Who Are The Palestinians? Part 2

[Sixties Fan]

The Genocide of Palestinians is Israel’s Long Term Goal | Mnar Muhawesh (1 of 2)



Is BuzzFeed a Mouthpiece for the Israeli Defense Forces (IDF)? | Mnar Muhawesh 2 of 2

[Another anti USA organization Tinfoil has no problem embracing.
Anyone who may be paid by Iran, or writes against Israel - no matter what it is, not matter how accurate or not, is a friend, indeed.]

The mystery of MintPress News

 

[jamesduncan]

Ancient Israel appears in archaeology The Mesha Stele | Louvre Museum | Paris

As a favor would you please paraphrase it for me?
If what you say sounds interesting I'll look at the link.

Ok -?

 

[Shusha]

Oh please would everyone STOP talking about the names and labels as though they mean anything! They don't.

There are two peoples. You can call them anything you want. But stop denying that either exist.

 

[Sixties Fan]

This led to me doing some Googling and discovering this video of her making the same complaints back in April 2016. Only she gives away a lot more in this video – such as the reason SJP objects to the antisemitism and genocidal statements. Clue: not because such things are wrong or evil.


Meanwhile, this genocidal lunatic and apologist for antisemites is currently speaking in the US on a Nakba tour.

(full article online)

Hater Admits SJP Only “Pretends” To Object to Idea Israel Has No Right to Exist

 

[Coyote]

I don't think you can say Israel has either. Where the Palestinians have used violence, Israel has used the power of its state. Building and expanding Jewish only settlements in occupied territories is good faith or peaceful means.

You can't say Israel has made good faith attempts to achieve peace? Really?

It has made SOME.

You mean like accepting the (first and second) Partition plans? Like offering peace treaties giving Arab Palestinians everything they asked for with land swaps -- three times, or is it four?

They did not give them everything they asked for But Olmert' plan might have eventually been negotiated into something acceptable to both sides, something between the 6.3 % Olmert wanted and the 1.9% Abbas wanted but Olmert was himself being targeted for corruption leaving him to politically weak to follow through.

Olmert is the one I am familiar with, what were the other landswap deals that were deals actually offered not just talked about?

In terms of "giving them everything they asked for" what was offered on the right of return and Jerusalem? Add to that, Israel was going to keep security control indefinately, over the border between the West Bank and Jordan. A Palestine state would not have free access to its own international borders and that would leave its economy and ability to conduct trade up to the whims of Israel.

Like the unilateral withdrawal from Gaza? Like not building any new settlements in Area C for 20 years? Like a full building freeze that lasted for years? Like voluntarily restricting the freedom of worship for Jews at their most holy site for fear of upsetting Muslims? Like removing perfectly reasonable security precautions from the Temple Mount? Like granting a foreign country special privileges over your holy sites and territory? Like enshrining equality for all peoples into Israeli laws, with special acknowledgements to the Arab people? Like continuing to offer medical treatment and other services to the people of Gaza, even though that is supposed to be handled by the Palestinian governments? Like releasing thousands of criminals and terrorists on good faith, despite knowing they will (and have) attack innocent Israelis again? Come on.

You make it sound as if Israel is an altruistic force for good. Some of those examples aren't quite what they seem on the surface. For example the much proclaimed unilateral withdrawal from Gaza. What is unsaid was Gaza was Ann expensive and politically divisive albatross around Israel's neck. The decision was based on an economic calculus that determined the cost of protecting a few Jews in Gaza simply wasn't worth it any more.

The whole "settlements in occupied territories" is an EXCUSE that is used by the Arab Palestinians in order to continue to reject peace. It is only an excuse.

Why?

1. It invalidates a peace treaty which grants Israel control over that territory.
2. It assumes a border already exists between Israel and some other entity, which is not true.
3. It assumes that the presence of Jews on a piece of land is a barrier to peace (while also rejecting any idea that the presence of Arabs in Israel is a barrier to peace -- a blatant hypocrisy.)
4. It neglects the Israeli restraint in not building new "settlements" and only allowing for natural expansion in existing "settlements" which it intends to keep in final negotiations..
5. It places pre-conditions on the negotiation process, effectively making some parts of the negotiation non-negotiable.
6. It creates a false representation of the conflict by focusing on only a very small minority of Arab Palestinians. (Nearly all Arab Palestinians live under direct Palestinian government rule).

I disagree it is only an excuse. Maybe that is so in the eyes of the Israelis but to the Palestinians it represents the gradual confiscation of the area they hope to have as a future state. There is a gulf of mistrust of motivations layered in as well. What you call an excuse is seen as proof of israel's real intentions.

By the way ... Israel has also insisted on preconditions.

 

[P F Tinmore]

The Genocide of Palestinians is Israel’s Long Term Goal | Mnar Muhawesh (1 of 2)



Is BuzzFeed a Mouthpiece for the Israeli Defense Forces (IDF)? | Mnar Muhawesh 2 of 2

[Another anti USA organization Tinfoil has no problem embracing.
Anyone who may be paid by Iran, or writes against Israel - no matter what it is, not matter how accurate or not, is a friend, indeed.]

The mystery of MintPress News

Who is MintPress and why are they doing all this hiring?

Who is MintPress and why are they doing all this hiring?

 

[P F Tinmore]

This led to me doing some Googling and discovering this video of her making the same complaints back in April 2016. Only she gives away a lot more in this video – such as the reason SJP objects to the antisemitism and genocidal statements. Clue: not because such things are wrong or evil.


Meanwhile, this genocidal lunatic and apologist for antisemites is currently speaking in the US on a Nakba tour.

(full article online)

Hater Admits SJP Only “Pretends” To Object to Idea Israel Has No Right to Exist

 

[P F Tinmore]

From that point, until the Oslo Accords, the Arab Palestinians rejected any peace agreements.

The PLO offered a peace agreement in the early 70s where there would be one secular state with equal rights for all people including the Jews.

Israel rejected the offer because they wanted to pig the place for themselves.

 

[P F Tinmore]

• For the Arabs, the essential point of principle is to resist to the last the establishment of Jewish sovereignty in any part of Palestine.

I think there is a hint there.

 

[P F Tinmore]

In July 1947, the Mandate Authority asked the United Nations to consider the report on the irreconcilable differences, and to recommend a settlement of the problem.

Between a colonial project and the Palestinians.

They had two reports. One would have lead to peace and one that lead to war.

They chose war.

 

[P F Tinmore]

RE: Who Are The Palestinians? Part 2
※→ P F Tinmore, et al,

That falls into the category and ICRC led discussion on typology of armed conflicts and related issues:

• Armed Groups and International Law •​

In this case, the court has to decide:

Some Arab Palestinians consider the May 1948 Conflict as being a conflict between citizens of the territory formerly under the Mandate. (That is a Civil War NIAC.)

Some Arab Palestinians consider the conflict between Israel and the territories formerly under the Mandate.

Some Outside Observers see the conflict between Israel and the territories occupied since 1967.

Still other Outside Observers see the conflict as a struggle between first ceased from Jordan then abandon by Jordan; placed in the hands of Israel.

There are all sorts of views that are considered that could change the entire outlook on the sovereignty and the type of conflict.

Non-international Armed Conflicts (NIAC), between governmental forces and non-governmental armed groups, or between such groups only.

What about foreign non governmental armed forces attacking a civilian population?

(COMMENT)

Depending in the Rules of Land Warfare being used, the scope and nature of the may fall under Article 4, Rights and Duties of Neutral Powers and Persons in Case of War on Land (Hague V) wherein: "Corps of combatants cannot be formed nor recruiting agencies opened on the territory of a neutral Power to assist the belligerents." Remember that this was written in 1907, the intention here may have broader implications in a Poost-WWII era.

Most Respectfully,
R

Where is it that the Palestinians were faced with a colonial project.

What are the legalities of that?

 

[Sixties Fan]

Palestinian Authority TV documentary presents Israel's coastal cities as "Palestine"

 

[P F Tinmore]

The Arab Palestinian decided it was in their best interest to choose conflict

It was the Palestinians who were attacked.

 

[Sixties Fan]

 

[P F Tinmore]

RE: Who Are The Palestinians? Part 2
※→ P F Tinmore, et al,

The question as to why they are not laws, is that they do not direct any particular action to be taken; nor do they prohibit any particular action. These two things lea you directly to why the Resolutions are not enforceable.

Neither of these are enforceable Resolutions; and neither are laws.

Come on, Rocco, now you are getting deep into Israeli bullshit territory. UN General Assembly resolutions are non binding but the international laws they reference are binding.

You are just trying to smokescreen the issue.

(COMMENT)

(a) WHAT is the right to self-determination without external interference?

(b) WHAT is the right to national independence and sovereignty?
​

The way you employ these two resolution, promulgated in 1974, is to suggest that someone ---- somehow ---- denied these rights to the Arab Palestinian. But it does not actually make that accusation.

If you examine the UN Resolution A/RES/43/177 Acknowledgement of the Proclamation of the State of Palestine (1988), you will notice that it says:

"Aware of the proclamation of the State of Palestine by the Palestine National Council in line with General Assembly resolution 181 (II) and in exercise of the inalienable rights of the Palestinian people,"​

The two resolutions you cite serve to remind the Palestinians that they have options ⇒ that only they can fulfill their rights and expectation. The State of Israel could not then, or at any time Declare Independence for the Arab Palestinians.

Further, Resolution 43/177 assert strongly and publicly that some effort "needs to be made to enable the Palestinian people to exercise their sovereignty over their territory occupied since 1967." This is made difficult by the fact that "the Arab Higher Committee (AHC) of Palestine sent to the United Nations a formal declaration of war (A/AC.21/10) in “self-defense” against any attempt to partition the Holy Land." (See: UNITED NATIONS PALESTINE COMMISSION DAILY NEWS SUMMARY – 10, dated 7 February 1948)

"In a letter to the Secretary-General signed by Isa Nakleh, the committee declared that the Arabs would fight “to the last man” against any force going to Palestine to partition that country,” and charged the United States with having exercised “flagrant interference and pressure” to force votes favoring partition. (Browne; N.Y. Times)"​

(NOTE)
International humanitarian law distinguishes two types of armed conflicts, namely:

• International Armed Conflicts (IAC), opposing two or more States, and

• Non-international Armed Conflicts (NIAC), between governmental forces and non-governmental armed groups, or between such groups only. IHL treaty law also establishes a distinction between non-international armed conflicts in the meaning of common Article 3 of the Geneva Conventions of 1949 and non-international armed conflicts falling within the definition provided in Art. 1 of Additional Protocol II.​

In the last 20 years, that Arab Palestinian has made no attempt at a good faith effort in the settle or their disputes by peaceful means in accordance with the Charter.

Most Respectfully,
R

I don't think you can say Israel has either. Where the Palestinians have used violence, Israel has used the power of its state. Building and expanding Jewish only settlements in occupied territories is good faith or peaceful means.

I don't think you can say Israel has either. Where the Palestinians have used violence, Israel has used the power of its state.

Indeed, Israel uses peaceful means like airplanes, bombs, missiles, tanks,...

 

[Sixties Fan]

Photos from another camp posted on Facebook by the PLO Supreme Council for Sport and Youth Affairs showed a large map of "Palestine" that erased Israel painted by girls in the camp:

Posted text: "Pictures from the summer camps of 2017
The Wonderful [Girls] of Palestine [Summer] Camp
Asira Al-Shimaliya - Nablus"
[Facebook page of the PLO Supreme Council for Sport and Youth Affairs, Aug. 7, 2017]

(full article online)

PA summer camps teach terror and Martyrdom-death for kids - PMW Bulletins

 

[thetor]

You should be BANNED...Why? for total IGNORANCE.........Palestinian are Greek Philistines!!!!!!!!!!WTF

The Palestinian leaders today love to say that they are descendants of the ancients Philistines.

Have them banned.

Just 1 problem: Philistines were Greek Do “palestinians” like souvlaki? LOL

Take it up with the Palestinian leaders. They have come up with the idea, not me. You are Oops ing the wrong person.

Tracking the Philistines

Unfortunately, the Philistines were neither Arabs nor Semites (which the current Palestinians certainly claim to be), and the name Palestine was assigned to the region after the Romans put down the Bar Kochba rebellion around A.D. 135.

------------
Take it up with the Arab leaders

Not correct on either statement...Try harder in future because Banality is just that

Not correct on what?
What exactly are you quoting and defying as not being true.

Where is your evidence to what you believe to be true.

What is it that you do believe to be true?

Your mixed metaphors exasperate

 

[P F Tinmore]

Photos from another camp posted on Facebook by the PLO Supreme Council for Sport and Youth Affairs showed a large map of "Palestine" that erased Israel painted by girls in the camp:

Posted text: "Pictures from the summer camps of 2017
The Wonderful [Girls] of Palestine [Summer] Camp
Asira Al-Shimaliya - Nablus"
[Facebook page of the PLO Supreme Council for Sport and Youth Affairs, Aug. 7, 2017]

(full article online)

PA summer camps teach terror and Martyrdom-death for kids - PMW Bulletins

Show me an official map of Israel without those phony armistice lines.

 

[JoelT1]

RE: Who Are The Palestinians? Part 2
※→ P F Tinmore, et al,

The question as to why they are not laws, is that they do not direct any particular action to be taken; nor do they prohibit any particular action. These two things lea you directly to why the Resolutions are not enforceable.

Neither of these are enforceable Resolutions; and neither are laws.

Come on, Rocco, now you are getting deep into Israeli bullshit territory. UN General Assembly resolutions are non binding but the international laws they reference are binding.

You are just trying to smokescreen the issue.

(COMMENT)

(a) WHAT is the right to self-determination without external interference?

(b) WHAT is the right to national independence and sovereignty?
​

The way you employ these two resolution, promulgated in 1974, is to suggest that someone ---- somehow ---- denied these rights to the Arab Palestinian. But it does not actually make that accusation.

If you examine the UN Resolution A/RES/43/177 Acknowledgement of the Proclamation of the State of Palestine (1988), you will notice that it says:

"Aware of the proclamation of the State of Palestine by the Palestine National Council in line with General Assembly resolution 181 (II) and in exercise of the inalienable rights of the Palestinian people,"​

The two resolutions you cite serve to remind the Palestinians that they have options ⇒ that only they can fulfill their rights and expectation. The State of Israel could not then, or at any time Declare Independence for the Arab Palestinians.

Further, Resolution 43/177 assert strongly and publicly that some effort "needs to be made to enable the Palestinian people to exercise their sovereignty over their territory occupied since 1967." This is made difficult by the fact that "the Arab Higher Committee (AHC) of Palestine sent to the United Nations a formal declaration of war (A/AC.21/10) in “self-defense” against any attempt to partition the Holy Land." (See: UNITED NATIONS PALESTINE COMMISSION DAILY NEWS SUMMARY – 10, dated 7 February 1948)

"In a letter to the Secretary-General signed by Isa Nakleh, the committee declared that the Arabs would fight “to the last man” against any force going to Palestine to partition that country,” and charged the United States with having exercised “flagrant interference and pressure” to force votes favoring partition. (Browne; N.Y. Times)"​

(NOTE)
International humanitarian law distinguishes two types of armed conflicts, namely:

• International Armed Conflicts (IAC), opposing two or more States, and

• Non-international Armed Conflicts (NIAC), between governmental forces and non-governmental armed groups, or between such groups only. IHL treaty law also establishes a distinction between non-international armed conflicts in the meaning of common Article 3 of the Geneva Conventions of 1949 and non-international armed conflicts falling within the definition provided in Art. 1 of Additional Protocol II.​

In the last 20 years, that Arab Palestinian has made no attempt at a good faith effort in the settle or their disputes by peaceful means in accordance with the Charter.

Most Respectfully,
R

I don't think you can say Israel has either. Where the Palestinians have used violence, Israel has used the power of its state. Building and expanding Jewish only settlements in occupied territories is good faith or peaceful means.

I don't think you can say Israel has either. Where the Palestinians have used violence, Israel has used the power of its state.

Indeed, Israel uses peaceful means like airplanes, bombs, missiles, tanks,...

Arabs: Israel embraces a culture of peace Member of Saudi delegation: Israeli society wants peace

 

[JoelT1]

Photos from another camp posted on Facebook by the PLO Supreme Council for Sport and Youth Affairs showed a large map of "Palestine" that erased Israel painted by girls in the camp:

Posted text: "Pictures from the summer camps of 2017
The Wonderful [Girls] of Palestine [Summer] Camp
Asira Al-Shimaliya - Nablus"
[Facebook page of the PLO Supreme Council for Sport and Youth Affairs, Aug. 7, 2017]

(full article online)

PA summer camps teach terror and Martyrdom-death for kids - PMW Bulletins

Show me an official map of Israel without those phony armistice lines.

Ancient Israel in archaeology The Mesha Stele | Louvre Museum | Paris