Commenter Profile

Total number of comments: 687 (since 2012-03-20 17:36:43)

Showing comments 687 - 601

  • Palestinian youth fulfill their 'right of return' to the destroyed village of Iqrit
    • @Walid

      Why is that? I am sure that any minute now Talknic will show up to inform you that:
      a) These descendants are not entitled to the RoR
      b) The Palestinians do not claim a right for descendants.

  • Palestinian youth say the talks with Israel are futile
  • Palestinian writers bring Gaza's hardships to American audience
    • @woody

      Of course it is understandable, Gaza is a territory that is extremely hostile to Israel and its people, there are no reasons other than humanitarian to permit entry to Israel.

      And I apologize for the Egypt comment, I should have been more clear so it would not go over your head. What I meant to communicate is that the essay above has nothing to say about Ali's attempts to leave Gaza through Egypt.

    • Barred (understandably) from entry to Israel to travel to Jordan. No comment on whether Egypt barred entry to fly to Jordan.

  • Palestinians can have an embassy in Jerusalem, but God forbid not a capital -- Israeli mayor
    • Woody Tanaka says: And your editing is the exact opposite of honest.
      My "editing" in no way distorted the message, which is available in its entirety just a few inches above. And no, I have no intention of picking from your ridiculous choices. The Palestinians do not intend to provide #1 if they gain power and Israeli citizens who identify as Palestinians are not without freedom and human rights.

    • @puppies

      Of course I object to that, as does the vast majority of the non-arab world. And I suspect that if the BDS crew were to be honest about their real intentions its support would dry up and they would fade away.

    • @Woody

      Let's try that the other way around. If you have no problem with what the Jordanians did with the indigenous Jewish population then you have no right to assert the non-existent RoR.

    • @pjdude

      Moronic analogy, but nonetheless...

      1) If you replace your cat with a dog, you will not have a cat.
      2) I did not use the word destruction.

    • Really? Your answer is to invoke The Blood Libel?

    • @seafoid

      Sure. When the Jordanians controlled part of Jerusalem they were very tolerant of the Jews. They kindly and politely helped every one of them to leave.

    • @unverified__5ilf90kd

      Probably because neither Herzl's promises nor the dead letter partition plan constituted legality.

    • amigo says: BDS and resulting 1SS will sort out... And neither will it be called Israel ...
      Refreshing honesty. BDS is intended to eliminate the state of Israel.

  • Where is Sarah Ali?
    • talknic says: Under the Peace Treaty with Egypt and the crossings agreement of 2005. Israel IS the Occupying Power.
      I am sure that makes sense in the fantasy world that you have constructed for yourself, however in the real world Israel exercises no control over that border.

    • Heinous actions?

      Please explain how Israel can prevent a Gazan from travelling to Cairo and from there to Amman?

  • 'Contractually obligated' to say the peace process is alive, Aslan told Americans to get ready for one state
    • @amigo

      4. No personal attacks. We encourage spirited, passionate debate, but if you have to resort to vicious personal attack, you’re not advancing the discussion. Stay on the issues.

  • Explicit censorship of Palestine solidarity work is becoming the new normal on American campuses
    • Really? You people are law students? And you believe there is a First Amendment issue here? Was NU "chilling" their rights when they permitted your cohorts to chant “Long Live the Intifada” and to bullhorn that the President of Northeastern is a “Zionist Goon"?

  • Video: 8-year-old boys stopped by soldiers-- 'you were about to throw stones'
  • The NY Times' unbalanced coverage of the BDS movement (Updated)
    • The article fails to note that refugee return is a right guaranteed by international law. Right of return was enshrined in the 1948 Universal Declaration of Human Rights (Article 13), and the right of return for Palestinian refugees was affirmed by UN Resolution 194 in 1948. Major human rights organizations including Human Rights Watch and Amnesty International state that the right of return of Palestinian refugees is protected by international law.


      The UDHC is not law, UNGA 194 is both non-binding and provides no rights and the opinions of human rights groups do not constitute law. And none on the above even begin to address the Palestinian's unique definition where both descendants of citizens of other counties both remain "refugees".

  • Poll: If two-states collapse, Americans overwhelmingly favor 'democracy'
    • It appears that if the 2SS solution collapses most Americans would prefer that a single state emerge. Of course, that single state would be Israel from the river to the sea excluding both Gaza and Palestinians not currently residing within. Non-Israeli residents would presumably be offered citizenship if they were interested in becoming loyal Israelis.

  • Disenfranchised: How the NYT spins the status of Palestinian land
    • Sumud says: How predictably dishonest.
      The entirety of his comment was two inches above in plain view, for anyone to see. And the balance of his statement in no way mitigates the hateful, racist, violent call for ethnic cleansing.

      All of which you apparently support.

    • @talknic

      For about the millionth time, the resolution you are in love with does not assign territory to anyone, nor does it name "both parties". Palestine is not named, the UN does not get to award territory and their official position is that borders need to be negotiated.

      And despite your carefully constructed fantasy world, Palestine has not been a state since 1922. Even the Palestinians do not engage is that nonsense.

    • There is no way in hell you will be allowed to live in peace in the middle east. Neither will your grandchildren, their grandchildren and their grand-grand-grand children. You will be fought against till you are utterly crushed and removed from Arab lands...

      How refreshingly honest.

    • @Talkback

      The UN never recognized Palestinian borders, in fact when the UN accorded to Palestine non-member observer State status in the United Nations they specifically declared that borders needed to be negotiated.

      And once again, UN 476 does not grant anything to the State of Palestine.

    • @talknic

      - UN 476 does not assign territory to either party
      - Why "peace in Palestine"? Because Palestine is a geographical area they desire peace within.
      - Ummm... So what?
      - Looking forward to mods ever doing their jobs and putting an end to your constant childish insults.

    • In official parlance they are the occupied Palestinian territories: meaning the land belongs to Palestine and it is occupied by Israel.

      This is 100% incorrect. The UN has never officially declared that the territories belong to the State of Palestine, the PA, PLO or any other concoction of the Palestinian Arabs.

  • Mohammed Assaf banned from performing at FIFA World Cup
  • Do SodaStream's workers have the right to vote? Roger Waters asks Scarlett Johansson
    • Do they have the right to vote?
      Yes, They have the opportunity to vote in any election the Palestinians choose to schedule.
      Do they have access to the roads?
      Mostly yes. However, there are roads that for security reasosn are Israeli only.
      Can they travel to their work place without waiting for hours to pass through the occupying forces control barriers?
      Probably yes. Is there some eveidence that every Palestinian Sodastream worker waits for hours every day at roadblocks? I doubt it.
      Do they have clean drinking water?
      Do they have sanitation?
      Do they have citizenship?
      Palestinian citizenship? Who knows? Ask the Palestinians.
      Do they have the right not to have the standard issue kicking in their door in the middle of the night and taking their children away?
      Has this actually happened to any Sodastream worker? Or is this just more hyperbole?
      Do they have the right to appeal against arbitrary and indefinite imprisonment?
      Typically yes.
      Do they have the right to re-occupy the property and homes they owned before 1948?
      I doubt any Sodastream worker owned property anywhere in 1948.
      Do they have the right to an ordinary, decent human family life?
      Yes. Decent jobs provide for decent family life.
      Do they have the right to self determination?
      Yes, but no more than the Israelis.
      Do they have the right to continue to develop a cultural life that is ancient and profound?

    • kma says: I assume Johansson knows occupied Palestinians can’t vote.
      They could if the Palestinian leadership would allow for elections.

  • BDS leaders say Palestinian human rights are compatible with Israeli Jewish future
    • “Freedom, justice and equality, the ultimate goals of the BDS movement, would only ‘destroy’ an unjust regime, not harm any humans. BDS categorically opposes all forms of racism, including anti-Semitism, and consistently advocates for equal rights for all humans,”

      This statement does not in any way contradict Cary Nelson's. Regardless of what the BDS crew and their useful idiots choose to oppose (publicly) , they will have little to no say in what emerges from the elimination of Israel. What emerges would be whatever mess the current power brokers agree to - a state as imagined by Abbas, Hamas and the PLO.

      The only role of the BDS is to assist with the transfer of power. Somehow I doubt they will stick around to protest and boycott the Palestinians when their idealized state fails to show up.

  • Netanyahu continues moving the goalposts - announces new settlement bloc Israel must keep in deal with Palestinians
    • eljay says: >> Partition never happened?
      Exactly. It never happened.

      link to

    • talknic says: UNSC res 476. Just one of EIGHT reminders to Israel of UNSC res 252. You still haven’t read it? What an amazing glutton for ignorance!
      Of course I have read it, it is just that like so many of your bizarre interpretations, few people agree with you. Certainly not me.

      None of which you reference make Jerusalem the territory of a Palestinian State, none declare that the city should remain or be divided and none preclude Israel from retaining Jerusalem under a peace agreement.

    • Bumblebye says: Strange how Israeli law enforcement is completely absent, totally fails to prevent this.
      Prevent what? A bunch of old fat Israelis standing around in the sun? Being "provocative"?

    • Ira Glunts says: The reasons you request are legal, ethical and realist.
      The Palestinians have no legal claim to Jerusalem, it was never theirs in the first place so it certainly was not "taken" from them. And yes, Olmert offered parts of Jerusalem in his offer (an offer that many Mondos insist never happened) and quite tellingly, the Palestinians turned it down as not enough. Their intransigence is hardly a reason to divide the city.

    • Bumblebye says: The Israelis are in possession of stolen goods.
      Stolen, huh? Not that I agree but if it were it would not have been from the Palestinians. And BTW, the Israelis were not "awarded" anything by the partition, the partition never happened.

    • Ira Glunts says: The Israelis must agree to giving the Palestinians Arab East Jerusalem
      Really? And why must they agree to dividing Jerusalem? Apart from the reason the Palestinians want it.

  • Europeans with 'no legitimate claim' to America wiped out indigenous people -- 'totally different' from Israel (Harris)
    • Cliff says: Jews are also indigenous to America or Europe or Morocco.
      And the Palestinian Arabs are also indigenous to Arabia, Syria, Egypt, Yemen, etc... What's your point?

    • Of course it is totally different. The Jewish people are also the indigenous people. Moreover while not as deliberately false as the disappearing Palestine maps that presumably inspire these, they are nonetheless highly inaccurate.

  • BDS: The best hope for a true peace
  • PLO official: Kerry threatened to stop funds if Palestinians do not agree to his framework
  • Chilean soccer team puts Palestine front and center
    • Annie Robbins says: you mean like these guys disappeared palestine on their map?
      "Palestine" was not disappeared, the West Bank and Gaza were.

    • Hmmm...

      I keep looking and looking and I cannot find Israel on that map. Do you suppose the Palestinian's mean that it should go away?

  • As Kerry leaves Israel, Netanyahu announces 272 new settlement homes
    • ttalknic says: Of course they’re unwilling to accept less than their legal rights. WTF should they?
      Why should they? Well first of all, most of their "rights" are imaginary. Secondly, they are supposed to be more interested in having a state than in eliminating the Jewish one.

      a) The Palestinians are under no legal obligation to forgo any of their legal rights even in negotiations.
      Refusing to recognize Israel as a Jewish State is not a Legal Right. However they can chose not to and thereby jeopardize their ability to get the state they supposedly want - that is their right.

      b) UNSC res 476 says you’re full of sh*t. As far back as May 22nd the Israeli Government admitted to Palestine having territories “outside the State of Israel”
      476 does not assign territory to the Palestinians. Nor does your ridiculous linky. You need to get over the idea that anything not explicitly Israeli is Palestinian by default.

      c) UNSC res 476 and Israeli Govt statements from May 22nd 1948 (ibid) tell us you’re spouting drivel
      See Above (b)

      d) link to says you’re spouting nonsense
      The Palestinians are not confining their demands to those definitions, the Palestinians and 99.99% of their supporters (everyone but yourself) believe descendants have a RoR.

      e) While occupation exists and it does, the Laws of War, Geneva Conventions, Ceasefire and Armistice Agreements apply
      None of the above preclude Palestinians from being convicted of murder and criminality.

    • The Truth says: You do realize that the Palestinians are under no moral or legal obligation to accept Israel as a “Jewish” state, right?
      What's your point? That should everything they dream come to fruition and all that remains towards getting the state they (supposedly) desire is recognizing Israel as a Jewish State - they should not do that?

    • talknic says: mondonut Did you have a point?
      The point is all too obvious, but I will spell it out for you. The idea that the only party required to compromise (or refusing to) are the Israelis, is simply ridiculous. The Palestinians brag on their unwillingness.

      As for the rest of your nonsense:
      a) It is a negotiation, the Israelis can demand what they want, no "legal right" to do so is required.
      b) True for both sides. As of yet the territory is not Palestine.
      c) Palestine has no territory. Only claims.
      d) Your definition of refugee has no similarity to Palestinians'
      e) The prisoners whose release is demanded are not POWs, Israel is not required to release murderers and criminals.

    • Sammar says: What else is new? Did anyone really expect Kerry to get any concessions from the Israelis? Palestinians?

      First we can not accept Israel as a Jewish state. Secondly we can not accept any Palestinian state on the 1967 borders, without Jerusalem. Thirdly we can not accept any Israeli on Palestinian territory, sea or air, after the completion of the gradual withdrawal. Fourth we can not accept any solution without the exercise of the refugees' right of return according to Resolution 194, the right of return and compensation, and (fifth) the release of all prisoners at the signing of the agreement. This is the Palestinian position.

      - Saeb Erekat

  • Avigdor's triumph: Israel reportedly wants to transfer northern villages into Palestinian state
    • talknic says: Your notion is really ^&*ing stupid.
      This is a really simple concept, it is simply amazing that you and your friends just do not get it. According to the poll Israeli citizens who self identify as Palestinians were asked if they preferred their villages to be sovereign Israel or Palestine. By a large margin they chose Israel.

      Why is that so hard to understand?

    • Alex Kane says: There has been polling on this question, and the majority of Palestinian citizens polled are against the plan.
      So given the choice between self determination in their own state and their supposedly second class status in Israel - they choose Israel. Makes you wonder if life in Israel is not as bad as the Mondos make it out to be.

    • Cliff says: ... it doesn’t matter WHAT State or ideology controls the land at the moment.
      Good to know. So apparently you are in agreement with Lieberman.

    • This is an absolutely terrible plan both because Palestinians do not want to be citizens of Palestine and the State of Palestine has no interest in additional territory.

  • Low turnout for Palestinian prisoner release as negotiations slump
    • MRW says: They’re freedom fighters.
      Sure they are.

      Abu Muhsan Khaled Ibrahim Jamal was sentenced to life imprisonment for the murder of Shlomo Yehia in 1991.

      Shlomo Yehia was born in 1915 in Yemen and immigrated to Israel in Operation Magic Carpet. He settled in Moshav Kadima where he worked as a gardener even after reaching retirement age. On September 26th 1991 he went out to work as usual and was stabbed to death in a public park. Shlomo was 76 years old at the time of his death and was survived by his wife and six children.

  • Three university presidents issue statements against boycott
    • link to

      The Executive Committee of the Association of American Universities strongly opposes a boycott of Israeli academic institutions. Three U.S. scholarly organizations have now expressed support for such a boycott. Any such boycott of academic institutions directly violates academic freedom, which is a fundamental principle of AAU universities and of American higher education in general.
      William C. Powers, President, The University of Texas at Austin – Chair
      Amy Gutmann, President, University of Pennsylvania – Vice Chair
      Scott S. Cowen, President, Tulane University – Past Chair
      Richard H. Brodhead, President, Duke University
      Michael V. Drake, Chancellor, University of California, Irvine
      Bernadette Gray-Little, The University of Kansas
      Mark A. Nordenberg, Chancellor, University of Pittsburgh
      Morton O. Schapiro, President, Northwestern University
      Lou Anna K. Simon, President, Michigan State University
      David Skorton, President, Cornell University
      Hunter R. Rawlings III, President, Association of American Universities – ex-officio

      List of Universities opposed to Boycott
      Boston University
      Brandeis University
      Brown University
      Cornell University
      Dickinson College
      Duke University
      George Washington University
      Harvard University
      Indiana University
      Michigan State
      New York University
      Northwestern University
      Princeton University
      Tulane University
      University of California-Irvine
      University of California-San Diego
      University of Chicago
      University of Kansas
      University of Maryland
      University of Pennsylvania
      University of Pittsburgh
      University of Texas-Austin
      Washington University in St. Louis
      Wesleyan University
      Willamette University
      Yale University

      List of Universities in agreement with Boycott

  • Israel's war on Christmas rages on
  • EU official threatens funding to PA, saying Israel should pay for its occupation
    • What a joke. Unnamed officials issuing vague threats with zero political backing, threats that run counter to everything they have said, done and tried to achieve over the past few years. Sure, it's great stuff for the Mondos to chew on but it has no basis in reality.

  • African asylum-seekers march to Jerusalem to protest detention, violently arrested [Video]
  • Interview with Dr. Haidar Eid: 'The Palestinian struggle is not about independence -- it is about liberation'
    • Great interview. I wish the entire world understood this breathtakingly simple concept. Will ending the occupation bring peace? No. Will the RoR? No. Will a Palestinian State? No. Will all of the above? No.

      What brings peace? Nothing less than the dismantling of the State of Israel. Let's see how much worldwide support the Palestinians enjoy when that becomes obvious. Better yet, send Abbas back to the U.N. to make that demand.

  • Jews who protest settlements are 'mutants' who should have been aborted, says ZOA leader
    • Hostage says: I think you are losing sight of the fact that the Zionist Organization was a foriegn principal...
      No, I am not. But nice try with the spin. Here is the original statement:

      The ZOA is an organization that was ordered to register as an Israeli foreign agent seven times.

      True of False?

    • Talkback says: That 7-5=2 and not 0 is disputed. You just pick mathematical solutions which are pro Arab and antisemitic.
      Are you really that dense? Read the other two orders, neither demand that the ZOA register as an agent of Israel.

    • t alknic says: Twice is “NEVER” … WOW!!! AMAZING!!
      Congratulations are in order again, you can perform simple math. Of course you are still wrong, neither of the two remaining orders ask ZOA to register as an Israeli foreign agent.

      Apparently your fascination with minutiae is all about when it suits your own purposes.

    • irmep says: ZOA was ordered to register as a foreign agent of the World Zionist Organization, an Israeli entity.
      Doubling down on your lies? The US never linked the World Zionist Organization to Israeli in its orders, that is pure invention on your part. Further, as you so aptly demonstrated, Israel did not exist when the majority of the orders were issued.

    • @talknic

      Congratulations, you found an obscure link making the same false claim. Try again. Follow the actual link above where they detail that 5 of the 7 orders/requests came before Israel existed.

    • irmep says: The ZOA is an organization that was ordered to register as an Israeli foreign agent seven times.
      ZOA was NEVER ordered to register as an Israeli foreign agent.

  • Are you blind (to Palestinian rights)?
    • @talknic

      Fact: An entire reply without actually mentioning UNGA 194. Or the nature of GA resolutions. Hardly a reply at all.

      Fact: UN GA resolutions are non-binding. As your friends like to say, full stop. This is affirmed by the UN itself. link to

      Fsct: There is no pre-exisiting law that grants the Palestinians the RoR that they claim. If there were, the Palestinians would reference that and not UNGA194

    • I suppose the 194 refers to UNGA 194 and the farcical belief that a General Assembly resolution confers rights to the Palestinians. Yeah, yeah, I know - it "codifies" International law into a nice easy to understand package and is therefore elevated into something binding. Which is of course, nonsense. Same goes for the Dorothy in Oz Theory that if it is repeated enough times, it becomes law. More nonsense.

  • Why Israel wanted Arafat dead
    • Why would anyone take seriously murder accusations leveled by the PA when the PA itself refuses to release the 2004 medical records it received from the French hospital where Arafat died?

      But if it were polonium poisoning (doubtful), then who?

      Means - Every world power, their agents, their allies, their partners in crime. As well as anyone with sufficient access to black markets.

      Motive - Apparently everyone, including the Israelis - as well as Palestinian successors and anyone willing to kill for the rather large amounts of cash flowing through his hands.

      Opportunity - Pretty much just the Palestinians themselves.

      link to

      A leading British biomedical scientist says it is “highly unlikely” that former Palestinian leader Yasser Arafat died in a French hospital in 2004 from a lethal dose of radioactive polonium...

      ...Professor Nicholas Priest, who formerly headed the biomedical research unit of the Atomic Energy Authority in Britain, told The Independent that, while poisoning by polonium “cannot be totally ruled out”, the symptoms were very different from those of the Russian dissident Alexander Litvinenko, who died in London in 2006. The professor, a specialist in radiation toxicology, is one the few British scientists to have worked with polonium-210. He was involved in the research over Mr Litvinenko’s death – the only known case of fatal poisoning by the substance. “Key indicators it was not polonium [that killed Arafat] were lack of hair loss in the face, and no damage to his bone marrow, both of which were found extensively in Litvinenko,”

  • What Comes Next: A one-state reality and a two-state discourse
    • talknic says: Feigning stupidity is …. stupid.
      So when an essay on this site openly declares having a problem with Jews, not Israelis or settlers, but Jews - that is to be ignored and everyone is just supposed to fill in the blanks to make him sound less hateful. Sure.

      And BTW, I do not know that citizens of an Occupying Power are prohibited from settling (or existing) in occupied territories. That is just another figment from your fevered imagination.

    • Hostage says: it’s really stupid for you to even ask.
      a) Please point out where Noam Sheizaf restricts his commentary to settlers. All I can find is where he has a problem with Jews, as in "Right now, every sixth person east of the Green Line is a Jew."

      b) "not s single refugee" is incorrect. Up until 2003 the Israelis allowed over 100,000 Palestinians (including Shadi Tubasi) into Israel under family unification. The Olmert offer was for another 5000. There is zero expectation from anyone that a negotiated settlement would not include some limited return.

      c) Ad hominem. Of course.

    • Implementing a real two-state solution, on the other hand, seems more and more unlikely. Right now, every sixth person east of the Green Line is a Jew.

      So Jews are not allowed to be Palestinian? Arabs only?

  • Netanyahu's man in Geneva, Laurent Fabius of France
    • Justpassingby says: Fabious mother is jewish i believe ...
      How is that relevant?

  • Echoing Netanyahu, Ted Cruz slams Kerry and calls on Iran to recognize Israel as 'Jewish state'
    • Ira Glunts says:What would be in your mind a fair and just proposal for Kerry to put forward in the negotiations?
      What does that have to do with your assertion that the US is obliged to pressure the Israelis to compromise to Palestinian demands? Why do you not see the the Palestinians as equally intransigent?

    • @ Ira Glunts

      The US will continue to refuse to exert the necessary pressure on Israel the Palestinians to be “reasonable” to even get to a point where the PA Israelis might even consider signing on.

  • The first time I saw a settlement from behind its walls
  • Video: 'The real truth about the West Bank' offers rejoinder to Danny Ayalon's hasbara lies
    • Shingo says: No it doesn’t. If it proved that Jesus referred to himself as a Jew, it would be apparent from your quote and you wouldn’t be insisting I Google it.
      Now you just being willfully ignorant, the reason I suggested Google is because you so obviously cannot understand it. So go ahead and refuse to learn what the passage means, it's your loss.

    • Shingo says: That does not answer the question. When did Jesus refer to himself as a Jew?
      Actually it does. You either need to think harder or use the Google to learn the commonly accepted interpretation.

    • Joe Catron says: I’ll bite. When did Jesus refer to himself as a Jew?
      John 4:22, Ye worship ye know not what: we know what we worship: for salvation is of the Jews.

  • Infographic: How the Syrian crisis created a disaster for Palestinian refugee children
    • talknic says: An offer defying the law is not a legitimate offer.
      True. However there was nothing "law defying" about the offer. They were free to accept the deal or not. At least they should have been, the Palestinian leadership denied them that opportunity.

    • seafoid says: Why won’t Israel let the Palestinians home, mondonut?
      For most of them, it is not their home, they have never been there. They have no desire to become Israeli citizens, there are too many enemies of the state, and they have no legal right to do so.

    • talknic says: Abbas rejected a “conditional Israeli offer” that had no legal basis.
      It is was a legitimate offer, as the RoR crowd likes to point out (when it suits their purposes) , the RoR is an individual right. Those individuals should have the opportunity to make their own decision. That was denied to them by Abbas/

    • Yes they are barred from refuge in the West Bank, but by the Palestinians not Israel.

      link to

      Last month, Abbas asked the U.N. to seek Israeli permission to bring Palestinians caught in Syria’s civil war to the Palestinian territories.

      Abbas said in comments published Thursday that Israel linked its acceptance to refugees relinquishing claims to returning to what is now Israel.

      Abbas says “we rejected that.”

      Israeli officials declined comment.

  • What comes next: The future bends toward equal rights
    • Talkback says: In 1988 the UN had allready affirmed the “need to enable the Palestinian people to exercise their sovereignty over their territory occupied since 1967;
      The UN's recognition of Palestine did not include an endorsement of their territorial claims. The same goes for the nonsensical GA resolution you linked to. There was no such thing as "their territory" to affirm.

    • talknic says: There is yet to be a settlement and until there is, it ain’t Israeli.
      And it sure as hell is not Palestinian.

    • Shingo says: The UN just tecignized Palestine along the 1967 borders.
      That is ridiculous. Source?

    • talknic says: Uh huh The MAJORITY of the International Powers ...
      None of which disputes anything I said. It is in fact the very doublespeak I mentioned. The UN has never assigned Jerusalem to the Palestinians and they could not care less if the Israelis retained it in a settlement.

Showing comments 687 - 601

Comments are closed.