"Free Palestine

[P F Tinmore]

It wasn't as black and white as you make it out to be. Those who live their now have a right to keep living there.

Actually it was as black and white as that, defined by the UN resolution that stated that the arab muslims that were preparted to live in peace with the Jews should be allowed to return to their homes. They never said all arab muslims as they knew the majority would not accept the rules, so they were barred from returning.

that were preparted to live in peace with the Jews​

Where does it say that?

UN res 194


Article 11 of the resolution reads:

(The General Assembly) Resolves that the refugees wishing to return to their homes and live at peace with their neighbours should be permitted to do so at the earliest practicable date, and that compensation should be paid for the property of those choosing not to return and for loss of or damage to property which, under principles of international law or in equity, should be made good by the Governments or authorities responsible.

Exactly!

That does not match what you posted.

You lied.

Wrong again as the term neighbours in this case means the Jews. Want to try again tinny, or are you feeling the pain yet ?

No, I am not the one who faked the quote.

 

[aris2chat]

As long as they are not restricted items, of course they can. How do you thing the stores stayed supplied? Flowers, fruit, vegetable are among the items they export to europe and asia. Sale of goods to Israel is relatively new, through Israeli goods can be found throughout gaza stores.
Egypt has had their border closed most of last year, only opening it for palestinians that were in egypt to return to gaza.

How generous of Israel to allow them such luxury.

Everything that goes into gaza is held and distributed by hamas. Food and medicines have expired before hamas allows them to be sold. Building supplies and fuel have hamas getting them first. Hamas charge premium prices for being allowed to receive good, but they don't want to pay for fuel from the PA or for much of the supplies, nor do they want to pay taxes to the PA. Most of what goes into gaza is via donations or paid for from NGOs.
Israel and egypt provide 2/3 of the electricity to gaza. The gaza power plant is controlled by hamas who restrict power to just a few hours a day.
It is their shell game. They control gaza.

Gaza was a mess long before Hamas came into power. And Israel built the wall to keep residents out long before Hamas was in power as well. Members of the Hamas govrenment were born and raised in Gaza right? Shouldn't they love Israel for all the marvelous things Israel did for them when they were growing up?

The wall is in the WB not gaza. Gaza is just a fence.

Palestinians in gaza were given work at Israeli pay on the farms and Israeli businesses in gaza before the withdrawal.
They were treated a "hell" of a lot better than they were when egypt controlled gaza.
Gazans were allowed into Israel for work, medical treatment, education and to visit the mount. The might have needed ID cards and passes to come and go but that should be expected since so many were calling for and carrying out acts of terrorism.
The power, sewage and other services were established by the Israelis. There was building, growth and development under Israel. An air port was built, a deep water harbor was in the works. Hotels and tourism were growing thanks to Israel.
All that ended with hamas, and Israel withdrawal from gaza.

So how marvelous is hamas? What have they done but bring war and destruction to gaza?

It's not a wall just a fence...

Well whatever. As an American I just hope Israel doesn't drag us into a religious war. If Israel wants to pretend Palestinians hate them for no reason, well, I hope they know they made the beds that they're sleeping in.

No 2 state solution anymore right? The most prominent Israeli warned that the evil arabs were voting and had to be stopped right? What a joke.

Arabs have hated them for 1500 yrs. It is not Israel, that is just a political excuse. Most palestinians would accept a negotiated settlement for peace. Hamas will not. Most would recognize Israel as a jewish state. Hamas will not.
Hamas will not even come to some peace with the PA and allow free elections or set an election day. They say they will allow a vote but not the right to campaign in gaza if not hamas. The want to control election within gaza. Hamas killed or kicked the PLO/PA out of gaza.
The more deprived the palestinians feel the more anger which empowers hamas. They are in control of the desperation in gaza. They are the cause.
WB prospers while hamas crushes gaza.
People should stop equating the conditions between Israelis and palestinians as Israel's responsibility. They are not Israel and it is not up to Israel to give them the rights of Israelis. They don't serve Israel or pay Israeli taxes. Israel does not have refugee camps. The camps were set up in the WB and G by arabs not Israelis.
Till Oslo there was a trickle of palestinians that applied for entry and citizenship in Israel, about two thousand a year, despite PLO and arab attempts to prevent this. Palestinians were allowed to use Israeli courts to reclaim land if there was some proof, or to be compensated when the land could not be returned.
Most arab state won't even allow palestinians to get jobs or live outside of the camps unless they have some special skill that would be of benefit.

 

[Coyote]

No they don't.

Descendants of murderous squatters have to right to that which belongs to others. They declared war. They lost. By what right do squatters who initiated a war have the right to that which they never owned in the first place?

They aren't squatters.

LINK showing that they own the land, either through international treaty or land deeds. A clue the Ottoman census put the numbers of arab muslims in Palestine to be very low, with the Christians outnumbering them in many places. The Jews owned most of Jerusalem, Hebron and other towns and cities.

Till the end of WWII most of the "local" arabs were serfs and most of those who "owned" land were foreign officials who had been given land by the Ottomans. The area was very poor and under/un-developed and little if any taxes were generated. Were were all these people who could afford to own land?
A tax province or sanjuk is not a state and the people within are not a nation. Sanjuks were little more than counties and what became the mandate were made up of at least half a dozen of these. Where was "palestine"? Even under the Romans there were three palæstina (name given by the romans) and mostly in what is now the gaza, sinai and jordan, not jerusalem or most of the roman towns in the fertile area.
The region was populated by people from throughout the mediterranean and middle east. To say there was a native people beside the jews is a misunderstanding. Yes, there are remnants of crusaders, armenians, persians, greeks, italians, french, english, etc. that has live there for hundreds of years but they were not a single people that were arab or palestinian. There were dozens of people and tribles like an amish quilt that existed as muslims or kafir in the area.
So where was this palestine? It was a region like saying the levant or fertile crescent.
So were was the state of palestine and who were the palestinian people, especially those who owned land?
Slaves, serfs, workers, share croppers, seasonal laborers, renters did not own the land or homes they occupied. Apart from some store owners in the urban areas, few locals owned land, even if their family have worked the land for generations.
Most did not want to serve in the military so the Ottoman gave land to those that served the government as officers, those from outside of those sanjuks. There was a tradition, before the Ottomans opened the area to jewish immigration, of land owned by jews/synagogues remained in those hands. It was passed down, sold to other jews or given to the synagogues to be rented or sold to other jews coming to the area. It never left jewish hands. Till the early 19th C jews could not buy non-jewish land, it could only be given by the empire or rented to them. Even being able to pray at the wall is a relatively modern privilage of the Ottomans, through there have been a few times off and on when it was permitted. The other land owners were the churches and wakf. The churches owned land they farmed to support themselves and the maintenance of the churches they were responsible for. The rest was for the most part state land.
The idea of a palestine or palestinian people is a modern creation, not historically based.
The muslims were arab, syrian, (later) jordanian, egyptian but not palestinian. They were known by tribe or were serfs in large part.

So where is the origin of this nation for the palestinians? Where are the lines for borders? Where is this history and government?

First, I never claimed there was a nation. There is a people. As I pointed out to Phoenall if national borders, government, currency etc were required for a people to be a people then a whole lot of groups would lose their identity.

Why are they more deserving of a state than the kurds, yazidi, armeneans, zoroastrians or dozens of other "people" with their own language, traditions, religions, culture, history, etc.?

Are Jews any more deserving of a state then those aforementioned people? The answer is no, yet they have one, they have self determination, freedom, security and rights.

At this point, the Palestinians are stateless, citizenless, subject to military law and a system that administers "justice" one way for them and one way for their Jewish counterparts.

You can argue for self determination for those other groups if you want and if that is what they want. Make a case for it. No one else has.

They already have self determination as it is not something that can be handed out. Do you have the self determination to post on this board daily, do the Palestinians have the self determination to engage in terrorism, violence, propaganda and a whole range of other activities. They are stateless because they wont take that other small step of self determination because they would be in debt to the rest of the world. They are not citizenless as they have over 6 million citizens around the world. They are subject to military law because they believe violence and terrorism is the right and only way to carry out the final solution. The system works that way because that is how it is written in the Geneva conventions, which the Israelis follow. As an example the customary punishment under Jordanian law for murder ( the laws that apply in the west bank under the Geneva conventions) is different to the punishment under Israeli law. So the Israelis apply the law of the land. If you cant understand the Geneva conventions then I advise you to refrain from posting on topics you are not educated enough to understand.

They do not have self-determination.

Definition: the process by which a country determines its own statehood and forms its own allegiances and government.

 

[TheOldSchool]

How generous of Israel to allow them such luxury.

Everything that goes into gaza is held and distributed by hamas. Food and medicines have expired before hamas allows them to be sold. Building supplies and fuel have hamas getting them first. Hamas charge premium prices for being allowed to receive good, but they don't want to pay for fuel from the PA or for much of the supplies, nor do they want to pay taxes to the PA. Most of what goes into gaza is via donations or paid for from NGOs.
Israel and egypt provide 2/3 of the electricity to gaza. The gaza power plant is controlled by hamas who restrict power to just a few hours a day.
It is their shell game. They control gaza.

Gaza was a mess long before Hamas came into power. And Israel built the wall to keep residents out long before Hamas was in power as well. Members of the Hamas govrenment were born and raised in Gaza right? Shouldn't they love Israel for all the marvelous things Israel did for them when they were growing up?

The wall is in the WB not gaza. Gaza is just a fence.

Palestinians in gaza were given work at Israeli pay on the farms and Israeli businesses in gaza before the withdrawal.
They were treated a "hell" of a lot better than they were when egypt controlled gaza.
Gazans were allowed into Israel for work, medical treatment, education and to visit the mount. The might have needed ID cards and passes to come and go but that should be expected since so many were calling for and carrying out acts of terrorism.
The power, sewage and other services were established by the Israelis. There was building, growth and development under Israel. An air port was built, a deep water harbor was in the works. Hotels and tourism were growing thanks to Israel.
All that ended with hamas, and Israel withdrawal from gaza.

So how marvelous is hamas? What have they done but bring war and destruction to gaza?

It's not a wall just a fence...

Well whatever. As an American I just hope Israel doesn't drag us into a religious war. If Israel wants to pretend Palestinians hate them for no reason, well, I hope they know they made the beds that they're sleeping in.

No 2 state solution anymore right? The most prominent Israeli warned that the evil arabs were voting and had to be stopped right? What a joke.

Arabs have hated them for 1500 yrs. It is not Israel, that is just a political excuse. Most palestinians would accept a negotiated settlement for peace. Hamas will not. Most would recognize Israel as a jewish state. Hamas will not.
Hamas will not even come to some peace with the PA and allow free elections or set an election day. They say they will allow a vote but not the right to campaign in gaza if not hamas. The want to control election within gaza. Hamas killed or kicked the PLO/PA out of gaza.
The more deprived the palestinians feel the more anger which empowers hamas. They are in control of the desperation in gaza. They are the cause.
WB prospers while hamas crushes gaza.
People should stop equating the conditions between Israelis and palestinians as Israel's responsibility. They are not Israel and it is not up to Israel to give them the rights of Israelis. They don't serve Israel or pay Israeli taxes. Israel does not have refugee camps. The camps were set up in the WB and G by arabs not Israelis.
Till Oslo there was a trickle of palestinians that applied for entry and citizenship in Israel, about two thousand a year, despite PLO and arab attempts to prevent this. Palestinians were allowed to use Israeli courts to reclaim land if there was some proof, or to be compensated when the land could not be returned.
Most arab state won't even allow palestinians to get jobs or live outside of the camps unless they have some special skill that would be of benefit.

Continue that line of thinking and nothing will change. Which is fine if you're okay with that. But I'd recommend at least electing someone whose foreign policy won't isolate Israel from the rest of the world. As it's isolated right now.

Though, unfortunately, that may involve doing something to better the lives of people in both Gaza and the West Bank.

Btw if everything is so terrible in Gaza but so great in the West Bank; why does the West Bank have the giant wall you mentioned earlier but Gaza merely has a giant fence?

 

[aris2chat]

They aren't squatters.

LINK showing that they own the land, either through international treaty or land deeds. A clue the Ottoman census put the numbers of arab muslims in Palestine to be very low, with the Christians outnumbering them in many places. The Jews owned most of Jerusalem, Hebron and other towns and cities.

Till the end of WWII most of the "local" arabs were serfs and most of those who "owned" land were foreign officials who had been given land by the Ottomans. The area was very poor and under/un-developed and little if any taxes were generated. Were were all these people who could afford to own land?
A tax province or sanjuk is not a state and the people within are not a nation. Sanjuks were little more than counties and what became the mandate were made up of at least half a dozen of these. Where was "palestine"? Even under the Romans there were three palæstina (name given by the romans) and mostly in what is now the gaza, sinai and jordan, not jerusalem or most of the roman towns in the fertile area.
The region was populated by people from throughout the mediterranean and middle east. To say there was a native people beside the jews is a misunderstanding. Yes, there are remnants of crusaders, armenians, persians, greeks, italians, french, english, etc. that has live there for hundreds of years but they were not a single people that were arab or palestinian. There were dozens of people and tribles like an amish quilt that existed as muslims or kafir in the area.
So where was this palestine? It was a region like saying the levant or fertile crescent.
So were was the state of palestine and who were the palestinian people, especially those who owned land?
Slaves, serfs, workers, share croppers, seasonal laborers, renters did not own the land or homes they occupied. Apart from some store owners in the urban areas, few locals owned land, even if their family have worked the land for generations.
Most did not want to serve in the military so the Ottoman gave land to those that served the government as officers, those from outside of those sanjuks. There was a tradition, before the Ottomans opened the area to jewish immigration, of land owned by jews/synagogues remained in those hands. It was passed down, sold to other jews or given to the synagogues to be rented or sold to other jews coming to the area. It never left jewish hands. Till the early 19th C jews could not buy non-jewish land, it could only be given by the empire or rented to them. Even being able to pray at the wall is a relatively modern privilage of the Ottomans, through there have been a few times off and on when it was permitted. The other land owners were the churches and wakf. The churches owned land they farmed to support themselves and the maintenance of the churches they were responsible for. The rest was for the most part state land.
The idea of a palestine or palestinian people is a modern creation, not historically based.
The muslims were arab, syrian, (later) jordanian, egyptian but not palestinian. They were known by tribe or were serfs in large part.

So where is the origin of this nation for the palestinians? Where are the lines for borders? Where is this history and government?

First, I never claimed there was a nation. There is a people. As I pointed out to Phoenall if national borders, government, currency etc were required for a people to be a people then a whole lot of groups would lose their identity.

Why are they more deserving of a state than the kurds, yazidi, armeneans, zoroastrians or dozens of other "people" with their own language, traditions, religions, culture, history, etc.?

Are Jews any more deserving of a state then those aforementioned people? The answer is no, yet they have one, they have self determination, freedom, security and rights.

At this point, the Palestinians are stateless, citizenless, subject to military law and a system that administers "justice" one way for them and one way for their Jewish counterparts.

You can argue for self determination for those other groups if you want and if that is what they want. Make a case for it. No one else has.

They already have self determination as it is not something that can be handed out. Do you have the self determination to post on this board daily, do the Palestinians have the self determination to engage in terrorism, violence, propaganda and a whole range of other activities. They are stateless because they wont take that other small step of self determination because they would be in debt to the rest of the world. They are not citizenless as they have over 6 million citizens around the world. They are subject to military law because they believe violence and terrorism is the right and only way to carry out the final solution. The system works that way because that is how it is written in the Geneva conventions, which the Israelis follow. As an example the customary punishment under Jordanian law for murder ( the laws that apply in the west bank under the Geneva conventions) is different to the punishment under Israeli law. So the Israelis apply the law of the land. If you cant understand the Geneva conventions then I advise you to refrain from posting on topics you are not educated enough to understand.

They do not have self-determination.

Definition: the process by which a country determines its own statehood and forms its own allegiances and government.

Few groups/people have that right in the region. Why only the palestinians should have that right. They were never a people before the mandate. Historical they did not exist.

They were just arabs and a state was created, Jordan.

 

[TheOldSchool]

They aren't squatters.

LINK showing that they own the land, either through international treaty or land deeds. A clue the Ottoman census put the numbers of arab muslims in Palestine to be very low, with the Christians outnumbering them in many places. The Jews owned most of Jerusalem, Hebron and other towns and cities.

Till the end of WWII most of the "local" arabs were serfs and most of those who "owned" land were foreign officials who had been given land by the Ottomans. The area was very poor and under/un-developed and little if any taxes were generated. Were were all these people who could afford to own land?
A tax province or sanjuk is not a state and the people within are not a nation. Sanjuks were little more than counties and what became the mandate were made up of at least half a dozen of these. Where was "palestine"? Even under the Romans there were three palæstina (name given by the romans) and mostly in what is now the gaza, sinai and jordan, not jerusalem or most of the roman towns in the fertile area.
The region was populated by people from throughout the mediterranean and middle east. To say there was a native people beside the jews is a misunderstanding. Yes, there are remnants of crusaders, armenians, persians, greeks, italians, french, english, etc. that has live there for hundreds of years but they were not a single people that were arab or palestinian. There were dozens of people and tribles like an amish quilt that existed as muslims or kafir in the area.
So where was this palestine? It was a region like saying the levant or fertile crescent.
So were was the state of palestine and who were the palestinian people, especially those who owned land?
Slaves, serfs, workers, share croppers, seasonal laborers, renters did not own the land or homes they occupied. Apart from some store owners in the urban areas, few locals owned land, even if their family have worked the land for generations.
Most did not want to serve in the military so the Ottoman gave land to those that served the government as officers, those from outside of those sanjuks. There was a tradition, before the Ottomans opened the area to jewish immigration, of land owned by jews/synagogues remained in those hands. It was passed down, sold to other jews or given to the synagogues to be rented or sold to other jews coming to the area. It never left jewish hands. Till the early 19th C jews could not buy non-jewish land, it could only be given by the empire or rented to them. Even being able to pray at the wall is a relatively modern privilage of the Ottomans, through there have been a few times off and on when it was permitted. The other land owners were the churches and wakf. The churches owned land they farmed to support themselves and the maintenance of the churches they were responsible for. The rest was for the most part state land.
The idea of a palestine or palestinian people is a modern creation, not historically based.
The muslims were arab, syrian, (later) jordanian, egyptian but not palestinian. They were known by tribe or were serfs in large part.

So where is the origin of this nation for the palestinians? Where are the lines for borders? Where is this history and government?

First, I never claimed there was a nation. There is a people. As I pointed out to Phoenall if national borders, government, currency etc were required for a people to be a people then a whole lot of groups would lose their identity.

Why are they more deserving of a state than the kurds, yazidi, armeneans, zoroastrians or dozens of other "people" with their own language, traditions, religions, culture, history, etc.?

Are Jews any more deserving of a state then those aforementioned people? The answer is no, yet they have one, they have self determination, freedom, security and rights.

At this point, the Palestinians are stateless, citizenless, subject to military law and a system that administers "justice" one way for them and one way for their Jewish counterparts.

You can argue for self determination for those other groups if you want and if that is what they want. Make a case for it. No one else has.

They already have self determination as it is not something that can be handed out. Do you have the self determination to post on this board daily, do the Palestinians have the self determination to engage in terrorism, violence, propaganda and a whole range of other activities. They are stateless because they wont take that other small step of self determination because they would be in debt to the rest of the world. They are not citizenless as they have over 6 million citizens around the world. They are subject to military law because they believe violence and terrorism is the right and only way to carry out the final solution. The system works that way because that is how it is written in the Geneva conventions, which the Israelis follow. As an example the customary punishment under Jordanian law for murder ( the laws that apply in the west bank under the Geneva conventions) is different to the punishment under Israeli law. So the Israelis apply the law of the land. If you cant understand the Geneva conventions then I advise you to refrain from posting on topics you are not educated enough to understand.

They do not have self-determination.

Definition: the process by which a country determines its own statehood and forms its own allegiances and government.

It's a funny thing how in the long run people always choose freedom.

The middle east may be in the clutches of ultra conservative muslims, but they will eventually choose freedom too.

 

[Coyote]

LINK showing that they own the land, either through international treaty or land deeds. A clue the Ottoman census put the numbers of arab muslims in Palestine to be very low, with the Christians outnumbering them in many places. The Jews owned most of Jerusalem, Hebron and other towns and cities.

Till the end of WWII most of the "local" arabs were serfs and most of those who "owned" land were foreign officials who had been given land by the Ottomans. The area was very poor and under/un-developed and little if any taxes were generated. Were were all these people who could afford to own land?
A tax province or sanjuk is not a state and the people within are not a nation. Sanjuks were little more than counties and what became the mandate were made up of at least half a dozen of these. Where was "palestine"? Even under the Romans there were three palæstina (name given by the romans) and mostly in what is now the gaza, sinai and jordan, not jerusalem or most of the roman towns in the fertile area.
The region was populated by people from throughout the mediterranean and middle east. To say there was a native people beside the jews is a misunderstanding. Yes, there are remnants of crusaders, armenians, persians, greeks, italians, french, english, etc. that has live there for hundreds of years but they were not a single people that were arab or palestinian. There were dozens of people and tribles like an amish quilt that existed as muslims or kafir in the area.
So where was this palestine? It was a region like saying the levant or fertile crescent.
So were was the state of palestine and who were the palestinian people, especially those who owned land?
Slaves, serfs, workers, share croppers, seasonal laborers, renters did not own the land or homes they occupied. Apart from some store owners in the urban areas, few locals owned land, even if their family have worked the land for generations.
Most did not want to serve in the military so the Ottoman gave land to those that served the government as officers, those from outside of those sanjuks. There was a tradition, before the Ottomans opened the area to jewish immigration, of land owned by jews/synagogues remained in those hands. It was passed down, sold to other jews or given to the synagogues to be rented or sold to other jews coming to the area. It never left jewish hands. Till the early 19th C jews could not buy non-jewish land, it could only be given by the empire or rented to them. Even being able to pray at the wall is a relatively modern privilage of the Ottomans, through there have been a few times off and on when it was permitted. The other land owners were the churches and wakf. The churches owned land they farmed to support themselves and the maintenance of the churches they were responsible for. The rest was for the most part state land.
The idea of a palestine or palestinian people is a modern creation, not historically based.
The muslims were arab, syrian, (later) jordanian, egyptian but not palestinian. They were known by tribe or were serfs in large part.

So where is the origin of this nation for the palestinians? Where are the lines for borders? Where is this history and government?

First, I never claimed there was a nation. There is a people. As I pointed out to Phoenall if national borders, government, currency etc were required for a people to be a people then a whole lot of groups would lose their identity.

Why are they more deserving of a state than the kurds, yazidi, armeneans, zoroastrians or dozens of other "people" with their own language, traditions, religions, culture, history, etc.?

Are Jews any more deserving of a state then those aforementioned people? The answer is no, yet they have one, they have self determination, freedom, security and rights.

At this point, the Palestinians are stateless, citizenless, subject to military law and a system that administers "justice" one way for them and one way for their Jewish counterparts.

You can argue for self determination for those other groups if you want and if that is what they want. Make a case for it. No one else has.

They already have self determination as it is not something that can be handed out. Do you have the self determination to post on this board daily, do the Palestinians have the self determination to engage in terrorism, violence, propaganda and a whole range of other activities. They are stateless because they wont take that other small step of self determination because they would be in debt to the rest of the world. They are not citizenless as they have over 6 million citizens around the world. They are subject to military law because they believe violence and terrorism is the right and only way to carry out the final solution. The system works that way because that is how it is written in the Geneva conventions, which the Israelis follow. As an example the customary punishment under Jordanian law for murder ( the laws that apply in the west bank under the Geneva conventions) is different to the punishment under Israeli law. So the Israelis apply the law of the land. If you cant understand the Geneva conventions then I advise you to refrain from posting on topics you are not educated enough to understand.

They do not have self-determination.

Definition: the process by which a country determines its own statehood and forms its own allegiances and government.

Few groups/people have that right in the region. Why only the palestinians should have that right. They were never a people before the mandate. Historical they did not exist.

They were just arabs and a state was created, Jordan.

"they were just arabs"...doesn't that just say it all?

 

[aris2chat]

Everything that goes into gaza is held and distributed by hamas. Food and medicines have expired before hamas allows them to be sold. Building supplies and fuel have hamas getting them first. Hamas charge premium prices for being allowed to receive good, but they don't want to pay for fuel from the PA or for much of the supplies, nor do they want to pay taxes to the PA. Most of what goes into gaza is via donations or paid for from NGOs.
Israel and egypt provide 2/3 of the electricity to gaza. The gaza power plant is controlled by hamas who restrict power to just a few hours a day.
It is their shell game. They control gaza.

Gaza was a mess long before Hamas came into power. And Israel built the wall to keep residents out long before Hamas was in power as well. Members of the Hamas govrenment were born and raised in Gaza right? Shouldn't they love Israel for all the marvelous things Israel did for them when they were growing up?

The wall is in the WB not gaza. Gaza is just a fence.

Palestinians in gaza were given work at Israeli pay on the farms and Israeli businesses in gaza before the withdrawal.
They were treated a "hell" of a lot better than they were when egypt controlled gaza.
Gazans were allowed into Israel for work, medical treatment, education and to visit the mount. The might have needed ID cards and passes to come and go but that should be expected since so many were calling for and carrying out acts of terrorism.
The power, sewage and other services were established by the Israelis. There was building, growth and development under Israel. An air port was built, a deep water harbor was in the works. Hotels and tourism were growing thanks to Israel.
All that ended with hamas, and Israel withdrawal from gaza.

So how marvelous is hamas? What have they done but bring war and destruction to gaza?

It's not a wall just a fence...

Well whatever. As an American I just hope Israel doesn't drag us into a religious war. If Israel wants to pretend Palestinians hate them for no reason, well, I hope they know they made the beds that they're sleeping in.

No 2 state solution anymore right? The most prominent Israeli warned that the evil arabs were voting and had to be stopped right? What a joke.

Arabs have hated them for 1500 yrs. It is not Israel, that is just a political excuse. Most palestinians would accept a negotiated settlement for peace. Hamas will not. Most would recognize Israel as a jewish state. Hamas will not.
Hamas will not even come to some peace with the PA and allow free elections or set an election day. They say they will allow a vote but not the right to campaign in gaza if not hamas. The want to control election within gaza. Hamas killed or kicked the PLO/PA out of gaza.
The more deprived the palestinians feel the more anger which empowers hamas. They are in control of the desperation in gaza. They are the cause.
WB prospers while hamas crushes gaza.
People should stop equating the conditions between Israelis and palestinians as Israel's responsibility. They are not Israel and it is not up to Israel to give them the rights of Israelis. They don't serve Israel or pay Israeli taxes. Israel does not have refugee camps. The camps were set up in the WB and G by arabs not Israelis.
Till Oslo there was a trickle of palestinians that applied for entry and citizenship in Israel, about two thousand a year, despite PLO and arab attempts to prevent this. Palestinians were allowed to use Israeli courts to reclaim land if there was some proof, or to be compensated when the land could not be returned.
Most arab state won't even allow palestinians to get jobs or live outside of the camps unless they have some special skill that would be of benefit.

Continue that line of thinking and nothing will change. Which is fine if you're okay with that. But I'd recommend at least electing someone whose foreign policy won't isolate Israel from the rest of the world. As it's isolated right now.

Though, unfortunately, that may involve doing something to better the lives of people in both Gaza and the West Bank.

Btw if everything is so terrible in Gaza but so great in the West Bank; why does the West Bank have the giant wall you mentioned earlier but Gaza merely has a giant fence?

Change the hamas thinking. The refusal to accept Israel as a state and the call for the death of all jews. Change the hate coming out of the mosques and schools.

For more than 60 yrs Israel has tried and all it got was more violence in return.

Right now the palestinians do not seem to be ready for a state unless it means the annihilation of Israelis. Israelis will not play the sacrificial lamb to the palestinian god of violence. They will not allow another genocide of jews.

 

[P F Tinmore]

You sure about that?

YEP I am as the arab muslims an leave at any time they want, but they cant return. Once they have gone they stay gone for ever. The only people stopping the arab muslims from leaving is hamas who controls who leaves gaza

I don't think you are right about that. Hamas has no control over the borders.

Palestinian freedom of movement - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia

He is completely wrong. The people in Gaza are basically trapped. I'm not even sure they can import or export goods.

That is the main problem. Israel will not allow them to export anything. No produce, no manufactured goods, nothing.

That means that they are not allowed to make any money. That is why most of them are on the dole.

And wrong once again tinny as they don't produce anything to export, and if they did they expect the Jews to organise and pay for the shipping costs out of gaza to its destination

Before Israel imposed a blockade on Hamas-run Gaza three years ago, Gaza exported more than $300 million worth of products each year, from garments to furniture to agricultural products to ice cream.

How Israel s easing of Gaza blockade has hurt Gaza business - CSMonitor.com

 

[TheOldSchool]

Gaza was a mess long before Hamas came into power. And Israel built the wall to keep residents out long before Hamas was in power as well. Members of the Hamas govrenment were born and raised in Gaza right? Shouldn't they love Israel for all the marvelous things Israel did for them when they were growing up?

The wall is in the WB not gaza. Gaza is just a fence.

Palestinians in gaza were given work at Israeli pay on the farms and Israeli businesses in gaza before the withdrawal.
They were treated a "hell" of a lot better than they were when egypt controlled gaza.
Gazans were allowed into Israel for work, medical treatment, education and to visit the mount. The might have needed ID cards and passes to come and go but that should be expected since so many were calling for and carrying out acts of terrorism.
The power, sewage and other services were established by the Israelis. There was building, growth and development under Israel. An air port was built, a deep water harbor was in the works. Hotels and tourism were growing thanks to Israel.
All that ended with hamas, and Israel withdrawal from gaza.

So how marvelous is hamas? What have they done but bring war and destruction to gaza?

It's not a wall just a fence...

Well whatever. As an American I just hope Israel doesn't drag us into a religious war. If Israel wants to pretend Palestinians hate them for no reason, well, I hope they know they made the beds that they're sleeping in.

No 2 state solution anymore right? The most prominent Israeli warned that the evil arabs were voting and had to be stopped right? What a joke.

Arabs have hated them for 1500 yrs. It is not Israel, that is just a political excuse. Most palestinians would accept a negotiated settlement for peace. Hamas will not. Most would recognize Israel as a jewish state. Hamas will not.
Hamas will not even come to some peace with the PA and allow free elections or set an election day. They say they will allow a vote but not the right to campaign in gaza if not hamas. The want to control election within gaza. Hamas killed or kicked the PLO/PA out of gaza.
The more deprived the palestinians feel the more anger which empowers hamas. They are in control of the desperation in gaza. They are the cause.
WB prospers while hamas crushes gaza.
People should stop equating the conditions between Israelis and palestinians as Israel's responsibility. They are not Israel and it is not up to Israel to give them the rights of Israelis. They don't serve Israel or pay Israeli taxes. Israel does not have refugee camps. The camps were set up in the WB and G by arabs not Israelis.
Till Oslo there was a trickle of palestinians that applied for entry and citizenship in Israel, about two thousand a year, despite PLO and arab attempts to prevent this. Palestinians were allowed to use Israeli courts to reclaim land if there was some proof, or to be compensated when the land could not be returned.
Most arab state won't even allow palestinians to get jobs or live outside of the camps unless they have some special skill that would be of benefit.

Continue that line of thinking and nothing will change. Which is fine if you're okay with that. But I'd recommend at least electing someone whose foreign policy won't isolate Israel from the rest of the world. As it's isolated right now.

Though, unfortunately, that may involve doing something to better the lives of people in both Gaza and the West Bank.

Btw if everything is so terrible in Gaza but so great in the West Bank; why does the West Bank have the giant wall you mentioned earlier but Gaza merely has a giant fence?

Change the hamas thinking. The refusal to accept Israel as a state and the call for the death of all jews. Change the hate coming out of the mosques and schools.

For more than 60 yrs Israel has tried and all it got was more violence in return.

Right now the palestinians do not seem to be ready for a state unless it means the annihilation of Israelis. Israelis will not play the sacrificial lamb to the palestinian god of violence. They will not allow another genocide of jews.

How can Israeli's call for Hamas to recognize Israel when Israel JUST reelected a man who swore to never recognize Palestine? How can you change the hate in Mosques and Schools when all of the people are treated as if they were hated by Israel? Restricted movement, blocked off by walls, not allowed to leave, under constant threat of air raids, restricted imports and exports, etc....

Israel has NOT tried! The violence is WILDLY lopsided in the favor of Israel! Look at the casualties from all the conflicts. It's not even close! For 60 years Israel has been in the position of power in negotiations, backed by the most powerful nations in the world, and they have never been willing to concede anything of real value.

There are 3 ways this plays out. 1. The status quo remains and rockets fly into Israel as Israel further isolates itself from the rest of the world. 2. Israel lays to waste all Palestinian land and never has to worry about Palestinians again. And completely isolates itself from the rest of the world. 3. Israel comes to the table in an honest attempt at peace (so Bibi will have to be gone).

Of course there's the 4th option that 1 and 2 will likely lead to which is an all out war in the middle east that Israel may or may not survive. Which of those options seems the best to you?

 

[Challenger]

Oh, they formed state? When ?

He ant answer because there is no evidence of there ever being a Palestinian state until 1988

Well....maybe. Daher el-Omar ruled most of Palestine as an independant Emirate from 1730 to 1775. Daher was a native Palestinian. That should count.

Interesting...I did not know that

Me neither, until I found out about it researching something else.

So he ruled the NORTERN PART OF PALESTINE not all of it. And this does not mean that Palestine was a nation does it ?

Another fail

You said there was no evidence of a Palestinian state until 1988, look you said it here:

....there is no evidence of there ever being a Palestinian state until 1988

I provided you with some evidence for a Palestinian state before 1988, seems you are moving the goalposts again.

 

[Hossfly]

As soon as you use the term nation to describe the arab muslims claims you are showing your lack of understanding. Which is why the questions are always asked and never replied to properly. If Palestine was a nation before 1988 then it must have had a capital city, a currency, a leader or leaders, a GDP, and a set of laws. It must also have had a treaty signed by the LoN giving it the land undewr the terms of the Mandate for Palestine. Like Syria has, Iraq has, Jordan has and Israel has.
But seeing as it was just an undefined area in the M.E. that had no leaders or capital then it could not have been a nation. It is no different to the Gobi desert, the Sahara, the Pampas or the Steppes which are also not nations but just places on the map.

Palestine, as the mandate clearly showed, was a subject under international law. While she could not conclude international conventions, the mandatory Power, until further notice, concluded them on her behalf, in virtue of Article 19 of the mandate. The mandate, in Article 7, obliged the Mandatory to enact a nationality law, which again showed that the Palestinians formed a nation, and that Palestine was a State, though provisionally under guardianship. It was, moreover, unnecessary to labour the point; there was no doubt whatever that Palestine was a separate political entity. - See more at: Mandate for Palestine - League of Nations 32nd session - Minutes of the Permanent Mandates Commission 18 August 1937

Once again you fail to see the truth in as much as Palestine was not a nation until 1988, and the Nationality Law was to provide consular cover for any Mandate for Palestine inhabitant to travel outside of the mandate. If Palestine was a nation why are its passports from that era all BRITISH and not issued by the Palestinian government on the order of its government ?

Still waiting for the Internationally agreed treaty signed by the representatives of Palestine that gave the Palestinians a nation. Just like the ones that gave the Syrians, Iraqi's, Jordanians and Israeli's their nations.

What international treaty gave Israelis their nation?

Quote the passages.

None, Tinmore. It was given to the Israelites by the Creator. Period.

Which "Creator", assuming such a thing even exists? All you have is a fairy story written by a bunch of religious fanatics who were exiled for misbehaving and subsequently made up a "religion" based on Sumerian/Assyrian/Babylonian fairy stories. In any event claims of "ancient title" have always been rejected by competent legal bodies like the ICJ.

So sue me.

 

[Challenger]

No they don't.

Descendants of murderous squatters have to right to that which belongs to others. They declared war. They lost. By what right do squatters who initiated a war have the right to that which they never owned in the first place?

They aren't squatters.

LINK showing that they own the land, either through international treaty or land deeds. A clue the Ottoman census put the numbers of arab muslims in Palestine to be very low, with the Christians outnumbering them in many places. The Jews owned most of Jerusalem, Hebron and other towns and cities.

Till the end of WWII most of the "local" arabs were serfs and most of those who "owned" land were foreign officials who had been given land by the Ottomans. The area was very poor and under/un-developed and little if any taxes were generated. Were were all these people who could afford to own land?
A tax province or sanjuk is not a state and the people within are not a nation. Sanjuks were little more than counties and what became the mandate were made up of at least half a dozen of these. Where was "palestine"? Even under the Romans there were three palæstina (name given by the romans) and mostly in what is now the gaza, sinai and jordan, not jerusalem or most of the roman towns in the fertile area.
The region was populated by people from throughout the mediterranean and middle east. To say there was a native people beside the jews is a misunderstanding. Yes, there are remnants of crusaders, armenians, persians, greeks, italians, french, english, etc. that has live there for hundreds of years but they were not a single people that were arab or palestinian. There were dozens of people and tribles like an amish quilt that existed as muslims or kafir in the area.
So where was this palestine? It was a region like saying the levant or fertile crescent.
So were was the state of palestine and who were the palestinian people, especially those who owned land?
Slaves, serfs, workers, share croppers, seasonal laborers, renters did not own the land or homes they occupied. Apart from some store owners in the urban areas, few locals owned land, even if their family have worked the land for generations.
Most did not want to serve in the military so the Ottoman gave land to those that served the government as officers, those from outside of those sanjuks. There was a tradition, before the Ottomans opened the area to jewish immigration, of land owned by jews/synagogues remained in those hands. It was passed down, sold to other jews or given to the synagogues to be rented or sold to other jews coming to the area. It never left jewish hands. Till the early 19th C jews could not buy non-jewish land, it could only be given by the empire or rented to them. Even being able to pray at the wall is a relatively modern privilage of the Ottomans, through there have been a few times off and on when it was permitted. The other land owners were the churches and wakf. The churches owned land they farmed to support themselves and the maintenance of the churches they were responsible for. The rest was for the most part state land.
The idea of a palestine or palestinian people is a modern creation, not historically based.
The muslims were arab, syrian, (later) jordanian, egyptian but not palestinian. They were known by tribe or were serfs in large part.

So where is the origin of this nation for the palestinians? Where are the lines for borders? Where is this history and government?

First, I never claimed there was a nation. There is a people. As I pointed out to Phoenall if national borders, government, currency etc were required for a people to be a people then a whole lot of groups would lose their identity.

Why are they more deserving of a state than the kurds, yazidi, armeneans, zoroastrians or dozens of other "people" with their own language, traditions, religions, culture, history, etc.?

Are Jews any more deserving of a state then those aforementioned people? The answer is no, yet they have one, they have self determination, freedom, security and rights.

At this point, the Palestinians are stateless, citizenless, subject to military law and a system that administers "justice" one way for them and one way for their Jewish counterparts.

You can argue for self determination for those other groups if you want and if that is what they want. Make a case for it. No one else has.

They already have self determination as it is not something that can be handed out. Do you have the self determination to post on this board daily, do the Palestinians have the self determination to engage in terrorism, violence, propaganda and a whole range of other activities. They are stateless because they wont take that other small step of self determination because they would be in debt to the rest of the world. They are not citizenless as they have over 6 million citizens around the world. They are subject to military law because they believe violence and terrorism is the right and only way to carry out the final solution. The system works that way because that is how it is written in the Geneva conventions, which the Israelis follow. As an example the customary punishment under Jordanian law for murder ( the laws that apply in the west bank under the Geneva conventions) is different to the punishment under Israeli law. So the Israelis apply the law of the land. If you cant understand the Geneva conventions then I advise you to refrain from posting on topics you are not educated enough to understand.

 

[RoccoR]

Coyote, et al,

OK --- I can work with this.

They do not have self-determination.

Definition: the process by which a country determines its own statehood and forms its own allegiances and government.

(QUESTIONS)

In what way were the Palestinians denied:

• Statehood.
  • Pursuant to the resolutions of the Arab Summit Conferences and on the basis of the international legitimacy embodied in the resolutions of the United Nations since 1947, and
  • Through the exercise by the Palestinian Arab people of its right to self-determination, political independence and sovereignty over its territory:
  • The Palestine National Council hereby declares, in the Name of God and on behalf of the Palestinian Arab people, the establishment of the State of Palestine in the land of Palestine with its capital at Jerusalem.
• Form it own Allegiance
  • Video: Hamas Pledges Allegiance to Muslim Brotherhood
  • This video is a reminder of the irony that the Muslim Brotherhood is often considered “moderate” while its Palestinian branch, Hamas, is considered a terrorist group. The video shows that the two are inseparable
    • The video shows Hamas Prime Minister Ismail Haniyeh on stage towards the end (1:12 minutes into the video), apparently taking the pledge with his hand raised.
    • The two countries (Saudi Arabia and Egypt) are said to be worried that under British law the Brotherhood cannot be proscribed as a terrorist group despite being the centre of a web of extremist groups. Had the report been published without the mechanisms in place to ban the Muslim Brotherhood, both Saudi and Egypt may have felt pressurised to end their own crackdowns on the group.
      
      The Brotherhood operates through a number of front organisations in the UK, most of which are based in two buildings in West London. According to the website Stand For Peace these include the Muslim Association of Britain and Interpal, which has been accused by the US government of being the “fundraising coordinator of HAMAS”.
  • The State of Palestine currently enjoys bilateral recognition from 135 other States. Many States extended recognition to the State of Palestine following the Declaration of Independence by the Palestine National Council on 15 November 1988 in Algeris, Algeria. Other States recognized the State of Palestine in the recent period following extensive bilateral and multilateral diplomatic efforts. Below you will find a list of those States which have extended recognition to the State of Palestine and their corresponding date of recognition.
• Form its own government
  • The current Government was sworn in by the President of the State of Palestine, Mr. Mahmoud Abbas, on 2 June 2014.

(COMMENT)

The Arab Palestinians want, on the one hand --- to play the part of the martyr and argue that Israel has somehow denied them these rights or opportunities; when in fact, the Arab Palestinian has attempted to use self-determination on multiple occasions.

Most Respectfully,
R

 

[aris2chat]

Till the end of WWII most of the "local" arabs were serfs and most of those who "owned" land were foreign officials who had been given land by the Ottomans. The area was very poor and under/un-developed and little if any taxes were generated. Were were all these people who could afford to own land?
A tax province or sanjuk is not a state and the people within are not a nation. Sanjuks were little more than counties and what became the mandate were made up of at least half a dozen of these. Where was "palestine"? Even under the Romans there were three palæstina (name given by the romans) and mostly in what is now the gaza, sinai and jordan, not jerusalem or most of the roman towns in the fertile area.
The region was populated by people from throughout the mediterranean and middle east. To say there was a native people beside the jews is a misunderstanding. Yes, there are remnants of crusaders, armenians, persians, greeks, italians, french, english, etc. that has live there for hundreds of years but they were not a single people that were arab or palestinian. There were dozens of people and tribles like an amish quilt that existed as muslims or kafir in the area.
So where was this palestine? It was a region like saying the levant or fertile crescent.
So were was the state of palestine and who were the palestinian people, especially those who owned land?
Slaves, serfs, workers, share croppers, seasonal laborers, renters did not own the land or homes they occupied. Apart from some store owners in the urban areas, few locals owned land, even if their family have worked the land for generations.
Most did not want to serve in the military so the Ottoman gave land to those that served the government as officers, those from outside of those sanjuks. There was a tradition, before the Ottomans opened the area to jewish immigration, of land owned by jews/synagogues remained in those hands. It was passed down, sold to other jews or given to the synagogues to be rented or sold to other jews coming to the area. It never left jewish hands. Till the early 19th C jews could not buy non-jewish land, it could only be given by the empire or rented to them. Even being able to pray at the wall is a relatively modern privilage of the Ottomans, through there have been a few times off and on when it was permitted. The other land owners were the churches and wakf. The churches owned land they farmed to support themselves and the maintenance of the churches they were responsible for. The rest was for the most part state land.
The idea of a palestine or palestinian people is a modern creation, not historically based.
The muslims were arab, syrian, (later) jordanian, egyptian but not palestinian. They were known by tribe or were serfs in large part.

So where is the origin of this nation for the palestinians? Where are the lines for borders? Where is this history and government?

First, I never claimed there was a nation. There is a people. As I pointed out to Phoenall if national borders, government, currency etc were required for a people to be a people then a whole lot of groups would lose their identity.

Why are they more deserving of a state than the kurds, yazidi, armeneans, zoroastrians or dozens of other "people" with their own language, traditions, religions, culture, history, etc.?

Are Jews any more deserving of a state then those aforementioned people? The answer is no, yet they have one, they have self determination, freedom, security and rights.

At this point, the Palestinians are stateless, citizenless, subject to military law and a system that administers "justice" one way for them and one way for their Jewish counterparts.

You can argue for self determination for those other groups if you want and if that is what they want. Make a case for it. No one else has.

They already have self determination as it is not something that can be handed out. Do you have the self determination to post on this board daily, do the Palestinians have the self determination to engage in terrorism, violence, propaganda and a whole range of other activities. They are stateless because they wont take that other small step of self determination because they would be in debt to the rest of the world. They are not citizenless as they have over 6 million citizens around the world. They are subject to military law because they believe violence and terrorism is the right and only way to carry out the final solution. The system works that way because that is how it is written in the Geneva conventions, which the Israelis follow. As an example the customary punishment under Jordanian law for murder ( the laws that apply in the west bank under the Geneva conventions) is different to the punishment under Israeli law. So the Israelis apply the law of the land. If you cant understand the Geneva conventions then I advise you to refrain from posting on topics you are not educated enough to understand.

They do not have self-determination.

Definition: the process by which a country determines its own statehood and forms its own allegiances and government.

Few groups/people have that right in the region. Why only the palestinians should have that right. They were never a people before the mandate. Historical they did not exist.

They were just arabs and a state was created, Jordan.

"they were just arabs"...doesn't that just say it all?

The identity of a palestine or palestinians did not exist.
Most of the arab speaking world that did not identify with a particular tribe or group were just arabs. That was the only unifying thing they had.
It was hundreds of little people or arab. It is just the way things were. Nationalism and statehood are modern concepts. Islam was supposed to unify them till it became a dozen or so separate groups, and each considered the others heretics.
You seem to want to change the facts to suit your own perceptions of what a people or nation should be today.
You need to understand what it was in the 18th, 19th and 20th century, not what you want it to have been.

 

[Challenger]

Palestine, as the mandate clearly showed, was a subject under international law. While she could not conclude international conventions, the mandatory Power, until further notice, concluded them on her behalf, in virtue of Article 19 of the mandate. The mandate, in Article 7, obliged the Mandatory to enact a nationality law, which again showed that the Palestinians formed a nation, and that Palestine was a State, though provisionally under guardianship. It was, moreover, unnecessary to labour the point; there was no doubt whatever that Palestine was a separate political entity. - See more at: Mandate for Palestine - League of Nations 32nd session - Minutes of the Permanent Mandates Commission 18 August 1937

Once again you fail to see the truth in as much as Palestine was not a nation until 1988, and the Nationality Law was to provide consular cover for any Mandate for Palestine inhabitant to travel outside of the mandate. If Palestine was a nation why are its passports from that era all BRITISH and not issued by the Palestinian government on the order of its government ?

Still waiting for the Internationally agreed treaty signed by the representatives of Palestine that gave the Palestinians a nation. Just like the ones that gave the Syrians, Iraqi's, Jordanians and Israeli's their nations.

What international treaty gave Israelis their nation?

Quote the passages.

None, Tinmore. It was given to the Israelites by the Creator. Period.

Which "Creator", assuming such a thing even exists? All you have is a fairy story written by a bunch of religious fanatics who were exiled for misbehaving and subsequently made up a "religion" based on Sumerian/Assyrian/Babylonian fairy stories. In any event claims of "ancient title" have always been rejected by competent legal bodies like the ICJ.

So sue me.

Would that get the Palestinians their freedom? If so, send me your details and I'll get my lawyers on to it right away.

 

[Challenger]

In what way were the Palestinians denied:

Belligerent occupation by the Zionist regime prevents them exercising the full unfettered sovereignty, of an independant state. Definition: a state or a governing body having the full right and power to govern itself without any interference from outside sources or bodies.

 

[Challenger]

The identity of a palestine or palestinians did not exist.

Yes it did. Although by and large subsumed in the Pan-Arabism prevalent at the time, an Arab from Arabia could distinguish between an Arab from Mesopotamia from Syria, from Palestine. Much like in the U.K. we can distinguish between a Cornishman, a Geordie, a Cockney, etc. A Cornishman, a Geordie and a Cockney are all Englishmen, but they have their own fierce pride in their regional history and identity.

 

[joesakic]

I do not know why there is a focus on whether the people indigenous to the land were called Palestinians or not. I am from Canada and we displaced many aboriginals in this land. Whether or not the were from the Metis tribe, Iroquois etc. or whether they are called Indians or aboriginals does not matter. It seems like unlike Zionists, I feel very badly on how we treated the people indigenous to this land. I encourage aboriginals in Canada to have tax empetions, fist rights on government jobs, mining agreements regarding natural resources because WE TOOK IT ALL FROM THEM. For Zionists to deny they displaced people wether the are Arab, Palestinian, or whatever they want to be called is ignorant.
Please note THERE IS A HUGE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN ZIONISM AND JUDAISM. Jews lived in a much more peaceful time in the Middle East prior to Zionism.
ZIONISTS please listen to your brothers of the Neturei Karta and the True Torah Jews. They have the true insight into peace for the region.

 

[Challenger]

I do not know why there is a focus on whether the people indigenous to the land were called Palestinians or not. I am from Canada and we displaced many aboriginals in this land. Whether or not the were from the Metis tribe, Iroquois etc. or whether they are called Indians or aboriginals does not matter. It seems like unlike Zionists, I feel very badly on how we treated the people indigenous to this land. I encourage aboriginals in Canada to have tax empetions, fist rights on government jobs, mining agreements regarding natural resources because WE TOOK IT ALL FROM THEM. For Zionists to deny they displaced people wether the are Arab, Palestinian, or whatever they want to be called is ignorant.
Please note THERE IS A HUGE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN ZIONISM AND JUDAISM. Jews lived in a much more peaceful time in the Middle East prior to Zionism.
ZIONISTS please listen to your brothers of the Neturei Karta and the True Torah Jews. They have the true insight into peace for the region.

Nice first post, but you need to be aware there is a firestorm of hatred and invective heading your way from the Zionists and their fellow travellers on this forum. I hope you have thick skin...