Obama Backs Arab Democracy in Two-State Israeli-Palestinian Resolution

  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    May 19, 2011 6:59 PM GMT
    I strongly support Obama's vision!!!
    Of course those who hate it I ask that you please tell me why without hysterics and stereotyping of Palestinians. Why do you NOT want a 2 state solution. And for those who DO support this vision, tell me why as well.

    http://news.yahoo.com/s/yblog_theenvoy/20110519/ts_yblog_theenvoy/obama-lays-out-u-s-vision-for-supporting-arab-democracy-resolving-israeli-palestinian-conflict#mwpphu-containerE
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    May 19, 2011 7:19 PM GMT
    Its my opinion that the two state solution is as good for Israel as it is for Palestine, as Obama said, a perpetual Israeli "occupation" is not good for anyone and is actually self destructive to Israels own interests. This Occupation is one of the primary reasons Israel is so Isolated and disliked in the region.

    I am very very pleased to read that Obama is promoting going back to the 1967 lines before Israels attack and subsequent "Occupation" of East Jerusalem, the West Bank and the Gaza Strip. Israel's agreeing to do so is nothing but right and again, I think it is in Israels own best interest, because doing so would permanently heal a lot of wounds, not all by any means but Israel has been guilty of forcing many a Palestinian off their land, Farms and out of their homes since 1967 and thereby is to blame for a lot of the Ire and Isolation it suffers in the Region.

    Of major importance is that Hamas, must back off its hardline reluctance and so far refusal to accept Israel's right to exist and turn away from violence, If they don't, they need to move out of the way so peace can go forward. Both sides will have to deal a blow to their extremist factions for peace to work, this will be hard because on the Palestine side there is Hamas not wanting to accept Israel right to exist and on the Israeli side you have the likes of Lieberman and even Netanyahu who basicly see no problem in stealing Palestine territory because like our Zionist Apologist C4 here on RJ, they don't seem to accept Palestines right to exist or they too would see a problem in building Settlements on what should be part of the Palestine State.

    NIETHER SIDE CAN HAVE ITS CAKE AND EAT IT TOO !!!! BUT BY ALL APPEARANCES THIS SEEMS TO BE PRIMARILY ISRAEL'S PROBLEM.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    May 19, 2011 7:37 PM GMT
    southbeach1500 saidCaesarea4 will probably be on a suicide watch after he hears the news!

    WASHINGTON – President Barack Obama is endorsing the Palestinians' demand for their future state to be based on the borders that existed before the 1967 Middle East war, in a move that will likely infuriate Israel. Israel says the borders of a Palestinian state have to be determined through negotiations.

    In a speech outlining U.S. policy in the Middle East and North Africa, Obama on Thursday sided with the Palestinians' opening position a day ahead of a visit to Washington by Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. Netanyahu is vehemently opposed to referring to the 1967 borders.

    http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20110519/ap_on_re_us/us_obama_mideast_palestinians_1



    __________________________________________________________


    Yes and LEERON (C4) will quote all his posts "where this has already been discussed" and of course "Settled in his mind". However, no one crowned him the Authority on anything so far as I know.

    SB or LAGYM, would you mind going to this Article on Huffington Post and go down through the first or by now the second page of comments and post the link to the site, "MOVE OVER AIPAC" They are doing an extensive advertising campaign to forward what Obama is suggesting.

    I think if Netanyahu would do some soul searching that he too would see the return to 1967 lines as in Israels best interests also, doing so I still say would heal a lot of unecessary wounds that Israel has inflicted on the Palestinians since 67'. Israel was totally wrong in occupying and building those settlements on stolen land in the first place and logically as well as politically no amount of ZIONIST PROPAGANDA can cover over how wrong those settlements are. NOWHERE ELSE IN THE WORLD HAS SUCH A THING GONE ON FOR NEARLY 63 years. ( building on Palestinian land started as soon as the Zionist forced out the Palestinians starting I believe even before 194icon_cool.gif

    If Obama can get past the likes of Eric Cantor's undermining this effort and others who with him are so beholding to AIPAC and I am sure will be hard at work with their Propaganda as to why going back to those 67' lines is in their minds "not practical". It should be noted that Eric Cantor went around Obama by sending a letter to Netanyahu telling him that Congress would work with Netanyahu to basicly get him his wish lists in spite of Obama, (you can find an article about this on Huffington Post, and also Eric Cantor invited Netanyahu to speak to congress months ago in anticipation of Obama's speach today. WHEN IN HISTORY HAS ANY CONGRESSMAN TRIED SO HARD TO UNDERMINE A SITTING PRESIDENT AND STATE DEPARTMENT'S DIPLOMATIC POLICIES ?
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    May 19, 2011 7:57 PM GMT
    And here one was thinking Obama would never say anything of interesticon_eek.gif
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    May 19, 2011 8:00 PM GMT
    True_blue_aussie saidAnd here one was thinking Obama would never say anything of interesticon_eek.gif


    So do you agree and support the vision? Why or why not?
  • Webster666

    Posts: 9217

    May 20, 2011 1:33 AM GMT
    Yawn.
    Every President since Harry Truman has made the same exact speech.

    Be realistic.
    It ain't gonna happen.
    And, the U.S. will keep right on writing billion dollar checks to Israel.

    Shalom.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    May 20, 2011 1:58 AM GMT
    Webster666 saidYawn.
    Every President since Harry Truman has made the same exact speech.

    Be realistic.
    It ain't gonna happen.
    And, the U.S. will keep right on writing billion dollar checks to Israel.

    Shalom.


    ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Well buddy I know we see eye to eye on very little on this subject but I have to agree with you here, I expect by the Weekend or Monday at the Latest that Obama will be backing up on those 1967 lines. (I do wish he would stick to that, but he's not got that much spine, when AIPAC gets done lobbying and working overtime on Congress over the next few days and weeks, he'll cave)

    All I hope is that the Hamas side gets their act together and agrees to recognize Israel and to stop the bombing hostilites and that Israel will recognize the rights of Palestine to enough of a degree that they stop the settlements and thereby show a good faith effort to negotiate something that Palestine will be pleased with rather than Israel doing all the taking as has been done historically. So you see, I don't Hate Israel !!!
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    May 20, 2011 2:49 AM GMT
    I'm on record as supporting peaceful coexistence based on compromise and the two-state solution (one Jewish, the other Arab).

    UNSCR 242, Oslo Accords, Camp David 2000 and Taba 2001
    (I support the Clinton COMPROMISE parameters. Do you?!)

    http://www.realjock.com/gayforums/354843

    Yalla, Peace!
    http://www.realjock.com/gayforums/1285693
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    May 20, 2011 3:01 AM GMT
    I am for a one state solution. One without Israel. Israel will never let the Palestinians live in peace, even in a country of their own. Judea delenda est.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    May 20, 2011 3:11 AM GMT
    Palestine's gonna keep listening to that Ke$ha song (you know which one) and taking it to heart, with or without Israel. It's a Muslim cuntry, it's what they do.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    May 20, 2011 3:20 AM GMT
    FearTheFall saidPalestine's gonna keep listening to that Ke$ha song (you know which one) and taking it to heart, with or without Israel. It's a Muslim cuntry, it's what they do.


    Just like Tunisia, no?
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    May 20, 2011 3:34 AM GMT
    Caesarea4 saidI'm on record as supporting peaceful coexistence based on compromise and the two-state solution (one Jewish, the other Arab).

    UNSCR 242, Oslo Accords, Camp David 2000 and Taba 2001
    (I support the Clinton COMPROMISE parameters. Do you?!)

    http://www.realjock.com/gayforums/354843

    Yalla, Peace!
    http://www.realjock.com/gayforums/1285693


    _______________________________________________________

    Excepting for one very crucial detail !! the above holds to the ZIONIST PROPAGANDA that PALESTINE NEVER EXISTED, therefore these ZIONIST FANATICS, use this handy lie to sooth their collective consciences to make it OK TO STEAL LAND, FARMS AND HOMES OF PALESTINIANS and BUILD ALL THE SETTLEMENTS THEY WANT TO, because THEIR HANDY PROPAGANDA HAS IT THAT IT NEVER BELONGED TO THE PALESTINIANS ANYWAY. HANDY SHIT THAT PROPAGANDA !!!! IT TAKES CHUTZPAH TO USE IT THOUGH !!!

    YESSIREE LEERON IS ON RECORD SAYING A HELL OF A LOT !!!! BUT BE DAMN SURE YOU READ BETWEEN THE LINES !!!
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    May 20, 2011 4:38 AM GMT
    Caesarea4 saidI'm on record as supporting peaceful coexistence based on compromise and the two-state solution (one Jewish, the other Arab).

    UNSCR 242, Oslo Accords, Camp David 2000 and Taba 2001
    (I support the Clinton COMPROMISE parameters. Do you?!)

    http://www.realjock.com/gayforums/354843

    Yalla, Peace!
    http://www.realjock.com/gayforums/1285693


    Trouble is there is only compromise so long as israel gets what it wants or all deal are off. Thats not even meting half way.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    May 20, 2011 6:52 AM GMT
    LAGYM saidI strongly support Obama's vision!!!
    Of course those who hate it I ask that you please tell me why without hysterics and stereotyping of Palestinians. Why do you NOT want a 2 state solution. And for those who DO support this vision, tell me why as well.

    http://news.yahoo.com/s/yblog_theenvoy/20110519/ts_yblog_theenvoy/obama-lays-out-u-s-vision-for-supporting-arab-democracy-resolving-israeli-palestinian-conflict#mwpphu-containerE


    Hey good idea! Let's support a United States that had borders from a long time ago too BEFORE they took the land due to war! That means YOU belong in MEXICO now. Better start learning Spanish.

    If Israel gives Palestine "pre 1967" borders then the US needs to give itself "Pre 1967 borders" and give Hawaii back to the Hawaiians.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    May 20, 2011 1:52 PM GMT
    sxydrkhair saidThe West Bank doesn't belong to Israel. It never has. Gaza,

    You do realize that other than between 1949-1967, Trans/Jordan's so-called "West Bank" was known as Judea & Samaria, right?
    That Jews have been living there, e.g. in Hebron and in Gaza, for thousands of years, right?
    Until, that is, they were all ethnically cleansed during the 1948 Arab invasion.

    The last legal accepted partition (1922-23) assigned all of western Mandate Palestine (the 22% from the river to the sea) to the Jewish state.
    While all of eastern Palestine (77%) was assigned to Trans-Jordan for an Arab (only! no Jews allowed) state.

    sxydrkhairsaidGolan, South Lebanon and Sinai too.

    Why aren't these part of "Palestine"?
    When did Sinai become part of Egypt? What about self-determination for its Bedouin population?
    When did Lebanon south of the Litani River become part of Lebanon?
    When did the Golan become part of Syria?

    sxydrkhair saidillegally occupied the West Bank and Gaza.

    As discussed time and again, an "occupation" is what happens between war and peace and is not "illegal".
    This is just the regular dose of vapid soundbites and silly slogans that some confuse as arguments.
    Was the occupation of Germany and Japan following WW II "illegal"?
    Should it have served as a pretense to perpetuate the war forever?

    Note that UN Security Council Resolution 242, which is binding on the parties, authorizes Israel to hold the disputed territories until a border is negotiated as part of a comprehensive peace agreement, only after which it should withdraw in accordace with that agreement.

    The problem is that the Arab parties were quick to war and glacially slow to peace.
    Thus the situation is not resolved, with some Arab parties insisting on war forever (until victory) instead of negotiations, compromise and peace.


    sxydrkhair said
    True_blue_aussie said
    Trouble is there is only compromise so long as israel gets what it wants or all deal are off. Thats not even meting half way.

    BINGO!!! caesraea4 doesn't get that in his head.

    How quaint that this complaint comes from people who oppose the paradigm of compromise, can't think of one thing on which they can compromise, and issue list after list of ransom demands required for them to stop the violence and terrorism.

    Already 10.5 years ago Israel was willing to compromise on a net 97% of the disputed territories and on the Arab neighborhoods of eastern Jerusalem - which would become an independent, sovereign, and internationally recognized state - contiguous in Gaza and the WB. Clinton further offered a $30 Billion fund to compensate/resettle the Palestinian Arab refugees in the nascent Palestinian Arab state. And Israel was willing to compromise on the Temple Mount, Judaism's holiest site, placing it under some shared mechanism.

    The Arab side violently rejected this (as it has compromises proposed in 1937, 1947 and since).

    So rather than argue history and sling their propaganda slogans and anti-Israel soundbites, let me ask - in the spirit of the Obama initiative and this forum topic - for each of the Israel-haters (who put demonizing Israel ahead of doing what would most benefit the Palestinian Arabs) to state on what the Arabs can and should compromise.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    May 20, 2011 4:36 PM GMT
    Oh the tangled webs of ZIONIST PROPAGANDA to JUSTIFY THE ZIONIST LED THEFT OF LAND, FARMS AND HOMES of Palestinians, then blame the Palestinian because they fight for their rights by the most natural of reactions to Israels ZIONIST ZEALOT actions. Fortunately the world is seeing through these Propaganda tactics and especially of constant framing of those who would disaggree with those actions as "HATERS OF ISRAEL", such bunk is no longer bought into by most of the world, and such Chutzpah in making such claims is the very reason for as LEERON (C4) complained about, that "ISRAEL HAS NEVER BEEN SO ISOLATED"

    For the blame in Israels Isolation look no further than the Zionist Zealots who lead Israel and continue right on making more and more claims on Palestinian land, and as we speak are even right now making plans to build even more Settlements.

    The world sees right through the scheme of the Zionist Fanatic leaders whose intentions all along were to keep right on taking over occupied land building more and more settlements with the idea to keep more and more of it and eventually frustrate efforts to give it back and at most give in trade unwanted Israeli land.

    IT TAKES A LOT OF CHUTZPAH TO PULL THIS CRAP WHILE SAYING THEY WANT PEACE !!!

    OH WHAT TANGLE WEBS WE WEAVE, WHEN AT FIRST WE TRY TO DECEIVE !!! Israel has been the primary problem in this conflict all along and has woven for themselves such disgust over the world that they've even put their best friend the US in a situation where even it now has to step away from backing such Chutzpah !!

    LEERON YOUR PROPAGANDA FALLS ON DEAF EARS we see right through it !!

  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    May 21, 2011 4:30 AM GMT
    You do realize that other than between 1949-1967, Trans/Jordan's so-called "West Bank" was known as Judea & Samaria, right?
    That Jews have been living there, e.g. in Hebron and in Gaza, for thousands of years, right?
    Until, that is, they were all ethnically cleansed during the 1948 Arab invasion.

    The last legal accepted partition (1922-23) assigned all of western Mandate Palestine (the 22% from the river to the sea) to the Jewish state.

    While all of eastern Palestine (77%) was assigned to Trans-Jordan for an Arab (only! no Jews allowed) state.


    sxydrkhair> Palestine wasn't only for Jews, there were many other people living there with Jewish people.

    While eastern Palestine was ONLY for Arabs, there was no such restriction within Western Palestine - into which Arabs from eastern/Trans-Jordanian Palestine could enter without even being counted as immigrants.


    sxydrkhair> Jewish people were not native in Palestine because they were immigrated to Palestine from Europe and other places.

    Just as Arabs - from Egypt (Al Masri), Morocco (Mughrabi), Syria (Qassem), Iraq (Barghouti), let alone Muslims from Bosnia to as far as Afghanistan - are "not native".

    Here we see the tip of the xenophobia/racist iceberg.
    If an Arab im/migrated from Baghdad, Cairo, Damascus or Fez, he was "native".
    If a Jew im/migrated from Baghdad, Cairo, Damascus of Frez, he was a "foreigner" with no right to be there.


    sxydrkhair> about 90% Palestinians aren't genetically "Arabs". ...They are culturally and linguistically Arabized peoples. If you are talking about Palestinian Bedouin Arabs, then that is something different. DNA geneticist has said, "Palestinians are descendants of a core population that lived in the area since prehistoric times".

    Oddly the geneticists do not distinguish between the "Palestinian Bedouin Arabs" and the "Palestinians".
    They are closely related and both descend from a "core population that lived in the area".
    The key is that "the area" is not bound by 20th century borders.


    sxydrkhair> It was proposals for Arab or Jewish states in the early mandate period.

    The "Palestine Mandate" was the Jewish state-to-be.

    When Syria fell under a French Mandate and refused to allow Faisal Hussein to serve as King, the British carved out eastern/Trans-Jordanian Palestine and installed his brother (Abdullah) as King, freeing up Iraq to be ruled by Faisal.


    sxydrkhair> Then the British had divided Western Palestine into European Jewish and Palestinian states in 1948.

    First there was the 1922-23 partition. It established the 77% of eastern/Trans-Jordanian Palestine as the Palestinian Arab-state to be (no Jews allowed). While reserving the 22% of "Western Palestine" as the Jewish state-to-be.

    It was the Jewish "half" (22%) which was partitioned by the UN in 1947.


    Why aren't these part of "Palestine"?
    When did Sinai become part of Egypt? What about self-determination for its Bedouin population?
    When did Lebanon south of the Litani River become part of Lebanon?
    When did the Golan become part of Syria?


    sxydrkhair> I never said Golan, South Lebanon and Sinai part of Palestine. If you look at the British Mandate of Palestine map, you'll noticed the Golan Height wasn't part of the British Mandate. Golan Height (Syria) was under the French.

    Except that the Golan was historically part of "Palestine".
    It was given to French/Syria in 1923.
    As I believe Lebanon south of the Litani River was.

    Do you know when and why the Sinai become Egyptian and no longer part of "Palestine"?
    Why should the Sinai Bedouins be "occupied" by Egypt?
    Shouldn't they have self-determination?


    As discussed time and again, an "occupation" is what happens between war and peace and is not "illegal".
    This is just the regular dose of vapid soundbites and silly slogans that some confuse as arguments.
    Was the occupation of Germany and Japan following WW II "illegal"?
    Should it have served as a pretense to perpetuate the war forever?


    sxydrkhair> The Israeli occupation of Palestinian territories is illegal.

    Repeating your lie doesn't make it true.
    I note that you cite no laws other than concepts you don't understand.


    Note that UN Security Council Resolution 242, which is binding on the parties, authorizes Israel to hold the disputed territories until a border is negotiated as part of a comprehensive peace agreement, only after which it should withdraw in accordace with that agreement.

    sxydrkhair> ?

    Do you accept or reject UNSCR 242?
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    May 21, 2011 4:37 AM GMT
    The problem is that the Arab parties were quick to war and glacially slow to peace.
    Thus the situation is not resolved, with some Arab parties insisting on war forever (until victory) instead of negotiations, compromise and peace.

    Already 10.5 years ago Israel was willing to compromise on a net 97% of the disputed territories and on the Arab neighborhoods of eastern Jerusalem - which would become an independent, sovereign, and internationally recognized state - contiguous in Gaza and the WB. Clinton further offered a $30 Billion fund to compensate/resettle the Palestinian Arab refugees in the nascent Palestinian Arab state. And Israel was willing to compromise on the Temple Mount, Judaism's holiest site, placing it under some shared mechanism.

    The Arab side violently rejected this (as it has compromises proposed in 1937, 1947 and since).

    So rather than argue history and sling their propaganda slogans and anti-Israel soundbites, let me ask - in the spirit of the Obama initiative and this forum topic - for each of the Israel-haters (who put demonizing Israel ahead of doing what would most benefit the Palestinian Arabs) to state on what the Arabs can and should compromise.


    sxydrkhair> [silence]
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    May 21, 2011 4:43 AM GMT
    But OMG Israelis not bloody happy, and will not accept this as being acceptable; they are really pissed with Obama; very angry phone call have been made. maybe they should show how upset they are by refusing any "handouts" from the States.

    Time to spare a thought ans prayer at this time for the people of Palestine.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    May 21, 2011 4:45 AM GMT
    sxydrkhair said
    True_blue_aussie said
    Trouble is there is only compromise so long as israel gets what it wants or all deal are off. Thats not even meting half way.


    BINGO!!! caesraea4 doesn't get that in his head.


    Here we go again.......... Israel is not happy, outraged even at the suggestion of the 1967 borders being looked at, but US say this has long been on the books.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    May 21, 2011 5:07 AM GMT
    The problem is that the Arab parties were quick to war and glacially slow to peace.
    Thus the situation is not resolved, with some Arab parties insisting on war forever (until victory) instead of negotiations, compromise and peace.

    Already 10.5 years ago Israel was willing to compromise on a net 97% of the disputed territories and on the Arab neighborhoods of eastern Jerusalem - which would become an independent, sovereign, and internationally recognized state - contiguous in Gaza and the WB. Clinton further offered a $30 Billion fund to compensate/resettle the Palestinian Arab refugees in the nascent Palestinian Arab state. And Israel was willing to compromise on the Temple Mount, Judaism's holiest site, placing it under some shared mechanism.

    The Arab side violently rejected this (as it has compromises proposed in 1937, 1947 and since).

    So rather than argue history and sling their propaganda slogans and anti-Israel soundbites, let me ask - in the spirit of the Obama initiative and this forum topic - for each of the Israel-haters (who put demonizing Israel ahead of doing what would most benefit the Palestinian Arabs) to state on what the Arabs can and should compromise.

    sxydrkhair 1> [silence]

    sxydrkhair 2> CAESAREA4 is a moron.

    As I've said, their response - at best - is silence.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    May 21, 2011 6:18 AM GMT
    What a cruel JOKESTER !! Yah Yah !!! Israel offered this and Israel offered that, but never is told the full story of WHAT THEY WANTED. With Israel there is always that heavy dose of CHUTZPAH to expect to keep what they steal of the Palestinian lands, farms and homes, cover up the Atrocities from thiemselves and YELL, WHINE, CRY, PLEAD, PLAY THE VICTIM, AND WHATEVER ELSE THEY CAN CONTRIVE TO PLACE THE ATTENTION OF WHAT LITTLE THE PALESTINIANS HAVE DONE IN COMPARISION TO WHAT THE PRIMARY AGGRESSORS THE ISRAELI'S HAVE DONE.

    So yes !!! they offered !!! But lets hear about what they took (or wanted too) right before the Palestinians got disgusted with their damn Chutzpah and walked out. This side is never told by our ZIONIST PROPAGANDIST IN CHIEF. For over 60 years Israels ZIONIST ZEALOTS have been running Palestinians off their Land, their Farms and out of their home to build ZIONIST SETTLEMENTS. They just increased the NEWLY PLANNED SETTLEMENT NUMBERS TO AN ADDITIONSL 1500, added to 500 they announced in honor of the Fogel Family who were murdered and they are finishing up around 300, so all together that is about 2300 and there are probably more they haven't told about.

    YESSIREEE !!! ISRAEL SURE WANTS PEACE ALLRIGHT !!!! A PIECE OF PALESTINIANS LAND UNTIL THERE IS NON LEFT FOR PALESTINE TO EXIST.

    WHO BELIEVES THE ISRAELI'S ARE SEEKING PEACE IN GOOD FAITH WHILE BUILDING SO MANY SETTLEMENTS ????
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    May 21, 2011 6:38 AM GMT
    So rather than argue history and sling their propaganda slogans and anti-Israel soundbites, let me ask - in the spirit of the Obama initiative and this forum topic - for each of the Israel-haters (who put demonizing Israel ahead of doing what would most benefit the Palestinian Arabs) to state on what the Arabs can and should compromise.

    sxydrkhair 1> [silence]

    sxydrkhair 2> CAESAREA4 is a moron.

    sxydrkhair 3> Reason why I don't bother responding because Caesarea4 sure doesn't know what he is talking about.

    As I've said, their response - at best - is silence.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    May 21, 2011 6:55 AM GMT
    sxydrkhair, don't you just love it when you reverse engineer LEERON's overused tactics right back on him and he whines and complains about it. LOL !!!

    I sure hope Obama sticks with the 1967 lines as a starting point to negotiate from. These Zionist Zealots whining about how their settlements will be inside Palestine if they go back to the 1967 lines is about the biggest line of SHITZPAH they could try to pull, next to announcing 1500 more settlement units yesterday. The god damn idiots should have thought of that when they were building Settlements illegally in OCCUPIED TERRITORY. I HAVE NO SIMPATHEY WHATEVER OVER THOSE SETTLEMENTS BEING LOCATED WITHIN A PALESTINIAN STATE !!!

    ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Notice too sxydrkhair that the nearly 50 year old LEERON has been around long enough to know better that to keep trying to cover up the present with his Zionist Propaganda history fantasies. LOL !!! He tries covering things up like a little child who is just learning how to lie, Ask him why he's stuck on history, when the current facts on the ground are what's important, like over 2000 settlement units are planned while trying to fool the world into thinking they are serious about making peace. AND THEY WONDER WHY THEY ARE SO ISOLATED AND HATED ? WHAT DUMB TACTICS !!!
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    May 21, 2011 2:02 PM GMT
    So rather than argue history and sling their propaganda slogans and anti-Israel soundbites, let me ask - in the spirit of the Obama initiative and this forum topic - for each of the Israel-haters (who put demonizing Israel ahead of doing what would most benefit the Palestinian Arabs) to state on what the Arabs can and should compromise.

    The Usual Suspects> attempt to demonize Israel and personal attacks.

    As I've said, their response - at best - is silence.