An Appropriate Thread

[Hollie]

The oldest surviving people of the place are the native people, now of the Muslim and Christian faith. Just because the native people converted to other religions over the centuries doesn't change the fact that they are the indigenous people.

People from Europe or other continents, regardless of religion are not "the oldest surviving people" of the place. That's just silly. Those who follow the Hindu Gaudiya Vaishnava tradition in the U.S. and Europe do not miraculously become indigenous to West Bengal.

That's an interesting analogy, one that rather flagrantly refutes your own babbling.

Egyptian, Syrian and Lebanese absentee land owners are certainty not indigenous people.

Similarly, with the many different invasions that have occurred over the timeline of many centuries across your hilariously described "country of Pal'istan" by various foreign invaders, your selective and biased assignment of "indigenous population" is only unique to you.

 

[Shusha]

The oldest surviving people of the place are the native people, now of the Muslim and Christian faith. Just because the native people converted to other religions over the centuries doesn't change the fact that they are the indigenous people.

Actually, you are wrong. The purpose of defining indigenous peoples is to define pre-conquest indigenous cultures in order to preserve and protect them. Conquering cultures, by definition, are not indigenous.

 

[Phoenall]

The oldest surviving people of the place are the native people, now of the Muslim and Christian faith. Just because the native people converted to other religions over the centuries doesn't change the fact that they are the indigenous people.

People from Europe or other continents, regardless of religion are not "the oldest surviving people" of the place. That's just silly. Those who follow the Hindu Gaudiya Vaishnava tradition in the U.S. and Europe do not miraculously become indigenous to West Bengal.

So again you deny the existence of the Jews and their rights under international law. The evidence proves that the Roman Catholics forcibly stole Jews and then took them to Europe as their slaves in the 4C. The descendants of these Jews are the ones that are returning to their homeland and you dont like it because it shows your 2000 years of hatred and blood libels against the Jews and your track record of being the most hateful group on Earth

 

[P F Tinmore]

Yes, I fully understand that. The oldest surviving "people of the place", as Tinman calls them, are the Jewish people.

The Jews were not the first people there nor were they ever the only people there.

There is no historic precedence for an exclusive Jewish state. History call for a multi religious place.

So, in the context of this thread, then, you are arguing that States which are homogeneous and built around a specific culture or ethnicity should not exist. Or are you applying this only to Jews?

You have been reading my posts for a year and this is what you think?

WOW!

Perhaps you should stop saying things which contradict your own arguments, huh? Not to mention paying attention to mine.

I did not say the Jewish people were the first people, nor the only people. I said they are the oldest surviving people of the place. Nor did I (or anyone) call for an exclusive Jewish state. Or for one with only one religious group.

Do you believe that every time a new flag is raised over city hall that everyone leaves and a whole new population moves in?

 

[miketx]

This is america, no one really gives a fuck about any morality, it's just a tool for subjugating others.

There's plenty of morality in America, just don't look for it around democrats, because you will not find it.

 

[montelatici]

The oldest surviving people of the place are the native people, now of the Muslim and Christian faith. Just because the native people converted to other religions over the centuries doesn't change the fact that they are the indigenous people.

People from Europe or other continents, regardless of religion are not "the oldest surviving people" of the place. That's just silly. Those who follow the Hindu Gaudiya Vaishnava tradition in the U.S. and Europe do not miraculously become indigenous to West Bengal.

That's an interesting analogy, one that rather flagrantly refutes your own babbling.

Egyptian, Syrian and Lebanese absentee land owners are certainty not indigenous people.

Similarly, with the many different invasions that have occurred over the timeline of many centuries across your hilariously described "country of Pal'istan" by various foreign invaders, your selective and biased assignment of "indigenous population" is only unique to you.

85% of the land was owned by native Palestinian Christian and Muslim inhabitants of Palestine. The Zionists had purchased only 6% of the land by 1948. 8-9% of the land may have still been owned by non-Palestinian, non-Jews by 1946. What part of article 164. do you not understand?

Do you think that while stating the fact that the population owned 85% of the land they were talking about a population that lived somewhere else? LOL

"164. The Arab population, despite the strenuous efforts of Jews to acquire land in Palestine, at present remains in possession of approximately 85 per cent of the land."

https://unispal.un.org/DPA/DPR/unispal.nsf/0/07175DE9FA2DE563852568D3006E10F3

 

[montelatici]

This is america, no one really gives a fuck about any morality, it's just a tool for subjugating others.

There's plenty of morality in America, just don't look for it around democrats, because you will not find it.

 

[miketx]

This is america, no one really gives a fuck about any morality, it's just a tool for subjugating others.

There's plenty of morality in America, just don't look for it around democrats, because you will not find it.

So you're a faggot. Cool.

 

[Shusha]

85% of the land was owned by native Palestinian Christian and Muslim inhabitants of Palestine. The Zionists had purchased only 6% of the land by 1948. 8-9% of the land may have still been owned by non-Palestinian, non-Jews by 1946. What part of article 164. do you not understand?

Do you think that while stating the fact that the population owned 85% of the land they were talking about a population that lived somewhere else? LOL

"164. The Arab population, despite the strenuous efforts of Jews to acquire land in Palestine, at present remains in possession of approximately 85 per cent of the land."

Still conflating ownership with possession.

 

[montelatici]

This is america, no one really gives a fuck about any morality, it's just a tool for subjugating others.

There's plenty of morality in America, just don't look for it around democrats, because you will not find it.

So you're a faggot. Cool.

You couldn't make this stuff up. Really brings to light who the Trump supporters are.

 

[montelatici]

85% of the land was owned by native Palestinian Christian and Muslim inhabitants of Palestine. The Zionists had purchased only 6% of the land by 1948. 8-9% of the land may have still been owned by non-Palestinian, non-Jews by 1946. What part of article 164. do you not understand?

Do you think that while stating the fact that the population owned 85% of the land they were talking about a population that lived somewhere else? LOL

"164. The Arab population, despite the strenuous efforts of Jews to acquire land in Palestine, at present remains in possession of approximately 85 per cent of the land."

Still conflating ownership with possession.

You want ownership? The word is being used interchangeably. The facts are the facts Shusha, it's just that when confronted with the facts that debunk all the propaganda you've been fed, you have to try to defend the indefensible. That is, the myth that the Jews bought the land. LOL

 

[Fenton Lum]

85% of the land was owned by native Palestinian Christian and Muslim inhabitants of Palestine. The Zionists had purchased only 6% of the land by 1948. 8-9% of the land may have still been owned by non-Palestinian, non-Jews by 1946. What part of article 164. do you not understand?

Do you think that while stating the fact that the population owned 85% of the land they were talking about a population that lived somewhere else? LOL

"164. The Arab population, despite the strenuous efforts of Jews to acquire land in Palestine, at present remains in possession of approximately 85 per cent of the land."

Still conflating ownership with possession.

You want ownership? The word is being used interchangeably. The facts are the facts Shusha, it's just that when confronted with the facts that debunk all the propaganda you've been fed, you have to try to defend the indefensible. That is, the myth that the Jews bought the land. LOL

My my my.

 

[Fenton Lum]

85% of the land was owned by native Palestinian Christian and Muslim inhabitants of Palestine. The Zionists had purchased only 6% of the land by 1948. 8-9% of the land may have still been owned by non-Palestinian, non-Jews by 1946. What part of article 164. do you not understand?

Do you think that while stating the fact that the population owned 85% of the land they were talking about a population that lived somewhere else? LOL

"164. The Arab population, despite the strenuous efforts of Jews to acquire land in Palestine, at present remains in possession of approximately 85 per cent of the land."

Still conflating ownership with possession.

Or perhaps you're conflating onwership with covets, seeks to cleanse. and colonialism.

 

[Phoenall]

Yes, I fully understand that. The oldest surviving "people of the place", as Tinman calls them, are the Jewish people.

The Jews were not the first people there nor were they ever the only people there.

There is no historic precedence for an exclusive Jewish state. History call for a multi religious place.

So, in the context of this thread, then, you are arguing that States which are homogeneous and built around a specific culture or ethnicity should not exist. Or are you applying this only to Jews?

You have been reading my posts for a year and this is what you think?

WOW!

Perhaps you should stop saying things which contradict your own arguments, huh? Not to mention paying attention to mine.

I did not say the Jewish people were the first people, nor the only people. I said they are the oldest surviving people of the place. Nor did I (or anyone) call for an exclusive Jewish state. Or for one with only one religious group.

Do you believe that every time a new flag is raised over city hall that everyone leaves and a whole new population moves in?

When it is an islamic flag then yes, as they believe in a complete fresh start. Just look at the fighting between hamas and fatah

 

[Phoenall]

The oldest surviving people of the place are the native people, now of the Muslim and Christian faith. Just because the native people converted to other religions over the centuries doesn't change the fact that they are the indigenous people.

People from Europe or other continents, regardless of religion are not "the oldest surviving people" of the place. That's just silly. Those who follow the Hindu Gaudiya Vaishnava tradition in the U.S. and Europe do not miraculously become indigenous to West Bengal.

That's an interesting analogy, one that rather flagrantly refutes your own babbling.

Egyptian, Syrian and Lebanese absentee land owners are certainty not indigenous people.

Similarly, with the many different invasions that have occurred over the timeline of many centuries across your hilariously described "country of Pal'istan" by various foreign invaders, your selective and biased assignment of "indigenous population" is only unique to you.

85% of the land was owned by native Palestinian Christian and Muslim inhabitants of Palestine. The Zionists had purchased only 6% of the land by 1948. 8-9% of the land may have still been owned by non-Palestinian, non-Jews by 1946. What part of article 164. do you not understand?

Do you think that while stating the fact that the population owned 85% of the land they were talking about a population that lived somewhere else? LOL

"164. The Arab population, despite the strenuous efforts of Jews to acquire land in Palestine, at present remains in possession of approximately 85 per cent of the land."

A/364 of 3 September 1947

Cant you read English as being in possession does not mean they own it. Like Israel is in possession of the west bank, but does not own it. As the article before the one you link shows


163. The Arabs of Palestine consider themselves as having a "natural" right to that country, although they have not been in possession of it as a sovereign nation.

And then the rest of the article you manipulated says

The provisions of the land transfer regulations of 1940, which gave effect to the 1939 White Paper policy, have severely restricted the Jewish efforts to acquire new land.

And what about this


167. With regard to the promises and pledges made to the Arabs as inducement for their support of the Allies in the First World War, it is to be noted that apparently there is no unequivocal agreement as to whether Palestine was included within the territory pledged to independence by the McMahon-Hussein correspondence. In this connexion, since the question of interpretation was raised Great Britain has consistently denied that Palestine was among the territories to which independence was pledged.

 

[Phoenall]

85% of the land was owned by native Palestinian Christian and Muslim inhabitants of Palestine. The Zionists had purchased only 6% of the land by 1948. 8-9% of the land may have still been owned by non-Palestinian, non-Jews by 1946. What part of article 164. do you not understand?

Do you think that while stating the fact that the population owned 85% of the land they were talking about a population that lived somewhere else? LOL

"164. The Arab population, despite the strenuous efforts of Jews to acquire land in Palestine, at present remains in possession of approximately 85 per cent of the land."

Still conflating ownership with possession.

Even his own link says the same thing, shows how he will manipulate to achieve his POV

 

[Phoenall]

85% of the land was owned by native Palestinian Christian and Muslim inhabitants of Palestine. The Zionists had purchased only 6% of the land by 1948. 8-9% of the land may have still been owned by non-Palestinian, non-Jews by 1946. What part of article 164. do you not understand?

Do you think that while stating the fact that the population owned 85% of the land they were talking about a population that lived somewhere else? LOL

"164. The Arab population, despite the strenuous efforts of Jews to acquire land in Palestine, at present remains in possession of approximately 85 per cent of the land."

Still conflating ownership with possession.

You want ownership? The word is being used interchangeably. The facts are the facts Shusha, it's just that when confronted with the facts that debunk all the propaganda you've been fed, you have to try to defend the indefensible. That is, the myth that the Jews bought the land. LOL

So why isnt this lodged with the rest of the UN archives ? Could it be that it is not regarded as official and is in fact a novel with no actual reality in it ?

 

[P F Tinmore]

163. The Arabs of Palestine consider themselves as having a "natural" right to that country, although they have not been in possession of it as a sovereign nation.

Indeed, and those rights have been affirmed by subsequent UN resolutions.

The Palestinians have the right to sovereignty. Preventing the exercise of their right is illegal external interference.

When they say "without external interference" there are no exceptions listed.

 

[P F Tinmore]

The Jews were not the first people there nor were they ever the only people there.

There is no historic precedence for an exclusive Jewish state. History call for a multi religious place.

So, in the context of this thread, then, you are arguing that States which are homogeneous and built around a specific culture or ethnicity should not exist. Or are you applying this only to Jews?

You have been reading my posts for a year and this is what you think?

WOW!

Perhaps you should stop saying things which contradict your own arguments, huh? Not to mention paying attention to mine.

I did not say the Jewish people were the first people, nor the only people. I said they are the oldest surviving people of the place. Nor did I (or anyone) call for an exclusive Jewish state. Or for one with only one religious group.

Do you believe that every time a new flag is raised over city hall that everyone leaves and a whole new population moves in?

When it is an islamic flag then yes, as they believe in a complete fresh start. Just look at the fighting between hamas and fatah

Deflection.

 

[Phoenall]

163. The Arabs of Palestine consider themselves as having a "natural" right to that country, although they have not been in possession of it as a sovereign nation.

Indeed, and those rights have been affirmed by subsequent UN resolutions.

The Palestinians have the right to sovereignty. Preventing the exercise of their right is illegal external interference.

When they say "without external interference" there are no exceptions listed.

And what rights are those, as this gives no indication of any rights, apart from the ones the arab muslims heap on themselves.

Take it up with the leadership as they are allowing it to happen