Who Are The Palestinians?

[docmauser1]

He had a minor tremors, so , and there is no proof he was an alky, so since poisoning is a common way to get rid of someone , that does seem more likely. Read he had aids as well, all these stories made up to hide the real reason.

Arafat is dead, and piss be on him.

 

[docmauser1]

The armistice lines never divided Palestine from anybody else. In the case of the West Bank and Gaza, the lines ran through Palestine. How can the Palestinians violate a line that is Palestine on both sides?

But the problem's that, major arab settlers&squatters from the hood didn't ran through palestine, they had been running to palestine, of course.

 

[docmauser1]

Invalid how?

Invalid big-time, of course.
"In addition to the lack of registration and underregistration of property, no map or cadastral survey accompanied the description of the lands registered. Boundaries in many instances were identified by roads, buildings or referenced to a local piece of history such as the "land of the great fight' or "land of the big rock." During the 1920s, the director of lands stated with complete frankness and accuracy that he was unable from registered information and the isolated plan that sometimes accompanied it, to locate the piece of land that a registered transaction purported to concern."
The Land Question In Palestine, 1917-1939 by Kenneth W. Stein, University of North Carolina Press, 1984.
Now, let's read more tall tales about major arab settlers from homelands they humped their camels in on about how they got to be all "saudi sheiks" to own(!) 90%(!) of the mandate palestine.

Kenneth W. Stein, now that's an impartial source. LOL

Very much impartial, indded. He doesn't dazzle us with drivel about major arab settlers&squatters from the hood, who all got to be "saudi sheiks" to own(!) 90%(!) of the mandate palestine and "indigenous palisimians", too!

 

[P F Tinmore]

It is not a "false conclusion."

There are several concepts in play here.

First:

Every State likewise has the duty to refrain from the threat or use of force to violate international lines of demarcation, such as armistice lines, established by or pursuant to an international agreement to which it is a party or which it is otherwise bound to respect.​

The armistice lines never divided Palestine from anybody else. In the case of the West Bank and Gaza, the lines ran through Palestine. How can the Palestinians violate a line that is Palestine on both sides?

The armistice lines have little to do with Palestine. They were agreements between two sovereign states.

1949 Armistice Agreements - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia

Look at the map on the right. It clearly shows Israeli territory and Arab territory following the signing of the agreements.

Armistice lines did not designate any territory.

 

[RoccoR]

docmauser1, P F Tinmore, et al,

The mistake here is much more simplistic, fundamentally, than that.

The armistice lines never divided Palestine from anybody else. In the case of the West Bank and Gaza, the lines ran through Palestine. How can the Palestinians violate a line that is Palestine on both sides?

But the problem's that, major arab settlers&squatters from the hood didn't ran through palestine, they had been running to palestine, of course.

(COMMENT)

One must remember to keep in mind that:

When the Armistice lines were drawn in 1949, the term "Palestine" was still being used as defined in the original "Palestine Order in Council." It referred to the territories to which the former Mandate for Palestine applied. It wasn't a political subdivision on its own.

The "Palestine" of 1949 was a legal entity (trusteeship) but not be a sovereign state and not self-governing. For all intent and purposes, The "Palestine" of 1949 had two component parts:​

• • The apportionment that Declared Independence by the right of self-determination of the Jewish People (AKA: The new State of Israel).
  • The apportionment that declined to participate in the Partition Plan (AKA: The Arab State unrealized).

When the Armistice Lines were drawn, the Lines separated the various Arab Contingents from the the Israeli Contingents. The distinction made by P F Tinmore in the question "How can the Palestinians violate a line that is Palestine on both sides?" is a distinction without relevance. The Israelis were just as much Palestinians as the Arabs. Palestinian, a territorial name, was just as applicable to all the inhabitance of the time (Jewish and Arab). In 1949, the foreign influence were the remnants of the 5 Arab Armies that established Occupation Authorities in the West Bank and Gaza Strip. In addressing the P F Tinmore in the question, we have to understand that the term "Palestinians" is representational of both the Israelis and Arab. So, in fact, the question is meaningless (like drawing lines in water), except for the implied threat to the sovereignty of Israel. What the Armistice Line separated then and now are the Hostile and Belligerent Parties.​

The word game used by P F Tinmore in the question is nothing more then a fallacious philosophical dilemma by the aggressors to justify Jihad and armed struggle. It is an outcome of the concept that all the former Territory under the old Mandate is an objective of the contemporary Arab Palestinian of today; that the territorial sovereignty of Israel today, represents an occupation by force of territory that is rightfully Arab Palestinian.

In terms of the West Bank, the distinction made by P F Tinmore in the question "How can the Palestinians violate a line that is Palestine on both sides?" is even made more dubious when one considers that the last sovereignty over the territory, prior to the Palestinian Declaration of Independence in 1988, was Jordanian. Rightfully, the Arab Palestinians of the West Bank should actually be called the "former Jordanian of Palestine." The historical geography of the West Bank is that what the UN calls the Palestinian territory occupied since 1967, is the exact same territory as that Annexed by the Jordanians in 1950.

On April 11, 1950, elections were held for a new Jordanian parliament in which the Palestinian Arabs of the West Bank were equally represented. Thirteen days later, Parliament unanimously approved a motion to unite the two banks of the Jordan River, constitutionally expanding the Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan in order to safeguard what was left of the Arab territory of Palestine from further Zionist expansion.

The Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan now included nearly one and a half million people, more than half a million of whom were refugees evicted from Jewish-occupied Palestine. All automatically became citizens of Jordan, a right that had first been offered in December 1949 to all Palestinians who wished to claim it. Although the Arab League opposed this plan, and no other Arab government followed Jordan’s lead, the Hashemite Kingdom offered the possibility of normal life for many people who would have otherwise remained stateless refugees.​

When the Palestinians accepted Jordanian Citizenship, they exercised their right of self-determination, but also relinquished any "refugee status." Under the Convention Relating to the Status of Refugees, the:

C. This Convention shall cease to apply to any person falling under the terms of section A if:

(1) He has voluntarily re-availed himself of the protection of the country of his nationality; or
(2) Having lost his nationality, he has voluntarily re-acquired it; or
(3) He has acquired a new nationality, and enjoys the protection of the country of his new nationality; or
(4) He has voluntarily re-established himself in the country which he leftor outside which he remained owing to fear of persecution; or​

(TO THE QUESTION: Who are the Palestinians)

And again, the Palestinians shot themselves in the foot. When the "Jordanian parliament in which the Palestinian Arabs of the West Bank were equally represented" (right of self-determination), acquired a new nationality, and enjoyed the protection of the country of the Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan, their new nationality.

While were might find it difficult to determine "who is a Palestinian," by the process of elimination we can rule-out what we call the Arab Palestinian of the West Bank. They abdicated their relationship as Palestinians when they accepted Jordanian citizenship.

(BOTTOM LINE)

There are no Arab Palestinians in the West Bank. They alerted that status in and by themselves in a Parliamentary process. And as for the P F Tinmore in the question "How can the Palestinians violate a line that is Palestine on both sides?" is a distinction without relevance; in that since 1950, there were no Palestinians on the Eastern side (towards Jordan) of the Armistice Line.

Most Respectfully,
R

 

[toastman]

It is not a "false conclusion."

There are several concepts in play here.

First:

Every State likewise has the duty to refrain from the threat or use of force to violate international lines of demarcation, such as armistice lines, established by or pursuant to an international agreement to which it is a party or which it is otherwise bound to respect.​

The armistice lines never divided Palestine from anybody else. In the case of the West Bank and Gaza, the lines ran through Palestine. How can the Palestinians violate a line that is Palestine on both sides?

The armistice lines have little to do with Palestine. They were agreements between two sovereign states.

1949 Armistice Agreements - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia

Look at the map on the right. It clearly shows Israeli territory and Arab territory following the signing of the agreements.

Armistice lines did not designate any territory.

You said that the lines ran through Palestine. That's absurd. I'm not talking about designating territory.
I'm referring more to your "the armistice agreements seperated Palestine into three areas of occupation"

 

[docmauser1]

docmauser1, P F Tinmore, et al,

The mistake here is much more simplistic, fundamentally, than that.

The armistice lines never divided Palestine from anybody else. In the case of the West Bank and Gaza, the lines ran through Palestine. How can the Palestinians violate a line that is Palestine on both sides?

But the problem's that, major arab settlers&squatters from the hood didn't ran through palestine, they had been running to palestine, of course.

(COMMENT)

One must remember to keep in mind that:

When the Armistice lines were drawn in 1949, the term "Palestine" was still being used as defined in the original "Palestine Order in Council." It referred to the territories to which the former Mandate for Palestine applied. It wasn't a political subdivision on its own.

The "Palestine" of 1949 was a legal entity (trusteeship) but not be a sovereign state and not self-governing. For all intent and purposes, The "Palestine" of 1949 had two component parts:​

• • The apportionment that Declared Independence by the right of self-determination of the Jewish People (AKA: The new State of Israel).
  • The apportionment that declined to participate in the Partition Plan (AKA: The Arab State unrealized).

When the Armistice Lines were drawn, the Lines separated the various Arab Contingents from the the Israeli Contingents. The distinction made by P F Tinmore in the question "How can the Palestinians violate a line that is Palestine on both sides?" is a distinction without relevance. The Israelis were just as much Palestinians as the Arabs. Palestinian, a territorial name, was just as applicable to all the inhabitance of the time (Jewish and Arab). In 1949, the foreign influence were the remnants of the 5 Arab Armies that established Occupation Authorities in the West Bank and Gaza Strip. In addressing the P F Tinmore in the question, we have to understand that the term "Palestinians" is representational of both the Israelis and Arab. So, in fact, the question is meaningless (like drawing lines in water), except for the implied threat to the sovereignty of Israel. What the Armistice Line separated then and now are the Hostile and Belligerent Parties.​

The word game used by P F Tinmore in the question is nothing more then a fallacious philosophical dilemma by the aggressors to justify Jihad and armed struggle. It is an outcome of the concept that all the former Territory under the old Mandate is an objective of the contemporary Arab Palestinian of today; that the territorial sovereignty of Israel today, represents an occupation by force of territory that is rightfully Arab Palestinian.

In terms of the West Bank, the distinction made by P F Tinmore in the question "How can the Palestinians violate a line that is Palestine on both sides?" is even made more dubious when one considers that the last sovereignty over the territory, prior to the Palestinian Declaration of Independence in 1988, was Jordanian. Rightfully, the Arab Palestinians of the West Bank should actually be called the "former Jordanian of Palestine." The historical geography of the West Bank is that what the UN calls the Palestinian territory occupied since 1967, is the exact same territory as that Annexed by the Jordanians in 1950.

On April 11, 1950, elections were held for a new Jordanian parliament in which the Palestinian Arabs of the West Bank were equally represented. Thirteen days later, Parliament unanimously approved a motion to unite the two banks of the Jordan River, constitutionally expanding the Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan in order to safeguard what was left of the Arab territory of Palestine from further Zionist expansion.

The Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan now included nearly one and a half million people, more than half a million of whom were refugees evicted from Jewish-occupied Palestine. All automatically became citizens of Jordan, a right that had first been offered in December 1949 to all Palestinians who wished to claim it. Although the Arab League opposed this plan, and no other Arab government followed Jordan’s lead, the Hashemite Kingdom offered the possibility of normal life for many people who would have otherwise remained stateless refugees.​

When the Palestinians accepted Jordanian Citizenship, they exercised their right of self-determination, but also relinquished any "refugee status." Under the Convention Relating to the Status of Refugees, the:

C. This Convention shall cease to apply to any person falling under the terms of section A if:

(1) He has voluntarily re-availed himself of the protection of the country of his nationality; or
(2) Having lost his nationality, he has voluntarily re-acquired it; or
(3) He has acquired a new nationality, and enjoys the protection of the country of his new nationality; or
(4) He has voluntarily re-established himself in the country which he leftor outside which he remained owing to fear of persecution; or​

(TO THE QUESTION: Who are the Palestinians)
And again, the Palestinians shot themselves in the foot. When the "Jordanian parliament in which the Palestinian Arabs of the West Bank were equally represented" (right of self-determination), acquired a new nationality, and enjoyed the protection of the country of the Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan, their new nationality.
While were might find it difficult to determine "who is a Palestinian," by the process of elimination we can rule-out what we call the Arab Palestinian of the West Bank. They abdicated their relationship as Palestinians when they accepted Jordanian citizenship.
(BOTTOM LINE)
There are no Arab Palestinians in the West Bank. They alerted that status in and by themselves in a Parliamentary process. And as for the P F Tinmore in the question "How can the Palestinians violate a line that is Palestine on both sides?" is a distinction without relevance; in that since 1950, there were no Palestinians on the Eastern side (towards Jordan) of the Armistice Line.
Most Respectfully, R

I know, but, considering the words of the Jordanian FM Nasser Judah at the UNSC "Most of the refugees on our territory are Jordanian citizens in addition to their status as refugees, and it lies at the heart of our responsibilities to protect and restore their legitimate rights recognised by the international terms of reference pertaining to the peace process. As a host country, we, in turn, have rights for the burdens we have shouldered." we've a quantum mech cake, which is, both, eaten and not so eaten. The UNRWA is babbling about 2,070,973 registered Palestine refugees there. Of all of those, for all intents and purposes, professional refugees the gazabad ones don't have a jordanian citizenship and carry a temporary jordano passport.

 

[docmauser1]

... Most Respectfully, R

Ah! Mucho apologies! Forgot to add Most Respectfully, Doc M!

 

[MJB12741]

It is not a "false conclusion."

There are several concepts in play here.

First:

Every State likewise has the duty to refrain from the threat or use of force to violate international lines of demarcation, such as armistice lines, established by or pursuant to an international agreement to which it is a party or which it is otherwise bound to respect.​

The armistice lines never divided Palestine from anybody else. In the case of the West Bank and Gaza, the lines ran through Palestine. How can the Palestinians violate a line that is Palestine on both sides?

The armistice lines have little to do with Palestine. They were agreements between two sovereign states.

1949 Armistice Agreements - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia

Look at the map on the right. It clearly shows Israeli territory and Arab territory following the signing of the agreements.

Armistice lines did not designate any territory.

I feel the solution would be a self governing, self determination Palestinian State where the Palestinians could no longer suck off of Israel to provide for them. The big question is where to put it as no surrounding Arab country will grant the Palestinians a right of return back to their indigenous homelands. Do you think Mecca might be a nice place for a Palestinian State?

 

[montelatici]

It is not a "false conclusion."

There are several concepts in play here.

First:

Every State likewise has the duty to refrain from the threat or use of force to violate international lines of demarcation, such as armistice lines, established by or pursuant to an international agreement to which it is a party or which it is otherwise bound to respect.​

The armistice lines never divided Palestine from anybody else. In the case of the West Bank and Gaza, the lines ran through Palestine. How can the Palestinians violate a line that is Palestine on both sides?

The armistice lines have little to do with Palestine. They were agreements between two sovereign states.

1949 Armistice Agreements - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia

Look at the map on the right. It clearly shows Israeli territory and Arab territory following the signing of the agreements.

Armistice lines did not designate any territory.

I feel the solution would be a self governing, self determination Palestinian State where the Palestinians could no longer suck off of Israel to provide for them. The big question is where to put it as no surrounding Arab country will grant the Palestinians a right of return back to their indigenous homelands. Do you think Mecca might be a nice place for a Palestinian State?

The Palestinians come from Palestine, the Jews come from Europe, North Africa and other areas of the Middle East. The Jews should just go back where their parents and grand parents came from. That would solve the problem.

 

[Penelope]

It is not a "false conclusion."

There are several concepts in play here.

First:

Every State likewise has the duty to refrain from the threat or use of force to violate international lines of demarcation, such as armistice lines, established by or pursuant to an international agreement to which it is a party or which it is otherwise bound to respect.​

The armistice lines never divided Palestine from anybody else. In the case of the West Bank and Gaza, the lines ran through Palestine. How can the Palestinians violate a line that is Palestine on both sides?

The armistice lines have little to do with Palestine. They were agreements between two sovereign states.

1949 Armistice Agreements - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia

Look at the map on the right. It clearly shows Israeli territory and Arab territory following the signing of the agreements.

Armistice lines did not designate any territory.

I feel the solution would be a self governing, self determination Palestinian State where the Palestinians could no longer suck off of Israel to provide for them. The big question is where to put it as no surrounding Arab country will grant the Palestinians a right of return back to their indigenous homelands. Do you think Mecca might be a nice place for a Palestinian State?

The Palestinians are home, and some of the Jews homes are on their land.

 

[MJB12741]

It is not a "false conclusion."

There are several concepts in play here.

First:

Every State likewise has the duty to refrain from the threat or use of force to violate international lines of demarcation, such as armistice lines, established by or pursuant to an international agreement to which it is a party or which it is otherwise bound to respect.​

The armistice lines never divided Palestine from anybody else. In the case of the West Bank and Gaza, the lines ran through Palestine. How can the Palestinians violate a line that is Palestine on both sides?

The armistice lines have little to do with Palestine. They were agreements between two sovereign states.

1949 Armistice Agreements - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia

Look at the map on the right. It clearly shows Israeli territory and Arab territory following the signing of the agreements.

Armistice lines did not designate any territory.

I feel the solution would be a self governing, self determination Palestinian State where the Palestinians could no longer suck off of Israel to provide for them. The big question is where to put it as no surrounding Arab country will grant the Palestinians a right of return back to their indigenous homelands. Do you think Mecca might be a nice place for a Palestinian State?

The Palestinians come from Palestine, the Jews come from Europe, North Africa and other areas of the Middle East. The Jews should just go back where their parents and grand parents came from. That would solve the problem.

The indigenous Palestinians were Jews. Not a single Muslim among them. So who are the invaders? Duh!

 

[docmauser1]

The Palestinians come from Palestine, the Jews come from Europe, North Africa and other areas of the Middle East. The Jews should just go back where their parents and grand parents came from. That would solve the problem.

Then we should send palistanians back to Texas.

 

[Penelope]

The armistice lines never divided Palestine from anybody else. In the case of the West Bank and Gaza, the lines ran through Palestine. How can the Palestinians violate a line that is Palestine on both sides?

The armistice lines have little to do with Palestine. They were agreements between two sovereign states.

1949 Armistice Agreements - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia

Look at the map on the right. It clearly shows Israeli territory and Arab territory following the signing of the agreements.

Armistice lines did not designate any territory.

I feel the solution would be a self governing, self determination Palestinian State where the Palestinians could no longer suck off of Israel to provide for them. The big question is where to put it as no surrounding Arab country will grant the Palestinians a right of return back to their indigenous homelands. Do you think Mecca might be a nice place for a Palestinian State?

The Palestinians come from Palestine, the Jews come from Europe, North Africa and other areas of the Middle East. The Jews should just go back where their parents and grand parents came from. That would solve the problem.

The indigenous Palestinians were Jews. Not a single Muslim among them. So who are the invaders? Duh!

There were obviously the Canaanites you originally stole the land from, intermarried with and they stayed.

The armistice lines never divided Palestine from anybody else. In the case of the West Bank and Gaza, the lines ran through Palestine. How can the Palestinians violate a line that is Palestine on both sides?

The armistice lines have little to do with Palestine. They were agreements between two sovereign states.

1949 Armistice Agreements - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia

Look at the map on the right. It clearly shows Israeli territory and Arab territory following the signing of the agreements.

Armistice lines did not designate any territory.

I feel the solution would be a self governing, self determination Palestinian State where the Palestinians could no longer suck off of Israel to provide for them. The big question is where to put it as no surrounding Arab country will grant the Palestinians a right of return back to their indigenous homelands. Do you think Mecca might be a nice place for a Palestinian State?

The Palestinians come from Palestine, the Jews come from Europe, North Africa and other areas of the Middle East. The Jews should just go back where their parents and grand parents came from. That would solve the problem.

The indigenous Palestinians were Jews. Not a single Muslim among them. So who are the invaders? Duh!

There were obviously the Canaanites you originally stole the land from, intermarried with and they stayed.

 

[MJB12741]

The armistice lines have little to do with Palestine. They were agreements between two sovereign states.

1949 Armistice Agreements - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia

Look at the map on the right. It clearly shows Israeli territory and Arab territory following the signing of the agreements.

Armistice lines did not designate any territory.

I feel the solution would be a self governing, self determination Palestinian State where the Palestinians could no longer suck off of Israel to provide for them. The big question is where to put it as no surrounding Arab country will grant the Palestinians a right of return back to their indigenous homelands. Do you think Mecca might be a nice place for a Palestinian State?

The Palestinians come from Palestine, the Jews come from Europe, North Africa and other areas of the Middle East. The Jews should just go back where their parents and grand parents came from. That would solve the problem.

The indigenous Palestinians were Jews. Not a single Muslim among them. So who are the invaders? Duh!

There were obviously the Canaanites you originally stole the land from, intermarried with and they stayed.

The armistice lines have little to do with Palestine. They were agreements between two sovereign states.

1949 Armistice Agreements - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia

Look at the map on the right. It clearly shows Israeli territory and Arab territory following the signing of the agreements.

Armistice lines did not designate any territory.

I feel the solution would be a self governing, self determination Palestinian State where the Palestinians could no longer suck off of Israel to provide for them. The big question is where to put it as no surrounding Arab country will grant the Palestinians a right of return back to their indigenous homelands. Do you think Mecca might be a nice place for a Palestinian State?

The Palestinians come from Palestine, the Jews come from Europe, North Africa and other areas of the Middle East. The Jews should just go back where their parents and grand parents came from. That would solve the problem.

The indigenous Palestinians were Jews. Not a single Muslim among them. So who are the invaders? Duh!

There were obviously the Canaanites you originally stole the land from, intermarried with and they stayed.

Oh that's right. I forgot about all those Muslim Canaanites.

 

[toastman]

It is not a "false conclusion."

There are several concepts in play here.

First:

Every State likewise has the duty to refrain from the threat or use of force to violate international lines of demarcation, such as armistice lines, established by or pursuant to an international agreement to which it is a party or which it is otherwise bound to respect.​

The armistice lines never divided Palestine from anybody else. In the case of the West Bank and Gaza, the lines ran through Palestine. How can the Palestinians violate a line that is Palestine on both sides?

The armistice lines have little to do with Palestine. They were agreements between two sovereign states.

1949 Armistice Agreements - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia

Look at the map on the right. It clearly shows Israeli territory and Arab territory following the signing of the agreements.

Armistice lines did not designate any territory.

I feel the solution would be a self governing, self determination Palestinian State where the Palestinians could no longer suck off of Israel to provide for them. The big question is where to put it as no surrounding Arab country will grant the Palestinians a right of return back to their indigenous homelands. Do you think Mecca might be a nice place for a Palestinian State?

The Palestinians come from Palestine, the Jews come from Europe, North Africa and other areas of the Middle East. The Jews should just go back where their parents and grand parents came from. That would solve the problem.

Keep dreaming Nazi scum. The Jews aren't going anywhere. No matter how much you want it to happen.

 

[MJB12741]

Armistice lines did not designate any territory.

I feel the solution would be a self governing, self determination Palestinian State where the Palestinians could no longer suck off of Israel to provide for them. The big question is where to put it as no surrounding Arab country will grant the Palestinians a right of return back to their indigenous homelands. Do you think Mecca might be a nice place for a Palestinian State?

The Palestinians come from Palestine, the Jews come from Europe, North Africa and other areas of the Middle East. The Jews should just go back where their parents and grand parents came from. That would solve the problem.

The indigenous Palestinians were Jews. Not a single Muslim among them. So who are the invaders? Duh!

There were obviously the Canaanites you originally stole the land from, intermarried with and they stayed.

Armistice lines did not designate any territory.

I feel the solution would be a self governing, self determination Palestinian State where the Palestinians could no longer suck off of Israel to provide for them. The big question is where to put it as no surrounding Arab country will grant the Palestinians a right of return back to their indigenous homelands. Do you think Mecca might be a nice place for a Palestinian State?

The Palestinians come from Palestine, the Jews come from Europe, North Africa and other areas of the Middle East. The Jews should just go back where their parents and grand parents came from. That would solve the problem.

The indigenous Palestinians were Jews. Not a single Muslim among them. So who are the invaders? Duh!

There were obviously the Canaanites you originally stole the land from, intermarried with and they stayed.

Oh that's right. I forgot about all those Muslim Canaanites.

Seriously, Were there Jews among the Canaanite tribes. Were there Muslims among them? Boy that's a tough one, huh Penelope?

 

[Penelope]

I feel the solution would be a self governing, self determination Palestinian State where the Palestinians could no longer suck off of Israel to provide for them. The big question is where to put it as no surrounding Arab country will grant the Palestinians a right of return back to their indigenous homelands. Do you think Mecca might be a nice place for a Palestinian State?

The Palestinians come from Palestine, the Jews come from Europe, North Africa and other areas of the Middle East. The Jews should just go back where their parents and grand parents came from. That would solve the problem.

The indigenous Palestinians were Jews. Not a single Muslim among them. So who are the invaders? Duh!

There were obviously the Canaanites you originally stole the land from, intermarried with and they stayed.

I feel the solution would be a self governing, self determination Palestinian State where the Palestinians could no longer suck off of Israel to provide for them. The big question is where to put it as no surrounding Arab country will grant the Palestinians a right of return back to their indigenous homelands. Do you think Mecca might be a nice place for a Palestinian State?

The Palestinians come from Palestine, the Jews come from Europe, North Africa and other areas of the Middle East. The Jews should just go back where their parents and grand parents came from. That would solve the problem.

The indigenous Palestinians were Jews. Not a single Muslim among them. So who are the invaders? Duh!

There were obviously the Canaanites you originally stole the land from, intermarried with and they stayed.

Oh that's right. I forgot about all those Muslim Canaanites.

Seriously, Were there Jews among the Canaanite tribes. Were there Muslims among them? Boy that's a tough one, huh Penelope?

Its a tough one for you. It even says in your history books they intermarried with everyone. Like I once said you might be a Canaanite Princess.

 

[RoccoR]

P F Tinmore, et al,

The Armistice Lines are lines of demarcation. Under the Declaration of Principles, the lines of demarcation are recognized and protected; even if the people of the State of Palestine (Palestinians) object.

Every State likewise has the duty to refrain from the threat or use of force to violate international lines of demarcation, such as armistice lines, established by or pursuant to an international agreement to which it is a party or which it is otherwise bound to respect. Nothing in the foregoing shall be construed as prejudicing the positions of the parties concerned with regard to the status and effects of such lines under their special regimes or as affecting their temporary character.​

Armistice lines did not designate any territory.

(COMMENT)

Any system of line segments can enclose an area; and that area maybe a territory (international lines of demarcation). The contemporary designation is (A/RES/43/177 15 December 1988): "the designation "Palestine" should be used in place of the designation "Palestine Liberation Organization;" ---

Considering (A/RES/67/19 4 December 2012),

Reaffirming its commitment, in accordance with international law, to the two-State solution of an independent, sovereign, democratic, viable and contiguous State of Palestine living side by side with Israel in peace and security on the basis of the pre-1967 borders,

Bearing in mind the mutual recognition of 9 September 1993 between the Government of the State of Israel and the Palestine Liberation Organization, the representative of the Palestinian people,

Affirming the right of all States in the region to live in peace within secure and internationally recognized borders,​

Most Respectfully,
R

 

[MJB12741]

The Palestinians come from Palestine, the Jews come from Europe, North Africa and other areas of the Middle East. The Jews should just go back where their parents and grand parents came from. That would solve the problem.

The indigenous Palestinians were Jews. Not a single Muslim among them. So who are the invaders? Duh!

There were obviously the Canaanites you originally stole the land from, intermarried with and they stayed.

The Palestinians come from Palestine, the Jews come from Europe, North Africa and other areas of the Middle East. The Jews should just go back where their parents and grand parents came from. That would solve the problem.

The indigenous Palestinians were Jews. Not a single Muslim among them. So who are the invaders? Duh!

There were obviously the Canaanites you originally stole the land from, intermarried with and they stayed.

Oh that's right. I forgot about all those Muslim Canaanites.

Seriously, Were there Jews among the Canaanite tribes. Were there Muslims among them? Boy that's a tough one, huh Penelope?

Its a tough one for you. It even says in your history books they intermarried with everyone. Like I once said you might be a Canaanite Princess.

You can deny all you want the truth. Won't change the facts one bit as to who are the Palestinian squatters & who is occupying who's land.