Israel's Lies

[RoccoR]

RE: Israel's Lies
⁜→ P F Tinmore,

BLUF: AH, yessss... The question of Palestine.

The key here is how "YOU" define "Palestine."

To the Palestinians Palestine is Palestine. Occupations are periods of history that do not change the original fact. The opinion of foreigners do not change anything.

(COMMENT)

This is a typical and harmless looking response. But the reality of this statement has a very profound set of consequences if implemented. There is no muddy water here. The Arab Palestinians want to control Israeli sovereign territory. I repeat: → the Arab Palestinians want to control all of Palestine including Israel which they consider "Occupied Territory."

​

Palestine, with the boundaries it had during the British Mandate, is an indivisible territorial unit.​

​

The Palestinian Arab people possess the legal right to their homeland and to self-determination after the completion of the liberation of their country in accordance with their wishes and entirely of their own accord and will.​

​

​

Palestine from the river to the sea, and from north to south, is a land of the Palestinian people and its homeland and its legitimate right, we may not a waiver an inch or any part thereof, no matter what the reasons and circumstances and pressures.​

​

​

As a side note, I noticed that the State of Palestine/Palestine Liberation Organization, Negotiation Affairs Department (PLO/NAD) Website has taken the narratives down on the explanation of their political positions for the nine major points of negotiation (including the position on Borders). I thought that was interesting. I wonder what that means.​

​

I also noticed that the PLO/NAD Website left an ironic key statement behind under Publications (absent the publication): "The Looming Annexation: Israel's Denial of Palestine's Right to Exist" AND if you connect the dot, you finally get to the publication "Irregular Armed Forces and their Role in Politics and State Formation."​

terra nullius ‘The expression “ terra nullius ” was a legal term of art employed in connection with “occupation” as one of the accepted legal methods of acquiring sovereignty over territory. “Occupation” being legally an original means of peacefully acquiring sovereignty over territory otherwise than by cession or succession, it was a cardinal condition of a valid “occupation” that the territory should be terra nullius— a territory belonging to no-one—at the time of the act alleged to constitute the “occupation”

Occupation is the method that Israel claims it has acquired territory. None of the other methods fit.

When territory is peacefully controlled for a period of time that territory can be claimed. Israel's claim to the territory has never been peaceful. It has always been contested by the native population.

Israel constantly whines about so-called terrorist attacks as the natives refuse to cede their territory to Israel.

All "peace offers" to the Palestinians have required them to surrender territory to Israel. So far no such treaty has ever been signed.

(COMMENT)

First, let me say, that I do not speak for Israel. But I think that Israel made a "mistake" by not Annexing the West Bank the moment that HM King Hussein "announced the severance of all administrative and legal ties with the occupied West Bank." On 1 August 1988, it was a peaceful transition. The transition was from Jordaining Soveirenty to Israeli effective control. There was no outbreak of hostilities. It took the Arab Palestinians nearly three Months to respond. And their response was well overtaken by events.

Second, The Arab Palestinians were not asked to surrender any territory. How can this be true, you might ask? Because the Arab Palestinian Leadership generally:

◈ Rejected Negotiations opportunities.​

◈ Did not avail themselves of the "Dispute Clause" in the Oslo Accords.​

◈ On those occasions where they did come to the negotiation table, they did not act in go faith.​

◈ Continued Asymmetric and terrorist attacks on a continuous timeline from 1967 to the present.​

◈ Or, the Arab Palestinian adopted a policy of:​

✦ no peace with Israel,​

✦ no recognition of Israel,​

✦ no negotiations with Israel,​

​

Holy verbosity, Batman!

(COMMENT)

Your questions do not lend themselves to sound bite answers. Your questions may be simple to ask, but much more difficult to explain.

Literally hundreds of people have written thousands of books on the "Question of Palestine." And even more thousands of exchanges and cables that were composed between the Quartet (UN, US, EU, and Russia Federation) trying to hammer-out kinks in various approaches to a solution. If you are expecting a simple three or four-sentence answer to your questions, --- prepare to be continuously disappointed.

I'm not 'verbose' as you term it. If anything, experts on the subject will suggest that I'm oversimplifying the answers; what they sometimes call the baby-spoon explanations.



Most Respectfully,
R

 

[P F Tinmore]

Second, The Arab Palestinians were not asked to surrender any territory.

Name one proposal where Palestine would keep all of their territory.

I await your response.

 

[P F Tinmore]

And even more thousands of exchanges and cables that were composed between the Quartet (UN, US, EU, and Russia Federation) trying to hammer-out kinks in various approaches to a solution.

And what did those dumbfucks accomplish?

 

[Hollie]

Second, The Arab Palestinians were not asked to surrender any territory.

Name one proposal where Palestine would keep all of their territory.

I await your response.

You might want to define ''their territory'' as it relates to the ''Pals''.

"Occupation doesn't mean sovereignty''. I'm paraphrasing but that is one of your preferred slogans.

When did the Pal-Arab occupation of the territory called Palestine grant the ''their territory'' designation

 

[P F Tinmore]

RE: Israel's Lies
⁜→ P F Tinmore,

BLUF: AH, yessss... The question of Palestine.

The key here is how "YOU" define "Palestine."

To the Palestinians Palestine is Palestine. Occupations are periods of history that do not change the original fact. The opinion of foreigners do not change anything.

(COMMENT)

This is a typical and harmless looking response. But the reality of this statement has a very profound set of consequences if implemented. There is no muddy water here. The Arab Palestinians want to control Israeli sovereign territory. I repeat: → the Arab Palestinians want to control all of Palestine including Israel which they consider "Occupied Territory."

​

Palestine, with the boundaries it had during the British Mandate, is an indivisible territorial unit.​

​

The Palestinian Arab people possess the legal right to their homeland and to self-determination after the completion of the liberation of their country in accordance with their wishes and entirely of their own accord and will.​

​

​

Palestine from the river to the sea, and from north to south, is a land of the Palestinian people and its homeland and its legitimate right, we may not a waiver an inch or any part thereof, no matter what the reasons and circumstances and pressures.​

​

​

As a side note, I noticed that the State of Palestine/Palestine Liberation Organization, Negotiation Affairs Department (PLO/NAD) Website has taken the narratives down on the explanation of their political positions for the nine major points of negotiation (including the position on Borders). I thought that was interesting. I wonder what that means.​

​

I also noticed that the PLO/NAD Website left an ironic key statement behind under Publications (absent the publication): "The Looming Annexation: Israel's Denial of Palestine's Right to Exist" AND if you connect the dot, you finally get to the publication "Irregular Armed Forces and their Role in Politics and State Formation."​

terra nullius ‘The expression “ terra nullius ” was a legal term of art employed in connection with “occupation” as one of the accepted legal methods of acquiring sovereignty over territory. “Occupation” being legally an original means of peacefully acquiring sovereignty over territory otherwise than by cession or succession, it was a cardinal condition of a valid “occupation” that the territory should be terra nullius— a territory belonging to no-one—at the time of the act alleged to constitute the “occupation”

Occupation is the method that Israel claims it has acquired territory. None of the other methods fit.

When territory is peacefully controlled for a period of time that territory can be claimed. Israel's claim to the territory has never been peaceful. It has always been contested by the native population.

Israel constantly whines about so-called terrorist attacks as the natives refuse to cede their territory to Israel.

All "peace offers" to the Palestinians have required them to surrender territory to Israel. So far no such treaty has ever been signed.

(COMMENT)

First, let me say, that I do not speak for Israel. But I think that Israel made a "mistake" by not Annexing the West Bank the moment that HM King Hussein "announced the severance of all administrative and legal ties with the occupied West Bank." On 1 August 1988, it was a peaceful transition. The transition was from Jordaining Soveirenty to Israeli effective control. There was no outbreak of hostilities. It took the Arab Palestinians nearly three Months to respond. And their response was well overtaken by events.

Second, The Arab Palestinians were not asked to surrender any territory. How can this be true, you might ask? Because the Arab Palestinian Leadership generally:

◈ Rejected Negotiations opportunities.​

◈ Did not avail themselves of the "Dispute Clause" in the Oslo Accords.​

◈ On those occasions where they did come to the negotiation table, they did not act in go faith.​

◈ Continued Asymmetric and terrorist attacks on a continuous timeline from 1967 to the present.​

◈ Or, the Arab Palestinian adopted a policy of:​

✦ no peace with Israel,​

✦ no recognition of Israel,​

✦ no negotiations with Israel,​

​

Holy verbosity, Batman!

(COMMENT)

Your questions do not lend themselves to sound bite answers. Your questions may be simple to ask, but much more difficult to explain.

Literally hundreds of people have written thousands of books on the "Question of Palestine." And even more thousands of exchanges and cables that were composed between the Quartet (UN, US, EU, and Russia Federation) trying to hammer-out kinks in various approaches to a solution. If you are expecting a simple three or four-sentence answer to your questions, --- prepare to be continuously disappointed.

I'm not 'verbose' as you term it. If anything, experts on the subject will suggest that I'm oversimplifying the answers; what they sometimes call the baby-spoon explanations.



Most Respectfully,
R

First, let me say, that I do not speak for Israel.

WOW, you sure had me fooled!

But I think that Israel made a "mistake" by not Annexing the West Bank the moment that HM King Hussein "announced the severance of all administrative and legal ties with the occupied West Bank."

I think you missed the point of my post.

 

[P F Tinmore]

Second, The Arab Palestinians were not asked to surrender any territory.

Name one proposal where Palestine would keep all of their territory.

I await your response.

You might want to define ''their territory'' as it relates to the ''Pals''.

"Occupation doesn't mean sovereignty''. I'm paraphrasing but that is one of your preferred slogans.

When did the Pal-Arab occupation of the territory called Palestine grant the ''their territory'' designation

You haven't been following my posts.

 

[RoccoR]

RE: Israel's Lies
⁜→ P F Tinmore,

BLUF: To surrender any territory, you must first be the sovereign over that territory in question.

Second, The Arab Palestinians were not asked to surrender any territory.

Name one proposal where Palestine would keep all of their territory.

I await your response.

(COMMENT)

◈ Area "A" → is under the exclusive administration of the Palestinian Authority; the Gaza Strip is under Sovereign Palestinian control.​

​

◈ Area "B" → is under the joint administration by both the Palestinian Authority and Israel;​

​

◈ Area "C" → is under the exclusive administration of Israel. All Israeli settlements are located in Area "C", is administered by Israel.​

Where are the Israeli demands for Area A, and the Gaza Strip?


Most Respectfully,
R

 

[Hollie]

Second, The Arab Palestinians were not asked to surrender any territory.

Name one proposal where Palestine would keep all of their territory.

I await your response.

You might want to define ''their territory'' as it relates to the ''Pals''.

"Occupation doesn't mean sovereignty''. I'm paraphrasing but that is one of your preferred slogans.

When did the Pal-Arab occupation of the territory called Palestine grant the ''their territory'' designation

You haven't been following my posts.

I anticipated you would scurry off.

 

[P F Tinmore]

To surrender any territory, you must first be the sovereign over that territory in question.

Who says they are not?

Link?

 

[P F Tinmore]

RE: Israel's Lies
⁜→ P F Tinmore,

BLUF: To surrender any territory, you must first be the sovereign over that territory in question.

Second, The Arab Palestinians were not asked to surrender any territory.

Name one proposal where Palestine would keep all of their territory.

I await your response.

(COMMENT)

◈ Area "A" → is under the exclusive administration of the Palestinian Authority; the Gaza Strip is under Sovereign Palestinian control.​

​

◈ Area "B" → is under the joint administration by both the Palestinian Authority and Israel;​

​

◈ Area "C" → is under the exclusive administration of Israel. All Israeli settlements are located in Area "C", is administered by Israel.​

Where are the Israeli demands for Area A, and the Gaza Strip?


Most Respectfully,
R

You are ducking. A,B, and C are irrelevant to my post.

 

[toastman]

Second, The Arab Palestinians were not asked to surrender any territory.

Name one proposal where Palestine would keep all of their territory.

I await your response.

It’s not their territory. It’s Israel’s territory. Israel is a country. Palestine isn’t and likely never will be .

 

[toastman]

To surrender any territory, you must first be the sovereign over that territory in question.

Who says they are not?

Link?

You need a link for that ? Geez, you’re more misinformed than I thought .

 

[Hollie]

Second, The Arab Palestinians were not asked to surrender any territory.

Name one proposal where Palestine would keep all of their territory.

I await your response.

I can’t find any indication that “their territory” ever applied to the Pal-Arab occupation of the geographic area called Palestine. The geographic area called Palestine was a Sanjak, (an administrative division of the Ottoman Empire), and never controlled or held as sovereign by any group called “Palestinian Arabs”.

When did the geographic area become “their territory”?

link?

 

[toastman]

How about this Tinmore. In order to clarify things, why don’t you post a map of what you think Palestine is as of now.

 

[RoccoR]

RE: Israel's Lies
⁜→ P F Tinmore,

BLUF: If you don't understand the meaning of sovereignty, it will be next to impossible for you to understand which of the Areas meets the criteria for sovereignty.

To surrender any territory, you must first be the sovereign over that territory in question.

Who says they are not?

Link?

You are ducking. A,B, and C are irrelevant to my post.

(COMMENT)

I gave you the definition of "Sovereignty" in Posting #454 yesterday. But I think that the ThoughtCompany outlines it better than I've seen anywhere else.

​

7. Has sovereignty. No other State should have power over the country's territory.​

Somewhat. The West Bank and Gaza Strip do not yet have full sovereignty and control over their own territory.​

A sovereign Palestinian Arab state has never existed.Rather, the status of the territory is, at best, disputed. This, of course, is the reason for the negotiations between Israelis and Palestinians—negotiations which Indyk has long advocated and which Palestinians have long rejected. By claiming that the land is “Palestinian territory,” Indyk is prejudging an outcome, effectively saying that negotiations aren’t necessary as the land already belongs to Palestinian Arabs.​

Source: By: Foreign Affairs Magazine, ‘Palestinian Land,’ and the Press, Sean Durns May 29, 2020 ​

When Secretary of State Mike Pompeo recently announced an official change to U.S. policy regarding Israel’s settlements in the West Bank, saying the U.S. no longer finds them to be “inconsistent with international law,” it was unclear if he — or whoever else was behind the policy — thought through its full implications. ​

SOURCE: Brookings Institute, Omar H. Rahman Monday, November 25, 2019 ​

​

(COMMENT)​

​

Nothing I'm going to say will satify you. And I suspect, it is that approach the Ramalla Government (such that it is) will take. If it were so easy for you to prove, you would have thrown it in my face. All you can do is ask for negative answer (proof does not exsist). I simply do not know how to do that. All I can say, is that the Arab Palestinian government in Ramalla does not have final authority on all matters in Area "B" and certainly is not the final authority in Area "C" or Jerusalem. Subtract all that from the disputed territory and what you have left, might be the Sovereign State of Palestine.​

​

​

Most Respectfully,​

R​

 

[P F Tinmore]

RE: Israel's Lies
⁜→ P F Tinmore,

BLUF: If you don't understand the meaning of sovereignty, it will be next to impossible for you to understand which of the Areas meets the criteria for sovereignty.

To surrender any territory, you must first be the sovereign over that territory in question.

Who says they are not?

Link?

You are ducking. A,B, and C are irrelevant to my post.

(COMMENT)

I gave you the definition of "Sovereignty" in Posting #454 yesterday. But I think that the ThoughtCompany outlines it better than I've seen anywhere else.

​

7. Has sovereignty. No other State should have power over the country's territory.​

Somewhat. The West Bank and Gaza Strip do not yet have full sovereignty and control over their own territory.​

A sovereign Palestinian Arab state has never existed.Rather, the status of the territory is, at best, disputed. This, of course, is the reason for the negotiations between Israelis and Palestinians—negotiations which Indyk has long advocated and which Palestinians have long rejected. By claiming that the land is “Palestinian territory,” Indyk is prejudging an outcome, effectively saying that negotiations aren’t necessary as the land already belongs to Palestinian Arabs.​

Source: By: Foreign Affairs Magazine, ‘Palestinian Land,’ and the Press, Sean Durns May 29, 2020 ​

When Secretary of State Mike Pompeo recently announced an official change to U.S. policy regarding Israel’s settlements in the West Bank, saying the U.S. no longer finds them to be “inconsistent with international law,” it was unclear if he — or whoever else was behind the policy — thought through its full implications. ​

SOURCE: Brookings Institute, Omar H. Rahman Monday, November 25, 2019 ​

​

(COMMENT)​

​

Nothing I'm going to say will satify you. And I suspect, it is that approach the Ramalla Government (such that it is) will take. If it were so easy for you to prove, you would have thrown it in my face. All you can do is ask for negative answer (proof does not exsist). I simply do not know how to do that. All I can say, is that the Arab Palestinian government in Ramalla does not have final authority on all matters in Area "B" and certainly is not the final authority in Area "C" or Jerusalem. Subtract all that from the disputed territory and what you have left, might be the Sovereign State of Palestine.​

​

​

Most Respectfully,​

R​

You are deflecting from my post.

Israel's Lies

The Cool Aid Club has spoken. You don't find it odd that your contrived version of history is ruthlessly contradicted by facts? Very well said post!

www.usmessageboard.com

 

[Hollie]

RE: Israel's Lies
⁜→ P F Tinmore,

BLUF: If you don't understand the meaning of sovereignty, it will be next to impossible for you to understand which of the Areas meets the criteria for sovereignty.

To surrender any territory, you must first be the sovereign over that territory in question.

Who says they are not?

Link?

You are ducking. A,B, and C are irrelevant to my post.

(COMMENT)

I gave you the definition of "Sovereignty" in Posting #454 yesterday. But I think that the ThoughtCompany outlines it better than I've seen anywhere else.

​

7. Has sovereignty. No other State should have power over the country's territory.​

Somewhat. The West Bank and Gaza Strip do not yet have full sovereignty and control over their own territory.​

A sovereign Palestinian Arab state has never existed.Rather, the status of the territory is, at best, disputed. This, of course, is the reason for the negotiations between Israelis and Palestinians—negotiations which Indyk has long advocated and which Palestinians have long rejected. By claiming that the land is “Palestinian territory,” Indyk is prejudging an outcome, effectively saying that negotiations aren’t necessary as the land already belongs to Palestinian Arabs.​

Source: By: Foreign Affairs Magazine, ‘Palestinian Land,’ and the Press, Sean Durns May 29, 2020 ​

When Secretary of State Mike Pompeo recently announced an official change to U.S. policy regarding Israel’s settlements in the West Bank, saying the U.S. no longer finds them to be “inconsistent with international law,” it was unclear if he — or whoever else was behind the policy — thought through its full implications. ​

SOURCE: Brookings Institute, Omar H. Rahman Monday, November 25, 2019 ​

​

(COMMENT)​

​

Nothing I'm going to say will satify you. And I suspect, it is that approach the Ramalla Government (such that it is) will take. If it were so easy for you to prove, you would have thrown it in my face. All you can do is ask for negative answer (proof does not exsist). I simply do not know how to do that. All I can say, is that the Arab Palestinian government in Ramalla does not have final authority on all matters in Area "B" and certainly is not the final authority in Area "C" or Jerusalem. Subtract all that from the disputed territory and what you have left, might be the Sovereign State of Palestine.​

​

​

Most Respectfully,​

R​

You are deflecting from my post.

Israel's Lies

The Cool Aid Club has spoken. You don't find it odd that your contrived version of history is ruthlessly contradicted by facts? Very well said post!

www.usmessageboard.com

You are, as usual, deflecting.

Identify the areas maintained as sovereign by either of the Pal-Arab enclaves.

Link?

You deflected from an earlier question:

When did the Pal-Arab occupation of the territory called Palestine achieve the ''their territory'' designation?

Link?

 

[toastman]

Can someone explain to me Tinmores logic.. he does nothing but deflect, then accuses others of deflecting .

 

[RoccoR]

RE: Israel's Lies
⁜→ toastman,

I don't believe that our friend P F Tinmore can present a defendable argument.

Can someone explain to me Tinmores logic.. he does nothing but deflect, then accuses others of deflecting .

(COMMENT)

The HoAP act as if some power is going to turn the clock block and replay history. That simply is NOT going to happen.


Most Respectfully,
R

 

[P F Tinmore]

RE: Israel's Lies
⁜→ toastman,

I don't believe that our friend P F Tinmore can present a defendable argument.

Can someone explain to me Tinmores logic.. he does nothing but deflect, then accuses others of deflecting .

(COMMENT)

The HoAP act as if some power is going to turn the clock block and replay history. That simply is NOT going to happen.


Most Respectfully,
R

Huh?