Scott Posted January 2, 2015 Share Posted January 2, 2015 Off-topic, inflammatory posts removed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mosha Posted January 2, 2015 Share Posted January 2, 2015 Firing rockets from schools and hospitals isn't a war crime? All just propaganda and photoshop. If you really believe this, you should be encouraging Israel to join the ICC itself, present its evidence and prosecute for war crimes. What has Israel got to lose? On these forums was a video form Finnsh TV reporting from a Palestinian hospital, and the reporter was reporting on the sound of rockets being launched from hospital grounds. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post willyumiii Posted January 2, 2015 Popular Post Share Posted January 2, 2015 As they should! A lot of money buys the Jews immunity and mega support from the US. After WWII the Jews should have been given a good chunk of Germany instead of taking Palestine away from the Palestinians. The world would be a much safer place today if they had done that! What they di is equal to kicking everyone out of California and giving it all to the Native American Indians since they were mistreated. How well do you think that would fly? 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
willyumiii Posted January 2, 2015 Share Posted January 2, 2015 Jews, Muslims, and Christians all believe in the same god. They hate eachother so much, they could possibly cause a war that could destroy everyone on earth some day. I think their god must be pretty f#cked up! Religion = Superstition and is not worth anyone dieing over! Period! 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chuckd Posted January 2, 2015 Share Posted January 2, 2015 As they should! A lot of money buys the Jews immunity and mega support from the US. After WWII the Jews should have been given a good chunk of Germany instead of taking Palestine away from the Palestinians. The world would be a much safer place today if they had done that! What they di is equal to kicking everyone out of California and giving it all to the Native American Indians since they were mistreated. How well do you think that would fly? The size difference between California and Israel is too much. Let's just give the Indian nations Rhode Island instead. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post Ulysses G. Posted January 2, 2015 Popular Post Share Posted January 2, 2015 A lot of money buys the Jews immunity and mega support from the US. More like being the only true democracy in Middle East and America's closet ally. Those things earn a lot of support. 4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post ggold Posted January 2, 2015 Popular Post Share Posted January 2, 2015 (edited) Looks like its panic stations in Israel, now that their war criminals will be named and shamed before the whole world. More writing on the wall for the end of what John Kerry described as "the unsustainable status quo". What else could Abbas do? “They attack us and our land every day, to whom are we to complain? The security council let us down – where are we to go?” Abbas told a gathering of Palestinian leaders in remarks broadcast on official television. http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/dec/31/palestinian-president-international-criminal-court What do the hypocritical US and Israeli governments prefer: the Abbas way appealing peacefully to the referee or the Hamas way? They should be praising the PA leader for choosing the non combatant path not criticizing him. Netanyahu said that the Palestinians had more to fear from the ICC than Israel. Why do they object to the move then...hmmm strange? Netanyahu added that Israel will act "to protect soldiers of the IDF – the most moral army in the world." http://www.haaretz.com/news/diplomacy-defense/1.634753 ..well that's handy, because now they will be able to prove that in court won't they?. It may take years for the war criminals to be held responsible. But it will be interesting to see Israeli politicians and individual IDF found guilty afraid to visit signatory countries where they may be arrested. Just on a technical note... The ICC can prosecute individuals accused of genocide, crimes against humanity and war crimes committed since 1 July 2002, when the Rome statute came into force. The court can pursue an individual only if crimes were committed on the territory of a state party – one that has signed and ratified the Rome statute – or by a citizen of such a state. Israel has signed but not ratified the treaty. http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/dec/31/palestinian-president-international-criminal-court Perhaps Israel and the US should ratify the ICC treaty themselves if they wish to prosecute Hamas. What have they got to lose? The Oslo accord stipulated that the Palestinians would not make unilateral moves to join international organisations. So they have now killed that accord. Also Just because the Palestinians have applied to join the ICC there is no guarantee the ICC will accept them. There is doubt if the ICC could initiate proceedings against Israel. Even the Palestinians own UN envoy has said the PA could never take Israel to the ICC because they the Palestinians were guilty of crimes against humanity. The 22 year old Accords have been dead in the water for a long time. Israel contravened the spirit of a peace agreement by building more colonies on stolen land, continually stalling, and moving the goalposts...having gained PLO recognition of the state of Israel in 1993 they now demand recognition of the Jewish state of Israel, erasing the language of 20% of its own citizens and condemning them further into apartheid. Time for a fresh approach by-passing the dishonest US brokers, who carry too much Israeli baggage via the Zionist lobby in Washington. Palestinians are facing up to the truth and reconciliation process by applying to sign and ratify their ICC membership. Israel still has too much to hide and lack the courage to ratify the treaty. I can assure you that arabs are not interested n truth and reconciliation. They have never even used such words ever. And to say that 20% of Israels own people have had their language erased is Just a plain and simple lie. You really are just trolling these topics with you're continual lies and miss information. Edited January 2, 2015 by ggold 6 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post ggold Posted January 2, 2015 Popular Post Share Posted January 2, 2015 (edited) There never has been a Palestine in the history of the World that I can find ! There are more of them on welfare all over the World than any other culture. There never has been a Palestine in the history of the World that I can find ! You haven't looked hard enough. Try ..http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Palestine "The region has been controlled by numerous peoples, including Ancient Egyptians, Canaanites, Israelites, Assyrians, Babylonians, Persians, Ancient Greeks, Romans, Byzantines, the Sunni Arab Caliphates, the Shia Fatimid Caliphate, Crusaders, Ayyubids, Mameluks, Mongols, Ottomans, the British and modern Israelis and Palestinians." The Romans called the province Syria Palaestina, and the Greek historian Herodotus in the 5th century BC called it Palaistine The so called Jewish King Herod the Great himself was the son of a Palestinian Arab. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antipater_the_Idumaean There are more of them on welfare all over the World than any other culture. Is that a fact, fantasy or a prejudice...link please! The only part of the Middle East that was called anything close to Palestine was Philistine which is the Gaza strip today. And while Herod was the son of an Arab his Father was not Palestinian he did not even come from the area you claim was Palestine. His father was an Edomite, and Herod was raised within the Jewish faith. Also if you look at a map of the Mongol empire, it never encompassed Israel. Wikipedia is hardly the font of real knowledge! Probably why you quote it so often? Edited January 2, 2015 by ggold 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post ggold Posted January 2, 2015 Popular Post Share Posted January 2, 2015 As they should! A lot of money buys the Jews immunity and mega support from the US. After WWII the Jews should have been given a good chunk of Germany instead of taking Palestine away from the Palestinians. The world would be a much safer place today if they had done that! What they di is equal to kicking everyone out of California and giving it all to the Native American Indians since they were mistreated. How well do you think that would fly? considering the Americans practised genocide against the Native Indians, Maybe they should have given California to the Indians, Instead it is now More hispanic than American? There was no Palestine to take away from the Palestinians either. And if anything Palestine was the name of the area given to the Jewish people by mandate. 4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scott Posted January 2, 2015 Share Posted January 2, 2015 Off-topic post removed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Morch Posted January 3, 2015 Share Posted January 3, 2015 They will have as much success in achieving victory there as in in the UN security consul. But first, stop killing your neighbors and each other, stop being a 'refuges' for nearly 70 years now, stop being stubborn and see what you can work out a solutions with Israel, forget about Jerusalem and a 'refuges' right to return, this will not happened, ever... If you want to get yourselves out of the 19th century living, disengage the Hamas, renounce Iran and refuse any help from entities that are at odd with Israel... For over 60 years now, Arabs of all nation creed and color have tried and failed to dislodge Israel from it's rightful place to exist and live in peace, why do you think that you will succeeds where so many others have failed? move on, move forward.... for the sake of your future generations... The Fatah, despite appearances (aka the Palestinian Unity government) would love nothing more than seeing Hamas disappear. However, as Hamas represents massive popular support among Palestinians, there is no way for the Fatah to actually "disengage" the Hamas. In the same way, it is unrealistic to expect that Israel (whether as a whole or just as government) would "disengage" the illegal settlers in the West Bank. The Fatah leadership does not have particularly good relationship with Iran as it is. Rather, Iran is more connected (on and off, depending on political tides) to the Hamas and the Islamic Jihad. Refuse aid from entities that are at odds with Israel? How is "at odds" defined? Is Saudi Arabia "at odds" with Israel? Is the EU "at odds" with Israel? Seems like a rather unrealistic condition. "For over 60 years now, Arabs of all nation...." http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Egypt%E2%80%93Israel_Peace_Treaty http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Israel%E2%80%93Jordan_peace_treaty http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oslo_Accords http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arab_Peace_Initiative Again, painting with a broad brush does not a good argument make. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Morch Posted January 3, 2015 Share Posted January 3, 2015 JDGRUEN post # 31. There is an easy way to avoid being on the wrong end of all that Israeli military hardware -- stop rocketing Israel - stop building tunnels into Israel - stop sending terrorists through those tunnels to attack Israel - stop making war with Israel ... There is an easy way to avoid being on the wrong end of all that Palestinian military hardware -- stop rocketing Palestine - stop building new settlements in illegally occupied land in Palestine - stop sending Zionist terrorist settlers into that illegally occupied land , - stop making war with Palestine ... Hamas rockets are fired from the Gaza Strip, where there are no illegal settlements. The current effort is by the Fatah, which holds sway in the West Bank, where there are illegal settlements. According to the proposed logic things should have been opposite... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Morch Posted January 3, 2015 Share Posted January 3, 2015 Good, about time! What a disgrace yesterday at the so called America always vetoes "security council". What a joke! There was no veto. The resolution was defeated. You might want to note this from the OP: The U.S. has not said how it will react, but it provides hundreds of millions of dollars in aid to the Palestinians. I never said the merkins vetoed. But they love that ace in the hole whenever it is convenient for Israeli lobby back in DC. May want to have a read on the USA Negroponte doctrine http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Negroponte_doctrine Wonder if posters felt the same way about Russia and the PRC exercising their veto right in relation to the situation in Syria (just to give one example...). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Seastallion Posted January 3, 2015 Share Posted January 3, 2015 Good, about time! What a disgrace yesterday at the so called America always vetoes "security council". What a joke! There was no veto. The resolution was defeated. You might want to note this from the OP: The U.S. has not said how it will react, but it provides hundreds of millions of dollars in aid to the Palestinians. I never said the merkins vetoed. But they love that ace in the hole whenever it is convenient for Israeli lobby back in DC. May want to have a read on the USA Negroponte doctrine http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Negroponte_doctrine Wonder if posters felt the same way about Russia and the PRC exercising their veto right in relation to the situation in Syria (just to give one example...). I do (think the same way whenever any of the permanent members use their veto for solely self-serving reasons.) I think an ideal "league of nations" should have no permanent members power of veto. Permanent members is ok, but not the veto, as it makes a mockery of what the UN is supposed to be about. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Morch Posted January 3, 2015 Share Posted January 3, 2015 After failing to get the security council to approve his unilateral deadline for peace negotiations Abbas is now doubling down as nobody has more dirty washing to air with the ICC, who are part of the Palestinian unity (sic) government. What this does underline is Abbas has zero intention of pursuing a negotiated settlement and the U.S. Should stop funding the Palestinian authority. Well, obviously if there will ever be a counter motion on this front it will be directed at the Hamas and the Islamic Jihad leadership, rather than the Fatah's. So the backlash, if it ever comes to that, might hurt the Palestinian cause, but play well (if properly marketed) for the Fatah on the domestic court. Apparently, the leaderships of both Hamas and Islamic Jihad went along with this (their consent was a condition posed by the ICC), which would either mean that they do not see the possibility of actual investigation as realistic, or that they do not think that even so actual steps could be taken against them by the PA. The way the Palestinian Unity government is set up will probably not be grounds for legal actions against either Abbas, the Fatah or the PA, as far as association with Hamas goes. The joining up thing takes up to two months, any issue filed takes time to be considered. If it is taken up by the ICC, the country in question can claim it conducts an investigation already, which given certain standards will result in the case being dropped. Israel is in the process of conducting such investigations (which, of course, can be argued to be a sham). Further, the UNSC can put proceedings on hold if they are deemed to be disruptive of diplomatic efforts. I would say this is more about Palestinian increasing the pressure on Israel, while doing their best not to cross certain lines. A lot of the rhetoric, indignation, threats etc. thrown about from all sides got to do with appearances and political considerations. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Morch Posted January 3, 2015 Share Posted January 3, 2015 It is at least heartening to know there are a huge number of Jews around the world who want to expose the current Israeli government for what it is. There is even a facebook page. I wont list the names of prominent Jewish writers, academics, historians artists etc who see what is happening under Netanhanyu. https://facebook.com/Zionocracy Not sure why it would come as a surprise that there are opposing views among Israelis or Jews. The Facebook page linked, however, is rather a fringe effort in this context. Lumping all of those voices together is misleading, as there are many variations and disagreements of opinion within. Finding similar dissent on the Palestinian side, now that would be news.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Morch Posted January 3, 2015 Share Posted January 3, 2015 Jingthing post # 44. In the long run, there kind of has to be a Palestinian state because in the long run I don't see how Israel can sustain the current status quo forever. So no future Palestinian state, then probably no Israel in the long run. But having a Palestinian state certainly doesn't guarantee Israel's future existence either. A fine comment which is certainly spot on apart from that closing comment. ''Having a Palestinian state certainly doesn't guarantee Israel's future existence either.'' In my view the fact that the two states could and indeed can exist side by side and also depend on each other would in the long run consolidate Israels positing as it would Palestine too. Look at the region and for all the differences all the assorted states manages to survive. Perhaps if the region was left to its own devices instead of being to high degree the punchbag for a small number of other nations, peace and harmony may well survive and grow to maturity. Positive thoughts, positive actions lead to a positive peace. "Look at the region and for all the differences all the assorted states manages to survive". A look at the region actually sees many of the countries torn by internal conflicts, at each other's throat or being bullied by neighbors. If the region was "left to its own devices" most of these countries would not be in existence to begin with. While it may be claimed that outside interference caused a lot of the issues, this does not quite make the claim that no interference would have been better. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dexterm Posted January 3, 2015 Share Posted January 3, 2015 There never has been a Palestine in the history of the World that I can find ! There are more of them on welfare all over the World than any other culture. There never has been a Palestine in the history of the World that I can find ! You haven't looked hard enough. Try ..http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Palestine "The region has been controlled by numerous peoples, including Ancient Egyptians, Canaanites, Israelites, Assyrians, Babylonians, Persians, Ancient Greeks, Romans, Byzantines, the Sunni Arab Caliphates, the Shia Fatimid Caliphate, Crusaders, Ayyubids, Mameluks, Mongols, Ottomans, the British and modern Israelis and Palestinians." The Romans called the province Syria Palaestina, and the Greek historian Herodotus in the 5th century BC called it Palaistine The so called Jewish King Herod the Great himself was the son of a Palestinian Arab. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antipater_the_Idumaean There are more of them on welfare all over the World than any other culture. Is that a fact, fantasy or a prejudice...link please! The only part of the Middle East that was called anything close to Palestine was Philistine which is the Gaza strip today. And while Herod was the son of an Arab his Father was not Palestinian he did not even come from the area you claim was Palestine. His father was an Edomite, and Herod was raised within the Jewish faith. Also if you look at a map of the Mongol empire, it never encompassed Israel. Wikipedia is hardly the font of real knowledge! Probably why you quote it so often? Perhaps you ought to look at the map Mandatory Palestine in 1922. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mandatory_Palestine Edom is clearly part of that area. Ergo the so called Jewish (convert) King Herod was in fact a Palestinian king. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scott Posted January 3, 2015 Share Posted January 3, 2015 Off-topic posts and replies removed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Morch Posted January 3, 2015 Share Posted January 3, 2015 The Oslo accord stipulated that the Palestinians would not make unilateral moves to join international organisations. So they have now killed that accord. Also Just because the Palestinians have applied to join the ICC there is no guarantee the ICC will accept them. There is doubt if the ICC could initiate proceedings against Israel. Even the Palestinians own UN envoy has said the PA could never take Israel to the ICC because they the Palestinians were guilty of crimes against humanity. The 22 year old Accords have been dead in the water for a long time. Israel contravened the spirit of a peace agreement by building more colonies on stolen land, continually stalling, and moving the goalposts...having gained PLO recognition of the state of Israel in 1993 they now demand recognition of the Jewish state of Israel, erasing the language of 20% of its own citizens and condemning them further into apartheid. Time for a fresh approach by-passing the dishonest US brokers, who carry too much Israeli baggage via the Zionist lobby in Washington. Palestinians are facing up to the truth and reconciliation process by applying to sign and ratify their ICC membership. Israel still has too much to hide and lack the courage to ratify the treaty. If the Palestinians wish to opt out of the Oslo Accords, they may do so. Obviously, though, there is a price attached. The Oslo Accords were breached by both sides on numerous occasions, hardly a one sided affair. Anyone claiming total responsibility of one side to the failure of the Accords is either hopelessly biased or disengaged from relevant realities. The hyperbole "erasing the language" and "apartheid" claims were previously expanded upon and debunked on relevant topics (not much to do with the current one, but anything goes when one pushed an agenda). Not wanting the USA as brokers is fine, claiming that the UN is a level playing field, is not. What "truth and reconciliation" process are you on about? Nice try to create yet another faux linkage to South Africa, but no cigar. So far the Palestinians exhibit some reluctance owning up to past mistakes, just the same as Israel does. Difference being that Israel at least got an opposition voice which broadcasts dissent. t would seem that Abbas is doing its best to eat the cake and keep it whole, rather than full 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ggold Posted January 3, 2015 Share Posted January 3, 2015 There never has been a Palestine in the history of the World that I can find ! There are more of them on welfare all over the World than any other culture. There never has been a Palestine in the history of the World that I can find ! You haven't looked hard enough. Try ..http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Palestine "The region has been controlled by numerous peoples, including Ancient Egyptians, Canaanites, Israelites, Assyrians, Babylonians, Persians, Ancient Greeks, Romans, Byzantines, the Sunni Arab Caliphates, the Shia Fatimid Caliphate, Crusaders, Ayyubids, Mameluks, Mongols, Ottomans, the British and modern Israelis and Palestinians." The Romans called the province Syria Palaestina, and the Greek historian Herodotus in the 5th century BC called it Palaistine The so called Jewish King Herod the Great himself was the son of a Palestinian Arab. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antipater_the_Idumaean There are more of them on welfare all over the World than any other culture. Is that a fact, fantasy or a prejudice...link please! The only part of the Middle East that was called anything close to Palestine was Philistine which is the Gaza strip today. And while Herod was the son of an Arab his Father was not Palestinian he did not even come from the area you claim was Palestine. His father was an Edomite, and Herod was raised within the Jewish faith. Also if you look at a map of the Mongol empire, it never encompassed Israel. Wikipedia is hardly the font of real knowledge! Probably why you quote it so often? Perhaps you ought to look at the map Mandatory Palestine in 1922. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mandatory_Palestine Edom is clearly part of that area. Ergo the so called Jewish (convert) King Herod was in fact a Palestinian king. Edom was in the Southern Negev area, you are just being pedantic He was an Arab but not Palestinian as there was no Palestine in that era. He didn't even come from that area that was called Philistine now the Gaza strip! So again you are full of miss information and twisted lies. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Morch Posted January 3, 2015 Share Posted January 3, 2015 I think it is you who is missing the point. Israel gave back 100% of occupied land to Egypt in return for peace.All Israel needs to do is the same with the Palestinians. Israel gets to keep land stolen in 1948. The Palestinians are willing to compromise on the 67 borders Will get back to you later on your other points. Got to travel today...and no need for profanities please. A fine argument, issue being only that things are NOT the same. Egypt was not a house divided in the way that the Palestinians currently are. Before spouting nonsense about the Palestinian Unity government (the same one who still can't pave the way for elections), might consider that de-facto, the PA still does not hold sway in the Gaza Strip. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Morch Posted January 3, 2015 Share Posted January 3, 2015 There was no veto. The resolution was defeated. You might want to note this from the OP: The U.S. has not said how it will react, but it provides hundreds of millions of dollars in aid to the Palestinians. I never said the merkins vetoed. But they love that ace in the hole whenever it is convenient for Israeli lobby back in DC. May want to have a read on the USA Negroponte doctrine http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Negroponte_doctrine Wonder if posters felt the same way about Russia and the PRC exercising their veto right in relation to the situation in Syria (just to give one example...). I do (think the same way whenever any of the permanent members use their veto for solely self-serving reasons.) I think an ideal "league of nations" should have no permanent members power of veto. Permanent members is ok, but not the veto, as it makes a mockery of what the UN is supposed to be about. Ah, so there's this little matter of deciding when a veto is used properly or " for solely self-serving reasons". This would probably have something to do with the eye of the beholder. A one nation one vote system got its own issues, much in evidence on the UN General Assembly. Not a fan of the veto thing, but,as someone posted on another topic, at least the UNSC is somewhat consistent on a number of issues. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
.png.3b3332cc2256ad0edbc2fe9404feeef0.png)
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now