Palestinian Talks, lectures, & interviews.

[rylah]

Usually all these talks are just choirs of opportunists cynically bandwagoning on the conflict,
for their own benefit of position, attention and income. All that BDS, Peace Now none sense...

But some talks will go historic for being REAL and MATURE.

Rochman claims to favor rights and equality but he doesn't mean it.

A character judgement based on anything he said, did,
or just your pertaining to read people's minds?

No wonder we never hear self-criticism in anti-Israel ranks,
you folks can't handle anything beyond a one track conformist preaching.

Rudy can express just whatever he thinks, criticize and praise,
and not just him but on both sides, that's the point of this whole format, and kudos for that.

Was there anything he said you actually didn't agree with?

I don't recall him ever mentioning the refugees. If he is going to ignore half of the Palestinians, where are rights and equality?

There are more problems.

That's probably because you just disregard him by default,
without any connection to the conversation.

Why can't you even listen, or actually address the message,
without trying to manipulate and mislead?

Some maturity...would not kill a grumpy old man.

 

[P F Tinmore]

Usually all these talks are just choirs of opportunists cynically bandwagoning on the conflict,
for their own benefit of position, attention and income. All that BDS, Peace Now none sense...

But some talks will go historic for being REAL and MATURE.

Rochman claims to favor rights and equality but he doesn't mean it.

A character judgement based on anything he said, did,
or just your pertaining to read people's minds?

No wonder we never hear self-criticism in anti-Israel ranks,
you folks can't handle anything beyond a one track conformist preaching.

Rudy can express just whatever he thinks, criticize and praise,
and not just him but on both sides, that's the point of this whole format, and kudos for that.

Was there anything he said you actually didn't agree with?

I don't recall him ever mentioning the refugees. If he is going to ignore half of the Palestinians, where are rights and equality?

There are more problems.

That's probably because you just disregard him by default,
without any connection to the conversation.

Why can't you even listen, or actually address the message,
without trying to manipulate and mislead?

Some maturity...would not kill a grumpy old man.

I just listened to it again. He did not mention refugees.

Another thing he said that contradicted himself is the autonomous zones where the Palestinians would govern themselves. Then he mentioned annexing area C. He seems to imply that the Palestinians will govern their own population centers. A city is not a population center but an economic center. It includes the city and the surrounding resources it needs to survive. A city without its resources is on welfare.

Like Nablus, for example.

The Nablus district is Nablus and its surrounding resources it needs to survive. Most of Nablus would be in Israel. How can that work without its resources?

 

[rylah]

Usually all these talks are just choirs of opportunists cynically bandwagoning on the conflict,
for their own benefit of position, attention and income. All that BDS, Peace Now none sense...

But some talks will go historic for being REAL and MATURE.

Rochman claims to favor rights and equality but he doesn't mean it.

A character judgement based on anything he said, did,
or just your pertaining to read people's minds?

No wonder we never hear self-criticism in anti-Israel ranks,
you folks can't handle anything beyond a one track conformist preaching.

Rudy can express just whatever he thinks, criticize and praise,
and not just him but on both sides, that's the point of this whole format, and kudos for that.

Was there anything he said you actually didn't agree with?

I don't recall him ever mentioning the refugees. If he is going to ignore half of the Palestinians, where are rights and equality?

There are more problems.

That's probably because you just disregard him by default,
without any connection to the conversation.

Why can't you even listen, or actually address the message,
without trying to manipulate and mislead?

Some maturity...would not kill a grumpy old man.

I just listened to it again. He did not mention refugees.

Another thing he said that contradicted himself is the autonomous zones where the Palestinians would govern themselves. Then he mentioned annexing area C. He seems to imply that the Palestinians will govern their own population centers. A city is not a population center but an economic center. It includes the city and the surrounding resources it needs to survive. A city without its resources is on welfare.

Like Nablus, for example.

The Nablus district is Nablus and its surrounding resources it needs to survive. Most of Nablus would be in Israel. How can that work without its resources?

Then you didn't actually understand what he was saying,
and he didn't mention no annexation or autonomous zones.

But what he said and what you say are actually very similar,
namely the innate Arab relationship the the cities as separate economic centers,
with their natural social structure of each tribe/community leaders, as opposed to a unified vision of economy and separate national sovereignty. And that resonates 100% with your previous post, what Kefah Abukhdeir was saying about Hamas and Fatah being essential heretics by Islamic values, in their striving for a separate national sovereignty. Rudy doesn't propose Shchem to be a separate city, but full integration into the country economy and society with respect to the social structure of both populations and the mutual goals that do align.

They both agree, it's a classic case of 2 people involved in the conflict agreeing on something,
and an opinionated shmuck from 1000's miles away jumps to disagree seeking attention.

What makes you think you know better,
let alone better than the people actually involved?

 

[P F Tinmore]

Usually all these talks are just choirs of opportunists cynically bandwagoning on the conflict,
for their own benefit of position, attention and income. All that BDS, Peace Now none sense...

But some talks will go historic for being REAL and MATURE.

Rochman claims to favor rights and equality but he doesn't mean it.

A character judgement based on anything he said, did,
or just your pertaining to read people's minds?

No wonder we never hear self-criticism in anti-Israel ranks,
you folks can't handle anything beyond a one track conformist preaching.

Rudy can express just whatever he thinks, criticize and praise,
and not just him but on both sides, that's the point of this whole format, and kudos for that.

Was there anything he said you actually didn't agree with?

I don't recall him ever mentioning the refugees. If he is going to ignore half of the Palestinians, where are rights and equality?

There are more problems.

That's probably because you just disregard him by default,
without any connection to the conversation.

Why can't you even listen, or actually address the message,
without trying to manipulate and mislead?

Some maturity...would not kill a grumpy old man.

I just listened to it again. He did not mention refugees.

Another thing he said that contradicted himself is the autonomous zones where the Palestinians would govern themselves. Then he mentioned annexing area C. He seems to imply that the Palestinians will govern their own population centers. A city is not a population center but an economic center. It includes the city and the surrounding resources it needs to survive. A city without its resources is on welfare.

Like Nablus, for example.

The Nablus district is Nablus and its surrounding resources it needs to survive. Most of Nablus would be in Israel. How can that work without its resources?

Then you didn't actually understand what he was saying,
and he didn't mention no annexation or autonomous zones.

But what he said and what you say are actually very similar,
namely the innate Arab relationship the the cities as separate economic centers,
with their natural social structure of each tribe/community leaders, as opposed to a unified vision of economy and separate national sovereignty. And that resonates 100% with your previous post, what Kefah Abukhdeir was saying about Hamas and Fatah being essential heretics by Islamic values, in their striving for a separate national sovereignty. Rudy doesn't propose Shchem to be a separate city, but full integration into the country economy and society with respect to the social structure of both populations and the mutual goals that do align.

They both agree, it's a classic case of 2 people involved in the conflict agreeing on something,
and an opinionated shmuck from 1000's miles away jumps to disagree seeking attention.

What makes you think you know better,
let alone better than the people actually involved?

Rudy doesn't propose Shchem to be a separate city, but full integration into the country economy and society with respect to the social structure of both populations and the mutual goals that do align.

I am saying that a city needs its surrounding resources. It is a center of that district for a reason.

He is saying, and it already is de facto, that the surrounding area will be Israel.

So whose resources will the city depend on?

 

[rylah]

Usually all these talks are just choirs of opportunists cynically bandwagoning on the conflict,
for their own benefit of position, attention and income. All that BDS, Peace Now none sense...

But some talks will go historic for being REAL and MATURE.

Rochman claims to favor rights and equality but he doesn't mean it.

A character judgement based on anything he said, did,
or just your pertaining to read people's minds?

No wonder we never hear self-criticism in anti-Israel ranks,
you folks can't handle anything beyond a one track conformist preaching.

Rudy can express just whatever he thinks, criticize and praise,
and not just him but on both sides, that's the point of this whole format, and kudos for that.

Was there anything he said you actually didn't agree with?

I don't recall him ever mentioning the refugees. If he is going to ignore half of the Palestinians, where are rights and equality?

There are more problems.

That's probably because you just disregard him by default,
without any connection to the conversation.

Why can't you even listen, or actually address the message,
without trying to manipulate and mislead?

Some maturity...would not kill a grumpy old man.

I just listened to it again. He did not mention refugees.

Another thing he said that contradicted himself is the autonomous zones where the Palestinians would govern themselves. Then he mentioned annexing area C. He seems to imply that the Palestinians will govern their own population centers. A city is not a population center but an economic center. It includes the city and the surrounding resources it needs to survive. A city without its resources is on welfare.

Like Nablus, for example.

The Nablus district is Nablus and its surrounding resources it needs to survive. Most of Nablus would be in Israel. How can that work without its resources?

Then you didn't actually understand what he was saying,
and he didn't mention no annexation or autonomous zones.

But what he said and what you say are actually very similar,
namely the innate Arab relationship the the cities as separate economic centers,
with their natural social structure of each tribe/community leaders, as opposed to a unified vision of economy and separate national sovereignty. And that resonates 100% with your previous post, what Kefah Abukhdeir was saying about Hamas and Fatah being essential heretics by Islamic values, in their striving for a separate national sovereignty. Rudy doesn't propose Shchem to be a separate city, but full integration into the country economy and society with respect to the social structure of both populations and the mutual goals that do align.

They both agree, it's a classic case of 2 people involved in the conflict agreeing on something,
and an opinionated shmuck from 1000's miles away jumps to disagree seeking attention.

What makes you think you know better,
let alone better than the people actually involved?

Rudy doesn't propose Shchem to be a separate city, but full integration into the country economy and society with respect to the social structure of both populations and the mutual goals that do align.

I am saying that a city needs its surrounding resources. It is a center of that district for a reason.

He is saying, and it already is de facto, that the surrounding area will be Israel.

So whose resources will the city depend on?

The entire country,
Shchem will be no different than Tel-Aviv or Be'er Sheva.

It's the usual municipal structural division of regions in one country,
like in regional areas as upper Galilee, Beit Shean Valley, the Yizre'el Valley,
all have smaller municipal units, some encompassing single large cities, some several small ones
with surrounding villages, some others follow natural cultural and geographic conditions, but all as part of one state and economy.

In what way does it make sense to insist on further fragmentation of economies and jurisdictions?

 

[P F Tinmore]

Usually all these talks are just choirs of opportunists cynically bandwagoning on the conflict,
for their own benefit of position, attention and income. All that BDS, Peace Now none sense...

But some talks will go historic for being REAL and MATURE.

Rochman claims to favor rights and equality but he doesn't mean it.

A character judgement based on anything he said, did,
or just your pertaining to read people's minds?

No wonder we never hear self-criticism in anti-Israel ranks,
you folks can't handle anything beyond a one track conformist preaching.

Rudy can express just whatever he thinks, criticize and praise,
and not just him but on both sides, that's the point of this whole format, and kudos for that.

Was there anything he said you actually didn't agree with?

I don't recall him ever mentioning the refugees. If he is going to ignore half of the Palestinians, where are rights and equality?

There are more problems.

That's probably because you just disregard him by default,
without any connection to the conversation.

Why can't you even listen, or actually address the message,
without trying to manipulate and mislead?

Some maturity...would not kill a grumpy old man.

I just listened to it again. He did not mention refugees.

Another thing he said that contradicted himself is the autonomous zones where the Palestinians would govern themselves. Then he mentioned annexing area C. He seems to imply that the Palestinians will govern their own population centers. A city is not a population center but an economic center. It includes the city and the surrounding resources it needs to survive. A city without its resources is on welfare.

Like Nablus, for example.

The Nablus district is Nablus and its surrounding resources it needs to survive. Most of Nablus would be in Israel. How can that work without its resources?

Then you didn't actually understand what he was saying,
and he didn't mention no annexation or autonomous zones.

But what he said and what you say are actually very similar,
namely the innate Arab relationship the the cities as separate economic centers,
with their natural social structure of each tribe/community leaders, as opposed to a unified vision of economy and separate national sovereignty. And that resonates 100% with your previous post, what Kefah Abukhdeir was saying about Hamas and Fatah being essential heretics by Islamic values, in their striving for a separate national sovereignty. Rudy doesn't propose Shchem to be a separate city, but full integration into the country economy and society with respect to the social structure of both populations and the mutual goals that do align.

They both agree, it's a classic case of 2 people involved in the conflict agreeing on something,
and an opinionated shmuck from 1000's miles away jumps to disagree seeking attention.

What makes you think you know better,
let alone better than the people actually involved?

Rudy doesn't propose Shchem to be a separate city, but full integration into the country economy and society with respect to the social structure of both populations and the mutual goals that do align.

I am saying that a city needs its surrounding resources. It is a center of that district for a reason.

He is saying, and it already is de facto, that the surrounding area will be Israel.

So whose resources will the city depend on?

The entire country,
Shchem will be no different than Tel-Aviv or Be'er Sheva.

It's the usual municipal structural division of regions in one country,
like in regional areas as upper Galilee, Beit Shean Valley, the Yizre'el Valley,
all have smaller municipal units, some encompassing single large cities, some several small ones
with surrounding villages, some others follow natural cultural and geographic conditions, but all as part of one state and economy.

In what way does it make sense to insist on further fragmentation of economies and jurisdictions?

Clearly you do not understand how a regional economy works within its district.

 

[rylah]

Usually all these talks are just choirs of opportunists cynically bandwagoning on the conflict,
for their own benefit of position, attention and income. All that BDS, Peace Now none sense...

But some talks will go historic for being REAL and MATURE.

Rochman claims to favor rights and equality but he doesn't mean it.

A character judgement based on anything he said, did,
or just your pertaining to read people's minds?

No wonder we never hear self-criticism in anti-Israel ranks,
you folks can't handle anything beyond a one track conformist preaching.

Rudy can express just whatever he thinks, criticize and praise,
and not just him but on both sides, that's the point of this whole format, and kudos for that.

Was there anything he said you actually didn't agree with?

I don't recall him ever mentioning the refugees. If he is going to ignore half of the Palestinians, where are rights and equality?

There are more problems.

That's probably because you just disregard him by default,
without any connection to the conversation.

Why can't you even listen, or actually address the message,
without trying to manipulate and mislead?

Some maturity...would not kill a grumpy old man.

I just listened to it again. He did not mention refugees.

Another thing he said that contradicted himself is the autonomous zones where the Palestinians would govern themselves. Then he mentioned annexing area C. He seems to imply that the Palestinians will govern their own population centers. A city is not a population center but an economic center. It includes the city and the surrounding resources it needs to survive. A city without its resources is on welfare.

Like Nablus, for example.

The Nablus district is Nablus and its surrounding resources it needs to survive. Most of Nablus would be in Israel. How can that work without its resources?

Then you didn't actually understand what he was saying,
and he didn't mention no annexation or autonomous zones.

But what he said and what you say are actually very similar,
namely the innate Arab relationship the the cities as separate economic centers,
with their natural social structure of each tribe/community leaders, as opposed to a unified vision of economy and separate national sovereignty. And that resonates 100% with your previous post, what Kefah Abukhdeir was saying about Hamas and Fatah being essential heretics by Islamic values, in their striving for a separate national sovereignty. Rudy doesn't propose Shchem to be a separate city, but full integration into the country economy and society with respect to the social structure of both populations and the mutual goals that do align.

They both agree, it's a classic case of 2 people involved in the conflict agreeing on something,
and an opinionated shmuck from 1000's miles away jumps to disagree seeking attention.

What makes you think you know better,
let alone better than the people actually involved?

Rudy doesn't propose Shchem to be a separate city, but full integration into the country economy and society with respect to the social structure of both populations and the mutual goals that do align.

I am saying that a city needs its surrounding resources. It is a center of that district for a reason.

He is saying, and it already is de facto, that the surrounding area will be Israel.

So whose resources will the city depend on?

The entire country,
Shchem will be no different than Tel-Aviv or Be'er Sheva.

It's the usual municipal structural division of regions in one country,
like in regional areas as upper Galilee, Beit Shean Valley, the Yizre'el Valley,
all have smaller municipal units, some encompassing single large cities, some several small ones
with surrounding villages, some others follow natural cultural and geographic conditions, but all as part of one state and economy.

In what way does it make sense to insist on further fragmentation of economies and jurisdictions?

Clearly you do not understand how a regional economy works within its district.

Again you assume that you know better,
but don't actually present any substance or argument.

I'm saying virtually the same basics things you've been banging about for years,
but you just need to disagree because it comes from an Israeli...

Frankly it seems you're finding yourself threatened by becoming irrelevant
at the notion that the 2 sides can actually agree on something fundamental.

Clearly, because your do not seek the good of either side,
rather to feed up a blown out ego at the expense of other people's conflicts,
maliciously seeking to thrive off and prolong disagreement even where there not.

Be sincere for once

Why can't you stand Rudy and Kefah agreeing?

 

[P F Tinmore]

Usually all these talks are just choirs of opportunists cynically bandwagoning on the conflict,
for their own benefit of position, attention and income. All that BDS, Peace Now none sense...

But some talks will go historic for being REAL and MATURE.

Rochman claims to favor rights and equality but he doesn't mean it.

A character judgement based on anything he said, did,
or just your pertaining to read people's minds?

No wonder we never hear self-criticism in anti-Israel ranks,
you folks can't handle anything beyond a one track conformist preaching.

Rudy can express just whatever he thinks, criticize and praise,
and not just him but on both sides, that's the point of this whole format, and kudos for that.

Was there anything he said you actually didn't agree with?

I don't recall him ever mentioning the refugees. If he is going to ignore half of the Palestinians, where are rights and equality?

There are more problems.

That's probably because you just disregard him by default,
without any connection to the conversation.

Why can't you even listen, or actually address the message,
without trying to manipulate and mislead?

Some maturity...would not kill a grumpy old man.

I just listened to it again. He did not mention refugees.

Another thing he said that contradicted himself is the autonomous zones where the Palestinians would govern themselves. Then he mentioned annexing area C. He seems to imply that the Palestinians will govern their own population centers. A city is not a population center but an economic center. It includes the city and the surrounding resources it needs to survive. A city without its resources is on welfare.

Like Nablus, for example.

The Nablus district is Nablus and its surrounding resources it needs to survive. Most of Nablus would be in Israel. How can that work without its resources?

Then you didn't actually understand what he was saying,
and he didn't mention no annexation or autonomous zones.

But what he said and what you say are actually very similar,
namely the innate Arab relationship the the cities as separate economic centers,
with their natural social structure of each tribe/community leaders, as opposed to a unified vision of economy and separate national sovereignty. And that resonates 100% with your previous post, what Kefah Abukhdeir was saying about Hamas and Fatah being essential heretics by Islamic values, in their striving for a separate national sovereignty. Rudy doesn't propose Shchem to be a separate city, but full integration into the country economy and society with respect to the social structure of both populations and the mutual goals that do align.

They both agree, it's a classic case of 2 people involved in the conflict agreeing on something,
and an opinionated shmuck from 1000's miles away jumps to disagree seeking attention.

What makes you think you know better,
let alone better than the people actually involved?

Rudy doesn't propose Shchem to be a separate city, but full integration into the country economy and society with respect to the social structure of both populations and the mutual goals that do align.

I am saying that a city needs its surrounding resources. It is a center of that district for a reason.

He is saying, and it already is de facto, that the surrounding area will be Israel.

So whose resources will the city depend on?

The entire country,
Shchem will be no different than Tel-Aviv or Be'er Sheva.

It's the usual municipal structural division of regions in one country,
like in regional areas as upper Galilee, Beit Shean Valley, the Yizre'el Valley,
all have smaller municipal units, some encompassing single large cities, some several small ones
with surrounding villages, some others follow natural cultural and geographic conditions, but all as part of one state and economy.

In what way does it make sense to insist on further fragmentation of economies and jurisdictions?

Clearly you do not understand how a regional economy works within its district.

Again you assume that you know better,
but don't actually present any substance or argument.

I'm saying virtually the same basics things you've been banging about for years,
but you just need to disagree because it comes from an Israeli...

Frankly it seems you're finding yourself threatened by becoming irrelevant
at the notion that the 2 sides can actually agree on something fundamental.

Clearly, because your do not seek the good of either side,
rather to feed up a blown out ego at the expense of other people's conflicts,
maliciously seeking to thrive off and prolong disagreement even where there not.

Be sincere for once

Why can't you stand Rudy and Kefah agreeing?

Nice rant, but if you want more info on my post just ask.

 

[rylah]

Usually all these talks are just choirs of opportunists cynically bandwagoning on the conflict,
for their own benefit of position, attention and income. All that BDS, Peace Now none sense...

But some talks will go historic for being REAL and MATURE.

Rochman claims to favor rights and equality but he doesn't mean it.

A character judgement based on anything he said, did,
or just your pertaining to read people's minds?

No wonder we never hear self-criticism in anti-Israel ranks,
you folks can't handle anything beyond a one track conformist preaching.

Rudy can express just whatever he thinks, criticize and praise,
and not just him but on both sides, that's the point of this whole format, and kudos for that.

Was there anything he said you actually didn't agree with?

I don't recall him ever mentioning the refugees. If he is going to ignore half of the Palestinians, where are rights and equality?

There are more problems.

That's probably because you just disregard him by default,
without any connection to the conversation.

Why can't you even listen, or actually address the message,
without trying to manipulate and mislead?

Some maturity...would not kill a grumpy old man.

I just listened to it again. He did not mention refugees.

Another thing he said that contradicted himself is the autonomous zones where the Palestinians would govern themselves. Then he mentioned annexing area C. He seems to imply that the Palestinians will govern their own population centers. A city is not a population center but an economic center. It includes the city and the surrounding resources it needs to survive. A city without its resources is on welfare.

Like Nablus, for example.

The Nablus district is Nablus and its surrounding resources it needs to survive. Most of Nablus would be in Israel. How can that work without its resources?

Then you didn't actually understand what he was saying,
and he didn't mention no annexation or autonomous zones.

But what he said and what you say are actually very similar,
namely the innate Arab relationship the the cities as separate economic centers,
with their natural social structure of each tribe/community leaders, as opposed to a unified vision of economy and separate national sovereignty. And that resonates 100% with your previous post, what Kefah Abukhdeir was saying about Hamas and Fatah being essential heretics by Islamic values, in their striving for a separate national sovereignty. Rudy doesn't propose Shchem to be a separate city, but full integration into the country economy and society with respect to the social structure of both populations and the mutual goals that do align.

They both agree, it's a classic case of 2 people involved in the conflict agreeing on something,
and an opinionated shmuck from 1000's miles away jumps to disagree seeking attention.

What makes you think you know better,
let alone better than the people actually involved?

Rudy doesn't propose Shchem to be a separate city, but full integration into the country economy and society with respect to the social structure of both populations and the mutual goals that do align.

I am saying that a city needs its surrounding resources. It is a center of that district for a reason.

He is saying, and it already is de facto, that the surrounding area will be Israel.

So whose resources will the city depend on?

The entire country,
Shchem will be no different than Tel-Aviv or Be'er Sheva.

It's the usual municipal structural division of regions in one country,
like in regional areas as upper Galilee, Beit Shean Valley, the Yizre'el Valley,
all have smaller municipal units, some encompassing single large cities, some several small ones
with surrounding villages, some others follow natural cultural and geographic conditions, but all as part of one state and economy.

In what way does it make sense to insist on further fragmentation of economies and jurisdictions?

Clearly you do not understand how a regional economy works within its district.

Again you assume that you know better,
but don't actually present any substance or argument.

I'm saying virtually the same basics things you've been banging about for years,
but you just need to disagree because it comes from an Israeli...

Frankly it seems you're finding yourself threatened by becoming irrelevant
at the notion that the 2 sides can actually agree on something fundamental.

Clearly, because your do not seek the good of either side,
rather to feed up a blown out ego at the expense of other people's conflicts,
maliciously seeking to thrive off and prolong disagreement even where there not.

Be sincere for once

Why can't you stand Rudy and Kefah agreeing?

Nice rant, but if you want more info on my post just ask.

For 2 pages you have been triyng to deflect the conversation
to anything BUT what was discussed in either of the videos we posted.

Can you even address any of what Rudy and Khefa actually said,
or just trying to switch the subject?

 

[P F Tinmore]

Usually all these talks are just choirs of opportunists cynically bandwagoning on the conflict,
for their own benefit of position, attention and income. All that BDS, Peace Now none sense...

But some talks will go historic for being REAL and MATURE.

Rochman claims to favor rights and equality but he doesn't mean it.

A character judgement based on anything he said, did,
or just your pertaining to read people's minds?

No wonder we never hear self-criticism in anti-Israel ranks,
you folks can't handle anything beyond a one track conformist preaching.

Rudy can express just whatever he thinks, criticize and praise,
and not just him but on both sides, that's the point of this whole format, and kudos for that.

Was there anything he said you actually didn't agree with?

I don't recall him ever mentioning the refugees. If he is going to ignore half of the Palestinians, where are rights and equality?

There are more problems.

That's probably because you just disregard him by default,
without any connection to the conversation.

Why can't you even listen, or actually address the message,
without trying to manipulate and mislead?

Some maturity...would not kill a grumpy old man.

I just listened to it again. He did not mention refugees.

Another thing he said that contradicted himself is the autonomous zones where the Palestinians would govern themselves. Then he mentioned annexing area C. He seems to imply that the Palestinians will govern their own population centers. A city is not a population center but an economic center. It includes the city and the surrounding resources it needs to survive. A city without its resources is on welfare.

Like Nablus, for example.

The Nablus district is Nablus and its surrounding resources it needs to survive. Most of Nablus would be in Israel. How can that work without its resources?

Then you didn't actually understand what he was saying,
and he didn't mention no annexation or autonomous zones.

But what he said and what you say are actually very similar,
namely the innate Arab relationship the the cities as separate economic centers,
with their natural social structure of each tribe/community leaders, as opposed to a unified vision of economy and separate national sovereignty. And that resonates 100% with your previous post, what Kefah Abukhdeir was saying about Hamas and Fatah being essential heretics by Islamic values, in their striving for a separate national sovereignty. Rudy doesn't propose Shchem to be a separate city, but full integration into the country economy and society with respect to the social structure of both populations and the mutual goals that do align.

They both agree, it's a classic case of 2 people involved in the conflict agreeing on something,
and an opinionated shmuck from 1000's miles away jumps to disagree seeking attention.

What makes you think you know better,
let alone better than the people actually involved?

Rudy doesn't propose Shchem to be a separate city, but full integration into the country economy and society with respect to the social structure of both populations and the mutual goals that do align.

I am saying that a city needs its surrounding resources. It is a center of that district for a reason.

He is saying, and it already is de facto, that the surrounding area will be Israel.

So whose resources will the city depend on?

The entire country,
Shchem will be no different than Tel-Aviv or Be'er Sheva.

It's the usual municipal structural division of regions in one country,
like in regional areas as upper Galilee, Beit Shean Valley, the Yizre'el Valley,
all have smaller municipal units, some encompassing single large cities, some several small ones
with surrounding villages, some others follow natural cultural and geographic conditions, but all as part of one state and economy.

In what way does it make sense to insist on further fragmentation of economies and jurisdictions?

Clearly you do not understand how a regional economy works within its district.

Again you assume that you know better,
but don't actually present any substance or argument.

I'm saying virtually the same basics things you've been banging about for years,
but you just need to disagree because it comes from an Israeli...

Frankly it seems you're finding yourself threatened by becoming irrelevant
at the notion that the 2 sides can actually agree on something fundamental.

Clearly, because your do not seek the good of either side,
rather to feed up a blown out ego at the expense of other people's conflicts,
maliciously seeking to thrive off and prolong disagreement even where there not.

Be sincere for once

Why can't you stand Rudy and Kefah agreeing?

Nice rant, but if you want more info on my post just ask.

For 2 pages you have been triyng to deflect the conversation
to anything BUT what was discussed in either of the videos we posted.

Can you even address any of what Rudy and Khefa actually said,
or just trying to switch the subject?

I did bring up an important issue and got an incoherent response.

 

[rylah]

Usually all these talks are just choirs of opportunists cynically bandwagoning on the conflict,
for their own benefit of position, attention and income. All that BDS, Peace Now none sense...

But some talks will go historic for being REAL and MATURE.

Rochman claims to favor rights and equality but he doesn't mean it.

A character judgement based on anything he said, did,
or just your pertaining to read people's minds?

No wonder we never hear self-criticism in anti-Israel ranks,
you folks can't handle anything beyond a one track conformist preaching.

Rudy can express just whatever he thinks, criticize and praise,
and not just him but on both sides, that's the point of this whole format, and kudos for that.

Was there anything he said you actually didn't agree with?

I don't recall him ever mentioning the refugees. If he is going to ignore half of the Palestinians, where are rights and equality?

There are more problems.

That's probably because you just disregard him by default,
without any connection to the conversation.

Why can't you even listen, or actually address the message,
without trying to manipulate and mislead?

Some maturity...would not kill a grumpy old man.

I just listened to it again. He did not mention refugees.

Another thing he said that contradicted himself is the autonomous zones where the Palestinians would govern themselves. Then he mentioned annexing area C. He seems to imply that the Palestinians will govern their own population centers. A city is not a population center but an economic center. It includes the city and the surrounding resources it needs to survive. A city without its resources is on welfare.

Like Nablus, for example.

The Nablus district is Nablus and its surrounding resources it needs to survive. Most of Nablus would be in Israel. How can that work without its resources?

Then you didn't actually understand what he was saying,
and he didn't mention no annexation or autonomous zones.

But what he said and what you say are actually very similar,
namely the innate Arab relationship the the cities as separate economic centers,
with their natural social structure of each tribe/community leaders, as opposed to a unified vision of economy and separate national sovereignty. And that resonates 100% with your previous post, what Kefah Abukhdeir was saying about Hamas and Fatah being essential heretics by Islamic values, in their striving for a separate national sovereignty. Rudy doesn't propose Shchem to be a separate city, but full integration into the country economy and society with respect to the social structure of both populations and the mutual goals that do align.

They both agree, it's a classic case of 2 people involved in the conflict agreeing on something,
and an opinionated shmuck from 1000's miles away jumps to disagree seeking attention.

What makes you think you know better,
let alone better than the people actually involved?

Rudy doesn't propose Shchem to be a separate city, but full integration into the country economy and society with respect to the social structure of both populations and the mutual goals that do align.

I am saying that a city needs its surrounding resources. It is a center of that district for a reason.

He is saying, and it already is de facto, that the surrounding area will be Israel.

So whose resources will the city depend on?

The entire country,
Shchem will be no different than Tel-Aviv or Be'er Sheva.

It's the usual municipal structural division of regions in one country,
like in regional areas as upper Galilee, Beit Shean Valley, the Yizre'el Valley,
all have smaller municipal units, some encompassing single large cities, some several small ones
with surrounding villages, some others follow natural cultural and geographic conditions, but all as part of one state and economy.

In what way does it make sense to insist on further fragmentation of economies and jurisdictions?

Clearly you do not understand how a regional economy works within its district.

Again you assume that you know better,
but don't actually present any substance or argument.

I'm saying virtually the same basics things you've been banging about for years,
but you just need to disagree because it comes from an Israeli...

Frankly it seems you're finding yourself threatened by becoming irrelevant
at the notion that the 2 sides can actually agree on something fundamental.

Clearly, because your do not seek the good of either side,
rather to feed up a blown out ego at the expense of other people's conflicts,
maliciously seeking to thrive off and prolong disagreement even where there not.

Be sincere for once

Why can't you stand Rudy and Kefah agreeing?

Nice rant, but if you want more info on my post just ask.

For 2 pages you have been triyng to deflect the conversation
to anything BUT what was discussed in either of the videos we posted.

Can you even address any of what Rudy and Khefa actually said,
or just trying to switch the subject?

I did bring up an important issue and got an incoherent response.

Maybe an important issue, but you only made general statements,
that address nothing of what Rudy and Kefah were discussing.
And actually in contradiction to what they said.

We can later discuss all those important issues,
after you address the original discussion:
things Rudy and Kefah agree upon.

Otherwise what is the point in posting videos
if you're not even willing to discuss them?

 

[P F Tinmore]

Usually all these talks are just choirs of opportunists cynically bandwagoning on the conflict,
for their own benefit of position, attention and income. All that BDS, Peace Now none sense...

But some talks will go historic for being REAL and MATURE.

Rochman claims to favor rights and equality but he doesn't mean it.

A character judgement based on anything he said, did,
or just your pertaining to read people's minds?

No wonder we never hear self-criticism in anti-Israel ranks,
you folks can't handle anything beyond a one track conformist preaching.

Rudy can express just whatever he thinks, criticize and praise,
and not just him but on both sides, that's the point of this whole format, and kudos for that.

Was there anything he said you actually didn't agree with?

I don't recall him ever mentioning the refugees. If he is going to ignore half of the Palestinians, where are rights and equality?

There are more problems.

That's probably because you just disregard him by default,
without any connection to the conversation.

Why can't you even listen, or actually address the message,
without trying to manipulate and mislead?

Some maturity...would not kill a grumpy old man.

I just listened to it again. He did not mention refugees.

Another thing he said that contradicted himself is the autonomous zones where the Palestinians would govern themselves. Then he mentioned annexing area C. He seems to imply that the Palestinians will govern their own population centers. A city is not a population center but an economic center. It includes the city and the surrounding resources it needs to survive. A city without its resources is on welfare.

Like Nablus, for example.

The Nablus district is Nablus and its surrounding resources it needs to survive. Most of Nablus would be in Israel. How can that work without its resources?

Then you didn't actually understand what he was saying,
and he didn't mention no annexation or autonomous zones.

But what he said and what you say are actually very similar,
namely the innate Arab relationship the the cities as separate economic centers,
with their natural social structure of each tribe/community leaders, as opposed to a unified vision of economy and separate national sovereignty. And that resonates 100% with your previous post, what Kefah Abukhdeir was saying about Hamas and Fatah being essential heretics by Islamic values, in their striving for a separate national sovereignty. Rudy doesn't propose Shchem to be a separate city, but full integration into the country economy and society with respect to the social structure of both populations and the mutual goals that do align.

They both agree, it's a classic case of 2 people involved in the conflict agreeing on something,
and an opinionated shmuck from 1000's miles away jumps to disagree seeking attention.

What makes you think you know better,
let alone better than the people actually involved?

Rudy doesn't propose Shchem to be a separate city, but full integration into the country economy and society with respect to the social structure of both populations and the mutual goals that do align.

I am saying that a city needs its surrounding resources. It is a center of that district for a reason.

He is saying, and it already is de facto, that the surrounding area will be Israel.

So whose resources will the city depend on?

The entire country,
Shchem will be no different than Tel-Aviv or Be'er Sheva.

It's the usual municipal structural division of regions in one country,
like in regional areas as upper Galilee, Beit Shean Valley, the Yizre'el Valley,
all have smaller municipal units, some encompassing single large cities, some several small ones
with surrounding villages, some others follow natural cultural and geographic conditions, but all as part of one state and economy.

In what way does it make sense to insist on further fragmentation of economies and jurisdictions?

Clearly you do not understand how a regional economy works within its district.

Again you assume that you know better,
but don't actually present any substance or argument.

I'm saying virtually the same basics things you've been banging about for years,
but you just need to disagree because it comes from an Israeli...

Frankly it seems you're finding yourself threatened by becoming irrelevant
at the notion that the 2 sides can actually agree on something fundamental.

Clearly, because your do not seek the good of either side,
rather to feed up a blown out ego at the expense of other people's conflicts,
maliciously seeking to thrive off and prolong disagreement even where there not.

Be sincere for once

Why can't you stand Rudy and Kefah agreeing?

Nice rant, but if you want more info on my post just ask.

For 2 pages you have been triyng to deflect the conversation
to anything BUT what was discussed in either of the videos we posted.

Can you even address any of what Rudy and Khefa actually said,
or just trying to switch the subject?

I did bring up an important issue and got an incoherent response.

Maybe an important issue, but you only made general statements,
that address nothing of what Rudy and Kefah were discussing.
And actually in contradiction to what they said.

We can later discuss all those important issues,
after you address the original discussion:
things Rudy and Kefah agree upon.

Otherwise what is the point in posting videos
if you're not even willing to discuss them?

Like what?

 

[rylah]

flacaltenn can You chip in?

In post #91 Kefah explains that "Nationalism is Haram" in Islam,
in post #97 Rudy talks about social structure arguing the same, in favor of Israeli sovereignty.

Kefah argues from a religious perspective,
Rudy from historic and socio-political perspectives.

Kefah might not agree that it should be Israeli sovereignty,
but essentially both Rudy and Kefah agree on one-state paradigm.

P F Tinmore now seems to shift his position 180 degrees in the other direction, and in contradiction to that agreement (and himself) - focusing on independent city states,
based on claims of incompatibility of a unified regional economy.


I think you have much to add on regional economics.

 

[P F Tinmore]

nomatic

flacaltenn can You chip in?

In post #91 Kefah explains that "Nationalism is Haram" in Islam,
in post #97 Rudy talks about social structure arguing the same, in favor of Israeli sovereignty.

Kefah argues from a religious perspective,
Rudy from historic and socio-political perspectives.

Kefah might not agree that it should be Israeli sovereignty,
but essentially both Rudy and Kefah agree on one-state paradigm.

P F Tinmore now seems to shift his position 180 degrees in the other direction, and in contradiction to that agreement (and himself) - focusing on independent city states,
based on claims of incompatibility of a unified regional economy.


I think you have much to add on regional economics.

One of the places that Rudy goes off the rails is that he defines Palestinian cities and villages as nomadic. That is a blatant contradiction in terms. Then he bases his conclusions on false premise.

 

[rylah]

nomatic

flacaltenn can You chip in?

In post #91 Kefah explains that "Nationalism is Haram" in Islam,
in post #97 Rudy talks about social structure arguing the same, in favor of Israeli sovereignty.

Kefah argues from a religious perspective,
Rudy from historic and socio-political perspectives.

Kefah might not agree that it should be Israeli sovereignty,
but essentially both Rudy and Kefah agree on one-state paradigm.

P F Tinmore now seems to shift his position 180 degrees in the other direction, and in contradiction to that agreement (and himself) - focusing on independent city states,
based on claims of incompatibility of a unified regional economy.


I think you have much to add on regional economics.

One of the places that Rudy goes off the rails is that he defines Palestinian cities and villages as nomadic. That is a blatant contradiction in terms. Then he bases his conclusions on false premise.

He was referring to the social structure,
not the cities themselves.

How is that different from you claiming cities
can't function in unified economy?

That claim only works if there's no unified national aspiration,
or cohesive social structure to be built upon.

Which is exactly why:
The Palestinian local elections held May 13 showed that Palestinians voted for tribal and independent lists instead of political lists, giving serious cause for concern.

and why:
Among the first moves by Arafat in '94 was to establish a Tribal Department.

Then from one side of the mouth you shout "from the river to the sea!",
while from the other you say "it cant work in unified economy".

So...

 

[P F Tinmore]

nomatic

flacaltenn can You chip in?

In post #91 Kefah explains that "Nationalism is Haram" in Islam,
in post #97 Rudy talks about social structure arguing the same, in favor of Israeli sovereignty.

Kefah argues from a religious perspective,
Rudy from historic and socio-political perspectives.

Kefah might not agree that it should be Israeli sovereignty,
but essentially both Rudy and Kefah agree on one-state paradigm.

P F Tinmore now seems to shift his position 180 degrees in the other direction, and in contradiction to that agreement (and himself) - focusing on independent city states,
based on claims of incompatibility of a unified regional economy.


I think you have much to add on regional economics.

One of the places that Rudy goes off the rails is that he defines Palestinian cities and villages as nomadic. That is a blatant contradiction in terms. Then he bases his conclusions on false premise.

He was referring to the social structure,
not the cities themselves.

How is that different from you claiming cities
can't function in unified economy?

That claim only works if there's no unified national aspiration,
or cohesive social structure to be built upon.

Which is exactly why:
The Palestinian local elections held May 13 showed that Palestinians voted for tribal and independent lists instead of political lists, giving serious cause for concern.

and why:
Among the first moves by Arafat in '94 was to establish a Tribal Department.

Then from one side of the mouth you shout "from the river to the sea!",
while from the other you say "it cant work in unified economy".

So...

A unified economy is not in the plans.

 

[rylah]

nomatic

flacaltenn can You chip in?

In post #91 Kefah explains that "Nationalism is Haram" in Islam,
in post #97 Rudy talks about social structure arguing the same, in favor of Israeli sovereignty.

Kefah argues from a religious perspective,
Rudy from historic and socio-political perspectives.

Kefah might not agree that it should be Israeli sovereignty,
but essentially both Rudy and Kefah agree on one-state paradigm.

P F Tinmore now seems to shift his position 180 degrees in the other direction, and in contradiction to that agreement (and himself) - focusing on independent city states,
based on claims of incompatibility of a unified regional economy.


I think you have much to add on regional economics.

One of the places that Rudy goes off the rails is that he defines Palestinian cities and villages as nomadic. That is a blatant contradiction in terms. Then he bases his conclusions on false premise.

He was referring to the social structure,
not the cities themselves.

How is that different from you claiming cities
can't function in unified economy?

That claim only works if there's no unified national aspiration,
or cohesive social structure to be built upon.

Which is exactly why:
The Palestinian local elections held May 13 showed that Palestinians voted for tribal and independent lists instead of political lists, giving serious cause for concern.

and why:
Among the first moves by Arafat in '94 was to establish a Tribal Department.

Then from one side of the mouth you shout "from the river to the sea!",
while from the other you say "it cant work in unified economy".

So...

A unified economy is not in the plans.

Clearly, that's exactly what I'm talking about.
And what you've been pretentiously demanding for years,
but now won't even discuss that, nor what Kefah says in the video you've posted.

I suggest review the new rules:

New "Clean Start" Policy on Creating Threads

We always HAVE been a Discussion board. We've always focused almost solely on getting thread topics to be discussed and not on arbitrary content issues.. STILL completely committed to the Free Speech thing.. But lately, the thread titles and Opening Posts have been giving Free Speech a bad...

www.usmessageboard.com

 

[flacaltenn]

flacaltenn can You chip in?

In post #91 Kefah explains that "Nationalism is Haram" in Islam,
in post #97 Rudy talks about social structure arguing the same, in favor of Israeli sovereignty.

Kefah argues from a religious perspective,
Rudy from historic and socio-political perspectives.

Kefah might not agree that it should be Israeli sovereignty,
but essentially both Rudy and Kefah agree on one-state paradigm.

P F Tinmore now seems to shift his position 180 degrees in the other direction, and in contradiction to that agreement (and himself) - focusing on independent city states,
based on claims of incompatibility of a unified regional economy.


I think you have much to add on regional economics.

Of course I'll chip in.. I love "real and mature" people debating honestly. But I'm gonna have check in after the couple hours of watching the vids...

 

[P F Tinmore]

flacaltenn can You chip in?

In post #91 Kefah explains that "Nationalism is Haram" in Islam,
in post #97 Rudy talks about social structure arguing the same, in favor of Israeli sovereignty.

Kefah argues from a religious perspective,
Rudy from historic and socio-political perspectives.

Kefah might not agree that it should be Israeli sovereignty,
but essentially both Rudy and Kefah agree on one-state paradigm.

P F Tinmore now seems to shift his position 180 degrees in the other direction, and in contradiction to that agreement (and himself) - focusing on independent city states,
based on claims of incompatibility of a unified regional economy.


I think you have much to add on regional economics.

Of course I'll chip in.. I love "real and mature" people debating honestly. But I'm gonna have check in after the couple hours of watching the vids...

But I'm gonna have check in after the couple hours of watching the vids...

Here is an excellent vid from someone who has been there.

Palestinian Talks, lectures, & interviews.

For those who want to dig deeper than sound bites. Of course discussions are always welcome. Palestine at the ICC: Prospects and Limitations

www.usmessageboard.com

 

[rylah]

flacaltenn can You chip in?

In post #91 Kefah explains that "Nationalism is Haram" in Islam,
in post #97 Rudy talks about social structure arguing the same, in favor of Israeli sovereignty.

Kefah argues from a religious perspective,
Rudy from historic and socio-political perspectives.

Kefah might not agree that it should be Israeli sovereignty,
but essentially both Rudy and Kefah agree on one-state paradigm.

P F Tinmore now seems to shift his position 180 degrees in the other direction, and in contradiction to that agreement (and himself) - focusing on independent city states,
based on claims of incompatibility of a unified regional economy.


I think you have much to add on regional economics.

Of course I'll chip in.. I love "real and mature" people debating honestly. But I'm gonna have check in after the couple hours of watching the vids...

But I'm gonna have check in after the couple hours of watching the vids...

Here is an excellent vid from someone who has been there.

Palestinian Talks, lectures, & interviews.

For those who want to dig deeper than sound bites. Of course discussions are always welcome. Palestine at the ICC: Prospects and Limitations

www.usmessageboard.com

Seriously??! the video opens with "the stripes are Nile and Euphrates"...
Why not just go straight with 'bloody matzos', and post the latest Farakhan rant?

I find it very telling, that instead of discussing what the involved people say and actually agree,
you prefer to duck with a clearly biased source with an agenda.

Exactly why you don't deserve to desecrate the land with your presence
you don't deserve to breath her air,
you don't deserve to enjoy her views
you don't deserve do smell her scents,
you don't deserve to taste the fruit of her soil.

Because clearly,
you don't mean well to neither of her inhabitants.