Is Israel the Same as South Africa?

[P F Tinmore]

"...Indeed, some worship mammon and some do not."

Like your Saudi oil barons?

Yeah, right, Tinny.

To paraphrase one of your own, just a few minutes ago...

Typical BS excuse for Under-Performers...

Israel has always been subsidized. What is your point?

 

[P F Tinmore]

P F Tinmore, et al,

Remember the basics.

What we call today, the Palestinians, never had sovereignty over the territory once under Mandate. Blah, blah, blah.

Typical BS excuse to kick people out of their homeland.

(COMMENT)

Who started the conflict between the Jewish and the Arab Palestinian?

Don't take a swing at someone and then cry because they beat the snot out of you. If I ever did that, my father would give me a second licking.

Most Respectfully,
R

You always get it back assward, Rocco.

The Palestinians did not go to Europe. The Europeans went to Palestine.

 

[Kondor3]

"...Israel has always been subsidized. What is your point?"

So have the Palestinians...

By the Arabs...

Then again...

The Jews of Palestine were creating enclaves of high-yield Agriculture and Industry long before 1948, and long before they were receiving any sort of subsidies or foreign aid...

Never mind the fact that between the founding of the State of Israel in 1948 and the conclusion of the last big Arab-Israel War (1973), the United States was providing relatively small amounts of both economic and military aid to Israel (although the US did step-in and help to replenish military inventories consumed in the 1967 War).

And, beyond some modest grant-money from the US in the period 1948-1959 to help with accommodating new immigration, etc., during the period 1959-1973, most of the modest aid dollars that flowed from the US to Israel were actually in the form of loans, which Israel has mostly and long-since repaid by now.

No... the Jews pretty much did that by themselves, without a lot of outside help, prior to the end of the 1973 War.

And, rather than begrudging the Jews some modest aid from the outside, perhaps we should be focusing upon Arab aid to Palestine, yes?

Where, oh where, was the matching and equivalent aid to the Arab-Muslim Palestinians, by their Arab-Muslim brethren, to offset such so-called Subsidies?

If the Palestinians have been under-subsidized or under-funded in recent decades, we know where to place the blame.

Squarely upon the Muslim world.

It's not the Jews' fault if your boys are cheap-skates and tight-fisted misers.

Or, alternatively, perhaps they know a Loser Cause when they see one, and, beyond giving some lip-service to the Palestinians, they choose not to throw good money after bad.

I guess I can't blame them, if that's the case.

It's a Loser Cause, alright.

The only things that the Palestinians create are rockets and suicide-vests and excuses... lots and lots and lots of excuses for under-performing, compared to the Jews of Israel.

 

[RoccoR]

P F Tinmore, et al,

What is this?

Israel has always been subsidized. What is your point?

(COMMENT)

US Aid to Lebanon:

This partnership between the people of America and Lebanon dates back to 1951, and continues in strength today. The American people are contributing $109 million to USAID’s programs in Lebanon in 2010.​

US Aid to Jordan:

U.S. Provides $360 Million in Additional Grant Assistance to Jordan.​

US Aid to Palestine

“To date, we have moved $295.7 million in fiscal year 2012 money… and $200 million in fiscal year 2013 assistance,” State Department spokeswoman Victoria Nuland told reporters.​

Who do we not support in the Region? We give over a Billion dollar to Egypt, and send $195 million in humanitarian and food aid to Syria.

Most Respectfully,
R

 

[RoccoR]

P F Tinmore, et al,

No, I don't think I forgot to mention "immigration."

P F Tinmore, et al,

Remember the basics.

Typical BS excuse to kick people out of their homeland.

(COMMENT)

Who started the conflict between the Jewish and the Arab Palestinian?

Don't take a swing at someone and then cry because they beat the snot out of you. If I ever did that, my father would give me a second licking.

Most Respectfully,
R

You always get it back assward, Rocco.

The Palestinians did not go to Europe. The Europeans went to Palestine.

(COMMENT)

Like I said, it has been going on for 800 years. And yes, they came from all over the world. That was the intention of the Sultan (the Sovereign over the Territory) and the LoN/UN/Allied Powers (to which the Ottoman's surrendered the Territory).

It was the intention and the Arab Palestinians defied the powers, openly challenging the authority by force.

Most Respectfully,
R

 

[ForeverYoung436]

P F Tinmore, et al,

Remember the basics.

Typical BS excuse to kick people out of their homeland.

(COMMENT)

Who started the conflict between the Jewish and the Arab Palestinian?

Don't take a swing at someone and then cry because they beat the snot out of you. If I ever did that, my father would give me a second licking.

Most Respectfully,
R

You always get it back assward, Rocco.

The Palestinians did not go to Europe. The Europeans went to Palestine.

You are also the descendent of immigrants, and not Cherokee or Apache.

 

[P F Tinmore]

"...Israel has always been subsidized. What is your point?"

So have the Palestinians...

By the Arabs...

Then again...

The Jews of Palestine were creating enclaves of high-yield Agriculture and Industry long before 1948, and long before they were receiving any sort of subsidies or foreign aid...

Never mind the fact that between the founding of the State of Israel in 1948 and the conclusion of the last big Arab-Israel War (1973), the United States was providing relatively small amounts of both economic and military aid to Israel (although the US did step-in and help to replenish military inventories consumed in the 1967 War).

And, beyond some modest grant-money from the US in the period 1948-1959 to help with accommodating new immigration, etc., during the period 1959-1973, most of the modest aid dollars that flowed from the US to Israel were actually in the form of loans, which Israel has mostly and long-since repaid by now.

No... the Jews pretty much did that by themselves, without a lot of outside help, prior to the end of the 1973 War.

And, rather than begrudging the Jews some modest aid from the outside, perhaps we should be focusing upon Arab aid to Palestine, yes?

Where, oh where, was the matching and equivalent aid to the Arab-Muslim Palestinians, by their Arab-Muslim brethren, to offset such so-called Subsidies?

If the Palestinians have been under-subsidized or under-funded in recent decades, we know where to place the blame.

Squarely upon the Muslim world.

It's not the Jews' fault if your boys are cheap-skates and tight-fisted misers.

Or, alternatively, perhaps they know a Loser Cause when they see one, and, beyond giving some lip-service to the Palestinians, they choose not to throw good money after bad.

I guess I can't blame them, if that's the case.

It's a Loser Cause, alright.

The only things that the Palestinians create are rockets and suicide-vests and excuses... lots and lots and lots of excuses for under-performing, compared to the Jews of Israel.

Get serious. Israel is the mooch capital of the world.

 

[P F Tinmore]

P F Tinmore, et al,

Remember the basics.


(COMMENT)

Who started the conflict between the Jewish and the Arab Palestinian?

Don't take a swing at someone and then cry because they beat the snot out of you. If I ever did that, my father would give me a second licking.

Most Respectfully,
R

You always get it back assward, Rocco.

The Palestinians did not go to Europe. The Europeans went to Palestine.

You are also the descendent of immigrants, and not Cherokee or Apache.

Good point. Unfortunately, when the Europeans took over America military conquest was not illegal.

When the Europeans took over Palestine it was.

 

[Kondor3]

"...Get serious. Israel is the mooch capital of the world."

Translation:

"The points you made do not reflect well upon a people with whom I share such an affinity.

The points you made are accurate in the main and cannot be counterpointed sufficiently so as to redeem that aspect of the argument for 'my side'.

So, I will serve-up a terse, non-serious, meaningless dismissal as fluff or filler, and call the Israelis more names, on my way out the door, disengaging from the exchange."

Translation:

For this round - final score: Kondor 1, Tinny 0.

But thank you for playing.

 

[P F Tinmore]

P F Tinmore, et al,

No, I don't think I forgot to mention "immigration."

P F Tinmore, et al,

Remember the basics.


(COMMENT)

Who started the conflict between the Jewish and the Arab Palestinian?

Don't take a swing at someone and then cry because they beat the snot out of you. If I ever did that, my father would give me a second licking.

Most Respectfully,
R

You always get it back assward, Rocco.

The Palestinians did not go to Europe. The Europeans went to Palestine.

(COMMENT)

Like I said, it has been going on for 800 years. And yes, they came from all over the world. That was the intention of the Sultan (the Sovereign over the Territory) and the LoN/UN/Allied Powers (to which the Ottoman's surrendered the Territory).

It was the intention and the Arab Palestinians defied the powers, openly challenging the authority by force.

Most Respectfully,
R

Britain never annexed or otherwise claimed ownership. The territory was ceded to the people.

 

[RoccoR]

P F Tinmore; et al,

I think you've made a small error here.

You always get it back assward, Rocco.

The Palestinians did not go to Europe. The Europeans went to Palestine.

You are also the descendent of immigrants, and not Cherokee or Apache.

Good point. Unfortunately, when the Europeans took over America military conquest was not illegal.

When the Europeans took over Palestine it was.

(COMMENT)

The Law of Aggression and Military Conquest applies to the attacker (Aggressor); not the defender. A state may not attack with an armed force and capture territorial for conquest. However, it does not apply to the defender which successfully defeats the aggressor and captures hostile ground in the process.

Article 2

The first use of armed force by a State in contravention of the Charter shall constitute prima facie evidence of an act of aggression although the Security Council may, in conformity with the Charter, conclude that a determination that an act of aggression has been committed would not be justified in the light of other relevant circumstances, including the fact that the acts concerned or their consequences are not of sufficient gravity.​

Article 5

1. No consideration of whatever nature, whether political, economic, military or otherwise, may serve as a justification for aggression.

2. A war of aggression is a crime against international peace. Aggression gives rise to international responsibility.

3. No territorial acquisition or special advantage resulting from aggression is or shall be recognized as lawful.​

Article 7

Nothing in this Definition, and in particular article 3, could in any way prejudice the right to self-determination, freedom and independence, as derived from the Charter, of peoples forcibly deprived of that right and referred to in the Declaration on Principles of International Law concerning Friendly Relations and Co-operation among States in accordance with the Charter of the United Nations, particularly peoples under colonial and racist regimes or other forms of alien domination; nor the right of these peoples to struggle to that end and to seek and receive support, in accordance with the principles of the Charter and in conformity with the above-mentioned Declaration.​

SOURCE: A/RES/3314(XXIX) 14 December 1974

In the case of Israel 'v' Arab Palestinian, the law would have to be retroactive to apply. In respect to the conceptual applicability, the Arab Palestinians, and the Arab League, would be the "aggressors" relative to the Wars of 1948, 1967, and 1973. Thus, the Law of Conquest (Article 5, Paragraph 3) does not apply. The Israelis were not the "first use of armed force by a State in contravention of the Charter" (Article 2).

Relative to the Treaty agreements, the Law of Conquest still would not apply. The Turkish State (successor government to the Ottoman Empire) relinquished its authority to the Allied Powers (Article 139 of Treaty of Servers, in conjunction with Section VII - Syria, Mesopotamia, Palestine). The territory was surrendered by the sovereign to the Allied Powers, not as a result of trial by combat.

SPECIAL NOTE:

ARTICLE 129.

Jews of other than Turkish nationality who are habitually resident, on the coming into force of the present Treaty, within the boundaries of Palestine, as determined in accordance with Article 95 will ipso facto become citizens of Palestine to the exclusion of any other nationality.

SOURCE: http://www.hri.org/docs/sevres/part3.html

Most Respectfully,
R

 

[Roudy]

P F Tinmore, et al,

Remember the basics.

What we call today, the Palestinians, never had sovereignty over the territory once under Mandate. Blah, blah, blah.

Typical BS excuse to kick people out of their homeland.

(COMMENT)

Who started the conflict between the Jewish and the Arab Palestinian?

Don't take a swing at someone and then cry because they beat the snot out of you. If I ever did that, my father would give me a second licking.

Most Respectfully,
R

exactly.

 

[Roudy]

P F Tinmore, et al,

What is this?

Israel has always been subsidized. What is your point?

(COMMENT)

US Aid to Lebanon:

This partnership between the people of America and Lebanon dates back to 1951, and continues in strength today. The American people are contributing $109 million to USAID’s programs in Lebanon in 2010.​

US Aid to Jordan:

U.S. Provides $360 Million in Additional Grant Assistance to Jordan.​

US Aid to Palestine

“To date, we have moved $295.7 million in fiscal year 2012 money… and $200 million in fiscal year 2013 assistance,” State Department spokeswoman Victoria Nuland told reporters.​

Who do we not support in the Region? We give over a Billion dollar to Egypt, and send $195 million in humanitarian and food aid to Syria.

Most Respectfully,
R

You forgot Egypt and Pakistan that have received a whopping total of 30 billion since 2001.

 

[Roudy]

P F Tinmore, et al,

Remember the basics.

Typical BS excuse to kick people out of their homeland.

(COMMENT)

Who started the conflict between the Jewish and the Arab Palestinian?

Don't take a swing at someone and then cry because they beat the snot out of you. If I ever did that, my father would give me a second licking.

Most Respectfully,
R

You always get it back assward, Rocco.

The Palestinians did not go to Europe. The Europeans went to Palestine.

Being that the only people with the label "Palestinians" at that time were Jews. This makes no sense.

 

[P F Tinmore]

Rocco,

The Palestinians fought foreigners in Palestine yet you say they were the aggressors.

 

[Kondor3]

Any sign of Matching Funds yet from the Muslim world, in support of the Palestinians, to match the subsidies going to the Israelis?

Or does the Muslim world know that for what it is... throwing good money after bad?

 

[RoccoR]

P F Tinmore, et al,

Yes, what we call today, Arab Palestinians, opened hostilities against Jewish Immigrants in defiance of the Allied Powers intentions to establish a Jewish National Home.

Rocco,

The Palestinians fought foreigners in Palestine yet you say they were the aggressors.

(COMMENT)

Sovereignty and Citizenship was neither the responsibility of, or in the dominion of, the Arab Palestinian.

Neither is the concept that the Jewish Immigrant was a "foreigner." That was not the intention of the Ottoman Empire (for 800 years) nor was it the intention of the Allied Powers. If there was ever a case to be made, then the entire idea of Arab armed struggle against the Jewish Immigrant who were invited to participate in the establishment of a Jewish National Home, was the original justification for separation-like measures instituted by the Arab against the Jew. For it was they that instituted the struggle for separation. I see it as pure greediness and the promotion of a segregationist model, by armed force, on the part of the Arab and their cultural inability to share the land.

ARTICLE 129.
Jews of other than Turkish nationality who are habitually resident, on the coming into force of the present Treaty, within the boundaries of Palestine, as determined in accordance with Article 95 will ipso facto become citizens of Palestine to the exclusion of any other nationality.

SOURCE: Sevres Treaty: Part III

The Jewish People were authorized to be there. And without regard of how the Arab Palestinian wants to define them, the Arab Palestinian was the first to draw blood. And they (as I said before) will use any excuse, even the xenophobic promotion you show here, in order to justify the continuation of the conflict.

Make no mistake, that no matter how you or Arab Palestinians, define the Jewish Immigrant (foreigners, aliens, whatever), the Arab Palestinian was an aggressor culture that targeted a minority group of lawful immigrants. You can attempt to justify it, as you have, but at the end of the day, you are the aggressor.

Most Respectfully,
R

 

[P F Tinmore]

ARTICLE 129.
Jews of other than Turkish nationality who are habitually resident, on the coming into force of the present Treaty, within the boundaries of Palestine, as determined in accordance with Article 95 will ipso facto become citizens of Palestine to the exclusion of any other nationality.

SOURCE: Sevres Treaty: Part III

That is quite similar to the PLO Charter definition.

Article 6:

The Jews who had normally resided in Palestine until the beginning of the Zionist invasion will be considered Palestinians.

The Avalon Project : The Palestinian National Charter

And the current Palestinian constitution states that all citizens are equal without regard to race, religion, sex, etc..

 

[MHunterB]

From Tinny's source: Article 2: "Palestine, with the boundaries it had during the British Mandate, is an indivisible territorial unit. "
IOW, they refuse to recognize the Partition. So obviously they are NOT intending to abide by *ANY* UN Resolutions or rulings of the ICJ or whatever.

Isn't that just the very essence of a 'rogue state'? As per the next two Articles:

Article 3:

The Palestinian Arab people possess the legal right to their homeland and have the right to determine their destiny after achieving the liberation of their country in accordance with their wishes and entirely of their own accord and will.

Article 4:

The Palestinian identity is a genuine, essential, and inherent characteristic; it is transmitted from parents to children. The Zionist occupation and the dispersal of the Palestinian Arab people, through the disasters which befell them, do not make them lose their Palestinian identity and their membership in the Palestinian community, nor do they negate them.

 

[P F Tinmore]

From Tinny's source: Article 2: "Palestine, with the boundaries it had during the British Mandate, is an indivisible territorial unit. "
IOW, they refuse to recognize the Partition. So obviously they are NOT intending to abide by *ANY* UN Resolutions or rulings of the ICJ or whatever.

Isn't that just the very essence of a 'rogue state'? As per the next two Articles:

Article 3:

The Palestinian Arab people possess the legal right to their homeland and have the right to determine their destiny after achieving the liberation of their country in accordance with their wishes and entirely of their own accord and will.

Article 4:

The Palestinian identity is a genuine, essential, and inherent characteristic; it is transmitted from parents to children. The Zionist occupation and the dispersal of the Palestinian Arab people, through the disasters which befell them, do not make them lose their Palestinian identity and their membership in the Palestinian community, nor do they negate them.

That is the same thing any other people would say.

Why do you have a problem?