Israel to deport tens of thousands of Palestinians? [Archive]

Dragoonster

11th April 2010, 06:46 PM

try deporting even 1,000 Palestinians. See what the world reaction is.

I wonder how Obama would react if 10,000 Palestinians are deported because they went from Gaza to the WB without a proper "travel permit".

I don't think the world would react much, the article seems to suggest some deportations of this type have been taking place for years:

According to a decision by the West Bank commander that was not backed by military legislation, since 2007, Palestinians with Gaza addresses must request a permit to stay in the West Bank. Since 2000, they have been defined as illegal sojourners if they have Gaza addresses, as if they were citizens of a foreign state. Many of them have been deported to Gaza, including those born in the West Bank.

On the bright side maybe it provides an argument to lessen US aid to Israel, since they can instead pay for their exploition of the OT by charging its residents:

The new provision also allow the IDF commander in the area to require that the infiltrator pay for the cost of his own detention, custody and expulsion, up to a total of NIS 7,500.

Terrible all around.

The Fool

11th April 2010, 07:23 PM

Incidentally, I bet 7$ this thread blows up by Tuesday.
terrorist attack?

but to comment on the OP, maybe its best to see what israel intends to do with this. If its to remove people going from gaza to the west bank who's intention is to attack Israel then fair enough....if its being used to simply lower the population of the west bank (parts of which Israel wants) by packing as many people as possible off to gaza (none of which Israel wants) then its not fair enough.

Thunder

11th April 2010, 07:41 PM

bigjelmapro

11th April 2010, 11:23 PM

Still trying to find where the PA is doing anything beyond paying lip service to this announcement, in addition to the Muslim Brotherhood official website, which is apparently still running the propaganda that Gaza's electricity has stopped, once again, parading around in candle-lit vigils :rolleyes:

The issue I have with this strange announcement is that I get the feeling that the PA is once again employing the IDF to balance the advantage of Fatah in the political sphere and is rooting out Hamas supporters in the WB under the auspices of a cryptic IDF order.

On the bright side maybe it provides an argument to lessen US aid to Israel, since they can instead pay for their exploition of the OT by charging its residents:
How would alleviating detention costs on Israeli tax payers who pay for this be any justification for lessening loan guarantees and grants between Israel and the US (3/4 of which go directly into the US military industry).

Failed logic?

Dragoonster

11th April 2010, 11:41 PM

Still trying to find where the PA is doing anything beyond paying lip service to this announcement, in addition to the Muslim Brotherhood official website, which is apparently still running the propaganda that Gaza's electricity has stopped, once again, parading around in candle-lit vigils :rolleyes:

The issue I have with this strange announcement is that I get the feeling that the PA is once again employing the IDF to balance the advantage of Fatah in the political sphere and is rooting out Hamas supporters in the WB under the auspices of a cryptic IDF order.

The linked article is from Haaretz; are you suggesting the policy is a fabrication of Fatah? Or that Fatah is in collusion with the IDF and writing IDF policy? Just what exactly is your claim?

How would alleviating detention costs on Israeli tax payers who pay for this be any justification for lessening loan guarantees and grants between Israel and the US (3/4 of which go directly into the US military industry).

Failed logic?

Depends on how many are deported and how much if any profit is skimmed from the detention costs. But that wasn't a serious statement on my part, just a poor attempt at a barely humorous lead-in to the quote.

Archer17

12th April 2010, 07:47 AM

I'm sorry, but since when is Gaza and the West Bank considered seperate political entities?

are they not both governed by the Palestine Authority?

when did Israel declare that since Hamas took over, Palestinian residents of Gaza were no longer considered the same political nationality as Palestinian residents of the WB?

Israel needs to stop playing these damn games with people's lives.

I cannot believe that Palestinians from Gaza do not have full rights to travel to and back, from the West Bank, and vice-versa. I thought Israel no longer controled Gaza?
Gaza and the West Bank have been, for all intents and purposes, two separate entities since the Fatah-Hamas donnybrook in 2007 resulted in Fatah being kicked out of Gaza. I was going to post a link regarding the Hamas-Fatah schism but apparently don't have enough posts yet to do any more than type out a long-hand url, so hell with it.

I have no love lost for Hamas and anyone who follows international geopolitics knows that, as far as Hamas' international diplomatic isolation goes, it's primarily self-wrought. Israel's blockade of the Strip however is another matter and amounts to collective punishment IMO. But I digress...

I'm taking the Haaretz article with a grain of salt. I don't doubt that this policy they mention is true but Haaretz isn't my choice for reading between the lines on what is a ambiguous edict. The Israelis showed some restraint regarding prior edicts and I find it hard to believe Israel would suddenly take a path that is this over the top. Time will tell. Suffice it to say that if the worst-case scenarios brought up by Haaretz do come to fruition then Israel has, for all intents and purposes, crossed a line that even this Israel-friendly country can no longer soft-shoe. The settlement-building and lack of flexibility on Jerusalem is bad enough, mass deportations in Fatah-land would be indefensible.

WildCat

12th April 2010, 03:21 PM

I was going to post a link regarding the Hamas-Fatah schism but apparently don't have enough posts yet to do any more than type out a long-hand url, so hell with it.
6 1/2 years and only 14 posts? A man of few words... :p

I think you need 15 to post urls.

Archer17

12th April 2010, 04:12 PM

6 1/2 years and only 14 posts? A man of few words... :p

I think you need 15 to post urls.
I was busy. ;)

Thunder

12th April 2010, 06:27 PM

The settlement-building and lack of flexibility on Jerusalem is bad enough, mass deportations in Fatah-land would be indefensible.

well, if they do try it, Israel is sure to bring up the Holocaust a bunch of times, in order to justify it.

quixotecoyote

12th April 2010, 06:32 PM

well, if they do try it, Israel is sure to bring up the Holocaust a bunch of times, in order to justify it.

Yes, because of all the other times Israel has brought up the holocaust to justify specific policies regarding the treatment of Palestinians, this is a completely reasonable statement.

bigjelmapro

16th April 2010, 02:18 AM

The linked article is from Haaretz; are you suggesting the policy is a fabrication of Fatah? Or that Fatah is in collusion with the IDF and writing IDF policy? Just what exactly is your claim?

Bit naive aren't we? Suggesting the Haaretz article lacks depth and doesn't present all possibilities. But hey, its an Haaretz article, so not surprised.

Skeptic

16th April 2010, 02:53 AM

I'm taking the Haaretz article with a grain of salt. I don't doubt that this policy they mention is true but Haaretz isn't my choice for reading between the lines on what is a ambiguous edict.

Ha'aretz -- self-styled "The Paper for Thinking People" -- is well-known as a "progressive" (read: de facto anti-zionist, anti-Israeli) paper, or more precisely, loony left rag.

It is famous, or notorious, for its "shocking discoveries" of evil Jewish zionist conspiracies, most if not all of them not passing muster, such as the fake "massacre" at Tantura, publishing Shahak's bogus 1964 letter about orthodox Jews "stopping" treatment of a non-Jew which collapsed with a heart attack; for giving sympathetic and wide forum to the so-called "new historians" (who are actually neither), and so on.

They are also well-known for praising Arafat to the skies during the Oslo "peace" process, and for that matter probably one of the first to invent, and certainly those to popularize, the newspeak Orwellian term "peace process" -- as opposed to "peace" -- ca. 1994, to make it clear why so many buses are blowing up and Jews shot by Arafat's "peace" partners. It's not peace, said Ha'aretz; it's a peace process, so it's perfectly natural that you're getting killed.

One infamous Ha'aretz headline ca. 1996 was, "terrorism expected to increase as the peace process progresses", on which an Israeli satirist remark laconically, "until peace will arrive and war will break out" (which is, incidentally, just what happened in 2001).

Right now an Ha'aretz journalist is under arrest, for spying, after she -- when a soldier -- had taken out numerous classified documents from a general's headquarters and passed it on to another Ha'aretz journalist, now in Spain, trying to engineer a 'deal' whereby he will return the documents and in return will not be prosecuted (sound good. I too would like to be able to make such deals -- if I steal a car, it's OK, as long as I give it back when I'm caught).

The descent to espionage, if not treason, is the logical result of the road Ha'aretz had taken in the last couple of decades, best described as "Israel sucks, except for those who agree with us."

the joke about Ha'aretz is that it's the only newspaper with three times as many angry letters declaring they're canceling the subscription per month than actual subscribers.

16th April 2010, 02:55 AM

roflmao, Sceptics posts are so funny. sometimes i think he is just a parody of a crazy fundy.

bigjelmapro

16th April 2010, 06:17 AM

The descent to espionage, if not treason, is the logical result of the road Ha'aretz had taken in the last couple of decades, best described as "Israel sucks, except for those who agree with us."

The problem with this espionage case is that they assume Anat is a reporter. I'm curious how she held her position in the army for so long, unless she didn't disclose her half-baked position regarding terrorists and what to do with them.

Thunder

16th April 2010, 07:26 AM

Scootch

16th April 2010, 08:09 AM

Neo-Nazis say that the ADL is a treasonous organization.

Neo-Nazis say a lot of things.

Skeptic

16th April 2010, 09:42 AM

The problem with this espionage case is that they assume Anat is a reporter. I'm curious how she held her position in the army for so long, unless she didn't disclose her half-baked position regarding terrorists and what to do with them.

She did it before she was a reporter, when she was a soldier, if I am not mistaken. You know as well as I do that if the IDF checked every 19-year-old or so soldier for "loony views", left-wing or right-wing, they'd soon run out of soldiers -- that's part of what being 19 means.

Skeptic

16th April 2010, 09:51 AM

Neo-Nazis say a lot of things.

Yes, but when they say things about the eeeeeeeeeeeevil Israel or those who support it, you can trust them.

Thunder

16th April 2010, 01:43 PM

roflmao, Sceptics posts are so funny. sometimes i think he is just a parody of a crazy fundy.

indeed

bigjelmapro

17th April 2010, 12:25 AM

Oh, this is gold:

Column One: The Haaretz spy scandal (http://www.jpost.com/LandedPages/PrintArticle.aspx?id=173305)

Over the past two weeks Israel has been rocked by a major espionage scandal in which the Haaretz newspaper plays a central role. To understand the significance of the scandal, it is worthwhile to preface a discussion of it with a look at a smaller story Haaretz developed this week.

On Sunday, Haaretz’s Amira Hass reported that in January, the IDF published a new military order that paves the way for the mass expulsion of illegal aliens from Judea and Samaria. The story sported the disturbing headline, “IDF order will enable mass deportation from West Bank.”

In a follow-up on Monday, Hass reported that 10 self-described human rights organizations (all funded by the New Israel Fund) sent a joint letter to Defense Minister Ehud Barak asking him to rescind the order. She noted, too, that, “the international media also has taken great interest in the story.”

And indeed, on Wednesday, a Google news search for “IDF West Bank deportation order” drew nearly 20,000 results.

Also on Monday, Haaretz published an editorial based on Hass’s stories. Titled, “IDF bid to expel West Bank Palestinians is a step too far,” the editorial asserted, “Implementing this new military order is not only likely to spark a new conflagration in the territories, it is liable to give the world clear-cut proof that Israel’s aim is a mass deportation of Palestinians from the West Bank.”

That is, Israel is fomenting a war and Israel deserves to lose that war because it is the villain.

On Wednesday, Haaretz reported that Jordan had joined it in condemning Israel.

That’s quite an accomplishment for an Israeli newspaper with a negligible share of the domestic market.

The only problem is that the order Hass reported on is 41 years old. After creating an international scandal, on Wednesday Haaretz acknowledged that the supposedly new order has been in place since 1969. What changed in January is that the IDF decided to expand the rights of illegal aliens in Judea and Samaria to pre-deportation hearings.

This was not a change for the worse in the status of illegal residents. It was a change for the better.

And still, due to Haaretz’s misreporting, Israeli diplomats are being called into the chanceries of the world and raked over the coals for the country’s alleged plot to conduct a mass expulsion of Palestinians.

Haaretz accomplished two things with this story. It weakened Israel abroad, which clearly serves its ideological purposes. And it demonstrated its enormous power to damage Israel’s international image at will, which of course puts Israel’s law enforcement and judicial arms on notice as they prosecute and adjudicate the Haaretz spy scandal.

HAARETZ’S MANIPULATION of the deportation story bears a striking similarity to the way it manipulated its own spy scandal. That scandal was under a total court-issued gag order that barred the local media from reporting on it until last Thursday.
...

Now, be sure to read the article. Not abandon the thread. Its pretty straightforward that Haaretz has managed pretty well in their misleading, sensationalist, propaganda. And this position is perfectly justifiable, and can not be excused by the same drivel of right vs. left. Its about responsible reporting. End of story.

Skeptic

17th April 2010, 12:47 AM

Don't expect any apology from Haaretz, or from those who rely on them. Expect the usual "explanation" on their editorial page: admitting the report the wrote was, ahem, false and misleading, but whine that that doesn't matter, and only right wing extremists would make a big fuss about it, when we all have a sacred duty to fight the occupation, so lying for that purpose is okey-dokey.

The Fool

17th April 2010, 02:56 AM

It appears that this order has changed the definition of "infiltrator" to widen it significantly...therefore increasing the number of people that could be deported....Is this correct?

Dragoonster

17th April 2010, 05:12 AM

Now, be sure to read the article. Not abandon the thread. Its pretty straightforward that Haaretz has managed pretty well in their misleading, sensationalist, propaganda. And this position is perfectly justifiable, and can not be excused by the same drivel of right vs. left. Its about responsible reporting. End of story.

Thanks for posting this. Had no idea Haaretz was anything but a respectable news source. I'd love to just plead ignorance but you're right, is naive to trust a single source even when it appears credible, especially when it doesn't.

bigjelmapro

17th April 2010, 06:23 AM

Thanks for posting this. Had no idea Haaretz was anything but a respectable news source. I'd love to just plead ignorance but you're right, is naive to trust a single source even when it appears credible, especially when it doesn't.
There's plenty of good material on Haaretz, they simply have this other dark side to them when it comes to stories like these.

Thunder

17th April 2010, 06:28 AM

is Haaretz's article about the issue...incorrect?

or are we just gonna attack the messenger..in order to deflect from the horrible truth and facts of the message.

mortimer

17th April 2010, 06:46 AM

is Haaretz's article about the issue...incorrect?
Yes.

Thunder

17th April 2010, 07:10 AM

Yes.

how so?

mortimer

17th April 2010, 07:18 AM

how so?
You need only read two words into the article...

"A new..."

Thunder

17th April 2010, 07:19 AM

You need only read two words into the article...

"A new..."

thats a very stupid thing to say. obviously, you have nothing but nonsense to contribute to this thread.

mortimer

17th April 2010, 07:31 AM

thats a very stupid thing to say. obviously, you have nothing but nonsense to contribute to this thread.

Just to be clear, you think it's stupid to say a 41 year old order is not new?

Skeptic

17th April 2010, 09:59 AM

Thanks for posting this. Had no idea Haaretz was anything but a respectable news source. I'd love to just plead ignorance but you're right, is naive to trust a single source even when it appears credible, especially when it doesn't.

Haaretz is the oldest, or one of the oldest, Hebrew-language newspapers in Israel, in fact predating the state. It used to be a reliable source of news, or, at least, as reliable as any newspaper could be.

Since the 1980s, however, it began to turn into a "post-zionist" newspaper, then as now fashionable among the 2% of the population which lives in the Israeli equivalent of Manhattan's upper west side and/or are humanities professors (usually the same group), arguing that Arafat really wants peace, that the war of 1948 had nothing to do with the Arab desire to destroy the just-declared Israel but was a zionist conspiracy; that zionism is evil and passel; portrayed Orthodox Jews in a way that, if done in any other newspaper, would caused justified accusations of antisemitism; and so on.

As I write this, one of its reporters is in jail for spying; another had run away to Spain with classified military documents and is trying to "cut a deal" so as to avoid similar arrest; and one of its senior editors has just been caught calling a major who had been killed a week ago in a Gaza firefight a "fascist" based on nothing more than the fact that he was an orthodox Jew.

Haaretz's response? The usual combination of suggestio falsi (as in the false suggestion of "ethnic cleansing" in the article this thread is based on) and suppresio veri (it is the one newspaper in the country that is not, surprise surprise, dealing in any detail with the arrests and flight of its reporters or the bias of its editors, except for the usual "it's all a conspiracy by right-wing extremists" / "what's the big deal?" / "we're just being prosecuted for telling the truth!" trio).

A sad descent of a once-respected news source.

bigjelmapro

18th April 2010, 12:19 AM

is Haaretz's article about the issue...incorrect?

or are we just gonna attack the messenger..in order to deflect from the horrible truth and facts of the message.
How about you actually make an effort to read an article in its entirety before making yourself look yet more foolish in yet another thread. There's no messanger, this is yet another case of Haaretz misleading the public and its reader base.

WildCat

18th April 2010, 01:51 PM

Have the mass deportations started yet?

Skeptic

18th April 2010, 01:53 PM

is Haaretz's article about the issue...incorrect?

Yes. It claims there's a "new" law whose purpose is to now allows the deportation of people, when in fact the law has been in place for 41 years and had not resulted in such deportations.

The only "new" thing is that the law was changed to give those who might be deported more rights and make deportation harder.

And yet Haaretz managed to make this pro-deportee change in a 41-year-old law that has not actually been used into a nefarious evil plan to deport "tens of thousands of Palestinians", a totally baseless assertion.

So, yes, it's incorrect. Why do you ask? Are you going to apologize?

WildCat

18th April 2010, 01:55 PM

So, yes, it's incorrect. Why do you ask? Are you going to apologize?
If Thunder stays true to his parky76 persona he'll just ignore this thread and start another one on much the same topic.

Skeptic

18th April 2010, 01:58 PM

Have the mass deportations started yet?

Like the "ethnic cleansing" and the "genocide" of the Palestinians, it's going to start any day now.

That the ethnically cleansed / genocided Palestinian population somehow magically trebled or so, making the Israelies the most inefficient genociders and ethnic cleansers in history...

That no mass deportation had occurred in the 41 years this "deportation law" has been in effect -- and that the only change in it now is making deportations, even in theory, harder...

Well, all that is a a mere smokescreen, a typical zionist trick to hide the awful truth.

Just ask Haaretz.

The Fool

18th April 2010, 05:36 PM

dup

The Fool

18th April 2010, 05:46 PM

That no mass deportation had occurred in the 41 years this "deportation law" has been in effect -- and that the only change in it now is making deportations, even in theory, harder...

Well, all that is a a mere smokescreen, a typical zionist trick to hide the awful truth.

Just ask Haaretz.
My understanding of this is that the definition of "infiltrator" used by the "41 year old law" has been widened significantly and essentially making it a new law. This appears to be getting the ignore treatment from people claiming the law has not changed.

The deportation process may have had another processing stage attached (made harder??) but also appears to have been widened to cover many more people.

once again, I don't have a lot of details at hand....is that a fair assesment?

bigjelmapro

20th April 2010, 06:00 AM

If Thunder stays true to his parky76 persona he'll just ignore this thread and start another one on much the same topic.
He already has, and looky, with a poll :D http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?p=5846394#post5846394

*EDIT - Sorry, just noticed that was last month's redundant thread.

Thunder

20th April 2010, 01:30 PM

If Thunder stays true to his parky76 persona he'll just ignore this thread and start another one on much the same topic.

:p;)

Skeptic

21st April 2010, 07:30 PM

I guess that's an admission.

By the way, this forum is FULL of threads to the effect of "Claim X about Al Quaeda [or some other group] proven to be false, USA government proven to lie / be mistaken once again", or "Horrible bias against Muslims revealed in inaccurate statement made by Y yesterday".

Without going into the merit of those threads per se, let us note: did any of those who love posting on such threads ever apologize, or admit they are wrong, about the clearly-false libels they post about Israel day in, day out?

Even when, as in this case, the truth is obvious -- and takes about two minutes to google -- and they could have done it before posting their lies, but decided to bash Israel instead, since the facts shouldn't get in the way of a good "Israel is evil" story?

No?

Gee. It's almost as if they're biased against the Jewish state or something.

Thunder

21st April 2010, 07:48 PM

Gee. It's almost as if they're biased against the Jewish state or something.

yes, cause only someone who is biased against Israel, could ever find something wrong with Israel.

a truly even-handed, unbaised person would understand that Israel is always right, and all accusations against them are based on Jew-hatred. And when Israel IS guilty of the accusations against it, such actions were justified by the Holocaust, or the fact that Israel is surrounded by a billion evil Muslims, or the fact that Israel is the Middle East's only true democratic society.

bigjelmapro

22nd April 2010, 05:48 AM

Ooh....see the italic drivel...a new trend.

Bill Thompson

22nd April 2010, 11:11 PM

Do not forget "Trail of Tears". US history is worse that Israeli. Plus the Cheorkee had more ligit claim to the land. And I doubt woman and children are going to needlessly die in route during the Israeli transportation.

Thunder

23rd April 2010, 05:56 AM

bigjelmapro

24th April 2010, 09:08 AM

ah...so because the USA did it in 1845...Israel can do it in 2010.

i see.
So you still pushing the failed OP? No need to address the Haaretz disinformation ploy already addressed? Difference is the US did it. Would like to see how this is at all applicable to Israel today.

Skeptic

24th April 2010, 11:04 AM

Ah...so because the USA did it in 1845...Israel can do it in 2010.

Except that, contrary to what you said, Israel does not do it in 2010. The Haaretz article you quoted was at least wrong, if not deliberate misinformation.

Thunder

24th April 2010, 04:45 PM

Israel never exiled hundreds of thousands of Palestinians?

never in 1948 and in 1967?

talk about historical revisionism. maybe you guys should be writers for The Institute for Historical Review.

bigjelmapro

24th April 2010, 11:48 PM

You took the bait Skeptic. Can't you see how his simplistic approaches work by now?

Apparently Parky can't tell the difference between people fleeing and being displaced during the time of war, which happened on all sides during '48/'67/'73, and that of forceful relocation with official government policies (ie Indian Removal Act).

Has nothing to do with historical revisionism. Just a hopeless attempt at historical equivalence.

Bill Thompson

25th April 2010, 02:36 AM

ah...so because the USA did it in 1845...Israel can do it in 2010.

i see.

It is a blink in human history. We have not changed at all since then.

I have a news flash for you. In case you did not know, NOONE lives on land that their forefathers originated from. "Palestine" was never really a country any more than "Cherokeeland".

The reason why they fight is not because of some great injustice. The reason why the Palestinians fight is because the Isrealis are mostly jewish. If they were muslims, they would not care about relocation. THey are following the rules Mohamed wrote down in the Qu'ran. They are only doing what they do because they think it pleases their Allah.

Know the real enemy. It is not the Israelis.

The Cherokees knew it was not fair for them to relocate. They fought it all the way to the Supreme Court. They one, by the way. The President and the Georgians had different ideas. The Cherokees knew they were out gunned and knew it would be foolish to fight when it was wiser to move. The Palestinians are not so wise.

OK, maybe some people in a one and only one valley in Africa somewhere might live in the homeland of their ancestors. But even that is arguable.

Thunder

25th April 2010, 06:28 AM

Apparently Parky can't tell the difference between people fleeing and being displaced during the time of war, which happened on all sides during '48/'67/'73, and that of forceful relocation with official government policies (ie Indian Removal Act).

it is well know that perhaps 50% or more of the Palestinian refugees from the 1948 was were forced out by Zionist forces.

and, whether forced out or left by choice, the UN Charter states that all refugees from war have the right to return to their homes and lands.

would you tell a German Jew that he has no right to reclaim his lands and property in Germany, because he chose to leave Germany before 1938?

bigjelmapro

26th April 2010, 12:13 AM

it is well know that perhaps 50% or more of the Palestinian refugees from the 1948 was were forced out by Zionist forces.

:rolleyes: 'It is well know that perhaps..', what's wrong with this sentence?

And the difference between a policy that didn't occur through war, ie the US relocation policy, and one that did occur through war? Funny how you guys never have to source and make speculatory statements...

and, whether forced out or left by choice, the UN Charter states that all refugees from war have the right to return to their homes and lands.

As tied in below, once a state of belligerency ends and agreements signed, then this right of return/compensation can occur, on all sides. This has been stated countless times already, yet you keep bringing it up.

would you tell a German Jew that he has no right to reclaim his lands and property in Germany, because he chose to leave Germany before 1938?
State of belligerency doesn't exist between Israel and Germany now does it? Poor use of strawman.

Thunder

26th April 2010, 10:37 AM

As tied in below, once a state of belligerency ends and agreements signed, then this right of return/compensation can occur, on all sides. This has been stated countless times already, yet you keep bringing it up.

Israel is in a state of war with the Fatah ruled West Bank?

Israel is in a state of war with Jordan? How many Palestinian refugees live in Jordan?

fascinating.

WildCat

26th April 2010, 09:46 PM

Israel is in a state of war with the Fatah ruled West Bank?

Israel is in a state of war with Jordan? How many Palestinian refugees live in Jordan?

fascinating.
What's fascinating is you first posted about 1948, when there was indeed a war. Now all of a sudden you pretend you were talking about the present.

I guess it's all you can do when you're losing the argument so badly.

bigjelmapro

27th April 2010, 01:03 AM

Israel is in a state of war with the Fatah ruled West Bank?

Israel is in a state of war with Jordan? How many Palestinian refugees live in Jordan?

fascinating.
Jordan signed a non-belligerency agreement in 1994. The PA hasn't and still continues proxy warfare against Israel and continues to adhere to the face-value meaning of the Khartoum resolution of 1973

Those classified by UNRWA as Palestinian refugees in Jordan, as in those who haven't already been resettled and still retain Jordanian citizenship (of which quite a number still do) would still be part of the future Palestinian state and not part of Jordan.

Your logic is bewildering. You put the cart in front of the horse more times than I can count...

atadoff

2nd May 2010, 04:12 AM

40 yrs and no mass deportations? Not very good at this are they.

Thunder

2nd May 2010, 07:52 AM

40 yrs and no mass deportations? Not very good at this are they.

how many Palestinians were forced from the West Bank in 1967?

how many have been allowed to return?

thought not.

Thunder

2nd May 2010, 07:53 AM

I guess it's all you can do when you're losing the argument so badly.

My friend, I won this argument years ago. My victory is proven every time the right-wing Zionists in this forum attack me personally rather than debating the subjects.

Skeptic

2nd May 2010, 08:19 AM

That just shows how sneaky they are.

Thunder

2nd May 2010, 05:38 PM

That just shows how sneaky they are.

personal attacks rather than debating the subject, is not sneaky.

its just pathetic. and it shows they have lost.

WildCat

2nd May 2010, 08:45 PM

That just shows how sneaky they are.
Disguising "personal attacks" as valid criticism of Thunder's "arguments".

bigjelmapro

5th May 2010, 09:28 AM

My friend, I won this argument years ago. My victory is proven every time the right-wing Zionists in this forum attack me personally rather than debating the subjects.
You've won absolutely nothing on the threads you've started or commented on regarding this subject matter. The magical appearance of carbon copies of threads with the same subject matter and the recycling of the same drivel is a stellar example of how you've continually failed to get past the thick rhetoric and abundant use of fallacies of a wide variety.

And who can forget, labeling and categorizing those who oppose this drivel as 'right-wing'....

Weak and hopeless. So move on, make another thread so the same people can challenge you on the same talking points.

Sisiphus I tell you. ;)