Methodist Church Considers HP Company Divestment

[RoccoR]

montelatici, et al,

Well, lets look at the data another way.

You said it was ruled by the Ottomans for over 700 years. That was a load of bullshit as Rocco's posting confirmed. You are so frigging dumb.

(COMMENT)

Whether you look at the simplified Palestine: A Timeline or the Palestinian History, A Chronology, I think you can go back two millennium (two thousand years) and not find a single period of autonomous self-government by the native or indigenous population.

63 B.C.
Incorporation of Palestine into the Roman Empire.
A.D.
70
Destruction of the Second Temple by Roman Emperor Titus.
132-135
Bar Kokhba revolt suppressed. Jews barred from Jerusalem and Emperor Hadrian builds new pagan city of Aelia Capitolina on its ruins.
330-640
Palestine under Byzantine rule: Jerusalem and Palestine increasingly Christianized.
638
Arabs under the Caliph 'Umar capture Palestine from Byzantines.
661-750
Umayyad caliphs rule Palestine from Damascus. Dynasty descended from Umayya of Meccan tribe of Quraysh. Construction of Dome of the Rock in Jerusalem by Caliph 'Abd al-Malik (685-705). Construction of al-Aqsa mosque in Jerusalem by Caliph al-Walid I (705-715).
750-1258
'Abbasid caliphs rule Palestine from Iraq. Dynasty, founded by Abu al-' Abbas al-Saffah, who is descended from' Abbas, uncle of the Prophet.
969
Fatimid dynasty, claiming descent from the Prophet's daughter Fatima and her cousin 'Ali, rule Palestine from Egypt. They proclaim themselves caliphs in rivalry to the' Abbasids.
1071
Saljuqs, originally from Isfahan, capture Jerusalem and parts of Palestine, which remains officially within the 'Abbasid Empire.
1099-1187
Crusaders establish the Latin Kingdom of Jerusalem.
1187
Kurdish general Saladin (Salah al-Din who was born in Takrit northern Iraq, the birth place of Saddam Hussein too), son of Ayyub, the sultan of Mosul, defeats Crusaders at Hittin in northern Palestine and recaptures Jerusalem. The Ayyubid dynasty rules Palestine from Cairo.
1260
Mamluks succeed Ayyubids, ruling Palestine from Cairo; defeat Mongols at Battle of 'Ayn Jalut near Nazareth.
1291
Mamluks capture final Crusader strongholds of Acre and Caesarea.
1516-1917
Palestine incorporated into the Ottoman Empire with its capital in Istanbul.
1832-1840
Muhammad 'Ali Pasha of Egypt occupies Palestine. Ottomans subsequently reassert their rule.
1876-1877
Palestinian deputies from Jerusalem attend the first Ottoman Parliament in Istanbul, elected under a new Ottoman Constitution.
1878
The first modern Zionist agricultural settlement of Petach Tiqwa established (click here to learn more about Zionist and its impact on the Palestinian people).
1882-1903
First wave of 25,000 Zionist immigrants enters Palestine, coming mainly from eastern Europe.
1882
Baron Edmond de Rothschild of Paris starts financial backing for Jewish settlement in Palestine.
1887-1888
Palestine divided by Ottomans into the districts (sanjaks) of Jerusalem, Nablus, and Acre. The first was attached directly to Istanbul, the others to the wilayet of Beirut.
1896
Theodor Herzl, an Austro-Hungarian Jewish journalist and writer, publishes Der Judenstaat, advocating establishment of a Jewish state in Palestine or elsewhere.
1896
Jewish Colonization Association, founded in 1891 in London by German Baron Maurice de Hirsch, starts aiding Zionist settlements in Palestine.
1897
First Zionist Congress in Switzerland issues the Basle Program calling for the establishment of a "home for the Jewish people in Palestine." It also establishes the World Zionist Organization (WZO) to work to that end.
1901
Jewish National Fund (JNF) set up by fifth Zionist Congress in Basle to acquire land for WZO; land acquired by JNF to be inalienably Jewish, and exclusively Jewish labor to be employed on it, click here to read to Zionist apartheid & racist quotes.
​

May be you can ding me for being off on the rule by Ottoman Empire. But I did go back to the BCE terminator; and beyond. Can you point-out to me when the territory was not under the government influence or external control of another entity.

Most Respectfully,
R

 

[Phoenall]

The same ones that cant find any evidence and still run with the lies.

If it is so widespread as you claim then you will have no problem producing the links. The only cleansing is that of the Christians by the palestinians

You only find the info that supports your belief system. No one can help you with that but you.

Do you also need someone to provide you links on how euros genocided their way into occupation of North America?

So you cant find any links so you try and project your failure. The topic is Isreal/Palestine so keep to the topic and don't try and deflect by bringing in other nations. The other islamonazi propagandists all try that and fail because they are too stupid to keep on topic.


So how about those links to Israeli cleansing of Palestinians and apartheid in Israel ?

I thought you were going to post links proving Israel is not occupying and settling on Paletinian land.

It isn't Palestinian land. It was ottoman land for the last 700 years, then British from about the 1920's to late 1940's, then five Arab nations attacked Israel and even though they were defeated, the Jordanians and Egyptians occupied the West Bank and Gaza for 20 years up to 1967, where the Arabs once again attacked Israel and this time they lost those as well. During the last twenty years of Arabs "occupying" the same lands, there was no whining about an occupation, nor was there a peep from anybody about a "Palestine".

So who should Israel be giving the land back to? The Jordanians and Egyptians? The British? The Turks? And why can't Jews live in their ancestral and religious homeland? Because a bunch of savage Muslims said so?

So who should Israel be giving the land back to?

See, that's what I'm talking about. Where did I say that? I'm sure you have "proof". The term/concept "savage" is always used in a cleansing operation.

Simple enough question, why are you struggling to provide an answer.

I have given you the timeline of ownership and have shown that the arab muslims never had any ownership or sovereignty of the land. What "proof" would you accept that the land is Jewish ?

 

[Phoenall]

If Israel was some american group sponging off of US taxpayers you'd be soiling yourself with rage. Colonial powers tried to go in and carve up the middle east amongst themselves just like they did in Africa and there's been nothing but trouble ever since. We just keep throwing good money and bodies in after bad. Mostly because of zealots such as yourself. Ya just can't have a sensible conversation with fanatics.

Actually you have your history wrong. The entire region was part of Ottoman Empire for over 700 years of which at no time did the Ottomans recognize a Palestine or Palestinian people. When the Ottomans joined the Germans in World War I, they were defeated and their empire collapsed. 99% of the conquered Ottoman territory in the ME was carved into Muslim states, except for Israel, which was designated to be the Jewish homeland on the religious and ancestral Jewish land.

American public stands staunchly shoulder to shoulder with Israel, and the two nations are inseparable. US Govt. officials and politicians are merely carrying out the will of the people.

No, as usual you are full of crap. The Mameluks ruled Palestine until 1486. The Ottomans lost control of Palestine in 1799 when it was invaded by Napoleon and it remained under local and/or Egyptian rule until Muhammed Ali was defeated by the allied British and Ottomans and signed the Treaty of 1841. Where do you get 700 plus years you idiot.

The Ottomans certainly recognized Filistin (Palestine) it's on Ottoman era maps. There is nothing ancestral to Europeans about Palestine. Europeans are Europeans. It is the ancestral land of the native inhabitants, the Palestinian Christians and Muslims.

Little by little more of us are becoming even handed in evaluating the conflict. Within a decade most Americans will be supporting the non-Jews in Palestine/Israel as we came around to supporting the non-whites in South Africa.

If we can get around the endless propaganda machine and Israeli lobby.

Like ignoring and denying the presence of Jews that lived in Palestine for 4,500 years, 2000 years before any Christians or muslims showed their faces. Then you have to make up fantasy tales of how the arab muslims never invaded Palestine yet the Jews were converted to islam in the process. Have you figured out yet were the time machine is that allowed the muslims to go back to 2,500 B.C.E. and convert Abraham, Moses and Daniel into muslims ?

You'll never get peace in/from a religious war.

You do if you evict the interlopers and stop them from re-entering

 

[Phoenall]

Wow what a bunch of hogwash was that. Palestinians voted for Hamas, a barbaric terrorist organization to rule both the West Bank and Gaza. They currently rule and control all of Gaza. Yet another desperate bullshit nonsensical Monte comparison goes down in flames.

If Israel was some american group sponging off of US taxpayers you'd be soiling yourself with rage. Colonial powers tried to go in and carve up the middle east amongst themselves just like they did in Africa and there's been nothing but trouble ever since. We just keep throwing good money and bodies in after bad. Mostly because of zealots such as yourself. Ya just can't have a sensible conversation with fanatics.

Actually you have your history wrong. The entire region was part of Ottoman Empire for over 700 years of which at no time did the Ottomans recognize a Palestine or Palestinian people. When the Ottomans joined the Germans in World War I, they were defeated and their empire collapsed. 99% of the conquered Ottoman territory in the ME was carved into Muslim states, except for Israel, which was designated to be the Jewish homeland on the religious and ancestral Jewish land.

American public stands staunchly shoulder to shoulder with Israel, and the two nations are inseparable. US Govt. officials and politicians are merely carrying out the will of the people.

No, as usual you are full of crap. The Mameluks ruled Palestine until 1486. The Ottomans lost control of Palestine in 1799 when it was invaded by Napoleon and it remained under local and/or Egyptian rule until Muhammed Ali was defeated by the allied British and Ottomans and signed the Treaty of 1841. Where do you get 700 plus years you idiot.

The Ottomans certainly recognized Filistin (Palestine) it's on Ottoman era maps. There is nothing ancestral to Europeans about Palestine. Europeans are Europeans. It is the ancestral land of the native inhabitants, the Palestinian Christians and Muslims.

Little by little more of us are becoming even handed in evaluating the conflict. Within a decade most Americans will be supporting the non-Jews in Palestine/Israel as we came around to supporting the non-whites in South Africa.

And what about the Palestinian Jews that also lived there, shows just how even handed you are when you totally ignore and deny the second largest religion in that area prior to 1948

Well that's the issue isn't, they're both going to have to learn to get along. Or not, up to them. The US should get the hell out and let 'em both grow up, and that means cut off Israel's US taxpayer gravy train.

Another semi literate that only looks at the information that supports their POV. The USA uses the Israeli aid system as a work round for international trade laws. It means that through Israel they can subsidise the defence industry without being penalised for dirty dealings. Without Israel laundering the money the Obama government would face 50% of their defence workers unemployed. No modern R&D at a price they could afford, and access to other nations weapons to copy. So go ahead pull the plug and watch America sink into oblivion

 

[Fenton Lum]

You only find the info that supports your belief system. No one can help you with that but you.

Do you also need someone to provide you links on how euros genocided their way into occupation of North America?

So you cant find any links so you try and project your failure. The topic is Isreal/Palestine so keep to the topic and don't try and deflect by bringing in other nations. The other islamonazi propagandists all try that and fail because they are too stupid to keep on topic.


So how about those links to Israeli cleansing of Palestinians and apartheid in Israel ?

I thought you were going to post links proving Israel is not occupying and settling on Paletinian land.

It isn't Palestinian land. It was ottoman land for the last 700 years, then British from about the 1920's to late 1940's, then five Arab nations attacked Israel and even though they were defeated, the Jordanians and Egyptians occupied the West Bank and Gaza for 20 years up to 1967, where the Arabs once again attacked Israel and this time they lost those as well. During the last twenty years of Arabs "occupying" the same lands, there was no whining about an occupation, nor was there a peep from anybody about a "Palestine".

So who should Israel be giving the land back to? The Jordanians and Egyptians? The British? The Turks? And why can't Jews live in their ancestral and religious homeland? Because a bunch of savage Muslims said so?

So who should Israel be giving the land back to?

See, that's what I'm talking about. Where did I say that? I'm sure you have "proof". The term/concept "savage" is always used in a cleansing operation.

Simple enough question, why are you struggling to provide an answer.

I have given you the timeline of ownership and have shown that the arab muslims never had any ownership or sovereignty of the land. What "proof" would you accept that the land is Jewish ?

Moot. They're both there now and they're gong to have to figure it out like adults. We should leave them to it and cut off welfare to Israel.

 

[Fenton Lum]

Actually you have your history wrong. The entire region was part of Ottoman Empire for over 700 years of which at no time did the Ottomans recognize a Palestine or Palestinian people. When the Ottomans joined the Germans in World War I, they were defeated and their empire collapsed. 99% of the conquered Ottoman territory in the ME was carved into Muslim states, except for Israel, which was designated to be the Jewish homeland on the religious and ancestral Jewish land.

American public stands staunchly shoulder to shoulder with Israel, and the two nations are inseparable. US Govt. officials and politicians are merely carrying out the will of the people.

No, as usual you are full of crap. The Mameluks ruled Palestine until 1486. The Ottomans lost control of Palestine in 1799 when it was invaded by Napoleon and it remained under local and/or Egyptian rule until Muhammed Ali was defeated by the allied British and Ottomans and signed the Treaty of 1841. Where do you get 700 plus years you idiot.

The Ottomans certainly recognized Filistin (Palestine) it's on Ottoman era maps. There is nothing ancestral to Europeans about Palestine. Europeans are Europeans. It is the ancestral land of the native inhabitants, the Palestinian Christians and Muslims.

Little by little more of us are becoming even handed in evaluating the conflict. Within a decade most Americans will be supporting the non-Jews in Palestine/Israel as we came around to supporting the non-whites in South Africa.

If we can get around the endless propaganda machine and Israeli lobby.

Like ignoring and denying the presence of Jews that lived in Palestine for 4,500 years, 2000 years before any Christians or muslims showed their faces. Then you have to make up fantasy tales of how the arab muslims never invaded Palestine yet the Jews were converted to islam in the process. Have you figured out yet were the time machine is that allowed the muslims to go back to 2,500 B.C.E. and convert Abraham, Moses and Daniel into muslims ?

You'll never get peace in/from a religious war.

You do if you evict the interlopers and stop them from re-entering

Nah, not at all. Just more stupidass bloodshed, loss of life (devastating to the pro choice folks), and american taxpayer funding to Israel. But interestingly, you just copped to eviction / cleansing. Properly so I might add, that is the Israeli goal, as well as a few of the wacked out Palestinian politicos on the other side of the question.

 

[montelatici]

montelatici, et al,

Well, lets look at the data another way.

You said it was ruled by the Ottomans for over 700 years. That was a load of bullshit as Rocco's posting confirmed. You are so frigging dumb.

(COMMENT)

Whether you look at the simplified Palestine: A Timeline or the Palestinian History, A Chronology, I think you can go back two millennium (two thousand years) and not find a single period of autonomous self-government by the native or indigenous population.

63 B.C.
Incorporation of Palestine into the Roman Empire.
A.D.
70
Destruction of the Second Temple by Roman Emperor Titus.
132-135
Bar Kokhba revolt suppressed. Jews barred from Jerusalem and Emperor Hadrian builds new pagan city of Aelia Capitolina on its ruins.
330-640
Palestine under Byzantine rule: Jerusalem and Palestine increasingly Christianized.
638
Arabs under the Caliph 'Umar capture Palestine from Byzantines.
661-750
Umayyad caliphs rule Palestine from Damascus. Dynasty descended from Umayya of Meccan tribe of Quraysh. Construction of Dome of the Rock in Jerusalem by Caliph 'Abd al-Malik (685-705). Construction of al-Aqsa mosque in Jerusalem by Caliph al-Walid I (705-715).
750-1258
'Abbasid caliphs rule Palestine from Iraq. Dynasty, founded by Abu al-' Abbas al-Saffah, who is descended from' Abbas, uncle of the Prophet.
969
Fatimid dynasty, claiming descent from the Prophet's daughter Fatima and her cousin 'Ali, rule Palestine from Egypt. They proclaim themselves caliphs in rivalry to the' Abbasids.
1071
Saljuqs, originally from Isfahan, capture Jerusalem and parts of Palestine, which remains officially within the 'Abbasid Empire.
1099-1187
Crusaders establish the Latin Kingdom of Jerusalem.
1187
Kurdish general Saladin (Salah al-Din who was born in Takrit northern Iraq, the birth place of Saddam Hussein too), son of Ayyub, the sultan of Mosul, defeats Crusaders at Hittin in northern Palestine and recaptures Jerusalem. The Ayyubid dynasty rules Palestine from Cairo.
1260
Mamluks succeed Ayyubids, ruling Palestine from Cairo; defeat Mongols at Battle of 'Ayn Jalut near Nazareth.
1291
Mamluks capture final Crusader strongholds of Acre and Caesarea.
1516-1917
Palestine incorporated into the Ottoman Empire with its capital in Istanbul.
1832-1840
Muhammad 'Ali Pasha of Egypt occupies Palestine. Ottomans subsequently reassert their rule.
1876-1877
Palestinian deputies from Jerusalem attend the first Ottoman Parliament in Istanbul, elected under a new Ottoman Constitution.
1878
The first modern Zionist agricultural settlement of Petach Tiqwa established (click here to learn more about Zionist and its impact on the Palestinian people).
1882-1903
First wave of 25,000 Zionist immigrants enters Palestine, coming mainly from eastern Europe.
1882
Baron Edmond de Rothschild of Paris starts financial backing for Jewish settlement in Palestine.
1887-1888
Palestine divided by Ottomans into the districts (sanjaks) of Jerusalem, Nablus, and Acre. The first was attached directly to Istanbul, the others to the wilayet of Beirut.
1896
Theodor Herzl, an Austro-Hungarian Jewish journalist and writer, publishes Der Judenstaat, advocating establishment of a Jewish state in Palestine or elsewhere.
1896
Jewish Colonization Association, founded in 1891 in London by German Baron Maurice de Hirsch, starts aiding Zionist settlements in Palestine.
1897
First Zionist Congress in Switzerland issues the Basle Program calling for the establishment of a "home for the Jewish people in Palestine." It also establishes the World Zionist Organization (WZO) to work to that end.
1901
Jewish National Fund (JNF) set up by fifth Zionist Congress in Basle to acquire land for WZO; land acquired by JNF to be inalienably Jewish, and exclusively Jewish labor to be employed on it, click here to read to Zionist apartheid & racist quotes.
​

May be you can ding me for being off on the rule by Ottoman Empire. But I did go back to the BCE terminator; and beyond. Can you point-out to me when the territory was not under the government influence or external control of another entity.

Most Respectfully,
R

The issue had nothing to do with who ruled. The issue was Ruddy's assertion that the Ottomans ruled for 700 years. They did not rule anywhere near 700 years.

Who ruled has nothing to do with the rights of the native inhabitants pursuant to Article 22 of the Covenant of the League of Nations.

 

[Fenton Lum]

If Israel was some american group sponging off of US taxpayers you'd be soiling yourself with rage. Colonial powers tried to go in and carve up the middle east amongst themselves just like they did in Africa and there's been nothing but trouble ever since. We just keep throwing good money and bodies in after bad. Mostly because of zealots such as yourself. Ya just can't have a sensible conversation with fanatics.

Actually you have your history wrong. The entire region was part of Ottoman Empire for over 700 years of which at no time did the Ottomans recognize a Palestine or Palestinian people. When the Ottomans joined the Germans in World War I, they were defeated and their empire collapsed. 99% of the conquered Ottoman territory in the ME was carved into Muslim states, except for Israel, which was designated to be the Jewish homeland on the religious and ancestral Jewish land.

American public stands staunchly shoulder to shoulder with Israel, and the two nations are inseparable. US Govt. officials and politicians are merely carrying out the will of the people.

No, as usual you are full of crap. The Mameluks ruled Palestine until 1486. The Ottomans lost control of Palestine in 1799 when it was invaded by Napoleon and it remained under local and/or Egyptian rule until Muhammed Ali was defeated by the allied British and Ottomans and signed the Treaty of 1841. Where do you get 700 plus years you idiot.

The Ottomans certainly recognized Filistin (Palestine) it's on Ottoman era maps. There is nothing ancestral to Europeans about Palestine. Europeans are Europeans. It is the ancestral land of the native inhabitants, the Palestinian Christians and Muslims.

Little by little more of us are becoming even handed in evaluating the conflict. Within a decade most Americans will be supporting the non-Jews in Palestine/Israel as we came around to supporting the non-whites in South Africa.

And what about the Palestinian Jews that also lived there, shows just how even handed you are when you totally ignore and deny the second largest religion in that area prior to 1948

Well that's the issue isn't, they're both going to have to learn to get along. Or not, up to them. The US should get the hell out and let 'em both grow up, and that means cut off Israel's US taxpayer gravy train.

Another semi literate that only looks at the information that supports their POV. The USA uses the Israeli aid system as a work round for international trade laws. It means that through Israel they can subsidise the defence industry without being penalised for dirty dealings. Without Israel laundering the money the Obama government would face 50% of their defence workers unemployed. No modern R&D at a price they could afford, and access to other nations weapons to copy. So go ahead pull the plug and watch America sink into oblivion

And you think that began with the Obama administration? No, war is what we're all about as a society, can't live without it, you're right. America has already sunk into oblivion as war profiteers and global arms dealers, many of which get turned back on us. Osama won in a way, we have become the middle east.

"The USA uses the Israeli aid system as a work round for international trade laws. It means that through Israel they can subsidise the defence and defense contracting industries without being penalised for dirty dealings. Without Israel laundering the money the american government would face 50% of their defence workers unemployed."

Now we're getting somewhere, thanks. So it's not about the Palestinians brutalizing Jewish folk at all, it's just about resources, markets and money. War is business to corporate globalists.

 

[Roudy]

montelatici, et al,

Well, lets look at the data another way.

You said it was ruled by the Ottomans for over 700 years. That was a load of bullshit as Rocco's posting confirmed. You are so frigging dumb.

(COMMENT)

Whether you look at the simplified Palestine: A Timeline or the Palestinian History, A Chronology, I think you can go back two millennium (two thousand years) and not find a single period of autonomous self-government by the native or indigenous population.

63 B.C.
Incorporation of Palestine into the Roman Empire.
A.D.
70
Destruction of the Second Temple by Roman Emperor Titus.
132-135
Bar Kokhba revolt suppressed. Jews barred from Jerusalem and Emperor Hadrian builds new pagan city of Aelia Capitolina on its ruins.
330-640
Palestine under Byzantine rule: Jerusalem and Palestine increasingly Christianized.
638
Arabs under the Caliph 'Umar capture Palestine from Byzantines.
661-750
Umayyad caliphs rule Palestine from Damascus. Dynasty descended from Umayya of Meccan tribe of Quraysh. Construction of Dome of the Rock in Jerusalem by Caliph 'Abd al-Malik (685-705). Construction of al-Aqsa mosque in Jerusalem by Caliph al-Walid I (705-715).
750-1258
'Abbasid caliphs rule Palestine from Iraq. Dynasty, founded by Abu al-' Abbas al-Saffah, who is descended from' Abbas, uncle of the Prophet.
969
Fatimid dynasty, claiming descent from the Prophet's daughter Fatima and her cousin 'Ali, rule Palestine from Egypt. They proclaim themselves caliphs in rivalry to the' Abbasids.
1071
Saljuqs, originally from Isfahan, capture Jerusalem and parts of Palestine, which remains officially within the 'Abbasid Empire.
1099-1187
Crusaders establish the Latin Kingdom of Jerusalem.
1187
Kurdish general Saladin (Salah al-Din who was born in Takrit northern Iraq, the birth place of Saddam Hussein too), son of Ayyub, the sultan of Mosul, defeats Crusaders at Hittin in northern Palestine and recaptures Jerusalem. The Ayyubid dynasty rules Palestine from Cairo.
1260
Mamluks succeed Ayyubids, ruling Palestine from Cairo; defeat Mongols at Battle of 'Ayn Jalut near Nazareth.
1291
Mamluks capture final Crusader strongholds of Acre and Caesarea.
1516-1917
Palestine incorporated into the Ottoman Empire with its capital in Istanbul.
1832-1840
Muhammad 'Ali Pasha of Egypt occupies Palestine. Ottomans subsequently reassert their rule.
1876-1877
Palestinian deputies from Jerusalem attend the first Ottoman Parliament in Istanbul, elected under a new Ottoman Constitution.
1878
The first modern Zionist agricultural settlement of Petach Tiqwa established (click here to learn more about Zionist and its impact on the Palestinian people).
1882-1903
First wave of 25,000 Zionist immigrants enters Palestine, coming mainly from eastern Europe.
1882
Baron Edmond de Rothschild of Paris starts financial backing for Jewish settlement in Palestine.
1887-1888
Palestine divided by Ottomans into the districts (sanjaks) of Jerusalem, Nablus, and Acre. The first was attached directly to Istanbul, the others to the wilayet of Beirut.
1896
Theodor Herzl, an Austro-Hungarian Jewish journalist and writer, publishes Der Judenstaat, advocating establishment of a Jewish state in Palestine or elsewhere.
1896
Jewish Colonization Association, founded in 1891 in London by German Baron Maurice de Hirsch, starts aiding Zionist settlements in Palestine.
1897
First Zionist Congress in Switzerland issues the Basle Program calling for the establishment of a "home for the Jewish people in Palestine." It also establishes the World Zionist Organization (WZO) to work to that end.
1901
Jewish National Fund (JNF) set up by fifth Zionist Congress in Basle to acquire land for WZO; land acquired by JNF to be inalienably Jewish, and exclusively Jewish labor to be employed on it, click here to read to Zionist apartheid & racist quotes.
​

May be you can ding me for being off on the rule by Ottoman Empire. But I did go back to the BCE terminator; and beyond. Can you point-out to me when the territory was not under the government influence or external control of another entity.

Most Respectfully,
R

The issue had nothing to do with who ruled. The issue was Ruddy's assertion that the Ottomans ruled for 700 years. They did not rule anywhere near 700 years.

Who ruled has nothing to do with the rights of the native inhabitants pursuant to Article 22 of the Covenant of the League of Nations.

Fine, the issue was starting from 1291 no such thing as a Palestine or Palestinian people. The majority of time the land was indeed under Ottoman rule. Palestine is a European name, which Muslims whether it be Arabs or Ottomans have discarded for the last 1400+ years.

 

[RoccoR]

Fenton Lum, et al,

Now this is interesting.

Moot. They're both there now and they're gong to have to figure it out like adults. We should leave them to it and cut off welfare to Israel.

(FORCED QUESTION)

What is the real suggestion here?

• You want a final - sudden death - no holds barred - military confrontation between the two adversaries???
• No rule of War, since the Palestinians do not honor them?
• No limitation - since the Arab Palestinians have been targeting civilians for over 40 years.

Is this what you really want?

• One Final military confrontation between the Israelis and the Arab-Palestinians!
• A confrontation to the death --- one culture (the only Jewish Nation in the world) --- against all the subcultures in the 22 nations (the offensive Arab League --- especially the first six member states – Egypt, Iraq, Jordan, Lebanon, Syria and Saudi Arabia) linch mob!
​

(CONDITION and SITUATION)

Possibility that it is "Incitement to Conflict" could lead to certain unpredictable outcomes:

By using UN and ICC (as well as poisining the atmosphere of the international community against Israel) as instruments of Political Warfare and Diplomatic Pressure, projects the idea that the decisions made by the UN or the ICC today --- are only temporary; they are not defensible over time. That a consortium can challenge the stare decisis effect on adopted recommendations --- instructional steps and the precedent set on the best interest of cultures in distress.

There must be an evaluation on the potential reaction by Israel in making the future of the ONLY nation of its kind in the world, designed specially to preserve and protect a culture that has been persecuted for centuries; will face imminent destruction by Islamic element from every direction.

Even after a massive (five nation) Arab League assault immediately after the establishment of a Jewish National Home in 1948 (in the shadow of the Holocaust of NAZI Germany). Supporting such former NAZIs leaders as former Wehrmacht Colonel Fawzi al-Qawuqji, Waffen SS Special Commando Hasan Salama, Grand Mufti Amin al-Husseini who escaped arrest by the British, who submitted a draft German-Arab Declaration of Cooperation; including many letters to Germany on the topic to prevent Jewish emigration to Palestine AND collaboration with Nazis and his participative support for their genocidal actions.

Given that the International Community would set such conditions as to invariably bring the Jewish State down,that the lost of independence and sovereignty were emanate, and that the Israelis come to believe an attempt to military starve Israel such that an overwhelming Arab League Force might exploit and attack Israel, that Israel would not preemptively and systematically attack each participating nation. That in the event that the condition were to develop that would invariably lead to the total destruction of the Jewish State that Israel would have no alternative to launch such attacks on very key and irreplaceable targets in the Islamic World before the ability to do so was degraded.
​

Most Respectfully,
R

​

 

[RoccoR]

montelatici, et al,

I think you are wrong on two counts.

The issue had nothing to do with who ruled. The issue was Ruddy's assertion that the Ottomans ruled for 700 years. They did not rule anywhere near 700 years.

Who ruled has nothing to do with the rights of the native inhabitants pursuant to Article 22 of the Covenant of the League of Nations.

(COMMENT)

The issue of which country exhibited sovereignty over the territory, is not the issue of my mistake in 700 years. It was that in the last 700 years, the native inhabitants did not have self-government, autonomy, or sovereignty and independence (maybe even 2000 years).

The League of nations covenant did not identify the inhabitants west of the Jordan River as having any special quality. That territory West of the Jordan River was not mention in Article 22 as having provisional recognition. It was the Allied Powers that gave provisional recognition to that portion of the territory East of the Jordan River and covered in Article 25 of the Mandate as not subject to the Article specific to issue of Israeli immigration and the establishment of the Jewish National Home. It was not the case then (1920 and 1922) or since that time that the Arab Palestinians have demonstrated their ability to stand alone.

Article 22 did stipulate that tutelage was an issue. And at every turn, the Arab Palestinian, West of the Jordan River, rejected such. As opposed to the Arab that were East of the Jordan River; of the Jewish immigrants.

Most Respectfully,
R

 

[montelatici]

montelatici, et al,

I think you are wrong on two counts.

The issue had nothing to do with who ruled. The issue was Ruddy's assertion that the Ottomans ruled for 700 years. They did not rule anywhere near 700 years.

Who ruled has nothing to do with the rights of the native inhabitants pursuant to Article 22 of the Covenant of the League of Nations.

(COMMENT)

The issue of which country exhibited sovereignty over the territory, is not the issue of my mistake in 700 years. It was that in the last 700 years, the native inhabitants did not have self-government, autonomy, or sovereignty and independence (maybe even 2000 years).

The League of nations covenant did not identify the inhabitants west of the Jordan River as having any special quality. That territory West of the Jordan River was not mention in Article 22 as having provisional recognition. It was the Allied Powers that gave provisional recognition to that portion of the territory East of the Jordan River and covered in Article 25 of the Mandate as not subject to the Article specific to issue of Israeli immigration and the establishment of the Jewish National Home. It was not the case then (1920 and 1922) or since that time that the Arab Palestinians have demonstrated their ability to stand alone.

Article 22 did stipulate that tutelage was an issue. And at every turn, the Arab Palestinian, West of the Jordan River, rejected such. As opposed to the Arab that were East of the Jordan River; of the Jewish immigrants.

Most Respectfully,
R

It wasn't your mistake. It was Ruddy's mistake.

Article 22 did not identify any inhabitants specifically. It states "the inhabitants" be they in african Middle Eastern or any other territories of the Axis powers.

The Palestinian Arabs and Christians presented draft constitutions, begged and requested independence for the full term of the Mandate. The British admitted that the only reason independence was not granted to the native inhabitants was because the European colonial population had not increased to a point that would result in their ability to rule over the native population. The Peel Commission reports exactly that.

 

[Roudy]

Fenton Lum, et al,

Now this is interesting.

Moot. They're both there now and they're gong to have to figure it out like adults. We should leave them to it and cut off welfare to Israel.

(FORCED QUESTION)

What is the real suggestion here?

• You want a final - sudden death - no holds barred - military confrontation between the two adversaries???
• No rule of War, since the Palestinians do not honor them?
• No limitation - since the Arab Palestinians have been targeting civilians for over 40 years.

Is this what you really want?

• One Final military confrontation between the Israelis and the Arab-Palestinians!
• A confrontation to the death --- one culture (the only Jewish Nation in the world) --- against all the subcultures in the 22 nations (the offensive Arab League --- especially the first six member states – Egypt, Iraq, Jordan, Lebanon, Syria and Saudi Arabia) linch mob!
​

(CONDITION and SITUATION)

Possibility that it is "Incitement to Conflict" could lead to certain unpredictable outcomes:

By using UN and ICC (as well as poisining the atmosphere of the international community against Israel) as instruments of Political Warfare and Diplomatic Pressure, projects the idea that the decisions made by the UN or the ICC today --- are only temporary; they are not defensible over time. That a consortium can challenge the stare decisis effect on adopted recommendations --- instructional steps and the precedent set on the best interest of cultures in distress.

There must be an evaluation on the potential reaction by Israel in making the future of the ONLY nation of its kind in the world, designed specially to preserve and protect a culture that has been persecuted for centuries; will face imminent destruction by Islamic element from every direction.

Even after a massive (five nation) Arab League assault immediately after the establishment of a Jewish National Home in 1948 (in the shadow of the Holocaust of NAZI Germany). Supporting such former NAZIs leaders as former Wehrmacht Colonel Fawzi al-Qawuqji, Waffen SS Special Commando Hasan Salama, Grand Mufti Amin al-Husseini who escaped arrest by the British, who submitted a draft German-Arab Declaration of Cooperation; including many letters to Germany on the topic to prevent Jewish emigration to Palestine AND collaboration with Nazis and his participative support for their genocidal actions.

Given that the International Community would set such conditions as to invariably bring the Jewish State down,that the lost of independence and sovereignty were emanate, and that the Israelis come to believe an attempt to military starve Israel such that an overwhelming Arab League Force might exploit and attack Israel, that Israel would not preemptively and systematically attack each participating nation. That in the event that the condition were to develop that would invariably lead to the total destruction of the Jewish State that Israel would have no alternative to launch such attacks on very key and irreplaceable targets in the Islamic World before the ability to do so was degraded.
​

Most Respectfully,
R

​

Exactly! They want Palestinians do whatever tickles their fancy, and Israelis to be held back and show restraint. Hilarious. No nation that wishes to survive will accept that.

 

[Roudy]

montelatici, et al,

I think you are wrong on two counts.

The issue had nothing to do with who ruled. The issue was Ruddy's assertion that the Ottomans ruled for 700 years. They did not rule anywhere near 700 years.

Who ruled has nothing to do with the rights of the native inhabitants pursuant to Article 22 of the Covenant of the League of Nations.

(COMMENT)

The issue of which country exhibited sovereignty over the territory, is not the issue of my mistake in 700 years. It was that in the last 700 years, the native inhabitants did not have self-government, autonomy, or sovereignty and independence (maybe even 2000 years).

The League of nations covenant did not identify the inhabitants west of the Jordan River as having any special quality. That territory West of the Jordan River was not mention in Article 22 as having provisional recognition. It was the Allied Powers that gave provisional recognition to that portion of the territory East of the Jordan River and covered in Article 25 of the Mandate as not subject to the Article specific to issue of Israeli immigration and the establishment of the Jewish National Home. It was not the case then (1920 and 1922) or since that time that the Arab Palestinians have demonstrated their ability to stand alone.

Article 22 did stipulate that tutelage was an issue. And at every turn, the Arab Palestinian, West of the Jordan River, rejected such. As opposed to the Arab that were East of the Jordan River; of the Jewish immigrants.

Most Respectfully,
R

It wasn't your mistake. It was Ruddy's mistake.

Article 22 did not identify any inhabitants specifically. It states "the inhabitants" be they in african Middle Eastern or any other territories of the Axis powers.

The Palestinian Arabs and Christians presented draft constitutions, begged and requested independence for the full term of the Mandate. The British admitted that the only reason independence was not granted to the native inhabitants was because the European colonial population had not increased to a point that would result in their ability to rule over the native population. The Peel Commission reports exactly that.

Yada yada yada, for the last 1400 years of Arab / Ottoman rule there has not been a Palestine or a Palestinian people.

 

[montelatici]

montelatici, et al,

I think you are wrong on two counts.

The issue had nothing to do with who ruled. The issue was Ruddy's assertion that the Ottomans ruled for 700 years. They did not rule anywhere near 700 years.

Who ruled has nothing to do with the rights of the native inhabitants pursuant to Article 22 of the Covenant of the League of Nations.

(COMMENT)

The issue of which country exhibited sovereignty over the territory, is not the issue of my mistake in 700 years. It was that in the last 700 years, the native inhabitants did not have self-government, autonomy, or sovereignty and independence (maybe even 2000 years).

The League of nations covenant did not identify the inhabitants west of the Jordan River as having any special quality. That territory West of the Jordan River was not mention in Article 22 as having provisional recognition. It was the Allied Powers that gave provisional recognition to that portion of the territory East of the Jordan River and covered in Article 25 of the Mandate as not subject to the Article specific to issue of Israeli immigration and the establishment of the Jewish National Home. It was not the case then (1920 and 1922) or since that time that the Arab Palestinians have demonstrated their ability to stand alone.

Article 22 did stipulate that tutelage was an issue. And at every turn, the Arab Palestinian, West of the Jordan River, rejected such. As opposed to the Arab that were East of the Jordan River; of the Jewish immigrants.

Most Respectfully,
R

It wasn't your mistake. It was Ruddy's mistake.

Article 22 did not identify any inhabitants specifically. It states "the inhabitants" be they in african Middle Eastern or any other territories of the Axis powers.

The Palestinian Arabs and Christians presented draft constitutions, begged and requested independence for the full term of the Mandate. The British admitted that the only reason independence was not granted to the native inhabitants was because the European colonial population had not increased to a point that would result in their ability to rule over the native population. The Peel Commission reports exactly that.

Yada yada yada, for the last 1400 years of Arab / Ottoman rule there has not been a Palestine or a Palestinian people.

There certainly were Palestinians, that's what people of Palestina Prima were called.

So there was no Palestinian state. What does that have to do with anything? That the inhabitants of Palestine were ruled by foreigners does not change their right to independence as per Article 22 of the Covenant of the League of Nations. They certainly had a right to self determination as the native inhabitants before a bunch of European colonists.

 

[Roudy]

montelatici, et al,

I think you are wrong on two counts.

The issue had nothing to do with who ruled. The issue was Ruddy's assertion that the Ottomans ruled for 700 years. They did not rule anywhere near 700 years.

Who ruled has nothing to do with the rights of the native inhabitants pursuant to Article 22 of the Covenant of the League of Nations.

(COMMENT)

The issue of which country exhibited sovereignty over the territory, is not the issue of my mistake in 700 years. It was that in the last 700 years, the native inhabitants did not have self-government, autonomy, or sovereignty and independence (maybe even 2000 years).

The League of nations covenant did not identify the inhabitants west of the Jordan River as having any special quality. That territory West of the Jordan River was not mention in Article 22 as having provisional recognition. It was the Allied Powers that gave provisional recognition to that portion of the territory East of the Jordan River and covered in Article 25 of the Mandate as not subject to the Article specific to issue of Israeli immigration and the establishment of the Jewish National Home. It was not the case then (1920 and 1922) or since that time that the Arab Palestinians have demonstrated their ability to stand alone.

Article 22 did stipulate that tutelage was an issue. And at every turn, the Arab Palestinian, West of the Jordan River, rejected such. As opposed to the Arab that were East of the Jordan River; of the Jewish immigrants.

Most Respectfully,
R

It wasn't your mistake. It was Ruddy's mistake.

Article 22 did not identify any inhabitants specifically. It states "the inhabitants" be they in african Middle Eastern or any other territories of the Axis powers.

The Palestinian Arabs and Christians presented draft constitutions, begged and requested independence for the full term of the Mandate. The British admitted that the only reason independence was not granted to the native inhabitants was because the European colonial population had not increased to a point that would result in their ability to rule over the native population. The Peel Commission reports exactly that.

Yada yada yada, for the last 1400 years of Arab / Ottoman rule there has not been a Palestine or a Palestinian people.

There certainly were Palestinians, that's what people of Palestina Prima were called.

So there was no Palestinian state. What does that have to do with anything? That the inhabitants of Palestine were ruled by foreigners does not change their right to independence as per Article 22 of the Covenant of the League of Nations. They certainly had a right to self determination as the native inhabitants before a bunch of European colonists.

Yes of course you're making unsubstantiated allegations again. No one, and certainly not the Ottomans, who were Muslims who ruled the land for last hundreds of years, recognized a Palestine or Palestinian people.

Case closed.

 

[montelatici]

montelatici, et al,

I think you are wrong on two counts.

The issue had nothing to do with who ruled. The issue was Ruddy's assertion that the Ottomans ruled for 700 years. They did not rule anywhere near 700 years.

Who ruled has nothing to do with the rights of the native inhabitants pursuant to Article 22 of the Covenant of the League of Nations.

(COMMENT)

The issue of which country exhibited sovereignty over the territory, is not the issue of my mistake in 700 years. It was that in the last 700 years, the native inhabitants did not have self-government, autonomy, or sovereignty and independence (maybe even 2000 years).

The League of nations covenant did not identify the inhabitants west of the Jordan River as having any special quality. That territory West of the Jordan River was not mention in Article 22 as having provisional recognition. It was the Allied Powers that gave provisional recognition to that portion of the territory East of the Jordan River and covered in Article 25 of the Mandate as not subject to the Article specific to issue of Israeli immigration and the establishment of the Jewish National Home. It was not the case then (1920 and 1922) or since that time that the Arab Palestinians have demonstrated their ability to stand alone.

Article 22 did stipulate that tutelage was an issue. And at every turn, the Arab Palestinian, West of the Jordan River, rejected such. As opposed to the Arab that were East of the Jordan River; of the Jewish immigrants.

Most Respectfully,
R

It wasn't your mistake. It was Ruddy's mistake.

Article 22 did not identify any inhabitants specifically. It states "the inhabitants" be they in african Middle Eastern or any other territories of the Axis powers.

The Palestinian Arabs and Christians presented draft constitutions, begged and requested independence for the full term of the Mandate. The British admitted that the only reason independence was not granted to the native inhabitants was because the European colonial population had not increased to a point that would result in their ability to rule over the native population. The Peel Commission reports exactly that.

Yada yada yada, for the last 1400 years of Arab / Ottoman rule there has not been a Palestine or a Palestinian people.

There certainly were Palestinians, that's what people of Palestina Prima were called.

So there was no Palestinian state. What does that have to do with anything? That the inhabitants of Palestine were ruled by foreigners does not change their right to independence as per Article 22 of the Covenant of the League of Nations. They certainly had a right to self determination as the native inhabitants before a bunch of European colonists.

Yes of course you're making unsubstantiated allegations again. No one, and certainly not the Ottomans, who were Muslims who ruled the land for last hundreds of years, recognized a Palestine or Palestinian people.

Case closed.

Of course people from Palestina Prima or Filistin were known as Palestinians. What else would they have been called? You are such a dummy.

 

[RoccoR]

Roudy, et al,
Suriye Vilayeti - Tarih ve Medeniyet
That is correct. The designator "Palestine" was a regional name.

Yes of course you're making unsubstantiated allegations again. No one, and certainly not the Ottomans, who were Muslims who ruled the land for last hundreds of years, recognized a Palestine or Palestinian people.

Case closed.

(COMMENT)

And actually, still today, the term "Palestine" is a regional designation; either it means the "Palestinian Territories of the West Bank and Gaza Strip; OR the "1988 State of Palestine."

Sunday, January 19, 2014
Chris Gratien, Georgetown University

Note that the region of Palestine or Filistin also appears on this map (straddling Nablus and Jerusalem provinces at left), but only as a geographical space and not an administrative unit. (Source: tarihvemedeniyet.org)
​

Most Respectfully,
R

 

[RoccoR]

montelatici, et al,

OK, I just can't help myself here.

They might really have a reason for the name....

What else would they have been called? You are such a dummy.

(COMEDY RELEIF)

OH, you are such the "philistine."

(Smug, ignorant and normally boureoise classified as being ingnorant or opposed to cultural values
one who lacks knowledge in a specific area.)

Most Respectfully,
R

 

[montelatici]

montelatici, et al,

OK, I just can't help myself here.

They might really have a reason for the name....

What else would they have been called? You are such a dummy.

(COMEDY RELEIF)

OH, you are such the "philistine."

(Smug, ignorant and normally boureoise classified as being ingnorant or opposed to cultural values
one who lacks knowledge in a specific area.)

Most Respectfully,
R

At least you have a sense of humor. Etruscan was a disparaging term the Romans used for the Tirreni (who ruled Rome for more than a century) although the Romans learned almost everything technological from them. Etruscan was associated with ignorant and uncultured for the Romans.

The plumbing, the architecture, armament and concrete came from the Etruscans, not the Romans. A recent discovery in Mugello, near Florence, demonstrates that the Etruscans had a modern civilization and a written language in Italy in 2,500 BC. Before the Iron Age! You are of Italian descent, you should be proud of your ancestry, which predates Jews.


The 2,500-year-old inscription found on a stone slab may describe an Etruscan fertility goddess.


Etruscan Inscription Offers Rare Clue to Mysterious People