Why are the Palestinians still in refugee camps?

[laughing dog]

Your point about terrorists was one-sided. I pointed that out. No one is stopping you from continuing your Perhaps if you stopped your false accusations of derailing, you might be able to continue your predictable one sided propaganda of blaming the Arabs/Palestinians and absolving the gov't of Israel of any responsibility for the state of affairs.

Why can't you address the post instead of persisting with your derail? The original specifically said "PLO", you don't get to pretend it's Israeli terrorists.

Your point about terrorists was one-sided. I pointed that out. Sorry if reality is a problem for your views.

You are the one derailing your thread with your false accusations, not me. You can fling any false accusations you wish about derailing, but I am entitled to rebut them. And, as long as you fling your false accusations, I will rebut them. There would be no need to rebut your insulting and false accusations if they did not persist. Maybe you can figure it out.

Your own link starts out with

Today less than 1 in 5 Palestinians lives in a refugee camp, as against over half in the years from 1948 to 1967.

Which suggests a strong improvement in the situation (contrary to your OP insinuation).

Later, it states

Israeli authorities say that if people were able to stand up to the PLO and if it had the funds to invest in the infrastructure, within eight years every camp resident could own a single-dwelling home in a clean and uncongested neighborhood.

. Your entire OP is based on uncorroborated gov't of Israel claims.

Finally, your link is from May 26, 1992 - 18 and half years ago.


All in all, your OP is yet another example of your predictable propaganda of placing the entire responsibility or blame on Arabs or Palestinians for the situation while ignoring any contribution or responsibility of the gov't of Israel.

 

[Jayjay]

Finally, your link is from May 26, 1992 - 18 and half years ago.

28 and a half.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

Your point about terrorists was one-sided. I pointed that out. Sorry if reality is a problem for your views.

You are the one derailing your thread with your false accusations, not me. You can fling any false accusations you wish about derailing, but I am entitled to rebut them. And, as long as you fling your false accusations, I will rebut them. There would be no need to rebut your insulting and false accusations if they did not persist. Maybe you can figure it out.

Your own link starts out with

Today less than 1 in 5 Palestinians lives in a refugee camp, as against over half in the years from 1948 to 1967.

Which suggests a strong improvement in the situation (contrary to your OP insinuation).

Later, it states

Israeli authorities say that if people were able to stand up to the PLO and if it had the funds to invest in the infrastructure, within eight years every camp resident could own a single-dwelling home in a clean and uncongested neighborhood.

. Your entire OP is based on uncorroborated gov't of Israel claims.

Finally, your link is from May 26, 1992 - 18 and half years ago.


All in all, your OP is yet another example of your predictable propaganda of placing the entire responsibility or blame on Arabs or Palestinians for the situation while ignoring any contribution or responsibility of the gov't of Israel.

You still haven't addressed the post in question.

 

[laughing dog]

Your point about terrorists was one-sided. I pointed that out. Sorry if reality is a problem for your views.

You are the one derailing your thread with your false accusations, not me. You can fling any false accusations you wish about derailing, but I am entitled to rebut them. And, as long as you fling your false accusations, I will rebut them. There would be no need to rebut your insulting and false accusations if they did not persist. Maybe you can figure it out.

Your own link starts out with
Which suggests a strong improvement in the situation (contrary to your OP insinuation).

Later, it states
. Your entire OP is based on uncorroborated gov't of Israel claims.

Finally, your link is from May 26, 1992 - 18 and half years ago.


All in all, your OP is yet another example of your predictable propaganda of placing the entire responsibility or blame on Arabs or Palestinians for the situation while ignoring any contribution or responsibility of the gov't of Israel.

You still haven't addressed the post in question.

I explicitly addressed the content of your link in the OP, so your response is an example of extreme obtuseness or outright intellectual dishonesty.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

Your point about terrorists was one-sided. I pointed that out. Sorry if reality is a problem for your views.

You are the one derailing your thread with your false accusations, not me. You can fling any false accusations you wish about derailing, but I am entitled to rebut them. And, as long as you fling your false accusations, I will rebut them. There would be no need to rebut your insulting and false accusations if they did not persist. Maybe you can figure it out.

Your own link starts out with
Which suggests a strong improvement in the situation (contrary to your OP insinuation).

Later, it states
. Your entire OP is based on uncorroborated gov't of Israel claims.

Finally, your link is from May 26, 1992 - 18 and half years ago.


All in all, your OP is yet another example of your predictable propaganda of placing the entire responsibility or blame on Arabs or Palestinians for the situation while ignoring any contribution or responsibility of the gov't of Israel.

You still haven't addressed the post in question.

I explicitly addressed the content of your link in the OP, so your response is an example of extreme obtuseness or outright intellectual dishonesty.

But where have you addressed any of my points in the post you don't want to answer?

 

[laughing dog]

I explicitly addressed the content of your link in the OP, so your response is an example of extreme obtuseness or outright intellectual dishonesty.

But where have you addressed any of my points in the post you don't want to answer?

The summary is that your OP is based on Israeli propaganda that is almost 30 years old. There is no reason to take your "points" seriously.

But, if you want an answer to your OP question - people who blindly place all the responsibility on one party while absolving other parties of their responsibilities.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

I explicitly addressed the content of your link in the OP, so your response is an example of extreme obtuseness or outright intellectual dishonesty.

But where have you addressed any of my points in the post you don't want to answer?

The summary is that your OP is based on Israeli propaganda that is almost 30 years old. There is no reason to take your "points" seriously.

But, if you want an answer to your OP question - people who blindly place all the responsibility on one party while absolving other parties of their responsibilities.

In other words, you have no answer for my post.

 

[laughing dog]

The summary is that your OP is based on Israeli propaganda that is almost 30 years old. There is no reason to take your "points" seriously.

But, if you want an answer to your OP question - people who blindly place all the responsibility on one party while absolving other parties of their responsibilities.

In other words, you have no answer for my post.

A more honest interpretation is that you are incapable of understanding the answer. Because it is there.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

The summary is that your OP is based on Israeli propaganda that is almost 30 years old. There is no reason to take your "points" seriously.

But, if you want an answer to your OP question - people who blindly place all the responsibility on one party while absolving other parties of their responsibilities.

In other words, you have no answer for my post.

A more honest interpretation is that you are incapable of understanding the answer. Because it is there.

No never responded other than with a derail. That says there's no answer.

 

[laughing dog]

A more honest interpretation is that you are incapable of understanding the answer. Because it is there.

No never responded other than with a derail.

That is utterly false. Perhaps you should clarify what you feel has not been responded to, so that we can put an end to your stupid and false accusations.

That says there's no answer.

A derail need not mean there is no answer, so your conclusion is incorrect for two reasons: faulty reasoning and a false premise.

Is it possible you wish to deflect attention from your OP that it is based on almost 30 year old Israeli propaganda, so you persist in derailing your own thread with blatantly stupid and false accusations?

 

[Loren Pechtel]

That is utterly false. Perhaps you should clarify what you feel has not been responded to, so that we can put an end to your stupid and false accusations.

That says there's no answer.

A derail need not mean there is no answer, so your conclusion is incorrect for two reasons: faulty reasoning and a false premise.

Is it possible you wish to deflect attention from your OP that it is based on almost 30 year old Israeli propaganda, so you persist in derailing your own thread with blatantly stupid and false accusations?

This isn't 1984. Pretending your derail isn't a derail doesn't make it go away. If it's not a derail answer the post!

 

[laughing dog]

That is utterly false. Perhaps you should clarify what you feel has not been responded to, so that we can put an end to your stupid and false accusations.

That says there's no answer.

A derail need not mean there is no answer, so your conclusion is incorrect for two reasons: faulty reasoning and a false premise.

Is it possible you wish to deflect attention from your OP that it is based on almost 30 year old Israeli propaganda, so you persist in derailing your own thread with blatantly stupid and false accusations?

This isn't 1984. Pretending your derail isn't a derail doesn't make it go away. If it's not a derail answer the post!

Pretending my response is a derail does not make it so.

My original response was #19 in this thread. The thread is now at post 52. Of the 34 posts - all but 2 have been about your false accusation of derail. Each time you respond with the insulting accusation, I deny it. The repetition of your dishonest and insulting accusation reflects more on you than reality and it means you are the major cause of this derail.

I did answer the post and I did answer the OP: your OP is based on unsubstantiated 28 and half year old claims by the Israeli gov't. Israeli terrorists do have a reason to keep Palestinians in the camps. I never denied that Palestinian terrorists did not have a reason. In addition, placing the responsibility on one and only party is either pure ignorance or pure bigotry. It is exactly that mindset that perpetuates the situation. The gov't of Israel has no interest in resolving the situation in a mutually beneficial fashion. Which means it will continue as long people push the false and bigoted single cause explanation of the situation.

You can take your accusation of derail and shove it.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

This isn't 1984. Pretending your derail isn't a derail doesn't make it go away. If it's not a derail answer the post!

Pretending my response is a derail does not make it so.

My original response was #19 in this thread. The thread is now at post 52. Of the 34 posts - all but 2 have been about your false accusation of derail. Each time you respond with the insulting accusation, I deny it. The repetition of your dishonest and insulting accusation reflects more on you than reality and it means you are the major cause of this derail.

I did answer the post and I did answer the OP: your OP is based on unsubstantiated 28 and half year old claims by the Israeli gov't. Israeli terrorists do have a reason to keep Palestinians in the camps. I never denied that Palestinian terrorists did not have a reason. In addition, placing the responsibility on one and only party is either pure ignorance or pure bigotry. It is exactly that mindset that perpetuates the situation. The gov't of Israel has no interest in resolving the situation in a mutually beneficial fashion. Which means it will continue as long people push the false and bigoted single cause explanation of the situation.

You can take your accusation of derail and shove it.

Your response in #19: "Your insight into the terrorist mindset is fascinating. But to which terrorists do you refer - Palestinian or Israeli? "

We have already established that you knew the context was the PLO.

That's a derail.

 

[laughing dog]

This isn't 1984. Pretending your derail isn't a derail doesn't make it go away. If it's not a derail answer the post!

Pretending my response is a derail does not make it so.

My original response was #19 in this thread. The thread is now at post 52. Of the 34 posts - all but 2 have been about your false accusation of derail. Each time you respond with the insulting accusation, I deny it. The repetition of your dishonest and insulting accusation reflects more on you than reality and it means you are the major cause of this derail.

I did answer the post and I did answer the OP: your OP is based on unsubstantiated 28 and half year old claims by the Israeli gov't. Israeli terrorists do have a reason to keep Palestinians in the camps. I never denied that Palestinian terrorists did not have a reason. In addition, placing the responsibility on one and only party is either pure ignorance or pure bigotry. It is exactly that mindset that perpetuates the situation. The gov't of Israel has no interest in resolving the situation in a mutually beneficial fashion. Which means it will continue as long people push the false and bigoted single cause explanation of the situation.

You can take your accusation of derail and shove it.

Your response in #19: "Your insight into the terrorist mindset is fascinating. But to which terrorists do you refer - Palestinian or Israeli? "

We have already established that you knew the context was the PLO.

That's a derail.

No, I was gently pointing out your restriction was bullshit and bigoted. That is not a derail.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

Your response in #19: "Your insight into the terrorist mindset is fascinating. But to which terrorists do you refer - Palestinian or Israeli? "

We have already established that you knew the context was the PLO.

That's a derail.

No, I was gently pointing out your restriction was bullshit and bigoted. That is not a derail.

It's not my restriction, it's what the article said. It's the PLO that was doing it.

 

[laughing dog]

Your response in #19: "Your insight into the terrorist mindset is fascinating. But to which terrorists do you refer - Palestinian or Israeli? "

We have already established that you knew the context was the PLO.

That's a derail.

No, I was gently pointing out your restriction was bullshit and bigoted. That is not a derail.

It's not my restriction, it's what the article said. It's the PLO that was doing it.

You choose the 28 and half year old article, not me. The restriction is bullshit and bigoted.

 

[Jayjay]

It's not my restriction, it's what the article said. It's the PLO that was doing it.

You choose the 28 and half year old article, not me. The restriction is bullshit and bigoted.

Why does it matter that the article is from the early 90s, when the events in question happened in early 1970s?

 

[laughing dog]

It's not my restriction, it's what the article said. It's the PLO that was doing it.

You choose the 28 and half year old article, not me. The restriction is bullshit and bigoted.

Why does it matter that the article is from the early 90s, when the events in question happened in early 1970s?

If this discussion is about history, then the thread is in the wrong fora.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

It's not my restriction, it's what the article said. It's the PLO that was doing it.

You choose the 28 and half year old article, not me. The restriction is bullshit and bigoted.

I chose an article from a credible, non-Jewish source that described what was actually going on--something very rare these days because printing something like that now makes your organization unable to report from Palestinian areas. Saying the "restriction" is bullshit is simply denying reality, the article says what it says.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

Why does it matter that the article is from the early 90s, when the events in question happened in early 1970s?

If this discussion is about history, then the thread is in the wrong fora.

You think the situation is different now? Israel has long since given up on trying to fix the problem but that doesn't mean the terrorists aren't keeping them oppressed for PR purposes.