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.
RE: Palestine Today
※→ P F Tinmore, et al,
No false premise...
(COMMENT)Article 2You are (again) basing your conclusions on false premise. You are saying that the citizens of Palestine are the invaders and the foreign settlers out of Europe are the defenders.
4. All Members shall refrain in their international relations from the threat or use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of any state, or in any other manner inconsistent with the Purposes of the United Nations.
You make no sense.
In 1948, it is universally recognized that the Arab League attempted to invade Israel to obstruct Jewish Self-determination. That set the conditions for an armistice.
The international community understood that the Mandate was terminating. Under Article 77 of the UN Charter, and at the direction of the UN, the UN Palestine Commission (UNPC) was to become the successor government. That Successor Government had been working with the Jewish Agency in the Steps Preparatory to Independence. It was all a move in the light of day with full transparency. The UNPC offered to work with the Arab High Committee, but they had rejected participation in the process necessary to create working self-governing institution (something they still are lacking after half a century).
In 1967, the conflict again was not a matter of the Israelis opposing the Arab Palestinians, who had rejected participation in self-governing institutions, but a pursuit of hostile Jordanian Forces. The West Bank was annexed by Jordan (1950), and the people were Jordanian citizens. The State of Israel occupied territory it overran in pursuit of hostile forces.
Most Respectfully,
R
I am trying to find something in all this verbosity that relates to my post.RE: Palestine Today
※→ P F Tinmore, et al,
No false premise...
(COMMENT)Article 2You are (again) basing your conclusions on false premise. You are saying that the citizens of Palestine are the invaders and the foreign settlers out of Europe are the defenders.
4. All Members shall refrain in their international relations from the threat or use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of any state, or in any other manner inconsistent with the Purposes of the United Nations.
You make no sense.
In 1948, it is universally recognized that the Arab League attempted to invade Israel to obstruct Jewish Self-determination. That set the conditions for an armistice.
The international community understood that the Mandate was terminating. Under Article 77 of the UN Charter, and at the direction of the UN, the UN Palestine Commission (UNPC) was to become the successor government. That Successor Government had been working with the Jewish Agency in the Steps Preparatory to Independence. It was all a move in the light of day with full transparency. The UNPC offered to work with the Arab High Committee, but they had rejected participation in the process necessary to create working self-governing institution (something they still are lacking after half a century).
In 1967, the conflict again was not a matter of the Israelis opposing the Arab Palestinians, who had rejected participation in self-governing institutions, but a pursuit of hostile Jordanian Forces. The West Bank was annexed by Jordan (1950), and the people were Jordanian citizens. The State of Israel occupied territory it overran in pursuit of hostile forces.
Most Respectfully,
R
Annexation (Latin ad, to, and nexus, joining) is the administrative action[1] and concept in international law relating to the forcible acquisition of one state's territory by another state.[2] It is generally held to be an illegal act.RE: Palestine Today
※→ P F Tinmore, et al,
Just what particular legal citation or clause are you basing this assertion?
(COMMENT)Deflection. It is illegal to annex occupied territory. It is what it is.
BTW, Israel annexed occupied territory.
What does the actual law say?
Most Respectfully,
R
Annexation - Wikipedia
I am trying to find something in all this verbosity that relates to my post.RE: Palestine Today
※→ P F Tinmore, et al,
No false premise...
(COMMENT)Article 2You are (again) basing your conclusions on false premise. You are saying that the citizens of Palestine are the invaders and the foreign settlers out of Europe are the defenders.
4. All Members shall refrain in their international relations from the threat or use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of any state, or in any other manner inconsistent with the Purposes of the United Nations.
You make no sense.
In 1948, it is universally recognized that the Arab League attempted to invade Israel to obstruct Jewish Self-determination. That set the conditions for an armistice.
The international community understood that the Mandate was terminating. Under Article 77 of the UN Charter, and at the direction of the UN, the UN Palestine Commission (UNPC) was to become the successor government. That Successor Government had been working with the Jewish Agency in the Steps Preparatory to Independence. It was all a move in the light of day with full transparency. The UNPC offered to work with the Arab High Committee, but they had rejected participation in the process necessary to create working self-governing institution (something they still are lacking after half a century).
In 1967, the conflict again was not a matter of the Israelis opposing the Arab Palestinians, who had rejected participation in self-governing institutions, but a pursuit of hostile Jordanian Forces. The West Bank was annexed by Jordan (1950), and the people were Jordanian citizens. The State of Israel occupied territory it overran in pursuit of hostile forces.
Most Respectfully,
R
Wouldn't that be like pissing in the ocean to make it salty?
Wouldn't that be like pissing in the ocean to make it salty?
Wouldn't that be like pissing in the ocean to make it salty?
