- Dec 6, 2009
- 78,245
- 4,290
- 1,815
- Thread starter
- #11,021
Israeli goons attacking Palestinian civilians.
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
Israeli goons attacking Palestinian civilians.
(COMMENT)"I willl not be silenced on Israeli Aparthied."
Israeli soldiers brutally arrested Palestinian young from a hospital in the occupied Jerusalem.
Israeli soldiers brutally arrested Palestinian young from a hospital in the occupied Jerusalem.
Israel declared independence in Palestine.RE: Palestine Today
⁜→ P F Tinmore, ForeverYoung436, et al,
This is an attempt to absolve the Araab Palestinians by trying to claim a variation of non-performance.
Nonsense! Absolute nonsense!
(COMMENT)What part of this was followed?
I hold the position that the Arab Palestinians did have and still has an implied duty not to do anything that prevents the other party from performing critical steps preparatory to independence.
When the Arab Palestinians and Arab League aggressors prevent Israel from performance of the General Assembly adopted Recommendation through the uses of armed force, neither the Arab Palestinians or the Arab League agressors may make a legitimate complaint of noncompliance or nonperformance. This same position is just as sound and valid when (as in the recent Arab Palestinians hostile activities on the southern border), disrupts the environment conducive to the maintenance of regional peace and security.
When the Arab Palestinians and Arab League aggressors disputes peace negotiations resort to Jihadism, Fedayeen Activism, Hostile Insurgency Operations, Radicalized Islamic Behaviors, and Asymmetric Violence to prevent peaceful means as may be appropriate to the circumstances and nature of the dispute THEN, (again) neither the Arab Palestinians or the Arab League aggressors may make a legitimate complaint that the Israelis are NOT pursuing in good faith negotiations.
Most Respectfully,
R
The Jewish people declared their sovereign self-determination in their homeland. That it was called “Palestine” by outsiders has no relevancy to the Jewish people.
Just as the fact that it is called Eretz Israel has no relevancy to the Arab people.
Still BOTH the Arab Palestinians and the Jewish Palestinians (now Jewish Israelis) have rights to self-determination and sovereignty within that territory.
There is no way of denying one and granting the other without being discriminatory.IOW, apartheid.There is no way of denying one and granting the other without being discriminatory.
Israeli soldiers brutally arrested Palestinian young from a hospital in the occupied Jerusalem.
Israel declared independence in Palestine.RE: Palestine Today
⁜→ P F Tinmore, ForeverYoung436, et al,
This is an attempt to absolve the Araab Palestinians by trying to claim a variation of non-performance.
Nonsense! Absolute nonsense!
(COMMENT)What part of this was followed?
I hold the position that the Arab Palestinians did have and still has an implied duty not to do anything that prevents the other party from performing critical steps preparatory to independence.
When the Arab Palestinians and Arab League aggressors prevent Israel from performance of the General Assembly adopted Recommendation through the uses of armed force, neither the Arab Palestinians or the Arab League agressors may make a legitimate complaint of noncompliance or nonperformance. This same position is just as sound and valid when (as in the recent Arab Palestinians hostile activities on the southern border), disrupts the environment conducive to the maintenance of regional peace and security.
When the Arab Palestinians and Arab League aggressors disputes peace negotiations resort to Jihadism, Fedayeen Activism, Hostile Insurgency Operations, Radicalized Islamic Behaviors, and Asymmetric Violence to prevent peaceful means as may be appropriate to the circumstances and nature of the dispute THEN, (again) neither the Arab Palestinians or the Arab League aggressors may make a legitimate complaint that the Israelis are NOT pursuing in good faith negotiations.
Most Respectfully,
R
The Jewish people declared their sovereign self-determination in their homeland. That it was called “Palestine” by outsiders has no relevancy to the Jewish people.
Just as the fact that it is called Eretz Israel has no relevancy to the Arab people.
Still BOTH the Arab Palestinians and the Jewish Palestinians (now Jewish Israelis) have rights to self-determination and sovereignty within that territory.
There is no way of denying one and granting the other without being discriminatory.IOW, apartheid.There is no way of denying one and granting the other without being discriminatory.
Well now, that is an interesting take. You are claiming an equivalency between the self-determination and sovereignty of ethnic or cultural peoples and apartheid. ALL nations built upon an ethnic or cultural group, then, are apartheid.
Scotland, Wales, Ireland, England = apartheid.
Croatia, Serbia, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Slovenia, Montenegro, Kosovo, Macedonia = apartheid.
Spain and Catalonia = apartheid.
Korea = apartheid.
Japan = apartheid.
Armenia, Moldova, Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, Georgia, Azerbaijan, Tajikistan, Kyrgyzstan, Belarus, Uzbekistan, Turkmenistan, Ukraine, Kazakhstan, Russia = all apartheid.
Cherokee Nation = apartheid.
Nisga'a Nation = apartheid.
I could go on and on. In fact, one would be hard-pressed to find a nation which is not apartheid under your definition. The only ones which come to mind are those colonized lands such as Canada, US and Australia. (Oh, the irony.)
IOW, you are vastly expanding the definition of apartheid to suit your Israel (Jew) hatred. You are creating your own definition of the term expressly so you can demonize the Jewish State. You are also only speaking out about a single apartheid in a world full of apartheid nations (double standards).
Further, the self-determination of a peoples is one of the most basic principles in international law. And it is one you argue frequently.
Your own argument is inherently contradictory. How are you going to reconcile it? Oh, you won't. You'll put up a couple of your dancing men, or mark this post "funny" or if I've really hit home, I'll get the doofus emoji.
Israel declared independence in Palestine.RE: Palestine Today
⁜→ P F Tinmore, ForeverYoung436, et al,
This is an attempt to absolve the Araab Palestinians by trying to claim a variation of non-performance.
Nonsense! Absolute nonsense!
(COMMENT)What part of this was followed?
I hold the position that the Arab Palestinians did have and still has an implied duty not to do anything that prevents the other party from performing critical steps preparatory to independence.
When the Arab Palestinians and Arab League aggressors prevent Israel from performance of the General Assembly adopted Recommendation through the uses of armed force, neither the Arab Palestinians or the Arab League agressors may make a legitimate complaint of noncompliance or nonperformance. This same position is just as sound and valid when (as in the recent Arab Palestinians hostile activities on the southern border), disrupts the environment conducive to the maintenance of regional peace and security.
When the Arab Palestinians and Arab League aggressors disputes peace negotiations resort to Jihadism, Fedayeen Activism, Hostile Insurgency Operations, Radicalized Islamic Behaviors, and Asymmetric Violence to prevent peaceful means as may be appropriate to the circumstances and nature of the dispute THEN, (again) neither the Arab Palestinians or the Arab League aggressors may make a legitimate complaint that the Israelis are NOT pursuing in good faith negotiations.
Most Respectfully,
R
The Jewish people declared their sovereign self-determination in their homeland. That it was called “Palestine” by outsiders has no relevancy to the Jewish people.
Just as the fact that it is called Eretz Israel has no relevancy to the Arab people.
Still BOTH the Arab Palestinians and the Jewish Palestinians (now Jewish Israelis) have rights to self-determination and sovereignty within that territory.
There is no way of denying one and granting the other without being discriminatory.IOW, apartheid.There is no way of denying one and granting the other without being discriminatory.
Well now, that is an interesting take. You are claiming an equivalency between the self-determination and sovereignty of ethnic or cultural peoples and apartheid. ALL nations built upon an ethnic or cultural group, then, are apartheid.
Scotland, Wales, Ireland, England = apartheid.
Croatia, Serbia, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Slovenia, Montenegro, Kosovo, Macedonia = apartheid.
Spain and Catalonia = apartheid.
Korea = apartheid.
Japan = apartheid.
Armenia, Moldova, Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, Georgia, Azerbaijan, Tajikistan, Kyrgyzstan, Belarus, Uzbekistan, Turkmenistan, Ukraine, Kazakhstan, Russia = all apartheid.
Cherokee Nation = apartheid.
Nisga'a Nation = apartheid.
I could go on and on. In fact, one would be hard-pressed to find a nation which is not apartheid under your definition. The only ones which come to mind are those colonized lands such as Canada, US and Australia. (Oh, the irony.)
IOW, you are vastly expanding the definition of apartheid to suit your Israel (Jew) hatred. You are creating your own definition of the term expressly so you can demonize the Jewish State. You are also only speaking out about a single apartheid in a world full of apartheid nations (double standards).
Further, the self-determination of a peoples is one of the most basic principles in international law. And it is one you argue frequently.
Your own argument is inherently contradictory. How are you going to reconcile it? Oh, you won't. You'll put up a couple of your dancing men, or mark this post "funny" or if I've really hit home, I'll get the doofus emoji.
Israel declared independence in Palestine.RE: Palestine Today
⁜→ P F Tinmore, ForeverYoung436, et al,
This is an attempt to absolve the Araab Palestinians by trying to claim a variation of non-performance.
Nonsense! Absolute nonsense!
(COMMENT)
I hold the position that the Arab Palestinians did have and still has an implied duty not to do anything that prevents the other party from performing critical steps preparatory to independence.
When the Arab Palestinians and Arab League aggressors prevent Israel from performance of the General Assembly adopted Recommendation through the uses of armed force, neither the Arab Palestinians or the Arab League agressors may make a legitimate complaint of noncompliance or nonperformance. This same position is just as sound and valid when (as in the recent Arab Palestinians hostile activities on the southern border), disrupts the environment conducive to the maintenance of regional peace and security.
When the Arab Palestinians and Arab League aggressors disputes peace negotiations resort to Jihadism, Fedayeen Activism, Hostile Insurgency Operations, Radicalized Islamic Behaviors, and Asymmetric Violence to prevent peaceful means as may be appropriate to the circumstances and nature of the dispute THEN, (again) neither the Arab Palestinians or the Arab League aggressors may make a legitimate complaint that the Israelis are NOT pursuing in good faith negotiations.
Most Respectfully,
R
The Jewish people declared their sovereign self-determination in their homeland. That it was called “Palestine” by outsiders has no relevancy to the Jewish people.
Just as the fact that it is called Eretz Israel has no relevancy to the Arab people.
Still BOTH the Arab Palestinians and the Jewish Palestinians (now Jewish Israelis) have rights to self-determination and sovereignty within that territory.
There is no way of denying one and granting the other without being discriminatory.IOW, apartheid.There is no way of denying one and granting the other without being discriminatory.
Well now, that is an interesting take. You are claiming an equivalency between the self-determination and sovereignty of ethnic or cultural peoples and apartheid. ALL nations built upon an ethnic or cultural group, then, are apartheid.
Scotland, Wales, Ireland, England = apartheid.
Croatia, Serbia, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Slovenia, Montenegro, Kosovo, Macedonia = apartheid.
Spain and Catalonia = apartheid.
Korea = apartheid.
Japan = apartheid.
Armenia, Moldova, Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, Georgia, Azerbaijan, Tajikistan, Kyrgyzstan, Belarus, Uzbekistan, Turkmenistan, Ukraine, Kazakhstan, Russia = all apartheid.
Cherokee Nation = apartheid.
Nisga'a Nation = apartheid.
I could go on and on. In fact, one would be hard-pressed to find a nation which is not apartheid under your definition. The only ones which come to mind are those colonized lands such as Canada, US and Australia. (Oh, the irony.)
IOW, you are vastly expanding the definition of apartheid to suit your Israel (Jew) hatred. You are creating your own definition of the term expressly so you can demonize the Jewish State. You are also only speaking out about a single apartheid in a world full of apartheid nations (double standards).
Further, the self-determination of a peoples is one of the most basic principles in international law. And it is one you argue frequently.
Your own argument is inherently contradictory. How are you going to reconcile it? Oh, you won't. You'll put up a couple of your dancing men, or mark this post "funny" or if I've really hit home, I'll get the doofus emoji.
Nobody talks about the Jewish people who were kicked out of their : Native Country"