• Security incident: ISF was recently accessed by intruders. Please change your password, and change it anywhere else you used it. Read more

The Punishment of Gaza

WildCat said:
Dude, that was 15 years ago. And in all that time, they couldn't be bothered with, you know, writing down this new amendment?

Or is it one of those double-secret amendments?
Click to expand...

It's the Palestinian's New Clothes. Only the smart people of the kingdom can see the amendment. You want to be one of the smart people, don't you Wildcat?
 
WildCat said:
Dude, that was 15 years ago. And in all that time, they couldn't be bothered with, you know, writing down this new amendment?

Or is it one of those double-secret amendments?
Click to expand...

I was looking up some info on the Hamas charter from one of the other threads, and I happened to recall the story of their 2006 election manifesto. They had the 'destroy Israel' bit in there initially, but Abbas pulled a power play with the backing of the Quartet and got them to change it to "create a Palestinian state with Jerusalem as it's capital" which then got reported all over the news as "Hamas moderates its stance on Israel" rather than "Hamas removes overt call for Israel's destruction under political pressure."
 
quixotecoyote said:
I was looking up some info on the Hamas charter from one of the other threads, and I happened to recall the story of their 2006 election manifesto. They had the 'destroy Israel' bit in there initially, but Abbas pulled a power play with the backing of the Quartet and got them to change it to "create a Palestinian state with Jerusalem as it's capital" which then got reported all over the news as "Hamas moderates its stance on Israel" rather than "Hamas removes overt call for Israel's destruction under political pressure."
Click to expand...

Do you have a source that shows this change in the charter? As far as I can tell it's all still in there. Even the part about destroying Israel.

"The Day of Judgement will not come about until Muslims fight the Jews (killing the Jews), when the Jew will hide behind stones and trees. The stones and trees will say O Muslims, O Abdulla, there is a Jew behind me, come and kill him. Only the Gharkad tree, would not do that because it is one of the trees of the Jews."

Which is a quote from Mohammad that was put in the charter.

Consider also a group of people who tend to murder people for so much as drawing their prophet. How seriously will they take their prophet who calls to kill Jews?

"Israel, by virtue of its being Jewish and of having a Jewish population, defies Islam and the Muslims. " (from charter). But don't tell Thunder that Hamas refers to Israel as a Jewish state!
 
Last edited:
WildCat said:
Dude, that was 15 years ago. And in all that time, they couldn't be bothered with, you know, writing down this new amendment?

Or is it one of those double-secret amendments?
Click to expand...
The ammendment is written down.....Nothing is secret. Have you never read the letter that amended the document?

seriously, how many different ways can you spin a failed argument? I suppose if all you have is that they have not rewritten the document and ammendment into the one document you probably do need to dress it up in as many different looking forms as you can.

Honestly, I stopped ignoring you again to see if anything had changed....oh well......I notice you have the rest of the conga line following you through the thread taking up the new "secret amendment" Chant...I hope it works out for you guys.
 
Last edited:
Skeptic said:
Notice how of all the people there, the one group considered "questionable" are the Jews?
Click to expand...

I did not intend to paint as broad a group as, "the Jews" with the brush of "questionable." However, it is my understanding that the British Mandate in Palestine was not originally expected to result in an influx of Jewish settlers. Thus the adjective, "questionable." If you have a source that indicates that the post-WWI British Mandate in Jordan/Transjordan/Palestine was expected to result in an influx of Jewish settlers, I would really like to see it.

If you re-read my post and have a blow-by-blow account of how it is biased, I would also like to know. I am not sure how the "account" of blame should be apportioned. Both sides (or multi-lateral sides given the Israel/(Palestine, Jordan, Syria, Iraq, Egypt, Lebanon) history of recent conflict) have a significant portion of blame. I certainly don't know how a skeptic would weigh the rights and wrongs and come to a decision.
 
In other words, "skeptic," your back-handed attempt to paint me as anti-Jewish is pathetic. I know and love Jews. I know and love skepticism more.
 
Finn McR said:
I did not intend to paint as broad a group as, "the Jews" with the brush of "questionable." However, it is my understanding that the British Mandate in Palestine was not originally expected to result in an influx of Jewish settlers. Thus the adjective, "questionable." If you have a source that indicates that the post-WWI British Mandate in Jordan/Transjordan/Palestine was expected to result in an influx of Jewish settlers, I would really like to see it.
Click to expand...

Both Jews and Arabs were in-fluxing to that area because both considered it their holy land. But it only seems to be problem with Jews going there, not with Arabs. People seem to have this misconception that Arabs were always there and Jews suddenly showed up. Nothing could be further from the truth. Both had been traveling there even before the mandate.

Also as far as blame, both groups had an influx there, the solution was to give them each a piece of land of their own since it wasn't an existing country. One side was not happy with the idea of the other existing.
 
Last edited:
Elind said:
I know we all have Google these days, but since you keep referencing the current, valid, charter could you be so kind as to provide the link(s)?
Click to expand...
No, I am not linking you to a copy of the charter. Or the Letter from Arafat that amends it. I have been batting back the same old same old argument about this for years. Sorry but at a certain time its time to learn to walk.
 
The Fool said:
Elind said:
I know we all have Google these days, but since you keep referencing the current, valid, charter could you be so kind as to provide the link(s)?
Click to expand...

No, I am not linking you to a copy of the charter. Or the Letter from Arafat that amends it. I have been batting back the same old same old argument about this for years. Sorry but at a certain time its time to learn to walk.
Click to expand...
I bet the PA keeps a copy right next to their pet Yeti, in the room with the space aliens.
 
The Fool said:
No, I am not linking you to a copy of the charter. Or the Letter from Arafat that amends it. I have been batting back the same old same old argument about this for years. Sorry but at a certain time its time to learn to walk.
Click to expand...

So if Obama, just for laughs, wrote a letter to Queen Elizabeth saying the US Declaration of Independence was null and void...? That would be all that's needed to erase the last 230 years of history and make the USA a colony again?

Look, the PNC agreed to change their charter and authorized their "Legal Committee" to redraft it, but they never did. The task never got done.

To claim that declaring their intent to make the changes but not actually making the changes is the same as having made the changes is just revisionism. It's entirely possible that back in 1993 their intentions were good and they really planned on making the changes, but they never did and that's historical fact.

Here, read up.

http://www.mideastweb.org/peacechild/plocharter_letter_1996.htm

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Palestinian_National_Covenant
 
The Fool said:
No, I am not linking you to a copy of the charter. Or the Letter from Arafat that amends it. I have been batting back the same old same old argument about this for years. Sorry but at a certain time its time to learn to walk.
Click to expand...

Isn't that so convenient? Suddenly he doesn't want to be bothered to back up his claim. Where have I seen that style of argument before?
 
Mycroft said:
So if Obama, just for laughs, wrote a letter to Queen Elizabeth saying the US Declaration of Independence was null and void...? That would be all that's needed to erase the last 230 years of history and make the USA a colony again?
Click to expand...
Lol...yes Mycroft thats correct. Obama could do that but I doubt it would be accepted by anyone....what do you think?


Look, the PNC agreed to change their charter and authorized their "Legal Committee" to redraft it, but they never did. The task never got done.

To claim that declaring their intent to make the changes but not actually making the changes is the same as having made the changes is just revisionism. It's entirely possible that back in 1993 their intentions were good and they really planned on making the changes, but they never did and that's historical fact.

Here, read up.

http://www.mideastweb.org/peacechild/plocharter_letter_1996.htm

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Palestinian_National_Covenant
Click to expand...

yes, whatever...

from your own link..

"Like President Clinton, Israel and the Likud party now formally agreed that the objectionable clauses of the charter had been abrogated, in official statements and statements by Prime Minister Netanyahu, Foreign Minister Sharon, Defense Minister Mordechai and Trade and Industry Minister Sharansky.[12][13][14][15] With official Israeli objections to the Charter disappearing henceforward from lists of Palestinian violations of agreements [16], the international legal controversy ended."

however the legal controversy whipped up by partisan hacks in the Jref politics forum goes on :)


be very very carefull mycroft, this appears to be a case of you publicly disagreeing with Netanyahu, Sharon, Mordechai and even the great man Sharansky!! Your head must be spinning.
 
So just link to the charter since it's been removed now according to our in house propagandist.

Funny too since recently Hamas touted the killing of 4 Israeli citizens (one of them pregnant) as heroic.
 
Last edited:
Elind said:
In some cultures intending to do something is as good as doing it, so why waste more energy than necessary?
:boggled:
Click to expand...
Mate...do you comprehend the difference between the words amended and redrafted. If you do then help Mycroft.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page

ISF - Join now!

Every member here is approved by hand. No bots, no spam, just people who care about evidence and honest debate.

Membership is free!

Create your free account

Back
Top Bottom