Post Reply
Page 4 of 21  •  Prev 1 2 3 4 5 6 ... 21 Next
Switch to Forum Live View The Palestinians’ mistake in seeking statehood from the U.N.
3 years ago  ::  Apr 19, 2011 - 10:16PM #31
LeahOne
Posts: 16,148

Apr 19, 2011 -- 9:11PM, SherriMunnerlyn wrote:


Apr 19, 2011 -- 12:44PM, LeahOne wrote:


"..... his ancestors were the shepherds who stood in the fields outside the manger Jesus was born in."


No doubt you want people to see this as a statement of fact and truth.  I suppose in your much-romanticized version of history it's unquestionable.




LeahOne,


Look up Beit Sahour on Wikipedia, the name of the village means House Of The Night Watch, and is reputed to be near where the angels proclaimed Jesus birth to shepherds. 80% of the population are Christians. And, last, Palestinian American Mazin Qumsiyeh, who was born there, states the ancestors of the Christians there trace their background to those shepherds. Why would they lie about their ancestors?


Sherri





LOL!  You seem to be under the VERY mistaken impression that the entire 'Nativity story' in your Bible is 'historical reality' .


Since the season for staying all night with the flocks is *lambing* season - and that is NOT around the winter solstice! - either there were no shepherds, or your (Biblical) Jesus wasn't born on 25 Dec.   The percentage of Christians there  is irrelevant to anyone's honesty. 


Since 'their' official religious authority, the Waqf,  has recently started denying that Solomon's Temple stood on (well, 'in' may be more accurate) the Temple Mount - why should anyone expect the UNofficial 'rank & file' folks to be so much more honest than their own 'authority'?


And since when we discussed this Big Lie of the Waqf - you stated that it was of no importance and were perfectly willing to give them a pass on that lie.  That was *afterï»ż* people had to explain to you what the 'Waqf' actually was, lol!


So, Sherri - since you gave the Waqf a pass on their lying about Solomon's Temple - I'm shocked - SHOCKED! - that you feel free to complain because I don't share your belief in your Christian religious mythos (IF you understand that word correctly, you know that I'm not saying the Nativity stories are 'false' - but that they're NOT 'historical reality').

Quick Reply
Cancel
3 years ago  ::  Apr 20, 2011 - 1:59AM #32
Kinky.christian
Posts: 262

One person who thinks the PA is making a mistake in seeking statehood is is Ahmad Samih Khalidi


Ahmad Samih Khalidi is a senior associate member of St Antony's College, Oxford. The college has received large grants from the Saudi Government


Khalidi seems to think the goal of a Palestinian state within the 1967 borders is too limted. Why not try for the lot?


See: A West Bank anachronism 


Seriously, UN recongnition of a Palestinian state within the 1967 borders also implies recognition of Israel within the 1967 borders. This offer may be as good as it gets. Perhaps it should not be dismissed too cavalierly.


 

Quick Reply
Cancel
3 years ago  ::  Apr 20, 2011 - 4:41AM #33
habesor
Posts: 5,633

K-Christian,


I read the article by Khalidi that you cited. I also read some of the replies. One of those replies contained the following which pretty much reflects what I thought about the article:


"This article is grimly amusing. Back in the 1970s some PLO leaders were upfront about the fact that the idea of a separate Palestinian state (and even a separate Palestinian people) was just a way to spin the conflict in a way that countered Israeli claims to statehood on a national basis - winning sympathy in the West with the image of a Palestinian people being denied their own specific state...as against the less appealing image of Arab people wishing to drive the Israelis into the sea.


I've hoped since then that actually more and more Palestinians will come to want their own specific state, and I hope that enough of them now do - so making this a viable goal (however great the difficulties), instead of a mere disposable and in its way cynical tactic meant to achieve the non-viable and calamitous goal of destroying Israel as a Jewish nation state.


But alas now we have an article positively cheer-leading for the non-viable and calamitous goal. C'mon guys - a state isn't good enough, it's not what we really want, it's not ever what we really wanted ...No, we want a pan-Palestinian (Arab) dream again, we want to go for broke again. C'mon guys, let's go for glorious broke! Blimey, as the old song goes, when will they ever learn?


It may be dressed up in right-on cuddly cliches, but this is moronic, and basically bloodthirsty, useless rubbish."


There is an additional aspect to this whole question and that is what consequences would such a stupid UN decision have for the UN. Given that it would be in violation of several previous UN decisions (e.g UNSC242 and 338)  and UN sponsored and sanctioned agreements (the 1949 Armistice agreements for starters) one has to wonder what sort of credibility the UN would have as a peace promoting organization. There are national institutions which have, given time, overcome the damaging effects of stupid decisions (e.g. U.S Supreme Court and the Dred Scott decision) and international organizations which have not (e.g. the League of nations and the Italian invasion of Ethiopia). The UNGA has already made one stupendouly stupid decision in 1975 when it officially decided that Zionism was racism; a decision that it rescinded a decade and a half later and which has the distiction of being the only UNGA decision ever to be rescinded. Is history going to repeat itself in September and will the UN be able to recover in the future?


Habesor

Habesor
Quick Reply
Cancel
3 years ago  ::  Apr 20, 2011 - 1:11PM #34
teilhard
Posts: 50,149

A Guess --


The "Hamas" Terror-Thugs hope-hope-hope to PROVOKE Israel into making a strong Military Response, with the hoped-for Result of numerous innocent "Palestinian" Casualties (since "Hamas" DELIBERATELY operates using "Civilians" as SHIELDS) ... THEN "Hamas" will loudly trumpet their losses ...


Apr 19, 2011 -- 2:03PM, Stardove wrote:


Isn't Christianity suppose to be about forgiveness?  Turn the other cheek....


Sirens sounded throughout southern Israel on Thursday, warning residents to take cover as at least 10 rockets, missiles and mortars were fired from the Gaza Strip and Israel launched an airstrike to destroy a rocket launcher.


How should Israel respond when missiles are being fired into the country?


The Israeli response was relatively muted, showing that at least for the moment, military officials were still weighing how to halt the projectiles from Gaza that left schools closed in several Israeli cities for a second day and sent residents scrambling for shelters.


Four mortars, four Kassam rockets and two longer-range Grad military-grade rockets were fired into Israeli towns, a police spokesman said. No one was injured. One longer-range Grad missile landed just north of the coastal city of Ashdod, which is less than 20 miles from Tel Aviv, in the deepest strike inside Israeli territory so far.


Continued at link.





Quick Reply
Cancel
3 years ago  ::  Apr 20, 2011 - 4:50PM #35
KindredSai
Posts: 5,385

Apr 20, 2011 -- 4:41AM, habesor wrote:


K-Christian,


I read the article by Khalidi that you cited. I also read some of the replies. One of those replies contained the following which pretty much reflects what I thought about the article:


"This article is grimly amusing. Back in the 1970s some PLO leaders were upfront about the fact that the idea of a separate Palestinian state (and even a separate Palestinian people) was just a way to spin the conflict in a way that countered Israeli claims to statehood on a national basis - winning sympathy in the West with the image of a Palestinian people being denied their own specific state...as against the less appealing image of Arab people wishing to drive the Israelis into the sea.


I've hoped since then that actually more and more Palestinians will come to want their own specific state, and I hope that enough of them now do - so making this a viable goal (however great the difficulties), instead of a mere disposable and in its way cynical tactic meant to achieve the non-viable and calamitous goal of destroying Israel as a Jewish nation state.


But alas now we have an article positively cheer-leading for the non-viable and calamitous goal. C'mon guys - a state isn't good enough, it's not what we really want, it's not ever what we really wanted ...No, we want a pan-Palestinian (Arab) dream again, we want to go for broke again. C'mon guys, let's go for glorious broke! Blimey, as the old song goes, when will they ever learn?


It may be dressed up in right-on cuddly cliches, but this is moronic, and basically bloodthirsty, useless rubbish."


There is an additional aspect to this whole question and that is what consequences would such a stupid UN decision have for the UN. Given that it would be in violation of several previous UN decisions (e.g UNSC242 and 338)  and UN sponsored and sanctioned agreements (the 1949 Armistice agreements for starters) one has to wonder what sort of credibility the UN would have as a peace promoting organization. There are national institutions which have, given time, overcome the damaging effects of stupid decisions (e.g. U.S Supreme Court and the Dred Scott decision) and international organizations which have not (e.g. the League of nations and the Italian invasion of Ethiopia). The UNGA has already made one stupendouly stupid decision in 1975 when it officially decided that Zionism was racism; a decision that it rescinded a decade and a half later and which has the distiction of being the only UNGA decision ever to be rescinded. Is history going to repeat itself in September and will the UN be able to recover in the future?


Habesor




Let's be clear here habesor.


It's not Fatah who is going against international law. It's Israel. There is an international consensus (excluding Israel) that Israel is law breaking at this moment in time.


The UNGA decision to recognise Palestine as a State is to bypass Israel's attempt for a political impasse to stall any prospect of Statehood.


The September recognition should be welcomed not be known as some mistake.




Quick Reply
Cancel
3 years ago  ::  Apr 20, 2011 - 5:03PM #36
browbeaten
Posts: 2,959

Apr 20, 2011 -- 4:50PM, KindredSai wrote:


Apr 20, 2011 -- 4:41AM, habesor wrote:


K-Christian,


I read the article by Khalidi that you cited. I also read some of the replies. One of those replies contained the following which pretty much reflects what I thought about the article:


"This article is grimly amusing. Back in the 1970s some PLO leaders were upfront about the fact that the idea of a separate Palestinian state (and even a separate Palestinian people) was just a way to spin the conflict in a way that countered Israeli claims to statehood on a national basis - winning sympathy in the West with the image of a Palestinian people being denied their own specific state...as against the less appealing image of Arab people wishing to drive the Israelis into the sea.


I've hoped since then that actually more and more Palestinians will come to want their own specific state, and I hope that enough of them now do - so making this a viable goal (however great the difficulties), instead of a mere disposable and in its way cynical tactic meant to achieve the non-viable and calamitous goal of destroying Israel as a Jewish nation state.


But alas now we have an article positively cheer-leading for the non-viable and calamitous goal. C'mon guys - a state isn't good enough, it's not what we really want, it's not ever what we really wanted ...No, we want a pan-Palestinian (Arab) dream again, we want to go for broke again. C'mon guys, let's go for glorious broke! Blimey, as the old song goes, when will they ever learn?


It may be dressed up in right-on cuddly cliches, but this is moronic, and basically bloodthirsty, useless rubbish."


There is an additional aspect to this whole question and that is what consequences would such a stupid UN decision have for the UN. Given that it would be in violation of several previous UN decisions (e.g UNSC242 and 338)  and UN sponsored and sanctioned agreements (the 1949 Armistice agreements for starters) one has to wonder what sort of credibility the UN would have as a peace promoting organization. There are national institutions which have, given time, overcome the damaging effects of stupid decisions (e.g. U.S Supreme Court and the Dred Scott decision) and international organizations which have not (e.g. the League of nations and the Italian invasion of Ethiopia). The UNGA has already made one stupendouly stupid decision in 1975 when it officially decided that Zionism was racism; a decision that it rescinded a decade and a half later and which has the distiction of being the only UNGA decision ever to be rescinded. Is history going to repeat itself in September and will the UN be able to recover in the future?


Habesor




Let's be clear here habesor.


It's not Fatah who is going against international law. It's Israel. There is an international consensus (excluding Israel) that Israel is law breaking at this moment in time.


The UNGA decision to recognise Palestine as a State is to bypass Israel's attempt for a political impasse to stall any prospect of Statehood.


The September recognition should be welcomed not be known as some mistake



The overwhelming facts are that you or anyone else cannot define the borders of either Israel or a proposed Palestinian state and as such,  a self-proclaimed state will exist borderless. But more importantly, trying to define the borders using the green line may, indeed, force negotiations on BOTH SIDES, but will also implicitly recognize Israel within these "negotiated" borders and this, the Arabs/Palestinians, WILL NOT do.


.

Quick Reply
Cancel
3 years ago  ::  Apr 20, 2011 - 5:11PM #37
KindredSai
Posts: 5,385

The overwhelming facts are that you or anyone else cannot define the borders of either Israel or a proposed Palestinian state and as such,  a self-proclaimed state will exist borderless. But more importantly, trying to define the borders using the green line may, indeed, force negotiations on BOTH SIDES, but will also implicitly recognize Israel within these "negotiated" borders and this, the Arabs/Palestinians, WILL NOT do.


You are forgetting Habesor, Israel's creation led to de fact borders in line with resolution 181, there was sans negotiation. Borders were imposed.


You are also forgetting that the State of Israel is pre-determining the outcome of negotiations with settlement building which makes borders hard to negotiate when Israel with advantage can have the upper hand.


The State of Israel and the US are not honest negotiators.

Quick Reply
Cancel
3 years ago  ::  Apr 20, 2011 - 5:21PM #38
browbeaten
Posts: 2,959

Apr 20, 2011 -- 5:11PM, KindredSai wrote:


The overwhelming facts are that you or anyone else cannot define the borders of either Israel or a proposed Palestinian state and as such,  a self-proclaimed state will exist borderless. But more importantly, trying to define the borders using the green line may, indeed, force negotiations on BOTH SIDES, but will also implicitly recognize Israel within these "negotiated" borders and this, the Arabs/Palestinians, WILL NOT do.


You are forgetting Habesor, Israel's creation led to de fact borders in line with resolution 181, there was sans negotiation. Borders were imposed.


You are also forgetting that the State of Israel is pre-determining the outcome of negotiations with settlement building which makes borders hard to negotiate when Israel with advantage can have the upper hand.


The State of Israel and the US are not honest negotiators.



Firstly, I'm not Habesor, not do I speak for him.  Secondly, you're first statement is completely false.  There are no "de facto" borders.  They are NOT documented in any legal paperwork, anywhere.  They are simply and have always been borders that can only be defined through negotiation.   Israel has as much right to any land in and out of this Armistice line until such time as the actual borders are negotiated and put down on paper.  You are trying, desperately, to push your opinion as if it were fact and that is not the case here.   Israel and the US are the ONLY ones trying to negotiate, whether honestly or otherwise.  But, let's face it, it is ONLY Israel and the US that are showing up to the table, so who is really being honest here?


.

Quick Reply
Cancel
3 years ago  ::  Apr 20, 2011 - 5:33PM #39
KindredSai
Posts: 5,385

Apr 20, 2011 -- 5:21PM, browbeaten wrote:


Apr 20, 2011 -- 5:11PM, KindredSai wrote:


The overwhelming facts are that you or anyone else cannot define the borders of either Israel or a proposed Palestinian state and as such,  a self-proclaimed state will exist borderless. But more importantly, trying to define the borders using the green line may, indeed, force negotiations on BOTH SIDES, but will also implicitly recognize Israel within these "negotiated" borders and this, the Arabs/Palestinians, WILL NOT do.


You are forgetting Habesor, Israel's creation led to de fact borders in line with resolution 181, there was sans negotiation. Borders were imposed.


You are also forgetting that the State of Israel is pre-determining the outcome of negotiations with settlement building which makes borders hard to negotiate when Israel with advantage can have the upper hand.


The State of Israel and the US are not honest negotiators.



Firstly, I'm not Habesor, not do I speak for him.  Secondly, you're first statement is completely false.  There are no "de facto" borders.  They are NOT documented in any legal paperwork, anywhere.  They are simply and have always been borders that can only be defined through negotiation.   Israel has as much right to any land in and out of this Armistice line until such time as the actual borders are negotiated and put down on paper.  You are trying, desperately, to push your opinion as if it were fact and that is not the case here.   Israel and the US are the ONLY ones trying to negotiate, whether honestly or otherwise.  But, let's face it, it is ONLY Israel and the US that are showing up to the table, so who is really being honest here?


.





Sorry Brow not habesor.


The first statement is not false at all, Israel's creation in 1948 had de facto borders,  in 1993 the Oslo accords cited that the borders of the West Bank and Gaza are to be negotiated however this was considered null because of Israel's failiure to create a climate of peace by building settlements.


It's not my sole opinion that Israel is going against international law and then expects to negotiate.


Place no trust in Israeli and American promises. They're worthless and won't be honored. They're not honest peace brokers, wanting only unchallengeable domination. Expect no Final Settlement. They'll indefinitely delay and postpone to give Israel enough time to tighten occupation, kill your people, destroy your homes, and steal your land. Only binding, enforceable guarantees are acceptable, and given US/Israeli duplicity, nothing negotiated with them is certain.


Francis Boyle, Senior Advisor to PLO.

Quick Reply
Cancel
3 years ago  ::  Apr 20, 2011 - 5:50PM #40
browbeaten
Posts: 2,959

Apr 20, 2011 -- 5:33PM, KindredSai wrote:


Apr 20, 2011 -- 5:21PM, browbeaten wrote:


Apr 20, 2011 -- 5:11PM, KindredSai wrote:


The overwhelming facts are that you or anyone else cannot define the borders of either Israel or a proposed Palestinian state and as such,  a self-proclaimed state will exist borderless. But more importantly, trying to define the borders using the green line may, indeed, force negotiations on BOTH SIDES, but will also implicitly recognize Israel within these "negotiated" borders and this, the Arabs/Palestinians, WILL NOT do.


You are forgetting Habesor, Israel's creation led to de fact borders in line with resolution 181, there was sans negotiation. Borders were imposed.


You are also forgetting that the State of Israel is pre-determining the outcome of negotiations with settlement building which makes borders hard to negotiate when Israel with advantage can have the upper hand.


The State of Israel and the US are not honest negotiators.



Firstly, I'm not Habesor, not do I speak for him.  Secondly, you're first statement is completely false.  There are no "de facto" borders.  They are NOT documented in any legal paperwork, anywhere.  They are simply and have always been borders that can only be defined through negotiation.   Israel has as much right to any land in and out of this Armistice line until such time as the actual borders are negotiated and put down on paper.  You are trying, desperately, to push your opinion as if it were fact and that is not the case here.   Israel and the US are the ONLY ones trying to negotiate, whether honestly or otherwise.  But, let's face it, it is ONLY Israel and the US that are showing up to the table, so who is really being honest here?


.





Sorry Brow not habesor.


The first statement is not false at all, Israel's creation in 1948 had de facto borders,  in 1993 the Oslo accords cited that the borders of the West Bank and Gaza are to be negotiated however this was considered null because of Israel's failiure to create a climate of peace by building settlements.


It's not my sole opinion that Israel is going against international law and then expects to negotiate.


Place no trust in Israeli and American promises. They're worthless and won't be honored. They're not honest peace brokers, wanting only unchallengeable domination. Expect no Final Settlement. They'll indefinitely delay and postpone to give Israel enough time to tighten occupation, kill your people, destroy your homes, and steal your land. Only binding, enforceable guarantees are acceptable, and given US/Israeli duplicity, nothing negotiated with them is certain.


Francis Boyle, Senior Advisor to PLO.




Never miss an opportunity to miss an opportunity.  That about sums it up, once again.


.


 

Quick Reply
Cancel
Page 4 of 21  •  Prev 1 2 3 4 5 6 ... 21 Next
 
    Viewing this thread :: 0 registered and 1 guest
    No registered users viewing
    Advertisement

    Beliefnet On Facebook