A Few Facts About The Palestinians

[montelatici]

How can a colonial invader not be the aggressor? Did not the European Zionists go to Palestine (a place on another continent) where native people were already living?

 

[flacaltenn]

First off -- Both YOU and Billo made those similar remarks. You must not read your own stuff because it was from a post at the top of the page.



Secondly --- you are confused because I am AGILE about my thoughts on the issue. Coming at it not just "over the top" but also from the bottom up and the sides as well. I know that's disturbing for a fixed repetitive zealot like yourself, -- so just don't worry about me -- OK??

And Yes -- I'm saying that a Palestinian "truth" puts them on the same track to irrelevance as the Native Americans who preferred to feud amongst themselves and never learned the culture and the ways of the world that changed around them. But I made no judgement on their lose of "nationality" or how it occurred. Just that when an indigenous people centuries behind in their thinking about "nationality" don't "school up" on presenting their demands in the normal way -- they are largely ignored as "a nation"..

Well I'm saying it.

Saying an occupational force can claim self defense, is like saying an assassin, who breaks into the house of his target and gets a little more resistance than anticipated, telling the police he had to kill the home owner in self defense, because he was in fear of his life.

You cannot claim self defense if you're the one causing the violence.

And the occupation is the cause of all the violence.

Actually that WORKS in G.Britain. As homeowners have been routinely prosecuted for installing mesh glass or other defensive methods that MIGHT injure an intruder..

But that's another topic. The West Bank was NEVER UNoccupied in your lifetime. Jordan was the previous "occupier". And you see how "armed resistance" was not effective at all against Jordan. Clear as day. You WANT bloodshed and violence because you are not in the fight. The folks who need to decide WHEN to fight and WHAT to fight for should have learned by now that owning a "nation-state" takes more than throwing rocks and getting innocent Pali kids killed regularly for no reason at all. The "armed resistance" part comes AFTER you develop a nation-state plan and establish leadership. Doing it ass backwards is why the Palis have a long string of lost string of lost opportunities towards statehood.. That's the LARGEST Palestinian fact on the list..

Another "Palestinian Fact" is that they need to be more like Zionists. And less like an angry mob that is captured periodically by a new group of radicals. Because THEY are in diaspora now -- just like the Jews were. And they need to PROMOTE a set of nationalistic goals and find the leadership to get there.

 

[Viktor]

How can a colonial invader not be the aggressor? Did not the European Zionists go to Palestine (a place on another continent) where native people were already living?

Jews had been living on that land for over 2000 years. Read your bible.

 

[Boston1]

Given that we are dealing with people of various religions I don't think its reasonable to include secular ideology as a form of proof.

Besides nonsecular scientific research concludes that Judaic presence in this area goes back well into the middle bronze age Well over 4000 years ago.

 

[Viktor]

@monte

Its laughable that you claim these supposedly discriminatory laws in Israel (which even your link confirms are not actually discriminatory in legislation) in comparison to Arab laws which prevent sale of land to anyone who is Jewish, as an example.


I guess the US is also an apartheid state given the appalling way you treat black people. All those discriminatory laws about how to treat black people. Tsk tsk.

UNITED NATIONS A General Assembly Distr. GENERAL A/HRC/22/NGO/1 12 February 2013 Original: English Human Rights Council Twenty-second session Agenda item 7 Human rights situation in Palestine and other occupied Arab territoUNITED NATIONS A General Assembly Distr. GENERAL A/HRC/22/NGO/1 12 February 2013 Original: English Human Rights Council Twenty-second session Agenda item 7 Human rights situation in Palestine and other occupied Arab territory.

"Three related fundamental laws interact to mandate preferential treatment of Israeli Jews: The Law of Return: It gives all Jews in the world the right to “return” to Israel and obtain Israeli citizenship automatically. Palestinian refugees in the Diaspora who were forcibly evicted from their homes and driven out of their lands have, under international and natural law, the right to return, but are not allowed to. The Law of Citizenship: Arabs in Israel, who are the indigenous people of PalestineIsrael, may acquire citizenship if they were born in present-day Israel. But these Arabs do not have the same rights as Jews because Jews are both citizens and nationals, while Arabs are only citizens. The Status Law: It officially sanctions “national” institutions to provide “national” benefits exclusively for a “nation” that Israeli law identifies as “the Jewish people” or “citizens by return.” Arabs, not possessing “nationality” status in the state of Israel, are not legally eligible for “nationality” benefits. They cannot live or work on “national” land, participate in “national” housing, nor share government benefits of “national” agriculture. These three “fundamental” laws convey the false impression Israel tries hard to make as a so-called democracy where all citizens have equal rights. Racial discrimination is by definition “any distinction, exclusion, restriction, or preference based on race, color, descent, or national or ethnic origin.” By this definition, discrimination against Arabs in Israel would, correctly, be called “racist,” because it is based on differences in “national or ethnic origin.” United Nations as well as United States laws have expanded the strictly biological definition of “racism” to recognize also as “racist” any discrimination based on religious differences. The very laws that require Israel to “in-gather” Jews, regardless of race, are the same laws that discriminate against Arabs. Israel is legally obliged to “in-gather” Jews, provide benefits to Jews immigrating from foreign countries, and to deny the same benefits to native-born Arabs who are already Israeli citizens. This is certainly “racist” by UN and US criteria. Is Zionism responsible for this discrimination? Yes, because Israel’s laws and internal policies derive from the ideology of Zionism which insists that Israel be a “Jewish” state. This means demographically and politically and not only symbolically Jewish. To maintain a Jewish majority in the face of the Arabs’ greater natural population increase, some of Israel’s population already agrees with the proposition that Arabs should be expelled from their native land."

http://eaford.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/12/Are-Arabs-Discriminated-against-in-Israel.pdf

Interesting, as "racist" would thus apply to virtually every Islamist majority nation.

Jews and Arabs are the same race.

 

[Viktor]

Given that we are dealing with people of various religions I don't think its reasonable to include secular ideology as a form of proof.

Besides nonsecular scientific research concludes that Judaic presence in this area goes back well into the middle bronze age Well over 4000 years ago.

How is the bible "secular?"

 

[Viktor]

So, you claim that state.gov has stated that Gaza is ruled by "Islamic terrorist animals"? Can you provide a link for that.

Governance of the Gaza Strip - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

[Boston1]

@monte

Its laughable that you claim these supposedly discriminatory laws in Israel (which even your link confirms are not actually discriminatory in legislation) in comparison to Arab laws which prevent sale of land to anyone who is Jewish, as an example.


I guess the US is also an apartheid state given the appalling way you treat black people. All those discriminatory laws about how to treat black people. Tsk tsk.

UNITED NATIONS A General Assembly Distr. GENERAL A/HRC/22/NGO/1 12 February 2013 Original: English Human Rights Council Twenty-second session Agenda item 7 Human rights situation in Palestine and other occupied Arab territoUNITED NATIONS A General Assembly Distr. GENERAL A/HRC/22/NGO/1 12 February 2013 Original: English Human Rights Council Twenty-second session Agenda item 7 Human rights situation in Palestine and other occupied Arab territory.

"Three related fundamental laws interact to mandate preferential treatment of Israeli Jews: The Law of Return: It gives all Jews in the world the right to “return” to Israel and obtain Israeli citizenship automatically. Palestinian refugees in the Diaspora who were forcibly evicted from their homes and driven out of their lands have, under international and natural law, the right to return, but are not allowed to. The Law of Citizenship: Arabs in Israel, who are the indigenous people of PalestineIsrael, may acquire citizenship if they were born in present-day Israel. But these Arabs do not have the same rights as Jews because Jews are both citizens and nationals, while Arabs are only citizens. The Status Law: It officially sanctions “national” institutions to provide “national” benefits exclusively for a “nation” that Israeli law identifies as “the Jewish people” or “citizens by return.” Arabs, not possessing “nationality” status in the state of Israel, are not legally eligible for “nationality” benefits. They cannot live or work on “national” land, participate in “national” housing, nor share government benefits of “national” agriculture. These three “fundamental” laws convey the false impression Israel tries hard to make as a so-called democracy where all citizens have equal rights. Racial discrimination is by definition “any distinction, exclusion, restriction, or preference based on race, color, descent, or national or ethnic origin.” By this definition, discrimination against Arabs in Israel would, correctly, be called “racist,” because it is based on differences in “national or ethnic origin.” United Nations as well as United States laws have expanded the strictly biological definition of “racism” to recognize also as “racist” any discrimination based on religious differences. The very laws that require Israel to “in-gather” Jews, regardless of race, are the same laws that discriminate against Arabs. Israel is legally obliged to “in-gather” Jews, provide benefits to Jews immigrating from foreign countries, and to deny the same benefits to native-born Arabs who are already Israeli citizens. This is certainly “racist” by UN and US criteria. Is Zionism responsible for this discrimination? Yes, because Israel’s laws and internal policies derive from the ideology of Zionism which insists that Israel be a “Jewish” state. This means demographically and politically and not only symbolically Jewish. To maintain a Jewish majority in the face of the Arabs’ greater natural population increase, some of Israel’s population already agrees with the proposition that Arabs should be expelled from their native land."

http://eaford.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/12/Are-Arabs-Discriminated-against-in-Israel.pdf

Interesting, as "racist" would thus apply to virtually every Islamist majority nation.

Jews and Arabs are the same race.

depends on what markers you look at within the genetic code. Some show clear differences and some don't, most, like 99.9% any human has in common even with a monkey. So to say we are almost identical is somewhat disingenuous

One of the most obvious differences can be seen in the various genetic diseases Judaic ppl inherit vs the prevalence of those same diseases in other races, like the north africans.

 

[Viktor]

So, you claim that state.gov has stated that Gaza is ruled by "Islamic terrorist animals"? Can you provide a link for that.

Hamas - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

[Viktor]

So, you claim that state.gov has stated that Gaza is ruled by "Islamic terrorist animals"? Can you provide a link for that.

Governance of the Gaza Strip - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Hamas - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

[Boston1]

Given that we are dealing with people of various religions I don't think its reasonable to include secular ideology as a form of proof.

Besides nonsecular scientific research concludes that Judaic presence in this area goes back well into the middle bronze age Well over 4000 years ago.

How is the bible "secular?"

Whoops
did I get secular and nonsecular mixed up ?

Let me look it up

yup, my bad

I meant nonsecular

 

[Billo_Really]

Actually that WORKS in G.Britain. As homeowners have been routinely prosecuted for installing mesh glass or other defensive methods that MIGHT injure an intruder..

But that's another topic. The West Bank was NEVER UNoccupied in your lifetime. Jordan was the previous "occupier". And you see how "armed resistance" was not effective at all against Jordan. Clear as day. You WANT bloodshed and violence because you are not in the fight. The folks who need to decide WHEN to fight and WHAT to fight for should have learned by now that owning a "nation-state" takes more than throwing rocks and getting innocent Pali kids killed regularly for no reason at all. The "armed resistance" part comes AFTER you develop a nation-state plan and establish leadership. Doing it ass backwards is why the Palis have a long string of lost string of lost opportunities towards statehood.. That's the LARGEST Palestinian fact on the list..

Another "Palestinian Fact" is that they need to be more like Zionists. And less like an angry mob that is captured periodically by a new group of radicals. Because THEY are in diaspora now -- just like the Jews were. And they need to PROMOTE a set of nationalistic goals and find the leadership to get there.

That is land Israel seized in the '67 war. I don't think anyone disagrees with that. It is also land Israel has effectively controlled against the will of the indigenous residents. That's an occupation. And that's what is causing all the violence.

How would you like it if the Chinese came into your neighborhood and set up roadblocks and checkpoints that resulted in a 15 minute trip to the store, becomes a 2 hour sojourn, if your allowed to pass on that day?

Or your wife goes into labor and you're trying to get to the hospital, but they won't allow you to go through the checkpoint?

Are you telling me you wouldn't be pissed off? You'd just turn to your wife and say, "Sorry honey, they won't let us through. I guess you'll have to have the baby in the back seat? You're down with that? Aren't ya, dear?"

 

[SAYIT]

The problem is, so much Zionist propaganda has been absorbed by most Americans, when the facts are presented and the sources are impeccable, cognitive dissonance sets in. The zealots are those that continue repeating propaganda that has been proven to be false...
...The non-Jews of Palestine are not going away and Israel's decision to not allow the establishment of a sovereign Palestinian state when they had the chance The Swiss cheese offer with the equivalent of Crusader castles manned by the IDF which had control within the proposed state made any the offer DOA.

The irony of one such as you whining about propaganda and cognitive dissonance is massive and obvious but clearly you can't see it.

I'm not surprised.

You conveniently forget that not only did the Arabs reject the UN proposed partition in 1947 that could have established a Pal State, they continued to reject statehood in any of the following 20 years (until June, 1967) in which they had the unfettered opportunity to create a Pal State - without Israeli involvement - on all or any of the land they controlled (including all of Jerusalem).

Needless to say, those hapless "refugees" consistently eschewed their chance at statehood for the honor of life in squalid "refugee" camps and of tossing generation after generation of their kids into the fire just to satisfy the Jihadists among them and the global Nazi types for whom those "refugees" are the front line of their war against the hated Joooo.

 

[SAYIT]

LOL I think you are confused between an embargo and a blockade.

I'm not confused. I'm saying you can't put lipstick on a pig.

Quote
Embargoes are similar to economic sanctions and are generally considered legal barriers to trade, not to be confused with blockades, which are often considered to be acts of war.[2]
End Quote

Not only is this an act of war by Israel, it's also collective punishment, which is a war crime.

Gaza is at war with Israel. Just ask Hamas ;--)

This isn't a war; it's a belligerent occupation.

Ergo Israel has the right to defend itself with a nice peaceful blockade.

An occupational force cannot claim self defense.

Unless that is someone is dumb enough to try and run the blockade and ignore warning shots.

They're not sending the right kind of aid ship.

This is the one I would send...

Next step is an armed intrusion. All acts legal in conditions of war.

It's not a war, but it is illegal.

Something tells me you are not aware of the legal implications of any blockade let alone this one.

And just what do you base that on?

You might find this paper interesting, while I have not had time to read the whole thing yet its does seem full of useful information, even if I don't really agree with any of the UN findings

The Legality of the Israeli Naval Blockade of the Gaza Strip ...

Quote
3.2 ISRAEL’S COMPLIANCE WITH THE LAW GOVERNING THE IMPOSITION OF THE NAVAL BLOCKADE
Israel maintains that the naval blockade was properly declared and notified. (213) The naval blockade of the Gaza Strip began on 3 January 2009 and was announced on 6 January 2009. (214)The Naval Blockade Notice stated: “All mariners are advised that as of 03 January 2009, 1700 UTC, Gaza maritime area is closed to all maritime trafic (sic) and is under blockade imposed by Israeli Navy until further notice”(215) and also provided the geographical boundaries of the naval blockade by way of coordinates. (216) It was published on international channels, (217) and on the IDF, Shipping Authority and Ministry of Transport websites. (218) Israel informed all vessels in the Mediterranean Sea about the naval blockade, transmitted the announcement twice daily to vessels located within 300 kilometres of the Israeli coast, and notified states which Israel knew had planned to send ships to the Gaza Strip. (219) Israel asserts that the naval blockade has always been effective as no vessels have been permitted through, (220) and that it has been enforced impartially and without discrimination against the vessels of all states. (221) Israel also maintains that the naval blockade of the Gaza Strip has not prevented access to the ports and coasts of neutral states. (222)


As regards Israel’s humanitarian obligations under the San Remo Manual, the Turkel Report concedes that it is possible that the naval blockade, combined with the Closure Policy, affects the civilian population of the Gaza Strip. (223) However, it finds that there is no evidence that Israel is trying to starve the population of the Gaza Strip. (224) It also accepts Israel’s position that “food insecurity” is not the same as “starvation”. (225) It finds that the civilian population has not been denied objects for its survival and notes that Israel has permitted the passage of required items as well as humanitarian aid. (226) The Turkel Report therefore concludes that there is no breach of Paragraph 102(a) of the San Remo Manual. (227) As regards Paragraph 102(b) of the San Remo Manual and whether the damage to the civilian population is excessive in relation to the military advantage anticipated from the naval blockade, the Turkel Report accepts that it is difficult to assess the humanitarian repercussions of the naval blockade when it is examined separately to the Closure Policy that has been enforced since September 2007. (228) It notes that as there was no Gazan port, there had been limited maritime trade via the Gaza Strip, and there are no records to refer to. (229) It also notes that when humanitarian aid arrives by vessel, it is diverted to the Israeli port at Ashdod whereupon it is subjected to the Closure Policy. (230) The Turkel Report also notes that Israeli caselaw supports the finding that Israel has complied with its obligations under Paragraphs 102(a) and 103 of the San Remo Manual. (231) Finally, the Turkel Report refers to an International Committee of the Red Cross (hereinafter ICRC) report which suggests that medical supply stocks are low because of disagreement between Palestinian authorities, and not because of Israel’s non-compliance with Paragraph 104 of the San Remo Manual. (232)
End Quote

The Turkel report has major problems.

Summary of Israel’s National Investigation

Israel’s summary was based on the Turkel Commission’s report for which the Panel notes that original material was not provided. It also observes that Turkel has completely ignored the report of the UNHRC FFM (to which it formed an opposing opinion on the legality of the blockade). Of further concern is the Panel’s careless reading of Turkel. In para. 47 (a) it refers to “statements by various United Nations organizations” supporting Turkel’s position that the conflict between Israel and the Gaza Strip is an “international armed conflict”. In fact Turkel only cites the one UN report written by Special Rapporteur John Dugard in which the author declares that the Gaza Strip remains occupied territory.

The Panel seems unaware that much of the Turkel report cannot be taken at face value. Thus it has copied that Israel “provides humanitarian aid in those areas that human rights organizations identify as a source of concern” (para. 47 (f)) when in fact members of the Commission agreed with Gisha’s representative Tamar Feldman on 13 October 2010 that Israel does not supply any humanitarian goods to the Palestinians. Turkel’s assertion, again repeated by the Panel, that no humanitarian supplies were found on the remaining vessels is also false.​

Here's the findings of another UN report...

U.N. experts say Israel's blockade of Gaza illegal

Israel's naval blockade of the Gaza Strip violates international law, a panel of human rights experts reporting to a U.N. body said on Tuesday, disputing a conclusion reached by a separate U.N. probe into Israel's raid on a Gaza-bound aid ship.

The so-called Palmer Report on the Israeli raid of May 2010 that killed nine Turkish activists said earlier this month that Israel had used unreasonable force in last year's raid, but its naval blockade of the Hamas-ruled strip was legal.

A panel of five independent U.N. rights experts reporting to the U.N. Human Rights Council rejected that conclusion, saying the blockade had subjected Gazans to collective punishment in "flagrant contravention of international human rights and humanitarian law."​

It is funny (but not surprising) that one such as you would need BS sources like the UNHRC and Global Research to "validate" his POV.

Despite his claim to some Jewish heritage, Michel Chossudovsky's Global Research website is rife with anti-Jewish conspiracy theory and Holocaust denial.

As for the UN Gen Ass's HRC, it is the successor to the UN Commission on Human Rights (UNCHR). The name change was necessitated by the foul, anti-Semitic stench that persistently emanated from the CHR however the players, the culture and the agenda didn't begin to change until the US became actively involved.

The so-called "Falk Report" - the five HR "experts" quoted in the Reuter's article - was later recanted by Falk when all the facts became known to him.

The restraints on Gaza are as necessary as they are legal and the same bleeding-heart (and goose-stepping) voices that scream "collective punishment" once did the same in the matter of Israel's security fence which has undoubtedly saved as many lives.

It is difficult for the Arabs to prosecute the war against the hated Joooo without heavy weapons and perhaps that is why you scream so loudly and consistently about Israel's ability to limit them.

 

[SAYIT]

How can a colonial invader not be the aggressor? Did not the European Zionists go to Palestine (a place on another continent) where native people were already living?

Wow ... you must literally live under a rock.

There was much dislocation following WW2. In fact, between 1944 and 1948 about 31 million people - including some 12 million ethnic Germans - were expelled from Central and Eastern European countries.

Many left the continent entirely but evidently your problem is with the Jewish refugees ... and only with the Jewish ones.

I'm not surprised.

Flight and expulsion of Germans (1944–50) - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

[Billo_Really]

It is funny (but not surprising) that one such as you would need BS sources like the UNHRC and Global Research to "validate" his POV.

Your regurgitated talking points are such a joke.

Ad hominems are not valid rebuttals.

Despite his claim to some Jewish heritage, Michel Chossudovsky's Global Research website is rife with anti-Jewish conspiracy theory and Holocaust denial.

Give me 3 examples.

Give me none, proves you're full of shit!

As for the UN Gen Ass's HRC, it is the successor to the UN Commission on Human Rights (UNCHR). The name change was necessitated by the foul, anti-Semitic stench that persistently emanated from the CHR however the players, the culture and the agenda didn't begin to change until the US became actively involved.

Violating the human rights of Palestinian's, has nothing to do with anti-Semitism.

The so-called "Falk Report" - the five HR "experts" quoted in the Reuter's article - was later recanted by Falk when all the facts became known to him.

He didn't recant his report. He said it would've had a different conclusion, if Israel had cooperated. He still stands behind the findings of the report. BTW, the other members of the commission, never changed their position and still maintain it today.

The restraints on Gaza are as necessary as they are legal and the same bleeding-heart (and goose-stepping) voices that scream "collective punishment" once did the same in the matter of Israel's security fence which has undoubtedly saved as many lives.

Israel's Iron Curtain has been ruled illegal by the ICJ.

And collective punishment was outlawed, because that's what the Nazi's did to the Jews. Now, 70 years later, you're defending this disgusting policy. What size jack boot do you wear?

It is difficult for the Arabs to prosecute the war against the hated Joooo without heavy weapons and perhaps that is why you scream so loudly and consistently about Israel's ability to limit them.

Why would I hate Jews?

 

[SAYIT]

Despite his claim to some Jewish heritage, Michel Chossudovsky's Global Research website is rife with anti-Jewish conspiracy theory and Holocaust denial.

Give me 3 examples. Give me none, proves you're full of shit!

And when I provide 3 examples will you admit you are full of shit or simply do what you always do ... pretend you didn't see them and continue with your mindless hate for Jews?

It is difficult for the Arabs to prosecute the war against the hated Joooo without heavy weapons and perhaps that is why you scream so loudly and consistently about Israel's ability to limit them.

Why would I hate Jews?

A good question but perhaps one better asked of yourself.

 

[montelatici]

The problem is, so much Zionist propaganda has been absorbed by most Americans, when the facts are presented and the sources are impeccable, cognitive dissonance sets in. The zealots are those that continue repeating propaganda that has been proven to be false...
...The non-Jews of Palestine are not going away and Israel's decision to not allow the establishment of a sovereign Palestinian state when they had the chance The Swiss cheese offer with the equivalent of Crusader castles manned by the IDF which had control within the proposed state made any the offer DOA.

The irony of one such as you whining about propaganda and cognitive dissonance is massive and obvious but clearly you can't see it.

I'm not surprised.

You conveniently forget that not only did the Arabs reject the UN proposed partition in 1947 that could have established a Pal State, they continued to reject statehood in any of the following 20 years (until June, 1967) in which they had the unfettered opportunity to create a Pal State - without Israeli involvement - on all or any of the land they controlled (including all of Jerusalem).

Needless to say, those hapless "refugees" consistently eschewed their chance at statehood for the honor of life in squalid "refugee" camps and of tossing generation after generation of their kids into the fire just to satisfy the Jihadists among them and the global Nazi types for whom those "refugees" are the front line of their war against the hated Joooo.

The cognitive dissonance of the Zionist supporters is truly extraordinary.

In 1947 they believe, that the non-Jews should have passively accepted that nearly half of their population would be placed under foreign (European) colonial rule forever. in a state that would never be a state for Christians and Muslims. What native people have (or would have) ever accepted such an arrangement?

The Palestinians tried to establish a Palestinian state from 1947-1967. Jordan refused to recognize the All-Palestine Government that intended to establish the Palestinian state consisting of the West Bank, Gaza and East Jerusalem. Some forget that King Abdullah of Jordan was assassinated by Palestinians who were against the annexation of the West Bank and East Jerusalem. The Jordanian royals feared an independent Palestine given the fact that native Jordanians (Hashemite Bedouins) were vastly outnumbered by the Palestinians. With the Jordanians the Israelis, who always intended to create a "Greater Israel" to include the West Bank, prevented the establishment of a Palestinian state.

 

[Billo_Really]

And when I provide 3 examples will you admit you are full of shit or simply do what you always do ... pretend you didn't see them and continue with your mindless hate for Jews?

Give me 3 examples that prove your point, sweet cheeks, and I'll admit I'm full of shit.

A good question but perhaps one better asked of yourself.

I'm not the one making the claim, you are.

Are you telling me you can't say why you said what you said?

If you can't state the reason behind your claim, then you just think things for no apparent reason.

 

[Boston1]

Actually that WORKS in G.Britain. As homeowners have been routinely prosecuted for installing mesh glass or other defensive methods that MIGHT injure an intruder..

But that's another topic. The West Bank was NEVER UNoccupied in your lifetime. Jordan was the previous "occupier". And you see how "armed resistance" was not effective at all against Jordan. Clear as day. You WANT bloodshed and violence because you are not in the fight. The folks who need to decide WHEN to fight and WHAT to fight for should have learned by now that owning a "nation-state" takes more than throwing rocks and getting innocent Pali kids killed regularly for no reason at all. The "armed resistance" part comes AFTER you develop a nation-state plan and establish leadership. Doing it ass backwards is why the Palis have a long string of lost string of lost opportunities towards statehood.. That's the LARGEST Palestinian fact on the list..

Another "Palestinian Fact" is that they need to be more like Zionists. And less like an angry mob that is captured periodically by a new group of radicals. Because THEY are in diaspora now -- just like the Jews were. And they need to PROMOTE a set of nationalistic goals and find the leadership to get there.

That is land Israel seized in the '67 war. I don't think anyone disagrees with that. It is also land Israel has effectively controlled against the will of the indigenous residents. That's an occupation. And that's what is causing all the violence.

How would you like it if the Chinese came into your neighborhood and set up roadblocks and checkpoints that resulted in a 15 minute trip to the store, becomes a 2 hour sojourn, if your allowed to pass on that day?

Or your wife goes into labor and you're trying to get to the hospital, but they won't allow you to go through the checkpoint?

Are you telling me you wouldn't be pissed off? You'd just turn to your wife and say, "Sorry honey, they won't let us through. I guess you'll have to have the baby in the back seat? You're down with that? Aren't ya, dear?"

LOL your funny.

Thats land Jordan LOST in an aggressive war against Israel. Why do you think that precious security council of yours adopted UNR242 under tittle VI instead of VII ?