Way To Go Hamas

[MJB12741]

So, if Hamas says the sky is blue and I say the sky is blue. Does that mean that I support Hamas?

Of course! And its occupation© too. The sky color of the moment is irrelevant.

I now askTinmore whiich he prefers,supporting Israel or supporting Hamas?

 

[Phoenall]

Interesting that you glaringly left something out here. In your first sentence you state the facts, but from then on you lay all the blame on Israel. If both sides refuse to budge, would it not be fair to say that the Palestinians and Abbas/Hamas show no interest towards peace either and have done nothing towards moving closer?

Everyone keeps claiming that the Palestinians keep setting pre-conditions, but ignore the fact that Israel does the same (which you never seem to mention). None of these preconditions are conducive to negotiating peace.

Second - everyone, including you, keep blaming the Palestinians for lack of progress but it isn't just the Palestinians, it's Israel's actions or lack there of, that are contributing to this as well. You never seem to bring that up either.

Since Netyanahu has been in power - what specific steps has he taken to move the process forward? He seems quite happy to keep the status quo. Sharon did more than Bibi in regards to this which leads me to think Bibi does not truly desire peace and feels if he stalls long enough Israel will get everything and the Palestinians left with a permanent occupation/semi-automous status which will not reduce violence.

It is only in recent years that Israel has went in with an agenda based on CUSTOMARY INTERNATIONAL LAW as it applies to Israel. So their "pre conditions " are actually addendum brought in before the negotiations start. The one that is the most controversial to team Palestine is the recognition of Israel as THE JEWISH STATE, which Arafat had already done. All they are asking is for a reaffirmation of the letters of recognition and the P.A.s acceptance of fact.
The Palestinians go in and demand that illegal conditions be met before they will even think about any negotiations. So the talks are halted even before they begin when the Palestinian representative demands the pre conditions be met. The Israeli contingent sit there and shrug their shoulders, then say what is the point.
The Israelis agree to all peace talks and turn up with initial proposals that are just a starting point for negotiations, how many times has any Palestinian faction refused to meet and just ignored repeated requests by the International community. The next Israeli P.M. might give in to the Palestinians and go down in history as the mass murderer of Jews

Israel has always set pre conditions. They call it "pre conditions for peace". Whatever they call it - it is pre conditions and effectively halts the peace process.

No they are part of the conditions in the negotiations that need to be addressed as part of the deal. They are not like the Palestinian illegal demands that must be met in full before the Palestinians will even consider meeting to talk peace.

What illegal demands do the Palestinians make?

Right of return, eviction of all Jews from Palestine, removal of Jewish settlements on Jewish owned land, a ban on Jews visiting the Temple mount.

Not one has any standing in International Law, and in fact they all breach the current International laws and UN charters

 

[Phoenall]

It is only in recent years that Israel has went in with an agenda based on CUSTOMARY INTERNATIONAL LAW as it applies to Israel. So their "pre conditions " are actually addendum brought in before the negotiations start. The one that is the most controversial to team Palestine is the recognition of Israel as THE JEWISH STATE, which Arafat had already done. All they are asking is for a reaffirmation of the letters of recognition and the P.A.s acceptance of fact.
The Palestinians go in and demand that illegal conditions be met before they will even think about any negotiations. So the talks are halted even before they begin when the Palestinian representative demands the pre conditions be met. The Israeli contingent sit there and shrug their shoulders, then say what is the point.
The Israelis agree to all peace talks and turn up with initial proposals that are just a starting point for negotiations, how many times has any Palestinian faction refused to meet and just ignored repeated requests by the International community. The next Israeli P.M. might give in to the Palestinians and go down in history as the mass murderer of Jews

Israel has always set pre conditions. They call it "pre conditions for peace". Whatever they call it - it is pre conditions and effectively halts the peace process.

No they are part of the conditions in the negotiations that need to be addressed as part of the deal. They are not like the Palestinian illegal demands that must be met in full before the Palestinians will even consider meeting to talk peace.

Preconditions are preconditions and stall negotiations saying certain things must be met. There is no discernable difference if it is "preconditions for peace" or "preconditions to talking" - it's the same thing in the end because it means no peace process without those being met.

I too would like to know what "illegal demands" are being made by the Palestinians.

How the Israel-Palestine Peace Process Collapsed - The Atlantic

Palestinians set new conditions for peace talks to continue - Diplomacy Politics - Jerusalem Post

Halt of violence from G or the WB and recognition of Israel, wow, what unreasonable preconditions! Such an impossible impediment to peace talks. How could Israel possibly expect anyone to agree to such terms. Shame on Israel for thinking there could be any peace talk with such conditions.

How about Israel halt violence and recognize Palestine?

They have done many times, and the Palestinian terrorists decide it does not apply to them so start attacking Israeli civilians. Once the Palestinians comply with their promises then Israel will lift the blockade and occupation. So as always the ball is in the Palestinians court and they don't know how to play it.

 

[Phoenall]

It is only in recent years that Israel has went in with an agenda based on CUSTOMARY INTERNATIONAL LAW as it applies to Israel. So their "pre conditions " are actually addendum brought in before the negotiations start. The one that is the most controversial to team Palestine is the recognition of Israel as THE JEWISH STATE, which Arafat had already done. All they are asking is for a reaffirmation of the letters of recognition and the P.A.s acceptance of fact.
The Palestinians go in and demand that illegal conditions be met before they will even think about any negotiations. So the talks are halted even before they begin when the Palestinian representative demands the pre conditions be met. The Israeli contingent sit there and shrug their shoulders, then say what is the point.
The Israelis agree to all peace talks and turn up with initial proposals that are just a starting point for negotiations, how many times has any Palestinian faction refused to meet and just ignored repeated requests by the International community. The next Israeli P.M. might give in to the Palestinians and go down in history as the mass murderer of Jews

Israel has always set pre conditions. They call it "pre conditions for peace". Whatever they call it - it is pre conditions and effectively halts the peace process.

No they are part of the conditions in the negotiations that need to be addressed as part of the deal. They are not like the Palestinian illegal demands that must be met in full before the Palestinians will even consider meeting to talk peace.

Preconditions are preconditions and stall negotiations saying certain things must be met. There is no discernable difference if it is "preconditions for peace" or "preconditions to talking" - it's the same thing in the end because it means no peace process without those being met.

I too would like to know what "illegal demands" are being made by the Palestinians.

How the Israel-Palestine Peace Process Collapsed - The Atlantic

Palestinians set new conditions for peace talks to continue - Diplomacy Politics - Jerusalem Post

Halt of violence from G or the WB and recognition of Israel, wow, what unreasonable preconditions! Such an impossible impediment to peace talks. How could Israel possibly expect anyone to agree to such terms. Shame on Israel for thinking there could be any peace talk with such conditions.

The preconditions, on the side of the Palestinians include: freeze on settlements.

Is that unreasonable?

Shame on the Palestinians for thinking there can be peace talks without such conditions!

It is when they refuse to stop all their building work in the Negev and Jerusalem. And it is not a freeze on settlements it is a destruction of the settlements built on Jewish owned land and eviction of 6 million Jews from Palestine.

 

[Phoenall]

Israel has always set pre conditions. They call it "pre conditions for peace". Whatever they call it - it is pre conditions and effectively halts the peace process.

No they are part of the conditions in the negotiations that need to be addressed as part of the deal. They are not like the Palestinian illegal demands that must be met in full before the Palestinians will even consider meeting to talk peace.

Preconditions are preconditions and stall negotiations saying certain things must be met. There is no discernable difference if it is "preconditions for peace" or "preconditions to talking" - it's the same thing in the end because it means no peace process without those being met.

I too would like to know what "illegal demands" are being made by the Palestinians.

How the Israel-Palestine Peace Process Collapsed - The Atlantic

Palestinians set new conditions for peace talks to continue - Diplomacy Politics - Jerusalem Post

Halt of violence from G or the WB and recognition of Israel, wow, what unreasonable preconditions! Such an impossible impediment to peace talks. How could Israel possibly expect anyone to agree to such terms. Shame on Israel for thinking there could be any peace talk with such conditions.

The preconditions, on the side of the Palestinians include: freeze on settlements.

Is that unreasonable?

Shame on the Palestinians for thinking there can be peace talks without such conditions!

And then when it's time to talk, they are going to demand: E. Jerusalem, '67 borders, right of return

All illegal demands that have no founding in International law

 

[Lipush]

I'm shocked, I tell you

 

[aris2chat]

Till jews and jewish money began to develop the area the land was highly underpopulated. Most of the land was undeveloped and under producing, not able to generate enough income or taxes to cover the expenses of governing the land.
As more jobs were created more arab immigrated, full time or seasonal, for the employment and higher pay being offered.
In a land the size of the mandate a population of 250,000 with a good percentage which was Bedouin and moved around to find places to feed their livestock, it is easy to understand that people would consider it a land in need of a people. People to develop, to create jobs, to increase the economy, to become leaders to form a stable government, to provide infrastructure and services, to modernize the land and make it able to trade with the rest of the world.
Israel used to be a land able to support millions. Romans estimated that Jerusalem alone was populated by two million during passover. It was a land that produced oil and grains that were shipped around the roman empire.
Much of the population in the early 19th C were part of a feudal system. They were share croppers, indentured, serfs or slaves. The majority were not land owners, nor did they have sufficient funds to invest in building a country. Even at the end of the Ottoman empire and British Mandate, many would not register or pay taxes on the land to avoid service in the military. They had not loyalty to the land or the authorities trying to govern the land.
Those that owned land were eager to sell at many times the value of the land. They perfected money instead of land or statehood. Even Arafat's relative sold land in Jerusalem to the jews returning to their ancestral land. Churches and mosques sold land as well.
There might have been a small population of "indigenous " people but they were not for the most part owners of the land they lived on or worked. They could not vote, there was under educated, they held little in the way of wealth or possession. They had little identity beyond the village or tribe they might belong to. They had not national identity or sense of belonging to a people beyond perhaps arab/syrian. If you called them palestinian they would not have know what you were talking about till the mandate.
It is erroneous to believe they had some ancient identity or unity as palestinians or that they owned their homes, farms they worked or even the live stock they care for. Those that did own land or held wealth were the minority till more jobs and higher wages and opportunists came with the influx of jews and the british management of the mandate.
Just because there was a population of sorts by no means did they have the ability to become a people or a nation. Even the mosque and dome on the mount were in neglect and of little import to the locals or the muslim world as a whole.

 

[MJB12741]

We know that the overwhelming majority of today's "Palestinians" are land thieving squatters with no titles or deed whatsoever to the land they stole.

 

[MJB12741]

We know that the overwhelming majority of today's "Palestinians" are land thieving squatters with no titles or deed whatsoever to the land they stole.

The Palestinians need a Palestinian State with self determination away from Israel's brutal treatment of peace oferings, a security fence & land concessions keeping tghem in Israel. The problem is that no surrounding Arab country will grant the Palestinians any right of return back to their indigenous homelands. So where can this ideal Palestinian State be located?

 

[aris2chat]

There is a misconception that arab use of land and wells meant ownership. It might have an offense between tribes to use the well or graze on land of an enemy tribe back the day. The rise of nationalism was slow to catch on outside of the major towns. There was no sense of unity even among those that followed Lawrence against the turks. They were tribal factions that fractured when the joined governing of Damascus was needed. Arab unity was a failure in practice.
Today was see the same type of issues with the on going violence by muslims world wide. There is not identity of unity except perhaps for the weeks of the Haj. Even there we have seen terrorism, violence, death and conflict between various sectors.

 

[MJB12741]

There is a misconception that arab use of land and wells meant ownership. It might have an offense between tribes to use the well or graze on land of an enemy tribe back the day. The rise of nationalism was slow to catch on outside of the major towns. There was no sense of unity even among those that followed Lawrence against the turks. They were tribal factions that fractured when the joined governing of Damascus was needed. Arab unity was a failure in practice.
Today was see the same type of issues with the on going violence by muslims world wide. There is not identity of unity except perhaps for the weeks of the Haj. Even there we have seen terrorism, violence, death and conflict between various sectors.

If this trend continues much longer it will result in unifying all other religions against Muslims. Radical Islam has already bonded Christians & Jews like never before. Praise be to Allah.