No 'Deals' With Israel, Unless We Get Everything We Want

[Lipush]

Speaking of the mass murder of Jews in Hebron in '29 - it was hardly something that 'just happened':

As a CAMERA report (based on documentation in a book by Jennie Lebel titled ‘The Mufti of Jerusalem: Haj-Amin el-Husseini and National-Socialism‘) makes clear, Haj Amin’s desire to ‘help the Palestinians’ was superseded by a greater passion – to annihilate the Jews.


Haj Amin El-Husseini, who was appointed Mufti of Jerusalem in 1921 aided by sympathetic British officials, advocated violent opposition to Jewish settlement in the Mandate for Palestine and incited the Arabs against the growing Jewish presence. Lebel describes the violence of 1929, where Haj Amin spread the story that the Jews planned to destroy the Dome of the Rock and the Aqsa mosque. Using falsified photos of the mosque on fire and disseminating propaganda that borrowed from the anti-Jewish forgery, the “Protocols of the Elders of Zion,” the mufti instigated a widespread pogrom against Jews in Palestine. On Aug. 23, Arabs streamed into Jerusalem and attacked Jews. Six days later, a second wave of attacks resulted in 64 dead in Hebron…

Hebron | CiF Watch (citation of source quoted in bold)

The Hebron massacre started when a bunch of Zionists went down to the Wailing Wall and declared it theirs. You couldn't ******* share it. You had to be so god-damn selfish, it had to be "all" yours. Well, **** you!

BTW, what about the over 400 jews, whose lives were saved that night by their arab neighbors, hiding them in their basements? I like how one arab family was able to do it. When the roving bands of rioters came to their house, they told them, "But we've already killed our jews!" And the rioters moved on.

Share the Western Wall?

Those are the Muslims who cannot ******* share it. Jews cannot get there without being stoned.

And what's the connection of the Muslim believers to our Holy Temple anyway?

Besides that stupid tale about that talking-flying-donkey.

 

[Billo_Really]

In all likelihood, your letter is now part of your Congressman's Office emergency supply of toilet paper, once they spat-out the obligatory 'we share your concerns' blather.

Probably so. But legally, that's my only option.

 

[Billo_Really]

You don't really expect me to fall for this trap; do you?

It's not a trap. It's putting this issue in the most generic terms possible.

This is a set-up known as the "False Dilemma or Dichotomy;" AKA: Excluded Middle. It is a product of "black-and/or-white thinking."

It assumes that the question is entirely balanced and unbiased.

It is generic and historically accurate.

It is a strategy that is aimed at forcing me to admit that the Palestinian, an Ottoman derivative population, had some mastery or control over the territorial sovereignty over Mandate of Palestine, and thereby are the victims.

If forces you to deal with the fact that there was an indigenous population that had been living there for generations, who had rights to.

The Palestinian are a people with absolutely no history of leadership or social advancement to form a cohesive nation in the last millennium of time. They are a brutal and embittered people in chaos that have no collective ability to form a heritage of any value or substance.

That's not a very nice thing to say.

Is the leopard finally showing its spots?

Are they a people that have indicated, in any way - shape - or form - that they are a capable of standing on their own two feet and reasonably handle "sovereignty?"

That's a question Zionists never had any intention of asking.

The Answer is "NO." Thus, you support the culture that has proven itself to be a benefit to humanity; without regard to the slanted Arab view of their immigration status, which attempts to deny them the right of self-determination.

Again, when asking "who has the right to self-determination", is it the people just moving into the area, or the people already living there?

If there is a case of discrimination, of apartheid, of segregation, and an unwillingness to adjust to 21st Century morals and turpitude, then the Arab-Palestinian should look in the mirror to recognize it. But, the rest of the world needs to understand that the very last thing we need is an out-of-control, parasitic, Jihadist based sovereign Islamic Waqf backed by a bunch of unproductive Fedayeen that don't know anything other than to create havoc; that can give no other excuse than - the world didn't turn-out the way they wanted it.

The last thing the world needs, is a pariah state that doesn't give a shit about human rights and international law. The last thing we need, is another Nazi Germany and Israel, is becoming just that.

Most Respectfully,
R

This is a lie!

It is a deliberate lie!

None of what you said above, is respectful at all.

The truth is now out. All this pretending to be nice and respectful, is just a façade. The bias and prejudice of the real RoccoR, are now "face up" on the table for all to see.

 

[aris2chat]

Jews were given permission by the Ottomans to pray at the wall. No muslim or christian thought of the wall in any such way. It was the foundation wall of what was the Herod temple during the time of Jesus. It was the last remnants of their temple, all be it under Roman occupation. Rome later burned the temple down and built a temple to jupiter on the mount. Christian built a church and muslim later built a mosque on the mount.
The last jewish part of the mount is the wall. So, yes they call it theirs. No one else really cared about the mounts foundation stones. Their used to be toilets up against the wall under muslim times, now muslims on the mount let the walls crumble even at risk to their mosques and their people. The dome and al-aqsa were in major disrepair till Jordan offered to repair the dome. Fires, earthquakes, leaking roofs, dumped garbage had all take a toll on the mount. Few muslim gave much though to Jerusalem till the Mandate. Not so revered or holy but rather a political tool.
If they are all people of the book and hold Solomon as a prophet and builder of the original temple, why should any care if jews pray at the wall?

 

[Kondor3]

"...This is a lie!..."

Ruh-Roh, Rocco, rooks rike rure rin rouble !!!

< snicker >

 

[Billo_Really]

"...This is a lie!..."

Ruh-Roh, Rocco, rooks rike rure rin rouble !!!

< snicker >

You know that's a muslim dog, don't you?

 

[Kondor3]

"...This is a lie!..."

Ruh-Roh, Rocco, rooks rike rure rin rouble !!!

< snicker >

You know that's a muslim dog, don't you?

Couldn't care less...

 

[Billo_Really]

Jews were given permission by the Ottomans to pray at the wall. No muslim or christian thought of the wall in any such way. It was the foundation wall of what was the Herod temple during the time of Jesus. It was the last remnants of their temple, all be it under Roman occupation. Rome later burned the temple down and built a temple to jupiter on the mount. Christian built a church and muslim later built a mosque on the mount.
The last jewish part of the mount is the wall. So, yes they call it theirs. No one else really cared about the mounts foundation stones. Their used to be toilets up against the wall under muslim times, now muslims on the mount let the walls crumble even at risk to their mosques and their people. The dome and al-aqsa were in major disrepair till Jordan offered to repair the dome. Fires, earthquakes, leaking roofs, dumped garbage had all take a toll on the mount. Few muslim gave much though to Jerusalem till the Mandate. Not so revered or holy but rather a political tool.
If they are all people of the book and hold Solomon as a prophet and builder of the original temple, why should any care if jews pray at the wall?

The Wall was just as sacred to muslims, as it was to the jews.

 

[Billo_Really]

Ruh-Roh, Rocco, rooks rike rure rin rouble !!!

< snicker >

You know that's a muslim dog, don't you?

Couldn't care less...

Talk to the hand!

 

[P F Tinmore]

P F Tinmore, et al,

That is where the perception fits in place.

Perception and experience guides us all.


(COMMENT)

I know that mine is not "Israeli Propaganda." I seriously doubt that there is a true Israeli Propagandist in the forum. Not even those that are from Israel.

Perspective is something we all share, yet, albeit --- not through the same lens.

The achievement of a worthy goal such as peace, can only be fulfilled through diligence, hard work, dedication and the sacrifice to see the task through. Few successful entrepreneurs of tower and stature had everything handed to them on a silver platter. So it is with diplomacy striving for peace and prosperity for themselves and a nation.

The perspective comes with the recognition that the Palestinian is completely on the wrong track, and have not just sabotaged themselves, but entire future generations of their clan through the pursuit of systematically raising the next generation of Jihadist and Fedayeen.

Most Respectfully,
R

The Palestinians were attacked by foreigners out of Europe.

What are their options?

(COMMENT)

I do not see the Jewish Immigrant as foreigners. I see them as displaced persons invited to immigrate in order to establish a Jewish National Home.

They were invited by the Allied Powers, having all the necessary reigns of power passed to them by Treaty.

Most Respectfully,
R

Indeed you don't. Foreigners inviting other foreigners to Palestine with the stated goal of pigging the place for themselves and shoving the natives aside.

External interference is illegal.

Why do you disrespect the law and the inherent rights of the natives?

 

[aris2chat]

It was a dream journey and a winged horse, not a donkey for the muslims. Jesus was the one on the donkey entering humbly during passover and then proceeded to trash the temple very publicly, leading to his arrest.

 

[Billo_Really]

It was a dream journey and a winged horse, not a donkey for the muslims. Jesus was the one on the donkey entering humbly during passover and then proceeded to trash the temple very publicly, leading to his arrest.

That wouldn't of happened if Arnold had anything to say about it.


[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aKJonM0fM54]Terminator - YouTube[/ame]

 

[RoccoR]

Billo_Really, P F Tinmore, et al,

I give you an "open apology" if my post was somehow offensive to you. In the written medium, there is some difficulty translating a respective and congenial tone while still being most serious in the explicit sense.

For me, some concepts are difficult to transmit in this written form and remain fully revealed, expressed without vagueness, implication, or ambiguity --- AND --- simultaneously - completely courteous and gracious in tone.

Are they a people that have indicated, in any way - shape - or form - that they are a capable of standing on their own two feet and reasonably handle "sovereignty?"

That's a question Zionists never had any intention of asking.

Again, when asking "who has the right to self-determination", is it the people just moving into the area, or the people already living there?

(REFERENCE OBSERVATION)

1. Reaffirms that the universal realization of the right of all peoples, including those under colonial, foreign and alien domination, to self-determination is a fundamental condition for the effective guarantee and observance of human rights and for the preservation and promotion of such rights;

2. Declares its firm opposition to acts of foreign military intervention, aggression and occupation, since these have resulted in the suppression of the right of peoples to self-determination and other human rights in certain parts of the world;

SOURCE: A/RES/49/148 23 December 1994

Affirming that indigenous peoples are equal to all other peoples, while recognizing the right of all peoples to be different, to consider themselves different, and to be respected as such,

Recalling also the 2007 United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples, which addresses their individual and collective rights,

Stressing the importance of promoting and pursuing the objectives of the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples also through international cooperation to support national and regional efforts to achieve the ends of the Declaration, including the right to maintain and strengthen the distinct political, legal, economic, social and cultural institutions of indigenous peoples and the right to participate fully, if they so choose, in the political, economic, social and cultural life of the State,

Recognizing the value and the diversity of the cultures and the form of the social organization of indigenous peoples and their holistic traditional scientific knowledge of their lands, natural resources and environment,

SOURCE: A/RES/66/142 30 March 2012

SOURCE: Resolution adopted by the General Assembly [without reference to a Main Committee (A/61/L.67 and Add.1)]GA Resolution 61/295.

(COMMENT)

In answering the question, "who has the right to self-determination" --- is a gray matter exercise. It requires an unbiased approach and an understanding that these are relatively new concepts to mix and match.

• First: All people (not just the indigenous population) have the right of self-determination.
• Second: Indigenous peoples are equal to all other peoples. Therefore, All other people are equal to Indigenous People.
• Third: There is value in the diversity of the cultures; and not just in the maintenance of the indigenous people and culture.

In the case of the conflict: Israeli 'v' Arab-Palestinian, neither has an advantage over the other. However, if there is an advantage, it rest with the diversity (multicultural). But more importantly, there is a recognition that the intervention of 5 Arab Armies in the attempt to block the exercise of the Israeli "right to self-determination" was an inappropriate application of foreign military force.

Most Respectfully,
R

 

[Indeependent]

Considering most of the Arab and Balkan nations were "created" in the 20th century, a lot of nations have to answer to this question.

 

[Sally]

You don't really expect me to fall for this trap; do you?

It's not a trap. It's putting this issue in the most generic terms possible.

This is a set-up known as the "False Dilemma or Dichotomy;" AKA: Excluded Middle. It is a product of "black-and/or-white thinking."

It assumes that the question is entirely balanced and unbiased.

It is generic and historically accurate.

If forces you to deal with the fact that there was an indigenous population that had been living there for generations, who had rights to.

That's not a very nice thing to say.

Is the leopard finally showing its spots?

That's a question Zionists never had any intention of asking.

Again, when asking "who has the right to self-determination", is it the people just moving into the area, or the people already living there?

If there is a case of discrimination, of apartheid, of segregation, and an unwillingness to adjust to 21st Century morals and turpitude, then the Arab-Palestinian should look in the mirror to recognize it. But, the rest of the world needs to understand that the very last thing we need is an out-of-control, parasitic, Jihadist based sovereign Islamic Waqf backed by a bunch of unproductive Fedayeen that don't know anything other than to create havoc; that can give no other excuse than - the world didn't turn-out the way they wanted it.

The last thing the world needs, is a pariah state that doesn't give a shit about human rights and international law. The last thing we need, is another Nazi Germany and Israel, is becoming just that.

Most Respectfully,
R

This is a lie!

It is a deliberate lie!

None of what you said above, is respectful at all.

The truth is now out. All this pretending to be nice and respectful, is just a façade. The bias and prejudice of the real RoccoR, are now "face up" on the table for all to see.

I think Rocco realizes that many of the readers realize how much research he has put into this subject and we respect him for it, but people who don't want to hear the facts gleaned from this research appear to resent what he says. On the other hand, there are posting who are repeating the same stuff we have seen for years and years on forums, and these posters all seem to have gotten their facts from certain places and want us to think that they have become historians on this subject. They don't think that readers can see the bias and prejudice that they have so they believe they are fooling everyone. Rocco, when you were in military intelligence, no doubt your supervisors gave you very high grades when it came to a yearly evaluation. You must have done an excellent job for this country.

 

[Kondor3]

"...They don't think that readers can see the bias and prejudice that they have so they believe they are fooling everyone..."

It does get rather embarrassing when they switch gears and try to pretend impartiality or flexibility from time to time, doesn't it?

A little like watching a coworker wet his pants at a podium event and not even realizing it.

But there's an upside to such things... an enormous blind-spot that can be capitalized upon, from time to time...

A little like shooting fish in a barrel, when the timing's right, and it's exploited to its fullest...

 

[P F Tinmore]

Recalling also the 2007 United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples, which addresses their individual and collective rights,

Stressing the importance of promoting and pursuing the objectives of the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples also through international cooperation to support national and regional efforts to achieve the ends of the Declaration, including the right to maintain and strengthen the distinct political, legal, economic, social and cultural institutions of indigenous peoples and the right to participate fully, if they so choose, in the political, economic, social and cultural life of the State,

Recognizing the value and the diversity of the cultures and the form of the social organization of indigenous peoples and their holistic traditional scientific knowledge of their lands, natural resources and environment,

SOURCE: A/RES/66/142 30 March 2012

Gee, Rocco, I don't see foreigners mentioned here.

 

[Billo_Really]

I think Rocco realizes that many of the readers realize how much research he has put into this subject and we respect him for it, but people who don't want to hear the facts gleaned from this research appear to resent what he says.

So what? You don't want to hear the facts "gleaned" from my research, so what are you saying?

On the other hand, there are posting who are repeating the same stuff we have seen for years and years on forums, and these posters all seem to have gotten their facts from certain places and want us to think that they have become historians on this subject.

Seeing how you don't even go to the links I provide, how the **** would you know about these "certain places"? And judging from all your ad hominem replies, you don't care about the credibility of a particular website, because any one that criticizes Israel, is automatically trashed and dismissed as anti-Semitic.

BTW, those "places", happen to be the UN's official website.

They don't think that readers can see the bias and prejudice that they have so they believe they are fooling everyone.

I let the readers think whatever they want. But what I don't see, is the reasons you make dumbass statements like that. I've asked you several times to explain why you think I'm "bias" and "prejudice" towards Israel and to date, you've been unable to do that.

For the record, I'm the most objective poster at this website on this subject. I'm willing to look at both sides without feeling the need to cherry-pick the information. This conflict has nothing to do with my daily life. I have nothing to gain, nor do I have anything to lose. So I'm about as honest a voice as you will see on this issue.

Rocco, when you were in military intelligence, no doubt your supervisors gave you very high grades when it came to a yearly evaluation. You must have done an excellent job for this country.

I'm sure he did. But that's not what we're talking about now.

 

[Billo_Really]

Billo_Really, P F Tinmore, et al,

I give you an "open apology" if my post was somehow offensive to you. In the written medium, there is some difficulty translating a respective and congenial tone while still being most serious in the explicit sense.

For me, some concepts are difficult to transmit in this written form and remain fully revealed, expressed without vagueness, implication, or ambiguity --- AND --- simultaneously - completely courteous and gracious in tone.

Are they a people that have indicated, in any way - shape - or form - that they are a capable of standing on their own two feet and reasonably handle "sovereignty?"

That's a question Zionists never had any intention of asking.

Again, when asking "who has the right to self-determination", is it the people just moving into the area, or the people already living there?

(REFERENCE OBSERVATION)

Affirming that indigenous peoples are equal to all other peoples, while recognizing the right of all peoples to be different, to consider themselves different, and to be respected as such,

Recalling also the 2007 United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples, which addresses their individual and collective rights,

Stressing the importance of promoting and pursuing the objectives of the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples also through international cooperation to support national and regional efforts to achieve the ends of the Declaration, including the right to maintain and strengthen the distinct political, legal, economic, social and cultural institutions of indigenous peoples and the right to participate fully, if they so choose, in the political, economic, social and cultural life of the State,

Recognizing the value and the diversity of the cultures and the form of the social organization of indigenous peoples and their holistic traditional scientific knowledge of their lands, natural resources and environment,

SOURCE: A/RES/66/142 30 March 2012

SOURCE: Resolution adopted by the General Assembly [without reference to a Main Committee (A/61/L.67 and Add.1)]GA Resolution 61/295.

(COMMENT)

In answering the question, "who has the right to self-determination" --- is a gray matter exercise. It requires an unbiased approach and an understanding that these are relatively new concepts to mix and match.

• First: All people (not just the indigenous population) have the right of self-determination.
• Second: Indigenous peoples are equal to all other peoples. Therefore, All other people are equal to Indigenous People.
• Third: There is value in the diversity of the cultures; and not just in the maintenance of the indigenous people and culture.

In the case of the conflict: Israeli 'v' Arab-Palestinian, neither has an advantage over the other. However, if there is an advantage, it rest with the diversity (multicultural). But more importantly, there is a recognition that the intervention of 5 Arab Armies in the attempt to block the exercise of the Israeli "right to self-determination" was an inappropriate application of foreign military force.

Most Respectfully,
R

I accept your apology and thank you an almost entirely unbiased post. I agree with pretty much everything you said, except for the last part.

The "arab armies" didn't go in to stop Israel from becoming a state, they went in to protect the civil rights of the indigenous arab population. And when looking at what happened next, it's obvious that the "arab armies" didn't have what it would take, to block Israel's independence.

And to this day, they still don't.

 

[Sally]

Billo_Really, P F Tinmore, et al,

I give you an "open apology" if my post was somehow offensive to you. In the written medium, there is some difficulty translating a respective and congenial tone while still being most serious in the explicit sense.

For me, some concepts are difficult to transmit in this written form and remain fully revealed, expressed without vagueness, implication, or ambiguity --- AND --- simultaneously - completely courteous and gracious in tone.

That's a question Zionists never had any intention of asking.

Again, when asking "who has the right to self-determination", is it the people just moving into the area, or the people already living there?

(REFERENCE OBSERVATION)

Affirming that indigenous peoples are equal to all other peoples, while recognizing the right of all peoples to be different, to consider themselves different, and to be respected as such,


SOURCE: Resolution adopted by the General Assembly [without reference to a Main Committee (A/61/L.67 and Add.1)]GA Resolution 61/295.

(COMMENT)

In answering the question, "who has the right to self-determination" --- is a gray matter exercise. It requires an unbiased approach and an understanding that these are relatively new concepts to mix and match.

• First: All people (not just the indigenous population) have the right of self-determination.
• Second: Indigenous peoples are equal to all other peoples. Therefore, All other people are equal to Indigenous People.
• Third: There is value in the diversity of the cultures; and not just in the maintenance of the indigenous people and culture.

In the case of the conflict: Israeli 'v' Arab-Palestinian, neither has an advantage over the other. However, if there is an advantage, it rest with the diversity (multicultural). But more importantly, there is a recognition that the intervention of 5 Arab Armies in the attempt to block the exercise of the Israeli "right to self-determination" was an inappropriate application of foreign military force.

Most Respectfully,
R

I accept your apology and thank you an almost entirely unbiased post. I agree with pretty much everything you said, except for the last part.

The "arab armies" didn't go in to stop Israel from becoming a state, they went in to protect the civil rights of the indigenous arab population. And when looking at what happened next, it's obvious that the "arab armies" didn't have what it would take, to block Israel's independence.

And to this day, they still don't.

I have to disagree with you, Billy. As some head Arabs said at that time, they will fight the Jews to the last man. The Arabs couldn't stand to see any Jews having a state in the Middle East. Anyhow, you might find this an interesting read, although you will probably disagree with it since you are an expert on the history of the area.

Palestinian Myths