International News
See other International News Articles
Title: Trump to Palestinian Authority: No More Aid, No More Talking, No More Anything Until You Commit to Peace
Source:
TimesOfIsrael via AoS
URL Source: http://acecomments.mu.nu/?post=373538
Published: Jan 25, 2018
Author: Ace
Post Date: 2018-01-25 17:57:07 by Tooconservative
Keywords: None
Views: 10309
Comments: 86
Oh well. We'll just have to take the crudity of words backed up by actual action instead of more words. "That money is not going to them unless they sit down and negotiate peace, because I can tell you that Israel does want to make peace, and they’re going to have to want to make peace, too, or we’re going to have nothing to do with it any longer," he said. This Trump is so boorish. I wish we had a well-spoken chubby-faced College Boy like Marco who would talk tough for conservative crowds and then pursue the perpetual pay-off-the-Palestinians plan that the Establishment prefers. In unscripted remarks to the press on Thursday, US President Donald Trump said the US would no longer transfer monetary aid to the Palestinians unless they entered peace negotiations with Israel, and excoriated the Palestinian leadership’s reaction to his decision last month to recognize Jerusalem as Israel's capital.
Poster Comment:
Haley is toeing the same line at the U.N. in a showdown with the Pali scumbag.
Twitchy:
| Nikki Haley destroyed Mahmoud Abbas during the UN Security Council meeting … we love this woman.
From Fox News:
She made Abbas SO mad …
DAMN. |
Post Comment Private Reply Ignore Thread
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
Begin Trace Mode for Comment # 85.
because I can tell you that Israel does want to make peace, and they’re going to have to want to make peace, too,
I am not convinced Israel wants peace at all, except possibly on the condition that the Palestinians officially accept their second rate status. Israel will not accept a 2 state solution even if it means peace, though I'd love to be proven wrong.
Of course Israel will claim they do want peace. If Trump were to make the same ultimatum to Israel it would be interesting to see the reaction. Maybe a 2 state solution OR no more money type deal. AIPAC would go anti-trump in an instant.
#2. To: Pinguinite (#1)
AIPAC, like AMA and ABA and AARP, are just not the powerhouses they once were. They still have influence but pols just aren't very scared of them any more.
Chamber of Commerce is, by itself, probably more powerful than the 4 I listed combined. And a half-dozen more. CoC is very powerful. In many ways, they are the primary muck in the Beltway swamp.
I found it interesting that Trump just happened to launch this threat to defund the Palis, had Haley reinforce it by telling off Abbas to his face, and all just as he arrived at Davos. Imagine their faces! LOL
I saw Times of Israel also reported that France's new prez, Macron, had said he will not recognize Jerusalem as the Palestinian capital but he otherwise will stick with the EU idea that Jerusalem should be a capital for both states in a two-state solution. It's not unthinkable, every peace plan has always had this concept in it.
A handful of small EU countries like Slovenia had been trying to agitate for EU countries to recognize Palestine as a state and its capital as Jerusalem, in effect granting Palestine the status of a nation. That would be a prelude to demanding that Palestine be given a seat at the U.N. So France won't be a part of that. And they do still hold a veto on the Security Council.
#45. To: Tooconservative (#2)
I saw Times of Israel also reported that France's new prez, Macron, had said he will not recognize Jerusalem as the Palestinian capital but he otherwise will stick with the EU idea that Jerusalem should be a capital for both states in a two-state solution.
That's mighty WHITE of the Micro-Leader. And French. Maybe Trump out to move our French embassy to Marseilles. JUST BECAUSE.
I realize you know this, but it bears repeating: Jerusalem has been historically JEWISH and the de facto capital of Israel for over 2000 years.
The EU "idea" of a bi-capital for an alleged "two-state solution" makes as much sense as the EU's suicidal importation/invitation of Muzzie invaders, looters, rapists, and terrorists.
The EU's agenda is a literal occultist, One-World dictatorship in any case. Much like the Democrat Party in the US, the EU/UN are focused on "Divide & Conquer" tactics, lies, and propaganda...
As of late, even the subversive Vatican has stepped out of the closet to support the occultist One-World Gubmint agenda.
#49. To: Liberator (#45)
I realize you know this, but it bears repeating: Jerusalem has been historically JEWISH and the de facto capital of Israel for over 2000 years.
You mean, other than in 70 AD when the Romans leveled it, leaving it unrecognizable according to Josephus. Jesus did prophesy destruction of Jerusalem and the Disapora in Matthew 24. That's when they destroyed the other fortresses and cities of Israel. Enslaved the able-bodied adults and sold all under 17 as personal slaves. Josephus said 1.1 million inhabitants, mostly Jewish, were killed. Then Titus built the Arch of Titus to celebrate. The Jews really hate that thing.
#52. To: Tooconservative (#49)
You mean, other than in 70 AD when the Romans leveled it, leaving it unrecognizable according to Josephus. Jesus did prophesy destruction of Jerusalem and the Disapora in Matthew 24. That's when they destroyed the other fortresses and cities of Israel. Enslaved the able-bodied adults and sold all under 17 as personal slaves. Josephus said 1.1 million inhabitants, mostly Jewish, were killed. Then Titus built the Arch of Titus to celebrate. The Jews really hate that thing.
Bunch of interesting historical tidbits you scrunched up in that little paragraph.
I guess it's hard to sleep on a bed of crushed rock and dust. Oy. "Sho vee took a little break....."
#53. To: Liberator (#52)
Bunch of interesting historical tidbits you scrunched up in that little paragraph.
Well, it is the prophecy of Jesus in Matthew 24 so it doesn't hurt to relay a summary of a contemporary Jew. Of course, Josephus wrote from a perspective that local Jewish leaders like the priests and the hothead Zealots provoked the Romans into destroying Jerusalem and other Jewish cities and sending most of the population into slavery. His account of the massacre and aftermath in Jerusalem is pretty grim stuff.
#54. To: Tooconservative, redleghunter (#53) (Edited)
Of course, Josephus wrote from a perspective that local Jewish leaders like the priests and the hothead Zealots provoked the Romans into destroying Jerusalem and other Jewish cities and sending most of the population into slavery. His account of the massacre and aftermath in Jerusalem is pretty grim stuff.
It's a fascinating historical account. We're fortunate that his account was preserved for posterity. Rarely are past bloody aftermaths related in such detail. I'm sure The Almighty wanted it that way, told from an "outsider" perspective" so it couldn't be claimed to be biased in any way.
That the place and slaughter take place in Jerusalem is one in a litany of many accounts germane to Biblical prophecy and the Jews' self-destruction, redemption, and ultimate return to their home land.
#55. To: Liberator (#54)
Rarely are past bloody aftermaths related in such detail.
Josephus acted as the main negotiator with the Jews in Jerusalem for the Roman general. He was writing a personal account of it. He blamed the Jews but some historians thought he would have been afraid to write anything that would make an emperor want him dead.
#56. To: Tooconservative (#55)
He blamed the Jews but some historians thought he would have been afraid to write anything that would make an emperor want him dead.
Valid and logical claim.
Off the top of your head have you any idea of Josephus' timeline of his personal account?
#57. To: Liberator (#56) (Edited)
Off the top of your head have you any idea of Josephus' timeline of his personal account?
Josephus was there from the beginning to the end AFAIK. He wrote about the entire operation.
Josephus surrendered to Titus' father and was very close to young Titus. Josephus was a Benedict Arnold who got full citizenship and took the family name (Titus Flavius Josephus) as his own. Definitely a dynastic family retainer type, a fixture of the court.
| Josephus recorded Jewish history, with special emphasis on the first century CE and the First Jewish–Roman War, including the Siege of Masada. His most important works were The Jewish War (c. 75) and Antiquities of the Jews (c. 94). The Jewish War recounts the Jewish revolt against Roman occupation (66–70). Antiquities of the Jews recounts the history of the world from a Jewish perspective for an ostensibly Roman audience. These works provide valuable insight into first century Judaism and the background of Early Christianity. |
The Jewish War described briefly:
| Divided into seven books, it opens with a summary of Jewish history from the capture of Jerusalem by the Seleucid ruler Antiochus IV Epiphanes in 164 BC to the first stages of the First Jewish–Roman War (Book I and II). The next five books detail the unfolding of the war, under Roman generals Vespasian and Titus, to the death of the last Sicarii. The book was written about 75 AD, originally in Josephus's "paternal tongue" – either Aramaic or Hebrew[4] – though this version has not survived. It was later translated into Greek, probably under the supervision of Josephus himself. However, "the current Greek edition does not appear to be a translation, but must be considered a new edition, a complete re-working of the first writing and likely a considerable expansion". |
So, yeah, for the first-century, it was a very comprehensive account. We have few to match it or even to compare to it.
I may as well include this first-century bust which is supposedly Josephus himself:
#81. To: Tooconservative (#57)
That's quite a beak on that bust.
(Maybe his worried look broken beak was a warning that Josephus had better edit his original account of "history.")
#83. To: Liberator (#81) (Edited)
That's quite a beak on that bust.
Well, aquiline noses were all the rage back in the day. The sculptors had a pretty free hand to conform statues to the general Roman style.
We don't know how accurate any of these old Roman statues are.
#85. To: Tooconservative (#83)
Well, aquiline noses were all the rage back in the day. The sculptors had a pretty free hand to conform statues to the general Roman style.
Maybe THAT was their plastic surgery fad back in the day. Maybe the bigger and more beakish the schnozz, the more masculine or powerful. And sculptor accommodated the wish of their customers.
We don't know how accurate any of these old Roman statues are.
True. Hmm...You mean centaurs might not actually have existed back then? :-(
And if Mona Lisa was considered "a beauty," those were dire time, weren't they?...
Replies to Comment # 85.
I always thought the various art and statues of Roman emperors had big fake noses. I doubt they had such hawkish honkers in real life. It was the admired facial standard in art in that era. Artists always tend to conform to the popular sensibilities and physical ideals of their own era.
End Trace Mode for Comment # 85.
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
[Home] [Headlines] [Latest Articles] [Latest Comments] [Post] [Mail] [Sign-in] [Setup] [Help] [Register]