Who Are The Palestinians? Part 2

[toastman]

It is the Palestinians that favour death and destruction and it shows when they refuse point blank to negotiate a settlement. Care to show where in the Israeli constitution/charter it states the destruction of Palestine and the death of all Palestinians. Like it does in the many Palestinian charters.................

Negotiate what? Israel never negotiated in good faith.

Why waste the time?

Two treaties that have stood the test of time with Jordan and Egypt. Now what have the Palestinians ever negotiated ?

Negotiate peace with whom? They are not at war with any of their neighbors.

Tell that to Jordan, Egypt and Israel who they are constantly at war with. And your LIEs no longer work as Palestine still has no borders according to the UN. By the way I did not mention peace I mentioned negotiations honoured by Palestine, kithman and taqiya

Palestine is not at war with any of its neighbors.

Show some proof that it is.

Why negotiate if there is no war and no border disputes?

Just because YOU don't recognize Israel, doesn't mean it's not there. 'Palestine' is at war with Israel and yes, they are neighbours.

Palestine is the orange. What's so hard to understand ? A 3rd grader could comprehend this.

 

[montelatici]

P F Tinmore, et al,

Again, I disagree.

This is just some foolishness to justify their unlawful action by Palestinians.

Palestine is not at war with any of its neighbors.

Show some proof that it is.

Why negotiate if there is no war and no border disputes?

(COMMENT)

From a practical aspect, firing rockets and mortars across the border into sovereign territory of Israel is an act of aggression. While the Arab Palestinian may not recognize the "JIHAD" as a war, it is a war with real casualties. It is the political policy of the Arab Palestinians to eject the State of Israel, recognized since 1948, even though the PLO exchanged letter of Mutual Recognition.

As I have said before, this pledge of conflict has gone essential unchanged for more nearly seven decades (made in February 1948) and is mimicked in Palestinian National Charter (1968), the Covenant of the Islamic Resistance Movement (1988), and more recently in a 2013 major position paper, published by Khaled Meshal, Chairman of the Hamas Political Bureau(currently hiding out on Doha, Qatar).

If there is no dispute, then why fire rockets and mortars at Israel?

You don't know how unreliable and impractical you sound when you suggest there is "no war."

Article 1
Aggression is the use of armed force by a State against the sovereignty, territorial integrity or political independence of another State, or in any other manner inconsistent with the Charter of the United Nations, as set out in this Definition.

Explanatory note: In this Definition the term "State":

1. 
   (a) Is used without prejudice to questions of recognition or to whether a State is a member of the United Nations;
   (b) Includes the concept of a "group of States" where appropriate.

Article 2
The First use of armed force by a State in contravention of the Charter shall constitute prima facie evidence of an act of aggression although the Security Council may, in conformity with the Charter, conclude that a determination that an act of aggression has been committed would not be justified in the light of other relevant circumstances, including the fact that the acts concerned or their consequences are not of sufficient gravity.

Most Respectfully,
R

1. The first use of armed force was on the part of the European Jews.

2. A blockade is an act of aggression.

3. Palestinian attacks are in retaliation for armed attacks by the Israelis and the blockade.

 

[P F Tinmore]

P F Tinmore, et al,

Again, I disagree.

This is just some foolishness to justify their unlawful action by Palestinians.

Palestine is not at war with any of its neighbors.

Show some proof that it is.

Why negotiate if there is no war and no border disputes?

(COMMENT)

From a practical aspect, firing rockets and mortars across the border into sovereign territory of Israel is an act of aggression. While the Arab Palestinian may not recognize the "JIHAD" as a war, it is a war with real casualties. It is the political policy of the Arab Palestinians to eject the State of Israel, recognized since 1948, even though the PLO exchanged letter of Mutual Recognition.

As I have said before, this pledge of conflict has gone essential unchanged for more nearly seven decades (made in February 1948) and is mimicked in Palestinian National Charter (1968), the Covenant of the Islamic Resistance Movement (1988), and more recently in a 2013 major position paper, published by Khaled Meshal, Chairman of the Hamas Political Bureau(currently hiding out on Doha, Qatar).

If there is no dispute, then why fire rockets and mortars at Israel?

You don't know how unreliable and impractical you sound when you suggest there is "no war."

Article 1
Aggression is the use of armed force by a State against the sovereignty, territorial integrity or political independence of another State, or in any other manner inconsistent with the Charter of the United Nations, as set out in this Definition.

Explanatory note: In this Definition the term "State":

1. 
   (a) Is used without prejudice to questions of recognition or to whether a State is a member of the United Nations;
   (b) Includes the concept of a "group of States" where appropriate.

Article 2
The First use of armed force by a State in contravention of the Charter shall constitute prima facie evidence of an act of aggression although the Security Council may, in conformity with the Charter, conclude that a determination that an act of aggression has been committed would not be justified in the light of other relevant circumstances, including the fact that the acts concerned or their consequences are not of sufficient gravity.

Most Respectfully,
R

Again, I disagree.​

No surprise, you do not believe that the Palestinians have the right to defend themselves.

 

[P F Tinmore]

Negotiate what? Israel never negotiated in good faith.

Why waste the time?

Two treaties that have stood the test of time with Jordan and Egypt. Now what have the Palestinians ever negotiated ?

Negotiate peace with whom? They are not at war with any of their neighbors.

Tell that to Jordan, Egypt and Israel who they are constantly at war with. And your LIEs no longer work as Palestine still has no borders according to the UN. By the way I did not mention peace I mentioned negotiations honoured by Palestine, kithman and taqiya

Palestine is not at war with any of its neighbors.

Show some proof that it is.

Why negotiate if there is no war and no border disputes?

Just because YOU don't recognize Israel, doesn't mean it's not there. 'Palestine' is at war with Israel and yes, they are neighbours.

Palestine is the orange. What's so hard to understand ? A 3rd grader could comprehend this.

Why does every map in the world show Israel inside fake borders?

 

[RoccoR]

montelatici, et al,

The blockade was put-up (land, air, and sea blockade on the Gaza Strip by Israel from 2007 to present) in response to the abuses by Palestinians after the 2005 disengagement and withdrawal from GAZA. In 2005, after the withdrawal, there was no blockade until the Palestinians started to import more and more rockets. Had the Palestinians behaved themselves, there would still be no blockade.

P F Tinmore, et al,

Again, I disagree.

This is just some foolishness to justify their unlawful action by Palestinians.

Palestine is not at war with any of its neighbors.

Show some proof that it is.

Why negotiate if there is no war and no border disputes?

(COMMENT)

From a practical aspect, firing rockets and mortars across the border into sovereign territory of Israel is an act of aggression. While the Arab Palestinian may not recognize the "JIHAD" as a war, it is a war with real casualties. It is the political policy of the Arab Palestinians to eject the State of Israel, recognized since 1948, even though the PLO exchanged letter of Mutual Recognition.

As I have said before, this pledge of conflict has gone essential unchanged for more nearly seven decades (made in February 1948) and is mimicked in Palestinian National Charter (1968), the Covenant of the Islamic Resistance Movement (1988), and more recently in a 2013 major position paper, published by Khaled Meshal, Chairman of the Hamas Political Bureau(currently hiding out on Doha, Qatar).

If there is no dispute, then why fire rockets and mortars at Israel?

You don't know how unreliable and impractical you sound when you suggest there is "no war."

Article 1
Aggression is the use of armed force by a State against the sovereignty, territorial integrity or political independence of another State, or in any other manner inconsistent with the Charter of the United Nations, as set out in this Definition.

Explanatory note: In this Definition the term "State":

1. 
   (a) Is used without prejudice to questions of recognition or to whether a State is a member of the United Nations;
   (b) Includes the concept of a "group of States" where appropriate.

Article 2
The First use of armed force by a State in contravention of the Charter shall constitute prima facie evidence of an act of aggression although the Security Council may, in conformity with the Charter, conclude that a determination that an act of aggression has been committed would not be justified in the light of other relevant circumstances, including the fact that the acts concerned or their consequences are not of sufficient gravity.

Most Respectfully,
R

1. The first use of armed force was on the part of the European Jews.

2. A blockade is an act of aggression.

3. Palestinian attacks are in retaliation for armed attacks by the Israelis and the blockade.

(COMMENT)

After the disengagement, the Palestinians fired first; in fact fired a rocket and the last day of the occupation.

The blockade is in response to acts of war.

Wrong, the blockade was not put in place until 2007.

Most Respectfully,
R

 

[toastman]

Two treaties that have stood the test of time with Jordan and Egypt. Now what have the Palestinians ever negotiated ?

Negotiate peace with whom? They are not at war with any of their neighbors.

Tell that to Jordan, Egypt and Israel who they are constantly at war with. And your LIEs no longer work as Palestine still has no borders according to the UN. By the way I did not mention peace I mentioned negotiations honoured by Palestine, kithman and taqiya

Palestine is not at war with any of its neighbors.

Show some proof that it is.

Why negotiate if there is no war and no border disputes?

Just because YOU don't recognize Israel, doesn't mean it's not there. 'Palestine' is at war with Israel and yes, they are neighbours.

Palestine is the orange. What's so hard to understand ? A 3rd grader could comprehend this.

Why does every map in the world show Israel inside fake borders?

Because only you consider them fake borders.

Remember the last time we debated Israel's ? I provided plenty of evidence to show that Israel indeed has internationally recognized borders, while you provided nothing

 

[toastman]

P F Tinmore, et al,

Again, I disagree.

This is just some foolishness to justify their unlawful action by Palestinians.

Palestine is not at war with any of its neighbors.

Show some proof that it is.

Why negotiate if there is no war and no border disputes?

(COMMENT)

From a practical aspect, firing rockets and mortars across the border into sovereign territory of Israel is an act of aggression. While the Arab Palestinian may not recognize the "JIHAD" as a war, it is a war with real casualties. It is the political policy of the Arab Palestinians to eject the State of Israel, recognized since 1948, even though the PLO exchanged letter of Mutual Recognition.

As I have said before, this pledge of conflict has gone essential unchanged for more nearly seven decades (made in February 1948) and is mimicked in Palestinian National Charter (1968), the Covenant of the Islamic Resistance Movement (1988), and more recently in a 2013 major position paper, published by Khaled Meshal, Chairman of the Hamas Political Bureau(currently hiding out on Doha, Qatar).

If there is no dispute, then why fire rockets and mortars at Israel?

You don't know how unreliable and impractical you sound when you suggest there is "no war."

Article 1
Aggression is the use of armed force by a State against the sovereignty, territorial integrity or political independence of another State, or in any other manner inconsistent with the Charter of the United Nations, as set out in this Definition.

Explanatory note: In this Definition the term "State":

1. 
   (a) Is used without prejudice to questions of recognition or to whether a State is a member of the United Nations;
   (b) Includes the concept of a "group of States" where appropriate.

Article 2
The First use of armed force by a State in contravention of the Charter shall constitute prima facie evidence of an act of aggression although the Security Council may, in conformity with the Charter, conclude that a determination that an act of aggression has been committed would not be justified in the light of other relevant circumstances, including the fact that the acts concerned or their consequences are not of sufficient gravity.

Most Respectfully,
R

1. The first use of armed force was on the part of the European Jews.

2. A blockade is an act of aggression.

3. Palestinian attacks are in retaliation for armed attacks by the Israelis and the blockade.

1) Liar. I already refuted this lie

2) The blockade is a result of Hamas threats and aggression

3) Israeli attacks are in retaliation are in retaliation of attacks by 'Palestinians'.

 

[RoccoR]

P F Tinmore, et al,

I don't believe any map shows Israel inside any international borders.

Why does every map in the world show Israel inside fake borders?

(COMMENT)

Again, you are making an assertion not found in evidence. If anything, the West Bank and Gaza Strip are inside the international borders established by treaty with Israel, and the two parties of Egypt and Jordan.

Most Respectfully,
R

 

[toastman]

P F Tinmore, et al,

I don't believe any map shows Israel inside any international borders.

Why does every map in the world show Israel inside fake borders?

(COMMENT)

Again, you are making an assertion not found in evidence. If anything, the West Bank and Gaza Strip are inside the international borders established by treaty with Israel, and the two parties of Egypt and Jordan.

Most Respectfully,
R

Yes, they show Israel inside the internationally recognized boundaries with Jordan and Egypt.

 

[montelatici]

P F Tinmore, et al,

Again, I disagree.

This is just some foolishness to justify their unlawful action by Palestinians.

Palestine is not at war with any of its neighbors.

Show some proof that it is.

Why negotiate if there is no war and no border disputes?

(COMMENT)

From a practical aspect, firing rockets and mortars across the border into sovereign territory of Israel is an act of aggression. While the Arab Palestinian may not recognize the "JIHAD" as a war, it is a war with real casualties. It is the political policy of the Arab Palestinians to eject the State of Israel, recognized since 1948, even though the PLO exchanged letter of Mutual Recognition.

As I have said before, this pledge of conflict has gone essential unchanged for more nearly seven decades (made in February 1948) and is mimicked in Palestinian National Charter (1968), the Covenant of the Islamic Resistance Movement (1988), and more recently in a 2013 major position paper, published by Khaled Meshal, Chairman of the Hamas Political Bureau(currently hiding out on Doha, Qatar).

If there is no dispute, then why fire rockets and mortars at Israel?

You don't know how unreliable and impractical you sound when you suggest there is "no war."

Article 1
Aggression is the use of armed force by a State against the sovereignty, territorial integrity or political independence of another State, or in any other manner inconsistent with the Charter of the United Nations, as set out in this Definition.

Explanatory note: In this Definition the term "State":

1. 
   (a) Is used without prejudice to questions of recognition or to whether a State is a member of the United Nations;
   (b) Includes the concept of a "group of States" where appropriate.

Article 2
The First use of armed force by a State in contravention of the Charter shall constitute prima facie evidence of an act of aggression although the Security Council may, in conformity with the Charter, conclude that a determination that an act of aggression has been committed would not be justified in the light of other relevant circumstances, including the fact that the acts concerned or their consequences are not of sufficient gravity.

Most Respectfully,
R

1. The first use of armed force was on the part of the European Jews.

2. A blockade is an act of aggression.

3. Palestinian attacks are in retaliation for armed attacks by the Israelis and the blockade.

1) Liar. I already refuted this lie

2) The blockade is a result of Hamas threats and aggression

3) Israeli attacks are in retaliation are in retaliation of attacks by 'Palestinians'.

Liar. 1913

 

[toastman]

P F Tinmore, et al,

Again, I disagree.

This is just some foolishness to justify their unlawful action by Palestinians.

Palestine is not at war with any of its neighbors.

Show some proof that it is.

Why negotiate if there is no war and no border disputes?

(COMMENT)

From a practical aspect, firing rockets and mortars across the border into sovereign territory of Israel is an act of aggression. While the Arab Palestinian may not recognize the "JIHAD" as a war, it is a war with real casualties. It is the political policy of the Arab Palestinians to eject the State of Israel, recognized since 1948, even though the PLO exchanged letter of Mutual Recognition.

As I have said before, this pledge of conflict has gone essential unchanged for more nearly seven decades (made in February 1948) and is mimicked in Palestinian National Charter (1968), the Covenant of the Islamic Resistance Movement (1988), and more recently in a 2013 major position paper, published by Khaled Meshal, Chairman of the Hamas Political Bureau(currently hiding out on Doha, Qatar).

If there is no dispute, then why fire rockets and mortars at Israel?

You don't know how unreliable and impractical you sound when you suggest there is "no war."

Article 1
Aggression is the use of armed force by a State against the sovereignty, territorial integrity or political independence of another State, or in any other manner inconsistent with the Charter of the United Nations, as set out in this Definition.

Explanatory note: In this Definition the term "State":

1. 
   (a) Is used without prejudice to questions of recognition or to whether a State is a member of the United Nations;
   (b) Includes the concept of a "group of States" where appropriate.

Article 2
The First use of armed force by a State in contravention of the Charter shall constitute prima facie evidence of an act of aggression although the Security Council may, in conformity with the Charter, conclude that a determination that an act of aggression has been committed would not be justified in the light of other relevant circumstances, including the fact that the acts concerned or their consequences are not of sufficient gravity.

Most Respectfully,
R

1. The first use of armed force was on the part of the European Jews.

2. A blockade is an act of aggression.

3. Palestinian attacks are in retaliation for armed attacks by the Israelis and the blockade.

1) Liar. I already refuted this lie

2) The blockade is a result of Hamas threats and aggression

3) Israeli attacks are in retaliation are in retaliation of attacks by 'Palestinians'.

Liar. 1913

Post a link to the documented attack that took place in 1913

 

[montelatici]

1913

 

[toastman]

1834 looting of Safed - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia

 

[montelatici]

1834 looting of Safed - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia

Just a wiki Hasbara entry. Watch 1913 Seeds of Conflict. The first verifiable attack was an attack by Jews on Arabs.

 

[toastman]

1834 looting of Safed - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia

Just a wiki Hasbara entry. Watch 1913 Seeds of Conflict. The first verifiable attack was an attack by Jews on Arabs.

Hasbara entry? Really? IS that all you got ? You are beyond pathetic.

1834 Safed pogrom Project Gutenberg Self-Publishing - eBooks Read eBooks online

Translation of 1834 Safed pogrom in English

 

[montelatici]

1913

 

[montelatici]

The response to your propaganda will be 1913.

 

[P F Tinmore]

montelatici, et al,

The blockade was put-up (land, air, and sea blockade on the Gaza Strip by Israel from 2007 to present) in response to the abuses by Palestinians after the 2005 disengagement and withdrawal from GAZA. In 2005, after the withdrawal, there was no blockade until the Palestinians started to import more and more rockets. Had the Palestinians behaved themselves, there would still be no blockade.

P F Tinmore, et al,

Again, I disagree.

This is just some foolishness to justify their unlawful action by Palestinians.

Palestine is not at war with any of its neighbors.

Show some proof that it is.

Why negotiate if there is no war and no border disputes?

(COMMENT)

From a practical aspect, firing rockets and mortars across the border into sovereign territory of Israel is an act of aggression. While the Arab Palestinian may not recognize the "JIHAD" as a war, it is a war with real casualties. It is the political policy of the Arab Palestinians to eject the State of Israel, recognized since 1948, even though the PLO exchanged letter of Mutual Recognition.

As I have said before, this pledge of conflict has gone essential unchanged for more nearly seven decades (made in February 1948) and is mimicked in Palestinian National Charter (1968), the Covenant of the Islamic Resistance Movement (1988), and more recently in a 2013 major position paper, published by Khaled Meshal, Chairman of the Hamas Political Bureau(currently hiding out on Doha, Qatar).

If there is no dispute, then why fire rockets and mortars at Israel?

You don't know how unreliable and impractical you sound when you suggest there is "no war."

Article 1
Aggression is the use of armed force by a State against the sovereignty, territorial integrity or political independence of another State, or in any other manner inconsistent with the Charter of the United Nations, as set out in this Definition.

Explanatory note: In this Definition the term "State":

1. 
   (a) Is used without prejudice to questions of recognition or to whether a State is a member of the United Nations;
   (b) Includes the concept of a "group of States" where appropriate.

Article 2
The First use of armed force by a State in contravention of the Charter shall constitute prima facie evidence of an act of aggression although the Security Council may, in conformity with the Charter, conclude that a determination that an act of aggression has been committed would not be justified in the light of other relevant circumstances, including the fact that the acts concerned or their consequences are not of sufficient gravity.

Most Respectfully,
R

1. The first use of armed force was on the part of the European Jews.

2. A blockade is an act of aggression.

3. Palestinian attacks are in retaliation for armed attacks by the Israelis and the blockade.

(COMMENT)

After the disengagement, the Palestinians fired first; in fact fired a rocket and the last day of the occupation.

The blockade is in response to acts of war.

Wrong, the blockade was not put in place until 2007.

Most Respectfully,
R

In 2005, after the withdrawal, there was no blockade...​

Not true.

Start @ 9:10

 

[toastman]

montelatici, et al,

The blockade was put-up (land, air, and sea blockade on the Gaza Strip by Israel from 2007 to present) in response to the abuses by Palestinians after the 2005 disengagement and withdrawal from GAZA. In 2005, after the withdrawal, there was no blockade until the Palestinians started to import more and more rockets. Had the Palestinians behaved themselves, there would still be no blockade.

P F Tinmore, et al,

Again, I disagree.

This is just some foolishness to justify their unlawful action by Palestinians.

Palestine is not at war with any of its neighbors.

Show some proof that it is.

Why negotiate if there is no war and no border disputes?

(COMMENT)

From a practical aspect, firing rockets and mortars across the border into sovereign territory of Israel is an act of aggression. While the Arab Palestinian may not recognize the "JIHAD" as a war, it is a war with real casualties. It is the political policy of the Arab Palestinians to eject the State of Israel, recognized since 1948, even though the PLO exchanged letter of Mutual Recognition.

As I have said before, this pledge of conflict has gone essential unchanged for more nearly seven decades (made in February 1948) and is mimicked in Palestinian National Charter (1968), the Covenant of the Islamic Resistance Movement (1988), and more recently in a 2013 major position paper, published by Khaled Meshal, Chairman of the Hamas Political Bureau(currently hiding out on Doha, Qatar).

If there is no dispute, then why fire rockets and mortars at Israel?

You don't know how unreliable and impractical you sound when you suggest there is "no war."

Article 1
Aggression is the use of armed force by a State against the sovereignty, territorial integrity or political independence of another State, or in any other manner inconsistent with the Charter of the United Nations, as set out in this Definition.

Explanatory note: In this Definition the term "State":

1. 
   (a) Is used without prejudice to questions of recognition or to whether a State is a member of the United Nations;
   (b) Includes the concept of a "group of States" where appropriate.

Article 2
The First use of armed force by a State in contravention of the Charter shall constitute prima facie evidence of an act of aggression although the Security Council may, in conformity with the Charter, conclude that a determination that an act of aggression has been committed would not be justified in the light of other relevant circumstances, including the fact that the acts concerned or their consequences are not of sufficient gravity.

Most Respectfully,
R

1. The first use of armed force was on the part of the European Jews.

2. A blockade is an act of aggression.

3. Palestinian attacks are in retaliation for armed attacks by the Israelis and the blockade.

(COMMENT)

After the disengagement, the Palestinians fired first; in fact fired a rocket and the last day of the occupation.

The blockade is in response to acts of war.

Wrong, the blockade was not put in place until 2007.

Most Respectfully,
R

In 2005, after the withdrawal, there was no blockade...​

Not true.

Start @ 9:10

Very true, there was no naval or air blockade right after the withdrawal.

 

[montelatici]

The Gaza border, air space and territorial sea have always been under Israeli control.