The 77 year old flop

[pbel]

Far right Zionists have no honor...remember the Irgun, USS Liberty, Lavon Affair, Jonathan Pollard...

It goes on, remember that!

 

[JakeStarkey]

Jewish honor is better than Palestinian.

 

[Roudy]

You people never fail to make me laugh.

You are so addicted to debate you even defy the very definition of this activity:

DEBATE:

a discussion between people in which they express different opinions about something

Debate - Definition and More from the Free Merriam-Webster Dictionary

A formal contest of argumentation in which two opposing teams defend and attack a given proposition.

debate - definition of debate by the Free Online Dictionary, Thesaurus and Encyclopedia.

You love debating so much you engage in this activity even when there's nothing to debate, even when everybody is in perfect agreement.

Everybody here is perfectly aware that the palestinian people will never sanction the ethnic
cleansing of western palestine, that they will never accept only the WB and Gaza as their historical homeland.

Everybody knows this conflict is not about a few inches of land here, a few inches there... it is about the right of the palestinian people to live in the western half of their homeland.

If you don't believe me just read the small selection I compiled below including quotes by almost all posters who contributed to this thread.

"You people".

Anti Semites have a very limited vocabulary.

 

[Roudy]

The Zionist bloggers/sites blame the Palestinians for the breakdown in negotiations. Kerry blames the Israeli decision to build more settlements. I wonder which source is more reliable.

If you like your source, you can keep it, period.

 

[montelatici]

The Zionist bloggers/sites blame the Palestinians for the breakdown in negotiations. Kerry blames the Israeli decision to build more settlements. I wonder which source is more reliable.

If you like your source, you can keep it, period.

I have learned that rule in my brief time on this forum. Believe whatever you agree with, truth be damned. It certainly is an entertaining forum for that reason.

 

[Roudy]

Jewish honor is better than Palestinian.

What honor? Their leader and founder Arafat stole billions from his "suffering" people, then secretly died of aids, and now his wife who controls the money is sitting pretty in France, and won't lift a finger to help her "people" nor does she dare set foot in the West Bank or Gaza.

There's your Palestinian "honor".

 

[Roudy]

The Zionist bloggers/sites blame the Palestinians for the breakdown in negotiations. Kerry blames the Israeli decision to build more settlements. I wonder which source is more reliable.

If you like your source, you can keep it, period.

I have learned that rule in my brief time on this forum. Believe whatever you agree with, truth be damned. It certainly is an entertaining forum for that reason.

It is entertaining because nitwit lying Islamic propagandists like you are on it.

 

[montelatici]

If you like your source, you can keep it, period.

I have learned that rule in my brief time on this forum. Believe whatever you agree with, truth be damned. It certainly is an entertaining forum for that reason.

It is entertaining because nitwit lying Islamic propagandists like you are on it.

Can you point to any "lying Islamic propaganda" I have written? I only write facts.

 

[José]

" the palestinian people will never accept neither the partition of their homeland nor the exile imposed on them by the jewish racial dictatorship."

Yeah, they will. They have no other choice. If they fight, they will be squashed as they always have been already.

Jake, don't you read (or believe) your own posts?

Here's what you typed a few hours ago:

Greater Israel is becoming the only acceptable solution, with the Palestinians who can't accept it be cleansed to other countries involuntarily.

Why do you think "Greater Israel" (a one-state solution) "is becoming the only acceptable solution"?

Because you have a (correct) gut feeling that palestinians will never compromise their birthright to live in western Palestine, because you share Rocco's gut feeling that Palestinians have always been and will always be "bad faith partners" in the peace talks with Israel.

 

[José]

The irony behind my exchanges with Hossfly, proudveteran and Jake is that I didn't even have to use my own arguments...

I used their own words to prove my point...

How devastating is that?

 

[proudveteran06]

Originally posted by proudveteran
[Definition of NEGOTIATE

b: to arrange for or bring about through conference, discussion, and compromise <negotiate a treaty>

Why is there " disagreement?" Try to read the above definition SLOWLY if capable. Israel has shown compromise in many aspects starting with Gaza. Tell us exactly what the Palestinians have been doing to " negotiate?" The Palestinian, on the other hand claims the Palestinians are willing to find a way to end the " Two State Solution" conflict but claims the Israelis are unwilling to " negotiate" Understand now? Doubt it

You say:

The palestinian state (ie, the partition of Palestine) is DOA.

Tinmore says:

The two-state solution is nothing but the partition plan palestinians have been unequivocally, constantly rejecting since the first decades of the last century.

Whether or not Palestinians are being reasonable, "serious" by demanding their right to live in western Palestine is a secondary, unimportant question that's totally open to subjective interpretation.

What's really important here is that both of you agree on the crucial, fundamental issue:

The right of the palestinian people to live in an undivided Palestine has always been, is and will always be a non-negotiable point.

Again:

Where's the (important) disagreement?

Try to read if possible. The Israelis don't feel that way . Where was " Palestine" prior to 67? It was considered Jordan and Egypt . Israel already gave up Gaza, is willing to give up 90 percent of the W. Bank . Please tell us again ( lol). what the Palestinians are doing to " negotiate? "

 

[proudveteran06]

The irony behind my exchanges with Hossfly, proudveteran and Jake is that I didn't even have to use my own arguments...

I used their own words to prove my point...

How devastating is that?

Delusions of Grandeur setting in again. . It would be nicer if he knew what he was talking about. .

 

[Hossfly]

You people never fail to make me laugh.

You are so addicted to debate you even defy the very definition of this activity:

DEBATE:





You love debating so much you engage in this activity even when there's nothing to debate, even when everybody is in perfect agreement.

Everybody here is perfectly aware that the palestinian people will never sanction the ethnic
cleansing of western palestine, that they will never accept only the WB and Gaza as their historical homeland.

Everybody knows this conflict is not about a few inches of land here, a few inches there... it is about the right of the palestinian people to live in the western half of their homeland.

If you don't believe me just read the small selection I compiled below including quotes by almost all posters who contributed to this thread.

"You people".

Well, I almost included one of your posts in which you refer to the "phoney peace talks" but I couldn't remember your exact words and couldn't spend 5 hours looking for it due to having a real life outside the net.

Anyway:

Welcome to the team, Hossfly!!

The team of those who already realized the palestinian people will never accept neither the partition of their homeland nor the exile imposed on them by the jewish racial dictatorship.

Thanks, Coach Jose. When's our first practice?

 

[José]

You people never fail to make me laugh.

You are so addicted to debate you even defy the very definition of this activity:

DEBATE:





You love debating so much you engage in this activity even when there's nothing to debate, even when everybody is in perfect agreement.

Everybody here is perfectly aware that the palestinian people will never sanction the ethnic
cleansing of western palestine, that they will never accept only the WB and Gaza as their historical homeland.

Everybody knows this conflict is not about a few inches of land here, a few inches there... it is about the right of the palestinian people to live in the western half of their homeland.

If you don't believe me just read the small selection I compiled below including quotes by almost all posters who contributed to this thread.

"You people".

Anti Semites have a very limited vocabulary.

Anti-semite or Jewphile... you totally agree with Tinmore and me when we say the two-state delusion was never seriously considered by the palestinian people when you say:

Originally posted by Roudy:
If you believe that (that arabs are even remotely considering the possibility of giving up their right to live in western Palestine) I have a used car to sell you.

 

[José]

The irony behind my exchanges with Hossfly, proudveteran and Jake is that I didn't even have to use my own arguments...

I used their own words to prove my point...

How devastating is that?

Delusions of Grandeur setting in again. . It would be nicer if he knew what he was talking about. .

Finally something we can agree on.

I urgently need to get a hold of this huge, giant ego of mine.

But what I said was an accurate description of reality (let me add Roudy to the crowd now), not delusional.

 

[toastman]

Jose, can you show me a map of this so called 'western Palestine' ?

 

[José]

Jose, can you show me a map of this so called 'western Palestine' ?

Toastman,

Western (and Eastern) Palestine were never a country (or part of a country) because Ottoman and then british rule didn't allowed it to be.

But western Palestine was the HISTORICAL HOMELAND of the arab people who lived there.

First it was the homeland of ARABS.

Then when those arabs developed the palestinian national identity in the first half of the last century it became (and continues to be) the homeland of palestinian arabs.

 

[proudveteran06]

The irony behind my exchanges with Hossfly, proudveteran and Jake is that I didn't even have to use my own arguments...

I used their own words to prove my point...

How devastating is that?

Another Pro Palestinian with Delusions of Grandeur . How devastating is that? Answer; It's pathetic

 

[toastman]

Jose, can you show me a map of this so called 'western Palestine' ?

Toastman,

Western (and Eastern) Palestine were never a country (or part of a country) because Ottoman and then british rule didn't allowed it to be.

But western Palestine was the HISTORICAL HOMELAND of the arab people who lived there.

First it was the homeland of ARABS.

Then when those arabs developed the palestinian national identity in the first half of the last century it became (and continues to be) the homeland of palestinian arabs.

I agree with you that there once WAS a Western Palestine. But not anymore. Maps have changed over time as you already know, and what you might call 'Western Palestine' is called Israel now, and has been for the last 66 years.

Israel Map - Israel Satellite Image - Physical - Political

 

[P F Tinmore]

P F Tinmore, et al,

I think you are a little bit behind the times. Forget 1937! Come back to the living and the current situation.


(OBSERVATION)


(COMMENT)

Today, a determination has to be made about the Palestinian demands they put forth just to enter into "good faith" negotiations.

The Palestinians have compiled a new list of demands for the continuation of peace talks, the list of demands are: (Article: Palestinians publish new list of demands: PM must agree to East Jerusalem as capital, Elior Levy, Published: 04.03.14, Israel News)

1. A written commitment by Prime Minister Benjamin Netnayahu that the borders of the Palestinian state will be along the 1967 'green-line' and that its capital will be East Jerusalem.
2. The release of 1,200 Palestinian prisoners, including political heavyweights Marwan Barghouti, Ahmed Saadat and Fuad Shubkhi.
3. An end to the Egyptian-Israeli blockade on Gaza, and the formulation of dealing allowing the flow of goods into Gaza.
4. A halt in construction in East Jerusalem.
5. The IDF will not be allowed to enter Area A – the area of the West Bank under autonomous PA control since the Oslo Accords – to conduct arrests or assassinations
6. Israel will permit the PA control over Area C – currently under Israel's control.
7. The Palestinians known as the Church of Nativity deportees – a group of terrorist who barricaded themselves in the Church of the Nativity on April 2, 2002 and were later deported to European nations and the Gaza Strip – will be allowed to return to the West Bank.
8. The reopening of a number of Palestinian development agencies Israel shut down.

Are these legitimate demands as a prerequisite to "good faith negotiations" for peace? Or, is this some kind of devious means at subterfuge --- to break-down the negotiation process? There is a question as to whether the Palestinians ever wanted to employ peaceful means as a foundation for settlement.

Should Israel just step back from the process and allow the current path of events to unfold as they are? (Maintain the status quo.)

If Israel does not meet these negotiation demands, what benefit does a break-down in the negotiations give the Arab Palestinian.

How do these demands help?

Most Respectfully,
R

Look at Israel's pre-conditions.

1)The Palestinians must surrender.
2) They must disarm.
3) No refugees.
4) No Jerusalem.
5) Settlements will stay.
6) Israel will control all imports and exports.
7) Israel will control all travel and tourism.
8) Israel recognized as a Jewish state.​

OK, so who isn't serious?

The Palestinian is lying again;

Israel has offered to give up most of the settlements in the W. Bank


Israel said willing to give up 90% of West Bank | The Times of Israel


Israel said willing to give up 90% of West Bank

Palestinians reportedly insisting on land swaps for no more than 3% of territory; either way, most Jewish settlements would remain in place

By Gavriel Fiske February 6, 2014, 10:55 am 99




The closed-door negotiations between Israel and the Palestinian Authority over the future contours of a Palestinian state, and how much land and settlements Israel will retain, have reportedly come down to a matter of a few percentage points, with both sides agreeing in principle that the majority of Jewish West Bank settlements would be transferred to Israeli sovereignty in a final status deal.

Get The Times of Israel's Daily Edition by email
and never miss our top stories Free Sign up!

Citing anonymous Israeli, Palestinian and American sources close to the negotiations, Walla News reported on Thursday that Israel is seeking to annex about 10 percent of the West Bank’s land area in a final deal. Meanwhile, the Palestinians are seeking to have Israel annex only around 3% of the West Bank, the report said.




Some 70-80% of Jewish West Bank settlements will be transferred to Israel whether Israel retains 10% or 3% of West Bank land, the report noted. According to a source on the American side, “it is clear” that Israel is “willing in principle to give up” control of 90% of the West Bank.


Israel has also offered to share E. Jerusalem. Israel will not control all tourism etc. etc. It does demand that " Palestine" remain unmilitarized for obvious reasons such as Japan was after WW 11. What the Palestinan doesn't mention is that they are demanding some land within the 67 Borders. If they got everything they wanted Israel will eventually be annex to " Palestine". Why should there be a " Palestinian State" but not a " Jewish State?"



The closed-door negotiations between Israel and the Palestinian Authority over the future contours of a Palestinian state, and how much land and settlements Israel will retain, have reportedly come down to a matter of a few percentage points, with both sides agreeing in principle that the majority of Jewish West Bank settlements would be transferred to Israeli sovereignty in a final status deal.

Citing anonymous Israeli, Palestinian and American sources close to the negotiations, Walla News reported on Thursday that Israel is seeking to annex about 10 percent of the West Bank’s land area in a final deal. Meanwhile, the Palestinians are seeking to have Israel annex only around 3% of the West Bank, the report said.







Abbas Shuts Down the Peace Process « Commentary Magazine


Abbas Shuts Down the Peace Process


Tom Wilson | [MENTION=30056]Tom[/MENTION]JamesWilson 02.12.2014 - 2:20 PM





Last week, Jonathan Tobin wrote here of how we were on the eve of a fourth Palestinian “no” to a peace agreement. It would appear that has now arrived, albeit slightly sooner than anyone had expected. Many observers assumed that once Secretary of State John Kerry got around to submitting his framework for a negotiated peace, Palestinian Authority head Mahmoud Abbas would then set about finding an excuse for rejecting it. What few could have predicted was that Abbas would find a way to reject the proposal before it was even submitted. Yet, this is precisely the impressive feat that Abbas has now accomplished.

Earlier today, Abbas’s spokespeople in Ramallah announced the PA’s new set of red lines in any negotiated peace settlement. Each and every one of these red lines blows to pieces anything Kerry was about to propose, as it does to the prospects for an agreement between the two sides in general. These red lines which Abbas details in a letter being sent to the U.S. and the Quartet seamlessly preempts whatever Kerry was likely to outline in his own peace parameters. In this way Abbas artfully dodges a scenario in which the Israelis would agree to a peace plan and the Palestinians would come under pressure not to derail yet another effort to resolve the conflict.



Abbas’s new red lines block just about every concession that the Israelis, and even the U.S., have requested. Abbas demands: a total Israeli withdrawal from all territories that went to Israel in 1967; that Israel complete that withdrawal within three to four years; that the Palestinians not be required to recognize the Jewish state; that east Jerusalem be specified as the capital of a Palestinian state; the release of all Palestinian prisoners; and resolving the refugee issue along the lines of UN General Assembly resolution 194, which in essence means sending those Palestinians claiming to be refugees, not to a Palestinian state, but to Israel, thus terminating the existence of the Jewish state Abbas refuses to recognize.




So, Who isn't serious???

There are some things that Abbas can't negotiate governed by law.

The legal rights of the inhabitants of occupied territory cannot be curtailed
by any agreement or other arrangement between the occupying power
and the authorities of the occupied territory. This is intended to prevent
national authorities from being put under pressure to make conces-
sions which might not be in the population’s best interests or weaken
its legal rights.

Similarly, the inhabitants of the occupied territory cannot renounce their
rights under the Fourth Geneva Convention. This again is a safeguard.
It prevents the occupying power from exploiting the vulnerability of the
occupied territory by exerting undue pressure to undermine and weaken
the protection which the law affords.

http://www.icrc.org/eng/assets/files/other/law9_final.pdf