17 Jan 06
1 edit
Originally posted by no1marauderSmokescreens ...... admit that I supported the continuing of the peace negotiations on the basis of the Roadmap and you didn't.
Then it should be easy for you to name ONE position of Sharon as spelled out in his Herzliya speech you disagree with. Do so. After all, you're the one who cut and pasted it in its entirety.
I proved it. There is no denying, marauder.
17 Jan 06
Sharon: The government under my leadership will not compromise on the realization of all phases of the Roadmap. It is incumbent upon the Palestinians to uproot the terrorist groups and to create a law-abiding society which fights against violence and incitement. Peace and terror cannot coexist. The world is currently united in its unequivocal demand from the Palestinians to act toward the cessation of terrorism and the implementation of reforms. Only a transformation of the Palestinian Authority into a different authority will enable progress in the political process. The Palestinians must fulfill their obligations. A full and complete implementation will - at the end of the process - lead to peace and tranquility.
This rigid approach, setting forth preconditions on the Palestinians without reciprocal ones on the Israelis is what the PA, PeaceNow and I oppose. "The government under my leadership will not compromise on the realization of all phases of the Roadmap". No compromises from Israel on the phases of the Roadmap which require massive Palestinian concessions before Israel has to do anything substantive; that is Sharon's position. And yours.
17 Jan 06
Originally posted by ivanhoeYou support Sharon's vision of the RoadMap as spelled out in the above post.
Smokescreens ...... admit that I supported the continuing of the peace negotiations on the basis of the Roadmap and you didn't.
I proved it. There is no denying, marauder.
The PA, PeaceNow and I support a different vision of negotiations based on, but not rigidly determined, by the RoadMap.
It's laughable how you dodge the question and can't present a single position of Sharon's that you disagree with.
17 Jan 06
Originally posted by ivanhoeYou can keep lying all you want while calling other people liars; that's your childish side coming through as usual. The content of my posts is clear that my position accords with PeaceNow's in basic contours and it is also clear that you falsely claimed that your position was the same as PeaceNow's. That was a lie. You support the position of Sharon 100% and PeaceNow opposes it. The rest of your drivel aside, it is utterly clear that you are deceitful, dishonest and irrational.
[b]marauder: "I'll expect your immediate apology for deliberately trying to deceive people "
The only one who is deceiving people is you.
Therefore the only one who should apologise is you.
You did NOT support the Roadmap and now you all of a sudden support it.
I have given the proof for that. You do not hesitate to lie if this serves your purposes . You are a proven liar.[/b]
17 Jan 06
Originally posted by CliffLandinYour knowledge only goes back 50 years. The Jews started re-populatiing Palestine since 1890, and originally owned that land several hundred years ago. So the Jewish state was not 'created' it was re-established. The fact that Muslim fanatics resort to suicide to make a point is of no consquence.
Really? You are questioning whether western Christian nations creating a Jewish state in a muslem country created instability? So you are saying that since the creation of Israel the region has been more stable. Please elaborate. Tell us how many nations resorted to suicide bombers before '48. I feel that I have a pretty strong arguement, whether or not you say it goes nowhere. It goes nowhere because you refuse to look at facts.
17 Jan 06
Originally posted by Rajk999I suggest you take a history course as you obviously don't know what you are talking about. When did the Jews own the land of Palestine "several hundred years" before 1890? What was the comparative population of Jews to Palestinians in Palestine in 1890? 1917? 1939? 1948? They were always a minority at the beginning a tiny one and in 1948 about 30% of the population of Palestine.
Your knowledge only goes back 50 years. The Jews started re-populatiing Palestine since 1890, and originally owned that land several hundred years ago. So the Jewish state was not 'created' it was re-established. The fact that Muslim fanatics resort to suicide to make a point is of no consquence.
17 Jan 06
Originally posted by Rajk999Would you agree that Native Americans have a right to reclaim
Your knowledge only goes back 50 years. The Jews started re-populatiing Palestine since 1890, and originally owned that land several hundred years ago. So the Jewish state was not 'created' it was re-established. The fact that Muslim fanatics resort to suicide to make a point is of no consquence.
New York, Missouri, Oklahoma or California?
How is their displacement distinct from the Jews'?
Nemesio
17 Jan 06
Originally posted by NemesioAre you arguing for the return of native american lands? That is exactly my point. The Jews claim to have a right to lands that were theirs a thousand years prior. When was the last time, before the modern state of Israel, that the Jews controlled Jerusalem? Before the time of Jesus, I believe. Since then it has been under the control of the Romans, various Muslems and various Christians. The Jews claiming that land is about the same as the Aleuts claiming lands in Siberia and the US and the UK backing them. How do you think the Russians would feel about that?
Would you agree that Native Americans have a right to reclaim
New York, Missouri, Oklahoma or California?
How is their displacement distinct from the Jews'?
Nemesio
17 Jan 06
Interesting how youall support UN resolutions when its in favour of your favourite cause/nation/religion and go against it when it is not. The UN, and by extention the world, supported the re-establishing of a Jewish state. The instability was caused by the Muslim nations deciding that they dont have to abide by any UN directive and has been fighting illegal wars with Israel since 1948 .. all of which they got clobbered in and will continue to get clobbered in future. Its true that Israel more recently did not follow UN but thats a another story.
17 Jan 06
Originally posted by no1marauderI proved you were wrong. I proved you lied. That is enough.
You can keep lying all you want while calling other people liars; that's your childish side coming through as usual. The content of my posts is clear that my position accords with PeaceNow's in basic contours and it is also clear that you falsely claimed that your position was the same as PeaceNow's. That was a lie. You support the position of Sharon 100 ...[text shortened]... t of your drivel aside, it is utterly clear that you are deceitful, dishonest and irrational.
17 Jan 06
Originally posted by Rajk999Are you referring to the 1947 UN Partition Plan that divided Palestine in to two states, one Jewish and one Arab? This plan called for neither the Palestinians nor the Jews to control Jerusalem. Take a good look at this link and then tell me how Israel is in accord with this plan.
Interesting how youall support UN resolutions when its in favour of your favourite cause/nation/religion and go against it when it is not. The UN, and by extention the world, supported the re-establishing of a Jewish state. The instability was caused by the Muslim nations deciding that they dont have to abide by any UN directive and has been fighting illegal ...[text shortened]... bered in future. Its true that Israel more recently did not follow UN but thats a another story.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1947_UN_Partition_Plan
"In December 1948, the UN General Assembly passed Resolution 194 which declared (amongst other things) that "refugees wishing to return to their homes and live in peace with their neighbors should be permitted to do so" and that "compensation should be paid for the property of those choosing not to return." However, the resolution was never implemented, see Palestinian refugee."
So which resolution are you referring to, because I am having a hard time finding any information on a UN Resolution that established Israel?
I did find this UN resolution;
"United Nations Security Council Resolution 242 (S/RES/242) was adopted unanimously by the UN Security Council on November 22, 1967 in the aftermath of the Six Day War. It calls for the "withdrawal of Israeli armed forces from territories occupied in the recent conflict" (see semantic dispute) in exchange for an end to the Arab-Israeli conflict. The "territories" here refer to the West Bank, East Jerusalem, the Gaza Strip, the Sinai Peninsula and the Golan Heights. It also calls for the recognition of all established states by belligerent parties (Israel, Egypt, Syria, Jordan) of each other and calls for the establishment of defensible boundries for all parties."
17 Jan 06
Originally posted by CliffLandinSo you agree that the UN passed a resoluton that gives Israel the right to a state in the land of Palestine. Forget that Israel also is in violation for the time being. Your contention was that Israel was the cause of the instability. I am saying that the mulsim states started the instability after 1948 by constant and repeated attempts to destroy the newly formed state.
[b]Are you referring to the 1947 UN Partition Plan that divided Palestine in to two states, one Jewish and one Arab? b]
17 Jan 06
1 edit
Originally posted by Rajk999You are incorrect. The General Assembly approved a plan granting two states in Palestine. However, GA resolutions are NON-BINDING in international law and thus cannot be the source of any "right to a state". Secondly, there is nothing in the UN Charter giving that agency the power to give one group of people's land to another group. Thirdly, the people of Palestine had a right to self-determination under international law, but no partition plan was ever put forth for them to approve or reject by democratic processes. The GA plan would almost certainly have been rejected by the Palestinian people has about 70% were non-Jewish and the plan gave the Jewish state the majority of the land (though the population in the area designated as the Jewish state had a slight majority of non-Jews).
So you agree that the UN passed a resoluton that gives Israel the right to a state in the land of Palestine. Forget that Israel also is in violation for the time being. Your contention was that Israel was the cause of the instability. I am saying that the mulsim states started the instability after 1948 by constant and repeated attempts to destroy the newly formed state.
It may be water under the bridge, but the creation of Israel in 1948 was, at best, of dubious legality under international law and more likely was a clear violation of IL.
17 Jan 06
Originally posted by NemesioThe Bible says nothing about native Americans reclaiming land, besides, they have their casinos now. The Bible does say that the Israelites shall inheret the present day state of Israel....can't argue with the Bible; you should know that, Nem...😉
Would you agree that Native Americans have a right to reclaim
New York, Missouri, Oklahoma or California?
How is their displacement distinct from the Jews'?
Nemesio