Palestinian Talks, lectures, & interviews.

[P F Tinmore]

The Treaty of Lausanne does NOT even mention "Palestine" anywhere in the text.

What a stupid thing to say. Lebanon, Syria, Iraq, and Transjordan were not mentioned either. You say this just to mislead. As if Palestine was not mentioned that it was excluded. It is just one of those Israeli talking points that you like so much.

 

[P F Tinmore]

It should be noted at this point, realtive to the "Tinmore Claim" → that Palestine was already a defined territory,

It was. An agreement between the Ottomans and Egypt formed that international border in 2006. The borders with Lebanon/Syria and Palestine was established by Sykes–Picot in 1916. Article 25 in the Palestine Mandate established the border between Transjordan and Palestine in 1922.

The Treaty of Lausanne transferred title to Palestine in 1924. That is when the inhabitants became Palestinians and the citizens of Palestine by international law and followed by domestic law in 1925.

Citizenship is the link between a people and their state.

 

[P F Tinmore]

There has been a very unenlightened strategy for the pro_Arab Palestinians to Kling to the opening of the Nationality Section, Article 30 Treaty of Lausanne (24 July 1923). This Article stipulates that:

Turkish subjects habitually resident in territory which in accordance with the provisions of the present Treaty is detached from Turkey will become ipsofacto, in the conditions laid down by the local law, nationals of the State to which such territory is transferred.​

Read that a few times and let it sink in.

 

[RoccoR]

RE: Palestinian Talks, lectures, & interviews
⁜→ P F Tinmore, et al,

BLUF: Well, think what you will. But there is a question as to who showed a lack of intelligence or common sense.

The Treaty of Lausanne does NOT even mention "Palestine" anywhere in the text.

What a stupid thing to say. Lebanon, Syria, Iraq, and Transjordan were not mentioned either. You say this just to mislead. As if Palestine was not mentioned that it was excluded. It is just one of those Israeli talking points that you like so much.

(COMMENT)

Well, you are not exactly correct. In Section I, Territorial Clauses, Article 3, Treaty of Lausanne it mentions both Syria and Iraq. With regard to Lebanon and Transjordan, both were considered undefined territories of Syria.

(I ) With Syria:​

The frontier described in Article 8 of the Franco-Turkish Agreement of the 20th October, 1921.​

​

(2) With Iraq:​

The frontier between Turkey and Iraq shall be laid down in friendly arrangements to be concluded between Turkey and Great Britain within nine months.​

Now, another point I would like you to remember because you keep making a big deal about Palestine having Borders:

​

After the end of World War I, Great Britain received a League of Nations mandate for Palestine encompassing Jordan. The British soon divided the mandate for administrative purposes along the Jordan River - Wadi 'Araba line. However, the precise southern limits of Palestine and Trans-Jordan were indefinite. At the time, Britain claimed access to the Gulf of Aqaba, while the Arabians considered Ma'an, about 50 miles to the north, to be within their domain based on its inclusion in the Ottoman vilayet of the Hejaz.​

SOURCE: Page 2 • INTERNATIONAL BOUNDARY STUDY • No. 60 • JORDAN - SAUDI ARABIA BOUNDARY (1965)​

​

​

As for your comments on Posting 222 and 223, I think that you are not rendering answers that make a difference. The current Boundary between Jordan and Israel set by the 1994 Treaty. (I think I gave Maps in Posting #207, and links to the Treaties several times.) I read pretty well. I think I comprehend the difference between the 1924 Treaty on Nationality versus Territory. And, even that has been overtaken by event. All this twisted nonsense you are blabbering about is covered today within the Conventions and Protocols relating to:

◈. The Status of Refugees​

​

◈. The Status of Stateless Persons​

All I can say at this point is to fact-check your material before you present it. Everyone makes mistakes now and then. But few intelligent people make such blunders and then call someone stupid on that basis.


Most Respectfully,
R

 

[P F Tinmore]

I think I comprehend the difference between the 1924 Treaty on Nationality versus Territory. And, even that has been overtaken by event.

Please expound.

 

[P F Tinmore]

Well, you are not exactly correct. In Section I, Territorial Clauses, Article 3, Treaty of Lausanne it mentions both Syria and Iraq.

Syria and Iraq were only mentioned because they border Turkey and those borders had to be defined.

Nice try though.

 

[flacaltenn]

(QUESTIONS)

◈ So, within the boundaries of Israeli Sovereignty, who is being systematically oppressed and dominated?
◈ So, within the boundaries of Israeli Sovereignty, what one racial group over any other racial group or groups?
◈ So, within the boundaries of Israeli Sovereignty, with the intention of maintaining that what regime?

Uhhh, Israel does not have boundaries.

Uhhh, Islamic terrorist franchises can show you where the boundaries are.

You live in some alternate reality?

A line of goons with guns does not make a border.

A "nation" without a government and a history of FAILED govts doesn't have a border either..

Palestinians are extremely leery of ceding power to a central government. A lot of egg-headed intellectuals can yack all they want -- but it's NOT LIKELY that Palestinians will ever agree to BEING a nation-state.. Actually pretty smart given the Arab track record of "national govts"...

I don't slight the Palis one bit for rejecting a national govt...

 

[Hollie]

Well, you are not exactly correct. In Section I, Territorial Clauses, Article 3, Treaty of Lausanne it mentions both Syria and Iraq.

Syria and Iraq were only mentioned because they border Turkey and those borders had to be defined.

Nice try though.

So you still insist the Treaty of Lausanne created your magical kingdom of Pal’istan?

Seems rather odd in the sense that Pal’istan is not named in the Treaty.

Maybe you’re confused?

 

[P F Tinmore]

(QUESTIONS)

◈ So, within the boundaries of Israeli Sovereignty, who is being systematically oppressed and dominated?
◈ So, within the boundaries of Israeli Sovereignty, what one racial group over any other racial group or groups?
◈ So, within the boundaries of Israeli Sovereignty, with the intention of maintaining that what regime?

Uhhh, Israel does not have boundaries.

Uhhh, Islamic terrorist franchises can show you where the boundaries are.

You live in some alternate reality?

A line of goons with guns does not make a border.

A "nation" without a government and a history of FAILED govts doesn't have a border either..

Palestinians are extremely leery of ceding power to a central government. A lot of egg-headed intellectuals can yack all they want -- but it's NOT LIKELY that Palestinians will ever agree to BEING a nation-state.. Actually pretty smart given the Arab track record of "national govts"...

I don't slight the Palis one bit for rejecting a national govt...

The never answered question.

Fatah lost the elections. How/why is it running the West Bank?

 

[P F Tinmore]

 

[RoccoR]

RE: Palestinian Talks, lectures, & interviews
⁜→ Hollie, P F Tinmore, et al,

BLUF: There is even a deeper flaw (in my layman's opinion) to P F Tinmore's notions.

Well, you are not exactly correct. In Section I, Territorial Clauses, Article 3, Treaty of Lausanne it mentions both Syria and Iraq.

Syria and Iraq were only mentioned because they border Turkey and those borders had to be defined.

Nice try though.

So you still insist the Treaty of Lausanne created your magical kingdom of Pal’istan?

Seems rather odd in the sense that Pal’istan is not named in the Treaty.

Maybe you’re confused?

(COMMENT)

Over time, there have probably been a million treaties that have been written between various nations. The circumstances that induced any given treaty, as well as, the enforceability of any of those treaties do not last forever. That, coupled with the fact that the habitual inhabitance of the territory and the Jewish immigrants were not bound parties to the treaty.

Then add the fact that the creation of the post-WWII recommendations and by the new trustee authorities and the withdraw of the UK from the position of Mandatory create a new set of circumstances.

◈ The adoption of General Assembly Resolution 181 (II) Recommendation by the UN Special Committee on Palestine [A/RES/181(II) of 29 November 1947] and the acceptance by the Israelis add a component, ​

​

◈ The formal adoption of the Resolution 273 (III) Admission of Israel to membership in the United Nations [A/RES/273 (III) 11 May 1949],​

​

◈ The tacit approval through acts which implies the positive adopted resolutions were accepted, gave the implied authority by the General Assembly, representing the original authority passed down from the Allied Powers, for the accepted creation of Israel.​

The pro-Hostile Terrorist Arab Palestinian Consortium, no matter what the interpretation they may hold, will find it difficult to say today that there was an existence of a Palestine that was a greater legal entity than that of the Government of Palestine (GoP). There was no soveriegn authority granted to the habitual inhabitance of the territory given by the Treaty.

I think I comprehend the difference between the 1924 Treaty on Nationality versus Territory. And, even that has been overtaken by event.

Please expound.

(COMMENT)

There are several Sections to the Treaty of Lausanne which address different aspect the Treaty covers. Section I covers Territorial Issues. Section II covers Nationality issues. Relative to the the territory formerly under the Mandate for Palestine, Article 16 grants title to the Allied Powers. Relative to the the territory formerly under the Mandate for Palestine, Article 30 protects the habitual inhabitence from becomeing stateless. It is just that simple. And in the thumbnail perspective (less all the fine detail) - when the Civil Administration created the entity known as the Government of Palestine (GoP), the GoP became a placeholder for the establishment of a self-governing institution(s) by Article 16, and through Article 30, the habitual inhabitance became citizens of the GoP.

The pro-Hostile Terrorist Arab Palestinian Consortium can put that all in a blender and twist it all up, but at the end of the day, no matter how they poor it, it will come out in favor of the Israelis.

◈ No court in the world is going to say, on the basis of the Treaty of Lausanne, the State of Israel (the 22d Ranked Country on the Human Development Index) must be disrupted and placed in the hands of the State of Palestine (the 119th Ranked Country on the Human Development Index).​

​

◈ No Court in the world is going to say that a State has no right or duty to protect its territory and its citizens from a pro-Hostile Terrorist Arab Palestinian Consortium - and then call that protection "Apartheid."​

​

◈ And no chamber of law is going to say that the population of any entity that reverse people like Dalal al-Maghribi is not a terrorist supporting nation and turn around and declare it "name calling." And no chamber of law is going to declare arson, suicide bombing, kidnap and murder, hijackings, and incitement to violence - targeting civilians is going to say this is legitimate agression.​

There is no nation in the world that has not made mistakes. The more active in world affairs the greater the probability of mistakes. But this does not apply to the pro-Hostile Terrorist Arab Palestinian Consortium which conducts "criminal acts" directed against Israel, intended or calculated to create "terror" in the minds of the citizenry and general public. No valid legal mechanism in the world is going to say that Protected Persons (Hostile Arab Palestinians) who commit an offence which is solely intended to harm the Occupying Power, which make attempts on the life or limb of members of the occupying forces or administration, that constitute a grave collective danger, or seriously damage the property of the occupying forces or administration or the installations used by occupying forces, is in any way legitimate (certainly not any of the top ten most powerful nations of the world).


Most Respectfully,
R

 

[P F Tinmore]

RE: Palestinian Talks, lectures, & interviews
⁜→ Hollie, P F Tinmore, et al,

BLUF: There is even a deeper flaw (in my layman's opinion) to P F Tinmore's notions.

Well, you are not exactly correct. In Section I, Territorial Clauses, Article 3, Treaty of Lausanne it mentions both Syria and Iraq.

Syria and Iraq were only mentioned because they border Turkey and those borders had to be defined.

Nice try though.

So you still insist the Treaty of Lausanne created your magical kingdom of Pal’istan?

Seems rather odd in the sense that Pal’istan is not named in the Treaty.

Maybe you’re confused?

(COMMENT)

Over time, there have probably been a million treaties that have been written between various nations. The circumstances that induced any given treaty, as well as, the enforceability of any of those treaties do not last forever. That, coupled with the fact that the habitual inhabitance of the territory and the Jewish immigrants were not bound parties to the treaty.

Then add the fact that the creation of the post-WWII recommendations and by the new trustee authorities and the withdraw of the UK from the position of Mandatory create a new set of circumstances.

◈ The adoption of General Assembly Resolution 181 (II) Recommendation by the UN Special Committee on Palestine [A/RES/181(II) of 29 November 1947] and the acceptance by the Israelis add a component, ​

​

◈ The formal adoption of the Resolution 273 (III) Admission of Israel to membership in the United Nations [A/RES/273 (III) 11 May 1949],​

​

◈ The tacit approval through acts which implies the positive adopted resolutions were accepted, gave the implied authority by the General Assembly, representing the original authority passed down from the Allied Powers, for the accepted creation of Israel.​

The pro-Hostile Terrorist Arab Palestinian Consortium, no matter what the interpretation they may hold, will find it difficult to say today that there was an existence of a Palestine that was a greater legal entity than that of the Government of Palestine (GoP). There was no soveriegn authority granted to the habitual inhabitance of the territory given by the Treaty.

I think I comprehend the difference between the 1924 Treaty on Nationality versus Territory. And, even that has been overtaken by event.

Please expound.

(COMMENT)

There are several Sections to the Treaty of Lausanne which address different aspect the Treaty covers. Section I covers Territorial Issues. Section II covers Nationality issues. Relative to the the territory formerly under the Mandate for Palestine, Article 16 grants title to the Allied Powers. Relative to the the territory formerly under the Mandate for Palestine, Article 30 protects the habitual inhabitence from becomeing stateless. It is just that simple. And in the thumbnail perspective (less all the fine detail) - when the Civil Administration created the entity known as the Government of Palestine (GoP), the GoP became a placeholder for the establishment of a self-governing institution(s) by Article 16, and through Article 30, the habitual inhabitance became citizens of the GoP.

The pro-Hostile Terrorist Arab Palestinian Consortium can put that all in a blender and twist it all up, but at the end of the day, no matter how they poor it, it will come out in favor of the Israelis.

◈ No court in the world is going to say, on the basis of the Treaty of Lausanne, the State of Israel (the 22d Ranked Country on the Human Development Index) must be disrupted and placed in the hands of the State of Palestine (the 119th Ranked Country on the Human Development Index).​

​

◈ No Court in the world is going to say that a State has no right or duty to protect its territory and its citizens from a pro-Hostile Terrorist Arab Palestinian Consortium - and then call that protection "Apartheid."​

​

◈ And no chamber of law is going to say that the population of any entity that reverse people like Dalal al-Maghribi is not a terrorist supporting nation and turn around and declare it "name calling." And no chamber of law is going to declare arson, suicide bombing, kidnap and murder, hijackings, and incitement to violence - targeting civilians is going to say this is legitimate agression.​

There is no nation in the world that has not made mistakes. The more active in world affairs the greater the probability of mistakes. But this does not apply to the pro-Hostile Terrorist Arab Palestinian Consortium which conducts "criminal acts" directed against Israel, intended or calculated to create "terror" in the minds of the citizenry and general public. No valid legal mechanism in the world is going to say that Protected Persons (Hostile Arab Palestinians) who commit an offence which is solely intended to harm the Occupying Power, which make attempts on the life or limb of members of the occupying forces or administration, that constitute a grave collective danger, or seriously damage the property of the occupying forces or administration or the installations used by occupying forces, is in any way legitimate (certainly not any of the top ten most powerful nations of the world).


Most Respectfully,
R

I am trying to find some relevance to all that.

Perhaps you could pull something out for us to discuss.

 

[flacaltenn]

(QUESTIONS)

◈ So, within the boundaries of Israeli Sovereignty, who is being systematically oppressed and dominated?
◈ So, within the boundaries of Israeli Sovereignty, what one racial group over any other racial group or groups?
◈ So, within the boundaries of Israeli Sovereignty, with the intention of maintaining that what regime?

Uhhh, Israel does not have boundaries.

Uhhh, Islamic terrorist franchises can show you where the boundaries are.

You live in some alternate reality?

A line of goons with guns does not make a border.

A "nation" without a government and a history of FAILED govts doesn't have a border either..

Palestinians are extremely leery of ceding power to a central government. A lot of egg-headed intellectuals can yack all they want -- but it's NOT LIKELY that Palestinians will ever agree to BEING a nation-state.. Actually pretty smart given the Arab track record of "national govts"...

I don't slight the Palis one bit for rejecting a national govt...

The never answered question.

Fatah lost the elections. How/why is it running the West Bank?

Because of what I just explained to you.. Palis not happy with the graft/corruption of Fatah, not willing to radicalize to the Hamas tune.. Read what I said again.. Palis do not TRUST or want a "nation-state" with a powerful central govt.. This is why all your head-banging academic and activist videos wont FIX this problem.. They've never willingly got behind ANY KIND of "national govt".. There's no Palestinian govt to negotiate with..

You're wasting your time because you do NOT understand their preferred social/organizational structure.. They are SELF IDENTIFIED by tribes and families and places of origin.. THAT is the natural Arab culture.. And when Arab countries ADOPT a nation state, they end up with ruthless, barbaric dictators as the ONLY MEANS to suppress conflict along tribal, familial, place of origin lines...

 

[flacaltenn]

From a policy paper I wrote last year..

Support for the two-state solution is at its lowest level since Oslo, with only 43 percent of Palestinians saying they would accept it. More than half of the public views the PA as a burden on the Palestinian people, and a large majority, ranging from 60 to 70 percent in 2018, demands the resignation of the PA president, Mahmoud Abbas. Public support for Hamas, the largest Islamist faction in Palestine, stands at about one-third, compared to about 40 percent for Fatah, the mainstream nationalist faction. Confidence in diplomacy has plummeted: only 25 percent of Palestinians believe that a Palestinian state will emerge in the next five years. Violence is increasingly popular, particularly among the youth, and on several occasions during the past three years a majority of the public has supported it.

There may be a simple fundamental reason for the inability of the Israelis and Palestinians to reach a peaceful resolution to the status of the Occupied Territories for the past 50 years. This reason is fairly obvious when you read all the various “One State, Two State, even Three State solutions that have been suggested by all the interested parties. The Palestinians don’t have a history of unified national governance, nor do they generally place value or trust in that very Western concept. In a 2018 article by Dr. Khalil Shikaki, he cites that “more than half of the [Palestinian] public views the Palestinian Authority as a burden on the Palestinian people”.

Support for the two-state solution is at its lowest level since Oslo, with only 43 percent of Palestinians saying they would accept it. More than half of the public views the PA as a burden on the Palestinian people, and a large majority, ranging from 60 to 70 percent in 2018, demands the resignation of the PA president, Mahmoud Abbas. Public support for Hamas, the largest Islamist faction in Palestine, stands at about one-third, compared to about 40 percent for Fatah, the mainstream nationalist faction. Confidence in diplomacy has plummeted: only 25 percent of Palestinians believe that a Palestinian state will emerge in the next five years. Violence is increasingly popular, particularly among the youth, and on several occasions during the past three years a majority of the public has supported it.

The article goes on to describe the decreasing support amongst both Israelis and Palestinians for a Two State solution while top world brokers of peace still tout this approach as “the only viable alternative”. Particularly distressing for the Palestinians and undoubtedly driving their pessimism of this approach, is the view unfolding before them of fifty years of Israeli settlement activity in the West Bank.

 

[P F Tinmore]

(QUESTIONS)

◈ So, within the boundaries of Israeli Sovereignty, who is being systematically oppressed and dominated?
◈ So, within the boundaries of Israeli Sovereignty, what one racial group over any other racial group or groups?
◈ So, within the boundaries of Israeli Sovereignty, with the intention of maintaining that what regime?

Uhhh, Israel does not have boundaries.

Uhhh, Islamic terrorist franchises can show you where the boundaries are.

You live in some alternate reality?

A line of goons with guns does not make a border.

A "nation" without a government and a history of FAILED govts doesn't have a border either..

Palestinians are extremely leery of ceding power to a central government. A lot of egg-headed intellectuals can yack all they want -- but it's NOT LIKELY that Palestinians will ever agree to BEING a nation-state.. Actually pretty smart given the Arab track record of "national govts"...

I don't slight the Palis one bit for rejecting a national govt...

The never answered question.

Fatah lost the elections. How/why is it running the West Bank?

Because of what I just explained to you.. Palis not happy with the graft/corruption of Fatah, not willing to radicalize to the Hamas tune.. Read what I said again.. Palis do not TRUST or want a "nation-state" with a powerful central govt.. This is why all your head-banging academic and activist videos wont FIX this problem.. They've never willingly got behind ANY KIND of "national govt".. There's no Palestinian govt to negotiate with..

You're wasting your time because you do NOT understand their preferred social/organizational structure.. They are SELF IDENTIFIED by tribes and families and places of origin.. THAT is the natural Arab culture.. And when Arab countries ADOPT a nation state, they end up with ruthless, barbaric dictators as the ONLY MEANS to suppress conflict along tribal, familial, place of origin lines...

Perhaps if you would answer my never answered question, that would answer your questions.

 

[P F Tinmore]

The article goes on to describe the decreasing support amongst both Israelis and Palestinians for a Two State solution

Solution to what? What is the problem?

 

[flacaltenn]

(QUESTIONS)

◈ So, within the boundaries of Israeli Sovereignty, who is being systematically oppressed and dominated?
◈ So, within the boundaries of Israeli Sovereignty, what one racial group over any other racial group or groups?
◈ So, within the boundaries of Israeli Sovereignty, with the intention of maintaining that what regime?

Uhhh, Israel does not have boundaries.

Uhhh, Islamic terrorist franchises can show you where the boundaries are.

You live in some alternate reality?

A line of goons with guns does not make a border.

A "nation" without a government and a history of FAILED govts doesn't have a border either..

Palestinians are extremely leery of ceding power to a central government. A lot of egg-headed intellectuals can yack all they want -- but it's NOT LIKELY that Palestinians will ever agree to BEING a nation-state.. Actually pretty smart given the Arab track record of "national govts"...

I don't slight the Palis one bit for rejecting a national govt...

The never answered question.

Fatah lost the elections. How/why is it running the West Bank?

Because of what I just explained to you.. Palis not happy with the graft/corruption of Fatah, not willing to radicalize to the Hamas tune.. Read what I said again.. Palis do not TRUST or want a "nation-state" with a powerful central govt.. This is why all your head-banging academic and activist videos wont FIX this problem.. They've never willingly got behind ANY KIND of "national govt".. There's no Palestinian govt to negotiate with..

You're wasting your time because you do NOT understand their preferred social/organizational structure.. They are SELF IDENTIFIED by tribes and families and places of origin.. THAT is the natural Arab culture.. And when Arab countries ADOPT a nation state, they end up with ruthless, barbaric dictators as the ONLY MEANS to suppress conflict along tribal, familial, place of origin lines...

Perhaps if you would answer my never answered question, that would answer your questions.

Oooooh.. I LOVE "never answered questions".. Hit me... LOL...

 

[flacaltenn]

The article goes on to describe the decreasing support amongst both Israelis and Palestinians for a Two State solution

Solution to what? What is the problem?

Is THIS the "never answered question"??? If it is -- I'm disappointed. The "problem" is a bunch of JORDANIAN citizens isolated in land that Jordan GAVE AWAY -- because they were tired of their "Palestinian problem"...

And what I WANT is a fair solution to that problem that doesn't FORCE Palis into a nation state that they dont WANT or trust just to get their own JUSTICE and self-governance.

Read that last sentence again.. You and others are TOO HUNG UP ON the concept of "statehood".. What's REQUIRED is self-determination and self-rule.. Had this been done with a City State or Emirates model 3 decades ago -- there would be vibrant self-rule and prosperity for the Palestinians today.

 

[P F Tinmore]

(QUESTIONS)

◈ So, within the boundaries of Israeli Sovereignty, who is being systematically oppressed and dominated?
◈ So, within the boundaries of Israeli Sovereignty, what one racial group over any other racial group or groups?
◈ So, within the boundaries of Israeli Sovereignty, with the intention of maintaining that what regime?

Uhhh, Israel does not have boundaries.

Uhhh, Islamic terrorist franchises can show you where the boundaries are.

You live in some alternate reality?

A line of goons with guns does not make a border.

A "nation" without a government and a history of FAILED govts doesn't have a border either..

Palestinians are extremely leery of ceding power to a central government. A lot of egg-headed intellectuals can yack all they want -- but it's NOT LIKELY that Palestinians will ever agree to BEING a nation-state.. Actually pretty smart given the Arab track record of "national govts"...

I don't slight the Palis one bit for rejecting a national govt...

The never answered question.

Fatah lost the elections. How/why is it running the West Bank?

Because of what I just explained to you.. Palis not happy with the graft/corruption of Fatah, not willing to radicalize to the Hamas tune.. Read what I said again.. Palis do not TRUST or want a "nation-state" with a powerful central govt.. This is why all your head-banging academic and activist videos wont FIX this problem.. They've never willingly got behind ANY KIND of "national govt".. There's no Palestinian govt to negotiate with..

You're wasting your time because you do NOT understand their preferred social/organizational structure.. They are SELF IDENTIFIED by tribes and families and places of origin.. THAT is the natural Arab culture.. And when Arab countries ADOPT a nation state, they end up with ruthless, barbaric dictators as the ONLY MEANS to suppress conflict along tribal, familial, place of origin lines...

Perhaps if you would answer my never answered question, that would answer your questions.

Oooooh.. I LOVE "never answered questions".. Hit me... LOL...

Sure.

Fatah lost the elections. How/why is it running the West Bank?

 

[P F Tinmore]

The article goes on to describe the decreasing support amongst both Israelis and Palestinians for a Two State solution

Solution to what? What is the problem?

Is THIS the "never answered question"??? If it is -- I'm disappointed. The "problem" is a bunch of JORDANIAN citizens isolated in land that Jordan GAVE AWAY -- because they were tired of their "Palestinian problem"...

And what I WANT is a fair solution to that problem that doesn't FORCE Palis into a nation state that they dont WANT or trust just to get their own JUSTICE and self-governance.

Read that last sentence again.. You and others are TOO HUNG UP ON the concept of "statehood".. What's REQUIRED is self-determination and self-rule.. Had this been done with a City State or Emirates model 3 decades ago -- there would be vibrant self-rule and prosperity for the Palestinians today.

Read that last sentence again.. You and others are TOO HUNG UP ON the concept of "statehood".

As you know, I have posted many Palestinian videos (that you have never watched). How many mention creating a new state?