"Settlements destroy chance for peace" - Caroline Glick's amazing reality-check

[CMike]

Addressing the common issues of "Jewish ethnic cleansing of Palestinians" (Or is that the other way around?), civil rights and British hypocrisy.

A must-watch!

?"???????? ?? ?????? ???? ??????? ??? ??? ???????? ?????" - ????? ?? ?????? ????.?? - YouTube

thoughts?

 

[CMike]

Excellent..its never been about two states to the Arabs, it's always been about no Jews..That's just the way it is Lipush ..That's just the way it is.

For the arabs it's one state that doesn't include Israel.

 

[CMike]

It's not a "talking point", it's a serious issue of contention. The continuous theft of land erodes any possibility of a two state solution.

Only if you believe that Israel is located in Narnia.

In the real world, the "Palestinian" majority has no desire for a peaceful coexistence with Israel in any form. That's why, when Israel halted its "settlement" activities for 10 months, the "Palestinians" still refused to come to the table.

Besides that reality, its people like you that are the problem. By labeling Israel's actions "theft," you've changed the issue from one of contention to one of condemnation.

It is theft. Redefining theft doesn't alter what it is. And please, your OP is a prime example of condemnation labeling.

Pehaps theft done by the arabs.

Glick has a great point. The point is the sheer aduacity of telling jews where they can't and can life simply because they are jewish.

What does that mean if there really was a palestinian state? That all the jews will be kicked out of their homes simply because they are jewish?

There are many Israeli arabs who live there. None are told where to live because of their religion.

 

[Coyote]

Only if you believe that Israel is located in Narnia.

In the real world, the "Palestinian" majority has no desire for a peaceful coexistence with Israel in any form. That's why, when Israel halted its "settlement" activities for 10 months, the "Palestinians" still refused to come to the table.

Besides that reality, its people like you that are the problem. By labeling Israel's actions "theft," you've changed the issue from one of contention to one of condemnation.

It is theft. Redefining theft doesn't alter what it is. And please, your OP is a prime example of condemnation labeling.

Pehaps theft done by the arabs.

Glick has a great point. The point is the sheer aduacity of telling jews where they can't and can life simply because they are jewish.

What does that mean if there really was a palestinian state? That all the jews will be kicked out of their homes simply because they are jewish?

There are many Israeli arabs who live there. None are told where to live because of their religion.

Actually, yes, they are.

 

[Coyote]

Excellent..its never been about two states to the Arabs, it's always been about no Jews..That's just the way it is Lipush ..That's just the way it is.

For the arabs it's one state that doesn't include Israel.

The majority of Palestinians still support a two state solution.

 

[P F Tinmore]

From the article I linked to earlier:

"The controversial Arab neighborhoods right outside the Old City that today the Arabs call Sheikh Jarrah and Silwan were actually Jewish neighborhoods. Sheikh Jarrah consisted of two Jewish neighborhoods known as Nahalat Shimon and Shimon HaTzadiq. The latter was purchased by Jews in 1876. Nahalat Shimon was built by Sephardic and Yemenite Jews in 1891. Sheikh Jarrah was primarily a Jewish neighborhood in the late 19th century and remained so up until 1948."

Well, as those neighborhoods exist now (predominantly Arab), I wouldn't want them. It's really the Old City that's in contention. The Old City is too small to be divided, and means too much to Jews for that to happen.

I say it's not really up to me as an American - but if the Israelis want to press their claim and there's no prior 'disqualification' due to the treaty signed with Jordan, then I would support them in the attempt. Whatever went on elsewhere doesn't make a historically Jewish neighborhood built on land BOUGHT by Jews well before the Mandate somehow magically be 'Palestinian land'.

Jews own land in the US and it is still US land. It surely does not belong to Israel.

 

[toastman]

When they annex it, it will

 

[CMike]

It is theft. Redefining theft doesn't alter what it is. And please, your OP is a prime example of condemnation labeling.

Pehaps theft done by the arabs.

Glick has a great point. The point is the sheer aduacity of telling jews where they can't and can life simply because they are jewish.

What does that mean if there really was a palestinian state? That all the jews will be kicked out of their homes simply because they are jewish?

There are many Israeli arabs who live there. None are told where to live because of their religion.

Actually, yes, they are.

Like?

 

[CMike]

Excellent..its never been about two states to the Arabs, it's always been about no Jews..That's just the way it is Lipush ..That's just the way it is.

For the arabs it's one state that doesn't include Israel.

The majority of Palestinians still support a two state solution.

The leadership has made it clear that they don't.

 

[Coyote]

For the arabs it's one state that doesn't include Israel.

The majority of Palestinians still support a two state solution.

The leadership has made it clear that they don't.

The people don't agree with the leadership then

 

[Coyote]

Pehaps theft done by the arabs.

Glick has a great point. The point is the sheer aduacity of telling jews where they can't and can life simply because they are jewish.

What does that mean if there really was a palestinian state? That all the jews will be kicked out of their homes simply because they are jewish?

There are many Israeli arabs who live there. None are told where to live because of their religion.

Actually, yes, they are.

Like?

There are Jewish only settlements, sections of cities, roads etc.

 

[MHunterB]

Actually, yes, they are.

Like?

There are Jewish only settlements, sections of cities, roads etc.

And there are also 'Jews not allowed' settlements, sections of cities, roads, etc.

The PLO/PA has a law making selling ANY land to a Jewish person punishable by death.

And actually, it is NOT 'Jewish only' for the roads: it is whether you have an Israeli or a Palestinian license plate.

http://israelmatzav.blogspot.com/2010/12/jewish-only-roads-canard.html

 

[P F Tinmore]

PFT, as the old saying goes...

You're entitled to your own opinions, but not your own facts.

The Egyptian administration
could, until the Six Day War, be considered as the only one who
acted in concert with the juridical status of the area, which was that of a
« trust territory ». In the view of Egypt, the Gaza Strip remained part of
Palestine and therefore Palestine might be said to have retained an actual
existence, albeit in a somewhat truncated form (73). It would be erroneous
to simply describe the Egyptian presence as that of a belligerent occupant, not
only were the conditions under which Egypt entered the Gaza Strip the same
as those under which Jordan entered the West Bank, ipso facto excluding a
possible belligerent occupancy, but Egypt in actual fact assumed its task of
« trustee »

http://rbdi.bruylant.be/public/mode...79.2 - pp. 500 à 538 - Frank van de Craen.pdf

Its pretty sad that you actually buy this revisionist bullshit.

Of course, you fail to answer the obvious quesiton: why wouldn't Jordan and Egypt simply give the "Palestinians" sovereignty in the land they captured? The answer: because your "held in trust" claim is a lie.

Egypt and Jordan are two different stories. As my quote states, Egypt was the only one of the three who assumed its task of trustee. Egypt assisted the Palestinians in creating the All Palestine Government that declared independence in 1948.

Jordan opposed and helped to thwart Palestinian independence because it had a different agenda. Jordan was promised $3M a year for five years and the West Bank if it would not attack Israel in the upcoming 1948 war. It did not and expected to annex the West Bank.

 

[Roudy]

Zionist propaganda is Zionist propaganda.

Whereas the Islamist / Palestinian garbage propaganda you spew is.....<drum roll please>....

 

[Roudy]

The Egyptian administration
could, until the Six Day War, be considered as the only one who
acted in concert with the juridical status of the area, which was that of a
« trust territory ». In the view of Egypt, the Gaza Strip remained part of
Palestine and therefore Palestine might be said to have retained an actual
existence, albeit in a somewhat truncated form (73). It would be erroneous
to simply describe the Egyptian presence as that of a belligerent occupant, not
only were the conditions under which Egypt entered the Gaza Strip the same
as those under which Jordan entered the West Bank, ipso facto excluding a
possible belligerent occupancy, but Egypt in actual fact assumed its task of
« trustee »

http://rbdi.bruylant.be/public/mode...79.2 - pp. 500 à 538 - Frank van de Craen.pdf

Its pretty sad that you actually buy this revisionist bullshit.

Of course, you fail to answer the obvious quesiton: why wouldn't Jordan and Egypt simply give the "Palestinians" sovereignty in the land they captured? The answer: because your "held in trust" claim is a lie.

Egypt and Jordan are two different stories. As my quote states, Egypt was the only one of the three who assumed its task of trustee. Egypt assisted the Palestinians in creating the All Palestine Government that declared independence in 1948.

Jordan opposed and helped to thwart Palestinian independence because it had a different agenda. Jordan was promised $3M a year for five years and the West Bank if it would not attack Israel in the upcoming 1948 war. It did not and expected to annex the West Bank.

Jordan and Egypt held on to the West Bank and Gaza for 20 years between 1948 and 1967, and no Arab stood up on either side and uttered the word "Palestine."

Believe or not. LOLOLOLOL

 

[P F Tinmore]

Its pretty sad that you actually buy this revisionist bullshit.

Of course, you fail to answer the obvious quesiton: why wouldn't Jordan and Egypt simply give the "Palestinians" sovereignty in the land they captured? The answer: because your "held in trust" claim is a lie.

Egypt and Jordan are two different stories. As my quote states, Egypt was the only one of the three who assumed its task of trustee. Egypt assisted the Palestinians in creating the All Palestine Government that declared independence in 1948.

Jordan opposed and helped to thwart Palestinian independence because it had a different agenda. Jordan was promised $3M a year for five years and the West Bank if it would not attack Israel in the upcoming 1948 war. It did not and expected to annex the West Bank.

Jordan and Egypt held on to the West Bank and Gaza for 20 years between 1948 and 1967, and no Arab stood up on either side and uttered the word "Palestine."

Believe or not. LOLOLOLOL

The All Palestine Government was formed in 1948.

 

[Kondor3]

"...The All Palestine Government was formed in 1948.

The Palestinian Declaration was served-up in October 1948...

The Israeli Declaration was served-up in May 1948...

Five months after the Israelis had formally seceded from the pseudo-nation beginning to gel as 'Palestine'...

And striking-out on their own... their secession legitimized by force-of-arms and formally recognized by the UN as a fiat accompli in the following year (1949)...

As usual, with the Palestinians... a day late, and a shekel short... too little, too late.

 

[P F Tinmore]

"...The All Palestine Government was formed in 1948.

The Palestinian Declaration was served-up in October 1948...

The Israeli Declaration was served-up in May 1948...

Five months after the Israelis had formally seceded from the pseudo-nation beginning to gel as 'Palestine'...

And striking-out on their own... their secession legitimized by force-of-arms and the formally recognized by the UN as a fiat accompli in the following year (1949(...

As usual, with the Palestinians... a day late, and a shekel short... too little, too late.

The difference is that Israel was declared by the foreign Jewish Agency that was created in Zurich by the foreign World Zionist Organization.

Palestine was declared by the natives who have the right to sovereignty inside their territory.

 

[Kondor3]

"...The difference is that Israel was declared by the foreign Jewish Agency that was created in Zurich by the foreign World Zionist Organization. Palestine was declared by the natives who have the right to sovereignty inside their territory."

No.

Israel was declared by the Jewish residents of British Mandate Palestine.

Some long-time multi-generational Jewish residents.

Some recently-arrived immigrants.

Who also had the right of sovereignty over their lands within Palestine.

Civil wars are nasty things, aren't they?

But the Early Statehood Declarer gets the bigger piece of the pie.

Too bad the Arabs weren't as well organized as the Jews, with respect to the Legal Particulars, on British Departure Day.

Of course, back then, the Arab-Muslims were a bit more interested in slaughtering the Jews and drowning them in the Med, rather than worrying about some future legal difficulty.

Short-sightedness, as well as martial incompetency - a sure recipe for Defeat.

Welcome to your Consequences.

 

[Roudy]

Egypt and Jordan are two different stories. As my quote states, Egypt was the only one of the three who assumed its task of trustee. Egypt assisted the Palestinians in creating the All Palestine Government that declared independence in 1948.

Jordan opposed and helped to thwart Palestinian independence because it had a different agenda. Jordan was promised $3M a year for five years and the West Bank if it would not attack Israel in the upcoming 1948 war. It did not and expected to annex the West Bank.

Jordan and Egypt held on to the West Bank and Gaza for 20 years between 1948 and 1967, and no Arab stood up on either side and uttered the word "Palestine."

Believe or not. LOLOLOLOL

The All Palestine Government was formed in 1948.

Now now Tinmore, that bogus claim and deflection still doesn't answer why when Jordan and Egypt controlled the West Bank and Gaza for 20 years, no Arab got up and uttered the word Palestine, now does it? Especially if as you falsely claimed an "all Palestine govt was declared in 1948". OOOPS!

So let me get this straight. Arabs control the West Bank and Gaza from 1948 to 1967, yet NOT ONE SINGLE "Palestinian" ever mentions the word Palestine. As soon as the Jews control the land..."Free Palestine!" Stranger than fiction. Ha ha ha.