Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
Israel was declared by the foreign Jewish Agency that was created in Zurich by the foreign World Zionist Organization.Your ranting is both flawed and irrelevant. Firstly, you make the continued error of suggesting the Egyptian, Syrian and Lebanese squatters / land grabbers can be described as a native population. Secondly, Israel was never a foreign colonial power. Your befuddlement seems to center around confusing some invention of yours regarding a foreign colonial power (the Brits?), previously at war with Arab squatters.Actually it is a war between the native population and a foreign colonial power.P F Tinmore, et al,
I said "IF" (Conditional statement).
(COMMENT)No occupation? I don't see where that is true.However, if as you claim, that Gaza and the West Bank are all one with Israel, then their is no occupation. Although you might make a case for either a "Protectorate Territory" or "Dependent Territory." In which case, international law does not apply to domestic issues.
That would, in point of fact, make Israel a Secessionist State (a State that formally withdraws from the former Territory to which the Mandate of Palestine applied to establish Sovereignty and Independence over a separate political entity); with people exercising their right of self determination.
• The International Community cannot interfere with Domestic Issues. [Article 2(7)]
• If Israel is part of Palestine as "P F Tinmore" and HAMAS Claim, then it is all one country.
• All one country implies any dispute between the people of Israel and the people of the Wes Bank and Gaza Strip is a non-international (domestic nature).
• "Nothing contained in the present Charter shall authorize the United Nations to intervene in matters which are essentially within the domestic jurisdiction of any state or shall require the Members to submit such matters to settlement under the present Charter.
That would make the Israeli-Palestinian Conflict a form of Civil War (a war between political factions or regions within the same country).
Most Respectfully,
R
What war was fought between the British and Arab squatters?
Israel was declared by the foreign Jewish Agency that was created in Zurich by the foreign World Zionist Organization.Your ranting is both flawed and irrelevant. Firstly, you make the continued error of suggesting the Egyptian, Syrian and Lebanese squatters / land grabbers can be described as a native population. Secondly, Israel was never a foreign colonial power. Your befuddlement seems to center around confusing some invention of yours regarding a foreign colonial power (the Brits?), previously at war with Arab squatters.Actually it is a war between the native population and a foreign colonial power.P F Tinmore, et al,
I said "IF" (Conditional statement).
(COMMENT)No occupation? I don't see where that is true.However, if as you claim, that Gaza and the West Bank are all one with Israel, then their is no occupation. Although you might make a case for either a "Protectorate Territory" or "Dependent Territory." In which case, international law does not apply to domestic issues.
That would, in point of fact, make Israel a Secessionist State (a State that formally withdraws from the former Territory to which the Mandate of Palestine applied to establish Sovereignty and Independence over a separate political entity); with people exercising their right of self determination.
• The International Community cannot interfere with Domestic Issues. [Article 2(7)]
• If Israel is part of Palestine as "P F Tinmore" and HAMAS Claim, then it is all one country.
• All one country implies any dispute between the people of Israel and the people of the Wes Bank and Gaza Strip is a non-international (domestic nature).
• "Nothing contained in the present Charter shall authorize the United Nations to intervene in matters which are essentially within the domestic jurisdiction of any state or shall require the Members to submit such matters to settlement under the present Charter.
That would make the Israeli-Palestinian Conflict a form of Civil War (a war between political factions or regions within the same country).
Most Respectfully,
R
What war was fought between the British and Arab squatters?
Of the 37 people who signed Israel's declaration of independence only one was born in Palestine and he was the son of immigrants.
(COMMENT)Actually it is a war between the native population and a foreign colonial power.RoccoR said:That would make the Israeli-Palestinian Conflict a form of Civil War (a war between political factions or regions within the same country).
Maybe because another UN body, the UNCCP, was supposed to address that problem. Who knows? The UN runs more on politics than on legal principles.P F Tinmore, et al,
Oh yeah --- "The Mysterious "Colonial Power."
(COMMENT)Actually it is a war between the native population and a foreign colonial power.RoccoR said:That would make the Israeli-Palestinian Conflict a form of Civil War (a war between political factions or regions within the same country).
Who is the "Colonial Power?"
OH, be sure to let the UN Committee of 24 (Special Committee on Decolonization) know. They could they were unable to find any country in the Middle East under which Declaration on the Granting of Independence to Colonial Countries and Peoples General Assembly Resolution 1514 (XV) was applicable.
Most Respectfully,
R
Of course. Arab-Moslem ineptitude and incompetence always finds blame elsewhere.Maybe because another UN body, the UNCCP, was supposed to address that problem. Who knows? The UN runs more on politics than on legal principles.P F Tinmore, et al,
Oh yeah --- "The Mysterious "Colonial Power."
(COMMENT)Actually it is a war between the native population and a foreign colonial power.RoccoR said:That would make the Israeli-Palestinian Conflict a form of Civil War (a war between political factions or regions within the same country).
Who is the "Colonial Power?"
OH, be sure to let the UN Committee of 24 (Special Committee on Decolonization) know. They could they were unable to find any country in the Middle East under which Declaration on the Granting of Independence to Colonial Countries and Peoples General Assembly Resolution 1514 (XV) was applicable.
Most Respectfully,
R
Maybe because another UN body, the UNCCP, was supposed to address that problem. Who knows? The UN runs more on politics than on legal principles.P F Tinmore, et al,
Oh yeah --- "The Mysterious "Colonial Power."
(COMMENT)Actually it is a war between the native population and a foreign colonial power.RoccoR said:That would make the Israeli-Palestinian Conflict a form of Civil War (a war between political factions or regions within the same country).
Who is the "Colonial Power?"
OH, be sure to let the UN Committee of 24 (Special Committee on Decolonization) know. They could they were unable to find any country in the Middle East under which Declaration on the Granting of Independence to Colonial Countries and Peoples General Assembly Resolution 1514 (XV) was applicable.
Most Respectfully,
R
(COMMENT)Maybe because another UN body, the UNCCP, was supposed to address that problem. Who knows? The UN runs more on politics than on legal principles.P F Tinmore, et al,
Oh yeah --- "The Mysterious "Colonial Power."
(COMMENT)Actually it is a war between the native population and a foreign colonial power.RoccoR said:That would make the Israeli-Palestinian Conflict a form of Civil War (a war between political factions or regions within the same country).
Who is the "Colonial Power?"
OH, be sure to let the UN Committee of 24 (Special Committee on Decolonization) know. They could they were unable to find any country in the Middle East under which Declaration on the Granting of Independence to Colonial Countries and Peoples General Assembly Resolution 1514 (XV) was applicable.
Most Respectfully,
R
The UNCCP was based on the partition plan that flopped and, of course, it flopped too. The only thing that was in it for the Palestinians was their right to return and that flopped too because it was mishandled from the start. They put the right to return into a negotiated position not in the enforcement. Not to mention that the refugees were not a part of the negotiations. The territorial negotiations were by those who had no authority over that territory.P F Tinmore, et al,
Well, I think you have this all wrong. There was a United Nations Conciliation Commission for Palestine (UNCCP) was created by UN A/RES/194(III) in 1948; for the conflicts at the time. But in the establishment of this UNCCP in 1948, Decolonization was NOT in the mandate because A/RES/15/1514 Declaration on the Granting of Independence to Colonial Countries and Peoples was not written until December 1960.
(COMMENT)Maybe because another UN body, the UNCCP, was supposed to address that problem. Who knows? The UN runs more on politics than on legal principles.P F Tinmore, et al,
Oh yeah --- "The Mysterious "Colonial Power."
(COMMENT)Actually it is a war between the native population and a foreign colonial power.RoccoR said:That would make the Israeli-Palestinian Conflict a form of Civil War (a war between political factions or regions within the same country).
Who is the "Colonial Power?"
OH, be sure to let the UN Committee of 24 (Special Committee on Decolonization) know. They could they were unable to find any country in the Middle East under which Declaration on the Granting of Independence to Colonial Countries and Peoples General Assembly Resolution 1514 (XV) was applicable.
Most Respectfully,
R
You may want to revise your position here. The establishment of a Special Committee on the Implementation of the A/RES/15/1514 (XVI) Declaration on the Granting of Independence of Colonial Countries and Peoples of 14 December 1960. The Special Committee was established by A/RES/1654 (XVI) (1961).
The idea of creating the UNCCP was first raised by the UN Mediator for Palestine, Count Folke Bernadotte, in his Progress Report of September 1948. The UNCCP had a twin mandates:
• A Broad Mandate (paragraphs 4 through 6) for conciliation of all outstanding issues between the parties.
• A Specific Mandate (paragraph 11) for the protection and promotion of a durable solution for Palestine refugees.
The first problem held within the Authority itself UN A/RES/194(III), which is a Progress Report, and the parties to the conflict were considered Israel and the Arab States (Lebanon, Syria, Jordan and Egypt). There was not entity known as the "Palestinians" or any variation (to include the failed start-up All Palestine Government).
The second problem was the inseparable is of the "Right-of-Return (RoR), Repatriation - Resettlement -Rehabilitation (Re3)." The UNCCP wanted to grant the Arab Delegations a comprehensive plan for the settlement of the entire refugee problem; and this repatriation would be put into effect only as an integral part of a general and final peace settlement.
It has been Customary Law that the aggressor that failed in the attempt to suppress a people from establishing sovereignty and independence should pay the Re3. Similarly, it has been Customary Law that the each nation (including Israel) shall exercise its national sovereignty if it decides that acceptance, of extraordinary UNCCP negotiated requirements, would jeopardized the the internal security interests of its its nation and/or compromise the ability to adequately defend against similar future attempts. That would include that actual stated threat the Arabs of Palestinians will never submit or yield to any power going to Palestine to enforce partition; and any attempt to establish a Jewish State in Arab Territory is an act of aggression which will be resisted in self-defense. This would pretty much negate the potential that the RoR for the Arabs of Palestinians would be acceptable under any reason.
Most Respectfully,
R
The UNCCP was based on the partition plan that flopped and, of course, it flopped too. The only thing that was in it for the Palestinians was their right to return and that flopped too because it was mishandled from the start. They put the right to return into a negotiated position not in the enforcement. Not to mention that the refugees were not a part of the negotiations. The territorial negotiations were by those who had no authority over that territory.P F Tinmore, et al,
Well, I think you have this all wrong. There was a United Nations Conciliation Commission for Palestine (UNCCP) was created by UN A/RES/194(III) in 1948; for the conflicts at the time. But in the establishment of this UNCCP in 1948, Decolonization was NOT in the mandate because A/RES/15/1514 Declaration on the Granting of Independence to Colonial Countries and Peoples was not written until December 1960.
(COMMENT)Maybe because another UN body, the UNCCP, was supposed to address that problem. Who knows? The UN runs more on politics than on legal principles.P F Tinmore, et al,
Oh yeah --- "The Mysterious "Colonial Power."
(COMMENT)Actually it is a war between the native population and a foreign colonial power.RoccoR said:That would make the Israeli-Palestinian Conflict a form of Civil War (a war between political factions or regions within the same country).
Who is the "Colonial Power?"
OH, be sure to let the UN Committee of 24 (Special Committee on Decolonization) know. They could they were unable to find any country in the Middle East under which Declaration on the Granting of Independence to Colonial Countries and Peoples General Assembly Resolution 1514 (XV) was applicable.
Most Respectfully,
R
You may want to revise your position here. The establishment of a Special Committee on the Implementation of the A/RES/15/1514 (XVI) Declaration on the Granting of Independence of Colonial Countries and Peoples of 14 December 1960. The Special Committee was established by A/RES/1654 (XVI) (1961).
The idea of creating the UNCCP was first raised by the UN Mediator for Palestine, Count Folke Bernadotte, in his Progress Report of September 1948. The UNCCP had a twin mandates:
• A Broad Mandate (paragraphs 4 through 6) for conciliation of all outstanding issues between the parties.
• A Specific Mandate (paragraph 11) for the protection and promotion of a durable solution for Palestine refugees.
The first problem held within the Authority itself UN A/RES/194(III), which is a Progress Report, and the parties to the conflict were considered Israel and the Arab States (Lebanon, Syria, Jordan and Egypt). There was not entity known as the "Palestinians" or any variation (to include the failed start-up All Palestine Government).
The second problem was the inseparable is of the "Right-of-Return (RoR), Repatriation - Resettlement -Rehabilitation (Re3)." The UNCCP wanted to grant the Arab Delegations a comprehensive plan for the settlement of the entire refugee problem; and this repatriation would be put into effect only as an integral part of a general and final peace settlement.
It has been Customary Law that the aggressor that failed in the attempt to suppress a people from establishing sovereignty and independence should pay the Re3. Similarly, it has been Customary Law that the each nation (including Israel) shall exercise its national sovereignty if it decides that acceptance, of extraordinary UNCCP negotiated requirements, would jeopardized the the internal security interests of its its nation and/or compromise the ability to adequately defend against similar future attempts. That would include that actual stated threat the Arabs of Palestinians will never submit or yield to any power going to Palestine to enforce partition; and any attempt to establish a Jewish State in Arab Territory is an act of aggression which will be resisted in self-defense. This would pretty much negate the potential that the RoR for the Arabs of Palestinians would be acceptable under any reason.
Most Respectfully,
R
The UN has continuously fucked up everything starting with Resolution 181. If they would have followed their own charter, we would not be in the mess we are in today.
Enter a new generation of Palestinians who will not except foreigners determining their fate and negotiating away their rights.
The UNCCP was based on the partition plan that flopped and, of course, it flopped too. The only thing that was in it for the Palestinians was their right to return and that flopped too because it was mishandled from the start. They put the right to return into a negotiated position not in the enforcement. Not to mention that the refugees were not a part of the negotiations. The territorial negotiations were by those who had no authority over that territory.P F Tinmore, et al,
Well, I think you have this all wrong. There was a United Nations Conciliation Commission for Palestine (UNCCP) was created by UN A/RES/194(III) in 1948; for the conflicts at the time. But in the establishment of this UNCCP in 1948, Decolonization was NOT in the mandate because A/RES/15/1514 Declaration on the Granting of Independence to Colonial Countries and Peoples was not written until December 1960.
(COMMENT)Maybe because another UN body, the UNCCP, was supposed to address that problem. Who knows? The UN runs more on politics than on legal principles.P F Tinmore, et al,
Oh yeah --- "The Mysterious "Colonial Power."
(COMMENT)Actually it is a war between the native population and a foreign colonial power.
Who is the "Colonial Power?"
OH, be sure to let the UN Committee of 24 (Special Committee on Decolonization) know. They could they were unable to find any country in the Middle East under which Declaration on the Granting of Independence to Colonial Countries and Peoples General Assembly Resolution 1514 (XV) was applicable.
Most Respectfully,
R
You may want to revise your position here. The establishment of a Special Committee on the Implementation of the A/RES/15/1514 (XVI) Declaration on the Granting of Independence of Colonial Countries and Peoples of 14 December 1960. The Special Committee was established by A/RES/1654 (XVI) (1961).
The idea of creating the UNCCP was first raised by the UN Mediator for Palestine, Count Folke Bernadotte, in his Progress Report of September 1948. The UNCCP had a twin mandates:
• A Broad Mandate (paragraphs 4 through 6) for conciliation of all outstanding issues between the parties.
• A Specific Mandate (paragraph 11) for the protection and promotion of a durable solution for Palestine refugees.
The first problem held within the Authority itself UN A/RES/194(III), which is a Progress Report, and the parties to the conflict were considered Israel and the Arab States (Lebanon, Syria, Jordan and Egypt). There was not entity known as the "Palestinians" or any variation (to include the failed start-up All Palestine Government).
The second problem was the inseparable is of the "Right-of-Return (RoR), Repatriation - Resettlement -Rehabilitation (Re3)." The UNCCP wanted to grant the Arab Delegations a comprehensive plan for the settlement of the entire refugee problem; and this repatriation would be put into effect only as an integral part of a general and final peace settlement.
It has been Customary Law that the aggressor that failed in the attempt to suppress a people from establishing sovereignty and independence should pay the Re3. Similarly, it has been Customary Law that the each nation (including Israel) shall exercise its national sovereignty if it decides that acceptance, of extraordinary UNCCP negotiated requirements, would jeopardized the the internal security interests of its its nation and/or compromise the ability to adequately defend against similar future attempts. That would include that actual stated threat the Arabs of Palestinians will never submit or yield to any power going to Palestine to enforce partition; and any attempt to establish a Jewish State in Arab Territory is an act of aggression which will be resisted in self-defense. This would pretty much negate the potential that the RoR for the Arabs of Palestinians would be acceptable under any reason.
Most Respectfully,
R
The UN has continuously fucked up everything starting with Resolution 181. If they would have followed their own charter, we would not be in the mess we are in today.
Enter a new generation of Palestinians who will not except foreigners determining their fate and negotiating away their rights.
No legal right of return and you cant provide a link that says it is an international law. The UNCCP was not based on res 181 at all as it came in after the arab muslims refused to accept 181 and the Jews had declared independence. Once again you try and mix up facts to meet your POV and fail.
The arab muslims had no authority over that land so they should not have been offered Jewish land by the UN in the first place. So yes if the UN had not exceeded their authority and enforced the LoN treaties and Mandate then we would not have the situation we have today. A few well placed strikes and some forfeiture of sovereignty would have the desired effect.
We hear this every generation and the first thing they do is go running to foreigners to determine their fate and negotiate away their rights. Just look at arafat, abbas and the other "leaders" that line their pockets before passing on the aid to the people, all foreingers that use the two year rule.
(COMMENT)No legal right of return and you cant provide a link that says it is an international law.
West Bank FiguresP F Tinmore, et al,
The Right of Return (RoR) is is not as easy as you think. If it was, everyone would be armed with the legal citation and the source in Customary Law, International Law, Accords, Agreements, and Treaties. By the Pro-Arab-Palestinians always go back to the General Assembly Resolution 194 (III) of December 11, 1948, the Palestinian refugees have the right to return and receive financial compensation for lost property. It is reasonable to assume, that Arab Palestinian people have made the claim for a half century, and will continue to make the claim to the RoR; the Pro-Arab-Palestinians movement is relentless in trying to assert that what happened to Palestinians is a form of ethnic cleansing. They are trying to criminalize the establishment of the Jewish National Home. They will use the RoR to overrun the Jewish State of Israel.
For the UN to entertain that line of assertion that it is either implement the RoR or support Ethnic Cleansing. This is a False Dilemmas (Logical Fallacy) --- in that the Pro-Arab-Palestinians imply there are only two choices (you are either if RoR or against the Pro-Arab-Palestinians Movement.
(COMMENT)No legal right of return and you cant provide a link that says it is an international law.
In fact, the entire line of claims by the Pro-Arab-Palestinians reaffirm the position they hold:
• The recognition of the Balfour Declaration, the San Remo Agreement, the Order in Council and the associated Mandate of Palestine or any authoritative documentation arising therefrom are illegitimate.
• That the Allied Powers imposing Jew Immigration to Jewish people willing to assist in the reconstituting and establishment of the Jewish National Home represents an act of aggression and invasion.
• The Pro-Arab-Palestinians are determined to oppose, with all the means at their disposal; in an attempt to disrupt any scheme that provides for the dissection, segregation or partition of the Territory formerly under the Administration of the Mandate.
• Arab Palestinian made a solid declaration that it is the "unflinching determination of every Arab in Palestine to defend his country against any power or group of powers or any force going to Palestine to partition the country. The Arabs are in duty and honor bound to defend their country to the last man."
There is no authoritative Pro-Arab-Palestinians definition of what constitutes the RoR. And since the UNRWA CERI (Consolidate Eligibility Requirements Instruction) is not International Law. What is true is that today, in order for a Arab-Palestinian to have been an actual displaced person whose residence was Palestine (during the period 1 June 1946 to 15 May 1948), would be ≈ 68 years of age. Only about 4% of the 2,785,366 (represents Palestinian population only) (July 2015 est.) are 65 years of age and older.
Life Expectancy at Birth:The practical side of the implementation of RoR is that it places the sworn enemies in the rear area of Israel and opens an entirely new type and kind of internal threat. Additionally, just out of West Bank alone that would place 111K+ unemployed people to the already burdened economy:
Total Population: 75.91 years
Male: 73.79 years
Female: 78.17 years (2015 est.)
Country Comparison to the World: 92
Most Respectfully,
R
The UNCCP was based on the partition plan that flopped and, of course, it flopped too. The only thing that was in it for the Palestinians was their right to return and that flopped too because it was mishandled from the start. They put the right to return into a negotiated position not in the enforcement. Not to mention that the refugees were not a part of the negotiations. The territorial negotiations were by those who had no authority over that territory.P F Tinmore, et al,
Well, I think you have this all wrong. There was a United Nations Conciliation Commission for Palestine (UNCCP) was created by UN A/RES/194(III) in 1948; for the conflicts at the time. But in the establishment of this UNCCP in 1948, Decolonization was NOT in the mandate because A/RES/15/1514 Declaration on the Granting of Independence to Colonial Countries and Peoples was not written until December 1960.
(COMMENT)Maybe because another UN body, the UNCCP, was supposed to address that problem. Who knows? The UN runs more on politics than on legal principles.P F Tinmore, et al,
Oh yeah --- "The Mysterious "Colonial Power."
(COMMENT)
Who is the "Colonial Power?"
OH, be sure to let the UN Committee of 24 (Special Committee on Decolonization) know. They could they were unable to find any country in the Middle East under which Declaration on the Granting of Independence to Colonial Countries and Peoples General Assembly Resolution 1514 (XV) was applicable.
Most Respectfully,
R
You may want to revise your position here. The establishment of a Special Committee on the Implementation of the A/RES/15/1514 (XVI) Declaration on the Granting of Independence of Colonial Countries and Peoples of 14 December 1960. The Special Committee was established by A/RES/1654 (XVI) (1961).
The idea of creating the UNCCP was first raised by the UN Mediator for Palestine, Count Folke Bernadotte, in his Progress Report of September 1948. The UNCCP had a twin mandates:
• A Broad Mandate (paragraphs 4 through 6) for conciliation of all outstanding issues between the parties.
• A Specific Mandate (paragraph 11) for the protection and promotion of a durable solution for Palestine refugees.
The first problem held within the Authority itself UN A/RES/194(III), which is a Progress Report, and the parties to the conflict were considered Israel and the Arab States (Lebanon, Syria, Jordan and Egypt). There was not entity known as the "Palestinians" or any variation (to include the failed start-up All Palestine Government).
The second problem was the inseparable is of the "Right-of-Return (RoR), Repatriation - Resettlement -Rehabilitation (Re3)." The UNCCP wanted to grant the Arab Delegations a comprehensive plan for the settlement of the entire refugee problem; and this repatriation would be put into effect only as an integral part of a general and final peace settlement.
It has been Customary Law that the aggressor that failed in the attempt to suppress a people from establishing sovereignty and independence should pay the Re3. Similarly, it has been Customary Law that the each nation (including Israel) shall exercise its national sovereignty if it decides that acceptance, of extraordinary UNCCP negotiated requirements, would jeopardized the the internal security interests of its its nation and/or compromise the ability to adequately defend against similar future attempts. That would include that actual stated threat the Arabs of Palestinians will never submit or yield to any power going to Palestine to enforce partition; and any attempt to establish a Jewish State in Arab Territory is an act of aggression which will be resisted in self-defense. This would pretty much negate the potential that the RoR for the Arabs of Palestinians would be acceptable under any reason.
Most Respectfully,
R
The UN has continuously fucked up everything starting with Resolution 181. If they would have followed their own charter, we would not be in the mess we are in today.
Enter a new generation of Palestinians who will not except foreigners determining their fate and negotiating away their rights.
No legal right of return and you cant provide a link that says it is an international law. The UNCCP was not based on res 181 at all as it came in after the arab muslims refused to accept 181 and the Jews had declared independence. Once again you try and mix up facts to meet your POV and fail.
The arab muslims had no authority over that land so they should not have been offered Jewish land by the UN in the first place. So yes if the UN had not exceeded their authority and enforced the LoN treaties and Mandate then we would not have the situation we have today. A few well placed strikes and some forfeiture of sovereignty would have the desired effect.
We hear this every generation and the first thing they do is go running to foreigners to determine their fate and negotiate away their rights. Just look at arafat, abbas and the other "leaders" that line their pockets before passing on the aid to the people, all foreingers that use the two year rule.No legal right of return and you cant provide a link that says it is an international law.
All that without refuting one word of my video.P F Tinmore, et al,
The Right of Return (RoR) is is not as easy as you think. If it was, everyone would be armed with the legal citation and the source in Customary Law, International Law, Accords, Agreements, and Treaties. By the Pro-Arab-Palestinians always go back to the General Assembly Resolution 194 (III) of December 11, 1948, the Palestinian refugees have the right to return and receive financial compensation for lost property. It is reasonable to assume, that Arab Palestinian people have made the claim for a half century, and will continue to make the claim to the RoR; the Pro-Arab-Palestinians movement is relentless in trying to assert that what happened to Palestinians is a form of ethnic cleansing. They are trying to criminalize the establishment of the Jewish National Home. They will use the RoR to overrun the Jewish State of Israel.
For the UN to entertain that line of assertion that it is either implement the RoR or support Ethnic Cleansing. This is a False Dilemmas (Logical Fallacy) --- in that the Pro-Arab-Palestinians imply there are only two choices (you are either if RoR or against the Pro-Arab-Palestinians Movement.
(COMMENT)No legal right of return and you cant provide a link that says it is an international law.
In fact, the entire line of claims by the Pro-Arab-Palestinians reaffirm the position they hold:
• The recognition of the Balfour Declaration, the San Remo Agreement, the Order in Council and the associated Mandate of Palestine or any authoritative documentation arising therefrom are illegitimate.
• That the Allied Powers imposing Jew Immigration to Jewish people willing to assist in the reconstituting and establishment of the Jewish National Home represents an act of aggression and invasion.
• The Pro-Arab-Palestinians are determined to oppose, with all the means at their disposal; in an attempt to disrupt any scheme that provides for the dissection, segregation or partition of the Territory formerly under the Administration of the Mandate.
• Arab Palestinian made a solid declaration that it is the "unflinching determination of every Arab in Palestine to defend his country against any power or group of powers or any force going to Palestine to partition the country. The Arabs are in duty and honor bound to defend their country to the last man."
There is no authoritative Pro-Arab-Palestinians definition of what constitutes the RoR. And since the UNRWA CERI (Consolidate Eligibility Requirements Instruction) is not International Law. What is true is that today, in order for a Arab-Palestinian to have been an actual displaced person whose residence was Palestine (during the period 1 June 1946 to 15 May 1948), would be ≈ 68 years of age. Only about 4% of the 2,785,366 (represents Palestinian population only) (July 2015 est.) are 65 years of age and older.
Life Expectancy at Birth:The practical side of the implementation of RoR is that it places the sworn enemies in the rear area of Israel and opens an entirely new type and kind of internal threat. Additionally, just out of West Bank alone that would place 111K+ unemployed people to the already burdened economy:
Total Population: 75.91 years
Male: 73.79 years
Female: 78.17 years (2015 est.)
Country Comparison to the World: 92
Most Respectfully,
R
You make the mistake of desperately wanting to believe these canned YouTube videos you cut and paste. How convenient for you that these Islamic terrorist infomercials are not subject to challenge.All that without refuting one word of my video.P F Tinmore, et al,
The Right of Return (RoR) is is not as easy as you think. If it was, everyone would be armed with the legal citation and the source in Customary Law, International Law, Accords, Agreements, and Treaties. By the Pro-Arab-Palestinians always go back to the General Assembly Resolution 194 (III) of December 11, 1948, the Palestinian refugees have the right to return and receive financial compensation for lost property. It is reasonable to assume, that Arab Palestinian people have made the claim for a half century, and will continue to make the claim to the RoR; the Pro-Arab-Palestinians movement is relentless in trying to assert that what happened to Palestinians is a form of ethnic cleansing. They are trying to criminalize the establishment of the Jewish National Home. They will use the RoR to overrun the Jewish State of Israel.
For the UN to entertain that line of assertion that it is either implement the RoR or support Ethnic Cleansing. This is a False Dilemmas (Logical Fallacy) --- in that the Pro-Arab-Palestinians imply there are only two choices (you are either if RoR or against the Pro-Arab-Palestinians Movement.
(COMMENT)No legal right of return and you cant provide a link that says it is an international law.
In fact, the entire line of claims by the Pro-Arab-Palestinians reaffirm the position they hold:
• The recognition of the Balfour Declaration, the San Remo Agreement, the Order in Council and the associated Mandate of Palestine or any authoritative documentation arising therefrom are illegitimate.
• That the Allied Powers imposing Jew Immigration to Jewish people willing to assist in the reconstituting and establishment of the Jewish National Home represents an act of aggression and invasion.
• The Pro-Arab-Palestinians are determined to oppose, with all the means at their disposal; in an attempt to disrupt any scheme that provides for the dissection, segregation or partition of the Territory formerly under the Administration of the Mandate.
• Arab Palestinian made a solid declaration that it is the "unflinching determination of every Arab in Palestine to defend his country against any power or group of powers or any force going to Palestine to partition the country. The Arabs are in duty and honor bound to defend their country to the last man."
There is no authoritative Pro-Arab-Palestinians definition of what constitutes the RoR. And since the UNRWA CERI (Consolidate Eligibility Requirements Instruction) is not International Law. What is true is that today, in order for a Arab-Palestinian to have been an actual displaced person whose residence was Palestine (during the period 1 June 1946 to 15 May 1948), would be ≈ 68 years of age. Only about 4% of the 2,785,366 (represents Palestinian population only) (July 2015 est.) are 65 years of age and older.
Life Expectancy at Birth:The practical side of the implementation of RoR is that it places the sworn enemies in the rear area of Israel and opens an entirely new type and kind of internal threat. Additionally, just out of West Bank alone that would place 111K+ unemployed people to the already burdened economy:
Total Population: 75.91 years
Male: 73.79 years
Female: 78.17 years (2015 est.)
Country Comparison to the World: 92
Most Respectfully,
R
BTW, UNRWA is a relief agency. It merely defines who is eligible for aid. It has nothing to do with RoR.
All that without refuting one word of my video.P F Tinmore, et al,
The Right of Return (RoR) is is not as easy as you think. If it was, everyone would be armed with the legal citation and the source in Customary Law, International Law, Accords, Agreements, and Treaties. By the Pro-Arab-Palestinians always go back to the General Assembly Resolution 194 (III) of December 11, 1948, the Palestinian refugees have the right to return and receive financial compensation for lost property. It is reasonable to assume, that Arab Palestinian people have made the claim for a half century, and will continue to make the claim to the RoR; the Pro-Arab-Palestinians movement is relentless in trying to assert that what happened to Palestinians is a form of ethnic cleansing. They are trying to criminalize the establishment of the Jewish National Home. They will use the RoR to overrun the Jewish State of Israel.
For the UN to entertain that line of assertion that it is either implement the RoR or support Ethnic Cleansing. This is a False Dilemmas (Logical Fallacy) --- in that the Pro-Arab-Palestinians imply there are only two choices (you are either if RoR or against the Pro-Arab-Palestinians Movement.
(COMMENT)No legal right of return and you cant provide a link that says it is an international law.
In fact, the entire line of claims by the Pro-Arab-Palestinians reaffirm the position they hold:
• The recognition of the Balfour Declaration, the San Remo Agreement, the Order in Council and the associated Mandate of Palestine or any authoritative documentation arising therefrom are illegitimate.
• That the Allied Powers imposing Jew Immigration to Jewish people willing to assist in the reconstituting and establishment of the Jewish National Home represents an act of aggression and invasion.
• The Pro-Arab-Palestinians are determined to oppose, with all the means at their disposal; in an attempt to disrupt any scheme that provides for the dissection, segregation or partition of the Territory formerly under the Administration of the Mandate.
• Arab Palestinian made a solid declaration that it is the "unflinching determination of every Arab in Palestine to defend his country against any power or group of powers or any force going to Palestine to partition the country. The Arabs are in duty and honor bound to defend their country to the last man."
There is no authoritative Pro-Arab-Palestinians definition of what constitutes the RoR. And since the UNRWA CERI (Consolidate Eligibility Requirements Instruction) is not International Law. What is true is that today, in order for a Arab-Palestinian to have been an actual displaced person whose residence was Palestine (during the period 1 June 1946 to 15 May 1948), would be ≈ 68 years of age. Only about 4% of the 2,785,366 (represents Palestinian population only) (July 2015 est.) are 65 years of age and older.
Life Expectancy at Birth:The practical side of the implementation of RoR is that it places the sworn enemies in the rear area of Israel and opens an entirely new type and kind of internal threat. Additionally, just out of West Bank alone that would place 111K+ unemployed people to the already burdened economy:
Total Population: 75.91 years
Male: 73.79 years
Female: 78.17 years (2015 est.)
Country Comparison to the World: 92
Most Respectfully,
R
BTW, UNRWA is a relief agency. It merely defines who is eligible for aid. It has nothing to do with RoR.
(COMMENT)P F Tinmore said:All that without refuting one word of my video.
In this Brief, the author argues that the right of refugees to return to their homes and properties had already achieved customary status (binding international law) by 1948. UN Resolution 194, therefore, simply reaffirms international legal principles that were already binding and which required states to allow refugees to return to their places of origin, and prohibited mass expulsion of persons - particularly on discriminatory grounds. UN Resolution 194's consistency with international law and practice over the past five decades further strengthens its value as a normative framework for a durable solution for Palestinian refugees today.P F Tinmore et al,
I don’t believe I had an intention of “refuting” (primary intention of proving the video to be wrong or false). I don’t start-out argumentative where it is not necessary. I merely outlined some of the factors not taken into account in the “strict compliance” concepts the video presents.
In every comment I make, there is always something left-out or truncated. You can write an Event-Encyclopedia or multi-volume study on the conflict and still leave something out. There is a limitation here.
The video presentation did not touch on why the Palestinians were displaced, or what dangers they pose to the peace and security to that landscape. It merely attempts, as my previous comment discussed, the strategy of trying to demonstrate that everything that does not agree with the Arab Palestinian view is illegal, improper or at fault in some fashion.
I think that the actually history of the Arab Palestinian and the political involvement of the Mufti to exploit religious disputes, demonstrates the weakness and failure of the radicalized Arab Palestinian as is creates an Islamic Resistance, a Jihadist Insurgency, and resort to a harmful new way of life that accelerates and embraces death and dishonors the people and the culture.
When the people of the world think of a terrorist, the picture they mentally envision is that of the Arab (bomb vest optional).
Arab Palestinians send their kids to Jihadist Summer Camp, yet parade the dead bodies of their children around when they intentionally perform military operations in a densely populated areas, and attempted to draw fire, to make a media event out of it.
(COMMENT)P F Tinmore said:All that without refuting one word of my video.
There is no solution for the Palestinian question except through Jihad.
HAMAS Covenant
"The Islamic Land of Palestine is one and cannot be divided.
There is no difference between Haifa and Nablus, between
Lod and Ramallah, between Jerusalem and Nazareth. Dividing
Palestine into cantons and giving recognition to the occupation
is prohibited by Sharia (Islamic religious law), since Palestinian
is Wakf (Islamic Trust) for all Moslems in the East and in the
West. No one has the right to give it up or to forsake it. The
liberation of Palestine is a mandatory obligation for all
Moslem and not only for our Palestinian nation.”
Shiekh Yuosouf Abu Sneina,
Official Cleric of the Al Aqsa Mosque,
Nowhere, in this reference list, does the International Body of Law, require the Jewish State of Israel to repatriate Arab-Palestinians that declared a Jihad before the Declaration of Independence of Israel. Nor does the International Body of Law, being used as a Trojan Horse, enjoin the Israeli to accept Jihadists, Fedayeen, insurgents, radical Islamist and assorted terrorists that kidnap and murder, specifically zero-in on civilians as targets of conventional and asymmetric attacks, hijackings, piracy, sabotage, bombings and other tactics that spread fear across the general population. There is no International Law that require Israel to place its citizens in jeopardy by re-admitting Arabs of Palestine that 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.
None of these laws are —- by absolute decree —- are applicable under the conditions of conflict, wherein the identified refugees wish to avail themselves of the RoR, yet have pledged an oath to open hostilities and to maintain hostilities until the Jewish National Home is removed. This oath was made in 1948, even before the the Declaration of Independence for the Jewish State of Israel; and before the Arab League Nations coordinated assault.
Most Respectfully,
R
In this Brief, the author argues that the right of refugees to return to their homes and properties had already achieved customary status (binding international law) by 1948. UN Resolution 194, therefore, simply reaffirms international legal principles that were already binding and which required states to allow refugees to return to their places of origin, and prohibited mass expulsion of persons - particularly on discriminatory grounds. UN Resolution 194's consistency with international law and practice over the past five decades further strengthens its value as a normative framework for a durable solution for Palestinian refugees today.P F Tinmore et al,
I don’t believe I had an intention of “refuting” (primary intention of proving the video to be wrong or false). I don’t start-out argumentative where it is not necessary. I merely outlined some of the factors not taken into account in the “strict compliance” concepts the video presents.
In every comment I make, there is always something left-out or truncated. You can write an Event-Encyclopedia or multi-volume study on the conflict and still leave something out. There is a limitation here.
The video presentation did not touch on why the Palestinians were displaced, or what dangers they pose to the peace and security to that landscape. It merely attempts, as my previous comment discussed, the strategy of trying to demonstrate that everything that does not agree with the Arab Palestinian view is illegal, improper or at fault in some fashion.
I think that the actually history of the Arab Palestinian and the political involvement of the Mufti to exploit religious disputes, demonstrates the weakness and failure of the radicalized Arab Palestinian as is creates an Islamic Resistance, a Jihadist Insurgency, and resort to a harmful new way of life that accelerates and embraces death and dishonors the people and the culture.
When the people of the world think of a terrorist, the picture they mentally envision is that of the Arab (bomb vest optional).
Arab Palestinians send their kids to Jihadist Summer Camp, yet parade the dead bodies of their children around when they intentionally perform military operations in a densely populated areas, and attempted to draw fire, to make a media event out of it.
(COMMENT)P F Tinmore said:All that without refuting one word of my video.
There is no solution for the Palestinian question except through Jihad.
HAMAS Covenant
"The Islamic Land of Palestine is one and cannot be divided.
There is no difference between Haifa and Nablus, between
Lod and Ramallah, between Jerusalem and Nazareth. Dividing
Palestine into cantons and giving recognition to the occupation
is prohibited by Sharia (Islamic religious law), since Palestinian
is Wakf (Islamic Trust) for all Moslems in the East and in the
West. No one has the right to give it up or to forsake it. The
liberation of Palestine is a mandatory obligation for all
Moslem and not only for our Palestinian nation.”
Shiekh Yuosouf Abu Sneina,
Official Cleric of the Al Aqsa Mosque,
Nowhere, in this reference list, does the International Body of Law, require the Jewish State of Israel to repatriate Arab-Palestinians that declared a Jihad before the Declaration of Independence of Israel. Nor does the International Body of Law, being used as a Trojan Horse, enjoin the Israeli to accept Jihadists, Fedayeen, insurgents, radical Islamist and assorted terrorists that kidnap and murder, specifically zero-in on civilians as targets of conventional and asymmetric attacks, hijackings, piracy, sabotage, bombings and other tactics that spread fear across the general population. There is no International Law that require Israel to place its citizens in jeopardy by re-admitting Arabs of Palestine that 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.
None of these laws are —- by absolute decree —- are applicable under the conditions of conflict, wherein the identified refugees wish to avail themselves of the RoR, yet have pledged an oath to open hostilities and to maintain hostilities until the Jewish National Home is removed. This oath was made in 1948, even before the the Declaration of Independence for the Jewish State of Israel; and before the Arab League Nations coordinated assault.
Most Respectfully,
R
http://www.badil.org/phocadownload/Badil_docs/bulletins-and-briefs/Brief-No.8.pdf
