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

[Coyote]

Those rockets land anyplace they can reach.

Do Israeli Jews have the right to bomb the places now held by Palestinians where they were expelled during the initial conflicts?

So, since the Palestinians cannot mooch the high tech weapons that Israel has, they are expected to just sit on their hands?

Interesting questions. Are the Jews moving into the West Bank the same Jews that were expelled?

Interesting questions...yes. But you aren’t answering them are you?

I am asking because I don't know. The narrative is usually the Jews were expelled so the Jews have the right to move back. Now, are these the same people who were expelled, or just a basket of people who share a religion?

Well I don’t buy into any multigenerational right to move back for either side and most claiming that as a right are not among those directly affected.

You don't object to the Jews "moving back" after thousands of years. What is the problem with the Palestinians moving back after 70 years? And besides, there are records of Palestinian citizenship.

I highlighted the part of my post you skipped over...

 

[Sixties Fan]

The one I highlighted.

Well, you can't but that is a one sided question. Why is it bad for Palestinians to attack Israelis but OK for the Israelis to attack Palestinians in far greater numbers?

It is not one sided. How about you answer my question first and then I will answer yours?

Now you are dodging.

I highlighted in bold the question I asked you that started this. You have yet to answer it. That is dodging. I am going to play word games. If you won’t answer then say you won’t, stop the games. However I am really interested in your answer.

I don't agree with any killing. I just question the double standard.

You do not even know the meaning of double standard.

 

[Hollie]

Those rockets land anyplace they can reach.

Do Israeli Jews have the right to bomb the places now held by Palestinians where they were expelled during the initial conflicts?

So, since the Palestinians cannot mooch the high tech weapons that Israel has, they are expected to just sit on their hands?

Interesting questions. Are the Jews moving into the West Bank the same Jews that were expelled?

Interesting questions...yes. But you aren’t answering them are you?

I am asking because I don't know. The narrative is usually the Jews were expelled so the Jews have the right to move back. Now, are these the same people who were expelled, or just a basket of people who share a religion?

Well I don’t buy into any multigenerational right to move back for either side and most claiming that as a right are not among those directly affected.

You don't object to the Jews "moving back" after thousands of years. What is the problem with the Palestinians moving back after 70 years? And besides, there are records of Palestinian citizenship.

Citizenship in an Islamist caliphate? The caliphate collapsed under the dead weight of its own untenable occupation.

 

[Coyote]

The one I highlighted.

Well, you can't but that is a one sided question. Why is it bad for Palestinians to attack Israelis but OK for the Israelis to attack Palestinians in far greater numbers?

It is not one sided. How about you answer my question first and then I will answer yours?

Now you are dodging.

I highlighted in bold the question I asked you that started this. You have yet to answer it. That is dodging. I am going to play word games. If you won’t answer then say you won’t, stop the games. However I am really interested in your answer.

I don't agree with any killing. I just question the double standard.

If Israeli’s deliberately targeted civilians wth the attempt to murder I say the same thing, for example the horrific murder of the family who’s house was firebombed. That is equivalent to the example in my question. None of it is ok.

 

[P F Tinmore]

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

You are asking the Israelis to put their sovereignty and territorial integrity at risk.

The Palestinians do not ask for others to provide anything.

(COMMENT)

The tension and mistrust between the Hostile Arab Palestinian (HoAP) and the Israelis, that has accumulated over the decades of violence have tainted and contaminated any attempt at a fair and just negotiation or settlement of disputes.

There is (absolutely) no reasonable expectation that the "Right of Return" (or anything remotely like it) could happen happen for several generations. Until the semior members of government come from a family that has no previous experience with the Arab-Israeli Conflict. And the parents of the prodigy of that generation haven't even been born yet.

Most Respectfully,
R

The "right of return" for Arabs into Israel has been done already by those Israel decided to allow back. Some have turned to murdering Jews in Israel.

The other "right of return" they refer to, being that of 5 Million Arabs, mostly descendants of those who fought the Jews during the Independence war and left before it started or were expelled afterwards, will never happen.

There are about 20,000 living Arabs who actually fled or were expelled from Israel before, during or after the war.

NONE will be allowed to return.

Many who fled were not allowed back...were not violent, and had their land essentially confiscated through absentee landowner laws.

And, according to you, the Palestinians do not have rights.

The Palestinian people's have those same exact rights.

They just don't have the right to murder civilians. No one has that right.

I don't see the Palestinians living in their homeland.

There are Arab Israeli (Palestinian) citizens in Israel, there are Palestinians in West Bank and Gaza.

Is all set to right yet? No. But you can't say there are none living there.

OK, but the vast majority of Palestinians no longer live on their own land.

What you mean to write is that Arabs-Moslems no longer live on lands that were once under the control of the Ottoman Empire.

You can spend your every waking moment agonizing about the fact of the former Ottoman sanjak and the collapse of the Ottoman Empire. However, the fact remains that the Ottoman Empire released all rights and title to the area.

You’re left to slam away at your keyboard as your participation in the gee-had.

However, the fact remains that the Ottoman Empire released all rights and title to the area.

Indeed, to the new state of Palestine.

 

[Sixties Fan]

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

You are asking the Israelis to put their sovereignty and territorial integrity at risk.

(COMMENT)

The tension and mistrust between the Hostile Arab Palestinian (HoAP) and the Israelis, that has accumulated over the decades of violence have tainted and contaminated any attempt at a fair and just negotiation or settlement of disputes.

There is (absolutely) no reasonable expectation that the "Right of Return" (or anything remotely like it) could happen happen for several generations. Until the semior members of government come from a family that has no previous experience with the Arab-Israeli Conflict. And the parents of the prodigy of that generation haven't even been born yet.

Most Respectfully,
R

The "right of return" for Arabs into Israel has been done already by those Israel decided to allow back. Some have turned to murdering Jews in Israel.

The other "right of return" they refer to, being that of 5 Million Arabs, mostly descendants of those who fought the Jews during the Independence war and left before it started or were expelled afterwards, will never happen.

There are about 20,000 living Arabs who actually fled or were expelled from Israel before, during or after the war.

NONE will be allowed to return.

Many who fled were not allowed back...were not violent, and had their land essentially confiscated through absentee landowner laws.

The Palestinian people's have those same exact rights.

They just don't have the right to murder civilians. No one has that right.

I don't see the Palestinians living in their homeland.

There are Arab Israeli (Palestinian) citizens in Israel, there are Palestinians in West Bank and Gaza.

Is all set to right yet? No. But you can't say there are none living there.

OK, but the vast majority of Palestinians no longer live on their own land.

What you mean to write is that Arabs-Moslems no longer live on lands that were once under the control of the Ottoman Empire.

You can spend your every waking moment agonizing about the fact of the former Ottoman sanjak and the collapse of the Ottoman Empire. However, the fact remains that the Ottoman Empire released all rights and title to the area.

You’re left to slam away at your keyboard as your participation in the gee-had.

However, the fact remains that the Ottoman Empire released all rights and title to the area.

Indeed, to the new state of Palestine.

No Tinmore. You keep getting this all wrong. And on purpose.
But....keep it up. It is always entertaining.

 

[Shusha]

I don't agree with any killing. I just question the double standard.

Wait, what?! Says the guy who insists that Jews are not protected persons and therefore have no right to life and are "fair game".

 

[Shusha]

The Palestinians want all of Palestine?

WOW, how bizarre!

Well, more specifically, you continually argue that Arab Palestinians have all the rights to sovereignty and that the Jewish Palestinians have no rights to sovereignty.

 

[Shusha]

Indeed, to the new state of Palestine.

Indeed, for the purpose of reconstituting the national homeland for the Jewish people.

 

[P F Tinmore]

Well, you can't but that is a one sided question. Why is it bad for Palestinians to attack Israelis but OK for the Israelis to attack Palestinians in far greater numbers?

It is not one sided. How about you answer my question first and then I will answer yours?

Now you are dodging.

I highlighted in bold the question I asked you that started this. You have yet to answer it. That is dodging. I am going to play word games. If you won’t answer then say you won’t, stop the games. However I am really interested in your answer.

I don't agree with any killing. I just question the double standard.

If Israeli’s deliberately targeted civilians wth the attempt to murder I say the same thing, for example the horrific murder of the family who’s house was firebombed. That is equivalent to the example in my question. None of it is ok.

Watch about the first 10 minutes of this.

 

[P F Tinmore]

The Palestinians want all of Palestine?

WOW, how bizarre!

Well, more specifically, you continually argue that Arab Palestinians have all the rights to sovereignty and that the Jewish Palestinians have no rights to sovereignty.

They don't?

 

[P F Tinmore]

I don't agree with any killing. I just question the double standard.

Wait, what?! Says the guy who insists that Jews are not protected persons and therefore have no right to life and are "fair game".

I just posted what the Fourth Geneva Convention said.

 

[Hollie]

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

You are asking the Israelis to put their sovereignty and territorial integrity at risk.

(COMMENT)

The tension and mistrust between the Hostile Arab Palestinian (HoAP) and the Israelis, that has accumulated over the decades of violence have tainted and contaminated any attempt at a fair and just negotiation or settlement of disputes.

There is (absolutely) no reasonable expectation that the "Right of Return" (or anything remotely like it) could happen happen for several generations. Until the semior members of government come from a family that has no previous experience with the Arab-Israeli Conflict. And the parents of the prodigy of that generation haven't even been born yet.

Most Respectfully,
R

The "right of return" for Arabs into Israel has been done already by those Israel decided to allow back. Some have turned to murdering Jews in Israel.

The other "right of return" they refer to, being that of 5 Million Arabs, mostly descendants of those who fought the Jews during the Independence war and left before it started or were expelled afterwards, will never happen.

There are about 20,000 living Arabs who actually fled or were expelled from Israel before, during or after the war.

NONE will be allowed to return.

Many who fled were not allowed back...were not violent, and had their land essentially confiscated through absentee landowner laws.

The Palestinian people's have those same exact rights.

They just don't have the right to murder civilians. No one has that right.

I don't see the Palestinians living in their homeland.

There are Arab Israeli (Palestinian) citizens in Israel, there are Palestinians in West Bank and Gaza.

Is all set to right yet? No. But you can't say there are none living there.

OK, but the vast majority of Palestinians no longer live on their own land.

What you mean to write is that Arabs-Moslems no longer live on lands that were once under the control of the Ottoman Empire.

You can spend your every waking moment agonizing about the fact of the former Ottoman sanjak and the collapse of the Ottoman Empire. However, the fact remains that the Ottoman Empire released all rights and title to the area.

You’re left to slam away at your keyboard as your participation in the gee-had.

However, the fact remains that the Ottoman Empire released all rights and title to the area.

Indeed, to the new state of Palestine.

Indeed, you have a need to reinvent history.

 

[Hollie]

The Palestinians want all of Palestine?

WOW, how bizarre!

Well, more specifically, you continually argue that Arab Palestinians have all the rights to sovereignty and that the Jewish Palestinians have no rights to sovereignty.

They don't?

Indeed no.

 

[RoccoR]

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

No, that would be entirely wrong. (So few words → so many mistakes.)

However, the fact remains that the Ottoman Empire released all rights and title to the area.

Indeed, to the new state of Palestine.

(COMMENT)

Article 16 does not say anything about "Palestine." (In fact, "Palestine" is not mentioned anywhere in the Treaty.) And, there was no party to the agreement (Treaty of Lausanne) that represented the Regional Arab Inhabitance ---- none.

ARTICLE 16.

Turkey hereby renounces all rights and title whatsoever over or respecting the territories situated outside the frontiers laid down in the present Treaty and the islands other than those over which her sovereignty is recognised by the said Treaty, the future of these territories and islands being settled or to be settled by the parties concerned.

The provisions of the present Article do not prejudice any special arrangements arising from neighbourly relations which have been or may be concluded between Turkey and any limitrophe countries.​

The Government of Palestine was the British Mandatory. The Arab Higher Committee rejected the notion of participation in the establishment of Self-Governing Institutions (three times before 1923).

The State of Palestine was not created until well after the PLO Declared Independence.

Finally, there is a question as to whether there is a State of Palestine today. The question is, where is this new State sovereignty? → OR → Is it possible to have a "state" that has no sovereignty? As far as the neighboring states are concerned, the State of Israel has treaties pertaining to "International Boundaries." What do the undefined Arab Palestinians have? See: UN Memo from the Under-Secretary-General for Legal Affairs • SUBJECT: Issues Related to General Assembly Resolution 67/19 on the Status of Palestine in the UN • 11 December 2012 •

Most Respectfully,
R

 

[Mindful]

Can't go anywhere to get away from Israel Derangement Symtoms. The usual suspects showing up when I make a comment on Iran. Elsewhere------->

It's a terminal condition.

 

[Sixties Fan]

Though Guardian reports on violence in the region typically won’t explicitly defend Palestinian terror attacks, the language employed in headlines and text often convey the message that Jewish victims – especially those beyond the green line – are not victims of violent extremism, but represent the fall-out from a political dynamic to which Israelis bear most of the blame.

Within the Guardian’s intersectional calculus – a rock, paper, scissors-like game of competitive victimhood – Palestinians score higher than Israeli Jews nearly every time, often regardless of the circumstances.

This is why, more likely than not, the Guardian often ignores straight-forward stories involving Palestinian attacks on Israelis, such as the September attack which claimed the life of Ari Fuld – a story they still haven’t noted, even in passing. It also helps explain why the Guardian initially ignored the drive-by attack on Dec. 9th at a bus stop in the West Bank community of Ofra that injured seven, even after a baby – delivered by emergency C-section after his 30 week pregnant mother, Shira Ish-Ran, was shot in the stomach by the gunman – tragically died three days later.

(full article online)

More than just a bad headline: Guardian morally blurs victim and perpetrator

 

[Sixties Fan]

Nasser took the opportunity to post photos of three terrorists—including the two killed in Thursday, on his Instagram account with the following comment: “A sad morning that carries with it pride with the martyrs, and honor in resistance. ‘If you lost the way, follow the martyrs.’”

Posted as a “story”, the photos and text automatically delete in 24 hours. However, Eylon Levy, an investigative reporter with i24 news in Israel, screen-grabbed the fleeting post inciting to murder Jewish civilians, which was replayed in his report.

Nasser’s post celebrated mass murder and, by direct association, Hamas, which is considered to be a terrorist organization in virtually all civilized nations. This is not nuanced stuff.

On Friday evening, I asked the Times for comment on this clear and extreme ethical breach, eliciting this prompt reply:

“This photographer is not a New York Times staff photographer (he has freelanced for us). His social media posts have no connection to the Timesand do not adhere to our guidelines.”

This statement, however, directly contravenes the Times’ ethical guidelines.

The New York Times Handbook of Values and Practices for Editorial and News Departments sets out, very clearly, exactly what one would expect of a publication self-promoted as adhering to the highest ethical and reporting standards.

The preamble to this very thorough articulation of NYT standards stresses that integrity is the foundation of all that journalists do and will withstand no compromise.

The guidelines also clearly state that contracts with freelancers must adhere to the same standards as those applied to staff.

(full article online)

The New York Times Should Sever Its Relations with This Liability

 

[Sixties Fan]

The still not yet released US peace plan is clearly a threat to these EU states - such a threat that they are trying to sabotage it before it is released.

Why are they so frightened?

Here are some possibilities, and I suspect it is a combination of these factors.

1) They have not moved past the mentality of the 1970s when the Arab world was unified enough to use the oil weapon combined with the threat of terror in Europe in support of Palestinians. That fear, more than anything else, caused these weak-willed nations to desire to sacrifice Israel to avoid their own citizens being victimized by Islamist terror. (Look how well that worked.)

2) They have adopted the Arab model of an honor/shame society. They have put so much political capital into these failed UN resolutions and their own peace initiatives (i.e., The Quartet) that they don't want to be told that they have utterly failed. It makes them look bad, and appearances are more important than peace.

3) The idea that a boor like Trump could be more successful than they have been in reaching Middle East peace is too much to bear.

4) They really don't want peace. They want Israel to disappear under the slow drip-drip of "peace plan" after "peace plan" where Israel slowly loses land and its Jewish character and eventually gets converted into yet another Arab state.

5) The central idea of the plan, that the Arab world should be involved as part of the solution, is scary - because they want the Arab world to remain a bogeyman. The ever present and bogus threat of the "Arab street" plays into their (quite bigoted) view of the world, and if the Arab world embraces the plan it ends their ability to push their policies out of fear rather than out of doing what's right.

(full article online)

Why is the EU so scared of a peace plan? ~ Elder Of Ziyon - Israel News

 

[Mindful]

Though Guardian reports on violence in the region typically won’t explicitly defend Palestinian terror attacks, the language employed in headlines and text often convey the message that Jewish victims – especially those beyond the green line – are not victims of violent extremism, but represent the fall-out from a political dynamic to which Israelis bear most of the blame.

Within the Guardian’s intersectional calculus – a rock, paper, scissors-like game of competitive victimhood – Palestinians score higher than Israeli Jews nearly every time, often regardless of the circumstances.

This is why, more likely than not, the Guardian often ignores straight-forward stories involving Palestinian attacks on Israelis, such as the September attack which claimed the life of Ari Fuld – a story they still haven’t noted, even in passing. It also helps explain why the Guardian initially ignored the drive-by attack on Dec. 9th at a bus stop in the West Bank community of Ofra that injured seven, even after a baby – delivered by emergency C-section after his 30 week pregnant mother, Shira Ish-Ran, was shot in the stomach by the gunman – tragically died three days later.

(full article online)

More than just a bad headline: Guardian morally blurs victim and perpetrator

Can't stand that English rag.

It used to be a noble institution.