docmauser1
Gold Member
- Oct 8, 2010
- 7,274
- 698
- 190
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
Next they'll hold a vote that the moon is made of Swiss Cheese, because they say so.
No. There was no Palestine during Jesus' time.on referring to THEMSELVES using a word that was used ONLY to
describe jews living in ISRAEL/JUDEA for almost 2000 years
So, was Jesus a Palestinian then?
No state now or in the forseeable future. Sorry 'bout that Tinmore,George,etc,etc...........
No state now or in the forseeable future. Sorry 'bout that Tinmore,George,etc,etc...........
No. There was no Palestine during Jesus' time.on referring to THEMSELVES using a word that was used ONLY to
describe jews living in ISRAEL/JUDEA for almost 2000 years
So, was Jesus a Palestinian then?
There are too many lies in this article. This guy has no credibility.
There are too many lies in this article. This guy has no credibility.
I read the article and the credentials of the author-- I can see where you
do not agree with some of his statements ---neither would Achmadinejad
and many other notables-----but where are the actual LIES? I did not
notice a single outright "LIE"
According to international law, an entity must meet four criteria in order to claim statehood: 1. It must exercise effective and independent governmental control; 2. It must possess a defined territory over which it exercises such control; 3. It must have the capacity to freely engage in foreign relations; 4. It must have effective and independent control over a permanent population.
ARTICLE 1
The state as a person of international law should possess the following qualifications: a ) a permanent population; b ) a defined territory; c ) government; and d) capacity to enter into relations with the other states.
The Avalon Project : Convention on Rights and Duties of States (inter-American); December 26, 1933
try to be a bit more specific----that is the SPECIFIC LIE?
Israels legal rights stem from the Treaty of Sèvres (1920) and from the League of Nations Mandate (1922).
try to be a bit more specific----that is the SPECIFIC LIE?
Israels legal rights stem from the Treaty of Sèvres (1920) and from the League of Nations Mandate (1922).
No it didn't.
(COMMENT)try to be a bit more specific----that is the SPECIFIC LIE?
Israels legal rights stem from the Treaty of Sèvres (1920) and from the League of Nations Mandate (1922).
No it didn't.
oh ok thanks ----not impressed
EXCERPTs A/PV.207 11 May 1949 OFFICIAL RECORDS OF THE THIRD SESSION OF THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY said:
- It was logical that the United Nations, which had created the State of Israel, should also admit it to membership.
SOURCE: A/PV.207 of 11 May 1949
- At the invitation of the President, the delegation of Israel took its place in the General Assembly.
irosie91, et al,
Well, actually, our friend "PF Tinmore" is correct here. The Treaty of Sèvres is void. It was with the Ottoman Empire which disolved. It was not implemented at the time of the collapse. Mustafa Kemal (Ataturk) took power and disowned the treaty. It might as well had never been written.
(COMMENT)No it didn't.
oh ok thanks ----not impressed
EXCERPTs A/PV.207 11 May 1949 OFFICIAL RECORDS OF THE THIRD SESSION OF THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY said:
- It was logical that the United Nations, which had created the State of Israel, should also admit it to membership.
SOURCE: A/PV.207 of 11 May 1949
- At the invitation of the President, the delegation of Israel took its place in the General Assembly.
Most Respectfully,
R
Whatever the decision of the General Assembly regarding the admission of Israel, it would not change the verdict of history. The record would always reveal the true facts. The League of Nations and later the United Nations had sanctioned the invasion of Palestine by immigrants who had set up gangs to terrorize the legitimate inhabitants. They had sanctioned aggression against an innocent people, disappointed their natural aspirations and violated their inherent rights. The United Nations, by admitting Israel, would be offering shelter to a group which had not only imposed its rule by force on the people Palestine, but which had also driven from their homes almost a million of those people. A recent report in the New York Times had revealed that many of those who had attempted to return had been fired at. Finally, the Zionists had not respected the resolutions of the General Assembly and had given no definite assurances that they would do so in the future. They felt that they were absolved of such assurances because under the shield of power politics they would always find excuses and apologies. They had planned to realize their aggressive designs by invoking three pretexts: the establishment of a national home, the solution of the problem of the European displaced persons and the final fait accompli. In view of the historical precedents, tile United Nations must realize that the recognition of accomplished facts meant the sanctioning of aggression and injustice.