Trump Presenting Peace Plan To Israeli Leaders

[DavidSon]

The UN has nothing to do with this deal. Who cares what they think?

The first article I linked to about Hamas is from 2004 lol. I was referring to this year. Or two days ago. Either way I'll never see things the way you do. The Israeli air-force has struck multiple targets in Palestine, Lebenon, Syria, and Iraq all this year while people like you and the mainstream media refuse to talk about it. For a proclaimed "student of the Middle East" you are seriously misinformed.

The Kremlin seems to care what the UN says:

“There is a whole number of respective resolutions of the U.N. Security Council,” said Dmitry Peskov, according to Russia’s TASS news agency. “It’s obvious that certain points of this plan are not in full compliance with the U.N. Security Council resolutions."

"“We see the Palestinians’ reaction; we see the reaction of the whole number of Arab states, which show solidarity with the Palestinians in opposing this plan,” said Peskov. “This certainly raises doubts over its viability.”

It's a shame you have no respect for International law but as you know, there are repercussions to ignoring UN Resolutions. The member states could start a conversation about enforcing rulings on Israel quickly, like overnight. The US would block any measure to punish Israel for crimes against humanity like the always do, but the attitude worldwide will continue to grow negative. Maybe you guys should just drop out and join S.Korea will your nuclear programs lol.

"The UN Charter, in its Preamble, set an objective: "to establish conditions under which justice and respect for the obligations arising from treaties and other sources of international law can be maintained". Ever since, the development of, and respect for international law has been a key part of the work of the Organization. This work is carried out in many ways - by courts, tribunals, multilateral treaties - and by the Security Council, which can approve peacekeeping missions, impose sanctions, or authorize the use of force when there is a threat to international peace and security, if it deems this necessary. These powers are given to it by the UN Charter, which is considered an international treaty. As such, it is an instrument of international law, and UN Member States are bound by it. The UN Charter codifies the major principles of international relations, from sovereign equality of States to the prohibition of the use of force in international relations."

 

[Red Sky at Morning]

@DavidSon - would you conclude that the UN is without political bias against Israel? Does its make up and political presuppositions make it able to adjudicate in an even handed way in this situation.

The reason why I ask is that numerically there are a significant voting bloc of either Muslim or liberal left wing states who are either religiously against the state of Israel or against the idea that the Bible has any meaning or significance in the modern world.

As these votes add up, the “UN” simply becomes a container (or brand) for the collective nations and is therefore as good (or bad) as the views of those who the various national delegates represent.

 

[Red Sky at Morning]

It is ironic that the old saying “Never look a gift-horse in the mouth” came to be accepted as words of wisdom, when the origin of the phrase was the Trojan Horse!

In the same way, the devil may be in the detail...

Pan-Islamic body OIC rejects Trump’s Mideast plan

The Organisation of Islamic Cooperation (OIC) rejects US President Donald Trump’s plan for the Middle East, calling on its 57 member states not to help implement it.

The pan-Islamic body, which represents more than 1.5 billion Muslims worldwide, “rejects this US-Israeli plan, as it does not meet the minimum aspirations and legitimate rights of the Palestinian people, and contradicts the terms of reference of the peace process,” it says in a statement.

It calls on “all member states not [to] deal with this plan or cooperate with the US Administration efforts to enforce it in any way or form.”

— AFP

What might happen next is anyone’s guess!

 

[Thunderian]

The first article I linked to about Hamas is from 2004 lol. I was referring to this year. Or two days ago.

Oh, so Hamas has launched 10,000 rockets and mortars at Israeli civilians, not 10,007. That was your point?

Either way I'll never see things the way you do. The Israeli air-force has struck multiple targets in Palestine, Lebenon, Syria, and Iraq all this year while people like you and the mainstream media refuse to talk about it. For a proclaimed "student of the Middle East" you are seriously misinformed.

I don’t pay all that much attention to what the mainstream media says, but the people I follow have been pretty open about it. Were you under the impression you’re the only one who knows that Israel is attacking Iranian proxies all over the Middle East? I kind of thought we were all on the same page on that. I’ve mentioned it on this board at least once or twice. Is that what you mean by “refusing to talk about it”?

The Kremlin seems to care what the UN says:

The Kremlin is killing children in Syria with barrel bombs as we speak. I’m sure that must be against one or two of the UN’s rules. If Israel’s imagined crimes have you so worked up, why are you being silent about that?

It's a shame you have no respect for International law but as you know, there are repercussions to ignoring UN Resolutions.

International law? Every projectile launched by the Palestinians at Israeli civilians is a violation of international law. When do the repercussions against the people responsible for terror attacks against Israel kick in?

 

[Helioform]

Amazing that some people on a conspiracy board do not even see how evil the UN really is. How many crimes have been committed by UN "peace keepers" for example? But as long as they bash Israel, all is fine.

• We are grateful to The Washington Post, The New York Times, Timemagazine and other great publications whose directors have attended our meetings and respected their promises of discretion for almost forty years. … It would have been impossible for us to develop our plan for the world if we had been subject to the bright lights of publicity during those years. But, the world is now much more sophisticated and prepared to march towards a world government. The supranational sovereignty of an intellectual elite and world bankers is surely preferable to the national auto-determination practiced in past centuries.
  • Purported remarks at a Bilderberg Group meeting in Baden-Baden, Germany in June 1991, as quoted in Programming, Pitfalls and Puppy-Dog Tales (1993) by Gyeorgos C. Hatonn, p. 65 and various nationalist tracts. The ultimate source for the quotation (i.e. the person who passed it on to the public) is never identified.

Quotes about Rockefeller

I think without internationalists like you, the international system we have been trying to build, the international system we have today, wouldn't be here.

• UN Secretary-General Kofi Annan, at a book signing for "Memoirs" at the UN headquarters in New York, in 2002, as quoted in The "Proud Internationalist": The Globalist Vision of David Rockefeller (2006) by Will Banyan, p. 2

They are trying to reconstruct the Tower of Babel with this world government (the UN being a prototype of that). And we know from the Bible how things ended...

 

[Thunderian]

Wow. This is very big news, and fits exactly in with what I’ve been saying about Israel’s changing relationships with Muslim countries.

Netanyahu, Sudanese leader meet in Uganda, agree to start normalizing ties

***

www.haaretz.com

 

[DavidSon]

57 Members of the Organization of Islamic Cooperation Condemn Trump Peace Plan

"The pan-Islamic body, which is the second largest intergovernmental organisation after the UN, said it in a statement today that it “rejects this US-Israeli plan, as it does not meet the minimum aspirations and legitimate rights of the Palestinian people, and contradicts the terms of reference of the peace process.”

"The open-ended extraordinary meeting later adopted a resolution to express concerns over “the flagrant violation of the principles of international law” and called “upon the American administration to abide by the internationally agreed on legal terms of reference for a just, lasting and comprehensive peace."

 

[Thunderian]

Now Morocco.

Exclusive: Israel pushing Trump to back Morocco over Western Sahara

Netanyahu wanted a 3-way deal to boost ties with Morocco

www.axios.com

 

[Stephania]

 

[Red Sky at Morning]

Israel blasts "unfortunate" threat by EU

Foreign Ministry responds to EU High Representative statement that application of sovereignty would not go "unchallenged."
Arutz Sheva Staff, 04/02/20 16:58

Josep Borrell
REUTERS/Muhammad Hamed

The Israeli Foreign Ministry responded Tuesday to the threats of European Union High Representative and Vice-President Josep Borrell, who warned that the EU would respond if Israel applied its law over any parts of Judea and Samaria.

"The fact that Josep Borell chose to use threatening language toward Israel, shortly after he took office and only hours after his meetings in Iran, is unfortunate, to say the least and very strange," the Foreign Ministry stated.

In his statement, Borell said that "the European Union is fully committed to the transatlantic partnership and values all efforts to help find a peaceful resolution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. The EU recalls its commitment to a negotiated two-State solution, based on 1967 lines, with equivalent land swaps, as may be agreed between the parties, with the State of Israel and an independent, democratic, contiguous, sovereign and viable State of Palestine, living side by side in peace, security and mutual recognition – as set out in the Council Conclusions of July 2014."

"The US initiative, as presented on 28 January, departs from these internationally agreed parameters."

In his statement Borrell also criticized the deal's suggestions on the issues of borders, Jerusalem, and its management of the "refugee question."

"The European Union calls on both sides to re-engage and to refrain from any unilateral actions contrary to international law that could exacerbate tensions," the statement said, adding that the EU is "especially concerned by statements on the prospect of annexation of the Jordan Valley and other parts of the West Bank."

"In line with international law and relevant UN Security Council resolutions, the EU does not recognize Israel’s sovereignty over the territories occupied since 1967.

"Steps towards annexation, if implemented, could not pass unchallenged," he warned.
He concluded by promising that "the European Union will continue to support all efforts aimed at reviving a political process in line with international law, which ensures equal rights and which is acceptable to both parties" and emphasizing that "the European Union reiterates its fundamental commitment to the security of Israel."

Israel blasts "unfortunate" threat by EU

Foreign Ministry responds to EU High Representative statement that application of sovereignty would not go "unchallenged."

www.israelnationalnews.com

 

[TempestOfTempo]

Yes, that one thing that happened 50 years ago should be used to judge everything Israel has done before and since.

34 Americans died in the Liberty attack, which the US seems to have gotten over. At least twice as many Americans have been killed by Palestinian terror attacks, so what was your point again?

"34 Americans died in the Liberty attack, which the US seems to have gotten over."
Types the Canadian.

 

[TempestOfTempo]

Hahha thats funny, the truth is Palestine lost the war. They can't do anything right now... The international support is a joke. Is the darwin law "the stronger will survive". Is very simple.. Maybe, if they recover the support of arab's countries ... They have a chance to win.

If they lost, why is the fight still going on?

 

[rainerann]

Now Morocco.

Exclusive: Israel pushing Trump to back Morocco over Western Sahara

Netanyahu wanted a 3-way deal to boost ties with Morocco

www.axios.com

DId you actually read this article and do you know anything about the politics in Morocco? I truly cannot see how this is relevant to your point that there is any Islamic support in favor of the annexation of the occupied territories or that this article has anything to do with the situation between Israel and Palestine.

Quite frankly, the gist of this article is that Israel is trying to bribe Morocco with increased support in gaining sovereignty over Western Sahara. It says they have responded to these appeals from Israel. It says absolutely nothing about how Morocco has responded since the fake peace deal was released by the US.

This is literally the article. It looks much more flashy for people who do not have the time to click on it and realize that your one line statement is so far off base, that it would have been better for your argument to not have posted this at all just in case someone took the time to read it for themselves.

Israel and the U.S. have been discussing a deal that would see the U.S. recognize Moroccan sovereignty in the occupied Western Sahara and Morocco take steps to normalize relations with Israel, according to Israeli and U.S. sources.

Why it matters: This would be a major diplomatic achievement for Morocco's king, Mohammed VI, and a boost for Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu — who would get a high-profile public visit to Morocco — in perilous political times.

• It could also advance the Trump administration's aim of bringing Israel and Arab states closer together.
• But it would be a highly controversial step that runs counter to the international consensus.

The big picture: Western Sahara is a sparsely populated disputed territory, formerly controlled by Spain but claimed by Morocco despite international opposition and fierce resistance from the indigenous population.

• A violent insurgency ended in 1991 after 16 years, but the matter remains unresolved.

The backstory: Contacts between Netanyahu and the Moroccans started getting more serious after a secret meeting with Moroccan Foreign Minister Nasser Bourita on the sidelines of the UN General Assembly in September 2018.

• That meeting was the result of a back channel established between Bourita and Netanyahu’s national security adviser, Meir Ben-Shabbat, with the help of businessman Yariv Elbaz.
• Elbaz, a Moroccan Jew, is one of the main food retailers in Morocco and a close associate of Jared Kushner.
• In May 2019, Elbaz met with Kushner in Morocco and took him and the entire White House “peace team” for a visit at the old Jewish cemetery in Casablanca.

The back channel was established behind the back of Mossad director Yossi Cohen, who is in charge of Israel’s secret diplomacy in the Arab world.

• Cohen was furious when it was discovered, but Netanyahu told Ben-Shabbat to push ahead anyway.
• According to Israeli sources, Ben-Shabbat wanted to use Israel’s close relations with the Trump administration to reach a breakthrough with Morocco.
• He approached Trump administration officials and proposed the U.S. support the Moroccan position on a sensitive national security issue — the Moroccan occupation of Western Sahara.
• The proposal for a trilateral deal was also conveyed to the Moroccans, Israeli officials said.

Netanyahu tried to push the deal ahead of Israel's April 2019 election, but it was shelved when details of Ben-Shabbat's visit to Morocco leaked to the Arab press.

• He tried again before the September 2019 election, but then-national security adviser John Bolton, a fierce opponent of Moroccan sovereignty over Western Sahara, killed the idea.
• The issue came up again in November, before Secretary of State Pompeo’s visit to Morocco. Nothing came of it while Pompeo was in Rabat.

So this whole thing has been in the works since last year because Netanyahu was hoping that it would be advantageous during the election. The issue with sovereignty over the area is because of Spanish withdrawal. There is conflict over who should get to reclaim this territory. So what Netanyahu has really done is make a promise that he can't really keep. The king of Morocco appears to be taking the bait because it could be politically advantageous for him as well. They both have something to gain by being able to claim that they were in political power when they were able to annex disputed territory.

As a result of this political motivation for Morocco to listen when Netanyahu is making crap promises like this, using an article like this actually works against you. You have just further demonstrated that there is no reason to believe that the deal presented by the Trump administration can be remotely considered a fair and balanced agreement. You have highlighted other examples of where Netanyahu has become rogue and blinded by power so that his own interests surpass the route to achieve peace within his own area and other areas like Morocco as well.

The area of western Sahara that Israel is claiming the US can apply a statement of sovereignty is contested by Morroco and Sahrawi Arab Democratic Republic. The UN has made a statement that the Sahrawi people are legitimate people. The article you posted agrees and refers to them as the "indigenous population" within the areas. As a result, they also want to achieve sovereignty. Israel should stay out of it.

To reiterate, this conversation between Morocco and Palestine has nothing to do with the Arab world deciding that Palestine should give in or that Morocco is tired or drained in response to the Palestinian cause like you were suggesting earlier and like this article is no doubt intended to support. That is not what the article suggests. That is not what Morocco and Israel are discussing. It has absolutely nothing to do with anything at all. Although, it does seem that you have decided on the scripted pitch you will make in future discussions on this. I will keep this in mind.

 

[Thunderian]

You have just further demonstrated that there is no reason to believe that the deal presented by the Trump administration can be remotely considered a fair and balanced agreement.

Have I not been clear? This is not a fair and balanced deal. It’s not supposed to be, and it certainly can’t be as long as the Palestinians refuse to even sit down and bargain. This is a deal to allow Israel to do what it needs to, for Arab nations to wash their hands of the Palestinians, and for Trump to claim victory.

I posted that article as an example of Arab nations treating Israel as a legitimate state, and not as an endorsement of the peace deal. However, Morocco has reacted positively to the deal.

Morocco 'appreciates' Mideast peace plan, says needs acceptance by parties

Morocco 'appreciates' the new U.S. plan for peace between Israel and the Palestinians, its foreign ministry said in a statement on Wednesday, but added that "acceptance by the parties... is... fundamental to the implementation and sustainability of the plan."

www.reuters.com

 

[rainerann]

Have I not been clear? This is not a fair and balanced deal. It’s not supposed to be, and it certainly can’t be as long as the Palestinians refuse to even sit down and bargain. This is a deal to allow Israel to do what it needs to, for Arab nations to wash their hands of the Palestinians, and for Trump to claim victory.

I posted that article as an example of Arab nations treating Israel as a legitimate state, and not as an endorsement of the peace deal. However, Morocco has reacted positively to the deal.

Morocco 'appreciates' Mideast peace plan, says needs acceptance by parties

Morocco 'appreciates' the new U.S. plan for peace between Israel and the Palestinians, its foreign ministry said in a statement on Wednesday, but added that "acceptance by the parties... is... fundamental to the implementation and sustainability of the plan."

www.reuters.com

It is not a fair and balanced deal, but it will make it possible for Israel to do what you believe they should be able to do, which apparently includes controlling water distribution, annexing the occupied territories and having military authority over Palestine. These are all things Israel needs to be able to do.

Newspeak. Up is down apparently in your world.

Without becoming detailed further with Moroccan politics, based on the article you presented. I would not consider Morocco to be a good example. They do not seem to have had the same degree of reverence for the area as a Holy site as some other areas. They do not even seem to be dominantly Muslim. They seem more like the African version of New York. This is the backstory from your first article about how a contact was created with Morocco.

• That meeting was the result of a back channel established between Bourita and Netanyahu’s national security adviser, Meir Ben-Shabbat, with the help of businessman Yariv Elbaz.
• Elbaz, a Moroccan Jew, is one of the main food retailers in Morocco and a close associate of Jared Kushner.
• In May 2019, Elbaz met with Kushner in Morocco and took him and the entire White House “peace team” for a visit at the old Jewish cemetery in Casablanca.

So support is not surprising based on this information. This is not a real example of Muslim support in Morocco. Not that Palestine needs to be solely supported by the Muslim communities that do have more established religious considerations for the area. A lot of people can see that the only reason they need military authority over the area is that they never left the occupied territories.

And if that weren't enough. This is what your article from Reuters says about Morrocan support of the peace plan.

"Morocco ‘appreciates’ the new U.S. plan for peace between Israel and the Palestinians, its foreign ministry said in a statement on Wednesday, but added that “acceptance by the parties... is... fundamental to the implementation and sustainability of the plan.”

Morocco is a close ally of the United States and added in the statement that it hopes for “a constructive peace process” offering “a realistic, applicable, equitable and lasting solution” to the dispute."

So who knows how they are clipping this quote together. Either way, it is saying both parties have to accept in order for this plan to work.

Basically, this is saying that Morocco is remaining neutral on stating a position encouraging or discouraging Palestine from accepting or declining the plan. I know you wish it said something along the lines of "Morocco made a statement the other day in favor of the plan presented by the Trump administration. They said, 'we have not ever seen such a good plan presented to Palestine. They would be silly not to take it." Unfortunately, it doesn't say anything close to this.

The statement from Morocco was basically a PC way of saying we don't want to piss off the people who might help us get sovereignty over Western Sahara, and we don't want to piss off the Muslims who are citizens of Morroco. Morocco just wants the area in western Sahara to be theirs.

Are you even reading these articles before you are posting them?

 

[rainerann]

The reality is there could have been peace a long time ago if Israel had left the occupied territory, but Israel doesn't want peace. Palestine resisting when they are not in the wrong is turned into newspeak when people try to turn around and say that there is no peace because they don't want peace. Israel wants annexation more than they want peace with Palestine. That is just a reality. If they wanted peace, they would leave the occupied territory, but that is not what Israel wants.

 

[TokiEl]

The reality is there could have been peace a long time ago if Israel had left the occupied territory, but Israel doesn't want peace. Palestine resisting when they are not in the wrong is turned into newspeak when people try to turn around and say that there is no peace because they don't want peace. Israel wants annexation more than they want peace with Palestine. That is just a reality. If they wanted peace, they would leave the occupied territory, but that is not what Israel wants.

The Holy land is the land of the Holy One of Israel.

In God's epic the antagonist and adversary is the god of this world who is the god of Islam.

So that's why there is no peace...


In His book the God of Israel promised to return a remant of His people to His land for His own Name's sake.

And the antagonist contest that... as he is very annoying.

Not unlike urself.

 

[rainerann]

The Holy land is the land of the Holy One of Israel.

In God's epic the antagonist and adversary is the god of this world who is the god of Islam.

So that's why there is no peace...


In His book the God of Israel promised to return a remant of His people to His land for His own Name's sake.

And the antagonist contest that... as he is very annoying.

Not unlike urself.

Thank you for making another incredibly delusional comment. I am grateful for how all of your comments like this have helped me to become the person I am today.

 

[UnderAlienControl]

Palestinians should ‘tell us where they want to draw the lines’ but Israeli settlements will stay – Kushner

US President Donald Trump’s senior adviser Jared Kushner has said that Palestinians are welcome to suggest changes to borders in the proposed peace plan. However, the existing Israeli settlements are not going anywhere, he added.

www.rt.com

Redress Online

Redress Online is an online news portal that shares latest news and updates related to Government Aid, Tax News, USA News etc.

www.redressonline.com

Gunmen blow up gas pipeline between Egypt & Israel – reports

Armed insurgents have blown up a gas pipeline in the northern Sinai connecting Egypt and Israel, according to media reports.

www.rt.com

 

[Thunderian]

Are you even reading these articles before you are posting them?

Are you even reading my posts before you are responding to them?

I don’t care if the deal is unfair to Palestinians. They don’t deserve a good deal. I also don’t care if Arab Muslim nations say one thing, and then another thing that contradicts it. That’s kind of their thing, if you haven’t noticed. It’s what they actually do that is meaningful, and they are beginning to treat Israel with respect, and the Palestinians with less and less regard all the time.

If I’m wrong about all this, we’ll know soon enough, but I’m sure that this will mark a major change in Israel’s relations with Arab nations, and an equally major change in the relationship between Arab nations and the Palestinians. You, and others here, are clinging to the old framework of how things are done in Palestine, but I believe that the days of pretending the Palestinians can be dealt with as if they sincerely desire peace, or their own state, are gone.

The raison d’être of the Palestinian liberation movement has never been about a state for Palestinians, but has always been about driving Jews from the land. Clearly, the Jews are going nowhere, and from now on, that’s going to be the framework.