"Settlements destroy chance for peace" - Caroline Glick's amazing reality-check

[MHunterB]

I was not aware either Mark Twain or Churchill were Historians or residents of Palestine.

Does anyone have to be an historian to see what has been going on? Since you are so busy on forums bashing Israel all day long, do you have any idea of the population changes in this country? There were others besides Mark Twain who also observed what he saw, and don't forget that Mark Twain was a journalist and no doubt paid close attention to what he observed. As for Churchill, have you ever thought that the British officials in the area reported back to him what was going on?

I already produced UN documents proving the land was never vacant, proving Mark Twain was a liar. As for Churhhill, who can expect truth from a war criminal like him? And the UN documents dont document what he claimed to be true, either. They document Jewish immigration.

So again we see the oh-so-much-more-moral poster, that self-proclaimed 'person of conscience' once again attacking the messengers of whatever she doesn't deign to consider a fact. She's doing exactly what she scornfully slandered 'Zionists' as 'always' doing..... What makes it somehow OK when l'il sherrikins does it?

Churchill is a 'war criminal'? Oh, now that's a truly reasonable assessment of him..... Twain, of course being a mere writer of (mostly) fiction, one could get away with claiming he was a 'liar'......

But what are we ordinary folk to make of the self-proclaimed 'Christian' in our midst who feels oh-so-comfortable slapping such labels as 'war criminal' on one of Britain's ablest champions, and 'liar' upon a man who remains one of America's most renown philosophers and men of letters (not to mention beloved story-tellers)?

 

[SherriMunnerlyn]

Jerusalem in 1947 100 000 Jews 105 000 Arabs and others . The Origins and Evolution of the Palestine Problem - CEIRPP, DPR study, part II: 1947-1977 (30 June 1979)

 

[SherriMunnerlyn]

Debate continues to rage about iconic leader "Winston Churchill led Britain to victory against the Nazi war machine, but debate continues to rage about whether he was responsible for overseeing atrocities that rival those ordered by Adolf Hitler.CHURCHILL IN HIS OWN WORDS(During first World War): “Perhaps the next time round the way to do it will be to kill women, children and the civilian population.”Churchill on defending the morality of bombing from the air: “Now everyone’s at it. It’s simply a question of fashion – similar to that of whether short or long dresses are in.”“I do not understand the squeamishness about the use of gas. I am strongly in favour of using poisonous gas against uncivilised tribes.”Writing as president of the Air Council, 1919." » Winston Churchill: War Hero or War Criminal? Alex Jones' Infowars: There's a war on for your mind!

 

[MHunterB]

Oh, yes - Alex Jones - a whore for publicity and money. Truly a reputable and most reliable source, if of course one is a conspiranutter wanker : ))

I think you need to find me a UN document which suggests Churchill was a war criminal.

 

[MHunterB]

Jerusalem in 1947 100 000 Jews 105 000 Arabs and others . The Origins and Evolution of the Palestine Problem - CEIRPP, DPR study, part II: 1947-1977 (30 June 1979)

UNISPAL is not even pretending to be an 'overview' group or anything objective: it exists to promote the Palestinian POV. Its 'mandate' is totally and completely one-sided, without any consideration nor concern for any Israeli needs or rights.

 

[SherriMunnerlyn]

Everything they say, they provide sources for, I am speaking of the two UN documents I have been citing. Jerusalem had 100000 Arabs or other nonJews in 1947, Israel is diligently working on ethnically cleansing them and their descendants from Jerusalem.

 

[SherriMunnerlyn]

The*Judaization of Jerusalem*(Arabic:*تهويد القدس*,tahweed il-quds;*Hebrew:*יהוד ירושלים*,*yehud yerushalaim) refers to the view that*Israel*has sought to transform the physical and demographic landscape of*Jerusalem*to correspond with a vision of a united and fundamentally*Jewish*Jerusalem under Israeli sovereignty.[1]*The question of whether there is an Israeli government policy for the Judaization of Jerusalem is a matter of debate. Judaization of Jerusalem - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia There is a Wikipedia article on Israels ethnic cleansing/Judaization project in Jerusalem.

 

[HistoryBefore67]

The "Judaization of Jerusalem" is the equivalent of saying "the Americanization of the cheeseburger."

 

[toastman]

The "Judaization of Jerusalem" is the equivalent of saying "the Americanization of the cheeseburger."

 

[toastman]

Everything they say, they provide sources for, I am speaking of the two UN documents I have been citing. Jerusalem had 100000 Arabs or other nonJews in 1947, Israel is diligently working on ethnically cleansing them and their descendants from Jerusalem.

Arab propaganda

 

[P F Tinmore]

More "Palestinian" logic:

"Palestine is not Jordan"

"Okay, so from 1948-1967, the West Bank was part of Jordan. So what happened in 1967."

"Israel stole it from Palestine."

"I thought they took the land from Jordan."

"Its the same thing."

"But you just said that Palestine and Jordan are not the same thing."

"Well, they are when it serves my purposes."

"I thought they took the land from Jordan."

Jordan, and Egypt, held Palestinian land in trust. Remember, Jordan attempted to annex the West Bank but could not.

 

[HistoryBefore67]

PFT, as the old saying goes...

You're entitled to your own opinions, but not your own facts.

 

[P F Tinmore]

You speaking of "pointlessly attacking the messengers" but didn't comment to the point at all.

Caroline Glick brought up some seriously issues, but your ignoring them and spitting the same old mantra of "ZioNazis".

That's tiring, honestly.

She made some excellent points, none of you guys Anti-Zionists adressed them.

I wonder why is that.

What I saw is a proud defender of a nation's war crimes spouting lies, like the demographic lies she told and the ethnic cleansing lies she told. She ignored Israels ethnic cleansing altogether, somehow magically converting what the world calls Israels ethnic cleansing to Palestinians ethnic cleansing. I know Hitlers proud of all his Zionist progenies, like her. You mention excellent points she made, I heard none. What might those excellent points be, from the perspective of a Zionist like you? Sherri

Looney tunes, for ethnic cleansing to occur, a population would have to decrease over time, not multiply many times over, like the "Palestinians" have.

The bigger the lie, the more these Jew hating Islamo-terrorist ass lickers repeat it.

...for ethnic cleansing to occur, a population would have to decrease over time...

Ethnic cleansing isn't about numbers it is about location. Israel has been locating Palestinians elsewhere, by force, since before it was called Israel.

 

[HistoryBefore67]

You know, it just occurred to me...

Maybe PFT is just doing a comedy routine and we just don't get the joke.

Let's try something:

Ethnic cleansing isn't about numbers it is about location. Israel has been locating Palestinians elsewhere, by force, since before it was called Israel.

You know... that fits!

(Well, its a better explanation than assuming that PFT really believes the drivel he's serving us.)

 

[toastman]

More "Palestinian" logic:

"Palestine is not Jordan"

"Okay, so from 1948-1967, the West Bank was part of Jordan. So what happened in 1967."

"Israel stole it from Palestine."

"I thought they took the land from Jordan."

"Its the same thing."

"But you just said that Palestine and Jordan are not the same thing."

"Well, they are when it serves my purposes."

"I thought they took the land from Jordan."

Jordan, and Egypt, held Palestinian land in trust. Remember, Jordan attempted to annex the West Bank but could not.

Israel should be able to do it

 

[toastman]

You know, it just occurred to me...

Maybe PFT is just doing a comedy routine and we just don't get the joke.

Let's try something:

Ethnic cleansing isn't about numbers it is about location. Israel has been locating Palestinians elsewhere, by force, since before it was called Israel.

You know... that fits!

(Well, its a better explanation than assuming that PFT really believes the drivel he's serving us.)

There's no way that he could believe the crap he writes.

 

[P F Tinmore]

PFT, as the old saying goes...

You're entitled to your own opinions, but not your own facts.

The Egyptian administration
could, until the Six Day War, be considered as the only one who
acted in concert with the juridical status of the area, which was that of a
« trust territory ». In the view of Egypt, the Gaza Strip remained part of
Palestine and therefore Palestine might be said to have retained an actual
existence, albeit in a somewhat truncated form (73). It would be erroneous
to simply describe the Egyptian presence as that of a belligerent occupant, not
only were the conditions under which Egypt entered the Gaza Strip the same
as those under which Jordan entered the West Bank, ipso facto excluding a
possible belligerent occupancy, but Egypt in actual fact assumed its task of
« trustee »

http://rbdi.bruylant.be/public/mode...79.2 - pp. 500 à 538 - Frank van de Craen.pdf

 

[toastman]

The key words there Tinnie are:

ready?

"In the View of Egypt"


Let me try that.

In the view of Israel, the West Bank belongs to Israel...

am I doing it right Tinnie ?

 

[HistoryBefore67]

PFT, as the old saying goes...

You're entitled to your own opinions, but not your own facts.

The Egyptian administration
could, until the Six Day War, be considered as the only one who
acted in concert with the juridical status of the area, which was that of a
« trust territory ». In the view of Egypt, the Gaza Strip remained part of
Palestine and therefore Palestine might be said to have retained an actual
existence, albeit in a somewhat truncated form (73). It would be erroneous
to simply describe the Egyptian presence as that of a belligerent occupant, not
only were the conditions under which Egypt entered the Gaza Strip the same
as those under which Jordan entered the West Bank, ipso facto excluding a
possible belligerent occupancy, but Egypt in actual fact assumed its task of
« trustee »

http://rbdi.bruylant.be/public/mode...79.2 - pp. 500 à 538 - Frank van de Craen.pdf

Its pretty sad that you actually buy this revisionist bullshit.

Of course, you fail to answer the obvious quesiton: why wouldn't Jordan and Egypt simply give the "Palestinians" sovereignty in the land they captured? The answer: because your "held in trust" claim is a lie.

 

[Kondor3]

"...The continuous theft of land erodes any possibility of a two state solution."

True. Israeli intentions about a two-state solution were real enough in the period 1948-1967, but since their victory in the 1967 Six Day War, they seem to have lost all interest. In light of Hamas and Hezbollah, I don't blame 'em one little bit.