Peace Process Antics

[Bloodrock44]

Of course none of that happened until after the foreigners showed up.

And of course you don't condemn it because those "foreigners" brought it on themselves? Reminds me of when Palestinian terrorists went into a settlement and targeted children and even infants in their beds. The pro-Palestinians were condoning the murders because it was "settlements" and not Israel proper. I can imagine where you stood.

Of course none of that happened until after the foreigners showed up.

And of course you're going to be a typical pro-Palestinian and not address the fact that the brave Palestinians target children. I can guess the color of the streak running up your back.

 

[RoccoR]

et al,

Actually, the "foreigner" campaign, as an active counter to the "national home" objective --- which leads to the establishment of Israel, has been very successful.

The "assault on children" campaign has, likewise, has been very successful at promoting a victimization image of the Palestinian.

And of course you don't condemn it because those "foreigners" brought it on themselves? Reminds me of when Palestinian terrorists went into a settlement and targeted children and even infants in their beds. The pro-Palestinians were condoning the murders because it was "settlements" and not Israel proper. I can imagine where you stood.

Of course none of that happened until after the foreigners showed up.

And of course you're going to be a typical pro-Palestinian and not address the fact that the brave Palestinians target children. I can guess the color of the streak running up your back.

(COMMENT)

In the overall scheme of things, this is just an embarrassment to the Israelis.

Most Respectfully,
R

 

[Bloodrock44]

et al,

Actually, the "foreigner" campaign, as an active counter to the "national home" objective --- which leads to the establishment of Israel, has been very successful.

The "assault on children" campaign has, likewise, has been very successful at promoting a victimization image of the Palestinian.

Of course none of that happened until after the foreigners showed up.

And of course you're going to be a typical pro-Palestinian and not address the fact that the brave Palestinians target children. I can guess the color of the streak running up your back.

(COMMENT)

In the overall scheme of things, this is just an embarrassment to the Israelis.

Most Respectfully,
R

I can see where they accuse Israeli's as being foreigners and Europeans and gain sympathy, but Palestinians murder children and they're seen as the victims? Apparently I'm missing something here. I most respectfully disagree that it's an overall embarrassment to Israel.

 

[RoccoR]

Bloodrock44, et al,

Yes. This is a true program to make it appear that the Palestinians are victims.

I can see where they accuse Israeli's as being foreigners and Europeans and gain sympathy, but Palestinians murder children and they're seen as the victims? Apparently I'm missing something here. I most respectfully disagree that it's an overall embarrassment to Israel.

(COMMENT)

HAMAS and FATAH don't care two licks about international humanitarian law. But the campaign is to exploit western vulnerabilities and sympathies for the children.

This is all for their cause. Post 7592642

Most Respectfully,
R

 

[P F Tinmore]

et al,

Actually, the "foreigner" campaign, as an active counter to the "national home" objective --- which leads to the establishment of Israel, has been very successful.

The "assault on children" campaign has, likewise, has been very successful at promoting a victimization image of the Palestinian.

Of course none of that happened until after the foreigners showed up.

And of course you're going to be a typical pro-Palestinian and not address the fact that the brave Palestinians target children. I can guess the color of the streak running up your back.

(COMMENT)

In the overall scheme of things, this is just an embarrassment to the Israelis.

Most Respectfully,
R

Actually, the "foreigner" campaign, as an active counter to the "national home" objective --- which leads to the establishment of Israel, has been very successful.

Indeed, because it is true.

 

[Bloodrock44]

Bloodrock44, et al,

Yes. This is a true program to make it appear that the Palestinians are victims.

I can see where they accuse Israeli's as being foreigners and Europeans and gain sympathy, but Palestinians murder children and they're seen as the victims? Apparently I'm missing something here. I most respectfully disagree that it's an overall embarrassment to Israel.

(COMMENT)

HAMAS and FATAH don't care two licks about international humanitarian law. But the campaign is to exploit western vulnerabilities and sympathies for the children.

This is all for their cause. Post 7592642

Most Respectfully,
R

Thanks for clearing that up. I misunderstood.

 

[RoccoR]

P F Tinmore, et al,

This is an extension of the argument that the Allied Powers and the UN didn't have the right to prepare the ground and help establish a Jewish National Homeland.

et al,

Actually, the "foreigner" campaign, as an active counter to the "national home" objective --- which leads to the establishment of Israel, has been very successful.

The "assault on children" campaign has, likewise, has been very successful at promoting a victimization image of the Palestinian.

And of course you're going to be a typical pro-Palestinian and not address the fact that the brave Palestinians target children. I can guess the color of the streak running up your back.

(COMMENT)

In the overall scheme of things, this is just an embarrassment to the Israelis.

Most Respectfully,
R

Actually, the "foreigner" campaign, as an active counter to the "national home" objective --- which leads to the establishment of Israel, has been very successful.

Indeed, because it is true.

(COMMENT)

OK, we get that. The Palestinians consider the Jewish Immigration an invasion, and accordingly, all "initiatives, and so-called peaceful solutions and international conferences, are in contradiction to the principles of the Islamic Resistance Movement."

So the only solution for the Palestinian question is through Jihad; as dictated by the Islamic Resistance Movement. This is the Arab concept that they may apply force, by whatever means, including armed struggle, against foreign occupation and aggression for liberation.

So since there is no solution, except force, why raise the issue? What other option is there?

Most Respectfully,
R

 

[P F Tinmore]

P F Tinmore, et al,

This is an extension of the argument that the Allied Powers and the UN didn't have the right to prepare the ground and help establish a Jewish National Homeland.

et al,

Actually, the "foreigner" campaign, as an active counter to the "national home" objective --- which leads to the establishment of Israel, has been very successful.

The "assault on children" campaign has, likewise, has been very successful at promoting a victimization image of the Palestinian.


(COMMENT)

In the overall scheme of things, this is just an embarrassment to the Israelis.

Most Respectfully,
R

Actually, the "foreigner" campaign, as an active counter to the "national home" objective --- which leads to the establishment of Israel, has been very successful.

Indeed, because it is true.

(COMMENT)

OK, we get that. The Palestinians consider the Jewish Immigration an invasion, and accordingly, all "initiatives, and so-called peaceful solutions and international conferences, are in contradiction to the principles of the Islamic Resistance Movement."

So the only solution for the Palestinian question is through Jihad; as dictated by the Islamic Resistance Movement. This is the Arab concept that they may apply force, by whatever means, including armed struggle, against foreign occupation and aggression for liberation.

So since there is no solution, except force, why raise the issue? What other option is there?

Most Respectfully,
R

It has nothing to do with Islamic resistance or jihad. It has to do with the inherent rights of the Palestinians that have been violated for a hundred years.

The solution need not be violent.

 

[RoccoR]

P F Tinmore, et al,

I beg to differ.

P F Tinmore, et al,

This is an extension of the argument that the Allied Powers and the UN didn't have the right to prepare the ground and help establish a Jewish National Homeland.

Indeed, because it is true.

(COMMENT)

OK, we get that. The Palestinians consider the Jewish Immigration an invasion, and accordingly, all "initiatives, and so-called peaceful solutions and international conferences, are in contradiction to the principles of the Islamic Resistance Movement."

So the only solution for the Palestinian question is through Jihad; as dictated by the Islamic Resistance Movement. This is the Arab concept that they may apply force, by whatever means, including armed struggle, against foreign occupation and aggression for liberation.

So since there is no solution, except force, why raise the issue? What other option is there?

Most Respectfully,
R

It has nothing to do with Islamic resistance or jihad. It has to do with the inherent rights of the Palestinians that have been violated for a hundred years.

The solution need not be violent.

(COMMENT)

That is not the policy, as stated, of either HAMAS or FATAH.

• FATAH: "Armed struggle is the only way to liberate Palestine."
• HAMAS: "There is no solution for the Palestinian question except through Jihad."

Post Number 7596984​

Have they made a change to their standing policy? What is this new policy?

Most Respectfully,
R

 

[Ropey]

From another post of mine in a RR thread.

Consider the facts. Israel has the capability to annihilate the Palestinians but lack the desire. The Palestinians have the desire to annihilate Israel but lack the capability. Which will come first, peace between Israel & the Palestinian terrorists or hell freezing over?

^^ Peace Process Question ^^

IMO

The end of times will come before Jews/Christians/Muslims are taken to task for their misuse of their word.

The ten commandments are rather clear. After that, there's the murkiness of man's interpretations and it's not rocket science, even if the rocks the Palestinians once threw are now rockets.

Islam can never be at Islamic peace with any entity that is not under submission to Allah and in the Ummah.

To the Muslim way of thinking, the only ummah that counts is the Ummah Islamiyyah, the Islamic Community, an entity that theoretically comprises all Muslims throughout the world, whatever their national origin. In Islamic thought, "The Ummah" represents a universal world order, ruled by an Islamic government (the Caliph) in accordance with the "Law of God" (the Shariah, Islamic religious law), and patterned after the community founded by Muhammad at Medina in 622 AD; it even includes Jews and Christians living within its territory as separate (and inferior) communities.

I think you begin to see the conflict that exists between these two concepts. This is especially true in the Muslim World which finds itself divided into a number of independent nation-states, each with its own constitution, usually patterned on western political models as much as on the values and principles of Islamic law. Today, a growing number of Muslims reject this situation, which they view as favoring the "big powers", and are pushing for a return to a single umma once again. One might say this is the Muslims Hope. One Arab political party, the Hizb ut-Tahrir or Liberation Party, is actively seeking to bring the Muslim World under one umbrella; opposing democracy (rule by the people), its utopian rallying cry is that "the rule is for none but Allah." But, since achieving its goals involves political struggle, it has been outlawed in the Arab World and is carrying on its activities from--where else but England!

The best that can be hoped for is some form of (Tactical Hudna) and few other than those seriously involved in the Israel / Muslim issue understand the dichotomy for peace. It's not as though any of the major players misunderstand or don't know this. It's why Presidents usually leave this to the end of their terms.

A stalemate you say? Yes, according to Islam it is at best, a stalemate, and the expression of the stalemate is an anger on the Muslim side.

Why?

Not one inch of the Muslim Consecrated Ummah should be under the control of unbelievers and if those unbelievers are in control of true believers? Then that in and of itself is enough for any single Muslim Authority to orchestrate war preparations and no Muslim population of true believers will or can be against such a thing. Regardless of anything else.

• Western Peace means two sides winning an end to hostilities.
  
• Islamic Peace means no unbelievers in control of true believers.

Israel's population is ~20% Arab Muslim with another 5-6% being Christan and Druze Arabs as well as some smattering of Shia (Persian) Muslim.

Now these Arab/Persian Muslims are under the control of the Knesset (Israeli Parliament) and the Israeli civilian policing infrastructure of course.

However, this means that there is a burr under every true believer who understands this issue. They attribute this burr to Jews because Jews are in control of believers in the Ummah.

They see the same thing with the US bases in Muslim countries and we must skirt some very sensitive issues to be able to base in those regions.

That's why there's so much civilian outrage against the US bases and the Pakistani allowance for drone attacks isn't helping matters. The people can see that the US is in some control of the Pakistani Muslim Leadership and they're angry because that means the leadership is 'confused' and thus 'illegitimate' and able to be challenged.

It's the people who will rise up. When they do, it's not for Western style peace with their leaders. It will be to call them illegitimate and then they will drag them out to kill them.

If that challenge ends up with the leaders killing their own people for having their Muslim leadership challenged? Then the Religious Jihad is on. Now Abbas is seen as illegitimate for even working with the Jews on non military issues. Hamas is seen as legitimate regardless of the dislike for the internecine treatment of their own people. Why? Because they're legitimate. If Abbas tried what Hamas is doing to their people AND worked with Israel?

He would be dragged out and killed sooner or later. And if Hamas gets enough power to attempt his overthrow and murder again. It's all good since he's illegitimate anyway. That's why peace accords can't work.

They render the Muslim peace maker illegitimate and open to attack. Sadat was illegitimate and needed guards everywhere. So was Mubarak seen as illegitimate. Sadtat was assassinated and Mubarak is kept incapacitated by drugs.

Peace in Western terms? I don't see it coming unless it comes from horrific violence and the Sunni/Shia schism is widening.

Peace in Islamic terms? They're still fighting over the illegitimacy of each other. The Jews are secondary to that unless one of those sides begins to lose their fight. Then the pattern is usually to attack Israel.

Now Israel is attacking Hezbollah's shipments of modern rockets to Lebanon and this gives Assad another out because he's not killing his own. He's killing Sunni and so... he's legitimate.

Peace?

 

[sealadaigh]

Yep. Those poor peaceful Palestinians. Pure as the wind driven snow. Always minding their own business. Right. They strap butt bombs on their children and send them off to murder Israeli children. Until that apartheid wall was built.

Of course none of that happened until after the foreigners showed up.

And of course you don't condemn it because those "foreigners" brought it on themselves? Reminds me of when Palestinian terrorists went into a settlement and targeted children and even infants in their beds. The pro-Palestinians were condoning the murders because it was "settlements" and not Israel proper. I can imagine where you stood.

i think when you distort the facts of an incident, you trivialise the victims. i believe an opinion poll indicated that 63% of the palestinians opposed the attack at itamar, if thaat is to what you are referring. that contradicts what you said about "condoning" and while it may seem low, the over 60 years of brutality inflicted against and witnessed by the palestinian people makes it not an unusual response.

considering the part that the settlements play in this conflict does not equate to condoning certain acts. i suppose another way of putting it would be to say thaat ignoring the part the settlements play provokes and encourages such attacks.

i believe these men were murderers and not terrorists. they were not tried for terrorist related ofenses. it is not uncommon for what are called "ordinary decent criminals" as opposed to "political prisoners" to claim some sort of political status in order to mitigate their offenses at some time in the future.

i do not recall tinmore or anyone else condoning the itamar attack.

 

[Bloodrock44]

Of course none of that happened until after the foreigners showed up.

And of course you don't condemn it because those "foreigners" brought it on themselves? Reminds me of when Palestinian terrorists went into a settlement and targeted children and even infants in their beds. The pro-Palestinians were condoning the murders because it was "settlements" and not Israel proper. I can imagine where you stood.

i think when you distort the facts of an incident, you trivialise the victims. i believe an opinion poll indicated that 63% of the palestinians opposed the attack at itamar, if thaat is to what you are referring. that contradicts what you said about "condoning" and while it may seem low, the over 60 years of brutality inflicted against and witnessed by the palestinian people makes it not an unusual response.

considering the part that the settlements play in this conflict does not equate to condoning certain acts. i suppose another way of putting it would be to say thaat ignoring the part the settlements play provokes and encourages such attacks.

i believe these men were murderers and not terrorists. they were not tried for terrorist related ofenses. it is not uncommon for what are called "ordinary decent criminals" as opposed to "political prisoners" to claim some sort of political status in order to mitigate their offenses at some time in the future.

i do not recall tinmore or anyone else condoning the itamar attack.

Distort the facts my arse. Cowardly terrorists murdered children in their beds and you call it "not an unusual response"? And only 63% opposed? That means 1 in 3 approved. Quit trying to put lipstick on a pig.

 

[P F Tinmore]

P F Tinmore, et al,

I beg to differ.

P F Tinmore, et al,

This is an extension of the argument that the Allied Powers and the UN didn't have the right to prepare the ground and help establish a Jewish National Homeland.


(COMMENT)

OK, we get that. The Palestinians consider the Jewish Immigration an invasion, and accordingly, all "initiatives, and so-called peaceful solutions and international conferences, are in contradiction to the principles of the Islamic Resistance Movement."

So the only solution for the Palestinian question is through Jihad; as dictated by the Islamic Resistance Movement. This is the Arab concept that they may apply force, by whatever means, including armed struggle, against foreign occupation and aggression for liberation.

So since there is no solution, except force, why raise the issue? What other option is there?

Most Respectfully,
R

It has nothing to do with Islamic resistance or jihad. It has to do with the inherent rights of the Palestinians that have been violated for a hundred years.

The solution need not be violent.

(COMMENT)

That is not the policy, as stated, of either HAMAS or FATAH.

• FATAH: "Armed struggle is the only way to liberate Palestine."
• HAMAS: "There is no solution for the Palestinian question except through Jihad."

Post Number 7596984​

Have they made a change to their standing policy? What is this new policy?

Most Respectfully,
R

There is a lot more to Palestinian policy than Fatah and Hamas. It seems that both are being left in the dust.

 

[RoccoR]

P F Tinmore, et al,

Saying that, doesn't make it viably true. (I'm not being disrespectful, but practical.)

There is a lot more to Palestinian policy than Fatah and Hamas. It seems that both are being left in the dust.

(COMMENT)

A policy is really not viable if no one understands what it is and everyone agrees that is the policy; with all parties clearly understanding it. Understanding Policy is fundamental to establishing the principles that guide decisions and compromises which have a reasonable expectation of achieving practical outcomes between the parties to the dispute.

If there is a higher level Palestinian Policy, what is it? Who supports it?

Most Respectfully,
R

 

[P F Tinmore]

P F Tinmore, et al,

Saying that, doesn't make it viably true. (I'm not being disrespectful, but practical.)

There is a lot more to Palestinian policy than Fatah and Hamas. It seems that both are being left in the dust.

(COMMENT)

A policy is really not viable if no one understands what it is and everyone agrees that is the policy; with all parties clearly understanding it. Understanding Policy is fundamental to establishing the principles that guide decisions and compromises which have a reasonable expectation of achieving practical outcomes between the parties to the dispute.

If there is a higher level Palestinian Policy, what is it? Who supports it?

Most Respectfully,
R

The People are moving toward non violent resistance and BDS. There is at least tacit approval from political parties.

 

[Bloodrock44]

P F Tinmore, et al,

Saying that, doesn't make it viably true. (I'm not being disrespectful, but practical.)

There is a lot more to Palestinian policy than Fatah and Hamas. It seems that both are being left in the dust.

(COMMENT)

A policy is really not viable if no one understands what it is and everyone agrees that is the policy; with all parties clearly understanding it. Understanding Policy is fundamental to establishing the principles that guide decisions and compromises which have a reasonable expectation of achieving practical outcomes between the parties to the dispute.

If there is a higher level Palestinian Policy, what is it? Who supports it?

Most Respectfully,
R

The People are moving toward non violent resistance and BDS. There is at least tacit approval from political parties.

I see. The people want non-violence but the political parties are inclined to violence. We'll see when the people rise up and vote in new political parties.

 

[Sweet_Caroline]

P F Tinmore, et al,

Saying that, doesn't make it viably true. (I'm not being disrespectful, but practical.)


(COMMENT)

A policy is really not viable if no one understands what it is and everyone agrees that is the policy; with all parties clearly understanding it. Understanding Policy is fundamental to establishing the principles that guide decisions and compromises which have a reasonable expectation of achieving practical outcomes between the parties to the dispute.

If there is a higher level Palestinian Policy, what is it? Who supports it?

Most Respectfully,
R

The People are moving toward non violent resistance and BDS. There is at least tacit approval from political parties.

I see. The people want non-violence but the political parties are inclined to violence. We'll see when the people rise up and vote in new political parties.

Rise up against Hamas? Not if they value theirs and their families' lives.

 

[member]

"The solution need not be violent.

Once a "suicide bomber" - "always a suicide bomber." i know it's OLD news, but I find it, UNSETTLING, that a group of people who commit these acts were actually.... voted into office. (what a ridiculous term that is...)....it's the same (to me) as the images of the taliban having a grand opening of their new offices..............Lol - (to me, anyway).



"hamas isn't that bad, they do charitable work."



the core of hamas isn't charity, it's terrorism.

 

[RoccoR]

et al,

I'm sorry, but this is just too funny!

Once a "suicide bomber" - "always a suicide bomber."

(COMMENT)

Yep, the last thing going thorough his mind is the fireball.

[ame="http://youtu.be/qfResyFrqlM"]Silence - I Kill you![/ame]

Ahmed is my favorite Palestinian.

Most Respectfully,
R

 

[Bloodrock44]

et al,

I'm sorry, but this is just too funny!

Once a "suicide bomber" - "always a suicide bomber."

(COMMENT)

Yep, the last thing going thorough his mind is the fireball.

[ame="http://youtu.be/qfResyFrqlM"]Silence - I Kill you![/ame]

Ahmed is my favorite Palestinian.

Most Respectfully,
R

Mine too. I wonder how he's getting along with those 72 Virginians?