All The News Anti-Israel Posters Will Not Read Or Discuss

[USAF 2023]

[ The Six day war, not as simple as simply calling on Israel and Egypt as the only two involved]

Syria and Jordan were also involved

 

[USAF 2023]

They both can’t stand the fact that Israel exists.

No, its what Israel is doing with that existence that is so disgusting.

Nice try. If this were before 67 the Pro Pal objections wouldn’t be any different.

 

[Sixties Fan]

The Straits were INTERNATIONAL Waters and Egypt had no right to block it.

I agree.

In addition Egypt Military started to Mass at the Israeli Border and the U.N. Peacekeepers left. That is what started the War. Please tell us why those events occurred

Massing troops is not the same thing as an invasion. Israel invaded; Egypt did not. And besides, Egypt massing troops did not threaten Israels military.

"To claim that the Egyptian troops massed at the border could in any way threaten the existence of Israel is not only an insult to the intelligence of any person capable of analysing this type of situation, but above all an insult to the Israeli army.” ”All that talk about the huge danger we were in (. . .) was never taken into account when we were doing our calculations before the fighting began.” - General Matti Peled, Chief Logistics Officer ​

[ The Six day war, not as simple as simply calling on Israel and Egypt as the only two involved]

Syria and Jordan were also involved

Which is what the videos I posted tell.

Do not worry, Billo only takes allegations from conspiracy theory sites where they allege that some in the Israeli Military told "the truth" about wanting to attack Egypt and all other Arab countries and "extend its territory".

Which is the case with Orient XXI, where the General Peled "quote" comes from. Click on it and see for yourself. Do the research about it.

Now, did any Israeli military member actually say that?
Was an actual saying by any Israeli taken out of context and printed on the site?

Always click on their reference and try to find out what the site is all about. From what I saw, it is very pro those who are anti Israel.
The anti Israel people are always the victims of Israel.

That is the company Billo likes to keep.

 

[RoccoR]

RE: All The News Anti-Israel Posters Will Not Read Or Discuss
※→ Billo_Really, et al,

We all seem to agree on the first part. But the second part is tricky.

The Straits were INTERNATIONAL Waters and Egypt had no right to block it.

I agree.

In addition Egypt Military started to Mass at the Israeli Border and the U.N. Peacekeepers left. That is what started the War. Please tell us why those events occurred

Massing troops is not the same thing as an invasion. Israel invaded; Egypt did not. And besides, Egypt massing troops did not threaten Israels military.

"To claim that the Egyptian troops massed at the border could in any way threaten the existence of Israel is not only an insult to the intelligence of any person capable of analysing this type of situation, but above all an insult to the Israeli army.” ”All that talk about the huge danger we were in (. . .) was never taken into account when we were doing our calculations before the fighting began.” - General Matti Peled, Chief Logistics Officer ​

(COMMENT)

You do not have to wait for the Enemy to hit you. You are allowed to block the punch.

The wording of Article 2(4) is clear on that point. It says:

Article 2 UN CHARTER
The Organization and its Members, in pursuit of the Purposes stated in Article 1, shall act in accordance with the following Principles.

1. The Organization is based on the principle of the sovereign equality of all its Members.
2. All Members, in order to ensure to all of them the rights and benefits resulting from membership, shall fulfill in good faith the obligations assumed by them in accordance with the present Charter.
3. All Members shall settle their international disputes by peaceful means in such a manner that international peace and security, and justice, are not endangered.
4. All Members shall refrain in their international relations from the threat or use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of any state, or in any other manner inconsistent with the Purposes of the United Nations.
5. All Members shall give the United Nations every assistance in any action it takes in accordance with the present Charter, and shall refrain from giving assistance to any state against which the United Nations is taking preventive or enforcement action.
6. The Organization shall ensure that states which are not Members of the United Nations act in accordance with these Principles so far as may be necessary for the maintenance of international peace and security.
7. Nothing contained in the present Charter shall authorize the United Nations to intervene in matters which are essentially within the domestic jurisdiction of any state or shall require the Members to submit such matters to settlement under the present Charter; but this principle shall not prejudice the application of enforcement measures under Chapter Vll.

If you read it, "the threat --- of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of the State of Israel.

The credible threat is that they Egyptians ordered the UN PeaceKeepers out of the away and nearly a thousand tanks and a like number of artillery pieces, right up on the border. This was no training exercise. This was close to 100,000 men and equipment. → It was a credible THREAT.

Most Respectfully,
R

 

[USAF 2023]

The Straits were INTERNATIONAL Waters and Egypt had no right to block it.

I agree.

In addition Egypt Military started to Mass at the Israeli Border and the U.N. Peacekeepers left. That is what started the War. Please tell us why those events occurred

Massing troops is not the same thing as an invasion. Israel invaded; Egypt did not. And besides, Egypt massing troops did not threaten Israels military.

"To claim that the Egyptian troops massed at the border could in any way threaten the existence of Israel is not only an insult to the intelligence of any person capable of analysing this type of situation, but above all an insult to the Israeli army.” ”All that talk about the huge danger we were in (. . .) was never taken into account when we were doing our calculations before the fighting began.” - General Matti Peled, Chief Logistics Officer ​

[ The Six day war, not as simple as simply calling on Israel and Egypt as the only two involved]

Syria and Jordan were also involved

Which is what the videos I posted tell.

Do not worry, Billo only takes allegations from conspiracy theory sites where they allege that some in the Israeli Military told "the truth" about wanting to attack Egypt and all other Arab countries and "extend its territory".

Which is the case with Orient XXI, where the General Peled "quote" comes from. Click on it and see for yourself. Do the research about it.

Now, did any Israeli military member actually say that?
Was an actual saying by any Israeli taken out of context and printed on the site?

Always click on their reference and try to find out what the site is all about. From what I saw, it is very pro those who are anti Israel.
The anti Israel people are always the victims of Israel.

That is the company Billo likes to keep.

I would like to see those “ threads” except they don’t exist; only in his delusional “ mind”

 

[Sixties Fan]

The Straits were INTERNATIONAL Waters and Egypt had no right to block it.

I agree.

In addition Egypt Military started to Mass at the Israeli Border and the U.N. Peacekeepers left. That is what started the War. Please tell us why those events occurred

Massing troops is not the same thing as an invasion. Israel invaded; Egypt did not. And besides, Egypt massing troops did not threaten Israels military.

"To claim that the Egyptian troops massed at the border could in any way threaten the existence of Israel is not only an insult to the intelligence of any person capable of analysing this type of situation, but above all an insult to the Israeli army.” ”All that talk about the huge danger we were in (. . .) was never taken into account when we were doing our calculations before the fighting began.” - General Matti Peled, Chief Logistics Officer ​

[ The Six day war, not as simple as simply calling on Israel and Egypt as the only two involved]

Syria and Jordan were also involved

Which is what the videos I posted tell.

Do not worry, Billo only takes allegations from conspiracy theory sites where they allege that some in the Israeli Military told "the truth" about wanting to attack Egypt and all other Arab countries and "extend its territory".

Which is the case with Orient XXI, where the General Peled "quote" comes from. Click on it and see for yourself. Do the research about it.

Now, did any Israeli military member actually say that?
Was an actual saying by any Israeli taken out of context and printed on the site?

Always click on their reference and try to find out what the site is all about. From what I saw, it is very pro those who are anti Israel.
The anti Israel people are always the victims of Israel.

That is the company Billo likes to keep.

I would like to see those “ threads” except they don’t exist; only in his delusional “ mind”

He posted a link. It is in red. It is for a conspiracy theory site called OrientXII

 

[USAF 2023]

RE: All The News Anti-Israel Posters Will Not Read Or Discuss
※→ Billo_Really, et al,

We all seem to agree on the first part. But the second part is tricky.

The Straits were INTERNATIONAL Waters and Egypt had no right to block it.

I agree.

In addition Egypt Military started to Mass at the Israeli Border and the U.N. Peacekeepers left. That is what started the War. Please tell us why those events occurred

Massing troops is not the same thing as an invasion. Israel invaded; Egypt did not. And besides, Egypt massing troops did not threaten Israels military.

"To claim that the Egyptian troops massed at the border could in any way threaten the existence of Israel is not only an insult to the intelligence of any person capable of analysing this type of situation, but above all an insult to the Israeli army.” ”All that talk about the huge danger we were in (. . .) was never taken into account when we were doing our calculations before the fighting began.” - General Matti Peled, Chief Logistics Officer ​

(COMMENT)

You do not have to wait for the Enemy to hit you. You are allowed to block the punch.

The wording of Article 2(4) is clear on that point. It says:

Article 2 UN CHARTER
The Organization and its Members, in pursuit of the Purposes stated in Article 1, shall act in accordance with the following Principles.

1. The Organization is based on the principle of the sovereign equality of all its Members.
2. All Members, in order to ensure to all of them the rights and benefits resulting from membership, shall fulfill in good faith the obligations assumed by them in accordance with the present Charter.
3. All Members shall settle their international disputes by peaceful means in such a manner that international peace and security, and justice, are not endangered.
4. All Members shall refrain in their international relations from the threat or use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of any state, or in any other manner inconsistent with the Purposes of the United Nations.
5. All Members shall give the United Nations every assistance in any action it takes in accordance with the present Charter, and shall refrain from giving assistance to any state against which the United Nations is taking preventive or enforcement action.
6. The Organization shall ensure that states which are not Members of the United Nations act in accordance with these Principles so far as may be necessary for the maintenance of international peace and security.
7. Nothing contained in the present Charter shall authorize the United Nations to intervene in matters which are essentially within the domestic jurisdiction of any state or shall require the Members to submit such matters to settlement under the present Charter; but this principle shall not prejudice the application of enforcement measures under Chapter Vll.

If you read it, "the threat --- of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of the State of Israel.

The credible threat is that they Egyptians ordered the UN PeaceKeepers out of the away and nearly a thousand tanks and a like number of artillery pieces, right up on the border. This was no training exercise. This was close to 100,000 men and equipment. → It was a credible THREAT.

Most Respectfully,
R

RE: All The News Anti-Israel Posters Will Not Read Or Discuss
※→ Billo_Really, et al,

We all seem to agree on the first part. But the second part is tricky.

The Straits were INTERNATIONAL Waters and Egypt had no right to block it.

I agree.

In addition Egypt Military started to Mass at the Israeli Border and the U.N. Peacekeepers left. That is what started the War. Please tell us why those events occurred

Massing troops is not the same thing as an invasion. Israel invaded; Egypt did not. And besides, Egypt massing troops did not threaten Israels military.

"To claim that the Egyptian troops massed at the border could in any way threaten the existence of Israel is not only an insult to the intelligence of any person capable of analysing this type of situation, but above all an insult to the Israeli army.” ”All that talk about the huge danger we were in (. . .) was never taken into account when we were doing our calculations before the fighting began.” - General Matti Peled, Chief Logistics Officer ​

(COMMENT)

You do not have to wait for the Enemy to hit you. You are allowed to block the punch.

The wording of Article 2(4) is clear on that point. It says:

Article 2 UN CHARTER
The Organization and its Members, in pursuit of the Purposes stated in Article 1, shall act in accordance with the following Principles.

1. The Organization is based on the principle of the sovereign equality of all its Members.
2. All Members, in order to ensure to all of them the rights and benefits resulting from membership, shall fulfill in good faith the obligations assumed by them in accordance with the present Charter.
3. All Members shall settle their international disputes by peaceful means in such a manner that international peace and security, and justice, are not endangered.
4. All Members shall refrain in their international relations from the threat or use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of any state, or in any other manner inconsistent with the Purposes of the United Nations.
5. All Members shall give the United Nations every assistance in any action it takes in accordance with the present Charter, and shall refrain from giving assistance to any state against which the United Nations is taking preventive or enforcement action.
6. The Organization shall ensure that states which are not Members of the United Nations act in accordance with these Principles so far as may be necessary for the maintenance of international peace and security.
7. Nothing contained in the present Charter shall authorize the United Nations to intervene in matters which are essentially within the domestic jurisdiction of any state or shall require the Members to submit such matters to settlement under the present Charter; but this principle shall not prejudice the application of enforcement measures under Chapter Vll.

If you read it, "the threat --- of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of the State of Israel.

The credible threat is that they Egyptians ordered the UN PeaceKeepers out of the away and nearly a thousand tanks and a like number of artillery pieces, right up on the border. This was no training exercise. This was close to 100,000 men and equipment. → It was a credible THREAT.

Most Respectfully,
R

Arab Threats Against Israel

It was more then just a threat; It was a promise. One more example of How the Arabs INITIATED the 67 War,

 

[USAF 2023]

The Straits were INTERNATIONAL Waters and Egypt had no right to block it.

I agree.

In addition Egypt Military started to Mass at the Israeli Border and the U.N. Peacekeepers left. That is what started the War. Please tell us why those events occurred

Massing troops is not the same thing as an invasion. Israel invaded; Egypt did not. And besides, Egypt massing troops did not threaten Israels military.

"To claim that the Egyptian troops massed at the border could in any way threaten the existence of Israel is not only an insult to the intelligence of any person capable of analysing this type of situation, but above all an insult to the Israeli army.” ”All that talk about the huge danger we were in (. . .) was never taken into account when we were doing our calculations before the fighting began.” - General Matti Peled, Chief Logistics Officer ​

[ The Six day war, not as simple as simply calling on Israel and Egypt as the only two involved]

Syria and Jordan were also involved

Which is what the videos I posted tell.

Do not worry, Billo only takes allegations from conspiracy theory sites where they allege that some in the Israeli Military told "the truth" about wanting to attack Egypt and all other Arab countries and "extend its territory".

Which is the case with Orient XXI, where the General Peled "quote" comes from. Click on it and see for yourself. Do the research about it.

Now, did any Israeli military member actually say that?
Was an actual saying by any Israeli taken out of context and printed on the site?

Always click on their reference and try to find out what the site is all about. From what I saw, it is very pro those who are anti Israel.
The anti Israel people are always the victims of Israel.

That is the company Billo likes to keep.

I would like to see those “ threads” except they don’t exist; only in his delusional “ mind”

He posted a link. It is in red. It is for a conspiracy theory site called OrientXII

He posted a link? Know what; So did I ! See above

 

[P F Tinmore]

It is understood that these negotiations shall cover remaining issues, including: Jerusalem, refugees, settlements, security arrangements, borders, relations and cooperation with other neighbors, and other issues of common interest.

Rights are non negotiable.

 

[P F Tinmore]

Neither policy nor violence should be a driver towards peace. The default political position is "peace." Peace should be the natural static condition for any modern state to gravitate towards.

Then what should the Palestinians do about the constant violence by Israel?

 

[P F Tinmore]

Everything about the completion of the "Step Preparatory to Independent" and the subsequent creation of the Jewish State of Israel was entirely legal.

Only if Resolution 181 was valid. It was not.

 

[Hollie]

Neither policy nor violence should be a driver towards peace. The default political position is "peace." Peace should be the natural static condition for any modern state to gravitate towards.

Then what should the Palestinians do about the constant violence by Israel?

What you mean to say is “what should the Israelis do about the constant gee-had attacks by Islamic terrorists.

What did the Jordanians do after the Black September gee-had?

 

[P F Tinmore]

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.

What about Israel's violations against Palestine's international boundaries?

 

[P F Tinmore]

Neither policy nor violence should be a driver towards peace. The default political position is "peace." Peace should be the natural static condition for any modern state to gravitate towards.

Then what should the Palestinians do about the constant violence by Israel?

What you mean to say is “what should the Israelis do about the constant gee-had attacks by Islamic terrorists.

What did the Jordanians do after the Black September gee-had?

More of Israel's terrorist propaganda crap again.

 

[P F Tinmore]

The settlements are all in Area C (full Israeli civil and security control). By agreement with the Arab Palestinian Leadership (AKA: The Palestinian Authority) and under the guidance Area "C" full Israeli civil and security control, any settlements established by Israel is "legal."

Any treaty or agreement that violates the rights of a people is invalid.

 

[Hollie]

Neither policy nor violence should be a driver towards peace. The default political position is "peace." Peace should be the natural static condition for any modern state to gravitate towards.

Then what should the Palestinians do about the constant violence by Israel?

What you mean to say is “what should the Israelis do about the constant gee-had attacks by Islamic terrorists.

What did the Jordanians do after the Black September gee-had?

More of Israel's terrorist propaganda crap again.

More of your cut and paste slogans.

 

[Hollie]

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.

What about Israel's violations against Palestine's international boundaries?

You’re retreating to your silly claims relative to the Treaty of Lausanne.

How, umm, pointless. The same cut and paste nonsense.

 

[P F Tinmore]

RE: All The News Anti-Israel Posters Will Not Read Or Discuss
※→ P F Tinmore, et al,

Exactly what is: "Israel's settler colonial project"

(BLUF): There is actually no such thing. Those are just words of description that can be generated manually or auto computer generated from any number of nerd site.

Our descriptive words index contains a huge selection of words which you can use for your writing projects. It is also great for students and teachers, this resource will be beneficial to your school English studies. We have categorized descriptive words by category. We also have a search function which you can use to finds the right descriptive words and phrases quickly!

And for heaven's sake, don't bring up those old newspaper cuttings and essays by the original members of the World Zionist Organization. Those are well over a century ago and have no connection at all to the post-1967 Six Day War outcomes.

All Israeli settlers are necessary, integral, and active members of Israel's settler-colonial project.

Now I don't believe that settler colonialism, per se, is illegal. However, virtually every action required to achieve such a project is illegal.

Can you name anything about Israel that is actually legal?

I await your response.

(COMMENT)

Everything about the completion of the "Step Preparatory to Independent" and the subsequent creation of the Jewish State of Israel was entirely legal. It was done with the explicit approval of the UN and tacit approval of the Security Council. The Arab League, violating Article 2(4) ignited the conflict that still rages today in a slightly different form.

As you well know, the West Bank into three administrative divisions. We generally say or describe these areas as:

• Area A (full civil and security control by the Palestinian Authority)
• Area B (Palestinian civil control and joint Israeli-Palestinian security control)
• Area C (full Israeli civil and security control)​

The settlements are all in Area C (full Israeli civil and security control). By agreement with the Arab Palestinian Leadership (AKA: The Palestinian Authority) and under the guidance Area "C" full Israeli civil and security control, any settlements established by Israel is "legal."

IF: the Arab Palestinian Leadership (AKA: The Palestinian Authority) had a:

• The political problem with the settlements,
• Wish to dispute the authority of the settlements,
• Want to challenge the competency of the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO), the sole legitimate representative of the Palestinian people in any Palestinian territory that is liberated,

THEN: The complainant must use either of the recognized platforms.

• Oslo II Accord - Declaration of Principles On Interim Self-Government Arrangements (September 13, 1993)

※ Artilce V(3) (TRANSITIONAL PERIOD AND PERMANENT STATUS NEGOTIATIONS)

It is understood that these negotiations shall cover remaining issues, including: Jerusalem, refugees, settlements, security arrangements, borders, relations and cooperation with other neighbors, and other issues of common interest.

※ Article XV (RESOLUTION OF DISPUTES)

Disputes arising out of the application or interpretation of this Declaration of Principles. or any subsequent agreements pertaining to the interim period, shall be resolved by negotiations through the Joint Liaison Committee to be established pursuant to Article X above.​

• These methods are 100% consistent with the existing and internationally accept practice:

※ 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 States shall pursue in good faith negotiations for the early conclusion of a universal treaty on general and complete disarmament under effective international control and strive to adopt appropriate measures to reduce international tensions and strengthen confidence among States.

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.

(ARAB PALESTINIAN OBSTRUCTION TO PEACE)

The fact that the Arab Palestinian Leadership has not fulfilled in good faith of the obligations assumed by States, in accordance with the Charter. Neither policy nor violence should be a driver towards peace. The default political position is "peace." Peace should be the natural static condition for any modern state to gravitate towards. In the case of the Arab Palestinians, → the default political stance is something other than peace.

Most Respectfully,
R

All Israeli settlers are necessary, integral, and active members of Israel's settler-colonial project.

Now I don't believe that settler colonialism, per se, is illegal. However, virtually every action required to achieve such a project is illegal.

Can you name anything about Israel that is actually legal?

I await your response.
(COMMENT)

You are ducking my question.

 

[P F Tinmore]

RE: All The News Anti-Israel Posters Will Not Read Or Discuss
※→ P F Tinmore, et al,

Exactly what is: "Israel's settler colonial project"

(BLUF): There is actually no such thing. Those are just words of description that can be generated manually or auto computer generated from any number of nerd site.

Our descriptive words index contains a huge selection of words which you can use for your writing projects. It is also great for students and teachers, this resource will be beneficial to your school English studies. We have categorized descriptive words by category. We also have a search function which you can use to finds the right descriptive words and phrases quickly!

And for heaven's sake, don't bring up those old newspaper cuttings and essays by the original members of the World Zionist Organization. Those are well over a century ago and have no connection at all to the post-1967 Six Day War outcomes.

All Israeli settlers are necessary, integral, and active members of Israel's settler-colonial project.

Now I don't believe that settler colonialism, per se, is illegal. However, virtually every action required to achieve such a project is illegal.

Can you name anything about Israel that is actually legal?

I await your response.

(COMMENT)

Everything about the completion of the "Step Preparatory to Independent" and the subsequent creation of the Jewish State of Israel was entirely legal. It was done with the explicit approval of the UN and tacit approval of the Security Council. The Arab League, violating Article 2(4) ignited the conflict that still rages today in a slightly different form.

As you well know, the West Bank into three administrative divisions. We generally say or describe these areas as:

• Area A (full civil and security control by the Palestinian Authority)
• Area B (Palestinian civil control and joint Israeli-Palestinian security control)
• Area C (full Israeli civil and security control)​

The settlements are all in Area C (full Israeli civil and security control). By agreement with the Arab Palestinian Leadership (AKA: The Palestinian Authority) and under the guidance Area "C" full Israeli civil and security control, any settlements established by Israel is "legal."

IF: the Arab Palestinian Leadership (AKA: The Palestinian Authority) had a:

• The political problem with the settlements,
• Wish to dispute the authority of the settlements,
• Want to challenge the competency of the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO), the sole legitimate representative of the Palestinian people in any Palestinian territory that is liberated,

THEN: The complainant must use either of the recognized platforms.

• Oslo II Accord - Declaration of Principles On Interim Self-Government Arrangements (September 13, 1993)

※ Artilce V(3) (TRANSITIONAL PERIOD AND PERMANENT STATUS NEGOTIATIONS)

It is understood that these negotiations shall cover remaining issues, including: Jerusalem, refugees, settlements, security arrangements, borders, relations and cooperation with other neighbors, and other issues of common interest.

※ Article XV (RESOLUTION OF DISPUTES)

Disputes arising out of the application or interpretation of this Declaration of Principles. or any subsequent agreements pertaining to the interim period, shall be resolved by negotiations through the Joint Liaison Committee to be established pursuant to Article X above.​

• These methods are 100% consistent with the existing and internationally accept practice:

※ 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 States shall pursue in good faith negotiations for the early conclusion of a universal treaty on general and complete disarmament under effective international control and strive to adopt appropriate measures to reduce international tensions and strengthen confidence among States.

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.

(ARAB PALESTINIAN OBSTRUCTION TO PEACE)

The fact that the Arab Palestinian Leadership has not fulfilled in good faith of the obligations assumed by States, in accordance with the Charter. Neither policy nor violence should be a driver towards peace. The default political position is "peace." Peace should be the natural static condition for any modern state to gravitate towards. In the case of the Arab Palestinians, → the default political stance is something other than peace.

Most Respectfully,
R

And for heaven's sake, don't bring up those old newspaper cuttings and essays by the original members of the World Zionist Organization.

Only Zionist shills will argue with source documents.

 

[rylah]

RE: All The News Anti-Israel Posters Will Not Read Or Discuss
※→ P F Tinmore, et al,

Exactly what is: "Israel's settler colonial project"

(BLUF): There is actually no such thing. Those are just words of description that can be generated manually or auto computer generated from any number of nerd site.

Our descriptive words index contains a huge selection of words which you can use for your writing projects. It is also great for students and teachers, this resource will be beneficial to your school English studies. We have categorized descriptive words by category. We also have a search function which you can use to finds the right descriptive words and phrases quickly!

And for heaven's sake, don't bring up those old newspaper cuttings and essays by the original members of the World Zionist Organization. Those are well over a century ago and have no connection at all to the post-1967 Six Day War outcomes.

All Israeli settlers are necessary, integral, and active members of Israel's settler-colonial project.

Now I don't believe that settler colonialism, per se, is illegal. However, virtually every action required to achieve such a project is illegal.

Can you name anything about Israel that is actually legal?

I await your response.

(COMMENT)

Everything about the completion of the "Step Preparatory to Independent" and the subsequent creation of the Jewish State of Israel was entirely legal. It was done with the explicit approval of the UN and tacit approval of the Security Council. The Arab League, violating Article 2(4) ignited the conflict that still rages today in a slightly different form.

As you well know, the West Bank into three administrative divisions. We generally say or describe these areas as:

• Area A (full civil and security control by the Palestinian Authority)
• Area B (Palestinian civil control and joint Israeli-Palestinian security control)
• Area C (full Israeli civil and security control)​

The settlements are all in Area C (full Israeli civil and security control). By agreement with the Arab Palestinian Leadership (AKA: The Palestinian Authority) and under the guidance Area "C" full Israeli civil and security control, any settlements established by Israel is "legal."

IF: the Arab Palestinian Leadership (AKA: The Palestinian Authority) had a:

• The political problem with the settlements,
• Wish to dispute the authority of the settlements,
• Want to challenge the competency of the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO), the sole legitimate representative of the Palestinian people in any Palestinian territory that is liberated,

THEN: The complainant must use either of the recognized platforms.

• Oslo II Accord - Declaration of Principles On Interim Self-Government Arrangements (September 13, 1993)

※ Artilce V(3) (TRANSITIONAL PERIOD AND PERMANENT STATUS NEGOTIATIONS)

It is understood that these negotiations shall cover remaining issues, including: Jerusalem, refugees, settlements, security arrangements, borders, relations and cooperation with other neighbors, and other issues of common interest.

※ Article XV (RESOLUTION OF DISPUTES)

Disputes arising out of the application or interpretation of this Declaration of Principles. or any subsequent agreements pertaining to the interim period, shall be resolved by negotiations through the Joint Liaison Committee to be established pursuant to Article X above.​

• These methods are 100% consistent with the existing and internationally accept practice:

※ 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 States shall pursue in good faith negotiations for the early conclusion of a universal treaty on general and complete disarmament under effective international control and strive to adopt appropriate measures to reduce international tensions and strengthen confidence among States.

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.

(ARAB PALESTINIAN OBSTRUCTION TO PEACE)

The fact that the Arab Palestinian Leadership has not fulfilled in good faith of the obligations assumed by States, in accordance with the Charter. Neither policy nor violence should be a driver towards peace. The default political position is "peace." Peace should be the natural static condition for any modern state to gravitate towards. In the case of the Arab Palestinians, → the default political stance is something other than peace.

Most Respectfully,
R

And for heaven's sake, don't bring up those old newspaper cuttings and essays by the original members of the World Zionist Organization.

Only Zionist shills will argue with source documents.

You don't understand the argument.
In which document does it mention that Palestine is an Arab state?