Donald Trumpf is the best president the Organized Criminal state-establishment has had since Woody Wilson gave safe passage to Trotsky!

Num 26:10-11
10 The earth opened its mouth and swallowed them along with Korah, whose followers died when the fire devoured the 250 men.
And they served as a warning sign.
11 The line of Korah, however, did not die out. NIV

Korah was:
A: The Pharaoh's Treasurer
B: A Levite
C: The Organized Criminal instigator of the rebellion against Moses
D: Associated with "fallen angels"
E: A Gold Bug.
F: ALL OF THE ABOVE!!

Push the PLO into the sea and MIGA.

" Push the PLO into the sea and MIGA. "

I would go for that !!

Good riddance. Send them back to Egypt or somewhere besides Israel.

Put 'em in boxcars, right?

Middle East Peacenik coalition

It's a cleaver ploy to get the official Middle East Peace Envoy, Jared Kushner to move out of The Donald's basement, and to Palestine for negotiations.

Put 'em in boxcars, right?

No. Make use of empty pig-hauling 18-wheelers. Check Craigslist.

No. Make use of empty pig-hauling 18-wheelers. Check Craigslist.

Wow. You make the Nazis look civil.

You make the Nazis look civil

What did Alfred Rosenberg, the Zionist who Hitler appointed to lead the National Socialist movement make the Nazis look like?

"The Holocaust was an unprecedented crime "

UNPRECEDENTED?

Bull. Shyte.

"You must understand. The leading Bolsheviks who took over Russia were not Russians. They hated Russians. They hated Christians. Driven by ethnic hatred they tortured and slaughtered millions of Russians without a shred of human remorse. The October Revolution was not what you call in America the "Russian Revolution." It was an invasion and conquest over the Russian people. More of my countrymen suffered horrific crimes at their bloodstained hands than any people or nation ever suffered in the entirety of human history. It cannot be understated. Bolshevism was the greatest human slaughter of all time. The fact that most of the world is ignorant of this reality is proof that the global media itself is in the hands of the perpetrators."
--@Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn

REPUBLICAN PARTY, RED FROM THE START

Trump comrades... feel the sting of Stang!

Perhaps even less know than those Russian Bolsheviks that Solzhenitsyn talks about are the first batch that got run out of Russia in 1848, took refuge in Germany, and then joined Ape Lincoln's Union Army as "Hessian" officers during the War of Northern Aggression, aka Civil War.

Pen pals

What did Alfred Rosenberg, the Zionist who Hitler appointed to lead the National Socialist movement make the Nazis look like?

Alfred who? Man, you're digging deep.

Put 'em in boxcars, right?

That is 100% BS hyperbole that one expects from Leftist propagandists.

How long have you supported Jihad and pushing Israel into the sea?

Alfred who? Man, you're digging deep.

Not any deeper than you with your "boxcar" comment.

Push the PLO into the sea and MIGA.

They just need to be shoved well outside Israeli lands and into any and all of their fellow Jihadi Muzzie lands. (OH WAIT -- THEY FULLY REJECT THEIR FELLOW ORPHAN MUZZIES!!)

PLO and their parasitic gangstas who threaten Israel EVERY DAY have ZERO right to Israeli land (once mostly desert), or to hijacking Israel's sovereignty.

It's only BECAUSE and since Israel has created wealth and their farms green, the Palis feel entitled. (Reminds me of OTHER parasitic, entitled domestic types.)

How long have you supported Jihad and pushing Israel into the sea?

I'm simply trying to push Israel back on to their own land and allow the Palestinian Arabs to have their own country as outlined in UN 181.

I'm simply trying to push Israel back on to their own land and allow the Palestinian Arabs to have their own country as outlined in UN 181.

Your position seems to be more in line with hijacking Israel and handing it to a "nation" ("Palestine") for which a culture and government have NEVER officially existed to begin with. (Why not also petition the UN to allocate US provincial land to all the Indian tribes?)

YOU HAVE CHOSEN TO FURTHER IGNORE: The Palestinians have rejected and VETOED having and embracing offers to have their own nation (they/Arafat even rejected a couple other subsequent/recent deals for your "Palestinian Nation. What's the excuse in these instances?)

Israel's actual originally proposed UN outlined land was reduced by, oh...90%. And you want to reduce that sliver further?

The UN has always been a bribed, corrupt mouthpiece for:

1) Arab-Muzzies
2) New World Order/One World Gimmint elites
3) Excusing Arab-Muzzie aggression (did NOTHING to stop them invading Israel in '48, '56, '67, and '73. EXCEPT when Israel began kickin' azz in all instances.)

You appear enamored with the UN as a Final Authoritah over men and our sovereignty. That's based on exactly WHAT historical or present principle and ethic they imbue?

I'm simply trying to push Israel back on to their own land and allow the Palestinian Arabs to have their own country as outlined in UN 181.

First, explain to us how and when the Mooslum (pigpiss be upon them) deathcult and their heros MoHamHead (PBUH) and Allah the Pigraper (PBUH, too) have ever benefited anyplace they've infested with their vile, defective, bloodthirsty, medieval bullbarack?

How about this: it's time for Allah (PBUH, always) to die.
Fvck 'em; they've had hundreds of years to get straight and play nice. Why does the world need the Moo (PBUT) deathcult?

have ever benefited anyplace they've infested with their vile, defective, bloodthirsty, medieval bullbarack?

They were doing just fine until the Jews invaded their land around the time of the second world war.

Your position seems to be more in line with hijacking Israel and handing it to a "nation" ("Palestine") for which a culture and government have NEVER officially existed to begin with.

Not I. UN 181 called for dividing the British Mandate of Palestine into two sections -- one for the Palestinian Arabs and one for the Palestinian Jews.

"YOU HAVE CHOSEN TO FURTHER IGNORE: The Palestinians have rejected and VETOED having and embracing offers to have their own nation"

The Palestinians accepted, in writing and posted in Israeli newspapers, the 2002 Saudi Peace Plan which was endorsed by the Arab League in 2002 at the Beirut Summit and re-endorsed at the 2007 Arab League summit and re-endorsed at the 2017 Arab League summit.

Why did Israel reject it?

"Israel's actual originally proposed UN outlined land was reduced by, oh...90%."

I have no idea what you're talking about and neither do you.

"You appear enamored with the UN as a Final Authoritah over men and our sovereignty. That's based on exactly WHAT historical or present principle and ethic they imbue?"

Well, Israel accepted the UN as "a Final Authoritah over men and sovereignty" when they agreed with UN 181 as it applied to giving land to them. No complaints about that.

They were doing just fine until the Jews invaded their land around the time of the second world war.

Nice historical revisionism. Right up there with, "Islam, religion of Peace" and "We're here from the Gummint and here to help".

I have no idea what you're talking about and neither do you.

Speak for yourself. Then step away from the full-length mirror.

Well, Israel accepted the UN as "a Final Authoritah over men and sovereignty" when they agreed with UN 181 as it applied to giving land to them. No complaints about that.

Actually they DID, but accepted the crumbs that were handed them, the original deal reneged upon.

Any "Israeli state" was to be a historical footnote in any case when the UN, Brits and American knew well that before the ink was dry on the UN 181 '48 agreement that several Arab nations military had already mobilized for an invasion Israel, soon to be wiped out.

BUT GUESS WHAT?? It didn't happen. And the reptilian phonies of the fake UN had egg on their faces.

The Palestinians accepted, in writing and posted in Israeli newspapers, the 2002 Saudi Peace Plan which was endorsed by the Arab League in 2002 at the Beirut Summit and re-endorsed at the 2007 Arab League summit and re-endorsed at the 2017 Arab League summit.

Your Arab brethren rejected UN 181 terms. Perhaps this summary and overview of events help YOU understand the situation.

Institute for Contemporary Affairs

Founded jointly with the Wechsler Family Foundation

Vol. 17, No. 33

• Seventy years ago, on November 29, 1947, the UN General Assembly adopted Resolution 181 calling for the partition of Mandatory Palestine into Jewish and Arab states. The Jews accepted the plan with a mixture of joy and hesitation, while the Arabs rejected it and launched a war to forcibly prevent its implementation.
• The Arabs denied the Jews any right whatsoever in their ancestral homeland, and a large majority still maintains this view to this day.
• Since the Arab states rejected the resolution upon its adoption and prevented its implementation, the Palestinian leadership can neither logically nor legally claim today that Resolution 181 can serve as a basis for the establishment of a Palestinian state.
• Moreover, the partition plan refers to the creation of an Arab state, not a Palestinian state. Indeed, nowhere does it indicate the creation of a Palestinian state for the Palestinian people. There was never any such designation as “Palestinian” for the Arab population residing in the area.
• Finally, according to the UN Charter, General Assembly resolutions are simply recommendations and are not legally binding. Only resolutions adopted by the Security Council under Chapter 7 of the Charter may be obligatory. Thus, Resolution 181 cannot in any manner be considered to be a basis for a Palestinian claim to statehood. id="attachment_61612" st*l*="width: 510px" class="wp-caption aligncenter">

  United Nations General Assembly partition vote, November 29, 1947

As we approach the seventieth anniversary of the United Nations General Assembly Resolution 181 for the partition of Palestine, which was adopted on November 29th, 1947,¹ it is appropriate to examine the impact and significance of that resolution, most particularly for the Palestinian leadership. Indeed, Mahmoud Abbas, Chairman of the PLO and head of the Palestinian Authority, when appealing to the Secretary-General as well as the Security Council of the United Nations (UN), constantly refers to that resolution as the source of authority for the establishment of a Palestinian state, and for the delineation of its boundaries.²

Based on international law as well as factual and historical evidence, this paper details the meaning and impact of Resolution 181, in addition to explaining why it cannot serve as an authoritative and legal reference for the establishment of a Palestinian state and the right to self-determination for the Palestinian people.

United Nations Partition Map, 1947 (United Nations)

UN Resolution 181: Its Historical Context

On November 29, 1947, the UN General Assembly, in Resolution 181, approved what is known as the “partition plan.” This plan intended to split the geographical area of Palestine into two distinct states: one Jewish and one Arab, with Jerusalem as an internationally-ministered separate entity (corpus separatum – see map).³ Thirty-three countries voted in favor, 13 against, ten abstained, and one was absent.”⁴

Initially, both Jews and Arabs were shocked by the idea of partition.⁵ “The Zionist movement viewed the whole of Eretz Yisrael as a Jewish patrimony,” according to Israeli scholar Prof. Shlomo Avineri, “and the effort to reach a Jewish majority was aimed at giving this claim international support and legitimacy. And the emerging Palestinian national movement … viewed Falastin as integral a part of the great Arab homeland as all other lands from Morocco to Iraq.”⁶

However, although the two sides shared the surprise, their reaction to the partition plan diverged significantly. The Jews accepted the plan with a mixture of joy and hesitation, while the other rejected it and launched a war to forcibly prevent its implementation.

Although both parties claimed a legitimate right to inhabit the area, the Arabs denied the Jews any right whatsoever in their ancestral homeland, and a large majority still maintains this view to this day. The adoption of UN Resolution 181 was seen as cataclysmic by the Arab side; not only did they not abide by it, but they went to war against the nascent Jewish State to express their discontentment and their refusal to allow a such a state to exist.

UN Resolution 181’s Content

The partition plan officially terminated the British Mandate for Palestine. British forces were to be evacuated from Palestine within a few months after the implementation of the resolution, more precisely by August 1, 1948.⁷ It further suggested that the area of Palestine be divided into eight parts: three cities were meant to be under Jewish rule, three cities under Arab rule, and the city of Jaffa was intended to an Arab district under Jewish rule.⁸ Jerusalem was intended to be administered by a UN Ad Hoc Committee and therefore have the status of an international city, meant to belong to neither of the parties.

Secondly, the resolution stated that no party should attempt to prevent the successful implementation of all its clauses, at it states:

The resolution requests that the Security Council consider, if circumstances during the transitional period require such consideration, whether the situation in Palestine constitutes a threat to peace. If it decides that such a threat exists, and in order to maintain international peace and security, the Security Council should supplement the authorization of the General Assembly by taking measures, under Articles 39 and 41 of the Charter, to empower the United Nations Commission to exercise in Palestine the functions which are assigned to it by this resolution.⁹

However, the UN took no measures to follow through with its assessment when Arab aggression took place against Jews in 1947 and especially in 1948, following Israel’s declaration of independence.¹⁰ Therefore, although Resolution 181 was meant to create a modus operandi between the two parties, it utterly failed to do so, since the Arab party categorically rejected it. Its implementation could therefore not be accomplished.

The remains of a Hadassah hospital convoy to Mt. Scopus in Jerusalem, April 13, 1948. The Arab attack killed 78 people heading to the hospital.

The remains of a Hadassah hospital convoy to Mt. Scopus in Jerusalem, April 13, 1948. The Arab attack killed 78 people heading to the hospital.

The Resolution Cannot Be Utilized as a Basis for Palestinian Statehood

 Since the Arab states rejected the resolution upon its adoption and prevented its implementation, the Palestinian leadership can neither logically nor legally claim today that Resolution 181 can serve as a basis for the establishment of the Palestinian state. One cannot reject and undermine a formal resolution and change one’s mind 70 years later.

With incredible chutzpa (audacity) PLO observer Nasser al-Qidwa sent a letter to U.N. Secretary-General Kofi Annan in 1999, demanding that “Israel must still explain to the international community the measures it took illegally to extend its laws and regulations to the territory it occupied in the war of 1948, beyond the territory allocated to the Jewish State in Resolution 181.”¹²  This territory included several modern-day Israeli cities, as well as Jerusalem.  

Dr. Dore Gold, Israel’s ambassador to the United Nations, was directly confronted with this issue. He responded by quoting Prime Minister David Ben-Gurion’s address to the Knesset in December 1949, in which he asserted that Israel could no longer accept the UN Resolution of 1947 as binding. Since the UN failed to implement its own resolution, Israel regarded the resolution as null and void.¹³

Concerning the city of Jerusalem, the rejected resolution itself formulated that the city was to be internationally ruled for ten years, after which a referendum would be held by its residents to decide on its sovereignty.

In addition to never being properly implemented and having been rejected by Arabs, the partition plan is semantically nebulous in that it refers to the creation of an Arab state, not a Palestinian state. Indeed, nowhere does it indicate the creation of a Palestinian state for the Palestinian people, but it states the creation of two states within the area of Palestine, one Jewish and one Arab. There was never any such designation as “Palestinian” for the Arab population residing in the area, and the designation was only adopted in 1964 with the creation of the Palestinian Liberation Organization (PLO). Therefore, when Mahmoud Abbas claims that Resolution 181 is a solid proof and basis that “Palestinians” have a right to their state of their own within the frontiers that it delineates, he is misleading the international community. 

Since Arab states not only rejected the plan but went to war against the new Jewish State, they are in no position whatsoever to use it a legal source for the establishment of a state of their own.

Lastly, according to the UN Charter, General Assembly resolutions are simply recommendations and are not legally binding. Only resolutions adopted by the Security Council under the Seventh Chapter of the Charter, to deal with threats to international peace and acts of aggression, may be obligatory. Therefore, the General Assembly through its 1947 Partition resolution, was not empowered to make any rules, and even less so to draw the borders of nations.¹⁴

Furthermore, Israel’s declaration of independence in May 1948 further reduced the importance of Resolution 181. It and its partition plan were rendered insignificant. According to Professor Eugene Kontorovich, who cites Israel’s reliance on the uti possidetis principle, a Latin term which means “as you possess,” the borders of the new state of Israel remained those of Mandatory Palestine.¹⁵ Indeed, since the Arab leadership rejected Resolution 181’s clauses, the delineation of borders is now defined by the aftermath of the 1948-1949 War of Independence. Therefore, Israel is lawfully entitled to the territories it acquired following its conflict with the Arabs in 1949.

In conclusion, based on solid factual and historical evidence as well as international law, Resolution 181 is not only non-binding, but it cannot in any manner be considered to be a basis for a Palestinian claim to statehood. The Arab leadership categorically rejected it in its entirety, in addition to waging war against the newborn Jewish State in order to render the resolution inoperable. The Palestinian leadership today cannot validly refer to that resolution as the basis for establishing a Palestinian state and by the same token, cannot accuse Israel of not abiding by it.  Moreover, since the UN did not even manage to implement its own resolution, what credibility and legitimacy does it have? It is time for the Arab leadership to stop manipulating the United Nations and historical facts. Sadly, based on their outward behavior in recent decades, it would be hard to expect a change from them anytime soon.

* * *

SOURCE: Jerusalem Center For Public Affairs

http://jcpa.org/article/70-years-un-resolution-181-assessment/

The Palestinians accepted, in writing and posted in Israeli newspapers, the 2002 Saudi Peace Plan which was endorsed by the Arab League in 2002 at the Beirut Summit and re-endorsed at the 2007 Arab League summit and re-endorsed at the 2017 Arab League summit. Why did Israel reject it?

Uh...maybe because it was suicidal. AND insulting. And totally one-side BS and a charade?

Folowing is the text of the "Arab [League] Peace Initiative" ((March 27, 2002) adopted at the Arab League summit in Beirut.

---

"The Council of the League of Arab States at the Summit Level, at its 14th Ordinary Session;

Reaffirming the resolution taken in June 1996 at the Cairo Extraordinary Arab Summit that a just and comprehensive peace in the Middle East is the strategic option of the Arab Countries, to be achieved in accordance with International Legality, and which would require a comparable commitment on the part of the Israeli Government.

Having listened to the statement made by His Royal Highness Prince Abdullah Bin Abdullaziz, the Crown Prince of the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia in which his Highness presented his Initiative, calling for full Israeli withdrawal from all the Arab territories occupied since June 1967, in implementation of Security Council Resolutions 242 and 338, reaffirmed by the Madrid Conference of 1991 and the land for peace principle, and Israel's acceptance of an independent Palestinian State, with East Jerusalem as its capital, in return for the establishment of normal relations in the context of a comprehensive peace with Israel.

Emanating from the conviction of the Arab countries that a military solution to the conflict will not achieve peace or provide security for the parties, the council:

1. Requests Israel to reconsider its policies and declare that a just peace is its strategic option as well.

2. Further calls upon Israel to affirm:

a. Full Israeli withdrawal from all the territories occupied since 1967, including the Syrian Golan Heights to the lines of June 4, 1967 as well as the remaining occupied Lebanese territories in the south of Lebanon.

b. Achievement of a just solution to the Palestinian Refugee problem to be agreed upon in accordance with UN General Assembly Resolution 194.

c. The acceptance of the establishment of a Sovereign Independent Palestinian State on the Palestinian territories occupied since the 4th of June 1967 in the West Bank and Gaza Strip, with East Jerusalem as its capital.

3. Consequently, the Arab Countries affirm the following:

a. Consider the Arab-Israeli conflict ended, and enter into a peace agreement with Israel, and provide security for all the states of the region.

b. Establish normal relations with Israel in the context of this comprehensive peace.

4. Assures the rejection of all forms of Palestinian patriation which conflict with the special circumstances of the Arab host countries.

5. Calls upon the Government of Israel and all Israelis to accept this initiative in order to safeguard the prospects for peace and stop the further shedding of blood, enabling the Arab Countries and Israel to live in peace and good neighborliness and provide future generations with security, stability, and prosperity.

6. Invites the International Community and all countries and Organizations to support this initiative.

7. Requests the Chairman of the Summit to form a special committee composed of some of its concerned member states and the Secretary General of the League of Arab States to pursue the necessary contacts to gain support for this initiative at all levels, particularly from the United Nations, the Security Council, the United States of America, the Russian Federation, the Muslim States and the European Union."

SOURCE: Jewish Virtual Library (https://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/the-arab-league-ldquo-peace-plan-rdquo-march-2002)

Ironically, there were originally TWO pieces of pie; In the other deal, 95% of the land accorded to "Trans-Jordan" and the surrounding area of Arab nations. Israel got the scraps and were expected to share it with Arab-Mooslems in "Palestine"/Israel.

Yes, true -- in NO Mooslem land are the concept of "freedom" or "peace" in practice. Or is honesty and integrity EVER any part of their goal, morality, or ethic code. They are at war...till the Twelfth of Never. (Yes, JUST LIKE THE AMERICAN LEFT).

That Israel is expected (by ANY sense or degree) to abide in any supposed agreement or pact that allows Palis/Muzzies anywhere WITHIN their current border from people for whom lying and bloodshed is a first thought in the AM (even BEFORE brushing teef and taking care of nature calls), in itself...suicidal/insanity.

We can see exactly why the Democrats/Left, Commies, Fascist, LBGTQXYZ, NOW, Antifa, and BLM are all allied with...militant Muzzies/Jihadists. They lie, assault and goad the other side into war, constantly toss tantrums and expect OTHERS to roll over for them.

"... the original deal reneged upon."

What "original deal"? You keep bringing it up, yet you refuse to say what it was.

•Since the Arab states rejected the resolution upon its adoption and prevented its implementation, the Palestinian leadership can neither logically nor legally claim today that Resolution 181 can serve as a basis for the establishment of a Palestinian state.

Why not? The Arab states rejected the deal, not the Palestinian Arabs. In fact, 700,000 Palestinian Arabs were driven from their lands and homes.

And if UN Resolution 181 can't serve as a basis, then certainly UN 242 and UN 338 can, both reaffirming the establishment of a Palestinian state.

Uh...maybe because it was suicidal. AND insulting. And totally one-side BS and a charade?

Are you referring to Israel's offers, like taking fertile West Bank land in exchange for a piece of the Negev Desert? Or the idiotic Oslo Accords making Palestine look like Indonesia without the water?

Ironically, there were originally TWO pieces of pie; In the other deal, 95% of the land accorded to "Trans-Jordan" and the surrounding area of Arab nations.

No, there was ONE pie called the British Mandate for Palestine. ONE. And it was 100% up to Great Britain to decide what to do with it. THEIR choice, not Israel's.

Great Britain decided to give up a piece they called Transjordan (later Jordan). The remainder they turned over to the UN and told them to partition it between the Palestinian Arabs and the Palestininan Jews who lived there.

The result was UN 181 which GAVE land to Israel which deemed it an insufficient gift and took more.

They were doing just fine until the Jews invaded their land around the time of the second world war.

You mean the land Jews inhabited for 3,000 years before the vile, defective, useless Mooslums (pigpiss be upon them) infested it?

You mean the land Jews inhabited for 3,000 years before the vile, defective, useless Mooslums (pigpiss be upon them) infested it?

That's the one. The Jews moved out, the Arabs moved in.

You're saying that because the Jews lived there 3,000 years ago the land is still theirs? Are you inplying they're like dogs marking their territory?

That's pretty insulting, I have to say.

Alfred who?

"In 1923, after the failed Beer Hall Putsch, Hitler, who had been imprisoned for  treason, appointed Rosenberg as the leader of the National Socialist movement, a position he held until Hitler's release."

...

"The Hungarian-Jewishjournalist Franz Szell, who was apparently residing in  Tilsit , Prussia, Germany,  spent a year researching in Latvianand Estonian archives before publishing in 1936 an open letter, with copies to Hermann Göring , Joseph Goebbels , German foreign minister Konstantin von Neurath, and others, accusing Rosenberg of having "no drop of German blood" flowing in his veins. Szell wrote that among Rosenberg's ancestors were only "Latvians, Jews, Mongols, and French."  ^[7]  "

https://en .wikipedia.org/wiki/Alfred_Rosenberg#Nazi_career

Lots of material on Youboob from him - no doubt he's a Nazi.

https://www.youtube.com/results? search_query=Alfred+Rosenberg

His prose is full of racial supremist bullshyte.

Not surprising Hollyvood has never made a movie about him.

"those who control the past control the future, those who control the present control the past"

--George Orwell