Palestine Today

[P F Tinmore]

RE: Palestine Today
⁜→ P F Tinmore, et al,

The Arab Palestinians OPENLY REJECTED this plan in 1947.

RE: Palestine Today
⁜→ P F Tinmore, et al,

I might believe that if you could show or explain where the borders of Palestine are.

RE: Palestine Today
⁜→ P F Tinmore, et al,

Every State has the duty to refrain from the threat or use of force to violate the existing international boundaries of another State or as a means of solving international disputes, including territorial disputes and problems concerning frontiers of States.

v/r
R

Today we uproot the fence, tomorrow the occupation.

Uhhh, that fence is in Palestine.

(COMMENT)

But since Arab Palestinian has NOT refrained from the threat or use of force to violate the existing international boundaries of another State or as a means of solving international disputes, including territorial disputes and problems concerning frontiers of States.

When did the Arab Palestinian seek a settlement of their international disputes by negotiation, inquiry, mediation, conciliation, arbitration, judicial settlement, or other peaceful means?

To my knowledge, the Arab Palestinian has not exercised the dispute resolution process either under the Principles of International Law concerning Friendly Relations and Co-operation among States or the Declaration of Principles on Interim Self-Government Arrangements.

"We have already recognized Israel's existence on the 1948 borders of Occupied Palestine," Erekat explained. He added that he made it clear to former Israeli Foreign Minister Tzipi Livni during a meeting in Munich that the Palestinians "won't change their history and religion and culture by recognizing Israel as a Jewish state."

Most Respectfully,
R

When did the Arab Palestinian seek a settlement of their international disputes

What dispute? I don't see a dispute.

(COMMENT)

The Arab Palestinians cannot have it both ways. They cannot have it both ways. It is not a game where you get to start over if the outcome is not to your liking.

The Arab League attempt in to supplant this recommendation (A/RES/181 II) through the use of "Armed Force." The conflict altered the outcome and the Arab League members took what they wanted.

Most Respectfully,
R

Holy deflection, Batman!

What dispute?

 

[P F Tinmore]

"Angels of Mercy" - Emotional Spoken Word Poem in Tribute of Razan al-Najjar by Abir Safa

 

[P F Tinmore]

 

[P F Tinmore]

 

[RoccoR]

RE: Palestine Today
⁜→ P F Tinmore, et al,

Oh, for heaven's sake. There have been dozens of ways the Arab Palestinians present some reasoning that come-off poorly, leading you to false, useless, or unsupported conclusions.

Every single day you hear about some sort of disturbance, some sort of all to arms and focus against the Israelis. And your defense today is to suggest there is NO dispute. What a circus ring of horse dung!

If there is no dispute, but there is an armed struggle, a call for Jihad, then the suggestion is that it is over nothing?

There is something amiss here; being it is more (much more) than a simply an error in reasoning, some sort of daily common error.

Holy deflection, Batman!

What dispute?

(COMMENT)

There is no deflection. I'm tackling the issue head-on. I suggest that the Arab Palestinians in the agreed upon zone identified as Areas "A" • "B" and "C" have lost the human characteristics that make them something other the cutthroat barbarians, murderer · killers · butcher · thug and homicide maniacs that they have proven themselves to be through a past history of criminal behaviors.

The Arab Palestinians of the territories in dispute, have an undisputed record Criminal Acts directed against Israel, committed with the intention of • or calculated to • cause death or serious bodily injury to the civilian population, for the purpose of perpetrating and intimidating the Israelis • in an attempt to compel the State of Israel and its citizenry to do (or to abstain from doing) some act that furthers their criminal objective.

The Arab Palestinians of the disputed territories use subjectivist fallacies when they make appeals to apply the logic that they are above the Rule of Law to justify some decades of criminal activity.

THEN, you have the audacity to say: "Holy deflection, Batman! → What dispute?

As if there has not been a conflict or dispute between the Arab Palestinians and the Israels over:

◈ Borders,
◈ Jerusalem,
◈ Refugees (right of return)
◈ Terrorist Prisoners
◈ Recognition of the Jewish State,
※ etc​

You need to check your grasp on reality. There is a dispute → you may be playing some sort of game; but there's actually a whole host of disputes, the least of which may be borders.

Most Respectfully,
R

 

[P F Tinmore]

Janna Jihad on USA Tour: Interactive workshop with the children of PACC Summer Fun Program at the Palestinian American Community Center in Clifton, NJ

 

[P F Tinmore]

RE: Palestine Today
⁜→ P F Tinmore, et al,

Oh, for heaven's sake. There have been dozens of ways the Arab Palestinians present some reasoning that come-off poorly, leading you to false, useless, or unsupported conclusions.

Every single day you hear about some sort of disturbance, some sort of all to arms and focus against the Israelis. And your defense today is to suggest there is NO dispute. What a circus ring of horse dung!

If there is no dispute, but there is an armed struggle, a call for Jihad, then the suggestion is that it is over nothing?

There is something amiss here; being it is more (much more) than a simply an error in reasoning, some sort of daily common error.

Holy deflection, Batman!

What dispute?

(COMMENT)

There is no deflection. I'm tackling the issue head-on. I suggest that the Arab Palestinians in the agreed upon zone identified as Areas "A" • "B" and "C" have lost the human characteristics that make them something other the cutthroat barbarians, murderer · killers · butcher · thug and homicide maniacs that they have proven themselves to be through a past history of criminal behaviors.

The Arab Palestinians of the territories in dispute, have an undisputed record Criminal Acts directed against Israel, committed with the intention of • or calculated to • cause death or serious bodily injury to the civilian population, for the purpose of perpetrating and intimidating the Israelis • in an attempt to compel the State of Israel and its citizenry to do (or to abstain from doing) some act that furthers their criminal objective.

The Arab Palestinians of the disputed territories use subjectivist fallacies when they make appeals to apply the logic that they are above the Rule of Law to justify some decades of criminal activity.

THEN, you have the audacity to say: "Holy deflection, Batman! → What dispute?

As if there has not been a conflict or dispute between the Arab Palestinians and the Israels over:

◈ Borders,
◈ Jerusalem,
◈ Refugees (right of return)
◈ Terrorist Prisoners
◈ Recognition of the Jewish State,
※ etc​

You need to check your grasp on reality. There is a dispute → you may be playing some sort of game; but there's actually a whole host of disputes, the least of which may be borders.

Most Respectfully,
R

The only so called disputes are Israeli talking points, i.e. there are no disputes.

 

[Shusha]

RE: Palestine Today
⁜→ P F Tinmore, et al,

Oh, for heaven's sake. There have been dozens of ways the Arab Palestinians present some reasoning that come-off poorly, leading you to false, useless, or unsupported conclusions.

Every single day you hear about some sort of disturbance, some sort of all to arms and focus against the Israelis. And your defense today is to suggest there is NO dispute. What a circus ring of horse dung!

If there is no dispute, but there is an armed struggle, a call for Jihad, then the suggestion is that it is over nothing?

There is something amiss here; being it is more (much more) than a simply an error in reasoning, some sort of daily common error.

Holy deflection, Batman!

What dispute?

(COMMENT)

There is no deflection. I'm tackling the issue head-on. I suggest that the Arab Palestinians in the agreed upon zone identified as Areas "A" • "B" and "C" have lost the human characteristics that make them something other the cutthroat barbarians, murderer · killers · butcher · thug and homicide maniacs that they have proven themselves to be through a past history of criminal behaviors.

The Arab Palestinians of the territories in dispute, have an undisputed record Criminal Acts directed against Israel, committed with the intention of • or calculated to • cause death or serious bodily injury to the civilian population, for the purpose of perpetrating and intimidating the Israelis • in an attempt to compel the State of Israel and its citizenry to do (or to abstain from doing) some act that furthers their criminal objective.

The Arab Palestinians of the disputed territories use subjectivist fallacies when they make appeals to apply the logic that they are above the Rule of Law to justify some decades of criminal activity.

THEN, you have the audacity to say: "Holy deflection, Batman! → What dispute?

As if there has not been a conflict or dispute between the Arab Palestinians and the Israels over:

◈ Borders,
◈ Jerusalem,
◈ Refugees (right of return)
◈ Terrorist Prisoners
◈ Recognition of the Jewish State,
※ etc​

You need to check your grasp on reality. There is a dispute → you may be playing some sort of game; but there's actually a whole host of disputes, the least of which may be borders.

Most Respectfully,
R

The only so called disputes are Israeli talking points, i.e. there are no disputes.

IOW, if you erase the Jewish people entirely there is no dispute.

How’s that answer on justice for the Jewish people coming along, Tinmore?

 

[USAF 2023]

on justice:

First, what justice is NOT: Justice does not mean the restoration of any particular conditions at any particular point in time. Restoration of this sort accepts the narrative that one particular, singular point of time is the "right' place or state of being, to the exclusion of all other possibilities. It is neither just to attempt to restore the Jewish people to Israel of 4000 years ago, nor to attempt to restore the Arabs to a point of time at the end of the Ottoman Empire.

Justice for individuals is vastly different from justice for peoples. And the achievement of justice for the one often comes at the cost of the achievement of justice for the other.

Justice is not an objective state. It is highly subjective and dependent on what each side is seeking in order to "make it right".

No legal benefit can be derived from illegal activities.

Nobody has the right to violate the rights of others.

Those are the principles I go by.

Well, yes. But you only apply those principles to your side. You literally define "illegal" activities based on who is performing the activity. If Arabs are "resisting" -- legal. If Jews are "resisting" -- apartheid, illegal and all sorts of other ugliness.

You have no capability of understanding justice as a nuanced balanced concept. Justice, for you, is black and white Arabs good, Jews evil. That is not justice. That's racism.

Settler colonialism is an aggression against the Palestinians that started over a hundred years ago.

What would justice for the Jewish people look like?

Abbas Makes It Official: Israel is Arab Palestine

You don't really expect to get an answer, do you?

 

[Shusha]

You don't really expect to get an answer, do you?

Of course not. He can't ever acknowledge even the existence of the Jewish people. The moment he does, he is on the slippery slope and every last one of his arguments and comments is blown to pieces.

 

[USAF 2023]

You don't really expect to get an answer, do you?

Of course not. He can't ever acknowledge even the existence of the Jewish people. The moment he does, he is on the slippery slope and every last one of his arguments and comments is blown to pieces.

Hey, according to him, REAL JEWS don’t believe Israel has the Right to Exist. What could be more stupid and ignorant then him putting a cartoon up where Hasidic Jews and Hamas actually AGREE on this issue?

 

[P F Tinmore]

Deflection city.

 

[P F Tinmore]

 

[Shusha]

Deflection city.

Yep, you sure are deflecting from my question.

You are insistent that the Arab Palestinians have a right to some sort of justice. What do you mean by justice? What would justice look like for the Arab Palestinians? How would the international community be able to measure that justice had been achieved?

What would justice for the Jewish people look like?

 

[P F Tinmore]

Deflection city.

Yep, you sure are deflecting from my question.

You are insistent that the Arab Palestinians have a right to some sort of justice. What do you mean by justice? What would justice look like for the Arab Palestinians? How would the international community be able to measure that justice had been achieved?

What would justice for the Jewish people look like?

You haven't been following my posts.

 

[Shusha]

Deflection city.

Yep, you sure are deflecting from my question.

You are insistent that the Arab Palestinians have a right to some sort of justice. What do you mean by justice? What would justice look like for the Arab Palestinians? How would the international community be able to measure that justice had been achieved?

What would justice for the Jewish people look like?

You haven't been following my posts.

You haven’t responded to my question. What would justice for either or both people look like?

You brought up justice. Seems the least you can do is clarify what it means to you.

 

[Shusha]

Deflection city.

Yep, you sure are deflecting from my question.

You are insistent that the Arab Palestinians have a right to some sort of justice. What do you mean by justice? What would justice look like for the Arab Palestinians? How would the international community be able to measure that justice had been achieved?

What would justice for the Jewish people look like?

You haven't been following my posts.

Also most of your posts are nonsensical.

 

[USAF 2023]

Deflection city.

You’re the one who’s deflecting. Refusing to acknowledge the PLO formal declaration that Jews are not entitled to be at the Western Wall for starters

 

[USAF 2023]

Deflection city.

Yep, you sure are deflecting from my question.

You are insistent that the Arab Palestinians have a right to some sort of justice. What do you mean by justice? What would justice look like for the Arab Palestinians? How would the international community be able to measure that justice had been achieved?

What would justice for the Jewish people look like?

You haven't been following my posts.

You haven’t responded to my question. What would justice for either or both people look like?

You brought up justice. Seems the least you can do is clarify what it means to you.

He’s going to accuse you of deflection.

 

[P F Tinmore]

Deflection city.

Yep, you sure are deflecting from my question.

You are insistent that the Arab Palestinians have a right to some sort of justice. What do you mean by justice? What would justice look like for the Arab Palestinians? How would the international community be able to measure that justice had been achieved?

What would justice for the Jewish people look like?

You haven't been following my posts.

Also most of your posts are nonsensical.

Don't blame your reading comprehension problems on me.