How do you negotiate

[OCA]

Right, but awhile ago, 06/10/2007 what's happened since?

Nothing.





http://www.ynet.co.il/english/articl...409075,00.html

[OCA]

Couldn't find anything more current

06/10/2007

That was six months ago

Besides that only applies to those coming from Gaza, the same place the rockets and suicide bomber come from.
During WAR you do not just let people come nilly wily into your country.


http://www.nytimes.com/2007/07/31/wo...31mideast.html

This is off topic but interesting.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisf...israel.comment

Not to mentiont that just says they are not letting them in, not that they are kicking them out over the last twenty years like you claimed. That was what the proof I asked for was for

They are punishing law abiding Palestinians for the actions of a few.

Apartheid.....Israel by creating the concentration camps has created a permanent group of second class citizens who do not possess all the rights of other Israeli's which by definition and action is exactly what took place in South Africa and ironically........Nazi Germany.

[Kathianne]

Nothing.





http://www.ynet.co.il/english/articl...409075,00.html

So now the poor Palestinians are like the illegals in our country? I have to say, you are consistent.

[OCA]

So now the poor Palestinians are like the illegals in our country? I have to say, you are consistent.

Kath, you want to debate or engage in frivolities? I must say your behavior in this thread has been....lets say..........less than whats required to make the grade.

[Kathianne]

Kath, you want to debate or engage in frivolities? I must say your behavior in this thread has been....lets say..........less than whats required to make the grade.

What's there to debate with? All you have put forward are 'poor Palestinians' stories. While I feel sorry for those that are innocent, they seem to be few and far between, whether voting in terrorists, strapping explosives on babies, hiding rockets in residential areas.

Funny thing is, Amnesty International recognizes that Israel is no longer occupying Gaza, yet now calls it a 'blockade' and says that Israel should care for all 'basic necessities' of the poor Palis. Sort of like you are told to feed and care for the guy across the street that you know wants to kill you and your family.

[OCA]

What's there to debate with? All you have put forward are 'poor Palestinians' stories. While I feel sorry for those that are innocent, they seem to be few and far between, whether voting in terrorists, strapping explosives on babies, hiding rockets in residential areas.

Funny thing is, Amnesty International recognizes that Israel is no longer occupying Gaza, yet now calls it a 'blockade' and says that Israel should care for all 'basic necessities' of the poor Palis. Sort of like you are told to feed and care for the guy across the street that you know wants to kill you and your family.

They occupied their territory ilegally in the first place, they expelled them and herded them into designated areas, they restrict the flow of neccessities in and out of those areas...........yes, they are responsible for them, not because the Palestinians wanted it that way but rather the Israeli's themselves have fixed it that way.

Few and far between? Go to my new thread in "international politics" and see how I debunked your few and far between melarkey.

The bitter truth is is that the root problem in all of the M.E. is the continued illegal existence and practices of Israel. Now i'm not calling for the elimination of Israel per say but if there were ni Israel there would be no probs in M.E.. If you support Israel you support the further continuation of problems in the M.E.

[truthmatters]

http://desertpeace.wordpress.com/200...mohammed-omer/

You can NEVER know the real story unless you listen to all sides.

[Kathianne]

They occupied their territory ilegally in the first place, they expelled them and herded them into designated areas, they restrict the flow of neccessities in and out of those areas...........yes, they are responsible for them, not because the Palestinians wanted it that way but rather the Israeli's themselves have fixed it that way.

Few and far between? Go to my new thread in "international politics" and see how I debunked your few and far between melarkey.

The bitter truth is is that the root problem in all of the M.E. is the continued illegal existence and practices of Israel. Now i'm not calling for the elimination of Israel per say but if there were ni Israel there would be no probs in M.E.. If you support Israel you support the further continuation of problems in the M.E.

What Tutu wrote was his opinion, not fact. Facts are that Israel exists and will continue to exist. That will piss off the poor Palis who could decide to have a state and be responsible for themselves, it's not going to happen.

[OCA]

What Tutu wrote was his opinion, not fact. Facts are that Israel exists and will continue to exist. That will piss off the poor Palis who could decide to have a state and be responsible for themselves, it's not going to happen.

Why should they accept a state that does not comprise fully the lands that were taken from them illegally in 1947? If Mexico were given part of Arizona and New Mexico by the U.N. and there were conflict, would you accept anything other than the return of the full territory that comprised Arizona and New Mexico? I think not.

[Kathianne]

Why should they accept a state that does not comprise fully the lands that were taken from them illegally in 1947? If Mexico were given part of Arizona and New Mexico by the U.N. and there were conflict, would you accept anything other than the return of the full territory that comprised Arizona and New Mexico? I think not.

It was 'land' not 'their land'. It was 'British controlled.' They gave it up, the UN tried to divide it, the Trans-Jordans attacked and were removed.

[Yurt]

Why should they accept a state that does not comprise fully the lands that were taken from them illegally in 1947? If Mexico were given part of Arizona and New Mexico by the U.N. and there were conflict, would you accept anything other than the return of the full territory that comprised Arizona and New Mexico? I think not.

isn't it true that the land was actually under the control of the ottoman empire, then went to the brits. as far as private ownership, jews have been lawfully purchasing vast amounts of land in the area since the mid 1800s. as far as governments, the ottoman empire no longer exists and when it did, that area was not autonomous.

do you side with muslims waging war and conquering that territory around 700 AD?

[OCA]

isn't it true that the land was actually under the control of the ottoman empire, then went to the brits. as far as private ownership, jews have been lawfully purchasing vast amounts of land in the area since the mid 1800s. as far as governments, the ottoman empire no longer exists and when it did, that area was not autonomous.

do you side with muslims waging war and conquering that territory around 700 AD?

Doesn't matter who controlled the territory at what time. The Occupying power should give first preference in reference to land to the indigenous peoples, much like what America should have done with the Iindians.

Palestinians had been in the area since biblical times, long after Jews had abandoned it.

[FSUK]

Below is an Early Day Motion, which has been signed by 77 British MP's from a a broad spectrum of the political arena and faiths.

"That this House notes that the Israeli government has expressed the desire to upgrade its relations with the EU to the same level as Norway and Switzerland; further notes that this would include the ability to have free passage of goods, people and capital between the two entities; further notes that Israel remains in consistent violation of UN Security Council Resolutions and the Fourth Geneva Convention, has routinely prevented the free movement of Palestinian goods and people and has withheld Palestinian funds from their people; further notes that these and other grievous human rights abuses represent a clear breach of Article Two of the EU-Israel Association Agreement, which calls for adherence to human rights laws; commends the International Development Select Committee's report into development assistance and the Occupied Palestinian territories, and in particular its recommendation that `the UK should urge the EU to use the Association Agreement with Israel as a lever for change and to consider suspending the Agreement until there are further improvements in access arrangements'; and urges the Government to insist that no upgrading of Israel's relations with the EU be considered until the Israeli government has brought itself into full compliance with international law, including the permanent lifting of all barriers to freedom of movement for Palestinian goods, people and capital."

http://edmi.parliament.uk/EDMi/EDMDe...32&SESSION=885

You see, my disagreement with the israels actions, are not some sort of unfounded propaganda.

[Kathianne]

Below is an Early Day Motion, which has been signed by 77 British MP's from a a broad spectrum of the political arena and faiths.

"That this House notes that the Israeli government has expressed the desire to upgrade its relations with the EU to the same level as Norway and Switzerland; further notes that this would include the ability to have free passage of goods, people and capital between the two entities; further notes that Israel remains in consistent violation of UN Security Council Resolutions and the Fourth Geneva Convention, has routinely prevented the free movement of Palestinian goods and people and has withheld Palestinian funds from their people; further notes that these and other grievous human rights abuses represent a clear breach of Article Two of the EU-Israel Association Agreement, which calls for adherence to human rights laws; commends the International Development Select Committee's report into development assistance and the Occupied Palestinian territories, and in particular its recommendation that `the UK should urge the EU to use the Association Agreement with Israel as a lever for change and to consider suspending the Agreement until there are further improvements in access arrangements'; and urges the Government to insist that no upgrading of Israel's relations with the EU be considered until the Israeli government has brought itself into full compliance with international law, including the permanent lifting of all barriers to freedom of movement for Palestinian goods, people and capital."

http://edmi.parliament.uk/EDMi/EDMDe...32&SESSION=885

You see, my disagreement with the israels actions, are not some sort of unfounded propaganda.

What else is new? If your argument is that Europe backs any and all requests of the Palestinians, funds them, and has a long history of anti-semitism, I'll not argue that.

[OCA]

It was 'land' not 'their land'. It was 'British controlled.' They gave it up, the UN tried to divide it, the Trans-Jordans attacked and were removed.

No, it wasn't their land, they'd only been there for 1500 or so years.

It wasn't the U.N.'s to divide.