What Kind of State in Israel?

[proudveteran06]

Ok, let's try this again, you fucking douchesack. I asked how is it different that the Pals don't allow jews on their territory and the Israelis don't allow Pals in Israel. How is that different?

I answered you ; you fucking douchsack ( probably with a prick) Take a course in reading comphrension. You are OBVIOUSLY referring to " Right of Return" and I explained it to you. What is there that you don't understand? Israel isn't asking any ARABS who live withing the " 1967 Borders" that the Arabs never recognized or respected to move. Israel isn't asking for a 100 % Jewish State with no Arabs allowed. Exactly what Palestinians are in the the 1967 Borders that were never recognized or respected? Show me evidence of Israel attempting to remove them.

Now, tell us again you fucking PRICK; Tell us EXACTLY what the Palestinians are doing to " negotiate"

So the Tinman showed that Gazans had no problem with Jews moving into an independent Palestinian state, so it's just the jews who don't want more arabs in Israel. It's ok, you lose again. Please try again soon.

I'm not referring to the Jews moving into " Palestine". I am referring to " Right of Return" which would eventually make Israel an annex to the " Palestinian State". Try again.... you loose. However, all Pro- Palestinians are loosers

 

[proudveteran06]

Ok, let's try this again, you fucking douchesack. I asked how is it different that the Pals don't allow jews on their territory and the Israelis don't allow Pals in Israel. How is that different?

I answered you ; you fucking douchsack ( probably with a prick) Take a course in reading comphrension. You are OBVIOUSLY referring to " Right of Return" and I explained it to you. What is there that you don't understand? Israel isn't asking any ARABS who live withing the " 1967 Borders" that the Arabs never recognized or respected to move. Israel isn't asking for a 100 % Jewish State with no Arabs allowed. Exactly what Palestinians are in the the 1967 Borders that were never recognized or respected? Show me evidence of Israel attempting to remove them.

Now, tell us again you fucking PRICK; Tell us EXACTLY what the Palestinians are doing to " negotiate"

Asshole,

Israel is pushing Palestinians off of their lands, inside the 1967 borders, CPT documents this, as do human rights groups, it is happening everyday!

Ethnic cleansing has been nonstop by Israel since 1948!

Israel needs to simply get the fuck out of East Jerusalem, the West Bank and Gaza for good and stop attacks upon the children and civilians of Palestine!

Israel needs to end her Occupation of Palestine!

Sherri

Asshole,

Israel is NEVER going to go back to the borders that the Arabs themselves have NEVER acknowledged or accepted or allow " Right of Return". It's that simple. Many of Israel's religious sites are in E. Jerusalem. Israel will NEVER be deprived of them again.

 

[proudveteran06]

irosie91, et al,

Yes, I don't quite understand this allegation that the US displaced "millions of Muslims."

oh the islamic version of history-----try again georgie-----the invading Moghul dogs ----left their stinking yurts in the hills and murdered more than 100 million hindus in the first 100 years of their OCCUPATION OF HINDU INDIA and they have been murdering Hindus ever since . I know your version of history-------in fact it was the first history of the Indian subcontinent I learned -----THE MOGHUL RULES ALL shit

Hinduism in India is 5000 years old-----the moghul dogs should go back to their stinking yurts in the hills and eat their rotted meat and stinking mare's milk

as to the myth of hindu aggression against muslims-----I have seen the TRUTH UP CLOSE ---lying dogs

(COMMENT)




Muslims killed 80 million Hindus to conquer India
Posted in the Islam Forum


#1
Jan 28, 2010

Judged:


5


4


3
Will Durant, the famous historian summed it up like this:
"The Islamic conquest of India is probably the bloodiest story in history. It is a discouraging tale, for its evident moral is that civilization is a precious good, whose delicate complex of order and freedom, culture and peace, can at any moment be overthrown by barbarians invading from without or multiplying within."

Koenraad Elst , the german historian writes in "Negation in India"

The Muslim conquests, down to the 16th century, were for the Hindus a pure struggle of life and death. Entire cities were burnt down and the populations massacred, with hundreds of thousands killed in every campaign, and similar numbers deported as slaves. Every new invader made (often literally) his hills of Hindus skulls. Thus, the conquest of Afghanistan in the year 1000 was followed by the annihilation of the Hindu population; the region is still called the Hindu Kush, i.e. Hindu slaughter. The Bahmani sultans (1347-1480) in central India made it a rule to kill 100,000 captives in a single day, and many more on other occasions. The conquest of the Vijayanagar empire in 1564 left the capital plus large areas of Karnataka depopulated. And so on.

As a contribution to research on the quantity of the Islamic crimes against humanity, we may mention that the Indian (subcontinent) population decreased by 80 million between 1000 (conquest of Afghanistan) and 1525 (end of Delhi Sultanate)..

But the Indian Pagans were far too numerous and never fully surrendered. What some call the Muslim period in Indian history, was in reality a continuous war of occupiers against resisters, in which the Muslim rulers were finally defeated in the 18th century. Against these rebellious Pagans the Muslim rulers preferred to avoid total confrontation, and to accept the compromise which the (in India dominant) Hanifite school of Islamic law made possible. Alone among the four Islamic law schools, the school of Hanifa gave Muslim rulers the right not to offer the Pagans the sole choice between death and conversion, but to allow them toleration as zimmis (protected ones) living under 20 humiliating conditions, and to collect the jizya (toleration tax) from them. Normally the zimmi status was only open to Jews and Christians (and even that concession was condemned by jurists of the Hanbalite school like lbn Taymiya), which explains why these communities have survived in Muslim countries while most other religions have not. On these conditions some of the higher Hindu castes could be found willing to collaborate, so that a more or less stable polity could be set up. Even then, the collaboration of the Rajputs with the Moghul rulers, or of the Kayasthas with the Nawab dynasty, one became a smooth arrangement when enlightened rulers like Akbar (whom orthodox Muslims consider an apostate) cancelled these humiliating conditions



Click here: Hinduism Defense: ISLAM’S CRIME AGAINST HUMANITY, PARTICULARLY AGAINST WOMEN

Rose,

The above is only a SMALL example of what those Vile Non- Civililized Dirty Muslims are capable of. These are ONLY with the Hindus! "G" and the rest of the filthy Pro- Palestinian posters can be in DE- NIAL all they want. Not going to change history

 

[RoccoR]

georgephillip, et al,

Ah yes, with rare exceptions (like the Palestinians), in almost every war/conflict area, there are columns of refugees that travel perpendicular and away from the forward edge of the battle area.

Yes, I don't quite understand this allegation that the US displaced "millions of Muslims."

Rocco..I was referring to the US invasions of Afghanistan and Iraq and the refugee flow they produced.

"The United Nations estimates that nearly 2.2 million Iraqis have fled the country since 2003,[1] with nearly 100,000 fleeing to Syria and Jordan each month between 2003 and 2006."

(COMMENT)

One of "many" reasons the US likes these 100 day wars (3 months) is that it puts a less of a strain on the refugee service components (UNHCR).

But, unfortunately, these very quick conventional battle scenarios give way to a very protracted post-conflict phase which are often a 10-to-30 times in duration as the war/conflict. On the US side of the house, this is because the focus on organization, training and supplies is on the "warfighter" and not the inevitability of the displaced.

It is actually easier to submit a favorable budget proposal for a weapons system and the Table of Organization to support it, than to secure funding for a Constabulary Unit that deals with post-Combat Occupation area concerns and refugees. The US is so very good at strike and annihilation capabilities, but so very bad at the administration of areas after the opposing force has been defeated. Thus, Iraq today doesn't look anything like the Iraq that was envisioned prior to the invasion. And the Afghanistan of today is a decade long struggle that is still unresolved.

Yes, I see what you mean. But when the administration has has never been able to pull-off post-conflict operations very well. That is the hidden trap behind Libya; and future trap of involvement in Syria. We should stay as far away from those entanglements as possible. All America needs in the region is --- still more enemies to blame us for helping.

Most Respectfully,
R

 

[proudveteran06]

It's obvious you have a problem with reading comprehension; Nothing to " guess" about. I never stated I " didn't like it" first of all. What I was comparing was the Double Standard and what Abbas expects of Israel which is not going to happen. I never stated that Abbas should " let Israelis" move into the " Palestinian Territory "either. Referring to " Right of Return" again? The answer should be obvious even to someone like you ( read slowly). Eventually the Palestinians will outnumber the JEWISH ISRAELIS and " Israel Proper" ( the 67 Borders will will never happen) will be annexed to the " Palestinian State". Hamas vowed to destroy Israel and that is the best way to make it happen? Can't do it from the outside? They can do it from the inside. Tell us again..... EXACTLY what are the Palestinians doing to " negotiate?" Forgot..... there is nobody home. Get it now? Of course not.

Ok, let's try this again, you fucking douchesack. I asked how is it different that the Pals don't allow jews on their territory and the Israelis don't allow Pals in Israel. How is that different?

Palestinian Prime Minister Salam Fayyad on Saturday said that Jews would enjoy freedom and full civil rights in a future Palestinian state, according to a report in the Aspen Daily News.

"Jews, to the extent they choose to stay and live in the state of Palestine, will enjoy those rights and certainly will not enjoy any less rights than Israeli Arabs enjoy now in the state of Israel," Fayyad said in response to a question from former CIA director James Woolsey at the Aspen Institute's Ideas Festival.

Fayyad: Jews can be equal citizens in Palestinian state - Israel News | Haaretz Daily Newspaper

Abbas: No Jews in Palestinian State




In 1948 and again in 1967, Israel made big steps to naturalize Palestinians living in annexed territories.

The Druze in the Golan, for example, have virtually all accepted citizenship, been given access to world-class education and healthcare for free, and volunteer for the army. They are free to travel anywhere in Israel, including the “Arab free” roads in Judea and Samaria. They have Israeli passports and enjoy every freedom given to people in the Western, democratic world.

The Palestinians living in cities like Umm Al-Faham, Haifa, Tel Aviv, and Jerusalem were all given the same offer. In Haifa, Israeli Arabs live next door to Israeli Jews in peace. I will admit that there are problems. Racism is a major issue. There is some segregation between neighborhoods, but that is no different from “Black neighborhoods” and “Mexican neighborhoods” and “White neighborhoods” in the United States. They are all given the same rights.

So why do the Palestinians treat the Jews differently?

Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas made it clear that a future state called Palestine will not be a home to Jews.


“We have frankly said, and always will say: If there is an independent Palestinian state with Jerusalem as its capital, we won’t agree to the presence of one Israeli in it.”


Try to read SLOWLY you fucking DOUCHBAG

 

[P F Tinmore]

Ok, let's try this again, you fucking douchesack. I asked how is it different that the Pals don't allow jews on their territory and the Israelis don't allow Pals in Israel. How is that different?

Palestinian Prime Minister Salam Fayyad on Saturday said that Jews would enjoy freedom and full civil rights in a future Palestinian state, according to a report in the Aspen Daily News.

"Jews, to the extent they choose to stay and live in the state of Palestine, will enjoy those rights and certainly will not enjoy any less rights than Israeli Arabs enjoy now in the state of Israel," Fayyad said in response to a question from former CIA director James Woolsey at the Aspen Institute's Ideas Festival.

Fayyad: Jews can be equal citizens in Palestinian state - Israel News | Haaretz Daily Newspaper

Abbas: No Jews in Palestinian State




In 1948 and again in 1967, Israel made big steps to naturalize Palestinians living in annexed territories.

The Druze in the Golan, for example, have virtually all accepted citizenship, been given access to world-class education and healthcare for free, and volunteer for the army. They are free to travel anywhere in Israel, including the “Arab free” roads in Judea and Samaria. They have Israeli passports and enjoy every freedom given to people in the Western, democratic world.

The Palestinians living in cities like Umm Al-Faham, Haifa, Tel Aviv, and Jerusalem were all given the same offer. In Haifa, Israeli Arabs live next door to Israeli Jews in peace. I will admit that there are problems. Racism is a major issue. There is some segregation between neighborhoods, but that is no different from “Black neighborhoods” and “Mexican neighborhoods” and “White neighborhoods” in the United States. They are all given the same rights.

So why do the Palestinians treat the Jews differently?

Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas made it clear that a future state called Palestine will not be a home to Jews.


“We have frankly said, and always will say: If there is an independent Palestinian state with Jerusalem as its capital, we won’t agree to the presence of one Israeli in it.”


Try to read SLOWLY you fucking DOUCHBAG

Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas made it clear that a future state called Palestine will not be a home to Jews.

Do you have a link?

 

[docmauser1]

Palestinian Prime Minister Salam Fayyad on Saturday said that Jews would enjoy freedom and full civil rights in a future Palestinian state, according to a report in the Aspen Daily News.

A PM of the illegal government, of course.

 

[docmauser1]

650,000 Jew inflict a Jewish State by force of arms upon 1.2 MILLION Arabs and it MOGHUL dogs who are responsible?

1.2 mln. arabs shouldn't've tried to inflict by force of arms an arab state on 650.000 jews, of course.

 

[ima]

I answered you ; you fucking douchsack ( probably with a prick) Take a course in reading comphrension. You are OBVIOUSLY referring to " Right of Return" and I explained it to you. What is there that you don't understand? Israel isn't asking any ARABS who live withing the " 1967 Borders" that the Arabs never recognized or respected to move. Israel isn't asking for a 100 % Jewish State with no Arabs allowed. Exactly what Palestinians are in the the 1967 Borders that were never recognized or respected? Show me evidence of Israel attempting to remove them.

Now, tell us again you fucking PRICK; Tell us EXACTLY what the Palestinians are doing to " negotiate"

So the Tinman showed that Gazans had no problem with Jews moving into an independent Palestinian state, so it's just the jews who don't want more arabs in Israel. It's ok, you lose again. Please try again soon.

I'm not referring to the Jews moving into " Palestine". I am referring to " Right of Return" which would eventually make Israel an annex to the " Palestinian State". Try again.... you loose. However, all Pro- Palestinians are loosers

So you agree that the Pals have a right of return but you just refuse it to them? It's a start.

 

[toomuchtime_]

So the Tinman showed that Gazans had no problem with Jews moving into an independent Palestinian state, so it's just the jews who don't want more arabs in Israel. It's ok, you lose again. Please try again soon.

I'm not referring to the Jews moving into " Palestine". I am referring to " Right of Return" which would eventually make Israel an annex to the " Palestinian State". Try again.... you loose. However, all Pro- Palestinians are loosers

So you agree that the Pals have a right of return but you just refuse it to them? It's a start.

There is no such thing as a universal right of return. If there were, much of the world would be playing musical nations. Jews have a right of return to Israel because Israeli law says they do.

 

[proudveteran06]

I'm pretty sure that the whites in South Africa had blacks around to be maids and what not also.

Want the " link?" If you were really interested in the facts you could have looked it up yourself. However, no Pro- Palestinian is ever interested in the facts.

Abbas vows: No room for Israelis in Palestinian state

By KHALED ABU TOAMEH

LAST UPDATED: 12/25/2010 17:33

PA president says US has failed to pressure J’lem, accuses Israel of ‘deception’ for blaming PA for impasse in talks.
Photo: AP
Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas announced on Saturday that when a Palestinian state is established, it will have no Israelis in it.

“We have frankly said, and always will say: If there is an independent Palestinian state with Jerusalem as its capital, we won’t agree to the presence of one Israeli in it,” Abbas told reporters in Ramallah.

RELATED:
Abbas: We reached deal with Olmert on security
Washington Watch: Settlements are excuse, not obstacle

He was commenting on unconfirmed reports suggesting that the PA leadership might agree to the presence of the IDF in the West Bank after the establishment of a Palestinian state.

“We are ready to have peace on the basis of international legitimacy and the road map, which we have accepted, as well as the Arab Peace Initiative,” Abbas said. “But when a Palestinian state is established, it would have no Israeli presence in it.”

BTW, the " Arab Peace Initiative" includes " Right of Return" Want " proof?" Ever hear of GOOGLE? There will be no response from these rabid racist Pro- Palestinians. There never is. Just hope Abbas keeps it up. There will NEVER be the " Palestinian State" that he wants.

There is no mention of Jews in this article.

No mention of Jews? Try to read

Abbas: No Jews in Palestinian State




In 1948 and again in 1967, Israel made big steps to naturalize Palestinians living in annexed territories.

The Druze in the Golan, for example, have virtually all accepted citizenship, been given access to world-class education and healthcare for free, and volunteer for the army. They are free to travel anywhere in Israel, including the “Arab free” roads in Judea and Samaria. They have Israeli passports and enjoy every freedom given to people in the Western, democratic world.

The Palestinians living in cities like Umm Al-Faham, Haifa, Tel Aviv, and Jerusalem were all given the same offer. In Haifa, Israeli Arabs live next door to Israeli Jews in peace. I will admit that there are problems. Racism is a major issue. There is some segregation between neighborhoods, but that is no different from “Black neighborhoods” and “Mexican neighborhoods” and “White neighborhoods” in the United States. They are all given the same rights.

So why do the Palestinians treat the Jews differently?

Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas made it clear that a future state called Palestine will not be a home to Jews.


“We have frankly said, and always will say: If there is an independent Palestinian state with Jerusalem as its capital, we won’t agree to the presence of one Israeli in it.”

There will be no response; There never is

 

[proudveteran06]

Palestinian Prime Minister Salam Fayyad on Saturday said that Jews would enjoy freedom and full civil rights in a future Palestinian state, according to a report in the Aspen Daily News.

"Jews, to the extent they choose to stay and live in the state of Palestine, will enjoy those rights and certainly will not enjoy any less rights than Israeli Arabs enjoy now in the state of Israel," Fayyad said in response to a question from former CIA director James Woolsey at the Aspen Institute's Ideas Festival.

Fayyad: Jews can be equal citizens in Palestinian state - Israel News | Haaretz Daily Newspaper

Abbas: No Jews in Palestinian State




In 1948 and again in 1967, Israel made big steps to naturalize Palestinians living in annexed territories.

The Druze in the Golan, for example, have virtually all accepted citizenship, been given access to world-class education and healthcare for free, and volunteer for the army. They are free to travel anywhere in Israel, including the “Arab free” roads in Judea and Samaria. They have Israeli passports and enjoy every freedom given to people in the Western, democratic world.

The Palestinians living in cities like Umm Al-Faham, Haifa, Tel Aviv, and Jerusalem were all given the same offer. In Haifa, Israeli Arabs live next door to Israeli Jews in peace. I will admit that there are problems. Racism is a major issue. There is some segregation between neighborhoods, but that is no different from “Black neighborhoods” and “Mexican neighborhoods” and “White neighborhoods” in the United States. They are all given the same rights.

So why do the Palestinians treat the Jews differently?

Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas made it clear that a future state called Palestine will not be a home to Jews.


“We have frankly said, and always will say: If there is an independent Palestinian state with Jerusalem as its capital, we won’t agree to the presence of one Israeli in it.”


Try to read SLOWLY you fucking DOUCHBAG

Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas made it clear that a future state called Palestine will not be a home to Jews.

Do you have a link?

Click here: Abbas: No Jews in Palestinian State — The Israel Situation


Of course there will not be an answer. There never is. It's O.K. for Abbas to DEMAND that even ISRAELI ARABS leave but Israel is supposed to accept " Right of Return" which would eventually annex them to the " Palestinian State?" Hold your breath till it happens; It never will.

 

[eots]

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RYXdoipaqnY&feature=g-high-rec]Israeli Soldiers Breaking The Silence on the Occupation of Palestine - YouTube[/ame]

 

[proudveteran06]

So the Tinman showed that Gazans had no problem with Jews moving into an independent Palestinian state, so it's just the jews who don't want more arabs in Israel. It's ok, you lose again. Please try again soon.

I'm not referring to the Jews moving into " Palestine". I am referring to " Right of Return" which would eventually make Israel an annex to the " Palestinian State". Try again.... you loose. However, all Pro- Palestinians are loosers

So you agree that the Pals have a right of return but you just refuse it to them? It's a start.

" Right of Return" ( which will never happen) calls for those who wants to live " with their neignbors in peace" lol something the Palestinians have no intention of doing. Hamas can't destroy Israel from the outside; they will try their best from the inside. Again; Being the Pro- Palestinian that you are you lose

 

[RoccoR]

eots, et al,

This is an interesting debate. This is one way that the counter-point should be addressed.

Israeli Soldiers Breaking The Silence on the Occupation of Palestine - YouTube

(COMMENT)

This young man seems to talk about it rationally and coherently. It is not a debate, but a single sided narrative (no counterpoint or opposing view). Yet! It opens some legitimate avenues to address and discuss.

Clearly, he points-out an inequality in the administration of Gaza and the West Bank, and the difference between how an Israeli citizen is treated versus how the Palestinian is treated.

And I believe that this is an essential initial first step. Understanding what is going on.

I think that this little video is well worth the viewing time. And it exemplifies the discussion that the Israelis have internally about the way they administer the "Occupied Territories" and treat the Palestinians.

As I've said, neither side has clean hands. And it is through rational dialog that we can bring both sides together and create solutions.

Most Respectfully,
R

 

[ima]

I'm not referring to the Jews moving into " Palestine". I am referring to " Right of Return" which would eventually make Israel an annex to the " Palestinian State". Try again.... you loose. However, all Pro- Palestinians are loosers

So you agree that the Pals have a right of return but you just refuse it to them? It's a start.

" Right of Return" ( which will never happen) calls for those who wants to live " with their neignbors in peace" lol something the Palestinians have no intention of doing. Hamas can't destroy Israel from the outside; they will try their best from the inside. Again; Being the Pro- Palestinian that you are you lose

I'm not pro-Pal, I'm pro-peace, probably the only one at this board.
And sorry to have to tell you, but if Hamas detonates a nuke on their border with Israel, they'll take most of Israel with them. On that, you lose BIGTIME!

 

[P F Tinmore]

artfulcodger,

Where did you get this nonsense?

once again Rocky, your ignorance is astounding, but you should probably be aware that this version of eventS stands in stark contradiction to the public statementS of Menachem Begin...Ezer Weitzman and Mosche Dayan---all of whom confirm Israel's role in initiating the 67 land-grab for purposes of expansion...I think these three carry a tad more authority on the matter....LMFAO!!!!!

(COMMENT)

Israel entered the conflict in '67 as a defensive measure.

Certain key points and position were taken as strategic military value. Yes they admit to that. In fact, the continued occupation of selected points are still justified for that reason.

GEN Moshe Dayan has been reported to have expressed some misgiving in the capture of the Golan Heights.

But the conflict would not have been triggered if the various Arab Forces had not been massed for attack. So there was no intent at the time of the conflict for land acquisition.

Most Respectfully,
R

THIS IS THE REASON FOR THE 1967 WAR THAT THE ARABS STARTED. RERGARDING THE GOLAN HEIGHTS SYRIA WAS USING IT AS AN ADVANTAGE POINT TO SHOOT DOWN AT ISRAELIS. SOMETHING THE PRO- PALESTINIANS WON'T ADMIT TO. DE- NIAL IS NOT THE RIVER


Between 1966 and 1967 Israel’s borders saw repeated Arab terrorist attacks and Syrian military activity.[32] On May 11, UN Secretary General U Thant leveled criticism at Syria for its sponsorship of Palestinian terrorism, denouncing those attacks as "deplorable," "insidious" and "menaces to peace."[33]

During 1965-7, Israel's armed forces staged numerous provocations along the Israeli-Syrian border area.[34] This escalation led the Syrians and the Soviets to believe Israel was planning to overthrow the Syrian regime using military force.[34] On April 7, 1967, a serious incident broke out between Israel and Syria over a cultivation problem within the demilitarized zone. Israel took military action against Syria, and eventually both sides employed artillery, tanks, and mortars.[35] During this clash Israeli airstrikes were launched a few miles from Damascus. Israel bombed both Syrian border villages, and Syrian military targets, and had refused a cease-fire proposal by the Chairman of Mixed Armistice Commission. After several hours the United Nations Truce Supervision Organization managed to arrange a cease-fire. Following this confrontation Arab governments pledged their support to Syria, but also complained that the Jordanian air force had done nothing to help Syrian planes even when they were shot down in Jordanian airspace.[36]

In May 1967, Israeli officials began to publicly threaten military action against Syria if Syria did not stop Palestinian guerrillas from crossing the border into Israel.[37] Following that, Nasser received false intelligence reports from the Soviet Union that an Israeli attack on Syria was imminent.[38][39][40][41][42] Egyptian intelligence later confirmed that the Soviet reports of Israeli force concentrations were in fact groundless,[43][44][45] but Nasser had by then already started his buildup and he feared that since a large portion of his army was already in the Sinai, a sudden callback of those forces would result in humiliation at a time when Nasser could ill afford being humiliated.[46] On May 19, U Thant called statements attributed to Israeli leaders "so threatening as to be particularly inflammatory in the sense that they could only heighten emotions and thereby increase tensions on the other side of the lines".[47] Nasser then misled the Egyptian people by perpetuating the falsehood claiming in an address on the anniversary of the Egyptian revolution, that the IDF was concentrating forces "on Syria's doorstep."[48] Israel's threats to invade Syria appeared serious to Arab leaders, however,[49][50][51] and foreign observers suspected that an Israeli strike on Syria was imminent.[52] According to Michael Oren, Nasser disregarded the counsel of his own intelligence[53] and began massing his troops in the Sinai Peninsula on Israel's border (May 16), expelled the UNEF force from Gaza and Sinai (May 19), and took up UNEF positions at Sharm el-Sheikh, overlooking the Straits of Tiran.[54][55] According to Moshe Shemesh, as Egypt and Syria shared a mutual defence pact, Nasser responded to the Israeli threats by beginning to concentrate his troops in the Sinai Peninsula according to the "Qahir" (Conqueror) defence plan. He also decided to prepare the feda'iyyun for carrying out the "Fahd 2 (Leopard) Plan" [murderous attacks] inside Israel and to coordinate military operations with Syria.[56]

The Straits of Tiran was regarded by the Western Powers and Israel as an international waterway[32][57][58] but its legal status was the subject of international controversy.[59] The Arabs believed that they had the right to regulate passage of ships while Israel, with the support of other major world powers, countered that the Arab claims were legally not supportable.[60] In 1967 Israel reiterated declarations made in 1957 that any closure of the Straits would be considered an act of war, or a justification for war.[61][62] On May 22 Nasser declared the Straits closed to Israeli shipping.[32][63] Nasser stated he was open to referring the closure to the International Court of Justice to determine its legality, but this option was rejected by Israel.[64][65] Egyptian propaganda attacked Israel,[66] and on May 27, Nasser stated "Our basic objective will be the destruction of Israel. The Arab people want to fight."[67]

On May 30, Jordan and Egypt signed a defense pact. The following day, at Jordan's invitation, the Iraqi army began deploying troops and armored units in Jordan.[68] They were later reinforced by an Egyptian contingent.

In May 1967, Israeli officials began to publicly threaten military action against Syria if Syria did not stop Palestinian guerrillas from crossing the border into Israel.

The UN has some responsibility for this conflict.

In 1949 the UN armistice agreement drew a cease fire line along the Syria/Palestine border dividing Syrian and Israeli forces. There was, however, no effort to address the question of the Israeli/Palestinian conflict. The "Palestinian question," they stated, would be addressed at a later date. Well, by 1967 there had been no effort to address that question. By 2012 there still has been no effort to address that question.

 

[georgephillip]

650,000 Jew inflict a Jewish State by force of arms upon 1.2 MILLION Arabs and it MOGHUL dogs who are responsible?

1.2 mln. arabs shouldn't've tried to inflict by force of arms an arab state on 650.000 jews, of course.

"Popular sovereignty or the sovereignty of the people is the principle that the legitimacy of the state is created and sustained by the will or consent of its people, who are the source of all political power..."

Possibly, you prefer the kosher version?

"The term 'squatter sovereignty' is used by Jefferson Davis in his book A Short History of the Confederate States of America. This term referred to the influx of new citizens in order to manipulate the ultimate sovereign votes."

Do you remember how apartheid turned out for the Confederacy?

Popular sovereignty - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

[P F Tinmore]

650,000 Jew inflict a Jewish State by force of arms upon 1.2 MILLION Arabs and it MOGHUL dogs who are responsible?

1.2 mln. arabs shouldn't've tried to inflict by force of arms an arab state on 650.000 jews, of course.

"Popular sovereignty or the sovereignty of the people is the principle that the legitimacy of the state is created and sustained by the will or consent of its people, who are the source of all political power..."

Possibly, you prefer the kosher version?

"The term 'squatter sovereignty' is used by Jefferson Davis in his book A Short History of the Confederate States of America. This term referred to the influx of new citizens in order to manipulate the ultimate sovereign votes."

Do you remember how apartheid turned out for the Confederacy?

Popular sovereignty - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The "state of Israel" was created in Palestine without the consent of the people. There was never a vote, but all indications show that the vast majority of the people were opposed to the creation of Israel.

 

[georgephillip]

eots, et al,

This is an interesting debate. This is one way that the counter-point should be addressed.

Israeli Soldiers Breaking The Silence on the Occupation of Palestine - YouTube

(COMMENT)

This young man seems to talk about it rationally and coherently. It is not a debate, but a single sided narrative (no counterpoint or opposing view). Yet! It opens some legitimate avenues to address and discuss.

Clearly, he points-out an inequality in the administration of Gaza and the West Bank, and the difference between how an Israeli citizen is treated versus how the Palestinian is treated.

And I believe that this is an essential initial first step. Understanding what is going on.

I think that this little video is well worth the viewing time. And it exemplifies the discussion that the Israelis have internally about the way they administer the "Occupied Territories" and treat the Palestinians.

As I've said, neither side has clean hands. And it is through rational dialog that we can bring both sides together and create solutions.

Most Respectfully,
R

We are agreed neither side has clean hands, yet Israeli hands are dirtied from enforcing an illegal occupation while Palestinian hands get soiled by resisting the illegal occupation.

Do you have any guesses about what might happen if the BDS movement gains sufficient strength to compel tens of thousands of "Jewish" settlers to leave the West Bank?