A message from Canada to the Palestinians

[Hossfly]

Did you find any inaccuracies?

Yeah. It's bullshit. I'm a Canadian. The Conservative government of Canada has been extremely supportive of Palestine.

How's $300 freaking million of our tax dollars going Palestine?
From our government website.

Support for the Palestinians

Canada recognizes the Palestinian right to self-determination and supports the creation of a sovereign, independent, viable, democratic and territorially contiguous Palestinian state, as part of a comprehensive, just and lasting peace settlement.

Canada recognizes the Palestinian Authority (PA) as the governmental entity in the West Bank and Gaza. Canada also recognizes the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO) as the principal representative of the Palestinian people Canada continues to support Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas and is working with the government led by Prime Minister Salem Fayyad in terms of much needed reform.

Working with its partners and through the United Nations, its agencies and other organizations, Canada continues to support and respond to the humanitarian and development needs of the Palestinian people. At the Paris Donors Conference in December 2007, Canada announced a commitment of $300 million over 5 years towards improving Palestinian security, governance and prosperity.

Canadian Policy on Key Issues in the Israeli-Palestinian Conflict

Canada continues to support Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas and is working with the government led by Prime Minister Salem Fayyad in terms of much needed reform.

Abbas left the government in June of 2007 and Fayyad has never been the prime minister of Palestine.

What are the two men currently doing?

 

[P F Tinmore]

Yeah. It's bullshit. I'm a Canadian. The Conservative government of Canada has been extremely supportive of Palestine.

How's $300 freaking million of our tax dollars going Palestine?
From our government website.

Support for the Palestinians

Canada recognizes the Palestinian right to self-determination and supports the creation of a sovereign, independent, viable, democratic and territorially contiguous Palestinian state, as part of a comprehensive, just and lasting peace settlement.

Canada recognizes the Palestinian Authority (PA) as the governmental entity in the West Bank and Gaza. Canada also recognizes the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO) as the principal representative of the Palestinian people Canada continues to support Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas and is working with the government led by Prime Minister Salem Fayyad in terms of much needed reform.

Working with its partners and through the United Nations, its agencies and other organizations, Canada continues to support and respond to the humanitarian and development needs of the Palestinian people. At the Paris Donors Conference in December 2007, Canada announced a commitment of $300 million over 5 years towards improving Palestinian security, governance and prosperity.

Canadian Policy on Key Issues in the Israeli-Palestinian Conflict

Canada continues to support Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas and is working with the government led by Prime Minister Salem Fayyad in terms of much needed reform.

Abbas left the government in June of 2007 and Fayyad has never been the prime minister of Palestine.

What are the two men currently doing?

Pretending to be the government and sucking money out of dupes.

 

[tinydancer]

Did you find any inaccuracies?

Yeah. It's bullshit. I'm a Canadian. The Conservative government of Canada has been extremely supportive of Palestine.

How's $300 freaking million of our tax dollars going Palestine?
From our government website.

Support for the Palestinians

Canada recognizes the Palestinian right to self-determination and supports the creation of a sovereign, independent, viable, democratic and territorially contiguous Palestinian state, as part of a comprehensive, just and lasting peace settlement.

Canada recognizes the Palestinian Authority (PA) as the governmental entity in the West Bank and Gaza. Canada also recognizes the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO) as the principal representative of the Palestinian people Canada continues to support Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas and is working with the government led by Prime Minister Salem Fayyad in terms of much needed reform.

Working with its partners and through the United Nations, its agencies and other organizations, Canada continues to support and respond to the humanitarian and development needs of the Palestinian people. At the Paris Donors Conference in December 2007, Canada announced a commitment of $300 million over 5 years towards improving Palestinian security, governance and prosperity.

Canadian Policy on Key Issues in the Israeli-Palestinian Conflict

Canada continues to support Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas and is working with the government led by Prime Minister Salem Fayyad in terms of much needed reform.

Abbas left the government in June of 2007 and Fayyad has never been the prime minister of Palestine.

The website doesn't claim that. He's Prime Minister of the PNA.

Salam Fayyad (Arabic: سلام فياض*, Salām Fayāḍ; born 1952) is a Palestinian politician and Prime Minister of the Palestinian National Authority.

Is wiki wrong?

And he's highly respected.

Management of the West Bank

Salaam Fayyad won international and domestic approval for his management of the West Bank. The World Bank credited him with making substantial improvements in Palestinian state institutions.

A polling in November of 2009 showed that 60.7% of Palestinians credited his government with improving the economy of the West Bank; 61.9% faulted Hamas for the deterioration in the economy of Gaza.

54.4% of Palestinians believed that Fayyad's government is superior to the Hamas government. 57.1% of Palestinians believed that Fayyad's government advanced reforms of the Palestinian Authority, 52% believe corruption decreased and 48% believed that security improved under his governance

Salam Fayyad - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

[tinydancer]

You're not offering any sources much less reliable ones. What you say does not address the specific points given in my source (which linked to other sources) - are you claiming they are all false?

Your links are unreliable and bias, but if you do your own research you will find what I have said is correct.

The best authorities, rather than the journalists and authors of books and other hearsay are the people who were actually present at the Camp David summit, which were President Clinton, Ehud Barak, Arafat and Dennis Ross.


Clinton blamed Arafat for the failure of the talks, stating "I regret that in 2000 Arafat missed the oportunity to bring that nation into being". Dennis Ross said "Arafat was unwilling to sing a final deal and the ultimate reason is that Arafat really wanted a one state solution [ie] a single Arab state including Gaza the West Bank and Israel".

Barak himself stated that he had offered Arafat more than 91% of the West Bank and all of the Gaza strip, with other compensation going to the Palestinians.

You must remember that Arafat did not even proposed a counter or final offer .... he merely ended negotiations.

Had he been serious, which of course he wasn't he probably would achieved a much better result for the Palestinians.

Anyone feel like believing President Clinton? He was there.

In his own words. In the very liberal New York Times blaming Arafat for the failure.

IMPASSE AT CAMP DAVID: THE OVERVIEW; CLINTON ENDS DEADLOCKED PEACE TALKS
By JANE PERLEZ
Published: July 26, 2000


Print

At the end of two weeks of marathon negotiations with the leaders of Israel and the Palestinians, a visibly fatigued President Clinton announced today that they were unable to reach an agreement ''at this time.''

The president and other American mediators made clear that it was Yasir Arafat, the Palestinian leader, who balked in the end, and by all accounts the issue was Jerusalem, the Holy City both Israelis and Palestinians claim as their sacred capital.

Speaking at the White House, Mr. Clinton singled out the Israeli prime minister, Ehud Barak, for his readiness to make hard compromises.

''I would be making a mistake not to praise Barak, because I think he took a big risk,'' the president said. ''The prime minister moved forward more from his initial position than Chairman Arafat, particularly surrounding the question of Jerusalem.''

IMPASSE AT CAMP DAVID: THE OVERVIEW; CLINTON ENDS DEADLOCKED PEACE TALKS - New York Times

The following corroborates the aforementioned this is threee diferent sources all stating essentially the same thing.

Shlomo Ben-Ami was Israel's top negotiator during the July 2000 Camp David summit. In the following excerpt from an interview he gave in Ha'aretz (September 13, 2001), Ben-Ami reflects on the summit and his subsequent conclusions about Palestinian intentions. Question: Didn't the Palestinians make a counterproposal? Answer: "No. And that is the heart of the matter. Never, in the negotiations between us and the Palestinians, was there a Palestinian counterproposal. There never was and there never will be. So the Israeli negotiator always finds himself in a dilemma: Either I get up and walk out because these guys aren't ready to put forward proposals of their own, or I make another concession. In the end, even the most moderate negotiator reaches a point where he understands that there is no end to it."
Insider Reflects on Failure of 2000 Camp David Summit

Ben-Ami's Camp David Diaries

It was Arafat's screw up. Turning down 97%. Turning down Gaza.

From Clinton's autobiography:

On the twenty-seventh, Barak’s cabinet endorsed the parameters with reservations, but all their reservations were within the parameters, and therefore subject to negotiations anyway.

It was historic: an Israeli government had said that to get peace, there would be a Palestinian state in roughly 97% of the West Bank, counting the swap, and all of Gaza where Israel also had settlements.

The ball was in Arafat’s court.

I was calling other Arab leaders daily to urge them to pressure Arafat to say yes. They were all impressed with Israel’s acceptance and told me they believed Arafat should take the deal.

I have no way of knowing what they told him, though the Saudi ambassador, Prince Bandar, later told me he and Crown Price Abdullah had the distinct impression Arafat was going to accept the parameters.

On the twenty-ninth, Dennis Ross met with Abu Ala, whom we all respected, to make sure Arafat understood the consequences of rejection.

I would be gone. Ross would be gone. Barak would lose the upcoming election to Sharon. Bush wouldn’t want to jump in after I had invested so much and failed.

I still didn’t believe Arafat would make such a colossal mistake.

Bill Clinton Reflects on Camp David Summit (2000)

 

[P F Tinmore]

Yeah. It's bullshit. I'm a Canadian. The Conservative government of Canada has been extremely supportive of Palestine.

How's $300 freaking million of our tax dollars going Palestine?
From our government website.

Support for the Palestinians

Canada recognizes the Palestinian right to self-determination and supports the creation of a sovereign, independent, viable, democratic and territorially contiguous Palestinian state, as part of a comprehensive, just and lasting peace settlement.

Canada recognizes the Palestinian Authority (PA) as the governmental entity in the West Bank and Gaza. Canada also recognizes the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO) as the principal representative of the Palestinian people Canada continues to support Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas and is working with the government led by Prime Minister Salem Fayyad in terms of much needed reform.

Working with its partners and through the United Nations, its agencies and other organizations, Canada continues to support and respond to the humanitarian and development needs of the Palestinian people. At the Paris Donors Conference in December 2007, Canada announced a commitment of $300 million over 5 years towards improving Palestinian security, governance and prosperity.

Canadian Policy on Key Issues in the Israeli-Palestinian Conflict

Canada continues to support Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas and is working with the government led by Prime Minister Salem Fayyad in terms of much needed reform.

Abbas left the government in June of 2007 and Fayyad has never been the prime minister of Palestine.

The website doesn't claim that. He's Prime Minister of the PNA.

Salam Fayyad (Arabic: سلام فياض*, Salām Fayāḍ; born 1952) is a Palestinian politician and Prime Minister of the Palestinian National Authority.

Is wiki wrong?

And he's highly respected.

Management of the West Bank

Salaam Fayyad won international and domestic approval for his management of the West Bank. The World Bank credited him with making substantial improvements in Palestinian state institutions.

A polling in November of 2009 showed that 60.7% of Palestinians credited his government with improving the economy of the West Bank; 61.9% faulted Hamas for the deterioration in the economy of Gaza.

54.4% of Palestinians believed that Fayyad's government is superior to the Hamas government. 57.1% of Palestinians believed that Fayyad's government advanced reforms of the Palestinian Authority, 52% believe corruption decreased and 48% believed that security improved under his governance

Salam Fayyad - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

From your link.

Anis al-Qasem, a constitutional lawyer who drafted the Basic Law, is among those who publicly declared the appointment of Fayyad to be illegal.

Neither Fayyad no any of his cabinet have been approved by the parliament as their constitution requires.

Abbas left the legal government in 2007 and appointed an illegal government.

 

[Hossfly]

Abbas left the government in June of 2007 and Fayyad has never been the prime minister of Palestine.

What are the two men currently doing?

Pretending to be the government and sucking money out of dupes.

Who is currently sitting in the President's chair? The PMs chair? Who sits in them?

 

[Roudy]

You are correct!

The Palestinians were also offered by Ehud Barak a very generous peace settlement at Camp David in 2000, but of course this was rejected by Arafat because the Palestinians won't settle for just a two state solution, what they really want is one state solution!!! that is all of Gaza, the West bank and Israel!

PALESTINIANS = ETERNAL TROUBLEMAKERS

....was it so generous?

The Myth of the Generous Offer

Although some people describe Israel's Camp David proposal as practically a return to the 1967 borders, it was far from that. Under the plan, Israel would have withdrawn completely from the small Gaza Strip. But it would annex strategically important and highly valuable sections of the West Bank--while retaining "security control" over other parts--that would have made it impossible for the Palestinians to travel or trade freely within their own state without the permission of the Israeli government (Political Science Quarterly, 6/22/01; New York Times, 7/26/01; Report on Israeli Settlement in the Occupied Territories, 9-10/00; Robert Malley, New York Review of Books, 8/9/01).

The annexations and security arrangements would divide the West Bank into three disconnected cantons. In exchange for taking fertile West Bank lands that happen to contain most of the region's scarce water aquifers, Israel offered to give up a piece of its own territory in the Negev Desert--about one-tenth the size of the land it would annex--including a former toxic waste dump.

Because of the geographic placement of Israel’s proposed West Bank annexations, Palestinians living in their new "independent state" would be forced to cross Israeli territory every time they traveled or shipped goods from one section of the West Bank to another, and Israel could close those routes at will. Israel would also retain a network of so-called "bypass roads" that would crisscross the Palestinian state while remaining sovereign Israeli territory, further dividing the West Bank.

Israel was also to have kept "security control" for an indefinite period of time over the Jordan Valley, the strip of territory that forms the border between the West Bank and neighboring Jordan. Palestine would not have free access to its own international borders with Jordan and Egypt--putting Palestinian trade, and therefore its economy, at the mercy of the Israeli military.

Had Arafat agreed to these arrangements, the Palestinians would have permanently locked in place many of the worst aspects of the very occupation they were trying to bring to an end. For at Camp David, Israel also demanded that Arafat sign an "end-of-conflict" agreement stating that the decades-old war between Israel and the Palestinians was over and waiving all further claims against Israel.

If the positions were reversed - would you have expected Israel to agree to such terms?

No sane person would.

That website is not as "fair" you one would think, here's another article on it's homepage. I wouldn't trust it at all. Especially over individuals in the US State Dept. who were sitting in at the negotiations:

In Death as in Life, Chávez Target of Media Scorn

Venezuela's left-wing populist president Hugo Chávez died on Tuesday, March 5, after a two-year battle with cancer. If world leaders were judged by the sheer volume of corporate media vitriol and misinformation about their policies, Chávez would be in a class of his own.
Shortly after Chávez won his first election in 1998, the U.S. government deemed him a threat to U.S. interests--an image U.S. media eagerly played up. When a coup engineered by Venezuelan business and media elites removed Chávez from power, many leading U.S outlets praised the move (Extra!, 6/02). The New York Times (4/13/02), calling it a "resignation," declared that "Venezuelan democracy is no longer threatened by a would-be dictator." The Chicago Tribune (4/14/02) cheered the removal of a leader who had been "praising Osama bin Laden"--an absurdly false charge.

In reporting Chávez's death, little had changed. "Venezuela Bully Chávez Is Dead," read the New York Post's front page (3/6/13); "Death of a Demogogue" was on Time's home page (3/6/13). CNN host Anderson Cooper (3/5/13) declared it was "the death of a world leader who made America see red, as in Fidel Castro red, Venezuela's socialist president, Hugo Chávez."
"The words 'Venezuelan strongman' so often preceded his name, and for good reason," declared NBC Nightly News host Brian Williams (3/5/13); on ABC World News (3/5/13), viewers were told that "many Americans viewed him as a dictator." That would be especially true if those Americans consumed corporate media.

 

[tinydancer]

Abbas left the government in June of 2007 and Fayyad has never been the prime minister of Palestine.

The website doesn't claim that. He's Prime Minister of the PNA.

Salam Fayyad (Arabic: سلام فياض*, Salām Fayāḍ; born 1952) is a Palestinian politician and Prime Minister of the Palestinian National Authority.

Is wiki wrong?

And he's highly respected.

Management of the West Bank

Salaam Fayyad won international and domestic approval for his management of the West Bank. The World Bank credited him with making substantial improvements in Palestinian state institutions.

A polling in November of 2009 showed that 60.7% of Palestinians credited his government with improving the economy of the West Bank; 61.9% faulted Hamas for the deterioration in the economy of Gaza.

54.4% of Palestinians believed that Fayyad's government is superior to the Hamas government. 57.1% of Palestinians believed that Fayyad's government advanced reforms of the Palestinian Authority, 52% believe corruption decreased and 48% believed that security improved under his governance

Salam Fayyad - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

From your link.

Anis al-Qasem, a constitutional lawyer who drafted the Basic Law, is among those who publicly declared the appointment of Fayyad to be illegal.

Neither Fayyad no any of his cabinet have been approved by the parliament as their constitution requires.

Abbas left the legal government in 2007 and appointed an illegal government.

What's your point? Many governments refuse to recognize Hamas. It's a dog's breakfast in Palestine. I personally hate it when any government has a President and a Prime Minister and then a million other top dogs.

My point was strictly to give a link to show the Canuck's support for Palestine. Including cash.

 

[P F Tinmore]

You are correct!

The Palestinians were also offered by Ehud Barak a very generous peace settlement at Camp David in 2000, but of course this was rejected by Arafat because the Palestinians won't settle for just a two state solution, what they really want is one state solution!!! that is all of Gaza, the West bank and Israel!

PALESTINIANS = ETERNAL TROUBLEMAKERS

....was it so generous?

The Myth of the Generous Offer

Although some people describe Israel's Camp David proposal as practically a return to the 1967 borders, it was far from that. Under the plan, Israel would have withdrawn completely from the small Gaza Strip. But it would annex strategically important and highly valuable sections of the West Bank--while retaining "security control" over other parts--that would have made it impossible for the Palestinians to travel or trade freely within their own state without the permission of the Israeli government (Political Science Quarterly, 6/22/01; New York Times, 7/26/01; Report on Israeli Settlement in the Occupied Territories, 9-10/00; Robert Malley, New York Review of Books, 8/9/01).

The annexations and security arrangements would divide the West Bank into three disconnected cantons. In exchange for taking fertile West Bank lands that happen to contain most of the region's scarce water aquifers, Israel offered to give up a piece of its own territory in the Negev Desert--about one-tenth the size of the land it would annex--including a former toxic waste dump.

Because of the geographic placement of Israel’s proposed West Bank annexations, Palestinians living in their new "independent state" would be forced to cross Israeli territory every time they traveled or shipped goods from one section of the West Bank to another, and Israel could close those routes at will. Israel would also retain a network of so-called "bypass roads" that would crisscross the Palestinian state while remaining sovereign Israeli territory, further dividing the West Bank.

Israel was also to have kept "security control" for an indefinite period of time over the Jordan Valley, the strip of territory that forms the border between the West Bank and neighboring Jordan. Palestine would not have free access to its own international borders with Jordan and Egypt--putting Palestinian trade, and therefore its economy, at the mercy of the Israeli military.

Had Arafat agreed to these arrangements, the Palestinians would have permanently locked in place many of the worst aspects of the very occupation they were trying to bring to an end. For at Camp David, Israel also demanded that Arafat sign an "end-of-conflict" agreement stating that the decades-old war between Israel and the Palestinians was over and waiving all further claims against Israel.

If the positions were reversed - would you have expected Israel to agree to such terms?

No sane person would.

That website is not as "fair" you one would think, here's another article on it's homepage. I wouldn't trust it at all. Especially over individuals in the US State Dept. who were sitting in at the negotiations:

In Death as in Life, Chávez Target of Media Scorn

Venezuela's left-wing populist president Hugo Chávez died on Tuesday, March 5, after a two-year battle with cancer. If world leaders were judged by the sheer volume of corporate media vitriol and misinformation about their policies, Chávez would be in a class of his own.
Shortly after Chávez won his first election in 1998, the U.S. government deemed him a threat to U.S. interests--an image U.S. media eagerly played up. When a coup engineered by Venezuelan business and media elites removed Chávez from power, many leading U.S outlets praised the move (Extra!, 6/02). The New York Times (4/13/02), calling it a "resignation," declared that "Venezuelan democracy is no longer threatened by a would-be dictator." The Chicago Tribune (4/14/02) cheered the removal of a leader who had been "praising Osama bin Laden"--an absurdly false charge.

In reporting Chávez's death, little had changed. "Venezuela Bully Chávez Is Dead," read the New York Post's front page (3/6/13); "Death of a Demogogue" was on Time's home page (3/6/13). CNN host Anderson Cooper (3/5/13) declared it was "the death of a world leader who made America see red, as in Fidel Castro red, Venezuela's socialist president, Hugo Chávez."
"The words 'Venezuelan strongman' so often preceded his name, and for good reason," declared NBC Nightly News host Brian Williams (3/5/13); on ABC World News (3/5/13), viewers were told that "many Americans viewed him as a dictator." That would be especially true if those Americans consumed corporate media.

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Id--ZFtjR5c]The Revolution Will Not Be Televised - Chavez: Inside the Coup - YouTube[/ame]

 

[Roudy]

....was it so generous?

The Myth of the Generous Offer



If the positions were reversed - would you have expected Israel to agree to such terms?

No sane person would.

That website is not as "fair" you one would think, here's another article on it's homepage. I wouldn't trust it at all. Especially over individuals in the US State Dept. who were sitting in at the negotiations:

In Death as in Life, Chávez Target of Media Scorn

Venezuela's left-wing populist president Hugo Chávez died on Tuesday, March 5, after a two-year battle with cancer. If world leaders were judged by the sheer volume of corporate media vitriol and misinformation about their policies, Chávez would be in a class of his own.
Shortly after Chávez won his first election in 1998, the U.S. government deemed him a threat to U.S. interests--an image U.S. media eagerly played up. When a coup engineered by Venezuelan business and media elites removed Chávez from power, many leading U.S outlets praised the move (Extra!, 6/02). The New York Times (4/13/02), calling it a "resignation," declared that "Venezuelan democracy is no longer threatened by a would-be dictator." The Chicago Tribune (4/14/02) cheered the removal of a leader who had been "praising Osama bin Laden"--an absurdly false charge.

In reporting Chávez's death, little had changed. "Venezuela Bully Chávez Is Dead," read the New York Post's front page (3/6/13); "Death of a Demogogue" was on Time's home page (3/6/13). CNN host Anderson Cooper (3/5/13) declared it was "the death of a world leader who made America see red, as in Fidel Castro red, Venezuela's socialist president, Hugo Chávez."
"The words 'Venezuelan strongman' so often preceded his name, and for good reason," declared NBC Nightly News host Brian Williams (3/5/13); on ABC World News (3/5/13), viewers were told that "many Americans viewed him as a dictator." That would be especially true if those Americans consumed corporate media.

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Id--ZFtjR5c]The Revolution Will Not Be Televised - Chavez: Inside the Coup - YouTube[/ame]

Well, yes of course. What a surprise, Pali supporters are also Chavez, Ahamdinejad, and co. supporters. I am shocked, shocked I tell ya.

 

[P F Tinmore]

The website doesn't claim that. He's Prime Minister of the PNA.

Salam Fayyad (Arabic: سلام فياض*, Salām Fayāḍ; born 1952) is a Palestinian politician and Prime Minister of the Palestinian National Authority.

Is wiki wrong?

And he's highly respected.

Management of the West Bank

Salaam Fayyad won international and domestic approval for his management of the West Bank. The World Bank credited him with making substantial improvements in Palestinian state institutions.

A polling in November of 2009 showed that 60.7% of Palestinians credited his government with improving the economy of the West Bank; 61.9% faulted Hamas for the deterioration in the economy of Gaza.

54.4% of Palestinians believed that Fayyad's government is superior to the Hamas government. 57.1% of Palestinians believed that Fayyad's government advanced reforms of the Palestinian Authority, 52% believe corruption decreased and 48% believed that security improved under his governance

Salam Fayyad - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

From your link.

Anis al-Qasem, a constitutional lawyer who drafted the Basic Law, is among those who publicly declared the appointment of Fayyad to be illegal.

Neither Fayyad no any of his cabinet have been approved by the parliament as their constitution requires.

Abbas left the legal government in 2007 and appointed an illegal government.

What's your point? Many governments refuse to recognize Hamas. It's a dog's breakfast in Palestine. I personally hate it when any government has a President and a Prime Minister and then a million other top dogs.

My point was strictly to give a link to show the Canuck's support for Palestine. Including cash.

Abbas and Fayyad are anti Palestine. They were cited in the Goldstone report as violators of international law.

 

[SAYIT]

From your link.



Neither Fayyad no any of his cabinet have been approved by the parliament as their constitution requires.

Abbas left the legal government in 2007 and appointed an illegal government.

What's your point? Many governments refuse to recognize Hamas. It's a dog's breakfast in Palestine. I personally hate it when any government has a President and a Prime Minister and then a million other top dogs.

My point was strictly to give a link to show the Canuck's support for Palestine. Including cash.

Abbas and Fayyad are anti Palestine. They were cited in the Goldstone report as violators of international law.

Time is running out for the creation of a Pal State larger than a postage stamp. Instead of exhorting your comrades to "just hang in there" perhaps you should be telling 'em to make a deal ... today.

 

[P F Tinmore]

What's your point? Many governments refuse to recognize Hamas. It's a dog's breakfast in Palestine. I personally hate it when any government has a President and a Prime Minister and then a million other top dogs.

My point was strictly to give a link to show the Canuck's support for Palestine. Including cash.

Abbas and Fayyad are anti Palestine. They were cited in the Goldstone report as violators of international law.

Time is running out for the creation of a Pal State larger than a postage stamp. Instead of exhorting your comrades to "just hang in there" perhaps you should be telling 'em to make a deal ... today.

Not really. When Israel and its US lackeys kill the two state solution, what is left?

 

[Hossfly]

What are the two men currently doing?

Pretending to be the government and sucking money out of dupes.

Who is currently sitting in the President's chair? The PMs chair? Who sits in them?

See how eager Tinny is to answer the questions?

 

[toastman]

Abbas and Fayyad are anti Palestine. They were cited in the Goldstone report as violators of international law.

Time is running out for the creation of a Pal State larger than a postage stamp. Instead of exhorting your comrades to "just hang in there" perhaps you should be telling 'em to make a deal ... today.

Not really. When Israel and its US lackeys kill the two state solution, what is left?

Abbas is the one who is killing the two-state solution. What was his counter offer to Olmert's proposal ? In other words, what was his offer for peace ?

 

[irosie91]

"israel and its US lackeys' are "killing the two state solution...."??
gee ..seems to me all my life I have noticed that the entire
ummah has voiced its rejection of "the two state solution" ---
---every time one of its billion + members sneers
(* (* zionist entity *) *)

*) <<< racist filth

 

[GHook93]

I have to say that I'm disappointed that the best response Canada can muster to the endless construction in the West Bank is to act as Israel's PR agency.

Why shouldn't they build on the West Bank? During he Oslo accords the Palestinians were offered first 95% of what they wanted and it was upped to 98% of what they wanted and Arafat rejected it. Not because he was a fool, but because he knew that his blunder and corruption scheme would be unmasked! He couldn't have peace or he would have wealth.

Israel should continue to build on the Judea and Samaria and Eastern Jerusalem. They should move in more and more Jewish families and move out more and more Arab families. Then when they make future offers to the Palestinians, the offer should be less and less. If the Palestinians didn't like the offer in the high 90s, then they will have to accept offers in the low 90s high 80s. Israel should not let the land remain idle! While under their control they should build it up and make use of it.

 

[Roudy]

I have to say that I'm disappointed that the best response Canada can muster to the endless construction in the West Bank is to act as Israel's PR agency.

Why shouldn't the build ont he West Bank, during he Oslo accords the Palestinians were offered first 95% of wha they wanted and it was upped to 98% of wha they wanted and Arafat rejected it.

Israel should continue to build on the Judea and Samaria and Eastern Jerusalem. They should move in more and more Jewish families and move out more and more Arab families. Then when the make offers to the Palestinians, the offer should be less and less. If the Palestinians didn't liek the offer in the high 90s, then they will have to accept offers in the low 90s high 80s. Israel should not let the land remain idle! While under their control they should build it up and make use of it.

What you said can be said in a mathematical formula.

Israel = Builders
Arabs / Muslims = Destroyers
Therefore,
Non Jewish Israel = Destroyed Islamic Shithole, cesspool of Shariah law, corruption, hate, islamic radicalism, chauvanism, intolerance and terror

 

[Hossfly]

I have to say that I'm disappointed that the best response Canada can muster to the endless construction in the West Bank is to act as Israel's PR agency.

Why shouldn't the build ont he West Bank, during he Oslo accords the Palestinians were offered first 95% of wha they wanted and it was upped to 98% of wha they wanted and Arafat rejected it.

Israel should continue to build on the Judea and Samaria and Eastern Jerusalem. They should move in more and more Jewish families and move out more and more Arab families. Then when the make offers to the Palestinians, the offer should be less and less. If the Palestinians didn't liek the offer in the high 90s, then they will have to accept offers in the low 90s high 80s. Israel should not let the land remain idle! While under their control they should build it up and make use of it.

I've stated often that Netanyahu should declare WB open for unlimited settlement building. Gaza is plenty big enough fo the Pals.

 

[irosie91]

I have to say that I'm disappointed that the best response Canada can muster to the endless construction in the West Bank is to act as Israel's PR agency.

Why shouldn't the build ont he West Bank, during he Oslo accords the Palestinians were offered first 95% of wha they wanted and it was upped to 98% of wha they wanted and Arafat rejected it.

Israel should continue to build on the Judea and Samaria and Eastern Jerusalem. They should move in more and more Jewish families and move out more and more Arab families. Then when the make offers to the Palestinians, the offer should be less and less. If the Palestinians didn't liek the offer in the high 90s, then they will have to accept offers in the low 90s high 80s. Israel should not let the land remain idle! While under their control they should build it up and make use of it.

I've stated often that Netanyahu should declare WB open for unlimited settlement building. Gaza is plenty big enough fo the Pals.

I honestly am not being cynical----the "palestinians" deserve an actual country
somewhere-----why can their country not be carved out of --SINAI-----gaza plus a
chunk of sinai----it is a very very DEVELOPABLE land -----just some de-
salination plants-----and----its got OIL Lets face it----one of the big
obstacles is the fact that the proposed "palestine" comes in two
separate chunks-----with Israel between. It certainly did not work
for PAKISTAN (east and west---india between) I want the palestinians
to keep Gaza and get a nice chunk of Sinai----which nobody is using anyway
now that Israel evacuated------Israel was doing VERY WELL there with
agriculture . A good source of energy could be the SOLAR thing---besides
the oil PALESTINE WOULD BE A BIG SUCCESS Asking Israel to give
up jerusalem and hebron ----will always create intense animosity----and is
a bad precedent-----one might as well ask saudi arabia to give up medina