Gaza army

P F Tinmore, et al,

When, the declaration was adopted by General Assembly as Resolution 1514 (XV) of 14 December 1960, it was a very different region.

No, I am just saying that those resolutions do not fit Palestine's situation. This is more applicable.

The United Nations and Decolonization - Declaration
(COMMENT)

In 1960, the West Bank was under Jordanian Sovereignty; established by the Jordanian parliament a decade before --- and remained so until 1988. This was a political action in which the Palestinian Arabs of the West Bank were equally represented in the Jordanian Parliament. The motion was unanimously approved through Parliament and with the consent of the Palestinian
People (right of self-determination). This was not a move by any colonial power. So, essentially, from the time of the Arab League invasion (1948), until the Disengagement from the West Bank by Jordan in EOM July 1988, by the consent of the Palestinians, the West Bank was under Jordanian control (military occupation until April 1950, and sovereignty through July1988). If there was a Colonial Power (establishment, exploitation, maintenance, acquisition, and expansion of colony in one territory by a political power from another territory), it would have been The Hashemite Kingdom. BUT, since the Palestinians of the West Bank were deeply involved in the annexation of the West Bank, and that the West Bank was annexed through the consent of the people, it is not really a colonial action.

Similarly, the Gaza Strip was (theoretically) was under the quasi-Administration of the "All Palestinian Government" (APG), under the umbrella protection of the Egyptian Military Governorship from the time of the Arab League invasion (1948) until the Egyptian Government dissolved the APG in 1959. From that point forward, and until the Peace Treaty between Israel and Egypt, the Egyptian Military Governorship maintained control over the Gaza Strip. Again, if there was a Colonial Power (establishment, exploitation, maintenance, acquisition, and expansion of colony in one territory by a political power from another territory), it would have been Arab Republic of Egypt.

In time of the Seventh Arab League Summit Conference Resolution on Palestine --- Rabat, Morocco 28 October 1974; the Arab League
(as the regional authority of Arabs) recognized an independent national authority under the command of the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO), the sole legitimate representative of the Palestinian people in any Palestinian territory that is liberated. This authority, once it is established, shall enjoy the support of the Arab states in all fields and at all levels. In 1974, the West Bank was still sovereign Jordanian territory; not liberated Palestinian territory. And again, the Gaza Strip was still under the Military Governorship; which did not change until the Treaty of Peace between the Arab Republic of Egypt and the State of Israel, 26 March 1979.


The fact is that the Palestinians have never had much to do in choosing their own leaders. For the most part they have been imposed on them by outsiders. Palestine was born under occupation and that continues today.
(COMMENT)

The Palestinians have always had the capacity in choosing their leadership. The Palestinians merely forfeited their options and allowed their opportunities to be exploited by other Arabs.

The Palestinians had essentially the same opportunities as the Israelis; they just could not make it work for them.

Most Respectfully,
R
The Palestinians have always had the capacity in choosing their leadership.​

Yeah, like their election of Hamas in 2006.

Not to mention that Britain arrested, exiled, or killed Palestinian leaders all through the Mandate period.
 
P F Tinmore, et al,

Humm. There are always answers. It is just that some of the answers you don't like. Remember the 1954 Convention relating to the Status of Stateless Persons.

When, the declaration was adopted by General Assembly as Resolution 1514 (XV) of 14 December 1960, it was a very different region.


Politics and propaganda have changed. Legalities have not.

I have a question that will not be answered.

If Israel occupied the Jordanian territory of the West Bank in 1967, why did Jordan relinquish the territory to the PLO in 1988?

Your post does not make any sense.
(COMMENT)

The Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan did not "relinquish the territory to the PLO in 1988;" as you suggest. "On July 31 1988, King Hussein announced the severance of all administrative and legal ties with the occupied West Bank." Under Article 1(1) of the Convention Relating to Stateless Persons:

• "For the purpose of this Convention, the term “stateless person” means a person who is not considered as a national by any State under the operation of its law."​

By default and under the unified Arab League Resolution of 28 October 1974 (Rabat), when Jordan broke all ties with the West Bank, the PLO became sole legitimate representative of the Palestinian people of the West Bank; who would have become stateless otherwise.

Most Respectfully,
R
 
P F Tinmore, et al,

This is confusing.

The Palestinians have always had the capacity in choosing their leadership.
Yeah, like their election of Hamas in 2006.

Not to mention that Britain arrested, exiled, or killed Palestinian leaders all through the Mandate period.
(COMMENT)

The Mandate Periods ended in 1948. That is 48 years (nearly half a century) before the election of the Islamic Resistance Movement (HAMAS), and a recognized terrorist organization. The Palestinians have the right to select their own government; but they must also be willing to accept the consequence of their actions. If the Palestinians want to elect and further a government that supports terrorism, they must be able to deal with the outcomes they created.

Most Respectfully,
R
 
P F Tinmore, et al,

This is confusing.

The Palestinians have always had the capacity in choosing their leadership.
Yeah, like their election of Hamas in 2006.

Not to mention that Britain arrested, exiled, or killed Palestinian leaders all through the Mandate period.
(COMMENT)

The Mandate Periods ended in 1948. That is 48 years (nearly half a century) before the election of the Islamic Resistance Movement (HAMAS), and a recognized terrorist organization. The Palestinians have the right to select their own government; but they must also be willing to accept the consequence of their actions. If the Palestinians want to elect and further a government that supports terrorism, they must be able to deal with the outcomes they created.

Most Respectfully,
R
The US had a similar problem when Jordan handed the West Bank to the PLO. The US name calling thing prevented them from dealing with the PLO.

They eventually got over it and are now dealing with the PLO.
 
P F Tinmore, et al,

When, the declaration was adopted by General Assembly as Resolution 1514 (XV) of 14 December 1960, it was a very different region.

No, I am just saying that those resolutions do not fit Palestine's situation. This is more applicable.

The United Nations and Decolonization - Declaration
(COMMENT)

In 1960, the West Bank was under Jordanian Sovereignty; established by the Jordanian parliament a decade before --- and remained so until 1988. This was a political action in which the Palestinian Arabs of the West Bank were equally represented in the Jordanian Parliament. The motion was unanimously approved through Parliament and with the consent of the Palestinian
People (right of self-determination). This was not a move by any colonial power. So, essentially, from the time of the Arab League invasion (1948), until the Disengagement from the West Bank by Jordan in EOM July 1988, by the consent of the Palestinians, the West Bank was under Jordanian control (military occupation until April 1950, and sovereignty through July1988). If there was a Colonial Power (establishment, exploitation, maintenance, acquisition, and expansion of colony in one territory by a political power from another territory), it would have been The Hashemite Kingdom. BUT, since the Palestinians of the West Bank were deeply involved in the annexation of the West Bank, and that the West Bank was annexed through the consent of the people, it is not really a colonial action.

Similarly, the Gaza Strip was (theoretically) was under the quasi-Administration of the "All Palestinian Government" (APG), under the umbrella protection of the Egyptian Military Governorship from the time of the Arab League invasion (1948) until the Egyptian Government dissolved the APG in 1959. From that point forward, and until the Peace Treaty between Israel and Egypt, the Egyptian Military Governorship maintained control over the Gaza Strip. Again, if there was a Colonial Power (establishment, exploitation, maintenance, acquisition, and expansion of colony in one territory by a political power from another territory), it would have been Arab Republic of Egypt.

In time of the Seventh Arab League Summit Conference Resolution on Palestine --- Rabat, Morocco 28 October 1974; the Arab League
(as the regional authority of Arabs) recognized an independent national authority under the command of the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO), the sole legitimate representative of the Palestinian people in any Palestinian territory that is liberated. This authority, once it is established, shall enjoy the support of the Arab states in all fields and at all levels. In 1974, the West Bank was still sovereign Jordanian territory; not liberated Palestinian territory. And again, the Gaza Strip was still under the Military Governorship; which did not change until the Treaty of Peace between the Arab Republic of Egypt and the State of Israel, 26 March 1979.


The fact is that the Palestinians have never had much to do in choosing their own leaders. For the most part they have been imposed on them by outsiders. Palestine was born under occupation and that continues today.
(COMMENT)

The Palestinians have always had the capacity in choosing their leadership. The Palestinians merely forfeited their options and allowed their opportunities to be exploited by other Arabs.

The Palestinians had essentially the same opportunities as the Israelis; they just could not make it work for them.

Most Respectfully,
R
When, the declaration was adopted by General Assembly as Resolution 1514 (XV) of 14 December 1960, it was a very different region.​

Politics and propaganda have changed. Legalities have not.

I have a question that will not be answered.

If Israel occupied the Jordanian territory of the West Bank in 1967, why did Jordan relinquish the territory to the PLO in 1988?

Your post does not make any sense.





Only to you because you refuse to understand the situation. The Palestinians rose up against their leaders and tried to take over control of Jordan through violence and terrorism and paid a heavy price. Some reports say 50,000 Palestinians in concentration camps were mass murdered in one month, this was twice the number killed in battles with Israel, leading to strained relationships and hatred of the Palestinians. The Jordan government started to distance themselves from the west bank, and finally instigated a split that left the Palestinians out on a limb with no leadership or nationality. The now extinct all Palestine government last action was to appoint the PLO and Arafat as the leaders of Palestine hoping that Israel would do the job of destroying the PLO for them.
 
P F Tinmore, et al,

This is confusing.

The Palestinians have always had the capacity in choosing their leadership.
Yeah, like their election of Hamas in 2006.

Not to mention that Britain arrested, exiled, or killed Palestinian leaders all through the Mandate period.
(COMMENT)

The Mandate Periods ended in 1948. That is 48 years (nearly half a century) before the election of the Islamic Resistance Movement (HAMAS), and a recognized terrorist organization. The Palestinians have the right to select their own government; but they must also be willing to accept the consequence of their actions. If the Palestinians want to elect and further a government that supports terrorism, they must be able to deal with the outcomes they created.

Most Respectfully,
R
The US had a similar problem when Jordan handed the West Bank to the PLO. The US name calling thing prevented them from dealing with the PLO.

They eventually got over it and are now dealing with the PLO.




You mean branding the terrorist killers terrorist killers, because that is what they were and are psychopathic islamist mass murderers.
The US is not dealing with mass murdering terrorists at all, they are dealing with the P.A. through third parties
 
P F Tinmore, et al,

When, the declaration was adopted by General Assembly as Resolution 1514 (XV) of 14 December 1960, it was a very different region.

No, I am just saying that those resolutions do not fit Palestine's situation. This is more applicable.

The United Nations and Decolonization - Declaration
(COMMENT)

In 1960, the West Bank was under Jordanian Sovereignty; established by the Jordanian parliament a decade before --- and remained so until 1988. This was a political action in which the Palestinian Arabs of the West Bank were equally represented in the Jordanian Parliament. The motion was unanimously approved through Parliament and with the consent of the Palestinian
People (right of self-determination). This was not a move by any colonial power. So, essentially, from the time of the Arab League invasion (1948), until the Disengagement from the West Bank by Jordan in EOM July 1988, by the consent of the Palestinians, the West Bank was under Jordanian control (military occupation until April 1950, and sovereignty through July1988). If there was a Colonial Power (establishment, exploitation, maintenance, acquisition, and expansion of colony in one territory by a political power from another territory), it would have been The Hashemite Kingdom. BUT, since the Palestinians of the West Bank were deeply involved in the annexation of the West Bank, and that the West Bank was annexed through the consent of the people, it is not really a colonial action.

Similarly, the Gaza Strip was (theoretically) was under the quasi-Administration of the "All Palestinian Government" (APG), under the umbrella protection of the Egyptian Military Governorship from the time of the Arab League invasion (1948) until the Egyptian Government dissolved the APG in 1959. From that point forward, and until the Peace Treaty between Israel and Egypt, the Egyptian Military Governorship maintained control over the Gaza Strip. Again, if there was a Colonial Power (establishment, exploitation, maintenance, acquisition, and expansion of colony in one territory by a political power from another territory), it would have been Arab Republic of Egypt.

In time of the Seventh Arab League Summit Conference Resolution on Palestine --- Rabat, Morocco 28 October 1974; the Arab League
(as the regional authority of Arabs) recognized an independent national authority under the command of the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO), the sole legitimate representative of the Palestinian people in any Palestinian territory that is liberated. This authority, once it is established, shall enjoy the support of the Arab states in all fields and at all levels. In 1974, the West Bank was still sovereign Jordanian territory; not liberated Palestinian territory. And again, the Gaza Strip was still under the Military Governorship; which did not change until the Treaty of Peace between the Arab Republic of Egypt and the State of Israel, 26 March 1979.


The fact is that the Palestinians have never had much to do in choosing their own leaders. For the most part they have been imposed on them by outsiders. Palestine was born under occupation and that continues today.
(COMMENT)

The Palestinians have always had the capacity in choosing their leadership. The Palestinians merely forfeited their options and allowed their opportunities to be exploited by other Arabs.

The Palestinians had essentially the same opportunities as the Israelis; they just could not make it work for them.

Most Respectfully,
R
The Palestinians have always had the capacity in choosing their leadership.​

Yeah, like their election of Hamas in 2006.

Not to mention that Britain arrested, exiled, or killed Palestinian leaders all through the Mandate period.




You mean foreign insurgent terrorists and agitators don't you, they were never Palestinians by birth. The same people claimed to be Iraqi's after Desert Storm but came from other parts of the Islamic world.
 
Lets see the detail of this 8 yr truce between hamas and Israel
a step in right direction. so far it sounds reasonable enough
 
Lets see the detail of this 8 yr truce between hamas and Israel
a step in right direction. so far it sounds reasonable enough
It is an interesting thought. The idea is to stop all violence from both sides and later on work on a peace agreement when people are not shooting at each other.

It is worth discussing. Nothing else has worked for the last hundred years.
 
P F Tinmore, et al,

Humm. There are always answers. It is just that some of the answers you don't like. Remember the 1954 Convention relating to the Status of Stateless Persons.

When, the declaration was adopted by General Assembly as Resolution 1514 (XV) of 14 December 1960, it was a very different region.

Politics and propaganda have changed. Legalities have not.

I have a question that will not be answered.

If Israel occupied the Jordanian territory of the West Bank in 1967, why did Jordan relinquish the territory to the PLO in 1988?

Your post does not make any sense.
(COMMENT)

The Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan did not "relinquish the territory to the PLO in 1988;" as you suggest. "On July 31 1988, King Hussein announced the severance of all administrative and legal ties with the occupied West Bank." Under Article 1(1) of the Convention Relating to Stateless Persons:

• "For the purpose of this Convention, the term “stateless person” means a person who is not considered as a national by any State under the operation of its law."​

By default and under the unified Arab League Resolution of 28 October 1974 (Rabat), when Jordan broke all ties with the West Bank, the PLO became sole legitimate representative of the Palestinian people of the West Bank; who would have become stateless otherwise.

Most Respectfully,
R
Of course this is after the fact. The Palestinian's stateless status is due to illegal external interference and illegal military conquest. The violation of several international laws are at play here. Enforcing resolution 1514 would be a remedy for these violations.

Here are some interesting concepts.

 
P F Tinmore, et al,

Humm. There are always answers. It is just that some of the answers you don't like. Remember the 1954 Convention relating to the Status of Stateless Persons.

When, the declaration was adopted by General Assembly as Resolution 1514 (XV) of 14 December 1960, it was a very different region.

Politics and propaganda have changed. Legalities have not.

I have a question that will not be answered.

If Israel occupied the Jordanian territory of the West Bank in 1967, why did Jordan relinquish the territory to the PLO in 1988?

Your post does not make any sense.
(COMMENT)

The Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan did not "relinquish the territory to the PLO in 1988;" as you suggest. "On July 31 1988, King Hussein announced the severance of all administrative and legal ties with the occupied West Bank." Under Article 1(1) of the Convention Relating to Stateless Persons:

• "For the purpose of this Convention, the term “stateless person” means a person who is not considered as a national by any State under the operation of its law."​

By default and under the unified Arab League Resolution of 28 October 1974 (Rabat), when Jordan broke all ties with the West Bank, the PLO became sole legitimate representative of the Palestinian people of the West Bank; who would have become stateless otherwise.

Most Respectfully,
R
Of course this is after the fact. The Palestinian's stateless status is due to illegal external interference and illegal military conquest. The violation of several international laws are at play here. Enforcing resolution 1514 would be a remedy for these violations.

Here are some interesting concepts.







They are stateless at their own request because to declare a state means they would be destitute and have to start selling the family silver.

By the way there is no legal right of return, and the UN has spelt out the criteria that the Palestinians need to hit before they will be granted a right of return. very soon it will be moot anyway as the last Palestinian refugee dies and there are no more left
 
P F Tinmore, et al,

This brings up an interesting set of questions?

Of course this is after the fact. The Palestinian's stateless status is due to illegal external interference and illegal military conquest. The violation of several international laws are at play here. Enforcing resolution 1514 would be a remedy for these violations.

Here are some interesting concepts.
(COMMENT)

Is the Resolution adopted by the General Assembly --- 1514 (XV) Declaration on the Granting of Independence to Colonial Countries and Peoples (A/RES/15/1514 14 December 1960):

• Binding and enforceable?
• What is the enforcement authority?
• What is the date this Resolution went into force?​

Let's assume (for the sake of this discussion) that these first three questions are irrelevant.

• Who is the Plaintiff?
• Who represents the Plaintiff?
• Who is the Defendant in the complaint?
• What specific complaint, outlined in the Resolution, is alleged?
• When did the alleged complain occur?
• What is the means of restitution for the complaint in settlement?​

I would suggest that:

1.
clear.gif
The Arab Palestinian are NOT the target of Israeli subjugation, domination and exploitation that would constitutes the denial of fundamental human rights.

2.
clear.gif
That the Israelis have the same right to self-determination as that of the Arab Palestinian; including the right to determine their political status and pursue their economic, social and cultural development.

3.
clear.gif
That the Israeli did not use the indecency of Palestinian political, economic, social or educational ill preparedness or capacity to implement sound governmental functions served as a pretext for delaying independence; and in fact the Palestinians have exercised their right of self-determination.

4.
clear.gif
That Palestinian armed action and Jihadist measures of all kinds directed against the Israeli peoples never cease in order to enable them to exercise peacefully and freely their right to complete independence, and the integrity of the State of Israel's national territory was never truly respected.

5.
clear.gif
That the territories, beyond the boundaries assumed by the State of Israel as sovereign, have been under Arab independence (in one form or another), to transfer all powers to the peoples of those territories, without any conditions or reservations, except for the measures necessary to protect Israeli sovereignty pursuant to Article 51 of the Charter; and in the implementation of UN Security Council Resolution 1373:

• Israel taking the necessary steps to prevent the commission of terrorist acts, including by provision of early warning to other States by exchange of information;
• Israel implementing countermeasures to deny Arab Palestinians the opportunity to provide safe haven to those who finance, plan, support, or commit terrorist acts, or provide safe havens;
• Israel acting in such a manner that would prevent those who finance, plan, facilitate or commit terrorist acts from using their respective territories for those purposes against Israeli sovereign integrity, the other States, or their citizens;
6.
clear.gif
Israel defends itself against any attempt aimed at the partial or total disruption of the national unity, the territorial integrity of its sovereignty, and the protection and safety of its citizenry from hostile rocket and mortar attacks, hijacking, suicide bombing, kidnapping and murder to assert their demands that were beyond their ability to achieve through good faith negotiations settlement of their disputes with Israel by negotiation, inquiry, mediation, conciliation, arbitration, or judicial settlement.

7.
clear.gif
That to the extent possible, Israel has attempted to observe faithfully and strictly the provisions of the Charter of the United Nations, the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and the present Declaration on the basis of equality. That to the extent possible, given the active threat of Jihad and armed aggression made by Arab Palestinian representative, and the lack of respect for the sovereign rights of the Israeli peoples and their territorial integrity, the Israelis have attempted to operate within the parameters of the the Hague and Geneva Convention.
Most Respectfully,
R
 
P F Tinmore, et al,

This brings up an interesting set of questions?
Indeed, that is what I do.

Of course this is after the fact. The Palestinian's stateless status is due to illegal external interference and illegal military conquest. The violation of several international laws are at play here. Enforcing resolution 1514 would be a remedy for these violations.

Here are some interesting concepts.
(COMMENT)

Is the Resolution adopted by the General Assembly --- 1514 (XV) Declaration on the Granting of Independence to Colonial Countries and Peoples (A/RES/15/1514 14 December 1960):

• Binding and enforceable?
• What is the enforcement authority?
• What is the date this Resolution went into force?​
As you know, the UN cannot create law. However it does compile resolutions based on pre existing international law and its own charter. The date of the resolution does not necessarily mean that the referenced laws did not start until then.
Let's assume (for the sake of this discussion) that these first three questions are irrelevant.

• Who is the Plaintiff?
• Who represents the Plaintiff?
• Who is the Defendant in the complaint?
• What specific complaint, outlined in the Resolution, is alleged?
• When did the alleged complain occur?
• What is the means of restitution for the complaint in settlement?​

I would suggest that:
Here is where you get into slime, speculation, smokescreen, and lies.

BTW, you have never posted anything showing where foreigners have superior rights to the indigenous population.

How about posting a map of Israel without armistice lines that are specifically not to be borders. Israel's territorial integrity???:bs1::cuckoo::cuckoo::cuckoo:

1.
clear.gif
The Arab Palestinian are NOT the target of Israeli subjugation, domination and exploitation that would constitutes the denial of fundamental human rights.

2.
clear.gif
That the Israelis have the same right to self-determination as that of the Arab Palestinian; including the right to determine their political status and pursue their economic, social and cultural development.

3.
clear.gif
That the Israeli did not use the indecency of Palestinian political, economic, social or educational ill preparedness or capacity to implement sound governmental functions served as a pretext for delaying independence; and in fact the Palestinians have exercised their right of self-determination.

4.
clear.gif
That Palestinian armed action and Jihadist measures of all kinds directed against the Israeli peoples never cease in order to enable them to exercise peacefully and freely their right to complete independence, and the integrity of the State of Israel's national territory was never truly respected.

5.
clear.gif
That the territories, beyond the boundaries assumed by the State of Israel as sovereign, have been under Arab independence (in one form or another), to transfer all powers to the peoples of those territories, without any conditions or reservations, except for the measures necessary to protect Israeli sovereignty pursuant to Article 51 of the Charter; and in the implementation of UN Security Council Resolution 1373:

• Israel taking the necessary steps to prevent the commission of terrorist acts, including by provision of early warning to other States by exchange of information;
• Israel implementing countermeasures to deny Arab Palestinians the opportunity to provide safe haven to those who finance, plan, support, or commit terrorist acts, or provide safe havens;
• Israel acting in such a manner that would prevent those who finance, plan, facilitate or commit terrorist acts from using their respective territories for those purposes against Israeli sovereign integrity, the other States, or their citizens;
6.
clear.gif
Israel defends itself against any attempt aimed at the partial or total disruption of the national unity, the territorial integrity of its sovereignty, and the protection and safety of its citizenry from hostile rocket and mortar attacks, hijacking, suicide bombing, kidnapping and murder to assert their demands that were beyond their ability to achieve through good faith negotiations settlement of their disputes with Israel by negotiation, inquiry, mediation, conciliation, arbitration, or judicial settlement.

7.
clear.gif
That to the extent possible, Israel has attempted to observe faithfully and strictly the provisions of the Charter of the United Nations, the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and the present Declaration on the basis of equality. That to the extent possible, given the active threat of Jihad and armed aggression made by Arab Palestinian representative, and the lack of respect for the sovereign rights of the Israeli peoples and their territorial integrity, the Israelis have attempted to operate within the parameters of the the Hague and Geneva Convention.
Most Respectfully,
R
 
Last edited:
P F Tinmore, et al,

This brings up an interesting set of questions?
Indeed, that is what I do.

Of course this is after the fact. The Palestinian's stateless status is due to illegal external interference and illegal military conquest. The violation of several international laws are at play here. Enforcing resolution 1514 would be a remedy for these violations.

Here are some interesting concepts.
(COMMENT)

Is the Resolution adopted by the General Assembly --- 1514 (XV) Declaration on the Granting of Independence to Colonial Countries and Peoples (A/RES/15/1514 14 December 1960):

• Binding and enforceable?
• What is the enforcement authority?
• What is the date this Resolution went into force?​
As you know, the UN cannot create law. However it does compile resolutions based on pre existing international law and its own charter. The date of the resolution does not necessarily mean that the referenced laws did not start until then.
Let's assume (for the sake of this discussion) that these first three questions are irrelevant.

• Who is the Plaintiff?
• Who represents the Plaintiff?
• Who is the Defendant in the complaint?
• What specific complaint, outlined in the Resolution, is alleged?
• When did the alleged complain occur?
• What is the means of restitution for the complaint in settlement?​

I would suggest that:
Here is where you get into slime, speculation, smokescreen, and lies.

BTW, you have never posted anything showing where foreigners have superior rights to the indigenous population.

How about posting a map of Israel without armistice lines that are specifically not to be borders. Israel's territorial integrity???:bs1::cuckoo::cuckoo::cuckoo:

1.
clear.gif
The Arab Palestinian are NOT the target of Israeli subjugation, domination and exploitation that would constitutes the denial of fundamental human rights.

2.
clear.gif
That the Israelis have the same right to self-determination as that of the Arab Palestinian; including the right to determine their political status and pursue their economic, social and cultural development.

3.
clear.gif
That the Israeli did not use the indecency of Palestinian political, economic, social or educational ill preparedness or capacity to implement sound governmental functions served as a pretext for delaying independence; and in fact the Palestinians have exercised their right of self-determination.

4.
clear.gif
That Palestinian armed action and Jihadist measures of all kinds directed against the Israeli peoples never cease in order to enable them to exercise peacefully and freely their right to complete independence, and the integrity of the State of Israel's national territory was never truly respected.

5.
clear.gif
That the territories, beyond the boundaries assumed by the State of Israel as sovereign, have been under Arab independence (in one form or another), to transfer all powers to the peoples of those territories, without any conditions or reservations, except for the measures necessary to protect Israeli sovereignty pursuant to Article 51 of the Charter; and in the implementation of UN Security Council Resolution 1373:

• Israel taking the necessary steps to prevent the commission of terrorist acts, including by provision of early warning to other States by exchange of information;
• Israel implementing countermeasures to deny Arab Palestinians the opportunity to provide safe haven to those who finance, plan, support, or commit terrorist acts, or provide safe havens;
• Israel acting in such a manner that would prevent those who finance, plan, facilitate or commit terrorist acts from using their respective territories for those purposes against Israeli sovereign integrity, the other States, or their citizens;
6.
clear.gif
Israel defends itself against any attempt aimed at the partial or total disruption of the national unity, the territorial integrity of its sovereignty, and the protection and safety of its citizenry from hostile rocket and mortar attacks, hijacking, suicide bombing, kidnapping and murder to assert their demands that were beyond their ability to achieve through good faith negotiations settlement of their disputes with Israel by negotiation, inquiry, mediation, conciliation, arbitration, or judicial settlement.

7.
clear.gif
That to the extent possible, Israel has attempted to observe faithfully and strictly the provisions of the Charter of the United Nations, the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and the present Declaration on the basis of equality. That to the extent possible, given the active threat of Jihad and armed aggression made by Arab Palestinian representative, and the lack of respect for the sovereign rights of the Israeli peoples and their territorial integrity, the Israelis have attempted to operate within the parameters of the the Hague and Geneva Convention.
Most Respectfully,
R




The UN can compile law when the majority of its members agree that what they say will be law. They do not compile resolutions based on existing law as the existing law is enough. But they do enforce those laws through their legal arm and with armed intervention.


Then we must also make the rest of the questions irrelevant, you cant pick and choose what aspects you want to use because they meet with your POV while others destroy your POV


You have never posted anything that shows arab muslim immigrants had more rights than indigenous Jews in 1948

How about you post a map showing the nation of palestines borders in 1917, 1923, 1948, 1949 and 1988 ?
 

Forum List

Back
Top