Who Are The Palestinians? Part 2

[Phoenall]

My (everyone that is not a Zionist propagandist) contention is that Gaza is densely populated and as stated by neutral news media, the Palestinian militias do not use human shields. Anyone that claims that the BBC is biased is certainly a Hasbara operative. If anything BBC is biased in support of Israel.

The Palestinians are defending themselves. There had been no rockets fired by the Palestinians since 2012 before the Palestinians retaliated against Israeli air raids.

"6) This current Gaza conflict began with Hamas rocket fire on 30 June 2014

Times of Israel: "Hamas operatives were behind a large volley of rockets which slammed into Israel Monday morning, the first time in years the Islamist group has directly challenged the Jewish state, according to Israeli defense officials.. The security sources, who spoke on condition of anonymity, assessed that Hamas had probably launched the barrage in revenge for an Israeli airstrike several hours earlier which killed one person and injured three more.. Hamas hasn't fired rockets into Israel since Operation Pillar of Defense ended in November 2012." The Nation: "During ten days of Operation Brother's Keeper in the West Bank [before the start of the Gaza conflict], Israel arrested approximately 800 Palestinians without charge or trial, killed nine civilians and raided nearly 1,300 residential, commercial and public buildings. Its military operation targeted Hamas members released during the Gilad Shalit prisoner exchange in 2011."

Debunking Israel s 11 Main Myths About Gaza Hamas and War Crimes Mehdi Hasan

The reality is that gaza is 50% arable open land that anyone with a computer can see for themselves. So the excuse that it is densely populated is a fallacy as only the 50% that is inhabited is densely populated. Go to Google Maps and change to satellite view and you will see just how much is arable open land.


Another monte lie busted

It is your lie that is busted. Gaza (the usable space) is much smaller than Google states.

Still 50% of gaza is unoccupied arable land, so why do they insist on fighting from civilian areas ?

 

[Phoenall]

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?

1948 the arab league declared war on Israel, part of the arab league was the Palestinians that later became Jordanian and Egyptian. The hamas charter says that they are at war with Israel and your attempts at re-writing reality are failing every time

 

[Phoenall]

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

Wrong again freddy boy as until 1967 it was under the control of Egypt, then until 2007 it was under the control of the P.A.

 

[Phoenall]

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.

Then explain why the Palestinians attacked the Jews and massacred them in 1929

So is firing illegal rockets at children

So when there was no blockade or armed attacks from 2005 till 2007 what was the reason for the Palestinian attacks ?

 

[Phoenall]

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.

Still waiting for examples of them defending themselves ?

 

[Phoenall]

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?

Which authorative body says that they are fake, as in the UN who says they are valid. They are the same borders granted under the mandate in 1923 as the extent of the Jewish National Home.

 

[Phoenall]

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

Then it was in 632 C.E. when the forfathers of the Palestinians massacred the Jewish tribe at medina

 

[Phoenall]

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

Islamonazi propaganda that has about as much truth as the tooth fairy

 

[aris2chat]

My (everyone that is not a Zionist propagandist) contention is that Gaza is densely populated and as stated by neutral news media, the Palestinian militias do not use human shields. Anyone that claims that the BBC is biased is certainly a Hasbara operative. If anything BBC is biased in support of Israel.

The Palestinians are defending themselves. There had been no rockets fired by the Palestinians since 2012 before the Palestinians retaliated against Israeli air raids.

"6) This current Gaza conflict began with Hamas rocket fire on 30 June 2014

Times of Israel: "Hamas operatives were behind a large volley of rockets which slammed into Israel Monday morning, the first time in years the Islamist group has directly challenged the Jewish state, according to Israeli defense officials.. The security sources, who spoke on condition of anonymity, assessed that Hamas had probably launched the barrage in revenge for an Israeli airstrike several hours earlier which killed one person and injured three more.. Hamas hasn't fired rockets into Israel since Operation Pillar of Defense ended in November 2012." The Nation: "During ten days of Operation Brother's Keeper in the West Bank [before the start of the Gaza conflict], Israel arrested approximately 800 Palestinians without charge or trial, killed nine civilians and raided nearly 1,300 residential, commercial and public buildings. Its military operation targeted Hamas members released during the Gilad Shalit prisoner exchange in 2011."

Debunking Israel s 11 Main Myths About Gaza Hamas and War Crimes Mehdi Hasan

Are you saying Col Kemp is lying? That we should accept to opinion of Mehdi Hassan? You are kidding, right? I will grant that it is extremely difficult to catch Hamas at work as rational people don't want to become their next victim but before they quickly and quietly slipped out of Gaza, an Indian TV crew managed to film a Hamas rocket launched from beneath their hotel window. Furthermore, UNRWA was forced to admit (very reluctantly) that UN "schools" were used by Hamas as armories. You and Hassan can deny or otherwise avoid the truth but it is still the truth.

He is saying that Google maps are lying and that the images shown are those planted by hasbara propagandists to fool the world.

See here Google Maps

Does he believe there is anything except 'hasbara' propaganda that does not promote hate of Israel, jews or the west?

 

[aris2chat]

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

violence erupted when some arab from zarnuka stole grapes from a jewish vineyard in rehovot. Arab hit a guard and stole his gun. The rumor was that a jew had killed an arab, obviously not true. After an arab was seen swinging a blade and shouting insult fighting did actually break out, one arab ended up shot.

 

[RoccoR]

aris2chat, et al,

The use of the term "hasbara" is NOT an insulting tag or an expression of a negative connotation.

Does he believe there is anything except 'hasbara' propaganda that does not promote hate of Israel, jews or the west?

(COMMENT)

Hasbara is rather difficult to define simply because it covers so much. it means "public diplomacy" or "people's diplomacy." In broad brush strokes, it is a form of dialog that one nation opens up to another nation to communicate positive messages and images of the first. In the US, we have an Under Secretary for Public Diplomacy and Public Affairs within the state department. Most sophisticated nations have a similar outreach program or system; not just isolated to Israel.

Public Diplomacy, is (in a way) a form of propaganda --- but in a positive sense. The Hasbara (Public Diplomacy) nearly aways approaches a topic advance good and the pride of a people and a nation. It is the opposite of pessimistic information and arguments; neither does it spread hate and fear. Public Diplomacy is nearly always up-beat and NOT doubtful about a future.

The Hasbara would not participate in a discussion group like the US Message Board. It does not get bogged-down in controversial subjects that will never be settled or confrontational issues of a provoking nature. Its influence is almost always dedicated to promoting the accented and robust nature of the country; ever optimistic, and a source of inspiring good news stories.

In the case of MONTELATICI's accusation ("Anyone that claims that the BBC is biased is certainly a Hasbara operative.") --- he simply does not understand the role of Public Diplomacy (AKA: Hasbara). If it did what MONTELATICI claims, by definition, it would not be "Public Diplomacy." You can be both Black and White at the same time in a binary definition.

Most Respectfully,
R

 

[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?

1948 the arab league declared war on Israel, part of the arab league was the Palestinians that later became Jordanian and Egyptian. The hamas charter says that they are at war with Israel and your attempts at re-writing reality are failing every time

Israel isn't a neighbor. There are no borders or border disputes.

 

[P F Tinmore]

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?

Which authorative body says that they are fake, as in the UN who says they are valid. They are the same borders granted under the mandate in 1923 as the extent of the Jewish National Home.

Israel is defined by armistice lines that are specifically not the be political or territorial borders. The UN does not recognize those borders. Israel does not recognize those borders.

The armistice lines are not just around Gaza and the West Bank. The armistice lines also follow the international borders between Palestine and its neighbors. (except for some areas of occupation) These armistice lines did not change any international borders. None of these borders are disputed.

Israel is 100% inside armistice lines that are not borders.

 

[RoccoR]

P F Tinmore, et al,

You get this wrong all the time.

Israel is defined by armistice lines that are specifically not the be political or territorial borders. The UN does not recognize those borders. Israel does not recognize those borders.

The armistice lines are not just around Gaza and the West Bank. The armistice lines also follow the international borders between Palestine and its neighbors. (except for some areas of occupation) These armistice lines did not change any international borders. None of these borders are disputed.

Israel is 100% inside armistice lines that are not borders.

(REFERENCES)

Treaty of Peace between the Arab Republic of Egypt and the State of Israel, 26 March 1979

Article II
The permanent boundary between Egypt and Israel is the recognized international boundary between Egypt and the former mandated territory of Palestine, as shown on the map at Annex II, without prejudice to the issue of the status of the Gaza Strip. The Parties recognize this boundary as inviolable. Each will respect the territorial integrity of the other, including their territorial waters and airspace.​

Treaty of Peace between The State of Israel and The Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan 26 October 1994

Article 2
1. The international boundary between Israel and Jordan is delimited with reference to the boundary definition under the Mandate as is shown in Annex I(a), on the mapping materials attached thereto and co-ordinates specified therein.​

Negotiations Affairs Department --- Palestine Liberation Organization (Sole legitimate representative of the Palestinian people in any Palestinian territory that is liberated.)

Since 1988, however, in the interest of achieving peace and ending the conflict, we limited our national aspirations to statehood to 22 percent of historic Palestine, seeking a state of our own in the West Bank and Gaza Strip, with East Jerusalem as its capital (that is, all of the territory occupied by Israel in 1967).
​

Hamas' Official Position Paper Thursday, March 21, 2013

1. Palestine from the river to the sea, and from north to south, is a land of the Palestinian people and its homeland and its legitimate right, we may not a waiver an inch or any part thereof, no matter what the reasons and circumstances and pressures.

2. Palestine - all of Palestine - is a land of Islamic and Arab affiliation, a blessed sacred land, that has a major portion in the heart of every Arab and Muslim

3. No recognition of the legitimacy of the occupation whatever; this is a principled position, political and moral, and therefore do not recognize the legitimacy of the Israeli occupation of Palestine, and recognition of "Israel" and the legitimacy of its presence on any part of Palestine no matter how long; nand it will not be long, God willing.​

(COMMENT)

Currently, there are two (2) Formal Peace Treaties in place (with Jordan and Egypt), and two (2) remaining Armistice Agreements in place (with Lebanon and Syria). The Treaty with Egypt supersedes the (originally SECRET) Agreement between Egypt and Israel of Sep 1975; which amended the understanding set by the Armistice.

It is important to remember that both Israel and Egypt made and agreement concerning the West Bank and Gaza Strip:

LETTER AGREEMENT ADDITIONAL TO THE TREATY OF PEACE OF 26 MARCH 1979
BETWEEN EGYPT AND ISRAEL,
CONCERNING THE ESTABLISHMENT OF FULL AUTONOMY IN THE
WEST BANK AND THE GAZA STRIP
March 26, 1979​

The two Governments agree to negotiate continuously and in good faith to conclude these negotiations at the earliest possible date. They also agree that the objective of the negotiations is the establishment of the self-governing authority in the West Bank and Gaza in order to provide full autonomy to the inhabitants.

The supplemental agreement:

The Beilin-Abu Mazen Document
31 October 1995
Framework for the conclusion of a final status agreement between
Israel and the Palestine Liberation Organization​

​

ARTICLE I: THE ESTABLISHMENT OF THE PALESTINIAN STATE AND ITS RELATIONS WITH THE STATE OF ISRAEL

1. As an integral part of this Framework Agreement and the full Final Status Agreement:

a. The Government of Israel shall extend its recognition to the independent State of Palestine within agreed and secure borders with its capital al-Quds upon its coming into being not later than May 5th 1999.

b. Simultaneously, the State of Palestine shall extend its recognition to the State ofIsrael within agreed and secure borders with its capital Yerushalayim.

c. Both sides continue to look favorably at the possibility of establishing a Jordanian-Palestinian confederation, to be agreed upon by the State of Palestine and the Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan.​

Now I think that if you look at the "Big Picture," Israel and Palestine made some arrangements and came to some understanding. I'm pretty sure we discussed this all before.

Most Respectfully,
R

 

[montelatici]

Between Israel and the virtual state of Palestine, there are no agreed upon borders so it is obvious that no arrangements were made, consequently there was no understanding. Given Netanyahu's recent declaration, there will not be an arrangement or understanding during his rule. So, there is no reason to negotiate.

 

[CMike]

How does anyone or any nation even begin to negotiate peace with a people who prefer death over life?

Well, it seems that Zionists threaten with the death of our entire planet, if their regime is in danger:

Van Creveld was quoted in David Hirst's The Gun and the Olive Branch(2003) as saying:

We possess several hundred atomic warheads and rockets and can launch them at targets in all directions, perhaps even at Rome. Most European capitals are targets for our air force. Let me quote General Moshe Dayan:

'Israel must be like a mad dog, too dangerous to bother.'

I consider it all hopeless at this point. We shall have to try to prevent things from coming to that, if at all possible. Our armed forces, however, are not the thirtieth strongest in the world, but rather the second or third.

We have the capability to take the world down with us. And I can assure you that that will happen before Israel goes under.[30]


Samson Option - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia

How can you negotiate with people who have chosen to behave like "mad dogs"?
How can you negotiate with people who threaten to destroy the entire planet?

Of course there is no evidence of this.

 

[montelatici]

How does anyone or any nation even begin to negotiate peace with a people who prefer death over life?

Well, it seems that Zionists threaten with the death of our entire planet, if their regime is in danger:

Van Creveld was quoted in David Hirst's The Gun and the Olive Branch(2003) as saying:

We possess several hundred atomic warheads and rockets and can launch them at targets in all directions, perhaps even at Rome. Most European capitals are targets for our air force. Let me quote General Moshe Dayan:

'Israel must be like a mad dog, too dangerous to bother.'

I consider it all hopeless at this point. We shall have to try to prevent things from coming to that, if at all possible. Our armed forces, however, are not the thirtieth strongest in the world, but rather the second or third.

We have the capability to take the world down with us. And I can assure you that that will happen before Israel goes under.[30]


Samson Option - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia

How can you negotiate with people who have chosen to behave like "mad dogs"?
How can you negotiate with people who threaten to destroy the entire planet?

Of course there is no evidence of this.

Of course there is.

"Moshe Dayan had genuinely understood this strangely counterintuitive injunction: "Israel must be like a mad dog," said Dayan"

Read more: Articles The Samson Option Palestine and Israel s Nuclear Strategy
Follow us: @AmericanThinker on Twitter | AmericanThinker on Facebook

 

[P F Tinmore]

P F Tinmore, et al,

You get this wrong all the time.

Israel is defined by armistice lines that are specifically not the be political or territorial borders. The UN does not recognize those borders. Israel does not recognize those borders.

The armistice lines are not just around Gaza and the West Bank. The armistice lines also follow the international borders between Palestine and its neighbors. (except for some areas of occupation) These armistice lines did not change any international borders. None of these borders are disputed.

Israel is 100% inside armistice lines that are not borders.

(REFERENCES)

Treaty of Peace between the Arab Republic of Egypt and the State of Israel, 26 March 1979

Article II
The permanent boundary between Egypt and Israel is the recognized international boundary between Egypt and the former mandated territory of Palestine, as shown on the map at Annex II, without prejudice to the issue of the status of the Gaza Strip. The Parties recognize this boundary as inviolable. Each will respect the territorial integrity of the other, including their territorial waters and airspace.​

Treaty of Peace between The State of Israel and The Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan 26 October 1994

Article 2
1. The international boundary between Israel and Jordan is delimited with reference to the boundary definition under the Mandate as is shown in Annex I(a), on the mapping materials attached thereto and co-ordinates specified therein.​

Negotiations Affairs Department --- Palestine Liberation Organization (Sole legitimate representative of the Palestinian people in any Palestinian territory that is liberated.)

Since 1988, however, in the interest of achieving peace and ending the conflict, we limited our national aspirations to statehood to 22 percent of historic Palestine, seeking a state of our own in the West Bank and Gaza Strip, with East Jerusalem as its capital (that is, all of the territory occupied by Israel in 1967).
​

Hamas' Official Position Paper Thursday, March 21, 2013

1. Palestine from the river to the sea, and from north to south, is a land of the Palestinian people and its homeland and its legitimate right, we may not a waiver an inch or any part thereof, no matter what the reasons and circumstances and pressures.

2. Palestine - all of Palestine - is a land of Islamic and Arab affiliation, a blessed sacred land, that has a major portion in the heart of every Arab and Muslim

3. No recognition of the legitimacy of the occupation whatever; this is a principled position, political and moral, and therefore do not recognize the legitimacy of the Israeli occupation of Palestine, and recognition of "Israel" and the legitimacy of its presence on any part of Palestine no matter how long; nand it will not be long, God willing.​

(COMMENT)

Currently, there are two (2) Formal Peace Treaties in place (with Jordan and Egypt), and two (2) remaining Armistice Agreements in place (with Lebanon and Syria). The Treaty with Egypt supersedes the (originally SECRET) Agreement between Egypt and Israel of Sep 1975; which amended the understanding set by the Armistice.

It is important to remember that both Israel and Egypt made and agreement concerning the West Bank and Gaza Strip:

LETTER AGREEMENT ADDITIONAL TO THE TREATY OF PEACE OF 26 MARCH 1979
BETWEEN EGYPT AND ISRAEL,
CONCERNING THE ESTABLISHMENT OF FULL AUTONOMY IN THE
WEST BANK AND THE GAZA STRIP
March 26, 1979​

The two Governments agree to negotiate continuously and in good faith to conclude these negotiations at the earliest possible date. They also agree that the objective of the negotiations is the establishment of the self-governing authority in the West Bank and Gaza in order to provide full autonomy to the inhabitants.

The supplemental agreement:

The Beilin-Abu Mazen Document
31 October 1995
Framework for the conclusion of a final status agreement between
Israel and the Palestine Liberation Organization​

​

ARTICLE I: THE ESTABLISHMENT OF THE PALESTINIAN STATE AND ITS RELATIONS WITH THE STATE OF ISRAEL

1. As an integral part of this Framework Agreement and the full Final Status Agreement:

a. The Government of Israel shall extend its recognition to the independent State of Palestine within agreed and secure borders with its capital al-Quds upon its coming into being not later than May 5th 1999.

b. Simultaneously, the State of Palestine shall extend its recognition to the State ofIsrael within agreed and secure borders with its capital Yerushalayim.

c. Both sides continue to look favorably at the possibility of establishing a Jordanian-Palestinian confederation, to be agreed upon by the State of Palestine and the Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan.​

Now I think that if you look at the "Big Picture," Israel and Palestine made some arrangements and came to some understanding. I'm pretty sure we discussed this all before.

Most Respectfully,
R

Rocco, you posted all that and left out the most important part.

 

[CMike]

Jordan/Palestine wouldn't have lost the land if it didn't attack Israel in 1967 for the purpose of annihilating it.

I doesn't get a redo now.

 

[CMike]

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.

That's absurd.

There have been no Jews in Gaza for nine years.

The Gaza government started the was by firing thousands of rockets into Israeli cities.

They rejected almost every cease fire offer.

This is solely on the heads of the arab government in gaza.