P F Tinmore
Diamond Member
- Dec 6, 2009
- 79,765
- 4,414
- 1,815
Discusses the legalities of the right of return. Also talks about "Birthright Palestine."
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
That isn't the same conference.Right of Return Conference...
Of COURSE it wasn't the same conference...That isn't the same conference.Right of Return Conference...
Good try at lying though
Discusses the legalities of the right of return. Also talks about "Birthright Palestine."
That isn't the same conference.Right of Return Conference...
Good try at lying though
Discusses the legalities of the right of return. Also talks about "Birthright Palestine."
No such legal concept as right of return as it is against the human rights of the people living in a nation. That is why it can never be forced by legislation from third parties. Would you accept some foreign national claiming that your home was theirs because they say so, well that is the whole basis of the Palestinian claims of right of return
Discusses the legalities of the right of return. Also talks about "Birthright Palestine."
No such legal concept as right of return as it is against the human rights of the people living in a nation. That is why it can never be forced by legislation from third parties. Would you accept some foreign national claiming that your home was theirs because they say so, well that is the whole basis of the Palestinian claims of right of return
Actually it guarantees the rights of people living in a nation.
Now, all you need are a People and a Nation, and you're in business....Actually it guarantees the rights of people living in a nation.
Discusses the legalities of the right of return. Also talks about "Birthright Palestine."
Discusses the legalities of the right of return. Also talks about "Birthright Palestine."
Interesting, thanks for sharing.
Found this, related to the above:
"In an attack on a Right of Return conference held at Boston University last weekend, one Richard Cravatts, a Boston-based Zionist propagandist, expressed his horror in The Times of Israel. Echoing standard Zionist arguments, he stated that "no population of refugees has ever presumed that the right of return - if such a right even exists - could be claimed, not only by the original refugees, but also by all of their descendants". Cravatts, like many Zionists who deny the right of the Palestinians to return, seems to have forgotten that it is European Jews, as fictional descedants of the supposed Hebrew refugees of the first century, who have "presumed" that very right in the name of which they colonised and colonise Palestine. While for Zionism Jewish "return" is the very condition of colonisation, Israel understands very well that the return of the actual Palestinian refugees and their descendants means nothing short of decolonisation and the undoing of the Zionist project. Israel's leaders are of course correct in their assessment.
It should be noted here that international law's understanding of the rights of refugees includes the rights of their descendants to return. In addition to the annual UN reassertion of the Palestinian refugees' right of return, the right of return was upheld in principle and practice after the Bosnian War. Upwards of half a million refugees and internally displaced persons returned with international assistance, following the 1995 Dayton Agreement, to their homes to areas in Bosnia (a country of three and a half million people) dominated demographically and politically by members of another ethnic community. As the Bosnian case clearly demonstates, the right of return of the refugees trumped the racially separatist policies of the local authorities who sought to continue to control the land of the diaplaced refugees and to populate it demographically with their own ethnic group at the expense of the refugees. International enforcement of the Bosnian refugees' right of return was based on the well-established right of return of refugees in international law and UN resolutions, while demographic racial separatism had no moral or legal standing whatsoever in enforcing the refugees' rights of return.
The problem for Zionism and Israel is not the right of return, as that is central to their ideology and their colonial-settler project, but rather with who is allowed to be a right-of-return-bearing subject."--Dr. Joseph Massad, from their Facebook page.
Discusses the legalities of the right of return. Also talks about "Birthright Palestine."
Interesting, thanks for sharing.
Found this, related to the above:
"In an attack on a Right of Return conference held at Boston University last weekend, one Richard Cravatts, a Boston-based Zionist propagandist, expressed his horror in The Times of Israel. Echoing standard Zionist arguments, he stated that "no population of refugees has ever presumed that the right of return - if such a right even exists - could be claimed, not only by the original refugees, but also by all of their descendants". Cravatts, like many Zionists who deny the right of the Palestinians to return, seems to have forgotten that it is European Jews, as fictional descedants of the supposed Hebrew refugees of the first century, who have "presumed" that very right in the name of which they colonised and colonise Palestine. While for Zionism Jewish "return" is the very condition of colonisation, Israel understands very well that the return of the actual Palestinian refugees and their descendants means nothing short of decolonisation and the undoing of the Zionist project. Israel's leaders are of course correct in their assessment.
It should be noted here that international law's understanding of the rights of refugees includes the rights of their descendants to return. In addition to the annual UN reassertion of the Palestinian refugees' right of return, the right of return was upheld in principle and practice after the Bosnian War. Upwards of half a million refugees and internally displaced persons returned with international assistance, following the 1995 Dayton Agreement, to their homes to areas in Bosnia (a country of three and a half million people) dominated demographically and politically by members of another ethnic community. As the Bosnian case clearly demonstates, the right of return of the refugees trumped the racially separatist policies of the local authorities who sought to continue to control the land of the diaplaced refugees and to populate it demographically with their own ethnic group at the expense of the refugees. International enforcement of the Bosnian refugees' right of return was based on the well-established right of return of refugees in international law and UN resolutions, while demographic racial separatism had no moral or legal standing whatsoever in enforcing the refugees' rights of return.
The problem for Zionism and Israel is not the right of return, as that is central to their ideology and their colonial-settler project, but rather with who is allowed to be a right-of-return-bearing subject."--Dr. Joseph Massad, from their Facebook page.
Just more of your RACIST JEW HATRED by using the term Zionist out of context and not as it is defined. There is no concept in International law of a right of return, if there is then the arab muslims are on land outside of Saudi arabia illegally and the original non muslim inhabitants should be given their lands back. This means that Jerusalem will be the Jewish capital and no arab muslims will be in existence. Or do you still believe that the laws don't apply to the Jews because of your RACIST JEW HATRED
And how about a link to your cut and paste ? Or are you afraid of showing that you are a RABID RACIST and that it is your words that you have added to the cut and paste to incite racial hatred and violence against the Jews.
Let us all join together & pray for a right of return for the Palestinians back to their native homelands. LET THERE BE PEACE ALREADY!
Discusses the legalities of the right of return. Also talks about "Birthright Palestine."
Interesting, thanks for sharing.
Found this, related to the above:
"In an attack on a Right of Return conference held at Boston University last weekend, one Richard Cravatts, a Boston-based Zionist propagandist, expressed his horror in The Times of Israel. Echoing standard Zionist arguments, he stated that "no population of refugees has ever presumed that the right of return - if such a right even exists - could be claimed, not only by the original refugees, but also by all of their descendants". Cravatts, like many Zionists who deny the right of the Palestinians to return, seems to have forgotten that it is European Jews, as fictional descedants of the supposed Hebrew refugees of the first century, who have "presumed" that very right in the name of which they colonised and colonise Palestine. While for Zionism Jewish "return" is the very condition of colonisation, Israel understands very well that the return of the actual Palestinian refugees and their descendants means nothing short of decolonisation and the undoing of the Zionist project. Israel's leaders are of course correct in their assessment.
It should be noted here that international law's understanding of the rights of refugees includes the rights of their descendants to return. In addition to the annual UN reassertion of the Palestinian refugees' right of return, the right of return was upheld in principle and practice after the Bosnian War. Upwards of half a million refugees and internally displaced persons returned with international assistance, following the 1995 Dayton Agreement, to their homes to areas in Bosnia (a country of three and a half million people) dominated demographically and politically by members of another ethnic community. As the Bosnian case clearly demonstates, the right of return of the refugees trumped the racially separatist policies of the local authorities who sought to continue to control the land of the diaplaced refugees and to populate it demographically with their own ethnic group at the expense of the refugees. International enforcement of the Bosnian refugees' right of return was based on the well-established right of return of refugees in international law and UN resolutions, while demographic racial separatism had no moral or legal standing whatsoever in enforcing the refugees' rights of return.
The problem for Zionism and Israel is not the right of return, as that is central to their ideology and their colonial-settler project, but rather with who is allowed to be a right-of-return-bearing subject."--Dr. Joseph Massad, from their Facebook page.
Just more of your RACIST JEW HATRED by using the term Zionist out of context and not as it is defined. There is no concept in International law of a right of return, if there is then the arab muslims are on land outside of Saudi arabia illegally and the original non muslim inhabitants should be given their lands back. This means that Jerusalem will be the Jewish capital and no arab muslims will be in existence. Or do you still believe that the laws don't apply to the Jews because of your RACIST JEW HATRED
And how about a link to your cut and paste ? Or are you afraid of showing that you are a RABID RACIST and that it is your words that you have added to the cut and paste to incite racial hatred and violence against the Jews.