Irish Palestine Solidarity Campaign

golden lane · 10-05-2012 1:38am

The Israeli wrote: »

Right after we agree on a lasting peace, we would narrow up our borders.

_____

Here is a different act of solidarity:
In case you happen to be in Dublin.
http://tiny.cc/u1g2dw

http://www.foleysbar.com/[/QUOTE]

so, only some of it..........is that fair, you are well aware that is not acceptable ..............so that is an excuse to keep all that you have......

stop treating the world like we are all idiots.....you will only alienate the people that are on your side (AND FEW THEY ARE NOW).....

your state is based on a sandhill.........one day there will be a big storm.....

The Israeli · 10-05-2012 1:48am

golden lane wrote: »

so, only some of it..........is that fair, you are well aware that is not acceptable ..............so that is an excuse to keep all that you have......

stop treating the world like we are all idiots.....you will only alienate the people that are on your side (AND FEW THEY ARE NOW).....

your state is based on a sandhill.........one day there will be a big storm.....

Yes, evacuating about half a million people isn't practical.
Even Abu Mazen agrees to the territory swapping layout. Of course, not to all of it, but I think we could agree on it, if there were serious negotiations and seize of terror.
Accordingly to the plan, the Palestinians would get a fair deal.

About the downhill - you wish.
The European Union is going downhill. Be concerned about that a little bit more.

I would also like to include this quote taken from -
http://www.wiesenthal.com/site/pp.asp?c=lsKWLbPJLnF&b=5958687

Since 1967, Israel has repeatedly conceded, “land for peace.” Following Egyptian President Sadat’s historic 1977 visit to Jerusalem and the Camp David Peace Accords, Israel withdrew from the vast Sinai Peninsula and has been at peace with Egypt ever since.

In 1995, Jordan signed a peace treaty with Israel but neither the Palestinians nor 21 other Arab states have done so. In 1993, Israel signed the Oslo Accords ceding administrative control of the West Bank to the Palestinian Authority(formerly the PLO). The PA never fulfilled its promise to end propaganda attacks and drop the Palestinian National Charter’s call for Israel’s destruction.

In 2000, Prime Minister Barak offered Yasser Arafat full sovereignty over 97% of the West Bank, a corridor to Gaza, and a capitol in the Arab section of Jerusalem. Arafat said NO. In 2008, PA President Abbas nixed virtually the same offer from Prime Minister Olmert. In 2005, Prime Minister Sharon unilaterally withdrew from Gaza. Taken over by terrorist Hamas, they turned dismantled Jewish communities into launching sites for suicide bombers and 8,000+ rockets into Israel proper. In 2010, Prime Minister Netanyahu renewed offers of unconditional negotiations leading to a Palestinian State, but Palestinians refused, demanding more unilateral Israeli concessions, including a total freeze of all Israeli construction in East Jerusalem and the West Bank.

hatrickpatrick · 10-05-2012 3:12am

Guys I'm sorry to be a pain in the ass about this but I'll bring it up one more time.
Can anyone provide ONE SHRED of evidence for "intimidation" or "bullying" beyond simply expressing disappointment and telling the band they'll lose fans over this?

I ask again, are we now vilifying mere political dissent and comment? Freedom of speech?

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

Any chance we could keep this thread on topic? No offense to anyone but there are a million threads in which we could debate the actual Israel / Palestine conflict itself, this one is about the IPSC group and in particular its media campaign against Dervish.

I'm just fascinated to hear a response to my earlier question - are people advocating censorship? Are people suggesting that dissent and protest shouldn't be allowed? How are "negative comments" and "threatening a loss of fanbase" in any way crimes? Politicians face the same gauntlet every day and they don't call for anyone to be censored or suggest that there's anything wrong with free speech?

Again, how is telling a politician that he or she will lose votes for pursuing a particular course of action any worse than telling a band they will lose fans for pursuing a particular course of action?

The people in this thread attacking the IPSC are implying an incredibly dangerous suggestion, that free speech and dissent should be somehow criminalized or regulated.

Where does that end? Would I get censored tomorrow for telling Gilmore he'll lose votes for being dishonest, or by saying that I won't vote for FG in the next election if they do X, Y, or Z?

Zebra3 · 10-05-2012 3:40am

The Israeli wrote: »

I would also like to include this quote taken from -
http://www.wiesenthal.com/site/pp.asp?c=lsKWLbPJLnF&b=5958687

Since 1967, Israel has repeatedly conceded, “land for peace.” Following Egyptian President Sadat’s historic 1977 visit to Jerusalem and the Camp David Peace Accords, Israel withdrew from the vast Sinai Peninsula and has been at peace with Egypt ever since.

In 1995, Jordan signed a peace treaty with Israel but neither the Palestinians nor 21 other Arab states have done so. In 1993, Israel signed the Oslo Accords ceding administrative control of the West Bank to the Palestinian Authority(formerly the PLO). The PA never fulfilled its promise to end propaganda attacks and drop the Palestinian National Charter’s call for Israel’s destruction.

In 2000, Prime Minister Barak offered Yasser Arafat full sovereignty over 97% of the West Bank, a corridor to Gaza, and a capitol in the Arab section of Jerusalem. Arafat said NO. In 2008, PA President Abbas nixed virtually the same offer from Prime Minister Olmert. In 2005, Prime Minister Sharon unilaterally withdrew from Gaza. Taken over by terrorist Hamas, they turned dismantled Jewish communities into launching sites for suicide bombers and 8,000+ rockets into Israel proper. In 2010, Prime Minister Netanyahu renewed offers of unconditional negotiations leading to a Palestinian State, but Palestinians refused, demanding more unilateral Israeli concessions, including a total freeze of all Israeli construction in East Jerusalem and the West Bank.

Israel has not repeatedly conceded land for peace.

It has illegally annexed the Golan Heights. It has illegally annexed East Jerusalem. Israel has no interest in peace. It has brought nothing but war to the Palestinian people. Since 1967, 700,000 Palestinians have been kidnapped by occupying Israeli military forces in the West Bank as they are deemed "a threat to security". This does not happen to zionists engaging in land theft which happens with the support of the Israeli state which breaks international law.

And how many times has Israel attacked Lebanon?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sabra_and_Shatila_massacre Peace loving Israel indeed.... :rolleyes:

The Palestinians have every right to demand that Israel stops illegal jewish only colonies on their land which is against international law.

The Israeli · 10-05-2012 8:14am

Zebra3 wrote: »

Israel has not repeatedly conceded land for peace.

It has illegally annexed the Golan Heights. It has illegally annexed East Jerusalem. Israel has no interest in peace. It has brought nothing but war to the Palestinian people. Since 1967, 700,000 Palestinians have been kidnapped by occupying Israeli military forces in the West Bank as they are deemed "a threat to security". This does not happen to zionists engaging in land theft which happens with the support of the Israeli state which breaks international law.

And how many times has Israel attacked Lebanon?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sabra_and_Shatila_massacre Peace loving Israel indeed.... :rolleyes:

The Palestinians have every right to demand that Israel stops illegal jewish only colonies on their land which is against international law.

zebra, you are like a stable power of an unwilling monologue. I confront you on one point, you throw it away and go to the next..
"Maybe the next point will be luckier". Well, just don't forget to markup what didn't work for you, because they are a part of the Israeli points.

I'll answer to this later.

paddyandy · 10-05-2012 10:54am

I would be really very surprised to find more than a half dozen Irish people who truly understand the Middle East it's religions and Cultures .Then there are Tribal and regional nuances .Understanding peoples around the world can not be learned from books and certainly not the Leftie Press that we have here cathartic Stuff that sells to our unhappy elements . Any Book or film about Ireland by outsiders is ALWAYS very flawed so reverse the psychology and the ME is much more complicated .The problems are esoteric and arcane .

fasttalkerchat · 10-05-2012 12:10pm

The Israeli wrote: »

exploding at check points through which Palestinians have to pass every day, and on their way to Israeli hospitals, at times (and trying to kill soldiers there will just make the checks slower) is going hand in hand with "stick up for themselves".

I would sooner ask the question "why are foreign soldiers in my country". I don't expect anyone who has grown up in an occupied country to see violence against soldiers in their country as being wrong.

The Israeli · 10-05-2012 12:35pm

fasttalkerchat wrote: »

I would sooner ask the question "why are foreign soldiers in my country". I don't expect anyone who has grown up in an occupied country to see violence against soldiers in their country as being wrong.

1) what country? When has the Palestinian existed and what were its borders? (never). You will get different answers from different organizations about what should be its borders. Accordingly to Hamas and Islamic jihad there is no place for Israel. Some not sane people in the West Bank feel the same. They are also willing to kill for it. I strongly doubt that there are any terrorists that have killed for the 67's borders. Just listen to their agenda and brain washing before terror acts and after failing terror acts. There are many videos on youtube.

Just think about a logic of a terrorist:
Killing yourself in an act of killing others is an act of a total defiance and rules breaking.
It means: feck you, I spit on what you represent and your proposals, I spit on your demands, I prefer to die than to live if I take you with me, and I hope that it makes you bleed and suffer.
Accepting the 67's borders solution means compromising. A person that is willing to compromise doesn't want to die and deliberately kill civilians (as opposed to an acceptable fighting as in army vs. army).
A compromising person needs the other side to trust him, as he needs to be trusted by the other side. That is the opposite of terrorism.
If you think the terrorists are fighting for the 67's borders in anyway than you are totally wrong. That's why we need an army till the other side will be willing to compromise.

2) Preventing terror, dahhh

Nodin · 10-05-2012 12:37pm

brimal wrote: »

The aggressive nature of the pro-Palestinian movement in Ireland needs to be addressed.

.........

Why? Did they take over your bedroom? Has some looney with a glint in his eye informed you that hes there on a mission from God to take back the promised land?

I think its the Israeli aggression in the West Bank that needs looking at, to be blunt.

The Israeli wrote:

Since 1967, Israel has repeatedly conceded, “land for peace.”
.........

Not this crock again.....the settler population is now in the hundreds of thousands. I'd suggest that if Israel genuinely thinks its trading anything for peace, its doing it wrong and should perhaps consult the instructions.

]
including a total freeze of all Israeli construction in East Jerusalem and the West Bank.

....did you read that before you posted it?
'Occupied People Request End To Illegal Colony-Build Shocker'. If somebody is intent on 'conceding land for peace', why would they be building colonies during peace talks? Why would they continue colony construction at all?

Nodin · 10-05-2012 12:40pm

paddyandy wrote: »

............. .The problems are esoteric and arcane .

No paddy, they aren't nessecarily that way at all.

Now if you want to argue that arriving and taking somebodys land in the middle east is different from arriving and taking somebodys land in Europe, feel free........

Nodin · 10-05-2012 12:42pm

Not that you support the settlements or anything....

The Israeli wrote: »

1) what country? When has the Palestinian existed and what were its borders? (never). You will get different answers from different organizations about what should be its borders. Accordingly to Hamas and Islamic jihad there is no place for Israel. Some not sane people in the West Bank feel the same. They are also willing to kill for it.
......

We know - for an a fact - what Israels borders are.

fasttalkerchat · 10-05-2012 12:42pm

The Israeli wrote: »

1) what country? When has the Palestinian existed and what were its borders? (never). You will get different answers from different organizations about what should be its borders. Accordingly to Hamas and Islamic jihad there is no place for Israel. Some not sane people in Fatah think the same.
2) Preventing terror, dahhh

Israel is just a story from an old book. Any settlement that allows an Isreali state to exist is a compromise to regain some rights and dignity for to the people of Palestine. I believe that Israhell shouldn't exits but that the Zionists may have to be given some land as part of a compromise.

The Israeli · 10-05-2012 12:59pm

Nodin wrote: »

Why? Did they take over your bedroom? Has some looney with a glint in his eye informed you that hes there on a mission from God to take back the promised land?

I think its the Israeli aggression in the West Bank that needs looking at, to be blunt.

[/I]

Not this crock again.....the settler population is now in the hundreds of thousands. I'd suggest that if Israel genuinely thinks its trading anything for peace, its doing it wrong and should perhaps consult the instructions.

....did you read that before you posted it?
'Occupied People Request End To Illegal Colony-Build Shocker'. If somebody is intent on 'conceding land for peace', why would they be building colonies during peace talks? Why would they continue colony construction at all?

that's all what you have to say? we'll it means that the quote was pretty good.
Israel has walked the mile for peace. You can't deny that.
I do agree that building in the territories isn't something that brings peace, but also isn't something that is going to cover the 95% of the west bank that was offered to the Palestinians not a long ago.

Nodin · 10-05-2012 1:08pm

The Israeli wrote: »

that's all what you have to say? we'll it means that the quote was pretty good.
Israel has walked the mile for peace.
You can't deny that.
.......................

Bit hard to go on at length about such a blatant load of shite, tbh.
Walked a mile for peace? The Israeli state never got out of the truck.

As of December 2010, 327,750 Israelis live in the 121 officially-recognised settlements in the West Bank, 192,000 Israelis live in settlements in East Jerusalem and over 20,000 live in settlements in the Golan Heights

http://www.haaretz.com/print-edition/news/idf-more-than-300-000-settlers-live-in-west-bank-1.280778

The Israeli · 10-05-2012 1:28pm

Nodin wrote: »

Bit hard to go on at length about such a blatant load of shite, tbh.
Walked a mile for peace? The Israeli state never got out of the truck.

http://www.haaretz.com/print-edition/news/idf-more-than-300-000-settlers-live-in-west-bank-1.280778

If the Palestinians wanted peace they would have agreed to 95% of the west bank and the rest in territory swaps. Your numbers are irrelevant when talking about swaps.
If they would have abandoned terror, engaged in talks, accepted to cancel their desire to return to the 48's borders (as it would put an end to Israel),
and accepted the 95% + swaps solution we might have been in peace by now.

Ahmm, Golan heights is not related to the Palestinian conflict and was won from Syria when it was used it for firing platform on the Israeli cities and villages below them, and when the Syrians planned to divert the Israeli major water source at that time.
We all can breath and thank the Spaghetti monster for not trading it back with the Assad family for "peace" for now.

Tiocfaidh Armani · 10-05-2012 1:30pm

As of December 2010, 327,750 Israelis live in the 121 officially-recognised settlements in the West Bank, 192,000 Israelis live in settlements in East Jerusalem and over 20,000 live in settlements in the Golan Heights

And every last one should be wiped out.

Mod note, user banned for this gem

lividduck · 10-05-2012 1:32pm

fasttalkerchat wrote: »

Israel is just a story from an old book. Any settlement that allows an Isreali state to exist is a compromise to regain some rights and dignity for to the people of Palestine. I believe that Israhell shouldn't exits but that the Zionists may have to be given some land as part of a compromise.

Israel has a perfrect right to exist and will continue to exist and take all reasonable steps to secure its citizens against attack.

Tiocfaidh Armani · 10-05-2012 1:32pm

If the Palestinians wanted peace they would have agreed to 95% of the west bank and the rest in territory swaps. Your numbers are irrelevant when talking about swaps.
If they would have abandoned terror, engaged in talks, accepted to cancel their desire to return to the 48's borders (as it would put an end to Israel),
and accepted the 95% + swaps solution we might have been in peace by now.

When was this ever on the table?

The Israeli · 10-05-2012 1:35pm

Tiocfaidh Armani wrote: »

When was this ever on the table?

Read page 13.
Sir, you support wiping out people. I support wiping out people that support wiping out people.

Thinking about it, even on this little thread I have seen similar ideas to yours.
Is it the face of IPSC - very possible. True liberals, and human rights defenders.

Tiocfaidh Armani · 10-05-2012 1:36pm

lividduck wrote: »

Israel has a perfrect right to exist and will continue to exist and take all reasonable steps to secure its citizens against attack.

It hasn't got the right to take out another people's right to exist in their own state, either.

That and their illegal settlements, which do nothing other than carve up more Palestinian land. They need to be wiped out for any chance of peace.

Tiocfaidh Armani · 10-05-2012 1:36pm

The Israeli wrote: »

Read page 13.
Sir, you support wiping out people. I support wiping out people that support wiping out people.

I support settlements being wiped out. They're illegal.

Nodin · 10-05-2012 1:38pm

The Israeli wrote: »

If the Palestinians wanted peace they would have agreed to 95% of the west bank and the rest in territory swaps. Your numbers are irrelevant when talking about swaps...

....sorry, I didn't mean to wreck the spin doctoring. Do continue. You're doing so well. 'All the Palestinians fault that Israels building outside its borders' right - do go on.

You read this, I presume
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/palestine-papers
.....you act like you haven't, but we both know you have....

The Israeli wrote: »

If they would have abandoned terror, engaged in talks, accepted to cancel their desire to return to the 48's borders (as it would put an end to Israel),
and accepted the 95% + swaps solution we might have been in peace by now..

....you mean they should have acted like they've been acting for nearly a decade? Yeah....thats really worked out in a reduction of settlements, expansion and settler numbers, hasn't it?

The Israeli wrote: »

Ahmm, Golan heights is not related to the Palestinian conflict ..

It's part of Israels colonial enterprise, so it is in a number of ways.

The Israeli wrote: »

......
We all can breath and thank the Spaghetti monster for not trading it back with the Assad family for "peace" for now.

....because theres two bastards in a room, and one is a worse bastard than the other, the first and lesser bastard is still a bastard....just to be clear there.

Nodin · 10-05-2012 1:39pm

lividduck wrote: »

Israel has a perfrect right to exist and will continue to exist and take all reasonable steps to secure its citizens against attack.

...except stop its colonial efforts, unfortunately.

lividduck · 10-05-2012 1:41pm

Zebra3 wrote: »

Israel has not repeatedly conceded land for peace.

It has illegally annexed the Golan Heights. It has illegally annexed East Jerusalem. Israel has no interest in peace. It has brought nothing but war to the Palestinian people. Since 1967, 700,000 Palestinians have been kidnapped by occupying Israeli military forces in the West Bank as they are deemed "a threat to security". This does not happen to zionists engaging in land theft which happens with the support of the Israeli state which breaks international law.

And how many times has Israel attacked Lebanon?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sabra_and_Shatila_massacre Peace loving Israel indeed.... :rolleyes:

The Palestinians have every right to demand that Israel stops illegal jewish only colonies on their land which is against international law.

And murdering athlethes in Munich wasn't against international law?
Or firing 8,000+ rockets into Israel wasn't against international law?
Or suicide bombing buses in Tel-Aviv, Jeruselem,Haifa etc, wasn't against international law?
The terrorists who sow the wind against Israel can only expect to reap the whirlwind from Israel.

wes · 10-05-2012 1:42pm

The Israeli wrote: »

If the Palestinians wanted peace they would have agreed to 95% of the west bank and the rest in territory swaps. Your numbers are irrelevant when talking about swaps.

Care to show us the official maps of this wonderful Israeli offer.........

The Israeli wrote: »

If they would have abandoned terror,

Bit rich, when Israel has never abandoned there own terror, what with the constant settler violence, and not to mention constant expansion of settlement even during peace talks. Surely both side ought to stop violence, and it is absurd to expect the Palestinians to be the only ones to stop violence while Israel constantly steals land.

Even now in the West Bank, where Fatah are actively working with Israeli security forces, Israel is still stealing land, day in and day out. Its a simple fact that the actions of Palestinians either way seem to result in constant settlement expansion.

The Israeli wrote: »

engaged in talks,

They did, even as Israel stole more and more of the land they were talking about dividing. Hardly negotiating in good faith imho.

The Israeli wrote: »

accepted to cancel their desire to return to the 48's borders (as it would put an end to Israel),

Yeah, the PLO did that years ago:
The P.L.O. And Israel: An End to Two Decades of Rejection?

So that was all the way back in 1988, and settlement have grown a great deal since then.

The Israeli wrote: »

and accepted the 95% + swaps solution we might have been in peace by now.

No such deal was ever offered.

fasttalkerchat · 10-05-2012 1:42pm

lividduck wrote: »

Israel has a perfrect right to exist and will continue to exist and take all reasonable steps to secure its citizens against attack.

Did this right come from story books too?
Israhell's Reasonable Steps:
http://www.un.int/wcm/webdav/site/palestine/shared/images/israeli-wall14.jpg
http://www.terrasantalibera.org/a3.jpg
http://26.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_llgp4mMpT41qjk8bzo1_500.jpg
http://lawrenceofcyberia.blogs.com/photos/uncategorized/dailymail_humanshield.jpg
http://www.rachelcorrie.org/racheladpic_files/image002.jpg

wes · 10-05-2012 1:44pm

The Israeli wrote: »

Sir, you support wiping out people.

Nasty lie right there. No such thing was said by anyone.

Settlement aren't people firstly. Secondly there all every single last one of them illegal. Now seeing as you are against them, you should have no issues with them being dismantled....... Unless of course, your only saying your against them.

Nodin · 10-05-2012 1:45pm

lividduck wrote: »

And murdering athlethes in Munich wasn't against international law?
Or firing 8,000+ rockets into Israel wasn't against international law?
Or suicide bombing buses in Tel-Aviv, Jeruselem,Haifa etc, wasn't against international law?
The terrorists who sow the wind against Israel can only expect to reap the whirlwind from Israel.

I'd imagine thats much the spirit that guided the Palestinians who carried out the attacks.

Do you support Israels policy of colonising the West Bank, Arab East Jerusalem etc?

fasttalkerchat · 10-05-2012 1:49pm

On the issue of settlements I believe that if they have the correct immigration clearance to be in Palestine and they get planning permission etc. they should be allowed to remain. Since the vast majority of Jewish people on Palestinian land have a right to be their because they were born their their is a responsibility on the Palestinian authority to accommodate them in terms of housing etc.

The Israeli · 10-05-2012 1:50pm

lividduck wrote: »

And murdering athlethes in Munich wasn't against international law?
Or firing 8,000+ rockets into Israel wasn't against international law?
Or suicide bombing buses in Tel-Aviv, Jeruselem,Haifa etc, wasn't against international law?
The terrorists who sow the wind against Israel can only expect to reap the whirlwind from Israel.

He also forgets to mention what led to the Lebanese war - Palestinian terror nests in Lebanon that committed attacks on the Israeli northern cities.
I can get you many of their mentioning but it's totally irrelevant.
He also forgets to introduce Hezbollah ("forgets")

He forgets to mention that Christian Lebanese committed the Massacre of Sabra and Shetila However, Israel could prevent it. A grave mistake, but blaming Israel for doing it by itself is "slightly" too much. That what do people who want to find faults in Israel. They dig out events from 25+ years ago.
They also forget that I can dig out much more, and more severe but I think that that is generally irrelevant.

fasttalkerchat · 10-05-2012 1:54pm

The Israeli wrote: »

He also forgets to mention what led to the Lebanese war - Palestinian terror nests in Lebanon that committed attacks on the Israeli northern cities.
I can get you many of their mentioning but it's totally irrelevant.
He also forgets to introduce Hezbollah ("forgets")

He forgets to mention that Christian Lebanese committed the Massacre of Sabra and Shetila However, Israel could prevent it. A grave mistake, but blaming Israel for doing it by itself is "slightly" too much. That what do people who want to find faults in Israel. They dig out events from 25+ years ago.
They also forget that I can dig out much more, and more severe but I think that that is generally irrelevant.

The IDF may not have directly pulled the trigger but certainly they did surround the camp and provide flares to the killers.

The Israel Defense Forces surrounded the Palestinian refugee camps, controlled access to them, and facilitated the massacre by firing illuminating flares over the camps.[5][6] In 1982, an independent commission chaired by Sean MacBride concluded that the Israeli authorities or forces were, directly or indirectly, responsible for the events.

wes · 10-05-2012 1:55pm

fasttalkerchat wrote: »

On the issue of settlements I believe that if they have the correct immigration clearance to be in Palestine and they get planning permission etc. they should be allowed to remain. Since the vast majority of Jewish people on Palestinian land have a right to be their because they were born their their is a responsibility on the Palestinian authority to accommodate them in terms of housing etc.

Well, actually they don't have any responsibility, as they are all Israeli citizens. Israel are the ones who have a responsibility for there own citizens. BTW, they have no right to be there, as all settlement are completely illegal, and all the settlers have no right to be on Palestinian land. Also, not all countries confer citizenship, soley on the virtue of being born some place.

Now, Abbas has said that some settlers can become Palestinian citizens:
PA: Settlers can become Palestinian citizens

Now, I think this is a good idea, and it can certainly help sort out some of the land issues as well.

However, the Palestinians are under no obligation to give any of the settlers citizenship, as they are all there illegally, and even if they are born in the West Bank, there still Israeli citizens.

The Israeli · 10-05-2012 2:00pm

wes wrote: »

No such deal was ever offered.

There are several sources. All in hebrew. One of them concidered to be reliable in your eyes as you quote often from it:

http://www.haaretz.co.il/news/politics/1.1295350

http://www.heskem.org.il/sources-view.asp?id=835&meid=43
http://www.nrg.co.il/online/1/ART2/203/770.html?hp=1&loc=1&tmp=5438
http://www.nrg.co.il/online/1/ART2/203/860.html

try to google it in English: Ehud Olmert / Ehud Barak land swaps.

And well well:
here, there is even a map that makes sense (not the green one that you like)
http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2011/09/12/opinion/mapping-mideast-peace.html

wes · 10-05-2012 2:03pm

The Israeli wrote: »

There are several sources. All in hebrew. One of them concidered to be reliable in your eyes as you quote often from it:

http://www.haaretz.co.il/news/politics/1.1295350

http://www.heskem.org.il/sources-view.asp?id=835&meid=43
http://www.nrg.co.il/online/1/ART2/203/770.html?hp=1&loc=1&tmp=5438
http://www.nrg.co.il/online/1/ART2/203/860.html

Sources in a language I can't read (not to mention the vast majority of posters can't read).... Completely worthless. If such a deal existed, then I find it hard to believe not a single english language news outlet reported on it.

Also, I notice a suspicous lack of official maps as wel, and in fact those links contain no maps at all. Strange that such a deal was offered but did not feature any maps, from any of your foreign language new souces. How very, very odd...... Its seem to me that you are being less than truthful (no maps, news stories in a foreign language), much like Israel claims of a great deal (a great deal according to Israel), and a deal that has no maps to go with it. So we have no way of verifying Israels claims, now do we, and imho the lack of a map from those making the claims, is really rather telling.

Also you can take a look at the Palestine papers, which show in great detail how fair the Palestinains were willing to go for peace, how they were frustrated:

The Palestine Papers

Lots of details there, including plenty pf maps. Something your claims lacked. Also, its in a language that everyone on the forum can read. What with this being an english language forum for the most part.

fasttalkerchat · 10-05-2012 2:07pm

wes wrote: »

Well, actually they don't have any responsibility, as they are all Israeli citizens. Israel are the ones who have a responsibility for there own citizens. BTW, they have no right to be there, as all settlement are completely illegal, and all the settlers have no right to be on Palestinian land. Also, not all countries confer citizenship, soley on the virtue of being born some place.

Now, Abbas has said that some settlers can become Palestinian citizens:
PA: Settlers can become Palestinian citizens

Now, I think this is a good idea, and it can certainly help sort out some of the land issues as well.

However, the Palestinians are under no obligation to give any of the settlers citizenship, as they are all there illegally, and even if they are born in the West Bank, there still Israeli citizens.

I differ with you because I believe that you can't really be an Israeli citizen. If the Zionists are given a piece of land to set up a state as part of a piece settlement then their would be a situation where individuals would have to decide whether to remain in Palestine or to move to Zionist-land.
The people who choose to remain in Palestine should IMO be offered citizenship and the Palestinian authority would have a responsibility to provide for them.

wes · 10-05-2012 2:10pm

fasttalkerchat wrote: »

The people who choose to remain in Palestine should IMO be offered citizenship and the Palestinian authority would have a responsibility to provide for them.

As I said, Abbas has said as much, and I do think its a good idea, but they are under no obligation of offer citizenship. They did make such a offer, as part of the peace negotiations, so we don't differ all that much. The whole thing however doesn't matter, as any peace deal is dead for the forseeable future, and the settlements may permanently kill one.

The Israeli · 10-05-2012 2:15pm

wes, I included an english source and a map.
http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2011/09/12/opinion/mapping-mideast-peace.html

wes · 10-05-2012 2:21pm

The Israeli wrote: »

wes, I included an english source and a map.
http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2011/09/12/opinion/mapping-mideast-peace.html

I didn't see your edit.

Also, from your own link:

A two-state solution is the only viable solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, and therefore negotiators must take a close look at the land swaps necessary for a negotiated settlement. These maps outline three possible land-swap scenarios, followed by a map of the Geneva Initiative for comparison.

You are being dishonest once again. These maps are not any kind of Israeli offer, but rather an op-ed, about how to reconcile the difference between the 2 sides. Seriously, at this point, I can't believe a word your saying.

fasttalkerchat · 10-05-2012 2:21pm

The Israeli wrote: »

wes, I included an english source and a map.
http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2011/09/12/opinion/mapping-mideast-peace.html

http://www.classwarfareexists.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/02/israel-palestine_map.jpg
Look at my image and tell me where the Zionists get their logic?

brimal · 10-05-2012 2:32pm

brimal wrote: »

The aggressive nature of the pro-Palestinian movement in Ireland needs to be addressed.

Another recent example would be the personal abuse and intimidation thrown towards film-maker Nicky Larkin after his recent articles in the Indo. He had gone from pro-Palestinian to pro-Israel stance after spending several weeks in both areas.

Some of the harassment he received was shocking.

Then you also have one of the movement's mouthpieces, who I won't name, burning Israel flags in public, assaulting a Guard, banned from half of Dublin, etc. - not a good look.

Would anyone like to stay on topic and address this point?

Nicky Larkin received torrents of abuse and intimidation off the 'peaceful' pro-Palestinian movement in Ireland.

I would like to ask the defenders of this movement - do you think there is a problem within the movement of over-aggressive campaigning (Intimidating/threatening messages on social media, burning of Israel flags in public, etc.) - or is this all fair game in your fight against Israel?

Nodin · 10-05-2012 2:34pm

brimal wrote: »

Would anyone like to stay on topic and address this point?

Nicky Larkin received torrents of abuse and intimidation off the 'peaceful' pro-Palestinian movement in Ireland.?

......."intimidation"? What intimidation?

wes · 10-05-2012 2:35pm

brimal wrote: »

Nicky Larkin received torrents of abuse and intimidation off the 'peaceful' pro-Palestinian movement in Ireland.

Care to link to examples of this abuse? This was asked by multiple posters before hand in regards to Dervish as well btw. Still no links to the abuse of Dervish or anyone else.......

Seems clear to me, that some on here, just don't like any kind of protest.

The Israeli · 10-05-2012 2:38pm

wes wrote: »

I didn't see your edit.

Also, from your own link:

You are being dishonest once again. These maps are not any kind of Israeli offer, but rather an op-ed, about how to reconcile the difference between the 2 sides. Seriously, at this point, I can't believe a word your saying.

Dishonesty isn't my stronger side here.
You are slightly right, however you have missed the following quote from the article. And come on! what are we dealing with? a dose of a percent?
Nothing that honest negotiations (that have never taken place) can't solve.

This article pretty backs me up. You can do your own investigation, but the message is pretty clear.

During the failed 2008 peace negotiations, the Israeli prime minister, Ehud Olmert, wanted a total swap of 6.3 percent, while Mahmoud Abbas, the Palestinian president, would agree to no more than 1.9 percent. These three maps explore and illustrate the middle ground between Mr. Olmert’s and Mr. Abbas’s proposals. Contrary to popular belief, most Israeli settlers are concentrated near the 1967 boundary.

Tiocfaidh Armani · 10-05-2012 2:40pm

Nothing that honest negotiations (that have never taken place) can't solve.

Yeah so stop pretending to talk of peace all the while continuing to steal more of their land. It's not a platform for honest talks.

brimal · 10-05-2012 2:42pm

wes, Nodin, I will certainly provide links soon. They were mostly social networking comments so will take a while to go through. Nicky Larkin himself has stated he received plenty of abuse too.

What about my question - do you believe there is a problem within the group of going too far? Burning of Israel's flag in public - you ok with this?

Nodin · 10-05-2012 2:42pm

wes wrote: »

Care to link to examples of this abuse? This was asked by multiple posters before hand in regards to Dervish as well btw. Still no links to the abuse of Dervish or anyone else.......

Seems clear to me, that some on here, just don't like any kind of protest.

....either that or they've no idea what "intimidation" and "aggression" really are. It's a bit odd they choose to concentrate on a few messages on facebook vs an occupying military.

golden lane · 10-05-2012 2:45pm

what is chrystal clear...........there are thousands of palestinian refugees............

they should live in palestine........they do not......there are thousands of people from other nations living where they used to live............most of these religeous idiots, believe that, that land was given to them by god......

well, by god !!!!! one day they will regret it......

wes · 10-05-2012 2:46pm

The Israeli wrote: »

Dishonesty isn't my stronger side here.

You most certinaly were dishonest.

The Israeli wrote: »

You are slightly right,

Try completely right.

The Israeli wrote: »

however you have missed the following quote from the article. And come on! what are we dealing with? a dose of a percent?

I never disputed percentage, now did I? I asked for a map. You have yet to provide one. 6.3% can easily surround East Jerusalem and ensure that there is no continguity of territory between the West Bank and East Jerusalem. You are once again being less than honest, and you know full well I asked for a map. You have never provided one.

The Israeli wrote: »

Nothing that honest negotiations (that have never taken place) can't solve.

How can honest negotiations take place when one side is stealing the land there negotiating over? Israel has always been less than honest.

The Israeli wrote: »

This article pretty backs me up. You can do your own investigation, but the message is pretty clear.

No actually it doesn't. The article is trying to bridge the gap between the 2 sides positions. Clearly the article writer doesn't see the offer in the same light you do. Otherwise the op-ed offering alternatives would simple not exist. Again, you claimed that the Palestinians passed on such a great deal, well you own op-ed that you linked too, doesn't seem to agree.

Nodin · 10-05-2012 2:47pm

brimal wrote: »

wes, Nodin, I will certainly provide links soon. They were mostly social networking comments so will take a while to go through. Nicky Larkin himself has stated he received plenty of abuse too.

What about my question - do you believe there is a problem within the group of going too far? Burning of Israel's flag in public - you ok with this?

...never been a flag burner meself, but its hardly reason to have a spasm.

Again - "going too far" - the IPSC are a peaceful protest group.....they haven't done anything untoward to my knowledge.

fasttalkerchat · 10-05-2012 2:48pm

brimal wrote: »

wes, Nodin, I will certainly provide links soon. They were mostly social networking comments so will take a while to go through. Nicky Larkin himself has stated he received plenty of abuse too.

What about my question - do you believe there is a problem within the group of going too far? Burning of Israel's flag in public - you ok with this?

People say hurtful things online and I think that everyone who insulted Dervish's musical ability and engaged in personal attacks here and elsewhere are doing little for the movement or for their own credibility.
What is important is that their is a strong opposition to any trade with Zionist forces and their is a will internationally to help the Palestinians in some small way.

Irish Palestine Solidarity Campaign

Comments