All The News Anti-Israel Posters Will Not Read Or Discuss

[P F Tinmore]

So he has a solution. Since the Jews visit as tourists and not as worshipers, the Al Aqsa compound must be closed to all visitors. " The Aqsa Mosque is a place of worship for Muslims and not a place for tourism. The Israeli occupation against Al-Aqsa is currently seeking to divide it spatially after being visited under the guise of tourism."

See? The Al Aqsa Mosque is so holy, that only Muslims can visit it. It is a place of worship!

And soccer:


And parkour:



But they must stop all tourism, because that desecrates the holy place.

(full article online)

Arab op-ed: End tourism at Temple Mount. (It is a sacred soccer stadium.) ~ Elder Of Ziyon - Israel News

So, our church has a baseball diamond and a gym with basketball hoops.

Do you have a point?

 

[Shusha]

Coming from a poster that dismisses any conversation about possible solutions, or discussion on Jewish rights as - "Israeli talking points".

What solutions have ever been offered that did not require the Palestinians to give up rights?

No solutions require Palestinians to give up their rights. The necessary compromises ensure that both the Arab Palestinians and the Jewish Palestinians are able to exercise their rights, including those for self-identification, self-determination, self-government, safety and security.

The problem with your POV, is that it consistently recognizes only the rights of the Arabs and not the rights of the Jewish people. Once you correct that problem, you will find that solutions are easy.

 

[Shusha]

So he has a solution. Since the Jews visit as tourists and not as worshipers, the Al Aqsa compound must be closed to all visitors. " The Aqsa Mosque is a place of worship for Muslims and not a place for tourism.

I couldn't agree more. The sooner the Temple Mount is open to Jewish worship, the better.

 

[montelatici]

Coming from a poster that dismisses any conversation about possible solutions, or discussion on Jewish rights as - "Israeli talking points".

What solutions have ever been offered that did not require the Palestinians to give up rights?

No solutions require Palestinians to give up their rights. The necessary compromises ensure that both the Arab Palestinians and the Jewish Palestinians are able to exercise their rights, including those for self-identification, self-determination, self-government, safety and security.

The problem with your POV, is that it consistently recognizes only the rights of the Arabs and not the rights of the Jewish people. Once you correct that problem, you will find that solutions are easy.

The problem is that you people believe that the Jews must rule over non-Jews in the area of Palestine. Once you correct that problem, you will find that a secular, democratic state in which all people of whatever religion have equal rights is the solution. Neither a Jewish, Christian or Muslim state will be a solution. Only a secular state is the solution.

 

[Shusha]

So, our church has a baseball diamond and a gym with basketball hoops.

Do you have a point?

The point was that the writer is a hypocritical liar creating fake excuses with the purpose of end Jewish visitation to the Temple Mount.

 

[Shusha]

The problem is that you people believe that the Jews must rule over non-Jews in the area of Palestine. Once you correct that problem, you will find that a secular, democratic state in which all people of whatever religion have equal rights is the solution.

You intentionally misrepresent my arguments. I have never stated that Jews must "rule over" non-Jews (nor has anyone on this board, nor the Israeli government). Indeed, I propose a solution in which both peoples have equal rights and are fully able to develop their own values and culture in safety and security.

 

[P F Tinmore]

Coming from a poster that dismisses any conversation about possible solutions, or discussion on Jewish rights as - "Israeli talking points".

What solutions have ever been offered that did not require the Palestinians to give up rights?

No solutions require Palestinians to give up their rights. The necessary compromises ensure that both the Arab Palestinians and the Jewish Palestinians are able to exercise their rights, including those for self-identification, self-determination, self-government, safety and security.

The problem with your POV, is that it consistently recognizes only the rights of the Arabs and not the rights of the Jewish people. Once you correct that problem, you will find that solutions are easy.

Resolution 181 (II). Future government of Palestine

The General Assembly,

Having met in special session at the request of the mandatory Power to constitute and instruct a special committee to prepare for the consideration of the question of the future government of Palestine at the second regular session;

Having constituted a Special Committee and instructed it to investigate all questions and issues relevant to the problem of Palestine, and to prepare proposals for the solution of the problem, and

Having received and examined the report of the Special Committee (document A/364) 1/ including a number of unanimous recommendations and a plan of partition with economic union approved by the majority of the Special Committee,

Considers that the present situation in Palestine is one which is likely to impair the general welfare and friendly relations among nations;

Takes note of the declaration by the mandatory Power that it plans to complete its evacuation of Palestine by 1 August 1948;

Recommends to the United Kingdom, as the mandatory Power for Palestine, and to all other Members of the United Nations the adoption and implementation, with regard to the future government of Palestine, of the Plan of Partition with Economic Union set out below;​

What did they want the Palestinians to agree to?

 

[Hollie]

Coming from a poster that dismisses any conversation about possible solutions, or discussion on Jewish rights as - "Israeli talking points".

What solutions have ever been offered that did not require the Palestinians to give up rights?

No solutions require Palestinians to give up their rights. The necessary compromises ensure that both the Arab Palestinians and the Jewish Palestinians are able to exercise their rights, including those for self-identification, self-determination, self-government, safety and security.

The problem with your POV, is that it consistently recognizes only the rights of the Arabs and not the rights of the Jewish people. Once you correct that problem, you will find that solutions are easy.

The problem is that you people believe that the Jews must rule over non-Jews in the area of Palestine. Once you correct that problem, you will find that a secular, democratic state in which all people of whatever religion have equal rights is the solution. Neither a Jewish, Christian or Muslim state will be a solution. Only a secular state is the solution.

Except that Arabs-Moslems have a demonstrated history of refusing secular, democratic institutions in favor of Islamic fascist dictators. What group was elected by the Peaceful Inner Strugglers in Gaza'istan?

Do you need a multiple choice type list?

 

[P F Tinmore]

Coming from a poster that dismisses any conversation about possible solutions, or discussion on Jewish rights as - "Israeli talking points".

What solutions have ever been offered that did not require the Palestinians to give up rights?

No solutions require Palestinians to give up their rights. The necessary compromises ensure that both the Arab Palestinians and the Jewish Palestinians are able to exercise their rights, including those for self-identification, self-determination, self-government, safety and security.

The problem with your POV, is that it consistently recognizes only the rights of the Arabs and not the rights of the Jewish people. Once you correct that problem, you will find that solutions are easy.

The problem is that you people believe that the Jews must rule over non-Jews in the area of Palestine. Once you correct that problem, you will find that a secular, democratic state in which all people of whatever religion have equal rights is the solution. Neither a Jewish, Christian or Muslim state will be a solution. Only a secular state is the solution.

Except that Arabs-Moslems have a demonstrated history of refusing secular, democratic institutions in favor of Islamic fascist dictators. What group was elected by the Peaceful Inner Strugglers in Gaza'istan?

Do you need a multiple choice type list?

There were no elections in "Gaza."

 

[Sixties Fan]

Jordan’s Refusal to Permit the Return of Israel’s Ambassador Is against International Law and the Peace Treaty

 

[montelatici]

The problem is that you people believe that the Jews must rule over non-Jews in the area of Palestine. Once you correct that problem, you will find that a secular, democratic state in which all people of whatever religion have equal rights is the solution.

You intentionally misrepresent my arguments. I have never stated that Jews must "rule over" non-Jews (nor has anyone on this board, nor the Israeli government). Indeed, I propose a solution in which both peoples have equal rights and are fully able to develop their own values and culture in safety and security.

Everyone on the Israeli side has stated that Jews must continue to rule over non-Jews in the area controlled by Israel. Non-Jews cannot, by definition have equal rights in a self-proclaimed Jewish state. Unless you believe non-Muslims can have equal rights in an Islamic state.

 

[Shusha]

Coming from a poster that dismisses any conversation about possible solutions, or discussion on Jewish rights as - "Israeli talking points".

What solutions have ever been offered that did not require the Palestinians to give up rights?

No solutions require Palestinians to give up their rights. The necessary compromises ensure that both the Arab Palestinians and the Jewish Palestinians are able to exercise their rights, including those for self-identification, self-determination, self-government, safety and security.

The problem with your POV, is that it consistently recognizes only the rights of the Arabs and not the rights of the Jewish people. Once you correct that problem, you will find that solutions are easy.

Resolution 181 (II). Future government of Palestine

The General Assembly,

Having met in special session at the request of the mandatory Power to constitute and instruct a special committee to prepare for the consideration of the question of the future government of Palestine at the second regular session;

Having constituted a Special Committee and instructed it to investigate all questions and issues relevant to the problem of Palestine, and to prepare proposals for the solution of the problem, and

Having received and examined the report of the Special Committee (document A/364) 1/ including a number of unanimous recommendations and a plan of partition with economic union approved by the majority of the Special Committee,

Considers that the present situation in Palestine is one which is likely to impair the general welfare and friendly relations among nations;

Takes note of the declaration by the mandatory Power that it plans to complete its evacuation of Palestine by 1 August 1948;

Recommends to the United Kingdom, as the mandatory Power for Palestine, and to all other Members of the United Nations the adoption and implementation, with regard to the future government of Palestine, of the Plan of Partition with Economic Union set out below;​

What did they want the Palestinians to agree to?

They wanted the Arab Palestinians and the Jewish Palestinians to agree to share the land under dispute. Because the dispute was likely to impair the general welfare.

This does not impair the rights of Palestinians, either Jewish or Arab, but instead supports those rights and gives them physical space to exist.

 

[Shusha]

The problem is that you people believe that the Jews must rule over non-Jews in the area of Palestine. Once you correct that problem, you will find that a secular, democratic state in which all people of whatever religion have equal rights is the solution.

You intentionally misrepresent my arguments. I have never stated that Jews must "rule over" non-Jews (nor has anyone on this board, nor the Israeli government). Indeed, I propose a solution in which both peoples have equal rights and are fully able to develop their own values and culture in safety and security.

Everyone on the Israeli side has stated that Jews must continue to rule over non-Jews in the area controlled by Israel. Non-Jews cannot, by definition have equal rights in a self-proclaimed Jewish state. Unless you believe non-Muslims can have equal rights in an Islamic state.

Of course non-Muslims can have equal rights in an Islamic state. They don't. But they can. Why do you see this as impossible?

 

[P F Tinmore]

They wanted the Arab Palestinians and the Jewish Palestinians to agree to share the land under dispute.

That is not what it said.

 

[Shusha]

They wanted the Arab Palestinians and the Jewish Palestinians to agree to share the land under dispute.

That is not what it said.

What do you think it said?

 

[montelatici]

Coming from a poster that dismisses any conversation about possible solutions, or discussion on Jewish rights as - "Israeli talking points".

What solutions have ever been offered that did not require the Palestinians to give up rights?

No solutions require Palestinians to give up their rights. The necessary compromises ensure that both the Arab Palestinians and the Jewish Palestinians are able to exercise their rights, including those for self-identification, self-determination, self-government, safety and security.

The problem with your POV, is that it consistently recognizes only the rights of the Arabs and not the rights of the Jewish people. Once you correct that problem, you will find that solutions are easy.

Resolution 181 (II). Future government of Palestine

The General Assembly,

Having met in special session at the request of the mandatory Power to constitute and instruct a special committee to prepare for the consideration of the question of the future government of Palestine at the second regular session;

Having constituted a Special Committee and instructed it to investigate all questions and issues relevant to the problem of Palestine, and to prepare proposals for the solution of the problem, and

Having received and examined the report of the Special Committee (document A/364) 1/ including a number of unanimous recommendations and a plan of partition with economic union approved by the majority of the Special Committee,

Considers that the present situation in Palestine is one which is likely to impair the general welfare and friendly relations among nations;

Takes note of the declaration by the mandatory Power that it plans to complete its evacuation of Palestine by 1 August 1948;

Recommends to the United Kingdom, as the mandatory Power for Palestine, and to all other Members of the United Nations the adoption and implementation, with regard to the future government of Palestine, of the Plan of Partition with Economic Union set out below;​

What did they want the Palestinians to agree to?

They wanted the Arab Palestinians and the Jewish Palestinians to agree to share the land under dispute. Because the dispute was likely to impair the general welfare.

This does not impair the rights of Palestinians, either Jewish or Arab, but instead supports those rights and gives them physical space to exist.

One third of the Palestinian people were left in the part of Palestine set up for European (Jew) rule. With the Bedouin, who were also non-Jews, they represented more than 50% of the people of the land set aside for the European Jews living in the sector. Yet they were to be subject to Jew rule for eternity, and would never have equal rights. How can a Christian or Muslim be equal in a Jewish state? How can a Muslim or a Christian swear fealty to another religion (a Jewish State) and remain a Christian or Muslim. Same for a non-Muslim in an Islamic state, how can a Christian swear loyalty to an Islamic state and remain a Christian? That's why religious states are so nefarious.

 

[P F Tinmore]

They wanted the Arab Palestinians and the Jewish Palestinians to agree to share the land under dispute.

That is not what it said.

For one, where did they say dispute?

The Palestinians were "offered the opportunity to give half of their country to colonial settlers." An offer to sign away their rights.

They refused like anyone else in the world would do.

 

[Shusha]

One third of the Palestinian people were left in the part of Palestine set up for European (Jew) rule. With the Bedouin, who were also non-Jews, they represented more than 50% of the people of the land set aside for the European Jews living in the sector.

So? Are you trying to claim that nations must have homogeneous populations? That Indians can't or shouldn't live under British rule? That Pakistanis can't or shouldn't live under Saudi rule? That Western Saharans can't live under Moroccan rule? Or Catalans under Spanish rule? Or Scots under British rule?

Are you trying to argue that ethnic nationalisms should be outlawed? All nationalisms? Or just "Jew-rule"?

Yet they were to be subject to Jew rule for eternity, and would never have equal rights.

Except they do have equal rights in Israel. They have all the fundamental equal rights that you would find in most places in the world. The only right they are not fully acting upon (for complex reasons) is their right to self-determination and sovereignty.

You seem to be arguing against the rights of Jews and Arabs to have separate self-determination and sovereignty. Why?

How can a Christian or Muslim be equal in a Jewish state?

The normal way. They have rights to practice their faith. To have laws which apply equally to all without respect to religion or race or ethnicity. To be permitted to hold their own festivals and holidays. These are all normal conditions in most countries in the world. It is the same in Israel. What is the problem with that? Are you using some other criteria for measuring religious equality?

How can a Muslim or a Christian swear fealty to another religion (a Jewish State) and remain a Christian or Muslim.

No one is suggesting they swear fealty to another religion. Do you think Jewish citizens in Iran have sworn fealty to Islam? Can one not be loyal to one's religious faith and also be loyal to their nation? I don't see any incompatibility here, as long as equal rights are protected under law.

 

[Shusha]

The Palestinians were "offered the opportunity to give half of their country to colonial settlers." An offer to sign away their rights.

Not at all. Because it wasn't solely the Arab "Palestinians" country. The Arab people and the Jewish people BOTH had rights to that territory. By law, by treaty, by moral standards.

Rather than the pro-Israel side demanding that Arabs give up their rights, you are denying the rights of the Jewish people. You continue to argue that only one side has rights. We continue to argue that both sides have rights.

 

[Shusha]

Let's put it another way. Why should the Jewish people be forced to give up their rights?