Palestinians: Eight Million Refugees Must Return to Israel

The sun rises in the east.

The sun sets in the west.

Daytime is light.

Nighttime is dark.

And the Palestinians will insist upon the Right of Return as part of any collection of demands to satisfy them and to produce a genuine and lasting peace.

Dog bites man.
 
The sun rises in the east.

The sun sets in the west.

Daytime is light.

Nighttime is dark.

And the Palestinians will insist upon the Right of Return as part of any collection of demands to satisfy them and to produce a genuine and lasting peace.

Dog bites man.

Thats not evidence that they are demanding it now.
 
Victory67,

Did you read the "NEGOTIATION AFFAIRS DEPARTMENTS" position?

No, there is no evidence whatsoever that this is a part of their current demands for a peace treaty.

Thank you for your honesty. I now feel like I'm having a positive influence in this forum.

We should deal in facts and not baseless assertions.
(COMMENT)

I think you should contact them and let them know they are "baseless."

Most Respectfully,
R

Rocco, I'm sure his eyes passed over the words - but that brain dysfunction of his doesn't allow words that contradict his perceptions to register......
 
Negotiators have no right to terminate individual legal rights of refugees to return to the homes they were unlawfully expelled from.

THE only possible way to bind refugees to what is agreed upon about refugees right of return is giving them rights to vote in the referendum vote.
 
Last edited:
As usual you are wrong. :cool:

You have no evidence, none, zippo, that the Palestinian negotiators are demanding the Right of Return for millions of Palestinian refugees, to the State of Israel.

I have posted their demands many times . They are demanding borders that were never recognized before , No rights in E. Jerusalem and " Right of Return" . Present a thread that shows something different. You can't; Liar
 
Don't be childish.

It has been one of the Palestinians key demands since May 15, 1948.

Whether it is on the agenda du jour or not, who knows.

But it's on the menu, and always has been.

I'm sorry honey, but there is no evidence whatsoever that this is part if their current demands for a peace treaty.

Its mere fear-mongering fantasy.


PA: No Peace Without Full 'Right of Return'

PA chief Mahmoud Abbas said that the "fate" of Arab refugees must be resolved if a peace treaty is to be achieved with Israel.

By David Lev
First Publish: 11/18/2013, 6:14 PM


At a joint press conference Monday with French President Francois Hollande, Palestinian Authority chief Mahmoud Abbas said that the fate of what he said were 5 million Arab refugees must be resolved if a peace treaty is to be achieved with Israel. That must come in addition to the establishment of a PA state in all of Judea, Samaria, and Jerusalem.

The official policy of the Palestinian Authority is to demand repatriation for the descendants of Arabs who fled Israel in 1948 to their original homes in Israel, thus flooding the Jewish state with Arab refugees and effectively erasing Israel from the map, replacing it with a “secular, democratic Palestine.”

In a law approved by the PA parliament in 2008, and signed into law by Abbas, the “right of return of Palestinian refugees to their homes and property, along with compensation for their suffering, is a holy cornerstone of their rights that cannot be negotiated away.

There will be no consideration of negotiation on this issue, nor will there be a referendum on it,” the law says.

A separate PA law states that “it is forbidden for Palestinian refugees to leave their current domicile as a solution for the 'right of return.' Anyone who acts against this law will be seen as a traitor, and will be subject to the penalties that this crime entails.” The law of the language is similar to that of the law against selling land to Jews. PA Arabs who do so are considered “traitors,” and their penalty is death.

Abbas' calls come as the Israeli Knesset established an official body to advocate for the rights of Jewish refugees from Arab countries, who were ethnically-cleansed during the 20th century.

PA: No Peace Without Full 'Right of Return' - Defense/Security - News - Israel National News
 
RoccoR said:
If the Arab League attacked into Israel, then they are, by definition, the "aggressor." And if the hostile aggressor losses, then they are the "Governments or authorities responsible."

The Zionists went to Palestine (unprovoked) with the stated goal of taking over the country. With the help of the British, a world superpower at the time, they proceeded to do just that.

Please explain how that is a defensive position.

I await your response.
 
proudveteran06, et al,

Unfortunately, I don't see the Right-of-Return (RoR) for 7 million, or 5 million, or even 3 million Hostile Arab Palestinians (HoAP), as even a table issue. It truly would be DOA.


(COMMENT)

The official Palestinian position specifically stipulates that they want "both" RoR and reparations for the refugees. But more than that, the Palestinians demand three things.
  • The Palestinians demand a confession that Israel created the refugee problem.
  • Reparations in various forms for lost property over a half century ago.
  • They want compensation for the property that cannot be repatriated.

The Palestinian are making the peace price so high - as to make another half-century of the "status quo" (Occupation) more acceptable and fiscally sound.

I cannot speak for the Israelis. But there must be a certain amount of reasonableness involved in the Negotiation. And the RoR and 3-Element Reparation demands are unreasonable. Yes, both sides need to compromise and make sacrifices, but these Palestinian demands are entirely unreasonable.

(ALTERNATIVE SCENARIO - The Epilog to Palestinian Good Faith Negotiations)

Remember, the customary settlements is that the losing side normally pays the reparations.


  • The Arabs attacked,
  • the Arabs lost control of their territory (not just once, but three times),
  • and the Arab deserve to pay their portion of the reparations, restitution, and compensation.
OR, they could just sit it out in the Refugee Camps that they have made so popular and fashionable. It is their choice (self-determination).

Most Respectfully,
R

You say that the Israelis should consider " Right of Return" to be " negotiated" however that is not the Palestinian position. Even if Israel were psychotic enough to consider it; How would it be " decided" who? Can't trust the Palestinians. If they can't wage war and destroy Israel from the outside they will try to do it from the inside. Another reason why " Right of Return" will never happen. :cool:
The Politics of the Palestinian Right of Return
by Alexander Joffe and Asaf Romirowsky
Forbes
February 24, 2014

The Politics of the Palestinian Right of Return :: Middle East Forum

US-backed negotiations between Israel and the Palestinian Authority are entering a critical period. With reports suggesting Israeli acceptance of the 1967 lines and land swaps, what about Palestinian concessions? Two issues are paramount: the 'right of return' and recognition of Israel as a Jewish state.

Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas recently stated, "Let me put it simply: the right of return is a personal decision. What does this mean? That neither the PA, nor the state, nor the PLO, nor Abu-Mazen [Abbas], nor any Palestinian or Arab leader has the right to deprive someone from his right to return."


This arch in the Aida Refugee Camp in Bethlehem features a giant key, symbolizing keys kept as mementos by many of the Palestinians who left their homes in 1948. (Image source: Reham Alhelsi/Flickr)



Jamil Mizer, a member of the political bureau of the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine (PFLP) underscored the issue saying, "there is talk about the liquidation of the Palestinian refugee cause, the return of hundreds of thousands to the lands occupied in 1948, and the dismantling of the right of return of over six million Palestinian refugees in the camps, in exile and in the diaspora, who are waiting for their moment to return to the homes and lands from which they were expelled".

The Politics of the Palestinian Right of Return :: Middle East Forum

Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas recently stated, "Let me put it simply: the right of return is a personal decision. What does this mean? That neither the PA, nor the state, nor the PLO, nor Abu-Mazen [Abbas], nor any Palestinian or Arab leader has the right to deprive someone from his right to return."

This is the key point.

The right of return is not a negotiable issue because no third party has the authority to negotiate away the rights of others.

Why is this simple concept so difficult to grasp?
 
So, only ethnic cleansing can insure Israel's survival. Will the rest of the world be cool with that?

Israel not surrendering to 67 Borders that were NEVER accepted before, not being deprived of their most religious sites , and conceding that the number of Palestinians should OUTNUMBER the Jewish population thereby annexing it to the " Palestinian state" is not ethnic cleansing, you moron . BRW, ethnic cleansing of the Jews were happening way before 1948 !!!




As I keep pointing out there were never any '67 borders, that is an ISLAMONAZI myth. The UN res 242 says land occupied in 1967, but does not say ALL THE. And then it says that the borders MUST BE BY MUTUAL AGREEMENT. As for the right of return only those arabs who were forced to leave have this, it does not pass on to their progeny.
 
P F Tinmore, et al,

You're right. Technically they are not the same thing. Practically they are.

Borders is the wrong word to use anyway.

Indeed, since armistice lines do not replace Palestine's international borders.
(OBSERVATION)

PLO Negotiations Affairs Department (NAD) - Borders said:
The 1967 border is the internationally-recognized border between Israel and the oPt.

SOURCE: PLO Negotiations Affairs Department (NAD)

(COMMENT)

I wouldn't believe them either; since they are the Palestinian source; the sole representatives of the Palestinian People.

Most Respectfully,
R
 
Last edited:
P F Tinmore, et al,

You right. Technically they are not the same thing. Practically they are.

Borders is the wrong word to use anyway.

Indeed, since armistice lines do not replace Palestine's international borders.
(OBSERVATION)

PLO Negotiations Affairs Department (NAD) - Borders said:
The 1967 border is the internationally-recognized border between Israel and the oPt.

SOURCE: PLO Negotiations Affairs Department (NAD)

(COMMENT)

I wouldn't believe them either; since they are the Palestinian source; the sole representatives of the Palestinian People.

Most Respectfully,
R

The PLO is recognized (whatever that means) as the representatives of the Palestinian people but their elected government is not.

Of course you don't see a problem with that.
 
P F Tinmore, et al,

Is the "Right-of-Return" (RoR) really some inherent and personal right?

This is the key point.

The right of return is not a negotiable issue because no third party has the authority to negotiate away the rights of others.

Why is this simple concept so difficult to grasp?
(COMMENT)

Or, is it a phrase found in Paragraph 11, GA Resolution 194 (III) from 1948?

Everything is negotiable, especially when the Palestinian smells something for nothing.

Most Respectfully,
R
 
15th post
You say that the Israelis should consider " Right of Return" to be " negotiated" however that is not the Palestinian position. Even if Israel were psychotic enough to consider it; How would it be " decided" who? Can't trust the Palestinians. If they can't wage war and destroy Israel from the outside they will try to do it from the inside. Another reason why " Right of Return" will never happen. :cool:
The Politics of the Palestinian Right of Return
by Alexander Joffe and Asaf Romirowsky
Forbes
February 24, 2014

The Politics of the Palestinian Right of Return :: Middle East Forum

US-backed negotiations between Israel and the Palestinian Authority are entering a critical period. With reports suggesting Israeli acceptance of the 1967 lines and land swaps, what about Palestinian concessions? Two issues are paramount: the 'right of return' and recognition of Israel as a Jewish state.

Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas recently stated, "Let me put it simply: the right of return is a personal decision. What does this mean? That neither the PA, nor the state, nor the PLO, nor Abu-Mazen [Abbas], nor any Palestinian or Arab leader has the right to deprive someone from his right to return."


This arch in the Aida Refugee Camp in Bethlehem features a giant key, symbolizing keys kept as mementos by many of the Palestinians who left their homes in 1948. (Image source: Reham Alhelsi/Flickr)



Jamil Mizer, a member of the political bureau of the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine (PFLP) underscored the issue saying, "there is talk about the liquidation of the Palestinian refugee cause, the return of hundreds of thousands to the lands occupied in 1948, and the dismantling of the right of return of over six million Palestinian refugees in the camps, in exile and in the diaspora, who are waiting for their moment to return to the homes and lands from which they were expelled".

The Politics of the Palestinian Right of Return :: Middle East Forum

Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas recently stated, "Let me put it simply: the right of return is a personal decision. What does this mean? That neither the PA, nor the state, nor the PLO, nor Abu-Mazen [Abbas], nor any Palestinian or Arab leader has the right to deprive someone from his right to return."

This is the key point.

The right of return is not a negotiable issue because no third party has the authority to negotiate away the rights of others.

Why is this simple concept so difficult to grasp?

Doesn't matter; Not going to happen. :clap2:
 
P F Tinmore, et al,

Is the "Right-of-Return" (RoR) really some inherent and personal right?

This is the key point.

The right of return is not a negotiable issue because no third party has the authority to negotiate away the rights of others.

Why is this simple concept so difficult to grasp?
(COMMENT)

Or, is it a phrase found in Paragraph 11, GA Resolution 194 (III) from 1948?

Everything is negotiable, especially when the Palestinian smells something for nothing.

Most Respectfully,
R

11. Resolves that the refugees wishing to return to their homes and live at peace with their neighbours should be permitted to do so at the earliest practicable date, and that compensation should be paid for the property of those choosing not to return and for loss of or damage to property which, under principles of international law or in equity, should be made good by the Governments or authorities responsible;

Instructs the Conciliation Commission to facilitate the repatriation, resettlement and economic and social rehabilitation of the refugees and the payment of compensation, and to maintain close relations with the Director of the United Nations Relief for Palestine Refugees and, through him, with the appropriate organs and agencies of the United Nations

Paragraph 11, GA Resolution 194 (III) ;

So, when is the UN going to pull its thumb out of it ass?
 
P F Tinmore, et al,

Is the "Right-of-Return" (RoR) really some inherent and personal right?

This is the key point.

The right of return is not a negotiable issue because no third party has the authority to negotiate away the rights of others.

Why is this simple concept so difficult to grasp?
(COMMENT)

Or, is it a phrase found in Paragraph 11, GA Resolution 194 (III) from 1948?

Everything is negotiable, especially when the Palestinian smells something for nothing.

Most Respectfully,
R

11. Resolves that the refugees wishing to return to their homes and live at peace with their neighbours should be permitted to do so at the earliest practicable date, and that compensation should be paid for the property of those choosing not to return and for loss of or damage to property which, under principles of international law or in equity, should be made good by the Governments or authorities responsible;

Instructs the Conciliation Commission to facilitate the repatriation, resettlement and economic and social rehabilitation of the refugees and the payment of compensation, and to maintain close relations with the Director of the United Nations Relief for Palestine Refugees and, through him, with the appropriate organs and agencies of the United Nations

Paragraph 11, GA Resolution 194 (III) ;

So, when is the UN going to pull its thumb out of it ass?
Around the same time muslims stop beating their wives.:cool:
 
RoccoR said:
If the Arab League attacked into Israel, then they are, by definition, the "aggressor." And if the hostile aggressor losses, then they are the "Governments or authorities responsible."

The Zionists went to Palestine (unprovoked) with the stated goal of taking over the country. With the help of the British, a world superpower at the time, they proceeded to do just that.

Please explain how that is a defensive position.

I await your response.

The " Zionists" went to " Palestine" ( not a country with the STATED goal of taking over " Palestine? " Translation; They have no right to be there even though its their Homeland . For that reason alone there will never be a " Palestinian state " They rejected it in 1917, 1948 , and before 1967 :cuckoo:
 
Back
Top Bottom