Now back to Israel as usual

PJfanwillneverleave1 said:

dignin said:

PJfanwillneverleave1 said:

dignin said:

PJfanwillneverleave1 said:

dignin said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

BS44325 said:

badbrains said:

BS44325 said:

badbrains said:

BS44325 said:

mickeyrat said:

BS44325 said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

BS44325 said:

badbrains said:

BS44325 said:

Again....no matter what side of the issue you are on...this is reality:

http://www.nationalreview.com/article/415690/no-peace-any-time-soon-not-because-bibi-charles-krauthammer

Who is Israel supposed to make a deal with?

An article written by a Zionist, gee, I wonder which way this article is going to lean. Come on man, u can do better then that. Or not.

You do realize that the Palestinians need to negotiate with zionists don't you?

A just settlement cannot be reached if you ignore them. You are proving my point that Israel has no one to negotiate with.

do you honestly believe they wish to negotiate?

Yes. Israel knows that the status quo cannot continue.

So lemme ask you then, have you questioned why those proposals were rejected throughout the years? If memory serves a major sticking point was surrounding the palestinian refugees STILL in camps to this day. PLO wanted right of return for them. Israel rejected out of hand. Is that really unreasonable for that right?

That probably is the largest sticking point for sure and I am not sure what the correct solution is. There are Israelis who believe there should be zero right of return. There are those who believe that every generation of displaced individuals with Palestinian heritage should be able to return. I am one who believes there should be "some" right of return but how we get to that number is difficult. Israel would be willing to accept some number of people as well as the handover of additional land regardless of internal opposition. Remember they once removed jewish settlers from Gaza by force and under the right conditions they would be willing to do that again. The question is whether there is a Palestinian government willing to accept that deal? Hamas runs the show now and they seek full destruction of Israel. How does one negotiate with them?

So with your theory, Israel doesn't want to negotiate with Hamas and Hamas doesn't want to negotiate with Israel. So now what?

The world joins nations such as Egypt in crushing Hamas. The Palestinian Authority will then be able to exert control and deal with Israel without having to worry about the Islamist rejectionists.

Crushing a democratically elected government. Ok, and then what happens when "nothing" happens and the Palestinian people are "still" prisoners in their "own" country? And anther group, like Ben has stated already, comes up because again, you can't kill an idea. Just like the Zionists have an idea for Israel, the Palestinians have an idea for their own land. Goes back and forth.

Edit-here's a theory, why not America and Israel join the "rest" of the world. Seems to be them and a tiny few islands in the pacific somewhere that support any actions Israel has taken.

And Canada

Fuck Stephen Harper.

This Canadian supports that statement 100%

This Harper government does not speak for me.

Did you guys vote in the last two elections?

Of course.

So is that yes?

You trolling again?

I have learned the hard way that trolling actually means asking questions people don't want to answer.

So.....

I'm trying to figure out where "of course" is not an answer. Is that confusing to you? A cryptic answer?

You have anything to add to the subject matter at hand?

Religion only on the periphery. This is about the oppresors and the oppressed. Aided by UK at the start then since good ole democratic values of the US of A.

dignin said:

PJfanwillneverleave1 said:

dignin said:

PJfanwillneverleave1 said:

dignin said:

PJfanwillneverleave1 said:

dignin said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

BS44325 said:

badbrains said:

BS44325 said:

badbrains said:

BS44325 said:

mickeyrat said:

BS44325 said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

BS44325 said:

badbrains said:

BS44325 said:

Again....no matter what side of the issue you are on...this is reality:

http://www.nationalreview.com/article/415690/no-peace-any-time-soon-not-because-bibi-charles-krauthammer

Who is Israel supposed to make a deal with?

An article written by a Zionist, gee, I wonder which way this article is going to lean. Come on man, u can do better then that. Or not.

You do realize that the Palestinians need to negotiate with zionists don't you?

A just settlement cannot be reached if you ignore them. You are proving my point that Israel has no one to negotiate with.

do you honestly believe they wish to negotiate?

Yes. Israel knows that the status quo cannot continue.

So lemme ask you then, have you questioned why those proposals were rejected throughout the years? If memory serves a major sticking point was surrounding the palestinian refugees STILL in camps to this day. PLO wanted right of return for them. Israel rejected out of hand. Is that really unreasonable for that right?

That probably is the largest sticking point for sure and I am not sure what the correct solution is. There are Israelis who believe there should be zero right of return. There are those who believe that every generation of displaced individuals with Palestinian heritage should be able to return. I am one who believes there should be "some" right of return but how we get to that number is difficult. Israel would be willing to accept some number of people as well as the handover of additional land regardless of internal opposition. Remember they once removed jewish settlers from Gaza by force and under the right conditions they would be willing to do that again. The question is whether there is a Palestinian government willing to accept that deal? Hamas runs the show now and they seek full destruction of Israel. How does one negotiate with them?

So with your theory, Israel doesn't want to negotiate with Hamas and Hamas doesn't want to negotiate with Israel. So now what?

The world joins nations such as Egypt in crushing Hamas. The Palestinian Authority will then be able to exert control and deal with Israel without having to worry about the Islamist rejectionists.

Crushing a democratically elected government. Ok, and then what happens when "nothing" happens and the Palestinian people are "still" prisoners in their "own" country? And anther group, like Ben has stated already, comes up because again, you can't kill an idea. Just like the Zionists have an idea for Israel, the Palestinians have an idea for their own land. Goes back and forth.

Edit-here's a theory, why not America and Israel join the "rest" of the world. Seems to be them and a tiny few islands in the pacific somewhere that support any actions Israel has taken.

And Canada

Fuck Stephen Harper.

This Canadian supports that statement 100%

This Harper government does not speak for me.

Did you guys vote in the last two elections?

Of course.

So is that yes?

You trolling again?

I have learned the hard way that trolling actually means asking questions people don't want to answer.

So.....

I'm trying to figure out where "of course" is not an answer. Is that confusing to you? A cryptic answer?

You have anything to add to the subject matter at hand?

yeah, I'm not sure where "of course" doesn't obviously mean "yes". either way.....

badbrains said:

How is this even fucken possible in 2015? Another Palestinian family being evicted from their OWN home theyve rented since 1953! All for more settlements. Straight bullshit. Can't wait to hear the defenders of these acts.

http://news.yahoo.com/palestinians-protest-planned-jerusalem-evictions-170854674.html?soc_src=mediacontentstory&soc_trk=tw

Wait, so the land's owner sold the land and the new owners want the renters out so they can move in and you think this is a crime?

You should read it to the bottom and read between the lines. As is often the case in this region, the facts are much more complicated and most of these facts are omitted from the press coverage. Unfortunately we do not have an author's name in this case, but to me the bias is pretty obvious. That aside, read the last two paragraphs:
"Jewish groups have bought property there through shadowy frontmen and straw companies. Selling land to Israeli settlers is viewed as treason by the Palestinians and carries a penalty of life imprisonment. Some alleged perpetrators have been killed."

Why would the author mention these facts if not for the reason that this eviction was over land purchased from an Arab by an Israeli? In most cases, the "shadowy" (again, an unnecessary editorialized comment by the author revealing bias) frontmen are in place in order to PROTECT the Arab selling the land since they could be imprisoned or killed if they openly sold land to an Israeli. Just think about that for a moment. They could be imprisoned or killed if they sell their own land.

Nowhere in the article does it mention that this family being evicted owns this property in question or that an Arab property owner is being evicted for "settlers." That's just your assumption, and based on how this piece is written, I can't say I blame you or anyone for coming to this conclusion, though it is sadly not the facts.

badbrains said:

And wether a shadowy buyer buys the house from said Arab, wouldn't they find out that he sold it anyways?

The point of the middleman is for the seller to be able to claim ignorance and hopefully not face these draconian penalties for selling his property to the buyer and for the price of his choosing.

JohnnieBeBlue said:

badbrains said:

But the facts are settlers are taking land from the Palestinians illegally and that's not debatable. Even the US is somewhat admitting that although ain't doing shit about it.

That's my entire point. No land was taken. There was no theft. This was a property owner making a sale, unless that's also now illegal.

The other interesting point in the article is that it states the land was previously owned by Jordan prior to the war. If Jordan doesn't want it back I am not exactly sure how it is automatically assumed to be Palestinian land?

benjs said:

BS44325 said:

JohnnieBeBlue said:

badbrains said:

But the facts are settlers are taking land from the Palestinians illegally and that's not debatable. Even the US is somewhat admitting that although ain't doing shit about it.

That's my entire point. No land was taken. There was no theft. This was a property owner making a sale, unless that's also now illegal.

The other interesting point in the article is that it states the land was previously owned by Jordan prior to the war. If Jordan doesn't want it back I am not exactly sure how it is automatically assumed to be Palestinian land?

The UN Partition Plan cordoned off a region for the "Jewish state" - the implicit assumption that the remainder was for Arabs. Fast forward a few years to the conclusion of the War of Independence... Anything I've read about the Armistice Lines of '49 mark off "Jewish" territory and "Arab" territory. I see both of these as valid grounds to assume the land ought to have defaulted to the indigenous Arabs of the land.

Well according to the article linked above this specific land was Jordanian land pre-1967. That's how the long-standing tenants describe it.