The Paradox of 'Israeli Retaliation"

[Shusha]

Actually to the extent that said Jews occupy Palestinian land, and inflict collective-punishment on Arab/Palestinians they do indeed enjoy a legal right of resistance...the occupation thus inheres collective-punishment thereby justifying violent retaliation.

The international community has made it clear that virtually the entire world considers the Israeli occupied territories to be illegal and contrary to the principles of international law. Every year since 1967 (up until the Oslo Process started), the UN General Assembly passed the same resolution (always with lopsided votes like 150-2), stating that Israel is obligated to vacate the West Bank, Gaza and East Jerusalem, in accordance with UN Resolution 242.
The only reason that Israel is able to maintain its occupation of Palestinian land is that the U.S. routinely vetoes every Security Council resolution that would insist that Israel live up to its obligations under international law.

1. International law is not a popularity contest nor is it subject to a vote. Therefore the logical fallacy argumentum ad populum will be automatically dismissed by me.

2. Neither the "international community" nor the UN has the right to create or establish borders. That can ONLY happen by treaty between the parties involved.

3. The 1949 Armistice lines are not borders. Thus, there is no such thing as "67 borders". And anything that discusses "1967 anything" can be dismissed as a failure of the poster to understand international law. Israel is under no obligation to vacate territory on the far side of the Green line without a peace treaty in place after negotiations, which is fully in accordance to all actual international law. Don't forget 242 also requires safe and secure borders.

4. Oslo exists. It happened. It is a treaty (read: international law) between the State of Israel and the legal representatives of the Arab Palestinians. You intentionally neglected to discuss Areas A, B and C in the context of that legal agreement. You are trying to ignore the Oslo Accords (international law).

5. Let's break this down:

• Arab Palestinians have no right to "resist" in Areas A and B, because they are under Arab Palestinian authority. There is nothing to resist. They have achieved authority over those areas. They have the right to self-defense IF and only IF Israel makes an unprovoked armed attack on Areas A and B - something Israel has never done.
• Arab Palestinians have no right to "resist" in Gaza, because it is under Arab Palestinian authority. There is nothing to resist. They have achieved authority over that area. They have the right to self-defense IF and only IF Israel makes an unprovoked armed attack on Gaza -- something Israel has never done.
• Arab Palestinians have no right to "resist" in Area C because Area C is -- by treaty (international law) -- under the control of Israel until a peace treaty is negotiated between the two parties.
• Arab Palestinians have no right to "resist" in the sovereign territory of Israel -- the sovereignty of which you recognize in your response to my direct question above.

• Any "resistance" in the sovereign territory of Israel is an armed attack against Israel which falls under the Article 51 provision you claimed in your posts against which Israel is entitled to defend herself and her citizens.
• Any "resistance" in Area C under Israeli control is an armed attack against Israel which falls under the Article 51 provision you claimed in your posts against which Israel is entitled to defend herself and her citizens.
• Any "resistance" from Gaza or Areas A and B is a violation of the peace treaty between Israel and the provisional government of Palestine and therefore also falls under the Article 51 provision you claimed in your posts against which Israel is entitled to defend herself and her citizens.

The correct way forward for the Arab Palestinians is to follow the intent of the UN Charter which is to establish peaceful, negotiated solutions to conflicts.

Shusha:


1. International law is not a popularity contest nor is it subject to a vote. Therefore the logical fallacy argumentum ad populum will be automatically dismissed by me.
( YOU dare to reference international law? Israel literally spits on IL...YOU ARE RUNNING CIRCLES AGAIN )

2. Neither the "international community" nor the UN has the right to create or establish borders. That can ONLY happen by treaty between the parties involved.

( LOL...and the act of ethnic-cleansing should be admissible in establishing borders? Do you have any faint clue princess? )

3. The 1949 Armistice lines are not borders. Thus, there is no such thing as "67 borders". And anything that discusses "1967 anything" can be dismissed as a failure of the poster to understand international law. Israel is under no obligation to vacate territory on the far side of the Green line without a peace treaty in place after negotiations, which is fully in accordance to all actual international law. Don't forget 242 also requires safe and secure borders.

( Sorry again princess but the international consensus on borders is framed around the 67 lines...nothing the Israelis have done since 48 is in accordance with international law...you are quite clueless...but then again you are clearly paraphrasing hasbara )

4. Oslo exists. It happened. It is a treaty (read: international law) between the State of Israel and the legal representatives of the Arab Palestinians. You intentionally neglected to discuss Areas A, B and C in the context of that legal agreement. You are trying to ignore the Oslo Accords (international law).

( Oslo is a farce...the present situation and Israel's continuing land theft render Oslo irrelevant )

5. Let's break this down:

• Arab Palestinians have no right to "resist" in Areas A and B, because they are under Arab Palestinian authority. There is nothing to resist. They have achieved authority over those areas. They have the right to self-defense IF and only IF Israel makes an unprovoked armed attack on Areas A and B - something Israel has never done.

( wrong again princess...to the extent that the UN---under western political pressure---recognized a state formed under ethnic-cleansing the piratical Jews have zero rights )

• Arab Palestinians have no right to "resist" in Gaza, because it is under Arab Palestinian authority. There is nothing to resist. They have achieved authority over that area. They have the right to self-defense IF and only IF Israel makes an unprovoked armed attack on Gaza -- something Israel has never done.

( wrong once more princess...the IDF is an criminal occupier )

• Arab Palestinians have no right to "resist" in Area C because Area C is -- by treaty (international law) -- under the control of Israel until a peace treaty is negotiated between the two parties.

( Wrong yet again for exactly the same reasons )

• Arab Palestinians have no right to "resist" in the sovereign territory of Israel -- the sovereignty of which you recognize in your response to my direct question above.

Wrong...apparently you are confused about the proposed sovereignty of a criminal occupier )

• Any "resistance" in the sovereign territory of Israel is an armed attack against Israel which falls under the Article 51 provision you claimed in your posts against which Israel is entitled to defend herself and her citizens.

( On no---wrong again...51 applies in favor of Palestinian legal resistance as has been explained four or five times...let me know when it registers )

• Any "resistance" in Area C under Israeli control is an armed attack against Israel which falls under the Article 51 provision you claimed in your posts against which Israel is entitled to defend herself and her citizens.

( Wrong yet again for the very same reasons )

• Any "resistance" from Gaza or Areas A and B is a violation of the peace treaty between Israel and the provisional government of Palestine and therefore also falls under the Article 51 provision you claimed in your posts against which Israel is entitled to defend herself and her citizens.

( wrong yet again...what a dizzying number of errors...please seek out someone better educated to explain 'criminal occupation' to you...preferably in monosyllables...)

The correct way forward for the Arab Palestinians is to follow the intent of the UN Charter which is to establish peaceful, negotiated solutions to conflicts.


ROTFLMAO!!!!!!!!!!!!!! If we follow the charter in letter and spirit Israel is nothing but culpable for its crimes...the UN charter is Israel's worst enemy...you cannot be this profoundly clueless...)

You need to make up your mind. According to the DIRECT question I asked you ALL territory on the one side of the Green Line is sovereign Israeli territory and the only "occupied" territory is that on the other side. Are you withdrawing that claim?

If you are NOT withdrawing that claim all actions within Israel's territory are off limits for legal Arab "resistance", even according to your own warped belief system. Therefore, any action which interferes with Israel's sovereignty or the safety of her citizens on her side of the Green Line is an attack from which she is entitled to defend herself.

 

[Ventura77]

Actually to the extent that said Jews occupy Palestinian land, and inflict collective-punishment on Arab/Palestinians they do indeed enjoy a legal right of resistance...the occupation thus inheres collective-punishment thereby justifying violent retaliation.

The international community has made it clear that virtually the entire world considers the Israeli occupied territories to be illegal and contrary to the principles of international law. Every year since 1967 (up until the Oslo Process started), the UN General Assembly passed the same resolution (always with lopsided votes like 150-2), stating that Israel is obligated to vacate the West Bank, Gaza and East Jerusalem, in accordance with UN Resolution 242.
The only reason that Israel is able to maintain its occupation of Palestinian land is that the U.S. routinely vetoes every Security Council resolution that would insist that Israel live up to its obligations under international law.

1. International law is not a popularity contest nor is it subject to a vote. Therefore the logical fallacy argumentum ad populum will be automatically dismissed by me.

2. Neither the "international community" nor the UN has the right to create or establish borders. That can ONLY happen by treaty between the parties involved.

3. The 1949 Armistice lines are not borders. Thus, there is no such thing as "67 borders". And anything that discusses "1967 anything" can be dismissed as a failure of the poster to understand international law. Israel is under no obligation to vacate territory on the far side of the Green line without a peace treaty in place after negotiations, which is fully in accordance to all actual international law. Don't forget 242 also requires safe and secure borders.

4. Oslo exists. It happened. It is a treaty (read: international law) between the State of Israel and the legal representatives of the Arab Palestinians. You intentionally neglected to discuss Areas A, B and C in the context of that legal agreement. You are trying to ignore the Oslo Accords (international law).

5. Let's break this down:

• Arab Palestinians have no right to "resist" in Areas A and B, because they are under Arab Palestinian authority. There is nothing to resist. They have achieved authority over those areas. They have the right to self-defense IF and only IF Israel makes an unprovoked armed attack on Areas A and B - something Israel has never done.
• Arab Palestinians have no right to "resist" in Gaza, because it is under Arab Palestinian authority. There is nothing to resist. They have achieved authority over that area. They have the right to self-defense IF and only IF Israel makes an unprovoked armed attack on Gaza -- something Israel has never done.
• Arab Palestinians have no right to "resist" in Area C because Area C is -- by treaty (international law) -- under the control of Israel until a peace treaty is negotiated between the two parties.
• Arab Palestinians have no right to "resist" in the sovereign territory of Israel -- the sovereignty of which you recognize in your response to my direct question above.

• Any "resistance" in the sovereign territory of Israel is an armed attack against Israel which falls under the Article 51 provision you claimed in your posts against which Israel is entitled to defend herself and her citizens.
• Any "resistance" in Area C under Israeli control is an armed attack against Israel which falls under the Article 51 provision you claimed in your posts against which Israel is entitled to defend herself and her citizens.
• Any "resistance" from Gaza or Areas A and B is a violation of the peace treaty between Israel and the provisional government of Palestine and therefore also falls under the Article 51 provision you claimed in your posts against which Israel is entitled to defend herself and her citizens.

The correct way forward for the Arab Palestinians is to follow the intent of the UN Charter which is to establish peaceful, negotiated solutions to conflicts.

Shusha:


1. International law is not a popularity contest nor is it subject to a vote. Therefore the logical fallacy argumentum ad populum will be automatically dismissed by me.
( YOU dare to reference international law? Israel literally spits on IL...YOU ARE RUNNING CIRCLES AGAIN )

2. Neither the "international community" nor the UN has the right to create or establish borders. That can ONLY happen by treaty between the parties involved.

( LOL...and the act of ethnic-cleansing should be admissible in establishing borders? Do you have any faint clue princess? )

3. The 1949 Armistice lines are not borders. Thus, there is no such thing as "67 borders". And anything that discusses "1967 anything" can be dismissed as a failure of the poster to understand international law. Israel is under no obligation to vacate territory on the far side of the Green line without a peace treaty in place after negotiations, which is fully in accordance to all actual international law. Don't forget 242 also requires safe and secure borders.

( Sorry again princess but the international consensus on borders is framed around the 67 lines...nothing the Israelis have done since 48 is in accordance with international law...you are quite clueless...but then again you are clearly paraphrasing hasbara )

4. Oslo exists. It happened. It is a treaty (read: international law) between the State of Israel and the legal representatives of the Arab Palestinians. You intentionally neglected to discuss Areas A, B and C in the context of that legal agreement. You are trying to ignore the Oslo Accords (international law).

( Oslo is a farce...the present situation and Israel's continuing land theft render Oslo irrelevant )

5. Let's break this down:

• Arab Palestinians have no right to "resist" in Areas A and B, because they are under Arab Palestinian authority. There is nothing to resist. They have achieved authority over those areas. They have the right to self-defense IF and only IF Israel makes an unprovoked armed attack on Areas A and B - something Israel has never done.

( wrong again princess...to the extent that the UN---under western political pressure---recognized a state formed under ethnic-cleansing the piratical Jews have zero rights )

• Arab Palestinians have no right to "resist" in Gaza, because it is under Arab Palestinian authority. There is nothing to resist. They have achieved authority over that area. They have the right to self-defense IF and only IF Israel makes an unprovoked armed attack on Gaza -- something Israel has never done.

( wrong once more princess...the IDF is an criminal occupier )

• Arab Palestinians have no right to "resist" in Area C because Area C is -- by treaty (international law) -- under the control of Israel until a peace treaty is negotiated between the two parties.

( Wrong yet again for exactly the same reasons )

• Arab Palestinians have no right to "resist" in the sovereign territory of Israel -- the sovereignty of which you recognize in your response to my direct question above.

Wrong...apparently you are confused about the proposed sovereignty of a criminal occupier )

• Any "resistance" in the sovereign territory of Israel is an armed attack against Israel which falls under the Article 51 provision you claimed in your posts against which Israel is entitled to defend herself and her citizens.

( On no---wrong again...51 applies in favor of Palestinian legal resistance as has been explained four or five times...let me know when it registers )

• Any "resistance" in Area C under Israeli control is an armed attack against Israel which falls under the Article 51 provision you claimed in your posts against which Israel is entitled to defend herself and her citizens.

( Wrong yet again for the very same reasons )

• Any "resistance" from Gaza or Areas A and B is a violation of the peace treaty between Israel and the provisional government of Palestine and therefore also falls under the Article 51 provision you claimed in your posts against which Israel is entitled to defend herself and her citizens.

( wrong yet again...what a dizzying number of errors...please seek out someone better educated to explain 'criminal occupation' to you...preferably in monosyllables...)

The correct way forward for the Arab Palestinians is to follow the intent of the UN Charter which is to establish peaceful, negotiated solutions to conflicts.


ROTFLMAO!!!!!!!!!!!!!! If we follow the charter in letter and spirit Israel is nothing but culpable for its crimes...the UN charter is Israel's worst enemy...you cannot be this profoundly clueless...)

You need to make up your mind. According to the DIRECT question I asked you ALL territory on the one side of the Green Line is sovereign Israeli territory and the only "occupied" territory is that on the other side. Are you withdrawing that claim?

If you are NOT withdrawing that claim all actions within Israel's territory are off limits for legal Arab "resistance", even according to your own warped belief system. Therefore, any action which interferes with Israel's sovereignty or the safety of her citizens on her side of the Green Line is an attack from which she is entitled to defend herself.

You cannot even disguise the obvious fact that you are lifting this duplicitous content directly from Hasbara-software...it is just as obvious that you are another bland paid troll...I regret to inform you that after reading some--if not all---of the absurd scripted content you've posted here it is a wasted effort even going through the motions of posting a reply...for the record Israel has no actual 'sovereignty' because the state was established in the immediate wake of an illegal ethnic-cleansing, therefore the use of wording like 'sovereign' is misleading and inaccurate...Israel is an artificial construct that legally and morally equates to occupied Palestine...you are welcome to play your bait-n-switch games to your heart's content however Israel remains a criminal occupier and the occupied inhere a legal right of resistance against the occupier...

 

[Shusha]

Oh come on. You can't even answer a simple question? What land -- be specific -- does Israel occupy?

 

[Indeependent]

Dog Shit Alert!

 

[Ventura77]

Oh come on. You can't even answer a simple question? What land -- be specific -- does Israel occupy?

That would depend entirely upon perspectives wouldn't it? Expedient legal applications aside the state of Israel was established as a direct result of an ethnic-cleansing therefore all of Israel is subject to a legal basis for resistance, you first disputed that Israel was an 'occupier' in any sense, now you shifted your argument to this tepid Hasbara draft...I've been doing this long enough to know the unmistakable signatures...why not simply confess that you are a paid liar posting lies?

 

[Ventura77]

Dog Shit Alert!

Oh look the feces=freak makes an appearance...

 

[Indeependent]

Linkless Dog Shit Alert!

 

[jillian]

Arabs have as much right to the Nation of Israel as you have to my front yard.
Cause and effect:
The British Empire returns Israel to the Jews.
The Jews invite Arabs to come live and work in Israel together.
Egypt tells those few Arabs to get out of Israel because Egypt decided to invade Israel.
Israel asked them to stay. They do not.
Egypt looses the war and refuses to let the uprooted Arabs into their land, so they squatted on the edge of the Jew's land, and have been terrorizing them ever since.
Inviting Hamas into Israel is akin to us inviting ISIS to take over Washington DC.

You have been brainwashed into believing there was a Palestine to begin with. There was not. The land belonged to the Brits., not the Arabs. Less that 3% of the land belonged to Arabs who sold to the Jews at exorbitant prices.

Stop trying to make the Jews give up their land. It is none of our business.

you're right of course. one correction, though. it was the grand mufti of Jerusalem who told the arabs to leave and said they would drive the jews to the sea in three days.

 

[Ventura77]

Arabs have as much right to the Nation of Israel as you have to my front yard.
Cause and effect:
The British Empire returns Israel to the Jews.
The Jews invite Arabs to come live and work in Israel together.
Egypt tells those few Arabs to get out of Israel because Egypt decided to invade Israel.
Israel asked them to stay. They do not.
Egypt looses the war and refuses to let the uprooted Arabs into their land, so they squatted on the edge of the Jew's land, and have been terrorizing them ever since.
Inviting Hamas into Israel is akin to us inviting ISIS to take over Washington DC.

You have been brainwashed into believing there was a Palestine to begin with. There was not. The land belonged to the Brits., not the Arabs. Less that 3% of the land belonged to Arabs who sold to the Jews at exorbitant prices.

Stop trying to make the Jews give up their land. It is none of our business.

you're right of course. one correction, though. it was the grand mufti of Jerusalem who told the arabs to leave and said they would drive the jews to the sea in three days.

A lie that has been debunked decades ago Jilllian...is there no sewer that you swags won't squeeze into in defense of the defenseless...the Zionist figures who conducted the ethnic-cleansing confessed that they expelled 800,000 Palestinians at gunpoint...put down the kool-aid...

 

[Roudy]

Israel illegally occupies Palestinian land, hence Palestinians inhere a legal right of resistance...

Israel is not committing armed attacks against "Palestine". Israel does -- rightly -- defend herself and her citizens when she is the target of an armed attack.

The presence of Israel, or Israelis or Jews is NOT an armed attack. Thus the "occupation", of itself, would not count as self defense as noted in Article 51, which describes responses to armed attacks.

And you didn't answer my question concerning exactly which areas of the territory are "occupied" by Israel. Specifically: Israel "proper", Area A, Area B, Area C, Gaza. Which of those are "occupied"?

Shusha: Israel is not committing armed attacks against "Palestine". Israel does -- rightly -- defend herself and her citizens when she is the target of an armed attack.

( Wrong again princess: Israel is a criminal occupier which routinely foments retaliation through repeated offenses against a civilian population )

The presence of Israel, or Israelis or Jews is NOT an armed attack. Thus the "occupation", of itself, would not count as self defense as noted in Article 51, which describes responses to armed attacks.

( Actually to the extent that said Jews occupy Palestinian land, and inflict collective-punishment on Arab/Palestinians they do indeed enjoy a legal right of resistance...the occupation thus inheres collective-punishment thereby justifying violent retaliation )

And you didn't answer my question concerning exactly which areas of the territory are "occupied" by Israel. Specifically: Israel "proper", Area A, Area B, Area C, Gaza. Which of those are "occupied"?




( The international community has made it clear that virtually the entire world considers the Israeli occupied territories to be illegal and contrary to the principles of international law. Every year since 1967 (up until the Oslo Process started), the UN General Assembly passed the same resolution (always with lopsided votes like 150-2), stating that Israel is obligated to vacate the West Bank, Gaza and East Jerusalem, in accordance with UN Resolution 242.
The only reason that Israel is able to maintain its occupation of Palestinian land is that the U.S. routinely vetoes every Security Council resolution that would insist that Israel live up to its obligations under international law. )

Now, now, chuckles. You do have a habit of plagiarizing from several notorious internet tabloids.

http://ifamericaknew.org/cur_sit/jew2jew.html

Al Estupido Al Ventura Lohouseher takes this garbage and then inserts his own dot dot dots...he thinks it makes him look important.

Not to mention it's a violation of the board rules.

 

[Roudy]

Arabs have as much right to the Nation of Israel as you have to my front yard.
Cause and effect:
The British Empire returns Israel to the Jews.
The Jews invite Arabs to come live and work in Israel together.
Egypt tells those few Arabs to get out of Israel because Egypt decided to invade Israel.
Israel asked them to stay. They do not.
Egypt looses the war and refuses to let the uprooted Arabs into their land, so they squatted on the edge of the Jew's land, and have been terrorizing them ever since.
Inviting Hamas into Israel is akin to us inviting ISIS to take over Washington DC.

You have been brainwashed into believing there was a Palestine to begin with. There was not. The land belonged to the Brits., not the Arabs. Less that 3% of the land belonged to Arabs who sold to the Jews at exorbitant prices.

Stop trying to make the Jews give up their land. It is none of our business.

you're right of course. one correction, though. it was the grand mufti of Jerusalem who told the arabs to leave and said they would drive the jews to the sea in three days.

A lie that has been debunked decades ago Jilllian...is there no sewer that you swags won't squeeze into in defense of the defenseless...the Zionist figures who conducted the ethnic-cleansing confessed that they expelled 800,000 Palestinians at gunpoint...put down the kool-aid...

What's been debunked is your baloney, Achmed.

 

[jillian]

Arabs have as much right to the Nation of Israel as you have to my front yard.
Cause and effect:
The British Empire returns Israel to the Jews.
The Jews invite Arabs to come live and work in Israel together.
Egypt tells those few Arabs to get out of Israel because Egypt decided to invade Israel.
Israel asked them to stay. They do not.
Egypt looses the war and refuses to let the uprooted Arabs into their land, so they squatted on the edge of the Jew's land, and have been terrorizing them ever since.
Inviting Hamas into Israel is akin to us inviting ISIS to take over Washington DC.

You have been brainwashed into believing there was a Palestine to begin with. There was not. The land belonged to the Brits., not the Arabs. Less that 3% of the land belonged to Arabs who sold to the Jews at exorbitant prices.

Stop trying to make the Jews give up their land. It is none of our business.

you're right of course. one correction, though. it was the grand mufti of Jerusalem who told the arabs to leave and said they would drive the jews to the sea in three days.

A lie that has been debunked decades ago Jilllian...is there no sewer that you swags won't squeeze into in defense of the defenseless...the Zionist figures who conducted the ethnic-cleansing confessed that they expelled 800,000 Palestinians at gunpoint...put down the kool-aid...

debunking by neo-nazis doesn't count, terrorist supporter.

but nice try

 

[Ventura77]

Arabs have as much right to the Nation of Israel as you have to my front yard.
Cause and effect:
The British Empire returns Israel to the Jews.
The Jews invite Arabs to come live and work in Israel together.
Egypt tells those few Arabs to get out of Israel because Egypt decided to invade Israel.
Israel asked them to stay. They do not.
Egypt looses the war and refuses to let the uprooted Arabs into their land, so they squatted on the edge of the Jew's land, and have been terrorizing them ever since.
Inviting Hamas into Israel is akin to us inviting ISIS to take over Washington DC.

You have been brainwashed into believing there was a Palestine to begin with. There was not. The land belonged to the Brits., not the Arabs. Less that 3% of the land belonged to Arabs who sold to the Jews at exorbitant prices.

Stop trying to make the Jews give up their land. It is none of our business.

you're right of course. one correction, though. it was the grand mufti of Jerusalem who told the arabs to leave and said they would drive the jews to the sea in three days.

A lie that has been debunked decades ago Jilllian...is there no sewer that you swags won't squeeze into in defense of the defenseless...the Zionist figures who conducted the ethnic-cleansing confessed that they expelled 800,000 Palestinians at gunpoint...put down the kool-aid...

debunking by neo-nazis doesn't count, terrorist supporter.

but nice try

How bout debunking by British broadcast monitors princess? God you are indeed lifeless slugs

 

[Roudy]

Arabs have as much right to the Nation of Israel as you have to my front yard.
Cause and effect:
The British Empire returns Israel to the Jews.
The Jews invite Arabs to come live and work in Israel together.
Egypt tells those few Arabs to get out of Israel because Egypt decided to invade Israel.
Israel asked them to stay. They do not.
Egypt looses the war and refuses to let the uprooted Arabs into their land, so they squatted on the edge of the Jew's land, and have been terrorizing them ever since.
Inviting Hamas into Israel is akin to us inviting ISIS to take over Washington DC.

You have been brainwashed into believing there was a Palestine to begin with. There was not. The land belonged to the Brits., not the Arabs. Less that 3% of the land belonged to Arabs who sold to the Jews at exorbitant prices.

Stop trying to make the Jews give up their land. It is none of our business.

you're right of course. one correction, though. it was the grand mufti of Jerusalem who told the arabs to leave and said they would drive the jews to the sea in three days.

A lie that has been debunked decades ago Jilllian...is there no sewer that you swags won't squeeze into in defense of the defenseless...the Zionist figures who conducted the ethnic-cleansing confessed that they expelled 800,000 Palestinians at gunpoint...put down the kool-aid...

debunking by neo-nazis doesn't count, terrorist supporter.

but nice try

How bout debunking by British broadcast monitors princess? God you are indeed lifeless slugs

An Internet jihadi troll calling others "lifeless slugs" ya gotta love it!

 

[Ventura77]

Arabs have as much right to the Nation of Israel as you have to my front yard.
Cause and effect:
The British Empire returns Israel to the Jews.
The Jews invite Arabs to come live and work in Israel together.
Egypt tells those few Arabs to get out of Israel because Egypt decided to invade Israel.
Israel asked them to stay. They do not.
Egypt looses the war and refuses to let the uprooted Arabs into their land, so they squatted on the edge of the Jew's land, and have been terrorizing them ever since.
Inviting Hamas into Israel is akin to us inviting ISIS to take over Washington DC.

You have been brainwashed into believing there was a Palestine to begin with. There was not. The land belonged to the Brits., not the Arabs. Less that 3% of the land belonged to Arabs who sold to the Jews at exorbitant prices.

Stop trying to make the Jews give up their land. It is none of our business.

you're right of course. one correction, though. it was the grand mufti of Jerusalem who told the arabs to leave and said they would drive the jews to the sea in three days.

A lie that has been debunked decades ago Jilllian...is there no sewer that you swags won't squeeze into in defense of the defenseless...the Zionist figures who conducted the ethnic-cleansing confessed that they expelled 800,000 Palestinians at gunpoint...put down the kool-aid...

debunking by neo-nazis doesn't count, terrorist supporter.

but nice try

How bout debunking by British broadcast monitors princess? God you are indeed lifeless slugs

An Internet jihadi troll calling others "lifeless slugs" ya gotta love it!

If the shoe fits wear it dirtbag...still a mystery to me why dullards like you, Hollie and feces-man post comments here...its never anything beyond a strangled sentence or third-grade attempts at sarcasm... and the IQ estimates literally announce themselves!!!

 

[Hollie]

you're right of course. one correction, though. it was the grand mufti of Jerusalem who told the arabs to leave and said they would drive the jews to the sea in three days.

A lie that has been debunked decades ago Jilllian...is there no sewer that you swags won't squeeze into in defense of the defenseless...the Zionist figures who conducted the ethnic-cleansing confessed that they expelled 800,000 Palestinians at gunpoint...put down the kool-aid...

debunking by neo-nazis doesn't count, terrorist supporter.

but nice try

How bout debunking by British broadcast monitors princess? God you are indeed lifeless slugs

An Internet jihadi troll calling others "lifeless slugs" ya gotta love it!

If the shoe fits wear it dirtbag...still a mystery to me why dullards like you, Hollie and feces-man post comments here...its never anything beyond a strangled sentence or third-grade attempts at sarcasm... and the IQ estimates literally announce themselves!!!

Such an angry, Louie. Are you still unclear why your silly tirades are the object of ridicule?

 

[Shusha]

That would depend entirely upon perspectives wouldn't it?

No. It is very simply a matter of international law.

you first disputed that Israel was an 'occupier' in any sense,

I most certainly have in the past and I stand by my assertion.

However, in this thread I am trying to ascertain YOUR claims. But you can't seem to decide what those are. You seem to be saying that Israel has no sovereignty (that its all Arab territory). Yet you also claim that it is the 1967 "border" which demarcate "Palestine."

So which is it? If we are to have a discussion about "occupation" you must clearly state what territory YOU think is occupied and why. Be clear. Make a statement and hold to it.

 

[Ventura77]

That would depend entirely upon perspectives wouldn't it?

No. It is very simply a matter of international law.

you first disputed that Israel was an 'occupier' in any sense,

I most certainly have in the past and I stand by my assertion.

However, in this thread I am trying to ascertain YOUR claims. But you can't seem to decide what those are. You seem to be saying that Israel has no sovereignty (that its all Arab territory). Yet you also claim that it is the 1967 "border" which demarcate "Palestine."

So which is it? If we are to have a discussion about "occupation" you must clearly state what territory YOU think is occupied and why. Be clear. Make a statement and hold to it.

To the contrary it is you who keeps jumping from one claim to another, but that is irrelevant to the fact that its been explained to you that Israel is an occupying power, and any 'recognition accorded" this artificial nation was the sum result of politics and not law...You have already committed yourself to a number of contradicting positions---a hazard of posting propaganda...you see I recognize the content that you post because it is alpha-numerical content fresh off your Hasbara-software...I sincerely doubt that you even comprehend a 10th of the absurdities that you post...the irony is that each one of you seem to believe that you are some kind of 'specialist' as opposed to mindless, immoral propaganda whores for Israel...

 

[Shusha]

That would depend entirely upon perspectives wouldn't it?

No. It is very simply a matter of international law.

you first disputed that Israel was an 'occupier' in any sense,

I most certainly have in the past and I stand by my assertion.

However, in this thread I am trying to ascertain YOUR claims. But you can't seem to decide what those are. You seem to be saying that Israel has no sovereignty (that its all Arab territory). Yet you also claim that it is the 1967 "border" which demarcate "Palestine."

So which is it? If we are to have a discussion about "occupation" you must clearly state what territory YOU think is occupied and why. Be clear. Make a statement and hold to it.

To the contrary it is you who keeps jumping from one claim to another, but that is irrelevant to the fact that its been explained to you that Israel is an occupying power, and any 'recognition accorded" this artificial nation was the sum result of politics and not law...You have already committed yourself to a number of contradicting positions---a hazard of posting propaganda...you see I recognize the content that you post because it is alpha-numerical content fresh off your Hasbara-software...I sincerely doubt that you even comprehend a 10th of the absurdities that you post...the irony is that each one of you seem to believe that you are some kind of 'specialist' as opposed to mindless, immoral propaganda whores for Israel...

Uh huh. So, Israel's an occupying power over some territory which you can not or will not name and you have absolutely no idea how or why and which legal instruments make it so.

Let's go back to Oslo then. It is a signed treaty agreement between the parties to the conflict. Areas A and B and Gaza are under direct Palestinian control. Area C is under complete Israeli control until a final settlement is negotiated. Israel "proper" (for a lack of a better term) is undisputed Israeli sovereign territory (not subject to negotiation).

"Resistance" is therefore unnecessary in Areas A and B and Gaza (they already have control over those areas). "Resistance" is in violation of peace treaties in Israel "proper" and in Area C. Therefore -- there is no occupation and no legitimate call for "resistance".

If you have anything other than Jew-bashing -- please post it. Otherwise, if you can't keep up, move along.

 

[Roudy]

you're right of course. one correction, though. it was the grand mufti of Jerusalem who told the arabs to leave and said they would drive the jews to the sea in three days.

A lie that has been debunked decades ago Jilllian...is there no sewer that you swags won't squeeze into in defense of the defenseless...the Zionist figures who conducted the ethnic-cleansing confessed that they expelled 800,000 Palestinians at gunpoint...put down the kool-aid...

debunking by neo-nazis doesn't count, terrorist supporter.

but nice try

How bout debunking by British broadcast monitors princess? God you are indeed lifeless slugs

An Internet jihadi troll calling others "lifeless slugs" ya gotta love it!

If the shoe fits wear it dirtbag...still a mystery to me why dullards like you, Hollie and feces-man post comments here...its never anything beyond a strangled sentence or third-grade attempts at sarcasm... and the IQ estimates literally announce themselves!!!

Speaking of shoes...dot dot dot...one thing I learned about those who boast their high IQ or intellect, they are usually among the stupidest most ignorant you'll ever come across.

Still waiting for evidence that the Ottomans who ruled the land for the last 700 years recognized a Palestine or Palestinian people.