So, let's go ahead and go back to the '1967' borders and end the 'occupation'

[Boston1]

Bingo

well that was a pain in the ass to find in my notes so I just looked it up on the net and took the first hit which just happened to be Wiki

Quote

Chapter VI of the United Nations Charter deals with peaceful settlement of disputes. It requires countries with disputes that could lead to war to first of all try to seek solutions through peaceful methods such as "negotiation, enquiry, mediation, conciliation, arbitration, judicial settlement, resort to regional agencies or arrangements, or other peaceful means of their own choice." If these methods of alternative dispute resolution fail, then they must refer it to the UN Security Council. Under Article 35, any country is allowed to bring a dispute to the attention of the UN Security Council or the General Assembly. This chapter authorizes the Security Council to issue recommendations but does not give it power to make binding resolutions; those provisions are contained Chapter VII.[1][2][3] Chapter VI is analogous to Articles 13-15 of the Covenant of the League of Nations which provide for arbitration and for submission of matters to the Council that are not submitted to arbitration. United Nations Security Council Resolution 47 and United Nations Security Council Resolution 242 are two examples of Chapter VI resolutions which remain unimplemented.

End Quote

So in the end resolution 242 IS NOT BINDING due to Israel's acts being defensive in nature

Which is why Israel is NOT IN VIOLATION of international law for not withdrawing from the disputed territories YET or EVER since resolution 242 IS NOTHING MORE THAN A RECOMENDATION AND NOT A BINDING RESOLUTION

You are batting zero my friend

Not "Disputed Territories" BUT Stolen Territories.....get it right ........IT IS ILLEGAL OCCUPIED PALESITIAN LAND...you Covert

Again you are lashing out against all factual evidence. UNSC 242 is a non binding resolution SUGGESTING Israel withdraw from the DISPUTED territories. The area was LOST in an AGGRESSIVE ARAB ACT against the peaceful Israeli people. Ergo the UN was constrained to pass this resolution under article VI instead of the binding article VII. Capiche ?

No land was stolen, it is being administered by the israeli's until a peaceful solution can be established exactly in accord with the SUGGESTED resolution.

:--)

What a peaceful solution so that all the Palestinian Lands are kept by Israel....Yeah sure that is why you have and are building Jewish towns on the Palestinian Land......You are full of Shit.....but we are not so gullible

I'd be very curious as to what you believe states, in legal terms of course, that the disputed territories are palestinian.

From what I can derive from history the areas last legal designation was "to be set aside for the creation of a Jewish national homeland" Which was the last internationally agreed use of the land within a binding agreement. Unfortunately that agreement expired, but it is still the last internationally agreed use of the area in question.

Since then war has decided its fate. Which I'd prefer it hadn't but so be it. The Israeli's are now in control of the area and are under no legally binding agreement to forfeit that land to any non state entity. Particularly when that forfeiture might jeopardize the peace between neighboring states

 

[Billo_Really]

Arguing there is no occupation, is as stupid as arguing gravity plays no role in plane crashes.

It's also "OFF TOPIC" and a...

Zone

Two

Violation!

This thread is about ending the occupation, not whether one exists.

It has been an occupation since 1967 and you fuckers are not going to change it now by calling it something else.

 

[Boston1]

Arguing there is no occupation, is as stupid as arguing gravity plays no role in plane crashes.

It's also "OFF TOPIC" and a...

Zone

Two

Violation!

This thread is about ending the occupation, not whether one exists.

It has been an occupation since 1967 and you fuckers are not going to change it now by calling it something else.

LOL You are too funny.

Seriously ? You want to pull the off topic card on discussing occupation ? When the thread tittle clearly states occupation is the topic ?

The simple reality is the thread tittle involves a false premise and any discussion of the subject presented must include the factual basis for establishing that false premise. As of yet, no argument has been presented which has stood up to scrutiny that establishes Israel's administration of the disputed territories as an occupation.

While I can understand why a palestinian sympathizer would want to insist that we accept the application of the term "occupation" to Israel's administering of the disputed territories I believe a very robust case can be made refuting such an application.

The facts expose the revisionist narrative for what it is. SPIN

Its very easy to establish that the UN is an extremely bias organization.

Its very easy to establish that the disputed territories are well within the areas designated within the last internationally agreed use of the land as being held in trust for the creation of a Jewish national homeland

it is factually accurate to suggest that Israel has a right to be there as a consequence of a defensive engagement

It is factually accurate to say that UNSC 242 is NOT A LEGALLY BINDING RESOLUTION BUT NOTHING MORE THAN A SUGGESTION.

It is factually accurate to say that the disputed territories are not now nor have ever been a palestinian state.

Kinda puts an end to this whole occupation diatribe

 

[Billo_Really]

WOW, just wow. OK take a deep breath and try and collect yourself.

Go fuck yourself! You're an arrogant piece of shit!

First of all, again, by descending into the childish personal attacks you are clearly expressing your frustration over being educated in the history of this conflict. That history simply doesn't support the revisionist narrative you are trying to run up the flagpole.

Your also a fuckin' liar!

Lets review

We've seen how the UN is extremely bias against Israel. Need I repeat that lesson for you ?

There is no bias against Israel.

I just took one year at random (2014) and counted all the UNSC resolutions for that year. Out of 65 resolutions, only 2 were about Israel. And both of those, were shared with Syria.

So fuck your UN bias bullshit, it doesn't wash.

We've seen how Jordan does encompass the internationally agreed boundaries of palestine. Need I repeat that lesson for you ?

Do I need to post the map of the partition plan again, for you, asshole?

We've see how Jordan is the Arab state envisioned by the authors of the palestinian mandate and how israel is the Jewish state.

Wrong. We've seen how the West Bank, Gaza, Golan Heights and East Jerusalem, is not Israel.

We've seen how the area west of the Jordan IS NOT JORDANIAN.

And not Israel either. West of the West Bank, is Israel.

Now lets investigate your latest claims concerning UNR 242

Give me a minute to go look put he relevant language of the resolution

Go ahead, I'll wait.

 

[Billo_Really]

LOL You are too funny.

Seriously ? You want to pull the off topic card on discussing occupation ? When the thread tittle clearly states occupation is the topic ?

Occupation is. Saying there is no occupation, is not. The thread is about ending the occupation, not whether there is one. How can that not be any more clear?

The simple reality is the thread tittle involves a false premise and any discussion of the subject presented must include the factual basis for establishing that false premise. As of yet, no argument has been presented which has stood up to scrutiny that establishes Israel's administration of the disputed territories as an occupation.

Let me know when you come back to planet earth.

While I can understand why a palestinian sympathizer would want to insist that we accept the application of the term "occupation" to Israel's administering of the disputed territories I believe a very robust case can be made refuting such an application.

I don't give a shit about either side. I'm the most objective voice one could hear on this subject.

The facts expose the revisionist narrative for what it is. SPIN

And psychologists call that "projection".

Its very easy to establish that the UN is an extremely bias organization.

No it isn't. I just proved it wasn't.

Its very easy to establish that the disputed territories are well within the areas designated within the last internationally agreed use of the land as being held in trust for the creation of a Jewish national homeland

What happened 2000 years ago, don't mean shit today.

it is factually accurate to suggest that Israel has a right to be there as a consequence of a defensive engagement

Listen fucker, states don't have rights, people do.

It is factually accurate to say that UNSC 242 is NOT A LEGALLY BINDING RESOLUTION BUT NOTHING MORE THAN A SUGGESTION.

Now I know you're retarded. All Security Counsel resolutions ARE binding.

It is factually accurate to say that the disputed territories are not now nor have ever been a palestinian state.

That doesn't matter. The only thing that matters, is its not Israel.

Kinda puts an end to this whole occupation diatribe

Like I said, let me know when you're back on planet earth.

 

[Boston1]

WOW, just wow. OK take a deep breath and try and collect yourself.

Go fuck yourself! You're an arrogant piece of shit!

First of all, again, by descending into the childish personal attacks you are clearly expressing your frustration over being educated in the history of this conflict. That history simply doesn't support the revisionist narrative you are trying to run up the flagpole.

Your also a fuckin' liar!

Lets review

We've seen how the UN is extremely bias against Israel. Need I repeat that lesson for you ?

There is no bias against Israel.

I just took one year at random (2014) and counted all the UNSC resolutions for that year. Out of 65 resolutions, only 2 were about Israel. And both of those, were shared with Syria.

So fuck your UN bias bullshit, it doesn't wash.

We've seen how Jordan does encompass the internationally agreed boundaries of palestine. Need I repeat that lesson for you ?

Do I need to post the map of the partition plan again, for you, asshole?

We've see how Jordan is the Arab state envisioned by the authors of the palestinian mandate and how israel is the Jewish state.

Wrong. We've seen how the West Bank, Gaza, Golan Heights and East Jerusalem, is not Israel.

We've seen how the area west of the Jordan IS NOT JORDANIAN.

And not Israel either. West of the West Bank, is Israel.

Now lets investigate your latest claims concerning UNR 242

Give me a minute to go look put he relevant language of the resolution

Go ahead, I'll wait.

WOW

Again you might want to discuss this issue you seem to have with peacefully discussing this conflict with others with a qualified therapist. Mention cognitive dissonance and you might save some time.

you are clearly lashing out against overwhelming evidence contrary to your preferred view. A view that is obviously indefensible in the face of factual evidence.

 

[Boston1]

LOL You are too funny.

Seriously ? You want to pull the off topic card on discussing occupation ? When the thread tittle clearly states occupation is the topic ?

Occupation is. Saying there is no occupation, is not. The thread is about ending the occupation, not whether there is one. How can that not be any more clear?

The simple reality is the thread tittle involves a false premise and any discussion of the subject presented must include the factual basis for establishing that false premise. As of yet, no argument has been presented which has stood up to scrutiny that establishes Israel's administration of the disputed territories as an occupation.

Let me know when you come back to planet earth.

While I can understand why a palestinian sympathizer would want to insist that we accept the application of the term "occupation" to Israel's administering of the disputed territories I believe a very robust case can be made refuting such an application.

I don't give a shit about either side. I'm the most objective voice one could hear on this subject.

The facts expose the revisionist narrative for what it is. SPIN

And psychologists call that "projection".

Its very easy to establish that the UN is an extremely bias organization.

No it isn't. I just proved it wasn't.

Its very easy to establish that the disputed territories are well within the areas designated within the last internationally agreed use of the land as being held in trust for the creation of a Jewish national homeland

What happened 2000 years ago, don't mean shit today.

it is factually accurate to suggest that Israel has a right to be there as a consequence of a defensive engagement

Listen fucker, states don't have rights, people do.

It is factually accurate to say that UNSC 242 is NOT A LEGALLY BINDING RESOLUTION BUT NOTHING MORE THAN A SUGGESTION.

Now I know you're retarded. All Security Counsel resolutions ARE binding.

It is factually accurate to say that the disputed territories are not now nor have ever been a palestinian state.

That doesn't matter. The only thing that matters, is its not Israel.

Kinda puts an end to this whole occupation diatribe

Like I said, let me know when you're back on planet earth.

I can't help but notice that you offer not one single reference to back your nonsense.

Have you a single point within established literature that supports your view ?

I have provided multiple references to support my position in this, its kinda hard not to notice that you on the other hand have provided nothing except a litany of profanity and false accusations.

If you insist on discussing what you prefer to refer to as an occupation, then I believe the definition of occupation and the reality of Israel's administration of the disputed territories is on the table. Particularly when that subject undermines the false premise of the thread title.

 

[Shusha]

Occupation is. Saying there is no occupation, is not. The thread is about ending the occupation, not whether there is one. How can that not be any more clear?

Do you not understand that the OP is a trick question? Its a trap. Its a pit that you have fallen into and are now at the bottom of whilst screaming at the top of your lungs that there is no trap.

 

[Boston1]

Occupation is. Saying there is no occupation, is not. The thread is about ending the occupation, not whether there is one. How can that not be any more clear?

Do you not understand that the OP is a trick question? Its a trap. Its a pit that you have fallen into and are now at the bottom of whilst screaming at the top of your lungs that there is no trap.

Bingo

The revisionists hard at work.

 

[theliq]

Bingo

well that was a pain in the ass to find in my notes so I just looked it up on the net and took the first hit which just happened to be Wiki

Quote

Chapter VI of the United Nations Charter deals with peaceful settlement of disputes. It requires countries with disputes that could lead to war to first of all try to seek solutions through peaceful methods such as "negotiation, enquiry, mediation, conciliation, arbitration, judicial settlement, resort to regional agencies or arrangements, or other peaceful means of their own choice." If these methods of alternative dispute resolution fail, then they must refer it to the UN Security Council. Under Article 35, any country is allowed to bring a dispute to the attention of the UN Security Council or the General Assembly. This chapter authorizes the Security Council to issue recommendations but does not give it power to make binding resolutions; those provisions are contained Chapter VII.[1][2][3] Chapter VI is analogous to Articles 13-15 of the Covenant of the League of Nations which provide for arbitration and for submission of matters to the Council that are not submitted to arbitration. United Nations Security Council Resolution 47 and United Nations Security Council Resolution 242 are two examples of Chapter VI resolutions which remain unimplemented.

End Quote

So in the end resolution 242 IS NOT BINDING due to Israel's acts being defensive in nature

Which is why Israel is NOT IN VIOLATION of international law for not withdrawing from the disputed territories YET or EVER since resolution 242 IS NOTHING MORE THAN A RECOMENDATION AND NOT A BINDING RESOLUTION

You are batting zero my friend

Not "Disputed Territories" BUT Stolen Territories.....get it right ........IT IS ILLEGAL OCCUPIED PALESITIAN LAND...you Covert

Again you are lashing out against all factual evidence. UNSC 242 is a non binding resolution SUGGESTING Israel withdraw from the DISPUTED territories. The area was LOST in an AGGRESSIVE ARAB ACT against the peaceful Israeli people. Ergo the UN was constrained to pass this resolution under article VI instead of the binding article VII. Capiche ?

No land was stolen, it is being administered by the israeli's until a peaceful solution can be established exactly in accord with the SUGGESTED resolution.

:--)

What a peaceful solution so that all the Palestinian Lands are kept by Israel....Yeah sure that is why you have and are building Jewish towns on the Palestinian Land......You are full of Shit.....but we are not so gullible

I'd be very curious as to what you believe states, in legal terms of course, that the disputed territories are palestinian.

From what I can derive from history the areas last legal designation was "to be set aside for the creation of a Jewish national homeland" Which was the last internationally agreed use of the land within a binding agreement. Unfortunately that agreement expired, but it is still the last internationally agreed use of the area in question.

Since then war has decided its fate. Which I'd prefer it hadn't but so be it. The Israeli's are now in control of the area and are under no legally binding agreement to forfeit that land to any non state entity. Particularly when that forfeiture might jeopardize the peace between neighboring states

Be as CURIOUS as you like,the bottom line is,Israels behaviour has been shameful(check its true definition) to the Palestinians and to most of us.....but still you persist with your defence of the indefencable................Go spew your Pro-Zionist Shit to someone else......because you are on "a hiding to nothing" with me,and the truthful on here.

Please God send me a Normal(not hateful) Jew to talk to...........because Boston ain't the real deal..just a Terrorist Zionist DRESSED IN SHEEPS CLOTHING..Amen

 

[Jroc]

Bingo

well that was a pain in the ass to find in my notes so I just looked it up on the net and took the first hit which just happened to be Wiki

Quote

Chapter VI of the United Nations Charter deals with peaceful settlement of disputes. It requires countries with disputes that could lead to war to first of all try to seek solutions through peaceful methods such as "negotiation, enquiry, mediation, conciliation, arbitration, judicial settlement, resort to regional agencies or arrangements, or other peaceful means of their own choice." If these methods of alternative dispute resolution fail, then they must refer it to the UN Security Council. Under Article 35, any country is allowed to bring a dispute to the attention of the UN Security Council or the General Assembly. This chapter authorizes the Security Council to issue recommendations but does not give it power to make binding resolutions; those provisions are contained Chapter VII.[1][2][3] Chapter VI is analogous to Articles 13-15 of the Covenant of the League of Nations which provide for arbitration and for submission of matters to the Council that are not submitted to arbitration. United Nations Security Council Resolution 47 and United Nations Security Council Resolution 242 are two examples of Chapter VI resolutions which remain unimplemented.

End Quote

So in the end resolution 242 IS NOT BINDING due to Israel's acts being defensive in nature

Which is why Israel is NOT IN VIOLATION of international law for not withdrawing from the disputed territories YET or EVER since resolution 242 IS NOTHING MORE THAN A RECOMENDATION AND NOT A BINDING RESOLUTION

You are batting zero my friend

Not "Disputed Territories" BUT Stolen Territories.....get it right ........IT IS ILLEGAL OCCUPIED PALESITIAN LAND...you Covert

Again you are lashing out against all factual evidence. UNSC 242 is a non binding resolution SUGGESTING Israel withdraw from the DISPUTED territories. The area was LOST in an AGGRESSIVE ARAB ACT against the peaceful Israeli people. Ergo the UN was constrained to pass this resolution under article VI instead of the binding article VII. Capiche ?

No land was stolen, it is being administered by the israeli's until a peaceful solution can be established exactly in accord with the SUGGESTED resolution.

:--)

What a peaceful solution so that all the Palestinian Lands are kept by Israel....Yeah sure that is why you have and are building Jewish towns on the Palestinian Land......You are full of Shit.....but we are not so gullible

I'd be very curious as to what you believe states, in legal terms of course, that the disputed territories are palestinian.

From what I can derive from history the areas last legal designation was "to be set aside for the creation of a Jewish national homeland" Which was the last internationally agreed use of the land within a binding agreement. Unfortunately that agreement expired, but it is still the last internationally agreed use of the area in question.

Since then war has decided its fate. Which I'd prefer it hadn't but so be it. The Israeli's are now in control of the area and are under no legally binding agreement to forfeit that land to any non state entity. Particularly when that forfeiture might jeopardize the peace between neighboring states

Be as CURIOUS as you like,the bottom line is,Israels behaviour has been shameful(check its true definition) to the Palestinians and to most of us.....but still you persist with your defence of the indefencable................Go spew your Pro-Zionist Shit to someone else......because you are on "a hiding to nothing" with me,and the truthful on here.

Please God send me a Normal(not hateful) Jew to talk to...........because Boston ain't the real deal..just a Terrorist Zionist DRESSED IN SHEEPS CLOTHING..Amen

The logic of an idiot " "Zionist" Jews are terrorist. The Arabs are just misunderstood Watch and learn boy

 

[hadit]

And they got their butts thoroughly kicked. They're still ticked about it.

You've seen too many episodes of Walker, Texas Ranger.

Which of the wars did the Arab nations win?

 

[Boston1]

Bingo

well that was a pain in the ass to find in my notes so I just looked it up on the net and took the first hit which just happened to be Wiki

Quote

Chapter VI of the United Nations Charter deals with peaceful settlement of disputes. It requires countries with disputes that could lead to war to first of all try to seek solutions through peaceful methods such as "negotiation, enquiry, mediation, conciliation, arbitration, judicial settlement, resort to regional agencies or arrangements, or other peaceful means of their own choice." If these methods of alternative dispute resolution fail, then they must refer it to the UN Security Council. Under Article 35, any country is allowed to bring a dispute to the attention of the UN Security Council or the General Assembly. This chapter authorizes the Security Council to issue recommendations but does not give it power to make binding resolutions; those provisions are contained Chapter VII.[1][2][3] Chapter VI is analogous to Articles 13-15 of the Covenant of the League of Nations which provide for arbitration and for submission of matters to the Council that are not submitted to arbitration. United Nations Security Council Resolution 47 and United Nations Security Council Resolution 242 are two examples of Chapter VI resolutions which remain unimplemented.

End Quote

So in the end resolution 242 IS NOT BINDING due to Israel's acts being defensive in nature

Which is why Israel is NOT IN VIOLATION of international law for not withdrawing from the disputed territories YET or EVER since resolution 242 IS NOTHING MORE THAN A RECOMENDATION AND NOT A BINDING RESOLUTION

You are batting zero my friend

Not "Disputed Territories" BUT Stolen Territories.....get it right ........IT IS ILLEGAL OCCUPIED PALESITIAN LAND...you Covert

Again you are lashing out against all factual evidence. UNSC 242 is a non binding resolution SUGGESTING Israel withdraw from the DISPUTED territories. The area was LOST in an AGGRESSIVE ARAB ACT against the peaceful Israeli people. Ergo the UN was constrained to pass this resolution under article VI instead of the binding article VII. Capiche ?

No land was stolen, it is being administered by the israeli's until a peaceful solution can be established exactly in accord with the SUGGESTED resolution.

:--)

What a peaceful solution so that all the Palestinian Lands are kept by Israel....Yeah sure that is why you have and are building Jewish towns on the Palestinian Land......You are full of Shit.....but we are not so gullible

I'd be very curious as to what you believe states, in legal terms of course, that the disputed territories are palestinian.

From what I can derive from history the areas last legal designation was "to be set aside for the creation of a Jewish national homeland" Which was the last internationally agreed use of the land within a binding agreement. Unfortunately that agreement expired, but it is still the last internationally agreed use of the area in question.

Since then war has decided its fate. Which I'd prefer it hadn't but so be it. The Israeli's are now in control of the area and are under no legally binding agreement to forfeit that land to any non state entity. Particularly when that forfeiture might jeopardize the peace between neighboring states

Be as CURIOUS as you like,the bottom line is,Israels behaviour has been shameful(check its true definition) to the Palestinians and to most of us.....but still you persist with your defence of the indefencable................Go spew your Pro-Zionist Shit to someone else......because you are on "a hiding to nothing" with me,and the truthful on here.

Please God send me a Normal(not hateful) Jew to talk to...........because Boston ain't the real deal..just a Terrorist Zionist DRESSED IN SHEEPS CLOTHING..Amen

Many people when faced with overwhelming evidence contrary to their preferred beliefs will lash out in attempt to maintain what have now become demonstrably false beliefs. Its called cognitive dissonance.

Unfortunately it would appear that you are one of those people. If you would like to discuss the issues civilly and peacefully that would be fine. But I will not engage in some childish war of insults, profanity and petty accusations.

 

[RoccoR]

theliq, et al,

I know of some "legal exceptions" to the law that have yet to be litigated, BUT I am unclear as to which law in particular, you claim Israel is acting contrary to or forbidden by law, in the establishment of its occupation.

Not "Disputed Territories" BUT Stolen Territories.....get it right ........IT IS ILLEGAL OCCUPIED PALESITIAN LAND...you Covert

(COMMENT)

First, I believe that all the territory that Israel has either "effective control" --- or --- "exclusive control" can be placed under dispute prior to Peace Negotiations or Claim Settlement Proceedings; especial with regard to the West Bank and Gaza Strip.

There is an argument to be made under international law; as there was a point at which both territories were expressly or implicitly relinquished to Israeli sovereignty. OR there was a point at which Israel was the only sovereignty to maintain control over the territory and claim. Terra nullius

​

Most Respectfully,
R

 

[Boston1]

theliq, et al,

I know of some "legal exceptions" to the law that have yet to be litigated, BUT I am unclear as to which law in particular, you claim Israel is acting contrary to or forbidden by law, in the establishment of its occupation.

Not "Disputed Territories" BUT Stolen Territories.....get it right ........IT IS ILLEGAL OCCUPIED PALESITIAN LAND...you Covert

(COMMENT)

First, I believe that all the territory that Israel has either "effective control" --- or --- "exclusive control" can be placed under dispute prior to Peace Negotiations or Claim Settlement Proceedings; especial with regard to the West Bank and Gaza Strip.

There is an argument to be made under international law; as there was a point at which both territories were expressly or implicitly relinquished to Israeli sovereignty. OR there was a point at which Israel was the only sovereignty to maintain control over the territory and claim. Terra nullius

View attachment 58079​

Most Respectfully,
R

Exactly, the claim of stolen palestinian land is fictional at best. The simple truth is it was never palestinian land. A few other sticky points when considering the revisionist diatribe is that early Zionists were BUYING LAND not stealing it when the local Arabs lashed out in bigotry and prejudice starting a war, which they lost. Land won in a defensive war is not land stolen its land acquired in self defense that further strengthens ones defensive position. Regardless the area in question went from a caliphate of the Ottoman empire to British mandated administration. The mandate called for two states to be created out of the area, one Jewish and one Arab.

See
Mandate For Palestine - The Legal Aspects of Jewish Rights

The claim is demonstrably false, and while the mandate expired the ONE Arab nation was established known as Jordan, or Trans-Jordan at the time. With the Jewish nations borders being still determined because and only because of Arab complaints that 80+% of the original mandate wasn't enough; they wanted it all and made it clear they wouldn't tolerate a Jewish presence in the mandated area.

Its really pretty simple. The entire situation boils down to prejudice and bigotry. Except the bigots lost and became terrorists segregated from society for the safety of all concerned.

One would think they'd face up to their past transgressions and join the rest of the world in at least some semblance of peace. But instead we continue to see one terrorist act after another and the constant attempts to run the revisionist narrative up the flag pole.

Pity really, Israel has become such a beautiful country and yet is forced to hold back the tide of this one small groups hatred in perpetuity

 

[montelatici]

Linking propaganda pieces doesn't make the European colonization of Palestine any less a European colonial project in which the native people are evicted by people from another continent. I don't understand how anyone would expect that a native people would passively accept colonization without resisting the colonizers. It is a case of cognizant dissonance not recognizing the invasion of Palestine by Europeans for what it was.

 

[Boston1]

Linking propaganda pieces doesn't make the European colonization of Palestine any less a European colonial project in which the native people are evicted by people from another continent. I don't understand how anyone would expect that a native people would passively accept colonization without resisting the colonizers. It is a case of cognizant dissonance not recognizing the invasion of Palestine by Europeans for what it was.

Again the revisionist view is expressing an extremely distorted view. SOME of todays Israelis come from Europe. Many were expelled from Arab nations.

Only about 35% of Jews in Israel claim Europe as their country of origin
Something like 28% fled Arab countries.
See
Demographics of Israel - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Once again the claims made by standard revisionist diatribe are demonstrably false

I'm not sure if its helpful for our revisionists to be constantly forwarding false information but I don't see where its helpful. Any even rudimentary view of the basic data will generally refute most if not all of the revisionist claims. Things like stolen land, apartheid, European colonists and the like are demonstrably either outright lies or half truths at best.

 

[montelatici]

The most rudimentary fact is that before the European invasion starting in the mid 18oos, 99% of the people in Palestine were either Christian or Muslim. The Zionists were European colonists, they described themselves as such.

 

[Boston1]

The most rudimentary fact is that before the European invasion starting in the mid 18oos, 99% of the people in Palestine were either Christian or Muslim. The Zionists were European colonists, they described themselves as such.

Yikes, another half truth.

The whole truth, of which you are leaving off quite a bit is that in the mid 1800 a massive pogrom to eliminate Jews from this area of the Ottoman empire was undertaken and Jews were either killed or forced to abandon their homes and flee.

What do you suppose that does to the population in the time frame you specify ?

Again your accusations are demonstrably false or half truths, Again even the slightest application of research will refute these insinuations that Jews had abandoned Judea of their own free will

Quote

Following the Damascus affair, Pogroms spread through the Middle East and North Africa. Pogroms occurred in: Aleppo (1850, 1875), Damascus (1840, 1848, 1890), Beirut (1862, 1874), Dayr al-Qamar (1847), Jerusalem (1847), Cairo (1844, 1890, 1901–02), Mansura (1877), Alexandria (1870, 1882, 1901–07), Port Said (1903, 1908), Damanhur (1871, 1873, 1877, 1891), Istanbul (1870, 1874), Buyukdere (1864), Kuzguncuk (1866), Eyub (1868), Edirne (1872), Izmir (1872, 1874).[16] There was a massacre of Jews in Baghdad in 1828.[12] There was another massacre in Barfurush in 1867.[12]

In 1839, in the eastern Persian city of Meshed, a mob burst into the Jewish Quarter, burned the synagogue, and destroyed the Torah scrolls. This is known as the Allahdad incident. It was only by forcible conversion that a massacre was averted.[17]

In Palestine there were riots and pogroms against Jews in 1920 and 1921. Tensions over the Western Wall in Jerusalem led to the 1929 Palestine riots,[18] whose main victims were the ancient Jewish community at Hebron which came to an end.

End Quote.

So again your revisionist narrative is proven vastly inadequate in relaying anything of a factual nature.

 

[Hollie]

The most rudimentary fact is that before the European invasion starting in the mid 18oos, 99% of the people in Palestine were either Christian or Muslim. The Zionists were European colonists, they described themselves as such.

A rudimentary fact sidestepped by those with little knowledge of history is that the geographic area called "Palestine" was the subject of an earlier invasion by Moslem hordes which was a part of the Ottoman Empire built upon dead bodies as a result of Islamist war, rapine and colonization.