• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Why Fatah and Hamas have lost the right to speak for the Palestinians

Evilroddy said:
Fledermaus:

I don't believe you ever answered my question posed on page 2 of this thread. Who will speak for the Palestinian people if not Fatah and Hamas? What other organisation(s) has/have any legitimacy to speak for Palestinians?

Cheers.
Evilroddy.
Click to expand...

Post #27.
 
Fledermaus said:
Post #27 proves you are wrong.
Click to expand...

Actually it doesn't and that is pretty obvious.

All post 27 does is posits some ,as yet unknown, entity might arise out of thin air and somehow magically unite the Palestinians factions.

The way I read it, the question was who should speak for the Palestinians NOW ,not in some future utopia that might never happen.The options were given and you ignored them, so no you never answered it.

On second thoughts post 27 also shows a staggering ignorance/naivete as to why the Palestinians have failed to unite and speak as one thus far.
 
oneworld2 said:
Actually it doesn't and that is pretty obvious.

All post 27 does is posits some ,as yet unknown, entity might arise out of thin air and somehow magically unite the Palestinians factions.

The way I read it, the question was who should speak for the Palestinians NOW ,not in some future utopia that might never happen.The options were given and you ignored them, so no you never answered it.

On second thoughts post 27 also shows a staggering ignorance/naivete as to why the Palestinians have failed to unite and speak as one thus far.
Click to expand...

Question was asked. Question was answered.

Not sorry that it doesn't meet the Oneworld2 litmus test.
 
Fledermaus said:
Question was asked. Question was answered.

Not sorry that it doesn't meet the Oneworld2 litmus test.
Click to expand...

I understand your bar is set low so as to avoid disappointment
 
Fledermaus said:
I understand that you can't accept any viewpoint but your own.
Click to expand...

On the contrary , I accept opposing views that are built on logic and reason , that's the difference. Yours here are built on a verifiable anti Arab bias,
 
TypicalRussian said:
View attachment 67275311View attachment 67275312

nuff said
Click to expand...

Pure propaganda. At no point was any of the "green" territory Palestinian.

The 1946 map includes state lands that were entrusted to the British for the purpose of creating a Jewish National Home as per the international law you guys pretend to care so much about and so the vast, vast majority of the green land should be white, with the only green areas remaining being those owned by Arabs (on the assumption that all Arabs owning land in the territory at the time were Palestinians, which is wrong but whatever).

The 1947 partition plan was also never territory that the Palestinians ever held and so was never "lost" by them. It was a proposal which would have allowed for the creation of a Palestinian state on those territories which was rejected by the Palestinians and other Arab countries but accepted by the Jews.

In the 49-67 map none of the green space was "Palestinian land". Gaza was occupied by Egypt and the WB was annexed by Jordan, with the population there given Jordanian citizenship. At no point were any of either of those territories "Palestinian".

The 2000 map is at least closer to reality. That is where, through agreement (which was violated continuously by the Palestinians, naturally) the Palestinians were for the first time granted some degree of sovereign control over territory. But rather than being reduced from the phony propaganda maps before it, this represented an increase over nothing, because at no point in recorded history was there ever "Palestinian land" under sovereign control of Palestinian Arabs in those territories.

Like with most things Russian, your analysis seems to suffer from a reality deficiency and a willful embrace of falsehoods. I wouldn't expect anything else.
 
Fledermaus said:
What is apparent is that neither is doing the job.

The problem is that both seek to kill their perceived opponents rather than negotiate.

Since neither would cede power to the other and neither will be able to take full control there appear to be years and years of sorrow ahead for the Palestinian people.

Perhaps a new star will arise among the Palestinians that can unite the various parties. If that happens they might get somewhere. If is isn't gunned down by Hamas, Fatah or any other group.
Click to expand...

Post #27.
Click to expand...

Fledermaus:

You didn't answer the question although the implication seems to be no political body should speak for the Palestinians until some rising "new star" emerges. This effectively leaves the Palestinian people and nation nurepresented and voiceless in the face of the State of Israel's absorption of land upon which Palestinians live. That's awfully convenient for the State of Israel if it can mute its resistance in the military occupation of the Palestinian Occupied Territories.

Cheers.
Evilroddy.
 
Last edited:
oneworld2 said:
You don't hold the moral highground , you just think you do. Huge difference.
Click to expand...

There's no need to continue this back and forth game.
The moral high ground is clearly on the side of your opposition and the opposition of the rest of the pro-murder camp.
You cannot claim that an ideology based solely on the wish to see innocents being murdered by the masses, where murder is the highest (And sometimes only) goal, is morally superior to one that recognizes human rights and promotes the values of civilized society. It's quite stupid.
 
Fledermaus said:
What is illogical about what I posted in #27?
Click to expand...

I never claimed the content was illogical, I claimed in never answered the question asked of you. The illogicality came in you thinking it did
 
Apocalypse said:
There's no need to continue this back and forth game.
The moral high ground is clearly on the side of your opposition and the opposition of the rest of the pro-murder camp.
You cannot claim that an ideology based solely on the wish to see innocents being murdered by the masses, where murder is the highest (And sometimes only) goal, is morally superior to one that recognizes human rights and promotes the values of civilized society. It's quite stupid.
Click to expand...

Your whole theses is built on a lie that there is a " pro murder camp " that I ,and seemingly others , belong to it.

The reality is, and I have cited where you have done this and if there really is a pro murder group here it is yourself that belongs in it having supported the murder of Palestinians at the fence and also lied about those people so as to try to justify their murder.

As for HRs violation both sides are guilty of them pn a mass scale so any contention of a superiority is at best dubious at worse just plain false
 
oneworld2 said:
I never claimed the content was illogical, I claimed in never answered the question asked of you. The illogicality came in you thinking it did
Click to expand...

Guess this was a lie.

oneworld2 said:
On the contrary , I accept opposing views that are built on logic and reason , that's the difference. Yours here are built on a verifiable anti Arab bias,
Click to expand...
 
Evilroddy said:
Fledermaus:

You didn't answer the question although the implication seems to be no political body should speak for the Palestinians until some rising "new star" emerges. This effectively leaves the Palestinian people and nation nurepresented and voiceless in the face of the State of Israel's absorption of land upon which Palestinians live. That's awfully convenient for the State of Israel if it can mute its resistance in the military occupation of the Palestinian Occupied Territories.

Cheers.
Evilroddy.
Click to expand...

What voice does it have now?

On one hand we have Hamas. A self destructive group who only claim to fame so far is attracting the wrath of the IDF due to thousands and thousands of acts of war. A group that systematically rips off the Palestinians of Gaza. A group more interested in making martyrs than making peace.

On the other hand you have Fatah who is pissed they don't have Gaza Palestinians to rip off. A kinder, gentler group who lost Gaza to Hamas. A group at least trying for peace but lacking legitimacy at this point.

Absent a charismatic and pragmatic leader who can either unite the two or elevate one to a higher position the Palestinians continue to be screwed. By themselves. A Palestinian Gandhi or MLK would go along way.

What say you?
 
Fledermaus said:
What voice does it have now?

On one hand we have Hamas. A self destructive group who only claim to fame so far is attracting the wrath of the IDF due to thousands and thousands of acts of war. A group that systematically rips off the Palestinians of Gaza. A group more interested in making martyrs than making peace.

On the other hand you have Fatah who is pissed they don't have Gaza Palestinians to rip off. A kinder, gentler group who lost Gaza to Hamas. A group at least trying for peace but lacking legitimacy at this point.

Absent a charismatic and pragmatic leader who can either unite the two or elevate one to a higher position the Palestinians continue to be screwed. By themselves. A Palestinian Gandhi or MLK would go along way.

What say you?
Click to expand...

Fatah has a real voice with both the State of Israel and the wider world because it is in charge of the Palestinian Authority. The fact that it is doing the State of Israel's dirty work by violently oppressing its own subjects is the disgusting but necessary price for maintaining that measure of authority.

Hamas has credibility with many Gazan Palestinians because it won an election democratically to come to power and because it is the only Palestinian authority which will not bow to the State of Israel's military occupation in the Palestinian Occupied Territories. While that latter point may disqualify Hamas for you and to a lesser extent for me, that is a big plus for oppressed Palestinians and the Arab Street all over the Middle East and North Africa.

Just like Sinn Fein is the now-legitimate political arm of the terroristic former IRA so Hamas has a political arm as well as a militant arm. So negotiating with the political arm without any kind of preconditions is a possible road forward towards peace in that part of the Levant. The problem is the State of Israel does not want a negotiated settlement, it seems to want the complete capitulation of the Palestinian Nation so that the Israeli Government can dictate the fate of the Palestinian Nation through absorption of land and displacement of people while at the same time blocking forever the creation of an autonomous and fully sovereign Palestinian State.

So, I ask again; who will speak for the Palestinians if not Fatah and Hamas? If America can hold its nose to negotiate with the terroristic Taliban in order to achieve peace in Afghanistan, then the State of Israel can likewise plug its nose and negotiate with brutal Fatah and terroristic and militant Hamas for peace in the Levant. The problem is that the State of Israel does not want a negotiated settlement ending in Palestinian statehood.

Cheers.
Evilroddy.
 
Last edited:
CJ 2.0 said:
Pure propaganda. At no point was any of the "green" territory Palestinian.

The 1946 map includes state lands that were entrusted to the British for the purpose of creating a Jewish National Home as per the international law you guys pretend to care so much about and so the vast, vast majority of the green land should be white, with the only green areas remaining being those owned by Arabs (on the assumption that all Arabs owning land in the territory at the time were Palestinians, which is wrong but whatever).

The 1947 partition plan was also never territory that the Palestinians ever held and so was never "lost" by them. It was a proposal which would have allowed for the creation of a Palestinian state on those territories which was rejected by the Palestinians and other Arab countries but accepted by the Jews.

In the 49-67 map none of the green space was "Palestinian land". Gaza was occupied by Egypt and the WB was annexed by Jordan, with the population there given Jordanian citizenship. At no point were any of either of those territories "Palestinian".

The 2000 map is at least closer to reality. That is where, through agreement (which was violated continuously by the Palestinians, naturally) the Palestinians were for the first time granted some degree of sovereign control over territory. But rather than being reduced from the phony propaganda maps before it, this represented an increase over nothing, because at no point in recorded history was there ever "Palestinian land" under sovereign control of Palestinian Arabs in those territories.

Like with most things Russian, your analysis seems to suffer from a reality deficiency and a willful embrace of falsehoods. I wouldn't expect anything else.
Click to expand...

these are ethnic lines in relation to Israel, if we want two states, stop the ethnic cleansing

Also, what is with the anti-Russia hate?
 
Evilroddy said:
Fatah has a real voice with both the State of Israel and the wider world because it is in charge of the Palestinian Authority. The fact that it is doing the State of Israel's dirty work by violently oppressing its own subjects is the disgusting but necessary price for maintaining that measure of authority.

Hamas has credibility with many Gazan Palestinians because it won an election democratically to come to power and because it is the only Palestinian authority which will not bow to the State of Israel's military occupation in the Palestinian Occupied Territories. While that latter point may disqualify Hamas for you and to a lesser extent for me, that is a big plus for oppressed Palestinians and the Arab Street all over the Middle East and North Africa.

Just like Sinn Fein is the now-legitimate political arm of the terroristic former IRA so Hamas has a political arm as well as a militant arm. So negotiating with the political arm without any kind of preconditions is a possible road forward towards peace in that part of the Levant. The problem is the State of Israel does not want a negotiated settlement, it seems to want the complete capitulation of the Palestinian Nation so that the Israeli Government can dictate the fate of the Palestinian Nation through absorption of land and displacement of people while at the same time blocking forever the creation of an autonomous and fully sovereign Palestinian State.

So, I ask again; who will speak for the Palestinians if not Fatah and Hamas? If America can hold its nose to negotiate with the terroristic Taliban in order to achieve peace in Afghanistan, then the State of Israel can likewise plug its nose and negotiate with brutal Fatah and terroristic and militant Hamas for peace in the Levant. The problem is that the State of Israel does not want a negotiated settlement ending in Palestinian statehood.

Cheers.
Evilroddy.
Click to expand...

And I answer again. Absent a uniter or a conqueror it will be the same old song and dance... Both ****ting the bed in both Gaza and the West Bank. Both with fatal flaws.

It isn't as if there will be a third party showing up. Hamas and Fatah won't let it happen.

It's like having the Democrats and the Republicans both being led by a Trump clone.
 
TypicalRussian said:
these are ethnic lines in relation to Israel, if we want two states, stop the ethnic cleansing

Also, what is with the anti-Russia hate?
Click to expand...

Ethnic lines?

What?

The vast, vast majority of the green state lands were not habitated. They were owned by the state. The state was the mandate. The mandate’s control over the state’s lands was to create a jewish national home in that territory. It was not the territory of any individual arabs (they can’t really be called palestinians as they did not refer to themselves as plestinians at the time) and it was not controlled by any arab government on their behalf.

The only ethnic cleansing advocated around these parts is those who support the systematic cleansing of Jews from the west bank. The rest of us have no issues with Arabs living in Israel or the Palestinians getting themselves a sovereign state once they give up their goal of destroying israel (which is the core motivating objective of palestinian nationalism) and demonstrate they won’t just use any sovereignty to further their aims of destroying israel like they did with the oslo ruse.

As for the “anti-Russian hate”, just characterizing the propaganda and approach I’ve seen from you so far and putting it into a broader context of how we see RT and other russian propaganda outlets work stories around false narratives. Pretty sure I just saw you dismiss an article cause it was in a jewish publication (and justified excluding it on those grounds). Which brings in a bunch of other stuff we can defer judgment on but fits into a whole different subcurrent of russian intellectual life.
 
Fledermaus said:
And I answer again. Absent a uniter or a conqueror it will be the same old song and dance... Both ****ting the bed in both Gaza and the West Bank. Both with fatal flaws.

It isn't as if there will be a third party showing up. Hamas and Fatah won't let it happen.

It's like having the Democrats and the Republicans both being led by a Trump clone.
Click to expand...

Fledermaus:

With respect you have not answered the question I have posed. Vague generalities about hypothetical future organisations will not replace the reality of Hamas and/or Fatah and the Palestinians' need for real representation now more than ever, given the intention of the State of Israel to annex large portions of the West Bank while besieging Gaza and keeping it isolated from the world at large. So your generalities are not a solution and your discounting of Hamas and/or Fatah in the absence of any real and present alternative is unrealistic and amounts to muzzling the Palestinian Nation at a time when it is under attack once again by the State of Israel. So, in the absence of a real alternative to Hamas and/or Fatah, your point fails as denial of the Palestinian Nation is not a real option.

Cheers.
Evilroddy.
 
Evilroddy said:
Fledermaus:

With respect you have not answered the question I have posed. Vague generalities about hypothetical future organisations will not replace the reality of Hamas and/or Fatah and the Palestinians' need for real representation now more than ever, given the intention of the State of Israel to annex large portions of the West Bank while besieging Gaza and keeping it isolated from the world at large. So your generalities are not a solution and your discounting of Hamas and/or Fatah in the absence of any real and present alternative is unrealistic and amounts to muzzling the Palestinian Nation at a time when it is under attack once again by the State of Israel. So, in the absence of a real alternative to Hamas and/or Fatah, your point fails as denial of the Palestinian Nation is not a real option.

Cheers.
Evilroddy.
Click to expand...

I have answered.

Hamas and Fatah suck. Period. Their "speaking for" the Palestinians has become a sham.

Which of the two SHOULD speak for the Palestinians is frankly irrelevant if neither gets their **** together. The Palestinians will continue to suffer the under either or both of them.

It's a Morton's Fork. A choice with no good outcome. If there are no hypotheticals allowed there is no good solution.
 
oneworld2 said:
Your whole theses is built on a lie that there is a " pro murder camp " that I ,and seemingly others , belong to it.

The reality is, and I have cited where you have done this and if there really is a pro murder group here it is yourself that belongs in it having supported the murder of Palestinians at the fence and also lied about those people so as to try to justify their murder.

As for HRs violation both sides are guilty of them pn a mass scale so any contention of a superiority is at best dubious at worse just plain false
Click to expand...

Your opposition including me does not support murder, and indeed you do.
Pro-murder camp ain't no lie, it's an objective reality documented in this thread and in the overwhelming majority of your previous posts.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom