Netanyahu steps up appeal to French Jews after attacks

Nederland, Netherlands, Pays-Bas, Alankomaat, Niederlande, Países Bajos, Paesi Bassi.... are all words to describe the exact same country. The same thing with Palestine. For reference: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Palestine#Etymology

 

If you say that "Palestine" is Israel, then it means that the "Palestinians" are Arabs and Jews, which makes Israel "Palestine", thus, the "Palestinians" dont need a country, because they have one already- Israel.

BUT if you dont agree with that, then "Palestine" is not Israel, which means that "Palestine" is only a nickname that Hadrian made in 135 AD after the revolt, beacuse the "Philistines" that have no connection to the "Palestinians" and "Palestine" is not existing nor existed. moreover, the term "Palestine" nowadays is only for political reasons - like I wrote.

 

I clearly sourced the etymology of the word Palestine.
It was not invented by Hadrian in 135AD. It's much older.

 

You're talking about Herodotus, which used the name "Palaistine", But the name was refering to the Philistines:

Do you see? Which means that if you say that because of the name that Herodotus used, then the "Palestinians" are real, then they are the descendents of the Philistines, which means that they belong to the area of Greece. BUT, of cource, it cant be done, because the Philistines were vanished without leaving trace.

About Hadrian:

Source: http://www.bible.ca/archeology/bibl...arabia-kadesh-barnea-shur-herodotus-484bc.htm

But, of course, if you still insist to use the word "Palestine" , then you need to use also the name "Colonia Aelia Capitolina". That name was made by Hadrian to Jerusalem when he renamed it.

BTW- Herodotus described also that the people he met were circumcised. The Philistines were uncircumcised.

Which leave us with what I already wrote to you:

 

As I already wrote to you (which sadly you prefer to ignore):
Judge, Sir Elihu Lauterpacht wrote in June 1968:

Source: https://books.google.co.il/books?id=...ation.&f=false

I even enlraged the you the words for you.

 

Also according to Prof. Stone:

Source: https://books.google.co.il/books?id... entirely lacked legal justification.&f=false

As you wanted, according to Fourth Geneva Convention.

 

Let's search for a solution. Anti-Israeli crowd, what do you think is the best solution for the problem between Israelis and Palestinians? What would make you happy? Pro-Israeli crowd, what would you deem as a fair solution? What kind of deal would satisfy you? Any neutrals? Keep it simple.

 

haha!!!

Jordan is a High-Contracting Party and was a High-Contracting Party during the 1948 War.

Once again you have FAILED to prove that Jordan's Occupation of the West Bank was illegal.

All you have is silly one-liners from inconsequential and unknown legal personalities, and misunderstanding of the 4th Geneva Conventions.

 

the best, most fair, most just solution?

Palestinian State in the West Bank, Gaza Strip, and Arab sections of East Jerusalem.

 

Are you even reading what I provided?
Once again: (I will qoute the part that talks about the "High Contracting Party)

BTW- the quote that I provided of Sir Elihu Lauterpacht, provided support to Prof. Stone's assertion. Thus, Jordanian occupation was illegal.

 

sorry bro, but Article 2 of the 4th GC says no such thing. If you read the actual article, you would know this.

The Israeli Supreme Court understands this, and said so in their Elon Moreh decision.

 

lol!!!! the opinion of two unknown guys decides the legality of this issue????

lol!!!! you must be kidding.

 

I did, thank you.

The location of Elon Morah was changed after the decision.

 

So you say that Sir Elihu Lauterpacht which was a British academic and lawyer, specializing in International Law, and the founder of the Lauterpacht Centre for International Law at the Law Faculty in Cambridge University + appeared before the International Court of Justice many times. This guy is a nobody? Interesting.

So you say that Prof. Stone which was a Professor of Jurisprudence and International Law at the University of Sydney from 1942 to 1972, and thereafter a visiting Professor of Law at the University of New South Wales and concurrently Distinguished Professor of Jurisprudence and International Law at the Hastings College of Law, University of California, is a nobody? Interesting

 

Hi Margot, was wondering where you were. Hope to see you back soon. It was the Gatestone Institute

http://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/5033/radical-islam-europe


They appear to be part of the anti islam extremist network, noting Douglas Murray on it's board of Governors and

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gatestone_Institute

Here is an example of them spreading misinformation

http://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/2367/european-muslim-no-go-zones

which is rebutted here

https://www.opendemocracy.net/ourki.../misinformed-expert-or-misinformation-network

Just so you know next time you come across them.

 

The tunnels were not against civilians. The tunnels have been there for ages if they had wanted to use them against civilians they would have. They were used to get into Israel, to get supplies to kidnap the soldier Gilad and against Soldiers in the summer attack and the focus of your government, to say they were intended against civilians, was in order to stir up hate and gain approval from Israelis civilians to go on such a destructive mission. If you had read the details I gave you will know that some of the information re location was misleading or just not true.



This I am sure is one of the things the ICC will be looking into

Are you meaning they objected to it? You will have a new Parliament soon. If you continue to move to the right then I would expect to see it again. Actually one of the reasons why I expect to see it is because an Israeli on another forum who used to talk very differently made clear that a two state solution meant Jews in Israel and 'Arabs' in the Palestinian State. He's usually right in what he says so I suspect this is what is on the cards though obviously things could change.

No it is possible to say right away when something is so off the mark as this is that it never would be acceptable.

The ICC will also be looking into settlements so possibly provide some help there.

No the guilt lies more strongly with the Israeli Government for stopping the talks with a conflict resolution expert which were going well with Hamas and for breaking the ceasefire which had been put into operation. Israel chose not to go for peace. It was believed by the West that demographics would eventually make her but this has not happened. Hamas will hold onto their weapons until a peace settlement. They are all they have to negotiate with. That is what the issue is. You can see at the beginning of this article here that the intent of the disengagement from Gaza plan was to end or 'freeze' the peace process

http://jfjfp.com/?p=63280

The summer onslaught on Gaza was a continuation of this policy

http://jfjfp.com/?p=63280

The Summer onslaught on Gaza is the first thing the ICC is having a look at.

Don't be ridiculous. Taking half their territory and expecting them to exist on little islands on the west bank of an apartheid state called Israel is no answer. There is no intention to give the Palestinians a state. Your government has now decided the Palestinians should be managed rather than an solution found.

http://972mag.com/defense-minister-...oking-for-a-way-to-manage-the-conflict/97761/

From what I have heard it was not so much his inspiration. He was convinced by trusted advisers that that was the only way an Israeli State would survive. Obviously this was destroyed by those who killed him, kindred spirits to those now in power and by this

http://www.lrb.co.uk/v33/n05/alastair-crooke/permanent-temporariness

He does and certainly in that he is revolutionary. Maybe about a year ago I realised that probably Israel will not last. In order to last she must be in continuous war and keep the indigenous population captive without rights. The only hope is what Rabin realised - a genuine two state solution. People will not let Israel continue as she is forever. Look at the ME, it is ablaze. Leaving aside strange things which god forbid do not happen, the most likely future is BDS, many leaving and then some sort of one state. He is suggesting just get on with that and learn to live together as equal citizens in peace. It would be the end of an ethnic nationalist Jewish State but it could be something incredibly creative .....needs a bit of a change in consciousness first though I think

He also suggested everyone get a foreign passport

I said it would be called democracy. I was basing it on his views of a future Jewish Democracy which if you keep going the way you are, I see as a very definite possibility

Plenty more of the article here http://972mag.com/a-truly-jewish-democracy-on-the-ideology-of-likuds-moshe-feiglin/62170/

I think I have put in enough to illustrate this is how you are moving.

 

This is an ignominious statement in fact an ignorant one.
From San Remo to the Balfour declaration it was <The Palestinian Mandate> and this nomenclature was used to dignify the mandate... There was not an <INDEPENDENT> state of Palestine per se... for Instance the second Mandate the British got was called the Mandate for Mesopotamia... Where is Mesopotamia today... is it called Iraq or is it called ISIS? hmmm

Now the French received also a Mandate during that period it was called the Mandate of the Levant Syria/Lebanon.

When you make your above statement and you slash off the word <Mandate> from it you are only giving hand to untruth!

 

You must have a chutzpah or you must be kidding yourself.
When Transjordan now called Jordan wanted to integrate/annex the so called West Bank to its realm not a single member of the UN and not the Arab League were in favor of that...
The only two States that were willing to accept this were the UK and Pakistan.

 

Uh huh. This ignores Netanyahu's very public bragging of how he deliberately derailed Oslo. Israel wants peace?
"Thousands" of Israeli civilian dead? Try around 700...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Second_Intifada#Combatant_versus_noncombatant_deaths

 

ADDENDUM


In 1922, recognizing THE HISTORICAL CONNECTION OF THE JEWISH PEOPLE WITH PALESTINE and the grounds for RECONSTITUTING their National Home in that SAME country. The League of Nations granted Britain a Mandate over Palestine, pending the reconstitution in Palestine of the JEWISH NATIONAL HOME.

One of Britain's first act as a Mandatory Power was to divide Palestine along the river Jordan, giving over 77% of it, to an upstart from ARABIA, by the name of Emir Abdullah who, 1946, established Trans-Jordan-later renamed Transjordan and even later Jordan. (King Abdullah originally had wanted to call his country "Palestine" but was persuaded by the British that the name "Jordan" would emphasize the King's rule over both banks of that river (Jordan). Thus in the greater part of Palestine-the area East of the River Jordan-the right of Palestinian Arabs to self-determination was realized (and this was considered the FIRST PARTITION OF PALESTINE).

Yet the Jews' concomitant right to self-determination in the remaining 23 % of Palestine was not to be granted so readily. Arab militants, through terror and intimidation, opposed the fulfillment of Jewish national aspirations in any parts of Palestine whatsoever.

In 1947 the United Nations sought to settle the conflict by a SECOND DIVISION (this time of Western Palestine) into Jewish and Arab States. In May 1948 Jewish Palestine (Israel) proclaimed its independence. The neighboring Arab States, however, joined in a massive assault on Israel. Though Israel succeeded in repulsing the invasion, Judea and Samaria were captured, and later annexed, by Jordan; only Britain and Pakistan recognized this illegal annexation (yet, NO Arab Country extended their recognition). Egypt also conquered the Gaza district (though not annexed it).

Since mid-1948, then, two independent sovereign states have existed in the AREA once known as "Palestine": the Arab-Palestinian State of Jordan (77% of the Mandate) in Eastern Palestine, and the Jewish-Palestinian State of Israel (23% of the Mandate), in Western Palestine. For this very reason another Arab Palestinian State was not established in Western Palestine (the so-called "West Bank", i.e., Judea and Samaria) during the 19 years it was controlled by Jordan. It made no sense then; it makes no sense now...!

All non-Jewish inhabitants in the area conquered by the British led army of King Abdullah were granted JORDANIAN CITIZENSHIP. Over 400,000 Palestinian Arabs from Western Palestine moved East of the Jordan River Eastern Palestine-mainly to be closer to Amman, the new Jordan capital, and the improved social and economic opportunities offered there. Ethnic, social, religious and identical language made these migrations merely a "change of address." As one writer put it.

Today, Jordan's population-even without the western area it had conquered in its abortive attack on Israel in 1967-is still composed in its majority [73%] of Arabs of Palestinian origin. As Jordan's late King Hussein said in an interview for the Paris-based An-Nahar al-Arabi w'al-Daouli, on 26 December 1981, "Truth is that Jordan is Palestine and Palestine is Jordan."
A change of scenery in Jordan [this artificial state] would automatically bring the largest Palestinian (Fundamentalist Party, the only party that represents 73% of Jordan's population) in the picture. A Palestinian Arab leader replacing the present King Abdullah son of the late king Hussein might revert to "Palestine" instead of Jordan.

I have in my possession two Jordanian State Stamps one from 1964, bearing the likeness of the late King Hussein and pictures Mandated Palestine as an undivided territory [All of Israel of today plus Jordan of today]..., the other a 1949 stamp pictures King Abdullah (the grand father of late king Hussein) of the kingdom of Jordan and bears the label of Palestine in English and Arabic.




If Jordan (ex Trans-Jordan) IS NOT Palestine, what then, was its previous name? One of the answers is in the "Palestinian National Covenant"

ART 2 : Palestine with its boundaries that existed at the time of the British Mandate is an integral regional unit.

ART 25 : In the territories lying between the Jordan and the eastern boundary of Palestine as ultimately determined, the Mandatory shall be entitled, with the consent of the Council of the League of Nations, to postpone or withhold application of such provisions of this mandate as he may consider inapplicable to the existing local conditions, and to make such provision for the administration of the territories as he may consider suitable to those conditions, provided that no action shall be taken which is inconsistent with the provision of Articles 15, 16 and 18.

After Jordan Independence May 25, 1946, the word PALESTINE was used on all official documents i.e. (I mentioned the stamp bearing Abdullah's picture and the label Palestine). King Abdullah wanted to call his newly acquired country the kingdom of Palestine, but the British persuaded him to drop the idea. He had also mentioned in the past : "He (God) granted me success in creating the Government of Transjordan by having it separated from the Balfour Declaration."

The Raison d'être of Jordan has been clarified as the creation of a Palestinian order on the East Bank of the river Jordan. Initially an artificial country, established by British Imperial Decree, with unclear boundaries and no national identity, Jordan has taken major strides in trying to build a new collective that might be termed "Jordanian-Palestinian". It is a state in search of a nation to fill it with content and purpose; nation building is proving, however, to be more arduous task now that the national Palestinian identity, authentic as it might be, has been kindled.

The Palestinian entity of Jordan has not eliminated its ambitions to contest Hashemite control over this sizable part of Mandated Palestine. In essence, the real Palestinian Arab-Jordanian contest is over the East-Bank and not the West Bank of the Jordan River. The eastern portion of Palestine (Jordan), for objective reasons, is the big prize to be attained.

Living in their own social and cultural milieu in the Eastern part of Mandated Palestine, and enjoying full political, economic and social rights, the Palestinian Arabs have already achieved all the elements of national self- determination and fulfillment. They constitute a majority within an established political entity, which happens to be situated on over 77% of the original territory of Historic Palestine.

Israel controls today only 23% of that territory. Jordan is, therefore, the answer to the "Palestinian problem" since its population is nearly 73% of Palestinian stock. I then conclude that Jordan can be designated as either the "Palestine-Jordan Hashemite Kingdom," or the "Republic of Palestine."

Historic Palestine has been already unevenly partitioned, and Jordan has come out with the Lion share!

The non-Israeli Arabs of Palestine should be REPATRIATED to their country (since they are ALL holders of Jordanian Ids and passports from the time Jordan ruled the West Bank for 19 years).

Jordan and Israel are now considered (after their Peace agreement) the two SUCCESSORS of the Palestine Mandate!

 

[MENTION=27062]HBendor[/MENTION]...How would you solve the Palestinian problem? What is the desirable outcome for your side?

 

I read everything you provided.
The tunnel that GIlad Shalit was kidnapped from wasntfrom a tunnel that was 170 meters near an Israeli village, i was right on the border- 100 meters from where I was at in the last operation.
For example, the tunnel that been discovered by the IDF near the village Ein Hashlosha:


As you can see the length of the tunnel, as the entering and exit of it describes as the blue arrows. You can see how much close the exit of the tunnels was to the village Ein Hashlosha. And that's was not to hurt civilians? ( as soldiers)
This tunnel was discovered in October 2013, before the last operation.

Source: http://www.idfblog.com/blog/2014/02...-hamas-digging-tunnels-building-rockets-gaza/

If you wrote to to me that Israel should takes into considiration what the Shin Bet says, then you say that Israel sould takes into considiration that tunnels are also against civilians.

Leiberman is maybe will not enter the next government and maybe even for the Knesset.
Nowadays Leiberman's party is busy with invastigation against several people in his party. In the last poll they got less then 10 Mandates, so I would not be sure confident as you are.

So you say that giving the Arabs an area of their own without checkpoints and with transportation contiguity would never be acceptable?

The ICC will invastigate the last operation, and not Bennet's plan.

The peace talks that was taking place was between Israel and the "Palestinian" Aothurity, and not with Hamas. And just after the PA decided to join Hamas to a unity government, just then the talks collapased. Hamas is a terror organization, and by joining him to a unity it means the opposite then what the Fatah tried to show.
If he Fatah wouldnt join Hamas to the unity then the peace talks would go on.

So you say that while the IDF searched for the 3 teenagers in the West Bank, Islamic Jihad started to shoot rockets thoward Israel is ok? Only because Islamic Jihad and (after that) Hamas that joined the firing (when he was incharge of firing to Zichron Ya'akov, Tel Aviv etc.) then Israel, after avoiding attacking in Gaza started to airstrike terror cells and missiles launchers.
So you say that when the Islamic Jihad shot rockets thoward Israel is Israel to be balmed on?

So you say that Wye agreement (withdrawal of Israel) that been started by Bibi and ended by Barak is not a peace act?
So you say that a withdrawal and mess evecuation of Israeli civilians in 2005 is not a peace act?
So you say that when Israel was over and over again agreed on ceasefire with Hamas in the last operation (as the others) and repsecting them is not a peace act?
So you say that by giving the Arabs areas and to be agreed to create the PA is not a peace act?

If Hamas wants to end this conflict then he need to be demilitarized! I dont think that the British people would allow the man that beheaded the British soldier would be still holding weapons. Or in other words- would be out and free to continue to do what he done to the British soldier, is it?

The way of nagotiate is with mouths, not with weapons.

The last operation was to stop the rockets that was been shooting at Israeli civilians.

The ICC wants to invastegate the last operation in Gaza, and Israel is prepered with proper videos and documantation against Hamas. For Ecample, rockets near UNRWA schools, weapons inside Mosques etc.

Israel will not take helf of their territory! But only give them full responsibility in Area B (when Area A will remain as it is). The Arabs will have transportation contiguity by remain the status que in the raods.

Israel is not an apartheid. Arabs can walk in the same sidewalks as Jews, Arabs can vote on Israeli elections, Arabs can become politicians, Arabs can study in Israeli universities, Arabs can demonstrate, Arabs enjoy money from Govermantal officies if they dont work, like Jewish unemployed people etc.

Ya'alon, as you showed is talking about what he's prespective about it. But first an formost it's need to be demilitarized.

His solution (which was Oslo) to the conflict wasnt desctoyed by the man who killed him! Read please:
After Rabin's assassination, Shimon Peres was chosen to replace Rabin and by that had the obligation to continue to fulfill Oslo B.
In 1997, when Netanyahu was the prime minister after Peres, he said he will be obligated to prior agreements. Threrefore, he signed on Hebron Redeployment Protocol that Dan Shomron and Sa'aib Arikat agreed on. this Protocol was an accompanied Agreement to Oslo B.
In 1998 Netanyahu signed also on Wye Agreement, which was designed to regulate and scheduling the withdrawal of Israel. Bibi fulfilled the first agreed step of the withdrawal and didnt succeeded to fulfill the rest. Which made his term as the prime minister come to an end.

After Netanyahu was elected Ahud Barak. Barak fulfilled the rest of the withdrawal that was agreed on in Wye agreement + suggested to do another withdrawal from Abu-Dis. After that, Barak went to acomplish an agreement with the "Palestinians" in Camp Devid, 2000, which led to the Second Intifadah that led to Operation Defensive Shield and the total destruction of Oslo Accords and the talks about peace and Arab state.
In the Second Intifadah thousands of Israeli civilians were killed.

Not quit. For Israel to lasts, Israel needs to protect the state indentity. When Israel's identity will lost then so Israel will follow.

Rabin's solution was destroyed by the Second Intifadah- As I showed you.

If Israel will lose it's identity, then it will be the end of Israel.
To be a "Jewish state" is not mean that "this state is only for Jews and only Jews enjoy rights", because that is not what is happening in Israel. Non-Jewish groups enjoy rights as the Jewish residents of Israel.

Bennet also suggested that the Arabs that live in Area C will be granted Israeli I.D.'s

The parties that you talking about are parties with very little soppurt from the people, those parties are extreme party with their conflict solution. Becuase those parties doesnt enjoy alot of soppurt then they cant rule here (like you say that Feiglin will).

 

This is history. History shows that Oslo was been destoryed by the Second Intifadah.

1,100 is the exect number if you combain the civilian causelties and the IDF causelties (IDF soldiers are also Israeli civilians).

And in 2005 there were 135 more.

Source: http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/Terrorism/victims.html

 

I am for <RELOCATION> of the <NON ISRAELI ARABS> to Jordan or any of the 22 x Arab countries. The relocating <NON ISRAELI ARABS> should be compensated for properties left behind provided that the Jews of Arab countries would receive the same.

A bi National country will only create chaos not during its implementation but a few years later... as an example the majority Christians in Lebanon were decimated and forced by the Muslims to leave their Patrimony. Lebanon today is a Muslim country where the Christians are a <scared> minority.

Israel could not integrate the Muslim Arabs as an example they do not in Europe.

These are two different peoples

These are two different Languages

Two different religions

Two different aspirations.

 

I thank both you and Ronstar for offering your solutions to the Palestinian problem. I don't know if you saw his ideas. Anyway my view is that there is enough bad blood between Israelis (Jews) and Palestinians (Muslim Arabs) for centuries to come. The only option Israelis have is to stick to their guns and create the nation state. Exclusive Jewish state. Given the opportunity Muslims would slaughter all of you. I have no doubts about it.