Hahahah you hypocrite...Would you accept Palestinian refugees who are suffering the same exact fate, in identical environment and similar threat as the darfur people? Wael, are you totally deranged? The Palestinians are suffering indeed... but their suffering is self-inflicted and totally avoidable, it's entirely up to them to end their suffering, all they need to do is implement UN resolution 242, recognize Israel, make peace with it and negotiate permanent borders in good faith. The arab world's explicitely stated and repeatedly reaffirmed "No peace, No recognition and No negotiations" attitude towards Israel is fully responsible for the suffering of the palestinian people. Moreover their suffering (largely occupation related inconveniences) doesn't even come close to the suffering of Sudanese civilians. Hundreds of thousands of sudanese women and children have been murdered by muslim extremists. And it's the little satan (Israel) that accepts a small number of sudanese refugees, it's the great satan that accepts 7,000 Palestinian families. The arab world is too busy bashing the great and the little satan and counting their oil revenue to help their own muslim brethren. But I still do. Why did "all of the surrounding Arab states refuse" to accept 7,000 Palestinian families? Why did the great satan accept them? I'll answer your question when you answer why did the whole world decide to dump your newly converted khazaris on the shores of my homeland and my people So you have no explanation of why the arab world did not accept 7,000 palestinian families. Well, I am not surprised, there are no good answers.
While I don't have time to rebut your nonsense point by point, here is just a couple of facts - UN resolution 242 does not address the issue of settlments so their expansion does not violate the resolution. The PLO did indeed agree to the terms of the resolution but then Arafat walked away from an extremely generous Clinton/Barak peace proposal without a counter-offer and now the current Palestinian government (Hamas) refuse to recognize previous agreements. Israel occupying 0.2% of the Middle East accepted and resettled 900,000 jewish refugees from arab countries and millions of refugees from Europe, Russia etc. There is no good reason why oil-rich, wealth arab states refuse to help palestinian refugees.
Just to show the level of conniving mentality this Zionist display, this is UNSCR 242 word for word; U.N. SECURITY COUNCIL RESOLUTION 242 NOVEMBER 22, 1967 The Security Council, Expressing its continuing concern with the grave situation in the Middle East, Emphasizing the inadmissibility of the acquisition of territory by war and the need to work for a just and lasting peace in which every State in the area can live in security, Emphasizing further that all Member States in their acceptance of the Charter of the United Nations have undertaken a commitment to act in accordance with Article 2 of the Charter, Affirms that the fulfillment of Charter principles requires the establishment of a just and lasting peace in the Middle East which should include the application of both the following principles: Withdrawal of Israeli armed forces from territories occupied in the recent conflict; Termination of all claims or states of belligerency and respect for and acknowledgement of the sovereignty, territorial integrity and political independence of every State in the area and their right to live in peace within secure and recognized boundaries free from threats or acts of force; Affirms further the necessity For guaranteeing freedom of navigation through international waterways in the area; For achieving a just settlement of the refugee problem; For guaranteeing the territorial inviolability and political independence of every State in the area, through measures including the establishment of demilitarized zones; Requests the Secretary General to designate a Special Representative to proceed to the Middle East to establish and maintain contacts with the States concerned in order to promote agreement and assist efforts to achieve a peaceful and accepted settlement in accordance with the provisions and principles in this resolution; Requests the Secretary-General to report to the Security Council on the progress of the efforts of the Special Representative as soon as possible." Our friend dddooo came accusing us of , listen to this, not implementing UNSCR 242. Obviously, he thought that the settlement of Sudanese Muslim refugees who have no entailment to the land and who, as we are speaking, locked behind fenced wires in concentration camps in Israel IS good substitute as a settlement to the Palestinian refugee problem which was caused by him in the first place. I especially love the broken record statement "Oh we are a small state in a sea of Arab states, we have accepted this and that and done this and that so our shit should not stink" Hey buddy, been there...Done that! As I showed in a previous post, you have not accepted Jews who were not Khazarahs... You only collected Jews who were not you for fear that your bluff will be called by the rest of the world that will expose your hypocrisy. And when you collected these Jews, who didn't want to come to your illegal state to start with, you locked them in concentration camps and exposed their children to poisoning radiation that eventually killed thousands of them, snatched other Saphardi Jewish children from their parents and give them to white Jews. I have met MANY of these Yamani Jews who are now re-discovering their identity and the crime that you committed against them you Fascist.
Emphasizing the inadmissibility of the acquisition of territory by war Absolutely Wael, that's exactly what I was talking about. Settlements are not "acquisition of territory", settlements were dismantled in the Sinai when peace with Egypt was achieved. Settlements were dismantled in Gaza. Settlements will be dismantled in the West Bank when the Pals are ready to make peace (unless some other border compromise will be negotiated). Settlements don't violate the resolution. Withdrawal of Israeli armed forces from territories occupied in the recent conflict; Fair enough, Israel is expected to give up land in exchange for... Termination of all claims or states of belligerency and respect for and acknowledgement of the sovereignty, territorial integrity and political independence of every State in the area and their right to live in peace within secure and recognized boundaries free from threats or acts of force; And unfortunately in response to this requirement of the resolution the arab world issued the infamous three noes: "No peace with Israel. No negotiations with Israel. No recognition of Israel."
Settlements are not an acquisition of territories????????????? Khahahahahahaha! Stupid me! Indeed you are. Where are the Sinai and Gaza settlements today? Spin it all you want but when the time is right Israel dismantles them. when even Hamas agreed to the previous agreements signed by the PA Hamas did not agree to recognize previous agreements signed by PA. You're not fooling anyone. When the Arab states called your bluff and told your Fascist state that they are ready for peace The arab states said they were willing to start negotiating with Israel after Israel withdraws from the territories and meet a bunch of other demands and pre-conditions. That's a PR stunt, and a pretty lousy and obvious one at that, that's not a serious political move.
British Jews and Christians fall out over bulldozer boycott. February 23rd, 2006 by Neil T. Thereâs a bit of a tizz going on here in the UK between the Church of England, the largest Christian denomination in Britain, and the Jewish community, over the CofEâs recent decision to disinvest from Caterpillar, who make construction machinery. The decision was made due to the use of Caterpillar bulldozers by the Israeli army for clearing Palestinian homes in the West Bank and Gaza, which as far as I know is in contrevention of United Nations agreements. This Guardian article explains the situaton, but essentially the chief rabbi, Jonathan Sacks, has accused the CofE of commiting anti-semitism as a result of this decision, and that it âset back Anglican-Jewish relations by 70 yearsâ. This argument, in my mind, is a load of old bunkum. Hereâs a Venn Diagram to illustrate my point: Venn Diagram <img src=http://www.neilturner.me.uk/uploads/jewsisrael.png> Note that the diagram is almost certainly not to scale, but I think it does illustrate the point Iâm trying to make here. In other words, just because youâre Jewish, does not mean you believe that what Israel is doing in the West Bank and Gaza is right. Iâm not taking sides with regard to the Middle East Conflict, but I think itâs a bit rich to assume all Jews support the Israeli occupation of Palestinian land. No sane person would say all Muslims are terrorists, so why bracket all Jews in the same way? Iâm sure some will be Jews who do think that this boycott is anti-semitic, and while Mr Sacks is entitled to his opinion he should not do so in a capacity whereby he claims to represent all British Jews. Because Iâm pretty sure that he does not.