Who Are The Palestinians?

[MJB12741]

[
No, the West Bank is NOT within Israel's international borders. Do yourself a favour and stop making a fool of yourself like you do on a daily basis.

Jordan - the state which the WB used to be part of -- says they do, in a treaty with Israel
How are Israel and Jordan wrong?

No country knows Palestinians better than Jordan. When will Israel ever learn from Jordan how to establish a lasting peace from Palestinians?

 

[montelatici]

No.

"Tribal sovereignty in the United States is the inherent authority of indigenous tribes to govern themselves within the borders of the United States of America. "

Tribal sovereignty in the United States - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia

Exactly! They are within the U.S borders. Not so with the West Bank. The West Bank is Sovereign Palestinian territory which is not inside Israel's borders.

The West Bank is within Israel's border, completely, and Israel completely controls the borders, air space and territorial sea of the West Bank and Gaza. That excludes the possibility of the West Bank having sovereignty except in a de jure manner. Which the Indian tribes have and the Bantustans had.

But playing with semantics to try to condone the treatment of the non-Jews by the Israeli Jews is futile, the facts are glaringly obvious on the ground. This is not history we are talking about, it is happening today, so your silly attempts to justify the unjustifiable is just a waste of time.

No, the West Bank is NOT within Israel's international borders. Do yourself a favour and stop making a fool of yourself like you do on a daily basis.

Israel controls the borders, therefore it is within Israel's border, full stop. Your childish games make you the fool.

 

[toastman]

[
No, the West Bank is NOT within Israel's international borders. Do yourself a favour and stop making a fool of yourself like you do on a daily basis.

Jordan - the state which the WB used to be part of -- says they do, in a treaty with Israel
How are Israel and Jordan wrong?

Israel and Jordan have a treaty that gave I

No.

"Tribal sovereignty in the United States is the inherent authority of indigenous tribes to govern themselves within the borders of the United States of America. "

Tribal sovereignty in the United States - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia

Exactly! They are within the U.S borders. Not so with the West Bank. The West Bank is Sovereign Palestinian territory which is not inside Israel's borders.

The West Bank is within Israel's border, completely, and Israel completely controls the borders, air space and territorial sea of the West Bank and Gaza. That excludes the possibility of the West Bank having sovereignty except in a de jure manner. Which the Indian tribes have and the Bantustans had.

But playing with semantics to try to condone the treatment of the non-Jews by the Israeli Jews is futile, the facts are glaringly obvious on the ground. This is not history we are talking about, it is happening today, so your silly attempts to justify the unjustifiable is just a waste of time.

No, the West Bank is NOT within Israel's international borders. Do yourself a favour and stop making a fool of yourself like you do on a daily basis.

Israel controls the borders, therefore it is within Israel's border, full stop. Your childish games make you the fool.

Wow Monti. Every time I refute your posts (which happens often), you start posting more jibberish to back up your previous jibberish.
The West Bank is not inside Israel, therefore your comparison doesn't work. Give up and quit making a fool of yourself

 

[montelatici]

You never refute my claims. You make ridiculous assertions that have no basis in fact. The West Bank has less autonomy sovereignty than the Bantustans, it is an occupied territory. I was being generous. It is you that consistently make a fool of yourself. The comical part of it is that you don't realize it.

"A Palestinian Bantustan won’t end the conflict"

Advertisement

 

[toastman]

You never refute my claims. You make ridiculous assertions that have no basis in fact. The West Bank has less autonomy sovereignty than the Bantustans, it is an occupied territory. I was being generous. It is you that consistently make a fool of yourself. The comical part of it is that you don't realize it.

"A Palestinian Bantustan won’t end the conflict"

Advertisement

Well I don't expect you to admit that I have refuted your bullshit so many times, but the proof is all over the I/P forum. You keep thinking you can get away with posting your propaganda but I have exposed you for the liar that you are.

Word of advice, when I refute your post, just let it go instead of continuing to back up your assertion because all you're doing is making a fool of yourself.
And for ***** sake, take a break with your Palestinian propaganda already! Enough is enough.

 

[M14 Shooter]

Jordan - the state which the WB used to be part of -- says they do, in a treaty with Israel
How are Israel and Jordan wrong?

Israel and Jordan have a treaty that gave I

You need to complete that thought.

 

[Phoenall]

The countries you mention doesn't have jurisdiction over millions of people held in the West Bank, Gaza and East Jerusalem as Israel has. If those countries did they would give them citizenship, as we in the U.S. do for the Native Americans who live on reservations.

You continuously make a bit of a fool of yourself. All you do is make false accusations in caps.

Not the question posed was it, I pointed out that 100% of the worlds nations withhold citizenship from those they have jurisdiction over. In the UK alone this amounts to about 3 million people who live and work here and are not UK citizens. I dare saw that in the US the numbers will be much higher, in the tens of millions. Many will be muslims out to disrupt and set up terror cells in advance of their world take over.


No false accusations Abdul all provable facts, or should this be commando ?

 

[MJB12741]

No.

"Tribal sovereignty in the United States is the inherent authority of indigenous tribes to govern themselves within the borders of the United States of America. "

Tribal sovereignty in the United States - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia

Exactly! They are within the U.S borders. Not so with the West Bank. The West Bank is Sovereign Palestinian territory which is not inside Israel's borders.

The West Bank is within Israel's border, completely, and Israel completely controls the borders, air space and territorial sea of the West Bank and Gaza. That excludes the possibility of the West Bank having sovereignty except in a de jure manner. Which the Indian tribes have and the Bantustans had.

But playing with semantics to try to condone the treatment of the non-Jews by the Israeli Jews is futile, the facts are glaringly obvious on the ground. This is not history we are talking about, it is happening today, so your silly attempts to justify the unjustifiable is just a waste of time.

No, the West Bank is NOT within Israel's international borders. Do yourself a favour and stop making a fool of yourself like you do on a daily basis.

Israel controls the borders, therefore it is within Israel's border, full stop. Your childish games make you the fool.

What "borders" are you talking about? I don't recall Israel setting borders.

 

[montelatici]

You never refute my claims. You make ridiculous assertions that have no basis in fact. The West Bank has less autonomy sovereignty than the Bantustans, it is an occupied territory. I was being generous. It is you that consistently make a fool of yourself. The comical part of it is that you don't realize it.

"A Palestinian Bantustan won’t end the conflict"

Advertisement

Well I don't expect you to admit that I have refuted your bullshit so many times, but the proof is all over the I/P forum. You keep thinking you can get away with posting your propaganda but I have exposed you for the liar that you are.

Word of advice, when I refute your post, just let it go instead of continuing to back up your assertion because all you're doing is making a fool of yourself.
And for ***** sake, take a break with your Palestinian propaganda already! Enough is enough.

You may refute a post, but that is it. You have no basis in fact to refute it. And, I demonstrate it consistently. It is you who consistently makes a fool of himself, attempting to justify the unjustifiable and attempting to replace fact with propaganda is impossible. So you are made to consistently look the fool.

How can you possibly claim that Palestine is a sovereign state and is not within the jurisdiction of Israel even more than the Bantustans were within the jurisdiction of white-rule South Africa. Do you realize what an imbecilic assertion that is?

 

[toastman]

You never refute my claims. You make ridiculous assertions that have no basis in fact. The West Bank has less autonomy sovereignty than the Bantustans, it is an occupied territory. I was being generous. It is you that consistently make a fool of yourself. The comical part of it is that you don't realize it.

"A Palestinian Bantustan won’t end the conflict"

Advertisement

Well I don't expect you to admit that I have refuted your bullshit so many times, but the proof is all over the I/P forum. You keep thinking you can get away with posting your propaganda but I have exposed you for the liar that you are.

Word of advice, when I refute your post, just let it go instead of continuing to back up your assertion because all you're doing is making a fool of yourself.
And for ***** sake, take a break with your Palestinian propaganda already! Enough is enough.

You may refute a post, but that is it. You have no basis in fact to refute it. And, I demonstrate it consistently. It is you who consistently makes a fool of himself, attempting to justify the unjustifiable and attempting to replace fact with propaganda is impossible. So you are made to consistently look the fool.

How can you possibly claim that Palestine is a sovereign state and is not within the jurisdiction of Israel even more than the Bantustans were within the jurisdiction of white-rule South Africa. Do you realize what an imbecilic assertion that is?

"The State of Palestinehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/State_of_Palestine#endnote_naming (Arabic: دولة فلسطين‎ Dawlat Filasṭīn) is a de jure sovereign state in the Middle East.[14][15]Its independence was declared on 15 November 1988 by the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO) in Algiers as a government-in-exile"

State of Palestine - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia

 

[M14 Shooter]

"The State of Palestine (Arabic: دولة فلسطين‎ Dawlat Filasṭīn) is a de jure sovereign state in the Middle East.[14][15]Its independence was declared on 15 November 1988 by the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO) in Algiers as a government-in-exile"
State of Palestine - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia

Doesn't mean squat until the Israelis agree to let the land go.

 

[montelatici]

LOL. Well thanks for confirming what I said in an earlier post that Palestine is a de jure sovereign state, like the Bantustans, as opposed to a de facto sovereign state state. You should look into definitions before you post nonsense, may be this will help.

" de-jure sovereign is one who has a legal claim to sovereignty but does not possess it in fact while de-facto sovereign is one who has no legal claim to sovereignty but possesses it in fact and exercises necessary force to make and enforce its laws."

 

[montelatici]

"The State of Palestine (Arabic: دولة فلسطين‎ Dawlat Filasṭīn) is a de jure sovereign state in the Middle East.[14][15]Its independence was declared on 15 November 1988 by the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO) in Algiers as a government-in-exile"
State of Palestine - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia

Doesn't mean squat until the Israelis agree to let the land go.

You are absolutely right M14. Thanks for the support. My Toast, you do look the fool even more. LOL

 

[toastman]

LOL. Well thanks for confirming what I said in an earlier post that Palestine is a de jure sovereign state, like the Bantustans, as opposed to a de facto sovereign state state. You should look into definitions before you post nonsense, may be this will help.

" de-jure sovereign is one who has a legal claim to sovereignty but does not possess it in fact while de-facto sovereign is one who has no legal claim to sovereignty but possesses it in fact and exercises necessary force to make and enforce its laws."

Oh, I know what it mean, but you said Palestine was not a SOVEREIGN state, Read your post again liar. How many times am I going to catch you in a lie ?

 

[toastman]

You said: "How can you possibly claim that Palestine is a sovereign state"

Then when I posted the link, you said this: "what I said in an earlier post that Palestine is a de jure sovereign state"

No, you didn't say de jure liar. All you have are lies and propaganda, like we all know

 

[montelatici]

You said: "How can you possibly claim that Palestine is a sovereign state"

Then when I posted the link, you said this: "what I said in an earlier post that Palestine is a de jure sovereign state"

No, you didn't say de jure liar. All you have are lies and propaganda, like we all know

You are correct, I thought I had stated that it was a de jure sovereign state like the Bantustans were, but I see I did not. So I agree that Palestine, like the Bantustans, is a de jure sovereign state.

When people discuss sovereignty, the concept is that of a de facto sovereign state, that is, a state that has control of its borders, air space, people etc. I don't believe that you or anyone else uses the term sovereign, to mean a state, like a Bantustan of Palestine, that has no control of its borders, air space, territorial sea, taxation, people, military, etc. Very few people add "de facto" to differentiate between a truly sovereign state and a de jure sovereign state.

But if you believe you have won the argument because Palestine, Tibet and the Bantustans) among others are/were de jure sovereign states , you have won.

How does that change the fact that Israel has jurisdiction over the Occupied Territories and its people and with this jurisdiction should be adhering to the Universal Declaration of Human Rights to which it is a signatory? (Which is the actual point of contention.)

 

[toastman]

You said: "How can you possibly claim that Palestine is a sovereign state"

Then when I posted the link, you said this: "what I said in an earlier post that Palestine is a de jure sovereign state"

No, you didn't say de jure liar. All you have are lies and propaganda, like we all know

You are correct, I thought I had stated that it was a de jure sovereign state like the Bantustans were, but I see I did not. So I agree that Palestine, like the Bantustans, is a de jure sovereign state.

When people discuss sovereignty, the concept is that of a de facto sovereign state, that is, a state that has control of its borders, air space, people etc. I don't believe that you or anyone else uses the term sovereign, to mean a state, like a Bantustan of Palestine, that has no control of its borders, air space, territorial sea, taxation, people, military, etc. Very few people add "de facto" to differentiate between a truly sovereign state and a de jure sovereign state.

But if you believe you have won the argument because Palestine, Tibet and the Bantustans) among others are/were de jure sovereign states , you have won.

How does that change the fact that Israel has jurisdiction over the Occupied Territories and its people and with this jurisdiction should be adhering to the Universal Declaration of Human Rights to which it is a signatory? (Which is the actual point of contention.)

I never said that the Palestinians have jurisdiction. I was just talking about their declaration of independence in 1988.

 

[Phoenall]

No.

"Tribal sovereignty in the United States is the inherent authority of indigenous tribes to govern themselves within the borders of the United States of America. "

Tribal sovereignty in the United States - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia

Exactly! They are within the U.S borders. Not so with the West Bank. The West Bank is Sovereign Palestinian territory which is not inside Israel's borders.

The West Bank is within Israel's border, completely, and Israel completely controls the borders, air space and territorial sea of the West Bank and Gaza. That excludes the possibility of the West Bank having sovereignty except in a de jure manner. Which the Indian tribes have and the Bantustans had.

But playing with semantics to try to condone the treatment of the non-Jews by the Israeli Jews is futile, the facts are glaringly obvious on the ground. This is not history we are talking about, it is happening today, so your silly attempts to justify the unjustifiable is just a waste of time.

Then the arab muslims can be deported as illegal immigrants cant they. Care to show the treaty that transferred the west bank to Israel and why the P.A. knows nothing about it ?

 

[montelatici]

What does that have to do with anything, Bantustans also declared independence, it didn't change the fact that were not de facto sovereign states.

 

[montelatici]

No.

"Tribal sovereignty in the United States is the inherent authority of indigenous tribes to govern themselves within the borders of the United States of America. "

Tribal sovereignty in the United States - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia

Exactly! They are within the U.S borders. Not so with the West Bank. The West Bank is Sovereign Palestinian territory which is not inside Israel's borders.

The West Bank is within Israel's border, completely, and Israel completely controls the borders, air space and territorial sea of the West Bank and Gaza. That excludes the possibility of the West Bank having sovereignty except in a de jure manner. Which the Indian tribes have and the Bantustans had.

But playing with semantics to try to condone the treatment of the non-Jews by the Israeli Jews is futile, the facts are glaringly obvious on the ground. This is not history we are talking about, it is happening today, so your silly attempts to justify the unjustifiable is just a waste of time.

Then the arab muslims can be deported as illegal immigrants cant they. Care to show the treaty that transferred the west bank to Israel and why the P.A. knows nothing about it ?

I guess the Israelis could evict all the non-Jews, but they would be committing a war crime (ethnic cleansing) as it is still occupied territory under international law and it is illegal to transfer population out of occupied territory.