Israel's Legal Right To Exist

It proclaimed that no new territories should be annexed by the victors, and that such territories should be administered solely for the benefit of their indigenous people.​

That would be the people who lived there. Colonial settlers would not benefit the indigenous people.

Since they have the sovereignty, they get to determine immigration policies.

The Jewish people are the indigenous people. And the Jewish people did and do live there. "...by right and not on sufferance"
 
It proclaimed that no new territories should be annexed by the victors, and that such territories should be administered solely for the benefit of their indigenous people.​

That would be the people who lived there. Colonial settlers would not benefit the indigenous people.

Since they have the sovereignty, they get to determine immigration policies.

The Jewish people are the indigenous people. And the Jewish people did and do live there. "...by right and not on sufferance"
Pfffft, Israeli talking point.
 
Pfffft, Israeli talking point.

You can't erase a whole people and pretend that they don't exist. Your whole argument of "Israel has no legal status" rests on the idea that the Jewish people have no rights to a government or a sovereignty. You have presented absolutely no legal grounds for the prohibition of a Jewish government or Jewish sovereignty in Israel. None. You just keep saying that the Jewish people don't 'count' as inhabitants or indigenous people. Your entire argument rests on this falsehood.
 
And...whenever you get to that point in the argument you run away from it with pointless comments like "Israeli talking point".
 
And btw, "you have not been reading my posts" is another one of your "I haven't got an answer" dodges. I have read every single word you have written on this thread since you made the claim "Israel has no legal status". You have failed to make a convincing argument.

Israel became a State the same way Jordan did.

They were both "Palestine". They were both assigned borders by the Mandate authorities. They were both charged with developing self-governing systems. They both did so. They both declared independence. They both entered into agreements with other States. They were both accepted into the UN. They both now act entirely as all other States do. Israel even had the additional benefit of having the legal force of international agreements calling for the re-constitution of their National Homeland.

So where is your legal argument? The only argument you have presented so far is that the government was Jewish and therefore prohibited from becoming the government of the State. There is certainly no international law which states that the Jewish people aren't allowed to form a government or a State. (Even the UN isn't that anti-semitic -- yet. Oh wait. I take that back. UNGA 3379).

Your premise, the foundations of all your posts here, is that the "Jewish people can't have sovereignty there". You build all your discussions around that premise. You are just uncomfortable enough with the special rules you make for Jews that you refrain from saying it outright (in contrast to other posters). What I mean is that you refrain from saying outright that its "Jews" who can't have any sort of sovereignty.

So you disguise it with vague suggestions that immigrants can't have sovereignty (oops, there goes the legal status of the Americas). Or that minorities can't have sovereignty (oops, there goes Pakistan, Bangladesh, etc). Or that a country can't be split into self-determining parts (oops, there goes Serbia, Bosnia, Slovenia, Montenegro, Croatia, Herzegovina, Macedonia, Ukraine, Russia, Georgia, Moldova, Estonia, Latvia, etc, etc). Or that there can be no such thing as returnees (oops, there goes Arab Palestine). Or that a country can't be split based primarily on religion rather than ethnicity or even culture (again, Pakistan and Bangladesh).

But because you actually recognize the flaws in your own arguments, you are reduced to having to argue that the Jewish people didn't exist in Israel. That they aren't indigenous. That they weren't inhabitants. Its a ridiculous argument. Its an erasing argument. But one that the Arabs are certainly not afraid to make.
 
Your whole argument of "Israel has no legal status" rests on the idea that the Jewish people have no rights to a government or a sovereignty.
Not true. You have not been reading my posts.

Go ahead and show me where you have stated that the Jewish people have a right to government and sovereignty in Israel.
I have always said that.

But they do not have an exclusive right.
 
I have always said that.

But they do not have an exclusive right.

Well, DUH! Who the hell is saying that the Jewish people have the exclusive right to the entire Ottoman Empire?! The Jewish people just want the same rights that the Jordanian people, and the Syrian people and the Lebanese people and the Iraqi people already have!
 
The only argument you have presented so far is that the government was Jewish and therefore prohibited from becoming the government of the State.
I have never said that. The fact that it was Jews who created Israel is irrelevant. It is the illegal activities that are the problem.

This is a good history on the creation of Israel.

HOME - 1948

BTW, even Rocco has linked to this site.
 
I have never said that. The fact that it was Jews who created Israel is irrelevant. It is the illegal activities that are the problem.

Well then, do tell. What illegal activities prohibit Israel from having "legal status"?
 
I have never said that. The fact that it was Jews who created Israel is irrelevant. It is the illegal activities that are the problem.

Well then, do tell. What illegal activities prohibit Israel from having "legal status"?
I posted the link.

Read up.
Why aren't you our Secretary of State?
Too honest.
But you've got a whole wall of photoshopped, superseded documents!
 

Forum List

Back
Top