970 timeframe.

So, for once, the Jews might end-up expelling others, if conditions remain unchanged.

Given that the Poles and Czechs and Indians and Pakistanis and Arabs have all expelled 'undesirable' populations en masse within living memory, this remains a distinct possibility.

If the Jews reach this point, the rest of the world will squawk and piss and moan, and there will be boycotts and sanctions and such, and a few folks will rattle sabers, but, as it becomes clear that this was a population shift rather than a slaughtering of innocents, passions will quickly cool - a brief period of wrist-slapping (_small price to pay for eliminating such mortal danger and achieving Eretz Yisrael in its entirety_) - and then the world will begin to forget - with much of the rest of the world breathing a sigh of relief that the long, pain-in-the-ass squabble over a tiny sliver of Middle East land, is finally over, as Jordan and Lebanon and Syria successfully assimilate their newly-arrived ethnic brethren and co-religionists, aided by Israel itself, and the international community.

This is not fantasy nor delusion nor sickness nor right nor wrong.

This is merely cold, calculating, dispassionate, logical speculation, based upon conditions as they now present themselves to us, and others, as they are likely to play-out.

Your Palestinian buddies had better pray to Allah that I'm wrong, and they had better get their heads out of their asses, and make-nice at the negotiating table this time.

I think that this is probably going to be their very last chance at the table.

If they screw-the-pooch on this one, I don't think there will be any more do-overs on the horizon.

It's entirely possible that I am dead-wrong about this possibility - and if I am, that's fine - I have no stake in this - but I, for one, see this as a distinct possibility, at this moment in history.

Conditions have never been more favorable for Israel to undertake radical action should this latest round of talks fail.

There is nobody in the region capable of stopping them.

There is no Arab Cavalry coming over the hill to rescue the Palestinians any longer.

Do not miss your last Window of Opportunty, lest you prompt the Israelis to use their own historic Window of Opportunity to their fullest advantage, in order to rid themselves of a mortal threat on their doorstep.

Meanwhile... you keep telling us how 'impossible' and 'crazy' and asinine such a suggestion is... and I'll keep telling us how wrong you are, and why.

But only if pushed...

I've already gone through my speculative exercise, introduced the concept, played Devil's Advocate in making a case for it, supplied compelling supporting logic... and feel no particular need to repeat myself endlessly, beating something into the ground again and again and again ad infinitum ad nauseum, like one or two of the folk around these parts.


----------



## MHunterB

What a pity, Steve, that you feel so entitled to ignore Jewish self-determination and are busily making up 'definitions' of Zionism to suit your evident need to make ridiculous and scurrilous attacks upon anyone who does not attack Israel.

Since I'm also a Zionist, every word you've attacked Kondor and Hoss wth, you've attacked me as well.  Not only that, but several hundred of my closest friends and family - to include my son, my sister AND my 88 year old mother.

And it's all based on propaganda and lies:  that's the worst of it.

Speaking of 'cowards', Steve - It takes a really lowlife sleaze to accuse an 88 year old lady of 'supporting Zionist terrorism' because she's a member of Hadassah.


----------



## Hossfly

Give it a rest, Little Stevie, get off your high horse and go back pacing the floors of you know where -- and stop reading the hate sites for their version of Edwin Black's "The Transfer."  By the way, do they happen to have an Australian version of Hava Nagila?

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2WF6irnzAiI&feature=youtube_gdata_player]Hava Nagila Texas Style - YouTube[/ame]


----------



## Hossfly

theliq said:


> Hossfly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Kondor3 said:
> 
> 
> 
> A shit? Really? Did I do you an injury in a previous life or something, Junior?
> 
> Then again, I *DO* speculate upon (_and sometimes advocate for_) positions that run counter to your own, and I seem to do it much better than you.
> 
> So, I understand your frustration, and your resorting to grade-school -caliber juvenile tactics and name-calling, as a Hail Mary play.
> 
> Sandlot stuff, boy... standlot stuff... and most of your colleagues who deal regularly in such matters earned their varsity letters long before you.
> 
> You may be in over your head.
> 
> But *DO* keep trying... you may get lucky one of these days, and, of course, Allah loves try-ers, too!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P.S. - I greatly enjoyed your seeming drunken rant about Zionism - plenty of things in there to chuckle-over, and I needed a good laugh right about then.
> 
> 
> 
> Looks like Stevie has read about Edwin Black's book The Transfer on one of the hate sites, Kondor.  Meanwhile, Stevie, of course, never talks about the Muslim terrorists who have murdered millions and millions of innocent people.  Why should he?  The Jews are not involved.  You have to laugh at him when he spits out "Zionists" as if it was a dirty name.
> 
> Edwin Black probably knows how his book is being used on the hate sites, trying to make it seem like the Zionists were palsy walsy with the Nazis for some nefarious purpose.   However........
> Edwin Black: 25th Anniversary of Transfer Agreement Pt. 1 - YouTube
> 
> Feb 15, 2010 ... In an interview for Book TV, investigattive journalist Edwin Black talks about his
> extraordinary book, "Transfer Agreement" and its 25th ...
> [ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Rk24LXer8kw]Edwin Black: 25th Anniversary of Transfer Agreement Pt. 1 - YouTube[/ame] - 99k
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> See Hoss,I can disscuss Moslem,Christian,Hindo.etc., Terrorism Anytime and would be in much or Total Agreement.
> 
> But this Discussion is reserved for the ZIONISTS,THEIR TERRORISM AND THE RESPONSIBILITY FOR THE MILLIONS OF DEATHS OF JEWS AND PALESTINIANS
Click to expand...

Why, Little Stevie, with all the different forums on the USMessageBoard covering many areas of the world, I haven't seen you condemning the terrorists in Africa, the Middle East, and Southeast Asia.  You really are not kidding anyone.  By the way, Edwin Black is really so tired of seeing his book discussed on the NeoNazi/Islamofascist hate sites and wishes they would talk about this instead.
http://tundratabloids.com/2011/01/e...ts-of-hte-arab-naxi-alliance-during-wwii.html


----------



## georgephillip

"Zionist factions competed for the honor of allying to Hitler. By 1940-41, the Stern Gang, among them Yitzhak Shamir, later Prime Minister of Israel, presented the Nazis with the 'Fundamental Features of the Proposal of the National Military Organization in Palestine (Irgun Zvai Leumi) Concerning the Solution of the Jewish Question in Europe and *the Participation of the NMO in the War on the Side of Germany.*'

"Avraham Stern and his followers announced that

'The NMO, which is well-acquainted with the goodwill of the German Reich government and its authorities towards Zionist activity inside Germany and towards Zionist emigration plans, is of the opinion that:

"'1. Common interests could exist between the establishment of a new order in Europe in conformity with the German concept, and the true national aspirations of the Jewish people as they are embodied by the NMO.

"'2. Cooperation between the new Germany and a renewed folkish-national Hebraium would be possible and,

"'3. *The establishment of the historic Jewish state on a national and totalitarian basis, bound by a treaty with the German Reich, would be in the interest of a maintained and strengthened future German position of power in the Near East.Proceeding from these considerations, the NMO in Palestine, under the condition the above-mentioned national aspirations of the Israeli freedom movement are recognized on the side of the German Reich, offers to actively take part in the war on Germanys side.*'

"They hanged people all over Europe after WW II for notes to the Nazis like these. But these treasons against the Jews were virtually unknown in the run up to the creation of the Zionist state in May 1948..."

51 Documents » CounterPunch: Tells the Facts, Names the Names


----------



## Sweet_Caroline




----------



## Intense

*Reminder.... This is a Zone 2 Posting Forum.... Lighten up.*


----------



## MHunterB

Oh, Georgie!  You are soo! silly.

Everyone here knows that you are a true Communist.   And so of course you are going to accuse everyone you wish to hate of being 'Nazi' supporters or sympathizers or collaborators.

Even as you prattle on about "pacifism".  

LMAO.

The rest of us know and understand that ultimately, as a response to a virulent 'ideology' - like Naziism, Communism, or 'Islamism', or any other such (which Zionism in mainstream is absolutely NOT!) - the "pacifism" is simply agreeing to be murdered.

I love it when the Commie scum 'counsel' everyone that 'pacifism' is what's needed:  Sure, the Communists fought against the Nazis quite ferociously.  And whenever captured, they made sure to rat out all their fellow 'partizans' who were NOT sufficiently Marxist......  LMAO!   There's a well-documented pattern from France and everywhere else in Europe of exactly that behavior ......  the Marxists were *using* the Nazis to make their take-over of European nations easier, and France was actually the exception.

By Georgie's "logic", as a Communist, he should stand condemned of every death and misery associated with 'the Great Leap Forward' , as well as the killing fields of Cambodia.


----------



## georgephillip

MHunterB said:


> Oh, Georgie!  You are soo! silly.
> 
> Everyone here knows that you are a true Communist.   And so of course you are going to accuse everyone you wish to hate of being 'Nazi' supporters or sympathizers or collaborators.
> 
> Even as you prattle on about "pacifism".
> 
> LMAO.
> 
> The rest of us know and understand that ultimately, as a response to a virulent 'ideology' - like Naziism, Communism, or 'Islamism', or any other such (which Zionism in mainstream is absolutely NOT!) - the "pacifism" is simply agreeing to be murdered.
> 
> I love it when the Commie scum 'counsel' everyone that 'pacifism' is what's needed:  Sure, the Communists fought against the Nazis quite ferociously.  And whenever captured, they made sure to rat out all their fellow 'partizans' who were NOT sufficiently Marxist......  LMAO!   There's a well-documented pattern from France and everywhere else in Europe of exactly that behavior ......  the Marxists were *using* the Nazis to make their take-over of European nations easier, and France was actually the exception.
> 
> By Georgie's "logic", as a Communist, he should stand condemned of every death and misery associated with 'the Great Leap Forward' , as well as the killing fields of Cambodia.


Tell us what your non-virulent ideology was trying to tell Hitler about the "assimilationist trend" and the difficulty that presented to the "Jewish condition" in 1933?

"*Zionism convicts itself. On June 21, 1933, the German Zionist Federation sent a secret memorandum to the Nazis:

Zionism has no illusions about the difficulty of the Jewish condition, which consists above all in an abnormal occupational pattern and in the fault of an intellectual and moral posture not rooted in ones own tradition. Zionism recognized decades ago that as a result of the assimilationist trend, symptoms of deterioration were bound to appear, which it seeks to overcome by carrying out its challenge to transform Jewish life completely."*

51 Documents » CounterPunch: Tells the Facts, Names the Names


----------



## Kondor3

georgephillip said:


> ..._On June 21, 1933, the German Zionist Federation sent a secret memorandum to the Nazis_..."


Did the thought ever once enter your mind that various Jewish organizations (including the Federation) were probably scared shit-less by the Nazis' rise to power, and that the Jews were telling the Nazis whatever-the-hell they wanted to hear, to keep the emmigration pipeline to Palestine open for as long as humanly possible, using every trick in the book that they could think of, to delay the Nazis turning off the faucet?


----------



## RoccoR

georgephillip,  _et al,_

What "exactly" does this means.



georgephillip said:


> MHunterB said:
> 
> 
> 
> Oh, Georgie!  You are soo! silly.
> 
> Everyone here knows that you are a true Communist.   And so of course you are going to accuse everyone you wish to hate of being 'Nazi' supporters or sympathizers or collaborators.
> 
> Even as you prattle on about "pacifism".
> 
> LMAO.
> 
> The rest of us know and understand that ultimately, as a response to a virulent 'ideology' - like Naziism, Communism, or 'Islamism', or any other such (which Zionism in mainstream is absolutely NOT!) - the "pacifism" is simply agreeing to be murdered.
> 
> I love it when the Commie scum 'counsel' everyone that 'pacifism' is what's needed:  Sure, the Communists fought against the Nazis quite ferociously.  And whenever captured, they made sure to rat out all their fellow 'partizans' who were NOT sufficiently Marxist......  LMAO!   There's a well-documented pattern from France and everywhere else in Europe of exactly that behavior ......  the Marxists were *using* the Nazis to make their take-over of European nations easier, and France was actually the exception.
> 
> By Georgie's "logic", as a Communist, he should stand condemned of every death and misery associated with 'the Great Leap Forward' , as well as the killing fields of Cambodia.
> 
> 
> 
> Tell us what your non-virulent ideology was trying to tell Hitler about the "assimilationist trend" and the difficulty that presented to the "Jewish condition" in 1933?
> 
> "*Zionism convicts itself. On June 21, 1933, the German Zionist Federation sent a secret memorandum to the Nazis:
> 
> Zionism has no illusions about the difficulty of the Jewish condition, which consists above all in an abnormal occupational pattern and in the fault of an intellectual and moral posture not rooted in ones own tradition. Zionism recognized decades ago that as a result of the assimilationist trend, symptoms of deterioration were bound to appear, which it seeks to overcome by carrying out its challenge to transform Jewish life completely."*
> 
> 51 Documents » CounterPunch: Tells the Facts, Names the Names
Click to expand...

*(QUESTIONS)*

How is this some sort of confession or conviction?

the difficulty of the Jewish condition
abnormal occupational pattern
the fault of an intellectual and moral posture not rooted in ones own tradition
result of the assimilationist trend, symptoms of deterioration were bound to appear
challenge to transform Jewish life completely
How is any of this harmful?

Most Respectfully,
R


----------



## ForeverYoung436

Kondor3 said:


> georgephillip said:
> 
> 
> 
> ..._On June 21, 1933, the German Zionist Federation sent a secret memorandum to the Nazis_..."
> 
> 
> 
> Did the thought ever once enter your mind that various Jewish organizations (including the Federation) were probably scared shit-less by the Nazis' rise to power, and that the Jews were telling the Nazis whatever-the-hell they wanted to hear, to keep the emmigration pipeline to Palestine open for as long as humanly possible, using every trick in the book that they could think of, to delay the Nazis turning off the faucet?
Click to expand...


If those letters are authentic, they make my blood run cold.  However, Kondor's theory sounds correct.


----------



## georgephillip

Kondor3 said:


> georgephillip said:
> 
> 
> 
> ..._On June 21, 1933, the German Zionist Federation sent a secret memorandum to the Nazis_..."
> 
> 
> 
> Did the thought ever once enter your mind that various Jewish organizations (including the Federation) were probably scared shit-less by the Nazis' rise to power, and that the Jews were telling the Nazis whatever-the-hell they wanted to hear, to keep the emmigration pipeline to Palestine open for as long as humanly possible, using every trick in the book that they could think of, to delay the Nazis turning off the faucet?
Click to expand...

What are your "thoughts" on the similarities between National Socialism, Zionism and totalitarianism? 

*"Avraham Stern and his followers announced that..."

"The establishment of the historic Jewish state on a national and totalitarian basis, bound by a treaty with the German Reich, would be in the interest of a maintained and strengthened future German position of power in the Near East."*

//www.counterpunch.org/2002/12/23/51-documents/

Those who offered to collaborate with the agents of the Holocaust by killing British troops in Palestine kept the showers on in Auschwitz.


----------



## georgephillip

RoccoR said:


> georgephillip,  _et al,_
> 
> What "exactly" does this means.
> 
> 
> 
> georgephillip said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> MHunterB said:
> 
> 
> 
> Oh, Georgie!  You are soo! silly.
> 
> Everyone here knows that you are a true Communist.   And so of course you are going to accuse everyone you wish to hate of being 'Nazi' supporters or sympathizers or collaborators.
> 
> Even as you prattle on about "pacifism".
> 
> LMAO.
> 
> The rest of us know and understand that ultimately, as a response to a virulent 'ideology' - like Naziism, Communism, or 'Islamism', or any other such (which Zionism in mainstream is absolutely NOT!) - the "pacifism" is simply agreeing to be murdered.
> 
> I love it when the Commie scum 'counsel' everyone that 'pacifism' is what's needed:  Sure, the Communists fought against the Nazis quite ferociously.  And whenever captured, they made sure to rat out all their fellow 'partizans' who were NOT sufficiently Marxist......  LMAO!   There's a well-documented pattern from France and everywhere else in Europe of exactly that behavior ......  the Marxists were *using* the Nazis to make their take-over of European nations easier, and France was actually the exception.
> 
> By Georgie's "logic", as a Communist, he should stand condemned of every death and misery associated with 'the Great Leap Forward' , as well as the killing fields of Cambodia.
> 
> 
> 
> Tell us what your non-virulent ideology was trying to tell Hitler about the "assimilationist trend" and the difficulty that presented to the "Jewish condition" in 1933?
> 
> "*Zionism convicts itself. On June 21, 1933, the German Zionist Federation sent a secret memorandum to the Nazis:
> 
> Zionism has no illusions about the difficulty of the Jewish condition, which consists above all in an abnormal occupational pattern and in the fault of an intellectual and moral posture not rooted in ones own tradition. Zionism recognized decades ago that as a result of the assimilationist trend, symptoms of deterioration were bound to appear, which it seeks to overcome by carrying out its challenge to transform Jewish life completely."*
> 
> 51 Documents » CounterPunch: Tells the Facts, Names the Names
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> *(QUESTIONS)*
> 
> How is this some sort of confession or conviction?
> 
> the difficulty of the Jewish condition
> abnormal occupational pattern
> the fault of an intellectual and moral posture not rooted in ones own tradition
> result of the assimilationist trend, symptoms of deterioration were bound to appear
> challenge to transform Jewish life completely
> How is any of this harmful?
> 
> Most Respectfully,
> R
Click to expand...

*Equating an assimilationist trend with symptoms of deterioration and a faulty moral posture sounds like racist Jews making an appeal to equally racist Aryans. I would say the harm of this kind of ethnic arrogance by a relative small number of psychotic Jews explains why over thousands of years in dozens of states millions of innocent  Jews have been maimed, murdered, and displaced by pyschotic killers like Hitler.*


----------



## georgephillip

ForeverYoung436 said:


> Kondor3 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> georgephillip said:
> 
> 
> 
> ..._On June 21, 1933, the German Zionist Federation sent a secret memorandum to the Nazis_..."
> 
> 
> 
> Did the thought ever once enter your mind that various Jewish organizations (including the Federation) were probably scared shit-less by the Nazis' rise to power, and that the Jews were telling the Nazis whatever-the-hell they wanted to hear, to keep the emmigration pipeline to Palestine open for as long as humanly possible, using every trick in the book that they could think of, to delay the Nazis turning off the faucet?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> If those letters are authentic, they make my blood run cold.  However, Kondor's theory sounds correct.
Click to expand...

*"In January 1941*, Stern attempted to make an agreement with the German Nazi authorities, offering to '*actively take part in the war on Germany's side*' in return for German support for Jewish immigration to Palestine and the establishment of a Jewish state. 

"Another attempt to contact the Germans was made in late 1941, but there is no record of a German response in either case.[12] 

"These appeals to Germany were in direct opposition to the views of other Zionists, such as Ze'ev Jabotinsky, who wanted Britain to defeat the Nazis even as they wanted to expel the British from Palestine."

Avraham Stern - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

In early 1941 the Nazis were just beginning to gain proficiency in the industrial process of mass murder as they exterminated hundreds of thousands of Jews and others in their sweep across Russia.

It's possible that Stern would not have made his offer a year later when the SS began implementing Hitler's Final Solution in his homeland, Poland.


----------



## Kondor3

georgephillip said:


> ForeverYoung436 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Kondor3 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Did the thought ever once enter your mind that various Jewish organizations (including the Federation) were probably scared shit-less by the Nazis' rise to power, and that the Jews were telling the Nazis whatever-the-hell they wanted to hear, to keep the emmigration pipeline to Palestine open for as long as humanly possible, using every trick in the book that they could think of, to delay the Nazis turning off the faucet?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> If those letters are authentic, they make my blood run cold.  However, Kondor's theory sounds correct.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> *"In January 1941*, Stern attempted to make an agreement with the German Nazi authorities, offering to '*actively take part in the war on Germany's side*' in return for German support for Jewish immigration to Palestine and the establishment of a Jewish state.
> 
> "Another attempt to contact the Germans was made in late 1941, but there is no record of a German response in either case.[12]
> 
> "These appeals to Germany were in direct opposition to the views of other Zionists, such as Ze'ev Jabotinsky, who wanted Britain to defeat the Nazis even as they wanted to expel the British from Palestine."
> 
> Avraham Stern - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
> 
> In early 1941 the Nazis were just beginning to gain proficiency in the industrial process of mass murder as they exterminated hundreds of thousands of Jews and others in their sweep across Russia.
> 
> It's possible that Stern would not have made his offer a year later when the SS began implementing Hitler's Final Solution in his homeland, Poland.
Click to expand...


Puh-leeeeze, George...

It is quite clear that that faction of the Palestinian Jewish Activist community differed dramatically from the larger percentage of factions which continued to support the British.

And, for that smaller faction, we are looking at Jews offering to fight the British in Palestine in return for allowing the Jews to continue to emmigrate to Palestine rather than slaughtering them.

Gee... imagine that... I'll start harassing and sniping at our common enemy (Britain) here on my own home turf if you'll keep the emmigration pipeline open and let my People go.

Given that various factions of the Palestinian Jews were already trying to push the Brits out of Palestine long before WWII even began, and given that even more too to that approach after WWII ended and before their 1948 Declaration of Statehood...

Why should we be surprised that a faction of the Jews of Palestine offered to hit the Brits as best they could in exchange for the lives of their fellow Jews?

And, because that deal fell through and was exposed, that faction took some considerable Public Relations hits in the months and years go come, being pitched as disloyal, when, in truth, they were being ultimately loyal to their own co-religionists at the (offered) expense of their Mandate Occuipers.

In their shoes - in a desperate last-minute attempt to get my people the hell outta Dodge and to avoid the extermination camps - I would have made a deal with the devil himself.

Some factions amongst the Jews of Palestine believed that there was little chance of that offer succeeding and that it would be best to be seen to be on the side of the Allies rather than the side of the Axis, but it's a good bet that they had to think long and hard about not joining the Stern faction in trying to rescue as many of their people as could in any way imaginable.

I fail to see the 'dastard-liness' in their approach.


----------



## Kondor3

ForeverYoung436 said:


> "..._If those letters are authentic, they make my blood run cold. However, Kondor's theory sounds correct._"


I have done zero reading on this subject but that is the only explanation that makes sense.

It is merely a variation on the survival theme.

In their shoes, I would tell those Nazi bastards whatever-the-hell they wanted to hear, and make a deal with the Devil himself, in order to keep the Escape Hatch (_the emmigration pipeline_) open as long as humanly possible, to get as many of my People the hell outta there as possible before the Nazis slammed the hatch closed for good.

On the macro level, it's no different than other collaborations between Jews and the Nazis; each and every one of them an interim step or a survival tactic in extremis. I will not judge any such overly-harshly until I know their stories and have walked a mile in their shoes, which, please God, neither I nor anyone else, will ever be obliged to do again.

This monkey-poo-flinging of accusing Jews of collaborating with Nazis are large straw-men in nature and easily set aside as partisan ultra-spin on entirely understandable reactions to unimaginably horrific circumstances.

Another collection of dogs (_groundless accusations, out of context_) with fleas that just won't hunt.


----------



## Hossfly

georgephillip said:


> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> 
> georgephillip,  _et al,_
> 
> What "exactly" does this means.
> 
> 
> 
> georgephillip said:
> 
> 
> 
> Tell us what your non-virulent ideology was trying to tell Hitler about the "assimilationist trend" and the difficulty that presented to the "Jewish condition" in 1933?
> 
> "*Zionism convicts itself. On June 21, 1933, the German Zionist Federation sent a secret memorandum to the Nazis:
> 
> Zionism has no illusions about the difficulty of the Jewish condition, which consists above all in an abnormal occupational pattern and in the fault of an intellectual and moral posture not rooted in ones own tradition. Zionism recognized decades ago that as a result of the assimilationist trend, symptoms of deterioration were bound to appear, which it seeks to overcome by carrying out its challenge to transform Jewish life completely."*
> 
> 51 Documents » CounterPunch: Tells the Facts, Names the Names
> 
> 
> 
> *(QUESTIONS)*
> 
> How is this some sort of confession or conviction?
> 
> the difficulty of the Jewish condition
> abnormal occupational pattern
> the fault of an intellectual and moral posture not rooted in ones own tradition
> result of the assimilationist trend, symptoms of deterioration were bound to appear
> challenge to transform Jewish life completely
> How is any of this harmful?
> 
> Most Respectfully,
> R
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> *Equating an assimilationist trend with symptoms of deterioration and a faulty moral posture sounds like racist Jews making an appeal to equally racist Aryans. I would say the harm of this kind of ethnic arrogance by a relative small number of psychotic Jews explains why over thousands of years in dozens of states millions of innocent  Jews have been maimed, murdered, and displaced by pyschotic killers like Hitler.*
Click to expand...

Of course Georgie Boy doesn't think it is psychotic for Muslims in the Middle East and Africa to actually kill Blacks.  Wny should he care if the Jews are not involved?  It looks like the HNIC here doesn't realize that the Jews were used as scapegoats, the same way he uses the Jews.  Hmm, I wonder if Georgie Boy can tell us why the Muslims have murdered millions of others since Islam began.  In fact, even Georgie Boy (with all the time he spends on forums dissing the Jews and Israel as a career) would not be safe in many Muslim countries because they would have no problems doing an abd in.  And, of course, they still keep these abds as slaves in the modern world of today, but that doesn't seem to bother Georgie Boy.


----------



## Kondor3

theliq said:


> "..."_the higher the zionist climbs>>>the more he's exposed_"



Ever get the sinking feeling that you're being ignored? 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




 Have fun in here talkin' to yourself...


----------



## georgephillip

Kondor3 said:


> georgephillip said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ForeverYoung436 said:
> 
> 
> 
> If those letters are authentic, they make my blood run cold.  However, Kondor's theory sounds correct.
> 
> 
> 
> *"In January 1941*, Stern attempted to make an agreement with the German Nazi authorities, offering to '*actively take part in the war on Germany's side*' in return for German support for Jewish immigration to Palestine and the establishment of a Jewish state.
> 
> "Another attempt to contact the Germans was made in late 1941, but there is no record of a German response in either case.[12]
> 
> "These appeals to Germany were in direct opposition to the views of other Zionists, such as Ze'ev Jabotinsky, who wanted Britain to defeat the Nazis even as they wanted to expel the British from Palestine."
> 
> Avraham Stern - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
> 
> In early 1941 the Nazis were just beginning to gain proficiency in the industrial process of mass murder as they exterminated hundreds of thousands of Jews and others in their sweep across Russia.
> 
> It's possible that Stern would not have made his offer a year later when the SS began implementing Hitler's Final Solution in his homeland, Poland.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Puh-leeeeze, George...
> 
> It is quite clear that that faction of the Palestinian Jewish Activist community differed dramatically from the larger percentage of factions which continued to support the British.
> 
> And, for that smaller faction, we are looking at Jews offering to fight the British in Palestine in return for allowing the Jews to continue to emmigrate to Palestine rather than slaughtering them.
> 
> Gee... imagine that... I'll start harassing and sniping at our common enemy (Britain) here on my own home turf if you'll keep the emmigration pipeline open and let my People go.
> 
> Given that various factions of the Palestinian Jews were already trying to push the Brits out of Palestine long before WWII even began, and given that even more too to that approach after WWII ended and before their 1948 Declaration of Statehood...
> 
> Why should we be surprised that a faction of the Jews of Palestine offered to hit the Brits as best they could in exchange for the lives of their fellow Jews?
> 
> And, because that deal fell through and was exposed, that faction took some considerable Public Relations hits in the months and years go come, being pitched as disloyal, when, in truth, they were being ultimately loyal to their own co-religionists at the (offered) expense of their Mandate Occuipers.
> 
> In their shoes - in a desperate last-minute attempt to get my people the hell outta Dodge and to avoid the extermination camps - I would have made a deal with the devil himself.
> 
> Some factions amongst the Jews of Palestine believed that there was little chance of that offer succeeding and that it would be best to be seen to be on the side of the Allies rather than the side of the Axis, but it's a good bet that they had to think long and hard about not joining the Stern faction in trying to rescue as many of their people as could in any way imaginable.
> 
> I fail to see the 'dastard-liness' in their approach.
Click to expand...

*You fail to see the evil in stealing Arab land for the benefit of Hitler's victims?
Maybe Lord Rothschild could help you understand Zionism's sordid past.*

"1. Common interests could exist between the establishment of a new order in Europe in conformity with the German concept, and the true national aspirations of the Jewish people as they are embodied by the NMO.

"2. Cooperation between the new Germany and a renewed folkish-national Hebraium would be possible and,

"3. The establishment of the historic Jewish state on a national and totalitarian basis, bound by a treaty with the German Reich, would be in the interest of a maintained and strengthened future German position of power in the Near East.

"Proceeding from these considerations, the NMO in Palestine, under the condition the above-mentioned national aspirations of the Israeli freedom movement are recognized on the side of the German Reich, offers to actively take part in the war on Germanys side.

"They hanged people all over Europe after WW II for notes to the Nazis like these. But these treasons against the Jews were virtually unknown in the run up to the creation of the Zionist state in May 1948. 

"Ninety percent of Americas Jews suddenly became emotional pro-Zionists. With Democrats, Republicans and even the Communist-organized Progressive Party competing for Jewish votes in the November Presidential election, Harry Trumans monetary aid bought arms from pro-Soviet Czechoslovakia, *and an Israel was born, run by the German Zionists cothinkers in Jerusalem.*

"Jews and other Americans still know little of Zionisms sordid past."
51 Documents » CounterPunch: Tells the Facts, Names the Names


----------



## Kondor3

georgephillip said:


> "...I fail to see the 'dastard-liness' in their approach."
> 
> 
> 
> "_You fail to see the evil in stealing Arab land for the benefit of Hitler's victims?_..."
Click to expand...

We were not talking about land-conquest or land-stealing.

We were talking about your accusations of so-called 'treason' by a faction of the Palestinian Jews against the wider European Jewish Community.

Accusations which I easily and logically counterpointed, here: http://www.usmessageboard.com/israel-and-palestine/305058-is-israel-the-same-as-south-africa-90.html#post7847653 .


----------



## georgephillip

Kondor3 said:


> georgephillip said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> "...I fail to see the 'dastard-liness' in their approach."
> 
> 
> 
> "_You fail to see the evil in stealing Arab land for the benefit of Hitler's victims?_..."
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> We were not talking about land-conquest or land-stealing.
> 
> We were talking about your accusations of so-called 'treason' by a faction of the Palestinian Jews against the wider European Jewish Community.
> 
> Accusations which I easily and logically counterpointed, here: http://www.usmessageboard.com/israel-and-palestine/305058-is-israel-the-same-as-south-africa-90.html#post7847653 .
Click to expand...

We were talking about illegal Jewish immigrants from Europe taking the homes and land of indigenous Arab Palestinians. Why do you suppose 99% of those migrants would have preferred coming to the USA instead of England's "little loyal Jewish Ulster" in Palestine?


----------



## Kondor3

georgephillip said:


> Kondor3 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> georgephillip said:
> 
> 
> 
> "_You fail to see the evil in stealing Arab land for the benefit of Hitler's victims?_..."
> 
> 
> 
> We were not talking about land-conquest or land-stealing.
> 
> We were talking about your accusations of so-called 'treason' by a faction of the Palestinian Jews against the wider European Jewish Community.
> 
> Accusations which I easily and logically counterpointed, here: http://www.usmessageboard.com/israel-and-palestine/305058-is-israel-the-same-as-south-africa-90.html#post7847653 .
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> We were talking about illegal Jewish immigrants from Europe taking the homes and land of indigenous Arab Palestinians. Why do you suppose 99% of those migrants would have preferred coming to the USA instead of England's "little loyal Jewish Ulster" in Palestine?
Click to expand...

We were obviously talking about different things.

YOU wanted to steer the conversation back to land-grabs.

I wanted to refute your charges of Treason by one Jewish faction against the other.

Which I did.

Doesn't matter.

Feel free to steer the conversation back in that direction, now that the Treason charge is off the table.


----------



## thetor

Kondor3 said:


> theliq said:
> 
> 
> 
> "..."_the higher the zionist climbs>>>the more he's exposed_"
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Ever get the sinking feeling that you're being ignored?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Have fun in here talkin' to yourself...
Click to expand...


Why don't you answer the original question


----------



## Kondor3

I don't interact well with drunks, trolls, propaganda shills or sock-puppets.


----------



## georgephillip

Kondor3 said:


> georgephillip said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Kondor3 said:
> 
> 
> 
> We were not talking about land-conquest or land-stealing.
> 
> We were talking about your accusations of so-called 'treason' by a faction of the Palestinian Jews against the wider European Jewish Community.
> 
> Accusations which I easily and logically counterpointed, here: http://www.usmessageboard.com/israel-and-palestine/305058-is-israel-the-same-as-south-africa-90.html#post7847653 .
> 
> 
> 
> We were talking about illegal Jewish immigrants from Europe taking the homes and land of indigenous Arab Palestinians. Why do you suppose 99% of those migrants would have preferred coming to the USA instead of England's "little loyal Jewish Ulster" in Palestine?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> We were obviously talking about different things.
> 
> YOU wanted to steer the conversation back to land-grabs.
> 
> I wanted to refute your charges of Treason by one Jewish faction against the other.
> 
> Which I did.
> 
> Doesn't matter.
> 
> Feel free to steer the conversation back in that direction, now that the Treason charge is off the table.
Click to expand...

*Except YOU didn't.
What you're calling "Treason" required Zionists collaborating with Hitler to transfer European Jews to  Palestine in order to facilitate land grabs from indigenous Palestinians, a tactic all good Nazis would endorse without a hint of "Treason" against one's sovereign or nation.*


----------



## Kondor3

georgephillip said:


> Kondor3 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> georgephillip said:
> 
> 
> 
> We were talking about illegal Jewish immigrants from Europe taking the homes and land of indigenous Arab Palestinians. Why do you suppose 99% of those migrants would have preferred coming to the USA instead of England's "little loyal Jewish Ulster" in Palestine?
> 
> 
> 
> We were obviously talking about different things.
> 
> YOU wanted to steer the conversation back to land-grabs.
> 
> I wanted to refute your charges of Treason by one Jewish faction against the other.
> 
> Which I did.
> 
> Doesn't matter.
> 
> Feel free to steer the conversation back in that direction, now that the Treason charge is off the table.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Except YOU didn't.
> What you're calling 'Treason' required Zionists collaborating with Hitler to transfer European Jews to  Palestine in order to facilitate land grabs from indigenous Palestinians, a tactic all good Nazis would endorse without a hint of 'Treason' against one's sovereign or nation.
Click to expand...

Yes, I did.

I was referring to a charge of Treason allegedly committed by the Jews of Palestine against their European Jewish brethren.

You know...

The charge that *YOU* raised...

"..._these treasons against the Jews_..."

...in your post at the following link...

http://www.usmessageboard.com/israel-and-palestine/305058-is-israel-the-same-as-south-africa-89.html#post7844448

Palestinians natives and land are non sequitur in the narrow context of that so-called treason-by-Jews-against-Jews which* YOU* established.

The context in which I was responding.


----------



## georgephillip

Kondor3 said:


> georgephillip said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Kondor3 said:
> 
> 
> 
> We were obviously talking about different things.
> 
> YOU wanted to steer the conversation back to land-grabs.
> 
> I wanted to refute your charges of Treason by one Jewish faction against the other.
> 
> Which I did.
> 
> Doesn't matter.
> 
> Feel free to steer the conversation back in that direction, now that the Treason charge is off the table.
> 
> 
> 
> Except YOU didn't.
> What you're calling 'Treason' required Zionists collaborating with Hitler to transfer European Jews to  Palestine in order to facilitate land grabs from indigenous Palestinians, a tactic all good Nazis would endorse without a hint of 'Treason' against one's sovereign or nation.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Yes, I did.
> 
> I was referring to a charge of Treason allegedly committed by the Jews of Palestine against their European Jewish brethren.
> 
> You know...
> 
> The charge that *YOU* raised...
> 
> "..._these treasons against the Jews_..."
> 
> ...in your post at the following link...
> 
> http://www.usmessageboard.com/israel-and-palestine/305058-is-israel-the-same-as-south-africa-89.html#post7844448
> 
> Palestinians natives and land are non sequitur in the narrow context of that so-called treason-by-Jews-against-Jews which* YOU* established.
> 
> The context in which I was responding.
Click to expand...

"Oran's Dictionary of the Law (1983) defines treason as '...[a]...citizen's actions to help a foreign government overthrow, make war against, or seriously injure the [parent nation].'" 
So, in your context, Jews who offered to kill British soldiers on Hitler's behalf were doing nothing to "seriously injure (their) parent nation?"

Treason - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


----------



## Kondor3

georgephillip said:


> "..._Oran's Dictionary of the Law (1983) defines treason as '...[a]...citizen's actions to help a foreign government overthrow, make war against, or seriously injure the [parent nation]._' ..."


YOU were the one who raised the point of Palestinian Jews committing 'treason' against their European Jewish brethren (in contradiction to the literal definition of 'treason'), not I.

But, knowing full-well, that the Palestinian Jews and the European Jews ere not de jure citizens of the same country, I construed you to mean METAPHORICAL 'treason' (betrayal) between co-religionists; which most reasonable folks would construe in the context of the earlier exchange.



> "..._So, in your context, Jews who offered to kill British soldiers on Hitler's behalf were doing nothing to "seriously injure (their) parent nation?_..."



I did not comment one way or another, about that small faction of Palestinian Jews who offered to fight the British in Palestine (in the context of harming their parent nation), in return for allowing the Jews to continue emmigrating from Europe.

De jure, that small faction of Jews in Palestine (_who attempted to strike a bargain with the Nazis over Jewish emmigration_) quite probably DID commit Sedition or Treason-Lite in such communications, in thought if not in deed, and, of course, had they carried through with their fight against the British (with or without Nazi endorsement), then they probably would, indeed, be considered Traitors to the British Crown.

And, even though the 'mainstream' segment of the Jewish population of Palestine supported the British War Effort and even fielded Combat-Arms and Police and Militia units put at the disposal of the Crown, they did so in the hope of being granted their own Homeland in fulfillment of the Balfour Declaration, as society-wide payment for their support, as well as wanting to neutralize the Nazi threat to their brethren in Europe, rather than out of any particular en masse loyalty to the British or their Mandate Rule.

But, in any event, that small faction of the Jews of Palestine which contacted the Nazis does NOT appear to have been engaged in 'treason' (small 'T') or 'betrayal' of their European Jewish brethren, as your original in this series claimed.


----------



## Roudy

georgephillip said:


> Kondor3 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> georgephillip said:
> 
> 
> 
> We were talking about illegal Jewish immigrants from Europe taking the homes and land of indigenous Arab Palestinians. Why do you suppose 99% of those migrants would have preferred coming to the USA instead of England's "little loyal Jewish Ulster" in Palestine?
> 
> 
> 
> We were obviously talking about different things.
> 
> YOU wanted to steer the conversation back to land-grabs.
> 
> I wanted to refute your charges of Treason by one Jewish faction against the other.
> 
> Which I did.
> 
> Doesn't matter.
> 
> Feel free to steer the conversation back in that direction, now that the Treason charge is off the table.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> *Except YOU didn't.
> What you're calling "Treason" required Zionists collaborating with Hitler to transfer European Jews to  Palestine in order to facilitate land grabs from indigenous Palestinians, a tactic all good Nazis would endorse without a hint of "Treason" against one's sovereign or nation.*
Click to expand...

Oh I see, so the Jews trying to escape without getting murdered by giving up all their possessions and German citizenship is called "collaboration". But the well known love affair between the Nazis and Arab Palestinians who fought for the Nazis and idolized them to this day, isn't. 

Interesting. 

Amin Al Husseini: Nazi Father of Jihad, Al Qaeda, Arafat, Saddam Hussein and the Muslim Brotherhood - Tell The Children The Truth - Homepage


----------



## georgephillip

Roudy said:


> georgephillip said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Kondor3 said:
> 
> 
> 
> We were obviously talking about different things.
> 
> YOU wanted to steer the conversation back to land-grabs.
> 
> I wanted to refute your charges of Treason by one Jewish faction against the other.
> 
> Which I did.
> 
> Doesn't matter.
> 
> Feel free to steer the conversation back in that direction, now that the Treason charge is off the table.
> 
> 
> 
> *Except YOU didn't.
> What you're calling "Treason" required Zionists collaborating with Hitler to transfer European Jews to  Palestine in order to facilitate land grabs from indigenous Palestinians, a tactic all good Nazis would endorse without a hint of "Treason" against one's sovereign or nation.*
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Oh I see, so the Jews trying to escape without getting murdered by giving up all their possessions and German citizenship is called "collaboration". But the well known love affair between the Nazis and Arab Palestinians who fought for the Nazis and idolized them to this day, isn't.
> 
> Interesting.
> 
> Amin Al Husseini: Nazi Father of Jihad, Al Qaeda, Arafat, Saddam Hussein and the Muslim Brotherhood - Tell The Children The Truth - Homepage
Click to expand...

Now tell us why all those good German Jews fleeing to Palestine were entitled to colonize Arab land?


----------



## Sweet_Caroline

georgephillip said:


> Roudy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> georgephillip said:
> 
> 
> 
> *Except YOU didn't.
> What you're calling "Treason" required Zionists collaborating with Hitler to transfer European Jews to  Palestine in order to facilitate land grabs from indigenous Palestinians, a tactic all good Nazis would endorse without a hint of "Treason" against one's sovereign or nation.*
> 
> 
> 
> Oh I see, so the Jews trying to escape without getting murdered by giving up all their possessions and German citizenship is called "collaboration". But the well known love affair between the Nazis and Arab Palestinians who fought for the Nazis and idolized them to this day, isn't.
> 
> Interesting.
> 
> Amin Al Husseini: Nazi Father of Jihad, Al Qaeda, Arafat, Saddam Hussein and the Muslim Brotherhood - Tell The Children The Truth - Homepage
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Now tell us why all those good German Jews fleeing to Palestine were entitled to colonize Arab land?
Click to expand...


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


----------



## rhodescholar

georgephillip said:


> Now tell us why all those good German Jews fleeing to Palestine were entitled to colonize Arab land?



A year later, and this asshole is still at it.... 

Tell us what exactly is "arab" land?  Is the US "whitey" land, and no one black or hispanic can move there?  And then tell us what nation was there when the jews began immigrating in the 1800s, you lying fucking trash?


----------



## P F Tinmore

Sweet_Caroline said:


> georgephillip said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Roudy said:
> 
> 
> 
> Oh I see, so the Jews trying to escape without getting murdered by giving up all their possessions and German citizenship is called "collaboration". But the well known love affair between the Nazis and Arab Palestinians who fought for the Nazis and idolized them to this day, isn't.
> 
> Interesting.
> 
> Amin Al Husseini: Nazi Father of Jihad, Al Qaeda, Arafat, Saddam Hussein and the Muslim Brotherhood - Tell The Children The Truth - Homepage
> 
> 
> 
> Now tell us why all those good German Jews fleeing to Palestine were entitled to colonize Arab land?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> *How easily you forget facts.​*
> [ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ubDhnM0MUmY]Howard Grief - EC4I middle east conflict documentary: Give Peace A Chance - YouTube[/ame]
Click to expand...


If what these guys say is true, why did the Zionists agree to half of Palestine in 1947 when they received the whole pie thirty years earlier?


----------



## georgephillip

rhodescholar said:


> georgephillip said:
> 
> 
> 
> Now tell us why all those good German Jews fleeing to Palestine were entitled to colonize Arab land?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> A year later, and this asshole is still at it....
> 
> Tell us what exactly is "arab" land?  Is the US "whitey" land, and no one black or hispanic can move there?  And then tell us what nation was there when the jews began immigrating in the 1800s, you lying fucking trash?
Click to expand...

*Are you still confused about*
"Palestine (Arabic: &#1601;&#1604;&#1587;&#1591;&#1610;&#1606;* Filas&#7789;&#299;n, Falas&#7789;&#299;n, Filis&#7789;&#299;n; Greek: &#928;&#945;&#955;&#945;&#953;&#963;&#964;&#943;&#957;&#951;, Palaistin&#275;; Latin: Palaestina; Hebrew: &#1508;&#1500;&#1513;&#1514;&#1497;&#1504;&#1492; Palestina)...a geographic region in Western Asia between the Mediterranean Sea and the Jordan River..." 

"The name was used by Ancient Greek writers, and was later used for the Roman province Syria Palaestina, the Byzantine Palaestina Prima and the Umayyad and Abbasid province of Jund Filastin. 

"The region is also known as the Land of Israel (Hebrew: &#1488;&#1512;&#1509;&#1470;&#1497;&#1513;&#1512;&#1488;&#1500; Eretz-Yisra'el),[1] the Holy Land, the Southern Levant,[2] Cisjordan, and historically has been known by other names including Canaan, Southern Syria and Jerusalem.

*Who ruled Filastin in the 1800s, is that the question, Golda?*

"In 1830, on the eve of Muhammad Ali's invasion, the Ottoman Porte transferred control of the sanjaks of Jerusalem and Nablus to Abdullah Pasha, the governor of Acre. According to Silverburg, in regional and cultural terms this move was important for creating an *Arab Palestine detached from Syria* (bilad al-Shams). According to Pappe, it was an attempt to reinforce the Syrian front in face of Muhammad Ali's invasion.[40][41] Two years later, in 1832, Palestine was conquered by Muhammad Ali's Egypt, but in 1840, Britain intervened and returned control of the Levant to the Ottomans in return for further capitulations."

*Ottomans.
Egyptians.
British.
No Jews required.*

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Palestine#Modern_period


----------



## georgephillip

P F Tinmore said:


> Sweet_Caroline said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> georgephillip said:
> 
> 
> 
> Now tell us why all those good German Jews fleeing to Palestine were entitled to colonize Arab land?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *How easily you forget facts.​*
> [ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ubDhnM0MUmY]Howard Grief - EC4I middle east conflict documentary: Give Peace A Chance - YouTube[/ame]
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> If what these guys say is true, why did the Zionists agree to half of Palestine in 1947 when they received the whole pie thirty years earlier?
Click to expand...

*San Remo and Oil*

Full Spectrum Dominance U.S. Power in Iraq and Beyond by Rahul Mahajan

"OlL AND HISTORICAL U.S. MIDDLE EAST POLICY

"Actually, it has never been a secret that U.S. Middle East policy revolves around oil. 

"Strong U.S. interest in the region's oil dates from after World War I, in particular after the *1920 San Remo agreement, in which Britain and France essentially divided the oil of the Middle East between them. 
*
"Britain had early on established the standard colonial means of dealing with oil; pressuring a weak, corrupt government to grant an oil concession, essentially a deal whereby some corporation gained the right to all the oil that lay under the land in the area covered by the concession, and was required to pay only token royalties to the government of the country. 

"In the first 50 years of Middle East oil concessions, Western corporations and a small ruling elite in the Middle East got very rich, but the people benefited minimally if at all.

"Unhappy U.S. oil companies complained strenuously about their exclusion, and through the intervention of the U.S. government (Herbert Hoover played a major role in this), replaced the San Remo agreement with the 1928 'Red-line' agreement, which gave them a 23.5 percent share of all oil concessions in the former Ottoman Empire (excluding Kuwait); later this agreement came to apply only to Iraq. 

"In 1933, Texaco and Chevron gained the ultimate prize-a 60-year concession on the lion's share of Saudi oil, which they later shared with Exxon and Mobil in the formation of Aramco. Around that time, Gulf also obtained 50 percent of the Kuwaiti concession."

*Israel's "legitimacy' comes from a resolution by western imperialists to divide the spoils of Middle East oil. I'll bet Saddam, Gaddafi, and Assad feel much better. Or not.*


----------



## Kondor3

georgephillip said:


> "..._I'll bet Saddam, Gaddafi, and Assad feel much better_..."


Actually, I'll bet Saddam and Gaddafi are feeling a little 'dead' right about now.

And it's a good bet that Assad feels the noose tightening more and more every day.

Couldn't happen to a nicer bunch of folk.


----------



## abu afak

theliq to Kondy said:
			
		

> *
> Yet you say nothing Kondy of the thousands DEAD at the hands of the Israelis
> 
> CAT GOT YA TONGUE*
> 
> ps........Strange but why haven't the Germans been exposed for supplying the GAS ??????????????Are you German Kondy



Perhaps You would like to put some meat on that bone.
No you wouldn't, so I will.

There are 100,000 dead in/and more than a million immigrants from.. Syria in just 2 years.
In Iraq, Saddam was responsible for the deaths of over 1 Million people, invading with the intention of conquering Iran and Kuwait. as well as genociding Kurds and Shia.

In Israel, OTOH, Several Thousand Palestinians are dead in a War THEY STARTED.
Virtually No Palestinians died before the Year 2000 Intifada, and since 2006 virtually all the 'Palestinian' dead are Gazans/Hamas instigated casualties.

That bears NO resemblance to Assad or Saddam except in the mind of Israel-Hating moral equivalence Attempters.
.


----------



## Kondor3

theliq said:


> "..._Yet you say nothing Kondy_..."


Seen.


----------



## Kondor3

abu afak said:


> theliq to Kondy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *
> Yet you say nothing Kondy of the thousands DEAD at the hands of the Israelis
> 
> CAT GOT YA TONGUE*
> 
> ps........Strange but why haven't the Germans been exposed for supplying the GAS ??????????????Are you German Kondy
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Perhaps You would like to put some meat on that bone.
> No you wouldn't, so I will.
> 
> There are 100,000 dead in/and more than a million immigrants from.. Syria in just 2 years.
> In Iraq, Saddam was responsible for the deaths of over 1 Million people, invading with the intention of conquering Iran and Kuwait. as well as genociding Kurds and Shia.
> 
> In Israel, OTOH, Several Thousands Palestinians are dead in a War THEY STARTED.
> Virtually No Palestinians died before the Year 2000 Intifada, and since 2006 virtually all the 'Palestinian' dead are Gazans/Hamas instigated casualties.
> 
> That bears NO resemblance to Assad or Saddam except in the mind of Israel-Hating moral equivalence Attempters.
> .
Click to expand...


----------



## toastman

abu afak said:


> theliq to Kondy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *
> Yet you say nothing Kondy of the thousands DEAD at the hands of the Israelis
> 
> CAT GOT YA TONGUE*
> 
> ps........Strange but why haven't the Germans been exposed for supplying the GAS ??????????????Are you German Kondy
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Perhaps You would like to put some meat on that bone.
> No you wouldn't, so I will.
> 
> There are 100,000 dead in/and more than a million immigrants from.. Syria in just 2 years.
> In Iraq, Saddam was responsible for the deaths of over 1 Million people, invading with the intention of conquering Iran and Kuwait. as well as genociding Kurds and Shia.
> 
> In Israel, OTOH, Several Thousand Palestinians are dead in a War THEY STARTED.
> Virtually No Palestinians died before the Year 2000 Intifada, and since 2006 virtually all the 'Palestinian' dead are Gazans/Hamas instigated casualties.
> 
> That bears NO resemblance to Assad or Saddam except in the mind of Israel-Hating moral equivalence Attempters.
> .
Click to expand...


Excellent post !


----------



## georgephillip

Kondor3 said:


> georgephillip said:
> 
> 
> 
> "..._I'll bet Saddam, Gaddafi, and Assad feel much better_..."
> 
> 
> 
> Actually, I'll bet Saddam and Gaddafi are feeling a little 'dead' right about now.
> 
> And it's a good bet that Assad feels the noose tightening more and more every day.
> 
> Couldn't happen to a nicer bunch of folk.
Click to expand...

*With the exception of rich US terrorists like Dick, Dubya, and Bubba whose personal war crimes dwarf any imagined by lesser lights like Saddam, Gaddafi, and Assad, the latter lacking the means to maim, murder, and displace millions of civilians on the opposite side of the planet from their homelands.*


----------



## docmauser1

georgephillip said:


> _With the exception of rich US terrorists like Dick, Dubya, and Bubba whose personal war crimes dwarf any imagined by lesser lights like Saddam, Gaddafi, and Assad, the latter lacking the means to maim, murder, and displace millions of civilians on the opposite side of the planet from their homelands._


Drivel.


----------



## Kondor3

georgephillip said:


> Kondor3 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> georgephillip said:
> 
> 
> 
> "..._I'll bet Saddam, Gaddafi, and Assad feel much better_..."
> 
> 
> 
> Actually, I'll bet Saddam and Gaddafi are feeling a little 'dead' right about now.
> 
> And it's a good bet that Assad feels the noose tightening more and more every day.
> 
> Couldn't happen to a nicer bunch of folk.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> With the exception of rich US terrorists like Dick, Dubya, and Bubba whose personal war crimes dwarf any imagined by lesser lights like Saddam, Gaddafi, and Assad, the latter lacking the means to maim, murder, and displace millions of civilians on the opposite side of the planet from their homelands.
Click to expand...

Ain't it fun, being the Biggest Dog in the Junkyard?


----------



## georgephillip

Kondor3 said:


> georgephillip said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Kondor3 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Actually, I'll bet Saddam and Gaddafi are feeling a little 'dead' right about now.
> 
> And it's a good bet that Assad feels the noose tightening more and more every day.
> 
> Couldn't happen to a nicer bunch of folk.
> 
> 
> 
> With the exception of rich US terrorists like Dick, Dubya, and Bubba whose personal war crimes dwarf any imagined by lesser lights like Saddam, Gaddafi, and Assad, the latter lacking the means to maim, murder, and displace millions of civilians on the opposite side of the planet from their homelands.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Ain't it fun, being the Biggest Dog in the Junkyard?
Click to expand...

American War Crimes


----------



## RoccoR

georgephillip;  _et al,_

This site is nothing more than another anti-American, anti-War, blog by people like Fred Branfman, an activist, who is still fighting a war long since buried.



georgephillip said:


> Kondor3 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> georgephillip said:
> 
> 
> 
> With the exception of rich US terrorists like Dick, Dubya, and Bubba whose personal war crimes dwarf any imagined by lesser lights like Saddam, Gaddafi, and Assad, the latter lacking the means to maim, murder, and displace millions of civilians on the opposite side of the planet from their homelands.
> 
> 
> 
> Ain't it fun, being the Biggest Dog in the Junkyard?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> American War Crimes
Click to expand...

*(COMMENT)*

There will always be people that oppose America and its policies.  They post these snippets and figures to incite emotion, but never actually put anything in context.

Junk info salads that explain nothing but sound informative.

Most Respectfully,
R


----------



## toastman

RoccoR said:


> georgephillip;  _et al,_
> 
> This site is nothing more than another anti-American, anti-War, blog by people like Fred Branfman, an activist, who is still fighting a war long since buried.
> 
> 
> 
> georgephillip said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Kondor3 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Ain't it fun, being the Biggest Dog in the Junkyard?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> American War Crimes
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> There will always be people that oppose America and its policies.  They post these snippets and figures to incite emotion, but never actually put anything in context.
> 
> Junk info salads that explain nothing but sound informative.
> 
> Most Respectfully,
> R
Click to expand...


Welcome to Georgies world. Those are the only kind of articles he reads.
His brain is poisoned with that propaganda crap !


----------



## georgephillip

RoccoR said:


> georgephillip;  _et al,_
> 
> This site is nothing more than another anti-American, anti-War, blog by people like Fred Branfman, an activist, who is still fighting a war long since buried.
> 
> 
> 
> georgephillip said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Kondor3 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Ain't it fun, being the Biggest Dog in the Junkyard?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> American War Crimes
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> There will always be people that oppose America and its policies.  They post these snippets and figures to incite emotion, but never actually put anything in context.
> 
> Junk info salads that explain nothing but sound informative.
> 
> Most Respectfully,
> R
Click to expand...

*How many innocent human beings who posed no threat to our homeland has the US military maimed, murdered, and displaced during your lifetime?*


----------



## RoccoR

georgephillip,  _et al,_

If you want to change American Foreign Policy, then work with the system.



georgephillip said:


> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> 
> georgephillip;  _et al,_
> 
> This site is nothing more than another anti-American, anti-War, blog by people like Fred Branfman, an activist, who is still fighting a war long since buried.
> 
> 
> 
> georgephillip said:
> 
> 
> 
> American War Crimes
> 
> 
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> There will always be people that oppose America and its policies.  They post these snippets and figures to incite emotion, but never actually put anything in context.
> 
> Junk info salads that explain nothing but sound informative.
> 
> Most Respectfully,
> R
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> *How many innocent human beings who posed no threat to our homeland has the US military maimed, murdered, and displaced during your lifetime?*
Click to expand...

*(COMMENT)*

If you just want to complain, then just be a parrot, complain and change nothing.

It is up to you.

Guys like Fred Branfman, Jerry Brown, Gary Hart and Tom Hayden have been around a long time.  What positive contribution have they made in a change in foreign policy?

Complainers seldom are known for accomplishments.  If you want to make a contribution, then let's hear your independent thought.

Most Respectfully,
R


----------



## georgephillip

RoccoR said:


> georgephillip,  _et al,_
> 
> If you want to change American Foreign Policy, then work with the system.
> 
> 
> 
> georgephillip said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> 
> georgephillip;  _et al,_
> 
> This site is nothing more than another anti-American, anti-War, blog by people like Fred Branfman, an activist, who is still fighting a war long since buried.
> 
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> There will always be people that oppose America and its policies.  They post these snippets and figures to incite emotion, but never actually put anything in context.
> 
> Junk info salads that explain nothing but sound informative.
> 
> Most Respectfully,
> R
> 
> 
> 
> *How many innocent human beings who posed no threat to our homeland has the US military maimed, murdered, and displaced during your lifetime?*
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> If you just want to complain, then just be a parrot, complain and change nothing.
> 
> It is up to you.
> 
> Guys like Fred Branfman, Jerry Brown, Gary Hart and Tom Hayden have been around a long time.  What positive contribution have they made in a change in foreign policy?
> 
> Complainers seldom are known for accomplishments.  If you want to make a contribution, then let's hear your independent thought.
> 
> Most Respectfully,
> R
Click to expand...

Stop "choosing" between War (R) or Debt (D) when selecting your congressional representatives. California ballots offer multiple third party choices for congressmen and senators. It's relatively easy in this state to find a candidate that reflects your foreign policy views without supporting Wall Street or the Pentagon. Since I've never voted outside this state, I have no way of knowing how many other locales offer similar choices. In particular. I don't know what third party congressional choices are available to active duty military personnel, especially those killing for the richest 1% of humanity outside the borders of their homeland.

BTW, Rocco, if some thug half your age and twice your size beats you like a rented mule and takes your lunch money, I won't call you a "complainer" for filing a police report.


----------



## RoccoR

georgephillip,  _et al,_

You cannot have your cake and eat it too!



georgephillip said:


> BTW, Rocco, if some thug half your age and twice your size beats you like a rented mule and takes your lunch money, I won't call you a "complainer" for filing a police report.


*(COMMENT)*

It is always the Arab Palestinian that is say that there were twice as many of them then Jewish Immigrants.

It is not the amount of land that makes a nation strong and prosperous; but rather the metal of the people that makes them what they are.

Most Respectfully,
R


----------



## P F Tinmore

RoccoR said:


> georgephillip,  _et al,_
> 
> You cannot have your cake and eat it too!
> 
> 
> 
> georgephillip said:
> 
> 
> 
> BTW, Rocco, if some thug half your age and twice your size beats you like a rented mule and takes your lunch money, I won't call you a "complainer" for filing a police report.
> 
> 
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> It is always the Arab Palestinian that is say that there were twice as many of them then Jewish Immigrants.
> 
> It is not the amount of land that makes a nation strong and prosperous; but rather the metal of the people that makes them what they are.
> 
> Most Respectfully,
> R
Click to expand...


Of course if the Palestinians could steal and mooch as good as Israel they could level the playing field.


----------



## georgephillip

RoccoR said:


> georgephillip,  _et al,_
> 
> You cannot have your cake and eat it too!
> 
> 
> 
> georgephillip said:
> 
> 
> 
> BTW, Rocco, if some thug half your age and twice your size beats you like a rented mule and takes your lunch money, I won't call you a "complainer" for filing a police report.
> 
> 
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> It is always the Arab Palestinian that is say that there were twice as many of them then Jewish Immigrants.
> 
> It is not the amount of land that makes a nation strong and prosperous; but rather the metal of the people that makes them what they are.
> 
> Most Respectfully,
> R
Click to expand...

*Much of the Israel's metal was forged in (Dark and Satanic) European mills:*

The Hidden Roots of Zionism

"When the war (to end all war) ended, Palestine became a British colony and the Zionists found they shared many interests with their new colonial masters. In 1917 Britain issued the Balfour Declaration, which was the first official recognition of the Zionist settlements in Palestine. 

Under the British Mandate Government, Britain privileged the small Jewish population over the Palestinians. 

"In 1917 there were 56,000 Jews in Palestine and 644,000 Palestinian Arabs. 

"Still Britain gave Jewish capital 90 percent of concessions for projects like building roads and power plants and by 1935, Zionists owned 872 out of the 1,212 industrial firms in Palestine.

"The British ruling class, which was rabidly anti-Semitic, had its own reasons for this support. Out of the First World War, Arab nationalism had emerged as a major threat to domination of the Middle East and Britain hoped that Zionists could be a useful force for policing the Arabs..."

*Israel came into existence because its founding fathers begged from the tables of every European tyrant seeking a deal with his "Jewish Problem." At the end of WWII, the US took over supplying Israel's metal in exchange for the oily instability we see today from Lebanon to Syria, to Kurdistan and beyond. *


----------



## Kondor3

Much of Israel's metal was forged in the fires of European pogrom and persecution and Holocaust spanning the two millennia since Euro-trash (_the Romans, under Titus_) kicked them out of their Home the last time.


----------



## georgephillip

Kondor3 said:


> Much of Israel's metal was forged in the fires of European pogrom and persecution and Holocaust spanning the two millennia since Euro-trash (_the Romans, under Titus_) kicked them out of their Home the last time.


What entitles Jews alone among all nations to their "Home" of thousands of years ago?


----------



## RoccoR

georgephillip,  _et al,_

Yes, well --- not that this has not been answered before.  In some ways, this is a fake questions.



georgephillip said:


> Kondor3 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Much of Israel's metal was forged in the fires of European pogrom and persecution and Holocaust spanning the two millennia since Euro-trash (_the Romans, under Titus_) kicked them out of their Home the last time.
> 
> 
> 
> What entitles Jews alone among all nations to their "Home" of thousands of years ago?
Click to expand...

*(COMMENT)*

FIRST:

The phrase "Jews alone" would suggest that out of the chaos, confusion and turmoil, only the "Jewish" people materialized a nation.  That is far from the truth.  They forget Egypt _[28 February 1922 (from UK protectorate status)]_, Iraq _[3 October 1932 (from League of Nations mandate under British administration)]_, Jordan _[25 May 1946 (from League of Nations mandate under British administration)]_, Kuwait _[19 June 1961, (became fully independent following an exchange of notes between the United Kingdom and the then HRH Emir of Kuwait)]_, Lebanon _[22 November 1943 (from League of Nations mandate under French administration)]_, Syria _[17 April 1946 (from League of Nations mandate under French administration)]_, and Yemen_ [independent in November 1918 (from the Ottoman Empire)]_, just to name a few.​
SECOND:

The association of the Jews with the Middle East, was made by and agreed upon by the Arabs Powers of the day, The Allied Powers of the Day, and the Ottoman Empire/Turkey.  It was not a unilateral decision or a sole association made by the Jewish; although they concurred.  The Partition Plan _(divided into an un-named "Jewish State" and an un-named "Arab State")_ was genuinely a United Nations plan.   The Jewish Agency participated in the in the implementation process of the UN Security Council.  The Arab Higher Committee rejected and opted not to participate.  When the Jewish Agency followed the UN guidance and Declared Independence under the right of self-determination, it was the Arab _(Palestinians and the Arab League)_ that, after choosing not to participate, opted for military action in defiance of the the UN Resolution and the implementation of the Partition Plan.​
Most Respectfully,
R


----------



## Kondor3

georgephillip said:


> Kondor3 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Much of Israel's metal was forged in the fires of European pogrom and persecution and Holocaust spanning the two millennia since Euro-trash (_the Romans, under Titus_) kicked them out of their Home the last time.
> 
> 
> 
> What entitles Jews alone among all nations to their "Home" of thousands of years ago?
Click to expand...







Superiority and Victory on the Battlefield...

...against those who attacked them.

What more is needed?


----------



## georgephillip

Kondor3 said:


> georgephillip said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Kondor3 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Much of Israel's metal was forged in the fires of European pogrom and persecution and Holocaust spanning the two millennia since Euro-trash (_the Romans, under Titus_) kicked them out of their Home the last time.
> 
> 
> 
> What entitles Jews alone among all nations to their "Home" of thousands of years ago?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Superiority and Victory on the Battlefield...
> 
> ...against those who attacked them.
> 
> What more is needed?
Click to expand...

*A star-spangled dragon's wing to shelter under.
Why Jews "win" in Palestine:
*
"In political space one of the great mysteries is why / how the tiny state of Israel achieves such capture over U.S. foreign policy in the Middle East? 

"The typical less than helpful answer is the Israel lobby, one step removed from Israel but no more illuminating. According to the CIA the GDP of Israel in 2012 is, depending on the method of calculation, between $240 and $252 billion USD and U.S. 

"GDP is about $16.6 trillion. $16.6 trillion is sixteen thousand and six hundred billion dollars. 

"There is no direct economic relationship to explain the power of Israel over U.S. foreign policy because the scale is so wildly imbalanced on the side of the U.S. 

"The answer then must be geo-political and a quick glance at a map of the Middle East places Israel in the vicinity of Iraq, Iran and Saudi Arabia, the very centers of oil geo-politics by the U.S. for the last century.

Capitalism and US Oil Geo-Politics » CounterPunch: Tells the Facts, Names the Names

*Jews have proven more reliable imperial tools than Arabs over the last century.
That's why they have all those big scary guns and shit.*


----------



## Kondor3

No, I don't think that's right...

The Jews of Israel got no large-scale military aid from the United States in the 1948 War...

The Jews of Israel got no large-scale military aid from the United States in the 1967 War...

They kicked Arab ass... big-time... by themselves...

The US countered Soviet moves and replenished depleted Israeli inventories *AFTER* the 1967 War...

The US provided some modest but significant aid to Israel in the period 1967-1973...

The Israelis kicked Arab ass again.. albeit with some behind-the-scenes help from us...

And we have been helping them with military aid ever since...

But, in truth, they are reaching a point where they can do for themselves in most areas...

Buying ships from Europe and Aircraft from the US and Europe and making their own Tanks and small-arms, although they are just about ready to fend for themselves with Aircraft, as well, if I remember my light reading on the subject correctly...

The Jews of Israel know that - in the final analysis - they can only rely upon _themselves_, and they have been slowly-but-surely positioning themselves for that time, for many years now...

As to the Jews being '_Imperial Tools_'...

I cannot think of a single thing that we have asked the Jews to do with their military that would have been of the slightest benefit to us...

From our perspective, they're a useful trip-wire against the Arabs, but we don't ask them to fight our wars for us nor to participate in them, so, I'm not sure how much value they have as '_Imperial Tools_'...

No... we give them stuff because we like and trust the Jews better than we like the Arabs. Why? For no better reason than it pleases us to do so.


----------



## georgephillip

RoccoR said:


> georgephillip,  _et al,_
> 
> Yes, well --- not that this has not been answered before.  In some ways, this is a fake questions.
> 
> 
> 
> georgephillip said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Kondor3 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Much of Israel's metal was forged in the fires of European pogrom and persecution and Holocaust spanning the two millennia since Euro-trash (_the Romans, under Titus_) kicked them out of their Home the last time.
> 
> 
> 
> What entitles Jews alone among all nations to their "Home" of thousands of years ago?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> FIRST:
> 
> The phrase "Jews alone" would suggest that out of the chaos, confusion and turmoil, only the "Jewish" people materialized a nation.  That is far from the truth.  They forget Egypt _[28 February 1922 (from UK protectorate status)]_, Iraq _[3 October 1932 (from League of Nations mandate under British administration)]_, Jordan _[25 May 1946 (from League of Nations mandate under British administration)]_, Kuwait _[19 June 1961, (became fully independent following an exchange of notes between the United Kingdom and the then HRH Emir of Kuwait)]_, Lebanon _[22 November 1943 (from League of Nations mandate under French administration)]_, Syria _[17 April 1946 (from League of Nations mandate under French administration)]_, and Yemen_ [independent in November 1918 (from the Ottoman Empire)]_, just to name a few.​
> SECOND:
> 
> The association of the Jews with the Middle East, was made by and agreed upon by the Arabs Powers of the day, The Allied Powers of the Day, and the Ottoman Empire/Turkey.  It was not a unilateral decision or a sole association made by the Jewish; although they concurred.  The Partition Plan _(divided into an un-named "Jewish State" and an un-named "Arab State")_ was genuinely a United Nations plan.   The Jewish Agency participated in the in the implementation process of the UN Security Council.  The Arab Higher Committee rejected and opted not to participate.  *When the Jewish Agency followed the UN guidance and Declared Independence under the right of self-determination,* it was the Arab _(Palestinians and the Arab League)_ that, after choosing not to participate, opted for military action in defiance of the the UN Resolution and the implementation of the Partition Plan.​
> Most Respectfully,
> R
Click to expand...

*Rocco...while it's not clear to me how 650,000 Jews can use self-determination to inflict their nation upon twice as many Arabs, at least I have the solace of knowing some Wise Men around Truman shared my misgivings of recognizing a Jewish state in the heart of Arab oil:*

http://jcpa.org/article/president-trumans-decision-to-recognize-israel/

"Some months earlier, during one of our weekly breakfasts at his ele gant Georgetown home, (Secretary of Defense, James V,) Forrestal had spoken emotionally and frankly to me concerning his opposition to helping the Zionists, as advocates of the creation of a Jewish state were called. 

"'You fellows over at the White House are just not facing up to the realities in the Middle East. There are thirty million Arabs on one side and about six hundred thousand Jews on the other. It is clear that in any contest, the Arabs are going to overwhelm the Jews. Why dont you face up to the realities? Just look at the numbers!' 

*Who knew?*


----------



## Hossfly

georgephillip said:


> Kondor3 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Much of Israel's metal was forged in the fires of European pogrom and persecution and Holocaust spanning the two millennia since Euro-trash (_the Romans, under Titus_) kicked them out of their Home the last time.
> 
> 
> 
> What entitles Jews alone among all nations to their "Home" of thousands of years ago?
Click to expand...

The same guy who gave instructions to Moses. Nothing hs changed, it's still in effect.


----------



## georgephillip

Kondor3 said:


> No, I don't think that's right...
> 
> The Jews of Israel got no large-scale military aid from the United States in the 1948 War...
> 
> The Jews of Israel got no large-scale military aid from the United States in the 1967 War...
> 
> They kicked Arab ass... big-time... by themselves...
> 
> The US countered Soviet moves and replenished depleted Israeli inventories *AFTER* the 1967 War...
> 
> The US provided some modest but significant aid to Israel in the period 1967-1973...
> 
> The Israelis kicked Arab ass again.. albeit with some behind-the-scenes help from us...
> 
> And we have been helping them with military aid ever since...
> 
> But, in truth, they are reaching a point where they can do for themselves in most areas...
> 
> Buying ships from Europe and Aircraft from the US and Europe and making their own Tanks and small-arms, although they are just about ready to fend for themselves with Aircraft, as well, if I remember my light reading on the subject correctly...
> 
> The Jews of Israel know that - in the final analysis - they can only rely upon _themselves_, and they have been slowly-but-surely positioning themselves for that time, for many years now...
> 
> As to the Jews being '_Imperial Tools_'...
> 
> I cannot think of a single thing that we have asked the Jews to do with their military that would have been of the slightest benefit to us...
> 
> From our perspective, they're a useful trip-wire against the Arabs, but we don't ask them to fight our wars for us nor to participate in them, so, I'm not sure how much value they have as '_Imperial Tools_'...
> 
> No... we give them stuff because we like and trust the Jews better than we like the Arabs. Why? For no better reason than it pleases us to do so.


We, Who?
The CIA trusts Israeli intelligence less than the Syrian or Saudi spies.
We give them stuff ($8 million/day) because most of that comes home to Boeing and Lockheed Martin shareholders.
Israel would never have existed in the first place without British imperialism funding Jewish capital at a nine to one ratio during the British occupation of Palestine, and if the British hadn't decapitated Arab leadership in Palestine during the 1936-39 revolt, Jews would've found their greedy asses floating back to Poland in 1948.
1967 was when Israel PROVED her metal by murdering 34 Americans aboard the USS Liberty in an amateurish attempt to blame the Egyptians and drag this country into yet another war in the Middle East.
Today, some Imperial Tools in Israel never miss a chance to beat the drums for regime change in Iran while expecting the US to pay the cost in blood and treasure.
Why is exactly why western imperialism created the Jewish state in the first place.


----------



## georgephillip

Hossfly said:


> georgephillip said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Kondor3 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Much of Israel's metal was forged in the fires of European pogrom and persecution and Holocaust spanning the two millennia since Euro-trash (_the Romans, under Titus_) kicked them out of their Home the last time.
> 
> 
> 
> What entitles Jews alone among all nations to their "Home" of thousands of years ago?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> The same guy who gave instructions to Moses. Nothing hs changed, it's still in effect.
Click to expand...

Was He Jewish?
Where's the deed?
He's still a Lie the Rich tell to their Slaves like you.


----------



## P F Tinmore

georgephillip said:


> Hossfly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> georgephillip said:
> 
> 
> 
> What entitles Jews alone among all nations to their "Home" of thousands of years ago?
> 
> 
> 
> The same guy who gave instructions to Moses. Nothing hs changed, it's still in effect.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Was He Jewish?
> Where's the deed?
> He's still a Lie the Rich tell to their Slaves like you.
Click to expand...


Where does it say that Moses was a Jew?

Quote the passage.


----------



## docmauser1

P F Tinmore said:


> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> 
> georgephillip,  _et al,_
> 
> You cannot have your cake and eat it too!
> 
> 
> 
> georgephillip said:
> 
> 
> 
> BTW, Rocco, if some thug half your age and twice your size beats you like a rented mule and takes your lunch money, I won't call you a "complainer" for filing a police report.
> 
> 
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> It is always the Arab Palestinian that is say that there were twice as many of them then Jewish Immigrants.
> 
> It is not the amount of land that makes a nation strong and prosperous; but rather the metal of the people that makes them what they are.
> Most Respectfully,
> R
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> _Of course if the Palestinians could steal and mooch as good as Israel they could level the playing field._
Click to expand...

Ahh, that is why palistanians are inventing (forging-stealing, that is) their "national history".


----------



## docmauser1

georgephillip said:


> _
> 
> 
> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> 
> It is not the amount of land that makes a nation strong and prosperous; but rather the metal of the people that makes them what they are.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Much of the Israel's metal was forged in (Dark and Satanic) European mills: ... _


Our honorable georgephillip and his _(Dark and Satanic)_ drivellll. Of course!


----------



## georgephillip

docmauser1 said:


> georgephillip said:
> 
> 
> 
> _
> 
> 
> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> 
> It is not the amount of land that makes a nation strong and prosperous; but rather the metal of the people that makes them what they are.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Much of the Israel's metal was forged in (Dark and Satanic) European mills: ... _
> 
> 
> 
> Our honorable georgephillip and his _(Dark and Satanic)_ drivellll. Of course!
Click to expand...

"To acquire the land for his state, Herzl was willing to beg from the table of every imperialist power, no matter how criminal. 

"He courted them all-the German Kaiser, the Turks, the Russian Tsar, and the British Empire. 

"In 1896, He entered into negotiations with the Turkish Sultan of the Ottoman Empire, which had ruled over Palestine for more than five hundred years. 

"HerzI offered the Sultan a deal-in exchange for giving Palestine to the Jews, *the Zionist movement would help soften world condemnation of Turkey for its genocidal campaign against the Armenians*. 

"He even pledged to meet with Armenian leaders to convince them to call off their resistance struggle!"

*Dark or Satanic, Drivel?*

The Hidden Roots of Zionism


----------



## toastman

George, aren't you tired of quoting other people all the time ? Can't you speak for yourself ?


----------



## Kondor3

georgephillip said:


> "..._We, Who?_..."


We, as in... the United States, and, to a lesser extent... The West in general.



> "..._The CIA trusts Israeli intelligence less than the Syrian or Saudi spies_..."



Doubtful. But even if true, so what? We are talking about Trust Between Whole Peoples, not trust between spooks, and a blind man could see that trust, vis a vis the Arabs.



> "..._We give them stuff ($8 million/day) because most of that comes home to Boeing and Lockheed Martin shareholders_..."



But most of what comes home to Boeing and Lockheed Martin shareholders could have been coming from Arabs  rather than Jews, but we like Jews lot better than Arabs - that's the point.



> "..._Israel would never have existed in the first place without British imperialism funding Jewish capital at a nine to one ratio during the British occupation of Palestine_..."



Looks like even the British liked the Jews better than they did the Arabs, even back then, eh? Given that they wanted Arab oil and oftentimes kissed Arab ass, the Brits must really have liked the Jews better, in order to fund at such disproportionate rates.



> :..._and if the British hadn't decapitated Arab leadership in Palestine during the 1936-39 revolt_..."



Best thing to do with a poisonous snake is to cut off it's head.

Well played, Brits...






Well played.

It's one of the risks you take when you revolt... sometimes, you lose... and the leadership pays the forfeit... another poor choice, in a very long string of poor choices that pervade the sorry-ass history of the Arabs of so-called Palestine.



> "..._1967 was when Israel PROVED her metal by murdering 34 Americans aboard the in an amateurish attempt to blame the Egyptians and drag this country into yet another war in the Middle East_..."



Yeah... on Day Two of the Six Day War... in the Fog of War... a bad-call fire-mission gone wrong... which scared the shit out of the Israelis and which some of their people stupidly tried to cover-up or explain-away... but, overall, an incident in which our own Court of Inquiry, and theirs, judged the incident as a mistake; one that Israel ponied-up and compensated for as best they could, monetarily.

It was a dangerous misunderstanding between friends when one of those friends was in the middle of a fight for its life against four larger nations (_Egypt, Syria, Jordan and Iraq - backed by others_) - and a bad thing happened between friends.

Funny how that 'bad thing happening between friends' has never allowed you (_those who wish to drive a wedge between those friends_) to Divide and Conquer as you would like. 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




You'd think that after 46 years it would sink-in with you 'characters' that that (_the June 6, 1967 USS Liberty incident_) is *NOT* the wedge you need to Divide and Conquer - to make the US write-off its Israeli ally - but, I guess, any bunch who would squat in shit-hole refugee camps for 65 years rather than picking up and moving and starting new lives elsewhere - well... such folks may not be the fastest-on-the-draw in reaching such conclusions.

Oh, and, with respect to proving its mettle...

Israel proved HERS by kicking Arab ass in the 1967 Six Day War...

With Egyptian, Syrian, Jordanian and Iraqi dead and missing at a staggering 24,000, as opposed to 1,000 for Israel..

*A 24-to-1 kill-ratio, all on their own, and with nobody's help but their own !!!*

Not to mention thousands of Arab tanks and vehicles captured...

And the Golan...

And, of course, the Pearl of Palestine...

*Jerusalem*...

Yeah...

They proved their mettle, alright...

Pretty phukking amazing...

Never mind finishing-off the local Arabs in the 1973 War, when they kicked ass *AGAIN*...

That's ANOTHER reason why we like the Jews better than the Arabs...

The Jews are Winners, not whiners, and they know how to fight, and they know how to WIN, and how to HANG ONTO what they've won...



> "..._Today, some Imperial Tools in Israel never miss a chance to beat the drums for regime change in Iran while expecting the US to pay the cost in blood and treasure_..."



Au contraire... the Israelis are ready to do a fly-over and phukk-them-up good-and-proper all by themselves, without the slightest help from us. Within the past couple of years, we've had our hands full trying to persuade the Israelis not to go-off half-cocked on their own and hit the Iranians before the need for a joint strike becomes more clear.



> "..._Why is exactly why western imperialism created the Jewish state in the first place._"



Uhhhh... yeah... that's why.... yeah, yeah... that's the ticket...

Way back in the 1930s or 1940s, a group of Western Imperialists (_Jew-lovers and tools of the International Jooooooish Kornspiracy, no doubt, from London and Washington and Paris  and other capitals_) all got toghether on some remote island where the meeting could never be detected or reported-upon, and they pulled out a Jewish Crystal Ball...

And that Crystal Ball gave them...

1. a wide-screen 'window' into the world of 2000 A.D. and beyond

2. a detailed look at the Iranian nuclear program

3. a vision of the dangerous Iranian theocracy that would spring-up in 1979

4. a vision of the Arab Troubles of 2000 A.D. and beyond...

5. a vision of the Iranian theocracy calling for the destruction of Israel

6. a vision of how powerful and influential a State of Israel would become after several wars

7. a vision of the Israelis destroying an Iraqi nuclear facility as a precedent for future action

8. a vision of the Israelis campaigning against the Iranian theocracy gaining nuclear weapons

...a vision so clear that those Evil Western Imperialists of the 1930s and 1940s decided then-and-there to create a State of Israel, so that those New Age Jews could phukk with the Iranians, and so that they could stir-up bad feelings and war-sentiments against a Dangerous Iranian Theocracy, and so that they could sucker the United States into doing all their work for them.

Yeah... THAT'S why Western Imperialists created the State of Israel, alright...

Yep... yep... yep... yeppers... yeah... that's the ticket!

Two words for that...

Puhhhh---leeeeze !

Honest-to-God, no bullshit...

You characters (_Palestinian propaganda-shills and Militant Islam Apologists and Jew-Bashers_) really DO take the cake...

When I think of you collectively, I cannot help but conjure-up images along the following lines...






Clowns...

Riding a clown-car...

Collectively, if not individually, your arguments and rationale and casus belli and your blame-targets and your excuses for your present condition, are ineffective, incompetent, illogical, delusional, comical and pathetic...

You guys really *DO* have to get some new material...

'Cause what "you've" been usin' stopped working 20 or 30 years ago...

It's just that ya'll haven't noticed yet...


----------



## georgephillip

toastman said:


> George, aren't you tired of quoting other people all the time ? Can't you speak for yourself ?


*Sure.
What's your problem with History?*

"The iron wall of English bayonets"

"The First World War and the Russian Revolution caused the collapse of Herzl's three beloved patrons, the Ottoman Empire, the German Kaiser, and Russian Tsarism. Though the Zionists played all sides covertly during the war, the more farsighted leaders anticipated that Britain would emerge as the dominant imperialist power from the war. 

"Weizmann stated as early as 1914, 'We can reasonably say that should Palestine fall within the British sphere of influence, and should Britain encourage Jewish settlement there, as a British dependency, we could have in twenty to thirty years a million Jews Out there, perhaps more; they would develop the country, *bring back civilization to it and form a very effective guard for the Suez Canal.'*

"When the war ended, Palestine became a British colony and the Zionists found they shared many interests with their new colonial masters. In 1917 Britain issued the Balfour Declaration, which was the first official recognition of the Zionist settlements in Palestine. 

"Under the British Mandate Government, Britain privileged the small Jewish population over the Palestinians. 

"In 1917 there were 56,000 Jews in Palestine and 644,000 Palestinian Arabs. Still Britain gave Jewish capital 90 percent of concessions for projects like building roads and power plants and by 1935, Zionists owned 872 out of the 1,212 industrial firms in Palestine."

The Hidden Roots of Zionism

*Why do you insist on pretending Israel is anything except a rogue state created by western imperialists to stimulate arms sales in the Middle East?*


----------



## georgephillip

*There was no "bad-call" friendly fire involved in Israel's deliberate attack on the USS Liberty as every surviving crew member of that murderous assault testifies. *

"At approximately 0600 hours (all times local) on the morning of June 8, 1967 an Israeli maritime reconnaissance aircraft observer reported seeing 'a US Navy cargo type ship,' just outside the coverage of the Israeli coastal radar defense net, bearing the hull markings 'GTR-5'.[11] This report, made to Israeli naval HQ, was also forwarded immediately to the Israeli navy intelligence directorate.[12]

"Throughout the remainder of the day prior to the attack, Israeli reconnaissance aircraft regularly flew out to USS Liberty's position and orbited the ship before returning to their bases in Israel. *A total of no fewer than eight (8) such flights were made.[*13]

"At approximately 1050 hours, the naval observer from the early morning reconnaissance flight arrived at Israeli air force HQ and sat down with the air-naval liaison officer there. The two officers consulted Jane's Fighting Ships and learned that the ship reported earlier in the day was USS Liberty, a United States Navy technical research ship.[14]

"From 0900 hours on June 8, 1967, until the time of the attack five hours later, USS Liberty maintained a speed of approximately five knots and a generally westerly-northwesterly course.[15]

"At 1400 hours, while approximately 17 miles off the Gaza coast, USS Liberty's crew observed three surface radar contacts closing with their position at high speed. A few moments later, the bridge radar crew observed high speed aircraft passing over the surface returns on the same heading.[16]

"Within a few short moments, and without any warning, Israeli fighter aircraft launched a rocket attack on USS Liberty. The aircraft made repeated firing passes, attacking USS Liberty with rockets and their internal cannons. After the first flight of fighter aircraft had exhausted their ordnance, subsequent flights of Israeli fighter aircraft continued to prosecute the attack with rockets, cannon fire, and napalm. [17]

"During the air attack, USS Liberty's crew had difficulty contacting Sixth Fleet to request assistance due to intense communications jamming[18]

"The initial targets on the ship were the command bridge, communications antennas, and the four .50 caliber machine guns, placed on the ship to repel boarders.[19]"

*Heroic Jews deliberately murdered 34 US service members in 1967 and their apologists in 2013 squeal like kosher whores whenever that truth is raised. 
*

*That's at least as funny as a car full of centrist clowns catching a Hellfire Missile in their collective ass-holes.*
USS Liberty Memorial: Summary of Events


----------



## Kondor3

georgephillip said:


> "..."



What part of "_The 1967 USS Liberty incident' is not sufficient for your purposes of attempting to drive a wedge between the United States and Israel_" do you not understand?

Oh, and, do not blame the rest of the world because 'you characters' end-up looking like clowns.

That's another one of your bad choices, as well, for using stale old bait that is repeated so often that it ends-up falling on entirely deaf ears.

As I said before, you jokers really do have to come up with some new material.

But you won't... because it doesn't exist... leaving you with nothing to do but beat the same old dead horse, day after day, year after boring year, until, finally, nobody is really listening to ya'll...






"_Insanity is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results each time._" - apochryphally attributed to Albert Einstein


----------



## RoccoR

georgephillip,  _et al,_

It is a behavioral process whereby a nations response becomes more frequent or more predictable in a given a continuous hostile environment --- reinforcement over time.

The reinforcement - typically is a conflict related stimulus provoking a combative response. 



georgephillip said:


> Why do you insist on pretending Israel is anything except a rogue state created by western imperialists to stimulate arms sales in the Middle East?


*(COMMENT)*

For more than six decades, the Arab League and the Palestinians have been provoking the Israelis to consistently respond with greater and greater harsh reactions to hostile events.  Over time, Israel becomes increasing more sensitive to a given Palestinian stimulus which becomes increasingly effective in evoking a ever more draconian response.

The environment the Palestinian now has is a direct result of their own making.

The more the Palestinians poke the bear, the more aggravated the bear becomes.

Most Respectfully,
R


----------



## toastman

georgephillip said:


> *There was no "bad-call" friendly fire involved in Israel's deliberate attack on the USS Liberty as every surviving crew member of that murderous assault testifies. *
> 
> "At approximately 0600 hours (all times local) on the morning of June 8, 1967 an Israeli maritime reconnaissance aircraft observer reported seeing 'a US Navy cargo type ship,' just outside the coverage of the Israeli coastal radar defense net, bearing the hull markings 'GTR-5'.[11] This report, made to Israeli naval HQ, was also forwarded immediately to the Israeli navy intelligence directorate.[12]
> 
> "Throughout the remainder of the day prior to the attack, Israeli reconnaissance aircraft regularly flew out to USS Liberty's position and orbited the ship before returning to their bases in Israel. *A total of no fewer than eight (8) such flights were made.[*13]
> 
> "At approximately 1050 hours, the naval observer from the early morning reconnaissance flight arrived at Israeli air force HQ and sat down with the air-naval liaison officer there. The two officers consulted Jane's Fighting Ships and learned that the ship reported earlier in the day was USS Liberty, a United States Navy technical research ship.[14]
> 
> "From 0900 hours on June 8, 1967, until the time of the attack five hours later, USS Liberty maintained a speed of approximately five knots and a generally westerly-northwesterly course.[15]
> 
> "At 1400 hours, while approximately 17 miles off the Gaza coast, USS Liberty's crew observed three surface radar contacts closing with their position at high speed. A few moments later, the bridge radar crew observed high speed aircraft passing over the surface returns on the same heading.[16]
> 
> "Within a few short moments, and without any warning, Israeli fighter aircraft launched a rocket attack on USS Liberty. The aircraft made repeated firing passes, attacking USS Liberty with rockets and their internal cannons. After the first flight of fighter aircraft had exhausted their ordnance, subsequent flights of Israeli fighter aircraft continued to prosecute the attack with rockets, cannon fire, and napalm. [17]
> 
> "During the air attack, USS Liberty's crew had difficulty contacting Sixth Fleet to request assistance due to intense communications jamming[18]
> 
> "The initial targets on the ship were the command bridge, communications antennas, and the four .50 caliber machine guns, placed on the ship to repel boarders.[19]"
> 
> *Heroic Jews deliberately murdered 34 US service members in 1967 and their apologists in 2013 squeal like kosher whores whenever that truth is raised.
> *
> 
> *That's at least as funny as a car full of centrist clowns catching a Hellfire Missile in their collective ass-holes.*
> USS Liberty Memorial: Summary of Events



Murdered my ass. You're such a rabid conspiracy theorist George. I picture you walking outside of your apartment looking over your should with paranoia every second thinking the government is gonna kill you or something. 
I know FULL WELL that you know the Liberty was not intentional. You just like to use it because you and all the other anti - Zionists love to demonize Israel.


----------



## toastman

Kondor3 said:


> georgephillip said:
> 
> 
> 
> "..."
> 
> 
> 
> 
> What part of "_The 1967 USS Liberty incident' is not sufficient for your purposes of attempting to drive a wedge between the United States and Israel_" do you not understand?
> 
> Oh, and, do not blame the rest of the world because 'you characters' end-up looking like clowns.
> 
> That's another one of your bad choices, as well, for using stale old bait that is repeated so often that it ends-up falling on entirely deaf ears.
> 
> As I said before, you jokers really do have to come up with some new material.
> 
> But you won't... because it doesn't exist... leaving you with nothing to do but beat the same old dead horse, day after day, year after boring year, until, finally, nobody is really listening to ya'll...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> "_Insanity is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results each time._" - apochryphally attributed to Albert Einstein
Click to expand...




RoccoR said:


> georgephillip,  _et al,_
> 
> It is a behavioral process whereby a nations response becomes more frequent or more predictable in a given a continuous hostile environment --- reinforcement over time.
> 
> The reinforcement - typically is a conflict related stimulus provoking a combative response.
> 
> 
> 
> georgephillip said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Why do you insist on pretending Israel is anything except a rogue state created by western imperialists to stimulate arms sales in the Middle East?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> For more than six decades, the Arab League and the Palestinians have been provoking the Israelis to consistently respond with greater and greater harsh reactions to hostile events.  Over time, Israel becomes increasing more sensitive to a given Palestinian stimulus which becomes increasingly effective in evoking a ever more draconian response.
> 
> The environment the Palestinian now has is a direct result of their own making.
> 
> The more the Palestinians poke the bear, the more aggravated the bear becomes.
> 
> Most Respectfully,
> R
Click to expand...


Kondor and Rocco, both of these posts are excellent and I commend you for them.


----------



## georgephillip

RoccoR said:


> georgephillip,  _et al,_
> 
> It is a behavioral process whereby a nations response becomes more frequent or more predictable in a given a continuous hostile environment --- reinforcement over time.
> 
> The reinforcement - typically is a conflict related stimulus provoking a combative response.
> 
> 
> 
> georgephillip said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Why do you insist on pretending Israel is anything except a rogue state created by western imperialists to stimulate arms sales in the Middle East?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> For more than six decades, the Arab League and the Palestinians have been provoking the Israelis to consistently respond with greater and greater harsh reactions to hostile events.  Over time, Israel becomes increasing more sensitive to a given Palestinian stimulus which becomes increasingly effective in evoking a ever more draconian response.
> 
> The environment the Palestinian now has is a direct result of their own making.
> 
> The more the Palestinians poke the bear, the more aggravated the bear becomes.
> 
> Most Respectfully,
> R
Click to expand...

*More than six decades ago, Rocco, Jews were one-third of all Palestinians owning about seven percent of the land. Today Jews control virtually all the land and water between the River and the sea. What response would you expect from those who've been victimized by Israel's creeping annexation since its "independence" in 1948? 

BTW, that bear's currently waking up in Moscow.*


----------



## toastman

georgephillip said:


> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> 
> georgephillip,  _et al,_
> 
> It is a behavioral process whereby a nations response becomes more frequent or more predictable in a given a continuous hostile environment --- reinforcement over time.
> 
> The reinforcement - typically is a conflict related stimulus provoking a combative response.
> 
> 
> 
> georgephillip said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Why do you insist on pretending Israel is anything except a rogue state created by western imperialists to stimulate arms sales in the Middle East?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> For more than six decades, the Arab League and the Palestinians have been provoking the Israelis to consistently respond with greater and greater harsh reactions to hostile events.  Over time, Israel becomes increasing more sensitive to a given Palestinian stimulus which becomes increasingly effective in evoking a ever more draconian response.
> 
> The environment the Palestinian now has is a direct result of their own making.
> 
> The more the Palestinians poke the bear, the more aggravated the bear becomes.
> 
> Most Respectfully,
> R
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> *More than six decades ago, Rocco, Jews were one-third of all Palestinians owning about seven percent of the land. Today Jews control virtually all the land and water between the River and the sea. What response would you expect from those who've been victimized by Israel's creeping annexation since its "independence" in 1948?
> 
> BTW, that bear's currently waking up in Moscow.*
Click to expand...


Palestinians and their supporters will ALWAYS find an excuse to justify Palestinian violence. ALWAYS
The Jews got the land, fair and square. Get over it. Like I keep saying, i they want any of Israels land, the only way to achieve this is through conventional warfare


----------



## georgephillip

toastman said:


> georgephillip said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> 
> georgephillip,  _et al,_
> 
> It is a behavioral process whereby a nations response becomes more frequent or more predictable in a given a continuous hostile environment --- reinforcement over time.
> 
> The reinforcement - typically is a conflict related stimulus provoking a combative response.
> 
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> For more than six decades, the Arab League and the Palestinians have been provoking the Israelis to consistently respond with greater and greater harsh reactions to hostile events.  Over time, Israel becomes increasing more sensitive to a given Palestinian stimulus which becomes increasingly effective in evoking a ever more draconian response.
> 
> The environment the Palestinian now has is a direct result of their own making.
> 
> The more the Palestinians poke the bear, the more aggravated the bear becomes.
> 
> Most Respectfully,
> R
> 
> 
> 
> *More than six decades ago, Rocco, Jews were one-third of all Palestinians owning about seven percent of the land. Today Jews control virtually all the land and water between the River and the sea. What response would you expect from those who've been victimized by Israel's creeping annexation since its "independence" in 1948?
> 
> BTW, that bear's currently waking up in Moscow.*
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Palestinians and their supporters will ALWAYS find an excuse to justify Palestinian violence. ALWAYS
> The Jews got the land, fair and square. Get over it. Like I keep saying, i they want any of Israels land, the only way to achieve this is through conventional warfare
Click to expand...

*How did thirty percent of Palestinians receive 55% of the land in 1948 "fair and square"?
Zionism never confused liberation and colonization or the role imperialism plays in their occupation of Palestine. Israel as a Jewish state will change or face the same fate as White South Africa did.*


----------



## Kondor3

_ "...Imperialists and Zionists and Jews, oh my...

Imperialists and Zionists and Jews, oh my..." _


----------



## docmauser1

georgephillip said:


> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> 
> _It is a behavioral process whereby a nations response becomes more frequent or more predictable in a given a continuous hostile environment --- reinforcement over time. The reinforcement - typically is a conflict related stimulus provoking a combative response.
> 
> 
> georgephillip said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Why do you insist on pretending Israel is anything except a rogue state created by western imperialists to stimulate arms sales in the Middle East?
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> (COMMENT)
> For more than six decades, the Arab League and the Palestinians have been provoking the Israelis to consistently respond with greater and greater harsh reactions to hostile events.  Over time, Israel becomes increasing more sensitive to a given Palestinian stimulus which becomes increasingly effective in evoking a ever more draconian response. The environment the Palestinian now has is a direct result of their own making. The more the Palestinians poke the bear, the more aggravated the bear becomes._
> 
> 
> 
> _More than six decades ago, Rocco, Jews were one-third of all Palestinians owning about seven percent of the land. Today Jews control virtually all the land and water between the River and the sea. What response would you expect from those who've been victimized by Israel's creeping annexation since its "independence" in 1948? BTW, that bear's currently waking up in Moscow._
Click to expand...

Our honorable georgephillip and his drivellaggio non sequitur, of course.


----------



## RoccoR

georgephillip,  _et al,_

Several issues here.



georgephillip said:


> More than six decades ago, Rocco, Jews were one-third of all Palestinians owning about seven percent of the land. Today Jews control virtually all the land and water between the River and the sea. What response would you expect from those who've been victimized by Israel's creeping annexation since its "independence" in 1948?
> 
> BTW, that bear's currently waking up in Moscow.


*(COMMENT)*

The Partition Plan is set the original conditions for the Jewish State and the Arab State _(both unnamed at the time)_.  The Partition Plan was not a Jewish contrivance, but rather, a UN recommendation by a special committee _(representatives of Australia, Canada, Czechoslovakia, Guatemala, India, Iran, Netherlands, Peru, Sweden, Uruguay and Yugoslavia)_ to the General Assembly.


The choice the Arabs and Palestinians made to reject both the Plan and participation in the implementation process, as well as, the choice to open hostilities --- set the conditions for the loss of ground control.

The Palestinian loss of ground control lead to the loss of resource control; a consequence of failure.

There is no "creeping annexation."  The territory bounded by the Armistice Lines that form the West Bank and Gaza Strip are formally recognized as the State of Palestine (SoP) (1988).  The Government of Israel (GoI) has not made any attempt to "annex" any portion of this territory, now defined as the State of Palestine.


At some point, the GoI will have to relinquish occupation control of the West Bank to SoP; within a framework of peace.

Organizational and infrastructural improvements that the GoI makes to Palestinian Territory is to the advantage to the SoP.

The Palestinians have demanded that ALL of the territory formally known as the Mandate for Palestine _(less Jordan)_, belongs to the Arabs.  The Jewish Agency _(out numbered 2:1 as you pointed out)_ by the Arab Palestinian, supported additionally by the combined forces of Egypt, Iraq, Jordan, Lebanon, and Syria, attempted by military force to negate the decision of the UN and to deny the right of the Jewish Agency to accept their apportionment under the Partition Plan.  The 1948 War of Independence and the two subsequent wars, provoked by the Arab Palestinian, supported additionally by the combined forces of Egypt, Iraq, Jordan, Lebanon, and Syria, have successively failed to take by military aggression _(in combination with state sponsored terrorism)_ what they were denied by the UN.

It is absolutely essential to the discussion to understand the military occupation of territory today was a direct outcome of military intervention by the Arab League _(external influences)_ in direct support and coordination with Hostile Arab Palestinians in there bid to take control of Israel, and all the territory bounded by the former British Mandate for Palestine (less Jordan); as claimed by the Palestine National Charter of 1968.

Most Respectfully,
R


----------



## Kondor3

georgephillip said:


> "..._BTW, that bear's currently waking up in Moscow._"


If Russia is unable and unwilling to go to war with the United States and The West (NATO, et al) over their long-time client, Syria, then...

They sure-as-hell aren't going to war over pissant, failed, dying Rump-Palestine; what's left of the place, anyway...

There is no Arab Cavalry coming over the hill this time.

There is also no Russian Cavalry coming over the hill this time, either, or anytime in the foreseeable future.

The Palestinians are phukking bat-shit-crazy Neo-Nazis and they are simply not worth the risk and the blood and treasure.

Not to the Russians, anyway.

They know a Loser when they see one.

Don't hold your breath waiting for the Russians.

They aren't coming.


----------



## docmauser1

georgephillip said:


> _How did thirty percent of Palestinians receive 55% of the land in 1948 "fair and square"?Zionism never confused liberation and colonization or the role imperialism plays in their occupation of Palestine. Israel as a Jewish state will change or face the same fate as White South Africa did._


Drivel.


----------



## Hoffstra

georgephillip said:


> *How did thirty percent of Palestinians receive 55% of the land in 1948 "fair and square"?
> Zionism never confused liberation and colonization or the role imperialism plays in their occupation of Palestine. Israel as a Jewish state will change or face the same fate as White South Africa did.*



this is a fact.

the Jews got a much higher percentage of Palestine than their percentage of the population.

of course the Arabs were mad at this.

and they responded with force.  

should the Arabs have accepted this travesty of justice?  in retrospect?  yes.

at the time, they made the right choice.


----------



## Kondor3

Hoffstra said:


> georgephillip said:
> 
> 
> 
> *How did thirty percent of Palestinians receive 55% of the land in 1948 "fair and square"?
> Zionism never confused liberation and colonization or the role imperialism plays in their occupation of Palestine. Israel as a Jewish state will change or face the same fate as White South Africa did.*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> this is a fact.
> 
> the Jews got a much higher percentage of Palestine than their percentage of the population.
> 
> of course the Arabs were mad at this.
> 
> and they responded with force.
> 
> should the Arabs have accepted this travesty of justice?  in retrospect?  yes.
> 
> at the time, they made the right choice.
Click to expand...

Their Big Mistake was not declaring Independence like the Israelis did, on Day One after the Termination of the British Mandate, and claiming theri own share per the 1947 UN Partition Plan.

But it's a Mistake that can no longer be erased... no do-overs... they've lost their bid to claim the entire river-to-sea land mass... and they're quickly losing what little they still DO have.

Their SECOND mistake was joining their Arab-Muslim brethren from Egypt, Syria, Jordan, Lebanon and Iraq, in trying to drive the Jews into the Med afterwards...

Their THIRD mistake was pulling their civilians out of Israeli-controlled territory and thereby abandoning their lands, on the false promises of their Arab neighbor countries that all would be won back for them.

Three strikes and you're out.


----------



## Hoffstra

Kondor3 said:


> ....Their THIRD mistake was pulling their civilians out of Israeli-controlled territory and thereby abandoning their lands, on the false promises of their Arab neighbor countries that all would be won back for them.
> 
> Three strikes and you're out.



you mean like how the Jews "pulled" their people out of the Middle East after the 1948 war?


----------



## Kondor3

That wasn't the Jews pulling their people out...

That was the Arabs kicking the Jews out...

Unlike the Palestinian-Arabs, where the vast majority were not kicked-off their land, but voluntarily abandoned it after being persuaded to do so by their Muslim-Arab neighbor-countries, who promised to win it all back for them within a couple of weeks...

65 years later, the less ambitious and resourceful of those Palestinians who made that choice and their descendants, are still paying the price for their foolishness, rotting in refugee camps and towns... *65 friggin' years later!!!*...

You'd have thought they'd have taken the hint by now and moved on to greener pastures...

The Jews in other Arab countries, however, were simply expelled - not just a small percentage of them being kicked-out by local militias, but *ALL* of them kicked-out, through the actions of Central Government A or B or C...


----------



## Hoffstra

Kondor3 said:


> That wasn't the Jews pulling their people out...
> 
> That was the Arabs kicking the Jews out...
> 
> Unlike the Palestinian-Arabs, where the vast majority were not kicked-off their land, but voluntarily abandoned it after being persuaded to do so by their Muslim-Arab neighbor-countries...



you are lying.

just as around half of the Jews were expelled from Arab/Muslim lands, around half of the Arabs were expelled from Israel.

there can be no peace when folks like you keep lying about history.


----------



## Kondor3

Hoffstra said:


> Kondor3 said:
> 
> 
> 
> That wasn't the Jews pulling their people out...
> 
> That was the Arabs kicking the Jews out...
> 
> Unlike the Palestinian-Arabs, where the vast majority were not kicked-off their land, but voluntarily abandoned it after being persuaded to do so by their Muslim-Arab neighbor-countries...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> you are lying.
> 
> just as around half of the Jews were expelled from Arab/Muslim lands, around half of the Arabs were expelled from Israel.
> 
> there can be no peace when folks like you keep lying about history.
Click to expand...

I seldom lie, and can never recall telling a lie on this forum.

I may have made a handful of mistakes here-and-there.

But I don't lie, and certainly do not feel pressured to by the likes of you.

The obligatory Wiki is a good place to start.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jewish_exodus_from_Arab_and_Muslim_countries

There were, indeed, a couple of Arab countries in which the Jews bailed-out en masse voluntarily - kinda-sorta...

There were, however, far more countries, and time-frames, in which they were pushed out by those central governments or driven-out by street mobs or had their citizenship pulled, necessitating flight, and on and on and on...

And those were Jews being pushed out in PEACETIME within those various national borders...

Whereas the minority of Palestinians who were pushed out of THEIR homes by militia units in the 1948-1949 timeframe were in a land actively engaged in WAR, against their co-religionists, not peacetime within those borders...

And, yes, when you strip-out those who came to Israel voluntarily versus those who were obliged to flee their countries due to persecution during peacetime, you find that those pushed out were, indeed, in the majority...

Perhaps I erred in not using the phrase 'substantial majority' rather than 'vast majority', but I wasn't far off the mark, and if it WAS off the mark, it was off the mark as a mistake, and not a lie...

I would not lower myself to LIE to a Palestinian propaganda shill.

There's really no need; especially when one's side is winning by such impressive margins.

As to 'peace'... there is no such thing in the Palestinian vocabulary... at least not while a single Jew breathes 'between River and Sea'... who do you think you're kidding?


----------



## Hoffstra

Kondor3 said:


> I would not lower myself to LIE to a Palestinian propaganda shill.
> 
> There's really no need; especially when one's side is winning by such impressive margins.



why do you insist on continuing with these personal attacks?

can't we talk about these issues, without them?


----------



## MHunterB

Hoffstra said:


> Kondor3 said:
> 
> 
> 
> I would not lower myself to LIE to a Palestinian propaganda shill.
> 
> There's really no need; especially when one's side is winning by such impressive margins.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> why do you insist on continuing with these personal attacks?
> 
> can't we talk about these issues, without them?
Click to expand...


LOL!!!  Oh, that's so amusing coming as it does from a fraud and a fake.  So, how do you davven, Hoffy?


----------



## Kondor3

Hoffstra said:


> Kondor3 said:
> 
> 
> 
> I would not lower myself to LIE to a Palestinian propaganda shill.
> 
> There's really no need; especially when one's side is winning by such impressive margins.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> why do you insist on continuing with these personal attacks?
> 
> can't we talk about these issues, without them?
Click to expand...


I consider an accusation of 'lying' to be a personal attack.

In that context, you fired the first shot.

But, of course, somehow, you managed to overlook that.


----------



## Hoffstra

MHunterB said:


> LOL!!!  Oh, that' so amusing coming as it does from a fraud and a fake.  So, how do you davven, Hoffy?



why do you keep trolling me, by asking me how I pray?

this thread is about Israel and Apartheid, not my praying habits.


----------



## MHunterB

Hoffstra said:


> MHunterB said:
> 
> 
> 
> LOL!!!  Oh, that' so amusing coming as it does from a fraud and a fake.  So, how do you davven, Hoffy?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> why do you keep trolling me, by asking me how I pray?
> 
> this thread is about Israel and Apartheid, not my praying habits.
Click to expand...


The question goes to your assertions that you are a actual member of the Jewish people who has at some time actually been a practitioner of Judaism.   It's not 'trolling' .


----------



## Hoffstra

Israel and the West Bank will become one state.

the only question is whether the Arabs will have full rights or be second class citizens.


----------



## RoccoR

Hoffstra,  _et al,_

I am interested in your theory.



Hoffstra said:


> Israel and the West Bank will become one state.
> 
> the only question is whether the Arabs will have full rights or be second class citizens.


*(COMMENT)*

I think it would take more than a century peace (non-violence) before they will establish normalized relations between the people themselves; based on the number of residual Article 15 Jihadists.

But I would be interested in understanding your theory on how a productive nation could emerge from the two cultures.

Most Respectfully,
R


----------



## Kondor3

Now that it is slowly dawning upon the Palestinians that they cannot win militarily...

They are beginning to conjure sugar-plum visions of dismantling the Palestinian government and allowing Israel to annex the West Bank and Gaza and for all of the Palestinians to become citizens of Israel...

This way, inside of a generation or so, they figure they can breed them out (out-produce the Israelis with new births) and then out-vote them at the polls, and thus re-take by Ballot what they could not re-take by the Rifle...

Silly, silly Arabs...


----------



## georgephillip

RoccoR said:


> georgephillip,  _et al,_
> 
> Several issues here.
> 
> 
> 
> georgephillip said:
> 
> 
> 
> More than six decades ago, Rocco, Jews were one-third of all Palestinians owning about seven percent of the land. Today Jews control virtually all the land and water between the River and the sea. What response would you expect from those who've been victimized by Israel's creeping annexation since its "independence" in 1948?
> 
> BTW, that bear's currently waking up in Moscow.
> 
> 
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> The Partition Plan is set the original conditions for the Jewish State and the Arab State _(both unnamed at the time)_.  The Partition Plan was not a Jewish contrivance, but rather, a UN recommendation by a special committee _(representatives of Australia, Canada, Czechoslovakia, Guatemala, India, Iran, Netherlands, Peru, Sweden, Uruguay and Yugoslavia)_ to the General Assembly.
> 
> 
> The choice the Arabs and Palestinians made to reject both the Plan and participation in the implementation process, as well as, the choice to open hostilities --- set the conditions for the loss of ground control.
> 
> The Palestinian loss of ground control lead to the loss of resource control; a consequence of failure.
> 
> There is no "creeping annexation."  The territory bounded by the Armistice Lines that form the West Bank and Gaza Strip are formally recognized as the State of Palestine (SoP) (1988).  The Government of Israel (GoI) has not made any attempt to "annex" any portion of this territory, now defined as the State of Palestine.
> 
> 
> At some point, the GoI will have to relinquish occupation control of the West Bank to SoP; within a framework of peace.
> 
> Organizational and infrastructural improvements that the GoI makes to Palestinian Territory is to the advantage to the SoP.
> 
> The Palestinians have demanded that ALL of the territory formally known as the Mandate for Palestine _(less Jordan)_, belongs to the Arabs.  The Jewish Agency _(out numbered 2:1 as you pointed out)_ by the Arab Palestinian, supported additionally by the combined forces of Egypt, Iraq, Jordan, Lebanon, and Syria, attempted by military force to negate the decision of the UN and to deny the right of the Jewish Agency to accept their apportionment under the Partition Plan.  The 1948 War of Independence and the two subsequent wars, provoked by the Arab Palestinian, supported additionally by the combined forces of Egypt, Iraq, Jordan, Lebanon, and Syria, have successively failed to take by military aggression _(in combination with state sponsored terrorism)_ what they were denied by the UN.
> 
> It is absolutely essential to the discussion to understand the military occupation of territory today was a direct outcome of military intervention by the Arab League _(external influences)_ in direct support and coordination with Hostile Arab Palestinians in there bid to take control of Israel, and all the territory bounded by the former British Mandate for Palestine (less Jordan); as claimed by the Palestine National Charter of 1968.
> 
> Most Respectfully,
> R
Click to expand...

*The UN Partition Plan is why the Arab League objected to giving Jews 55% of Mandate Palestine and that bit of western imperial deceit was only obtained through bribes and intimidation as even Harry Truman noted:*

"United States (Vote: For): President Truman later noted, 'The facts were that not only were there pressure movements around the United Nations unlike anything that had been seen there before, but that the White House, too, was subjected to a constant barrage. I do not think I ever had as much pressure and propaganda aimed at the White House as I had in this instance. The persistence of a few of the extreme Zionist leadersactuated by political motives and engaging in political threatsdisturbed and annoyed me.'[24]

"India (Vote: Against): Indian Prime Minister Jawaharlal Nehru spoke with anger and contempt for the way the UN vote had been lined up. He said the Zionists had tried to bribe India with millions and at the same time his sister, Vijaya Lakshmi Pandit, had received daily warnings that her life was in danger unless 'she voted right'.[25]

"Liberia (Vote: For): Liberia's Ambassador to the United States complained that the US delegation threatened aid cuts to several countries.[26] Harvey S. Firestone, Jr., President of Firestone Natural Rubber Company, with major holdings in the country, also pressured the Liberian government[21][23]

"Philippines (Vote: For): In the days before the vote, the Philippines' representative General Carlos P. Romulo stated 'We hold that the issue is primarily moral. The issue is whether the United Nations should accept responsibility for the enforcement of a policy which is clearly repugnant to the valid nationalist aspirations of the people of Palestine. *The Philippines Government holds that the United Nations ought not to accept such responsibility*'. After a phone call from Washington, the representative was recalled and the Philippines' vote changed.[23]

"Haiti (Vote: For): The promise of a five million dollar loan may have secured Haiti's vote for partition.[27]

"France (Vote: For): Shortly before the vote, France's delegate to the United Nations was visited by Bernard Baruch, a long-term Jewish supporter of the Democratic Party who, during the recent world war, had been an economic adviser to President Roosevelt, and had latterly been appointed by President Truman as the United States' ambassador to the newly-created UN Atomic Energy Commission. He was, privately, a supporter of the Irgun and it's front organization, the American League for a Free Palestine. Baruch implied that a French failure to support the resolution might cause planned American aid to France, which was badly needed for reconstruction, French currency reserves being exhausted and its balance of payments heavily in deficit, not to materialise. Previously, in order to avoid antagonising its Arab colonies, France had not publicly supported the resolution. After considering the danger of American aid being withheld, France finally voted in favour of it. So, too, did France's neighbours, Belgium, Luxembourg and the Netherlands.[20]"

United Nations Partition Plan for Palestine - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


----------



## Sweet_Caroline

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cn4r7ZjG9Nc&list=PL0877FD9B8BE484CE&index=32]A PALESTINIAN MYTH - The so said NAKBA - YouTube[/ame]


----------



## P F Tinmore

Indeed. George, resolution 181 was bases on threats, bribes, and arm twisting.

If you read about Israel's admission to the UN: A/PV.207 of 11 May 1949 You seriously wonder how it got the votes.



> Apart from those issues, was it possible to maintain that the applicant State was eligible for membership under Article 4 of the Charter? The replies of the representative of that State, as well as the behaviour of his Government with regard to the relevant decisions of the General Assembly, led to the conclusion tot *Israel had not fulfilled and still did not fulfil the requirements of that Article. *Furthermore, *was the Assembly satisfied that the applicant State had definite boundaries within which it exercised its jurisdiction?* Mr. Abbas stressed that, in putting those considerations before the Assembly, he was merely asking it to be fair and impartial in its judgment
> 
> Attempts were being made to effect Israel's admission before a full report had been received from the Conciliation Commission, which had been set up to consider many of the points raised in the course of the current discussion. Pressure hid been exerted to order to force a hasty decision upon the General Assembly. Mr. Abbas felt that such a decision would not be in the interests of Israel or of toe United Nations as a whole.
> 
> The delegation of Iraq considered that *the whole question of Palestine had been treated in a manner contrary to the principles of the Charter and of international law and to the ancient principle whereby every country was allotted to the people who inhabited it.* In view of those considerations, the delegation of *Iraq was of the opinion that the admission of Israel to the United Nations would be the highest consummation of injustice *and would drive another nail into the coffin of the United Nations.
> 
> *The frontiers of the State applying for membership in the United Nations were as yet undefined.* Moreover, the status of the area in and around Jerusalem and of the Holy Places all over Palestine, which were to have come under direct and effective United Nations control, was not yet determined.
> 
> The representative of the applicant State had failed to give satisfactory answers on any of the three main issues raised in the Ad Hoc Political Committee. It was clear that the applicant State intended to do practically nothing in connexion with the fate of the displaced Arabs. Equally, it had done nothing substantial in the matter of the assassination of the late United Nations Mediator. In that connexion, Fawzi Bey remarked that certain statements in the report (S/1315) submitted by the applicant State to the Security Council on that matter were incorrect *He also observed that he understood that the reputed assassins were to be decorated by their Government.*
> 
> The Committee had decided, contrary to long-established practice, to invite the representative of the applicant State to participate in the discussion. Even before that representative had completed his statements and replies, however, a joint resolution had been submitted recommending the admission of Israel to the United Nations, thus showing that the statements of the representative of the applicant State could have had but little effect on the intentions of the sponsors of the resolution. *The resolution was in favour of admitting the applicant State to membership in the United Nations, but not of admitting the Arab refugees to their own homes. *Were those refugees not human beings? Did not a Universal Declaration of Human Rights exist? The displaced Arabs continued to suffer from starvation and disease, they received bad food under the cloak of international charity, they were refused enjoyment of their rights as members of a nation, as human beings and as owners of property. Who would make good the humiliations they were suffering?* What restitution would be offered for the death of their children? Who would compensate them for the loss of their property and their country? Fawzi Bey did not believe that any of those things would be done by the delegations which favoured the admission of Israel, or by the Jews themselves, who had systematically driven a whole nation out of their native land. *


----------



## RoccoR

P F Tinmore,  _et al,_

I believe you've made another timeline mistake _(as opposed to an attempt to intentionally mislead George)_.



P F Tinmore said:


> Indeed. George, resolution 181 was bases on threats, bribes, and arm twisting.
> 
> If you read about Israel's admission to the UN: A/PV.207 of 11 May 1949 You seriously wonder how it got the votes.


*(COMMENT)*

As you can see, this (A/PV.207 of 11 May 1949) is not about the passage of General Assembly Resolution 181(II) which was passed in 1947 _(two years earlier)_.  This is a discussion on the acceptance of the Application for Membership; pertaining to the pledge in Part I, Section F, of GA/RES/181(II) _("sympathetic consideration should be given to its application for admission")_ IAW Article 4 of the Charter of the United Nations.  This discussion was held two months after the adoption of the application by the Security Council. 

It had nothing to do with the actual acceptance to the UNCOP recommendation for GA/RES/181(II). 

Most Respectfully,
R


----------



## P F Tinmore

RoccoR said:


> P F Tinmore,  _et al,_
> 
> I believe you've made another timeline mistake _(as opposed to an attempt to intentionally mislead George)_.
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> Indeed. George, resolution 181 was bases on threats, bribes, and arm twisting.
> 
> If you read about Israel's admission to the UN: A/PV.207 of 11 May 1949 You seriously wonder how it got the votes.
> 
> 
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> As you can see, this (A/PV.207 of 11 May 1949) is not about the passage of General Assembly Resolution 181(II) which was passed in 1947 _(two years earlier)_.  This is a discussion on the acceptance of the Application for Membership; pertaining to the pledge in Part I, Section F, of GA/RES/181(II) _("sympathetic consideration should be given to its application for admission")_ IAW Article 4 of the Charter of the United Nations.  This discussion was held two months after the adoption of the application by the Security Council.
> 
> It had nothing to do with the actual acceptance to the UNCOP recommendation for GA/RES/181(II).
> 
> Most Respectfully,
> R
Click to expand...


I listed these as two separate issues, Perhaps I should have been more clear.

There were issues in the vote on resolution 181.

There were also issues in Israel's acceptance into the UN.


----------



## RoccoR

P F Tinmore,  _et al,_

Clearly, the adoption of GA/RES/181(II) and its implementation were pivotal points in the outcomes we see today.



P F Tinmore said:


> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore,  _et al,_
> 
> I believe you've made another timeline mistake _(as opposed to an attempt to intentionally mislead George)_.
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> Indeed. George, resolution 181 was bases on threats, bribes, and arm twisting.
> 
> If you read about Israel's admission to the UN: A/PV.207 of 11 May 1949 You seriously wonder how it got the votes.
> 
> 
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> As you can see, this (A/PV.207 of 11 May 1949) is not about the passage of General Assembly Resolution 181(II) which was passed in 1947 _(two years earlier)_.  This is a discussion on the acceptance of the Application for Membership; pertaining to the pledge in Part I, Section F, of GA/RES/181(II) _("sympathetic consideration should be given to its application for admission")_ IAW Article 4 of the Charter of the United Nations.  This discussion was held two months after the adoption of the application by the Security Council.
> 
> It had nothing to do with the actual acceptance to the UNCOP recommendation for GA/RES/181(II).
> 
> Most Respectfully,
> R
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I listed these as two separate issues, Perhaps I should have been more clear.
> 
> There were issues in the vote on resolution 181.
> 
> There were also issues in Israel's acceptance into the UN.
Click to expand...

*(COMMENT)*

On the issue of GA/RES/181(II), it is exceptionally hard to see and understand the perspectives of the UNCOP and General Assembly in that that timeframe.  We can Monday Morning Quarterback the game, and point fingers today.  But back then, it was an entirely different environment; a very different set of conditions all together.

The surviving Jews of Europe, fresh from the clutches of the Final Solution and the horrors of the Holocaust, had a mind set; one which the Arab could not appreciate.  

It should be remembered that nowhere, in the annals of history for the last two millennium, do we attribute any wars aggression or conquest to the Jewish People.  The same could not be said for many nations of the world; especially the Arab.​
The need and the mindset for the special consideration given the Jewish People was of a magnitude that few can appreciate today.  While I've heard all the pro-Palestinian discussion on how terrible the conditions are in the West Bank and Gaza Strip, all about the "apartheid" character of Israel, I seriously doubt that the Palestinian has any conditions to report of a comparative nature to Auschwitz, Belzec, Chelmno, Dachau, Majdanek, Sobibor, or Treblinka.   Just as I am sure that the (apartheid era) condition in Soweto (SA) are in no way replicated in Palestine (West Bank or Gaza).  The "occupation" is about the containment of the violence promoted by Jihadist and Feday'een activities; which organize, instigate, facilitate, participate in, finance, and encourage operations against the sovereignty, territorial integrity or political independence of Israel.

It is not expected that the Palestinian should understand the reasons, no matter how it is explained.  The myopic view is that only the Palestinians have the right to self determinations, and so they manipulate the facts behind criminal containment and the quarantine of the Jihadist and Feday'een, so necessary to maintain peace and security, into disguised victimization.  They tend to deny and past history of criminal and terrorist behaviors; even as they call for it today.

Most Respectfully,
R


----------



## docmauser1

georgephillip said:


> _The UN Partition Plan is why the Arab League objected to giving Jews 55% of Mandate Palestine ..._


The UNSCOP reported to the Security Council on Feb.16, 1948:
"Powerful Arab interests, both inside and outside Palestine, are defying the resolution of the General Assembly and are engaged in a deliberate effort to alter by force the settlement envisaged therein."
And they decided to fight it out and got a kampfstiefel in the arse and are still trying to pull it out painfully. Case dismissed and closed.


----------



## P F Tinmore

RoccoR said:


> P F Tinmore,  _et al,_
> 
> Clearly, the adoption of GA/RES/181(II) and its implementation were pivotal points in the outcomes we see today.
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore,  _et al,_
> 
> I believe you've made another timeline mistake _(as opposed to an attempt to intentionally mislead George)_.
> 
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> As you can see, this (A/PV.207 of 11 May 1949) is not about the passage of General Assembly Resolution 181(II) which was passed in 1947 _(two years earlier)_.  This is a discussion on the acceptance of the Application for Membership; pertaining to the pledge in Part I, Section F, of GA/RES/181(II) _("sympathetic consideration should be given to its application for admission")_ IAW Article 4 of the Charter of the United Nations.  This discussion was held two months after the adoption of the application by the Security Council.
> 
> It had nothing to do with the actual acceptance to the UNCOP recommendation for GA/RES/181(II).
> 
> Most Respectfully,
> R
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I listed these as two separate issues, Perhaps I should have been more clear.
> 
> There were issues in the vote on resolution 181.
> 
> There were also issues in Israel's acceptance into the UN.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> On the issue of GA/RES/181(II), it is exceptionally hard to see and understand the perspectives of the UNCOP and General Assembly in that that timeframe.  We can Monday Morning Quarterback the game, and point fingers today.  But back then, it was an entirely different environment; a very different set of conditions all together.
> 
> The surviving Jews of Europe, fresh from the clutches of the Final Solution and the horrors of the Holocaust, had a mind set; one which the Arab could not appreciate.
> 
> It should be remembered that nowhere, in the annals of history for the last two millennium, do we attribute any wars aggression or conquest to the Jewish People.  The same could not be said for many nations of the world; especially the Arab.​
> The need and the mindset for the special consideration given the Jewish People was of a magnitude that few can appreciate today.  While I've heard all the pro-Palestinian discussion on how terrible the conditions are in the West Bank and Gaza Strip, all about the "apartheid" character of Israel, I seriously doubt that the Palestinian has any conditions to report of a comparative nature to Auschwitz, Belzec, Chelmno, Dachau, Majdanek, Sobibor, or Treblinka.   Just as I am sure that the (apartheid era) condition in Soweto (SA) are in no way replicated in Palestine (West Bank or Gaza).  The "occupation" is about the containment of the violence promoted by Jihadist and Feday'een activities; which organize, instigate, facilitate, participate in, finance, and encourage operations against the sovereignty, territorial integrity or political independence of Israel.
> 
> It is not expected that the Palestinian should understand the reasons, no matter how it is explained.  The myopic view is that only the Palestinians have the right to self determinations, and so they manipulate the facts behind criminal containment and the quarantine of the Jihadist and Feday'een, so necessary to maintain peace and security, into disguised victimization.  They tend to deny and past history of criminal and terrorist behaviors; even as they call for it today.
> 
> Most Respectfully,
> R
Click to expand...


Why should the Palestinians get the boot because of what happened in Europe?



> The delegation of Iraq considered that the whole question of Palestine had been treated in a manner contrary to the principles of the Charter and of international law and to the ancient principle whereby every country was allotted to the people who inhabited it.
> 
> A/PV.207 of 11 May 1949



Why do you always slime the Palestinians for defending their rights?


----------



## toastman

P F Tinmore said:


> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore,  _et al,_
> 
> Clearly, the adoption of GA/RES/181(II) and its implementation were pivotal points in the outcomes we see today.
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> I listed these as two separate issues, Perhaps I should have been more clear.
> 
> There were issues in the vote on resolution 181.
> 
> There were also issues in Israel's acceptance into the UN.
> 
> 
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> On the issue of GA/RES/181(II), it is exceptionally hard to see and understand the perspectives of the UNCOP and General Assembly in that that timeframe.  We can Monday Morning Quarterback the game, and point fingers today.  But back then, it was an entirely different environment; a very different set of conditions all together.
> 
> The surviving Jews of Europe, fresh from the clutches of the Final Solution and the horrors of the Holocaust, had a mind set; one which the Arab could not appreciate.
> 
> It should be remembered that nowhere, in the annals of history for the last two millennium, do we attribute any wars aggression or conquest to the Jewish People.  The same could not be said for many nations of the world; especially the Arab.​
> The need and the mindset for the special consideration given the Jewish People was of a magnitude that few can appreciate today.  While I've heard all the pro-Palestinian discussion on how terrible the conditions are in the West Bank and Gaza Strip, all about the "apartheid" character of Israel, I seriously doubt that the Palestinian has any conditions to report of a comparative nature to Auschwitz, Belzec, Chelmno, Dachau, Majdanek, Sobibor, or Treblinka.   Just as I am sure that the (apartheid era) condition in Soweto (SA) are in no way replicated in Palestine (West Bank or Gaza).  The "occupation" is about the containment of the violence promoted by Jihadist and Feday'een activities; which organize, instigate, facilitate, participate in, finance, and encourage operations against the sovereignty, territorial integrity or political independence of Israel.
> 
> It is not expected that the Palestinian should understand the reasons, no matter how it is explained.  The myopic view is that only the Palestinians have the right to self determinations, and so they manipulate the facts behind criminal containment and the quarantine of the Jihadist and Feday'een, so necessary to maintain peace and security, into disguised victimization.  They tend to deny and past history of criminal and terrorist behaviors; even as they call for it today.
> 
> Most Respectfully,
> R
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Why should the Palestinians get the boot because of what happened in Europe?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The delegation of Iraq considered that the whole question of Palestine had been treated in a manner contrary to the principles of the Charter and of international law and to the ancient principle whereby every country was allotted to the people who inhabited it.
> 
> A/PV.207 of 11 May 1949
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Why do you always slime the Palestinians for defending their rights?
Click to expand...


Give me some examples of the Palestinians defending their rights


----------



## docmauser1

toastman said:


> _Why should the Palestinians get the boot because of what happened in Europe?_


Why should jews get the boot because major arab immigrants from the hood decided to redistribute what wasn't theirs?


----------



## RoccoR

P F Tinmore,  _et al,_

This is the nature of conflict.



P F Tinmore said:


> Why should the Palestinians get the boot because of what happened in Europe?


*(COMMENT)*

The Palestinians did not "get the boot because of what happened in Europe" as you say.  They opened up hostilities and lost control.



P F Tinmore said:


> The delegation of Iraq considered that the whole question of Palestine had been treated in a manner contrary to the principles of the Charter and of international law and to the ancient principle whereby every country was allotted to the people who inhabited it.
> 
> A/PV.207 of 11 May 1949
Click to expand...

*(COMMENT)*

Don't, for a moment, think that the Iraqi believed then or now, that there is any such ancient principle.  They are just as bad as the Palestinian.   
Insight: Iraq security forces outmatched as 'open war' returns
Prisoners set clothes on fire and rioted inside the jail. Militants attacked it from outside with rocket-propelled grenades. A suicide bomber driving a car packed with explosives blasted his way through the main gate. When security forces backed ...
Reuters · 7/30/2013

Bombing rocks mosque in Iraq; 18 dead
(CNN)-- At least 18 Sunni worshipers were killed and 29 others were injured in Iraq on Friday when two bombs ripped through a mosque, police said. The incident occurred in Samarra, a largely Sunni city more than 60 

Bombings and a shooting kill 10 security force members in northern Iraq
Attacks kill 10 in northern Iraq   
A suicide assault on a police headquarters and other insurgent attacks in northern Iraq killed 10 members of the security forces on Saturday, police said.

UN chief deplores deadly incidents in Iraq's Camp Ashraf
... the responsibility of the Iraqi government to ensure the safety and security of the residents. He also called on the Iraqi government to promptly investigate the incident and disclose the findings. Earlier in the day, Iraqi media quoted a ...
Xinhua News Agency · 9/1/2013​
They are not any authority on international law and human rights.  They kill each other over the drop of a hat.  The Sunni 'vs' Shi'ite dispute is the worst.  

Find another example.  I suggest may be using the Hashemite Kingdom as your template.



P F Tinmore said:


> Why do you always slime the Palestinians for defending their rights?


*(COMMENT)*

I am not, in the least bit, sliming the Palestinians.  It is what it is.  In essences, I said that the Palestinians only have a capacity to think of themselves, and not the greater good.  They don't have the capacity to help save a culture.  It is a theme not so uncommon in the Middle East.

Of all the post-Ottoman Empire that was Muslim, it all went back to the Arabs excepts for a small sliver of land allocated to the Jewish National Home.  There was a greater good at work, one which the Hostile Arab Palestinian wants to suppress, deny and actively worked against.   

You can disregard my interpretation of the Hostile Arab Palestinian and use their own words:



			
				UNITED NATIONS PALESTINE COMMISSION - First Special Report to the Security Council:  The Problem of Security in Palestine said:
			
		

> 6.	The Secretary-General has been informed *by the Arab Higher Committee* that is determined to persist in its rejection of the partition plan and in its refusal to recognize the resolution of the Assembly and anything deriving therefrom. The Subsequent communication of 6 February to the Secretary-General from the representative of the Arab Higher Committee set forth the following conclusions of the Arab Higher Committee Delegation:
> 
> a. The Arabs of Palestine will never recognize the validity of the extorted partition recommendations or the authority of the United Nations to make them.
> 
> b. The Arabs of Palestine consider that any attempt by the Jews or any power or group of powers to establish a Jewish State in Arab territory is an act of aggression which will be resisted in self-defense by force.
> 
> c.	It is very unwise and fruitless to ask any commission to proceed to Palestine because not a single Arab will cooperate with the said commission.
> 
> d.	The United Nations or its commission should not be misled to believe that its efforts in the partition plan will meet with any success. It will be far better for the eclipsed prestige of this organization not to start on this adventure.
> 
> e.	The United Nations prestige will be better served by abandoning, not enforcing such an injustice.
> 
> f.	The determination of every Arab in Palestine is to oppose in every way the partition of that country.
> 
> g.	The Arabs of Palestine made a solemn declaration before the United Nations, before God and history, that they will never submit or yield to any power going to Palestine to enforce partition.
> 
> _*The only way to establish partition is first to wipe them out  man women and child."*_​*SOURCE:* A/AC.21/9  S/676  16 February 1948





			
				Palestine National Charter said:
			
		

> Article 9: Armed struggle is the only way to liberate Palestine. This is the overall strategy, not merely a tactical phase.
> Article 10: Commando (Feday'ee) action constitutes the nucleus of the Palestinian popular liberation war. This requires its escalation, comprehensiveness, and the mobilization of all the Palestinian popular and educational efforts and their organization and involvement in the armed Palestinian revolution.
> _*SOURCE:*_ Palestinian National Charter





			
				The Covenant of the Islamic Resistance Movement said:
			
		

> Article 13:  There is no solution for the Palestinian question except through Jihad.
> Article 15:   The Jihad for the Liberation of Palestine is an Individual Duty:  In face of the Jews' usurpation of Palestine, it is compulsory that the banner of Jihad be raised.
> _*SOURCE:*_ HAMAS Covenant


Me!  Slime the Palestinian!  ---  Oh no.  I just understand who they are and the character of the species and culture.  What was it they said:
_*The only way to establish partition is first to wipe them out  man women and child."*_​
I thought I was being kind.

It should be noted that the Israeli did not respond to this threat in kind.  Because if they had followed the lead of the Arab Higher Committee, there wouldn't be a problem with refugees today, there wouldn't be a border dispute, there wouldn't be a State of Palestine, HAMAS, Islamic Jihad, or Hezbollah to worry about.  There would not have been a massacre at the Olympics, there wouldn't have been the piracy of the Achille Lauro, the numerous attacks on airports, the suicide bombings, the ambushes or the rocket attacks.  The Israeli responded in a much different way, civilized way, with a Hostile Population that openly told the UN their strategy should the Jewish Agency accept the Partition Plan offer.  

If there was a culture that had adopted a holocaust-like strategy, it was the Arab Higher Committee ("wipe them out  man women and child").  The Palestinians did not "get the boot because of what happened in Europe" - but because of what they threatened to do in 1949 (and still promote today).  And in 1949, with the events of Auschwitz, Belzec, Chelmno, Dachau, Majdanek, Sobibor, and Treblinka, still very much fresh in their mind, I don't quite blame them.

Was I sliming?  No.  I was on my best behavior.  

Most Respectfully,
R


----------



## georgephillip

Kondor3 said:


> Now that it is slowly dawning upon the Palestinians that they cannot win militarily...
> 
> They are beginning to conjure sugar-plum visions of dismantling the Palestinian government and allowing Israel to annex the West Bank and Gaza and for all of the Palestinians to become citizens of Israel...
> 
> This way, inside of a generation or so, they figure they can breed them out (out-produce the Israelis with new births) and then out-vote them at the polls, and thus re-take by Ballot what they could not re-take by the Rifle...
> 
> Silly, silly Arabs...


*For thinking greedy. greedy Jews have the $lightest interest in peace:*

"The winter issue of Kivunim, a A Journal for Judaism and Zionism, publishes A Strategy for Israel in the Nineteen Eighties by Oded Yinon. The paper, published in Hebrew, rejects the idea that Israel should carry through with the Camp David accords and seek peace. 

"Instead, Yinon suggests that the Arab States should be destroyed from within by exploiting their internal religious and ethnic tensions: 'Lebanons total dissolution into five provinces serves as a precedent for the entire Arab world including Egypt, Syria, Iraq, and the Arabian peninsula and is already following that track...'"

Oded Yinon


----------



## Kondor3

georgephillip said:


> Kondor3 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Now that it is slowly dawning upon the Palestinians that they cannot win militarily...
> 
> They are beginning to conjure sugar-plum visions of dismantling the Palestinian government and allowing Israel to annex the West Bank and Gaza and for all of the Palestinians to become citizens of Israel...
> 
> This way, inside of a generation or so, they figure they can breed them out (out-produce the Israelis with new births) and then out-vote them at the polls, and thus re-take by Ballot what they could not re-take by the Rifle...
> 
> Silly, silly Arabs...
> 
> 
> 
> *For thinking greedy. greedy Jews have the $lightest interest in peace:*
> 
> "The winter issue of Kivunim, a &#8220;A Journal for Judaism and Zionism,&#8221; publishes &#8220;A Strategy for Israel in the Nineteen Eighties&#8221; by Oded Yinon. The paper, published in Hebrew, rejects the idea that Israel should carry through with the Camp David accords and seek peace.
> 
> "Instead, Yinon suggests that the Arab States should be destroyed from within by exploiting their internal religious and ethnic tensions: 'Lebanon&#8217;s total dissolution into five provinces serves as a precedent for the entire Arab world including Egypt, Syria, Iraq, and the Arabian peninsula and is already following that track...'"
> 
> Oded Yinon
Click to expand...

OK, so, now, what's the _down_-side...?





In actuality...

Greedy?

Not really.

The Jews don't want it all...

Just this...






...hell, they're most of the way there already, and getting closer every year.

And, once they have it, they'll be content; not giving a rat's ass what happens outside their borders, so long as those outsiders don't mess with Israel.


----------



## georgephillip

docmauser1 said:


> georgephillip said:
> 
> 
> 
> _The UN Partition Plan is why the Arab League objected to giving Jews 55% of Mandate Palestine ..._
> 
> 
> 
> The UNSCOP reported to the Security Council on Feb.16, 1948:
> "Powerful Arab interests, both inside and outside Palestine, are defying the resolution of the General Assembly and are engaged in a deliberate effort to alter by force the settlement envisaged therein."
> And they decided to fight it out and got a kampfstiefel in the arse and are still trying to pull it out painfully. Case dismissed and closed.
Click to expand...

*When are you planning to dip your kampfstiefels and your fat arse in the Brook of the Nile?
Before or after the Euphrates?*

"When viewed in the current context, the war on Iraq, the 2006 war on Lebanon, the 2011 war on Libya, the ongoing war on Syria, not to mention the process of regime change in Egypt, must be understood in relation to the Zionist Plan for the Middle East. 

"The latter consists in weakening and eventually fracturing neighboring Arab states as part of an Israeli expansionist project.

'Greater Israel' consists in an area extending from the Nile Valley to the Euphrates.
The Zionist project supports the Jewish settlement movement. More broadly it involves a policy of excluding Palestinians from Palestine leading to the eventual annexation of both the West Bank and Gaza to the State of Israel.

"Greater Israel would create a number of proxy States. It would include parts of Lebanon, Jordan, Syria, the Sinai, as well as parts of  Iraq and Saudi Arabia. (See map).
?Greater Israel?: The Zionist Plan for the Middle East | Global Research


----------



## georgephillip

Kondor3 said:


> georgephillip said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Kondor3 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Now that it is slowly dawning upon the Palestinians that they cannot win militarily...
> 
> They are beginning to conjure sugar-plum visions of dismantling the Palestinian government and allowing Israel to annex the West Bank and Gaza and for all of the Palestinians to become citizens of Israel...
> 
> This way, inside of a generation or so, they figure they can breed them out (out-produce the Israelis with new births) and then out-vote them at the polls, and thus re-take by Ballot what they could not re-take by the Rifle...
> 
> Silly, silly Arabs...
> 
> 
> 
> *For thinking greedy. greedy Jews have the $lightest interest in peace:*
> 
> "The winter issue of Kivunim, a A Journal for Judaism and Zionism, publishes A Strategy for Israel in the Nineteen Eighties by Oded Yinon. The paper, published in Hebrew, rejects the idea that Israel should carry through with the Camp David accords and seek peace.
> 
> "Instead, Yinon suggests that the Arab States should be destroyed from within by exploiting their internal religious and ethnic tensions: 'Lebanons total dissolution into five provinces serves as a precedent for the entire Arab world including Egypt, Syria, Iraq, and the Arabian peninsula and is already following that track...'"
> 
> Oded Yinon
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> OK, so, now, what's the _down_-side...?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> In actuality...
> 
> Greedy?
> 
> Not really.
> 
> The Jews don't want it all...
> 
> Just this...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ...hell, they're most of the way there already, and getting closer every year.
> 
> And, once they have it, they'll be content; not giving a rat's ass what happens outside their borders, so long as those outsiders don't mess with Israel.
Click to expand...

You're a page or two behind in your Zionist play book.
Greater Israel starts from the Nile Valley and ends at the Euphrates.

See map here.

"Israeli strategists viewed Iraq as their biggest strategic challenge from an Arab state. This is why Iraq was outlined as the centerpiece to the balkanization of the Middle East and the Arab World. In Iraq, on the basis of the concepts of the Yinon Plan, Israeli strategists have called for the division of Iraq into a Kurdish state and two Arab states, one for Shiite 

"Muslims and the other for Sunni Muslims. The first step towards establishing this was a war between Iraq and Iran, which the Yinon Plan discusses.

"The Atlantic, in 2008, and the U.S. militarys Armed Forces Journal, in 2006, both published widely circulated maps that closely followed the outline of the Yinon Plan. Aside from a divided Iraq, which the Biden Plan also calls for, the Yinon Plan calls for a divided Lebanon, Egypt, and Syria. 

"The partitioning of Iran, Turkey, Somalia, and Pakistan also all fall into line with these views. The Yinon Plan also calls for dissolution in North Africa and forecasts it as starting from Egypt and then spilling over into Sudan, Libya, and the rest of the region."


----------



## Kondor3

georgephillip said:


> Kondor3 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> georgephillip said:
> 
> 
> 
> *For thinking greedy. greedy Jews have the $lightest interest in peace:*
> 
> "The winter issue of Kivunim, a &#8220;A Journal for Judaism and Zionism,&#8221; publishes &#8220;A Strategy for Israel in the Nineteen Eighties&#8221; by Oded Yinon. The paper, published in Hebrew, rejects the idea that Israel should carry through with the Camp David accords and seek peace.
> 
> "Instead, Yinon suggests that the Arab States should be destroyed from within by exploiting their internal religious and ethnic tensions: 'Lebanon&#8217;s total dissolution into five provinces serves as a precedent for the entire Arab world including Egypt, Syria, Iraq, and the Arabian peninsula and is already following that track...'"
> 
> Oded Yinon
> 
> 
> 
> OK, so, now, what's the _down_-side...?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> In actuality...
> 
> Greedy?
> 
> Not really.
> 
> The Jews don't want it all...
> 
> Just this...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ...hell, they're most of the way there already, and getting closer every year.
> 
> And, once they have it, they'll be content; not giving a rat's ass what happens outside their borders, so long as those outsiders don't mess with Israel.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> "_You're a page or two behind in your Zionist play book. Greater Israel starts from the Nile Valley and ends at the Euphrates_...
Click to expand...

Nonsense.

Do they hope that some of their Muslim-Arab neighbor-states fall apart?

Possibly.

Do they plan on moving-in after the fall and taking control of the land, to be settled by Jews, so thereby incorporating those land-masses as part of Greater Israel?

Doubtful.

No matter how many feverish, paranoid, delusional citations come crawling out of the wood-work.

They just want what was theirs, 2,000 years ago - the combined area of the Kingdoms of old Judah and newer Israel.

Which that map pretty much defines.

They won't need more, for a long time to come.


----------



## P F Tinmore

RoccoR said:


> P F Tinmore,  _et al,_
> 
> This is the nature of conflict.
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> Why should the Palestinians get the boot because of what happened in Europe?
> 
> 
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> The Palestinians did not "get the boot because of what happened in Europe" as you say.  They opened up hostilities and lost control.
Click to expand...


The Palestinians opened up hostilities when they went to Europe and attacked the Zionists?

Rocco, you are a hoot!



> Most Respectfully,
> R


----------



## georgephillip

Kondor3 said:


> georgephillip said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Kondor3 said:
> 
> 
> 
> OK, so, now, what's the _down_-side...?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> In actuality...
> 
> Greedy?
> 
> Not really.
> 
> The Jews don't want it all...
> 
> Just this...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ...hell, they're most of the way there already, and getting closer every year.
> 
> And, once they have it, they'll be content; not giving a rat's ass what happens outside their borders, so long as those outsiders don't mess with Israel.
> 
> 
> 
> "_You're a page or two behind in your Zionist play book. Greater Israel starts from the Nile Valley and ends at the Euphrates_...
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Nonsense.
> 
> Do they hope that some of their Muslim-Arab neighbor-states fall apart?
> 
> Possibly.
> 
> Do they plan on moving-in after the fall and taking control of the land, to be settled by Jews, so thereby incorporating those land-masses as part of Greater Israel?
> 
> Doubtful.
> 
> No matter how many feverish, paranoid, delusional citations come crawling out of the wood-work.
> 
> They just want what was theirs, 2,000 years ago - the combined area of the Kingdoms of old Judah and newer Israel.
> 
> Which that map pretty much defines.
> 
> They won't need more, for a long time to come.
Click to expand...

You still haven't proven that Jews, alone among all nations of this planet, have any moral or legal right to "what was theirs 2000 years ago." Spare me the funny photos of big scary tanks and killer Jews with painted faces.


----------



## Hoffstra

Sweet_Caroline said:


> A PALESTINIAN MYTH - The so said NAKBA - YouTube



Nakba denial is as bad or WORSE than Holocaust denial!!!!


----------



## Hoffstra

Kondor3 said:


> Nonsense.
> 
> Do they hope that some of their Muslim-Arab neighbor-states fall apart?
> 
> Possibly.
> 
> Do they plan on moving-in after the fall and taking control of the land, to be settled by Jews, so thereby incorporating those land-masses as part of Greater Israel?
> 
> Doubtful.
> 
> No matter how many feverish, paranoid, delusional citations come crawling out of the wood-work.
> 
> They just want what was theirs, 2,000 years ago - the combined area of the Kingdoms of old Judah and newer Israel.
> 
> Which that map pretty much defines.
> 
> They won't need more, for a long time to come.



sorry bro, but there is a logical statute of limitations on how long after losing land, a culture can rightfully expect it back.


----------



## RoccoR

P F Tinmore,  _et al,_

Maybe you didn't read it all.



P F Tinmore said:


> The Palestinians opened up hostilities when they went to Europe and attacked the Zionists?
> 
> Rocco, you are a hoot!


*(COMMENT)*

Maybe I said:



RoccoR said:


> If there was a culture that had adopted a holocaust-like strategy, it was the Arab Higher Committee ("wipe them out  man women and child").  The Palestinians did not "get the boot because of what happened in Europe" - but because of what they threatened to do in 1949 (and still promote today).  And in 1949, with the events of Auschwitz, Belzec, Chelmno, Dachau, Majdanek, Sobibor, and Treblinka, still very much fresh in their mind, I don't quite blame them.



Most Respectfully,
R


----------



## P F Tinmore

RoccoR said:


> P F Tinmore,  _et al,_
> 
> Maybe you didn't read it all.
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> The Palestinians opened up hostilities when they went to Europe and attacked the Zionists?
> 
> Rocco, you are a hoot!
> 
> 
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> Maybe I said:
> 
> 
> 
> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> 
> If there was a culture that had adopted a holocaust-like strategy, it was the Arab Higher Committee ("wipe them out  man women and child").  The Palestinians did not "get the boot because of what happened in Europe" - but because of what they threatened to do in 1949 (and still promote today).  And in 1949, with the events of Auschwitz, Belzec, Chelmno, Dachau, Majdanek, Sobibor, and Treblinka, still very much fresh in their mind, I don't quite blame them.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Most Respectfully,
> R
Click to expand...


Why do you always criticize the Palestinians for self defense?


----------



## Kondor3

georgephillip said:


> "..._You still haven't proven that Jews, alone among all nations of this planet, have any moral or legal right to "what was theirs 2000 years ago_..."


Victory on the battlefield is all that is required. 

 Made doubly-sweet when you were attacked by your opponents and five other peoples for merely accepting United Nations plans in the first place...

And then winning against astounding odds.

What part of '_Victory on the battlefield changes everything_' do you not understand?

The old legalities of the 1930s and 1940s are absolutely meaningless and are now as dead as Julius Caesar.

Legal?

Fuck your old 1930s-1940s "legal".

The Palestinians have been sitting in shit-hole refugee camps for 65 years indulging in that particular pointless circle-jerk.

Let's just cut through all the bullshit.

The land has changed hands - permanently.

And the new owners are *far* bigger badasses than 'you' guys.

Badges?


We don't got to show you no stinking badges!

If you want it back, you must come take it.

If you can.

Love to see you try.


----------



## Hoffstra

Kondor3 said:


> Victory on the battlefield is all that is required.



so you admit that the Muslims rightfully ruled Palestine for 1,300 years?

or do you have one rule for Jews and another rule for Muslims.


----------



## Kondor3

Hoffstra said:


> Kondor3 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Victory on the battlefield is all that is required.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> so you admit that the Muslims rightfully ruled Palestine for 1,300 years?
> 
> or do you have one rule for Jews and another rule for Muslims.
Click to expand...


I don't admit shit.

I admit that the Muslims stole the land out from under the remaining Jews living in Palestine-Judea and stole the land out from under the Eastern Empire (Byzantines).

I admit that the Turks stole the land out from under the Thieving Arabs as the Ottomans consolidated their grip on the Eastern Med.

I admit that the scattered, rag-tag collection of natives had their asses kicked time and again by both Different-Believers and their own Co-Religionists...

I admit that the scattered, rag-tag collection of sheep-herders couldn't rule themselves if they tried, much less The Land...

I admit that the Brits took over the rule of that scattered, rag-tag collection of sheep-<bleep>ers from the Ottomans, because the Brits, too, knew that those sheep-<bleep>ers would fuck things up faster than a fly is drawn to camel shit....

I admit that the Jews had a far, far superior cultural and societal and religious collection of organizations and organizational and political skills and that they had been legally buying-up land in Palestine for 70-80 years prior to 1848...

I admit that the Palestinians didn't figure that out until very late in the game and didn't act on it until even later, as haphazardly disorganized as they were...

I admit that the Jews latched onto the UN Partition Plan in a genuine and grateful fashion, as quickly as it was offered, and that they based their own Declaration of Statehood upon that International Proposal, coming off looking like the epitome of reasonableness...

I admit that the Jews, surprisingly, after so many years of defeats and setbacks and disasters, finally managed to get their heads out of their asses and do what was needed to defend themselves and to carve-out a slice of the world for themselves, in such a way so that most of the rest of the world would not mind too much...

I admit that after a close call, the Jews managed to find a way to survive after all...

I admit that Nature seems to have DE-selected the so-called Palestinians, who are now destined to scatter to the four winds and to be re-aborbed into the neighboring Arab-Muslim populations from which their ancestors invaded and immigrated, several centuries ago...

I admit that we are dealing with survival of the fittest, and that the Palestinians do not meet that rigid criteria set down by Nature...

Best to toss in the towel, while you still have a towel to toss, and pack up, and move someplace else, and start new lives, and be happy...

Nobody wants to deny you the chance to be happy...

It's just that you can no longer do so where you are now...


----------



## Hoffstra

Kondor3 said:


> Hoffstra said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Kondor3 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Victory on the battlefield is all that is required.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> so you admit that the Muslims rightfully ruled Palestine for 1,300 years?
> 
> or do you have one rule for Jews and another rule for Muslims.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I don't admit shit.
> 
> I admit that the Muslims stole the land out from under the remaining Jews living in Palestine-Judea and stole the land out from under the Eastern Empire (Byzantines)...
Click to expand...


stole?

no sir.  You said it yourself.  "VICTORY ON THE BATTLEFIELD IS ALL THAT IS REQUIRED"

so either you believe that the Muslims rightfully owned & controlled Palestine, or that the Jews stole Palestine from the Muslims.

you can't have it both ways, silly.


----------



## Hoffstra

Kondor believes that the Jews rightfully control Palestine because, "victory on the battlefield is all that is required".

Yet he thinks that when the Muslims conquered the land from the Byzantines and then again from the Crusaders, they "stole it".

lolol!!!!!!!


----------



## Hoffstra

Kondor3 said:


> ....I admit that the scattered, rag*-tag collection of sheep-herders* couldn't rule themselves if they tried, much less The Land...
> 
> I admit that the Brits took over the rule of that *scattered, rag-tag collection of sheep-<bleep>ers* from the Ottomans, because the Brits, too, knew that *those sheep-<bleep>ers would fuck things up *faster than a fly is drawn to camel shit......



so not only do you call for ethnic cleansing against the Arabs, but you clearly have racist feelings towards Arabs.


----------



## Kondor3

Hoffstra said:


> "..._sorry bro, but there is a logical statute of limitations on how long after losing land, a culture can rightfully expect it back._"


Exactly...

Given that the Jews' claim out-dates the Arabs, and that the Jews have been waiting longer, well...

Glad you see it that way...


----------



## Hoffstra

Kondor3 said:


> Given that the Jews' claim out-dates the Arabs, and that the Jews have been waiting longer, well...



the vast majority of the people in the West Bank, are Muslim Arabs.

that means according to you, the land belongs to the Arab Muslims.

they have been there longer.  MUCH longer.

more than 1,000 years of uninterrupted occupancy.


----------



## Kondor3

Hoffstra said:


> Kondor3 said:
> 
> 
> 
> ....I admit that the scattered, rag*-tag collection of sheep-herders* couldn't rule themselves if they tried, much less The Land...
> 
> I admit that the Brits took over the rule of that *scattered, rag-tag collection of sheep-<bleep>ers* from the Ottomans, because the Brits, too, knew that *those sheep-<bleep>ers would fuck things up *faster than a fly is drawn to camel shit......
> 
> 
> 
> 
> so not only do you call for ethnic cleansing against the Arabs, but you clearly have racist feelings towards Arabs.
Click to expand...


Racist?

Not at all...

I have considerable respect for the Arabs of Saudi Arabia.

And other countries in which Arab culture and mores and religion have taken root.

It's just that I think the *Palestinian*-Arabs are a fucking joke.

But, nice try.

Oh, and, your deflection does nothing to address the counter-point that the Arabs, themselves, stole that land out from under the Jews and Byzantines.

Anything to avoid such an admission...

After all, if (1) you admit that they conquered the land by the sword, and (2) that such conquest legitimatized their rule, then (3) you would have to admit that 'Victory on the Battlefield' is a legitimate counterpoint, after all.

In your shoes, I'd shy-away from that sort of admission myself.


----------



## Hoffstra

Kondor3 said:


> ..Oh, and, your deflection does nothing to address the counter-point that the Arabs, themselves, stole that land out from under the Jews and Byzantines...



by your own logic, they didn't "steal" shit.

they rightfully and legitimately conquered it.

do you believe the Crusaders "stole" Palestine from the Muslims?


----------



## Kondor3

Hoffstra said:


> Kondor3 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Given that the Jews' claim out-dates the Arabs, and that the Jews have been waiting longer, well...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> the vast majority of the people in the West Bank, are Muslim Arabs. that means according to you, the land belongs to the Arab Muslims. they have been there longer. MUCH longer.
> 
> more than 1,000 years of uninterrupted occupancy.
Click to expand...


But they stole it from the Jews more than 1000 years ago.

The old owners are back.

And changed the title-deed again.

The same way the Arabs did.

By force of arms.

Your people have been enjoying the fruits of their thievery for *far* too long.

The Sheriff finally showed-up to make things right.

It just took him a little longer than originally expected to show up.

Karma's a bitch, isn't it?

If you don't like it... tough shit.

If you want it back, you must take it.

If you can.


----------



## Kondor3

Hoffstra said:


> Kondor3 said:
> 
> 
> 
> ..Oh, and, your deflection does nothing to address the counter-point that the Arabs, themselves, stole that land out from under the Jews and Byzantines...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> by your own logic, they didn't "steal" shit...
Click to expand...

All this flopping-about gets us nowhere.

The Jews are there to stay.

The land is theirs now.

If you want it back, you know what you must do.

I'm sure they'd greatly enjoy it if you tried... that would settle the matter in their favor once and for all... and you'd be out of their hair for good.


----------



## Hoffstra

Kondor3 said:


> But they stole it from the Jews more than 1000 years ago.
> 
> The old owners are back.
> 
> And changed the title-deed again.
> 
> The same way the Arabs did.
> 
> By force of arms.
> 
> Your people have been enjoying the fruits of their thievery for *far* too long.



you're confused, we're talking about the Palestinians, not the Israeli Jewish land thieves.

hell, the Israeli govt. even calls some of the settlers "thieves".


----------



## Hoffstra

Kondor3 said:


> All this flopping-about gets us nowhere.
> 
> The Jews are there to stay.
> 
> The land is theirs now.
> 
> If you want it back, you know what you must do.



do you believe the Crusaders "stole" the land from the Muslims?


----------



## Kondor3

Hoffstra said:


> Kondor3 said:
> 
> 
> 
> All this flopping-about gets us nowhere.
> 
> The Jews are there to stay.
> 
> The land is theirs now.
> 
> If you want it back, you know what you must do.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> do you believe the Crusaders "stole" the land from the Muslims?
Click to expand...


Yes.

The Crusaders stole it from the Muslims.

The Muslims stole it back later.

And the Crusaders were originally and acting ostensibly as agents for even older thieves - the Byzantines - who inherited that land from the Romans who stole it from the Jews in 70 AD...

One theft after another after another after another...

The only thing that has ever signified there in the end is The Sword...

And, nowadays, the Older Owners are back, with a bigger Sword...

It's their turn again, after a 2,000 -year wait...


----------



## Hoffstra

Kondor3 said:


> Yes.
> 
> The Crusaders stole it from the Muslims.
> 
> The Muslims stole it back later.
> 
> And the Crusaders were originally and acting ostensibly as agents for even older thieves - the Byzantines - who inherited that land from the Romans who stole it from the Jews in 70 AD...
> 
> One theft after another after another after another...
> 
> The only thing that has ever signified there in the end is The Sword...
> 
> And, nowadays, the Older Owners are back, with a bigger Sword...
> 
> It's their turn again, after a 2,000 -year wait...



and the Hebrews stole the land from the Canaanites?


----------



## Kondor3

Hoffstra said:


> Kondor3 said:
> 
> 
> 
> But they stole it from the Jews more than 1000 years ago.
> 
> The old owners are back.
> 
> And changed the title-deed again.
> 
> The same way the Arabs did.
> 
> By force of arms.
> 
> Your people have been enjoying the fruits of their thievery for *far* too long.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> you're confused, we're talking about the Palestinians, not the Israeli Jewish land thieves.
> 
> hell, the Israeli govt. even calls some of the settlers "thieves".
Click to expand...


Word games.

Semantics.

Wordsmithing.

Spin-doctoring.

Doesn't matter.

What DOES matter is who has control of the land.

And who is capable of KEEPING it.

Everything else is radio static.


----------



## Hoffstra

According to Kondor, the Jews stole the land from the Muslims.

Right now, the Muslims can't steal it back by force.

But they can steal it back by numbers.


----------



## Kondor3

Hoffstra said:


> Kondor3 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Yes.
> 
> The Crusaders stole it from the Muslims.
> 
> The Muslims stole it back later.
> 
> And the Crusaders were originally and acting ostensibly as agents for even older thieves - the Byzantines - who inherited that land from the Romans who stole it from the Jews in 70 AD...
> 
> One theft after another after another after another...
> 
> The only thing that has ever signified there in the end is The Sword...
> 
> And, nowadays, the Older Owners are back, with a bigger Sword...
> 
> It's their turn again, after a 2,000 -year wait...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> and the Hebrews stole the land from the Canaanites?
Click to expand...

Bingo.

When the Canaanites show-up again as a Recognizable People, with a Continuity of Recognized Identity stretching far enough back in time so as to legitimize their identity-claims - and when they show up in force capable of overwhelming Israel, they might be able to make a similar case.

Until then, the Oldest Organized and Still-Recognizable People Who Were Former Owners - now hold the Deed - again.

Fun, ain't it?

How does it feel to be on the Losing Side against _Dhimmis_ for once?


----------



## Hoffstra

Kondor3 said:


> Until then, the Oldest Organized and Still-Recognizable People hold the Deed - again.



within a few generation, simply due to birth rates, the Muslims will again rule Palestine.


hopefully they won't treat the Jews as poorly as the Jews treated the Palestinians.


----------



## Kondor3

Hoffstra said:


> According to Kondor, the Jews stole the land from the Muslims.
> 
> Right now, the Muslims can't steal it back by force.
> 
> But they can steal it back by numbers.



Good luck finding a place to stuff 'em all...






In another 20 years the Palestinians won't have enough land to make a decent-sized tennis court, _according to their own propaganda maps_...

Most of them will have long-since packed-up and moved to Jordan or Lebanon or Syria or Egypt and fled those shit-holes they're living in...

Especially if the Israelis smarten-up and start paying them off at attractive rates and provide logistics and security support that make it easy for them to leave...

Nobody wants to condemn their families to generations of such needless, pointless violence and increasing, crushing poverty, with no future for the children...

Few sane, rational, practical, realistic Palestinians believe this is going to end well for them...

Just the delusional, vicious stakeholder-leaders of that dying, failed proto-State that never really was...

Families will continue to slip away quietly, one by one, until the floodgates open, and they begin bailing-out in droves...


----------



## Hoffstra

Kondor3 said:


> Good luck finding a place to stuff 'em all...
> 
> In another 20 years the Palestinians won't have enough land to make a decent-sized tennis court, according to their own propaganda maps...
> 
> Most of them will have long-since packed-up and moved to Jordan or Lebanon or Syria or Egypt and fled those shit-holes they're living in...
> 
> Nobody wants to condemn their families to generations of such needless, pointless violence and increasing, crushing poverty, with no future for the children..




um, 200,000 Arabs in Israel in  1949 to 1.3 million in 2013.

690,000 Arabs in the West Bank in 1970, to 2.3 million in 2013.


friend, the Arabs of Israel and the West Bank ain't going anywhere.


----------



## Kondor3

Hoffstra said:


> Kondor3 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Good luck finding a place to stuff 'em all...
> 
> In another 20 years the Palestinians won't have enough land to make a decent-sized tennis court, according to their own propaganda maps...
> 
> Most of them will have long-since packed-up and moved to Jordan or Lebanon or Syria or Egypt and fled those shit-holes they're living in...
> 
> Nobody wants to condemn their families to generations of such needless, pointless violence and increasing, crushing poverty, with no future for the children..
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> um, 200,000 Arabs in Israel in  1949 to 1.3 million in 2013.
> 
> 690,000 Arabs in the West Bank in 1970, to 2.3 million in 2013.
> 
> 
> friend, the Arabs of Israel and the West Bank ain't going anywhere.
Click to expand...

Like I said... your own maps tell the story, and predict the future.


----------



## Hoffstra

Kondor3 said:


> Like I said... your own maps tell the story, and predict the future.



they're not my maps, you posted them.

and yes, if no two state solution is created, the one state solution will be the answer.

The Jews and Arabs of Palestine will have to make nice.


----------



## Kondor3

Hoffstra said:


> Kondor3 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Like I said... your own maps tell the story, and predict the future.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> they're not my maps, you posted them.
> 
> and yes, if no two state solution is created, the one state solution will be the answer.
> 
> The Jews and Arabs of Palestine will have to make nice.
Click to expand...


You may continue to delude yourself into believing that this is a viable backup plan, right up to the moment when it becomes clear that it is not viable after all...


----------



## Hoffstra

Kondor3 said:


> plan, right up to the moment when it becomes clear that it is not viable after all...



there are two options:

the two state solution and the one bi-national state.


if this last and final round of peace talks fail, we need to start looking at the bi-national state answer.

call it "Judea-Arabia".  has a nice ring to it.


----------



## P F Tinmore

Kondor3 said:


> Hoffstra said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Kondor3 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Good luck finding a place to stuff 'em all...
> 
> In another 20 years the Palestinians won't have enough land to make a decent-sized tennis court, according to their own propaganda maps...
> 
> Most of them will have long-since packed-up and moved to Jordan or Lebanon or Syria or Egypt and fled those shit-holes they're living in...
> 
> Nobody wants to condemn their families to generations of such needless, pointless violence and increasing, crushing poverty, with no future for the children..
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> um, 200,000 Arabs in Israel in  1949 to 1.3 million in 2013.
> 
> 690,000 Arabs in the West Bank in 1970, to 2.3 million in 2013.
> 
> 
> friend, the Arabs of Israel and the West Bank ain't going anywhere.
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Like I said... your own maps tell the story, and predict the future.
Click to expand...


You are missing a few things in your assessment.

Israel has never won its war against the Palestinians. Israel has never won any Palestinian land.

Palestinians outside the country are a bigger threat than those trapped inside.

Support for Palestine is growing rapidly while the world is growing weary of Israel.


----------



## Kondor3

P F Tinmore said:


> Kondor3 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Hoffstra said:
> 
> 
> 
> um, 200,000 Arabs in Israel in  1949 to 1.3 million in 2013.
> 
> 690,000 Arabs in the West Bank in 1970, to 2.3 million in 2013.
> 
> 
> friend, the Arabs of Israel and the West Bank ain't going anywhere.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Like I said... your own maps tell the story, and predict the future.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You are missing a few things in your assessment.
> 
> Israel has never won its war against the Palestinians. Israel has never won any Palestinian land.
> 
> Palestinians outside the country are a bigger threat than those trapped inside.
> 
> Support for Palestine is growing rapidly while the world is growing weary of Israel.
Click to expand...


I sure you're right, Tinny... mebbe there IS a Santa Claus for the Palestinians, after all.


----------



## Hoffstra

Kondor3 said:


> I sure you're right, Tinny... mebbe there IS a Santa Claus for the Palestinians, after all.



Santa might just come in the form of a failed peace process.


----------



## toastman

This is off topic, but I found this kind of interesting:

Abbas condemns killing of IDF soldiers in NY meeting with Jewish leaders | JPost | Israel News

I am referring to the part of the article where Abbas says Palestinians are starting to liken up to the idea of a bi-national state. In other words, a one state solution

What do you guys think ?


----------



## Kondor3

toastman said:


> This is off topic, but I found this kind of interesting:
> 
> Abbas condemns killing of IDF soldiers in NY meeting with Jewish leaders | JPost | Israel News
> 
> I am referring to the part of the article where Abbas says Palestinians are starting to liken up to the idea of a bi-national state. In other words, a one state solution
> 
> What do you guys think ?



Do you think the Jews would go for that?

I don't.

I could always be wrong.


----------



## toastman

No, I don't either.


----------



## ForeverYoung436

Kondor3 said:


> toastman said:
> 
> 
> 
> This is off topic, but I found this kind of interesting:
> 
> Abbas condemns killing of IDF soldiers in NY meeting with Jewish leaders | JPost | Israel News
> 
> I am referring to the part of the article where Abbas says Palestinians are starting to liken up to the idea of a bi-national state. In other words, a one state solution
> 
> What do you guys think ?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Do you think the Jews would go for that?
> 
> I don't.
> 
> I could always be wrong.
Click to expand...


Neither do I.  There are already 21 or 22 failed countries with Arab characters, languages,  flags, anthems and national holidays...and one Jewish state with all that.  Israel won't give it up.


----------



## Hossfly

Kondor3 said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Kondor3 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Like I said... your own maps tell the story, and predict the future.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You are missing a few things in your assessment.
> 
> Israel has never won its war against the Palestinians. Israel has never won any Palestinian land.
> 
> Palestinians outside the country are a bigger threat than those trapped inside.
> 
> Support for Palestine is growing rapidly while the world is growing weary of Israel.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I sure you're right, Tinny... mebbe there IS a Santa Claus for the Palestinians, after all.
Click to expand...

More likely a Tooth Fairy placing a shekel under the pillow for each rotten tooth placed there.


----------



## Kondor3

Hossfly said:


> Kondor3 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> You are missing a few things in your assessment.
> 
> Israel has never won its war against the Palestinians. Israel has never won any Palestinian land.
> 
> Palestinians outside the country are a bigger threat than those trapped inside.
> 
> Support for Palestine is growing rapidly while the world is growing weary of Israel.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I sure you're right, Tinny... mebbe there IS a Santa Claus for the Palestinians, after all.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> More likely a Tooth Fairy placing a shekel under the pillow for each rotten tooth placed there.
Click to expand...

Kinda where I was going with that, quite honestly...


----------



## Hoffstra

toastman said:


> This is off topic, but I found this kind of interesting:
> 
> Abbas condemns killing of IDF soldiers in NY meeting with Jewish leaders | JPost | Israel News
> 
> I am referring to the part of the article where Abbas says Palestinians are starting to liken up to the idea of a bi-national state. In other words, a one state solution
> 
> What do you guys think ?



if these peace talks fail, I hope the Palestinians dismantle the Palestine Authority and demand the beginning of negiations on a bi-national state from the River to the Sea.

call it "Judea-Arabia".


----------



## Kondor3

Hoffstra said:


> toastman said:
> 
> 
> 
> This is off topic, but I found this kind of interesting:
> 
> Abbas condemns killing of IDF soldiers in NY meeting with Jewish leaders | JPost | Israel News
> 
> I am referring to the part of the article where Abbas says Palestinians are starting to liken up to the idea of a bi-national state. In other words, a one state solution
> 
> What do you guys think ?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> if these peace talks fail, I hope the Palestinians dismantle the Palestine Authority and demand the beginning of negiations on a bi-national state from the River to the Sea.
> 
> call it "Judea-Arabia".
Click to expand...

And when the Jews (_knowing full-well in advance that the Palestinians hope to out-breed them and eventually out-vote them and to eventually take-over the nation_) refuse, which they almost certainly will, within mere days of any such proposal...

What then?


----------



## toastman

Hoffstra said:


> toastman said:
> 
> 
> 
> This is off topic, but I found this kind of interesting:
> 
> Abbas condemns killing of IDF soldiers in NY meeting with Jewish leaders | JPost | Israel News
> 
> I am referring to the part of the article where Abbas says Palestinians are starting to liken up to the idea of a bi-national state. In other words, a one state solution
> 
> What do you guys think ?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> if these peace talks fail, I hope the Palestinians dismantle the Palestine Authority and demand the beginning of negiations on a bi-national state from the River to the Sea.
> 
> call it "Judea-Arabia".
Click to expand...


Are you actually suggesting they change Israel's name to Judea-Arabia ?? 
I really can't tell if you're serious or not ....


----------



## ForeverYoung436

Hoffstra said:


> Kondor3 said:
> 
> 
> 
> plan, right up to the moment when it becomes clear that it is not viable after all...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> there are two options:
> 
> the two state solution and the one bi-national state.
> 
> 
> if this last and final round of peace talks fail, we need to start looking at the bi-national state answer.
> 
> call it "Judea-Arabia".  has a nice ring to it.
Click to expand...


I like that name.  It shows where the Jews come from, and where the Arabs come from.


----------



## Kondor3

ForeverYoung436 said:


> Hoffstra said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Kondor3 said:
> 
> 
> 
> plan, right up to the moment when it becomes clear that it is not viable after all...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> there are two options:
> 
> the two state solution and the one bi-national state.
> 
> 
> if this last and final round of peace talks fail, we need to start looking at the bi-national state answer.
> 
> call it "*Judea-Arabia*".  has a nice ring to it.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I like that name.  It shows where the *Jews* come from, and where the *Arabs* come from.
Click to expand...


----------



## Hoffstra

Kondor3 said:


> And when the Jews (_knowing full-well in advance that the Palestinians hope to out-breed them and eventually out-vote them and to eventually take-over the nation_) refuse, which they almost certainly will, within mere days of any such proposal...
> 
> What then?



then the Palestinians demand Israeli citizenship.


----------



## Kondor3

Hoffstra said:


> Kondor3 said:
> 
> 
> 
> And when the Jews (_knowing full-well in advance that the Palestinians hope to out-breed them and eventually out-vote them and to eventually take-over the nation_) refuse, which they almost certainly will, within mere days of any such proposal...
> 
> What then?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> then the Palestinians demand Israeli citizenship.
Click to expand...


And when the Jews refuse - and they will - using the Out-Breeding argument as their basis?


----------



## Hoffstra

Kondor3 said:


> And when the Jews refuse - and they will - using the Out-Breeding argument as their basis?



Remember the anti-Apartheid boycott?


----------



## Kondor3

Hoffstra said:


> Kondor3 said:
> 
> 
> 
> And when the Jews refuse - and they will - using the Out-Breeding argument as their basis?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Remember the anti-Apartheid boycott?
Click to expand...

The Israelis will find an excuse to make war on the Palestinians and to kick them all out before that ever happens.


----------



## P F Tinmore

Hoffstra said:


> Kondor3 said:
> 
> 
> 
> And when the Jews (_knowing full-well in advance that the Palestinians hope to out-breed them and eventually out-vote them and to eventually take-over the nation_) refuse, which they almost certainly will, within mere days of any such proposal...
> 
> What then?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> then the Palestinians demand Israeli citizenship.
Click to expand...


[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T-b6Y_ojOSs]Israel palestine: Is the one state solution the only solution? - YouTube[/ame]


----------



## Hoffstra

Kondor3 said:


> The Israelis will find an excuse to make war on the Palestinians and to kick them all out before that ever happens.



that would lead to another Holocaust.

why do you want six million Jews to die?


----------



## Kondor3

Hoffstra said:


> Kondor3 said:
> 
> 
> 
> The Israelis will find an excuse to make war on the Palestinians and to kick them all out before that ever happens.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> that would lead to another Holocaust.
> 
> why do you want six million Jews to die?
Click to expand...

We have been over this ground repeatedly.

Six millions Jews would not die.

Three-something million Palestinians would be expelled to go live elsewhere.

Islam does not have the muscle or dedication for the kind of overkill-retaliation you have in mind.

Not gonna happen, even IF the Jews DO decide to expel the Palestinians.

Sugar-plum visions of Global Jihad to the contrary notwithstanding.


----------



## Hoffstra

Kondor3 said:


> We have been over this ground repeatedly.
> 
> Six millions Jews would not die.
> 
> Three-something million Palestinians would be expelled to go live elsewhere.
> 
> Islam does not have the muscle or dedication for the kind of overkill-retaliation you have in mind.
> 
> Not gonna happen, even IF the Jews DO decide to expel the Palestinians.
> 
> Sugar-plum visions of Global Jihad to the contrary notwithstanding.



try to expel millions of Palestinians, and 6 million Jews will reap the enternal flame.

and people like you will be to blame.


----------



## toastman

P F Tinmore said:


> Hoffstra said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Kondor3 said:
> 
> 
> 
> And when the Jews (_knowing full-well in advance that the Palestinians hope to out-breed them and eventually out-vote them and to eventually take-over the nation_) refuse, which they almost certainly will, within mere days of any such proposal...
> 
> What then?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> then the Palestinians demand Israeli citizenship.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> [ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T-b6Y_ojOSs]Israel palestine: Is the one state solution the only solution? - YouTube[/ame]
Click to expand...


Tinmore, what is your personal opinion. Do you think a one state solution is the only option ?
What do you want to see happen (be detailed please)


----------



## Kondor3

Hoffstra said:


> Kondor3 said:
> 
> 
> 
> We have been over this ground repeatedly.
> 
> Six millions Jews would not die.
> 
> Three-something million Palestinians would be expelled to go live elsewhere.
> 
> Islam does not have the muscle or dedication for the kind of overkill-retaliation you have in mind.
> 
> Not gonna happen, even IF the Jews DO decide to expel the Palestinians.
> 
> Sugar-plum visions of Global Jihad to the contrary notwithstanding.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> try to expel millions of Palestinians, and 6 million Jews will reap the enternal flame.
> 
> and people like you will be to blame.
Click to expand...


Again, you fail to demonstrate how Islam will wreak vengeance.

Especially when most can't stand the Palestinians themselves.

As evidenced by walling-off those crazies in the West Bank and Gaza and not letting them come across the Jordanian and Egyptian borders.

In the final analysis, the Muslims will make a great noise, blow-up a few buildings and people to satisfy honor, and then forget about the whole thing almost as fast as the rest of the world, which will be emminently happy to see The Crazies (Palestinians) scattered to the four winds, and an end to this farcical pretense of a so-called 'Palestine'...

Again...

There is no Arab Cavalry riding over the hill this time, coming to the rescue...

Syria is in tatters...

Egypt is in tatters...

Libya is in tatters...

Iraq is in tatters...

Lebanon is in tatters...

The Jordanians are the only ones left in the neighborhood that are still semi-intact, and they just don't have the muscle...

No...

The Palestinians are on-their-own this time...

And it is not going to end well for them...

Although it IS likely to 'end' in the not-too-distant future...

Not exactly a Position-of-Strength, is is?


----------



## Hoffstra

toastman said:


> Tinmore, what is your personal opinion. Do you think a one state solution is the only option ?
> What do you want to see happen (be detailed please)



Judea-Arabia will be the only realistic solution if peace talks fail.


----------



## Hossfly

Hoffstra said:


> georgephillip said:
> 
> 
> 
> *How did thirty percent of Palestinians receive 55% of the land in 1948 "fair and square"?
> Zionism never confused liberation and colonization or the role imperialism plays in their occupation of Palestine. Israel as a Jewish state will change or face the same fate as White South Africa did.*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> this is a fact.
> 
> the Jews got a much higher percentage of Palestine than their percentage of the population.
> 
> of course the Arabs were mad at this.
> 
> and they responded with force.
> 
> should the Arabs have accepted this travesty of justice?  in retrospect?  yes.
> 
> at the time, they made the right choice.
Click to expand...

Naturally those like Miss Hoffstra and Georgie Boy never take into consideration that the Hashemites from Saudi Arabia got 78 percent of the Palestine Mandate.  When the previous King of Jordan, with the help of the Pakistani Army, in the incident known as Black September, murdered over 10,000 Palestinians who were trying to take over Jordan, Miss Hoffstra and Georgie Boy probably just yawned.  After all, it was just Arabs killing Arabs once again, and the Jews were not involved in this.  Come to think of it, Miss Hoffstra does sound like a very young person in all likelihood she wasn't even born at that time to be able to yawn at this.


----------



## georgephillip

Hossfly said:


> Hoffstra said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> georgephillip said:
> 
> 
> 
> *How did thirty percent of Palestinians receive 55% of the land in 1948 "fair and square"?
> Zionism never confused liberation and colonization or the role imperialism plays in their occupation of Palestine. Israel as a Jewish state will change or face the same fate as White South Africa did.*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> this is a fact.
> 
> the Jews got a much higher percentage of Palestine than their percentage of the population.
> 
> of course the Arabs were mad at this.
> 
> and they responded with force.
> 
> should the Arabs have accepted this travesty of justice?  in retrospect?  yes.
> 
> at the time, they made the right choice.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Naturally those like Miss Hoffstra and Georgie Boy never take into consideration that the Hashemites from Saudi Arabia got 78 percent of the Palestine Mandate.  When the previous King of Jordan, with the help of the Pakistani Army, in the incident known as Black September, murdered over 10,000 Palestinians who were trying to take over Jordan, Miss Hoffstra and Georgie Boy probably just yawned.  After all, it was just Arabs killing Arabs once again, and the Jews were not involved in this.  Come to think of it, Miss Hoffstra does sound like a very young person in all likelihood she wasn't even born at that time to be able to yawn at this.
Click to expand...

Hossie's ignorance of why there were thousands of Palestinians in Jordan in 1971 probably should be questioned, although he clings to ignorance like white clings to rice. In 1948 Mandate Palestine 650,000 Jews inflicted a Jewish state upon twice as many Palestinians living between the River and the sea. Thousands of Palestinians fled to Jordan so that heroic Jews (like Hossie) could take possession of their homes, businesses, and bank accounts. Killers like Hossie yawned and chalked up another victory for the "good guys."


----------



## toastman

georgephillip said:


> Hossfly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Hoffstra said:
> 
> 
> 
> this is a fact.
> 
> the Jews got a much higher percentage of Palestine than their percentage of the population.
> 
> of course the Arabs were mad at this.
> 
> and they responded with force.
> 
> should the Arabs have accepted this travesty of justice?  in retrospect?  yes.
> 
> at the time, they made the right choice.
> 
> 
> 
> Naturally those like Miss Hoffstra and Georgie Boy never take into consideration that the Hashemites from Saudi Arabia got 78 percent of the Palestine Mandate.  When the previous King of Jordan, with the help of the Pakistani Army, in the incident known as Black September, murdered over 10,000 Palestinians who were trying to take over Jordan, Miss Hoffstra and Georgie Boy probably just yawned.  After all, it was just Arabs killing Arabs once again, and the Jews were not involved in this.  Come to think of it, Miss Hoffstra does sound like a very young person in all likelihood she wasn't even born at that time to be able to yawn at this.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Hossie's ignorance of why there were thousands of Palestinians in Jordan in 1971 probably should be questioned, although he clings to ignorance like white clings to rice. In 1948 Mandate Palestine 650,000 Jews inflicted a Jewish state upon twice as many Palestinians living between the River and the sea. Thousands of Palestinians fled to Jordan so that heroic Jews (like Hossie) could take possession of their homes, businesses, and bank accounts. Killers like Hossie yawned and chalked up another victory for the "good guys."
Click to expand...


Why did they REALLY flee George ?? At least the truth


----------



## docmauser1

georgephillip said:


> _... why there were thousands of Palestinians in Jordan in 1971 probably should be questioned,_


On vacation?


georgephillip said:


> _In 1948 Mandate Palestine 650,000 Jews inflicted a Jewish state upon twice as many Palestinians living between the River and the sea._


There were no palistanians that time, of course.


georgephillip said:


> _Thousands of Palestinians fled to Jordan so that heroic Jews (like Hossie) could take possession of their homes, businesses, and bank accounts._


Yeah, we all remember "palistanian" businesses, factories, belching smoke, building ships, airplanes. Mattress "bank accounts"? hehe


----------



## georgephillip

toastman said:


> georgephillip said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Hossfly said:
> 
> 
> 
> Naturally those like Miss Hoffstra and Georgie Boy never take into consideration that the Hashemites from Saudi Arabia got 78 percent of the Palestine Mandate.  When the previous King of Jordan, with the help of the Pakistani Army, in the incident known as Black September, murdered over 10,000 Palestinians who were trying to take over Jordan, Miss Hoffstra and Georgie Boy probably just yawned.  After all, it was just Arabs killing Arabs once again, and the Jews were not involved in this.  Come to think of it, Miss Hoffstra does sound like a very young person in all likelihood she wasn't even born at that time to be able to yawn at this.
> 
> 
> 
> Hossie's ignorance of why there were thousands of Palestinians in Jordan in 1971 probably should be questioned, although he clings to ignorance like white clings to rice. In 1948 Mandate Palestine 650,000 Jews inflicted a Jewish state upon twice as many Palestinians living between the River and the sea. Thousands of Palestinians fled to Jordan so that heroic Jews (like Hossie) could take possession of their homes, businesses, and bank accounts. Killers like Hossie yawned and chalked up another victory for the "good guys."
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Why did they REALLY flee George ?? At least the truth
Click to expand...

*There were a variety of reasons that Arabs fled by the hundreds of thousands when 650,000 Jews decided to rule Palestine in 1948. Arabs with money went on vacation, probably expecting to return to their possessions in a few weeks time, at most. Some Arabs fled to open the field of battle for the five Arab armies taking up defensive positions around the 45% of Mandate Palestine that the UN graciously bestowed upon 1.35 million Arab Palestinians. The vast majority of fleeing Arabs, I believe, did so at the point of a Jewish bayonet:*

"Zionist forces committed 33 massacres and destroyed 531 Palestinian towns. Author Norman Finkelstein states: 'According to the former director of the Israeli army archives, "in almost every village occupied by us during the War... acts were committed which are defined as war crimes, such as murders, massacres, and rapes"...Uri Milstein, the authoritative Israeli military historian of the 1948 war, goes one step further, maintaining that every skirmish ended in a massacre of Arabs.9

"Count Folke Bernadotte, a former official of the Swedish Red Cross who saved thousands of Jews during World War II and was appointed U.N. mediator in Palestine, said of the refugees: 'It would be an offence against the principles of elemental justice if these innocent victims of the conflict were denied the right to return to their homes.'10 Bernadotte was assassinated by a Zionist organization led by future Israeli Prime Minister Yitzhak Shamir.'

The Catastrophe - Al Nakba

*What's your response the Bernadotte's indictment of al-Nakba?*


----------



## georgephillip

docmauser1 said:


> georgephillip said:
> 
> 
> 
> _... why there were thousands of Palestinians in Jordan in 1971 probably should be questioned,_
> 
> 
> 
> On vacation?
> 
> 
> georgephillip said:
> 
> 
> 
> _In 1948 Mandate Palestine 650,000 Jews inflicted a Jewish state upon twice as many Palestinians living between the River and the sea._
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> There were no palistanians that time, of course.
> 
> 
> georgephillip said:
> 
> 
> 
> _Thousands of Palestinians fled to Jordan so that heroic Jews (like Hossie) could take possession of their homes, businesses, and bank accounts._
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Yeah, we all remember "palistanian" businesses, factories, belching smoke, building ships, airplanes. Mattress "bank accounts"? hehe
Click to expand...

*Did you get your share?*


----------



## Hossfly

georgephillip said:


> Hossfly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Hoffstra said:
> 
> 
> 
> this is a fact.
> 
> the Jews got a much higher percentage of Palestine than their percentage of the population.
> 
> of course the Arabs were mad at this.
> 
> and they responded with force.
> 
> should the Arabs have accepted this travesty of justice?  in retrospect?  yes.
> 
> at the time, they made the right choice.
> 
> 
> 
> Naturally those like Miss Hoffstra and Georgie Boy never take into consideration that the Hashemites from Saudi Arabia got 78 percent of the Palestine Mandate.  When the previous King of Jordan, with the help of the Pakistani Army, in the incident known as Black September, murdered over 10,000 Palestinians who were trying to take over Jordan, Miss Hoffstra and Georgie Boy probably just yawned.  After all, it was just Arabs killing Arabs once again, and the Jews were not involved in this.  Come to think of it, Miss Hoffstra does sound like a very young person in all likelihood she wasn't even born at that time to be able to yawn at this.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Hossie's ignorance of why there were thousands of Palestinians in Jordan in 1971 probably should be questioned, although he clings to ignorance like white clings to rice. In 1948 Mandate Palestine 650,000 Jews inflicted a Jewish state upon twice as many Palestinians living between the River and the sea. Thousands of Palestinians fled to Jordan so that heroic Jews (like Hossie) could take possession of their homes, businesses, and bank accounts. Killers like Hossie yawned and chalked up another victory for the "good guys."
Click to expand...

Could you give your "650,000 thousand Jews blah, blah, blah" shtick a rest Georgie Boy?  You must have brought this up over by now thousands of times in your posts.  Meanwhile, it appears that you have no problem that the Hashemites were given 78 percent of the mandate, and you are probably comatose to the fact that this 78 percent was not unpopulated at the time but contained many Arabs.  By the way, Georgie Boy, I am not Jewish as you seem to think, but I think many viewers are aware that Black guys like you have it in for the Jews because you feel the Jews are responsible for the situation in which you now find yourself.  As the viewers can see, Georgie Boy, never concerns himself with what is happening to his people in Africa even though a forum is available for this.  It is always Jews, Jews, Jews with him.


----------



## toastman

Funny how people complain about the Jews getting offered a little over 50% of the land when in fact the Arabs got THE ENTIRE MIDDLE EAST and the territory did not belong to the Palestinians, they just owned land and loved there. Remember, it was the British who captured the land over the Ottoman empire, not the Palestinian Arabs .


----------



## Hoffstra

toastman said:


> Funny how people complain about the Jews getting offered a little over 50% of the land when in fact the Arabs got THE ENTIRE MIDDLE EAST and the territory did not belong to the Palestinians, they just owned land and loved there. Remember, it was the British who captured the land over the Ottoman empire, not the Palestinian Arabs .



the Jews got 60% of Palestine...even though they didn't even make up 40% of the population.

this was a massive injustice.

if you were an Arab, you too would been pissed and called for war.


----------



## Hossfly

Hoffstra said:


> toastman said:
> 
> 
> 
> Funny how people complain about the Jews getting offered a little over 50% of the land when in fact the Arabs got THE ENTIRE MIDDLE EAST and the territory did not belong to the Palestinians, they just owned land and loved there. Remember, it was the British who captured the land over the Ottoman empire, not the Palestinian Arabs .
> 
> 
> 
> 
> the Jews got 60% of Palestine...even though they didn't even make up 40% of the population.
> 
> this was a massive injustice.
> 
> if you were an Arab, you too would been pissed and called for war.
Click to expand...

I would say that the Hashemites of Saudi Arabia are Arabs too, and they received 78 percent of the Palestine Mandate.  The remaining 22 percent was to be divided in half -- one half to the Jews and one half to the Arabs.  The Jews accepted and the Arabs refused.  Of course everyone remembers how Arafat and his gang tried to take over Jordan which resulted in Black September.  Maybe Miss Hoffstra, when she is not too busy attending classes at Hofstra University on Long Island, can convince the present King of Jordan to give the "Palestinians" some of the land of Jordan.


----------



## toastman

Hoffstra said:


> toastman said:
> 
> 
> 
> Funny how people complain about the Jews getting offered a little over 50% of the land when in fact the Arabs got THE ENTIRE MIDDLE EAST and the territory did not belong to the Palestinians, they just owned land and loved there. Remember, it was the British who captured the land over the Ottoman empire, not the Palestinian Arabs .
> 
> 
> 
> 
> the Jews got 60% of Palestine...even though they didn't even make up 40% of the population.
> 
> this was a massive injustice.
> 
> if you were an Arab, you too would been pissed and called for war.
Click to expand...


The Jews were originally offered way more than that.

And once again, you justify Palestinian/Arab violence. Starting a war was a big mistake on their part. Specially because they, you know, lost AND didn't gain a country


----------



## Hoffstra

Hossfly said:


> I would say that the Hashemites of Saudi Arabia are Arabs too, and they received 78 percent of the Palestine Mandate.  The remaining 22 percent was to be divided in half -- one half to the Jews and one half to the Arabs....



only in a retarded world of Zionist math, does 60/40 equal one half for each side.


----------



## toastman

Hoffstra said:


> Hossfly said:
> 
> 
> 
> I would say that the Hashemites of Saudi Arabia are Arabs too, and they received 78 percent of the Palestine Mandate.  The remaining 22 percent was to be divided in half -- one half to the Jews and one half to the Arabs....
> 
> 
> 
> 
> only in a retarded world of Zionist math, does 60/40 equal one half for each side.
Click to expand...


That looks more like Irish math.....


----------



## Hoffstra

toastman said:


> That looks more like Irish math.....



I'm not Irish, you idiot!!


----------



## Hossfly

Hoffstra said:


> toastman said:
> 
> 
> 
> That looks more like Irish math.....
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I'm not Irish, you idiot!!
Click to expand...

He's not an idiot, Irish.


----------



## Hossfly

Hoffstra said:


> Hossfly said:
> 
> 
> 
> I would say that the Hashemites of Saudi Arabia are Arabs too, and they received 78 percent of the Palestine Mandate.  The remaining 22 percent was to be divided in half -- one half to the Jews and one half to the Arabs....
> 
> 
> 
> 
> only in a retarded world of Zionist math, does 60/40 equal one half for each side.
Click to expand...

Hmm, 89 percent to the Arabs and only 11 percent of the Palestine Mandate to the Jews.  Originally the Jews were supposed to get more, but they were satisfied with the 11 percent, and that 11 percent gave the Arabs in the Middle East a fit.  Better take remedial math at Hoffstra University on Long Island.  I am surprised that you weren't required to take it in your Freshman Year.


----------



## docmauser1

georgephillip said:


> docmauser1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> georgephillip said:
> 
> 
> 
> _... why there were thousands of Palestinians in Jordan in 1971 probably should be questioned,_
> 
> 
> 
> On vacation?There were no palistanians that time, of course.
> 
> 
> georgephillip said:
> 
> 
> 
> _Thousands of Palestinians fled to Jordan so that heroic Jews (like Hossie) could take possession of their homes, businesses, and bank accounts._
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Yeah, we all remember "palistanian" businesses, factories, belching smoke, building ships, airplanes. Mattress "bank accounts"? hehe
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> _Did you get your share?_
Click to expand...

Is our honorable georgephillip sharing?


----------



## georgephillip

docmauser1 said:


> georgephillip said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> docmauser1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> On vacation?There were no palistanians that time, of course.Yeah, we all remember "palistanian" businesses, factories, belching smoke, building ships, airplanes. Mattress "bank accounts"? hehe
> 
> 
> 
> _Did you get your share?_
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Is our honorable georgephillip sharing?
Click to expand...

*Not in the looting of my neighbors' land and water.
You?*


----------



## georgephillip

Hossfly said:


> georgephillip said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Hossfly said:
> 
> 
> 
> Naturally those like Miss Hoffstra and Georgie Boy never take into consideration that the Hashemites from Saudi Arabia got 78 percent of the Palestine Mandate.  When the previous King of Jordan, with the help of the Pakistani Army, in the incident known as Black September, murdered over 10,000 Palestinians who were trying to take over Jordan, Miss Hoffstra and Georgie Boy probably just yawned.  After all, it was just Arabs killing Arabs once again, and the Jews were not involved in this.  Come to think of it, Miss Hoffstra does sound like a very young person in all likelihood she wasn't even born at that time to be able to yawn at this.
> 
> 
> 
> Hossie's ignorance of why there were thousands of Palestinians in Jordan in 1971 probably should be questioned, although he clings to ignorance like white clings to rice. In 1948 Mandate Palestine 650,000 Jews inflicted a Jewish state upon twice as many Palestinians living between the River and the sea. Thousands of Palestinians fled to Jordan so that heroic Jews (like Hossie) could take possession of their homes, businesses, and bank accounts. Killers like Hossie yawned and chalked up another victory for the "good guys."
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Could you give your "650,000 thousand Jews blah, blah, blah" shtick a rest Georgie Boy?  You must have brought this up over by now thousands of times in your posts.  Meanwhile, it appears that you have no problem that the Hashemites were given 78 percent of the mandate, and you are probably comatose to the fact that this 78 percent was not unpopulated at the time but contained many Arabs.  By the way, Georgie Boy, I am not Jewish as you seem to think, but I think many viewers are aware that Black guys like you have it in for the Jews because you feel the Jews are responsible for the situation in which you now find yourself.  As the viewers can see, Georgie Boy, never concerns himself with what is happening to his people in Africa even though a forum is available for this.  It is always Jews, Jews, Jews with him.
Click to expand...

*Here's a couple of news flashes, Bigot:
I'm not Black (or Jew)
And "your people" caused Black September:*

"The fighting between the Arab states and Israel was halted with the UN-mediated 1949 Armistice Agreements, but the remaining Palestinian territories came under the control of Egypt and Transjordan. 

"In 1949, Transjordan officially changed its name to Jordan; in 1950, it annexed the West Bank of the Jordan River, and brought Palestinian representation into the government.

"At the time, the population east of the Jordan River contained over 400,000 Palestinian refugees who made up one-third of the population of the Kingdom; another third of the population was Palestinians on the West Bank. 

"*Only one third of the population consisted of the original inhabitants of Trans-Jordan, which meant that the Jordanians had become a ruling minority over a Palestinian majority.* 

"This proved to be a mercurial element in internal Jordanian politics and played a critical role in the political opposition. 

"Since the 1950s, the West Bank had become the center of the national and territorial aspects of the Palestinian problem that was the key issue of Jordan's domestic and foreign policy. According to King Hussein, the Palestinian problem spelled 'life or death' for Jordan and would remain the country's overriding national security issue.[7]"

*Those 400,000 Palestinians would not have been in Jordan in 1949 if 650,000 Jews hadn't inflicted their nation upon Palestine.*

Black September in Jordan - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


----------



## toastman

georgephillip said:


> Hossfly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> georgephillip said:
> 
> 
> 
> Hossie's ignorance of why there were thousands of Palestinians in Jordan in 1971 probably should be questioned, although he clings to ignorance like white clings to rice. In 1948 Mandate Palestine 650,000 Jews inflicted a Jewish state upon twice as many Palestinians living between the River and the sea. Thousands of Palestinians fled to Jordan so that heroic Jews (like Hossie) could take possession of their homes, businesses, and bank accounts. Killers like Hossie yawned and chalked up another victory for the "good guys."
> 
> 
> 
> Could you give your "650,000 thousand Jews blah, blah, blah" shtick a rest Georgie Boy?  You must have brought this up over by now thousands of times in your posts.  Meanwhile, it appears that you have no problem that the Hashemites were given 78 percent of the mandate, and you are probably comatose to the fact that this 78 percent was not unpopulated at the time but contained many Arabs.  By the way, Georgie Boy, I am not Jewish as you seem to think, but I think many viewers are aware that Black guys like you have it in for the Jews because you feel the Jews are responsible for the situation in which you now find yourself.  As the viewers can see, Georgie Boy, never concerns himself with what is happening to his people in Africa even though a forum is available for this.  It is always Jews, Jews, Jews with him.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> *Here's a couple of news flashes, Bigot:
> I'm not Black (or Jew)
> And "your people" caused Black September:*
> 
> "The fighting between the Arab states and Israel was halted with the UN-mediated 1949 Armistice Agreements, but the remaining Palestinian territories came under the control of Egypt and Transjordan.
> 
> "In 1949, Transjordan officially changed its name to Jordan; in 1950, it annexed the West Bank of the Jordan River, and brought Palestinian representation into the government.
> 
> "At the time, the population east of the Jordan River contained over 400,000 Palestinian refugees who made up one-third of the population of the Kingdom; another third of the population was Palestinians on the West Bank.
> 
> "*Only one third of the population consisted of the original inhabitants of Trans-Jordan, which meant that the Jordanians had become a ruling minority over a Palestinian majority.*
> 
> "This proved to be a mercurial element in internal Jordanian politics and played a critical role in the political opposition.
> 
> "Since the 1950s, the West Bank had become the center of the national and territorial aspects of the Palestinian problem that was the key issue of Jordan's domestic and foreign policy. According to King Hussein, the Palestinian problem spelled 'life or death' for Jordan and would remain the country's overriding national security issue.[7]"
> 
> *Those 400,000 Palestinians would not have been in Jordan in 1949 if 650,000 Jews hadn't inflicted their nation upon Palestine.*
> 
> Black September in Jordan - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Click to expand...


Yes, 'us people' caused everything , right? 
Sounds like more typical 'blame the Jooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooos'


----------



## Hoffstra

toastman said:


> Yes, 'us people' caused everything , right?
> Sounds like more typical 'blame the Jooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooos'



you saying Jews had nothing to do with 800,000 Arabs being exiled from Palestine?


----------



## toastman

Hoffstra said:


> toastman said:
> 
> 
> 
> Yes, 'us people' caused everything , right?
> Sounds like more typical 'blame the Jooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooos'
> 
> 
> 
> 
> you saying Jews had nothing to do with 800,000 Arabs being exiled from Palestine?
Click to expand...


Not all of them. Or even close to all of them. The ones that were expelled were because Israel was winning, and eventually won the civil war in 47-48 AND the 1948 Arab Israeli war. Had the Palestinians won, do you think there would be one single Jew living there ? 
The Palestinian Arabs are just butt hurt that they lost. 

What was the lesson learned??  Don't fuck with the Jews !! 

Obviously the Palestinians never learned that lesson, as seen by the first and second intifada


----------



## Hoffstra

toastman said:


> Not all of them. Or even close to all of them. The ones that were expelled were because Israel was winning, and eventually won the civil war. Had the Palestinians won, do you think there would be one single Jew living there ?
> The Palestinian Arabs are just butt hurt that they lost.
> 
> What was the lesson learned??  Don't fuck with the Jews !!
> 
> Obviously the Palestinians never learned that lesson, as seen by the first and second intifada



If it was not for the Intifada, there would NEVER have been a peace process, and Israelis offering Palestine 95% of the West Bank.

The Intifada fatigued Israel into accepting that they cannot rule the Palestinians without getting hurt...badly.

Israel will always win a full-scale conventional war.

But they will ALWAYS lose a war of attrition.

ZioNazis like you know this to be true.


----------



## toastman

Hoffstra said:


> toastman said:
> 
> 
> 
> Not all of them. Or even close to all of them. The ones that were expelled were because Israel was winning, and eventually won the civil war. Had the Palestinians won, do you think there would be one single Jew living there ?
> The Palestinian Arabs are just butt hurt that they lost.
> 
> What was the lesson learned??  Don't fuck with the Jews !!
> 
> Obviously the Palestinians never learned that lesson, as seen by the first and second intifada
> 
> 
> 
> 
> If it was not for the Intifada, there would NEVER have been a peace process, and Israelis offering Palestine 95% of the West Bank.
> 
> The Intifada fatigued Israel into accepting that they cannot rule the Palestinians without getting hurt...badly.
> 
> Israel will always win a full-scale conventional war.
> 
> But they will ALWAYS lose a war of attrition.
> 
> ZioNazis like you know this to be true.
Click to expand...


and this post confirms what I have always been saying about the anti - Zionists here: You guys are living in a delusional world !

And how nice of you to justify the intifada, where hundreds of Israelis were blown to pieces. You are a sick puppy


----------



## toastman

Hoffstra said:


> toastman said:
> 
> 
> 
> Not all of them. Or even close to all of them. The ones that were expelled were because Israel was winning, and eventually won the civil war. Had the Palestinians won, do you think there would be one single Jew living there ?
> The Palestinian Arabs are just butt hurt that they lost.
> 
> What was the lesson learned??  Don't fuck with the Jews !!
> 
> Obviously the Palestinians never learned that lesson, as seen by the first and second intifada
> 
> 
> 
> 
> If it was not for the Intifada, there would NEVER have been a peace process, and Israelis offering Palestine 95% of the West Bank.
> 
> The Intifada fatigued Israel into accepting that they cannot rule the Palestinians without getting hurt...badly.
> 
> Israel will always win a full-scale conventional war.
> *
> But they will ALWAYS lose a war of attrition.*
> 
> ZioNazis like you know this to be true.
Click to expand...


The Palestinians will not win and have not won anything. Every time they have attacked Israel, they got a spanking ten times as hard. So please, get out of this warped world you are in, and join the rest of us in reality.


----------



## Hoffstra

toastman said:


> and this post confirms what I have always been saying about the anti - Zionists here: You guys are living in a delusional world !
> 
> And how nice of you to justify the intifada, where hundreds of Israelis were blown to pieces. You are a sick puppy



I will condemn the Intifada when you comdemn the ethnic cleansing of hundreds of thousands of Palestinians in 1948 and 1967, the use of white phosphorous in civilian Gaza areas by Israel, and the Israeli theft of Palestinian private property.


----------



## Hoffstra

toastman said:


> The Palestinians will not win and have not won anything. Every time they have attacked Israel, they got a spanking ten times as hard. So please, get out of this warped world you are in, and join the rest of us in reality.



The Intifada brought Israel to its knees, Israeli mothers into tears, and Israel to the negotiating table.

See what a few rocks can do?


----------



## toastman

Then Israel built a wall , and Hamas were not and are still not unable to send in bombers. So the best they can do is launch a few rockets that rarely even reach any cities hahahaha. 
Sucks for them ! 

You see Hoffy boy, any time that the Palestinians throw something at Israel, Israel will always find a way to deter it.


----------



## Hoffstra

toastman said:


> Then Israel built a wall , and Hamas were not and are still not unable to send in bombers. So the best they can do is launch a few rockets that rarely even reach any cities hahahaha.
> Sucks for them !
> 
> You see Hoffy boy, any time that the Palestinians throw something at Israel, Israel will always find a way to deter it.



The East German Communists built a massive wall.

Now the Israeli Fascists have built a massive wall.

misery loves company huh?


----------



## Kondor3

Hoffstra said:


> toastman said:
> 
> 
> 
> Then Israel built a wall , and Hamas were not and are still not unable to send in bombers. So the best they can do is launch a few rockets that rarely even reach any cities hahahaha.
> Sucks for them !
> 
> You see Hoffy boy, any time that the Palestinians throw something at Israel, Israel will always find a way to deter it.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The East German Communists built a massive wall.
> 
> Now the Israeli Fascists have built a massive wall.
> 
> misery loves company huh?
Click to expand...

The difference being that...

East Germany built a wall to keep her own people *IN*...

Whereas Israel built a wall to keep the Barbarians *OUT*...

*Big* honkin' difference...

False analogy...


----------



## Hoffstra

Kondor3 said:


> The difference being that...
> 
> East Germany built a wall to keep her own people *IN*...
> 
> Whereas Israel built a wall to keep the Barbarians *OUT*...
> 
> *Big* honkin' difference...
> 
> False analogy...[/SIZE]



so why do the Izraelis keep taking more land outside the wall?


----------



## Kondor3

Hoffstra said:


> Kondor3 said:
> 
> 
> 
> The difference being that...
> 
> East Germany built a wall to keep her own people *IN*...
> 
> Whereas Israel built a wall to keep the Barbarians *OUT*...
> 
> *Big* honkin' difference...
> 
> False analogy...[/SIZE]
> 
> 
> 
> 
> so why do the Izraelis keep taking more land outside the wall?
Click to expand...


Because they keep moving the goal-posts...

Because that is how they win...

As one can tell from the Palestinians own shrinking-land propaganda maps...

Just because you build a wall doesn't mean that you can't sortie over that wall, grab more land, then re-build the wall along the perimeter of the newly-acquired patch(es)...

Such building and sorties and expansion are not mutually exclusive...

Bit by bit...

Until, eventually, you have it all...

A blind man could have seen this coming as early as the 1970s...


----------



## Hoffstra

Kondor3 said:


> Because they keep moving the goal-posts...
> 
> Because that is how they win...
> 
> As one can tell from the Palestinians own shrinking-land propaganda maps...
> 
> Just because you build a wall doesn't mean that you can't sortie over that wall, grab more land, then re-build the wall along the perimeter of the newly-acquired patch(es)...
> 
> Such building and sorties and expansion are not mutually exclusive...
> 
> Bit by bit...
> 
> Until, eventually, you have it all...
> 
> A blind man could have seen this coming as early as the 1970s...



so you support the one-state solution?

good to hear.


----------



## Kondor3

Hoffstra said:


> Kondor3 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Because they keep moving the goal-posts...
> 
> Because that is how they win...
> 
> As one can tell from the Palestinians own shrinking-land propaganda maps...
> 
> Just because you build a wall doesn't mean that you can't sortie over that wall, grab more land, then re-build the wall along the perimeter of the newly-acquired patch(es)...
> 
> Such building and sorties and expansion are not mutually exclusive...
> 
> Bit by bit...
> 
> Until, eventually, you have it all...
> 
> A blind man could have seen this coming as early as the 1970s...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> so you support the one-state solution?
> 
> good to hear.
Click to expand...

Indeed.

The Jewish Homeland, Greater Israel (Eretz Yisrael), from River to Sea.

With the Arabs living someplace else.


----------



## Hoffstra

Kondor3 said:


> Indeed.
> 
> The Jewish Homeland, Greater Israel (Eretz Yisrael), from River to Sea.
> 
> With the Arabs living someplace else.



attempting to do that will lead to another Holocaust.

why do you want 6 million more Jews to die?


----------



## toastman

Hoffstra said:


> toastman said:
> 
> 
> 
> Then Israel built a wall , and Hamas were not and are still not unable to send in bombers. So the best they can do is launch a few rockets that rarely even reach any cities hahahaha.
> Sucks for them !
> 
> You see Hoffy boy, any time that the Palestinians throw something at Israel, Israel will always find a way to deter it.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The East German Communists built a massive wall.
> 
> Now the Israeli Fascists have built a massive wall.
> 
> misery loves company huh?
Click to expand...


What a terrible comparison. This is just further proof that you know little to nothing about what we are discussing. 

Lets review this again. Palestinians continuously sent in suicide bombers from the West Bank to kill Israelis. Scored of suicide bombers. So Israel built a well and added checkpoints to keep the suicidal Islamist scumbags out. Guess what, it worked. Like a charm. But of course, since this made it practically impossible for Hamas to carry on with their suicide missions, them and their supporters call it an Apartheid Wall 
Which btw I saw coming the same day I heard about the construction of the wall.
Oh wait, maybe you're one of those Arab propaganda whores that believes the suicide bombings stopped because Hamas decided to stop them


----------



## Hossfly

Hoffstra said:


> toastman said:
> 
> 
> 
> Then Israel built a wall , and Hamas were not and are still not unable to send in bombers. So the best they can do is launch a few rockets that rarely even reach any cities hahahaha.
> Sucks for them !
> 
> You see Hoffy boy, any time that the Palestinians throw something at Israel, Israel will always find a way to deter it.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The East German Communists built a massive wall.
> 
> Now the Israeli Fascists have built a massive wall.
> 
> misery loves company huh?
Click to expand...

Of course, the East Germans built a Wall.  Don't you think the inhabitants behind the Wall wanted to escape the Communists, and a way to keep them in was the Wall.  However, the leaders in East Germany weren't worried about those wanting to escape planning to become suicide bombers.   Didn't they teach you this in your history class at Hoffstra University?  I am sure the viewers have picked up on the fact that Miss Hoffstra never mentions what her Islamofascist friends have done and are still doing.  I am willing to bet that Miss Hoffstra would have been great helping those escaped Nazis from Germany who went to the Middle East to help the Islamofascists write their propaganda.


----------



## georgephillip

toastman said:


> georgephillip said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Hossfly said:
> 
> 
> 
> Could you give your "650,000 thousand Jews blah, blah, blah" shtick a rest Georgie Boy?  You must have brought this up over by now thousands of times in your posts.  Meanwhile, it appears that you have no problem that the Hashemites were given 78 percent of the mandate, and you are probably comatose to the fact that this 78 percent was not unpopulated at the time but contained many Arabs.  By the way, Georgie Boy, I am not Jewish as you seem to think, but I think many viewers are aware that Black guys like you have it in for the Jews because you feel the Jews are responsible for the situation in which you now find yourself.  As the viewers can see, Georgie Boy, never concerns himself with what is happening to his people in Africa even though a forum is available for this.  It is always Jews, Jews, Jews with him.
> 
> 
> 
> *Here's a couple of news flashes, Bigot:
> I'm not Black (or Jew)
> And "your people" caused Black September:*
> 
> "The fighting between the Arab states and Israel was halted with the UN-mediated 1949 Armistice Agreements, but the remaining Palestinian territories came under the control of Egypt and Transjordan.
> 
> "In 1949, Transjordan officially changed its name to Jordan; in 1950, it annexed the West Bank of the Jordan River, and brought Palestinian representation into the government.
> 
> "At the time, the population east of the Jordan River contained over 400,000 Palestinian refugees who made up one-third of the population of the Kingdom; another third of the population was Palestinians on the West Bank.
> 
> "*Only one third of the population consisted of the original inhabitants of Trans-Jordan, which meant that the Jordanians had become a ruling minority over a Palestinian majority.*
> 
> "This proved to be a mercurial element in internal Jordanian politics and played a critical role in the political opposition.
> 
> "Since the 1950s, the West Bank had become the center of the national and territorial aspects of the Palestinian problem that was the key issue of Jordan's domestic and foreign policy. According to King Hussein, the Palestinian problem spelled 'life or death' for Jordan and would remain the country's overriding national security issue.[7]"
> 
> *Those 400,000 Palestinians would not have been in Jordan in 1949 if 650,000 Jews hadn't inflicted their nation upon Palestine.*
> 
> Black September in Jordan - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Yes, 'us people' caused everything , right?
> Sounds like more typical 'blame the Jooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooos'
Click to expand...

When one-third of all Mandate Palestinians created an ethnocracy at the expense of two-thirds of the total population in 1949, 700,000 Arabs were displaced from their homes. This occurred by UN Decree not by any form of self-determination on the part of all Palestinians. Such self-determination would have required a vote whereby the first governing body of Israel/Palestine would have represented the interests of Jew and and Arab proportionally, producing a Semitic Federation that would have had shared interests and ambitions with its neighbors instead of the "divide and conquer" mentality of western imperialists.


----------



## Kondor3

It doesn't matter anymore.

What *DOES* matter is that 'possession is nine-tenths of the law'.

If you want Palestine back then you must *TAKE* it back.

Come and get it.

If you *CAN*.

If you *DARE*.

It's a good guess that the Israelis would just *LOVE* to see you try.

It would be the *perfect* excuse to complete the job of land-aquisition and consolidation.

To send the last of 'you' packing to go live someplace else.

All this arguing about old and obsolete legal standings and population demographics is absolutely pointless.

We did this in the 1910s.

You did that in the 1920s.

We did this in the 1930s.

You did that in the 1940s.

Blah... blah... blah... blah...

Endless... fucking... blah...

Newsflash...

It doesn't *MATTER* anymore...

What *DOES* matter is that the Jews now have the land...

And you're not ever... *EVER*... gonna get it back...

*They have won*...

*You have los*t...

They will not rest until they have restored _Eretz Yisrael_ in its entirety, from River to Sea...

You cannot stop them...

They are most of the way to that goal already...

Getting closer every year...

And, to make matters even worse for you (_as if that were possible_)...

Your Arab neighbor-countries (_your old and mostly-useless allies_) are a mess now...

There will be *no* Arab cavalry coming over the hill this time to rescue you...

After *65 years (!!!)* of sitting in those shit-hole refugee camps and flea-bitten towns...

Time to wake up and smell the fucking coffee...

Time to pack up your families and move to greener pastures, in Jordan or Lebanon or any other place where you can make new lives for yourselves and be happy and live normally and in peace...

Because where you are now, you and your children and grandchildren have *zero* chance of being happy...

The flea-bitten scraps of land that you're still hanging onto by the skin of your teeth are simply *NOT WORTH THE GRIEF*... regardless of how much blood has been stupidly squandered and wasted on the effort so far... 

Time to face reality and cut your losses...

Time to make an end...

Time to turn off the lights and walk away...

*Time to go*...


----------



## Kondor3

Hoffstra said:


> Kondor3 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Indeed.
> 
> The Jewish Homeland, Greater Israel (Eretz Yisrael), from River to Sea.
> 
> With the Arabs living someplace else.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> attempting to do that will lead to another Holocaust.
> 
> why do you want 6 million more Jews to die?
Click to expand...

Brave talk.

There is no power nor combination of powers that you can bring to bear to accomplish that.

Especially with Egypt, Syria, Iraq, Lebanon and Libya all having become train-wrecks; in a shambles and unable to effectively make war against their neighbors...

Hell, the Arabs themselves fence-off the Crazies in Gaza and the West Bank,_ from their own sides of the borders_, and they, too, will be secretly glad to see an end to Palestinian madness.

And there is no Global War-Making Ummah that is going to magically materialize and then mobilize to wage Final Jihad against the Israelis and Jews, either...

That's nothing more than a juvenile fantasy...

There is no Arab cavalry coming over the hill again.

Those days are over.

Brave talk.

*Empty talk.*


----------



## docmauser1

georgephillip said:


> _When one-third of all Mandate Palestinians created an ethnocracy at the expense of two-thirds of the total population in 1949, 700,000 Arabs were displaced from their homes. ..._


Yeah, right.


----------



## toastman

georgephillip said:


> toastman said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> georgephillip said:
> 
> 
> 
> *Here's a couple of news flashes, Bigot:
> I'm not Black (or Jew)
> And "your people" caused Black September:*
> 
> "The fighting between the Arab states and Israel was halted with the UN-mediated 1949 Armistice Agreements, but the remaining Palestinian territories came under the control of Egypt and Transjordan.
> 
> "In 1949, Transjordan officially changed its name to Jordan; in 1950, it annexed the West Bank of the Jordan River, and brought Palestinian representation into the government.
> 
> "At the time, the population east of the Jordan River contained over 400,000 Palestinian refugees who made up one-third of the population of the Kingdom; another third of the population was Palestinians on the West Bank.
> 
> "*Only one third of the population consisted of the original inhabitants of Trans-Jordan, which meant that the Jordanians had become a ruling minority over a Palestinian majority.*
> 
> "This proved to be a mercurial element in internal Jordanian politics and played a critical role in the political opposition.
> 
> "Since the 1950s, the West Bank had become the center of the national and territorial aspects of the Palestinian problem that was the key issue of Jordan's domestic and foreign policy. According to King Hussein, the Palestinian problem spelled 'life or death' for Jordan and would remain the country's overriding national security issue.[7]"
> 
> *Those 400,000 Palestinians would not have been in Jordan in 1949 if 650,000 Jews hadn't inflicted their nation upon Palestine.*
> 
> Black September in Jordan - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Yes, 'us people' caused everything , right?
> Sounds like more typical 'blame the Jooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooos'
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> When one-third of all Mandate Palestinians created an ethnocracy at the expense of two-thirds of the total population in 1949, 700,000 Arabs were displaced from their homes. This occurred by UN Decree not by any form of self-determination on the part of all Palestinians. Such self-determination would have required a vote whereby the first governing body of Israel/Palestine would have represented the interests of Jew and and Arab proportionally, producing a Semitic Federation that would have had shared interests and ambitions with its neighbors instead of the "divide and conquer" mentality of western imperialists.
Click to expand...


How many of those Arabs were told to leave by the surrounding Arab nations because they would have a quick and swift victory over Israel and would be able to return to their homes shortly ?


----------



## georgephillip

docmauser1 said:


> georgephillip said:
> 
> 
> 
> _When one-third of all Mandate Palestinians created an ethnocracy at the expense of two-thirds of the total population in 1949, 700,000 Arabs were displaced from their homes. ..._
> 
> 
> 
> Yeah, right.
Click to expand...

*650,000 Jews.
1.35 million Arabs.
1948 Mandate Palestine.
Jewish state??*


----------



## georgephillip

toastman said:


> georgephillip said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> toastman said:
> 
> 
> 
> Yes, 'us people' caused everything , right?
> Sounds like more typical 'blame the Jooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooos'
> 
> 
> 
> When one-third of all Mandate Palestinians created an ethnocracy at the expense of two-thirds of the total population in 1949, 700,000 Arabs were displaced from their homes. This occurred by UN Decree not by any form of self-determination on the part of all Palestinians. Such self-determination would have required a vote whereby the first governing body of Israel/Palestine would have represented the interests of Jew and and Arab proportionally, producing a Semitic Federation that would have had shared interests and ambitions with its neighbors instead of the "divide and conquer" mentality of western imperialists.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> How many of those Arabs were told to leave by the surrounding Arab nations because they would have a quick and swift victory over Israel and would be able to return to their homes shortly ?
Click to expand...

I'm not sure.
Tens of thousands, at least.
Why do you think it matters?
Some greeeedy Joooooooos had made it clear for fifty years they were planning to claim all the land between the River and the sea. After the British decapitated Arab leadership in Palestine during the revolt between 1936-39, Jewish terror won out over Arab resistance. Unfortunately, some Jews miscalculated and waited until 1967 to take all the land in their second war of aggression. By that time international law had put an end to the slave-based morality of might makes right. Maybe you'll get to keep a few blocks of Jerusalem for old time's sake?


----------



## docmauser1

georgephillip said:


> docmauser1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> georgephillip said:
> 
> 
> 
> _When one-third of all Mandate Palestinians created an ethnocracy at the expense of two-thirds of the total population in 1949, 700,000 Arabs were displaced from their homes. ..._
> 
> 
> 
> Yeah, right.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> _650,000 Jews. 1.35 million Arabs. 1948 Mandate Palestine. Jewish state??_
Click to expand...

Any arab state?


----------



## docmauser1

georgephillip said:


> _Some greeeedy Joooooooos had made it clear for fifty years they were planning to claim all the land between the River and the sea. After the British decapitated Arab leadership in Palestine during the revolt between 1936-39, Jewish terror won out over Arab resistance. Unfortunately, some Jews miscalculated and waited until 1967 to take all the land in their second war of aggression. By that time international law had put an end to the slave-based morality of might makes right. Maybe you'll get to keep a few blocks of Jerusalem for old time's sake?_


Drunk drivel.


----------



## toastman

georgephillip said:


> toastman said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> georgephillip said:
> 
> 
> 
> When one-third of all Mandate Palestinians created an ethnocracy at the expense of two-thirds of the total population in 1949, 700,000 Arabs were displaced from their homes. This occurred by UN Decree not by any form of self-determination on the part of all Palestinians. Such self-determination would have required a vote whereby the first governing body of Israel/Palestine would have represented the interests of Jew and and Arab proportionally, producing a Semitic Federation that would have had shared interests and ambitions with its neighbors instead of the "divide and conquer" mentality of western imperialists.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> How many of those Arabs were told to leave by the surrounding Arab nations because they would have a quick and swift victory over Israel and would be able to return to their homes shortly ?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I'm not sure.
> Tens of thousands, at least.
> Why do you think it matters?
> Some greeeedy Joooooooos had made it clear for fifty years they were planning to claim all the land between the River and the sea. After the British decapitated Arab leadership in Palestine during the revolt between 1936-39, Jewish terror won out over Arab resistance. Unfortunately, some Jews miscalculated and waited until 1967 to take all the land in their second war of aggression. By that time international law had put an end to the slave-based morality of might makes right. Maybe you'll get to keep a few blocks of Jerusalem for old time's sake?
Click to expand...


My goodness I have never seen a period of history distorted so much!
I told you to stop reading your history from the Hamas History Book , didn't I?


----------



## toastman

docmauser1 said:


> georgephillip said:
> 
> 
> 
> _Some greeeedy Joooooooos had made it clear for fifty years they were planning to claim all the land between the River and the sea. After the British decapitated Arab leadership in Palestine during the revolt between 1936-39, Jewish terror won out over Arab resistance. Unfortunately, some Jews miscalculated and waited until 1967 to take all the land in their second war of aggression. By that time international law had put an end to the slave-based morality of might makes right. Maybe you'll get to keep a few blocks of Jerusalem for old time's sake?_
> 
> 
> 
> Drunk drivel.
Click to expand...


More like 'getting paid to spread Palestinian propaganda lies' drivel


----------



## P F Tinmore

toastman said:


> georgephillip said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> toastman said:
> 
> 
> 
> Yes, 'us people' caused everything , right?
> Sounds like more typical 'blame the Jooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooos'
> 
> 
> 
> When one-third of all Mandate Palestinians created an ethnocracy at the expense of two-thirds of the total population in 1949, 700,000 Arabs were displaced from their homes. This occurred by UN Decree not by any form of self-determination on the part of all Palestinians. Such self-determination would have required a vote whereby the first governing body of Israel/Palestine would have represented the interests of Jew and and Arab proportionally, producing a Semitic Federation that would have had shared interests and ambitions with its neighbors instead of the "divide and conquer" mentality of western imperialists.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> How many of those Arabs were told to leave by the surrounding Arab nations because they would have a quick and swift victory over Israel and would be able to return to their homes shortly ?
Click to expand...


A few percent.


----------



## Kondor3

There were Arab-Muslim refugees from the 1948 Israeli War of Independence who were suckered into abandoning their homes by the over-promising/under-delivering Arab Attacker-Nations of 1948, with the promise of a quick victory over the Jews, and a 'Palestine' from River to Sea.

There were Arab-Muslim refugees from the 1948 Israeli War of Independence who were driven out of their homes by the Jewish Militias who later coalesced to form a single Army...

There were two kinds of Palestinian Refugees...

1. Voluntary Refugees...

2. Involuntary Refugees...

I wonder if there is a reliable and objective barometer for telling us how many of each...

One that both sides could believe or be obliged to accept...

I doubt it, but, like anyone else, I could be wrong...


----------



## Kondor3

georgephillip said:


> "..._By that time international law had put an end to... might makes right_..."


----------



## toastman

P F Tinmore said:


> toastman said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> georgephillip said:
> 
> 
> 
> When one-third of all Mandate Palestinians created an ethnocracy at the expense of two-thirds of the total population in 1949, 700,000 Arabs were displaced from their homes. This occurred by UN Decree not by any form of self-determination on the part of all Palestinians. Such self-determination would have required a vote whereby the first governing body of Israel/Palestine would have represented the interests of Jew and and Arab proportionally, producing a Semitic Federation that would have had shared interests and ambitions with its neighbors instead of the "divide and conquer" mentality of western imperialists.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> How many of those Arabs were told to leave by the surrounding Arab nations because they would have a quick and swift victory over Israel and would be able to return to their homes shortly ?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> A few percent.
Click to expand...


Link ?


----------



## P F Tinmore

toastman said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> toastman said:
> 
> 
> 
> How many of those Arabs were told to leave by the surrounding Arab nations because they would have a quick and swift victory over Israel and would be able to return to their homes shortly ?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> A few percent.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Link ?
Click to expand...


Decisive causes of abandonment of Palestinian villages and towns according to* Benny Morris *Decisive causes of abandonment 	Occurrences[138]
military assault on settlement 	215
influence of nearby town's fall 	59
expulsion by Jewish forces 	53
fear (of being caught up in fighting) 	48
whispering campaigns 	15
*abandonment on Arab orders 	6*
unknown 	44

Causes of the 1948 Palestinian exodus - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


----------



## toastman

I've read that article several times Tinmore. Unfortunately, there is no OFFICIAL stat that tells is exactly or even close to how many fled and how many were expelled.


----------



## P F Tinmore

toastman said:


> I've read that article several times Tinmore. Unfortunately, there is no OFFICIAL stat that tells is exactly or even close to how many fled and how many were expelled.



Then why did you imply that they left at the advise of Arab leaders?


----------



## Sweet_Caroline

A MUST-SEE​
[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cn4r7ZjG9Nc]A PALESTINIAN MYTH - The so said NAKBA - YouTube[/ame]


----------



## Kondor3

P F Tinmore said:


> toastman said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> A few percent.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Link ?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Decisive causes of abandonment of Palestinian villages and towns according to* Benny Morris *Decisive causes of abandonment 	Occurrences[138]
> military assault on settlement 	215
> influence of nearby town's fall 	59
> expulsion by Jewish forces 	53
> fear (of being caught up in fighting) 	48
> whispering campaigns 	15
> *abandonment on Arab orders 	6*
> unknown 	44
> 
> Causes of the 1948 Palestinian exodus - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Click to expand...


Thank you for the link, Tinny...

You found something that looks kinda-sorta credible, from an Israeli historian...

As usual, you cherry-picked partial stats (second wave stats only)...

But that's easily fixed, given a fuller examination of the text at your Wiki link...

Here are overall status, according to this Morris fellow...

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

*Main causes of the Palestinian exodus according to Israeli historian Benny Morris*

*First wave*	December 1947 &#8211; March 1948	about 100,000	sense of vulnerability, attacks and fear of impending attack

*Second wave*	April&#8211;June 1948	250,000&#8211;300,000	attacks and fear of impending attack

*Third wave*	July&#8211;October 1948	about 100,000	attacks and expulsions

*Fourth wave*	October&#8211;November 1948	200,000&#8211;230,000	attacks and expulsions

*Border clearings*	November 1948 &#8211; 1950	30,000-40,000

...from that same Wiki page, and Morris' "Four-Wave Analysis" .

Causes of the 1948 Palestinian exodus - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

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

It would appear that the Israelis did *NOT* expel *ANY* of the Palestinians (_not so you'd notice, statistically, anyway, on the scale Morris is working on_) until the Third and Fourth waves...

Given that the Israelis declared Statehood in May 1948 and that the first actual Expulsions did not take place until July - a full two months later - it would appear that during the early going, the Jews-Israelis were not driving people from their homes on a large scale...

*At a maximum*, it appears that Jewish-induced *expulsions* account for *no more than one-half* (-ish) of all displaced persons...

*At a minimum*, it could be* far less*...

Morris does not appear to distinguish between Attack-Refugees and Expulsion-Refugees in his guess-timates but seems to lump them together, unfortunately...

But, bottom line...

*Refugees are a byproduct of war*...

In this case, a *war started by the Arab*s themselves...

*Long-term* refugees are a byproduct of *LOSING* a war...

Or *SEVERAL* wars...

*Welcome to your consequence*s...

Even still...

*Sixty-five (65) years???????????????!!!!!!!!!????????????

Puhhhh-leeeeze !!!!!*

If their lands have been under Israeli control for 65 years, with no practical hope of Return, then, why are the Palestinians still in these camps and towns after all this time?

Unless, of course, they've tried to emmigrate elsewhere, and nobody wants them.

Which also tells us something about them and their _supposedly_-sympathetic ethnic brethren and co-religionists...


----------



## P F Tinmore

Kondor3 said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> toastman said:
> 
> 
> 
> Link ?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Decisive causes of abandonment of Palestinian villages and towns according to* Benny Morris *Decisive causes of abandonment 	Occurrences[138]
> military assault on settlement 	215
> influence of nearby town's fall 	59
> expulsion by Jewish forces 	53
> fear (of being caught up in fighting) 	48
> whispering campaigns 	15
> *abandonment on Arab orders 	6*
> unknown 	44
> 
> Causes of the 1948 Palestinian exodus - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Thank you for the link, Tinny...
> 
> You found something that looks kinda-sorta credible, from an Israeli historian...
> 
> As usual, you cherry-picked partial stats (second wave stats only)...
> 
> But that's easily fixed, given a fuller examination of the text at your Wiki link...
> 
> Here are overall status, according to this Morris fellow...
> 
> ===================
> 
> *Main causes of the Palestinian exodus according to Israeli historian Benny Morris*
> 
> *First wave*	December 1947  March 1948	about 100,000	sense of vulnerability, attacks and fear of impending attack
> 
> *Second wave*	AprilJune 1948	250,000300,000	attacks and fear of impending attack
> 
> *Third wave*	JulyOctober 1948	about 100,000	attacks and expulsions
> 
> *Fourth wave*	OctoberNovember 1948	200,000230,000	attacks and expulsions
> 
> *Border clearings*	November 1948  1950	30,000-40,000
> 
> ...from that same Wiki page, and Morris' "Four-Wave Analysis" .
> 
> Causes of the 1948 Palestinian exodus - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
> 
> ====================
> 
> It would appear that the Israelis did *NOT* expel *ANY* of the Palestinians (_not so you'd notice, statistically, anyway, on the scale Morris is working on_) until the Third and Fourth waves...
> 
> Given that the Israelis declared Statehood in May 1948 and that the first actual Expulsions did not take place until July - a full two months later - it would appear that during the early going, the Jews-Israelis were not driving people from their homes on a large scale...
> 
> *At a maximum*, it appears that Jewish-induced *expulsions* account for *no more than one-half* (-ish) of all displaced persons...
> 
> *At a minimum*, it could be* far less*...
> 
> Morris does not appear to distinguish between Attack-Refugees and Expulsion-Refugees in his guess-timates but seems to lump them together, unfortunately...
> 
> But, bottom line...
> 
> *Refugees are a byproduct of war*...
> 
> In this case, a *war started by the Arab*s themselves...
> 
> *Long-term* refugees are a byproduct of *LOSING* a war...
> 
> Or *SEVERAL* wars...
> 
> *Welcome to your consequence*s...
> 
> Even still...
> 
> *Sixty-five (65) years???????????????!!!!!!!!!????????????
> 
> Puhhhh-leeeeze !!!!!*
> 
> If their lands have been under Israeli control for 65 years, with no practical hope of Return, then, why are the Palestinians still in these camps and towns after all this time?
> 
> Unless, of course, they've tried to emmigrate elsewhere, and nobody wants them.
> 
> Which also tells us something about them and their _supposedly_-sympathetic ethnic brethren and co-religionists...
Click to expand...


Sixty five years and Israel has not won yet.


----------



## toastman

P F Tinmore said:


> Kondor3 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> Decisive causes of abandonment of Palestinian villages and towns according to* Benny Morris *Decisive causes of abandonment 	Occurrences[138]
> military assault on settlement 	215
> influence of nearby town's fall 	59
> expulsion by Jewish forces 	53
> fear (of being caught up in fighting) 	48
> whispering campaigns 	15
> *abandonment on Arab orders 	6*
> unknown 	44
> 
> Causes of the 1948 Palestinian exodus - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Thank you for the link, Tinny...
> 
> You found something that looks kinda-sorta credible, from an Israeli historian...
> 
> As usual, you cherry-picked partial stats (second wave stats only)...
> 
> But that's easily fixed, given a fuller examination of the text at your Wiki link...
> 
> Here are overall status, according to this Morris fellow...
> 
> ===================
> 
> *Main causes of the Palestinian exodus according to Israeli historian Benny Morris*
> 
> *First wave*	December 1947  March 1948	about 100,000	sense of vulnerability, attacks and fear of impending attack
> 
> *Second wave*	AprilJune 1948	250,000300,000	attacks and fear of impending attack
> 
> *Third wave*	JulyOctober 1948	about 100,000	attacks and expulsions
> 
> *Fourth wave*	OctoberNovember 1948	200,000230,000	attacks and expulsions
> 
> *Border clearings*	November 1948  1950	30,000-40,000
> 
> ...from that same Wiki page, and Morris' "Four-Wave Analysis" .
> 
> Causes of the 1948 Palestinian exodus - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
> 
> ====================
> 
> It would appear that the Israelis did *NOT* expel *ANY* of the Palestinians (_not so you'd notice, statistically, anyway, on the scale Morris is working on_) until the Third and Fourth waves...
> 
> Given that the Israelis declared Statehood in May 1948 and that the first actual Expulsions did not take place until July - a full two months later - it would appear that during the early going, the Jews-Israelis were not driving people from their homes on a large scale...
> 
> *At a maximum*, it appears that Jewish-induced *expulsions* account for *no more than one-half* (-ish) of all displaced persons...
> 
> *At a minimum*, it could be* far less*...
> 
> Morris does not appear to distinguish between Attack-Refugees and Expulsion-Refugees in his guess-timates but seems to lump them together, unfortunately...
> 
> But, bottom line...
> 
> *Refugees are a byproduct of war*...
> 
> In this case, a *war started by the Arab*s themselves...
> 
> *Long-term* refugees are a byproduct of *LOSING* a war...
> 
> Or *SEVERAL* wars...
> 
> *Welcome to your consequence*s...
> 
> Even still...
> 
> *Sixty-five (65) years???????????????!!!!!!!!!????????????
> 
> Puhhhh-leeeeze !!!!!*
> 
> If their lands have been under Israeli control for 65 years, with no practical hope of Return, then, why are the Palestinians still in these camps and towns after all this time?
> 
> Unless, of course, they've tried to emmigrate elsewhere, and nobody wants them.
> 
> Which also tells us something about them and their _supposedly_-sympathetic ethnic brethren and co-religionists...
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Sixty five years and Israel has not won yet.
Click to expand...


65 years and Israel has become a beautiful, modern country with the best and most powerful army in the ME, and has given an endless list of contributions to the world. 
There's nothing to win at this point really


----------



## P F Tinmore

toastman said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Kondor3 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Thank you for the link, Tinny...
> 
> You found something that looks kinda-sorta credible, from an Israeli historian...
> 
> As usual, you cherry-picked partial stats (second wave stats only)...
> 
> But that's easily fixed, given a fuller examination of the text at your Wiki link...
> 
> Here are overall status, according to this Morris fellow...
> 
> ===================
> 
> *Main causes of the Palestinian exodus according to Israeli historian Benny Morris*
> 
> *First wave*	December 1947  March 1948	about 100,000	sense of vulnerability, attacks and fear of impending attack
> 
> *Second wave*	AprilJune 1948	250,000300,000	attacks and fear of impending attack
> 
> *Third wave*	JulyOctober 1948	about 100,000	attacks and expulsions
> 
> *Fourth wave*	OctoberNovember 1948	200,000230,000	attacks and expulsions
> 
> *Border clearings*	November 1948  1950	30,000-40,000
> 
> ...from that same Wiki page, and Morris' "Four-Wave Analysis" .
> 
> Causes of the 1948 Palestinian exodus - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
> 
> ====================
> 
> It would appear that the Israelis did *NOT* expel *ANY* of the Palestinians (_not so you'd notice, statistically, anyway, on the scale Morris is working on_) until the Third and Fourth waves...
> 
> Given that the Israelis declared Statehood in May 1948 and that the first actual Expulsions did not take place until July - a full two months later - it would appear that during the early going, the Jews-Israelis were not driving people from their homes on a large scale...
> 
> *At a maximum*, it appears that Jewish-induced *expulsions* account for *no more than one-half* (-ish) of all displaced persons...
> 
> *At a minimum*, it could be* far less*...
> 
> Morris does not appear to distinguish between Attack-Refugees and Expulsion-Refugees in his guess-timates but seems to lump them together, unfortunately...
> 
> But, bottom line...
> 
> *Refugees are a byproduct of war*...
> 
> In this case, a *war started by the Arab*s themselves...
> 
> *Long-term* refugees are a byproduct of *LOSING* a war...
> 
> Or *SEVERAL* wars...
> 
> *Welcome to your consequence*s...
> 
> Even still...
> 
> *Sixty-five (65) years???????????????!!!!!!!!!????????????
> 
> Puhhhh-leeeeze !!!!!*
> 
> If their lands have been under Israeli control for 65 years, with no practical hope of Return, then, why are the Palestinians still in these camps and towns after all this time?
> 
> Unless, of course, they've tried to emmigrate elsewhere, and nobody wants them.
> 
> Which also tells us something about them and their _supposedly_-sympathetic ethnic brethren and co-religionists...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sixty five years and Israel has not won yet.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 65 years and Israel has become a beautiful, modern country with the best and most powerful army in the ME, and has given an endless list of contributions to the world.
> There's nothing to win at this point really
Click to expand...


Israel is a castle built on sand.


----------



## toastman

P F Tinmore said:


> toastman said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> Sixty five years and Israel has not won yet.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 65 years and Israel has become a beautiful, modern country with the best and most powerful army in the ME, and has given an endless list of contributions to the world.
> There's nothing to win at this point really
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Israel is a castle built on sand.
Click to expand...


----------



## georgephillip

docmauser1 said:


> georgephillip said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> docmauser1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Yeah, right.
> 
> 
> 
> _650,000 Jews. 1.35 million Arabs. 1948 Mandate Palestine. Jewish state??_
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Any arab state?
Click to expand...

*Ask the Count why not.*

"This growing violence culminated in Israel's ruthless 1947-49 'War of Independence,' in which at least 750,000 Palestinian men, women, and children were expelled from their homes by numerically superior Israeli forces  half before any Arab armies joined the war. This massive humanitarian disaster is known as The Catastrophe, al Nakba in Arabic.8

"Zionist forces committed 33 massacres and destroyed 531 Palestinian towns. Author Norman Finkelstein states: 'According to the former director of the Israeli army archives, in almost every village occupied by us during the War... acts were committed which are defined as war crimes, such as murders, massacres, and rapes...Uri Milstein, the authoritative Israeli military historian of the 1948 war, goes one step further, maintaining that every skirmish ended in a massacre of Arabs.9

"Count Folke Bernadotte, a former official of the Swedish Red Cross who saved thousands of Jews during World War II and was appointed U.N. mediator in Palestine, said of the refugees: 'It would be an offence against the principles of elemental justice if these innocent victims of the conflict were denied the right to return to their homes.'10 *Bernadotte was assassinated by a Zionist organization led by future Israeli Prime Minister Yitzhak Shamir.1"*

The Catastrophe - Al Nakba


----------



## toastman

georgephillip said:


> docmauser1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> georgephillip said:
> 
> 
> 
> _650,000 Jews. 1.35 million Arabs. 1948 Mandate Palestine. Jewish state??_
> 
> 
> 
> Any arab state?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> *Ask the Count why not.*
> 
> "This growing violence culminated in Israel's ruthless 1947-49 'War of Independence,' in which at least 750,000 Palestinian men, women, and children were expelled from their homes by numerically superior Israeli forces  half before any Arab armies joined the war. This massive humanitarian disaster is known as The Catastrophe, al Nakba in Arabic.8
> 
> "Zionist forces committed 33 massacres and destroyed 531 Palestinian towns. Author Norman Finkelstein states: 'According to the former director of the Israeli army archives, in almost every village occupied by us during the War... acts were committed which are defined as war crimes, such as murders, massacres, and rapes...Uri Milstein, the authoritative Israeli military historian of the 1948 war, goes one step further, maintaining that every skirmish ended in a massacre of Arabs.9
> 
> "Count Folke Bernadotte, a former official of the Swedish Red Cross who saved thousands of Jews during World War II and was appointed U.N. mediator in Palestine, said of the refugees: 'It would be an offence against the principles of elemental justice if these innocent victims of the conflict were denied the right to return to their homes.'10 *Bernadotte was assassinated by a Zionist organization led by future Israeli Prime Minister Yitzhak Shamir.1"*
> 
> The Catastrophe - Al Nakba
Click to expand...


[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cn4r7ZjG9Nc]A PALESTINIAN MYTH - The so said NAKBA - YouTube[/ame]


----------



## georgephillip

docmauser1 said:


> georgephillip said:
> 
> 
> 
> _Some greeeedy Joooooooos had made it clear for fifty years they were planning to claim all the land between the River and the sea. After the British decapitated Arab leadership in Palestine during the revolt between 1936-39, Jewish terror won out over Arab resistance. Unfortunately, some Jews miscalculated and waited until 1967 to take all the land in their second war of aggression. By that time international law had put an end to the slave-based morality of might makes right. Maybe you'll get to keep a few blocks of Jerusalem for old time's sake?_
> 
> 
> 
> Drunk drivel.
Click to expand...

*Drink deeply, Drivel:*

"The Arab community, as it became increasingly aware of the Zionists intentions, strenuously opposed further Jewish immigration and land buying because it posed a real and imminent danger to the very existence of Arab society in Palestine. 

"Because of this opposition, the entire Zionist project never could have been realized without the military backing of the British. 

"The vast majority of the population of Palestine, by the way, had been Arabic since the seventh century A.D. (Over 1200 years)

"In short, Zionism was based on a faulty, colonialist world view that the rights of the indigenous inhabitants didnt matter. The Arabs opposition to Zionism wasnt based on anti-Semitism but rather on a totally reasonable fear of the dispossession of their people."

The Origin of the Palestine-Israel Conflict


----------



## RoccoR

_et al,_

*TOPIC:*   Is Israel the Same as South Africa?

How is this all fitting together with the topic?

v/r
R


----------



## georgephillip

toastman said:


> georgephillip said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> toastman said:
> 
> 
> 
> How many of those Arabs were told to leave by the surrounding Arab nations because they would have a quick and swift victory over Israel and would be able to return to their homes shortly ?
> 
> 
> 
> I'm not sure.
> Tens of thousands, at least.
> Why do you think it matters?
> Some greeeedy Joooooooos had made it clear for fifty years they were planning to claim all the land between the River and the sea. After the British decapitated Arab leadership in Palestine during the revolt between 1936-39, Jewish terror won out over Arab resistance. Unfortunately, some Jews miscalculated and waited until 1967 to take all the land in their second war of aggression. By that time international law had put an end to the slave-based morality of might makes right. Maybe you'll get to keep a few blocks of Jerusalem for old time's sake?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> My goodness I have never seen a period of history distorted so much!
> I told you to stop reading your history from the Hamas History Book , didn't I?
Click to expand...

*How would you grade the following History?*

"How long has Palestine been a specifically Arab country?

Palestine became a predominately Arab and Islamic country by the end of the seventh century. Almost immediately thereafter its boundaries and its characteristics  including its name in Arabic, Filastin  became known to the entire Islamic world, as much for its fertility and beauty as for its religious significance...

"In 1516, Palestine became a province of the Ottoman Empire, but this made it no less fertile, no less Arab or Islamic...Sixty percent of the population was in agriculture; the balance was divided between townspeople and a relatively small nomadic group. 

"All these people believed themselves to belong in a land called Palestine, despite their feelings that they were also members of a large Arab nation...

"Despite the steady arrival in Palestine of Jewish colonists after 1882, it is important to realize that not until the few weeks immediately preceding the establishment of Israel in the spring of 1948 was there ever anything other than a huge Arab majority. For example, the Jewish population in 1931 was 174,606 against a total of 1,033,314. Edward Said, The Question of Palestine.

The Origin of the Palestine-Israel Conflict


----------



## toastman

Seems about right. Why ?


----------



## georgephillip

RoccoR said:


> _et al,_
> 
> *TOPIC:*   Is Israel the Same as South Africa?
> 
> How is this all fitting together with the topic?
> 
> v/r
> R


*Rocco, please.
Stop trolling!*

"The question is not 'Is Israel the same as South Africa?'
It is "do Israel's actions meet the international definition of what apartheid is?"

"The crime of apartheid is defined by the 2002 Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court as inhumane acts of a character similar to other crimes against humanity 'committed in the context of an institutionalized regime of systematic oppression and domination by one racial group over any other racial group or groups and committed with the intention of maintaining that regime.'"

Is Israel an Apartheid State?

*The first time we tried to examine this question, we were sidetracked by the word "race." Perhaps we can all agree this time that the Haters on both sides, Jew and Arab, regard the other as racially inferior?*


----------



## georgephillip

toastman said:


> georgephillip said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> docmauser1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Any arab state?
> 
> 
> 
> *Ask the Count why not.*
> 
> "This growing violence culminated in Israel's ruthless 1947-49 'War of Independence,' in which at least 750,000 Palestinian men, women, and children were expelled from their homes by numerically superior Israeli forces  half before any Arab armies joined the war. This massive humanitarian disaster is known as The Catastrophe, al Nakba in Arabic.8
> 
> "Zionist forces committed 33 massacres and destroyed 531 Palestinian towns. Author Norman Finkelstein states: 'According to the former director of the Israeli army archives, in almost every village occupied by us during the War... acts were committed which are defined as war crimes, such as murders, massacres, and rapes...Uri Milstein, the authoritative Israeli military historian of the 1948 war, goes one step further, maintaining that every skirmish ended in a massacre of Arabs.9
> 
> "Count Folke Bernadotte, a former official of the Swedish Red Cross who saved thousands of Jews during World War II and was appointed U.N. mediator in Palestine, said of the refugees: 'It would be an offence against the principles of elemental justice if these innocent victims of the conflict were denied the right to return to their homes.'10 *Bernadotte was assassinated by a Zionist organization led by future Israeli Prime Minister Yitzhak Shamir.1"*
> 
> The Catastrophe - Al Nakba
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> [ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cn4r7ZjG9Nc]A PALESTINIAN MYTH - The so said NAKBA - YouTube[/ame]
Click to expand...

*"By inciting a million Palestinian Arabs to leave their lands, we have brought about their destruction." These are the final words from your video which would seem to imply every Arab who fled did so at the behest of his or her leaders.

That seems unlikely, especially since the declassification of "the concept of transfer" has emerged:*

"Discussion of the 'idea of transfer' in political Zionism became popular beginning in the 1980s when Israel declassified documents pertaining to the 1948 ArabIsraeli War period and the so-called New Historians began publishing articles and books based on these documents. 

"The Zionist 'concept of transfer' was cited by authors like Nur Masalha and Walid Khalidi to support their argument that the Zionist Yishuv followed an expulsion policy. 

"Others such as Morris reject the idea that 'transfer' thinking led to a political expulsion policy as such, but invoke the theory to explain that the idea of transfer was endorsed in practice by mainstream Zionist leaders, particularly David Ben-Gurion. 

"Critics of the 'transfer principle' theory cite public addresses by the Zionist leadership that preached co-existence with the Arabs."

Causes of the 1948 Palestinian exodus - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

*What percentage of the 700,000 Arabs who left their homes in 1948 did so because their "leaders" told them to do so?*


----------



## georgephillip

toastman said:


> Seems about right. Why ?


*How about this?*

"In short, Zionism was based on a faulty, colonialist world view that the rights of the indigenous inhabitants didnt matter. The Arabs opposition to Zionism wasnt based on anti-Semitism but rather on a totally reasonable fear of the dispossession of their people."

The Origin of the Palestine-Israel Conflict


----------



## Kondor3

georgephillip said:


> toastman said:
> 
> 
> 
> Seems about right. Why ?
> 
> 
> 
> *How about this?*
> 
> "In short, Zionism was based on a faulty, colonialist world view that the rights of the indigenous inhabitants didnt matter. The Arabs opposition to Zionism wasnt based on anti-Semitism but rather on a totally reasonable fear of the dispossession of their people."
> 
> The Origin of the Palestine-Israel Conflict
Click to expand...

Indeed.

Those fears have been realized.

There is no recourse.

After 65 years, it's time to face reality.

After 65 years, it's time to pack-up, turn off the lights, walk out the door, and find someplace else to live.


----------



## toastman

georgephillip said:


> toastman said:
> 
> 
> 
> Seems about right. Why ?
> 
> 
> 
> *How about this?*
> 
> "In short, Zionism was based on a faulty, colonialist world view that the rights of the indigenous inhabitants didn&#8217;t matter. The Arabs&#8217; opposition to Zionism wasn&#8217;t based on anti-Semitism but rather on a totally reasonable fear of the dispossession of their people."
> 
> The Origin of the Palestine-Israel Conflict
Click to expand...


Absolute garbage. The definition of Zionism that some of you people come up is such crap. You are basing the definition of azionism on how you think the State of Israel came to be instead of using the actual definition . 
ZIONISM is a rightceous movement that was meant for dealing with the Jewish question, and that was growing anti semitism


----------



## RoccoR

georgephillip; _et al,_

Yes, I understand what "apartheid" is, but I don't think you do.



			
				Article 7 - Crimes Against Humanity said:
			
		

> (h)     "The crime of apartheid" means inhumane acts of a character similar to those referred to in paragraph 1, committed in the context of an institutionalized regime of systematic oppression and domination by one racial group over any other racial group or groups and committed with the intention of maintaining that regime;
> 
> _*SOURCE:*_ Rome Statues - International Criminal Code






georgephillip said:


> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> 
> *TOPIC:*   Is Israel the Same as South Africa?
> 
> How is this all fitting together with the topic?
> 
> v/r
> R
> 
> 
> 
> *Rocco, please.
> Stop trolling!*
> 
> "The question is not 'Is Israel the same as South Africa?'
> It is "do Israel's actions meet the international definition of what apartheid is?"
Click to expand...

*(OBSERVATION)*

Apartheid is the political segregation, for social reasons, of the white population from the non-white majority in South Africa. 

The thread question suggest that there is political segregation, for social reasons, of the Arab population from the non-Arab majority in Israel.

*(COMMENT)*

Not once has a specific case of "Apartheid" has yet to be raised, even if we dispense with the "race" issue.

Give a specific example.

Most Respectfully,
R


----------



## Hossfly

P F Tinmore said:


> toastman said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> Sixty five years and Israel has not won yet.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 65 years and Israel has become a beautiful, modern country with the best and most powerful army in the ME, and has given an endless list of contributions to the world.
> There's nothing to win at this point really
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Israel is a castle built on sand.
Click to expand...

"Bumblebees can't fly".


----------



## georgephillip

Kondor3 said:


> georgephillip said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> toastman said:
> 
> 
> 
> Seems about right. Why ?
> 
> 
> 
> *How about this?*
> 
> "In short, Zionism was based on a faulty, colonialist world view that the rights of the indigenous inhabitants didnt matter. The Arabs opposition to Zionism wasnt based on anti-Semitism but rather on a totally reasonable fear of the dispossession of their people."
> 
> The Origin of the Palestine-Israel Conflict
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Indeed.
> 
> Those fears have been realized.
> 
> There is no recourse.
> 
> After 65 years, it's time to face reality.
> 
> After 65 years, it's time to pack-up, turn off the lights, walk out the door, and find someplace else to live.
Click to expand...

Indeed.
The Jews will be much happier in Cyprus or Kenya.
Remind Bibi about those lights.


----------



## georgephillip

toastman said:


> georgephillip said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> toastman said:
> 
> 
> 
> Seems about right. Why ?
> 
> 
> 
> *How about this?*
> 
> "In short, Zionism was based on a faulty, colonialist world view that the rights of the indigenous inhabitants didnt matter. The Arabs opposition to Zionism wasnt based on anti-Semitism but rather on a totally reasonable fear of the dispossession of their people."
> 
> The Origin of the Palestine-Israel Conflict
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Absolute garbage. The definition of Zionism that some of you people come up is such crap. You are basing the definition of azionism on how you think the State of Israel came to be instead of using the actual definition .
> ZIONISM is a rightceous movement that was meant for dealing with the Jewish question, and that was growing anti semitism
Click to expand...

Political Zionism was well aware Palestine was not a "land without a People" when the righteous movement you mention began to funnel Jewish victims of European racism to the Promised Land in the late 19th Century. Many indigenous Jews of Palestine were just as alarmed at the influx as their Arab neighbors. It was clear to anyone who could read that Political Zionists were allying themselves with England, and what the ultimate goals of European colonization would be. We are looking at the results in Syria right now.


----------



## Kondor3

georgephillip said:


> Kondor3 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> georgephillip said:
> 
> 
> 
> *How about this?*
> 
> "In short, Zionism was based on a faulty, colonialist world view that the rights of the indigenous inhabitants didn&#8217;t matter. The Arabs&#8217; opposition to Zionism wasn&#8217;t based on anti-Semitism but rather on a totally reasonable fear of the dispossession of their people."
> 
> The Origin of the Palestine-Israel Conflict
> 
> 
> 
> Indeed.
> 
> Those fears have been realized.
> 
> There is no recourse.
> 
> After 65 years, it's time to face reality.
> 
> After 65 years, it's time to pack-up, turn off the lights, walk out the door, and find someplace else to live.
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Indeed.
> The Jews will be much happier in Cyprus or Kenya.
> Remind Bibi about those lights.
Click to expand...

Taking another metaphorical boat trip down De-Nial today?

It's been 65 years... and every year, the Jews take-over more and more of Eretz Yisrael; re-acquiring and consolidating more of their old kingdom.

And every year, what little is left of Rump-Palestine continues to shrink, with what's left of the Arab-Palestinians squeezed onto smaller and smaller patches of land.

If you still think the Palestinians have any snowball's-chance-in-Hell of making this come-out their way, you are delusional, as well as living in a state of denial.

It's over.

You've been squatting in those shit-holes for 65 years.

Time to grow up, stop playing the victim, face reality, and move yourselves and your families someplace else, where they can build new and much happier lives.

The Jews have won.

You have lost.

Go away.

Before they kick your nasty asses out by force.


----------



## georgephillip

RoccoR said:


> georgephillip; _et al,_
> 
> Yes, I understand what "apartheid" is, but I don't think you do.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Article 7 - Crimes Against Humanity said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> (h)     "The crime of apartheid" means inhumane acts of a character similar to those referred to in paragraph 1, committed in the context of an institutionalized regime of systematic oppression and domination by one racial group over any other racial group or groups and committed with the intention of maintaining that regime;
> 
> _*SOURCE:*_ Rome Statues - International Criminal Code
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> georgephillip said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> 
> *TOPIC:*   Is Israel the Same as South Africa?
> 
> How is this all fitting together with the topic?
> 
> v/r
> R
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> *Rocco, please.
> Stop trolling!*
> 
> "The question is not 'Is Israel the same as South Africa?'
> It is "do Israel's actions meet the international definition of what apartheid is?"
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> *(OBSERVATION)*
> 
> Apartheid is the political segregation, for social reasons, of the white population from the non-white majority in South Africa.
> 
> The thread question suggest that there is political segregation, for social reasons, of the Arab population from the non-Arab majority in Israel.
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> Not once has a specific case of "Apartheid" has yet to be raised, even if we dispense with the "race" issue.
> 
> Give a specific example.
> 
> Most Respectfully,
> R
Click to expand...

*Starting with Citizenship v Nationality:*

"Israel's Apartheid Laws

"1. Identity and Citizenship

"Law of Return (1950)Grants right of immigration to Jews born anywhere in the world. Amended in 1970 to extend this right to 'a child and a grandchild of a Jew, the spouse of a Jew, the spouse of a child of a Jew and the spouse of a grandchild of a Jew.' A 'Jew' is defined as 'a person who was born of a Jewish mother or has become converted to Judaism and who is not a member of another religion.'

"Non-Jewish native-born Palestinians  most importantly those who fled during the Zionist massacres in 1947 and 1948  are in most cases prevented from returning.

"Nationality (/Citizenship) Law (1952)Confers automatic citizenship upon all who immigrate under the Law of Return. Non-Jews  including native-born Palestinians  must prove residency and pass other tests; citizenship is granted at the discretion of the Minister of the Interior.

"Under the new interim policy for 'family unification' passed by the Israeli Cabinet in 2002, and made part of the Nationality and Entry into Israel Law by the Knesset in 2003, a discriminatory system has been put in place preventing applications for residency or citizenship from Palestinian spouses of Israeli citizens.

"Population Registry Law (1965)Requires all residents of Israel to register their nationality  Jewish, Arab, Druze  with the Population Registry and to obtain an identity card carrying this information.

"Identity Card (Possession and Presentation) Law (1982)Residents must carry identity cards at all times and present them to 'senior police officers, to the heads of local authorities, or to police officers or soldiers on duty when requested to do so.'

Israel's Apartheid Laws

*If, as you allege, Israel does not practice apartheid, why is it Jews from all around the globe qualify as citizens and nationals of Israel while Arabs who have lived in Palestine for generation qualify as citizens only?*


----------



## georgephillip

Kondor3 said:


> georgephillip said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Kondor3 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Indeed.
> 
> Those fears have been realized.
> 
> There is no recourse.
> 
> After 65 years, it's time to face reality.
> 
> After 65 years, it's time to pack-up, turn off the lights, walk out the door, and find someplace else to live.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeed.
> The Jews will be much happier in Cyprus or Kenya.
> Remind Bibi about those lights.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Taking another metaphorical boat trip down De-Nial today?
> 
> It's been 65 years... and every year, the Jews take-over more and more of Eretz Yisrael; re-acquiring and consolidating more of their old kingdom.
> 
> And every year, what little is left of Rump-Palestine continues to shrink, with what's left of the Arab-Palestinians squeezed onto smaller and smaller patches of land.
> 
> If you still think the Palestinians have any snowball's-chance-in-Hell of making this come-out their way, you are delusional, as well as living in a state of denial.
> 
> It's over.
> 
> You've been squatting in those shit-holes for 65 years.
> 
> Time to grow up, stop playing the victim, face reality, and move yourselves and your families someplace else, where they can build new and much happier lives.
> 
> The Jews have won.
> 
> You have lost.
> 
> Go away.
> 
> Before they kick your nasty asses out by force.
Click to expand...

*You're way too funny.
Maybe you've been squatting under too many British guns lately?*

"'Palestine belongs to the Arabs in the same sense that England belongs to the English or France to the French...What is going on in Palestine today cannot be justified by any moral code of conduct...If they [the Jews] must look to the Palestine of geography as their national home, it is wrong to enter it under the shadow of the British gun. 

"'A religious act cannot be performed with the aid of the bayonet or the bomb. They can settle in Palestine only by the goodwill of the Arabs... As it is, they are co-sharers with the British in despoiling a people who have done no wrong to them. I am not defending the Arab excesses. 

"'I wish they had chosen the way of non-violence in resisting what they rightly regard as an unacceptable encroachment upon their country. But according to the accepted canons of right and wrong, nothing can be said against the Arab resistance in the face of overwhelming odds.' Mahatma Gandhi, quoted in 'A Land of Two Peoples' ed. Mendes-Flohr."

The Origin of the Palestine-Israel Conflict


----------



## docmauser1

georgephillip said:


> _"Israel's Apartheid Laws "1. Identity and Citizenship ..._


_About CEIA-SC We are a diverse group of Anti-Zionist Southern California activists who have come together to further peace through justice in the Middle East. To that end, we have joined a Palestine-initiated campaign of boycott, divestment and sanctions (BDS) against Israel, similar to those applied to South Africa during the apartheid era, in order to bring an end to Israel's immoral and oppressive policies towards Palestinians both within Israel and throughout the West Bank and Gaza Strip._
Do those arseholes purport to be taken seriously?


----------



## docmauser1

georgephillip said:


> _"'Palestine belongs to the Arabs in the same sense that England belongs to the English or France to the French... Mahatma Gandhi_


What did he say about California?


----------



## Hoffstra

Kondor3 said:


> ...The Jews have won.
> 
> You have lost.
> 
> Go away.
> 
> Before they kick your nasty asses out by force.[/SIZE]



so after the Nazis invaded and defeated the Polish, the Poles & Allies should have just accepted this as the end of the story?

and by the way, if the Israelis try to force our millions of Arabs, they will be responsible for causing another Holocaust of millions of Jews.

why do YOU want millions of Jews to die?


----------



## P F Tinmore

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rFZbeO2ujxg]Israeli Apartheid Week held in 215 cities throughout the world - YouTube[/ame]


----------



## Sweet_Caroline

P F Tinmore said:


> Israeli Apartheid Week held in 215 cities throughout the world - YouTube




[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ByMufgpcdnI]The Palestinian Wall of Lies - YouTube[/ame]


----------



## P F Tinmore

Sweet_Caroline said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> Israeli Apartheid Week held in 215 cities throughout the world - YouTube
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> [ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ByMufgpcdnI]The Palestinian Wall of Lies - YouTube[/ame]
Click to expand...


They "forgot" to mention all of the Christians, Jews, and others who support Palestine.


----------



## Sweet_Caroline

P F Tinmore said:


> Sweet_Caroline said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> Israeli Apartheid Week held in 215 cities throughout the world - YouTube
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> [ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ByMufgpcdnI]The Palestinian Wall of Lies - YouTube[/ame]
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> They "forgot" to mention all of the Christians, Jews, and others who support Palestine.
Click to expand...


Dare I ask what Palestine is.  Or are you going to play the dumb card again and get us all running around like we usually do explaining history to you?


----------



## Hossfly

P F Tinmore said:


> Israeli Apartheid Week held in 215 cities throughout the world - YouTube


Yes and they can all eat shit and die for the good it does them.


----------



## georgephillip

docmauser1 said:


> georgephillip said:
> 
> 
> 
> _"Israel's Apartheid Laws "1. Identity and Citizenship ..._
> 
> 
> 
> _About CEIA-SC We are a diverse group of Anti-Zionist Southern California activists who have come together to further peace through justice in the Middle East. To that end, we have joined a Palestine-initiated campaign of boycott, divestment and sanctions (BDS) against Israel, similar to those applied to South Africa during the apartheid era, in order to bring an end to Israel's immoral and oppressive policies towards Palestinians both within Israel and throughout the West Bank and Gaza Strip._
> Do those arseholes purport to be taken seriously?
Click to expand...

Do you?


----------



## toastman

Sweet_Caroline said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sweet_Caroline said:
> 
> 
> 
> The Palestinian Wall of Lies - YouTube
> 
> 
> 
> 
> They "forgot" to mention all of the Christians, Jews, and others who support Palestine.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Dare I ask what Palestine is.  Or are you going to play the dumb card again and get us all running around like we usually do explaining history to you?
Click to expand...


A fictional fairytale land


----------



## Kondor3

Hoffstra said:


> Kondor3 said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...The Jews have won.
> 
> You have lost.
> 
> Go away.
> 
> Before they kick your nasty asses out by force.[/SIZE]
> 
> 
> 
> 
> so after the Nazis invaded and defeated the Polish, the Poles & Allies should have just accepted this as the end of the story?
> 
> and by the way, if the Israelis try to force our millions of Arabs, they will be responsible for causing another Holocaust of millions of Jews.
> 
> why do YOU want millions of Jews to die?
Click to expand...


Why do you continue to delude yourself that millions of Jews will die?

Egypt is broken.

Libya is broken.

Lebanon is broken.

Syria is broken.

Iraq is broken.

That only leaves Jordan.

And they're just not up to the challenge.

I have no idea what Arab cavalry that your delusion believes will be coming over the hill.

But it has no basis whatsoever in Reality.

If the Jews decide to slaughter the Palestinian Arabs the world might try to intervene, although it probably could not do so before operations concluded; it would be swift and merciless and unstoppable.

If the Jews decide to merely expel the Palestinian Arabs, while letting them live - which is more their speed - nobody is really going to do shit, other than squawk and piss and moan and throw-up a few-months-long boycott or some such useless and belated measures.

Nobody is going to intervene effectively in the case of an Expulsion.

_Especially_ within the realm of Islam.

Hell, their own Arab neighbors fence 'em off from *THEIR* side.

They don't want anything more to do with those Crazies either.

The Arabs already fought (and lost) three wars... 1948, 1967 and 1973... on behalf of the Palestinians.

Three strikes and you're 'out' - just like baseball.

What you're looking at here is Donor Exhaustion.

And the rest of the Arab world has troubles of their own at the moment.

They have no time for you.

Ain't nobody comin' to the rescue this time.

Unless, of course, you'd care to educate the audience on the nature of the Arab-Mulsim military power that is capable of effectively intervening on short notice...

Something that you've been remarkably hesitant to supply the particulars for in the past, when challenged on that point...

Tee-hee... 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




Oh, and, by the way...

Thanks for confirming my suspicions about your stake in this ( "..._*our* millions of Arabs_" )...

Your status as a Palestinian Propaganda Shill is noted for future reference.

Figured that was bound to bubble to the surface, sooner or later...


----------



## Hoffstra

Kondor3 said:


> Why do you continue to delude yourself that millions of Jews will die?..



because trying to expel million of Arabs from the West Bank would lead to the death of millions of Jews.

why do you want that to happen?


----------



## Kondor3

Hoffstra said:


> Kondor3 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Why do you continue to delude yourself that millions of Jews will die?..
> 
> 
> 
> 
> because trying to expel million of Arabs from the West Bank would lead to the death of millions of Jews.
> 
> why do you want that to happen?
Click to expand...

So you have already told us...

Brave talk...

*Very* brave talk...

What *substance* is there, to back this up?

Again, please educate the audience as to the nature of this Arab-Muslim military power that will act on behalf of those Palestinians being expelled...

*Who* is going to kill those millions of Jews?


----------



## Hoffstra

Kondor3 said:


> So you have already told us...
> 
> Brave talk...
> 
> Very brave talk...
> 
> What substance is there, to back this up?
> 
> Again, please educate the audience as to the nature of this Arab-Muslim military power that will act on behalf of those Palestinians being expelled...
> 
> Who is going to kill those millions of Jews?



Pakistan has nukes.

China has nukes.

Russia has nukes.

If Israel dares to even attempt ethnic cleansing, like they did in 1948 and 1967, one of these nuclear weapons will be used to kill millions of Jews.

and that will be that.


----------



## Hoffstra

Kondor3 said:


> The Jews have won.
> 
> You have lost.
> 
> Go away.
> 
> Before they kick your nasty asses out by force.



You think the Jews would act like Milosevic, the Nazis, the Soviets by committing massive ethnic cleansing?

That's pretty anti-Semitic of you.


----------



## Kondor3

Hoffstra said:


> Kondor3 said:
> 
> 
> 
> So you have already told us...
> 
> Brave talk...
> 
> Very brave talk...
> 
> What substance is there, to back this up?
> 
> Again, please educate the audience as to the nature of this Arab-Muslim military power that will act on behalf of those Palestinians being expelled...
> 
> Who is going to kill those millions of Jews?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Pakistan has nukes.
> 
> China has nukes.
> 
> Russia has nukes.
> 
> If Israel dares to even attempt ethnic cleansing, like they did in 1948 and 1967, one of these nuclear weapons will be used to kill millions of Jews.
> 
> and that will be that.
Click to expand...


Bwaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaahahahahahahahaha....







You're living in a fool's dream world if you believe that Pakistan or Russia or China will 'go nuclear' - and face either Israeli or American nukes in retaliation - over something as _minor and unimportant_ as the Expulsion of the Palestinian Crazies...

But you're a _funny_ little critter, I'll grant'cha that...


----------



## Hoffstra

Kondor3 said:


> ...you're living in a fool's dream world if you believe that Pakistan or Russia or China will 'go nuclear' - and face either Israeli or American nukes in retaliation - over something as minor as the Expulsion of the Palestinian Crazies...
> 
> But you are a funny little critter, I'll grant'cha that...



Israel would never try to expel millions of Arabs.

they know such an act would be suicidal.


----------



## Kondor3

Hoffstra said:


> Kondor3 said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...you're living in a fool's dream world if you believe that Pakistan or Russia or China will 'go nuclear' - and face either Israeli or American nukes in retaliation - over something as minor as the Expulsion of the Palestinian Crazies...
> 
> But you are a funny little critter, I'll grant'cha that...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Israel would never try to expel millions of Arabs.
> 
> they know such an act would be suicidal.
Click to expand...


So you keep telling us, but you cannot conjure-up a credible Preventive nor Avenging Force for your purposes, so, your 'suicidal' reference may be a skosh premature...


----------



## Hoffstra

Kondor3 said:


> So you keep telling us, but you cannot conjure-up a credible Preventive nor Avenging Force for your purposes, so, your 'suicidal' reference may be a skosh premature...



since we know that Israel would never dare commit ethnic cleansing against millions of Arabs, this whole thing is useless.

Israel is a western democracy that has shares values with the USA.  That's why they are one of America's greatest allies.

They would never commit the Nazi act that you hypothesize about.


----------



## Kondor3

Hoffstra said:


> Kondor3 said:
> 
> 
> 
> So you keep telling us, but you cannot conjure-up a credible Preventive nor Avenging Force for your purposes, so, your 'suicidal' reference may be a skosh premature...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> since we know that Israel would never dare commit ethnic cleansing against millions of Arabs, this whole thing is useless.
> 
> Israel is a western democracy that has shares values with the USA.  That's why they are one of America's greatest allies.
> 
> They would never commit the Nazi act that you hypothesize about.
Click to expand...

Ahhhhhh...

Got your backside kicked once too often with Approach A, so we're switching-over to Approach B...

Expelling the Palestinians and scattering them amongst Jordan, Lebanon, Egypt, et al, is not only un-Nazi-like... far more merciful than gas chambers and rifle pits... but it would also be payback for the huge numbers of Jews that the Arabs themselves have expelled from their own countries in the past several decades...

Unless, of course, you're prepared to call those Muslim-Arab countries Nazi-like...

Goose... meet gander.


----------



## Hoffstra

Kondor3 said:


> ...Expelling the Palestinians and scattering them amongst Jordan, Lebanon, Egypt, et al, is not only un-Nazi-like... far more merciful than gas chambers and rifle pits... but it would also be payback for the huge numbers of Jews that the Arabs themselves have expelled from their own countries in the past several decades....



again, Israel would never commit this act as they are not Nazi pigs.

its disgusting that you think they would engage in such evil acts.


----------



## Kondor3

Hoffstra said:


> Kondor3 said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...Expelling the Palestinians and scattering them amongst Jordan, Lebanon, Egypt, et al, is not only un-Nazi-like... far more merciful than gas chambers and rifle pits... but it would also be payback for the huge numbers of Jews that the Arabs themselves have expelled from their own countries in the past several decades....
> 
> 
> 
> 
> again, Israel would never commit this act as they are not Nazi pigs.
> 
> its disgusting that you think they would engage in such evil acts.
Click to expand...

About as disgusting as the Arab-Muslims expelling so many Jews from their lands...


----------



## Hoffstra

Kondor3 said:


> About as disgusting as the Arab-Muslims expelling so many Jews from their lands...



65 years ago.

don't you guys ever get over these things???


----------



## Kondor3

Hoffstra said:


> Kondor3 said:
> 
> 
> 
> About as disgusting as the Arab-Muslims expelling so many Jews from their lands...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 65 years ago.
> 
> don't you guys ever get over these things???
Click to expand...


Throughout the period 1948 - 1972, actually...

Jewish exodus from Arab and Muslim countries - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Doesn't feel so good when the centuries-old Dhimmi roles are reversed, does it?

A little tough to toss-out the Nazi epithet when you're own kind have been soooooo good at doing the exact same thing for soooooo long.

Like I said... goose... meet gander.

Kinda takes the wind out of your sails in this context, doesn't it?


----------



## Hoffstra

Kondor3 said:


> Throughout the period 1948 - 1972, actually...
> 
> Jewish exodus from Arab and Muslim countries - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
> 
> Doesn't feel so good when the centuries-old Dhimmi roles are reversed, does it?



considering the Israelis kicked 300,000 Arabs from the West Bank during the Six Day War, looks like fair is fair.


----------



## Kondor3

Hoffstra said:


> Kondor3 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Throughout the period 1948 - 1972, actually...
> 
> Jewish exodus from Arab and Muslim countries - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
> 
> Doesn't feel so good when the centuries-old Dhimmi roles are reversed, does it?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> considering the Israelis kicked 300,000 Arabs from the West Bank during the Six Day War, looks like fair is fair.
Click to expand...

The difference being that the Israelis kicked-out population-segments that were actually engaged in war against them and that had demonstrated no loyalty to the government-in-question...

Whereas the Jews being kicked out of Arab countries were (1) citizens in good standing of those other countries and (2) not engaged in warfare or rebellion against their governments and (3) were expelled purely for their Religious Beliefs...

The Arab equivalent of the United States expelling all Muslims for their religious beliefs...

Hmmmmmmmmm......


----------



## MHunterB

Hoffstra said:


> Kondor3 said:
> 
> 
> 
> So you have already told us...
> 
> Brave talk...
> 
> Very brave talk...
> 
> What substance is there, to back this up?
> 
> Again, please educate the audience as to the nature of this Arab-Muslim military power that will act on behalf of those Palestinians being expelled...
> 
> Who is going to kill those millions of Jews?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Pakistan has nukes.
> 
> China has nukes.
> 
> Russia has nukes.
> 
> If Israel dares to even attempt ethnic cleansing, like they did in 1948 and 1967, one of these nuclear weapons will be used to kill millions of Jews.
> 
> and that will be that.
Click to expand...


Israel is a REALLY tiny place.  In the course of killing all those Jews, lots of Muslims will die - lots of Arabs.

And, in trying to take out the largest population centers - those nukes would blow away Al Aqsa and probably the entire Temple Mount.

Neither Russia nor China has any particular reason to want to destroy Israel - and I don't think Pakistan is that stupid (as in blowing up Al Aqsa).  

Oh, and then there's the basic flaw in Hoffy's scenario that Israel did NOT attempt 'ethnic cleansing' in  '48 OR '67.....  the Jordanians clearly did (East Jerusalem) and so did other Arab nations.  It appears the Jordanians, at least, have figured out that that was not a good idea.....


----------



## Hoffstra

MHunterB said:


> ...Oh, and then there's the basic flaw in Hoffy's scenario that Israel did NOT attempt 'ethnic cleansing' in  '48 OR '67.....  the Jordanians clearly did (East Jerusalem) and so did other Arab nations.  It appears the Jordanians, at least, have figured out that that was not a good idea.....



yes, Israel did indeed ethnically cleanse hundreds of thousands of Arabs from Israel in 1948

they did it again in 1967.


----------



## P F Tinmore

Sweet_Caroline said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sweet_Caroline said:
> 
> 
> 
> The Palestinian Wall of Lies - YouTube
> 
> 
> 
> 
> They "forgot" to mention all of the Christians, Jews, and others who support Palestine.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Dare I ask what Palestine is.  Or are you going to play the dumb card again and get us all running around like we usually do explaining history to you?
Click to expand...


----------



## MHunterB

Hoffstra said:


> MHunterB said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...Oh, and then there's the basic flaw in Hoffy's scenario that Israel did NOT attempt 'ethnic cleansing' in  '48 OR '67.....  the Jordanians clearly did (East Jerusalem) and so did other Arab nations.  It appears the Jordanians, at least, have figured out that that was not a good idea.....
> 
> 
> 
> 
> yes, Israel did indeed ethnically cleanse hundreds of thousands of Arabs from Israel in 1948
> 
> they did it again in 1967.
Click to expand...


Hoffy, hon - 'oh,yes they did!' is not an argument.


----------



## Hoffstra

MHunterB said:


> Hoffy, hon - 'oh,yes they did!' is not an argument.



I won't debate whether the sky is blue.

I won't debate whether the Holocaust happened.

I won't debate that Israel expelled hundreds of thousands of Arabs from Israel in 1948 and the West Bank in 1967.


----------



## RoccoR

georgephillip,  _et al,_

This is not "Aparthied."  This is the purpose behind the Balufour Declaration, the Mandate and the Partition Plan.



georgephillip said:


> If, as you allege, Israel does not practice apartheid, why is it Jews from all around the globe qualify as citizens and nationals of Israel while Arabs who have lived in Palestine for generation qualify as citizens only?


*(COMMENT #1)*

There is no segregation here.  It is the embodiment of the Jewish National Home; the realization of the first concept.  It is a case of intentional special immigration to accomplish the original intent:  "to secure the co-operation of all Jews who are willing to assist in the establishment of the Jewish national home."

*(COMMENT #2)*

Citizens Only!  Hummm.  This is an interesting blindness - you need to overcome this handicap.  

But clearly, you don't understand what "Apartheid" is.  

Most Respectfully,
R


----------



## toastman

P F Tinmore said:


> Sweet_Caroline said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> They "forgot" to mention all of the Christians, Jews, and others who support Palestine.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Dare I ask what Palestine is.  Or are you going to play the dumb card again and get us all running around like we usually do explaining history to you?
> 
> Click to expand...
Click to expand...


Why couldn't you answer the question ?


----------



## Kondor3

toastman said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sweet_Caroline said:
> 
> 
> 
> Dare I ask what Palestine is.  Or are you going to play the dumb card again and get us all running around like we usually do explaining history to you?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Why couldn't you answer the question ?
Click to expand...

Because he cannot show you any nation-polity called 'Palestine' which has ever existed at any point throughout all of recorded history.

He can show you a REGION sometimes called 'Palestine' but he cannot show you a NATION-POLITY in history that goes under such a name.

He knows it... we know it... 'most everybody knows it... but still, the so-called 'Palestinians' want to delude themselves otherwise and to get everyone else to buy into their delusion.


----------



## toastman

Kondor3 said:


> toastman said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Why couldn't you answer the question ?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Because he cannot show you any nation-polity called 'Palestine' which has ever existed at any point throughout all of recorded history.
> 
> He can show you a REGION sometimes called 'Palestine' but he cannot show you a NATION-POLITY in history that goes under such a name.
> 
> He knows it... we know it... 'most everybody knows it... but still, the so-called 'Palestinians' want to delude themselves otherwise and to get everyone else to buy into their delusion.
Click to expand...


----------



## P F Tinmore

toastman said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sweet_Caroline said:
> 
> 
> 
> Dare I ask what Palestine is.  Or are you going to play the dumb card again and get us all running around like we usually do explaining history to you?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Why couldn't you answer the question ?
Click to expand...


They built this without a government? Without a country?

*Gaza City*


----------



## toastman

You need to have a country to build those ??

News to me.....

And Gaza doesn't have a government, they have a terrorist organization who governs the Palestinians

What the fuck kind of government has a charter like Hamas does???


----------



## Kondor3

P F Tinmore said:


> "..._They built this without a government? Without a country?_..."


Which nation-(country)- caliber government built Gaza City, Tinny?

Which nation (country) built Gaza City, Tinny?

With a link, please, to that government's history, stretching back to the building (founding) of Gaza City.

Please name that country and government for us.

If you can.

Hint: Say _"I can't."_ - it's honest, painless and saves you any further embarrassment on the subject.


----------



## P F Tinmore

toastman said:


> You need to have a country to build those ??
> 
> News to me.....
> 
> And Gaza doesn't have a government, they have a terrorist organization who governs the Palestinians
> 
> What the fuck kind of government has a charter like Hamas does???



Hamas is not a terrorist in Palestine. That is an Israeli propaganda thing.

Their government uses their constitution not the Hamas charter.


----------



## toastman

P F Tinmore said:


> toastman said:
> 
> 
> 
> You need to have a country to build those ??
> 
> News to me.....
> 
> And Gaza doesn't have a government, they have a terrorist organization who governs the Palestinians
> 
> What the fuck kind of government has a charter like Hamas does???
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Hamas is not a terrorist in Palestine. That is an Israeli propaganda thing.
> 
> Their government uses their constitution not the Hamas charter.
Click to expand...


Gaza is not Palestine. It is part of the Palestinian territories.

And yes they are a terrorist organization

What kind of a government does this:

List of Palestinian suicide attacks - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


----------



## PamelaJ

I agree that a Jewish is not a racial category


----------



## docmauser1

georgephillip said:


> docmauser1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> georgephillip said:
> 
> 
> 
> _"Israel's Apartheid Laws "1. Identity and Citizenship ..._
> 
> 
> 
> _About CEIA-SC We are a diverse group of Anti-Zionist Southern California activists who have come together to further peace through justice in the Middle East. To that end, we have joined a Palestine-initiated campaign of boycott, divestment and sanctions (BDS) against Israel, similar to those applied to South Africa during the apartheid era, in order to bring an end to Israel's immoral and oppressive policies towards Palestinians both within Israel and throughout the West Bank and Gaza Strip._
> Do those arseholes purport to be taken seriously?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> _Do you?_
Click to expand...

The magnificient me is infernally apologizingz for offending our honorable georgephillip's dear little _diverse Anti-Zionist_ pet-shop project.


----------



## docmauser1

Hoffstra said:


> MHunterB said:
> 
> 
> 
> _...Oh, and then there's the basic flaw in Hoffy's scenario that Israel did NOT attempt 'ethnic cleansing' in  '48 OR '67.....  the Jordanians clearly did (East Jerusalem) and so did other Arab nations.  It appears the Jordanians, at least, have figured out that that was not a good idea....._
> 
> 
> 
> _yes, Israel did indeed ethnically cleanse hundreds of thousands of Arabs from Israel in 1948 they did it again in 1967._
Click to expand...

So, what are arabs still doing there?


----------



## georgephillip

RoccoR said:


> georgephillip,  _et al,_
> 
> This is not "Aparthied."  This is the purpose behind the Balufour Declaration, the Mandate and the Partition Plan.
> 
> 
> 
> georgephillip said:
> 
> 
> 
> If, as you allege, Israel does not practice apartheid, why is it Jews from all around the globe qualify as citizens and nationals of Israel while Arabs who have lived in Palestine for generation qualify as citizens only?
> 
> 
> 
> *(COMMENT #1)*
> 
> There is no segregation here.  It is the embodiment of the Jewish National Home; the realization of the first concept.  It is a case of intentional special immigration to accomplish the original intent:  "to secure the co-operation of all Jews who are willing to assist in the establishment of the Jewish national home."
> 
> *(COMMENT #2)*
> 
> Citizens Only!  Hummm.  This is an interesting blindness - you need to overcome this handicap.
> 
> But clearly, you don't understand what "Apartheid" is.
> 
> Most Respectfully,
> R
Click to expand...

"The word apartheid refers to any institutionalized regime of systematic oppression and domination by one racial group over another. The 'Israeli Arabs' - about 1.4 million Palestinian Christian and Muslim citizens who live in Israel - vote in elections. But they are a subordinated and marginalized minority. 

"A Star of David on Israel's flag symbolically tells Palestinian citizens: 'You do not belong.' Israel's Law of Return grants rights of automatic citizenship to Jews anywhere in the world, while those rights are denied to 750,000 Palestinian refugees, and their descendants, who were forced or fled in fear from their homes in what became Israel in 1948."

Campaign to End Israeli Apartheid - Home

*Any Jew on the planet has the "right" to become both a citizen and a national of Israel while Arabs whose families have lived between the River and the sea for generations are limited to second-class citizenship in the Jewish state, at best.

That would seem to require domination by one racial group over another.*


----------



## P F Tinmore

toastman said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> toastman said:
> 
> 
> 
> You need to have a country to build those ??
> 
> News to me.....
> 
> And Gaza doesn't have a government, they have a terrorist organization who governs the Palestinians
> 
> What the fuck kind of government has a charter like Hamas does???
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Hamas is not a terrorist in Palestine. That is an Israeli propaganda thing.
> 
> Their government uses their constitution not the Hamas charter.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Gaza is not Palestine. It is part of the Palestinian territories.
> 
> And yes they are a terrorist organization
> 
> What kind of a government does this:
> 
> List of Palestinian suicide attacks - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Click to expand...


Coal mine calling the kettle black. What kind of government does this.

Palestinian children killed since September 2000: *1519*

Remember These Children


----------



## docmauser1

georgephillip said:


> _"The word apartheid refers to any institutionalized regime of systematic oppression and domination by one racial group over another. The 'Israeli Arabs' - about 1.4 million Palestinian Christian and Muslim citizens who live in Israel - vote in elections. But they are a subordinated and marginalized minority. "A Star of David on Israel's flag symbolically tells Palestinian citizens: 'You do not belong.' Israel's Law of Return grants rights of automatic citizenship to Jews anywhere in the world, while those rights are denied to 750,000 Palestinian refugees, and their descendants, who were forced or fled in fear from their homes in what became Israel in 1948."_


"About CEIA-SC We are a diverse group of Anti-Zionist Southern California activists who have come together to further peace through justice in the Middle East. To that end, we have joined a Palestine-initiated campaign of boycott, divestment and sanctions (BDS) against Israel, similar to those applied to South Africa during the apartheid era, in order to bring an end to Israel's immoral and oppressive policies towards Palestinians both within Israel and throughout the West Bank and Gaza Strip."
Those Caliphorniah chicken little diverse arseholes should get a life and a job.


----------



## docmauser1

P F Tinmore said:


> _Palestinian children killed since September 2000: 1519_


If palistanians love their children more, than they hate jews ... .


----------



## RoccoR

georgephillip,  _et al,_

It is a very rare case, that a democracy or a republic has equal numbers on both sides of an issue or a cause.



georgephillip said:


> "The word apartheid refers to any institutionalized regime of systematic oppression and domination by one racial group over another. The 'Israeli Arabs' - about 1.4 million Palestinian Christian and Muslim citizens who live in Israel - vote in elections. But they are a subordinated and marginalized minority.


*(COMMENT)*

One side or another is going to be in a minority position.  That is the math.

How are "Palestinian Christian and Muslim citizens" subordinated?
How are "Palestinian Christian and Muslim citizens" marginalized?
What does this mean in terms of the impact on their lives.  Are they denied some essential to prosperity and life?  Is their standard of living and conditions less than any other regional neighbor?  Are the refused any social or educational opportunity that other citizen derive as citizens?



georgephillip said:


> "A Star of David on Israel's flag symbolically tells Palestinian citizens: 'You do not belong.' Israel's Law of Return grants rights of automatic citizenship to Jews anywhere in the world, while those rights are denied to 750,000 Palestinian refugees, and their descendants, who were forced or fled in fear from their homes in what became Israel in 1948."


*(COMMENT)*

This is nonsense.  Flags are flags.  Most Arab/Islamic flags have a bar theme with the colors Red, Black, Green and White.  They are so similar that after a decade in the Middle East, I still get some of them confused.  The Arab/Islamic symbol if a Crescent Moon, usually with a star in the center.  What does this symbology tell the Israeli?

As for the refugee population, that is a singular issue.  It is about a people that pledged to kill every Jewish man, women and child.  



georgephillip said:


> Any Jew on the planet has the "right" to become both a citizen and a national of Israel while Arabs whose families have lived between the River and the sea for generations are limited to second-class citizenship in the Jewish state, at best.
> 
> That would seem to require domination by one racial group over another.


*(COMMENT)*


Are the non-Jewish really second-class citizens in the Jewish state?  Compare the live and standard of living of the non-Jewish in Israel to the Arab in the neighboring states.  Then tell me about second-class citizenship.

It would seem that Israeli immigration operates in favor of the establishment in Palestine of a national home for the Jewish people; as was intended as far back as the Balfour Declaration, the San Remo Convention, as the Treaty of Sevres, as expressed by the Allied Powers in the Mandate for Palestine.

Most Respectfully,
R


----------



## P F Tinmore

RoccoR said:


> georgephillip,  _et al,_
> 
> It is a very rare case, that a democracy or a republic has equal numbers on both sides of an issue or a cause.
> 
> 
> 
> georgephillip said:
> 
> 
> 
> "The word apartheid refers to any institutionalized regime of systematic oppression and domination by one racial group over another. The 'Israeli Arabs' - about 1.4 million Palestinian Christian and Muslim citizens who live in Israel - vote in elections. But they are a subordinated and marginalized minority.
> 
> 
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> One side or another is going to be in a minority position.  That is the math.
> 
> How are "Palestinian Christian and Muslim citizens" subordinated?
> How are "Palestinian Christian and Muslim citizens" marginalized?
> What does this mean in terms of the impact on their lives.  Are they denied some essential to prosperity and life?  Is their standard of living and conditions less than any other regional neighbor?  Are the refused any social or educational opportunity that other citizen derive as citizens?
> 
> 
> 
> georgephillip said:
> 
> 
> 
> "A Star of David on Israel's flag symbolically tells Palestinian citizens: 'You do not belong.' Israel's Law of Return grants rights of automatic citizenship to Jews anywhere in the world, while those rights are denied to 750,000 Palestinian refugees, and their descendants, who were forced or fled in fear from their homes in what became Israel in 1948."
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> This is nonsense.  Flags are flags.  Most Arab/Islamic flags have a bar theme with the colors Red, Black, Green and White.  They are so similar that after a decade in the Middle East, I still get some of them confused.  The Arab/Islamic symbol if a Crescent Moon, usually with a star in the center.  What does this symbology tell the Israeli?
> 
> As for the refugee population, that is a singular issue.  It is about a people that pledged to kill every Jewish man, women and child.
> 
> 
> 
> georgephillip said:
> 
> 
> 
> Any Jew on the planet has the "right" to become both a citizen and a national of Israel while Arabs whose families have lived between the River and the sea for generations are limited to second-class citizenship in the Jewish state, at best.
> 
> That would seem to require domination by one racial group over another.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> 
> Are the non-Jewish really second-class citizens in the Jewish state?  Compare the live and standard of living of the non-Jewish in Israel to the Arab in the neighboring states.  Then tell me about second-class citizenship.
> 
> It would seem that Israeli immigration operates in favor of the establishment in Palestine of a national home for the Jewish people; as was intended as far back as the Balfour Declaration, the San Remo Convention, as the Treaty of Sevres, as expressed by the Allied Powers in the Mandate for Palestine.
> 
> Most Respectfully,
> R
Click to expand...


First, Israel is more prosperous because foreign money has been pumped in for more than a hundred years.

There are many laws, customs and practices that discriminate.


----------



## toastman

P F Tinmore said:


> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> 
> georgephillip,  _et al,_
> 
> It is a very rare case, that a democracy or a republic has equal numbers on both sides of an issue or a cause.
> 
> 
> 
> georgephillip said:
> 
> 
> 
> "The word apartheid refers to any institutionalized regime of systematic oppression and domination by one racial group over another. The 'Israeli Arabs' - about 1.4 million Palestinian Christian and Muslim citizens who live in Israel - vote in elections. But they are a subordinated and marginalized minority.
> 
> 
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> One side or another is going to be in a minority position.  That is the math.
> 
> How are "Palestinian Christian and Muslim citizens" subordinated?
> How are "Palestinian Christian and Muslim citizens" marginalized?
> What does this mean in terms of the impact on their lives.  Are they denied some essential to prosperity and life?  Is their standard of living and conditions less than any other regional neighbor?  Are the refused any social or educational opportunity that other citizen derive as citizens?
> 
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> This is nonsense.  Flags are flags.  Most Arab/Islamic flags have a bar theme with the colors Red, Black, Green and White.  They are so similar that after a decade in the Middle East, I still get some of them confused.  The Arab/Islamic symbol if a Crescent Moon, usually with a star in the center.  What does this symbology tell the Israeli?
> 
> As for the refugee population, that is a singular issue.  It is about a people that pledged to kill every Jewish man, women and child.
> 
> 
> 
> georgephillip said:
> 
> 
> 
> Any Jew on the planet has the "right" to become both a citizen and a national of Israel while Arabs whose families have lived between the River and the sea for generations are limited to second-class citizenship in the Jewish state, at best.
> 
> That would seem to require domination by one racial group over another.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> 
> Are the non-Jewish really second-class citizens in the Jewish state?  Compare the live and standard of living of the non-Jewish in Israel to the Arab in the neighboring states.  Then tell me about second-class citizenship.
> 
> It would seem that Israeli immigration operates in favor of the establishment in Palestine of a national home for the Jewish people; as was intended as far back as the Balfour Declaration, the San Remo Convention, as the Treaty of Sevres, as expressed by the Allied Powers in the Mandate for Palestine.
> 
> Most Respectfully,
> R
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> *First, Israel is more prosperous because foreign money has been pumped in for more than a hundred years.*
> 
> There are many laws, customs and practices that discriminate.
Click to expand...


This is a typical example of haters gonna hate. Israel haters CAN'T STAND that Israel is a beautiful prosperous nation , so they find bullshit excuses for it. 

You're incredibly biased, Tinmore.


----------



## P F Tinmore

toastman said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> 
> georgephillip,  _et al,_
> 
> It is a very rare case, that a democracy or a republic has equal numbers on both sides of an issue or a cause.
> 
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> One side or another is going to be in a minority position.  That is the math.
> 
> How are "Palestinian Christian and Muslim citizens" subordinated?
> How are "Palestinian Christian and Muslim citizens" marginalized?
> What does this mean in terms of the impact on their lives.  Are they denied some essential to prosperity and life?  Is their standard of living and conditions less than any other regional neighbor?  Are the refused any social or educational opportunity that other citizen derive as citizens?
> 
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> This is nonsense.  Flags are flags.  Most Arab/Islamic flags have a bar theme with the colors Red, Black, Green and White.  They are so similar that after a decade in the Middle East, I still get some of them confused.  The Arab/Islamic symbol if a Crescent Moon, usually with a star in the center.  What does this symbology tell the Israeli?
> 
> As for the refugee population, that is a singular issue.  It is about a people that pledged to kill every Jewish man, women and child.
> 
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> 
> Are the non-Jewish really second-class citizens in the Jewish state?  Compare the live and standard of living of the non-Jewish in Israel to the Arab in the neighboring states.  Then tell me about second-class citizenship.
> 
> It would seem that Israeli immigration operates in favor of the establishment in Palestine of a national home for the Jewish people; as was intended as far back as the Balfour Declaration, the San Remo Convention, as the Treaty of Sevres, as expressed by the Allied Powers in the Mandate for Palestine.
> 
> Most Respectfully,
> R
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *First, Israel is more prosperous because foreign money has been pumped in for more than a hundred years.*
> 
> There are many laws, customs and practices that discriminate.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> This is a typical example of haters gonna hate. Israel haters CAN'T STAND that Israel is a beautiful prosperous nation , so they find bullshit excuses for it.
> 
> You're incredibly biased, Tinmore.
Click to expand...


The truth is biased?

Indeed.


----------



## RoccoR

P F Tinmore, georgephillip,  _et al,_

Let's get to the bedrock issue in this exchange.



P F Tinmore said:


> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> 
> georgephillip,  _et al,_
> 
> It is a very rare case, that a democracy or a republic has equal numbers on both sides of an issue or a cause.
> 
> 
> 
> georgephillip said:
> 
> 
> 
> "The word apartheid refers to any institutionalized regime of systematic oppression and domination by one racial group over another. The 'Israeli Arabs' - about 1.4 million Palestinian Christian and Muslim citizens who live in Israel - vote in elections. But they are a subordinated and marginalized minority.
> 
> 
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> One side or another is going to be in a minority position.  That is the math.
> 
> How are "Palestinian Christian and Muslim citizens" subordinated?
> How are "Palestinian Christian and Muslim citizens" marginalized?
> What does this mean in terms of the impact on their lives.  Are they denied some essential to prosperity and life?  Is their standard of living and conditions less than any other regional neighbor?  Are the refused any social or educational opportunity that other citizen derive as citizens?
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> This is nonsense.  Flags are flags.  Most Arab/Islamic flags have a bar theme with the colors Red, Black, Green and White.  They are so similar that after a decade in the Middle East, I still get some of them confused.  The Arab/Islamic symbol if a Crescent Moon, usually with a star in the center.  What does this symbology tell the Israeli?
> 
> As for the refugee population, that is a singular issue.  It is about a people that pledged to kill every Jewish man, women and child.
> 
> 
> 
> georgephillip said:
> 
> 
> 
> Any Jew on the planet has the "right" to become both a citizen and a national of Israel while Arabs whose families have lived between the River and the sea for generations are limited to second-class citizenship in the Jewish state, at best.
> 
> That would seem to require domination by one racial group over another.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> 
> Are the non-Jewish really second-class citizens in the Jewish state?  Compare the live and standard of living of the non-Jewish in Israel to the Arab in the neighboring states.  Then tell me about second-class citizenship.
> 
> It would seem that Israeli immigration operates in favor of the establishment in Palestine of a national home for the Jewish people; as was intended as far back as the Balfour Declaration, the San Remo Convention, as the Treaty of Sevres, as expressed by the Allied Powers in the Mandate for Palestine.
> 
> Most Respectfully,
> R
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> First, Israel is more prosperous because foreign money has been pumped in for more than a hundred years.
> 
> There are many laws, customs and practices that discriminate.
Click to expand...

*(QUESTION)*

Without regard to the dubious assertion as to where the money comes from:

How are "Palestinian Christian and Muslim citizens" subordinated?
How are "Palestinian Christian and Muslim citizens" marginalized?
As to the financing of the Jewish National Home and the State of Israel, is it your claim that the non-Jewish citizens get no benefit from the prosperity enjoined in Israel?  What is the claim you make now?

Most Respectfully,
R


----------



## toastman

P F Tinmore said:


> toastman said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> *First, Israel is more prosperous because foreign money has been pumped in for more than a hundred years.*
> 
> There are many laws, customs and practices that discriminate.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> This is a typical example of haters gonna hate. Israel haters CAN'T STAND that Israel is a beautiful prosperous nation , so they find bullshit excuses for it.
> 
> You're incredibly biased, Tinmore.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> The truth is biased?
> 
> Indeed.
Click to expand...


Becoming a prosperous nation is not only about money. It's about the people who make it into a prosperous nation, mainly the government.

How do you know that Israel became as prosperous as it has solely because of the money given to them? You don't, but it is standard Arab propaganda to say so.

BTW, so many countries in the ME are sitting on tons of oil that has given them boatloads of money, yet most of them have not accomplished even close to what Israel has. Why??

One word: Government


----------



## georgephillip

RoccoR said:


> P F Tinmore, georgephillip,  _et al,_
> 
> Let's get to the bedrock issue in this exchange.
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> 
> georgephillip,  _et al,_
> 
> It is a very rare case, that a democracy or a republic has equal numbers on both sides of an issue or a cause.
> 
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> One side or another is going to be in a minority position.  That is the math.
> 
> How are "Palestinian Christian and Muslim citizens" subordinated?
> How are "Palestinian Christian and Muslim citizens" marginalized?
> What does this mean in terms of the impact on their lives.  Are they denied some essential to prosperity and life?  Is their standard of living and conditions less than any other regional neighbor?  Are the refused any social or educational opportunity that other citizen derive as citizens?
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> This is nonsense.  Flags are flags.  Most Arab/Islamic flags have a bar theme with the colors Red, Black, Green and White.  They are so similar that after a decade in the Middle East, I still get some of them confused.  The Arab/Islamic symbol if a Crescent Moon, usually with a star in the center.  What does this symbology tell the Israeli?
> 
> As for the refugee population, that is a singular issue.  It is about a people that pledged to kill every Jewish man, women and child.
> 
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> 
> Are the non-Jewish really second-class citizens in the Jewish state?  Compare the live and standard of living of the non-Jewish in Israel to the Arab in the neighboring states.  Then tell me about second-class citizenship.
> 
> It would seem that Israeli immigration operates in favor of the establishment in Palestine of a national home for the Jewish people; as was intended as far back as the Balfour Declaration, the San Remo Convention, as the Treaty of Sevres, as expressed by the Allied Powers in the Mandate for Palestine.
> 
> Most Respectfully,
> R
> 
> 
> 
> 
> First, Israel is more prosperous because foreign money has been pumped in for more than a hundred years.
> 
> There are many laws, customs and practices that discriminate.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> *(QUESTION)*
> 
> Without regard to the dubious assertion as to where the money comes from:
> 
> How are "Palestinian Christian and Muslim citizens" subordinated?
> How are "Palestinian Christian and Muslim citizens" marginalized?
> As to the financing of the Jewish National Home and the State of Israel, is it your claim that the non-Jewish citizens get no benefit from the prosperity enjoined in Israel?  What is the claim you make now?
> 
> Most Respectfully,
> R
Click to expand...

*Arab Israelis are discriminated against in housing and schooling for starters.*

"The Israeli Declaration of Independence stated that the State of Israel would ensure complete equality of social and political rights to all its inhabitants irrespective of religion, race or sex, and guaranteed freedom of religion, conscience, language, education and culture. While formally equal according to Israeli law, a number of official sources acknowledge that Arab citizens of Israel experience discrimination in many aspects of life. Israeli High Court Justice (Ret.) Theodor Or wrote in The Report by the State Commission of Inquiry into the Events of October 2000:[181]

"The Arab citizens of Israel live in a reality in which they experience discrimination as Arabs. This inequality has been documented in a large number of professional surveys and studies, has been confirmed in court judgments and government resolutions, and has also found expression in reports by the state comptroller and in other official documents.

"Although the Jewish majoritys awareness of this discrimination is often quite low, it plays a central role in the sensibilities and attitudes of Arab citizens. This discrimination is widely accepted, both within the Arab sector and outside it, and by official assessments, as a chief cause of agitation."

Arab citizens of Israel - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

*Are you truly surprised the Jewish state values Jews above all others?*


----------



## ForeverYoung436

RoccoR said:


> georgephillip,  _et al,_
> 
> It is a very rare case, that a democracy or a republic has equal numbers on both sides of an issue or a cause.
> 
> 
> 
> georgephillip said:
> 
> 
> 
> "The word apartheid refers to any institutionalized regime of systematic oppression and domination by one racial group over another. The 'Israeli Arabs' - about 1.4 million Palestinian Christian and Muslim citizens who live in Israel - vote in elections. But they are a subordinated and marginalized minority.
> 
> 
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> One side or another is going to be in a minority position.  That is the math.
> 
> How are "Palestinian Christian and Muslim citizens" subordinated?
> How are "Palestinian Christian and Muslim citizens" marginalized?
> What does this mean in terms of the impact on their lives.  Are they denied some essential to prosperity and life?  Is their standard of living and conditions less than any other regional neighbor?  Are the refused any social or educational opportunity that other citizen derive as citizens?
> 
> 
> 
> georgephillip said:
> 
> 
> 
> "A Star of David on Israel's flag symbolically tells Palestinian citizens: 'You do not belong.' Israel's Law of Return grants rights of automatic citizenship to Jews anywhere in the world, while those rights are denied to 750,000 Palestinian refugees, and their descendants, who were forced or fled in fear from their homes in what became Israel in 1948."
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> This is nonsense.  Flags are flags.  Most Arab/Islamic flags have a bar theme with the colors Red, Black, Green and White.  They are so similar that after a decade in the Middle East, I still get some of them confused.  The Arab/Islamic symbol if a Crescent Moon, usually with a star in the center.  What does this symbology tell the Israeli?
> 
> As for the refugee population, that is a singular issue.  It is about a people that pledged to kill every Jewish man, women and child.
> 
> 
> 
> georgephillip said:
> 
> 
> 
> Any Jew on the planet has the "right" to become both a citizen and a national of Israel while Arabs whose families have lived between the River and the sea for generations are limited to second-class citizenship in the Jewish state, at best.
> 
> That would seem to require domination by one racial group over another.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> 
> Are the non-Jewish really second-class citizens in the Jewish state?  Compare the live and standard of living of the non-Jewish in Israel to the Arab in the neighboring states.  Then tell me about second-class citizenship.
> 
> It would seem that Israeli immigration operates in favor of the establishment in Palestine of a national home for the Jewish people; as was intended as far back as the Balfour Declaration, the San Remo Convention, as the Treaty of Sevres, as expressed by the Allied Powers in the Mandate for Palestine.
> 
> Most Respectfully,
> R
Click to expand...


The star of David being on Israel's flag is the whole point of it.  There's a crescent moon on practically all of the Muslim countries' flags, and a cross in the flags of many European Christian countries.


----------



## RoccoR

P F Tinmore, georgephillip,  _et al,_

You need to read that report much closer.



georgephillip said:


> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> 
> Let's get to the bedrock issue in this exchange.
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> First, Israel is more prosperous because foreign money has been pumped in for more than a hundred years.
> 
> There are many laws, customs and practices that discriminate.
> 
> 
> 
> *(QUESTION)*
> 
> Without regard to the dubious assertion as to where the money comes from:
> 
> How are "Palestinian Christian and Muslim citizens" subordinated?
> How are "Palestinian Christian and Muslim citizens" marginalized?
> As to the financing of the Jewish National Home and the State of Israel, is it your claim that the non-Jewish citizens get no benefit from the prosperity enjoined in Israel?  What is the claim you make now?
> 
> Most Respectfully,
> R
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> *Arab Israelis are discriminated against in housing and schooling for starters.*
> 
> "The Israeli Declaration of Independence stated that the State of Israel would ensure complete equality of social and political rights to all its inhabitants irrespective of religion, race or sex, and guaranteed freedom of religion, conscience, language, education and culture. While formally equal according to Israeli law, a number of official sources acknowledge that Arab citizens of Israel experience discrimination in many aspects of life. Israeli High Court Justice (Ret.) Theodor Or wrote in The Report by the State Commission of Inquiry into the Events of October 2000:[181]
> 
> "The Arab citizens of Israel live in a reality in which they experience discrimination as Arabs. This inequality has been documented in a large number of professional surveys and studies, has been confirmed in court judgments and government resolutions, and has also found expression in reports by the state comptroller and in other official documents.
> 
> "Although the Jewish majoritys awareness of this discrimination is often quite low, it plays a central role in the sensibilities and attitudes of Arab citizens. This discrimination is widely accepted, both within the Arab sector and outside it, and by official assessments, as a chief cause of agitation."
> 
> Arab citizens of Israel - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
> 
> *Are you truly surprised the Jewish state values Jews above all others?*
Click to expand...

*(COMMENT)*

This information is more than a decade old.  While there are a slew of new news stories on the subject, almost every story I saw was using studies and data that were very old.

This issue is about the public school system.  It has its funding troubles the same as the US does.  I came from a poor neighborhood and my school reflected the income and land value of that neighborhood.  Most countries have this same problem.

These are filler stories that go for sympathy.  

Most Respectfully,
R


----------



## P F Tinmore

Jaffa's Ajami was treated as a Ghetto till 1967, says Jeries Qobti on the way to see Mario Deek the Leader of the Orthodox Church Scouts, and then it became "another way of treating us!" What happened last week to Mario when someone complained about noise while the church scout Orchestra was practicing? Palestinians living in Jaffa learn in Hebrew schools or even when they go to Arabic schools, the curriculum is written by the Israeli government. The only difference between the two types of schools is that you get to learn Arabic in the Arabic schools. In school, Jeries was taught about his own history in a different way: He learnt that this land was empty when the Jews built Jaffa,

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FybQW3OXtF0]89 Sleepless Gaza Jerusalem.divx - YouTube[/ame]


----------



## georgephillip

RoccoR said:


> P F Tinmore, georgephillip,  _et al,_
> 
> You need to read that report much closer.
> 
> 
> 
> georgephillip said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> 
> Let's get to the bedrock issue in this exchange.
> 
> 
> *(QUESTION)*
> 
> Without regard to the dubious assertion as to where the money comes from:
> 
> How are "Palestinian Christian and Muslim citizens" subordinated?
> How are "Palestinian Christian and Muslim citizens" marginalized?
> As to the financing of the Jewish National Home and the State of Israel, is it your claim that the non-Jewish citizens get no benefit from the prosperity enjoined in Israel?  What is the claim you make now?
> 
> Most Respectfully,
> R
> 
> 
> 
> *Arab Israelis are discriminated against in housing and schooling for starters.*
> 
> "The Israeli Declaration of Independence stated that the State of Israel would ensure complete equality of social and political rights to all its inhabitants irrespective of religion, race or sex, and guaranteed freedom of religion, conscience, language, education and culture. While formally equal according to Israeli law, a number of official sources acknowledge that Arab citizens of Israel experience discrimination in many aspects of life. Israeli High Court Justice (Ret.) Theodor Or wrote in The Report by the State Commission of Inquiry into the Events of October 2000:[181]
> 
> "The Arab citizens of Israel live in a reality in which they experience discrimination as Arabs. This inequality has been documented in a large number of professional surveys and studies, has been confirmed in court judgments and government resolutions, and has also found expression in reports by the state comptroller and in other official documents.
> 
> "Although the Jewish majoritys awareness of this discrimination is often quite low, it plays a central role in the sensibilities and attitudes of Arab citizens. This discrimination is widely accepted, both within the Arab sector and outside it, and by official assessments, as a chief cause of agitation."
> 
> Arab citizens of Israel - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
> 
> *Are you truly surprised the Jewish state values Jews above all others?*
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> This information is more than a decade old.  While there are a slew of new news stories on the subject, almost every story I saw was using studies and data that were very old.
> 
> This issue is about the public school system.  It has its funding troubles the same as the US does.  I came from a poor neighborhood and my school reflected the income and land value of that neighborhood.  Most countries have this same problem.
> 
> These are filler stories that go for sympathy.
> 
> Most Respectfully,
> R
Click to expand...

*Most countries weren't established as a Socialist enterprise; Israel was.
Can we be sure schools there are funded from local property taxes?*

"A 2009 study from the Hebrew University's School of Education demonstrated that the Israeli Education Ministry's budget for special assistance to students from low socioeconomic backgrounds 'severely' discriminated against Arabs. 

"The study found that because there were more needy Arab students, but fewer Arab students overall, educationally needy Jewish students receive anywhere from 3.8 to 6.9 times as much funding as equally needy Arab students. 

"The Education Ministry said in response to the report that a decision has already been made to abandon this allocation method.[31] 

"The Follow-Up Committee for Arab Education notes that the Israeli government spends an average of $192 per year on each Arab student compared to $1,100 per Jewish student. 

"The drop-out rate for Arab citizens of Israel is twice as high as that of their Jewish counterparts (12 percent versus 6 percent). The same group also notes that there is a 5,000-classroom shortage in the Arab sector.[32][verification needed]

"A 2007 report of the UN Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination noted that separate sectors are maintained for Jewish and Arab education. It recommended that Israel should assess the extent to which maintenance of separate Arab and Jewish sectors '*may amount to racial segregation*', and that mixed Arab-Jewish communities and schools, and intercultural education should be promoted.[33] 

"In a 2008 report, Israel responded that parents are entitled to enroll their children in the educational institution of their choice, whether the spoken language is Hebrew, Arabic or bilingual."

Racism in Israel - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


----------



## ForeverYoung436

georgephillip said:


> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore, georgephillip,  _et al,_
> 
> You need to read that report much closer.
> 
> 
> 
> georgephillip said:
> 
> 
> 
> *Arab Israelis are discriminated against in housing and schooling for starters.*
> 
> "The Israeli Declaration of Independence stated that the State of Israel would ensure complete equality of social and political rights to all its inhabitants irrespective of religion, race or sex, and guaranteed freedom of religion, conscience, language, education and culture. While formally equal according to Israeli law, a number of official sources acknowledge that Arab citizens of Israel experience discrimination in many aspects of life. Israeli High Court Justice (Ret.) Theodor Or wrote in The Report by the State Commission of Inquiry into the Events of October 2000:[181]
> 
> "The Arab citizens of Israel live in a reality in which they experience discrimination as Arabs. This inequality has been documented in a large number of professional surveys and studies, has been confirmed in court judgments and government resolutions, and has also found expression in reports by the state comptroller and in other official documents.
> 
> "Although the Jewish majoritys awareness of this discrimination is often quite low, it plays a central role in the sensibilities and attitudes of Arab citizens. This discrimination is widely accepted, both within the Arab sector and outside it, and by official assessments, as a chief cause of agitation."
> 
> Arab citizens of Israel - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
> 
> *Are you truly surprised the Jewish state values Jews above all others?*
> 
> 
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> This information is more than a decade old.  While there are a slew of new news stories on the subject, almost every story I saw was using studies and data that were very old.
> 
> This issue is about the public school system.  It has its funding troubles the same as the US does.  I came from a poor neighborhood and my school reflected the income and land value of that neighborhood.  Most countries have this same problem.
> 
> These are filler stories that go for sympathy.
> 
> Most Respectfully,
> R
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> *Most countries weren't established as a Socialist enterprise; Israel was.
> Can we be sure schools there are funded from local property taxes?*
> 
> "A 2009 study from the Hebrew University's School of Education demonstrated that the Israeli Education Ministry's budget for special assistance to students from low socioeconomic backgrounds 'severely' discriminated against Arabs.
> 
> "The study found that because there were more needy Arab students, but fewer Arab students overall, educationally needy Jewish students receive anywhere from 3.8 to 6.9 times as much funding as equally needy Arab students.
> 
> "The Education Ministry said in response to the report that a decision has already been made to abandon this allocation method.[31]
> 
> "The Follow-Up Committee for Arab Education notes that the Israeli government spends an average of $192 per year on each Arab student compared to $1,100 per Jewish student.
> 
> "The drop-out rate for Arab citizens of Israel is twice as high as that of their Jewish counterparts (12 percent versus 6 percent). The same group also notes that there is a 5,000-classroom shortage in the Arab sector.[32][verification needed]
> 
> "A 2007 report of the UN Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination noted that separate sectors are maintained for Jewish and Arab education. It recommended that Israel should assess the extent to which maintenance of separate Arab and Jewish sectors '*may amount to racial segregation*', and that mixed Arab-Jewish communities and schools, and intercultural education should be promoted.[33]
> 
> "In a 2008 report, Israel responded that parents are entitled to enroll their children in the educational institution of their choice, whether the spoken language is Hebrew, Arabic or bilingual."
> 
> Racism in Israel - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Click to expand...


75 Christians massacred in Pakistan the other week, others in Nigeria and Kenya, and all you can do is pull up some old news about Israel from Wikipedia.  What's your beef with Jews?  I have my own theory.  Jews are not to blame for your predicament.  My dad came to this country penniless and without family after the Holocaust, but created his own wealth by the sweat of his brow.


----------



## RoccoR

P F Tinmore, georgephillip,  _et al,_

There is no question that, as we go into the 21st Century, there are sever deficiencies in educations systems, both here in the US and abroad.



georgephillip said:


> georgephillip said:
> 
> 
> 
> "In a 2008 report, Israel responded that parents are entitled to enroll their children in the educational institution of their choice, whether the spoken language is Hebrew, Arabic or bilingual."
> 
> Racism in Israel - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Click to expand...

*(COMMENT)*

This is a multifaceted issue.


The first issue is the system of bilingual education, Arab language versus Hebrew language.  That would be equivalent to a bifurcated US education system with one set of schools being taught in English and another taught in Spanish.  The closest we, in America come is the International Schools you occasionally run into outside the US _(or special schools in and around Washington)_.  My oldest daughter went to such an International School while I was assigned to SHAPE in Belgium _(half day French and half day English)_.  But it is very rare to find a truly bifurcated system that is functional socially, and economically efficient.  Bifurcated systems inherently foster separation between those that speak the two languages in question and create fiscal disparities between the two systems _(among other issues)._  Unless the country (and Israelis not one) is independently wealthy, it will never be able to adequately maintain a bifurcated system of any quality.  Something will suffer; there will always be an inequality.   It is the nature of humanity.  And it will translate into future problems.


The second big issue is that of self-imposed segregation.  It is clear that the Arab and the Jew have not come to terms with cooperative coexistence; either socially, economically, or educationally.  While the Israeli system allows for the ethnically Arab children to go to school in the Hebrew language system, they do not take advantage of the offer.  This is an offer of integration _(the process of ending systematic cultural segregation)_; a process that is extremely hard to enable.  And integration is made even more difficult when the two cultures have parental discords that are yet unsolved.  This goes hat in hand with the latent expression of the Article 15 concept that "it is necessary that scientists, educators and teachers, information and media people, as well as the educated masses, especially the youth and sheikhs of the Islamic movements, should take part in the operation of awakening (the masses)."  There is a purpose to the culture to seek a continuing separation of the youth in the education process.  

Yes, as the UNCERD Report says: "maintenance of separate Arab and Jewish sectors 'may amount to racial segregation."  But that is not entirely to be laid at the feet of the Israeli system; or the Jewish people.   The solution is to eliminate the Arab schools and integrate the student population into a single system under a single funding program.  But then, indications are, that the Arab Community would oppose that as well and make another human rights complaint; to be used as anti-Israeli propaganda.  

But "apartheid" it is not.  Under "apartheid" there would be no choice to integrate.  The offer of integration is, in fact, evidence of a process exactly opposite to "apartheid."

Most Respectfully,
R


----------



## georgephillip

ForeverYoung436 said:


> georgephillip said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore, georgephillip,  _et al,_
> 
> You need to read that report much closer.
> 
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> This information is more than a decade old.  While there are a slew of new news stories on the subject, almost every story I saw was using studies and data that were very old.
> 
> This issue is about the public school system.  It has its funding troubles the same as the US does.  I came from a poor neighborhood and my school reflected the income and land value of that neighborhood.  Most countries have this same problem.
> 
> These are filler stories that go for sympathy.
> 
> Most Respectfully,
> R
> 
> 
> 
> *Most countries weren't established as a Socialist enterprise; Israel was.
> Can we be sure schools there are funded from local property taxes?*
> 
> "A 2009 study from the Hebrew University's School of Education demonstrated that the Israeli Education Ministry's budget for special assistance to students from low socioeconomic backgrounds 'severely' discriminated against Arabs.
> 
> "The study found that because there were more needy Arab students, but fewer Arab students overall, educationally needy Jewish students receive anywhere from 3.8 to 6.9 times as much funding as equally needy Arab students.
> 
> "The Education Ministry said in response to the report that a decision has already been made to abandon this allocation method.[31]
> 
> "The Follow-Up Committee for Arab Education notes that the Israeli government spends an average of $192 per year on each Arab student compared to $1,100 per Jewish student.
> 
> "The drop-out rate for Arab citizens of Israel is twice as high as that of their Jewish counterparts (12 percent versus 6 percent). The same group also notes that there is a 5,000-classroom shortage in the Arab sector.[32][verification needed]
> 
> "A 2007 report of the UN Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination noted that separate sectors are maintained for Jewish and Arab education. It recommended that Israel should assess the extent to which maintenance of separate Arab and Jewish sectors '*may amount to racial segregation*', and that mixed Arab-Jewish communities and schools, and intercultural education should be promoted.[33]
> 
> "In a 2008 report, Israel responded that parents are entitled to enroll their children in the educational institution of their choice, whether the spoken language is Hebrew, Arabic or bilingual."
> 
> Racism in Israel - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 75 Christians massacred in Pakistan the other week, others in Nigeria and Kenya, and all you can do is pull up some old news about Israel from Wikipedia.  What's your beef with Jews?  I have my own theory.  Jews are not to blame for your predicament.  My dad came to this country penniless and without family after the Holocaust, but created his own wealth by the sweat of his brow.
Click to expand...

I believe some of the violence in Pakistan, Nigeria, and Kenya stems from the same source as Israel, namely a western corporate caliphate spearheaded by the US government. Israel is the nuclear-armed archstone of that policy, and when it all blows up the spark will probably originate in Jerusalem.


----------



## Bloodrock44

Jesus H. Christ...over 1600 responses and you still haven't figured out the answer is no? You should be ashamed.


----------



## georgephillip

RoccoR said:


> P F Tinmore, georgephillip,  _et al,_
> 
> There is no question that, as we go into the 21st Century, there are sever deficiencies in educations systems, both here in the US and abroad.
> 
> 
> 
> georgephillip said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> georgephillip said:
> 
> 
> 
> "In a 2008 report, Israel responded that parents are entitled to enroll their children in the educational institution of their choice, whether the spoken language is Hebrew, Arabic or bilingual."
> 
> Racism in Israel - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> This is a multifaceted issue.
> 
> 
> The first issue is the system of bilingual education, Arab language versus Hebrew language.  That would be equivalent to a bifurcated US education system with one set of schools being taught in English and another taught in Spanish.  The closest we, in America come is the International Schools you occasionally run into outside the US _(or special schools in and around Washington)_.  My oldest daughter went to such an International School while I was assigned to SHAPE in Belgium _(half day French and half day English)_.  But it is very rare to find a truly bifurcated system that is functional socially, and economically efficient.  Bifurcated systems inherently foster separation between those that speak the two languages in question and create fiscal disparities between the two systems _(among other issues)._  Unless the country (and Israelis not one) is independently wealthy, it will never be able to adequately maintain a bifurcated system of any quality.  Something will suffer; there will always be an inequality.   It is the nature of humanity.  And it will translate into future problems.
> 
> 
> The second big issue is that of self-imposed segregation.  It is clear that the Arab and the Jew have not come to terms with cooperative coexistence; either socially, economically, or educationally.  While the Israeli system allows for the ethnically Arab children to go to school in the Hebrew language system, they do not take advantage of the offer.  This is an offer of integration _(the process of ending systematic cultural segregation)_; a process that is extremely hard to enable.  And integration is made even more difficult when the two cultures have parental discords that are yet unsolved.  This goes hat in hand with the latent expression of the Article 15 concept that "it is necessary that scientists, educators and teachers, information and media people, as well as the educated masses, especially the youth and sheikhs of the Islamic movements, should take part in the operation of awakening (the masses)."  There is a purpose to the culture to seek a continuing separation of the youth in the education process.
> 
> Yes, as the UNCERD Report says: "maintenance of separate Arab and Jewish sectors 'may amount to racial segregation."  But that is not entirely to be laid at the feet of the Israeli system; or the Jewish people.   The solution is to eliminate the Arab schools and integrate the student population into a single system under a single funding program.  But then, indications are, that the Arab Community would oppose that as well and make another human rights complaint; to be used as anti-Israeli propaganda.
> 
> But "apartheid" it is not.  Under "apartheid" there would be no choice to integrate.  The offer of integration is, in fact, evidence of a process exactly opposite to "apartheid."
> 
> Most Respectfully,
> R
Click to expand...


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ethnic_discrimination_in_Israel#Education_system
"Israeli law does not prohibit Palestinian Arab parents from enrolling their children in Jewish schools, but in practice, very few Palestinian Arab parents do so.[24][26]"

Isn't it worth asking what treatment an Arab child would receive from his or her Jewish classmates? It seems to me the treatment would be similar to what Black students faced in white schools in Little Rock and Selma during the 1950s and '60s. Since the power of the Jewish state leans toward continued segregation instead of the bend toward integration we saw in this country during Ike's, JFK's and Lyndon's Administrations, sending Arab children into Jewish schools would be a sequel to Daniel in the Lion's Den without the happy ending. It should also go without saying Arabs in Jewish schools would receive a skewed narrative of the history of Palestine and the conflict that has raged there since 650,000 Jews imposed an ethnocracy on 1.35 million Arabs in 1948.


----------



## RoccoR

P F Tinmore, georgephillip,  _et al,_

All change requires courage and strength.



georgephillip said:


> Racism in Israel - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
> "Israeli law does not prohibit Palestinian Arab parents from enrolling their children in Jewish schools, but in practice, very few Palestinian Arab parents do so.[24][26]"
> 
> Isn't it worth asking what treatment an Arab child would receive from his or her Jewish classmates? It seems to me the treatment would be similar to what Black students faced in white schools in Little Rock and Selma during the 1950s and '60s. Since the power of the Jewish state leans toward continued segregation instead of the bend toward integration we saw in this country during Ike's, JFK's and Lyndon's Administrations, sending Arab children into Jewish schools would be a sequel to Daniel in the Lion's Den without the happy ending. It should also go without saying Arabs in Jewish schools would receive a skewed narrative of the history of Palestine and the conflict that has raged there since 650,000 Jews imposed an ethnocracy on 1.35 million Arabs in 1948.


*(COMMENT)*

Don't make is sound as if the Arab is some sort of righteous victim.  They are not.

Look at the odds.  You say it yourself.   2:1 in favor of the Arab, not counting the rest of the Arab League.  And the idea that "650,000 Jews imposed an ethnocracy on 1.35 million Arabs in 1948," is really absurd.  Look at the history.  

But that is not the discussion.  The discussion is about how "very few Palestinian Arab parents" allow their children to go to better schools, and then cry "apartheid."  In this case, if there is a charge of "apartheid" to be made, surely it would be against the Arab who self-segregates.

Most Respectfully,
R


----------



## P F Tinmore

RoccoR said:


> P F Tinmore, georgephillip,  _et al,_
> 
> All change requires courage and strength.
> 
> 
> 
> georgephillip said:
> 
> 
> 
> Racism in Israel - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
> "Israeli law does not prohibit Palestinian Arab parents from enrolling their children in Jewish schools, but in practice, very few Palestinian Arab parents do so.[24][26]"
> 
> Isn't it worth asking what treatment an Arab child would receive from his or her Jewish classmates? It seems to me the treatment would be similar to what Black students faced in white schools in Little Rock and Selma during the 1950s and '60s. Since the power of the Jewish state leans toward continued segregation instead of the bend toward integration we saw in this country during Ike's, JFK's and Lyndon's Administrations, sending Arab children into Jewish schools would be a sequel to Daniel in the Lion's Den without the happy ending. It should also go without saying Arabs in Jewish schools would receive a skewed narrative of the history of Palestine and the conflict that has raged there since 650,000 Jews imposed an ethnocracy on 1.35 million Arabs in 1948.
> 
> 
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> Don't make is sound as if the Arab is some sort of righteous victim.  They are not.
> 
> Look at the odds.  You say it yourself.   2:1 in favor of the Arab, not counting the rest of the Arab League.  And the idea that "650,000 Jews imposed an ethnocracy on 1.35 million Arabs in 1948," is really absurd.  Look at the history.
> 
> But that is not the discussion.  The discussion is about how "very few Palestinian Arab parents" allow their children to go to better schools, and then cry "apartheid."  In this case, if there is a charge of "apartheid" to be made, surely it would be against the Arab who self-segregates.
> 
> Most Respectfully,
> R
Click to expand...


The question is not why the Palestinians don't send their children to the better Jewish schools.

It is why are the Jewish schools better?


----------



## RoccoR

P F Tinmore, georgephillip,  _et al,_

Yes, that was already asked and answered.



P F Tinmore said:


> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore, georgephillip,  _et al,_
> 
> All change requires courage and strength.
> 
> 
> 
> georgephillip said:
> 
> 
> 
> Racism in Israel - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
> "Israeli law does not prohibit Palestinian Arab parents from enrolling their children in Jewish schools, but in practice, very few Palestinian Arab parents do so.[24][26]"
> 
> Isn't it worth asking what treatment an Arab child would receive from his or her Jewish classmates? It seems to me the treatment would be similar to what Black students faced in white schools in Little Rock and Selma during the 1950s and '60s. Since the power of the Jewish state leans toward continued segregation instead of the bend toward integration we saw in this country during Ike's, JFK's and Lyndon's Administrations, sending Arab children into Jewish schools would be a sequel to Daniel in the Lion's Den without the happy ending. It should also go without saying Arabs in Jewish schools would receive a skewed narrative of the history of Palestine and the conflict that has raged there since 650,000 Jews imposed an ethnocracy on 1.35 million Arabs in 1948.
> 
> 
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> Don't make is sound as if the Arab is some sort of righteous victim.  They are not.
> 
> Look at the odds.  You say it yourself.   2:1 in favor of the Arab, not counting the rest of the Arab League.  And the idea that "650,000 Jews imposed an ethnocracy on 1.35 million Arabs in 1948," is really absurd.  Look at the history.
> 
> But that is not the discussion.  The discussion is about how "very few Palestinian Arab parents" allow their children to go to better schools, and then cry "apartheid."  In this case, if there is a charge of "apartheid" to be made, surely it would be against the Arab who self-segregates.
> 
> Most Respectfully,
> R
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> The question is not why the Palestinians don't send their children to the better Jewish schools.
> 
> It is why are the Jewish schools better?
Click to expand...

*(ANSWER)*

To attract and encourage integration.

Most Respectfully,
R


----------



## Hossfly

georgephillip said:


> ForeverYoung436 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> georgephillip said:
> 
> 
> 
> *Most countries weren't established as a Socialist enterprise; Israel was.
> Can we be sure schools there are funded from local property taxes?*
> 
> "A 2009 study from the Hebrew University's School of Education demonstrated that the Israeli Education Ministry's budget for special assistance to students from low socioeconomic backgrounds 'severely' discriminated against Arabs.
> 
> "The study found that because there were more needy Arab students, but fewer Arab students overall, educationally needy Jewish students receive anywhere from 3.8 to 6.9 times as much funding as equally needy Arab students.
> 
> "The Education Ministry said in response to the report that a decision has already been made to abandon this allocation method.[31]
> 
> "The Follow-Up Committee for Arab Education notes that the Israeli government spends an average of $192 per year on each Arab student compared to $1,100 per Jewish student.
> 
> "The drop-out rate for Arab citizens of Israel is twice as high as that of their Jewish counterparts (12 percent versus 6 percent). The same group also notes that there is a 5,000-classroom shortage in the Arab sector.[32][verification needed]
> 
> "A 2007 report of the UN Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination noted that separate sectors are maintained for Jewish and Arab education. It recommended that Israel should assess the extent to which maintenance of separate Arab and Jewish sectors '*may amount to racial segregation*', and that mixed Arab-Jewish communities and schools, and intercultural education should be promoted.[33]
> 
> "In a 2008 report, Israel responded that parents are entitled to enroll their children in the educational institution of their choice, whether the spoken language is Hebrew, Arabic or bilingual."
> 
> Racism in Israel - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 75 Christians massacred in Pakistan the other week, others in Nigeria and Kenya, and all you can do is pull up some old news about Israel from Wikipedia.  What's your beef with Jews?  I have my own theory.  Jews are not to blame for your predicament.  My dad came to this country penniless and without family after the Holocaust, but created his own wealth by the sweat of his brow.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I believe some of the violence in Pakistan, Nigeria, and Kenya stems from the same source as Israel, namely a western corporate caliphate spearheaded by the US government. Israel is the nuclear-armed archstone of that policy, and when it all blows up the spark will probably originate in Jerusalem.
Click to expand...

You really should be a little more subtle about your hatred of the Jews, Georgie Boy, instead of being so laughable  I am sure the Shiites in Pakistan would roll their eyes at your blaming the Jews and Jerusalem for the Sunnis always blowing them up, the Christians in Nigeria would shake their heads at your blaming the Jews and Jerusalem for their brethren having their throats slit and their churches blown up by the Boko Haram, and I think anyone with a head on their shoulder realizes that those Somali terrorists weren't happy that the Kenya Army was going after the other terrorists in Somali.  Hmmm, I wonder if there were no Jews and no Israel just whom would Georgie Boy find to blame because of the circumstances in his own life.  There always has to be a scapegoat for people like him.


----------



## Kondor3

georgephillip said:


> "..._Western Corporate Caliphate spearheaded by the US Governmen_t..." ????!!!!!


----------



## P F Tinmore

RoccoR said:


> P F Tinmore, georgephillip,  _et al,_
> 
> Yes, that was already asked and answered.
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore, georgephillip,  _et al,_
> 
> All change requires courage and strength.
> 
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> Don't make is sound as if the Arab is some sort of righteous victim.  They are not.
> 
> Look at the odds.  You say it yourself.   2:1 in favor of the Arab, not counting the rest of the Arab League.  And the idea that "650,000 Jews imposed an ethnocracy on 1.35 million Arabs in 1948," is really absurd.  Look at the history.
> 
> But that is not the discussion.  The discussion is about how "very few Palestinian Arab parents" allow their children to go to better schools, and then cry "apartheid."  In this case, if there is a charge of "apartheid" to be made, surely it would be against the Arab who self-segregates.
> 
> Most Respectfully,
> R
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The question is not why the Palestinians don't send their children to the better Jewish schools.
> 
> It is why are the Jewish schools better?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> *(ANSWER)*
> 
> To attract and encourage integration.
> 
> Most Respectfully,
> R
Click to expand...


I don't think so.


----------



## P F Tinmore

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XBrgw-IzLSc]Fadi Quran on the Growing Palestinian Nonviolent Resistance Movement & the Nakba Day Protests - YouTube[/ame]


----------



## RoccoR

P F Tinmore.  _et al,_

While the video mentions the "Apartheid Wall," we know that has little basis in fact and is purely propaganda.



P F Tinmore said:


> VIDEO:  Fadi Quran on the Growing Palestinian Nonviolent Resistance Movement & the Nakba Day Protests


*(COMMENT)*

While I like the Idea of a "non-violent" protest, I have severe reservations that people like Fadi Quran have any legitimate claim to enter Israel.  

Most Respectfully,
R


----------



## georgephillip

RoccoR said:


> P F Tinmore, georgephillip,  _et al,_
> 
> All change requires courage and strength.
> 
> 
> 
> georgephillip said:
> 
> 
> 
> Racism in Israel - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
> "Israeli law does not prohibit Palestinian Arab parents from enrolling their children in Jewish schools, but in practice, very few Palestinian Arab parents do so.[24][26]"
> 
> Isn't it worth asking what treatment an Arab child would receive from his or her Jewish classmates? It seems to me the treatment would be similar to what Black students faced in white schools in Little Rock and Selma during the 1950s and '60s. Since the power of the Jewish state leans toward continued segregation instead of the bend toward integration we saw in this country during Ike's, JFK's and Lyndon's Administrations, sending Arab children into Jewish schools would be a sequel to Daniel in the Lion's Den without the happy ending. It should also go without saying Arabs in Jewish schools would receive a skewed narrative of the history of Palestine and the conflict that has raged there since 650,000 Jews imposed an ethnocracy on 1.35 million Arabs in 1948.
> 
> 
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> Don't make is sound as if the Arab is some sort of righteous victim.  They are not.
> 
> Look at the odds.  You say it yourself.   2:1 in favor of the Arab, not counting the rest of the Arab League.  And the idea that "650,000 Jews imposed an ethnocracy on 1.35 million Arabs in 1948," is really absurd.  Look at the history.
> 
> But that is not the discussion.  The discussion is about how "very few Palestinian Arab parents" allow their children to go to better schools, and then cry "apartheid."  In this case, if there is a charge of "apartheid" to be made, surely it would be against the Arab who self-segregates.
> 
> Most Respectfully,
> R
Click to expand...

What price do those "very few Palestinian Arab parents" pay to allow their children to attend "better schools?" Instruction in Hebrew only? History classes that deny al-Nakba? Since it wasn't Arabs placing Jews in barb-wire encircled camps during Israel's first decade of existence, it's hard to see any self-segregation on the part of Zionism's victims.


----------



## Hossfly

georgephillip said:


> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore, georgephillip,  _et al,_
> 
> All change requires courage and strength.
> 
> 
> 
> georgephillip said:
> 
> 
> 
> Racism in Israel - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
> "Israeli law does not prohibit Palestinian Arab parents from enrolling their children in Jewish schools, but in practice, very few Palestinian Arab parents do so.[24][26]"
> 
> Isn't it worth asking what treatment an Arab child would receive from his or her Jewish classmates? It seems to me the treatment would be similar to what Black students faced in white schools in Little Rock and Selma during the 1950s and '60s. Since the power of the Jewish state leans toward continued segregation instead of the bend toward integration we saw in this country during Ike's, JFK's and Lyndon's Administrations, sending Arab children into Jewish schools would be a sequel to Daniel in the Lion's Den without the happy ending. It should also go without saying Arabs in Jewish schools would receive a skewed narrative of the history of Palestine and the conflict that has raged there since 650,000 Jews imposed an ethnocracy on 1.35 million Arabs in 1948.
> 
> 
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> Don't make is sound as if the Arab is some sort of righteous victim.  They are not.
> 
> Look at the odds.  You say it yourself.   2:1 in favor of the Arab, not counting the rest of the Arab League.  And the idea that "650,000 Jews imposed an ethnocracy on 1.35 million Arabs in 1948," is really absurd.  Look at the history.
> 
> But that is not the discussion.  The discussion is about how "very few Palestinian Arab parents" allow their children to go to better schools, and then cry "apartheid."  In this case, if there is a charge of "apartheid" to be made, surely it would be against the Arab who self-segregates.
> 
> Most Respectfully,
> R
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> What price do those "very few Palestinian Arab parents" pay to allow their children to attend "better schools?" Instruction in Hebrew only? History classes that deny al-Nakba? Since it wasn't Arabs placing Jews in barb-wire encircled camps during Israel's first decade of existence, it's hard to see any self-segregation on the part of Zionism's victims.
Click to expand...

Does anyone really think that Georgie Boy spends any of his time on civil rights for any minority in America, whether this minority is comprised of Blacks, Hispanics, Asians, etc.  He just used the Arabs as pawns as he blabber away about what he thinks are their terrible conditions.  So tell us, Georgie Boy, since you live in an area which is comprised mainly of El Salvadorans and Guatemalans and you are an English speaking person and one who probably graduated high school unless you dropped out, do you ever volunteer to help your neighbors' children since your neighbors are deficient in English and probably never had the chance to go to high school themselves, possibly not even past the 4th grade in their home country..  Tell us about all the good things you are doing for these Hispanic children to help them since their parents are unable to.  Here is a Jewish group which started a program, and they are looking for volunteers.  Are you up to it, Georgie Boy, or are you more comfortable just sitting in front of your computer dissing Israel?

KOREH L.A. Volunteer Reading Memories | KOREH L.A.


----------



## georgephillip

Hossfly said:


> georgephillip said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore, georgephillip,  _et al,_
> 
> All change requires courage and strength.
> 
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> Don't make is sound as if the Arab is some sort of righteous victim.  They are not.
> 
> Look at the odds.  You say it yourself.   2:1 in favor of the Arab, not counting the rest of the Arab League.  And the idea that "650,000 Jews imposed an ethnocracy on 1.35 million Arabs in 1948," is really absurd.  Look at the history.
> 
> But that is not the discussion.  The discussion is about how "very few Palestinian Arab parents" allow their children to go to better schools, and then cry "apartheid."  In this case, if there is a charge of "apartheid" to be made, surely it would be against the Arab who self-segregates.
> 
> Most Respectfully,
> R
> 
> 
> 
> What price do those "very few Palestinian Arab parents" pay to allow their children to attend "better schools?" Instruction in Hebrew only? History classes that deny al-Nakba? Since it wasn't Arabs placing Jews in barb-wire encircled camps during Israel's first decade of existence, it's hard to see any self-segregation on the part of Zionism's victims.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Does anyone really think that Georgie Boy spends any of his time on civil rights for any minority in America, whether this minority is comprised of Blacks, Hispanics, Asians, etc.  He just used the Arabs as pawns as he blabber away about what he thinks are their terrible conditions.  So tell us, Georgie Boy, since you live in an area which is comprised mainly of El Salvadorans and Guatemalans and you are an English speaking person and one who probably graduated high school unless you dropped out, do you ever volunteer to help your neighbors' children since your neighbors are deficient in English and probably never had the chance to go to high school themselves, possibly not even past the 4th grade in their home country..  Tell us about all the good things you are doing for these Hispanic children to help them since their parents are unable to.  Here is a Jewish group which started a program, and they are looking for volunteers.  Are you up to it, Georgie Boy, or are you more comfortable just sitting in front of your computer dissing Israel?
> 
> KOREH L.A. Volunteer Reading Memories | KOREH L.A.
Click to expand...

*Tell me how many hours every week you volunteer, Hossie.*

"When the children of south Tel Aviv head back to school on Tuesday, kindergarteners will attend facilities that are segregated by race. The children of asylum seekers from sub-Saharan Africa will go to their kindergartens and all the other kids will go to their own. As of this year, the municipality of Israel's most liberal city decided that separate-but-equal for three-to-six year olds was the way to go&#8212;in 2013.

"According to a report published by Ynet (Hebrew edition), the city built the new preschools for black children after Jewish-Israeli residents of the inner city area threatened to keep their children at home rather than allow them to learn how to count, fingerpaint and play on the swings alongside their peers from Eritrea and Sudan."

*Did you attend a segregated kindergarden?*

http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2013/08/23/the-banality-of-racism-in-israel-s-most-liberal-city.html


----------



## Hossfly

georgephillip said:


> Hossfly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> georgephillip said:
> 
> 
> 
> What price do those "very few Palestinian Arab parents" pay to allow their children to attend "better schools?" Instruction in Hebrew only? History classes that deny al-Nakba? Since it wasn't Arabs placing Jews in barb-wire encircled camps during Israel's first decade of existence, it's hard to see any self-segregation on the part of Zionism's victims.
> 
> 
> 
> Does anyone really think that Georgie Boy spends any of his time on civil rights for any minority in America, whether this minority is comprised of Blacks, Hispanics, Asians, etc.  He just used the Arabs as pawns as he blabber away about what he thinks are their terrible conditions.  So tell us, Georgie Boy, since you live in an area which is comprised mainly of El Salvadorans and Guatemalans and you are an English speaking person and one who probably graduated high school unless you dropped out, do you ever volunteer to help your neighbors' children since your neighbors are deficient in English and probably never had the chance to go to high school themselves, possibly not even past the 4th grade in their home country..  Tell us about all the good things you are doing for these Hispanic children to help them since their parents are unable to.  Here is a Jewish group which started a program, and they are looking for volunteers.  Are you up to it, Georgie Boy, or are you more comfortable just sitting in front of your computer dissing Israel?
> 
> KOREH L.A. Volunteer Reading Memories | KOREH L.A.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> *Tell me how many hours every week you volunteer, Hossie.*
> 
> "When the children of south Tel Aviv head back to school on Tuesday, kindergarteners will attend facilities that are segregated by race. The children of asylum seekers from sub-Saharan Africa will go to their kindergartens and all the other kids will go to their own. As of this year, the municipality of Israel's most liberal city decided that separate-but-equal for three-to-six year olds was the way to go&#8212;in 2013.
> 
> "According to a report published by Ynet (Hebrew edition), the city built the new preschools for black children after Jewish-Israeli residents of the inner city area threatened to keep their children at home rather than allow them to learn how to count, fingerpaint and play on the swings alongside their peers from Eritrea and Sudan."
> 
> *Did you attend a segregated kindergarden?*
> 
> Israel's Most Liberal City Introduces Racially Segregated Kindergartens - The Daily Beast
Click to expand...

Everything was segregated when I was a kid George. I didn't abide by the fact but that was life up until 1965. Things have changed so what's the issue?


----------



## RoccoR

P F Tinmore, georgephillip,  _et al,_

This is a legacy concept you have put forth here.  You are promoting a common theme in HAMAS Jihadism.



georgephillip said:


> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore, georgephillip,  _et al,_
> 
> All change requires courage and strength.
> 
> 
> 
> georgephillip said:
> 
> 
> 
> Racism in Israel - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
> "Israeli law does not prohibit Palestinian Arab parents from enrolling their children in Jewish schools, but in practice, very few Palestinian Arab parents do so.[24][26]"
> 
> Isn't it worth asking what treatment an Arab child would receive from his or her Jewish classmates? It seems to me the treatment would be similar to what Black students faced in white schools in Little Rock and Selma during the 1950s and '60s. Since the power of the Jewish state leans toward continued segregation instead of the bend toward integration we saw in this country during Ike's, JFK's and Lyndon's Administrations, sending Arab children into Jewish schools would be a sequel to Daniel in the Lion's Den without the happy ending. It should also go without saying Arabs in Jewish schools would receive a skewed narrative of the history of Palestine and the conflict that has raged there since 650,000 Jews imposed an ethnocracy on 1.35 million Arabs in 1948.
> 
> 
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> Don't make is sound as if the Arab is some sort of righteous victim.  They are not.
> 
> Look at the odds.  You say it yourself.   2:1 in favor of the Arab, not counting the rest of the Arab League.  And the idea that "650,000 Jews imposed an ethnocracy on 1.35 million Arabs in 1948," is really absurd.  Look at the history.
> 
> But that is not the discussion.  The discussion is about how "very few Palestinian Arab parents" allow their children to go to better schools, and then cry "apartheid."  In this case, if there is a charge of "apartheid" to be made, surely it would be against the Arab who self-segregates.
> 
> Most Respectfully,
> R
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> What price do those "very few Palestinian Arab parents" pay to allow their children to attend "better schools?" Instruction in Hebrew only? History classes that deny al-Nakba? Since it wasn't Arabs placing Jews in barb-wire encircled camps during Israel's first decade of existence, it's hard to see any self-segregation on the part of Zionism's victims.
Click to expand...

*(COMMENT)*

Today, you are an advocate of Article 15 Jihadist ideology.



			
				Article 15 HAMAS Covenant said:
			
		

> The day that enemies usurp part of Moslem land, Jihad becomes the individual duty of every Moslem. In face of the Jews' usurpation of Palestine, it is compulsory that the banner of Jihad be raised. To do this requires the diffusion of Islamic consciousness among the masses, both on the regional, Arab and Islamic levels. It is necessary to instill the spirit of Jihad in the heart of the nation so that they would confront the enemies and join the ranks of the fighters.
> 
> It is necessary that scientists, educators and teachers, information and media people, as well as the educated masses, especially the youth and sheikhs of the Islamic movements, should take part in the operation of awakening (the masses). It is important that basic changes be made in the school curriculum, to cleanse it of the traces of ideological invasion that affected it as a result of the orientalists and missionaries who infiltrated the region following the defeat of the Crusaders at the hands of Salah el-Din (Saladin). The Crusaders realised that it was impossible to defeat the Moslems without first having ideological invasion pave the way by upsetting their thoughts, disfiguring their heritage and violating their ideals. Only then could they invade with soldiers. This, in its turn, paved the way for the imperialistic invasion that made Allenby declare on entering Jerusalem: "Only now have the Crusades ended." General Guru stood at Salah el-Din's grave and said: "We have returned, O Salah el-Din." Imperialism has helped towards the strengthening of ideological invasion, deepening, and still does, its roots. All this has paved the way towards the loss of Palestine.
> 
> It is necessary to instill in the minds of the Moslem generations that the Palestinian problem is a religious problem, and should be dealt with on this basis. Palestine contains Islamic holy sites. In it there is al- Aqsa Mosque which is bound to the great Mosque in Mecca in an inseparable bond as long as heaven and earth speak of Isra` (Mohammed's midnight journey to the seven heavens) and Mi'raj (Mohammed's ascension to the seven heavens from Jerusalem).
> 
> *SOURCE:* The Jihad for the Liberation of Palestine is an Individual Duty



Your complaint and justification for perpetuating a segregated school systems is so that the Palestinian can further the continuation of the pre-Israeli Independence solemn Jihadist oath.



			
				II.	THE SECURITY SITUATION IN PALESTINE TODAY  First Special Report to the Security Council:  The Problem of Security in Palestine said:
			
		

> 6.	The Secretary-General has been informed by the Arab Higher Committee that is determined to persist in its rejection of the partition plan and in its refusal to recognize the resolution of the Assembly and anything deriving therefrom. The Subsequent communication of 6 February to the Secretary-General from the representative of the Arab Higher Committee set forth the following conclusions of the Arab Higher Committee Delegation:
> 
> a. The Arabs of Palestine will never recognize the validity of the extorted partition recommendations or the authority of the United Nations to make them.
> 
> b. The Arabs of Palestine consider that any attempt by the Jews or any power or group of powers to establish a Jewish State in Arab territory is an act of aggression which will be resisted in self-defense by force.
> 
> c.	It is very unwise and fruitless to ask any commission to proceed to Palestine because not a single Arab will cooperate with the said commission.
> 
> d.	The United Nations or its commission should not be misled to believe that its efforts in the partition plan will meet with any success. It will be far better for the eclipsed prestige of this organization not to start on this adventure.
> 
> e.	The United Nations prestige will be better served by abandoning, not enforcing such an injustice.
> 
> f.	The determination of every Arab in Palestine is to oppose in every way the partition of that country.
> 
> g.	The Arabs of Palestine made a solemn declaration before the United Nations, before God and history, that they will never submit or yield to any power going to Palestine to enforce partition.
> 
> _The only way to establish partition is first to wipe them out  man women and child."_​
> *SOURCE:* A/AC.21/9  S/676  16 February 1948



This is not Israeli Apartheid; but the reverse.   It is "Arab Palestinian Apartheid."  Remember, there is no objection to Arab Israeli children attending the Jewish Schools by the Israelis.  It is the Arab that wants it own schools for the purpose of meeting Jihadist goals.

Most Respectfully,
R


----------



## P F Tinmore

RoccoR said:


> P F Tinmore, georgephillip,  _et al,_
> 
> This is a legacy concept you have put forth here.  You are promoting a common theme in HAMAS Jihadism.
> 
> 
> 
> georgephillip said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore, georgephillip,  _et al,_
> 
> All change requires courage and strength.
> 
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> Don't make is sound as if the Arab is some sort of righteous victim.  They are not.
> 
> Look at the odds.  You say it yourself.   2:1 in favor of the Arab, not counting the rest of the Arab League.  And the idea that "650,000 Jews imposed an ethnocracy on 1.35 million Arabs in 1948," is really absurd.  Look at the history.
> 
> But that is not the discussion.  The discussion is about how "very few Palestinian Arab parents" allow their children to go to better schools, and then cry "apartheid."  In this case, if there is a charge of "apartheid" to be made, surely it would be against the Arab who self-segregates.
> 
> Most Respectfully,
> R
> 
> 
> 
> What price do those "very few Palestinian Arab parents" pay to allow their children to attend "better schools?" Instruction in Hebrew only? History classes that deny al-Nakba? Since it wasn't Arabs placing Jews in barb-wire encircled camps during Israel's first decade of existence, it's hard to see any self-segregation on the part of Zionism's victims.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> Today, you are an advocate of Article 15 Jihadist ideology.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Article 15 HAMAS Covenant said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The day that enemies usurp part of Moslem land, Jihad becomes the individual duty of every Moslem. In face of the Jews' usurpation of Palestine, it is compulsory that the banner of Jihad be raised. To do this requires the diffusion of Islamic consciousness among the masses, both on the regional, Arab and Islamic levels. It is necessary to instill the spirit of Jihad in the heart of the nation so that they would confront the enemies and join the ranks of the fighters.
> 
> It is necessary that scientists, educators and teachers, information and media people, as well as the educated masses, especially the youth and sheikhs of the Islamic movements, should take part in the operation of awakening (the masses). It is important that basic changes be made in the school curriculum, to cleanse it of the traces of ideological invasion that affected it as a result of the orientalists and missionaries who infiltrated the region following the defeat of the Crusaders at the hands of Salah el-Din (Saladin). The Crusaders realised that it was impossible to defeat the Moslems without first having ideological invasion pave the way by upsetting their thoughts, disfiguring their heritage and violating their ideals. Only then could they invade with soldiers. This, in its turn, paved the way for the imperialistic invasion that made Allenby declare on entering Jerusalem: "Only now have the Crusades ended." General Guru stood at Salah el-Din's grave and said: "We have returned, O Salah el-Din." Imperialism has helped towards the strengthening of ideological invasion, deepening, and still does, its roots. All this has paved the way towards the loss of Palestine.
> 
> It is necessary to instill in the minds of the Moslem generations that the Palestinian problem is a religious problem, and should be dealt with on this basis. Palestine contains Islamic holy sites. In it there is al- Aqsa Mosque which is bound to the great Mosque in Mecca in an inseparable bond as long as heaven and earth speak of Isra` (Mohammed's midnight journey to the seven heavens) and Mi'raj (Mohammed's ascension to the seven heavens from Jerusalem).
> 
> *SOURCE:* The Jihad for the Liberation of Palestine is an Individual Duty
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Your complaint and justification for perpetuating a segregated school systems is so that the Palestinian can further the continuation of the pre-Israeli Independence solemn Jihadist oath.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> II.	THE SECURITY SITUATION IN PALESTINE TODAY  First Special Report to the Security Council:  The Problem of Security in Palestine said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 6.	The Secretary-General has been informed by the Arab Higher Committee that is determined to persist in its rejection of the partition plan and in its refusal to recognize the resolution of the Assembly and anything deriving therefrom. The Subsequent communication of 6 February to the Secretary-General from the representative of the Arab Higher Committee set forth the following conclusions of the Arab Higher Committee Delegation:
> 
> a. The Arabs of Palestine will never recognize the validity of the extorted partition recommendations or the authority of the United Nations to make them.
> 
> b. The Arabs of Palestine consider that any attempt by the Jews or any power or group of powers to establish a Jewish State in Arab territory is an act of aggression which will be resisted in self-defense by force.
> 
> c.	It is very unwise and fruitless to ask any commission to proceed to Palestine because not a single Arab will cooperate with the said commission.
> 
> d.	The United Nations or its commission should not be misled to believe that its efforts in the partition plan will meet with any success. It will be far better for the eclipsed prestige of this organization not to start on this adventure.
> 
> e.	The United Nations prestige will be better served by abandoning, not enforcing such an injustice.
> 
> f.	The determination of every Arab in Palestine is to oppose in every way the partition of that country.
> 
> g.	The Arabs of Palestine made a solemn declaration before the United Nations, before God and history, that they will never submit or yield to any power going to Palestine to enforce partition.
> 
> _The only way to establish partition is first to wipe them out  man women and child."_​
> *SOURCE:* A/AC.21/9  S/676  16 February 1948
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> This is not Israeli Apartheid; but the reverse.   It is "Arab Palestinian Apartheid."  Remember, there is no objection to Arab Israeli children attending the Jewish Schools by the Israelis.  It is the Arab that wants it own schools for the purpose of meeting Jihadist goals.
> 
> Most Respectfully,
> R
Click to expand...


I don't see how you draw your conclusion from the links you posted.


----------



## RoccoR

P F Tinmore, georgephillip,  _et al,_

In nearly every other culture, the dispute was between the the forces of segregation and the forces of desegregation.  Even in segregation era of the US, the clash was about  ending state and local laws requiring segregation.  On 10 September 1963, twenty black students entered previously all white public schools in Birmingham, Mobile and Tuskegee Alabama.



P F Tinmore said:


> I don't see how you draw your conclusion from the links you posted.


*(COMMENT)*

In Israel, it is the opposite.  The argument is maintaining a segregated system.  The Arab citizenship wants a separate school system in order to meet Article 15 objectives and to use it as an tool to promote the propaganda concept that it is a form of Israeli "Apartheid." 

The Arab is doing the exact opposite of attempting to secure "desegregation."  It wants segregation in order to build the next generation of Jihadist.  

Most Respectfully,
R


----------



## P F Tinmore

RoccoR said:


> P F Tinmore, georgephillip,  _et al,_
> 
> In nearly every other culture, the dispute was between the the forces of segregation and the forces of desegregation.  Even in segregation era of the US, the clash was about  ending state and local laws requiring segregation.  On 10 September 1963, twenty black students entered previously all white public schools in Birmingham, Mobile and Tuskegee Alabama.
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> I don't see how you draw your conclusion from the links you posted.
> 
> 
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> In Israel, it is the opposite.  The argument is maintaining a segregated system.  The Arab citizenship wants a separate school system in order to meet Article 15 objectives and to use it as an tool to promote the propaganda concept that it is a form of Israeli "Apartheid."
> 
> The Arab is doing the exact opposite of attempting to secure "desegregation."  It wants segregation in order to build the next generation of Jihadist.
> 
> Most Respectfully,
> R
Click to expand...


How many Palestinians in Israel are members of Hamas?

What about the Christians?


----------



## RoccoR

P F Tinmore, georgephillip,  _et al,_

You don't have to be HAMAS or a Jihadist, or even the Feday'een of the Palestinian Liberation Organization to support the tenants of the furthering segregation.



P F Tinmore said:


> How many Palestinians in Israel are members of Hamas?
> 
> What about the Christians?


*(COMMENT)*

Wrong questions!  They should be:

How many Arabs are promoting desegregation?
How many Christians are promoting desegregation?

Remember, it is the side that is promoting segregation that is demonstrating "apartheid" leanings.

As our friend "georgephilips" said in his earlier Posting (#1628):  "Israeli law does not prohibit Palestinian Arab parents from enrolling their children in Jewish schools, but in practice, very few Palestinian Arab parents do so."

That means "most" Palestinian Arab parents oppose desegregation by NOT "enrolling their children in Jewish schools."

Most Respectfully,
R


----------



## Hossfly

P F Tinmore said:


> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore, georgephillip,  _et al,_
> 
> In nearly every other culture, the dispute was between the the forces of segregation and the forces of desegregation.  Even in segregation era of the US, the clash was about  ending state and local laws requiring segregation.  On 10 September 1963, twenty black students entered previously all white public schools in Birmingham, Mobile and Tuskegee Alabama.
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> I don't see how you draw your conclusion from the links you posted.
> 
> 
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> In Israel, it is the opposite.  The argument is maintaining a segregated system.  The Arab citizenship wants a separate school system in order to meet Article 15 objectives and to use it as an tool to promote the propaganda concept that it is a form of Israeli "Apartheid."
> 
> The Arab is doing the exact opposite of attempting to secure "desegregation."  It wants segregation in order to build the next generation of Jihadist.
> 
> Most Respectfully,
> R
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> How many Palestinians in Israel are members of Hamas?
> 
> What about the Christians?
Click to expand...

My prayer for today;

O Lord, please end the eternal misery and suffering of Your children and give Tinmore some common sense!


----------



## P F Tinmore

RoccoR said:


> P F Tinmore, georgephillip,  _et al,_
> 
> You don't have to be HAMAS or a Jihadist, or even the Feday'een of the Palestinian Liberation Organization to support the tenants of the furthering segregation.
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> How many Palestinians in Israel are members of Hamas?
> 
> What about the Christians?
> 
> 
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> Wrong questions!  They should be:
> 
> How many Arabs are promoting desegregation?
> How many Christians are promoting desegregation?
> 
> Remember, it is the side that is promoting segregation that is demonstrating "apartheid" leanings.
> 
> As our friend "georgephilips" said in his earlier Posting (#1628):  "Israeli law does not prohibit Palestinian Arab parents from enrolling their children in Jewish schools, but in practice, very few Palestinian Arab parents do so."
> 
> That means "most" Palestinian Arab parents oppose desegregation by NOT "enrolling their children in Jewish schools."
> 
> Most Respectfully,
> R
Click to expand...


You are still ducking the question.

Why are the "Arab" schools inferior?


----------



## Hossfly

P F Tinmore said:


> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore, georgephillip,  _et al,_
> 
> You don't have to be HAMAS or a Jihadist, or even the Feday'een of the Palestinian Liberation Organization to support the tenants of the furthering segregation.
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> How many Palestinians in Israel are members of Hamas?
> 
> What about the Christians?
> 
> 
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> Wrong questions!  They should be:
> 
> How many Arabs are promoting desegregation?
> How many Christians are promoting desegregation?
> 
> Remember, it is the side that is promoting segregation that is demonstrating "apartheid" leanings.
> 
> As our friend "georgephilips" said in his earlier Posting (#1628):  "Israeli law does not prohibit Palestinian Arab parents from enrolling their children in Jewish schools, but in practice, very few Palestinian Arab parents do so."
> 
> That means "most" Palestinian Arab parents oppose desegregation by NOT "enrolling their children in Jewish schools."
> 
> Most Respectfully,
> R
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You are still ducking the question.
> 
> Why are the "Arab" schools inferior?
Click to expand...

Damn and double damn!! Looks like my prayer went into His spam folder.  Oh well.


----------



## docmauser1

georgephillip said:


> "When the children of south Tel Aviv head back to school on Tuesday, kindergarteners will attend facilities that are segregated by race. The children of asylum seekers from sub-Saharan Africa will go to their kindergartens and all the other kids will go to their own. As of this year, the municipality of Israel's most liberal city decided that separate-but-equal for three-to-six year olds was the way to goin 2013. "According to a report published by Ynet (Hebrew edition), the city built the new preschools for black children after Jewish-Israeli residents of the inner city area threatened to keep their children at home rather than allow them to learn how to count, fingerpaint and play on the swings alongside their peers from Eritrea and Sudan."


Cool, if the most liberal city decided so, then it's allright for "asylum-seekers" from Congo, Togo, Ghana, Nigeria, Sudan, Sierra Leone, etc. ..., whom the govt. of Egypt, which is supposed to pick the ball as first country of entrance, tosses over to jews, providing bedouin coytes with a living, to have brand-new facilities of their own. If our honorable georgephillip's having heart-bleeding fits, he's more than welcome to provide for welfare of those sub-saharan "mexicans", of course. That'll be fair.


----------



## georgephillip

Hossfly said:


> georgephillip said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Hossfly said:
> 
> 
> 
> Does anyone really think that Georgie Boy spends any of his time on civil rights for any minority in America, whether this minority is comprised of Blacks, Hispanics, Asians, etc.  He just used the Arabs as pawns as he blabber away about what he thinks are their terrible conditions.  So tell us, Georgie Boy, since you live in an area which is comprised mainly of El Salvadorans and Guatemalans and you are an English speaking person and one who probably graduated high school unless you dropped out, do you ever volunteer to help your neighbors' children since your neighbors are deficient in English and probably never had the chance to go to high school themselves, possibly not even past the 4th grade in their home country..  Tell us about all the good things you are doing for these Hispanic children to help them since their parents are unable to.  Here is a Jewish group which started a program, and they are looking for volunteers.  Are you up to it, Georgie Boy, or are you more comfortable just sitting in front of your computer dissing Israel?
> 
> KOREH L.A. Volunteer Reading Memories | KOREH L.A.
> 
> 
> 
> *Tell me how many hours every week you volunteer, Hossie.*
> 
> "When the children of south Tel Aviv head back to school on Tuesday, kindergarteners will attend facilities that are segregated by race. The children of asylum seekers from sub-Saharan Africa will go to their kindergartens and all the other kids will go to their own. As of this year, the municipality of Israel's most liberal city decided that separate-but-equal for three-to-six year olds was the way to goin 2013.
> 
> "According to a report published by Ynet (Hebrew edition), the city built the new preschools for black children after Jewish-Israeli residents of the inner city area threatened to keep their children at home rather than allow them to learn how to count, fingerpaint and play on the swings alongside their peers from Eritrea and Sudan."
> 
> *Did you attend a segregated kindergarden?*
> 
> Israel's Most Liberal City Introduces Racially Segregated Kindergartens - The Daily Beast
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Everything was segregated when I was a kid George. I didn't abide by the fact but that was life up until 1965. Things have changed so what's the issue?
Click to expand...

*Possibly, the issue is how segregation seems to be making a comeback inside the Green Line?*

"Blumenthal explains how the occupation is moving back over the green line and how racism is a unifying force in Israeli society. Blumenthal says, 'I was most surprised at the banality of the racism and violence that I witnessed and how its so widely tolerated because its so common . . . And Im most surprised that this it hasnt made its way to the American public  thats why I set out to do this endeavour, this journalistic endeavor, to paint this intimate portrait of Israeli society for Americans who dont see what it really is.'

Blumenthal talks 'Goliath: Life and Loathing in Greater Israel' on Democracy Now!


----------



## Hossfly

georgephillip said:


> Hossfly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> georgephillip said:
> 
> 
> 
> *Tell me how many hours every week you volunteer, Hossie.*
> 
> "When the children of south Tel Aviv head back to school on Tuesday, kindergarteners will attend facilities that are segregated by race. The children of asylum seekers from sub-Saharan Africa will go to their kindergartens and all the other kids will go to their own. As of this year, the municipality of Israel's most liberal city decided that separate-but-equal for three-to-six year olds was the way to goin 2013.
> 
> "According to a report published by Ynet (Hebrew edition), the city built the new preschools for black children after Jewish-Israeli residents of the inner city area threatened to keep their children at home rather than allow them to learn how to count, fingerpaint and play on the swings alongside their peers from Eritrea and Sudan."
> 
> *Did you attend a segregated kindergarden?*
> 
> Israel's Most Liberal City Introduces Racially Segregated Kindergartens - The Daily Beast
> 
> 
> 
> Everything was segregated when I was a kid George. I didn't abide by the fact but that was life up until 1965. Things have changed so what's the issue?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> *Possibly, the issue is how segregation seems to be making a comeback inside the Green Line?*
> 
> "Blumenthal explains how the occupation is moving back over the green line and how racism is a unifying force in Israeli society. Blumenthal says, 'I was most surprised at the banality of the racism and violence that I witnessed and how its so widely tolerated because its so common . . . And Im most surprised that this it hasnt made its way to the American public  thats why I set out to do this endeavour, this journalistic endeavor, to paint this intimate portrait of Israeli society for Americans who dont see what it really is.'
> 
> Blumenthal talks 'Goliath: Life and Loathing in Greater Israel' on Democracy Now!
Click to expand...

Has anyone ever seen Georgie Boy bringing up actual segregation in the Muslim world?  It seems that he keeps his mouth zipped when it comes to his newest bestest friends in the whole wide world.  Why not tell us, Georgie Boy, why the Arabs prefer living in Israel and (if you research hard enough) would find that they prefer Israel's type of government over that in the Muslim world.  Speaking of the media in your article, Georgie Boy, do you really think the mainstream media here is telling its readers and viewers just how many Christians are being harassed and killed in the Muslim world.  After all, the majority of people living in this country happen to be Christians, and they have a right to hear what is happening to their fellow Christians.  It's a good thing that there are Christians like Raymond Ibrahim who collect data from around the Muslim world from various Christian organizations to at least apprise the people reading Internet sites just what is happening, or else everyone would be kept in the dark (not that you wouldn't be happy if this were so).


----------



## docmauser1

georgephillip said:


> Possibly, the issue is how segregation seems to be making a comeback inside the Green Line?


Possibly, the issue is unhealthy obsession with internet garbage collection and storage facilities, ie. dumpster-diving?


georgephillip said:


> "Blumenthal explains how the occupation is moving back over the green line and how racism is a unifying force in Israeli society. Blumenthal says, 'I was most surprised at the banality of the racism and violence that I witnessed and how its so widely tolerated because its so common . . . And Im most surprised that this it hasnt made its way to the American public  thats why I set out to do this endeavour, this journalistic endeavor, to paint this intimate portrait of Israeli society for Americans who dont see what it really is.'


Ah, "everyone-who-opposes-obama-is-a-racist" Blumenthal. Figures.


----------



## georgephillip

Hossfly said:


> georgephillip said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Hossfly said:
> 
> 
> 
> Everything was segregated when I was a kid George. I didn't abide by the fact but that was life up until 1965. Things have changed so what's the issue?
> 
> 
> 
> *Possibly, the issue is how segregation seems to be making a comeback inside the Green Line?*
> 
> "Blumenthal explains how the occupation is moving back over the green line and how racism is a unifying force in Israeli society. Blumenthal says, 'I was most surprised at the banality of the racism and violence that I witnessed and how its so widely tolerated because its so common . . . And Im most surprised that this it hasnt made its way to the American public  thats why I set out to do this endeavour, this journalistic endeavor, to paint this intimate portrait of Israeli society for Americans who dont see what it really is.'
> 
> Blumenthal talks 'Goliath: Life and Loathing in Greater Israel' on Democracy Now!
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Has anyone ever seen Georgie Boy bringing up actual segregation in the Muslim world?  It seems that he keeps his mouth zipped when it comes to his newest bestest friends in the whole wide world.  Why not tell us, Georgie Boy, why the Arabs prefer living in Israel and (if you research hard enough) would find that they prefer Israel's type of government over that in the Muslim world.  Speaking of the media in your article, Georgie Boy, do you really think the mainstream media here is telling its readers and viewers just how many Christians are being harassed and killed in the Muslim world.  After all, the majority of people living in this country happen to be Christians, and they have a right to hear what is happening to their fellow Christians.  It's a good thing that there are Christians like Raymond Ibrahim who collect data from around the Muslim world from various Christian organizations to at least apprise the people reading Internet sites just what is happening, or else everyone would be kept in the dark (not that you wouldn't be happy if this were so).
Click to expand...

I have noticed actual segregation in the Muslim world and wondered why US elites support such practices. Saudi Arabia and Bahrain come to mind immediately when I think of racist dictators who successive US administrations have propped up to the detriment of a majority of those who live there. While the Jewish state doesn't require a dictatorship to oppress its Arab population, it's becoming clear a majority of Jews living there would support policies of voluntary or forced transfer of all non-Jews living between the River and the sea. FWIW, I'm guessing arms $ales and oil $ales play a leading role in explaining why the "Land of the Free" supports racist, totalitarian governments from Jerusalem to Riyadh to Manama. What's your opinion?


----------



## georgephillip

docmauser1 said:


> georgephillip said:
> 
> 
> 
> Possibly, the issue is how segregation seems to be making a comeback inside the Green Line?
> 
> 
> 
> Possibly, the issue is unhealthy obsession with internet garbage collection and storage facilities, ie. dumpster-diving?
> 
> 
> georgephillip said:
> 
> 
> 
> "Blumenthal explains how the occupation is moving back over the green line and how racism is a unifying force in Israeli society. Blumenthal says, 'I was most surprised at the banality of the racism and violence that I witnessed and how its so widely tolerated because its so common . . . And Im most surprised that this it hasnt made its way to the American public  thats why I set out to do this endeavour, this journalistic endeavor, to paint this intimate portrait of Israeli society for Americans who dont see what it really is.'
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Ah, "everyone-who-opposes-obama-is-a-racist" Blumenthal. Figures.
Click to expand...

*Everyone who opposes Africans is a racist?*

"Fifty-two percent of Jewish Israelis identify with the statement by MK Miri Regev last month that African migrants are 'a cancer in the body' of the nation, and over a third condone anti-migrant violence, according to the Israel Democracy Institute (IDI) Peace Index for May 2012."

*"Us over here, them over there", Drivel?
When are you planning to annex 60% of the West Bank and give Jordanian citizenship to all the displaced Arabs?*

52% of Israeli Jews agree: African migrants are 'a cancer' | The Times of Israel


----------



## Hoffstra

Israel is similar to Apartheid, yes.


----------



## Hossfly

georgephillip said:


> Hossfly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> georgephillip said:
> 
> 
> 
> *Possibly, the issue is how segregation seems to be making a comeback inside the Green Line?*
> 
> "Blumenthal explains how the occupation is moving back over the green line and how racism is a unifying force in Israeli society. Blumenthal says, 'I was most surprised at the banality of the racism and violence that I witnessed and how its so widely tolerated because its so common . . . And Im most surprised that this it hasnt made its way to the American public  thats why I set out to do this endeavour, this journalistic endeavor, to paint this intimate portrait of Israeli society for Americans who dont see what it really is.'
> 
> Blumenthal talks 'Goliath: Life and Loathing in Greater Israel' on Democracy Now!
> 
> 
> 
> Has anyone ever seen Georgie Boy bringing up actual segregation in the Muslim world?  It seems that he keeps his mouth zipped when it comes to his newest bestest friends in the whole wide world.  Why not tell us, Georgie Boy, why the Arabs prefer living in Israel and (if you research hard enough) would find that they prefer Israel's type of government over that in the Muslim world.  Speaking of the media in your article, Georgie Boy, do you really think the mainstream media here is telling its readers and viewers just how many Christians are being harassed and killed in the Muslim world.  After all, the majority of people living in this country happen to be Christians, and they have a right to hear what is happening to their fellow Christians.  It's a good thing that there are Christians like Raymond Ibrahim who collect data from around the Muslim world from various Christian organizations to at least apprise the people reading Internet sites just what is happening, or else everyone would be kept in the dark (not that you wouldn't be happy if this were so).
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I have noticed actual segregation in the Muslim world and wondered why US elites support such practices. Saudi Arabia and Bahrain come to mind immediately when I think of racist dictators who successive US administrations have propped up to the detriment of a majority of those who live there. While the Jewish state doesn't require a dictatorship to oppress its Arab population, it's becoming clear a majority of Jews living there would support policies of voluntary or forced transfer of all non-Jews living between the River and the sea. FWIW, I'm guessing arms $ales and oil $ales play a leading role in explaining why the "Land of the Free" supports racist, totalitarian governments from Jerusalem to Riyadh to Manama. What's your opinion?
Click to expand...

But, Georgie Boy, there appears to be what you consider "racism" all over the Muslim world -- in rich and poor countries.  Do you really think the non Muslims or even Muslims who are not of the favored sects in these countries are treated fairly.  By the way, perhaps you should have gone to hear Miss Israel speak in your city, and you could have asked her about it.  Maybe you could even have asked her for a date.  You could have told her you are happy that you and yours don't have to ride in back of the bus anymore -- that you are free at last and can achieve whatever station in life  you desire if you put an effort into it.

Miss Israel ? aka ?Titi? ? takes a Los Angeles tour | Jewish Journal


----------



## Hossfly

georgephillip said:


> docmauser1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> georgephillip said:
> 
> 
> 
> Possibly, the issue is how segregation seems to be making a comeback inside the Green Line?
> 
> 
> 
> Possibly, the issue is unhealthy obsession with internet garbage collection and storage facilities, ie. dumpster-diving?
> 
> 
> georgephillip said:
> 
> 
> 
> "Blumenthal explains how the occupation is moving back over the green line and how racism is a unifying force in Israeli society. Blumenthal says, 'I was most surprised at the banality of the racism and violence that I witnessed and how its so widely tolerated because its so common . . . And Im most surprised that this it hasnt made its way to the American public  thats why I set out to do this endeavour, this journalistic endeavor, to paint this intimate portrait of Israeli society for Americans who dont see what it really is.'
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Ah, "everyone-who-opposes-obama-is-a-racist" Blumenthal. Figures.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> *Everyone who opposes Africans is a racist?*
> 
> "Fifty-two percent of Jewish Israelis identify with the statement by MK Miri Regev last month that African migrants are 'a cancer in the body' of the nation, and over a third condone anti-migrant violence, according to the Israel Democracy Institute (IDI) Peace Index for May 2012."
> 
> *"Us over here, them over there", Drivel?
> When are you planning to annex 60% of the West Bank and give Jordanian citizenship to all the displaced Arabs?*
> 
> 52% of Israeli Jews agree: African migrants are 'a cancer' | The Times of Israel
Click to expand...

Why, Georgie Boy, do you think it might have something to di with the crimes that are being committed by these Africans?  It seems that a lot of Arabs might have been affected by the crimes since they too don't hold these Africans in high regard.  Meanwhile, can the viewers actually see Georgie Boy taking the time to drag up an article like this if it happened in some other Middle East countries?  The bottom line is that these Middle East countries would kick these Blacks out so fast that they wouldn't know what happened, unless they wanted to use the Blacks as slave labor.  What does Georgie Boy care that these Africans do not want to settle in Muslim countries, but instead many times are shot in the back by Egyptians trying to get into Israel?   You want to know something, Georgie Boy, since  you don't seem to be aware of what goes on in your own county a lot of the time?  At one time the Blacks and Whites lived in perfect harmony in the city of Carson.  Then after a while lower class Blacks started moving in and the crime rate jumped.  The Blacks who could afford it moved out to such places like Palos Verdes.  So, Georgie Boy, would you have a problem with Blacks complaining about other Blacks committing crimes that it got so bad they were forced to move out to safer places?


----------



## georgephillip

Hossfly said:


> georgephillip said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> docmauser1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Possibly, the issue is unhealthy obsession with internet garbage collection and storage facilities, ie. dumpster-diving?Ah, "everyone-who-opposes-obama-is-a-racist" Blumenthal. Figures.
> 
> 
> 
> *Everyone who opposes Africans is a racist?*
> 
> "Fifty-two percent of Jewish Israelis identify with the statement by MK Miri Regev last month that African migrants are 'a cancer in the body' of the nation, and over a third condone anti-migrant violence, according to the Israel Democracy Institute (IDI) Peace Index for May 2012."
> 
> *"Us over here, them over there", Drivel?
> When are you planning to annex 60% of the West Bank and give Jordanian citizenship to all the displaced Arabs?*
> 
> 52% of Israeli Jews agree: African migrants are 'a cancer' | The Times of Israel
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Why, Georgie Boy, do you think it might have something to di with the crimes that are being committed by these Africans?  It seems that a lot of Arabs might have been affected by the crimes since they too don't hold these Africans in high regard.  Meanwhile, can the viewers actually see Georgie Boy taking the time to drag up an article like this if it happened in some other Middle East countries?  The bottom line is that these Middle East countries would kick these Blacks out so fast that they wouldn't know what happened, unless they wanted to use the Blacks as slave labor.  What does Georgie Boy care that these Africans do not want to settle in Muslim countries, but instead many times are shot in the back by Egyptians trying to get into Israel?   You want to know something, Georgie Boy, since  you don't seem to be aware of what goes on in your own county a lot of the time?  At one time the Blacks and Whites lived in perfect harmony in the city of Carson.  Then after a while lower class Blacks started moving in and the crime rate jumped.  The Blacks who could afford it moved out to such places like Palos Verdes.  So, Georgie Boy, would you have a problem with Blacks complaining about other Blacks committing crimes that it got so bad they were forced to move out to safer places?
Click to expand...

*Arabs living in Israel are concerned with crimes committed by Africans, but not to the extent as religious Jews; maybe that should tell us something about colonialism?
*
"The degree of religiosity attested to by respondents also accounted for a large disparity in the findings, with 81.5% and 66% of self-described ultra-Orthodox and Orthodox, respectively, agreeing with Regevs statement, as opposed to 38% of secular Israelis.

"Only 19% of Arab respondents agreed that the migrants were 'a cancer.'

52% of Israeli Jews agree: African migrants are 'a cancer' | The Times of Israel

*The point Blumenthal makes in his book is that the younger generation of Israelis and their leaders believe the peace process has failed. One of their solutions is to annex 60% of the West Bank and give the Palestinians living there Jordanian citizenship. Should something like that occur, would you support the Jews (again)? *


----------



## Hossfly

georgephillip said:


> Hossfly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> georgephillip said:
> 
> 
> 
> *Everyone who opposes Africans is a racist?*
> 
> "Fifty-two percent of Jewish Israelis identify with the statement by MK Miri Regev last month that African migrants are 'a cancer in the body' of the nation, and over a third condone anti-migrant violence, according to the Israel Democracy Institute (IDI) Peace Index for May 2012."
> 
> *"Us over here, them over there", Drivel?
> When are you planning to annex 60% of the West Bank and give Jordanian citizenship to all the displaced Arabs?*
> 
> 52% of Israeli Jews agree: African migrants are 'a cancer' | The Times of Israel
> 
> 
> 
> Why, Georgie Boy, do you think it might have something to di with the crimes that are being committed by these Africans?  It seems that a lot of Arabs might have been affected by the crimes since they too don't hold these Africans in high regard.  Meanwhile, can the viewers actually see Georgie Boy taking the time to drag up an article like this if it happened in some other Middle East countries?  The bottom line is that these Middle East countries would kick these Blacks out so fast that they wouldn't know what happened, unless they wanted to use the Blacks as slave labor.  What does Georgie Boy care that these Africans do not want to settle in Muslim countries, but instead many times are shot in the back by Egyptians trying to get into Israel?   You want to know something, Georgie Boy, since  you don't seem to be aware of what goes on in your own county a lot of the time?  At one time the Blacks and Whites lived in perfect harmony in the city of Carson.  Then after a while lower class Blacks started moving in and the crime rate jumped.  The Blacks who could afford it moved out to such places like Palos Verdes.  So, Georgie Boy, would you have a problem with Blacks complaining about other Blacks committing crimes that it got so bad they were forced to move out to safer places?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> *Arabs living in Israel are concerned with crimes committed by Africans, but not to the extent as religious Jews; maybe that should tell us something about colonialism?
> *
> "The degree of religiosity attested to by respondents also accounted for a large disparity in the findings, with 81.5% and 66% of self-described ultra-Orthodox and Orthodox, respectively, agreeing with Regevs statement, as opposed to 38% of secular Israelis.
> 
> "Only 19% of Arab respondents agreed that the migrants were 'a cancer.'
> 
> 52% of Israeli Jews agree: African migrants are 'a cancer' | The Times of Israel
> 
> *The point Blumenthal makes in his book is that the younger generation of Israelis and their leaders believe the peace process has failed. One of their solutions is to annex 60% of the West Bank and give the Palestinians living there Jordanian citizenship. Should something like that occur, would you support the Jews (again)? *
Click to expand...

Have you ever thought, Georgie Boy, that people do live in different neighborhoods and might experience more crime than those who live elsewhere.  Do you really think the Black people living in Baldwin Hills would think highly of the Blacks who come up to their  houses and start committing crimes.  Why not find some Arabs in your own city and ask them if the people in the Arab countries they came from would appreciate those coming in, whether legally or illegally, and start committing crimes.  No doubt some of them would tell you that if Blacks came into their country and committed a crime, their hands would be chopped off.  Weird how Georgie Boy is so obsessed with Israel and the Jews and doesn't appear to have any concern about the innocent people killed in the Muslim world.  Why are you so worried about whom I would support when you are so busy with your cut and paste jobs and don't even care what the Muslims are doing?   Amazing how people like Georgie Boy can even mention a peace process when the charters of Hamas and Fatah still call for the destruction of Israel   Maybe he thinks the destruction of Israel is part of a peace process.  The bottom line here is that even if Israel never existed, Georgie Boy would still find something on which to blame the Jews, and right now the Arabs are being used as pawns by him.  He would be digging around the bowels of the Internet to pull up every derogatory article he could find about the Jews so that he can cut and paste it.


----------



## georgephillip

Hoffstra said:


> Israel is similar to Apartheid, yes.


*Segregation is enforced in all the main spheres of Israeli life, including land allocation and housing, citizenship v nationality rights, education anHow Israeli Apartheid is Coming Unstuck » CounterPunch: Tells the Facts, Names the Namesd employment. And absolutely none of this was accidental or unintended. *

"To make sense of this, one has to understand how desperately Israel has sought to distinguish itself from apartheid South Africa.

"Israel cultivates, as South Africa once did, what scholars term 'grand apartheid'. This is segregation, largely covert and often often justified by security or cultural differences, to ensure that control of resources remains exclusively in the hands of the privileged community.

"At the same time, Israel long shied away from what some call South Africas model of 'petty apartheid'  the overt, symbolic, but far less significant segregation of park benches, buses and toilets.

"The avoidance of petty apartheid has been the key to Israels success in obscuring from the worlds view its grand apartheid, most obviously in the occupied territories but also inside Israel itself.

"This month South Africas departing ambassador to Israel, Ismail Coovadia, warned that Israel was a 'replication of apartheid'. 

"The idea that the world may soon wake up to this comparison deeply unnerves Netanyahu and the right, all the more so as they risk being identified as the party refusing to make concessions towards peace."


----------



## Kondor3

Well, when part of the population is linked to terrorism and suicide bombing and avalanches of indiscriminate rocket-launches directed against innocent civilians, you tend to wall-off and isolate the barbarians doing it. The alternative is to just go into the trouble-zones and kill everything that moves. Walling them off until they take the hint and leave is better than killing them. And keeping a very close eye and a firm hand upon those with blood-ties and cultural ties and religious ties to the barbarians also makes very good sense.


----------



## georgephillip

Kondor3 said:


> Well, when part of the population is linked to terrorism and suicide bombing and avalanches of indiscriminate rocket-launches directed against innocent civilians, you tend to wall-off and isolate the barbarians doing it. The alternative is to just go into the trouble-zones and kill everything that moves. Walling them off until they take the hint and leave is better than killing them. And keeping a very close eye and a firm hand upon those with blood-ties and cultural ties and religious ties to the barbarians also makes very good sense.


Well, when 650,000 mostly European migrants impose their nation on 1.35 million Arabs in Palestine of 1948, only self-destructive racists or amateurish apologists would confuse resistance with terrorism. Keep a close eye on rancid nationalist Jews who plan to annex 60% of the West Bank and transfer all Arabs living there to Jordan.


----------



## Hossfly

georgephillip said:


> Kondor3 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Well, when part of the population is linked to terrorism and suicide bombing and avalanches of indiscriminate rocket-launches directed against innocent civilians, you tend to wall-off and isolate the barbarians doing it. The alternative is to just go into the trouble-zones and kill everything that moves. Walling them off until they take the hint and leave is better than killing them. And keeping a very close eye and a firm hand upon those with blood-ties and cultural ties and religious ties to the barbarians also makes very good sense.
> 
> 
> 
> Well, when 650,000 mostly European migrants impose their nation on 1.35 million Arabs in Palestine of 1948, only self-destructive racists or amateurish apologists would confuse resistance with terrorism. Keep a close eye on rancid nationalist Jews who plan to annex 60% of the West Bank and transfer all Arabs living there to Jordan.
Click to expand...

Why don't the West Bankers wall off the Jews? Any reason why they don't?


----------



## Kondor3

georgephillip said:


> "...Well, when 650,000 mostly European migrants impose their nation on 1.35 million Arabs in Palestine of 1948..."


All true.

But this was decided in 1948.

And confirmed by astounding victories on the battlefield in 1967 and 1973.

They have won.

You have lost.

Old 'impositions' and old 'legal standings' don't mean a damned thing any longer.

And the longer you cling to such delusions, the longer it will take to snap out of it, face reality, and move someplace else, in order to begin a new and far happier and more prosperous life, for you and your family.

The Jews own the land now.

You forfeited the land through bad choices and losing several wars.

The world at-large has had quite enough of 'your' (the Palestinians) unrealistic and insane juvenile nonsense.

Go away.

Or die.

Your choice.

Either way... most of the rest of the world will not shed crocodile tears at your departure.


----------



## P F Tinmore

Kondor3 said:


> georgephillip said:
> 
> 
> 
> "...Well, when 650,000 mostly European migrants impose their nation on 1.35 million Arabs in Palestine of 1948..."
> 
> 
> 
> All true.
> 
> But this was decided in 1948.
> 
> And confirmed by astounding victories on the battlefield in 1967 and 1973.
> 
> They have won.
> 
> You have lost.
> 
> Old 'impositions' and old 'legal standings' don't mean a damned thing any longer.
> 
> And the longer you cling to such delusions, the longer it will take to snap out of it, face reality, and move someplace else, in order to begin a new and far happier and more prosperous life, for you and your family.
> 
> The Jews own the land now.
> 
> You forfeited the land through bad choices and losing several wars.
> 
> The world at-large has had quite enough of 'your' (the Palestinians) unrealistic and insane juvenile nonsense.
> 
> Go away.
> 
> Or die.
> 
> Your choice.
> 
> Either way... most of the rest of the world will not shed crocodile tears at your departure.
Click to expand...


There is no statute of limitation on Israel's crimes against the Palestinians.


----------



## Hossfly

georgephillip said:


> Hoffstra said:
> 
> 
> 
> Israel is similar to Apartheid, yes.
> 
> 
> 
> *Segregation is enforced in all the main spheres of Israeli life, including land allocation and housing, citizenship v nationality rights, education anHow Israeli Apartheid is Coming Unstuck » CounterPunch: Tells the Facts, Names the Namesd employment. And absolutely none of this was accidental or unintended. *
> 
> "To make sense of this, one has to understand how desperately Israel has sought to distinguish itself from apartheid South Africa.
> 
> "Israel cultivates, as South Africa once did, what scholars term 'grand apartheid'. This is segregation, largely covert and often often justified by security or cultural differences, to ensure that control of resources remains exclusively in the hands of the privileged community.
> 
> "At the same time, Israel long shied away from what some call South Africas model of 'petty apartheid'  the overt, symbolic, but far less significant segregation of park benches, buses and toilets.
> 
> "The avoidance of petty apartheid has been the key to Israels success in obscuring from the worlds view its grand apartheid, most obviously in the occupied territories but also inside Israel itself.
> 
> "This month South Africas departing ambassador to Israel, Ismail Coovadia, warned that Israel was a 'replication of apartheid'.
> 
> "The idea that the world may soon wake up to this comparison deeply unnerves Netanyahu and the right, all the more so as they risk being identified as the party refusing to make concessions towards peace."
Click to expand...

It looks like Georgie Boy can't get enough blabbering about this.  Tell you what, Georgie Boy.  Why not hop over there and start a campaign for Fair Housing Laws since now you are able to live wherever you want to in the Los Angeles area, not like it was previously.  Gee, years ago you couldn't even move to Inglewood.  As an aside, wouldn't it be hilarious watching Georgie Boy trying to convince the Muslim countries to treat those non Muslims and Muslims who are not of the favored sect more fairly.  Maybe Georgie Boy can start his campaign in Qatar and Bahrain.


----------



## Hoffstra

South Africa is a democracy.

Israel however, is a Jewish state.

which makes Israel much WORSE than South Africa.


----------



## georgephillip

Kondor3 said:


> georgephillip said:
> 
> 
> 
> "...Well, when 650,000 mostly European migrants impose their nation on 1.35 million Arabs in Palestine of 1948..."
> 
> 
> 
> All true.
> 
> But this was decided in 1948.
> 
> And confirmed by astounding victories on the battlefield in 1967 and 1973.
> 
> They have won.
> 
> You have lost.
> 
> Old 'impositions' and old 'legal standings' don't mean a damned thing any longer.
> 
> And the longer you cling to such delusions, the longer it will take to snap out of it, face reality, and move someplace else, in order to begin a new and far happier and more prosperous life, for you and your family.
> 
> The Jews own the land now.
> 
> You forfeited the land through bad choices and losing several wars.
> 
> The world at-large has had quite enough of 'your' (the Palestinians) unrealistic and insane juvenile nonsense.
> 
> Go away.
> 
> Or die.
> 
> Your choice.
> 
> Either way... most of the rest of the world will not shed crocodile tears at your departure.
Click to expand...

In fact, there are nearly equal numbers of Jews and Arabs living between the River and the sea in 2013. The world has lost its patience with arrogant fanatics in both camps who think they have the moral authority to decide the fates of millions of "the other." Any attempt by Jews to purge an equal number of Arabs from Filistan will prove at least as successful as the IDF's last foray into Lebanon in 2006. Not that amateur night keyboard commandoes will worry about old impositions or legalities, of which the Jews have none.


----------



## Hoffstra

Kondor3 said:


> georgephillip said:
> 
> 
> 
> "...Well, when 650,000 mostly European migrants impose their nation on 1.35 million Arabs in Palestine of 1948..."
> 
> 
> 
> All true.
> 
> But this was decided in 1948.
> 
> And confirmed by astounding victories on the battlefield in 1967 and 1973.
> 
> They have won.
> 
> You have lost.
> 
> Old 'impositions' and old 'legal standings' don't mean a damned thing any longer.
> 
> And the longer you cling to such delusions, the longer it will take to snap out of it, face reality, and move someplace else, in order to begin a new and far happier and more prosperous life, for you and your family.
> 
> The Jews own the land now...
Click to expand...


No, the Jews now own all STATE and PUBLIC land in Israel and the West Bank.

Private property STAYS private property.

And Israel has stolen lots of private property to build settlements.

That's why Israel is a state of thieves.


----------



## Kondor3

georgephillip said:


> ".._.In fact, there are nearly equal numbers of Jews and Arabs living between the River and the sea in 2013_..."


Doesn't matter. The Jews have 99.5% of the military muscle, which is all that counts in this context.



> "..._The world has lost its patience with arrogant fanatics in both camps_..."



There is some truth in this observation. Unfortunately for the Palestinian-Muslims, the world cannot do anything effective pertaining to such folk in the Israeli camp.



> "..._who think they have the moral authority to decide the fates of millions of 'the other'_..."



I don't believe that the Jews think they have the moral authority to decide the fate of millions.

To them, after the Holocaust, protecting their own, and their re-taken Homeland, is the highest moral imperative of all.

But they have the requisite military muscle, which, in the end, is what counts the most.



> "..._Any attempt by Jews to purge an equal number of Arabs from Filistan will prove at least as successful as the IDF's last foray into Lebanon in 2006_..."



If the Jews DO decide to start pushing-out the Arab-Muslims from the West Bank or Gaza, there are several ways to do it; ranging from the nasty to the downright sneaky and insidious, and, if they decide to ignore world opinion while they're doing it, there is nothing that you will be able to do to stop them from making a clean sweep. Nothing.



> "..._Not that amateur night keyboard commandoes will worry about old impositions or legalities_..."



Quite true.



> "..._of which the Jews have none._"



They no longer need any.

They have muscle.

Enough to kick your butt and all of your friends, put together.

You have no such asset.


----------



## Kondor3

Hoffstra said:


> "...Private property STAYS private property..."



Until the very moment that The State condemns that Private Property and waves a magic wand over it and - poof - it becomes Public Property.

You don't really think that such ethereal distinctions are actually a barrier, do you?

If you do, you're deluding yourself.



> "..._And Israel has stolen lots of private property to build settlements. That's why Israel is a state of thieves._"



Fun, ain't it?


----------



## Hoffstra

Kondor3 said:


> Fun, ain't it?



only if they enjoy being a nation of liars & thieves.

This is why Israelis are hated in nations all over the world where anti-Semitism has no roots.


----------



## georgephillip

Kondor3 said:


> georgephillip said:
> 
> 
> 
> ".._.In fact, there are nearly equal numbers of Jews and Arabs living between the River and the sea in 2013_..."
> 
> 
> 
> Doesn't matter. The Jews have 99.5% of the military muscle, which is all that counts in this context.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> "..._The world has lost its patience with arrogant fanatics in both camps_..."
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> There is some truth in this observation. Unfortunately for the Palestinian-Muslims, the world cannot do anything effective pertaining to such folk in the Israeli camp.
> 
> 
> 
> I don't believe that the Jews think they have the moral authority to decide the fate of millions.
> 
> But the have the requisite military muscle, which, in the end, is what counts the most.
> 
> 
> 
> If the Jews DO decide to start pushing-out the Arab-Muslims from the West Bank or Gaza, there are several ways to do it; ranging from the nasty to the downright sneaky and insidious, and, if they decide to ignore world opinion while they're doing it, there is nothing that you will be able to do to stop them from making a clean sweep. Nothing.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> "..._Not that amateur night keyboard commandoes will worry about old impositions or legalities_..."
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Quite true.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> "..._of which the Jews have none._"
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> They no longer need any.
> 
> They have muscle.
> 
> Enough to kick your butt and all of your friends, put together.
> 
> You have no such asset.
Click to expand...

What is it you imagine you have, other than a fertile imagination?


----------



## Kondor3

georgephillip said:


> "..._What is it you imagine you have, other than a fertile imagination?_"


What do I imagine that the Israelis have, to tip the scales in their favor, in the event of a Final Showdown, to avoid the West Bank or Gaza becoming another Lebanon 2006?

How about this?...






...or this?...






...or this?...






...or this?...






...or this?...






...or this?...






...or this?...






...or this?...






...or this?...






...or this?...






...all of which, when applied in a _Must-Win_ scenario, will sweep the field.

You have nothing comparable...

Not even close...

If the day comes, when the Israelis decide to flush The Crazies out of the West Bank and Gaza, they won't pussy-foot around like they did in Lebanon in 2006...

There will be absolutely nothing you can do to stop them...

Nothing...

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

Did I miss anything?


----------



## Kondor3

Hoffstra said:


> Kondor3 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Fun, ain't it?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _only if they enjoy being a nation of liars & thieves. This is why Israelis are hated in nations all over the world where anti-Semitism has no roots._
Click to expand...


Yes. Of course. Although I don't think they are overly-worried about such things. Better to be thought-of as thieves by one's adversaries than to be dead.


----------



## Hoffstra

Kondor3 said:


> georgephillip said:
> 
> 
> 
> "..._What is it you imagine you have, other than a fertile imagination?_"
> 
> 
> 
> What do I imagine that the Israelis have, to tip the scales in their favor, to avoid the West Bank or Gaza becoming another Lebanon 2006?
> 
> How about this?...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ...
Click to expand...


Israel doesn't control the USA anymore.

We have woken up to their deceit.


----------



## Kondor3

Hoffstra said:


> Kondor3 said:
> 
> 
> 
> "...How about this?...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> "_Israel doesn't control the USA anymore. We have woken up to their deceit._"
Click to expand...


Israel has never controlled the United States.

We chose Israel as a friend and ally.

Why?

We like them better than we like you.

Much better.

And after 9-11, it is highly unlikely that that will change anytime in the foreseeable future.

Present executive leadership notwithstanding.


----------



## georgephillip

Kondor3 said:


> georgephillip said:
> 
> 
> 
> "..._What is it you imagine you have, other than a fertile imagination?_"
> 
> 
> 
> What do I imagine that the Israelis have, to tip the scales in their favor, in the event of a Final Showdown, to avoid the West Bank or Gaza becoming another Lebanon 2006?
> 
> How about this?...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ...or this?...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ...or this?...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ...or this?...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ...or this?...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ...or this?...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ...or this?...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ...or this?...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ...or this?...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ...or this?...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ...all of which, when applied in a _Must-Win_ scenario, will sweep the field.
> 
> You have nothing comparable...
> 
> Not even close...
> 
> It the day comes, when the Israelis decide to flush The Crazies out of the West Bank and Gaza, they won't pussy-foot around like they did in Lebanon in 2006...
> 
> There will be absolutely nothing you can do to stop them...
> 
> Nothing...
> 
> ===================
> 
> Did I miss anything?
Click to expand...

Just my question.
What do you have beside a fertile imagination?
The US possesses powers of destruction orders of magnitude beyond that of Israel, yet all that firepower didn't prevent its heroes from getting their asses kicked out of Vietnam and Iraq. Even simplistic hasbara hacks should realize the economic sanctions Jews would face if they unleashed their arsenal on millions of indigenous Palestinians although killing all those women and children probably appeals to some kosher pussies and their limp-wrist apologists.


----------



## Kondor3

georgephillip said:


> Kondor3 said:
> 
> 
> 
> "...Did I miss anything?"
> 
> 
> 
> Just my question..."
Click to expand...

No, I nailed that one pretty well, I'd say. And, of course, you have nothing comparable to serve-up, other than pissant Hitler-ite militias and rocketry.



> "..._The US possesses powers of destruction orders of magnitude beyond that of Israel, yet all that firepower didn't prevent its heroes from getting their asses kicked out of Vietnam and Iraq_..."



We did not get kicked out of Vietnam. The nation was tired of a pointless war and we left. Our adversaries waited for two or more years after we left to make sure we weren't going to come back, before they made a move to finish off the other side in their civil war.

We did not get kicked out of Iraq. The nation was tired of a pointless war and we left. After toppling their government and trashing the place and rendering them harmless.



> "..._Even simplistic hasbara hacks should realize the economic sanctions Jews would face if they unleashed their arsenal on millions of indigenous Palestinians although killing all those women and children probably appeals to some kosher pussies and their limp-wrist apologists._"



The arsenal is there as Facilitating Muscle for any such Operation Clean Sweep, not Doomsday Muscle, and it keeps the neighbor barking-dog countries from interfering (not that they can do much anyway, nowadays).

If the Jews get serious about flushing the West Bank and Gaza, they don't need to kill those millions; only a few thousand of the more fanatical Militia types; the rest will fold quickly, and, the next thing you know, they're on the road, headed for Jordan or other destinations; all the brave and empty talk in the world to the contrary notwithstanding.

As to economic sanctions, the Jews need do no more than to claim it as Time-Delayed Payback for flushing the Jews out of several Muslim countries in the 1948-1975 timeframe, and thereby undercut much of the momentum for such sanctions.

With the US providing political cover and having their back, economically, the Israelis would ride-out that little mini-storm easily enough until the dust settles and things begin to get back to normal.

In truth, the world will be glad to see the back of The Palestinian Crazies as they're scattered between Jordan, Lebanon, Syria and other new homes for those unfortunate, irrational, savage folk.

The world will forget about them soon enough, so long as most of them survive The Flush; glad for an end to all the fuss; realizing that it ended the only way that it could have ended.

The Palestinian Crazies grow closer and closer to such an outcome with each passing year.


----------



## Hoffstra

Kondor3 said:


> ...If the Jews get serious about flushing the West Bank and Gaza, they don't need to kill those millions; only a few thousand of the more fanatical Militia types; the rest will fold quickly, and, the next thing you know, they're on the road, headed for Jordan or other destinations; all the brave and empty talk in the world to the contrary notwithstanding....



Its pretty anti-Semitic of you to suggest that Israel would act like the Nazis and Soviets did, committing ethnic cleansing against Gentiles.


----------



## Kondor3

Hoffstra said:


> "..._Its pretty anti-Semitic of you to suggest that Israel would act like the Nazis and Soviets did, committing ethnic cleansing against Gentiles._"


The Palestinians have sworn to drive the Jews into the Mediterranean.

The Jews driving-out the Palestinians - while still allowing them to live - is *far* more merciful than what the Palestinians have in mind for the Jews.

And we do not need to look far, to find the real-world connection and symmetry between the Palestinians and the Nazis, do we?

Nice try.

Not.


----------



## georgephillip

Kondor3 said:


> georgephillip said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Kondor3 said:
> 
> 
> 
> "...Did I miss anything?"
> 
> 
> 
> Just my question..."
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> No, I nailed that one pretty well, I'd say. And, of course, you have nothing comparable to serve-up, other than pissant Hitler-ite militias and rocketry.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> "..._The US possesses powers of destruction orders of magnitude beyond that of Israel, yet all that firepower didn't prevent its heroes from getting their asses kicked out of Vietnam and Iraq_..."
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> We did not get kicked out of Vietnam. The nation was tired of a pointless war and we left. Our adversaries waited for two or more years after we left to make sure we weren't going to come back, before they made a move to finish off the other side in their civil war.
> 
> We did not get kicked out of Iraq. The nation was tired of a pointless war and we left. After toppling their government and trashing the place and rendering them harmless.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> "..._Even simplistic hasbara hacks should realize the economic sanctions Jews would face if they unleashed their arsenal on millions of indigenous Palestinians although killing all those women and children probably appeals to some kosher pussies and their limp-wrist apologists._"
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> The arsenal is there as Facilitating Muscle for any such Operation Clean Sweep, not Doomsday Muscle, and it keeps the neighbor barking-dog countries from interfering (not that they can do much anyway, nowadays).
> 
> If the Jews get serious about flushing the West Bank and Gaza, they don't need to kill those millions; only a few thousand of the more fanatical Militia types; the rest will fold quickly, and, the next thing you know, they're on the road, headed for Jordan or other destinations; all the brave and empty talk in the world to the contrary notwithstanding.
> 
> As to economic sanctions, the Jews need do no more than to claim it as Time-Delayed Payback for flushing the Jews out of several Muslim countries in the 1948-1975 timeframe, and thereby undercut much of the momentum for such sanctions.
> 
> With the US providing political cover and having their back, economically, the Israelis would ride-out that little mini-storm easily enough until the dust settles and things begin to get back to normal.
> 
> In truth, the world will be glad to see the back of The Palestinian Crazies as they're scattered between Jordan, Lebanon, Syria and other new homes for those unfortunate, irrational, savage folk.
> 
> The world will forget about them soon enough, so long as most of them survive The Flush; glad for an end to all the fuss; realizing that it ended the only way that it could have ended.
> 
> The Palestinian Crazies grow closer and closer to such an outcome with each passing year.
Click to expand...

It's racist Jews who are circling the same drain White South Africa disappeared into.
Anyone delusional enough to believe hundreds of thousands of Palestinians will dissolve into the diaspora again has forgotten how Zionists stole Palestine in the first place. Demographics and world opinion should be providing racist Jews with a big incentive to practice their back stroke instead of hallucinating about Greater Israel; that one was FLUSHED with Moses.


----------



## Hoffstra

Kondor3 said:


> ...The Jews driving-out the Palestinians - while still allowing them to live - is *far* more merciful than what the Palestinians have in mind for the Jews...



The Jews driving out the Arabs would lead to another Holocaust of Jews.

why do you want millions of Jews to die?


----------



## Kondor3

georgephillip said:


> "...It's racist Jews who are circling the same drain White South Africa disappeared into..."


Yes, yes, yes... very nice, I'm sure.



> "..._Anyone delusional enough to believe hundreds of thousands of Palestinians will dissolve into the diaspora again has forgotten how Zionists stole Palestine in the first place_..."



You may continue to cling to this fading delusion for whatever comfort it gives you.



> "..._Demographics and world opinion should be providing racist Jews with a big incentive to practice their back stroke instead of hallucinating about Greater Israel; that one was FLUSHED with Moses._"



Neither demographics nor world opinion are going to save you.

The Jews will flush the West Bank and Gaza long before 'demographics' become a serious issue.


----------



## Kondor3

Hoffstra said:


> Kondor3 said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...The Jews driving-out the Palestinians - while still allowing them to live - is *far* more merciful than what the Palestinians have in mind for the Jews...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Jews driving out the Arabs would lead to another Holocaust of Jews.
> 
> why do you want millions of Jews to die?
Click to expand...

You continue to try (and fail) to conjure-up such a counterpointing scenario.

There will be no death of millions of Jews.

Unless, of course, you are hiding some Arab-Muslim power or another that the rest of the world knows nothing about.

Your premise is rejected, unless you can demonstrate for us who is going to massacre those Jews.

The brave, empty words of a Dying Cause.


----------



## Hoffstra

Kondor3 said:


> ...The Jews will flush the West Bank and Gaza long before 'demographics' become a serious issue.



flush?

are you calling millions of Arabs, "pieces of shit"?


----------



## Kondor3

Hoffstra said:


> Kondor3 said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...The Jews will flush the West Bank and Gaza long before 'demographics' become a serious issue.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> flush?
> 
> are you calling millions of Arabs, "pieces of shit"?
Click to expand...


Nope.

Got anything more substantive to grab onto, in your desperate attempt to divert attention away from your failure to demonstrate who is going to massacre those millions of Jews, as you claim?


----------



## Hoffstra

I see no solution that doesn't involve millions of Jews and millions of Arabs, living between the river and the sea.

that's just the way its gonna be.

the two communities will have to figure out how to live together.


----------



## georgephillip

Kondor3 said:


> georgephillip said:
> 
> 
> 
> "...It's racist Jews who are circling the same drain White South Africa disappeared into..."
> 
> 
> 
> Yes, yes, yes... very nice, I'm sure.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> "..._Anyone delusional enough to believe hundreds of thousands of Palestinians will dissolve into the diaspora again has forgotten how Zionists stole Palestine in the first place_..."
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You may continue to cling to this fading delusion for whatever comfort it gives you.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> "..._Demographics and world opinion should be providing racist Jews with a big incentive to practice their back stroke instead of hallucinating about Greater Israel; that one was FLUSHED with Moses._"
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Neither demographics nor world opinion are going to save you.
> 
> The Jews will flush the West Bank and Gaza long before 'demographics' become a serious issue.
Click to expand...

*Demographics already dictates the eventual winners in Palestine.* 

"According to Israel's Central Bureau of Statistics, as of May 2006, of Israel's 7 million people, 77% were Jews, 18.5% Arabs, and 4.3% "others".[64] Among Jews, 68% were Sabras (Israeli-born), mostly second- or third-generation Israelis, and the rest are olim  22% from Europe and the Americas, and 10% from Asia and Africa, including the Arab countries.[65]

"According to Palestinian evaluations, The West Bank is inhabited by approximately 2.4 million Palestinians and the Gaza Strip by another 1.4 million. According to a study presented at The Sixth Herzliya Conference on The Balance of Israel's National Security[66] there are 1.4 million Palestinians in the West Bank..."

"According to these Israeli and Palestinian estimates, the population in Israel and the Palestinian Territories stands at 9.810.8 million.

"Jordan has a population of around 6 million (2007 estimate).[68][69] Palestinians constitute approximately half of this number.[70]"

*Roughly equal numbers of Jews and Arabs living between the River and the sea with millions of additional Arabs in Jordan and Lebanon awaiting their Right of Return. FLUSH that and see which nation vanishes from the page of time.*

Demographics of Palestine - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


----------



## P F Tinmore

Hoffstra said:


> I see no solution that doesn't involve millions of Jews and millions of Arabs, living between the river and the sea.
> 
> that's just the way its gonna be.
> 
> the two communities will have to figure out how to live together.



One state:

Nobody would be pushed into the sea. Nobody would get killed. Settlement could stay.


----------



## Hossfly

P F Tinmore said:


> Hoffstra said:
> 
> 
> 
> I see no solution that doesn't involve millions of Jews and millions of Arabs, living between the river and the sea.
> 
> that's just the way its gonna be.
> 
> the two communities will have to figure out how to live together.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> One state:
> 
> Nobody would be pushed into the sea. Nobody would get killed. Settlement could stay.
Click to expand...

Yeah, one state so that the Muslims can overtake the Jews by having more babies and that Jews can then eventually be treated the same way they were (and how non Muslims are treated now) treated in Muslim countries.  Tinnie, of course, would like to see that even if he denies it here.  On a different USMB forum, a Muslim Pakistani Brit said the Muslims would take over Great Britain because they were having more babies, and that same thing would happen in Israel if there was one state.  So I say two states --  one for the Jews and one for the Arabs.  By the way, Tinnie, how come you have never mentioned that part of the country of Cyprus is occupied by the Turks?  Is it OK for them to do this since they are Muslims?


----------



## docmauser1

georgephillip said:


> It's racist Jews who are circling the same drain White South Africa disappeared into. Anyone delusional enough to believe hundreds of thousands of Palestinians will dissolve into the diaspora again has forgotten how Zionists stole Palestine in the first place. Demographics and world opinion should be providing racist Jews with a big incentive to practice their back stroke instead of hallucinating about Greater Israel; that one was FLUSHED with Moses.


Incoherent drivel.


----------



## georgephillip

P F Tinmore said:


> Hoffstra said:
> 
> 
> 
> I see no solution that doesn't involve millions of Jews and millions of Arabs, living between the river and the sea.
> 
> that's just the way its gonna be.
> 
> the two communities will have to figure out how to live together.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> One state:
> 
> Nobody would be pushed into the sea. Nobody would get killed. Settlement could stay.
Click to expand...

Would all Jews and Arabs living between the River and the sea be entitled to live inside or beyond the Green Line? What happens to the Apartheid Wall?


----------



## Kondor3

There is, in all probability, zero chance for a One-State solution.

The Jews of Israel have recaptured their old ancestral and spiritual homeland, after nearly being exterminated.

They are determined to have a homeland of their own, that they control, right where they are now.

They know that if they admit the West Bank and Gazan Arab-Muslim Palestinians to full citizenship status that they will end-up being overrun by population and votes within a generation or two.

That cannot be allowed to happen, in their eyes.

And they will do whatever is necessary to ensure that that does not happen.

Driven by the memories of near-extinction and the threat of future extinction, if they admit the Barbarians at the Gates.

From their perspective, that's entirely understandable.

If that means they've got to shove a couple of million Arabs off their last few scraps of land within Greater Israel, well, small price to pay, to realize The Dream.

The Arab-Muslims of Palestine had several chances for a One-State solution, stretching from 1948 to 1967.

After 1967, the Israelis seem to have closed-down further pursuit of that goal, and drifted towards a Two-State solution.

Given that the Arab-Muslim Palestinians have put up political barriers to a Two-State solution, repeatedly, over time, the Israelis appear to have given-up on that, as well, in recent years; no point giving The Enemy the umbrella of Statehood under which suicide bombings and rocket-launches might attain the illusion of legitimacy.

No two-state solution?

No one-state solution?

That leaves very little to discuss.

Other than where the remaining Arab-Muslims of Rump-Palestine are going to move to, as they continue to be pushed off their land, one hectare at a time.


----------



## georgephillip

docmauser1 said:


> georgephillip said:
> 
> 
> 
> It's racist Jews who are circling the same drain White South Africa disappeared into. Anyone delusional enough to believe hundreds of thousands of Palestinians will dissolve into the diaspora again has forgotten how Zionists stole Palestine in the first place. Demographics and world opinion should be providing racist Jews with a big incentive to practice their back stroke instead of hallucinating about Greater Israel; that one was FLUSHED with Moses.
> 
> 
> 
> Incoherent drivel.
Click to expand...

Care to provide some coherent drivel for transferring millions of Arabs out of Greater Israel?


----------



## docmauser1

georgephillip said:


> docmauser1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> georgephillip said:
> 
> 
> 
> It's racist Jews who are circling the same drain White South Africa disappeared into. Anyone delusional enough to believe hundreds of thousands of Palestinians will dissolve into the diaspora again has forgotten how Zionists stole Palestine in the first place. Demographics and world opinion should be providing racist Jews with a big incentive to practice their back stroke instead of hallucinating about Greater Israel; that one was FLUSHED with Moses.
> 
> 
> 
> Incoherent drivel.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Care to provide some coherent drivel for transferring millions of Arabs out of Greater Israel?
Click to expand...

You, folks, drivel, of course, the magnificient me talk.


----------



## Kondor3

georgephillip said:


> "..._Roughly equal numbers of Jews and Arabs living between the River and the sea with millions of additional Arabs in Jordan and Lebanon awaiting their Right of Return. FLUSH that and see which nation vanishes from the page of time_..."


You assume that the handful of remaining Arab-Muslim Palestinians will be allowed to remain in-place.

I assume that those couple of million will be expelled from the West Bank and Gaza and driven into Jordan and Lebanon and Egypt.

Much like the Poles did to the East Prussians (Germans) in 1945, or like the Czechs did to the Sudatenland Germans in 1945, or like the Muslims and Hindus did to each other in the 1947 timeframe while separating Pakistan from India at Independence time, or much like the Muslims did to the Jews in many Arab countries during the 1948-1975 timeframe.

In the end, from the Jewish-Israeli perspective, that is the only logical outcome which leaves a Jewish State of Israel intact and secure, and reaching its maximum intended Old Kingdom perimeter.

The Arab-Muslims of Rump-Palestine have other places where they can go, right next door, and still be amongst their own ethnic brethren and co-religionists.

The Jews have no such neighboring ethnic brethren and co-religionist -controlled regions to escape to.

The Jews have their backs to the Mediterranean, the terror and heartbreak of the Holocaust in their hearts and minds, and a determination to never, ever be pushed around like that again.

Neither your pissant Palestinians nor their Arab-Muslim brethren are capable of stopping them, once the Explusion begins.

The Palestinians will never be allowed to become Israeli citizens, so, the demographics just don't matter.

And the Palestinians will be expelled from Greater Israel before the demographics pose any serious risk of overwhelming the Jews militarily.

Not that there's any chance of such military overwhelming within our lifetimes or those of our children or grandchildren.

I would not rely too heavily upon this new-fangled _Demographics Plot_, if I were you... it's transparent, and will not be allowed to materialize.

Whatever the cost.


----------



## georgephillip

Kondor3 said:


> georgephillip said:
> 
> 
> 
> "..._Roughly equal numbers of Jews and Arabs living between the River and the sea with millions of additional Arabs in Jordan and Lebanon awaiting their Right of Return. FLUSH that and see which nation vanishes from the page of time_..."
> 
> 
> 
> You assume that the handful of remaining Arab-Muslim Palestinians will be allowed to remain in-place.
> 
> I assume that those couple of million will be expelled from the West Bank and Gaza and driven into Jordan and Lebanon and Egypt.
> 
> Much like the Poles did to the East Prussians (Germans) in 1945, or like the Czechs did to the Sudatenland Germans in 1945, or like the Muslims and Hindus did to each other in the 1947 timeframe while separating Pakistan from India at Independence time, or much like the Muslims did to the Jews in many Arab countries during the 1948-1975 timeframe.
> 
> In the end, from the Jewish-Israeli perspective, that is the only logical outcome which leaves a Jewish State of Israel intact and secure, and reaching its maximum intended Old Kingdom perimeter.
> 
> The Arab-Muslims of Rump-Palestine have other places where they can go, right next door, and still be amongst their own ethnic brethren and co-religionists.
> 
> The Jews have no such neighboring ethnic brethren and co-religionist -controlled regions to escape to.
> 
> The Jews have their backs to the Mediterranean, the terror and heartbreak of the Holocaust in their hearts and minds, and a determination to never, ever be pushed around like that again.
> 
> Neither your pissant Palestinians nor their Arab-Muslim brethren are capable of stopping them, once the Explusion begins.
> 
> The Palestinians will never be allowed to become Israeli citizens, so, the demographics just don't matter.
> 
> And the Palestinians will be expelled from Greater Israel before the demographics pose any serious risk of overwhelming the Jews militarily.
> 
> Not that there's any chance of such military overwhelming within our lifetimes or those of our children or grandchildren.
> 
> I would not rely too heavily upon this new-fangled _Demographics Plot_, if I were you... it's transparent, and will not be allowed to materialize.
> 
> Whatever the cost.
Click to expand...

*Whatever the cost, Arabs learned their lesson after Israel's war of aggression in 1967. There won't be a repeat of al-Nakba.
Jews will choose between democracy or ethnocracy or vanish from the page of time (again).
The Samud are not leaving Palestine.
*
"Sumud (Arabic: &#1589;&#1605;&#1608;&#1583;*) meaning 'steadfastness'[1] or 'steadfast perseverance' is an ideological theme and political strategy that first emerged among the Palestinian people through the experience of the dialectic of oppression and resistance in the wake of the Six-day war.[2] 

"Those who are steadfast, that is those who exhibit sumud, are referred to as samidin, the singular forms of which are samid (m.) and samida (f.).

"With the passing of the years since 1967, Palestinians have distinguished between two main forms of sumud. The first, static sumud, is more passive and is defined by Ibrahim Dhahak as the 'maintenance of Palestinians on their land.' 

"The second, resistance sumud (in Arabic, sumud muqawim) is a more dynamic ideology whose aim is to seek ways of building alternative institutions so as to resist and undermine the Israeli occupation of the Palestinian territories.[2]"

Sumud - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


----------



## Kondor3

georgephillip said:


> Kondor3 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> georgephillip said:
> 
> 
> 
> "..._Roughly equal numbers of Jews and Arabs living between the River and the sea with millions of additional Arabs in Jordan and Lebanon awaiting their Right of Return. FLUSH that and see which nation vanishes from the page of time_..."
> 
> 
> 
> You assume that the handful of remaining Arab-Muslim Palestinians will be allowed to remain in-place.
> 
> I assume that those couple of million will be expelled from the West Bank and Gaza and driven into Jordan and Lebanon and Egypt.
> 
> Much like the Poles did to the East Prussians (Germans) in 1945, or like the Czechs did to the Sudatenland Germans in 1945, or like the Muslims and Hindus did to each other in the 1947 timeframe while separating Pakistan from India at Independence time, or much like the Muslims did to the Jews in many Arab countries during the 1948-1975 timeframe.
> 
> In the end, from the Jewish-Israeli perspective, that is the only logical outcome which leaves a Jewish State of Israel intact and secure, and reaching its maximum intended Old Kingdom perimeter.
> 
> The Arab-Muslims of Rump-Palestine have other places where they can go, right next door, and still be amongst their own ethnic brethren and co-religionists.
> 
> The Jews have no such neighboring ethnic brethren and co-religionist -controlled regions to escape to.
> 
> The Jews have their backs to the Mediterranean, the terror and heartbreak of the Holocaust in their hearts and minds, and a determination to never, ever be pushed around like that again.
> 
> Neither your pissant Palestinians nor their Arab-Muslim brethren are capable of stopping them, once the Explusion begins.
> 
> The Palestinians will never be allowed to become Israeli citizens, so, the demographics just don't matter.
> 
> And the Palestinians will be expelled from Greater Israel before the demographics pose any serious risk of overwhelming the Jews militarily.
> 
> Not that there's any chance of such military overwhelming within our lifetimes or those of our children or grandchildren.
> 
> I would not rely too heavily upon this new-fangled _Demographics Plot_, if I were you... it's transparent, and will not be allowed to materialize.
> 
> Whatever the cost.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> *Whatever the cost, Arabs learned their lesson after Israel's war of aggression in 1967. There won't be a repeat of al-Nakba.
> Jews will choose between democracy or ethnocracy or vanish from the page of time (again).
> The Samud are not leaving Palestine.
> *
> "Sumud (Arabic: &#1589;&#1605;&#1608;&#1583;*) meaning 'steadfastness'[1] or 'steadfast perseverance' is an ideological theme and political strategy that first emerged among the Palestinian people through the experience of the dialectic of oppression and resistance in the wake of the Six-day war.[2]
> 
> "Those who are steadfast, that is those who exhibit sumud, are referred to as samidin, the singular forms of which are samid (m.) and samida (f.).
> 
> "With the passing of the years since 1967, Palestinians have distinguished between two main forms of sumud. The first, static sumud, is more passive and is defined by Ibrahim Dhahak as the 'maintenance of Palestinians on their land.'
> 
> "The second, resistance sumud (in Arabic, sumud muqawim) is a more dynamic ideology whose aim is to seek ways of building alternative institutions so as to resist and undermine the Israeli occupation of the Palestinian territories.[2]"
> 
> Sumud - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Click to expand...


Egypt is broken.

Syria is broken.

Libya is broken.

Iraq is broken.

Lebanon is broken.

If the Jews decide to make their move now, there is nobody to stop them.

Certainly not you pathetic, militarily incompetent people of the West Bank and Gaza.

During the next several years, the stars will never be so well aligned for Israel, to undertake an Expulsion.

If they go in guns-blazing in sweep-and-clear mode, they will overrun all of the West Bank and all of Gaza within a matter of a couple of weeks.

Disarming and driving the populace before them; completely overwhelming and mercilessly wiping-out all resistance along the way.

Providing logistics and financial and relocation assistance for those who lay down their arms or otherwise go peaceably, before setting them on the road.

You are in danger.

You are at-risk as never before.

There is no Arab cavalry coming over the hill this time, to support your fight with troops and munitions and war-assets, nor to rescue you as that short-lived combat winds down to an inevitable Israeli victory.

Your words are brave words.

But empty.

There is nothing of substance behind those words, sufficient to your purposes.

You (Palestinians) had better get your heads out of your asses and negotiate sincerely and humbly with the Israelis, this next round - as befits the defeated.

I don't think you're going to get another chance, if this latest round of talks fail.

From the Israeli perspective, greatly-weakened neighbors all-round spell a historic opportunity to settle matters once and for all.

But you're going to have to shut-the-fuck-up, go to the Israelis hat-in-hand, and take whatever they give you, and be content with the remaining scraps that your former mistakes have bequeathed you.

Submit, and make permanent peace.

Otherwise... not even the present-day *Rump* Palestine is likely to still be in existence, by the end of the decade.

Much of the world will be glad to see 'you' scattered, and an end to 'your' insanity...

And will shed no tears at your passing from the world stage, after 60+ years of bitching and pissing and moaning and terrorism and killing...

You won't be missed...

This round of talks is probably your very last chance...

Make the most of it...


----------



## José

> Originally posted by *Kondor3*
> There is no Arab cavalry coming over the hill this time



Cavalry is so 19th century.

Arab air squadron is far more likely.


----------



## Kondor3

José;7965534 said:
			
		

> Originally posted by *Kondor3*
> There is no Arab cavalry coming over the hill this time
> 
> 
> 
> Cavalry is so 19th century. Arab air squadron is far more likely.
Click to expand...

True.

But, after the way we trashed Iraq, and Afghanistan, I doubt the little phukkers will be trying that again anytime soon.

It will hurt them, and their co-religionists, far more than it would hurt us, shortly after their next strike.

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









Knock over two of our buildings - we knock over two of your countries.

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






Kill 3,000 of our people - we kill 300,000 of yours, including your leaders.

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

Besides, an Israeli sweep-and-clear action against the West Bank and Gaza would not be our doing.

If those skumbag Islamic Militants hit us again because of something that Israel did, and kill thousands more innocent American civilians, our reaction will not be as 'restrained' as the last time.

And 'restrained' is the right word, when one contemplates what we _could_ have done.

It will be their choice, to keep us out of it, or to unleash the Savage that we carry within us.

Which another attack upon the United States will certainly do.


----------



## José

Kondor3 said:


> José;7965534 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Originally posted by *Kondor3*
> There is no Arab cavalry coming over the hill this time
> 
> 
> 
> Cavalry is so 19th century. Arab air squadron is far more likely.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> True.
> 
> But, after how we trashed Iraq, and Afghanistan, I doubt the little phukkers will be trying that again anytime soon.
> 
> Knock over two of our buildings - we knock over two of your countries.
> 
> Kill 3,000 of our people, we kill 300,000 of yours.
> 
> Besides, an Israeli sweep-and-clear action against the West Bank and Gaza will not be our doing.
> 
> If those skumbags hit us again because of something that Israel did, and kill thousands more innocent American civilians, our reaction will not be as 'restrained' as the last time.
Click to expand...


Your reasoning starts from the wrong premise that the perpetrators of 911 give a flying fuck what America does to Iraq, Afghanistan or any other arab/muslim countries.

Non-state actors do no hold any territory nor are they responsible for any nation-state. Their fate do not depend of the survival of any country.

911 was conceived and planned in Germany. None of the perpetrators needed to "train" in Afghanistan to carry out the attack.

They never needed any training camp, any possesion of territory in any country... only the money to finance the whole operation.

Being basically a gang, a loose assosiation of a variety of individuals with many different grievances towards the US (israel being by far the most common one as well as the unifying factor) they couldn't care less how many arab countries America decides to invade.

If anything America killing arabs by the thousands is a godsend for them. It fits their agenda of allienating the US from the arab world perfectly.


----------



## Kondor3

José;7965690 said:
			
		

> Kondor3 said:
> 
> 
> 
> "..._If anything America killing arabs by the thousands is a godsend for them. It fits their agenda of allienating the US from the arab world perfectly._"
> 
> 
> 
> Indeed.
> 
> Until the Muslims themselves make the crazies amongst them stop attacking America.
> 
> Until that happens, we will just have to settle for 100-to-1 kill-ratios.
> 
> As to 'alienating' the Arabs... well... given that we're Infidel, that's never been too difficult.
> 
> The very first major foreign military intervention that we ever undertook was against Arab-Berber Muslims, in Tripoli, in the 1801-1805 timeframe.
> 
> They've been an occasional irritation for us since John Adams' and Thomas Jefferson's time.
> 
> And, every so often, we have to bitch-slap them, when they try to hit us again, for whatever reason attains to the excuse du jour... Israel, the color of the sky, the way their dogs bark... whatever.
> 
> Nothing's changed.
> 
> Other than that we've gone off-topic.
Click to expand...


----------



## José

> Originally posted by *Kondor3*
> Indeed.
> 
> Until the Muslims themselves make the crazies amongst them stop attacking America.
> 
> Until that happens, we will just have to settle for 100-to-1 kill-ratios.



As long as the ordinary arab sees America financing a racist, murderous, depraved state that keeps the palestinian people herded in Gaza and the West Bank, turning its borders into free shooting areas, killing any palestinian who try to move about his homeland, they won't do anything other than think to themselves:

*"Two skyscrappers was too little... it should have been 10 at least."*

And when they see Americans like you, not only making up hundreds of excuses for that murderous apartheid state but actually advocating further ethnic cleansing they probably also think:

*"A dirty nuke to wipe out that nation of Nazis from the face to the Earth would be way better than a couple of jumbo jets."*



> Originally posted by *Kondor3*
> As to 'alienating' the Arabs... well... given that we're Infidel, that's never been too difficult.



Yes... 90% of arabs hate America because its population do not raise their butts to the sky 5 times a day, not because the country finances a bloody racist state that kills the same population it should be protecting and affording civil rights....

Sure... that must be the real cause of anti-americanism in the Middle East, not enough american butts up in the air.



> Originally posted by *Kondor3*
> The very first major foreign military intervention that we ever undertook was against Arab-Berber Muslims, in Tripoli, in the 1801-1805 timeframe.
> 
> They've been an occasional irritation for us since John Adams' and Thomas Jefferson's time.
> 
> And, every so often, we have to bitch-slap them, when they try to hit us again, for whatever reason attains to the excuse du jour... Israel, the color of the sky, the way their dogs bark... whatever.
> 
> Nothing's changed.



*An occasional irritation. *

Your expression reminds me of a documentary I watched about Al Quaeda a few years before 911.

It ended with the line (referring to the USS Cole, the embassy bombings, etc...):

*"Is Al Quaeda destined to be an anoying fly bothering the US?"*

Well, buddy... If this "fly" can knock 2 skyscrappers down I don't wanna see what you call a dragonfly.


----------



## Kondor3

José;7965950 said:
			
		

> "... "


America is all-aquiver and shaking in its boots at the prospects of further Arab-Muslim attacks.

We will NOT allow the Arab-Muslim world to determine whom we can have as friends and allies.

We will NOT allow the Arab-Muslim world to dictate foreign policy to the United States.

Each major attack upon the United States will be repaid a hundred-fold.

"_Millions for defense, but not one cent for tribute_."

Go in peace, if you will.

Attack us at your very great peril.


----------



## Kondor3

José;7965950 said:
			
		

> "..._Yes... 90% of arabs hate America ...because the country finances a bloody racist state that kills the same population it should be protecting and affording civil rights_..."


No... 90% of Arabs hate America because it provides some modicum of financial and political and military support for a unique and resurrected State...

Built upon the intentions of the United Nations and which was repeatedly attacked on all sides by overwhelming odds...

And which kicked ass and made a place for itself in the world, and because the Arabs were three-time losers (1948, 1967 and 1973) in wars against the Jews of Israel...

And because the Barbarians refused to live peacefully as Israeli citizens while they still had the chance to make that choice...

And because, eventually, the Jews found themselves obliged to wall-off the Barbarians in their midst, to minimize the number of suicide-bombing attacks and to lessen the impact of the rocketry used by the Barbarians.

There... alternative perspective voiced.


----------



## docmauser1

georgephillip said:


> There won't be a repeat of al-Nakba.


Excellent find, showing us that palistanians have been busy, thieving jewish history events. It's no wonder, koran is a stolen and bastardized jewish bible, after all.


----------



## docmauser1

José;7965950 said:
			
		

> As long as the ordinary arab sees America financing a racist, murderous, depraved state that keeps the palestinian people herded in Gaza and the West Bank, turning its borders into free shooting areas, killing any palestinian who try to move about his homeland, they won't do anything other than think to themselves: ...


... never to touch LSD again?


----------



## José

> Originally posted by *Kondor3*
> And because the Barbarians refused to live peacefully as Israeli citizens while they still had the chance to make that choice...
> 
> And because, eventually, the Jews found themselves to wall-off the Barbarians in the midst, to minimize the number of suicide-bombing attacks and to lessen the impact of the rocketry used by the Barbarians.
> 
> There... alternative perspective voiced.



Kondor... let's stop debating the morality (or lack thereof) of the creation and continued existence of the state of Israel and let's focus on its history for a little while.

You have to have at least a cursory knowledge on Israel's history in order to avoid saying the absurdities you said above.

All Israeli historians are in perfect agreement that even before the end of the 1948 conflagration Israel had already decided to prevent the return of the displaced arab population.

The "border" between Israel and Gaza/West Bank was turned into a free shooting area. Israeli soldiers were authorized to shoot anyone trying to cross them into Israel.

*More than 3000 unarmed palestinians were murdered by Israel from 1948 to 1951 simply trying to return to their homes, harvest their crops or see their relatives.*

This happened at least 3 years before the beggining of the palestinian armed struggle, 3 years before the first fedayeen attack registered by israeli historians (May, 1951 if my memory serves me well), two decades before the creation of the PLO and three decades before the creation of Hamas with its rockets and suicide bombers.

From 48 to 51 you practically only had palestinians trying to return to their homes. I say "practically" because the few incidents of armed attack during this time period (10%) were caused by Palestinians trying to avenge the deaths of relatives killed by Israel's policy of shooting Palestinians even on their "side" of the fence (when they approached it too much).

This historical fact crushes the israeli propaganda that palestinians are kept herded in Gaza and the West Bank and shot dead when they "tresspass" into Israel as a "security measure".

What you really have is a state racist to the core killing the unwanted ethnic group in order to maintain an artificial demographics in the western half of the region.

You got the whole issue completely backwards, Kondor.

Palestinians are not murdered when they try to leave Gaza and the West Bank because of the rockets and suicide bombers.

They launch rockets *BECAUSE* they have been murdered by Israel while trying to return to their places of origin since 1948.

The palestinian armed struggle is the direct consequence of Israel's shoot to kill policy in place since 48 *not the cause of this policy*.

You are free to defend Israel all you want, Kondor.

What you are not free to do (or at least shouldn't be) is rape the history of the state of Israel.


----------



## docmauser1

José;7966569 said:
			
		

> You have to have at least a cursory knowledge on Israel's history in order to avoid saying the absurdities you said above. All Israeli historians are in perfect agreement that even before the end of the 1948 conflagration Israel had already decided to prevent the return of the displaced arab population. The "border" between Israel and Gaza/West Bank was turned into a free shooting area. Israeli soldiers were authorized to shoot anyone trying to cross them into Israel. More than 3000 unarmed palestinians were murdered by Israel from 1948 to 1951 simply trying to return to their homes, harvest their crops or see their relatives. This happened at least 3 years before the beggining of the palestinian armed struggle, 3 years before the first fedayeen attack registered by israeli historians (May, 1951 if my memory serves me well), two decades before the creation of the PLO and three decades before the creation of Hamas with its rockets and suicide bombers. From 48 to 51 you practically only had palestinians trying to return to their homes. I say "practically" because the few incidents of armed attack during this time period (10%) were caused by Palestinians trying to avenge the deaths of relatives killed by Israel's policy of shooting Palestinians even on their "side" of the fence (when they approached it too much). This historical fact crushes the israeli propaganda that palestinians are kept herded in Gaza and the West Bank and shot dead when they "tresspass" into Israel as a "security measure". What you really have is a state racist to the core killing the unwanted ethnic group in order to maintain an artificial demographics in the western half of the region. Palestinians are not murdered when they try to leave Gaza and the West Bank because of the rockets and suicide bombers. They launch rockets BECAUSE they have been murdered by Israel while trying to return to their places of origin since 1948. The palestinian armed struggle is the direct consequence of Israel's shoot to kill policy in place since 48 not the cause of this policy.


Who made that up?


----------



## Kondor3

José;7966569 said:
			
		

> "..._You have to have at least a cursory knowledge on Israel's history in order to avoid saying the absurdities you said above_..."



I do, indeed, have a modest working knowledge of Israel's history; it's merely that I side with them, and not with the Palestinians, as you do; consequently, I do not see such observations as 'absurdities'.



> "..._All Israeli historians are in perfect agreement that even before the end of the 1948 conflagration Israel had already decided to prevent the return of the displaced arab population_..."



Irrelevant. You side with the attackers (Egypt, Jordan, Iraq, Syria and Lebanon), then you're out for good, with no hope of return.



> "..._The "border" between Israel and Gaza/West Bank was turned into a free shooting area. Israeli soldiers were authorized to shoot anyone trying to cross them into Israel_..."



Absolutely. Entirely correct, from the Israeli perspective. Many countries behave in exactly the same fashion. Try to cross the border without permission, and you die. Nothing new there.



> "..._More than 3000 unarmed palestinians were murdered by Israel from 1948 to 1951 simply trying to return to their homes, harvest their crops or see their relatives_..."



If, by that, you mean that 3000 border infiltrators (and wannabes) who tried - despite warnings to forbear - to sneak across the border, were killed, then, that sounds like a fairly efficient guarding of their new borders to me.



> "..._This happened at least 3 years before the beggining of the palestinian armed struggle, 3 years before the first fedayeen attack registered by israeli historians (May, 1951 if my memory serves me well), two decades before the creation of the PLO and three decades before the creation of Hamas with its rockets and suicide bombers_..."



Doesn't matter if it happened in 1948 or 2013. If you cross a border-zone that is publicly declared to be a Death Strip for anyone caught trying to infiltrate, you are going to die.

Those killed should not have been so foolish as to try their luck against such efficient border controls.



> "..._From 48 to 51 you practically only had palestinians trying to return to their homes. I say 'practically' because the few incidents of armed attack during this time period (10%) were caused by Palestinians trying to avenge the deaths of relatives killed by Israel's policy of shooting Palestinians even on their "side" of the fence (when they approached it too much)_..."



Again... it doesn't matter. Cross the border under such controlled circumstances and you die. And, if there have been repreated attempts via Point A or B or C, or repeated violence eminating from Point A or B or C... then you would do well to avoid such Points. Approach such volatile Points under such circumstances and you die. Solution: stay the phukk away from such Points.



> "..._This historical fact crushes the israeli propaganda that palestinians are kept herded in Gaza and the West Bank and shot dead when they 'tresspass' into Israel as a 'security measure'_..."



Only if one settles for your interpretation of 'historical fact', which many (most) non-Muslims and many (most) non-Palestinian-sympathizers do not.



> "..._What you really have is a state racist to the core killing the unwanted ethnic group in order to maintain an artificial demographics in the western half of the region_..."



Incorrect, and maudlin dramatics on your part here, unfortunately.

What you really have here is a walling-off of the Barbarians in the West Bank and Gaza, after trying to avoid that walling-off for the first few decades, and eventually settling upon that controversial solution, once Israeli civilian casualty rates reached sufficient levels due to suicide bombings so as to force the Israelis' hand to such entirely understandable measures.



> "..._You got the whole issue completely backwards, Kondor_..."



One of us certainly does; although some elements of truth may lie in the middle.



> "..._Palestinians are not murdered when they try to leave Gaza and the West Bank because of the rockets and suicide bombers_..."



Confidence is fairly high that thousands leave Gaza and the West Bank every year; seeking new opportunities and new lives, rather than continuing to live in their shit-hole refugee towns and camps for another 65 years.

It is true that Palestinians are fired-upon and killed when they attempt to infiltrate Israel. It is also true that Palestinians are fired-upon and killed when they attempt to infiltrate other countries; the Egyptians, for example, keep a tight lid on how many Palestinian Crazies that they allow to pass back and forth.



> "..._They launch rockets BECAUSE they have been murdered by Israel while trying to return to their places of origin since 1948_..."



They launch rockets because they are too stupid to realize that they have lost those lands forevermore, and must now emmigrate to live amongst their ethnic brethren and co-religionists, in order to ever again have a chance at prosperity and happiness.



> "..._The palestinian armed struggle is the direct consequence of Israel's shoot to kill policy in place since 48 not the cause of this policy_..."



The Palestinian armed struggle is the last dying gasp of a Failed State That Never Was.



> "..._You are free to defend Israel all you want, Kondor_..."



Indeed.



> "..._What you are not free to do (or at least shouldn't be) is rape the history of the state of Israel._"



I've done no such thing.

Merely served-up the Alternative Position; one which is at-odds with your own.


----------



## José

> Originally posted by *Kondor3*
> Irrelevant. You side with the attackers (Egypt, Jordan, Iraq, Syria and Lebanon), then you're out for good, with no hope of return.





> Originally posted by *Kondor3*
> Incorrect, and maudlin dramatics on your part here, unfortunately.
> 
> What you really have here is a walling-off of the Barbarians in the West Bank and Gaza, after trying to avoid that walling-off for the first few decades, and eventually settling upon that controversial solution, once Israeli civilian casualty rates reached sufficient levels due to suicide bombings so as to force the Israelis' hand to such entirely understandable measures.



You know what is really funny, Kondor?

One of your favorite lines:

*"Palestinians who decided to live peacefully in Israel were allowed to become citizens while those who fled to the WB and Gaza and became sworn enemies of Israel were denied the right to live on israeli territory."*

is also based on a sad lack of knowledge of the minor details of the history of the state of Israel.

Between 1948 and 1951 (before the first fences separating Israel from the arab enclaves were set up to solve the "problem" of arab "infiltration" once and for all) about 30.000 palestinian refugees managed against all odds to return to their former villages or more commonly to nearby villages and towns since most of them were labelled "absentee property" and bulldozed or used to accomodate jewish immigrants.

So its quite ironic that among what you call the "peaceful" palestinians who decided to live in peace in Israel and who are today law abiding citizens of the state *you have hundreds of thousands of children, grandchildren and great-grandchildren of those 30k palestinians who managed to "infiltrate" into Israel*.

Even if you discard the ridiculous argument that someone who fled a warzone becomes a genocidal monster hellbent on killing jews due to the simple fact that they fled the warzone we can see that you got the whole issue backwards again.

The fact that they fled the warzone to the WB and Gaza was not an indication that they had genocidal intentions towards the jewish population (remember, of the 750.00 refugees, 30.000 managed to return and their children are now israeli citizens) *they hate the state because they were prevented from returning to their places of origin*.

Of course neither israeli palestinians nor the diaspora in Palestine, Lebannon, Egypt were/are enamored with the idea of the state of Israel.

This is perfectly understanble. Of all the peoples in the world super patriotic american clowns should have no trouble understanding, should be the first ones to sympathize with a people fiercely opposing the partition of their homeland.

But anyway, Kondor, always keep in mind this small, obscure but crucial detail of Israel's history:

30.000 palestinian refugees managed to return and became peaceful citizens of Israel *what  proves the fact that what really differentiates a peaceful palestinian citizen of Israel from an angry palestinian refugee is the right to live in their homeland rather than in exile*.


----------



## Kondor3

There are Arab-Muslim citizens of Israel who fled during the first wave of Troubles and who managed to return before the situation calcified, and who existed in sufficiently small numbers so as not to pose a material threat to the State of Israel and its Jewish majority...

There are Arab-Muslim citizens of Israel who did not flee during the first wave of Troubles and who have lived there all along and who existed in sufficiently small numbers so as not to pose a material threat to the State of Israel and its Jewish majority...

Both of these subsets, taken together, comprise the present-day Arab-Muslim Citizens of Israel; all of whom decided to make their peace with the Israeli Jews and to live in peace amongst them and according to Israeli law and governance...

These Arab-Muslim Citizens of Israel did not, for the most part, engage in active combat operations against the Israeli Jews, and, therefore, posed no ongoing military or guerrilla danger to the State of Israel and its Jewish majority...

These Arab-Muslim Citizens of Israel made their decision to live peaceably amongst the Israeli Jews, long before the situation calcified after the 1967 War, and long before the Intifadas and the suicide bombings and the rocketry served to forevermore lock out the possibility of accommodation...

The Arab-Muslim Palestinians who occupy the vistigial scraps of the West Bank and Gaza are too numerous and dangerous and cannot be admitted to union with the Israeli Jews without risking Jewish control of their own recaptured ancestral and spiritual homeland, and they will never go for that...

It doesn't matter that some percentage of Palestinian refugees and their descendants might be at least somewhat trustworthy, if readmitted...

There are far too many for whom that cannot and will not be the case, and there is no practicable hope of ever sorting that out, nor will the Arab-Muslims of the region be allowed to attain a demographic or voting majority within the framework of Israeli government...

That is to be avoided at all costs... it is an impossibility insofar as such an implementation spells the doom of Israel as a Jewish Homeland, and that will never, ever be allowed to materialize again, hell or high water, the entire world be damned, and against all odds...

Given the strength and power of the State of Israel (decades of Arab-Muslim hostility have served to make them far stronger than their enemies), and given the weakness of the half-assed pseudo-government of Rump Palestine, it does not require a crystal ball to see what is going to happen...

The Jews will win, and the Arab-Muslims of Palestine will lose...

Cost and world opinion be damned...

This is not necessarily Right nor Wrong...

But it is a Reality that has continued to unfold in favor of Israel for 65 years now, with no end in sight...

Any Palestinian with an ounce of sense and two shekels to rub together needs to get himself and his family out of that shithole before the balloon goes up...


----------



## Hossfly

docmauser1 said:


> José;7965950 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> As long as the ordinary arab sees America financing a racist, murderous, depraved state that keeps the palestinian people herded in Gaza and the West Bank, turning its borders into free shooting areas, killing any palestinian who try to move about his homeland, they won't do anything other than think to themselves: ...
> 
> 
> 
> ... never to touch LSD again?
Click to expand...

From what we have read from José. it is quite easy to see why many Muslim converts turn to terrorism like José Padilla.  Imagine what kind of mind says on a forum "Two skyscrappers was too little... it should have been 10 at least."  

Naturally you never see Muslims or converts to Islam talk about the millions and millions of innocent people the Muslims have murdered.  They have been so brainwashed to only think about some postage-sized country because Jews are controlling it and not their fellow Muslims.  There are Muslims who have never met a Jew, but want all Jews killed because of Israel.


----------



## José

> Originally posted by *Hossfly*
> Imagine what kind of mind says on a forum "Two skyscrappers was too little... it should have been 10 at least."



This "kind of mind" is only rivaled in terms of sheer moral depravation by the moral scum that has the courage to join the same message board to openly declare that  a given state has the right to shoot 3000 unarmed refugees whose only crime was trying to return to their villages carrying nothing but their personal belongings just because they belonged to the "unofficial" ethnicity of the state.

These individuals are so unbelievably fucked up in the head that they also think the said state had every right to continue to engage in such practice for the last 65 years and the next 65 if need be.

But just like most serial killers and pedophiles are unable to recognize their sordid behavior due to their own psychopathy there's no chance in Hell these degenerated individuals will ever recognize theirs.


----------



## Hossfly

José;7968570 said:
			
		

> Originally posted by *Hossfly*
> Imagine what kind of mind says on a forum "Two skyscrappers was too little... it should have been 10 at least."
> 
> 
> 
> 
> This "kind of mind" is only rivaled in terms of sheer moral depravation by the moral scum that has the courage to join the same message board to openly declare that  a given state has the right to shoot 3000 unarmed refugees whose only crime was trying to return to their villages carrying nothing but their personal belongings just because they belonged to the "unofficial" ethnicity of the state.
> 
> These individuals are so unbelievably fucked up in the head that they also think the said state had every right to continue to engage in such practice for the last 65 years and the next 65 if need be.
> 
> But just like most serial killers and pedophiles are unable to recognize their sordid behavior due to their own psychopathy there's no chance in Hell these degenerated individuals will ever recognize theirs.
Click to expand...

What state did all that carnage?


----------



## Kondor3

The Palestinians chose poorly.

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0H3rdfI28s0]Indiana Jones and the Last Crusade: Choose Wisely, Chose Poorly - YouTube[/ame]

Welcome to your consequences.

Vae victus.


----------



## José

docmauser1 said:


> José;7966569 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You have to have at least a cursory knowledge on Israel's history in order to avoid saying the absurdities you said above. All Israeli historians are in perfect agreement that even before the end of the 1948 conflagration Israel had already decided to prevent the return of the displaced arab population. The "border" between Israel and Gaza/West Bank was turned into a free shooting area. Israeli soldiers were authorized to shoot anyone trying to cross them into Israel. More than 3000 unarmed palestinians were murdered by Israel from 1948 to 1951 simply trying to return to their homes, harvest their crops or see their relatives. This happened at least 3 years before the beggining of the palestinian armed struggle, 3 years before the first fedayeen attack registered by israeli historians (May, 1951 if my memory serves me well), two decades before the creation of the PLO and three decades before the creation of Hamas with its rockets and suicide bombers. From 48 to 51 you practically only had palestinians trying to return to their homes. I say "practically" because the few incidents of armed attack during this time period (10%) were caused by Palestinians trying to avenge the deaths of relatives killed by Israel's policy of shooting Palestinians even on their "side" of the fence (when they approached it too much). This historical fact crushes the israeli propaganda that palestinians are kept herded in Gaza and the West Bank and shot dead when they "tresspass" into Israel as a "security measure". What you really have is a state racist to the core killing the unwanted ethnic group in order to maintain an artificial demographics in the western half of the region. Palestinians are not murdered when they try to leave Gaza and the West Bank because of the rockets and suicide bombers. They launch rockets BECAUSE they have been murdered by Israel while trying to return to their places of origin since 1948. The palestinian armed struggle is the direct consequence of Israel's shoot to kill policy in place since 48 not the cause of this policy.
> 
> 
> 
> Who made that up?
Click to expand...




Hossfly said:


> José;7968570 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Originally posted by *Hossfly*
> Imagine what kind of mind says on a forum "Two skyscrappers was too little... it should have been 10 at least."
> 
> 
> 
> 
> This "kind of mind" is only rivaled in terms of sheer moral depravation by the moral scum that has the courage to join the same message board to openly declare that  a given state has the right to shoot 3000 unarmed refugees whose only crime was trying to return to their villages carrying nothing but their personal belongings just because they belonged to the "unofficial" ethnicity of the state.
> 
> These individuals are so unbelievably fucked up in the head that they also think the said state had every right to continue to engage in such practice for the last 65 years and the next 65 if need be.
> 
> But just like most serial killers and pedophiles are unable to recognize their sordid behavior due to their own psychopathy there's no chance in Hell these degenerated individuals will ever recognize theirs.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> What state did all that carnage?
Click to expand...


Pfffftttt... 

"Never try to debate with someone you have to educate first."


----------



## docmauser1

José;7971071 said:
			
		

> Pfffftttt... "Never try to debate with someone you have to educate first."


Pfffftttt.


----------



## Kondor3

docmauser1 said:


> José;7971071 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Pfffftttt... "Never try to debate with someone you have to educate first."
> 
> 
> 
> Pfffftttt.
Click to expand...

Gotta love it when these Palestinian propaganda shills and Militant Islamist apologists start pontificating and acting all faux superior, dont'cha?

They sure are cute little critters...


----------



## georgephillip

docmauser1 said:


> georgephillip said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> docmauser1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Incoherent drivel.
> 
> 
> 
> Care to provide some coherent drivel for transferring millions of Arabs out of Greater Israel?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> You, folks, drivel, of course, the magnificient me talk.
Click to expand...

*Talk of what, genocide or ethnic cleansing?
What do you have to say about this?*

"The Peel Commission of 1937 was the first to propose a two-state solution to the conflict, whereby Palestine would be divided into two states: one Arab state and one Jewish state. 

"The Jewish state would include the coastal plain, Jezreel Valley, Beit She'an and the Galilee, while the Arab state would include Transjordan, Judea and Samaria, the Jordan Valley, and the Negev. 

"The 2 main Jewish leaders, Chaim Weizmann and David Ben-Gurion had convinced the Zionist Congress to approve equivocally the Peel recommendations as a basis for more negotiation. [20] [21] [22] 

"The Arab leadership in Palestine rejected the conclusions and refused to share any land in Palestine with the Jewish population. 

"The rejection of the Peel Commission's proposal by The Arabs led to the establishment of the Woodhead Commission, which rejected the proposal of the Peel Commission as non-applicable.

"In May 1939 the British government released a new policy paper which sought to implement a one-state solution in Palestine, significantly reduced the number of Jewish immigrants allowed to enter Palestine by establishing a quota for Jewish immigration which was set by the British government in the short-term and which would be set by the Arab leadership in the long-term. 

"The quota also placed restrictions on the rights of Jews to buy land from Arabs, in an attempt to limit the socio-political damage. These restrictions remained until the end of the mandate period, a period which occurred in parallel with World War II and the Holocaust, during which many Jewish refugees tried to escape from Europe.[23] 

"As a result, during the 1930s and 1940s the leadership of the Yishuv arranged a couple of illegal immigration waves of Jews to the British Mandate of Palestine (see also Aliyah Bet), which caused even more tensions in the region.

"Ben-Gurion said he wanted to 'concentrate the masses of our people in this country [Palestine] and its environs.'[24] 

"When he proposed accepting the Peel proposals in 1937, which included a Jewish state in part of Palestine, Ben-Gurion told the twentieth Zionist Congress, 'The Jewish state now being offered to us is not the Zionist objective. [...] But it can serve as a decisive stage along the path to greater Zionist implementation. It will consolidate in Palestine, within the shortest possible time, the real Jewish force, which will lead us to our historic goal.[25] 

"In a discussion in the Jewish Agency he said that he wanted a Jewish-Arab agreement 'on the assumption that after we become a strong force, as a result of the creation of the state, we shall abolish partition and expand to the whole of Palestine."

History of the Israeli?Palestinian conflict - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

*What "historic goal" are Jews seeking in Palestine, Drivel, the same one Nazis sought in Poland?*


----------



## Kondor3

Except the Nazis weren't returning to their Ethnic and Spiritual Homeland, and that the Poles weren't actively suicide-bombing and rocketing them,  when they took-on Poland...

There is no hiding the fact that the Jews of Israel intend on resurrecting a Greater Israel (Eretz Yisrael) which includes all of their present-day territory plus the West Bank and Gaza...

Thereby rounding-out their recapture of the old combined kingdoms of Judea and Israel as 'Jewish' territory...

So far, so good... no 'down-side' in sight...


----------



## Hossfly

georgephillip said:


> docmauser1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> georgephillip said:
> 
> 
> 
> Care to provide some coherent drivel for transferring millions of Arabs out of Greater Israel?
> 
> 
> 
> You, folks, drivel, of course, the magnificient me talk.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> *Talk of what, genocide or ethnic cleansing?
> What do you have to say about this?*
> 
> "The Peel Commission of 1937 was the first to propose a two-state solution to the conflict, whereby Palestine would be divided into two states: one Arab state and one Jewish state.
> 
> "The Jewish state would include the coastal plain, Jezreel Valley, Beit She'an and the Galilee, while the Arab state would include Transjordan, Judea and Samaria, the Jordan Valley, and the Negev.
> 
> "The 2 main Jewish leaders, Chaim Weizmann and David Ben-Gurion had convinced the Zionist Congress to approve equivocally the Peel recommendations as a basis for more negotiation. [20] [21] [22]
> 
> "The Arab leadership in Palestine rejected the conclusions and refused to share any land in Palestine with the Jewish population.
> 
> "The rejection of the Peel Commission's proposal by The Arabs led to the establishment of the Woodhead Commission, which rejected the proposal of the Peel Commission as non-applicable.
> 
> "In May 1939 the British government released a new policy paper which sought to implement a one-state solution in Palestine, significantly reduced the number of Jewish immigrants allowed to enter Palestine by establishing a quota for Jewish immigration which was set by the British government in the short-term and which would be set by the Arab leadership in the long-term.
> 
> "The quota also placed restrictions on the rights of Jews to buy land from Arabs, in an attempt to limit the socio-political damage. These restrictions remained until the end of the mandate period, a period which occurred in parallel with World War II and the Holocaust, during which many Jewish refugees tried to escape from Europe.[23]
> 
> "As a result, during the 1930s and 1940s the leadership of the Yishuv arranged a couple of illegal immigration waves of Jews to the British Mandate of Palestine (see also Aliyah Bet), which caused even more tensions in the region.
> 
> "Ben-Gurion said he wanted to 'concentrate the masses of our people in this country [Palestine] and its environs.'[24]
> 
> "When he proposed accepting the Peel proposals in 1937, which included a Jewish state in part of Palestine, Ben-Gurion told the twentieth Zionist Congress, 'The Jewish state now being offered to us is not the Zionist objective. [...] But it can serve as a decisive stage along the path to greater Zionist implementation. It will consolidate in Palestine, within the shortest possible time, the real Jewish force, which will lead us to our historic goal.[25]
> 
> "In a discussion in the Jewish Agency he said that he wanted a Jewish-Arab agreement 'on the assumption that after we become a strong force, as a result of the creation of the state, we shall abolish partition and expand to the whole of Palestine."
> 
> History of the Israeli?Palestinian conflict - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
> 
> *What "historic goal" are Jews seeking in Palestine, Drivel, the same one Nazis sought in Poland?*
Click to expand...

Whereas the Nazis invaded Poland for living space, the Jews owned their land to begin with. God gave it to them. Got any complaints, take it up with Him.


----------



## P F Tinmore

Hossfly said:


> georgephillip said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> docmauser1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> You, folks, drivel, of course, the magnificient me talk.
> 
> 
> 
> *Talk of what, genocide or ethnic cleansing?
> What do you have to say about this?*
> 
> "The Peel Commission of 1937 was the first to propose a two-state solution to the conflict, whereby Palestine would be divided into two states: one Arab state and one Jewish state.
> 
> "The Jewish state would include the coastal plain, Jezreel Valley, Beit She'an and the Galilee, while the Arab state would include Transjordan, Judea and Samaria, the Jordan Valley, and the Negev.
> 
> "The 2 main Jewish leaders, Chaim Weizmann and David Ben-Gurion had convinced the Zionist Congress to approve equivocally the Peel recommendations as a basis for more negotiation. [20] [21] [22]
> 
> "The Arab leadership in Palestine rejected the conclusions and refused to share any land in Palestine with the Jewish population.
> 
> "The rejection of the Peel Commission's proposal by The Arabs led to the establishment of the Woodhead Commission, which rejected the proposal of the Peel Commission as non-applicable.
> 
> "In May 1939 the British government released a new policy paper which sought to implement a one-state solution in Palestine, significantly reduced the number of Jewish immigrants allowed to enter Palestine by establishing a quota for Jewish immigration which was set by the British government in the short-term and which would be set by the Arab leadership in the long-term.
> 
> "The quota also placed restrictions on the rights of Jews to buy land from Arabs, in an attempt to limit the socio-political damage. These restrictions remained until the end of the mandate period, a period which occurred in parallel with World War II and the Holocaust, during which many Jewish refugees tried to escape from Europe.[23]
> 
> "As a result, during the 1930s and 1940s the leadership of the Yishuv arranged a couple of illegal immigration waves of Jews to the British Mandate of Palestine (see also Aliyah Bet), which caused even more tensions in the region.
> 
> "Ben-Gurion said he wanted to 'concentrate the masses of our people in this country [Palestine] and its environs.'[24]
> 
> "When he proposed accepting the Peel proposals in 1937, which included a Jewish state in part of Palestine, Ben-Gurion told the twentieth Zionist Congress, 'The Jewish state now being offered to us is not the Zionist objective. [...] But it can serve as a decisive stage along the path to greater Zionist implementation. It will consolidate in Palestine, within the shortest possible time, the real Jewish force, which will lead us to our historic goal.[25]
> 
> "In a discussion in the Jewish Agency he said that he wanted a Jewish-Arab agreement 'on the assumption that after we become a strong force, as a result of the creation of the state, we shall abolish partition and expand to the whole of Palestine."
> 
> History of the Israeli?Palestinian conflict - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
> 
> *What "historic goal" are Jews seeking in Palestine, Drivel, the same one Nazis sought in Poland?*
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Whereas the Nazis invaded Poland for living space, the Jews owned their land to begin with. God gave it to them. Got any complaints, take it up with Him.
Click to expand...


Yeah but God took it back because they wouldn't behave.


----------



## Hossfly

P F Tinmore said:


> Hossfly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> georgephillip said:
> 
> 
> 
> *Talk of what, genocide or ethnic cleansing?
> What do you have to say about this?*
> 
> "The Peel Commission of 1937 was the first to propose a two-state solution to the conflict, whereby Palestine would be divided into two states: one Arab state and one Jewish state.
> 
> "The Jewish state would include the coastal plain, Jezreel Valley, Beit She'an and the Galilee, while the Arab state would include Transjordan, Judea and Samaria, the Jordan Valley, and the Negev.
> 
> "The 2 main Jewish leaders, Chaim Weizmann and David Ben-Gurion had convinced the Zionist Congress to approve equivocally the Peel recommendations as a basis for more negotiation. [20] [21] [22]
> 
> "The Arab leadership in Palestine rejected the conclusions and refused to share any land in Palestine with the Jewish population.
> 
> "The rejection of the Peel Commission's proposal by The Arabs led to the establishment of the Woodhead Commission, which rejected the proposal of the Peel Commission as non-applicable.
> 
> "In May 1939 the British government released a new policy paper which sought to implement a one-state solution in Palestine, significantly reduced the number of Jewish immigrants allowed to enter Palestine by establishing a quota for Jewish immigration which was set by the British government in the short-term and which would be set by the Arab leadership in the long-term.
> 
> "The quota also placed restrictions on the rights of Jews to buy land from Arabs, in an attempt to limit the socio-political damage. These restrictions remained until the end of the mandate period, a period which occurred in parallel with World War II and the Holocaust, during which many Jewish refugees tried to escape from Europe.[23]
> 
> "As a result, during the 1930s and 1940s the leadership of the Yishuv arranged a couple of illegal immigration waves of Jews to the British Mandate of Palestine (see also Aliyah Bet), which caused even more tensions in the region.
> 
> "Ben-Gurion said he wanted to 'concentrate the masses of our people in this country [Palestine] and its environs.'[24]
> 
> "When he proposed accepting the Peel proposals in 1937, which included a Jewish state in part of Palestine, Ben-Gurion told the twentieth Zionist Congress, 'The Jewish state now being offered to us is not the Zionist objective. [...] But it can serve as a decisive stage along the path to greater Zionist implementation. It will consolidate in Palestine, within the shortest possible time, the real Jewish force, which will lead us to our historic goal.[25]
> 
> "In a discussion in the Jewish Agency he said that he wanted a Jewish-Arab agreement 'on the assumption that after we become a strong force, as a result of the creation of the state, we shall abolish partition and expand to the whole of Palestine."
> 
> History of the Israeli?Palestinian conflict - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
> 
> *What "historic goal" are Jews seeking in Palestine, Drivel, the same one Nazis sought in Poland?*
> 
> 
> 
> Whereas the Nazis invaded Poland for living space, the Jews owned their land to begin with. God gave it to them. Got any complaints, take it up with Him.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Yeah but God took it back because they wouldn't behave.
Click to expand...

They're behaving now so all is forgiven And that's a fact, Jack.


----------



## P F Tinmore

Hossfly said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Hossfly said:
> 
> 
> 
> Whereas the Nazis invaded Poland for living space, the Jews owned their land to begin with. God gave it to them. Got any complaints, take it up with Him.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Yeah but God took it back because they wouldn't behave.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> They're behaving now so all is forgiven And that's a fact, Jack.
Click to expand...


I thought the Messiah was to call his people back to the promised land not a bunch of criminals out of Europe.


----------



## Kondor3

P F Tinmore said:


> "..._Yeah but God took it back because they wouldn't behave._"


Much like He did for the Palestinians in 1948... and gave it back to the Jews at the same time.


----------



## georgephillip

Kondor3 said:


> Except the Nazis weren't returning to their Ethnic and Spiritual Homeland, and that the Poles weren't actively suicide-bombing and rocketing them,  when they took-on Poland...
> 
> There is no hiding the fact that the Jews of Israel intend on resurrecting a Greater Israel (Eretz Yisrael) which includes all of their present-day territory plus the West Bank and Gaza...
> 
> Thereby rounding-out their recapture of the old combined kingdoms of Judea and Israel as 'Jewish' territory...
> 
> So far, so good... no 'down-side' in sight...


You still haven't explained why Jews alone are entitled to land their ancestors pillaged thousands of years ago. Hint: it has nothing to do with scary Jews with painted faces or big guns; it has a great deal to do with Jews serving western imperial interests at least as devoutly as some of them serve their slave-like god. Maybe it's Original Sin?


----------



## Kondor3

georgephillip said:


> "...You still haven't explained why Jews alone are entitled to land..."


Right of Conquest, with the covert, tacit approval of The West, allowing it to stand, because we like them better than you. No further explanation is necessary.


----------



## Hossfly

georgephillip said:


> Kondor3 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Except the Nazis weren't returning to their Ethnic and Spiritual Homeland, and that the Poles weren't actively suicide-bombing and rocketing them,  when they took-on Poland...
> 
> There is no hiding the fact that the Jews of Israel intend on resurrecting a Greater Israel (Eretz Yisrael) which includes all of their present-day territory plus the West Bank and Gaza...
> 
> Thereby rounding-out their recapture of the old combined kingdoms of Judea and Israel as 'Jewish' territory...
> 
> So far, so good... no 'down-side' in sight...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You still haven't explained why Jews alone are entitled to land their ancestors pillaged thousands of years ago. Hint: it has nothing to do with scary Jews with painted faces or big guns; it has a great deal to do with Jews serving western imperial interests at least as devoutly as some of them serve their slave-like god. Maybe it's Original Sin?
Click to expand...

Once upon a time, in a land far, far away, lived a prince named Moses.............


----------



## georgephillip

Kondor3 said:


> georgephillip said:
> 
> 
> 
> "...You still haven't explained why Jews alone are entitled to land..."
> 
> 
> 
> Right of Conquest, with the covert, tacit approval of The West, allowing it to stand, because we like them better than you. No further explanation is necessary.
Click to expand...

The right of conquest expired with your pal Hitler.
Maybe you should tell Bibi?


----------



## RoccoR

georgephillip,  _et al,_

This sounds really special, but I still don't know what it means.



georgephillip said:


> You still haven't explained why Jews alone are entitled to land their ancestors pillaged thousands of years ago. Hint: it has nothing to do with scary Jews with painted faces or big guns; it has a great deal to do with Jews serving western imperial interests at least as devoutly as some of them serve their slave-like god. Maybe it's Original Sin?


*(COMMENT)*

So make it clear for an old man.  What is your theory and allegation?

Most Respectfully,
R


----------



## georgephillip

RoccoR said:


> georgephillip,  _et al,_
> 
> This sounds really special, but I still don't know what it means.
> 
> 
> 
> georgephillip said:
> 
> 
> 
> You still haven't explained why Jews alone are entitled to land their ancestors pillaged thousands of years ago. Hint: it has nothing to do with scary Jews with painted faces or big guns; it has a great deal to do with Jews serving western imperial interests at least as devoutly as some of them serve their slave-like god. Maybe it's Original Sin?
> 
> 
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> So make it clear for an old man.  What is your theory and allegation?
> 
> Most Respectfully,
> R
Click to expand...

*This old man remembers how the daily violence between Catholics and Protestants in Northern Ireland in 1969 sometimes trumped the daily body count in South Vietnam; the Irish mayhem began in 1609 when an English king evicted two large Catholic clans from north Ireland and replaced them with 20,000 Protestants from England and Scotland, founding the Plantation of Ulster.

My allegation is confirmed by the first British Governor of Jerusalem:*

"Sir Ronald Storrs, the first Governor of Jerusalem, certainly had no illusions about what a 'Jewish homeland' in Palestine meant for the British Empire: 'It will form for England,' he said, 'a little loyal Jewish Ulster in a sea of potentially hostile Arabism.'

*British Capitalists used the power of the state to pit one religion against another in Ireland and Palestine. I don't know that I would call it "special" or not, Rocco, but it's certainly obvious to this old man how the English invented the tactic of using foreign settlers to drive a wedge between colonial rulers and an indigenous population, be it Arab or Irish.*

Divide and Conquer as Imperial Rules - FPIF


----------



## RoccoR

georgephillip,  _et al,_

So as I understand it, the allegation is that the UK used the Balfour Declaration as a tool to introduce British Colonial power _(English imperial ambitions)_ to the Middle East.  And you are using a single comment by Sir Ronald Storrs ("a little loyal Jewish Ulster") as the foundation for that allegation.



georgephillip said:


> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> 
> georgephillip,  _et al,_
> 
> This sounds really special, but I still don't know what it means.
> 
> 
> 
> georgephillip said:
> 
> 
> 
> You still haven't explained why Jews alone are entitled to land their ancestors pillaged thousands of years ago. Hint: it has nothing to do with scary Jews with painted faces or big guns; it has a great deal to do with Jews serving western imperial interests at least as devoutly as some of them serve their slave-like god. Maybe it's Original Sin?
> 
> 
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> So make it clear for an old man.  What is your theory and allegation?
> 
> Most Respectfully,
> R
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> *This old man remembers how the daily violence between Catholics and Protestants in Northern Ireland in 1969 sometimes trumped the daily body count in South Vietnam; the Irish mayhem began in 1609 when an English king evicted two large Catholic clans from north Ireland and replaced them with 20,000 Protestants from England and Scotland, founding the Plantation of Ulster.
> 
> My allegation is confirmed by the first British Governor of Jerusalem:*
> 
> "Sir Ronald Storrs, the first Governor of Jerusalem, certainly had no illusions about what a 'Jewish homeland' in Palestine meant for the British Empire: 'It will form for England,' he said, 'a little loyal Jewish Ulster in a sea of potentially hostile Arabism.'
> 
> *British Capitalists used the power of the state to pit one religion against another in Ireland and Palestine. I don't know that I would call it "special" or not, Rocco, but it's certainly obvious to this old man how the English invented the tactic of using foreign settlers to drive a wedge between colonial rulers and an indigenous population, be it Arab or Irish.*
> 
> Divide and Conquer as Imperial Rules - FPIF
Click to expand...

*(COMMENT)*

I'm not sure I see any evidence for Post WWII "English imperial ambitions."  

But you are sure getting your monies worth from of this one comment out of Sir Ronald.

Most Respectfully,
R


----------



## P F Tinmore

RoccoR said:


> georgephillip,  _et al,_
> 
> So as I understand it, the allegation is that the UK used the Balfour Declaration as a tool to introduce British Colonial power _(English imperial ambitions)_ to the Middle East.  And you are using a single comment by Sir Ronald Storrs ("a little loyal Jewish Ulster") as the foundation for that allegation.
> 
> 
> 
> georgephillip said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> 
> georgephillip,  _et al,_
> 
> This sounds really special, but I still don't know what it means.
> 
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> So make it clear for an old man.  What is your theory and allegation?
> 
> Most Respectfully,
> R
> 
> 
> 
> *This old man remembers how the daily violence between Catholics and Protestants in Northern Ireland in 1969 sometimes trumped the daily body count in South Vietnam; the Irish mayhem began in 1609 when an English king evicted two large Catholic clans from north Ireland and replaced them with 20,000 Protestants from England and Scotland, founding the Plantation of Ulster.
> 
> My allegation is confirmed by the first British Governor of Jerusalem:*
> 
> "Sir Ronald Storrs, the first Governor of Jerusalem, certainly had no illusions about what a 'Jewish homeland' in Palestine meant for the British Empire: 'It will form for England,' he said, 'a little loyal Jewish Ulster in a sea of potentially hostile Arabism.'
> 
> *British Capitalists used the power of the state to pit one religion against another in Ireland and Palestine. I don't know that I would call it "special" or not, Rocco, but it's certainly obvious to this old man how the English invented the tactic of using foreign settlers to drive a wedge between colonial rulers and an indigenous population, be it Arab or Irish.*
> 
> Divide and Conquer as Imperial Rules - FPIF
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> I'm not sure I see any evidence for Post WWII "English imperial ambitions."
> 
> But you are sure getting your monies worth from of this one comment out of Sir Ronald.
> 
> Most Respectfully,
> R
Click to expand...


BTW, what was Churchill's position before he became prime minister?


----------



## docmauser1

georgephillip said:


> docmauser1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> georgephillip said:
> 
> 
> 
> Care to provide some coherent drivel for transferring millions of Arabs out of Greater Israel?
> 
> 
> 
> You, folks, drivel, of course, the magnificient me talk.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Talk of what, genocide or ethnic cleansing? What do you have to say about this?
> "The Peel Commission of 1937 was the first to propose a two-state solution to the conflict, whereby Palestine would be divided into two states: one Arab state and one Jewish state.
> "The Jewish state would include the coastal plain, Jezreel Valley, Beit She'an and the Galilee, while the Arab state would include Transjordan, Judea and Samaria, the Jordan Valley, and the Negev.
> "The 2 main Jewish leaders, Chaim Weizmann and David Ben-Gurion had convinced the Zionist Congress to approve equivocally the Peel recommendations as a basis for more negotiation. [20] [21] [22]
> "The Arab leadership in Palestine rejected the conclusions and refused to share any land in Palestine with the Jewish population.
> "The rejection of the Peel Commission's proposal by The Arabs led to the establishment of the Woodhead Commission, which rejected the proposal of the Peel Commission as non-applicable.
> "In May 1939 the British government released a new policy paper which sought to implement a one-state solution in Palestine, significantly reduced the number of Jewish immigrants allowed to enter Palestine by establishing a quota for Jewish immigration which was set by the British government in the short-term and which would be set by the Arab leadership in the long-term.
Click to expand...

Arab fault, indeed! But they didn't forget to drop in on jewish development, of course, and with appetites growing decided to redistribute jewish stuff.


georgephillip said:


> ...History of the Israeli?Palestinian conflict - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


That leftista-mccarthyista Sternhell et.al..


georgephillip said:


> What "historic goal" are Jews seeking in Palestine, Drivel, the same one Nazis sought in Poland?


Drivelaggio.


----------



## Hossfly

georgephillip said:


> Kondor3 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> georgephillip said:
> 
> 
> 
> "...You still haven't explained why Jews alone are entitled to land..."
> 
> 
> 
> Right of Conquest, with the covert, tacit approval of The West, allowing it to stand, because we like them better than you. No further explanation is necessary.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> The right of conquest expired with your pal Hitler.
> Maybe you should tell Bibi?
Click to expand...

Does anyone think that Georgie Boy is brave enough to tell China to get out of Tibet or to Turkey to stop occupying part of Cyprus.  Maybe he can get Calypso Louis Farrakhan to help him.


----------



## RoccoR

P F Tinmore,  _et al,_

For much of the conflict between the Arabs-Palestinians and the Israelis, there has been a series of discussions, from nearly every quarter, of a totally counterproductive nature.  These discussions cover nearly every facet and aspect of the historical, legal, economic, military, political, and moral arguments that can be made.  Nothing said today is anything new.  Nothing said today, is original thought.  And clearly nothing said today is a viable effort towards peace and reconciliation.



P F Tinmore said:


> BTW, what was Churchill's position before he became prime minister?


*(COMMENT)*

Nothing that thought, or did not think, makes a difference more than a half century later.  It is merely another platform from which to stage another argument that will circle around to the same positions that have been argued many times.  Each side blaming someone else for the failure to achieve peace.

Neither side, especially on the part of the Arab-Palestinian, tried in any fashion to achieve peace.  Neither side was willing to compromise.  Any hardship endured in the last six decades were equally caused by the waring factions.

The question here, about Sir Winston Churchill, is totally irrelevant.  Everyone knows that the remaining Mandate Powers had been totally transferred to the UNPC on the morning of the termination.  The Jewish Agency declared its independence under the watch of the UNPC; holding the Mandatory reigns.  And it is also well known that the UNPC, reported to the UNSC.

Each side knows that in some way, they each aggravated the conditions that propelled the continuation of the conflict; especially over the last six (+) decades.

Most Respectfully,
R


----------



## georgephillip

P F Tinmore said:


> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> 
> georgephillip,  _et al,_
> 
> So as I understand it, the allegation is that the UK used the Balfour Declaration as a tool to introduce British Colonial power _(English imperial ambitions)_ to the Middle East.  And you are using a single comment by Sir Ronald Storrs ("a little loyal Jewish Ulster") as the foundation for that allegation.
> 
> 
> 
> georgephillip said:
> 
> 
> 
> *This old man remembers how the daily violence between Catholics and Protestants in Northern Ireland in 1969 sometimes trumped the daily body count in South Vietnam; the Irish mayhem began in 1609 when an English king evicted two large Catholic clans from north Ireland and replaced them with 20,000 Protestants from England and Scotland, founding the Plantation of Ulster.
> 
> My allegation is confirmed by the first British Governor of Jerusalem:*
> 
> "Sir Ronald Storrs, the first Governor of Jerusalem, certainly had no illusions about what a 'Jewish homeland' in Palestine meant for the British Empire: 'It will form for England,' he said, 'a little loyal Jewish Ulster in a sea of potentially hostile Arabism.'
> 
> *British Capitalists used the power of the state to pit one religion against another in Ireland and Palestine. I don't know that I would call it "special" or not, Rocco, but it's certainly obvious to this old man how the English invented the tactic of using foreign settlers to drive a wedge between colonial rulers and an indigenous population, be it Arab or Irish.*
> 
> Divide and Conquer as Imperial Rules - FPIF
> 
> 
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> I'm not sure I see any evidence for Post WWII "English imperial ambitions."
> 
> But you are sure getting your monies worth from of this one comment out of Sir Ronald.
> 
> Most Respectfully,
> R
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> BTW, what was Churchill's position before he became prime minister?
Click to expand...

*Winnie was racist bigot and anti-Semite with both drunken eyes fixed firmly on Empire. He supported a Jewish homeland in Palestine because he believed it undercut Socialism's appeal to many European Jews:*

"The British ruling class, which was rabidly anti-Semitic, had its own reasons for this support. 

"Out of the First World War, Arab nationalism had emerged as a major threat to domination of the Middle East and Britain hoped that Zionists could be a useful force for policing the Arabs. 

"But Winston Churchill gave another reason for supporting Zionism-defeat of the left wing 'International Jews.' In an astoundingly anti-Semitic article titled 'Zionism versus Bolshevism,' Churchill wrote,

"First there are the Jews who, dwelling in every country throughout the world, identify themselves with that country, enter into its national life and, while adhering faithfully to their own religion, regard themselves as citizens in the fullest sense of the State which has received them....

"In violent opposition to all this sphere of Jewish effort rise the schemes of the International Jews.... 

"This movement among the Jews is not new. From the days of Spartacus...to those of Karl Marx, and down to Trotsky (Russia), Bela Kun (Hungary), Rosa Luxemburg (Germany), and Emma Goldman (United States), this world-wide conspiracy for the overthrow of civilization and for the reconstitution of society on the basis of arrested development, of envious malevolence, and impossible equality, has been steadily growing ...

"It becomes, therefore, specially important to foster and develop any strongly-marked Jewish movement which leads directly away from these fatal associations. And it is here that Zionism has such a deep significance for the whole world at the present time.... 

"hould there be created in our own life rime by the banks of the Jordan a Jewish State under the protection of the British Crown, which might comprise three or four millions of Jews, an event would have occurred in the history of the world which would, from every point of view, be beneficial, and would be especially in harmony with the truest interests of the British Empire."

The Hidden Roots of Zionism


----------



## MHunterB

P F Tinmore said:


> Hossfly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> Yeah but God took it back because they wouldn't behave.
> 
> 
> 
> They're behaving now so all is forgiven And that's a fact, Jack.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I thought the Messiah was to call his people back to the promised land not a bunch of criminals out of Europe.
Click to expand...


Then you thought wrong about it, as you always do.


----------



## MHunterB

I'm thinking that the whole reason for this thread is that Georgie boy want to fantasize about himself being like Nelson Mandela.....

I understand that G-boy is a male of African ancestry:  I think that's as far as it goes, isn't it????


----------



## ForeverYoung436

P F Tinmore said:


> Hossfly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> Yeah but God took it back because they wouldn't behave.
> 
> 
> 
> They're behaving now so all is forgiven And that's a fact, Jack.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I thought the Messiah was to call his people back to the promised land not a bunch of criminals out of Europe.
Click to expand...


By the Messiah, are you talking about the Jewish one or the Christian one?  If you're talking about the Jewish one, the Jewish people have to lay the groundwork and come back to the Promised Land, before the Messiah comes, according to most Rabbinic opinions.


----------



## georgephillip

Hossfly said:


> georgephillip said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Kondor3 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Right of Conquest, with the covert, tacit approval of The West, allowing it to stand, because we like them better than you. No further explanation is necessary.
> 
> 
> 
> The right of conquest expired with your pal Hitler.
> Maybe you should tell Bibi?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Does anyone think that Georgie Boy is brave enough to tell China to get out of Tibet or to Turkey to stop occupying part of Cyprus.  Maybe he can get Calypso Louis Farrakhan to help him.
Click to expand...

I'm brave enough to condemn China's occupation of Tibet and Turkey's genocide against Armenians while holding my country to the same standards in Afghanistan and Korea. What's Hossie afraid of?


----------



## MHunterB

Rocco, I find a basic dishonesty in virtually ALL 'pro-Palestinian' arguments is that what they are really arguing is not 'Israel is behaving poorly' - but "Israel should not exist at all".

While that remains their basic sentiment, I truly don't see any point in 'discussion' or 'negotiation' with them (HAMAS, PLO, etc) than there'd have been with the Nazis - OR with the Christians who piously herded our ancestors into church to hear the 'Good Friday' calumny against themselves for deicide, and the concomitant demands to convert.......


----------



## Hossfly

georgephillip said:


> Hossfly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> georgephillip said:
> 
> 
> 
> The right of conquest expired with your pal Hitler.
> Maybe you should tell Bibi?
> 
> 
> 
> Does anyone think that Georgie Boy is brave enough to tell China to get out of Tibet or to Turkey to stop occupying part of Cyprus.  Maybe he can get Calypso Louis Farrakhan to help him.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I'm brave enough to condemn China's occupation of Tibet and Turkey's genocide against Armenians while holding my country to the same standards in Afghanistan and Korea. What's Hossie afraid of?
Click to expand...

Truthfully, Hossfly is deathly afraid of the scourge of Islam and Sharia.


----------



## Hossfly

MHunterB said:


> I'm thinking that the whole reason for this thread is that Georgie boy want to fantasize about himself being like Nelson Mandela.....
> 
> I understand that G-boy is a male of African ancestry:  I think that's as far as it goes, isn't it????


I think it goes deeper than this, Marg.  I believe that Georgie Boy needs scapegoats in his life and is just using the Arabs as pawns.  Do you really think he cares about the Arabs except to use them in his fight against the Jews?  You probably realize how Calypso Louis Farakhan goes on and on about the Jews.  Georgie Boy is really no different.


----------



## georgephillip

RoccoR said:


> georgephillip,  _et al,_
> 
> So as I understand it, the allegation is that the UK used the Balfour Declaration as a tool to introduce British Colonial power _(English imperial ambitions)_ to the Middle East.  And you are using a single comment by Sir Ronald Storrs ("a little loyal Jewish Ulster") as the foundation for that allegation.
> 
> 
> 
> georgephillip said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> 
> georgephillip,  _et al,_
> 
> This sounds really special, but I still don't know what it means.
> 
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> So make it clear for an old man.  What is your theory and allegation?
> 
> Most Respectfully,
> R
> 
> 
> 
> *This old man remembers how the daily violence between Catholics and Protestants in Northern Ireland in 1969 sometimes trumped the daily body count in South Vietnam; the Irish mayhem began in 1609 when an English king evicted two large Catholic clans from north Ireland and replaced them with 20,000 Protestants from England and Scotland, founding the Plantation of Ulster.
> 
> My allegation is confirmed by the first British Governor of Jerusalem:*
> 
> "Sir Ronald Storrs, the first Governor of Jerusalem, certainly had no illusions about what a 'Jewish homeland' in Palestine meant for the British Empire: 'It will form for England,' he said, 'a little loyal Jewish Ulster in a sea of potentially hostile Arabism.'
> 
> *British Capitalists used the power of the state to pit one religion against another in Ireland and Palestine. I don't know that I would call it "special" or not, Rocco, but it's certainly obvious to this old man how the English invented the tactic of using foreign settlers to drive a wedge between colonial rulers and an indigenous population, be it Arab or Irish.*
> 
> Divide and Conquer as Imperial Rules - FPIF
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> I'm not sure I see any evidence for Post WWII "English imperial ambitions."
> 
> But you are sure getting your monies worth from of this one comment out of Sir Ronald.
> 
> Most Respectfully,
> R
Click to expand...

*Post WWII the English chose Democracy over Empire and stood aside for the greatest purveyor of violence in the world to take control of western imperial ambitions, particularly in the Middle East:*

"To review briefly some of the relevant history: During World War II, US planners recognized that the US would emerge from the war in a position of overwhelming power. 

"It is quite clear from the documentary record that 'President Roosevelt was aiming at United States hegemony in the postwar world,' to quote the assessment of diplomatic historian Geoffrey Warner. 

"Plans were developed to control what was called a *Grand Area*, a region encompassing the Western Hemisphere, the Far East, *the former British empire -- including the crucial Middle East oil reserves* -- and as much of Eurasia as possible, or at the very least its core industrial regions in Western Europe and the southern European states. 

"The latter were regarded as essential for ensuring control of Middle East energy resources. Within these expansive domains, the US was to maintain 'unquestioned power' with 'military and economic supremacy,' while ensuring the 'limitation of any exercise of sovereignty' by states that might interfere with its global designs. 

"The doctrines still prevail, though their reach has declined."

American Decline: Causes and Consequences


----------



## georgephillip

docmauser1 said:


> georgephillip said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> docmauser1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> You, folks, drivel, of course, the magnificient me talk.
> 
> 
> 
> Talk of what, genocide or ethnic cleansing? What do you have to say about this?
> "The Peel Commission of 1937 was the first to propose a two-state solution to the conflict, whereby Palestine would be divided into two states: one Arab state and one Jewish state.
> "The Jewish state would include the coastal plain, Jezreel Valley, Beit She'an and the Galilee, while the Arab state would include Transjordan, Judea and Samaria, the Jordan Valley, and the Negev.
> "The 2 main Jewish leaders, Chaim Weizmann and David Ben-Gurion had convinced the Zionist Congress to approve equivocally the Peel recommendations as a basis for more negotiation. [20] [21] [22]
> "The Arab leadership in Palestine rejected the conclusions and refused to share any land in Palestine with the Jewish population.
> "The rejection of the Peel Commission's proposal by The Arabs led to the establishment of the Woodhead Commission, which rejected the proposal of the Peel Commission as non-applicable.
> "In May 1939 the British government released a new policy paper which sought to implement a one-state solution in Palestine, significantly reduced the number of Jewish immigrants allowed to enter Palestine by establishing a quota for Jewish immigration which was set by the British government in the short-term and which would be set by the Arab leadership in the long-term.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Arab fault, indeed! But they didn't forget to drop in on jewish development, of course, and with appetites growing decided to redistribute jewish stuff.
> 
> 
> georgephillip said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...History of the Israeli?Palestinian conflict - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> That leftista-mccarthyista Sternhell et.al..
> 
> 
> georgephillip said:
> 
> 
> 
> What "historic goal" are Jews seeking in Palestine, Drivel, the same one Nazis sought in Poland?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Drivelaggio.
Click to expand...

*Maybe Herr Drivel seeks the same goals in Palestine that Winnie sought in Ireland?*

"It was 'divide and conquer' that made it possible for an insignificant island in the north of Europe to rule the world. Division and chaos, tribal, religious and ethnic hatred, were the secret to empire. Guns and artillery were always in the background in case things went awry, but in fact, it rarely came to that.

"It would appear the Israelis have paid close attention to English colonial policy because their policies in the Occupied Territories bear a distressing resemblance to Ireland under the Penal Laws. 

"The Israeli Knesset recently prevented Palestinians married to Arab Israelis from acquiring citizenship, a page lifted almost directly from the 1692 laws. 

"Israeli human rights activist Yael Stein called the action 'racist,' and Knesset member Zeeva Galon said it denied 'the fundamental right of Arab Israelis to start families.' 

"Even the U.S. is uncomfortable with the legislation. 'The new law,' said U.S. State Department spokesman Phillip Reeker, 'singles out one group for different treatment than others.'

*"Which, of course, was the whole point."*

Divide and Conquer as Imperial Rules - FPIF


----------



## docmauser1

georgephillip said:


> docmauser1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> georgephillip said:
> 
> 
> 
> Talk of what, genocide or ethnic cleansing? What do you have to say about this?
> "The Peel Commission of 1937 was the first to propose a two-state solution to the conflict, whereby Palestine would be divided into two states: one Arab state and one Jewish state.
> "The Jewish state would include the coastal plain, Jezreel Valley, Beit She'an and the Galilee, while the Arab state would include Transjordan, Judea and Samaria, the Jordan Valley, and the Negev.
> "The 2 main Jewish leaders, Chaim Weizmann and David Ben-Gurion had convinced the Zionist Congress to approve equivocally the Peel recommendations as a basis for more negotiation. [20] [21] [22]
> "The Arab leadership in Palestine rejected the conclusions and refused to share any land in Palestine with the Jewish population.
> "The rejection of the Peel Commission's proposal by The Arabs led to the establishment of the Woodhead Commission, which rejected the proposal of the Peel Commission as non-applicable.
> "In May 1939 the British government released a new policy paper which sought to implement a one-state solution in Palestine, significantly reduced the number of Jewish immigrants allowed to enter Palestine by establishing a quota for Jewish immigration which was set by the British government in the short-term and which would be set by the Arab leadership in the long-term.
> 
> 
> 
> Arab fault, indeed! But they didn't forget to drop in on jewish development, of course, and with appetites growing decided to redistribute jewish stuff.That leftista-mccarthyista Sternhell et.al..
> 
> 
> georgephillip said:
> 
> 
> 
> What "historic goal" are Jews seeking in Palestine, Drivel, the same one Nazis sought in Poland?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Drivelaggio.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Maybe Herr Drivel seeks the same goals in Palestine that Winnie sought in Ireland?
Click to expand...

Drivellaggio.


georgephillip said:


> ... "It would appear the Israelis have paid close attention to English colonial policy because their policies in the Occupied Territories bear a distressing resemblance to Ireland under the Penal Laws....
> fpif.org FPIF


"Foreign Policy in Focus", a project of the "Institute For Policy Studies" - a leftozaurus prancing in between the extreme civil rights movements to the feminist and gay rights movements . Why would our honorable georgephillip pick one the gayest dumps to fish garbage from?


----------



## Kondor3

georgephillip said:


> ".._.Post WWII the English chose Democracy over Empire_..."


Correction...

Post-WWII, the English had bled themselves white during two world wars within 25 years of each other, and become bankrupt, and their cities lay largely in shambles, and they needed to rebuild, and could no longer afford an empire, which they had tapped deeply in order to stay alive during those two world wars. They had reached their limit on their credit cards.

So they walked away from their Empire; not by choice, but forced to do so by circumstances.

Chose? Nonsense.


----------



## RoccoR

Kondor3, georgephillip, _et al,_

At the end of WWII, there was this phase of "neo-colonialism, the last stage of "imperialism;" or as some would say, "Post-Colonialism." 



Kondor3 said:


> georgephillip said:
> 
> 
> 
> ".._.Post WWII the English chose Democracy over Empire_..."
> 
> 
> 
> Correction...
> 
> Post-WWII, the English had bled themselves white during two world wars within 25 years of each other, and become bankrupt, and their cities lay largely in shambles, and they needed to rebuild, and could no longer afford an empire, which they had tapped deeply in order to stay alive during those two world wars. They had reached their limit on their credit cards.
> 
> So they walked away from their Empire; not by choice, but forced to do so by circumstances.
> 
> Chose? Nonsense.
Click to expand...

*(COMMENT)*

Clearly, colonial holdings had to pay for themselves.  Yes, --- the was a strong economic component as our friend "Kondor3" suggests.  While the major colonial powers were willing to pay a certain amount in the maintenance and upkeep of their individual realms, there was this emerging concept of "self-determination" and the move to divest holdings.  The replacement to colonial outposts was the movement of the Allied Powers towards small, regional hegemonies.  Which is not the same thing as a colony.  The US and Soviet Union were the first to establish a network of regional hegemonies; which many saw as the latent framework behind the "Cold War."

Today, while there are still a few protectorates and unincorporated territories _(the US having a half dozen or so)_, most of the vestiges of colonialism are gone.  The Allied Powers and World Associate Powers have either political-military hegemonies, political-economic hegemonies, or regional defense pacts alliances.  There are a few cartels _(which mimic political-economic mechanisms)_, but by and large, they are single economic commodity based; not with the capacity to align defensively against an aggressor.  Kuwait was an example of a cartel member that was exceptionally strong economically, but unable to defend itself regionally.

France tried to maintain some of its colonial holdings after WWII, but found it beyond their capability; most notably was Indochina.

Most Respectfully,
R


----------



## georgephillip

Kondor3 said:


> georgephillip said:
> 
> 
> 
> ".._.Post WWII the English chose Democracy over Empire_..."
> 
> 
> 
> Correction...
> 
> Post-WWII, the English had bled themselves white during two world wars within 25 years of each other, and become bankrupt, and their cities lay largely in shambles, and they needed to rebuild, and could no longer afford an empire, which they had tapped deeply in order to stay alive during those two world wars. They had reached their limit on their credit cards.
> 
> So they walked away from their Empire; not by choice, but forced to do so by circumstances.
> 
> Chose? Nonsense.
Click to expand...

It was Empire which bled England into two world wars and it was Empire the English chose to walk away from in 1945, not that the greatest purveyor of violence in the world would have tolerated any "Nonsense" to the contrary. (Ask the Greeks)


----------



## Hossfly

georgephillip said:


> Kondor3 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> georgephillip said:
> 
> 
> 
> ".._.Post WWII the English chose Democracy over Empire_..."
> 
> 
> 
> Correction...
> 
> Post-WWII, the English had bled themselves white during two world wars within 25 years of each other, and become bankrupt, and their cities lay largely in shambles, and they needed to rebuild, and could no longer afford an empire, which they had tapped deeply in order to stay alive during those two world wars. They had reached their limit on their credit cards.
> 
> So they walked away from their Empire; not by choice, but forced to do so by circumstances.
> 
> Chose? Nonsense.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> It was Empire which bled England into two world wars and it was Empire the English chose to walk away from in 1945, not that the greatest purveyor of violence in the world would have tolerated any "Nonsense" to the contrary. (Ask the Greeks)
Click to expand...

Are you still here, Georgie Boy?  How can you stand to live in a country that you consider "the greatest purveyor of violence in the world" when you can take your measly social security check and go live in some backwards country where you would be able to live like a king.  Say, since Georgie Boy has Commie ideas, maybe he can ask that kid who runs North Korea if he can be his valet and then perhaps be able to partake some of the perks that kid gets.  If Georgie Boy can pull this off, he will finally experience some of the finer things in life that it appears he missed out on.

Kim Jong Un's Luxurious 'Seven-Star' Lifestyle Of Yachts, Booze And Food


----------



## toastman

I stopped reading his posts while ago. I can't stand them anymore. All he does is copy pastes paragraphs from articles, and follows it up with a snarky remark.....

George, we want to hear YOUR opinion ! Do you have any ?!!?!!?!?


----------



## georgephillip

toastman said:


> I stopped reading his posts while ago. I can't stand them anymore. All he does is copy pastes paragraphs from articles, and follows it up with a snarky remark.....
> 
> George, we want to hear YOUR opinion ! Do you have any ?!!?!!?!?


USA!
USA!!
USA!!!

*Sufficiently snarky?*


----------



## toastman

georgephillip said:


> toastman said:
> 
> 
> 
> I stopped reading his posts while ago. I can't stand them anymore. All he does is copy pastes paragraphs from articles, and follows it up with a snarky remark.....
> 
> George, we want to hear YOUR opinion ! Do you have any ?!!?!!?!?
> 
> 
> 
> USA!
> USA!!
> USA!!!
> 
> *Sufficiently snarky?*
Click to expand...


I mean, the occasional copy/paste is fine, but I'm interested in your opinion ! 
So give it to use more often. 

I don't mind if you continue with the snarky remarks though


----------



## georgephillip

*There was no shortage of proud white racists who felt entitled to be racists in the US or South Africa during the middle of the 20th century; those private sentiments were reflected in the public statements of elected leaders, city mayors, for example:*

"The recent brouhaha over comments made by Upper Nazareth mayor Shimon Gapso has intensified with a tongue-in-cheek op-ed Gapso published yesterday in Haaretz. Of course, anti-Zionistsfor an array of reasons (moral, ethical, hateful or ignorant)have long charged Israels governing ideology with being racist at its core. So is Gapso any more racist than Zionism would predict from a holder of public office in Israel?"

"In some ways, its a bloggers dream when a public figure doesnt deny a label thrust on him (on charges of racism, Gapso may be all the wiser thanks to the musical Avenue Q), but instead cuts right to the chase: if hes a racist, so is the entire Zionist project."

Israeli Mayor: If I'm Racist, So Is Israel - The Daily Beast

*If the entire Zionist project is racist to its core, why should the US continue funding a violent, vindictive ethnocracy in the Middle East without any O-I-L?*


----------



## Kondor3

Ummmmm... because we like Jews better than we like Muslims?

It's not about _race_ - it's about _religion_ - and _symmetry_ - and the _lack_ thereof.


----------



## georgephillip

Kondor3 said:


> Ummmmm... because we like Jews better than we like Muslims?
> 
> It's not about _race_ - it's about _religion_ - and _symmetry_ - and the _lack_ thereof.


*Actually, it's about the settler-colonialist mentality and the (war) profits that flow from ethnic transfers of indigenous populations.*

"Symmetry (from Greek &#963;&#965;&#956;&#956;&#949;&#964;&#961;&#949;&#8150;&#957; symmetreín '*to measure together*') has two meanings. The first is a vague sense of harmonious and beautiful proportion and balance.[1][2] The second is an exact mathematical "patterned self-similarity" that can be demonstrated with the rules of a formal system, such as geometry or physics."

*???*


----------



## Kondor3

georgephillip said:


> Kondor3 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Ummmmm... because we like Jews better than we like Muslims?
> 
> It's not about _race_ - it's about _religion_ - and _symmetry_ - and the _lack_ thereof.
> 
> 
> 
> "_Actually, it's about the settler-colonialist mentality and the (war) profits that flow from ethnic transfers of indigenous populations_..."
Click to expand...

That too... sounds like fun...


----------



## georgephillip

Kondor3 said:


> georgephillip said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Kondor3 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Ummmmm... because we like Jews better than we like Muslims?
> 
> It's not about _race_ - it's about _religion_ - and _symmetry_ - and the _lack_ thereof.
> 
> 
> 
> "_Actually, it's about the settler-colonialist mentality and the (war) profits that flow from ethnic transfers of indigenous populations_..."
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> That too... sounds like fun...
Click to expand...

How does "symmetry" factor into your fun?


----------



## RoccoR

georgephillip,  _et al,_

Explain to me how this works.



georgephillip said:


> Actually, it's about the settler-colonialist mentality and the (war) profits that flow from ethnic transfers of indigenous populations.


*(QUESTION)*

Where and how does this money flow?

v/r
R


----------



## georgephillip

RoccoR said:


> georgephillip,  _et al,_
> 
> Explain to me how this works.
> 
> 
> 
> georgephillip said:
> 
> 
> 
> Actually, it's about the settler-colonialist mentality and the (war) profits that flow from ethnic transfers of indigenous populations.
> 
> 
> 
> *(QUESTION)*
> 
> Where and how does this money flow?
> 
> v/r
> R
Click to expand...

*Starting with Chomsky:*

"It is noteworthy that today the strongest support for Israel in the international arena comes from the United States, Canada and Australia, the so-called Anglosphere  settler-colonial societies based on extermination or expulsion of indigenous populations *in favor of a higher race*, and where such behavior is considered natural and praiseworthy."

*Part of that "strongest support for Israel..." stems from billion$ of corporate welfare directed at US defense contractors:*

"From 2009 to 2018, the United States is scheduled to give Israel--the largest recipient of U.S. assistance--*$30 billion in military aid*. Through its illegal 44-year military occupation of the Palestinian West Bank, East Jerusalem, and Gaza Strip, Israel misuses U.S. weapons in violation of U.S. law to kill and injure Palestinian civilians, destroy Palestinian civilian infrastructure, blockade the Gaza Strip, and build illegal settlements in West Bank and East Jerusalem."

*Maybe this is where fiscal austerity in the US should start?*

US Campaign to End the Israeli Occupation*:*How Much Military Aid to Israel? www.aidtoisrael.org


----------



## Kondor3

georgephillip said:


> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> 
> georgephillip,  _et al,_
> 
> Explain to me how this works.
> 
> 
> 
> georgephillip said:
> 
> 
> 
> Actually, it's about the settler-colonialist mentality and the (war) profits that flow from ethnic transfers of indigenous populations.
> 
> 
> 
> *(QUESTION)*
> 
> Where and how does this money flow?
> 
> v/r
> R
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> *Starting with Chomsky:*
> 
> "It is noteworthy that today the strongest support for Israel in the international arena comes from the United States, Canada and Australia, the so-called Anglosphere &#8211; settler-colonial societies based on extermination or expulsion of indigenous populations *in favor of a higher race*, and where such behavior is considered natural and praiseworthy."
> 
> *Part of that "strongest support for Israel..." stems from billion$ of corporate welfare directed at US defense contractors:*
> 
> "From 2009 to 2018, the United States is scheduled to give Israel--the largest recipient of U.S. assistance--*$30 billion in military aid*. Through its illegal 44-year military occupation of the Palestinian West Bank, East Jerusalem, and Gaza Strip, Israel misuses U.S. weapons in violation of U.S. law to kill and injure Palestinian civilians, destroy Palestinian civilian infrastructure, blockade the Gaza Strip, and build illegal settlements in West Bank and East Jerusalem."
> 
> Maybe this is where fiscal austerity in the US should start
> 
> US Campaign to End the Israeli Occupation*:*How Much Military Aid to Israel? www.aidtoisrael.org
Click to expand...


Nahhhhh...

Cut off aid to Egypt first...

Cut off aid to the rest of the Muslim world second...

Cut off aid to Asia third...

Cut off aid to Africa fourth...

Cut off aid to South America fifth...

Cut off aid to Central America sixth...

Cut off aid to Israel seventh...

Cut off aid to Canada and Europe and Australia last...

It's all about friendships, and who, we like best...

We've always liked the Jews better than we've liked the Muslims...

Much better...

And 9-11 pretty much cut that in stone...


----------



## Hossfly

georgephillip said:


> *There was no shortage of proud white racists who felt entitled to be racists in the US or South Africa during the middle of the 20th century; those private sentiments were reflected in the public statements of elected leaders, city mayors, for example:*
> 
> "The recent brouhaha over comments made by Upper Nazareth mayor Shimon Gapso has intensified with a tongue-in-cheek op-ed Gapso published yesterday in Haaretz. Of course, anti-Zionistsfor an array of reasons (moral, ethical, hateful or ignorant)have long charged Israels governing ideology with being racist at its core. So is Gapso any more racist than Zionism would predict from a holder of public office in Israel?"
> 
> "In some ways, its a bloggers dream when a public figure doesnt deny a label thrust on him (on charges of racism, Gapso may be all the wiser thanks to the musical Avenue Q), but instead cuts right to the chase: if hes a racist, so is the entire Zionist project."
> 
> Israeli Mayor: If I'm Racist, So Is Israel - The Daily Beast
> 
> *If the entire Zionist project is racist to its core, why should the US continue funding a violent, vindictive ethnocracy in the Middle East without any O-I-L?*


Our government is now going to give Pakistan over a billion and a half dollars (in addition to all the money already given previously), but Georgie Boy couldn't care less even though a lot of this money goes to the terrorists to target our military.  And, of course, Georgie Boy, has no problem with the Sunnis murdering the Shiites and Ahmadis there plus Christians and Hindus.  If the Jews are not involved, Georgie Boy just fluffs this off.  You don't have to ride in the back of the bus anymore, Georgie.  Why not take a vacation from your Cut and Paste jobs and enjoy Sunday in Los Angeles?  Take a bus to someplace you have never been; or if there is a bus going down Pico to the beach, take it and relax by watching the waves of the Pacific rolling in.  As an aside, after over 100 posts on this thread, one would think that even Georgie Boy has had enough but he keeps on with his Cut and Pastes jobs while innocent people are being murdered in the Muslim world because of their religous beliefs.  What a fine dhimmi he makes!!!


----------



## Hossfly

Kondor3 said:


> georgephillip said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Kondor3 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Ummmmm... because we like Jews better than we like Muslims?
> 
> It's not about _race_ - it's about _religion_ - and _symmetry_ - and the _lack_ thereof.
> 
> 
> 
> "_Actually, it's about the settler-colonialist mentality and the (war) profits that flow from ethnic transfers of indigenous populations_..."
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> That too... sounds like fun...
Click to expand...

Strange how Georgie Boy never says anything about the mentality of people who have no problem killings others in the name of their religion.  As you can see, Kondor, he certainly makes a good Dhimmi for them even though so many of them would consider him an abd.  If his new friends kill thousands in a month, he doesn't even sit up and take notice because no Jews are involved.


----------



## georgephillip

Hossfly said:


> georgephillip said:
> 
> 
> 
> *There was no shortage of proud white racists who felt entitled to be racists in the US or South Africa during the middle of the 20th century; those private sentiments were reflected in the public statements of elected leaders, city mayors, for example:*
> 
> "The recent brouhaha over comments made by Upper Nazareth mayor Shimon Gapso has intensified with a tongue-in-cheek op-ed Gapso published yesterday in Haaretz. Of course, anti-Zionistsfor an array of reasons (moral, ethical, hateful or ignorant)have long charged Israels governing ideology with being racist at its core. So is Gapso any more racist than Zionism would predict from a holder of public office in Israel?"
> 
> "In some ways, its a bloggers dream when a public figure doesnt deny a label thrust on him (on charges of racism, Gapso may be all the wiser thanks to the musical Avenue Q), but instead cuts right to the chase: if hes a racist, so is the entire Zionist project."
> 
> Israeli Mayor: If I'm Racist, So Is Israel - The Daily Beast
> 
> *If the entire Zionist project is racist to its core, why should the US continue funding a violent, vindictive ethnocracy in the Middle East without any O-I-L?*
> 
> 
> 
> Our government is now going to give Pakistan over a billion and a half dollars (in addition to all the money already given previously), but Georgie Boy couldn't care less even though a lot of this money goes to the terrorists to target our military.  And, of course, Georgie Boy, has no problem with the Sunnis murdering the Shiites and Ahmadis there plus Christians and Hindus.  If the Jews are not involved, Georgie Boy just fluffs this off.  You don't have to ride in the back of the bus anymore, Georgie.  Why not take a vacation from your Cut and Paste jobs and enjoy Sunday in Los Angeles?  Take a bus to someplace you have never been; or if there is a bus going down Pico to the beach, take it and relax by watching the waves of the Pacific rolling in.  As an aside, after over 100 posts on this thread, one would think that even Georgie Boy has had enough but he keeps on with his Cut and Pastes jobs while innocent people are being murdered in the Muslim world because of their religous beliefs.  What a fine dhimmi he makes!!!
Click to expand...

*So cut off all military aid to Pakistan AND Israel AND Egypt.
What's your problem with that?*

"A suicide bomber driving a minibus blew himself up outside a cafe in a mainly Shi'ite Muslim district of the Iraqi capital on Sunday, killing at least 38 people, police and medics said."

*Same as Iraq?*

Baghdad cafe bombing kills at least 38 | Reuters


----------



## Kondor3

georgephillip said:


> "..._So cut off all military aid to Pakistan AND Israel AND Egypt_..."


Well, Pakistan and Egypt, anyway... we don't like them as much...

Besides... two out of three ain't bad...


----------



## RoccoR

georgephillip,  _et al,_

I'm a bit confused again.



georgephillip said:


> *So cut off all military aid to Pakistan AND Israel AND Egypt.
> What's your problem with that?*
> 
> "A suicide bomber driving a minibus blew himself up outside a cafe in a mainly Shi'ite Muslim district of the Iraqi capital on Sunday, killing at least 38 people, police and medics said."
> 
> Same as Iraq?


*(COMMENT)*

So what does US Military Aid to Pakistan and Egypt have to do with the suppression of Palestinian behaviors in the Arab-Israeli conflict?

What does Iraq have to do with any of the other three?

v/r
R


----------



## georgephillip

RoccoR said:


> georgephillip,  _et al,_
> 
> I'm a bit confused again.
> 
> 
> 
> georgephillip said:
> 
> 
> 
> *So cut off all military aid to Pakistan AND Israel AND Egypt.
> What's your problem with that?*
> 
> "A suicide bomber driving a minibus blew himself up outside a cafe in a mainly Shi'ite Muslim district of the Iraqi capital on Sunday, killing at least 38 people, police and medics said."
> 
> Same as Iraq?
> 
> 
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> So what does US Military Aid to Pakistan and Egypt have to do with the suppression of Palestinian behaviors in the Arab-Israeli conflict?
> 
> What does Iraq have to do with any of the other three?
> 
> v/r
> R
Click to expand...

*I would respectively suggest the rich, corrupt generals and politicians currently ruling in Pakistan, Israel, Egypt, and Iraq would not be in power without the backing of the Greatest Purveyor of Violence in the World.*

"Whatever the secondary reasons for the war, the crucial factor in President Bush's decision to attack was to help Israel. 

"With support from Israel and America's Jewish-Zionist lobby, and prodded by Jewish 'neo-conservatives' holding high-level positions in his administration, President Bush - who was already fervently committed to Israel - resolved to invade and subdue one of Israel's chief regional enemies.

"This is so widely understood in Washington that US Senator Ernest Hollings was moved in May 2004 to acknowledge that the US invaded Iraq 'to secure Israel,' and 'everybody' knows it. 

"He also identified three of the influential pro-Israel Jews in Washington who played an important role in prodding the US into war: Richard Perle, chair of the Pentagon's Defense Policy Board; Paul Wolfowitz, Deputy Defense Secretary; and Charles Krauthammer, columnist and author. [1]

"Hollings referred to the cowardly reluctance of his Congressional colleagues to acknowledge this truth openly, saying that 'nobody is willing to stand up and say what is going on.' Due to 'the pressures we get politically,' he added, members of Congress uncritically support Israel and its policies."

*Apparently, the profits and jobs produced from arms sales to the Middle East warrant mass murder in Baghdad and Damascus.*

Iraq: A War For Israel


----------



## RoccoR

georgephillip,  _et al,_

There is so much wrong in this statement set, that I hardly know where to begin.



georgephillip said:


> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> 
> georgephillip,  _et al,_
> 
> I'm a bit confused again.
> 
> 
> 
> georgephillip said:
> 
> 
> 
> *So cut off all military aid to Pakistan AND Israel AND Egypt.
> What's your problem with that?*
> 
> "A suicide bomber driving a minibus blew himself up outside a cafe in a mainly Shi'ite Muslim district of the Iraqi capital on Sunday, killing at least 38 people, police and medics said."
> 
> Same as Iraq?
> 
> 
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> So what does US Military Aid to Pakistan and Egypt have to do with the suppression of Palestinian behaviors in the Arab-Israeli conflict?
> 
> What does Iraq have to do with any of the other three?
> 
> v/r
> R
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> *I would respectively suggest the rich, corrupt generals and politicians currently ruling in Pakistan, Israel, Egypt, and Iraq would not be in power without the backing of the Greatest Purveyor of Violence in the World.*
> 
> "Whatever the secondary reasons for the war, the crucial factor in President Bush's decision to attack was to help Israel.
> 
> "With support from Israel and America's Jewish-Zionist lobby, and prodded by Jewish 'neo-conservatives' holding high-level positions in his administration, President Bush - who was already fervently committed to Israel - resolved to invade and subdue one of Israel's chief regional enemies.
> 
> "This is so widely understood in Washington that US Senator Ernest Hollings was moved in May 2004 to acknowledge that the US invaded Iraq 'to secure Israel,' and 'everybody' knows it.
> 
> "He also identified three of the influential pro-Israel Jews in Washington who played an important role in prodding the US into war: Richard Perle, chair of the Pentagon's Defense Policy Board; Paul Wolfowitz, Deputy Defense Secretary; and Charles Krauthammer, columnist and author. [1]
> 
> "Hollings referred to the cowardly reluctance of his Congressional colleagues to acknowledge this truth openly, saying that 'nobody is willing to stand up and say what is going on.' Due to 'the pressures we get politically,' he added, members of Congress uncritically support Israel and its policies."
> 
> *Apparently, the profits and jobs produced from arms sales to the Middle East warrant mass murder in Baghdad and Damascus.*
> 
> Iraq: A War For Israel
Click to expand...

*(COMMENT)*

But it is so wrong that it is not worth the address.

Most Respectfully,
R


----------



## Kondor3

georgephillip said:


> "..._He also identified three of the influential pro-Israel Jews in Washington who played an important role in prodding the US into war_..."


It's all a Kornspiracy by those pesky Joooooos, I tellz ya...


----------



## georgephillip

RoccoR said:


> georgephillip,  _et al,_
> 
> There is so much wrong in this statement set, that I hardly know where to begin.
> 
> 
> 
> georgephillip said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> 
> georgephillip,  _et al,_
> 
> I'm a bit confused again.
> 
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> So what does US Military Aid to Pakistan and Egypt have to do with the suppression of Palestinian behaviors in the Arab-Israeli conflict?
> 
> What does Iraq have to do with any of the other three?
> 
> v/r
> R
> 
> 
> 
> *I would respectively suggest the rich, corrupt generals and politicians currently ruling in Pakistan, Israel, Egypt, and Iraq would not be in power without the backing of the Greatest Purveyor of Violence in the World.*
> 
> "Whatever the secondary reasons for the war, the crucial factor in President Bush's decision to attack was to help Israel.
> 
> "With support from Israel and America's Jewish-Zionist lobby, and prodded by Jewish 'neo-conservatives' holding high-level positions in his administration, President Bush - who was already fervently committed to Israel - resolved to invade and subdue one of Israel's chief regional enemies.
> 
> "This is so widely understood in Washington that US Senator Ernest Hollings was moved in May 2004 to acknowledge that the US invaded Iraq 'to secure Israel,' and 'everybody' knows it.
> 
> "He also identified three of the influential pro-Israel Jews in Washington who played an important role in prodding the US into war: Richard Perle, chair of the Pentagon's Defense Policy Board; Paul Wolfowitz, Deputy Defense Secretary; and Charles Krauthammer, columnist and author. [1]
> 
> "Hollings referred to the cowardly reluctance of his Congressional colleagues to acknowledge this truth openly, saying that 'nobody is willing to stand up and say what is going on.' Due to 'the pressures we get politically,' he added, members of Congress uncritically support Israel and its policies."
> 
> *Apparently, the profits and jobs produced from arms sales to the Middle East warrant mass murder in Baghdad and Damascus.*
> 
> Iraq: A War For Israel
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> But it is so wrong that it is not worth the address.
> 
> Most Respectfully,
> R
Click to expand...

"Some months before the invasion, retired four-star US Army General and former NATO Supreme Allied Commander Wesley Clark acknowledged in an interview: 'Those who favor this attack [by the US against Iraq] now will tell you candidly, and privately, that it is probably true that Saddam Hussein is no threat to the United States. But they are afraid at some point he might decide if he had a nuclear weapon to use it against Israel.' [2]

"Six months before the attack, President Bush met in the White House with eleven members of the US House of Representatives. While the "war against terrorism is going okay," he told the lawmakers, the United States would soon have to deal with a greater danger: 'The biggest threat, however, is Saddam Hussein and his weapons of mass destruction. He can blow up Israel and that would trigger an international conflict.'" [3

*What's your best guess about Saddam using one of his non-existent nukes to "blow up Israel?"*

Iraq: A War For Israel


----------



## toastman

georgephillip said:


> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> 
> georgephillip,  _et al,_
> 
> There is so much wrong in this statement set, that I hardly know where to begin.
> 
> 
> 
> georgephillip said:
> 
> 
> 
> *I would respectively suggest the rich, corrupt generals and politicians currently ruling in Pakistan, Israel, Egypt, and Iraq would not be in power without the backing of the Greatest Purveyor of Violence in the World.*
> 
> "Whatever the secondary reasons for the war, the crucial factor in President Bush's decision to attack was to help Israel.
> 
> "With support from Israel and America's Jewish-Zionist lobby, and prodded by Jewish 'neo-conservatives' holding high-level positions in his administration, President Bush - who was already fervently committed to Israel - resolved to invade and subdue one of Israel's chief regional enemies.
> 
> "This is so widely understood in Washington that US Senator Ernest Hollings was moved in May 2004 to acknowledge that the US invaded Iraq 'to secure Israel,' and 'everybody' knows it.
> 
> "He also identified three of the influential pro-Israel Jews in Washington who played an important role in prodding the US into war: Richard Perle, chair of the Pentagon's Defense Policy Board; Paul Wolfowitz, Deputy Defense Secretary; and Charles Krauthammer, columnist and author. [1]
> 
> "Hollings referred to the cowardly reluctance of his Congressional colleagues to acknowledge this truth openly, saying that 'nobody is willing to stand up and say what is going on.' Due to 'the pressures we get politically,' he added, members of Congress uncritically support Israel and its policies."
> 
> *Apparently, the profits and jobs produced from arms sales to the Middle East warrant mass murder in Baghdad and Damascus.*
> 
> Iraq: A War For Israel
> 
> 
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> But it is so wrong that it is not worth the address.
> 
> Most Respectfully,
> R
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> "Some months before the invasion, retired four-star US Army General and former NATO Supreme Allied Commander Wesley Clark acknowledged in an interview: 'Those who favor this attack [by the US against Iraq] now will tell you candidly, and privately, that it is probably true that Saddam Hussein is no threat to the United States. But they are afraid at some point he might decide if he had a nuclear weapon to use it against Israel.' [2]
> 
> "Six months before the attack, President Bush met in the White House with eleven members of the US House of Representatives. While the "war against terrorism is going okay," he told the lawmakers, the United States would soon have to deal with a greater danger: 'The biggest threat, however, is Saddam Hussein and his weapons of mass destruction. He can blow up Israel and that would trigger an international conflict.'" [3
> 
> *What's your best guess about Saddam using one of his non-existent nukes to "blow up Israel?"*
> 
> Iraq: A War For Israel
Click to expand...


How do you know Saddam didn't move his WMD'S before the U.S invasion ?
I'm not saying he definitely had them, but if he did, he had lots of time to move them somewhere else from the time he thought the U.S might invade up until the time that they did .


----------



## RoccoR

toastman, georgephillip, _et al,_

In the intelligence business, you can often learn more from what you don't see as from what you do see.



toastman said:


> georgephillip said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> 
> georgephillip,  _et al,_
> 
> There is so much wrong in this statement set, that I hardly know where to begin.
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> But it is so wrong that it is not worth the address.
> 
> Most Respectfully,
> R
> 
> 
> 
> "Some months before the invasion, retired four-star US Army General and former NATO Supreme Allied Commander Wesley Clark acknowledged in an interview: 'Those who favor this attack [by the US against Iraq] now will tell you candidly, and privately, that it is probably true that Saddam Hussein is no threat to the United States. But they are afraid at some point he might decide if he had a nuclear weapon to use it against Israel.' [2]
> 
> "Six months before the attack, President Bush met in the White House with eleven members of the US House of Representatives. While the "war against terrorism is going okay," he told the lawmakers, the United States would soon have to deal with a greater danger: 'The biggest threat, however, is Saddam Hussein and his weapons of mass destruction. He can blow up Israel and that would trigger an international conflict.'" [3
> 
> *What's your best guess about Saddam using one of his non-existent nukes to "blow up Israel?"*
> 
> Iraq: A War For Israel
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> How do you know Saddam didn't move his WMD'S before the U.S invasion ?
> I'm not saying he definitely had them, but if he did, he had lots of time to move them somewhere else from the time he thought the U.S might invade up until the time that they did .
Click to expand...

*(COMMENT)*

Each kind of WMD has a footprint that is inescapable.  No footprint, no WMD.

Based on what General Powell briefed, there is no way that Iraq had time to dispose of that amount of WMD.  It would have been impossible to move without detection.  Saddam had no nuclear capability or any really viable research into acquiring a nuclear capability.

Most Respectfully,
R


----------



## P F Tinmore

RoccoR said:


> toastman, georgephillip, _et al,_
> 
> In the intelligence business, you can often learn more from what you don't see as from what you do see.
> 
> 
> 
> toastman said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> georgephillip said:
> 
> 
> 
> "Some months before the invasion, retired four-star US Army General and former NATO Supreme Allied Commander Wesley Clark acknowledged in an interview: 'Those who favor this attack [by the US against Iraq] now will tell you candidly, and privately, that it is probably true that Saddam Hussein is no threat to the United States. But they are afraid at some point he might decide if he had a nuclear weapon to use it against Israel.' [2]
> 
> "Six months before the attack, President Bush met in the White House with eleven members of the US House of Representatives. While the "war against terrorism is going okay," he told the lawmakers, the United States would soon have to deal with a greater danger: 'The biggest threat, however, is Saddam Hussein and his weapons of mass destruction. He can blow up Israel and that would trigger an international conflict.'" [3
> 
> *What's your best guess about Saddam using one of his non-existent nukes to "blow up Israel?"*
> 
> Iraq: A War For Israel
> 
> 
> 
> 
> How do you know Saddam didn't move his WMD'S before the U.S invasion ?
> I'm not saying he definitely had them, but if he did, he had lots of time to move them somewhere else from the time he thought the U.S might invade up until the time that they did .
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> Each kind of WMD has a footprint that is inescapable.  No footprint, no WMD.
> 
> Based on what General Powell briefed, there is no way that Iraq had time to dispose of that amount of WMD.  It would have been impossible to move without detection.  Saddam had no nuclear capability or any really viable research into acquiring a nuclear capability.
> 
> Most Respectfully,
> R
Click to expand...


I agree.

And, could Saddam move WMDs out of Iraq without Mosad riding shotgun?


----------



## georgephillip

toastman said:


> georgephillip said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> 
> georgephillip,  _et al,_
> 
> There is so much wrong in this statement set, that I hardly know where to begin.
> 
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> But it is so wrong that it is not worth the address.
> 
> Most Respectfully,
> R
> 
> 
> 
> "Some months before the invasion, retired four-star US Army General and former NATO Supreme Allied Commander Wesley Clark acknowledged in an interview: 'Those who favor this attack [by the US against Iraq] now will tell you candidly, and privately, that it is probably true that Saddam Hussein is no threat to the United States. But they are afraid at some point he might decide if he had a nuclear weapon to use it against Israel.' [2]
> 
> "Six months before the attack, President Bush met in the White House with eleven members of the US House of Representatives. While the "war against terrorism is going okay," he told the lawmakers, the United States would soon have to deal with a greater danger: 'The biggest threat, however, is Saddam Hussein and his weapons of mass destruction. He can blow up Israel and that would trigger an international conflict.'" [3
> 
> *What's your best guess about Saddam using one of his non-existent nukes to "blow up Israel?"*
> 
> Iraq: A War For Israel
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> How do you know Saddam didn't move his WMD'S before the U.S invasion ?
> I'm not saying he definitely had them, but if he did, he had lots of time to move them somewhere else from the time he thought the U.S might invade up until the time that they did .
Click to expand...

IMHO, Saddam never doubted the outcome of a US invasion of Iraq; if he possessed a nuclear weapon and adequate delivery system, he would have used it against the US staging area in Kuwait. Assuming that scenario, do you believe he would have acted in self defense?


----------



## toastman

RoccoR said:


> toastman, georgephillip, _et al,_
> 
> In the intelligence business, you can often learn more from what you don't see as from what you do see.
> 
> 
> 
> toastman said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> georgephillip said:
> 
> 
> 
> "Some months before the invasion, retired four-star US Army General and former NATO Supreme Allied Commander Wesley Clark acknowledged in an interview: 'Those who favor this attack [by the US against Iraq] now will tell you candidly, and privately, that it is probably true that Saddam Hussein is no threat to the United States. But they are afraid at some point he might decide if he had a nuclear weapon to use it against Israel.' [2]
> 
> "Six months before the attack, President Bush met in the White House with eleven members of the US House of Representatives. While the "war against terrorism is going okay," he told the lawmakers, the United States would soon have to deal with a greater danger: 'The biggest threat, however, is Saddam Hussein and his weapons of mass destruction. He can blow up Israel and that would trigger an international conflict.'" [3
> 
> *What's your best guess about Saddam using one of his non-existent nukes to "blow up Israel?"*
> 
> Iraq: A War For Israel
> 
> 
> 
> 
> How do you know Saddam didn't move his WMD'S before the U.S invasion ?
> I'm not saying he definitely had them, but if he did, he had lots of time to move them somewhere else from the time he thought the U.S might invade up until the time that they did .
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> Each kind of WMD has a footprint that is inescapable.  No footprint, no WMD.
> 
> Based on what General Powell briefed, there is no way that Iraq had time to dispose of that amount of WMD.  It would have been impossible to move without detection.  Saddam had no nuclear capability or any really viable research into acquiring a nuclear capability.
> 
> Most Respectfully,
> R
Click to expand...


Well, the problem is, I know nothing about these issues, so thanks for clearing it up for me


----------



## toastman

georgephillip said:


> toastman said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> georgephillip said:
> 
> 
> 
> "Some months before the invasion, retired four-star US Army General and former NATO Supreme Allied Commander Wesley Clark acknowledged in an interview: 'Those who favor this attack [by the US against Iraq] now will tell you candidly, and privately, that it is probably true that Saddam Hussein is no threat to the United States. But they are afraid at some point he might decide if he had a nuclear weapon to use it against Israel.' [2]
> 
> "Six months before the attack, President Bush met in the White House with eleven members of the US House of Representatives. While the "war against terrorism is going okay," he told the lawmakers, the United States would soon have to deal with a greater danger: 'The biggest threat, however, is Saddam Hussein and his weapons of mass destruction. He can blow up Israel and that would trigger an international conflict.'" [3
> 
> *What's your best guess about Saddam using one of his non-existent nukes to "blow up Israel?"*
> 
> Iraq: A War For Israel
> 
> 
> 
> 
> How do you know Saddam didn't move his WMD'S before the U.S invasion ?
> I'm not saying he definitely had them, but if he did, he had lots of time to move them somewhere else from the time he thought the U.S might invade up until the time that they did .
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> IMHO, Saddam never doubted the outcome of a US invasion of Iraq; if he possessed a nuclear weapon and adequate delivery system, he would have used it against the US staging area in Kuwait. Assuming that scenario, do you believe he would have acted in self defense?
Click to expand...


I'm confused (it's early in the morning) . Would Saddam have acted in self defense if what ?


----------



## RoccoR

toastman,  georgephillip,  _et al,_

Recognizing this is the wrong thread for this discussion.



toastman said:


> georgephillip said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> toastman said:
> 
> 
> 
> How do you know Saddam didn't move his WMD'S before the U.S invasion ?
> I'm not saying he definitely had them, but if he did, he had lots of time to move them somewhere else from the time he thought the U.S might invade up until the time that they did .
> 
> 
> 
> IMHO, Saddam never doubted the outcome of a US invasion of Iraq; if he possessed a nuclear weapon and adequate delivery system, he would have used it against the US staging area in Kuwait. Assuming that scenario, do you believe he would have acted in self defense?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I'm confused (it's early in the morning) . Would Saddam have acted in self defense if what ?
Click to expand...

*(COMMENT)*

Probably not, although I don't think anyone is really sure.

Remember, that Saddam _(as well as everyone else in the Region, as well as all the Allied Powers in the Coalition)_ understood that even if he had a tactical nuclear capability, such a strike would not have changed the outcome.  The retaliatory strike would have devastated Iraq.  Iraq would have lost in any event; and what would have been left would have been assimilated by the regional Arab powers.​
Targeting would have been the big question.  If you were Saddam, and you knew you were going to take an action that would seal your fate, what would you target within the region?

Israel?
A regional capital?
Coalition Forces?
Mecca or Medina?
A major oil complex?
The Gulf Straits?

My guess would be Mecca and Medina _(something with decisive or far-reaching consequences that the other Arab nations would remember forever)_.  Saddam understood the real enablers to the Coalition Strike was the other Arab Countries, and not Israel.  

Most Respectfully,
R


----------



## Kondor3

Regional Target(s) for a hypothetical Iraqi nuclear attack in either 1991 or 2003?

The mustering areas for Coalition conventional forces, once most of the boots and assets are in-place?

Cook-down a few Divisions before they sortie?


----------



## georgephillip

Kondor3 said:


> Regional Target(s) for a hypothetical Iraqi nuclear attack in either 1991 or 2003?
> 
> The mustering areas for Coalition conventional forces, once most of the boots and assets are in-place?
> 
> Cook-down a few Divisions before they sortie?


Legitimate self-defense?


----------



## Kondor3

georgephillip said:


> Kondor3 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Regional Target(s) for a hypothetical Iraqi nuclear attack in either 1991 or 2003?
> 
> The mustering areas for Coalition conventional forces, once most of the boots and assets are in-place?
> 
> Cook-down a few Divisions before they sortie?
> 
> 
> 
> Legitimate self-defense?
Click to expand...

Yeppers...

Right up to the detonation of the first US nuclear warhead airburst over Baghdad...

Cook-down a couple of our divisions, we cook down a couple of your cities...

We'll see how long you keep it up, at that kind of exchange rate...


----------



## georgephillip

toastman said:


> georgephillip said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> toastman said:
> 
> 
> 
> How do you know Saddam didn't move his WMD'S before the U.S invasion ?
> I'm not saying he definitely had them, but if he did, he had lots of time to move them somewhere else from the time he thought the U.S might invade up until the time that they did .
> 
> 
> 
> IMHO, Saddam never doubted the outcome of a US invasion of Iraq; if he possessed a nuclear weapon and adequate delivery system, he would have used it against the US staging area in Kuwait. Assuming that scenario, do you believe he would have acted in self defense?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I'm confused (it's early in the morning) . Would Saddam have acted in self defense if what ?
Click to expand...

From Saddam's POV, tens of thousands of foreign hired killers were massing for an advertised invasion of Iraq inside Kuwait. Put that shoe on the other foot, and conjure an equal number of Muslim assassins massing in Mexico for an assault on the US homeland. Would not either victim of aggression be entitled to defend its sovereign territory by all means at its disposal?


----------

