All of your statement as you are a known quantity when it comes to using biased sources and outright lies.
The 77 year old flop
- Thread starter P F Tinmore
- Start date
All of your statement as you are a known quantity when it comes to using biased sources and outright lies.
More like he sounds like a spoilt child caught with his hand in the sweet jar. Now he will give links to Palestinian terrorists and what they say happened whenthey were 50,000 miles away.
1) They already do
HEAVILY ARMED MILITIAS WREST CONTROL OF WEST BANK PALESTINIAN REFUGEE CAMPS FROM PALESTINIAN AUTHORITY | sreaves32
The situation today is such that the Palestinian security forces don’t dare set foot in those areas, especially the big refugee camps of Nablus (Balata), Tulkarm, Dehaisha – between the Jewish Gush Etzion settlement bloc and Hebron – Askar - east of Nablus, and Jenin. Another no-go area is the Shoafat camp in the municipal area of Jerusalem.
Palestinian security units are afraid of being greeted in the same way as the Israeli military forces, which have cut down on entry to those camps after coming under a hail of automatic fire, firebombs and grenades wielded by gangs of armed thugs. There were also attempts to seize soldiers as hostages.
2) They already have in some cases
https://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/myths3/MFrefugees.html#8
The Arabs rejected all the Israeli compromises. They were unwilling to take any action that might be construed as recognition of Israel. They made repatriation a precondition for negotiations, something Israel rejected. The result was the confinement of the refugees in camps.
Despite the position taken by the Arab states, Israel did release the Arab refugeesÂ’ blocked bank accounts, which totaled more than $10 million, paid thousands of claimants cash compensation and granted thousands of acres as alternative holdings.
If Jordan asks them yes, but while Jordan wants them to patrol there NO!
Covered in another thread
Isn't it already.
See the Palestinian declaration of independence.
If there isn't then what are the government of Palestine doing in the UN, and the BBC say that east Jerusalem is the capital of Palestine.
So yes you should, and stop reading ISLAMONAZI sites in future
JakeStarkey
Diamond Member
- Aug 10, 2009
- 168,037
- 16,540
- 2,165
- Banned
- #25
Greater Israel is becoming the only acceptable solution, with the Palestinians who can't accept it be cleansed to other countries involuntarily. Any resistance inside the country after that to the existence of Israel must be a capital crime and the family removed to other countries.
RoccoR
Gold Member
P F Tinmore, et al,
You are confused.
Pre-conditions to the talks are those things set as a requirement even before they start the talks.
Just because there are no pre-conditions, July 2013, does mean those issues are not points for negotiation.
In the recent talks, Israel went in with NO pre-conditions in the resumption of negotiations.
Most Respectfully,
R
You are confused.
(COMMENT)
Pre-conditions to the talks are those things set as a requirement even before they start the talks.
Just because there are no pre-conditions, July 2013, does mean those issues are not points for negotiation.
In the recent talks, Israel went in with NO pre-conditions in the resumption of negotiations.
Most Respectfully,
R
JakeStarkey
Diamond Member
- Aug 10, 2009
- 168,037
- 16,540
- 2,165
- Banned
- #27
Is Israel going to allow Palestinians to have personal weapons and an army? Not in Israel.
Is Israel going to allow return of the refugees? No.
Is Israel going to give up the Jordan valley? No.
Will East Jerusalem be the capital of Palestine? Never.
Is Israel going to allow return of the refugees? No.
Is Israel going to give up the Jordan valley? No.
Will East Jerusalem be the capital of Palestine? Never.
Roudy
Diamond Member
- Mar 16, 2012
- 62,957
- 20,195
- 2,250
Like I always say, Gaza proved that this is not and has never been about land. Israel should just annex the West Bank, call it by it's correct name for 3000 years JUDEAH AND SAMARIA, before the Arab invaders changed it's name to "West Bank" in 1948, and get this thing over with.
You people never fail to make me laugh.
You are so addicted to debate you even defy the very definition of this activity:
DEBATE:
You love debating so much you engage in this activity even when there's nothing to debate, even when everybody is in perfect agreement.
Everybody here is perfectly aware that the palestinian people will never sanction the ethnic
cleansing of western palestine, that they will never accept only the WB and Gaza as their historical homeland.
Everybody knows this conflict is not about a few inches of land here, a few inches there... it is about the right of the palestinian people to live in the western half of their homeland.
If you don't believe me just read the small selection I compiled below including quotes by almost all posters who contributed to this thread.
You are so addicted to debate you even defy the very definition of this activity:
DEBATE:
You love debating so much you engage in this activity even when there's nothing to debate, even when everybody is in perfect agreement.
Everybody here is perfectly aware that the palestinian people will never sanction the ethnic
cleansing of western palestine, that they will never accept only the WB and Gaza as their historical homeland.
Everybody knows this conflict is not about a few inches of land here, a few inches there... it is about the right of the palestinian people to live in the western half of their homeland.
If you don't believe me just read the small selection I compiled below including quotes by almost all posters who contributed to this thread.
Hossfly
ZIONIST
"You people".José;8908692 said:
"You people".José;8908692 said:
Well, I almost included one of your posts in which you refer to the "phoney peace talks" but I couldn't remember your exact words and couldn't spend 5 hours looking for it due to having a real life outside the net.
Anyway:
Welcome to the team, Hossfly!!
The team of those who already realized the palestinian people will never accept neither the partition of their homeland nor the exile imposed on them by the jewish racial dictatorship.
proudveteran06
Silver Member
- Sep 12, 2012
- 2,565
- 482
- 98
The Palestinian is lying again;
Israel has offered to give up most of the settlements in the W. Bank
Israel said willing to give up 90% of West Bank | The Times of Israel
Israel said willing to give up 90% of West Bank
Palestinians reportedly insisting on land swaps for no more than 3% of territory; either way, most Jewish settlements would remain in place
By Gavriel Fiske February 6, 2014, 10:55 am 99
The closed-door negotiations between Israel and the Palestinian Authority over the future contours of a Palestinian state, and how much land and settlements Israel will retain, have reportedly come down to a matter of a few percentage points, with both sides agreeing in principle that the majority of Jewish West Bank settlements would be transferred to Israeli sovereignty in a final status deal.
Get The Times of Israel's Daily Edition by email
and never miss our top stories Free Sign up!
Citing anonymous Israeli, Palestinian and American sources close to the negotiations, Walla News reported on Thursday that Israel is seeking to annex about 10 percent of the West BankÂ’s land area in a final deal. Meanwhile, the Palestinians are seeking to have Israel annex only around 3% of the West Bank, the report said.
Some 70-80% of Jewish West Bank settlements will be transferred to Israel whether Israel retains 10% or 3% of West Bank land, the report noted. According to a source on the American side, “it is clear” that Israel is “willing in principle to give up” control of 90% of the West Bank.
Israel has also offered to share E. Jerusalem. Israel will not control all tourism etc. etc. It does demand that " Palestine" remain unmilitarized for obvious reasons such as Japan was after WW 11. What the Palestinan doesn't mention is that they are demanding some land within the 67 Borders. If they got everything they wanted Israel will eventually be annex to " Palestine". Why should there be a " Palestinian State" but not a " Jewish State?"
The closed-door negotiations between Israel and the Palestinian Authority over the future contours of a Palestinian state, and how much land and settlements Israel will retain, have reportedly come down to a matter of a few percentage points, with both sides agreeing in principle that the majority of Jewish West Bank settlements would be transferred to Israeli sovereignty in a final status deal.
Citing anonymous Israeli, Palestinian and American sources close to the negotiations, Walla News reported on Thursday that Israel is seeking to annex about 10 percent of the West BankÂ’s land area in a final deal. Meanwhile, the Palestinians are seeking to have Israel annex only around 3% of the West Bank, the report said.
Abbas Shuts Down the Peace Process « Commentary Magazine
Abbas Shuts Down the Peace Process
Tom Wilson | [MENTION=30056]Tom[/MENTION]JamesWilson 02.12.2014 - 2:20 PM
Last week, Jonathan Tobin wrote here of how we were on the eve of a fourth Palestinian “no” to a peace agreement. It would appear that has now arrived, albeit slightly sooner than anyone had expected. Many observers assumed that once Secretary of State John Kerry got around to submitting his framework for a negotiated peace, Palestinian Authority head Mahmoud Abbas would then set about finding an excuse for rejecting it. What few could have predicted was that Abbas would find a way to reject the proposal before it was even submitted. Yet, this is precisely the impressive feat that Abbas has now accomplished.
Earlier today, AbbasÂ’s spokespeople in Ramallah announced the PAÂ’s new set of red lines in any negotiated peace settlement. Each and every one of these red lines blows to pieces anything Kerry was about to propose, as it does to the prospects for an agreement between the two sides in general. These red lines which Abbas details in a letter being sent to the U.S. and the Quartet seamlessly preempts whatever Kerry was likely to outline in his own peace parameters. In this way Abbas artfully dodges a scenario in which the Israelis would agree to a peace plan and the Palestinians would come under pressure not to derail yet another effort to resolve the conflict.
AbbasÂ’s new red lines block just about every concession that the Israelis, and even the U.S., have requested. Abbas demands: a total Israeli withdrawal from all territories that went to Israel in 1967; that Israel complete that withdrawal within three to four years; that the Palestinians not be required to recognize the Jewish state; that east Jerusalem be specified as the capital of a Palestinian state; the release of all Palestinian prisoners; and resolving the refugee issue along the lines of UN General Assembly resolution 194, which in essence means sending those Palestinians claiming to be refugees, not to a Palestinian state, but to Israel, thus terminating the existence of the Jewish state Abbas refuses to recognize.
So, Who isn't serious???
You and Paul Francis Tinmore are in perfect aggreement, veteran:
You have both finally realized that the Israeli/Palestinian conflict is about the right to live in western Palestine and not about settlements, occupation, no matter how many times the western press and even palestinian leaders refer to them as the real obstacles.
As you said so many times:
"That's why the palestinian state is DOA!!"
The only thing that's still unanswered is why on Earth you have the strange idea that there is any disagreement between you two.
You have both finally realized that the Israeli/Palestinian conflict is about the right to live in western Palestine and not about settlements, occupation, no matter how many times the western press and even palestinian leaders refer to them as the real obstacles.
As you said so many times:
"That's why the palestinian state is DOA!!"
The only thing that's still unanswered is why on Earth you have the strange idea that there is any disagreement between you two.
proudveteran06
Silver Member
- Sep 12, 2012
- 2,565
- 482
- 98
José;8908953 said:You and Paul Francis Tinmore are in perfect aggreement, veteran:
You have both finally realized that the Israeli/Palestinian conflict is about the right to live in western Palestine and not about settlements, occupation, no matter how many times the western press and even palestinian leaders refer to them as the real obstacles.
As you said so many times:
"That's why the palestinian state is DOA!!"
The only thing that's still unanswered is why on Earth you have the strange idea that there is any disagreement between you two.
Definition of NEGOTIATE
b: to arrange for or bring about through conference, discussion, and compromise <negotiate a treaty>
Why is there " disagreement?" Try to read the above definition SLOWLY if capable. Israel has shown compromise in many aspects starting with Gaza. Tell us exactly what the Palestinians have been doing to " negotiate?" The Palestinian, on the other hand claims the Palestinians are willing to find a way to end the " Two State Solution" conflict but claims the Israelis are unwilling to " negotiate" Understand now? Doubt it
pbel
Gold Member
- Feb 26, 2012
- 5,653
- 449
- 130
Not while Israel keeps stealing land against all international norms...In our lifetime we will see the ME Nuke up.
Originally posted by proudveteran
[Definition of NEGOTIATE
b: to arrange for or bring about through conference, discussion, and compromise <negotiate a treaty>
Why is there " disagreement?" Try to read the above definition SLOWLY if capable. Israel has shown compromise in many aspects starting with Gaza. Tell us exactly what the Palestinians have been doing to " negotiate?" The Palestinian, on the other hand claims the Palestinians are willing to find a way to end the " Two State Solution" conflict but claims the Israelis are unwilling to " negotiate" Understand now? Doubt it
You say:
The palestinian state (ie, the partition of Palestine) is DOA.
Tinmore says:
The two-state solution is nothing but the partition plan palestinians have been unequivocally, constantly rejecting since the first decades of the last century.
Whether or not Palestinians are being reasonable, "serious" by demanding their right to live in western Palestine is a secondary, unimportant question that's totally open to subjective interpretation.
What's really important here is that both of you agree on the crucial, fundamental issue:
The right of the palestinian people to live in an undivided Palestine has always been, is and will always be a non-negotiable point.
Again:
Where's the (important) disagreement?
JakeStarkey
Diamond Member
- Aug 10, 2009
- 168,037
- 16,540
- 2,165
- Banned
- #39
" the palestinian people will never accept neither the partition of their homeland nor the exile imposed on them by the jewish racial dictatorship."
Yeah, they will. They have no other choice. If they fight, they will be squashed as they always have been already.
Yeah, they will. They have no other choice. If they fight, they will be squashed as they always have been already.
montelatici
Gold Member
- Feb 5, 2014
- 18,686
- 2,133
- 280
The Zionist bloggers/sites blame the Palestinians for the breakdown in negotiations. Kerry blames the Israeli decision to build more settlements. I wonder which source is more reliable.
Similar threads
- Poll
New Topics
-
-
-
Trump has reversed the balance of power in the Middle East- Started by Hafar1014
- Replies: 8
-
-
Good breakdown of the religious aspects of the Iran war (3.5.26)- Started by Invisibleflash
- Replies: 6
