I rest my case!

I don't see why you deny obvious facts: that the population of Jordan is largely Palestinian.


Yes, of course it is - I actually posted the stats earlier, after Roudy had claimed it was 80%!


Please drop the sniping and sarcasm - I'd rather stick to the topic.

he didn't snipe at you. and i don't see any 'sarcasm'.

palestinians ARE jordanian... the entire AREA was TRANSJORDAN until after WWII.

Do you complain that the United Arab Emirates exists? That was created after WWII, as well.

See why people think those who think like you are masking anti-semitism?

your standards aren't applied equally to the myriad of Arab countries in the region.

Only dishonest people would see Saigon's posting as masking anti-semitism. There are enough real anti-semites in these threads. No need to go and invent new ones.
 
Last edited:
It's probably around 75%, depending of course on who you count in (many Palestinians had their Jordanian citizenship taken away).

I linked an encyclopedia earlier that put it at 55%, which is going to be fairly close.

There were a lot of stories when it passed 50% for the first time - I seem to remember that was in the mid-nineties, possibly slightly earlier.
 
How about China and Tibet? How about the Polish-German borders? How about Kosovo (conquered by Nato from Serbia)? How about the Western Sahara and Morocco? How about India and Goa? ...

I agree totally on all of those...except perhaps Goa!!

There is no question that land is simply annexed by conquest in places like Tibet and Kosovo - that doesn't make it right, and it isn't always accepted by the international community either.

There is a lot of hypocricy involved in this (why don't we hear the EU or US insisting China get out of Tibet?!), but I think for most of us it is generally clear when land is simply being stolen.
 
Last edited:
I think this is the first time I have seen a Zionist poster claim that Israel was NOT created via the UN and according to international law, but was conquered and won by war.

No one else really needs to post on these threads - Roudy proves himself wrong without any help.

...that Israel was NOT created via the UN and according to international law,...

Well at least he did not use that lie.
Israel was eventually confirmed as a legal entity by the UN. Grasping at straws are we? Of course the Arabs refused and attacked and got their butts handed to them, not once, but five times afterwards.

Apparently your pastime seems to be disputing historical facts. Good luck, may Allah be with you. How's that Jews did 9-11 theory of yours going? Nowhere. Just like your Fraudestine.

Israel was admitted to the UN under the condition the it abides by UN resolutions. Israel has not fulfilled its obligation for membership.

A state must have defined borders. However, Israel has no borders so the UN recognizes Israel on the 1949 UN armistice lines that the UN specifically stated were not to be political or territorial boundaries.

There is something funny (or we could say illegitimate) about Israel's membership in the UN.
 
How about China and Tibet? How about the Polish-German borders? How about Kosovo (conquered by Nato from Serbia)? How about the Western Sahara and Morocco? How about India and Goa? ...

I agree totally on all of those...except perhaps Goa!!

There is no question that land is simply annexed by conquest in places like Tibet and Kosovo - that doesn't make it right, and it isn't always accepted by the international community either.

There is a lot of hypocricy involved in this (why don't we hear the EU or US insisting China get out of Tibet?!), but I think for most of us it is generally clear when land is simply being stolen.

It is never that simple. Welcome to the real world.
 
Well at least he did not use that lie.
Israel was eventually confirmed as a legal entity by the UN. Grasping at straws are we? Of course the Arabs refused and attacked and got their butts handed to them, not once, but five times afterwards.

Apparently your pastime seems to be disputing historical facts. Good luck, may Allah be with you. How's that Jews did 9-11 theory of yours going? Nowhere. Just like your Fraudestine.

Israel was admitted to the UN under the condition the it abides by UN resolutions. Israel has not fulfilled its obligation for membership.

A state must have defined borders. However, Israel has no borders so the UN recognizes Israel on the 1949 UN armistice lines that the UN specifically stated were not to be political or territorial boundaries.

There is something funny (or we could say illegitimate) about Israel's membership in the UN.

You do realize that nobody takes your racist lies seriously?
 
Israel independence war. Are you telling me that Zionists didn't fight the British? Then what is that King David British Military HQ that got bombed, you Jew haters keep whining about then? Fucking douchebags can't even keep their story straight.

How could Britain lose what it never owned?
Oh so 70,000 to 100,000 British soldiers were just vacationing there. And the Israelis weren't really fighting the Brits to gain their independence, they were fighting Arabs dressed as Brits. Happy now, imbecile? Ha ha ha.


1948 Arab

British forces in Palestine
There were 100,000 British troops deployed in Palestine "in two ground forces divisions, two independent infantry brigades, two mechanized regiments, some artillery units and a number of RAF squadrons".[69] The peak deployment was in July 1947, when 70,200 British troops were stationed in Palestine, supported by 1,277 civilian drivers and 28,155 civilian employees.[90] British forces, however, were gradually withdrawn in 1948. British High Commissioner Cunningham left Palestine on 14 May 1948[91] yet British forces overseeing the withdrawal remained in Palestine for several weeks thereafter, maintaining an enclave in and around Haifa and its port. Four Royal Air Force airmen were killed on 22 May when the Royal Egyptian Air Force struck RAF Ramat David, mistaking the airfield for one occupied by the Israeli Air Force.[92][93] The last British soldiers left Palestine on 30 June 1948.[94]
[edit]

Britain owned Palestine and just walked away from it without even giving it to anyone.

OK:cuckoo:
 
Israel was eventually confirmed as a legal entity by the UN. Grasping at straws are we? Of course the Arabs refused and attacked and got their butts handed to them, not once, but five times afterwards.

Apparently your pastime seems to be disputing historical facts. Good luck, may Allah be with you. How's that Jews did 9-11 theory of yours going? Nowhere. Just like your Fraudestine.

Israel was admitted to the UN under the condition the it abides by UN resolutions. Israel has not fulfilled its obligation for membership.

A state must have defined borders. However, Israel has no borders so the UN recognizes Israel on the 1949 UN armistice lines that the UN specifically stated were not to be political or territorial boundaries.

There is something funny (or we could say illegitimate) about Israel's membership in the UN.

You do realize that nobody takes your racist lies seriously?

which is why no one should pretend he's worth "debating".
 
Israel was eventually confirmed as a legal entity by the UN. Grasping at straws are we? Of course the Arabs refused and attacked and got their butts handed to them, not once, but five times afterwards.

Apparently your pastime seems to be disputing historical facts. Good luck, may Allah be with you. How's that Jews did 9-11 theory of yours going? Nowhere. Just like your Fraudestine.

Israel was admitted to the UN under the condition the it abides by UN resolutions. Israel has not fulfilled its obligation for membership.

A state must have defined borders. However, Israel has no borders so the UN recognizes Israel on the 1949 UN armistice lines that the UN specifically stated were not to be political or territorial boundaries.

There is something funny (or we could say illegitimate) about Israel's membership in the UN.

You do realize that nobody takes your racist lies seriously?

You do realize that nobody takes your third grade name calling lies seriously.
 
Israel was eventually confirmed as a legal entity by the UN.

You claimed Israel "won" the war against Britain, thus conquering the land by force.

As you know, land conquered by force does not hold legitimacy under international law, as would land upon which independence had been conferred by the UN.

So did Israel first "win" the land by force - or was independence conferred by the UN?

So mosdt countries are illegitemate then?

Not really. Conquest was not illegal until the early part of the 20th century. Now it is.

It is inadmissible to acquire land through the threat or use of force.

No land that has been conquered since then can be legally kept.
 
How about China and Tibet? How about the Polish-German borders? How about Kosovo (conquered by Nato from Serbia)? How about the Western Sahara and Morocco? How about India and Goa? ...

I agree totally on all of those...except perhaps Goa!!

There is no question that land is simply annexed by conquest in places like Tibet and Kosovo - that doesn't make it right, and it isn't always accepted by the international community either.

There is a lot of hypocricy involved in this (why don't we hear the EU or US insisting China get out of Tibet?!), but I think for most of us it is generally clear when land is simply being stolen.

It is never that simple. Welcome to the real world.

I take your point, of course, and don't disagree, but the real world of this conflict for me is not theoretical - it is driving home from work with air raid sirens screaming and wondering if my house and girlfriend were still going to be there. Of cowering in the dark with an Israeli sniper on my roof whole helicopters scanned the area for incoming militants. Of sitting down to dinner in the evening with M16s and AK47s piled in the middle of the table. Of tlking half the night a Palestinian man in Amman who wept to hear that I had just visited the town (Akko) his parents had been born in, and to know that he might never be allowed to see it.

This topic often seems theoretical from our safe homes - it rarely seems so from ground level.
 
which is why no one should pretend he's worth "debating".

Don't mistake disagreeing totally with someone to considering him not worth debating.

I disagree with Tinmore about most things, but he's fairly well informed, and a lot more polite than most.

There are a couple of foul-mouthed imbeciles on this forum who aren't worth debating and couldn't tell Ramat ha-Golan from Gefilte fish - but Tinmore isn't one of them.
 
You claimed Israel "won" the war against Britain, thus conquering the land by force.

As you know, land conquered by force does not hold legitimacy under international law, as would land upon which independence had been conferred by the UN.

So did Israel first "win" the land by force - or was independence conferred by the UN?

So mosdt countries are illegitemate then?

Not really. Conquest was not illegal until the early part of the 20th century. Now it is.

It is inadmissible to acquire land through the threat or use of force.

No land that has been conquered since then can be legally kept.

I agree with this - but I also agree with Artevelde - in the real world a lot of land is taken by conquest, and in some cases the west just looks the other way - i.e. Tibet.

I do think we should stand for justice equally and globally on this point.
 
which is why no one should pretend he's worth "debating".

Don't mistake disagreeing totally with someone to considering him not worth debating.

I disagree with Tinmore about most things, but he's fairly well informed, and a lot more polite than most.

There are a couple of foul-mouthed imbeciles on this forum who aren't worth debating and couldn't tell Ramat ha-Golan from Gefilte fish - but Tinmore isn't one of them.

he's a liar, a propagandist and a terrorist-supporter.

there is no debate.

people are entitled to their own opinions... not their own facts.
 
he's a liar, a propagandist and a terrorist-supporter.

there is no debate.

people are entitled to their own opinions... not their own facts.

Fair enough - I do respect your opinion.

But I hope you take the same approach with some of the posters here who post foul-mouthed hate speech against Arabs on a daily basis. They have more than their share of lies and propaganda, and it disappoints me more pro-Israel people don't put them in their place.
 
he's a liar, a propagandist and a terrorist-supporter.

there is no debate.

people are entitled to their own opinions... not their own facts.

Fair enough - I do respect your opinion.

But I hope you take the same approach with some of the posters here who post foul-mouthed hate speech against Arabs on a daily basis. They have more than their share of lies and propaganda, and it disappoints me more pro-Israel people don't put them in their place.

i don't 'debate' with them either. anyone who hates people for what they're born, whether it's their race, their religion, their sexuality, isn't someone i have much tolerance for.

i hope you can say the same re anti-semitic trash.
 
i hope you can say the same re anti-semitic trash.

Anti-semitism just makes my blood boil.

Anyone who really hates Jews needs to stand on that railway line at Birkenau and then ask themselves how they would feel if that was where their parents, their children and friends had died.

I am convinced most anti-semites would rethink their position if they ever went to Auschwitz.
 
So mosdt countries are illegitemate then?

Not really. Conquest was not illegal until the early part of the 20th century. Now it is.

It is inadmissible to acquire land through the threat or use of force.

No land that has been conquered since then can be legally kept.

I agree with this - but I also agree with Artevelde - in the real world a lot of land is taken by conquest, and in some cases the west just looks the other way - i.e. Tibet.

I do think we should stand for justice equally and globally on this point.

So you want to start war against just about the whole world? No thanks.

It is not the task of states to fight for justice, and certainly not globally. Let states fulfill their basic functions towards their citizens. That's difficult enough.

War and conflict are natural.
 
which is why no one should pretend he's worth "debating".

Don't mistake disagreeing totally with someone to considering him not worth debating.

I disagree with Tinmore about most things, but he's fairly well informed, and a lot more polite than most.

There are a couple of foul-mouthed imbeciles on this forum who aren't worth debating and couldn't tell Ramat ha-Golan from Gefilte fish - but Tinmore isn't one of them.

Tinmore is a racist anti-Semite.
 

Forum List

Back
Top