collective punishments

[Hossfly]

you are off topic, irosie.

If anyone is using Palestinian refusal of the Partition Plan in 1947 as a justification for perpetuating a state of hostility, then the 1947 borders ought to be acceptable to that person.

Of course some people want to go back thousands of years to justify maximum land acquisition and dispossession of another nation. Go figure.

your sophistry is really cute------the arabs (in 1947 the only people called
Palestinians were jews) refused the 1947 partition plan in 1947. They also
clearly stated that they would not tolerate a jewish state in the middle east
would destroy it along with its people. BESIDES that ---they intiated pogroms
against jewish populations in middle east lands and refused to allow jews
to leave those countries Remember your fond memories of the jewish infants
------1947 ---dead in the gutter of Aden. and the pogroms even in Tunisia ---
where jews had resided for more than 2500 years but in your view had NO
NATIONAL RIGHTS etc etc 1947 was 1947----since that time the population
of jews indigenous to middle east IN ISRAEL has increased-----the ones you insist
HAVE NO NATIONAL RIGHTS How do you imagine going back to 1947 can
happen now? An interesting factoid is that Beersheba is home to lots
of those very jews who escaped the oppressions that you laud----in the middle
east of 1947 and a few years thereafter-----that REACTION TO THE EXISTENCE OF
THE ZIONIST ENTITY. -----I know the next fact I tell you will upset you---
Hubby ---was no longer in Aden for that pogrom that warms the cockles of
your heart-----in 1947-----so his little throat was not slit by innocent arab muslims
who ------according to you----are JUSTIFIED

People of Amity's stripe want to re-write history.

 

[irosie91]

At the very least BALESTINIANS----should have chosen
a name that they can PRONOUNCE. I find it interesting that Arabic speaking jews----have
no trouble with the letter P but Arabic speaking muslims do. Is that not
interesting?

OMG, did you actually say this.

For the first time since joining this forum I am actually laughing.



The falastiniyoon are doing just fine pronouncing their own name, شكرا لك، يا عزيزي فتاة.

الفلسطينيين


Palestinian people - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Palestinian Arabic - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

how to say "Palestinians" in Arabic? - Bing Videos



There is no equivalent of the letter "P" in Arabic.

Say that looks like a picture an Israeli Jewish friend has of her mother and her Jewish classmates.

sally ----I am glad you posted that observation-----it was in my head too--but--
I just could not do it.......

 

[P F Tinmore]

P F Tinmore, et al,

I think you've made a mistake here; or maybe not.

P F Tinmore, MHunterB, et al,

What are "rights?" What are they if the indigenous population does not avial themselves of these "rights" and does not maintain them.


(COMMENT)

But, for the last thousand years (plus), there has always been a governmental authority over the territory of Palestine. The Israelis have just as many rights, if not more, than the Arab Palestinian. They were given an opportunity, they took the opportunity, and the made something of the opportunity. None of which can be said for the Arab Palestinian.

Most Respectfully,
R

Combine the military of a world super power with a well funded bunch of criminals from Europe against a basically unarmed civilian population and you blame the Palestinians of not maintaining their rights.

That is why external interference is illegal.

(COMMENT)

Of the three major wars fought over the territory, the only foreign (external influence) to set foot on the battlefield were those boot belonging to the Arab League.

Remembering that the immigration for those Jew People willing to reconstitute the National Home was approved by the Allied Powers.

Bantering around this allegation of "criminals from Europe" is merely a continuation of the "virtual victim strategy." It has nothing to do with the real-world construct of reality. It is propaganda to incite violence and promote hatred; a common theme in Arab Palestinian world.

The external interference was demonstrated by the Arab League (Military Elements of Lebanon, Syria, Jordan, Iraq, Yemen and Egypt) that crossed into the territory when Israel exercised its right to self-determination and declared independence. It was the Arab League that attempted to subvert the will of the UN General Assembly and deny the Jewish people their rights as made plain by the Assembly.

For nearly seven decades we've heard (over and over again) how the Arab Palestinian was denied the rights and how they have been a victim of a huge miscarriage of justice.

Let's not forget that:

The representative designated by the Government of the United Kingdom was Sir Alexander Cadogan. The representative designated by the Jewish Agency for Palestine was Mr. Moshe Shertok. As regards the Arab Higher Committee, the following telegraphic response was received by the Secretary-General on 19 January:

“ARAB HIGHER COMMITTEE IS DETERMINED PERSIST IN REJECTION PARTITION AND IN REFUSAL RECOGNIZE UNO RESOLUTION THIS RESPECT AND ANYTHING DERIVING THEREFROM. FOR THESE REASONS IT IS UNABLE ACCEPT INVITATION”​

No further communication has been addressed to or received from the Arab Higher Committee by the Commission. The Commission will, at the appropriate time, set forth in a separate document its views with regard to the implementations of this refusal by the Arab Higher Committee.

SOURCE: A/AC.21/7 29 January 1948

13. In conclusion, the Arab Higher Committee Delegation wishes to stress the following:

(a) The Arabs of Palestine will never recognise the validity of the extorted partition recommendations or the authority of the United Nations to make them.

(b) The Arabs of Palestine consider that any attempt by the Jews or any power group of powers to establish a Jewish state in Arab territory is an act of aggression which will be resisted in self-defense.

(c) It is very unwise and fruitless to ask any commission to proceed to Palestine because not a single Arab will cooperate with the said Commission.

(d) The United Nations or its Commission should not be misled to believe that its efforts in the partition plan will meet with any success. It will be far better for the eclipsed prestige of this organization not to start on this adventure.

(e) The United Nations prestige will be better served by abandoning, not enforcing such an injustice.

(f) The determination of every Arab in Palestine is to oppose in every way the partition of that country.

(g) The Arabs of Palestine made a solemn declaration before the United Nations, before God and history, that they will never submit or yield to any power going to Palestine to enforce partition. The only way to establish partition is first to wipe them out — man, woman and child.​

I beg to remain, etc.
/s/ Isa Nakhleh
Representative of the
Arab Higher Committee​

SOURCE: A/AC.21/10 16 February 1948

The Arab Palestinian did not have to go to war as the belligerent aggressor; they chose to go to war. Just as they chose to NOT participate in the process.

The Arabs of Palestine made a solemn declaration before the United Nations, before God and history, that they will never submit or yield to any power going to Palestine to enforce partition.

The only way to establish partition is first to wipe them out — man, woman and child.​

This legacy lives on today. If the Arabs want to point a finger at someone, they need to look in the mirror. They started the seven decades of conflict, and continue to refrain from participating in a good faith peace process to this very day.

Most Respectfully,
R

Remembering that the immigration for those Jew People willing to reconstitute the National Home was approved by the Allied Powers.

Rocco, Rocco, Rocco, when international law states that external interference is illegal do you think it was talking about Uruguay?

Or was it talking about world powers who have the means to interfere?

 

[RoccoR]

P F Tinmore, et al,

The Arab Palestinian, as in the shape of their perpetual victim persona, always try to blame someone else.

Remembering that the immigration for those Jew People willing to reconstitute the National Home was approved by the Allied Powers.

Rocco, Rocco, Rocco, when international law states that external interference is illegal do you think it was talking about Uruguay?

Or was it talking about world powers who have the means to interfere?

(COMMENT)

First, citation of "external interference" did not come into vogue until the UN Charter. It was applicable back in the day when the Mandate was written.

Even if it was, the League of Nations and the Allied Powers were not the "external influence." The territory was in there control by treaty arrangement.

Finally, the "external influence" was the Arab League and the introduction of their forces into the territory. The Allied Powers did not put any boots on the ground during the 1948 Israeli War for Independence. Only the Arab League crossed their borders and illegally entered the Territory under trusteeship and Israel.

The external influence WAS that of the Arab League.

Most Respectfully,
R

 

[P F Tinmore]

P F Tinmore, et al,

The Arab Palestinian, as in the shape of their perpetual victim persona, always try to blame someone else.

Remembering that the immigration for those Jew People willing to reconstitute the National Home was approved by the Allied Powers.

Rocco, Rocco, Rocco, when international law states that external interference is illegal do you think it was talking about Uruguay?

Or was it talking about world powers who have the means to interfere?

(COMMENT)

First, citation of "external interference" did not come into vogue until the UN Charter. It was applicable back in the day when the Mandate was written.

Even if it was, the League of Nations and the Allied Powers were not the "external influence." The territory was in there control by treaty arrangement.

Finally, the "external influence" was the Arab League and the introduction of their forces into the territory. The Allied Powers did not put any boots on the ground during the 1948 Israeli War for Independence. Only the Arab League crossed their borders and illegally entered the Territory under trusteeship and Israel.

The external influence WAS that of the Arab League.

Most Respectfully,
R

Indeed, but the UN does not create law. It does reference and sometimes clarify already existing legal norms. Though not specifically stated, these norms were mentioned in the LoN Covenant.

 

[RoccoR]

P F Tinmore, et al,

What!

Indeed, but the UN does not create law. It does reference and sometimes clarify already existing legal norms. Though not specifically stated, these norms were mentioned in the LoN Covenant.

(COMMENT)

Just cite whatever it is that you are using as "international law."

Most Respectfully,
R

 

[SAYIT]

amity1844, et al,

No, I don't think so.

This legacy lives on today. If the Arabs want to point a finger at someone, they need to look in the mirror. They started the seven decades of conflict, and continue to refrain from participating in a good faith peace process to this very day.

Most Respectfully,
R

Rocco, if we get the UN to declare that we go back to the 1947 Partition Plan, are you and Israel going to go along with that? No land grabs?

(COMMENT)

That would be tantamount to allowing the Arab Palestinian to engage in three wars (+), and numerous criminal activities without any sort of penalty.

As I said, the Israelis made something of their opportunities, and the Arab Palestinians took another path.

There are war reparations, restitution, claims and settlements to be considered, not to mention the infrastructure improvements and commercial enhancements. On the other hand, the Arab Palestinians lend nothing to the falling back on the original plan of apportionment.

There should never be a case where the Arab Palestinians (or any nation for that matter) should be allowed to use military aggression, fail --- and then, ask for a do-over at no cost to them.

Most Respectfully,
R

I respectfully disagree.
The Arabs and Amity can ask all they like ... they just can't have.

 

[Billo_Really]

What Israel is doing to the Gaza strip is brutal and inhuman.

Gaza strip

Israeli forces subject the Gaza Strip to a closure since 2007, an unprecedented form of severe collective punishment. The blockade is preventing reconstruction and recovery of thousands of homes, schools, hospitals and water networks destroyed during Israel's military offensives in 2008-2009 and in November 2012, depleting the resources of a collapsing economy. The population of 1.6 million people, more than half of which are children, suffers from high levels of poverty and dependence on aid.

It's also illegal and immoral.


Since Phonefuck can't provide any links justifying the Gaza blockade, here's a couple things that are interesting...

Gaza flotilla attack: UN report condemns Israeli 'brutality'

The UN Human Rights Council's fact-finding mission judged Israel's naval blockade of the Palestinian territory to be "unlawful" because there was a humanitarian crisis in Gaza at the time.

The panel concluded that there was "clear evidence" of wilful killing, torture or inhuman treatment and wilfully causing great suffering or serious injury to body or health – all crimes under the Geneva Convention.

Hey shithead (Phoney), I searched the official ICJ website and there is only one entry regarding Israel and it ain't about the blockade!





So you're a god-damn, mother-fucking liar!

 

[P F Tinmore]

P F Tinmore, et al,

What!

Indeed, but the UN does not create law. It does reference and sometimes clarify already existing legal norms. Though not specifically stated, these norms were mentioned in the LoN Covenant.

(COMMENT)

Just cite whatever it is that you are using as "international law."

Most Respectfully,
R

ARTICLE 22.

To those colonies and territories which as a consequence of the late war have ceased to be under the sovereignty of the States which formerly governed them and which are inhabited by peoples not yet able to stand by themselves under the strenuous conditions of the modern world, there should be applied the principle that the well-being and development of such peoples form a sacred trust of civilisation and that securities for the performance of this trust should be embodied in this Covenant.

Avalon Project - The Covenant of the League of Nations

Like I said, the right to self determination was not specifically stated. However:

The well-being and development of such peoples form a sacred trust. I read that to mean that being trampled by foreign powers would be a violation of that sacred trust. If you read that differently, explain where I am incorrect.

Also, These rights belong to the people and do not require "a state." This is contrary to those who say that people without a state have no rights.

 

[RoccoR]

et al, and @ Billo_Really,

I think you've maybe misunderstood something here.

Gaza flotilla attack: UN report condemns Israeli 'brutality'

The UN Human Rights Council's fact-finding mission judged Israel's naval blockade of the Palestinian territory to be "unlawful" because there was a humanitarian crisis in Gaza at the time.

The panel concluded that there was "clear evidence" of wilful killing, torture or inhuman treatment and wilfully causing great suffering or serious injury to body or health – all crimes under the Geneva Convention.

Hey shithead (Phoney), I searched the official ICJ website and there is only one entry regarding Israel and it ain't about the blockade!

(COMMENT)

There is a report that investigates the Blockade. It was prompted by the events of 31 May 2010 when a flotilla of six vessels was boarded and taken over by Israeli Defense Forces 72 nautical miles from land (AKA: Mavi Marmara Incident).

72. The Panel notes in this regard that the uncertain legal status of Gaza under international law cannot mean that Israel has no right to self-defence against armed attacks directed toward its territory. The Israeli report to the Panel makes it clear that the naval blockade as a measure of the use of force was adopted for the purpose of defending its territory and population, and the Panel accepts that was the case. It was designed as one way to prevent weapons reaching Gaza by sea and to prevent such attacks to be launched from the sea. Indeed there have been various incidents in which ships carrying weapons were intercepted by the Israeli authorities on their way to Gaza. While the attacks have not completely ceased since the time of the imposition of the naval blockade, their scale and intensity has much decreased over time. While this decrease might also be due to other factors,261 a blockade in those circumstances is a legitimate exercise of the right of self-defence. Although a blockade by definition imposes a restriction on all maritime traffic, given the relatively small size of the blockade zone and the practical difficulties associated with other methods of monitoring vessels (such as by search and visit), the Panel is not persuaded that the naval blockade was a disproportionate measure for Israel to have taken in response to the threat it faced.

82. The fundamental principle of the freedom of navigation on the high seas is subject to only certain limited exceptions under international law. Israel faces a real threat to its security from militant groups in Gaza. The naval blockade was imposed as a legitimate security measure in order to prevent weapons from entering Gaza by sea and its implementation complied with the requirements of international law.

SOURCE: UN Archive: September 2011 Panel of Inquiry Mavi Marmara Flotilla Incident

While the report did take issue with the general treatment of passengers, and recommended some measures in restitution, the blockade itself was considered legitimate.

Most Respectfully,
R