Palestinian identity ?

[Phoenall]

P F Tinmore, et al,

I think you need to re-read my posting. I don't think I said that; or even implied that.

(COMMENT)

I do not believe you will find anywhere - that says "citizens of a territory defined by international borders have no rights." The "rights" were defined. The question is: What "rights" are you suggesting they have? What "rights" and where are they documented as applying?

The internationally recognized border to the territory for which the Mandate Applied, outlined the Mandate Government as defined by the Council and Allied Powers. It did not outline subdivisions like Transjordan (as a Article 22 "Certain Communities"). And in those defined responsibilities and powers, it clearly states that the Mandatory was to protect ("safeguarding") the "civil rights" and the "religious rights" of the inhabitants (irrespective of race and religion). Those are the only two "rights" that were mentioned and were not otherwise defined alla 1922.

While I do not think that the Mandate was to be interpreted totally within a strict compliance framework, the Mandate did stipulate that the authority, control or administration would be "explicitly defined by the Council of the League Of Nations." And while "ensuring that the rights and position of other sections of the population are not prejudiced, shall facilitate Jewish immigration."

Most Respectfully,
R

Let's get a point straight. Is it that the Palestinian's rights were violated, or is it that the Palestinians just had no rights?

They had the same rights as everyone else did in 1917, until their leaders signed them away in the surrender treaties. So in effect they became stateless and landless vagabonds with no right to anything.

What rights did the Germans have after 1919 when they surrendered, or the Jews in 1933 to 1945 when they were mass murdered ?

They had the same rights as everyone else did in 1917, until their leaders signed them away in the surrender treaties.​

Link?

Treaty of Sèvres - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


Treaty of Lausanne - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Quote the passages that say what you said.

the renunciation of all non-Turkish land that was part of the Ottoman Empire, as well as parts of Turkish land, to the Allied powers.[2] Notably, Eastern Mediterranean land was to be divided, yielding, amongst others, the British Mandate of Palestine and the French Mandate of Syria.[3] The terms of the treaty brewed hostility and nationalistic feeling amongst Turks. The signatories of the treaty, themselves representatives of the Ottoman Empire, were stripped of their citizenship




Turkey gave up all claims to the remainder of the Ottoman Empire

 

[P F Tinmore]

P F Tinmore, et al,

All of it.

What part of all that answers my questions?

(COMMENT)

It itemizes the rights you asked about, documents them, and evaluate them in terms of Pre-1948 obligations, Post-1948. then Post-1976.

With the exception of "self-determination" which was not promised until 1945 (but still under Mandate), the Arab Palestinians had limited rights.

Most Respectfully,
R

OK, but:

A/RES/3236 (XXIX)
22 November 1974
Guided by the purposes and principles of the Charter,

Recalling its relevant resolutions which affirm the right of the Palestinian people to self-determination,

1. Reaffirms the inalienable rights of the Palestinian people in Palestine, including:

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

(b) The right to national independence and sovereignty;

2. Reaffirms also the inalienable right of the Palestinians to return to their homes and property from which they have been displaced and uprooted, and calls for their return;

3. Emphasizes that full respect for and the realization of these inalienable rights of the Palestinian people are indispensable for the solution of the question of Palestine;

4. Recognizes that the Palestinian people is a principal party in the establishment of a just and lasting peace in the Middle East;

5. Further recognizes the right of the Palestinian people to regain its rights by all means in accordance with the purposes and principles of the Charter of the United Nations;

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

Resolution 3236 states that Palestinians have inalienable rights and that these rights pre date the resolution.

At what time and under what circumstances did the Palestinians obtain these rights?

Did not exist until 1974 so cant be applied to 1917, 1923, 1948 or 1967.

They received those rights on the date the resolution became international law, when was that again ?

The resolution reaffirmed already existing rights. So when did they obtain these rights was my question.

Were does it say that ?

Find the laws that give those rights and you will your answer, and it seems that you cant find anything that predates 1974

The rights laid down in resolution 3236 had already gained some legitimacy by the time of the Mandate period. The right to self determination was demanded by the Palestinians consistantly at that time.

 

[Phoenall]

P F Tinmore, et al,

All of it.

(COMMENT)

It itemizes the rights you asked about, documents them, and evaluate them in terms of Pre-1948 obligations, Post-1948. then Post-1976.

With the exception of "self-determination" which was not promised until 1945 (but still under Mandate), the Arab Palestinians had limited rights.

Most Respectfully,
R

OK, but:

A/RES/3236 (XXIX)
22 November 1974
Guided by the purposes and principles of the Charter,

Recalling its relevant resolutions which affirm the right of the Palestinian people to self-determination,

1. Reaffirms the inalienable rights of the Palestinian people in Palestine, including:

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

(b) The right to national independence and sovereignty;

2. Reaffirms also the inalienable right of the Palestinians to return to their homes and property from which they have been displaced and uprooted, and calls for their return;

3. Emphasizes that full respect for and the realization of these inalienable rights of the Palestinian people are indispensable for the solution of the question of Palestine;

4. Recognizes that the Palestinian people is a principal party in the establishment of a just and lasting peace in the Middle East;

5. Further recognizes the right of the Palestinian people to regain its rights by all means in accordance with the purposes and principles of the Charter of the United Nations;

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

Resolution 3236 states that Palestinians have inalienable rights and that these rights pre date the resolution.

At what time and under what circumstances did the Palestinians obtain these rights?

Did not exist until 1974 so cant be applied to 1917, 1923, 1948 or 1967.

They received those rights on the date the resolution became international law, when was that again ?

The resolution reaffirmed already existing rights. So when did they obtain these rights was my question.

Were does it say that ?

Find the laws that give those rights and you will your answer, and it seems that you cant find anything that predates 1974

The rights laid down in resolution 3236 had already gained some legitimacy by the time of the Mandate period. The right to self determination was demanded by the Palestinians consistantly at that time.

They can demand the right to murder innocent people, it does not make it legal. It becomes legal when a law is enacted and the majority of nations accept it as such. But they have shown free determination many times starting by their refusal to engage with the lands sovereign owners in 1923, starting a civil war in 1929, refusing to accept 181 in 1947, engaging in acts of war in 1947, being party to the invasion to wipe out the Jews in 1948, accepting foreign rule in 1949, engaging in civil war in terrorism in 1967, engaging in civil war in 1970 to take over Jordan, continuing terrorism and violence and then partly declaring independence in 1988. When have they been stopped by foreign interference in all these actions ?

 

[Rehmani]

Look UK and EU both forcing Israel that don't establish illegal settlement on land of Palestine and in this regards they are making laws you better checked it out. And as long as long what Charlie Habdo is to do with it. because jews used that situation.

I would think someone who lives in the UK would know more about this that someone who lives thousands of miles away. Still waiting for the proof that the settlements are all illegal, when the facts show that the land was Jewish prior to 1949 when they were forcibly evicted by the Palestinian muslims and their land stolen. There are no such laws in the UK as they would fall foul of the existing human rights laws and racism laws. So the muslim terrorists murdered the innocents at Charlie Hebdo because the Jews might use the murders at a later date, are you trying hardtop be stupid ?

First Paris incident occur just after Israel killed 2000 innocent people and European were not happy with Israeli terror. And second incident occur after this bill passed by European parliament. While whole muslim world condemned the both incidents. Then who is behind the terror attack if all Muslim world rejecting it.

So what did the French have to do with the repercussions of the acts of war by hamas. The French did not drop any bombs on gaza, or fire at any hamas terrorists. If this is the case then France can drop bombs on Mecca and destroy the mosque there. Did the French oppose this bill and declare that they would only buy from Israeli farms in the west bank, again this means that the French can now bomb gaza in return for the deaths of innocents in France. See were this is leading as very soon there would be no muslims left if the west employed Islamic measures and moralities.
The muslims only condemned the attacks after they faces reprisals for them, which is common all over the world. It is islam and its teachings in the koran that is to blame, does it not say terrorise those who will not bow down before me until there is only islam ?

Look phoney you are full of hate and you are earning by spreading hate, tell us how much you earned as propagandist.

Nothing at all as I tell the truth that is very easy to find on the internet and in public library's

I will say you don't live in UK. And your language is english either. you know nothing.

 

[Rehmani]

Rehmani, et al,

Oh come now! Is that really accurate? Is it really close to the truth?

Look phoney you are full of hate and you are earning by spreading hate, tell us how much you earned as propagandist.

(EXAMPLES)

What are these examples of?

• Spreading Hate
• Bring Hate
• Preventing Peace

Band #1:

Arab Palestinian leaders spread hate - Columbia Daily ...
www.columbiatribune.com/opinion/letters_to_the_editor/arab...
Jan 24, 2015 · Arab Palestinian leaders spread hate - Columbia Daily Tribune: Letters To The Editor Opinion ... Open Column Arab Palestinian leaders spread hate.

Pro-Palestinian students bring hate, intimidation to ...
www.foxnews.com/us/2014/06/09/pro-palestinian-students-bring-hate...
Jun 09, 2014 · ... hateful rhetoric.Students for Justice in Palestine has ... Palestinian students bring hate, ... students in America uncomfortable on campus seems ...

How Palestinian Hate Prevents Peace - The New York Times
www.nytimes.com/2013/10/16/opinion/how-palestinian-hate-prevents...
Oct 15, 2013 · How Palestinian Hate Prevents Peace. By YUVAL STEINITZ ...Palestinian leaders must now reciprocate by immediately and fully halting their …
​

Band #2:

Hamas Rejects UN Textbooks for Teaching Non-Violence
www.timesofisrael.com/hamas-bashes-unrwas-human-rights-corriculum
... [in the books] refer to [Mahatma] Gandhi, Martin ... The Palestinian narrative was also ... the universal values that underpin the work of the United Nations. ...

6000 Boys Graduate Palestinian Islamic Jihad Terrorist ...
www.jewishpress.com/news/breaking-news/6000-boys-graduate...
Aug 19, 2015 · The Iranian-backed Palestinian Islamic Jihad terrorist organization held a graduation ceremony Tuesday for the 6,000 Gaza boys who this summer attended …

Kid Jihad” Summer Training Camp: Blood, Fire & AK-47’s ...
patriotupdate.com/kid-jihad-summer-training-camp-blood-fire-ak-47s
Tens of thousands of Palestinian children hurried to register for Terrorists (summer) training camp 101 and to attend programs which indoctrinate the youngsters in ...

Camp Jihad’: U.N.-Sponsored Camps Encourage Palestinian ...
www.theblaze.com/stories/2013/08/14/camp-jihad-u-n-sponsored-camps...
Summer at United Nations-funded camps in Gaza and the northern West Bank include playing with parachutes, jumping on trampolines, and racing down inflatable slides.

Islamic Jihad's Summer of Radicalization :: The ...
www.investigativeproject.org/4046/islamic-jihad-summer-of...
Summer camp conjures up bucolic images of swimming and other outdoor fun. But thousands of Palestinian children will experience something quite different, as ...
​

Most Respectfully,
R

Look body you can't compare some one like phoney who is living in UK with people of Palestine who are facing terror last 70 years by the Israeli army with modern war machine followed by wii elite force support.
Be real Roccr.

 

[Rehmani]

montelatici, et al,

This is entirely wrong.

Of course Palestinians are freedom fighters. And, of course Israel has prevented the Palestinians from exercising their right of self-determination.

In terms of heroism, the Palestinians are facing far stronger oppression and have far fewer resources than had the ANC, hence they are probably more heroic given their continued restistance.

As far as violence, the Palestinians have followed the course that other national liberation movements have followed, like the ANC. The ANC's Charter for Umkhonto we Sizwe is remarkably similar to that of the Palestinians.

(COMMENT)

The Palestinians have exercised the right of self-determination three times on 70 years, and the Israelis did not oppose them. "Of course" they Israelis did not interfere with the Arab Palestinian right to self-determination.

The Palestinians have attacked unarmed, non-combatants, nationally and internationally, countless times. They've attacked school children, the disabled, the aged, and the defenseless; many many times in the last 70 years.

Not all national liberation movements are honorable. And clearly the major Arab Palestinian leaders of 1948, were cross-section --- more being less honorable than others. These dishonorable leaders, with a history of serving the Ottoman/Turks and the WWII Germans in formal service and as enemy collaborators against the allied powers, have nothing to be proud of in terms of chivalry or a system of positive religious, moral, and social codes. And this lack of chivalry, in the exercise of positive religious, moral, and social codes, has been passed down over several generations to parents that train their children to hate and pursue acts of terror and war for a cause that cannot be won. These Hostile Arab Palestinians hold many of the characteristics of radical Islamic threats that are generally thought to be less than positive for the species and humanity.

Most Respectfully,
R

Roccor you are behaving like that either you are fool or you are thinking world is. I will say does't matter what ever you do but one thing you can not change the facts and figure, sound like you are writing history as you want to see.

 

[RoccoR]

P F Tinmore, et al,

Israel was the outcome of a successive series of events moving towards self-determination; just as the hardships of the Arab Palestinians was a consequence of very poor self-actualization.

The difference is in the objective and goals.

• The objective of the Arab Palestinian was to "prevent" the Jewish People from achieving an independent state. (The goal was NOT directed at achieving independence for themselves.) (PREVENTION)

• The objective of the Jewish People was to "achieving" an independent state. (The goal was NOT to prevent or hinder the Arab Palestinian from achieving independence.) (ACHIEVEMENT)
​

Was Israel created as part of the resolution 181 process or was it a unilateral move?

(COMMENT)

Israel was a creation of the Jewish People through their exercise of "collective self-determination;" nation building. It was the national aspiration deemed necessary as a matter of cultural self preservation.

The GA Resolution 181 was the "HOW TO BOOK" by the UN and the recommendations of the Special Committee on Palestine (UNSCOP). It was the UNSCOP that wrote the "Steps Preparatory to Independence" (the "HOW") and it was the General Assembly that adopted the recommendation as the proper steps (international consensus). BUT is was the Jewish People that initiated the action, completed the process to the extent possible (opposed by Powerful Arab Forces), and declared independence.

It was the collective decision of the Arab League to use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of any state (external interference). A violation of the Article 2(4) Principle of the UN Charter.

Most Respectfully,
R

 

[Challenger]

It was the collective decision of the Arab League to use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of any state (external interference). A violation of the Article 2(4) Principle of the UN Charter.

Except it wasn't. The Arab league intervened, "...by virtue of their responsibility as members of the Arab League which is a regional organization within the meaning of Chapter VIII of the Charter of the United Nations. The recent disturbances in Palestine further constitute a serious and direct threat to peace and security within the territories of the Arab States themselves. For these reasons, and considering that the security of Palestine is a sacred trust for them, and out of anxiousness to check the further deterioration of the prevailing conditions and to prevent the spread of disorder and lawlessness into the neighbouring Arab lands, and in order to fill the vacuum created by the termination of the Mandate and the failure to replace it by any legally constituted authority, the Arab Governments find themselves compelled to intervene for the sole purpose of restoring peace and security and establishing law and order in Palestine.

The Arab States recognize that the independence and sovereignty of Palestine which was so far subject to the British Mandate has now, with the termination of the Mandate, become established in fact, and maintain that the lawful inhabitants of Palestine are alone competent and entitled to set up an administration in Palestine for the discharge of all governmental functions without any external interference. As soon as that stage is reached the intervention of the Arab States, which is confined to the restoration of peace and establishment of law and order, shall be put an end to, and the sovereign State of Palestine will be competent in co-operation with the other States members of the Arab League, to take every step for the promotion of the welfare and security of its peoples and territory." Arab League Declaration on the intervention in Palestine, 15 May 1948 | Religion :: Science :: Peace

 

[RoccoR]

P F Tinmore, et al,

If this is true, then it should not be any problem for you to demonstrate that in International or customary law.

The resolution reaffirmed already existing rights. So when did they obtain these rights was my question.

(QUESTION)

These rights do not exist as far as I can tell. I don't claim that the Arab Palestinians have these rights you are advancing. AS far as they "already existing," these non-binding claims fail to substantiate their claim.

What were these right? Where did they come from?

The base argument has been, since before the Threat Letter from the Arab Higher Committee, in February 1948, is grounded in the establishment of a Jewish National Home --- which ended with the creation of the Jewish State. And that is a matter of "sovereignty," which was further compounded with the 1967 Six-Day War. The Jewish People, to the general extent that I can discern, have not challenged Arab Palestinian rights. They do not claim that the Arab Palestinian do not have certain rights. The Israelis take such action that is necessary to protect and preserve the Jewish National Home and a Territory necessarily isolated, governed separately, and sheltered from the Arab Palestinians that would use retroactive, undefined, and disguised "inherent rights" and "mutilated law" to dismember and destroy the cultural preserve of the Jewish People.

(QUOTE)

The rules for acquisition of territory were concisely summarized by the tribunal in the first (1998) Eritrea/Yemen Arbitration Award:

• “The modern international law of the acquisition (or attribution) of territory generally requires that there be: an intentional display of power and authority over the territory, by the exercise of jurisdiction and state functions, on a continuous and peaceful basis.”

Award of the Arbitral Tribunal in the first stage of the proceedings between Eritrea and Yemen (Territorial Sovereignty and Scope of the Dispute, (1998) 22 RIAA, p. 268, para. 239). Judge Dugard, in his dissenting opinion in the Pedra Branca/Pulau Batu Puteh case, stated:

This formulation requires serious attention for two reasons. First, because it gives effect to the jurisprudence of contemporary international law from the time of Max Huber’s seminal decision in the Island of Palmas Case (Netherlands/United States of America) (Award of 4 April 1928, RIAA, Vol. II (1949), pp. 839, 868). Secondly, because it was expounded by a Tribunal comprising two former Presidents of the International Court of Justice (Professor Sir Robert Y. Jennings and Judge Stephen M. Schwebel), the President of the Court (Judge Rosalyn Higgins) and two highly experienced and well regarded international law practitioners (Dr. Ahmed Sadek El-Kosheri and Mr. Keith Highet). In my view, this is a formulation of the law on the acquisition of territory that is to govern all acquisitions of territorial title based on the effective control of territory over a long period of time, including prescription, estoppel, abandonment of title by the previous sovereign, acquiescence and tacit agreement evidenced by conduct. (pages 150-151, para. 42).​

Please see the UN Reports of International Arbitral Awards, Volume/Pages 9 October 1998 Territorial Sovereignty and Scope of the Dispute (Eritrea and Yemen) XXII, pp. 211-334 or PCA Territorial Sovereignty and Scope of Dispute, 9 October 1998.

(COMMENT)

AGAIN, you are attempting to advance a theory of "rights" where the actual argument rests in the application of the "rights." And the Arab Palestinian claim so many rights, it is very hard to separate which one they are applying. In this case, the rights of the Arab Palestinian are as much blocked by law as the Israelis. While the Israelis can claim an intentional display of power and authority --- which the Arab Palestinians cannot, the Arab Palestinians cannot claim "exercise of jurisdiction and state functions, on a continuous and peaceful basis." The Arab Palestinians have NOT been continuously peaceful for any significant period of time in more than Century. Thus, the territory will probably remain in an "Occupied Status" since the Rule of Acquisition (OCCUPATION) cannot be fulfilled.

Most Respectfully,
R

 

[P F Tinmore]

P F Tinmore, et al,

If this is true, then it should not be any problem for you to demonstrate that in International or customary law.

The resolution reaffirmed already existing rights. So when did they obtain these rights was my question.

(QUESTION)

These rights do not exist as far as I can tell. I don't claim that the Arab Palestinians have these rights you are advancing. AS far as they "already existing," these non-binding claims fail to substantiate their claim.

What were these right? Where did they come from?

The base argument has been, since before the Threat Letter from the Arab Higher Committee, in February 1948, is grounded in the establishment of a Jewish National Home --- which ended with the creation of the Jewish State. And that is a matter of "sovereignty," which was further compounded with the 1967 Six-Day War. The Jewish People, to the general extent that I can discern, have not challenged Arab Palestinian rights. They do not claim that the Arab Palestinian do not have certain rights. The Israelis take such action that is necessary to protect and preserve the Jewish National Home and a Territory necessarily isolated, governed separately, and sheltered from the Arab Palestinians that would use retroactive, undefined, and disguised "inherent rights" and "mutilated law" to dismember and destroy the cultural preserve of the Jewish People.

(QUOTE)

The rules for acquisition of territory were concisely summarized by the tribunal in the first (1998) Eritrea/Yemen Arbitration Award:

• “The modern international law of the acquisition (or attribution) of territory generally requires that there be: an intentional display of power and authority over the territory, by the exercise of jurisdiction and state functions, on a continuous and peaceful basis.”

Award of the Arbitral Tribunal in the first stage of the proceedings between Eritrea and Yemen (Territorial Sovereignty and Scope of the Dispute, (1998) 22 RIAA, p. 268, para. 239). Judge Dugard, in his dissenting opinion in the Pedra Branca/Pulau Batu Puteh case, stated:

This formulation requires serious attention for two reasons. First, because it gives effect to the jurisprudence of contemporary international law from the time of Max Huber’s seminal decision in the Island of Palmas Case (Netherlands/United States of America) (Award of 4 April 1928, RIAA, Vol. II (1949), pp. 839, 868). Secondly, because it was expounded by a Tribunal comprising two former Presidents of the International Court of Justice (Professor Sir Robert Y. Jennings and Judge Stephen M. Schwebel), the President of the Court (Judge Rosalyn Higgins) and two highly experienced and well regarded international law practitioners (Dr. Ahmed Sadek El-Kosheri and Mr. Keith Highet). In my view, this is a formulation of the law on the acquisition of territory that is to govern all acquisitions of territorial title based on the effective control of territory over a long period of time, including prescription, estoppel, abandonment of title by the previous sovereign, acquiescence and tacit agreement evidenced by conduct. (pages 150-151, para. 42).​

Please see the UN Reports of International Arbitral Awards, Volume/Pages 9 October 1998 Territorial Sovereignty and Scope of the Dispute (Eritrea and Yemen) XXII, pp. 211-334 or PCA Territorial Sovereignty and Scope of Dispute, 9 October 1998.

(COMMENT)

AGAIN, you are attempting to advance a theory of "rights" where the actual argument rests in the application of the "rights." And the Arab Palestinian claim so many rights, it is very hard to separate which one they are applying. In this case, the rights of the Arab Palestinian are as much blocked by law as the Israelis. While the Israelis can claim an intentional display of power and authority --- which the Arab Palestinians cannot, the Arab Palestinians cannot claim "exercise of jurisdiction and state functions, on a continuous and peaceful basis." The Arab Palestinians have NOT been continuously peaceful for any significant period of time in more than Century. Thus, the territory will probably remain in an "Occupied Status" since the Rule of Acquisition (OCCUPATION) cannot be fulfilled.

Most Respectfully,
R

Holy smokescreen, Batman. How about just answering the question?

 

[RoccoR]

Challenger, et al,

This is nonsense.

It was the collective decision of the Arab League to use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of any state (external interference). A violation of the Article 2(4) Principle of the UN Charter.

Except it wasn't. The Arab league intervened, "...by virtue of their responsibility as members of the Arab League which is a regional organization within the meaning of Chapter VIII of the Charter of the United Nations. The recent disturbances in Palestine further constitute a serious and direct threat to peace and security within the territories of the Arab States themselves. For these reasons, and considering that the security of Palestine is a sacred trust for them, and out of anxiousness to check the further deterioration of the prevailing conditions and to prevent the spread of disorder and lawlessness into the neighbouring Arab lands, and in order to fill the vacuum created by the termination of the Mandate and the failure to replace it by any legally constituted authority, the Arab Governments find themselves compelled to intervene for the sole purpose of restoring peace and security and establishing law and order in Palestine.

The Arab States recognize that the independence and sovereignty of Palestine which was so far subject to the British Mandate has now, with the termination of the Mandate, become established in fact, and maintain that the lawful inhabitants of Palestine are alone competent and entitled to set up an administration in Palestine for the discharge of all governmental functions without any external interference. As soon as that stage is reached the intervention of the Arab States, which is confined to the restoration of peace and establishment of law and order, shall be put an end to, and the sovereign State of Palestine will be competent in co-operation with the other States members of the Arab League, to take every step for the promotion of the welfare and security of its peoples and territory." Arab League Declaration on the intervention in Palestine, 15 May 1948 | Religion :: Science :: Peace

(COMMENT)

All you have to do is merely read UN Security Council Resolution 50, THEN the UN Security Council Resolution 54, to make the determination.

UNSC RES/50 declares in para 11 that "rejected by either party or by both, or If, having been accepted, it is subsequently repudiated or violated, the situation in Palestine will be reconsidered with a view to action under Chapter VII of the Charter of the United Nations." THEN read UNSC RES/54, and you will notice that is says: "Taking into consideration that the Provisional Government of Israel has indicated its acceptance in principle of a prolongation of the truce in Palestine that the States members of the Arab League have rejected successive appeals of the United Nations Mediator, and of the Security Council in its resolution 53 (1948) of 7 July 1948, for the prolongation of the truce in Palestine; and that there has consequently developed a renewal of hostilities in Palestine. Israel accepted the Truce and the Arab League did not.

I agree that the Arab League used the compelling reason of self-defense (sole purpose of restoring peace and security and establishing law and order), BUT that merely attempts to color the issue. Jordan advanced across their borders to claim the West Bank, while Egypt claimed the Gaza Strip. the real truth was, the League jumped their borders to steal land, which the did and held for two decades.

You can pump-out that disinformation all you want. The fact is, that after using the "restoring peace and security" excuse --- they captured territory that was allocated for the Arab State.

Most Respectfully,
R

 

[RoccoR]

P F Tinmore, et al,

I did answer the question.

Holy smokescreen, Batman. How about just answering the question?

(COMMENT)

Other than the civil and religious rights (Mandate), there are no other preexisting rights that can documented; until 1948 (non-binding).

Most Respectfully,
R

 

[P F Tinmore]

P F Tinmore, et al,

Israel was the outcome of a successive series of events moving towards self-determination; just as the hardships of the Arab Palestinians was a consequence of very poor self-actualization.

The difference is in the objective and goals.

• The objective of the Arab Palestinian was to "prevent" the Jewish People from achieving an independent state. (The goal was NOT directed at achieving independence for themselves.) (PREVENTION)

• The objective of the Jewish People was to "achieving" an independent state. (The goal was NOT to prevent or hinder the Arab Palestinian from achieving independence.) (ACHIEVEMENT)
​

Was Israel created as part of the resolution 181 process or was it a unilateral move?

(COMMENT)

Israel was a creation of the Jewish People through their exercise of "collective self-determination;" nation building. It was the national aspiration deemed necessary as a matter of cultural self preservation.

The GA Resolution 181 was the "HOW TO BOOK" by the UN and the recommendations of the Special Committee on Palestine (UNSCOP). It was the UNSCOP that wrote the "Steps Preparatory to Independence" (the "HOW") and it was the General Assembly that adopted the recommendation as the proper steps (international consensus). BUT is was the Jewish People that initiated the action, completed the process to the extent possible (opposed by Powerful Arab Forces), and declared independence.

It was the collective decision of the Arab League to use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of any state (external interference). A violation of the Article 2(4) Principle of the UN Charter.

Most Respectfully,
R

The objective of the Arab Palestinian was to "prevent" the Jewish People from achieving an independent state. (The goal was NOT directed at achieving independence for themselves.) (PREVENTION)​

Why do you set up a false premise to base your posts?

The Palestinians consistently lobbied Britain for their independence and self determination. Of course this was consistently ignored. Any move toward independence by the Palestinians was crushed by Britain. Their organizations and institutions were closed down. Their leaders were arrested, exiled, or killed. They were strictly forbidden from forming any means of defense.

You portray this as a lack of desire or competence to gain independence.

 

[RoccoR]

P F Tinmore, et al,

Again NONSENSE.

The rights laid down in resolution 3236 had already gained some legitimacy by the time of the Mandate period. The right to self determination was demanded by the Palestinians consistantly at that time.

(COMMENT)

Resolution 3236 was adopted as NON-BINDING in 1974. Even if it was law, it cannot be applied retroactively.

Demonstrate how 1974 NON-BINDING Resolution pertaining to "self-determination" and "independence and sovereignty" (neither having yet been adopted) "already gained some legitimacy by the time of the Mandate period." The Mandate extends safeguards to civil and religious rights --- not "self-determination and sovereignty."

Most Respectfully,
R

 

[montelatici]

The Mandate did forbid the ceding of Palestine territory to any foreign power and it was the responsibility of the Mandatory to prevent the placement of Palestine territory under control of the Government of any foreign power. Being from another continent is about as foreign as it gets.

"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."

Self-determination is one of the major civil rights. In fact, it is the first civil right called out in the Covenant on Civil Rights.

"Article 1

1. All peoples have the right of self-determination. By virtue of that right they freely determine their political status and freely pursue their economic, social and cultural development.

2. All peoples may, for their own ends, freely dispose of their natural wealth and resources without prejudice to any obligations arising out of international economic co-operation, based upon the principle of mutual benefit, and international law. In no case may a people be deprived of its own means of subsistence.

3. The States Parties to the present Covenant, including those having responsibility for the administration of Non-Self-Governing and Trust Territories, shall promote the realization of the right of self-determination, and shall respect that right, in conformity with the provisions of the Charter of the United Nations....."

 

[Phoenall]

I would think someone who lives in the UK would know more about this that someone who lives thousands of miles away. Still waiting for the proof that the settlements are all illegal, when the facts show that the land was Jewish prior to 1949 when they were forcibly evicted by the Palestinian muslims and their land stolen. There are no such laws in the UK as they would fall foul of the existing human rights laws and racism laws. So the muslim terrorists murdered the innocents at Charlie Hebdo because the Jews might use the murders at a later date, are you trying hardtop be stupid ?

First Paris incident occur just after Israel killed 2000 innocent people and European were not happy with Israeli terror. And second incident occur after this bill passed by European parliament. While whole muslim world condemned the both incidents. Then who is behind the terror attack if all Muslim world rejecting it.

So what did the French have to do with the repercussions of the acts of war by hamas. The French did not drop any bombs on gaza, or fire at any hamas terrorists. If this is the case then France can drop bombs on Mecca and destroy the mosque there. Did the French oppose this bill and declare that they would only buy from Israeli farms in the west bank, again this means that the French can now bomb gaza in return for the deaths of innocents in France. See were this is leading as very soon there would be no muslims left if the west employed Islamic measures and moralities.
The muslims only condemned the attacks after they faces reprisals for them, which is common all over the world. It is islam and its teachings in the koran that is to blame, does it not say terrorise those who will not bow down before me until there is only islam ?

Look phoney you are full of hate and you are earning by spreading hate, tell us how much you earned as propagandist.

Nothing at all as I tell the truth that is very easy to find on the internet and in public library's

I will say you don't live in UK. And your language is english either. you know nothing.

Then youi prove you know nothing what so ever and need to get an English education

 

[Phoenall]

Rehmani, et al,

Oh come now! Is that really accurate? Is it really close to the truth?

Look phoney you are full of hate and you are earning by spreading hate, tell us how much you earned as propagandist.

(EXAMPLES)

What are these examples of?

• Spreading Hate
• Bring Hate
• Preventing Peace

Band #1:

Arab Palestinian leaders spread hate - Columbia Daily ...
www.columbiatribune.com/opinion/letters_to_the_editor/arab...
Jan 24, 2015 · Arab Palestinian leaders spread hate - Columbia Daily Tribune: Letters To The Editor Opinion ... Open Column Arab Palestinian leaders spread hate.

Pro-Palestinian students bring hate, intimidation to ...
www.foxnews.com/us/2014/06/09/pro-palestinian-students-bring-hate...
Jun 09, 2014 · ... hateful rhetoric.Students for Justice in Palestine has ... Palestinian students bring hate, ... students in America uncomfortable on campus seems ...

How Palestinian Hate Prevents Peace - The New York Times
www.nytimes.com/2013/10/16/opinion/how-palestinian-hate-prevents...
Oct 15, 2013 · How Palestinian Hate Prevents Peace. By YUVAL STEINITZ ...Palestinian leaders must now reciprocate by immediately and fully halting their …
​

Band #2:

Hamas Rejects UN Textbooks for Teaching Non-Violence
www.timesofisrael.com/hamas-bashes-unrwas-human-rights-corriculum
... [in the books] refer to [Mahatma] Gandhi, Martin ... The Palestinian narrative was also ... the universal values that underpin the work of the United Nations. ...

6000 Boys Graduate Palestinian Islamic Jihad Terrorist ...
www.jewishpress.com/news/breaking-news/6000-boys-graduate...
Aug 19, 2015 · The Iranian-backed Palestinian Islamic Jihad terrorist organization held a graduation ceremony Tuesday for the 6,000 Gaza boys who this summer attended …

Kid Jihad” Summer Training Camp: Blood, Fire & AK-47’s ...
patriotupdate.com/kid-jihad-summer-training-camp-blood-fire-ak-47s
Tens of thousands of Palestinian children hurried to register for Terrorists (summer) training camp 101 and to attend programs which indoctrinate the youngsters in ...

Camp Jihad’: U.N.-Sponsored Camps Encourage Palestinian ...
www.theblaze.com/stories/2013/08/14/camp-jihad-u-n-sponsored-camps...
Summer at United Nations-funded camps in Gaza and the northern West Bank include playing with parachutes, jumping on trampolines, and racing down inflatable slides.

Islamic Jihad's Summer of Radicalization :: The ...
www.investigativeproject.org/4046/islamic-jihad-summer-of...
Summer camp conjures up bucolic images of swimming and other outdoor fun. But thousands of Palestinian children will experience something quite different, as ...
​

Most Respectfully,
R

Look body you can't compare some one like phoney who is living in UK with people of Palestine who are facing terror last 70 years by the Israeli army with modern war machine followed by wii elite force support.
Be real Roccr.

The only terror is that faced by the JEWS from the arab muslims. they are only doing what a muslim has to do by the command of their false prophet and moon god. If they had not invaded in 1949 and tried to wipe out the Jews then they would not have been killed in vast numbers. If they did not fire illegal weapons from civilian areas that have been branded war crimes they would not see thousands of human shields killed in the backwash. They showed their intent in 2005 when Israel removed all Jews from gaza and the Palestinians increased the numbers and severity of the terrorist attacks.

 

[Phoenall]

It was the collective decision of the Arab League to use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of any state (external interference). A violation of the Article 2(4) Principle of the UN Charter.

Except it wasn't. The Arab league intervened, "...by virtue of their responsibility as members of the Arab League which is a regional organization within the meaning of Chapter VIII of the Charter of the United Nations. The recent disturbances in Palestine further constitute a serious and direct threat to peace and security within the territories of the Arab States themselves. For these reasons, and considering that the security of Palestine is a sacred trust for them, and out of anxiousness to check the further deterioration of the prevailing conditions and to prevent the spread of disorder and lawlessness into the neighbouring Arab lands, and in order to fill the vacuum created by the termination of the Mandate and the failure to replace it by any legally constituted authority, the Arab Governments find themselves compelled to intervene for the sole purpose of restoring peace and security and establishing law and order in Palestine.

The Arab States recognize that the independence and sovereignty of Palestine which was so far subject to the British Mandate has now, with the termination of the Mandate, become established in fact, and maintain that the lawful inhabitants of Palestine are alone competent and entitled to set up an administration in Palestine for the discharge of all governmental functions without any external interference. As soon as that stage is reached the intervention of the Arab States, which is confined to the restoration of peace and establishment of law and order, shall be put an end to, and the sovereign State of Palestine will be competent in co-operation with the other States members of the Arab League, to take every step for the promotion of the welfare and security of its peoples and territory." Arab League Declaration on the intervention in Palestine, 15 May 1948 | Religion :: Science :: Peace

So what about the threats from the arab league prior to may 1948 when the threat of genocide and mass murder were the order of the day. Or are they to be ignored and forgotten because they don't sit with your Jew hatred and Nazi dogma

 

[Phoenall]

P F Tinmore, et al,

If this is true, then it should not be any problem for you to demonstrate that in International or customary law.

The resolution reaffirmed already existing rights. So when did they obtain these rights was my question.

(QUESTION)

These rights do not exist as far as I can tell. I don't claim that the Arab Palestinians have these rights you are advancing. AS far as they "already existing," these non-binding claims fail to substantiate their claim.

What were these right? Where did they come from?

The base argument has been, since before the Threat Letter from the Arab Higher Committee, in February 1948, is grounded in the establishment of a Jewish National Home --- which ended with the creation of the Jewish State. And that is a matter of "sovereignty," which was further compounded with the 1967 Six-Day War. The Jewish People, to the general extent that I can discern, have not challenged Arab Palestinian rights. They do not claim that the Arab Palestinian do not have certain rights. The Israelis take such action that is necessary to protect and preserve the Jewish National Home and a Territory necessarily isolated, governed separately, and sheltered from the Arab Palestinians that would use retroactive, undefined, and disguised "inherent rights" and "mutilated law" to dismember and destroy the cultural preserve of the Jewish People.

(QUOTE)

The rules for acquisition of territory were concisely summarized by the tribunal in the first (1998) Eritrea/Yemen Arbitration Award:

• “The modern international law of the acquisition (or attribution) of territory generally requires that there be: an intentional display of power and authority over the territory, by the exercise of jurisdiction and state functions, on a continuous and peaceful basis.”

Award of the Arbitral Tribunal in the first stage of the proceedings between Eritrea and Yemen (Territorial Sovereignty and Scope of the Dispute, (1998) 22 RIAA, p. 268, para. 239). Judge Dugard, in his dissenting opinion in the Pedra Branca/Pulau Batu Puteh case, stated:

This formulation requires serious attention for two reasons. First, because it gives effect to the jurisprudence of contemporary international law from the time of Max Huber’s seminal decision in the Island of Palmas Case (Netherlands/United States of America) (Award of 4 April 1928, RIAA, Vol. II (1949), pp. 839, 868). Secondly, because it was expounded by a Tribunal comprising two former Presidents of the International Court of Justice (Professor Sir Robert Y. Jennings and Judge Stephen M. Schwebel), the President of the Court (Judge Rosalyn Higgins) and two highly experienced and well regarded international law practitioners (Dr. Ahmed Sadek El-Kosheri and Mr. Keith Highet). In my view, this is a formulation of the law on the acquisition of territory that is to govern all acquisitions of territorial title based on the effective control of territory over a long period of time, including prescription, estoppel, abandonment of title by the previous sovereign, acquiescence and tacit agreement evidenced by conduct. (pages 150-151, para. 42).​

Please see the UN Reports of International Arbitral Awards, Volume/Pages 9 October 1998 Territorial Sovereignty and Scope of the Dispute (Eritrea and Yemen) XXII, pp. 211-334 or PCA Territorial Sovereignty and Scope of Dispute, 9 October 1998.

(COMMENT)

AGAIN, you are attempting to advance a theory of "rights" where the actual argument rests in the application of the "rights." And the Arab Palestinian claim so many rights, it is very hard to separate which one they are applying. In this case, the rights of the Arab Palestinian are as much blocked by law as the Israelis. While the Israelis can claim an intentional display of power and authority --- which the Arab Palestinians cannot, the Arab Palestinians cannot claim "exercise of jurisdiction and state functions, on a continuous and peaceful basis." The Arab Palestinians have NOT been continuously peaceful for any significant period of time in more than Century. Thus, the territory will probably remain in an "Occupied Status" since the Rule of Acquisition (OCCUPATION) cannot be fulfilled.

Most Respectfully,
R

Holy smokescreen, Batman. How about just answering the question?

He did and blew you out of the water and right to the top of Everest. So what rights are being denied and by whom, and when did these rights become international law ?

 

[Phoenall]

The Mandate did forbid the ceding of Palestine territory to any foreign power and it was the responsibility of the Mandatory to prevent the placement of Palestine territory under control of the Government of any foreign power. Being from another continent is about as foreign as it gets.

"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."

Self-determination is one of the major civil rights. In fact, it is the first civil right called out in the Covenant on Civil Rights.

"Article 1

1. All peoples have the right of self-determination. By virtue of that right they freely determine their political status and freely pursue their economic, social and cultural development.

2. All peoples may, for their own ends, freely dispose of their natural wealth and resources without prejudice to any obligations arising out of international economic co-operation, based upon the principle of mutual benefit, and international law. In no case may a people be deprived of its own means of subsistence.

3. The States Parties to the present Covenant, including those having responsibility for the administration of Non-Self-Governing and Trust Territories, shall promote the realization of the right of self-determination, and shall respect that right, in conformity with the provisions of the Charter of the United Nations....."

When did this become international law then freddy boy ?