Who Are The Palestinians? Part 2

Toddsterpatriot

Diamond Member
Joined
May 3, 2011
Messages
64,365
Reaction score
12,621
Points
2,180
Location
Chicago
The European Jews went to Palestine for sanctuary when no other country would take them in.
Palestine wasn't a country. Still isn't a country.
LOL.. neither was Israel. It was a tiny city state in the Syrian province of Palestine for a few years of self rule.
LOL.. neither was Israel.

And now Israel is and Palestine still isn't.

It was a tiny city state in the Syrian province of Palestine for a few years of self rule.

Which years?
 

surada

Platinum Member
Joined
Jan 3, 2021
Messages
4,664
Reaction score
2,562
Points
893
The European Jews went to Palestine for sanctuary when no other country would take them in.
Palestine wasn't a country. Still isn't a country.
LOL.. neither was Israel. It was a tiny city state in the Syrian province of Palestine for a few years of self rule.
LOL.. neither was Israel.

And now Israel is and Palestine still isn't.

It was a tiny city state in the Syrian province of Palestine for a few years of self rule.

Which years?
From 500 BC until 1948. Do you remember the olive trees and almond trees and the pomegranates?
 

Hollie

Platinum Member
Joined
Jun 20, 2012
Messages
38,815
Reaction score
4,675
Points
1,130
When we look at the issue of armed resistance broadly, according to ‘Additional Protocol 1’ to the ‘Geneva Conventions’ (1949) all Peoples are entitled, under international humanitarian law, to the right to armed national liberation struggles. The Palestinian people were even mentioned by named in ‘United Nations General Assembly (UNGA) Resolution 2787’ in 1971:

“[The Resolution] Confirms the legality of the peoples’ struggle for self-determination and liberation from colonial and foreign domination and alien subjugation, notably in southern Africa and in particular that of the peoples of Zimbabwe, Namibia, Angola, Mozambique and Guinea (Bissau), as well as of the Palestinian people, by all available means consistent with the Charter of the United Nations.”

It is also clear that according to International Law, tracing back to UN General Assembly (UNGA) Resolution 3314, in 1974, that it was unacceptable for any State to engage in military occupations of foreign territory.

On November 29, 1978, with ‘United Nations General Assembly Resolution A/RES/33/24’, the right to armed struggle was again reaffirmed, as it was stated that the body recognised; “…the legitimacy of the struggle of peoples for independence, territorial integrity, national unity and liberation from colonial and foreign domination and foreign occupation by all available means, particularly armed struggle”. This legitimate and defensible right under international law, again confirmed in UNGA resolution 37/43 in 1982, is not in line therefore with any reasonable definition of terrorism.

To deny Palestinians their right to resist a foreign settler-colonialism occupying force, means that you are arguing against International Law. This is not a matter of opinion.

:eusa_clap::eusa_clap::eusa_clap::eusa_clap::eusa_clap::clap2::clap2::clap2::clap2::clap2:

Why do you always pimp Israeli talking points?
That long, tedious cut and paste is rather meaningless. Israel is not a foreign settler colonialism occupying force.

I can only give you a 3/10 for cobbling together most of your usual, tired, irrelevant and pointless slogans.
 

Hollie

Platinum Member
Joined
Jun 20, 2012
Messages
38,815
Reaction score
4,675
Points
1,130
Reiterating what the Pal'istanian terrorists have been screaming out for decades, yet, for some reason, people chose not to believe them.

"...Families ‎of the Martyrs and the Wounded (The Institute for the Martyrs/Palestine Martyrs’ ‎Families Foundation) has “a single purpose… of a criminal nature” and was ‎created with the “criminal purpose of incentivising acts of terrorism against ‎Israelis.”


Canada must now designate the PLO and Mahmoud Abbas as terror ‎supporters ‎
Maurice Hirsch, Adv. and Itamar Marcus | Jan 12, 2021
  • Canadian court: A PLO run organization is criminal, whose single ‎purpose is “incentivising acts of terrorism against Israelis”‎
A‏ ‏‎ Canadian court has found that the PLO Institute for the Care of the Families ‎of the Martyrs and the Wounded (The Institute for the Martyrs/Palestine Martyrs’ ‎Families Foundation) has “a single purpose… of a criminal nature” and was ‎created with the “criminal purpose of incentivising acts of terrorism against ‎Israelis.” The Institute for the Martyrs was founded by former PLO leader Yasser ‎Arafat, among other reasons, to give terrorists the security of knowing that their ‎families would be supported should they be killed while attacking Israelis. ‎Today, the PLO is headed by Mahmoud Abbas who has repeatedly expressed ‎his complete support for this institute and its financial support to families of ‎killed terrorists, including families of suicide bombers.‎
The decision of the Montreal District Court was given in the case of a ‎Palestinian whose request for refugee status was rejected by Canada because ‎she had worked for the Iraq branch of the Institute for the Martyrs. ‎
 

Hollie

Platinum Member
Joined
Jun 20, 2012
Messages
38,815
Reaction score
4,675
Points
1,130
The European Jews went to Palestine for sanctuary when no other country would take them in.
Palestine wasn't a country. Still isn't a country.
LOL.. neither was Israel. It was a tiny city state in the Syrian province of Palestine for a few years of self rule.
LOL.. neither was Israel.

And now Israel is and Palestine still isn't.

It was a tiny city state in the Syrian province of Palestine for a few years of self rule.

Which years?
From 500 BC until 1948. Do you remember the olive trees and almond trees and the pomegranates?
That timeframe conflicts with Ottoman control of the territory.
 

surada

Platinum Member
Joined
Jan 3, 2021
Messages
4,664
Reaction score
2,562
Points
893
The Hashemites - As the Arabs See the Jews
www.kinghussein.gov.jo/kabd_eng.html
King Abdullah bin Al-Hussein (1882-1951) "As the Arabs see the Jews". His Majesty King Abdullah, The American Magazine. November, 1947. Summary. This fascinating essay, written by King Hussein’s grandfather King Abdullah, appeared in the United States six months before the 1948 Arab-Israeli War. In the article, King Abdullah disputes the mistaken view that Arab opposition to Zionism (and later the …


And not once does he mention a "Palestinian" people.

That is because they had not been invented yet by your fellow Arabs as a propaganda tool.
You moron.. They had Palestinians stamps and currency and newspapers.
 

Dogmaphobe

Diamond Member
Joined
Sep 22, 2014
Messages
17,361
Reaction score
8,583
Points
1,295
Location
Or uh gun
The Hashemites - As the Arabs See the Jews
www.kinghussein.gov.jo/kabd_eng.html
King Abdullah bin Al-Hussein (1882-1951) "As the Arabs see the Jews". His Majesty King Abdullah, The American Magazine. November, 1947. Summary. This fascinating essay, written by King Hussein’s grandfather King Abdullah, appeared in the United States six months before the 1948 Arab-Israeli War. In the article, King Abdullah disputes the mistaken view that Arab opposition to Zionism (and later the …


And not once does he mention a "Palestinian" people.

That is because they had not been invented yet by your fellow Arabs as a propaganda tool.
You moron.. They had Palestinians stamps and currency and newspapers.
The fact that there was a territory administered by the British called "Palestine" does not mean there was a people called Palestinian. the letter you reference by King Abdullah actually proves that fact, but you are too stupid, too dishonest and too full of hatred towards Jews to understand that.
 

RoccoR

Gold Member
Joined
Sep 15, 2010
Messages
10,523
Reaction score
2,809
Points
290
Location
Reynoldsburg, OH
RE: Who Are The Palestinians? Part 2
⁜→ P F Tinmore, et al,

BLUF: Finally, somewhat of a decent challenge.


The application of the Protocols does not rest upon the determination as to whether or not the conflict is "just" or "unjust." For that matter, the application of the protocols does not revolve around the issue of "aggression" or "self-defense." As a matter of fact, neither Protocols I or II event mention the word "liberation" let alone "war of Liberation.

When we look at the issue of armed resistance broadly, according to ‘Additional Protocol 1’ to the ‘Geneva Conventions’ (1949) all Peoples are entitled, under international humanitarian law, to the right to armed national liberation struggles.
(COMMENT)

All the Protocols (I & II) say is that the terminology of "armed conflict" includes Armed confrontations on the matters of:


◈ Colonial Aggression
◈ Alien Occupation
◈ Right of Self-Determination

The Protocols do NOT grant approvals for or otherwise authorize such conflicts. In fact Protocol II (Article 3) specifically says:
Protocol Additional to the Geneva Conventions of 12 August 1949 said:
Article 3. Non-intervention

1. Nothing in this Protocol shall be invoked for the purpose of affecting the sovereignty of a State or the responsibility of the government, by all legitimate means, to maintain or re-establish law and order in the State or to defend the national unity and territorial integrity of the State.


2. Nothing in this Protocol shall be invoked as a justification for intervening, directly or indirectly, for any reason whatever, in the armed conflict or in the internal or external affairs of the High Contracting Party in the territory of which that conflict occurs.

Source:

Protocol Additional to the Geneva Conventions of 12 August 1949 said:
Protocol Additional to the Geneva Conventions of 12 August 1949 said:
This would rule out, as applicable the bottom three of the four Resolutions encouraging "by all means" and none of the four resolutions have been enacted into law (not in force). And, by the way, International Humanitarian Law "never" justifies a conflict for any reason. It is all about "protections" afforded in such conflicts.
◈ United Nations General Assembly (UNGA) Resolution 2787’ in 1971:
✦ UN General Assembly (UNGA) Resolution 3314, in 1974,
✦ United Nations General Assembly Resolution A/RES/33/24’, 1974
✦ UNGA resolution 37/43 in 1982,
One more point of order: Every single one of these resolutions came into existence AFTER the 1967 Conflict (Six-Day War). And at the time they were written, the Hashemite Kingdom held sovereignty over the West Bank. AND the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO) was established as the "sole legitimate representative of the Palestinian people - LAS Rabat Summit - resolution (28 October 1974)."​
Why do you always pimp Israeli talking points?
(COMMENT)
I'm still waiting for the copy of the "Israeli Talking Points" that you have. (Personally, I don't think there is any such thing.) But I, in any event, I don't actually speak for the Israelis. I express my opinions and I'll address "Bull Shit" when I see it.
SIGIL PAIR.png
Most Respectfully,
R
 

Toddsterpatriot

Diamond Member
Joined
May 3, 2011
Messages
64,365
Reaction score
12,621
Points
2,180
Location
Chicago
The European Jews went to Palestine for sanctuary when no other country would take them in.
Palestine wasn't a country. Still isn't a country.
LOL.. neither was Israel. It was a tiny city state in the Syrian province of Palestine for a few years of self rule.
LOL.. neither was Israel.

And now Israel is and Palestine still isn't.

It was a tiny city state in the Syrian province of Palestine for a few years of self rule.

Which years?


From 500 BC until 1948. Do you remember the olive trees and almond trees and the pomegranates?
From 500 BC until 1948.

Syria was in charge of Israel that entire time? Wow!

Do you remember the olive trees and almond trees and the pomegranates?

No, I don't remember events 2500 years ago. Do you?
 

Toddsterpatriot

Diamond Member
Joined
May 3, 2011
Messages
64,365
Reaction score
12,621
Points
2,180
Location
Chicago
The Hashemites - As the Arabs See the Jews
www.kinghussein.gov.jo/kabd_eng.html
King Abdullah bin Al-Hussein (1882-1951) "As the Arabs see the Jews". His Majesty King Abdullah, The American Magazine. November, 1947. Summary. This fascinating essay, written by King Hussein’s grandfather King Abdullah, appeared in the United States six months before the 1948 Arab-Israeli War. In the article, King Abdullah disputes the mistaken view that Arab opposition to Zionism (and later the …


And not once does he mention a "Palestinian" people.

That is because they had not been invented yet by your fellow Arabs as a propaganda tool.
You moron.. They had Palestinians stamps and currency and newspapers.
They had Palestinians stamps and currency and newspapers.

That's awesome! What was their currency?
Who was in their government?
 

Dogmaphobe

Diamond Member
Joined
Sep 22, 2014
Messages
17,361
Reaction score
8,583
Points
1,295
Location
Or uh gun
The Hashemites - As the Arabs See the Jews
www.kinghussein.gov.jo/kabd_eng.html
King Abdullah bin Al-Hussein (1882-1951) "As the Arabs see the Jews". His Majesty King Abdullah, The American Magazine. November, 1947. Summary. This fascinating essay, written by King Hussein’s grandfather King Abdullah, appeared in the United States six months before the 1948 Arab-Israeli War. In the article, King Abdullah disputes the mistaken view that Arab opposition to Zionism (and later the …


And not once does he mention a "Palestinian" people.

That is because they had not been invented yet by your fellow Arabs as a propaganda tool.
You moron.. They had Palestinians stamps and currency and newspapers.
They had Palestinians stamps and currency and newspapers.

That's awesome! What was their currency?
Who was in their government?
Currency printed by thomas de La rue of london.

facts never matter to Antisemites, though.
 

P F Tinmore

Diamond Member
Joined
Dec 6, 2009
Messages
60,589
Reaction score
2,662
Points
1,815
RE: Who Are The Palestinians? Part 2
⁜→ P F Tinmore, et al,

BLUF: Finally, somewhat of a decent challenge.


The application of the Protocols does not rest upon the determination as to whether or not the conflict is "just" or "unjust." For that matter, the application of the protocols does not revolve around the issue of "aggression" or "self-defense." As a matter of fact, neither Protocols I or II event mention the word "liberation" let alone "war of Liberation.

When we look at the issue of armed resistance broadly, according to ‘Additional Protocol 1’ to the ‘Geneva Conventions’ (1949) all Peoples are entitled, under international humanitarian law, to the right to armed national liberation struggles.
(COMMENT)

All the Protocols (I & II) say is that the terminology of "armed conflict" includes Armed confrontations on the matters of:


◈ Colonial Aggression
◈ Alien Occupation
◈ Right of Self-Determination

The Protocols do NOT grant approvals for or otherwise authorize such conflicts. In fact Protocol II (Article 3) specifically says:
Protocol Additional to the Geneva Conventions of 12 August 1949 said:
Article 3. Non-intervention

1. Nothing in this Protocol shall be invoked for the purpose of affecting the sovereignty of a State or the responsibility of the government, by all legitimate means, to maintain or re-establish law and order in the State or to defend the national unity and territorial integrity of the State.


2. Nothing in this Protocol shall be invoked as a justification for intervening, directly or indirectly, for any reason whatever, in the armed conflict or in the internal or external affairs of the High Contracting Party in the territory of which that conflict occurs.

Source:

Protocol Additional to the Geneva Conventions of 12 August 1949 said:
Protocol Additional to the Geneva Conventions of 12 August 1949 said:
This would rule out, as applicable the bottom three of the four Resolutions encouraging "by all means" and none of the four resolutions have been enacted into law (not in force). And, by the way, International Humanitarian Law "never" justifies a conflict for any reason. It is all about "protections" afforded in such conflicts.
◈ United Nations General Assembly (UNGA) Resolution 2787’ in 1971:
✦ UN General Assembly (UNGA) Resolution 3314, in 1974,
✦ United Nations General Assembly Resolution A/RES/33/24’, 1974
✦ UNGA resolution 37/43 in 1982,
One more point of order: Every single one of these resolutions came into existence AFTER the 1967 Conflict (Six-Day War). And at the time they were written, the Hashemite Kingdom held sovereignty over the West Bank. AND the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO) was established as the "sole legitimate representative of the Palestinian people - LAS Rabat Summit - resolution (28 October 1974)."​
Why do you always pimp Israeli talking points?
(COMMENT)
I'm still waiting for the copy of the "Israeli Talking Points" that you have. (Personally, I don't think there is any such thing.) But I, in any event, I don't actually speak for the Israelis. I express my opinions and I'll address "Bull Shit" when I see it.
SIGIL PAIR.png
Most Respectfully,
R
Liberation is not intervention. Liberation, by default, is a defensive position.

You need to ditch that Israeli talking point.
 

Hollie

Platinum Member
Joined
Jun 20, 2012
Messages
38,815
Reaction score
4,675
Points
1,130
RE: Who Are The Palestinians? Part 2
⁜→ P F Tinmore, et al,

BLUF: Finally, somewhat of a decent challenge.


The application of the Protocols does not rest upon the determination as to whether or not the conflict is "just" or "unjust." For that matter, the application of the protocols does not revolve around the issue of "aggression" or "self-defense." As a matter of fact, neither Protocols I or II event mention the word "liberation" let alone "war of Liberation.

When we look at the issue of armed resistance broadly, according to ‘Additional Protocol 1’ to the ‘Geneva Conventions’ (1949) all Peoples are entitled, under international humanitarian law, to the right to armed national liberation struggles.
(COMMENT)

All the Protocols (I & II) say is that the terminology of "armed conflict" includes Armed confrontations on the matters of:


◈ Colonial Aggression
◈ Alien Occupation
◈ Right of Self-Determination

The Protocols do NOT grant approvals for or otherwise authorize such conflicts. In fact Protocol II (Article 3) specifically says:
Protocol Additional to the Geneva Conventions of 12 August 1949 said:
Article 3. Non-intervention

1. Nothing in this Protocol shall be invoked for the purpose of affecting the sovereignty of a State or the responsibility of the government, by all legitimate means, to maintain or re-establish law and order in the State or to defend the national unity and territorial integrity of the State.


2. Nothing in this Protocol shall be invoked as a justification for intervening, directly or indirectly, for any reason whatever, in the armed conflict or in the internal or external affairs of the High Contracting Party in the territory of which that conflict occurs.

Source:

Protocol Additional to the Geneva Conventions of 12 August 1949 said:
Protocol Additional to the Geneva Conventions of 12 August 1949 said:
This would rule out, as applicable the bottom three of the four Resolutions encouraging "by all means" and none of the four resolutions have been enacted into law (not in force). And, by the way, International Humanitarian Law "never" justifies a conflict for any reason. It is all about "protections" afforded in such conflicts.
◈ United Nations General Assembly (UNGA) Resolution 2787’ in 1971:
✦ UN General Assembly (UNGA) Resolution 3314, in 1974,
✦ United Nations General Assembly Resolution A/RES/33/24’, 1974
✦ UNGA resolution 37/43 in 1982,
One more point of order: Every single one of these resolutions came into existence AFTER the 1967 Conflict (Six-Day War). And at the time they were written, the Hashemite Kingdom held sovereignty over the West Bank. AND the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO) was established as the "sole legitimate representative of the Palestinian people - LAS Rabat Summit - resolution (28 October 1974)."​
Why do you always pimp Israeli talking points?
(COMMENT)
I'm still waiting for the copy of the "Israeli Talking Points" that you have. (Personally, I don't think there is any such thing.) But I, in any event, I don't actually speak for the Israelis. I express my opinions and I'll address "Bull Shit" when I see it.
SIGIL PAIR.png
Most Respectfully,
R
Liberation is not intervention. Liberation, by default, is a defensive position.

You need to ditch that Israeli talking point.
Such a nonsense claim is by default, nonsense.
 

toastman

Gold Member
Joined
Aug 17, 2012
Messages
16,376
Reaction score
2,150
Points
245
What land does the UN call Pal’istan? When did the UN get into the land calling business?
In all of the 1949 UN Armistice Agreements, the UN called all of Palestine Palestine. In the Jordanian and Egyptian Armistice Agreements the UN called the Negev Palestine. Israel claims borders on that territory.
What territory specifically are you talking about that Israel ‘claims’ is theirs . Post a map and hiloge
the territories to which the Mandate for Palestine applies
the establishment in Palestine
There can't be a Mandate For Palestine if there is no Palestine. Balfour recognizes the existence of Palestine. The Treaty of Lausanne called it a state. The League of Nations called it a state. Various court rulings called it a state. The US had a trade agreement with Palestine in 1932.

The liars in Israel says that Palestine is not a state with no evidence to back up that claim.
There can't be a Mandate For Palestine if there is no Palestine.

And since there is no longer a Mandate for Palestine, we agree there is no longer a Palestine.
There can't be a Mandate For Palestine if there is no Palestine.
A state does not need a Mandate to exist.

An imaginary state doesn't need borders.
Interesting thing to say since Israel has never declared its borders.
You sure about that ? Would you like me to embarrass you again by posting Israel’s INTERNATIONALLY RECOGNIZED BORDERS with Egypt and Jordan ? Yea or no Tinmore ?
Of course there are a couple concerns that everybody ducks.

Israel claims borders on land that the UN calls Palestine.

Those treaties were brokered by the US. You know...the country that illegally gave East Jerusalem and The Golan Hts. to Israel.

There is a question of validity here.
BTW , where did you read that the US gave Israel East Jerusalem and the Golan Heights? Israel captured them during wars that Arabs started .

Israel planned the war beginning in 1953 .. Read Moshe Dayan. They attacked Egypt when all Egypt's troops were fighting in Yemen.
Israel started which war ?
1967.. They planned it for over a decade/ Read Moshe Dayan.
I read facts, like the facts that the Arabs were massing troops around Israel, making threats of annihalation and had closed the straits of Tiran, which Israel had said would be taken as an act of war. So Israel pre emptively attacked the Arabs (which is pathetic considering how small Israel is compared to the countries of beat by destroying all their air forces :lol: )
Since the Arabs lost the war, of course they act like crying babies and play the victim card. Truly pathetic..
They weren't amassing troops around Israel.. The Straits of Tiran had been closed for 14 months.. Nasser had asked for a summit to resolved the problem. Egyptian troops were deployed in Yemen to fight the civil war there.
In the months prior to June 1967, tensions became dangerously heightened. Israel reiterated its post-1956 position that the closure of the Straits of Tiran to Israeli shipping would be a cause for war (a casus belli).
ejecting UNEF.



Any more questions ??
The Straits of Tiran had been closed for 14 months before Israel attacked Egypt ,, and in the weeks prior Nasser had called for a summit to resolve the situation.
Can you provide a link all this? My guess is no...
 

toastman

Gold Member
Joined
Aug 17, 2012
Messages
16,376
Reaction score
2,150
Points
245
RE: Who Are The Palestinians? Part 2
⁜→ P F Tinmore, et al,

BLUF: Finally, somewhat of a decent challenge.


The application of the Protocols does not rest upon the determination as to whether or not the conflict is "just" or "unjust." For that matter, the application of the protocols does not revolve around the issue of "aggression" or "self-defense." As a matter of fact, neither Protocols I or II event mention the word "liberation" let alone "war of Liberation.

When we look at the issue of armed resistance broadly, according to ‘Additional Protocol 1’ to the ‘Geneva Conventions’ (1949) all Peoples are entitled, under international humanitarian law, to the right to armed national liberation struggles.
(COMMENT)

All the Protocols (I & II) say is that the terminology of "armed conflict" includes Armed confrontations on the matters of:


◈ Colonial Aggression
◈ Alien Occupation
◈ Right of Self-Determination

The Protocols do NOT grant approvals for or otherwise authorize such conflicts. In fact Protocol II (Article 3) specifically says:
Protocol Additional to the Geneva Conventions of 12 August 1949 said:
Article 3. Non-intervention

1. Nothing in this Protocol shall be invoked for the purpose of affecting the sovereignty of a State or the responsibility of the government, by all legitimate means, to maintain or re-establish law and order in the State or to defend the national unity and territorial integrity of the State.


2. Nothing in this Protocol shall be invoked as a justification for intervening, directly or indirectly, for any reason whatever, in the armed conflict or in the internal or external affairs of the High Contracting Party in the territory of which that conflict occurs.

Source:

Protocol Additional to the Geneva Conventions of 12 August 1949 said:
Protocol Additional to the Geneva Conventions of 12 August 1949 said:
This would rule out, as applicable the bottom three of the four Resolutions encouraging "by all means" and none of the four resolutions have been enacted into law (not in force). And, by the way, International Humanitarian Law "never" justifies a conflict for any reason. It is all about "protections" afforded in such conflicts.
◈ United Nations General Assembly (UNGA) Resolution 2787’ in 1971:
✦ UN General Assembly (UNGA) Resolution 3314, in 1974,
✦ United Nations General Assembly Resolution A/RES/33/24’, 1974
✦ UNGA resolution 37/43 in 1982,
One more point of order: Every single one of these resolutions came into existence AFTER the 1967 Conflict (Six-Day War). And at the time they were written, the Hashemite Kingdom held sovereignty over the West Bank. AND the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO) was established as the "sole legitimate representative of the Palestinian people - LAS Rabat Summit - resolution (28 October 1974)."​
Why do you always pimp Israeli talking points?
(COMMENT)
I'm still waiting for the copy of the "Israeli Talking Points" that you have. (Personally, I don't think there is any such thing.) But I, in any event, I don't actually speak for the Israelis. I express my opinions and I'll address "Bull Shit" when I see it.
SIGIL PAIR.png
Most Respectfully,
R
Liberation is not intervention. Liberation, by default, is a defensive position.

You need to ditch that Israeli talking point.
Please give some specific examples of how the Palestinians have “defended” themselves in the last few decades ...
This should be interesting
 

Hollie

Platinum Member
Joined
Jun 20, 2012
Messages
38,815
Reaction score
4,675
Points
1,130
You’re probably not surprised but the Pals are begging at the UN for more welfare money. Gee, has it been 24 hours already since the last time they came begging?

I guess between the recent Islamic terrorist ‘war games’ where they attacked the ocean with rockets and deposits of welfare money to their personal bank accounts it falls to everyone else to bail out the Islamic terrorist franchises.





Today, the Prime Minister of the State of Palestine, H.E. Dr. Mohammad Shtayyeh, and the Humanitarian Coordinator a.i., Ms. Lucia Elmi, launched the Humanitarian Response Plan (HRP) to help 1.8 vulnerable people in the occupied Palestinian territory (oPt) in 2021. The launch was broadcasted on social media, where speakers responded to questions from the public.
 

Hollie

Platinum Member
Joined
Jun 20, 2012
Messages
38,815
Reaction score
4,675
Points
1,130
As you might expect, the PA is falling over themselves in praise of attacks aimed at Israeli's.

A Pal religious authority is similarly 'blessing' attacks.




Abbas’ advisor praises rock thrower: “May his hands be blessed”‎
Nan Jacques Zilberdik | Jan 14, 2021
  • PA: “Rocks frighten the Israelis” – praise for rock thrower
  • Palestinian rock throwing is lethal

The picture above of an older Palestinian man throwing a rock with a sling ‎shot would almost be comical if rocks being thrown by Palestinians were just ‎a game and not a lethal weapon with which Israelis have been murdered.‎

The PA claims rock throwing is "peaceful resistance," but in reality it is an act ‎of terror and thousands of Israelis have been injured and some have been ‎murdered by rocks thrown by Palestinians, among them, for example, these ‎victims: ‎
Asher Palmer (25) and his infant son Yonatan were murdered by a ‎Palestinian who threw a rock at their car, making it overturn, killing ‎them both in 2011. ‎
Adele Biton (3) was driving with her mother and siblings in 2013, ‎when Palestinians threw rocks at their car, causing Adele’s mother to ‎lose control of the car, which crashed. Adele sustained severe head ‎injuries and never recovered. She died in 2015.‎
Alexander Levlovitch (64) was murdered by Palestinian terrorists who ‎threw rocks at his car and caused it to crash in 2015.‎
Israeli soldier Amit ben Yigal (21) was murdered by a Palestinian ‎terrorist who threw a rock down on his head from a building in 2020.‎
By posting the picture of the middle-aged Palestinian rock thrower above, PA ‎Chairman Abbas’ advisor Mahmoud Al-Habbash encouraged this lethal ‎means of “resistance” and added his praise too:‎
“May his hands be blessed”‎
[Facebook page of PA Supreme Shari’ah Judge Mahmoud Al-Habbash, Jan. 8, 2021]‎
 

Hollie

Platinum Member
Joined
Jun 20, 2012
Messages
38,815
Reaction score
4,675
Points
1,130
The typical putrid bile from the Arabs-Moslems masquerading as Pal'istanians




‎“Israeli rabbis indoctrinate the Jewish kids: ‎ Kill the Palestinian children” - Palestinian “expert” libels Israel
Nan Jacques Zilberdik | Jan 15, 2021
In fact, it is Palestinian leaders who encourage Palestinian children to kill ‎Jews

A Palestinian alleged “military expert” disseminates the lie that Israeli rabbis ‎are teaching Jewish kids to “kill everyone who is not Jewish,” as reported by ‎Palestinian Media Watch. Now Wasef Erekat has taken his libel a step ‎further, claiming that the rabbis specify that Jewish kids should “kill the ‎Palestinian children”: ‎
 

Hollie

Platinum Member
Joined
Jun 20, 2012
Messages
38,815
Reaction score
4,675
Points
1,130
Strong Warning Alert!


Somebody (other than the Pals of course), needs to take responsibility for the Pals' lack of high speed internet.

The costs of maintaining the expansive Islamic terrorist infrastructure are massive. Maintaining entire networks of Islamic terrorists and supporting the greed, theft and corruption as a first priority for the Pally leadership costs boatloads of money. With the middling funds available for the usual expenditures associated with maintaining the civil responsibilities of government, that endless black hole of want, need and entitlement needs others to do for them what they refuse to do.






RAMALLAH, Thursday, January 14, 2021 (WAFA) - The Palestinian Authority (PA) today issued a strong warning that Palestine's momentum towards the digital economy is falling behind due to Israel's control over access to the 4G/5G spectrum.

This continued deprivation of access to the necessary spectrum will have negative economic and social consequences, especially as Covid-19 is transitioning the Palestine society to digital life across key sectors and the current broadband infrastructure is not enough.

In a letter addressed to the international and donor community operating in Palestine, the Palestinian Authority reported the negative impact of such deprivation and the positive results of access to technology.
 

surada

Platinum Member
Joined
Jan 3, 2021
Messages
4,664
Reaction score
2,562
Points
893
The Hashemites - As the Arabs See the Jews
www.kinghussein.gov.jo/kabd_eng.html
King Abdullah bin Al-Hussein (1882-1951) "As the Arabs see the Jews". His Majesty King Abdullah, The American Magazine. November, 1947. Summary. This fascinating essay, written by King Hussein’s grandfather King Abdullah, appeared in the United States six months before the 1948 Arab-Israeli War. In the article, King Abdullah disputes the mistaken view that Arab opposition to Zionism (and later the …


And not once does he mention a "Palestinian" people.

That is because they had not been invented yet by your fellow Arabs as a propaganda tool.
You moron.. They had Palestinians stamps and currency and newspapers.
The fact that there was a territory administered by the British called "Palestine" does not mean there was a people called Palestinian. the letter you reference by King Abdullah actually proves that fact, but you are too stupid, too dishonest and too full of hatred towards Jews to understand that.
In 1952 a lot of Palestinians worked in our town and went to our church.
 

Most reactions - Past 7 days

Forum List

Top