Who Are The Palestinians?

[Vigilante]

 

[ChrisL]

Seriously.

When faced with conclusions drawn from patently verifiable facts of reality, montelatici petulantly stamps her little pink bootie into the 6,000 year old dust of her flat earth, and angrily shakes her chubby little fist at her geocentric cosmology, and sanctimoniously declares in her squishy voice that those facts are not real.

All that retard wants to engage in is a rock chucking conflict over who chucked the first rock in the retarded rock chucking conflict in the middle east.

We all know how "adult" and productive that behavior has proven to be.

The only patently verifiable fact, that is not subject to any interpretation, is that Europeans went to another continent colonized an area and ethnically cleansed most of the indigenous people living in that area.

I have no interest in your dopey crusade little SJW. Take your mawkish outrage at another entirely unrelated subject to your homeopathic, pony-kin, drum circle where it can get traction with other bong-smoke militants.

I see you have no answer to the basic fact, which is, if Europeans had not facilitated the colonization of another continent by Europeans of a particular religion, the current problem between colonizer and colonized in Palestine would not exist.

As far as your characterization of me. leave it at home. You couldn't be more deluded.

Little Pumpkin, there's just no reason for me to answer to your fact regarding European colonization... your "fact" is simply not relevant to the point I made.

It is literally irrelevant to the situation. Israel was a recognized nation, it was invaded, certain Israelis sided with the invaders, and the invaders lost. Those are facts not in dispute.

I refuse to be drawn into your retarded rationalizations regarding who chucked the first rock at whom so many generations in the past. Such stories from both sides are full of lies, and the lies weigh equally against each other. Peddle your dopey crusade to someone who will share in your mawkish outrage--I'm not a buyer.

But if you want to dispute the conclusions drawn from the indisputable facts presented, I'm an eager audience. But if you're just going to catalog all the crimes you perceive that were committed against your preferred people, then I'm telling you now I will not be persuaded by such bullshit emotional manipulations.

The indisputable fact is that Europeans went to another continent, expelled the people living there and created a nation.

Ancient history. The fact is that MOST lands were taken over by one group or another.

 

[montelatici]

50 years or so is not the definition of ancient. The fact is that when lands are taken over by colonizers, the colonizers must achieve demographic advantage, or else eventually they are either forced to blend in or are forced to leave. Algeria, Rhodesia, South Africa.

 

[Hossfly]

50 years or so is not the definition of ancient. The fact is that when lands are taken over by colonizers, the colonizers must achieve demographic advantage, or else eventually they are either forced to blend in or are forced to leave. Algeria, Rhodesia, South Africa.

.........Algeria, Rhodesia, South Africa.........."Palestine".........Fixed that for ya.

 

[ChrisL]

50 years or so is not the definition of ancient. The fact is that when lands are taken over by colonizers, the colonizers must achieve demographic advantage, or else eventually they are either forced to blend in or are forced to leave. Algeria, Rhodesia, South Africa.

.........Algeria, Rhodesia, South Africa.........."Palestine".........Fixed that for ya.

Palestine, of course!

 

[Phoenall]

50 years or so is not the definition of ancient. The fact is that when lands are taken over by colonizers, the colonizers must achieve demographic advantage, or else eventually they are either forced to blend in or are forced to leave. Algeria, Rhodesia, South Africa.

Only if the aggressors can evict them, and now that the Palestinians have signed the UN charter they are held by it. This means that Israel is accepted by them as THE JEWISH STATE as declared in the UN charter. You really are silly Haniya to think you can put one over on an intelligent non muslim

 

[Phoenall]

50 years or so is not the definition of ancient. The fact is that when lands are taken over by colonizers, the colonizers must achieve demographic advantage, or else eventually they are either forced to blend in or are forced to leave. Algeria, Rhodesia, South Africa.

Only if the aggressors can evict them, and now that the Palestinians have signed the UN charter they are held by it. This means that Israel is accepted by them as THE JEWISH STATE as declared in the UN charter. You really are silly Haniya to think you can put one over on an intelligent non muslim

 

[toastman]

No, Arab nations attempted to stop the ethnic cleansing of Christians and Muslims. And, the invading Europeans had more military might and were successful in ethnically cleansing the Christians and Muslims.

5 Arab nations attacked Israel from all sides. They started the war with Israel you propagandist liar.
And Israel did not even have close to the military might if all those countries combined.
It's incredible how full if shit you are Monti. You take Palestinian propaganda to a new level.

 

[montelatici]

50 years or so is not the definition of ancient. The fact is that when lands are taken over by colonizers, the colonizers must achieve demographic advantage, or else eventually they are either forced to blend in or are forced to leave. Algeria, Rhodesia, South Africa.

.........Algeria, Rhodesia, South Africa.........."Palestine".........Fixed that for ya.

Well, yes, you are right, the European colonizers of Palestine will end up in the same position as the European colonizers of Algeria, Rhodesia, and South Africa. Thanks.

 

[aris2chat]

Chew on this.

actually maybe not

Archaeologist Believes Jesus Was Born in a Different Bethlehem

 

[Hossfly]

Chew on this.

actually maybe not

Archaeologist Believes Jesus Was Born in a Different Bethlehem

Interesting article. Have you ever heard that even though Mary was pregnant, Joseph took her with him to Bethlehem in order to pay his yearly taxes? I understand that taxes were collected in August every year. If so, which Bethlehem would have been the one to go pay taxes? It would seem to be the closest one to his home. aris2chat

 

[ChrisL]

50 years or so is not the definition of ancient. The fact is that when lands are taken over by colonizers, the colonizers must achieve demographic advantage, or else eventually they are either forced to blend in or are forced to leave. Algeria, Rhodesia, South Africa.

.........Algeria, Rhodesia, South Africa.........."Palestine".........Fixed that for ya.

Well, yes, you are right, the European colonizers of Palestine will end up in the same position as the European colonizers of Algeria, Rhodesia, and South Africa. Thanks.

Your hatred for the Jews is quite palpable. Did your imam teach you how to be a bigot, or did you read it in your holy book?

 

[montelatici]

50 years or so is not the definition of ancient. The fact is that when lands are taken over by colonizers, the colonizers must achieve demographic advantage, or else eventually they are either forced to blend in or are forced to leave. Algeria, Rhodesia, South Africa.

.........Algeria, Rhodesia, South Africa.........."Palestine".........Fixed that for ya.

Well, yes, you are right, the European colonizers of Palestine will end up in the same position as the European colonizers of Algeria, Rhodesia, and South Africa. Thanks.

Your hatred for the Jews is quite palpable. Did your imam teach you how to be a bigot, or did you read it in your holy book?

How does my statement, in any way, demonstrate "hatred of the Jews"?

 

[Hossfly]

Chew on this.

actually maybe not

Archaeologist Believes Jesus Was Born in a Different Bethlehem

Interesting article. Have you ever heard that even though Mary was pregnant, Joseph took her with him to Bethlehem in order to pay his yearly taxes? I understand that taxes were collected in August every year. If so, which Bethlehem would have been the one to go pay taxes? It would seem to be the closest one to his home. aris2chat

Plus I have read somewhere that the tax records for that tax year are intact and still available for viewing and that Joseph's name and payment is listed. aris2chat

 

[toastman]

50 years or so is not the definition of ancient. The fact is that when lands are taken over by colonizers, the colonizers must achieve demographic advantage, or else eventually they are either forced to blend in or are forced to leave. Algeria, Rhodesia, South Africa.

.........Algeria, Rhodesia, South Africa.........."Palestine".........Fixed that for ya.

Well, yes, you are right, the European colonizers of Palestine will end up in the same position as the European colonizers of Algeria, Rhodesia, and South Africa. Thanks.

What happened to the European colonizers of America?

 

[montelatici]

50 years or so is not the definition of ancient. The fact is that when lands are taken over by colonizers, the colonizers must achieve demographic advantage, or else eventually they are either forced to blend in or are forced to leave. Algeria, Rhodesia, South Africa.

.........Algeria, Rhodesia, South Africa.........."Palestine".........Fixed that for ya.

Well, yes, you are right, the European colonizers of Palestine will end up in the same position as the European colonizers of Algeria, Rhodesia, and South Africa. Thanks.

What happened to the European colonizers of America?

They were able to eliminate the local people as a demographic threat from North to South America.

 

[P F Tinmore]

The only patently verifiable fact, that is not subject to any interpretation, is that Europeans went to another continent colonized an area and ethnically cleansed most of the indigenous people living in that area.

I have no interest in your dopey crusade little SJW. Take your mawkish outrage at another entirely unrelated subject to your homeopathic, pony-kin, drum circle where it can get traction with other bong-smoke militants.

I see you have no answer to the basic fact, which is, if Europeans had not facilitated the colonization of another continent by Europeans of a particular religion, the current problem between colonizer and colonized in Palestine would not exist.

As far as your characterization of me. leave it at home. You couldn't be more deluded.

Little Pumpkin, there's just no reason for me to answer to your fact regarding European colonization... your "fact" is simply not relevant to the point I made.

It is literally irrelevant to the situation. Israel was a recognized nation, it was invaded, certain Israelis sided with the invaders, and the invaders lost. Those are facts not in dispute.

I refuse to be drawn into your retarded rationalizations regarding who chucked the first rock at whom so many generations in the past. Such stories from both sides are full of lies, and the lies weigh equally against each other. Peddle your dopey crusade to someone who will share in your mawkish outrage--I'm not a buyer.

But if you want to dispute the conclusions drawn from the indisputable facts presented, I'm an eager audience. But if you're just going to catalog all the crimes you perceive that were committed against your preferred people, then I'm telling you now I will not be persuaded by such bullshit emotional manipulations.

The indisputable fact is that Europeans went to another continent, expelled the people living there and created a nation.

Ancient history. The fact is that MOST lands were taken over by one group or another.

That is true. However, about a hundred years ago or so conquest became illegal.

Israel came in late in that game.

 

[toastman]

50 years or so is not the definition of ancient. The fact is that when lands are taken over by colonizers, the colonizers must achieve demographic advantage, or else eventually they are either forced to blend in or are forced to leave. Algeria, Rhodesia, South Africa.

.........Algeria, Rhodesia, South Africa.........."Palestine".........Fixed that for ya.

Well, yes, you are right, the European colonizers of Palestine will end up in the same position as the European colonizers of Algeria, Rhodesia, and South Africa. Thanks.

What happened to the European colonizers of America?

They were able to eliminate the local people as a demographic threat from North to South America.

Which us exactly what Israel will do, for as long as they are threatened by them.

 

[montelatici]

50 years or so is not the definition of ancient. The fact is that when lands are taken over by colonizers, the colonizers must achieve demographic advantage, or else eventually they are either forced to blend in or are forced to leave. Algeria, Rhodesia, South Africa.

.........Algeria, Rhodesia, South Africa.........."Palestine".........Fixed that for ya.

Well, yes, you are right, the European colonizers of Palestine will end up in the same position as the European colonizers of Algeria, Rhodesia, and South Africa. Thanks.

What happened to the European colonizers of America?

They were able to eliminate the local people as a demographic threat from North to South America.

Which us exactly what Israel will do, for as long as they are threatened by them.

Well, there are many millions to eliminate a population many times larger than the Jewish population in the general area.. It did not prove feasible in Algeria, Rhodesia or South Africa. Maybe the Jews will be able to to eliminate those millions, maybe not.

 

[RoccoR]

P F Tinmore, et al,

I think you need to be more specific than that.

I have no interest in your dopey crusade little SJW. Take your mawkish outrage at another entirely unrelated subject to your homeopathic, pony-kin, drum circle where it can get traction with other bong-smoke militants.

I see you have no answer to the basic fact, which is, if Europeans had not facilitated the colonization of another continent by Europeans of a particular religion, the current problem between colonizer and colonized in Palestine would not exist.

As far as your characterization of me. leave it at home. You couldn't be more deluded.

Little Pumpkin, there's just no reason for me to answer to your fact regarding European colonization... your "fact" is simply not relevant to the point I made.

It is literally irrelevant to the situation. Israel was a recognized nation, it was invaded, certain Israelis sided with the invaders, and the invaders lost. Those are facts not in dispute.

I refuse to be drawn into your retarded rationalizations regarding who chucked the first rock at whom so many generations in the past. Such stories from both sides are full of lies, and the lies weigh equally against each other. Peddle your dopey crusade to someone who will share in your mawkish outrage--I'm not a buyer.

But if you want to dispute the conclusions drawn from the indisputable facts presented, I'm an eager audience. But if you're just going to catalog all the crimes you perceive that were committed against your preferred people, then I'm telling you now I will not be persuaded by such bullshit emotional manipulations.

The indisputable fact is that Europeans went to another continent, expelled the people living there and created a nation.

Ancient history. The fact is that MOST lands were taken over by one group or another.

That is true. However, about a hundred years ago or so conquest became illegal.

Israel came in late in that game.

(COMMENT)

What has Israeli taken by conquest?

What the law actually says is:

• 
  Article 5 A/RES/3314(XXIX)
  14 December 1974

• 
  1. No consideration of whatever nature, whether political, economic, military or otherwise, may serve as a justification for aggression.
  
  2. A war of aggression is a crime against international peace. Aggression gives rise to international responsibility.
  
  3. No territorial acquisition or special advantage resulting from aggression is or shall be recognized as lawful.
  

This is basically a restatement of UN Charter, Article 2's proscriptions which has been interpreted as to mean that it prohibits the acquisition of territory by war; and of UN Security Council Resolution 242, which states "inadmissibility of the acquisition of territory by war."

However, the West Bank and Gaza Strip were territories in which the parties to the conflict have entered into Peace Treaties. Israel did not take any territory from the Palestinians by either war or aggression.

Most Respectfully,
R