Follow @PoliticsIE
 
 
 
Page 199 of 203 FirstFirst ... 99149189195196197198199200201202203 LastLast
Results 1,981 to 1,990 of 2028

Thread: Irish government to recognise "Palestine".

  1. #1981
    Politics.ie Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2018
    Posts
    5,038
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)

    Default

    Getting to me?

    Good luck petal.

  2. #1982
    Politics.ie Member roc_'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Posts
    5,919
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Buchaill Dana View Post
    From a Zionist thats offensively stupid.
    Admittedly the tone and phrasing is offensive. That's not surprising considering the tone and plain venom that the usual suspects on here daily taunt the lone Israeli on this forum with.

    However, he speaks the truth. The term 'Palestinian' was rarely used before the 1960's to describe the Arabs of Palestine. In fact, their leadership objected to it and said that to confer independence on the region, and on what we now know as Palestinian Arabs, infringed on the Arab nationalist vision.

    e.g. Ahmed Shukeiry, the founder and first head of the PLO used to insist in the UN council that "it is common knowledge that Palestine is nothing but Southern Syria".

    It was a political strategy of the PLO to adopt the name "Palestinian" for the Muslim Arabs of the region during the 1960's to frame the conflict away from it's previous pan-Arab rhetoric to a "nationalist" rhetoric that would resonate better with Western experience. Also to re-frame the 1948 refugees as "homeless Palestinians" (previously they were referred to simply as displaced Arabs if you review the UN records) to make them weigh more heavily on the West and more effectively weaponise them.

    It might be added that official Israel has always recognised Palestinian Arab historical, moral and other rights and attachments to the land in any negotiations they have had with them (while the Arab leadership purport that Jews have no similar claim).

    This denial of recognition makes it understandable why some Israelis counter by making the point that the word 'Palestine' or 'Palestinian' is not even Arabic, and that the name Palestine after the 'Philistines' (Philistinia), while regularly used, along with others, throughout history, never had any connection with the Arab Muslims living there after the seventh century, etc.
    The news does not tell you how the seed is germinating in the ground but it may tell you when the first sprout breaks through the surface.

  3. #1983
    Politics.ie Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Location
    Jerusalem
    Posts
    12,567
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by roc_ View Post
    Well at least we're getting to understand what is actually going on at the UN, in terms of this organised capaign of lawfare and delegitimization of the State of Israel. --- The Organisation of Islamic Cooperation is an international organization founded in 1969, consisting of 57 member states





    Next on the agenda, we need to look at all the cheering and gloating about the vindication of terrorists like Hamas and their atrocities and rhetoric against Jews, and see where that is all coming from. Stand by Buachaill Dana we're getting to you.
    For some reason he chose Buchaill Dana. in his case - it's no Buachaill and, of course, no dana.
    The book totally contradicts any post-modern theory claiming a “Palestinian heritage,” or Palestinian nation. https://palestineisraelconflict.word...-palestinians/

  4. #1984
    Politics.ie Member PAGE61's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2018
    Posts
    1,152
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)

    Default

    More everyone is out to get us guff ...

    Dress a pig up as a donkey..its still a pig

  5. #1985
    Politics.ie Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2018
    Posts
    5,038
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by roc_ View Post
    Admittedly the tone and phrasing is offensive. That's not surprising considering the tone and plain venom that the usual suspects on here daily taunt the lone Israeli on this forum with.

    However, he speaks the truth. The term 'Palestinian' was rarely used before the 1960's to describe the Arabs of Palestine. In fact, their leadership objected to it and said that to confer independence on the region, and on what we now know as Palestinian Arabs, infringed on the Arab nationalist vision.

    e.g. Ahmed Shukeiry, the founder and first head of the PLO used to insist in the UN council that "it is common knowledge that Palestine is nothing but Southern Syria".

    It was a political strategy of the PLO to adopt the name "Palestinian" for the Muslim Arabs of the region during the 1960's to frame the conflict away from it's previous pan-Arab rhetoric to a "nationalist" rhetoric that would resonate better with Western experience. Also to re-frame the 1948 refugees as "homeless Palestinians" (previously they were referred to simply as displaced Arabs if you review the UN records) to make them weigh more heavily on the West and more effectively weaponise them.

    It might be added that official Israel has always recognised Palestinian Arab historical, moral and other rights and attachments to the land in any negotiations they have had with them (while the Arab leadership purport that Jews have no similar claim).

    This denial of recognition makes it understandable why some Israelis counter by making the point that the word 'Palestine' or 'Palestinian' is not even Arabic, and that the name Palestine after the 'Philistines' (Philistinia), while regularly used, along with others, throughout history, never had any connection with the Arab Muslims living there after the seventh century, etc.
    And the phrase Israelis was never used pre 47. All the crap above could equally be said about Israel. Economic migrants moving to a synthetic state founded on myth.

    Its an odd approach to take considering who he is defending/works for.

  6. #1986
    Politics.ie Member roc_'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Posts
    5,919
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Buchaill Dana View Post
    And the phrase Israelis was never used pre 47. All the crap above could equally be said about Israel. Economic migrants moving to a synthetic state founded on myth.

    Its an odd approach to take considering who he is defending/works for.
    What stupid, utterly far-fetched counter-assertions.

    At the end of a lot of history, Israel received UN recognition in 1947 through a resolution (said resolution being based on the agreement that a two state solution was the most realistic way to resolve the conflict) which the Jews reluctantly accepted, while Azzam Pasha, the General Secretary of the Arab League, announced, "This will be a war of extermination, a momentous massacre, which will be spoken of like the Mongolian massacres and the Crusades."

    A coalition of Arab states then invaded the newly recognised state, with the intent of wiping out the Jewish community living there, with the result that they lost, and in the process created a much stronger Jewish state due to the exchange of populations that occurred, with many Arabs fleeing the war in Israel and many Jews fleeing a hostile Arab world to join the new state.

    The main point is, what we said about the PLO strategy could certainly not be said about Jewish strategy in any form. They never embarked on such an abominable road as the Arab leadership did with respect to the Palestinian Arabs, effectively weaponising them.

    Little you care, though. To take just one illustration, do you know that almost 40% of Palestinians within the West Bank and Gaza live in camps. Gaza has eight Palestinian refugee camps, and the West bank has nineteen. Now, tell me, who is keeping them there? And what are these hostage Palestinians being taught? And that is not to even touch on the other Palestinian refugees.

    No, what the Arab leadership have done most certainly could not be alleged about Israel, notwithstanding how people like you try to blame them for every bad thing in the world. And tell me what other state in the world was not man-made, anyway?

    And the Jews Israel has taken in and given succour to considering what very many of those Jews were fleeing from can hardly all be dismissed as "economic migrants", ffs. I don't know if you added that sly little comment about economic migrants as a snide allusion to the Holocaust, or the previous or succeeding eras of persecution, or what.

    Even today to dismiss Jewish fears in this manner to say they are just "economic migrants", is abominable. E.g. Antisemitism pushing jews out of their homes in France | Euronews / A third of Europe's Jews have weighed leaving because of safety fearsl (and note these Jews are largely being persecuted by people like you because of their support for a Jewish homeland.).
    The news does not tell you how the seed is germinating in the ground but it may tell you when the first sprout breaks through the surface.

  7. #1987
    Politics.ie Member former wesleyan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Posts
    25,514
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Buchaill Dana View Post
    And the phrase Israelis was never used pre 47. All the crap above could equally be said about Israel. Economic migrants moving to a synthetic state founded on myth.

    Its an odd approach to take considering who he is defending/works for.
    As far as I know most arrived penniless , certainly those from the DP camps and the Arab countries did. Perhaps you have evidence to the contrary ?
    "What Michael Collins accepted in '22,De Valera accepted in'27 and Gerry Adams accepted in '98.Sooner or later they all come around to accepting the Treaty"

  8. #1988
    Politics.ie Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2018
    Posts
    5,038
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by former wesleyan View Post
    As far as I know most arrived penniless , certainly those from the DP camps and the Arab countries did. Perhaps you have evidence to the contrary ?
    Back then, yes. Today?

  9. #1989
    Politics.ie Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2018
    Posts
    5,038
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by roc_ View Post
    What stupid, utterly far-fetched counter-assertions.

    At the end of a lot of history, Israel received UN recognition in 1947 through a resolution (said resolution being based on the agreement that a two state solution was the most realistic way to resolve the conflict) which the Jews reluctantly accepted, while Azzam Pasha, the General Secretary of the Arab League, announced, "This will be a war of extermination, a momentous massacre, which will be spoken of like the Mongolian massacres and the Crusades."

    A coalition of Arab states then invaded the newly recognised state, with the intent of wiping out the Jewish community living there, with the result that they lost, and in the process created a much stronger Jewish state due to the exchange of populations that occurred, with many Arabs fleeing the war in Israel and many Jews fleeing a hostile Arab world to join the new state.

    The main point is, what we said about the PLO strategy could certainly not be said about Jewish strategy in any form. They never embarked on such an abominable road as the Arab leadership did with respect to the Palestinian Arabs, effectively weaponising them.

    Little you care, though. To take just one illustration, do you know that almost 40% of Palestinians within the West Bank and Gaza live in camps. Gaza has eight Palestinian refugee camps, and the West bank has nineteen. Now, tell me, who is keeping them there? And what are these hostage Palestinians being taught? And that is not to even touch on the other Palestinian refugees.

    No, what the Arab leadership have done most certainly could not be alleged about Israel, notwithstanding how people like you try to blame them for every bad thing in the world. And tell me what other state in the world was not man-made, anyway?

    And the Jews Israel has taken in and given succour to considering what very many of those Jews were fleeing from can hardly all be dismissed as "economic migrants", ffs. I don't know if you added that sly little comment about economic migrants as a snide allusion to the Holocaust, or the previous or succeeding eras of persecution, or what.

    Even today to dismiss Jewish fears in this manner to say they are just "economic migrants", is abominable. E.g. Antisemitism pushing jews out of their homes in France | Euronews / A third of Europe's Jews have weighed leaving because of safety fearsl (and note these Jews are largely being persecuted by people like you because of their support for a Jewish homeland.).
    You cut and paste from the wrong document. None of that has hee haw to do with my point.

  10. #1990
    Politics.ie Member roc_'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Posts
    5,919
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)

    Default

    Your cut and paste diversionary efforts are more the problem.

    Buchaill Dana search results 'cut and paste'...
    The news does not tell you how the seed is germinating in the ground but it may tell you when the first sprout breaks through the surface.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •