"Palestine" to Deny Citizenship to 45% of its Pal Residents

[docmauser1]

A reminder to all well-meaning israelophiles of all denominations out there, who thinks that, once palistanians get a state of their own and all the acrobatic bending over backwards is done to service their "social, historic, economic" and somesuch "justice" absurdities, the conflict will be over and palistanians will be living happily ever after in trade and harmony with their neighbor, you are delusional.

The ambassador unequivocally says that Palestinian refugees would not become citizens of the sought for U.N.-recognized Palestinian state, an issue that has been much discussed. “They are Palestinians, that’s their identity,” he says. "But … they are not automatically citizens."
This would not only apply to refugees in countries such as Lebanon, Egypt, Syria and Jordan or the other 132 countries where Abdullah says Palestinians reside. Abdullah said that "even Palestinian refugees who are living in [refugee camps] inside the [Palestinian] state, they are still refugees. They will not be considered citizens."
Abdullah said that the new Palestinian state would "absolutely not" be issuing Palestinian passports to refugees.
Neither this definitional status nor U.N. statehood, Abdullah says, would affect the eventual return of refugees to Palestine. "How the issue of the right of return will be solved I don’t know, it’s too early [to say], but it is a sacred right that has to be dealt with and solved [with] the acceptance of all." He says statehood "will never affect the right of return for Palestinian refugees."
For years, the world has backed a Palestinian state on the grounds Palestinians are stateless people who deserve a country of their own. And now, a senior Palestinian official has announced once they have received a state, most Palestinians will still be stateless – even those who actually live in "Palestine."
But of course, the PA doesn’t want a state to serve its people’s needs; it wants a state to further its goal of destroying Israel. Hence the refugees can’t be given citizenship; that would undermine its demand to resettle them in Israel, thereby destroying the Jewish state

There you are, same old arab sweet dreams of plundering jews and all the actions in furtherance of the goal.

 

[P F Tinmore]

You are misinterpreting what he said.

 

[SAYIT]

You are misinterpreting what he said.

Really? Perhaps then you would interpret for us what Ambassador Abdullah said:

"The ambassador unequivocally says that Palestinian refugees would not become citizens of the sought for U.N.-recognized Palestinian state, an issue that has been much discussed. “They are Palestinians, that’s their identity,” he says. “But … they are not automatically citizens.”
This would not only apply to refugees in countries such as Lebanon, Egypt, Syria and Jordan or the other 132 countries where Abdullah says Palestinians reside. Abdullah said that “even Palestinian refugees who are living in [refugee camps] inside the [Palestinian] state, they are still refugees. They will not be considered citizens.”

Who would be considered a citizen in a new state of Palestine? | Mondoweiss

 

[P F Tinmore]

You are misinterpreting what he said.

Really? Perhaps then you would interpret for us what Ambassador Abdullah said:

"The ambassador unequivocally says that Palestinian refugees would not become citizens of the sought for U.N.-recognized Palestinian state, an issue that has been much discussed. “They are Palestinians, that’s their identity,” he says. “But … they are not automatically citizens.”
This would not only apply to refugees in countries such as Lebanon, Egypt, Syria and Jordan or the other 132 countries where Abdullah says Palestinians reside. Abdullah said that “even Palestinian refugees who are living in [refugee camps] inside the [Palestinian] state, they are still refugees. They will not be considered citizens.”

Who would be considered a citizen in a new state of Palestine? | Mondoweiss

What he is saying that only refugees from 1967 occupied Palestine would be citizens of a state consisting of 1967 occupied Palestine.

Refugees from 1948 occupied Palestine is a separate issue.

 

[SAYIT]

You are misinterpreting what he said.

Really? Perhaps then you would interpret for us what Ambassador Abdullah said:

"The ambassador unequivocally says that Palestinian refugees would not become citizens of the sought for U.N.-recognized Palestinian state, an issue that has been much discussed. “They are Palestinians, that’s their identity,” he says. “But … they are not automatically citizens.”
This would not only apply to refugees in countries such as Lebanon, Egypt, Syria and Jordan or the other 132 countries where Abdullah says Palestinians reside. Abdullah said that “even Palestinian refugees who are living in [refugee camps] inside the [Palestinian] state, they are still refugees. They will not be considered citizens.”

Who would be considered a citizen in a new state of Palestine? | Mondoweiss

What he is saying that only refugees from 1967 occupied Palestine would be citizens of a state consisting of 1967 occupied Palestine.

Refugees from 1948 occupied Palestine is a separate issue.

Really? Are you trying to somehow justify the exclusion of 56% of current residents of what may someday constitute a "Palestinian" state from citizenship (not to mention the 1.6 million "Palestinians" inside Israel)?

"But the state Abdullah foresees would deny equal participation, and hence fair representation at the United Nations and other international bodies, not only to the 5.3 million refugees living outside historic Palestine, as Goodwin-Gill warned, but also to nearly two million inside the 1967 territories. These comprise 45% of the West Bank’s Palestinian population and a whopping 67% of the Gaza Strip’s, excluding a total of 56% of the proposed state’s residents from citizenship. And this does not count 1.6 million Palestinians inside Israel, including hundreds of thousands of internally-displaced refugees."
Who would be considered a citizen in a new state of Palestine? | Mondoweiss

 

[jillian]

A reminder to all well-meaning israelophiles of all denominations out there, who thinks that, once palistanians get a state of their own and all the acrobatic bending over backwards is done to service their "social, historic, economic" and somesuch "justice" absurdities, the conflict will be over and palistanians will be living happily ever after in trade and harmony with their neighbor, you are delusional.

The ambassador unequivocally says that Palestinian refugees would not become citizens of the sought for U.N.-recognized Palestinian state, an issue that has been much discussed. “They are Palestinians, that’s their identity,” he says. "But … they are not automatically citizens."
This would not only apply to refugees in countries such as Lebanon, Egypt, Syria and Jordan or the other 132 countries where Abdullah says Palestinians reside. Abdullah said that "even Palestinian refugees who are living in [refugee camps] inside the [Palestinian] state, they are still refugees. They will not be considered citizens."
Abdullah said that the new Palestinian state would "absolutely not" be issuing Palestinian passports to refugees.
Neither this definitional status nor U.N. statehood, Abdullah says, would affect the eventual return of refugees to Palestine. "How the issue of the right of return will be solved I don’t know, it’s too early [to say], but it is a sacred right that has to be dealt with and solved [with] the acceptance of all." He says statehood "will never affect the right of return for Palestinian refugees."
For years, the world has backed a Palestinian state on the grounds Palestinians are stateless people who deserve a country of their own. And now, a senior Palestinian official has announced once they have received a state, most Palestinians will still be stateless – even those who actually live in "Palestine."
But of course, the PA doesn’t want a state to serve its people’s needs; it wants a state to further its goal of destroying Israel. Hence the refugees can’t be given citizenship; that would undermine its demand to resettle them in Israel, thereby destroying the Jewish state

There you are, same old arab sweet dreams of plundering jews and all the actions in furtherance of the goal.

Sounds like an apartheid state to me.

 

[sealadaigh]

A reminder to all well-meaning israelophiles of all denominations out there, who thinks that, once palistanians get a state of their own and all the acrobatic bending over backwards is done to service their "social, historic, economic" and somesuch "justice" absurdities, the conflict will be over and palistanians will be living happily ever after in trade and harmony with their neighbor, you are delusional.

The ambassador unequivocally says that Palestinian refugees would not become citizens of the sought for U.N.-recognized Palestinian state, an issue that has been much discussed. “They are Palestinians, that’s their identity,” he says. "But … they are not automatically citizens."
This would not only apply to refugees in countries such as Lebanon, Egypt, Syria and Jordan or the other 132 countries where Abdullah says Palestinians reside. Abdullah said that "even Palestinian refugees who are living in [refugee camps] inside the [Palestinian] state, they are still refugees. They will not be considered citizens."
Abdullah said that the new Palestinian state would "absolutely not" be issuing Palestinian passports to refugees.
Neither this definitional status nor U.N. statehood, Abdullah says, would affect the eventual return of refugees to Palestine. "How the issue of the right of return will be solved I don’t know, it’s too early [to say], but it is a sacred right that has to be dealt with and solved [with] the acceptance of all." He says statehood "will never affect the right of return for Palestinian refugees."
For years, the world has backed a Palestinian state on the grounds Palestinians are stateless people who deserve a country of their own. And now, a senior Palestinian official has announced once they have received a state, most Palestinians will still be stateless – even those who actually live in "Palestine."
But of course, the PA doesn’t want a state to serve its people’s needs; it wants a state to further its goal of destroying Israel. Hence the refugees can’t be given citizenship; that would undermine its demand to resettle them in Israel, thereby destroying the Jewish state

There you are, same old arab sweet dreams of plundering jews and all the actions in furtherance of the goal.

i dunno there, boss. maybe it is de rigeur for this board to not post the source and author...or to link two different articles so that they appear as one, but to me, it seems pretty deceptive and shifty. i hope to god you are a gentile, because we have too many posters in this forum reinforcing unfair, negative stereotypes of jews.

i think it may be appropriate at this time to also caution pro-israel gentile posters to be aware of this. is it fair...definitely not. is it real...well, that's just the way it is.

also, and from the the daily star article in your post, that you quoted..."Neither this definitional status nor U.N. statehood, Abdullah says, would affect the eventual return of refugees to Palestine. "How the issue of the right of return will be solved I don’t know, it’s too early [to say], but it is a sacred right that has to be dealt with and solved [with] the acceptance of all." He says statehood "will never affect the right of return for Palestinian refugees."
all he is really saying is that there is a process...sheesh. ya don't think israeli officials are going to pitch one major bitch if the 5,000,000 refugees of their own making rush into the west bank.

my compliments though. it is nice to finally see a zionist concerned about the welfare of the refugees. good on you. i think a solution to their plight, and an obvious problem for all parties, is to have the various western powers involved absorb them into their countries, with israel paying reparations similar to the way the vuctims of the holocaust were paid...well, without a middle man like the bank leuim involved. hell, i bet even the USA could absorb most of them.

somehow though, i got a feelin' your gonna squeal like a poked pig over that idea.

 

[P F Tinmore]

Really? Perhaps then you would interpret for us what Ambassador Abdullah said:

"The ambassador unequivocally says that Palestinian refugees would not become citizens of the sought for U.N.-recognized Palestinian state, an issue that has been much discussed. “They are Palestinians, that’s their identity,” he says. “But … they are not automatically citizens.”
This would not only apply to refugees in countries such as Lebanon, Egypt, Syria and Jordan or the other 132 countries where Abdullah says Palestinians reside. Abdullah said that “even Palestinian refugees who are living in [refugee camps] inside the [Palestinian] state, they are still refugees. They will not be considered citizens.”

Who would be considered a citizen in a new state of Palestine? | Mondoweiss

What he is saying that only refugees from 1967 occupied Palestine would be citizens of a state consisting of 1967 occupied Palestine.

Refugees from 1948 occupied Palestine is a separate issue.

Really? Are you trying to somehow justify the exclusion of 56% of current residents of what may someday constitute a "Palestinian" state from citizenship (not to mention the 1.6 million "Palestinians" inside Israel)?

"But the state Abdullah foresees would deny equal participation, and hence fair representation at the United Nations and other international bodies, not only to the 5.3 million refugees living outside historic Palestine, as Goodwin-Gill warned, but also to nearly two million inside the 1967 territories. These comprise 45% of the West Bank’s Palestinian population and a whopping 67% of the Gaza Strip’s, excluding a total of 56% of the proposed state’s residents from citizenship. And this does not count 1.6 million Palestinians inside Israel, including hundreds of thousands of internally-displaced refugees."
Who would be considered a citizen in a new state of Palestine? | Mondoweiss

Refugees have the right to return to their homes.

If someone who is a refugee from Jaffa is living in Gaza and Gaza becomes part of a state called Palestine, He still has not returned to his home.

Why would his refugee status change?

 

[jillian]

A reminder to all well-meaning israelophiles of all denominations out there, who thinks that, once palistanians get a state of their own and all the acrobatic bending over backwards is done to service their "social, historic, economic" and somesuch "justice" absurdities, the conflict will be over and palistanians will be living happily ever after in trade and harmony with their neighbor, you are delusional.

The ambassador unequivocally says that Palestinian refugees would not become citizens of the sought for U.N.-recognized Palestinian state, an issue that has been much discussed. “They are Palestinians, that’s their identity,” he says. "But … they are not automatically citizens."
This would not only apply to refugees in countries such as Lebanon, Egypt, Syria and Jordan or the other 132 countries where Abdullah says Palestinians reside. Abdullah said that "even Palestinian refugees who are living in [refugee camps] inside the [Palestinian] state, they are still refugees. They will not be considered citizens."
Abdullah said that the new Palestinian state would "absolutely not" be issuing Palestinian passports to refugees.
Neither this definitional status nor U.N. statehood, Abdullah says, would affect the eventual return of refugees to Palestine. "How the issue of the right of return will be solved I don’t know, it’s too early [to say], but it is a sacred right that has to be dealt with and solved [with] the acceptance of all." He says statehood "will never affect the right of return for Palestinian refugees."
For years, the world has backed a Palestinian state on the grounds Palestinians are stateless people who deserve a country of their own. And now, a senior Palestinian official has announced once they have received a state, most Palestinians will still be stateless – even those who actually live in "Palestine."
But of course, the PA doesn’t want a state to serve its people’s needs; it wants a state to further its goal of destroying Israel. Hence the refugees can’t be given citizenship; that would undermine its demand to resettle them in Israel, thereby destroying the Jewish state

There you are, same old arab sweet dreams of plundering jews and all the actions in furtherance of the goal.

i dunno there, boss. maybe it is de rigeur for this board to not post the source and author...or to link two different articles so that they appear as one, but to me, it seems pretty deceptive and shifty. i hope to god you are a gentile, because we have too many posters in this forum reinforcing unfair, negative stereotypes of jews.

i think it may be appropriate at this time to also caution pro-israel gentile posters to be aware of this. is it fair...definitely not. is it real...well, that's just the way it is.

also, and from the the daily star article in your post, that you quoted..."Neither this definitional status nor U.N. statehood, Abdullah says, would affect the eventual return of refugees to Palestine. "How the issue of the right of return will be solved I don’t know, it’s too early [to say], but it is a sacred right that has to be dealt with and solved [with] the acceptance of all." He says statehood "will never affect the right of return for Palestinian refugees."
all he is really saying is that there is a process...sheesh. ya don't think israeli officials are going to pitch one major bitch if the 5,000,000 refugees of their own making rush into the west bank.

my compliments though. it is nice to finally see a zionist concerned about the welfare of the refugees. good on you. i think a solution to their plight, and an obvious problem for all parties, is to have the various western powers involved absorb them into their countries, with israel paying reparations similar to the way the vuctims of the holocaust were paid...well, without a middle man like the bank leuim involved. hell, i bet even the USA could absorb most of them.

somehow though, i got a feelin' your gonna squeal like a poked pig over that idea.

Te underlined part is a hyper-link to the source material, genius

Or are you too busy spewing nonsense to actually check?

 

[sealadaigh]

A reminder to all well-meaning israelophiles of all denominations out there, who thinks that, once palistanians get a state of their own and all the acrobatic bending over backwards is done to service their "social, historic, economic" and somesuch "justice" absurdities, the conflict will be over and palistanians will be living happily ever after in trade and harmony with their neighbor, you are delusional.

The ambassador unequivocally says that Palestinian refugees would not become citizens of the sought for U.N.-recognized Palestinian state, an issue that has been much discussed. “They are Palestinians, that’s their identity,” he says. "But … they are not automatically citizens."
This would not only apply to refugees in countries such as Lebanon, Egypt, Syria and Jordan or the other 132 countries where Abdullah says Palestinians reside. Abdullah said that "even Palestinian refugees who are living in [refugee camps] inside the [Palestinian] state, they are still refugees. They will not be considered citizens."
Abdullah said that the new Palestinian state would "absolutely not" be issuing Palestinian passports to refugees.
Neither this definitional status nor U.N. statehood, Abdullah says, would affect the eventual return of refugees to Palestine. "How the issue of the right of return will be solved I don’t know, it’s too early [to say], but it is a sacred right that has to be dealt with and solved [with] the acceptance of all." He says statehood "will never affect the right of return for Palestinian refugees."
For years, the world has backed a Palestinian state on the grounds Palestinians are stateless people who deserve a country of their own. And now, a senior Palestinian official has announced once they have received a state, most Palestinians will still be stateless – even those who actually live in "Palestine."
But of course, the PA doesn’t want a state to serve its people’s needs; it wants a state to further its goal of destroying Israel. Hence the refugees can’t be given citizenship; that would undermine its demand to resettle them in Israel, thereby destroying the Jewish state

There you are, same old arab sweet dreams of plundering jews and all the actions in furtherance of the goal.

i dunno there, boss. maybe it is de rigeur for this board to not post the source and author...or to link two different articles so that they appear as one, but to me, it seems pretty deceptive and shifty. i hope to god you are a gentile, because we have too many posters in this forum reinforcing unfair, negative stereotypes of jews.

i think it may be appropriate at this time to also caution pro-israel gentile posters to be aware of this. is it fair...definitely not. is it real...well, that's just the way it is.

also, and from the the daily star article in your post, that you quoted..."Neither this definitional status nor U.N. statehood, Abdullah says, would affect the eventual return of refugees to Palestine. "How the issue of the right of return will be solved I don’t know, it’s too early [to say], but it is a sacred right that has to be dealt with and solved [with] the acceptance of all." He says statehood "will never affect the right of return for Palestinian refugees."
all he is really saying is that there is a process...sheesh. ya don't think israeli officials are going to pitch one major bitch if the 5,000,000 refugees of their own making rush into the west bank.

my compliments though. it is nice to finally see a zionist concerned about the welfare of the refugees. good on you. i think a solution to their plight, and an obvious problem for all parties, is to have the various western powers involved absorb them into their countries, with israel paying reparations similar to the way the vuctims of the holocaust were paid...well, without a middle man like the bank leuim involved. hell, i bet even the USA could absorb most of them.

somehow though, i got a feelin' your gonna squeal like a poked pig over that idea.

Te underlined part is a hyper-link to the source material, genius

Or are you too busy spewing nonsense to actually check?

look, MADAM. i really do not know what your major malfunction is but you really may want to check your fire next time and think before you go shooting your mouth off.

now, as to "Te underlined part is a hyper-link to the source material, genius" i am well aware that there were hyper-links. i am also aware that a lot of people do not click hyper-links, one of them seemingly being you. that was what my post was about, and something you were apparently unaware of, given your referral to them in the singular. the first two paragraphs of the hyper-linked material were from what appears to be a legitimate newspaper, albeit small and with a target audience. the third paragraph, however, was from an entirely different source, a right wing propaganda rag. the lack of spacing beteen the first two paragraphs and the third paragraph was deliberately deceptive at best, and at worst, a violation of the very same copyright laws that you, in the past, have expressed your concern about in a rather haughty manner.

now, some people may feel threatened or intimidated by what you imagine is your bully pulpit but i am not one of those inclined to cower at your abuse of whatever power or position you might imagine you have. nor am i one to tolerate without comment your foul moods.it would probably be wise on your part to clean up your act immediately.

now, if you will excuse me, i have other things to do. i will forego the obligatory tit for tat rebuke of calling you genius because i do not think you are one and if i actually cared to insult you, i would have at least shown the initiative to to come up with something a little less pedestrian "genius."

now waddle your way out of here and try not to cross my path again. oh, and check with your legal team about copyright violations when you get to where you are going, why don't you. you are in dire need, BIG TIME, of a refresher course.

thank you for your time and concern.

 

[docmauser1]

i dunno there, boss. maybe it is de rigeur for this board to not post the source and author...or to link two different articles so that they appear as one, but to me, it seems pretty deceptive and shifty. i hope to god you are a gentile, because we have too many posters in this forum reinforcing unfair, negative stereotypes of jews.
i think it may be appropriate at this time to also caution pro-israel gentile posters to be aware of this. is it fair...definitely not. is it real...well, that's just the way it is.
also, and from the the daily star article in your post, that you quoted..."Neither this definitional status nor U.N. statehood, Abdullah says, would affect the eventual return of refugees to Palestine. "How the issue of the right of return will be solved I don’t know, it’s too early [to say], but it is a sacred right that has to be dealt with and solved [with] the acceptance of all." He says statehood "will never affect the right of return for Palestinian refugees."
all he is really saying is that there is a process...sheesh. ya don't think israeli officials are going to pitch one major bitch if the 5,000,000 refugees of their own making rush into the west bank.
my compliments though. it is nice to finally see a zionist concerned about the welfare of the refugees. good on you. i think a solution to their plight, and an obvious problem for all parties, is to have the various western powers involved absorb them into their countries, with israel paying reparations similar to the way the vuctims of the holocaust were paid...well, without a middle man like the bank leuim involved. hell, i bet even the USA could absorb most of them.
somehow though, i got a feelin' your gonna squeal like a poked pig over that idea.

whatew...wa...bossss...

 

[docmauser1]

look, MADAM. i really do not know what your major malfunction is but you really may want to check your fire next time and think before you go shooting your mouth off.
now, as to "Te underlined part is a hyper-link to the source material, genius" i am well aware that there were hyper-links. i am also aware that a lot of people do not click hyper-links, one of them seemingly being you. that was what my post was about, and something you were apparently unaware of, given your referral to them in the singular. the first two paragraphs of the hyper-linked material were from what appears to be a legitimate newspaper, albeit small and with a target audience. the third paragraph, however, was from an entirely different source, a right wing propaganda rag. the lack of spacing beteen the first two paragraphs and the third paragraph was deliberately deceptive at best, and at worst, a violation of the very same copyright laws that you, in the past, have expressed your concern about in a rather haughty manner.
now, some people may feel threatened or intimidated by what you imagine is your bully pulpit but i am not one of those inclined to cower at your abuse of whatever power or position you might imagine you have. nor am i one to tolerate without comment your foul moods.it would probably be wise on your part to clean up your act immediately.
now, if you will excuse me, i have other things to do. i will forego the obligatory tit for tat rebuke of calling you genius because i do not think you are one and if i actually cared to insult you, i would have at least shown the initiative to to come up with something a little less pedestrian "genius."
now waddle your way out of here and try not to cross my path again. oh, and check with your legal team about copyright violations when you get to where you are going, why don't you. you are in dire need, BIG TIME, of a refresher course.
thank you for your time and concern.

Hilarious drivel!

 

[Hossfly]

i dunno there, boss. maybe it is de rigeur for this board to not post the source and author...or to link two different articles so that they appear as one, but to me, it seems pretty deceptive and shifty. i hope to god you are a gentile, because we have too many posters in this forum reinforcing unfair, negative stereotypes of jews.

i think it may be appropriate at this time to also caution pro-israel gentile posters to be aware of this. is it fair...definitely not. is it real...well, that's just the way it is.

also, and from the the daily star article in your post, that you quoted..."Neither this definitional status nor U.N. statehood, Abdullah says, would affect the eventual return of refugees to Palestine. "How the issue of the right of return will be solved I don’t know, it’s too early [to say], but it is a sacred right that has to be dealt with and solved [with] the acceptance of all." He says statehood "will never affect the right of return for Palestinian refugees."
all he is really saying is that there is a process...sheesh. ya don't think israeli officials are going to pitch one major bitch if the 5,000,000 refugees of their own making rush into the west bank.

my compliments though. it is nice to finally see a zionist concerned about the welfare of the refugees. good on you. i think a solution to their plight, and an obvious problem for all parties, is to have the various western powers involved absorb them into their countries, with israel paying reparations similar to the way the vuctims of the holocaust were paid...well, without a middle man like the bank leuim involved. hell, i bet even the USA could absorb most of them.

somehow though, i got a feelin' your gonna squeal like a poked pig over that idea.

Te underlined part is a hyper-link to the source material, genius

Or are you too busy spewing nonsense to actually check?

look, MADAM. i really do not know what your major malfunction is but you really may want to check your fire next time and think before you go shooting your mouth off.

now, as to "Te underlined part is a hyper-link to the source material, genius" i am well aware that there were hyper-links. i am also aware that a lot of people do not click hyper-links, one of them seemingly being you. that was what my post was about, and something you were apparently unaware of, given your referral to them in the singular. the first two paragraphs of the hyper-linked material were from what appears to be a legitimate newspaper, albeit small and with a target audience. the third paragraph, however, was from an entirely different source, a right wing propaganda rag. the lack of spacing beteen the first two paragraphs and the third paragraph was deliberately deceptive at best, and at worst, a violation of the very same copyright laws that you, in the past, have expressed your concern about in a rather haughty manner.

now, some people may feel threatened or intimidated by what you imagine is your bully pulpit but i am not one of those inclined to cower at your abuse of whatever power or position you might imagine you have. nor am i one to tolerate without comment your foul moods.it would probably be wise on your part to clean up your act immediately.

now, if you will excuse me, i have other things to do. i will forego the obligatory tit for tat rebuke of calling you genius because i do not think you are one and if i actually cared to insult you, i would have at least shown the initiative to to come up with something a little less pedestrian "genius."

now waddle your way out of here and try not to cross my path again. oh, and check with your legal team about copyright violations when you get to where you are going, why don't you. you are in dire need, BIG TIME, of a refresher course.

thank you for your time and concern.

Stow the blarney, Seal. You should be ashamed of yourself talking to a little old lady like that.

 

[sealadaigh]

Te underlined part is a hyper-link to the source material, genius

Or are you too busy spewing nonsense to actually check?

look, MADAM. i really do not know what your major malfunction is but you really may want to check your fire next time and think before you go shooting your mouth off.

now, as to "Te underlined part is a hyper-link to the source material, genius" i am well aware that there were hyper-links. i am also aware that a lot of people do not click hyper-links, one of them seemingly being you. that was what my post was about, and something you were apparently unaware of, given your referral to them in the singular. the first two paragraphs of the hyper-linked material were from what appears to be a legitimate newspaper, albeit small and with a target audience. the third paragraph, however, was from an entirely different source, a right wing propaganda rag. the lack of spacing beteen the first two paragraphs and the third paragraph was deliberately deceptive at best, and at worst, a violation of the very same copyright laws that you, in the past, have expressed your concern about in a rather haughty manner.

now, some people may feel threatened or intimidated by what you imagine is your bully pulpit but i am not one of those inclined to cower at your abuse of whatever power or position you might imagine you have. nor am i one to tolerate without comment your foul moods.it would probably be wise on your part to clean up your act immediately.

now, if you will excuse me, i have other things to do. i will forego the obligatory tit for tat rebuke of calling you genius because i do not think you are one and if i actually cared to insult you, i would have at least shown the initiative to to come up with something a little less pedestrian "genius."

now waddle your way out of here and try not to cross my path again. oh, and check with your legal team about copyright violations when you get to where you are going, why don't you. you are in dire need, BIG TIME, of a refresher course.

thank you for your time and concern.

Stow the blarney, Seal. You should be ashamed of yourself talking to a little old lady like that.

i treat people with respect when they treat me with respect, and i usually treat them with respect even if they do not treat me that way. but when they don't treat me that way, it is my call on the respect/disrespect angle, and a crap shoot...i may, or i may not.

i am not checking ID at the door, hoss. i don't know if she is little or old, and she certainly doesn't act lady like. perhaps though, if she is as you suggest, she should replace...

"When the Founding Fathers protected our right to free speech, I think that meant we were supposed to use it."

with...

"i'm a crabby, old biddy in my cups so ignore what i have to say."

now, i am going to apologise to her for this post because it is a response to you and i don't know how to avoid the subject of her post in it exactly, but i am not going to apologise for the first one. i will give her a few free shots at me in trade though for this post, and not because i think she needs mollycoddling because of her age. that would be disrespectful.

and i am not talking about it anymore because i don't like talking about people in the third person.

 

[irosie91]

Is anyone surprised? did anyone out there believe that a "palestinian state" would end the meccan religion of Imperialism and dominance and oppression and rape and murder ??? Think "CALIPHATE"

 

[Roudy]

i dunno there, boss. maybe it is de rigeur for this board to not post the source and author...or to link two different articles so that they appear as one, but to me, it seems pretty deceptive and shifty. i hope to god you are a gentile, because we have too many posters in this forum reinforcing unfair, negative stereotypes of jews.

i think it may be appropriate at this time to also caution pro-israel gentile posters to be aware of this. is it fair...definitely not. is it real...well, that's just the way it is.

also, and from the the daily star article in your post, that you quoted..."Neither this definitional status nor U.N. statehood, Abdullah says, would affect the eventual return of refugees to Palestine. "How the issue of the right of return will be solved I don’t know, it’s too early [to say], but it is a sacred right that has to be dealt with and solved [with] the acceptance of all." He says statehood "will never affect the right of return for Palestinian refugees."
all he is really saying is that there is a process...sheesh. ya don't think israeli officials are going to pitch one major bitch if the 5,000,000 refugees of their own making rush into the west bank.

my compliments though. it is nice to finally see a zionist concerned about the welfare of the refugees. good on you. i think a solution to their plight, and an obvious problem for all parties, is to have the various western powers involved absorb them into their countries, with israel paying reparations similar to the way the vuctims of the holocaust were paid...well, without a middle man like the bank leuim involved. hell, i bet even the USA could absorb most of them.

somehow though, i got a feelin' your gonna squeal like a poked pig over that idea.

Te underlined part is a hyper-link to the source material, genius

Or are you too busy spewing nonsense to actually check?

look, MADAM. i really do not know what your major malfunction is but you really may want to check your fire next time and think before you go shooting your mouth off.

now, as to "Te underlined part is a hyper-link to the source material, genius" i am well aware that there were hyper-links. i am also aware that a lot of people do not click hyper-links, one of them seemingly being you. that was what my post was about, and something you were apparently unaware of, given your referral to them in the singular. the first two paragraphs of the hyper-linked material were from what appears to be a legitimate newspaper, albeit small and with a target audience. the third paragraph, however, was from an entirely different source, a right wing propaganda rag. the lack of spacing beteen the first two paragraphs and the third paragraph was deliberately deceptive at best, and at worst, a violation of the very same copyright laws that you, in the past, have expressed your concern about in a rather haughty manner.

now, some people may feel threatened or intimidated by what you imagine is your bully pulpit but i am not one of those inclined to cower at your abuse of whatever power or position you might imagine you have. nor am i one to tolerate without comment your foul moods.it would probably be wise on your part to clean up your act immediately.

now, if you will excuse me, i have other things to do. i will forego the obligatory tit for tat rebuke of calling you genius because i do not think you are one and if i actually cared to insult you, i would have at least shown the initiative to to come up with something a little less pedestrian "genius."

now waddle your way out of here and try not to cross my path again. oh, and check with your legal team about copyright violations when you get to where you are going, why don't you. you are in dire need, BIG TIME, of a refresher course.

thank you for your time and concern.

Geez the illiterate Jew hater gets exposed, and starts babbling in tongues. What a fucking freak show.

 

[Roudy]

look, MADAM. i really do not know what your major malfunction is but you really may want to check your fire next time and think before you go shooting your mouth off.
now, as to "Te underlined part is a hyper-link to the source material, genius" i am well aware that there were hyper-links. i am also aware that a lot of people do not click hyper-links, one of them seemingly being you. that was what my post was about, and something you were apparently unaware of, given your referral to them in the singular. the first two paragraphs of the hyper-linked material were from what appears to be a legitimate newspaper, albeit small and with a target audience. the third paragraph, however, was from an entirely different source, a right wing propaganda rag. the lack of spacing beteen the first two paragraphs and the third paragraph was deliberately deceptive at best, and at worst, a violation of the very same copyright laws that you, in the past, have expressed your concern about in a rather haughty manner.
now, some people may feel threatened or intimidated by what you imagine is your bully pulpit but i am not one of those inclined to cower at your abuse of whatever power or position you might imagine you have. nor am i one to tolerate without comment your foul moods.it would probably be wise on your part to clean up your act immediately.
now, if you will excuse me, i have other things to do. i will forego the obligatory tit for tat rebuke of calling you genius because i do not think you are one and if i actually cared to insult you, i would have at least shown the initiative to to come up with something a little less pedestrian "genius."
now waddle your way out of here and try not to cross my path again. oh, and check with your legal team about copyright violations when you get to where you are going, why don't you. you are in dire need, BIG TIME, of a refresher course.
thank you for your time and concern.

Hilarious drivel!

And totally insane.

 

[patrickcaturday]

A reminder to all well-meaning israelophiles of all denominations out there, who thinks that, once palistanians get a state of their own and all the acrobatic bending over backwards is done to service their "social, historic, economic" and somesuch "justice" absurdities, the conflict will be over and palistanians will be living happily ever after in trade and harmony with their neighbor, you are delusional.

The ambassador unequivocally says that Palestinian refugees would not become citizens of the sought for U.N.-recognized Palestinian state, an issue that has been much discussed. “They are Palestinians, that’s their identity,” he says. "But … they are not automatically citizens."
This would not only apply to refugees in countries such as Lebanon, Egypt, Syria and Jordan or the other 132 countries where Abdullah says Palestinians reside. Abdullah said that "even Palestinian refugees who are living in [refugee camps] inside the [Palestinian] state, they are still refugees. They will not be considered citizens."
Abdullah said that the new Palestinian state would "absolutely not" be issuing Palestinian passports to refugees.
Neither this definitional status nor U.N. statehood, Abdullah says, would affect the eventual return of refugees to Palestine. "How the issue of the right of return will be solved I don’t know, it’s too early [to say], but it is a sacred right that has to be dealt with and solved [with] the acceptance of all." He says statehood "will never affect the right of return for Palestinian refugees."
For years, the world has backed a Palestinian state on the grounds Palestinians are stateless people who deserve a country of their own. And now, a senior Palestinian official has announced once they have received a state, most Palestinians will still be stateless – even those who actually live in "Palestine."
But of course, the PA doesn’t want a state to serve its people’s needs; it wants a state to further its goal of destroying Israel. Hence the refugees can’t be given citizenship; that would undermine its demand to resettle them in Israel, thereby destroying the Jewish state

There you are, same old arab sweet dreams of plundering jews and all the actions in furtherance of the goal.

i dunno there, boss. maybe it is de rigeur for this board to not post the source and author...or to link two different articles so that they appear as one, but to me, it seems pretty deceptive and shifty. i hope to god you are a gentile, because we have too many posters in this forum reinforcing unfair, negative stereotypes of jews.

i think it may be appropriate at this time to also caution pro-israel gentile posters to be aware of this. is it fair...definitely not. is it real...well, that's just the way it is.

also, and from the the daily star article in your post, that you quoted..."Neither this definitional status nor U.N. statehood, Abdullah says, would affect the eventual return of refugees to Palestine. "How the issue of the right of return will be solved I don’t know, it’s too early [to say], but it is a sacred right that has to be dealt with and solved [with] the acceptance of all." He says statehood "will never affect the right of return for Palestinian refugees."
all he is really saying is that there is a process...sheesh. ya don't think israeli officials are going to pitch one major bitch if the 5,000,000 refugees of their own making rush into the west bank.

my compliments though. it is nice to finally see a zionist concerned about the welfare of the refugees. good on you. i think a solution to their plight, and an obvious problem for all parties, is to have the various western powers involved absorb them into their countries, with israel paying reparations similar to the way the vuctims of the holocaust were paid...well, without a middle man like the bank leuim involved. hell, i bet even the USA could absorb most of them.

somehow though, i got a feelin' your gonna squeal like a poked pig over that idea.

Te underlined part is a hyper-link to the source material, genius

Or are you too busy spewing nonsense to actually check?

Docmauser's post is truly deceptive as Reabhloideach states especially to individuals such as myself who are not as tech savey as they probably should be, I guess I am not a GENIUS. My question to docmauser is why he did not seperate the two and provide seperate links to each so there would be no confusion, I hope that it was not a deliberate deception on his part.

I did not realize that the underlined part was from two articles until Reabhloideach pointed it out and was really confused because the last paragraph is not in line with what the Ambassador has said in the past !!!. In an article in the Daily star some time ago ( I have not been able to find it ) Abdullah states that the reason that the refugees would not be given automatic citizenship is that it would automatically void their refugee status and thus terminate their UN Right of Return. This would make all future claims against Israel for land that they were driven off of in the 48 and 67 war null and void. This would have the effect of depriving them of the right to the land or for compensation to that land something Israel has acknowledged they have at least twice before in UN resolutions 181 and 273 !!!

Maybe we should concentrate on Israel's lack of integrity and basic dishonesty instead of distorting the PA's attempt to secure the rights of the refugees.

Once again thanks Reabhloideach and I hope that I will not be fooled by that trick again !!! Also you should know that Jillian is a moderator not that I think that should effect your posts at all, just be aware of it !!!

 

[docmauser1]

Docmauser's post is truly deceptive as Reabhloideach states especially to individuals such as myself who are not as tech savey as they probably should be, I guess I am not a GENIUS. My question to docmauser is why he did not seperate the two and provide seperate links to each so there would be no confusion, I hope that it was not a deliberate deception on his part. ...This would have the effect of depriving them of the right to the land or for compensation to that land something Israel has acknowledged they have at least twice before in UN resolutions 181 and 273 !!! Once again thanks Reabhloideach and I hope that I will not be fooled by that trick again !!!

Oh, bog off!

 

[Billo_Really]

my compliments though. it is nice to finally see a zionist concerned about the welfare of the refugees. good on you.

He doesn't give a shit about Palestinian refugees or Palestinian's in general. You should read his other posts applauding ethnic cleansing, the illegal occupation, the immoral blockade, etc. Even in the OP, he tried to spin comments by the Palestinian ambassador into another "wipe Israel off the map" speech. If you want to compliment him, that's your business. I just want to offer you a little more information as to what it is you are complimenting.

i think a solution to their plight, and an obvious problem for all parties, is to have the various western powers involved absorb them into their countries, with israel paying reparations similar to the way the vuctims of the holocaust were paid...well, without a middle man like the bank leuim involved. hell, i bet even the USA could absorb most of them.

Why should they have to leave an area that has been home to them for generations?