International law or even a legal framework regarding what is legitimate resistance to occupation?

[Hollie]

RE: International law or even a legal framework regarding what is legitimate resistance to occupation?
※→ P F Tinmore, et al,

(The appearance of ) Legitimacy is not an issue when exercising the "Right to Self-Determination." BUT, there is legitimacy.

RE: International law or even a legal framework regarding what is legitimate resistance to occupation?
※→ P F Tinmore, et al,

Yes, this is the counter argument. The anti-Government militia in the US use this same argument: " I do not recognize your authority over me; or the legal authority of the court." It does not go very far.

First, the definition of a "civilian" does not rest upon whether the Settler Activity is "legal" or "Illegal." That is simply not an issue. If it is "illegal," then it is a civil police and court matter;

What if the civil police and courts are illegal too?

(COMMENT)

In those areas of the Occupied Territories, → that have been annexed by the Knesset, → fall under the jurisdiction of the Minister of Public Security which has oversight of the Israeli National Police (INP), with its headquarters in [wait for it] → Jerusalem (East). The INP, not so dissimilar to the State Police in America, operates throughout Israel, and Area "C" (West Bank), and where there are no Local City Police.

The Israeli Judiciary has an appeal process --- and total separate --- the Police have various types of internal reviews and oversight. If anyone, citizen or non-citizen, with the jurisdiction of the INP, have what they believe to be evidence corruption or police misconduct (misfeasance, malfeasance or nonfeasance) --- Israel has a very keen interest in maintaining the trust and confidence of the people --- giving faith in the competence of those professionals in the system --- that justice for the people (police and judicial) can be obtained through the legal system.

If you believe that you have such evidence --- that you can categorically make such an allegation, it is incumbent upon you (in some cases a necessary duty or responsibility) to bring this to the attention of the Ombudsman's Office of the Israeli Judiciary through the Office of Public Inquiries.

Most Respectfully,
R

All that in territory that does not belong to Israel.

What is their legitimacy?

(COMMENT)

The concept of the Legitimacy of the State of Israel is very often scrambled by the fact that the meaning behind it is not very well understood.

When you ask → "What is their legitimacy?" → What you are really asking "how does it conform to the law or and customary rules of the procedure of creating a "State Government?"

※ Legitimacy ※
View attachment 167904

Introduction / Definition: Legitimacy is commonly defined in political science and sociology as the belief that a rule, institution, or leader has the right to govern. It is a judgment by an individual about the rightfulness of a hierarchy between rule or ruler and its subject and about the subordinate’s obligations toward the rule or ruler.
​

It is a expectation and accepted relationship between the "ruled" (people of Israel - subordinate) to that recognition of the "ruler" (the Government). Together, these ideas (if accepted and compatible) establish the State of Israel.

Legitimacy dovetails into Self-Determination. In the case of the State of Israel, there is no specific law or threshold it must meet to achieve Legitimacy, as there are many forms of government that have a political head that is accepted as the ruler: North Korea has KIM Jong-Un as Supreme Leader; Iran has Sayyed Ali Hosseini Khamenei as the Supreme Leader; Saudi Arabia has His Majesty Salman bin Abdulaziz Al Saud as King, and China has Xi Jinping as the General Secretary of the Communist Party. IF the people (within a specific boundary) accept the leadership of the nation over the same territory, THEN sovereignty is established.

The reason that the Montevideo Convention (Rights and Duties of States --- Article 3) states that: → "The political existence of the state is independent of recognition by the other states" → means it does not require the acceptance by any external authority (not even P F Tinmore). This is what is meant when the UN Charter [Article 2(7)] says: "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." This passage is the unfulfilled promise of the Members of the UN not to interfere, and in fact, is the basis for the phrase: "right to self-determination, by virtue of which all peoples can freely determine, without external interference, their political status and freely pursue their economic, social and cultural development; A/RES/50/172 (Respect for the principles of national sovereignty and non-interference in the internal affairs of States in their electoral processes).

Just as there is no law or threshold that would permit the rights of any proto-government (State of Palestine unable to stand-alone) to interfere within the domestic establishment of a sovereignty nation (State of Israel); so it is clear that the People of Palestine, as much as they may hate the Idea of Israeli Control, are forced to recognize the reality of effective control. And when the Arab Palestinian (as they have for the last half century) come to follow the direction f the Israeli Law, and have entered into agreements with the Israeli Government, THAT is a form of legitimacy (whether of not P F Tinmore agrees or not).

DOES Israel have Legitimacy: By virtue that it has peacefully and orderly confirmed or replaced a leadership which they Israeli people will follow, THAT is basic form of "legitimacy."

Is the State of Israel recognized? It is irrelevant. Under Customary Law, the existence of the State of Israel is independent of recognition. There is, however, 03/04/1949 S/RES/69 (1949) Israel membership in the UN.

The real question might be: When did the State of Palestine become a true State. What sovereignty does Palestine claim as under their control?

Most Respectfully,
R

A government derives its legitimacy from the will of the people.

The Israeli government was established with the disapproval of the vast majority of the people and was imposed on them by military force.

You rely too heavily on silly slogans. The majority of Arab-Islamist governments across the Islamist Middle East are totalitarian theocracies. Those governments rarely include voting by the citizenry to derive legitimacy from “the will of the people”. The Saudi monarchy, for example, is certainly the legitimate government of the KSA in spite of any “will of the people” slogan you may want to introduce.

 

[RoccoR]

RE: International law or even a legal framework regarding what is legitimate resistance to occupation?
※→ P F Tinmoore, et al,

Yes, these were published after the fact. GA RES 3237 does not even apply. In any event, these are non-binding.

[

(a) The right to self-determination without external interference;

(b) The right to national independence and sovereignty;

UN General Assembly Resolution 3236 and UN General Assembly Resolution 3237​

It does not say Palestinian state or Palestinian government. It says Palestinian people. States and governments are the result of the exercise of rights, not the prerequisite. The people inside their own defined territory have these rights.

(COMMENT)

While they say reaffirm, they do not state the source.

Most Respectfully,
R

 

[P F Tinmore]

RE: International law or even a legal framework regarding what is legitimate resistance to occupation?
※→ P F Tinmore, et al,

(The appearance of ) Legitimacy is not an issue when exercising the "Right to Self-Determination." BUT, there is legitimacy.

RE: International law or even a legal framework regarding what is legitimate resistance to occupation?
※→ P F Tinmore, et al,

Yes, this is the counter argument. The anti-Government militia in the US use this same argument: " I do not recognize your authority over me; or the legal authority of the court." It does not go very far.

What if the civil police and courts are illegal too?

(COMMENT)

In those areas of the Occupied Territories, → that have been annexed by the Knesset, → fall under the jurisdiction of the Minister of Public Security which has oversight of the Israeli National Police (INP), with its headquarters in [wait for it] → Jerusalem (East). The INP, not so dissimilar to the State Police in America, operates throughout Israel, and Area "C" (West Bank), and where there are no Local City Police.

The Israeli Judiciary has an appeal process --- and total separate --- the Police have various types of internal reviews and oversight. If anyone, citizen or non-citizen, with the jurisdiction of the INP, have what they believe to be evidence corruption or police misconduct (misfeasance, malfeasance or nonfeasance) --- Israel has a very keen interest in maintaining the trust and confidence of the people --- giving faith in the competence of those professionals in the system --- that justice for the people (police and judicial) can be obtained through the legal system.

If you believe that you have such evidence --- that you can categorically make such an allegation, it is incumbent upon you (in some cases a necessary duty or responsibility) to bring this to the attention of the Ombudsman's Office of the Israeli Judiciary through the Office of Public Inquiries.

Most Respectfully,
R

All that in territory that does not belong to Israel.

What is their legitimacy?

(COMMENT)

The concept of the Legitimacy of the State of Israel is very often scrambled by the fact that the meaning behind it is not very well understood.

When you ask → "What is their legitimacy?" → What you are really asking "how does it conform to the law or and customary rules of the procedure of creating a "State Government?"

※ Legitimacy ※
View attachment 167904

Introduction / Definition: Legitimacy is commonly defined in political science and sociology as the belief that a rule, institution, or leader has the right to govern. It is a judgment by an individual about the rightfulness of a hierarchy between rule or ruler and its subject and about the subordinate’s obligations toward the rule or ruler.
​

It is a expectation and accepted relationship between the "ruled" (people of Israel - subordinate) to that recognition of the "ruler" (the Government). Together, these ideas (if accepted and compatible) establish the State of Israel.

Legitimacy dovetails into Self-Determination. In the case of the State of Israel, there is no specific law or threshold it must meet to achieve Legitimacy, as there are many forms of government that have a political head that is accepted as the ruler: North Korea has KIM Jong-Un as Supreme Leader; Iran has Sayyed Ali Hosseini Khamenei as the Supreme Leader; Saudi Arabia has His Majesty Salman bin Abdulaziz Al Saud as King, and China has Xi Jinping as the General Secretary of the Communist Party. IF the people (within a specific boundary) accept the leadership of the nation over the same territory, THEN sovereignty is established.

The reason that the Montevideo Convention (Rights and Duties of States --- Article 3) states that: → "The political existence of the state is independent of recognition by the other states" → means it does not require the acceptance by any external authority (not even P F Tinmore). This is what is meant when the UN Charter [Article 2(7)] says: "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." This passage is the unfulfilled promise of the Members of the UN not to interfere, and in fact, is the basis for the phrase: "right to self-determination, by virtue of which all peoples can freely determine, without external interference, their political status and freely pursue their economic, social and cultural development; A/RES/50/172 (Respect for the principles of national sovereignty and non-interference in the internal affairs of States in their electoral processes).

Just as there is no law or threshold that would permit the rights of any proto-government (State of Palestine unable to stand-alone) to interfere within the domestic establishment of a sovereignty nation (State of Israel); so it is clear that the People of Palestine, as much as they may hate the Idea of Israeli Control, are forced to recognize the reality of effective control. And when the Arab Palestinian (as they have for the last half century) come to follow the direction f the Israeli Law, and have entered into agreements with the Israeli Government, THAT is a form of legitimacy (whether of not P F Tinmore agrees or not).

DOES Israel have Legitimacy: By virtue that it has peacefully and orderly confirmed or replaced a leadership which they Israeli people will follow, THAT is basic form of "legitimacy."

Is the State of Israel recognized? It is irrelevant. Under Customary Law, the existence of the State of Israel is independent of recognition. There is, however, 03/04/1949 S/RES/69 (1949) Israel membership in the UN.

The real question might be: When did the State of Palestine become a true State. What sovereignty does Palestine claim as under their control?

Most Respectfully,
R

A government derives its legitimacy from the will of the people.

The Israeli government was established with the disapproval of the vast majority of the people and was imposed on them by military force.

You rely too heavily on silly slogans. The majority of Arab-Islamist governments across the Islamist Middle East are totalitarian theocracies. Those governments rarely include voting by the citizenry to derive legitimacy from “the will of the people”. The Saudi monarchy, for example, is certainly the legitimate government of the KSA in spite of any “will of the people” slogan you may want to introduce.

Deflection.

 

[RoccoR]

RE: International law or even a legal framework regarding what is legitimate resistance to occupation?
※→ P F Tinmore, et al,

That ship has long sailed.

A government derives its legitimacy from the will of the people.

The Israeli government was established with the disapproval of the vast majority of the people and was imposed on them by military force.

(COMMENT)

The State of Israel was created by its people. It exercise sovereignty over the territory, by it people.

The Legitimacy is approved every election in a peaceful manner and the government transition is nearly seemly. The people find the government legitimate.

The Arab Palestinian people are never going to get any of the territory back unless they come to the table for negotiation. Otherwise, bit by bit, what territory the Arab Palestinian has sovereignty over will dissipate like water in the desert.

Most Respectfully,
R

 

[P F Tinmore]

RE: International law or even a legal framework regarding what is legitimate resistance to occupation?
※→ P F Tinmoore, et al,

Yes, these were published after the fact. GA RES 3237 does not even apply. In any event, these are non-binding.

[

(a) The right to self-determination without external interference;

(b) The right to national independence and sovereignty;

UN General Assembly Resolution 3236 and UN General Assembly Resolution 3237​

It does not say Palestinian state or Palestinian government. It says Palestinian people. States and governments are the result of the exercise of rights, not the prerequisite. The people inside their own defined territory have these rights.

(COMMENT)

While they say reaffirm, they do not state the source.

Most Respectfully,
R

The UN Charter and most UNGA resolutions are based on already existing international law.

 

[P F Tinmore]

RE: International law or even a legal framework regarding what is legitimate resistance to occupation?
※→ P F Tinmore, et al,

That ship has long sailed.

A government derives its legitimacy from the will of the people.

The Israeli government was established with the disapproval of the vast majority of the people and was imposed on them by military force.

(COMMENT)

The State of Israel was created by its people. It exercise sovereignty over the territory, by it people.

The Legitimacy is approved every election in a peaceful manner and the government transition is nearly seemly. The people find the government legitimate.

The Arab Palestinian people are never going to get any of the territory back unless they come to the table for negotiation. Otherwise, bit by bit, what territory the Arab Palestinian has sovereignty over will dissipate like water in the desert.

Most Respectfully,
R

The State of Israel was created by its people. It exercise sovereignty over the territory, by it people.

Not true. Most of the people were removed from the voter rolls before any election.

 

[RoccoR]

RE: International law or even a legal framework regarding what is legitimate resistance to occupation?
※→ P F Tinmoore, et al,

Get it together man...

RE: International law or even a legal framework regarding what is legitimate resistance to occupation?
※→ P F Tinmoore, et al,

Yes, these were published after the fact. GA RES 3237 does not even apply. In any event, these are non-binding.

[

(a) The right to self-determination without external interference;

(b) The right to national independence and sovereignty;

UN General Assembly Resolution 3236 and UN General Assembly Resolution 3237​

It does not say Palestinian state or Palestinian government. It says Palestinian people. States and governments are the result of the exercise of rights, not the prerequisite. The people inside their own defined territory have these rights.

(COMMENT)

While they say reaffirm, they do not state the source.

Most Respectfully,
R

The UN Charter and most UNGA resolutions are based on already existing international law.

(QUESTION)

"What law" → is all I'm asking? If it was out there, surely the pro-Palestinians would be citing it. (What is the reason for hiding the source of the claim?)

Most Respectfully,
R

 

[P F Tinmore]

RE: International law or even a legal framework regarding what is legitimate resistance to occupation?
※→ P F Tinmoore, et al,

Get t together man...

RE: International law or even a legal framework regarding what is legitimate resistance to occupation?
※→ P F Tinmoore, et al,

Yes, these were published after the fact. GA RES 3237 does not even apply. In any event, these are non-binding.

[

(a) The right to self-determination without external interference;

(b) The right to national independence and sovereignty;

UN General Assembly Resolution 3236 and UN General Assembly Resolution 3237​

It does not say Palestinian state or Palestinian government. It says Palestinian people. States and governments are the result of the exercise of rights, not the prerequisite. The people inside their own defined territory have these rights.

(COMMENT)

While they say reaffirm, they do not state the source.

Most Respectfully,
R

The UN Charter and most UNGA resolutions are based on already existing international law.

(QUESTION)

"What law" → is all I'm asking? If it was out there, surely the pro-Palestinians would be citing it. (What is the reason for hiding the source of the claim?)

Most Respectfully,
R

Resolution 3236 is based on long standing international law.

 

[RoccoR]

RE: International law or even a legal framework regarding what is legitimate resistance to occupation?
※→ P F Tinmore, et al,

OH! S now there is a new allegation.

That ship has long sailed.

A government derives its legitimacy from the will of the people.

The Israeli government was established with the disapproval of the vast majority of the people and was imposed on them by military force.

(COMMENT)

The State of Israel was created by its people. It exercise sovereignty over the territory, by it people.

The Legitimacy is approved every election in a peaceful manner and the government transition is nearly seemly. The people find the government legitimate.

The Arab Palestinian people are never going to get any of the territory back unless they come to the table for negotiation. Otherwise, bit by bit, what territory the Arab Palestinian has sovereignty over will dissipate like water in the desert.

Most Respectfully,
R

The State of Israel was created by its people. It exercise sovereignty over the territory, by it people.

Not true. Most of the people were removed from the voter rolls before any election.

(COMMENT)

After the Arab Palestinians rejected any participation in the "Steps to Preparatory to Independence" they want to roll back the clock and change history. Sorry about your luck.

There is a children's story called the Little Red Hen. And the moral to this story is: "if any would not work, neither should he or she eat."​

If any Arab Palestinian chose not to participate and not work towards peace and independence, they should not piggy back off the backs of others to attain Independence.

Most Respectfully,
R

 

[P F Tinmore]

RE: International law or even a legal framework regarding what is legitimate resistance to occupation?
※→ P F Tinmore, et al,

OH! S now there is a new allegation.

That ship has long sailed.

A government derives its legitimacy from the will of the people.

The Israeli government was established with the disapproval of the vast majority of the people and was imposed on them by military force.

(COMMENT)

The State of Israel was created by its people. It exercise sovereignty over the territory, by it people.

The Legitimacy is approved every election in a peaceful manner and the government transition is nearly seemly. The people find the government legitimate.

The Arab Palestinian people are never going to get any of the territory back unless they come to the table for negotiation. Otherwise, bit by bit, what territory the Arab Palestinian has sovereignty over will dissipate like water in the desert.

Most Respectfully,
R

The State of Israel was created by its people. It exercise sovereignty over the territory, by it people.

Not true. Most of the people were removed from the voter rolls before any election.

(COMMENT)

After the Arab Palestinians rejected any participation in the "Steps to Preparatory to Independence" they want to roll back the clock and change history. Sorry about your luck.

There is a children's story called the Little Red Hen. And the moral to this story is: "if any would not work, neither should he or she eat."​

If any Arab Palestinian chose not to participate and not work towards peace and independence, they should not piggy back off the backs of others to attain Independence.

Most Respectfully,
R

Britain tried to get the Palestinians to buy into their settler colonial project and play a subordinate roll in their own country.

Of course they refused such an offer.

 

[Hollie]

RE: International law or even a legal framework regarding what is legitimate resistance to occupation?
※→ P F Tinmore, et al,

OH! S now there is a new allegation.

That ship has long sailed.

A government derives its legitimacy from the will of the people.

The Israeli government was established with the disapproval of the vast majority of the people and was imposed on them by military force.

(COMMENT)

The State of Israel was created by its people. It exercise sovereignty over the territory, by it people.

The Legitimacy is approved every election in a peaceful manner and the government transition is nearly seemly. The people find the government legitimate.

The Arab Palestinian people are never going to get any of the territory back unless they come to the table for negotiation. Otherwise, bit by bit, what territory the Arab Palestinian has sovereignty over will dissipate like water in the desert.

Most Respectfully,
R

The State of Israel was created by its people. It exercise sovereignty over the territory, by it people.

Not true. Most of the people were removed from the voter rolls before any election.

(COMMENT)

After the Arab Palestinians rejected any participation in the "Steps to Preparatory to Independence" they want to roll back the clock and change history. Sorry about your luck.

There is a children's story called the Little Red Hen. And the moral to this story is: "if any would not work, neither should he or she eat."​

If any Arab Palestinian chose not to participate and not work towards peace and independence, they should not piggy back off the backs of others to attain Independence.

Most Respectfully,
R

Britain tried to get the Palestinians to buy into their settler colonial project and play a subordinate roll in their own country.

Of course they refused such an offer.

The Arabs-Moslems claiming to be "Pal'istanians" were citizens of a country?

Link?

 

[P F Tinmore]

RE: International law or even a legal framework regarding what is legitimate resistance to occupation?
※→ P F Tinmore, et al,

OH! S now there is a new allegation.

That ship has long sailed.

A government derives its legitimacy from the will of the people.

The Israeli government was established with the disapproval of the vast majority of the people and was imposed on them by military force.

(COMMENT)

The State of Israel was created by its people. It exercise sovereignty over the territory, by it people.

The Legitimacy is approved every election in a peaceful manner and the government transition is nearly seemly. The people find the government legitimate.

The Arab Palestinian people are never going to get any of the territory back unless they come to the table for negotiation. Otherwise, bit by bit, what territory the Arab Palestinian has sovereignty over will dissipate like water in the desert.

Most Respectfully,
R

The State of Israel was created by its people. It exercise sovereignty over the territory, by it people.

Not true. Most of the people were removed from the voter rolls before any election.

(COMMENT)

After the Arab Palestinians rejected any participation in the "Steps to Preparatory to Independence" they want to roll back the clock and change history. Sorry about your luck.

There is a children's story called the Little Red Hen. And the moral to this story is: "if any would not work, neither should he or she eat."​

If any Arab Palestinian chose not to participate and not work towards peace and independence, they should not piggy back off the backs of others to attain Independence.

Most Respectfully,
R

Britain tried to get the Palestinians to buy into their settler colonial project and play a subordinate roll in their own country.

Of course they refused such an offer.

The Arabs-Moslems claiming to be "Pal'istanians" were citizens of a country?

Link?

Why do you post here when you know so little? The Palestinians became citizens of Palestine by international law in 1924 and by domestic law in 1925.

 

[RoccoR]

RE: International law or even a legal framework regarding what is legitimate resistance to occupation?
※→ P F Tinmore, et al,

Oh come now!

Britain tried to get the Palestinians to buy into their settler colonial project and play a subordinate roll in their own country.

Of course they refused such an offer.

(COMMENT)

This is just a comeback used to hide the fact and ignore the reality that the Arab Palestinians would have been 10 times better-off if they had accepted the various participation offers → but did not because of the greed to always get more.

Even today, the longer the refuse to negotiate in good faith, the more settlements that will appear.

But you cannot make the political refusals, such as the Arab Palestinians have done, and then come back after losing territory and complain the the legality of the effort.

The Arab Palestinians cannot just disregard ever opportunity and overture to negotiate the terms of peace and then complain the extended occupation is illegal. If anything, the establishment of a paper government to attempt to avoid the consequences of their actions is illegal.

There should be a contest as to how many times the Arab Palestinians intentionally avoided a peaceful settlement just in the 21st Century...

Most Respectfully,
R

 

[P F Tinmore]

RE: International law or even a legal framework regarding what is legitimate resistance to occupation?
※→ P F Tinmore, et al,

Oh come now!

Britain tried to get the Palestinians to buy into their settler colonial project and play a subordinate roll in their own country.

Of course they refused such an offer.

(COMMENT)

This is just a comeback used t hide the fact and ignore the reality that the Arab Palestinians would have been 10 times better-off if they had accepted the various participation offers → but did not because of the greed to always get more.

Even today, the longer the refuse to negotiate in god faith, the more settlements that will appear.

But you cannot make the political refusals, such as the Arab Palestinians have done, and then come back after losing territory and complain the the legality of the effort.

The Arab Palestinians cannot just disregard ever opportunity and overture to negotiate the terms of peace and then complain the extended occupation is illegal. If anything, the establishment of a paper government to attempt to avoid the consequences of their actions is illegal.

There should be a contest as to how many times the Arab Palestinians intentionally avoided a peaceful settlement just in the 21st Century...

Most Respectfully,
R

The Palestinians have never been offered anything other than surrender and hold their hand out to Israel for whatever crumbs they can get.

 

[Hollie]

RE: International law or even a legal framework regarding what is legitimate resistance to occupation?
※→ P F Tinmore, et al,

OH! S now there is a new allegation.

That ship has long sailed.

(COMMENT)

The State of Israel was created by its people. It exercise sovereignty over the territory, by it people.

The Legitimacy is approved every election in a peaceful manner and the government transition is nearly seemly. The people find the government legitimate.

The Arab Palestinian people are never going to get any of the territory back unless they come to the table for negotiation. Otherwise, bit by bit, what territory the Arab Palestinian has sovereignty over will dissipate like water in the desert.

Most Respectfully,
R

The State of Israel was created by its people. It exercise sovereignty over the territory, by it people.

Not true. Most of the people were removed from the voter rolls before any election.

(COMMENT)

After the Arab Palestinians rejected any participation in the "Steps to Preparatory to Independence" they want to roll back the clock and change history. Sorry about your luck.

There is a children's story called the Little Red Hen. And the moral to this story is: "if any would not work, neither should he or she eat."​

If any Arab Palestinian chose not to participate and not work towards peace and independence, they should not piggy back off the backs of others to attain Independence.

Most Respectfully,
R

Britain tried to get the Palestinians to buy into their settler colonial project and play a subordinate roll in their own country.

Of course they refused such an offer.

The Arabs-Moslems claiming to be "Pal'istanians" were citizens of a country?

Link?

Why do you post here when you know so little? The Palestinians became citizens of Palestine by international law in 1924 and by domestic law in 1925.

Thats nonsensical and has been debunked many times.

Why do you repeat such nonsense?

 

[Hollie]

RE: International law or even a legal framework regarding what is legitimate resistance to occupation?
※→ P F Tinmore, et al,

Oh come now!

Britain tried to get the Palestinians to buy into their settler colonial project and play a subordinate roll in their own country.

Of course they refused such an offer.

(COMMENT)

This is just a comeback used t hide the fact and ignore the reality that the Arab Palestinians would have been 10 times better-off if they had accepted the various participation offers → but did not because of the greed to always get more.

Even today, the longer the refuse to negotiate in god faith, the more settlements that will appear.

But you cannot make the political refusals, such as the Arab Palestinians have done, and then come back after losing territory and complain the the legality of the effort.

The Arab Palestinians cannot just disregard ever opportunity and overture to negotiate the terms of peace and then complain the extended occupation is illegal. If anything, the establishment of a paper government to attempt to avoid the consequences of their actions is illegal.

There should be a contest as to how many times the Arab Palestinians intentionally avoided a peaceful settlement just in the 21st Century...

Most Respectfully,
R

The Palestinians have never been offered anything other than surrender and hold their hand out to Israel for whatever crumbs they can get.

Link?

 

[P F Tinmore]

RE: International law or even a legal framework regarding what is legitimate resistance to occupation?
※→ P F Tinmore, et al,

OH! S now there is a new allegation.

Not true. Most of the people were removed from the voter rolls before any election.

(COMMENT)

After the Arab Palestinians rejected any participation in the "Steps to Preparatory to Independence" they want to roll back the clock and change history. Sorry about your luck.

There is a children's story called the Little Red Hen. And the moral to this story is: "if any would not work, neither should he or she eat."​

If any Arab Palestinian chose not to participate and not work towards peace and independence, they should not piggy back off the backs of others to attain Independence.

Most Respectfully,
R

Britain tried to get the Palestinians to buy into their settler colonial project and play a subordinate roll in their own country.

Of course they refused such an offer.

The Arabs-Moslems claiming to be "Pal'istanians" were citizens of a country?

Link?

Why do you post here when you know so little? The Palestinians became citizens of Palestine by international law in 1924 and by domestic law in 1925.

Thats nonsensical and has been debunked many times.

Why do you repeat such nonsense?

Links?

Of course not. You are just blowing smoke out of your ass.

 

[P F Tinmore]

RE: International law or even a legal framework regarding what is legitimate resistance to occupation?
※→ P F Tinmore, et al,

Oh come now!

Britain tried to get the Palestinians to buy into their settler colonial project and play a subordinate roll in their own country.

Of course they refused such an offer.

(COMMENT)

This is just a comeback used t hide the fact and ignore the reality that the Arab Palestinians would have been 10 times better-off if they had accepted the various participation offers → but did not because of the greed to always get more.

Even today, the longer the refuse to negotiate in god faith, the more settlements that will appear.

But you cannot make the political refusals, such as the Arab Palestinians have done, and then come back after losing territory and complain the the legality of the effort.

The Arab Palestinians cannot just disregard ever opportunity and overture to negotiate the terms of peace and then complain the extended occupation is illegal. If anything, the establishment of a paper government to attempt to avoid the consequences of their actions is illegal.

There should be a contest as to how many times the Arab Palestinians intentionally avoided a peaceful settlement just in the 21st Century...

Most Respectfully,
R

The Palestinians have never been offered anything other than surrender and hold their hand out to Israel for whatever crumbs they can get.

Link?

Have you not read any of these fake peace offerings?

 

[Hollie]

RE: International law or even a legal framework regarding what is legitimate resistance to occupation?
※→ P F Tinmore, et al,

OH! S now there is a new allegation.

(COMMENT)

After the Arab Palestinians rejected any participation in the "Steps to Preparatory to Independence" they want to roll back the clock and change history. Sorry about your luck.

There is a children's story called the Little Red Hen. And the moral to this story is: "if any would not work, neither should he or she eat."​

If any Arab Palestinian chose not to participate and not work towards peace and independence, they should not piggy back off the backs of others to attain Independence.

Most Respectfully,
R

Britain tried to get the Palestinians to buy into their settler colonial project and play a subordinate roll in their own country.

Of course they refused such an offer.

The Arabs-Moslems claiming to be "Pal'istanians" were citizens of a country?

Link?

Why do you post here when you know so little? The Palestinians became citizens of Palestine by international law in 1924 and by domestic law in 1925.

Thats nonsensical and has been debunked many times.

Why do you repeat such nonsense?

Links?

Of course not. You are just blowing smoke out of your ass.

No support for your claim. That's what I expected.

 

[Hollie]

RE: International law or even a legal framework regarding what is legitimate resistance to occupation?
※→ P F Tinmore, et al,

Oh come now!

Britain tried to get the Palestinians to buy into their settler colonial project and play a subordinate roll in their own country.

Of course they refused such an offer.

(COMMENT)

This is just a comeback used t hide the fact and ignore the reality that the Arab Palestinians would have been 10 times better-off if they had accepted the various participation offers → but did not because of the greed to always get more.

Even today, the longer the refuse to negotiate in god faith, the more settlements that will appear.

But you cannot make the political refusals, such as the Arab Palestinians have done, and then come back after losing territory and complain the the legality of the effort.

The Arab Palestinians cannot just disregard ever opportunity and overture to negotiate the terms of peace and then complain the extended occupation is illegal. If anything, the establishment of a paper government to attempt to avoid the consequences of their actions is illegal.

There should be a contest as to how many times the Arab Palestinians intentionally avoided a peaceful settlement just in the 21st Century...

Most Respectfully,
R

The Palestinians have never been offered anything other than surrender and hold their hand out to Israel for whatever crumbs they can get.

Link?

Have you not read any of these fake peace offerings?

Arab-Moslem intransigence is the issue.

Have you not read the Hamas Charter?