Israel tells the US to Go Fxxx Itself, again.

[Marc39]

Irrelevant. Jerusalem is not inside Israel's internationally-recognized borders, and Israel has no legal right to claim the city as part of its territory. You might as well claim the moon is your capital.

Completely wrong.

The Palestine Mandate has established Palestine in its entirety as the Jewish homeland. Indeed, the original Palestine Mandate included the "East Bank", otherwise known today as Jordan. The Palestine Mandate does not distinguish the West Bank. It's all sovereign Jewish territory, under international law.

Preambular...

Whereas the Principal Allied Powers have also agreed that the Mandatory should be responsible for putting into effect the declaration originally made on November 2nd, 1917, by the Government of His Britannic Majesty, and adopted by the said Powers, in favor of the establishment in Palestine of a national home for the Jewish people...

Whereas recognition has thereby been given to the historical connection of the Jewish people with Palestine and to the grounds for reconstituting their national home in that country...

Article 6...

The Administration of Palestine, while ensuring that the rights and position of other sections of the population are not prejudiced, shall facilitate Jewish immigration under suitable conditions and shall encourage, in co-operation with the Jewish agency referred to in Article 4, close settlement by Jews on the land, including State lands and waste lands not required for public purposes

The Palestine Mandate calls for the establishment of "self-governing Jewish institutions"...

Article 2...

The Mandatory shall be responsible for placing the country under such political, administrative and economic conditions as will secure the establishment of the Jewish national home, as laid down in the preamble, and the development of self-governing institutions,...

The Palestine Mandate stipulates that no other government other than a Jewish-run government may administer Palestine.

Article 5...

The Mandatory shall be responsible for seeing that no Palestine territory shall be ceded or leased to, or in any way placed under the control of the Government of any foreign Power

Now, you know.

 

[P F Tinmore]

Irrelevant. Jerusalem is not inside Israel's internationally-recognized borders, and Israel has no legal right to claim the city as part of its territory. You might as well claim the moon is your capital.

Completely wrong.

The Palestine Mandate has established Palestine in its entirety as the Jewish homeland. Indeed, the original Palestine Mandate included the "East Bank", otherwise known today as Jordan. The Palestine Mandate does not distinguish the West Bank. It's all sovereign Jewish territory, under international law.

Preambular...

Whereas the Principal Allied Powers have also agreed that the Mandatory should be responsible for putting into effect the declaration originally made on November 2nd, 1917, by the Government of His Britannic Majesty, and adopted by the said Powers, in favor of the establishment in Palestine of a national home for the Jewish people...

Whereas recognition has thereby been given to the historical connection of the Jewish people with Palestine and to the grounds for reconstituting their national home in that country...

Article 6...


The Palestine Mandate calls for the establishment of "self-governing Jewish institutions"...

Article 2...

The Mandatory shall be responsible for placing the country under such political, administrative and economic conditions as will secure the establishment of the Jewish national home, as laid down in the preamble, and the development of self-governing institutions,...

The Palestine Mandate stipulates that no other government other than a Jewish-run government may administer Palestine.

Article 5...

The Mandatory shall be responsible for seeing that no Palestine territory shall be ceded or leased to, or in any way placed under the control of the Government of any foreign Power

Now, you know.

Too bad the British threw up their hands and left without doing any of that stuff.

 

[Marc39]

Irrelevant. Jerusalem is not inside Israel's internationally-recognized borders, and Israel has no legal right to claim the city as part of its territory. You might as well claim the moon is your capital.

Completely wrong.

The Palestine Mandate has established Palestine in its entirety as the Jewish homeland. Indeed, the original Palestine Mandate included the "East Bank", otherwise known today as Jordan. The Palestine Mandate does not distinguish the West Bank. It's all sovereign Jewish territory, under international law.

Preambular...


Article 6...


The Palestine Mandate calls for the establishment of "self-governing Jewish institutions"...

Article 2...


The Palestine Mandate stipulates that no other government other than a Jewish-run government may administer Palestine.

Article 5...

The Mandatory shall be responsible for seeing that no Palestine territory shall be ceded or leased to, or in any way placed under the control of the Government of any foreign Power

Now, you know.

Too bad the British threw up their hands and left without doing any of that stuff.

Forum Dunce, as I have instructed you, the British were merely trustees of the Palestine Mandate trust, which is protected against revocation by Article 80 of the UN Charter.

Unfortunately, your brain is fried, leaving you unable to retain information. Too bad you weren't aborted, which would have saved much misery.

You are the Forum Dunce.

 

[P F Tinmore]

Completely wrong.

The Palestine Mandate has established Palestine in its entirety as the Jewish homeland. Indeed, the original Palestine Mandate included the "East Bank", otherwise known today as Jordan. The Palestine Mandate does not distinguish the West Bank. It's all sovereign Jewish territory, under international law.

Preambular...


Article 6...


The Palestine Mandate calls for the establishment of "self-governing Jewish institutions"...

Article 2...


The Palestine Mandate stipulates that no other government other than a Jewish-run government may administer Palestine.

Article 5...


Now, you know.

Too bad the British threw up their hands and left without doing any of that stuff.

Forum Dunce, as I have instructed you, the British were merely trustees of the Palestine Mandate trust, which is protected against revocation by Article 80 of the UN Charter.

Unfortunately, your brain is fried, leaving you unable to retain information. Too bad you weren't aborted, which would have saved much misery.

You are the Forum Dunce.

I know you like to cherry pick information and take it out of context to prove your point.

Article 76

The basic objectives of the trusteeship system, in accordance with the Purposes of the United Nations laid down in Article 1 of the present Charter, shall be:

a. to further international peace and security;

b. to promote the political, economic, social, and educational advancement of the inhabitants of the trust territories, and their progressive development towards self-government or independence as may be appropriate to the particular circumstances of each territory and its peoples and the freely expressed wishes of the peoples concerned, and as may be provided by the terms of each trusteeship agreement;

The partition of Palestine without the approval of the Palestinians would be in violation of the UN's own charter. The fact that the Palestinians rejected the partition does not mean that Israel gets a state and the Palestinians don't. It means that the deal is off. No partition can take place. And, no partition took place. The UN did not create the state of Israel. Israel cannot point to the UN as a source of it legitimacy.

 

[Marc39]

Too bad the British threw up their hands and left without doing any of that stuff.

Forum Dunce, as I have instructed you, the British were merely trustees of the Palestine Mandate trust, which is protected against revocation by Article 80 of the UN Charter.

Unfortunately, your brain is fried, leaving you unable to retain information. Too bad you weren't aborted, which would have saved much misery.

You are the Forum Dunce.

I know you like to cherry pick information and take it out of context to prove your point.

Article 76

The basic objectives of the trusteeship system, in accordance with the Purposes of the United Nations laid down in Article 1 of the present Charter, shall be:

a. to further international peace and security;

b. to promote the political, economic, social, and educational advancement of the inhabitants of the trust territories, and their progressive development towards self-government or independence as may be appropriate to the particular circumstances of each territory and its peoples and the freely expressed wishes of the peoples concerned, and as may be provided by the terms of each trusteeship agreement;

The partition of Palestine without the approval of the Palestinians would be in violation of the UN's own charter. The fact that the Palestinians rejected the partition does not mean that Israel gets a state and the Palestinians don't. It means that the deal is off. No partition can take place. And, no partition took place. The UN did not create the state of Israel. Israel cannot point to the UN as a source of it legitimacy.

You have no clue, Forum Dunce. The Pallies were in flagrant violation of the UN Charter in initiating armed conflict with the Jews after issuance of UN Res. 181. Pallies lost any rights accorded under 181, Jews did not. The UN passed UN Res. 181 (Partition Plan)

Don't try to feign even a modicum of insight into the matter because you are the Forum Dunce.

 

[P F Tinmore]

Forum Dunce, as I have instructed you, the British were merely trustees of the Palestine Mandate trust, which is protected against revocation by Article 80 of the UN Charter.

Unfortunately, your brain is fried, leaving you unable to retain information. Too bad you weren't aborted, which would have saved much misery.

You are the Forum Dunce.

I know you like to cherry pick information and take it out of context to prove your point.

Article 76

The basic objectives of the trusteeship system, in accordance with the Purposes of the United Nations laid down in Article 1 of the present Charter, shall be:

a. to further international peace and security;

b. to promote the political, economic, social, and educational advancement of the inhabitants of the trust territories, and their progressive development towards self-government or independence as may be appropriate to the particular circumstances of each territory and its peoples and the freely expressed wishes of the peoples concerned, and as may be provided by the terms of each trusteeship agreement;

The partition of Palestine without the approval of the Palestinians would be in violation of the UN's own charter. The fact that the Palestinians rejected the partition does not mean that Israel gets a state and the Palestinians don't. It means that the deal is off. No partition can take place. And, no partition took place. The UN did not create the state of Israel. Israel cannot point to the UN as a source of it legitimacy.

You have no clue, Forum Dunce. The Pallies were in flagrant violation of the UN Charter in initiating armed conflict with the Jews after issuance of UN Res. 181. Pallies lost any rights accorded under 181, Jews did not. The UN passed UN Res. 181 (Partition Plan)

Don't try to feign even a modicum of insight into the matter because you are the Forum Dunce.

The Palestinians did not violate 181. 181 was not approved by the Palestinians which they had every right to do. Therefore, 181 was null and void. The Palestinians had every legal right to defend themselves from the foreigners who came to take over their country.

 

[Marc39]

I know you like to cherry pick information and take it out of context to prove your point.



The partition of Palestine without the approval of the Palestinians would be in violation of the UN's own charter. The fact that the Palestinians rejected the partition does not mean that Israel gets a state and the Palestinians don't. It means that the deal is off. No partition can take place. And, no partition took place. The UN did not create the state of Israel. Israel cannot point to the UN as a source of it legitimacy.

You have no clue, Forum Dunce. The Pallies were in flagrant violation of the UN Charter in initiating armed conflict with the Jews after issuance of UN Res. 181. Pallies lost any rights accorded under 181, Jews did not. The UN passed UN Res. 181 (Partition Plan)

Don't try to feign even a modicum of insight into the matter because you are the Forum Dunce.

The Palestinians did not violate 181. 181 was not approved by the Palestinians which they had every right to do. Therefore, 181 was null and void. The Palestinians had every legal right to defend themselves from the foreigners who came to take over their country.

Forum Dunce, in initiating the 1947 civil war against the Jews after issuance of UN Res. 181, they were in flagrant violation of the UN Charter. The Pallies obliterated any rights accorded under 181 in their actions against a nascent sovereign state.

You are clearly uninformed and unable to marshall any cognitive ability.

Your mental disability seems to be worsening. Very sad. Too bad you weren't aborted and spared everyone's misery.

 

[Marc39]

I know you like to cherry pick information and take it out of context to prove your point.



The partition of Palestine without the approval of the Palestinians would be in violation of the UN's own charter. The fact that the Palestinians rejected the partition does not mean that Israel gets a state and the Palestinians don't. It means that the deal is off. No partition can take place. And, no partition took place. The UN did not create the state of Israel. Israel cannot point to the UN as a source of it legitimacy.

You have no clue, Forum Dunce. The Pallies were in flagrant violation of the UN Charter in initiating armed conflict with the Jews after issuance of UN Res. 181. Pallies lost any rights accorded under 181, Jews did not. The UN passed UN Res. 181 (Partition Plan)

Don't try to feign even a modicum of insight into the matter because you are the Forum Dunce.

The Palestinians did not violate 181. 181 was not approved by the Palestinians which they had every right to do. Therefore, 181 was null and void. The Palestinians had every legal right to defend themselves from the foreigners who came to take over their country.

Forum Dunce, I have already instructed you that Pallies had no country, but, your sad mental disability prevents you from any retention of information.

Here, again, Forum Dunce...

Eminent historian Bernard Lewis...

For Arabs, the term Palestine was unacceptable... For Muslims it was alien...The main objection for them was that it seemed to assert a separate entity which politically conscious Arabs in Palestine and elsewhere denied. For them there was no such thing as a country called Palestine. The region which the British called Palestine was merely a separated part of a larger whole. Palestine was not a country and had no frontiers, only administrative boundaries; it was a group of provincial subdivisions, by no means always the same, within a larger entity. For a long time organized and articulate Arab political opinion was virtually unanimous on this point.

Try hard to remember, Forum Dunce.

You are the Forum Dunce.

 

[P F Tinmore]

You have no clue, Forum Dunce. The Pallies were in flagrant violation of the UN Charter in initiating armed conflict with the Jews after issuance of UN Res. 181. Pallies lost any rights accorded under 181, Jews did not. The UN passed UN Res. 181 (Partition Plan)

Don't try to feign even a modicum of insight into the matter because you are the Forum Dunce.

The Palestinians did not violate 181. 181 was not approved by the Palestinians which they had every right to do. Therefore, 181 was null and void. The Palestinians had every legal right to defend themselves from the foreigners who came to take over their country.

Forum Dunce, in initiating the 1947 civil war against the Jews after issuance of UN Res. 181, they were in flagrant violation of the UN Charter. The Pallies obliterated any rights accorded under 181 in their actions against a nascent sovereign state.

You are clearly uninformed and unable to marshall any cognitive ability.

Your mental disability seems to be worsening. Very sad. Too bad you weren't aborted and spared everyone's misery.

The Palestinians have every legal right to remove the foreigners from their land.

 

[Marc39]

The Palestinians did not violate 181. 181 was not approved by the Palestinians which they had every right to do. Therefore, 181 was null and void. The Palestinians had every legal right to defend themselves from the foreigners who came to take over their country.

Forum Dunce, in initiating the 1947 civil war against the Jews after issuance of UN Res. 181, they were in flagrant violation of the UN Charter. The Pallies obliterated any rights accorded under 181 in their actions against a nascent sovereign state.

You are clearly uninformed and unable to marshall any cognitive ability.

Your mental disability seems to be worsening. Very sad. Too bad you weren't aborted and spared everyone's misery.

The Palestinians have every legal right to remove the foreigners from their land.

Forum Dunce, Palestine was not their land. Palestine was Ottoman Turkish land, subsequently transferred to the Jews via the Treaty of Sevres and the San Remo Resolution.

Pallies owned little to no land as it was state-owned by the Ottomans.

I've instructed you on this matter many times, however, your mental disability impairs your ability to retain information. You should have been aborted.

You are the Forum Dunce.

 

[al Haq]

Irrelevant. Jerusalem is not inside Israel's internationally-recognized borders, and Israel has no legal right to claim the city as part of its territory. You might as well claim the moon is your capital.

Legal rights? According to who/what?

According to international law which has been affirmed by the entire world - except for Israel, of course, which seems to think it's exempt.

UN Security Council Resolution 465
Adopted 20 August 1980:

5. Determines that all measures taken by Israel to change the physical character, demographic composition, institutional structure or status of the Palestinian and other Arab territories occupied since 1967, including Jerusalem, or any part thereof, have no legal validity and that Israel's policy and practices of settling parts of its population and new immigrants in those territories constitute a flagrant violation of the Fourth Geneva Convention relative to the Protection of Civilian Persons in Time of War and also constitute a serious obstruction to achieving a comprehensive, just and lasting peace in the Middle East.

Linkie:
S/RES/465 (1980) of 1 March 1980

As the U.S. and the U.N. have repeatedly affirmed:

As to Jerusalem, United States policy remains unaffected and unchanged. As has been stated by every previous administration which addressed this issue, the status of Jerusalem and all other permanent status issues must be resolved by the parties through negotiations.

- George Mitchell, Special Envoy for Middle East Peace
State Department Briefing 25 Nov 2009

Linkie:
Special Envoy for Middle East Peace George Mitchell Briefs Press

Middle East Quartet condemns Israel over Jerusalem settlements
The Middle East Quartet set a deadline for peace between Israel and the Palestinians yesterday after condemning plans to build new Jewish homes in Arab east Jerusalem.

…

It called on Israel “to freeze all settlement activities . . . and to refrain from demolitions and evictions”.

Linkie:
Middle East Quartet condemns Israel over Jerusalem settlements - Times Online

UN chief says Israeli settlements must be stopped
RAMALLAH, West Bank – Israeli settlement building anywhere on occupied land is illegal and must be stopped, U.N. chief Ban Ki-moon said Saturday, after getting a closer look at some of the Israeli enclaves scattered across Palestinian-claimed territories.
…
On Saturday, Ban rejected Israel's distinction between east Jerusalem and the West Bank, noting that both are occupied lands.

"The world has condemned Israel's settlement plans in east Jerusalem," Ban told a news conference after his brief tour. "Let us be clear. All settlement activity is illegal anywhere in occupied territory and must be stopped."

Linkie:
UN chief says Israeli settlements must be stopped - Yahoo! News

 

[al Haq]

The US still recognizes Israel as the capital as a matter of law.

See my reply above.

 

[The Rabbi]

Irrelevant. Jerusalem is not inside Israel's internationally-recognized borders, and Israel has no legal right to claim the city as part of its territory. You might as well claim the moon is your capital.

Legal rights? According to who/what?

According to international law which has been affirmed by the entire world - except for Israel, of course, which seems to think it's exempt.

Fuck international law. Where do they get off telling a sovereign nation what it can and cannot do in its own capital?

 

[al Haq]

Fuck international law. Where do they get off telling a sovereign nation what it can and cannot do in its own capital?

International law does not care what Israel does in Tel Aviv.

 

[Winston Smith]

Fuck international law. Where do they get off telling a sovereign nation what it can and cannot do in its own capital?

International law does not care what Israel does in Tel Aviv.

A. Isreal did not invent the wheel. the US, Russia, Iran and many other nations routinely ignore international law when it suits their purposes.

B. International law can only goes so far. it cannot replace an independent nation's sovereignty.

 

[al Haq]

A. Isreal did not invent the wheel. the US, Russia, Iran and many other nations routinely ignore international law when it suits their purposes.

B. International law can only goes so far. it cannot replace an independent nation's sovereignty.

1. Apparently, ignoring and/or tolerating Israel's violations no longer serves the U.S.'s purposes.

2. Despite its claims, Israel does not have sovereignty over Jerusalem or any of the occupied territory.

 

[Winston Smith]

A. Isreal did not invent the wheel. the US, Russia, Iran and many other nations routinely ignore international law when it suits their purposes.

B. International law can only goes so far. it cannot replace an independent nation's sovereignty.

1. Apparently, ignoring and/or tolerating Israel's violations no longer serves the U.S.'s purposes.

2. Despite its claims, Israel does not have sovereignty over Jerusalem or any of the occupied territory.

A. You mean to say, it doesent serve Obama's Agenda. Thank god for Congress. But this statement only proves the hypocricy of the matter - the world will ignore any violations of "international law" by any nations - except Israel.

B. Israel does not need anybody's permission to procalaim its capital. but again, hypocracy rears its ugly head - where was the talk of sovereignty over jerusalem pre-1967?

 

[mdn2000]

al Haq, thanks for the response, I see the term International Law thrown around and I seriously had no idea what that meant.

The United Nations and its International law has no authority over the citizens of the United States, our Declaration of Independence trumps the United Nations, our Constitution is our law, there is no other law above the Constitution of the United States of America.

The United Nations is obsolete, a relic of another time, people want to talk about change this is where we need change, the world does not need another political body to rule over nations.

 

[CMike]

I don't see any other country having to justify every city that belongs to them.

Hillary is a fucking bitch.

I also have yet to see one demand that Obama/Hillary/Biden have put on the arabs.

Actually they are playing favorities. Thare in favor of the arab terrorists.

 

[mdn2000]

Every administration favors the Arabs, Saudi Arabia specifically. Its all about the oil.