We have already said that we would veto Palestinian membership.
My question was, do you think we would carry through
or renege on that promise?
I'm not sure I would trust Obama to carry through, if he
would betray america to our enemies no doubt he would
have no problem betraying Israel.
Obama is on record as saying he believes Israel should
retreat to pre 1967 areas, which means post 1948 areas when Egypt, Syria and Jordan usurped areas of Israel and held them for only 19 years.
If Israel were to go to the 1919 borders they would
greatly expand, after all they gave up Gaza to the
Arabs and that was orginally part of the Israeli partition,
so is Judea and Samaria which is now widely referred to
as 'the west bank' of Jordan, which never has had any
legal claim to the area.
'Palestinian' is a bit of a misnomer from the beginning.
A telling testimony: My former colleagues, all of whom
were British officers in the Palestine Police, tell me they
have documentary proof that the "Palestinians" are not
and never were "Palestinians." They were and are illegal
migrants into the Land of Israel from all the surrounding
Arab countries, and they came searching for work and
food from the Jewish settlers, because in their own Arab
countries, they were homeless, jobless and on the verge
of starvation.
As someone wrote in the Chicago Tribune: The massive
Arab immigration into Palestine during the Mandate
period accounts for roughly 75 percent of the
supposedly "Palestinian" population present at the time
of the partition in 1948.
Or as a Professor stated: Obviously the great majority
of "Palestinians" were themselves Immigrants or sons or
grandsons of immigrants from other Arab lands, that
came to partake of the prosperity generated by the
Jews. Entire towns and villages in 1948 could trace
their origins to other countries...
Or as others have phrased it: Eighty per cent of
current 'Palestinians' are illegal immigrants or the children
or grandchildren thereof who were quietly welcomed by
the British administrators of the Mandate. Any Arab
peasant or job seeker found a ready welcome in
unadministered "refugee camps", becoming a 'Palestinian'
overnight.
Or as respected Jurist who lectured at the Academy of
International Law in the Hague asserted: most of the
inhabitants of Palestine were not the descendants of its
original indigenous population, but rather many were
immigrants themselves.
Or as a scientist has put it: The absolute majority of the
so-called Palestinians are descendants of the Twentieth
Century Arab immigrants who searched for a rewarding
chunk of the economical boom engendered by the
returning Jews.
Or in the words of renowned researcher: There is no
age-old Palestinian people. Most so-called Palestinians
are relative newcomers to The Land of Israel.
Right. We should give up that seat.
Why should one be embarrassed about saying disparaging things about Netanyahu?
I wouldn't be opposed to the total abolishment of the
decidedly corrupt UN and quit funding them but to say
we should keep funding them and give up our seat on
the security council is about the most absurd and stupid
statement I've ever read on this forum.
Why you ask? Because it isn't good form to publicly
disparage any head of state for the sake of good
diplomacy.
From whence do you come with these ridiculous
questions and statements?
Was that a serious question?
Sadly, I believe so.
Yes. Should we revere Netanyahu?
No one has said he should be revered, that he should
be respected should go without question.
He should never have been shown the back door on his
first visit to the White House, do you not agree?
