• Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.

  • CF has always been a site that welcomes people from different backgrounds and beliefs to participate in discussion and even debate. That is the nature of its ministry. In view of recent events emotions are running very high. We need to remind people of some basic principles in debating on this site. We need to be civil when we express differences in opinion. No personal attacks. Avoid you, your statements. Don't characterize an entire political party with comparisons to Fascism or Communism or other extreme movements that committed atrocities. CF is not the place for broad brush or blanket statements about groups and political parties. Put the broad brushes and blankets away when you come to CF, better yet, put them in the incinerator. Debate had no place for them. We need to remember that people that commit acts of violence represent themselves or a small extreme faction.
  • We hope the site problems here are now solved, however, if you still have any issues, please start a ticket in Contact Us

Trump moves forward with Peace in Gaza -

Always in His Presence

Jesus is the only Way
Site Supporter
Nov 15, 2006
51,489
18,656
Broken Arrow, OK
✟1,131,348.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Charismatic
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
Isn’t it already there? Didn’t Trump someone in another thread claim this peace was completed?
Yes - this is phase two - boy it would be so helpful if you would read the links before the kneejerk reaction to criticize.

I'd be embarrassed.
 
Upvote 0

Always in His Presence

Jesus is the only Way
Site Supporter
Nov 15, 2006
51,489
18,656
Broken Arrow, OK
✟1,131,348.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Charismatic
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
IMO

It really feels like we’re looking at a total house of cards here—a self-appointed, self-serving setup that’s basically a corporate takeover disguised as diplomacy. By hand-picking an "Inner Circle" of his own inner circle, Trump has essentially bypassed any actual representation for the people living there, creating a board where you have to pay a billion dollars just to get a permanent seat at the table. It’s wild to think that a self-authored charter, written by the very people running it, can claim authority over an entire territory while the Palestinians and Israelis are sidelined from the real power. With only three years left in this administration, the whole thing seems built on a foundation of ego and temporary political leverage rather than any lasting justice, making you wonder how fast the wind will blow it all down once the names on the letterhead change.
As opposed to........ what country and what plan?
 
Upvote 0

Always in His Presence

Jesus is the only Way
Site Supporter
Nov 15, 2006
51,489
18,656
Broken Arrow, OK
✟1,131,348.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Charismatic
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
....I guess this means Canada isn't invited to the peace party.

Can you name anything that they have done to help peace in the Middle East?
 
Upvote 0

Maria Billingsley

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Oct 7, 2018
11,822
9,880
65
Martinez
✟1,222,806.00
Country
United States
Gender
Female
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Upvote 0

DaisyDay

I Did Nothing Wrong!! ~~Team Deep State
Jan 7, 2003
43,120
20,785
Finger Lakes
✟341,822.00
Country
United States
Gender
Female
Faith
Unitarian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
Does the government know carcinogens in our foods? I don't have to be Ben Carson to know that eating fewer carcinogens will lead to less cancer, and we need to do cancer research. At least the conversation about dyes in our food has come up.
Ben Carson is a neurosurgeon, not a nutritionist or oncologist, so he’s not an authority on carcinogens. Citing him as one is fallacious.

Yes, we may have fewer dyes in our food, but less access to health care including cancer care. Cutting cancer research while decrying poor Donald not getting credit for something he is working actively against is bizarre.
 
Upvote 0

wing2000

E pluribus unum
Site Supporter
Aug 18, 2012
26,290
22,183
✟1,838,907.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Upvote 0

Laodicean60

Well-Known Member
Jul 2, 2023
5,431
2,551
65
NM
✟113,111.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
But the alleged intention is an international organization for international peace.
Pictures don't move me (so I won't read into it), actions do, and if this works this would be good for Gaza. I'm kind of glad to get away from UN because it's a political and prejudiced organization.
 
Upvote 0

Always in His Presence

Jesus is the only Way
Site Supporter
Nov 15, 2006
51,489
18,656
Broken Arrow, OK
✟1,131,348.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Charismatic
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
As opposed to a fully autonomous Palestinian state which has yet to be explored.
Really?

First attempt -​

United Nations Partition Plan — 1947

  • What it proposed: Partition the British Mandate of Palestine into two independent states (one Jewish, one Arab) with Jerusalem under international administration.
  • Outcome: Rejected by Arab leadership/Arab League; led to civil war and then the 1948 Arab-Israeli War.
  • Why it failed: Palestinian and broader Arab rejection of the plan and opposition to the creation of a Jewish state.

Then the second attempt:​
Oslo Accords — 1993-1995
  • What it proposed: Framework for Palestinian self-government and negotiations toward a permanent settlement, implicitly envisioning two states over time.
  • Outcome: Created the Palestinian Authority but did not deliver a final resolution.
The third attempt:​
. Camp David Summit — July 2000
  • What it proposed: A comprehensive final agreement was negotiated between Israel (Prime Minister Ehud Barak) and the Palestinians (Chairman Yasser Arafat), mediated by U.S. President Bill Clinton.
  • Outcome: No agreement was reached. Talks collapsed in late July 2000.
  • Why it failed: Sticking points included Jerusalem’s status, borders/territorial contiguity, refugees and security. Both sides blamed each other; no written offer from Israel addressed core Palestinian demands to Arafat’s satisfaction and Arafat did not accept the proposals as presented.
The fourth attempt:​
Clinton Parameters — December 2000
  • What it proposed: U.S. President Clinton’s guidelines for a final status agreement based on previous negotiations.
  • Outcome: Not implemented. Both parties accepted in principle with reservations, but no follow-through.
The fifth attempt:
Taba Talks — January 2001
  • What it proposed: Continued negotiations after the Clinton Parameters.
  • Outcome: No agreement; talks ran out of time before Israeli elections and leadership changes.
  • Why it failed: Political turnover in Israel (Barak replaced by Sharon) and loss of momentum
The sixth attempt:
Road Map for Peace — 2003
  • What it proposed: U.S.–EU–UN–Russia Quartet plan with phased steps toward a two-state solution.
  • Outcome: Implementation stalled. Both sides accused the other of non-compliance.
  • Why it failed: Ongoing violence (Second Intifada) and mutual accusations regarding settlement activity/security and terrorism.
The seventh attempt:​
Annapolis Conference — November 27, 2007
  • What it proposed: Restart formal negotiations toward a two-state solution with a targeted peace treaty by end of 2008.
  • Outcome: Talks resumed but did not lead to an agreement. Olmert’s government faced internal politics and leadership collapse; negotiations faded.
  • Why it failed: Domestic political instability (Olmert scandal and resignation), continuing disagreements, and later shifts in Israeli policy away from the framework.
The eighth attempt:​
Later Negotiations (e.g., Kerry Talks 2013–14)
  • What they proposed: U.S. Secretary of State’s push for final status agreement based on 1967 borders and related issues.
  • Outcome: No deal; talks collapsed.
  • Why they failed: Deep gaps on settlements, security, refugees, Jerusalem; lack of trust.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

Always in His Presence

Jesus is the only Way
Site Supporter
Nov 15, 2006
51,489
18,656
Broken Arrow, OK
✟1,131,348.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Charismatic
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
Is this a prerequesite for joining the "Peace Board"?
Did I say it was?

Also be careful the spelling police will come after you.
 
Upvote 0

Maria Billingsley

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Oct 7, 2018
11,822
9,880
65
Martinez
✟1,222,806.00
Country
United States
Gender
Female
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Really?

First attempt -​

United Nations Partition Plan — 1947

  • What it proposed: Partition the British Mandate of Palestine into two independent states (one Jewish, one Arab) with Jerusalem under international administration.
  • Outcome: Rejected by Arab leadership/Arab League; led to civil war and then the 1948 Arab-Israeli War.
  • Why it failed: Palestinian and broader Arab rejection of the plan and opposition to the creation of a Jewish state.

Then the second attempt:​
Oslo Accords — 1993-1995
  • What it proposed: Framework for Palestinian self-government and negotiations toward a permanent settlement, implicitly envisioning two states over time.
  • Outcome: Created the Palestinian Authority but did not deliver a final resolution.
The third attempt:​
. Camp David Summit — July 2000
  • What it proposed: A comprehensive final agreement was negotiated between Israel (Prime Minister Ehud Barak) and the Palestinians (Chairman Yasser Arafat), mediated by U.S. President Bill Clinton.
  • Outcome: No agreement was reached. Talks collapsed in late July 2000.
  • Why it failed: Sticking points included Jerusalem’s status, borders/territorial contiguity, refugees and security. Both sides blamed each other; no written offer from Israel addressed core Palestinian demands to Arafat’s satisfaction and Arafat did not accept the proposals as presented.
The fourth attempt:​
Clinton Parameters — December 2000
  • What it proposed: U.S. President Clinton’s guidelines for a final status agreement based on previous negotiations.
  • Outcome: Not implemented. Both parties accepted in principle with reservations, but no follow-through.
The fifth attempt:
Taba Talks — January 2001
  • What it proposed: Continued negotiations after the Clinton Parameters.
  • Outcome: No agreement; talks ran out of time before Israeli elections and leadership changes.
  • Why it failed: Political turnover in Israel (Barak replaced by Sharon) and loss of momentum
The sixth attempt:
Road Map for Peace — 2003
  • What it proposed: U.S.–EU–UN–Russia Quartet plan with phased steps toward a two-state solution.
  • Outcome: Implementation stalled. Both sides accused the other of non-compliance.
  • Why it failed: Ongoing violence (Second Intifada) and mutual accusations regarding settlement activity/security and terrorism.
The seventh attempt:​
Annapolis Conference — November 27, 2007
  • What it proposed: Restart formal negotiations toward a two-state solution with a targeted peace treaty by end of 2008.
  • Outcome: Talks resumed but did not lead to an agreement. Olmert’s government faced internal politics and leadership collapse; negotiations faded.
  • Why it failed: Domestic political instability (Olmert scandal and resignation), continuing disagreements, and later shifts in Israeli policy away from the framework.
The eighth attempt:​
Later Negotiations (e.g., Kerry Talks 2013–14)
  • What they proposed: U.S. Secretary of State’s push for final status agreement based on 1967 borders and related issues.
  • Outcome: No deal; talks collapsed.
  • Why they failed: Deep gaps on settlements, security, refugees, Jerusalem; lack of trust.
A meaningful attempt . None of what was historically presented included a free Palestinian nation and full sovereignty.
 
Upvote 0

Laodicean60

Well-Known Member
Jul 2, 2023
5,431
2,551
65
NM
✟113,111.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
Ben Carson is a neurosurgeon, not a nutritionist or oncologist, so he’s not an authority on carcinogens. Citing him as one is fallacious.
I'll say it plainly, "you don't have to be a brain surgeon to know....." I didn't cite him for anything about cancer.
es, we may have fewer dyes in our food, but less access to health care including cancer care. Cutting cancer research while decrying poor Donald not getting credit for something he is working actively against is bizarre.
Cancer wasn't always a thing, especially when I was young, so what happened? What does research say? Seems the longer they research, the more cancer there is. Could the culprit be what we are ingesting, thus weakening our immune system? Fewer people would need healthcare if they weren't eating poison, but healthy people are bad for the healthcare business.

Why are you talking to me about Donald getting credit and decrying him, sounds like the twilite zone talk. But if I was to give a little credit RFK derserves it.
 
Upvote 0

Always in His Presence

Jesus is the only Way
Site Supporter
Nov 15, 2006
51,489
18,656
Broken Arrow, OK
✟1,131,348.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Charismatic
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
Upvote 0

Maria Billingsley

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Oct 7, 2018
11,822
9,880
65
Martinez
✟1,222,806.00
Country
United States
Gender
Female
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
What does two independent states mean?
Means nothing when the inhabitants , mostly Arab, were given less land in 1947.
Arabs were two-thirds of the population and owned the vast majority of the land, the UN plan gave 56% of the territory to the proposed Jewish state. The Arabs believed a small minority (the Jewish population, many of whom were recent immigrants) should not be given more than half the country against the will of the majority.
Arab leaders claimed the UN General Assembly did not have the legal authority to divide a country or give its land to another group without the consent of the inhabitants. Then in 1948 the land was forcibly given away . The Arab population saw it as an "injustice." This disagreement is what led to the war in 1948 and where we are today.
 
Upvote 0

Always in His Presence

Jesus is the only Way
Site Supporter
Nov 15, 2006
51,489
18,656
Broken Arrow, OK
✟1,131,348.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Charismatic
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
Means nothing when the inhabitants , mostly Arab, were given less land in 1947.
Arabs were two-thirds of the population and owned the vast majority of the land, the UN plan gave 56% of the territory to the proposed Jewish state. The Arabs believed a small minority (the Jewish population, many of whom were recent immigrants) should not be given more than half the country against the will of the majority.
My inquiry was based of your faulty assertion that a two state solution - which means an independent state for both has not been explored when it has been explored eight times.
Arab leaders claimed the UN General Assembly did not have the legal authority to divide a country or give its land to another group without the consent of the inhabitants. Then in 1948 the land was forcibly given away . The Arab population saw it as an "injustice." This disagreement is what led to the war in 1948 and where we are today.

It was not their land - it was Britian's -
 
Upvote 0

Maria Billingsley

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Oct 7, 2018
11,822
9,880
65
Martinez
✟1,222,806.00
Country
United States
Gender
Female
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
My inquiry was based of your faulty assertion that a two state solution - which means an independent state for both has not been explored when it has been explored eight times.


It was not their land - it was Britian's -
I am merely pointing out why none of the attempts could ever come to fruition.

The League of Nations was the original international body that established the legal framework for the area. In 1922, it formally approved the Mandate for Palestine, which handed the actual "power and jurisdiction" to Great Britain as the Mandatory Power.

You would be interested to know that the plan to divide the land into a 56% Jewish sector and a 43% Arab sector was proposed by the United Nations (Resolution 181), not by Britain. By 1947, Britain found the "dual mandate" impossible to manage due to rising violence and referred the matter to the newly formed UN for a solution.
Britain actually abstained from the vote on this partition plan and refused to enforce it because it was not agreed upon by both the Arab and Jewish inhabitants. Their official policy leading up to their 1948 withdrawal, known as the White Paper of 1939, had actually proposed a single, unified state with a limit on Jewish immigration—a policy that was rejected by Zionist leaders at the time.
 
Upvote 0

DaisyDay

I Did Nothing Wrong!! ~~Team Deep State
Jan 7, 2003
43,120
20,785
Finger Lakes
✟341,822.00
Country
United States
Gender
Female
Faith
Unitarian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
I'll say it plainly, "you don't have to be a brain surgeon to know....." I didn't cite him for anything about cancer.
He really shouldn't be cited for anything apart from brain surgery.
Cancer wasn't always a thing, especially when I was young, so what happened?
Yes, cancer has always been a thing even when you were young. Back then, it was usually a death sentence if surgery didn't get it all.
What does research say? Seems the longer they research, the more cancer there is. Could the culprit be what we are ingesting, thus weakening our immune system? Fewer people would need healthcare if they weren't eating poison, but healthy people are bad for the healthcare business.
As @loveofourlord mentioned above, cancer is a category of disease rather than a single malady. Yes, there are known (and surely unknown) carcinogens in food and in the environment.
Why are you talking to me about Donald getting credit and decrying him, sounds like the twilite zone talk.
This exchanged started with one poster fatuously claiming, "People say that if Trump cured cancer, people would still complain. Right now I believe them" to which I replied that he not only has not done anything of the sort but has actively worked against it. At this point, you interjected with Ben Carson and food dyes, quoting my post in full as though you were replying to what I said.

I apologize for not realizing that this was an unrelated tangent about RFK JR.
But if I was to give a little credit RFK derserves it.
Well, okay, pushing healthy food is certainly laudable. Too bad about all the active harm he is wreaking.
 
Upvote 0