Thread: Israel will never withdraw from Golan Heights - Netanyahu

Originally Posted by pseudolus

The league of nations did not exist when the Syke Picot was made.
.

That is a true fact as the League came after the first world war in advance of the next world war.

As far as your British notes are concerned anyone who was living in that part of the world could be referred to as Palestinian regardless of where their seed came from . Arabs, Greeks , Ottomans and Jews who resided on that land were referred to as Palestinians.

The world let the sides settle the territory. Israel returned land for peace. Sorry it is not a purrfect world. Amen.

Originally Posted by PeeCoffee

As far as your British notes are concerned anyone who was living in that part of the world could be referred to as Palestinian regardless of where their seed came from . Arabs, Greeks , Ottomans and Jews who resided on that land were referred to as Palestinians.

More nonsense from revisionist From Time Immemorial.

Frankly, no. You are talking bollocks. Do you consider Americans living in Thailand, Thai? How about Brits in Hong Kong? Are and were they Hong Kongers?

You are also ignoring that, according to the false writing of Peters, Palestine was not a barren land devoid of people, a "land without a people" for a "people without a land". If this was so, who were these people in the late 19th century who were being discussed? Who were these people "fighting for their rights" in 1938 at a time when the zioinist bullshit tells you that they did not exist, that no one lived in Palestine, and according to your revisionist fake history, people only appeared there pretending to be Palestinians when "israel made the land bloom" thirty years later.

This is a fallacy, and you do persist in repeating it, non stop. Why?

Palestine. Home to Palestinians, who were Muslim, Jewish, christian, and all sort of religions, but they were Palestinians, and they still are. They lived in peace side by side, right up until the zionist terrorists moved in and started attacking them and killing them.

How many times will keep repeating the same tired lame lie?

Originally Posted by PeeCoffee

Almost every Jew was forced out of every Arab country in 1948. Where were they forced to go ...and they became citizens of a "Jewish State". Tough to turn back the clock.

This is a fallacy. It is certainly true that "some" jews were forced to leave Arab lands, but by far and the most, left to go to Israel by themselves, with the promise of a Jewish home, free land, handouts, and lots of goodies.

The myth of the mass expulsion of Jews was fabricated to stop the people talking about the Nakba which was the mass expulsion and ethnic cleansing of Palestinians, as part of the open plan of the zionists, to clear from their stolen land non Jewish people

Originally Posted by PeeCoffee

I would wish for a two-State solution but who is going to enforce the peace ?
(The UN can't even hold it's own ground inthe GH.)

International law dictates a 2 state solution, but this is now unworkable due tot he settlements, the wall that is crisscrossing the west bank, encircling Palestinian villages, cutting off people from their land and farms and making life unlivable.. It is certainly the place to start but the end goal would be 1 land where everyone has equal rights and the Palestinian refuge situation has a fair and just settlement.

Even though Hamas and Fatah have agreed to a 2 state solution, israel does not. All of their actions as opposed to their false words prove that they want 1 state, an no muslims in it.

The only way for this to stop is for the USA to stop vetoing UNSC proposals and sanctions. Israel need to be hit with the full weight of international law - sanctions and confiscation of assets, expulsion of their agents in governments and lobbies, until such time as they actually start to properly talk and ACT peace.

This is the only way forward. International Law needs to be upheld, the same as it would be for every country in the world. The same applies for the Golan Heights issue.

Afrikaneers...were they African ?
What about Boers...Indians...negroes ...?

Language and its usage has changed in the past hundred years...and surely in the past 183 years.

Agreed there was relative peace possibly among the inhabitants from all creeds prior the British replacing the Ottomans. I'll leave it on your doorstep. C ya.

Originally Posted by PeeCoffee

Language and its usage has changed in the past hundred years...and surely in the past 183 years.

and so has the concept of a COUNTRY which is clearly what is confusing you.

Originally Posted by PeeCoffee

I'll leave it on your doorstep. C ya

What? Lies? No thanks. You take your Joan Peters lies with you.

Why? Boers. Afrikaneers. You prove my point. How very Anti-Bantuic of you. You will be denying next that the Xhosa and Zulu people ever existed, heh? Will you be saying that the Zulu's of KwaZulu (sort of like Palestinians or Palestine, don't you think) never existed because of Dutch and then British imperialism, and the introduction of settlers, who did not call themselves Zulus etc but instead Farmers in their own tongue?

Originally Posted by pseudolus

Originally Posted by PeeCoffee

As far as your British notes are concerned anyone who was living in that part of the world could be referred to as Palestinian regardless of where their seed came from . Arabs, Greeks , Ottomans and Jews who resided on that land were referred to as Palestinians.

More nonsense from revisionist From Time Immemorial.

Frankly, no. You are talking bollocks. Do you consider Americans living in Thailand, Thai? How about Brits in Hong Kong? Are and were they Hong Kongers?

You are also ignoring that, according to the false writing of Peters, Palestine was not a barren land devoid of people, a "land without a people" for a "people without a land". If this was so, who were these people in the late 19th century who were being discussed? Who were these people "fighting for their rights" in 1938 at a time when the zioinist bullshit tells you that they did not exist, that no one lived in Palestine, and according to your revisionist fake history, people only appeared there pretending to be Palestinians when "israel made the land bloom" thirty years later.

This is a fallacy, and you do persist in repeating it, non stop. Why?

Palestine. Home to Palestinians, who were Muslim, Jewish, christian, and all sort of religions, but they were Palestinians, and they still are. They lived in peace side by side, right up until the zionist terrorists moved in and started attacking them and killing them.

How many times will keep repeating the same tired lame lie?

Tired lame lies is all you ever write .

Lets try this, and see what life as PIWI is like.

Originally Posted by piwanoi

Originally Posted by PeeCoffee

Make that almost five decades, Piwanoi.

Or did you mean those on the West Bank living as Jordanians for two decades prior to the 1967 conflict ?

Sorry for not making myself Clearer I meant those living on the West Bank as Jordanians as you rightly say .

Yeah that's right. Yeah but heh PEEMutlinik, gufawww gufaawww, You know what they say, you can call a stable a dog kennel but it does not make a horse a dog. Cos yeah but heh ENT heh TAX it doesn't matter what name some bloke writes on a bit of paper and defines an area JORDAN or Israel on a stable door, because, the HORSE is still a fucking horse you stupid racist twats, the same as some one can say "this is now Jordan and we give all you Palestinians Jordanian citizenship and rights as per everyone else (which israel has never done)" but that does not mean that they are not Palestinians.

A dog in a stable does not make that dog a horse. There - using your own RACIST shite to prove you all wrong.

Ahhh no, sorry, I couldn't keep it up. I am very impressed by you piwi too keep that bullshit up. It is hard, unlike your penis I assume.

Originally Posted by pseudolus

Lets try this, and see what life as PIWI is like.

Originally Posted by piwanoi

Originally Posted by PeeCoffee

Make that almost five decades, Piwanoi.

Or did you mean those on the West Bank living as Jordanians for two decades prior to the 1967 conflict ?

Sorry for not making myself Clearer I meant those living on the West Bank as Jordanians as you rightly say .

Yeah that's right. Yeah but heh PEEMutlinik, gufawww gufaawww, You know what they say, you can call a stable a dog kennel but it does not make a horse a dog. Cos yeah but heh ENT heh TAX it doesn't matter what name some bloke writes on a bit of paper and defines an area JORDAN or Israel on a stable door, because, the HORSE is still a fucking horse you stupid racist twats, the same as some one can say "this is now Jordan and we give all you Palestinians Jordanian citizenship and rights as per everyone else (which israel has never done)" but that does not mean that they are not Palestinians.

A dog in a stable does not make that dog a horse. There - using your own RACIST shite to prove you all wrong.

Ahhh no, sorry, I couldn't keep it up. I am very impressed by you piwi too keep that bullshit up. It is hard, unlike your penis I assume.

Yeah but you said they reverted BACK to being Pali's so what was they before? FFS is it so hard to answer? BTW Bigot , A person who is intolerant of other people who hold a different opinion .

So the Jordainians took it off the Ottomans and King Hussain changed the name to the West Bank but it was secretly Palestine? yeah sounds about right .and became so when some of the Jordanian nationals reverted back to Palestinians and accused the Israeli's of stealing their land in 1967

Originally Posted by piwanoi

Originally Posted by pseudolus

Lets try this, and see what life as PIWI is like.

Originally Posted by piwanoi

Originally Posted by PeeCoffee

Make that almost five decades, Piwanoi.

Or did you mean those on the West Bank living as Jordanians for two decades prior to the 1967 conflict ?

Sorry for not making myself Clearer I meant those living on the West Bank as Jordanians as you rightly say .

Yeah that's right. Yeah but heh PEEMutlinik, gufawww gufaawww, You know what they say, you can call a stable a dog kennel but it does not make a horse a dog. Cos yeah but heh ENT heh TAX it doesn't matter what name some bloke writes on a bit of paper and defines an area JORDAN or Israel on a stable door, because, the HORSE is still a fucking horse you stupid racist twats, the same as some one can say "this is now Jordan and we give all you Palestinians Jordanian citizenship and rights as per everyone else (which israel has never done)" but that does not mean that they are not Palestinians.

A dog in a stable does not make that dog a horse. There - using your own RACIST shite to prove you all wrong.

Ahhh no, sorry, I couldn't keep it up. I am very impressed by you piwi too keep that bullshit up. It is hard, unlike your penis I assume.

Yeah but Yeah but Yeah but Yeah but Yeah but Yeah but Yeah but Yeah but Yeah but Yeah but Yeah but Yeah but Yeah but Yeah but Yeah but Yeah but Yeah but Yeah but Yeah but Yeah but BTW Bigot , A person who is intolerant of other people who hold a different opinion .

Yeah but yeah but you are a bigot who is intolerant of people who hold a different opinion to your, as defined by the preachings of your mad mullah pat condell, on islam, you racist bigot.


yeah but yeah but




Piwi, do you not believe then that in the houses of Parliament they said Palestinians and Palestine prior to the invention of israel? Do you not believe Hansard? Do you not know that you are not Thai even though you live in Thailand, and if you got a Thai Passport, you would still be English with a Thai passport? Same as Palestinians, when they were annexed by jordan, received Jordanian citizenship, and when Jordan left the west bank the Palestinians with jordanian citizenship, then REVERTED back to being Palestinians without Jordanian Citizenship?

Deliberately obtuse or pig ignornant, Which are you, piwaCILE?

Originally Posted by pseudolus

Originally Posted by piwanoi

Originally Posted by pseudolus

Lets try this, and see what life as PIWI is like.

Originally Posted by piwanoi

Originally Posted by PeeCoffee

Make that almost five decades, Piwanoi.

Or did you mean those on the West Bank living as Jordanians for two decades prior to the 1967 conflict ?

Sorry for not making myself Clearer I meant those living on the West Bank as Jordanians as you rightly say .

Yeah that's right. Yeah but heh PEEMutlinik, gufawww gufaawww, You know what they say, you can call a stable a dog kennel but it does not make a horse a dog. Cos yeah but heh ENT heh TAX it doesn't matter what name some bloke writes on a bit of paper and defines an area JORDAN or Israel on a stable door, because, the HORSE is still a fucking horse you stupid racist twats, the same as some one can say "this is now Jordan and we give all you Palestinians Jordanian citizenship and rights as per everyone else (which israel has never done)" but that does not mean that they are not Palestinians.

A dog in a stable does not make that dog a horse. There - using your own RACIST shite to prove you all wrong.

Ahhh no, sorry, I couldn't keep it up. I am very impressed by you piwi too keep that bullshit up. It is hard, unlike your penis I assume.

Yeah but Yeah but Yeah but Yeah but Yeah but Yeah but Yeah but Yeah but Yeah but Yeah but Yeah but Yeah but Yeah but Yeah but Yeah but Yeah but Yeah but Yeah but Yeah but Yeah but BTW Bigot , A person who is intolerant of other people who hold a different opinion .

Yeah but yeah but you are a bigot who is intolerant of people who hold a different opinion to your, as defined by the preachings of your mad mullah pat condell, on islam, you racist bigot.


yeah but yeah but




Piwi, do you not believe then that in the houses of Parliament they said Palestinians and Palestine prior to the invention of israel? Do you not believe Hansard? Do you not know that you are not Thai even though you live in Thailand, and if you got a Thai Passport, you would still be English with a Thai passport? Same as Palestinians, when they were annexed by jordan, received Jordanian citizenship, and when Jordan left the west bank the Palestinians with jordanian citizenship, then REVERTED back to being Palestinians without Jordanian Citizenship?

Deliberately obtuse or pig ignornant, Which are you, piwaCILE?

I was not aware that Hansard said anything about the West Bank, which is what is being discussed ,WHO did the Israeli's take the West bank off ? its that easy .and BTW show me my last post were I used the Phrase Yeah but

Originally Posted by piwaCILE

I was not aware that Hansard said anything about the West Bank, which is what is being discussed ,

that's because your ignorance and stupidity knows no bounds, that's why.

Note- Annexed by Jordan. Occupied by the israeli army, which is still is today, hence why Palestinians are tried in military courts, even children.

This was 50 years ago. Nothing has changed.

MIDDLE EAST (Hansard, 17 July 1967)

7. Mr. Rose asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs what representations he has made to the Governments of the kingdom of Jordan and of Israel as to the possibility of a federal administration of the west bank territory of Palestine previously annexed by Jordan and currently occupied by the Israeli army.

§Mr. George Brown None, Sir.

§Mr. Rose Is my right hon. Friend aware that the original partition plan involved the idea of an independent Palestinian Arab State? Would he not agree that this may be one of the methods of solving this difficult problem, because some sort of confederation would be of enormous benefit, not only to Jordan, but also to the Israel and Palestinian Arab refugees?

§Mr. Brown If such an agreement were acceptable to the States concerned I see no reason why we should object to it, but I would not have thought that it is an argument which we should put forward.

§Mr. Henig Since my right hon. Friend has recently been saying that it is a principle of Her Majesty's Government that war should not lead to territorial gains, would my right hon. Friend explain how it is that apparently Her Majesty's Government recognise that the west bank of the Jordan is part of Jordan, the Gaza Strip part of Egypt, even though these, by international agreement, were supposed to have been part of the Palestinian Arab State?

§Mr. Brown It depends where one decides that history begins. I am certainly sure that the recent war should not result in territorial aggrandisement.

PALESTINIAN REFUGEES (Hansard, 2 March 1955)

The Joint Under-Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs (Lord John Hope) Refugees suffering from infectious tuberculosis are segregated and cared for in local government hospitals in Gaza and the Lebanon, in the new Government sanitorium in Amman and in a missionary tuberculosis hospital on the West Bank. Next month the United Nations Relief and Works Agency will open a further 100-bed tuberculosis hospital in Jordan especially for refugees.

Even back in 1955 the UK tax payer were picking up the pieces of the israeli zionist ethnic cleansing.

Hope you are proud

Kremlin Stance on Golan Heights Status Unchanged

Moscow's stance on the Golan Heights status is unchanged and is based on international law and the UN Security Council resolutions, Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov said Monday.

In April, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu held a government meeting in the Israeli-controlled Golan Heights. He stressed that the decision to hold the meeting there had been taken to show that Israel does not intend to give up the territory, adding that the international community should recognize it as part of Israel.

"Our stance has not changed anyhow. In this case we adhere to international law and the relevant UN Security Council resolutions. Russia's position has not changed," Peskov said, answering a request to comment on the statements of the Israeli leadership on the region's territorial belonging.

The Golan Heights, internationally recognized as Syrian territory, was seized by Israel during the Six-Day War in 1967. In 1981, the Israeli parliament voted to annex two-thirds of the region.

Syria insists that Israel should fully withdraw to the pre-1967 border, however, Israel is unwilling to accept such terms as it would give Syria access to the Sea of Galilee, which is Israel's main source of fresh water.

The United Nations has repeatedly stated that Israel’s occupation of the Golan Heights is illegal, calling for it to be returned to Syria.

Kremlin Stance on Golan Heights Status Unchanged / Russian peacekeeper

Originally Posted by Hans Mann

"Our stance has not changed anyhow. In this case we adhere to international law and the relevant UN Security Council resolutions. Russia's position has not changed," Peskov said, answering a request to comment on the statements of the Israeli leadership on the region's territorial belonging.

This is interesting, and I was thinking last night, that I wonder how long until Russia wades into this. The telling statement is " we adhere to international law and the relevant UN Security Council resolutions". This is critcal because it is diametrically opposed to the israel stance, which is "ahhh leave us alone, we are the victims, we will do what ever we want" and the US position which is "We will help negotiate a peace settlement, as long as that is 100% in favour of israel and will only take into account what israel wants".

Now, and I want to be corrected by FACTS, not just the ranting and raving of the lunatic israel supporters on this, I have it in mind to think that there is actually no formal USA and Israel agreement where by is someone attacks israel or israel attacks someone (which is always the case), the US HAS TO join in that activity. There is no mutual defense or formal agreement in place which means that if israel is attacked, or feels threatened, that the US is treaty bound to rush to their defense.

Now of course, if Russia helps Assad get rid of ISIS finally, Assad might well "invite" them to build a military presence in Syria, perhaps near to the Golan Heights, and perhaps to then start to support them in getting the GH back.

Israel might well find that if the US is faced with openly fighting Russia there, they decide it is not in their strategic interests to do so, and israel is suddenly on it own.

Do not forget that the US, unless it has a treaty, will not always rush to countries defense. Iraq is a case in point, where Kuwait was using direction drilling to tap into Iraqs hydrocarbon reserves, so Iraq told the USA to tell Kuwait to stop, and they didn't, so then they asked "heh, if we go into Kuwait to stop them, will you do anything?" to which the US said "No". Saddam went in and was immediately betrayed by the USA who were eyeing up Iraqs oil .

I wonder, might the US like to have israel itself without all the hassle of having the psychotic israelis running the joint?

Originally Posted by Hans Mann

Syria insists that Israel should fully withdraw to the pre-1967 border, however, Israel is unwilling to accept such terms as it would give Syria access to the Sea of Galilee, which is Israel's main source of fresh water.

The Israelis may have to get used to sharing resources, the water, which they continue to deny the Palestinians.

Originally Posted by OhOh

Originally Posted by Hans Mann

Syria insists that Israel should fully withdraw to the pre-1967 border, however, Israel is unwilling to accept such terms as it would give Syria access to the Sea of Galilee, which is Israel's main source of fresh water.

The Israelis may have to get used to sharing resources, the water, which they continue to deny the Palestinians.

Indeed. Contrary to the false narrative bleated by the israelis and their propagandists, the reason why the Oslo accords were a crock, and the camp David plan, Clinton's "Parameters" and the Taba talks, and all others in between and after were all rejected is that they were all based upon the Allon plan. Allon, like every good zionist, wanted a land without a people for his people, so his plan was all about making conditions so bad for the Palestinians, that they would leave.

The Americans basically hoodwinked, and bribed arafat, into accepting the Oslo accords which were the Allon plan more or less..

All of these "road maps" and "plans" share the same principals. Israel would control all boards, citizenship, power, water, drainage, ports, airports and just about everything. They would have VETO over any law the Palestinians wanted to pass. Palestinian capitol would not be Jerusalem but somewhere else. All imports and exports subject to israeli customs and Tax charges, all taxation gathered by them, and amazingly enough, this is no matter if it was 1 or 2 states! The israelis had and have the fucking gall to demand all of the above control over a separate state of Palestine!

None of this has ever been negotiated, and any plan involving the USA starts and ends with what the israelis want, which is all of the land, no Palestinians, no solution to the refugee problem, no reparation payments, no reduction of settlements. They basically want, if forced to, to let the Palestinians have free movement within a big walled in cage, however, they will make life unbearable for them.

So it is no wonder that the Palestinians rejected this. However, in 2014, the Hamas and Fatah agreement saw them accept most of this. They actually, in their proposal said "Ohhhhh alright, FFS, have it your way, have all of your demands, but just let us live without 600 road blocks, taxes, cut off villages, summary executions, attacks by settlers etc. They gave in and agreed. So Bibi was right in the shit as his worst fear was coming true - a Palestinian Peace Offensive. Luckily for him some israeli lads were murdered almost straight away in the occupied west bank, so he hid the details that they knew it wasn't anything to do with Hamas, that they knew the kids were dead, and that the bodies had been recovered, and instead raided the Occupied West Bank prior to then launching their massive attack on Gaza. The West Bank raid was all about trying to get Hamas to respond which after a couple of weeks of bombings, murders, thousands of arrests, they did, and that gave Bibi his excuse to attack the Gaza and snub out talks of peace.

Bibi went to "mow the lawn", the israeli horrific way of describing the cyclical genocidal assaults on the civilian population of Gaza.

Originally Posted by PeeCoffee

Again, if Psuedolus writes it you can 'take it to the bank.'
Really great stuff in Speakers Corner where one can "voice their opinion" and "no flaming or abuse [is] allowed."

Question: Why did Hamas claim responsibility for the kidnapping and killing of the three boys prior to their two operatives dying in the shoot-out with IDF ?

PeeCoffee , You may want to read this thread which was solely about the Kidnapping and Murder of the 3 Israeli teens ,as I recall you was not a TD member then https://teakdoor.com/the-teakdoor-lou...ound-dead.html (Abducted Israeli teens found dead.)

Originally Posted by ENT

Originally Posted by pseudolus

Originally Posted by ENT

Before Arafat they were never called Palestinians.

FACT.

Dispossed Arabs from the west bank of the river Jordan were never called Palestinians as a separate ethnic or political group from other residents of British mandated Palestine.

Palestinians as a political,or legal entity describing Palestinian Arabs was an invention of Yasser Arafat.

Right just to prove once and for all that there is no foundation in this utter lie, propagated by the globally discredited book From Time Immemorial and then a raft of other books produced by the ADL, let's have a look at Hansard, the recordings of the British Parliament.

25 June 1918

ARAB POLITICAL REPRESENTATIVES (VISIT TO PALESTINE).

HC Deb 25 June 1918 vol 107 c903W 903W
§Major Earl WINTERTON asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs what facilities have been given to the Palestinian and Syrian political leaders now in Egypt to visit Palestine?

§Lord R. CECIL A Commission of Syrian Arab political representatives from Cairo visited Palestine early last month and met Moslem and Christian leaders and the heads of the various communities in the occupied area.

21st March,`1927

25. Colonel WEDGWOOD asked the Secretary of State for the Colonies when it is proposed to commence the construction of Government offices in Jerusalem; what Government buildings, costing how much, have been constructed in Palestine during the past eight years; and will wages paid to labour in such future construction be based on the cost of living of Jews?

§Mr. AMERY Plans for the proposed new Government offices in Jerusalem are now being prepared, but the site selected for them is in dispute. I hope however that the commencement of their construction will not be long delayed. I will send the right hon. Gentleman a copy of a return showing the Government buildings constructed during the past eight years. As regards the last part of the question, the rates of wages offered for labour to be employed on the construction of Government buildings must vary in each case according to the locality and the class of workmen which it is desired to attract.

§Colonel WEDGWOOD May we presume that it is desired to employ upon these buildings some of the many thousands of unemployed there?

§Mr. AMERY Yes, Sir. If the work is being done in the locality where they are or in a locality to which they can be brought.

§Sir FREDRIC WISE Who is going to pay for these new buildings?
15
§Colonel WEDGWOOD The Palestinians.

§Mr. AMERY The revenues of Palestine or the loan moneys raised by Palestine.

April 26 1938

Captain Cazalet Is my right hon. Friend satisfied that there is full cooperation between the police and the military now for the maintenance of order in Palestine?

§Mr. Ormsby-Gore Oh, yes, absolutely.
§Mr. Gallacher The Palestinians are fighting for their rights.

This is interesting...
22 July 1833

HC Deb 22 July 1833 vol 19 cc1075-81 1075

. Now, having been himself for some time at Jerusalem, having made Palestine the subject of his peculiar and careful observation, and having examined into the state and condition of the Jews there and elsewhere, he was bound to say, that he had never heard of a single English Jew 1078 having visited Palestine, even as a matter of curiosity or recreation. If their affection for the Holy Land had been so unconquerable as had been supposed—there were many Jews in England, who had leisure and means in abundance, to enable them to make a visit to that country; but they never thought of going so far: and as to those who inhabited Jerusalem, or any part of Palestine, of which there were many of Asiatic and some of European birth, the oppressions under which they suffered, and the degradations to which they were subject, were such as to make their abode a continued scene of suffering: and, accordingly, as soon as they could possess themselves of the means of competency, or even of removal, they generally hastened with all possible speed, to get away from the country and its persecutions, and repair to some other happier land.

So as you can clearly see, Palestine and the Palestians "existed"

That's right, as you can plainly read, the meowling Arabs who now exclusively claim themselves to be the only Palestinians were just one group of residents of the land called Palestine which included all of Jordan and Israel.

The other occupiers of that land were of mixed race, as well as Jews, whom you wish to conveniently ethnically cleanse from your biased accounts.

As you plainly state, non-Arab Palestinians, who were the Jews and Christians living there, were then driven out of Palestine, including Jerusalem,

Also, there's nothing in your post indicating that only Arabs were Palestinians, but that the population was collectively termed Palestinian, according to the name of the Btritish mandated territory of Palestine.

The area was not called lalaland od Jordan or Israel or anything else but Palestine, and all of its residents were termed Palestinian.

More dribbling ranting from our resident Uber Merkin Christian Hate Preacher terrorist Ent.

"The Palestinians are fighting for their rights"

What's not to understand?

Originally Posted by pseudolus

Originally Posted by ENT

Originally Posted by pseudolus

Originally Posted by ENT

Before Arafat they were never called Palestinians.

FACT.

Dispossed Arabs from the west bank of the river Jordan were never called Palestinians as a separate ethnic or political group from other residents of British mandated Palestine.

Palestinians as a political,or legal entity describing Palestinian Arabs was an invention of Yasser Arafat.

Right just to prove once and for all that there is no foundation in this utter lie, propagated by the globally discredited book From Time Immemorial and then a raft of other books produced by the ADL, let's have a look at Hansard, the recordings of the British Parliament.

25 June 1918

ARAB POLITICAL REPRESENTATIVES (VISIT TO PALESTINE).

HC Deb 25 June 1918 vol 107 c903W 903W
§Major Earl WINTERTON asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs what facilities have been given to the Palestinian and Syrian political leaders now in Egypt to visit Palestine?

§Lord R. CECIL A Commission of Syrian Arab political representatives from Cairo visited Palestine early last month and met Moslem and Christian leaders and the heads of the various communities in the occupied area.

21st March,`1927




April 26 1938

Captain Cazalet Is my right hon. Friend satisfied that there is full cooperation between the police and the military now for the maintenance of order in Palestine?

§Mr. Ormsby-Gore Oh, yes, absolutely.
§Mr. Gallacher The Palestinians are fighting for their rights.

This is interesting...
22 July 1833

HC Deb 22 July 1833 vol 19 cc1075-81 1075

. Now, having been himself for some time at Jerusalem, having made Palestine the subject of his peculiar and careful observation, and having examined into the state and condition of the Jews there and elsewhere, he was bound to say, that he had never heard of a single English Jew 1078 having visited Palestine, even as a matter of curiosity or recreation. If their affection for the Holy Land had been so unconquerable as had been supposed—there were many Jews in England, who had leisure and means in abundance, to enable them to make a visit to that country; but they never thought of going so far: and as to those who inhabited Jerusalem, or any part of Palestine, of which there were many of Asiatic and some of European birth, the oppressions under which they suffered, and the degradations to which they were subject, were such as to make their abode a continued scene of suffering: and, accordingly, as soon as they could possess themselves of the means of competency, or even of removal, they generally hastened with all possible speed, to get away from the country and its persecutions, and repair to some other happier land.

So as you can clearly see, Palestine and the Palestians "existed"

That's right, as you can plainly read, the meowling Arabs who now exclusively claim themselves to be the only Palestinians were just one group of residents of the land called Palestine which included all of Jordan and Israel.

The other occupiers of that land were of mixed race, as well as Jews, whom you wish to conveniently ethnically cleanse from your biased accounts.

As you plainly state, non-Arab Palestinians, who were the Jews and Christians living there, were then driven out of Palestine, including Jerusalem,

Also, there's nothing in your post indicating that only Arabs were Palestinians, but that the population was collectively termed Palestinian, according to the name of the Btritish mandated territory of Palestine.

The area was not called lalaland od Jordan or Israel or anything else but Palestine, and all of its residents were termed Palestinian.

More dribbling ranting from our resident Uber Merkin Christian Hate Preacher terrorist Ent.

"The Palestinians are fighting for their rights"

What's not to understand?

Strange Innit , why did'nt they fight for their rights when Gaza was under Egyptian Control and the West Bank Under the Jordanians pre 1967 ?

What's your theory on that, Piwi?


This should be amusing

Originally Posted by pseudolus

What's your theory on that, Piwi?


This should be amusing

I thought you told Dr Bob and ANT you had me on Ignore?, And I see you employing your usual ploy of answering a question with a question