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.
Blah, blah, blah, endless phukking blah...They can have all the rights they want - on the east side of the Jordan... no future for them, on the west side.Are you trying to justify your belief that the Palestinians have no rights?P F Tinmore, et al,
I'm not at all sure that you understand what a "right" is. In the atmosphere of contemporary foreign politics, a "right" (to this or that) is not always compatible with reality (reality always wins). While it is often framed as a formal promise, guarantee or assurance (typically in writing) that certain conditions will be fulfilled. Well that is sometimes true and sometimes not.
You will take note that The Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR) (what Human Rights activist like to call the "first of these projected instruments") never actually became law. However, its sister elements [(International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights)(CCPR) and the (International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights)(CESCR)] did ascend into treaties; enforceable in 1976. And then there is this thing called the International Bill of Human Rights (IBR) which is what you get when you assemble all three (UDHR -- CCPR -- CESCR) together into one document. But let me assure you that if any of these "project instruments" ever comes in conflict with the best interest of a signatory, they can withdraw under Article 41(2) of the CCPR and Article 54 of the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties.
(COMMENT)You blow off any mention of Palestinian rights as irrelevant.
Now, I would be remiss if I did not mention the Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples (DRIP --- A/RES/61/295 of 13 SEP 07). It has not ascended into a Treatise and is, unenforceable, on a stand alone basis. It is a 21st Product. It has some strange, and maybe ambiguous passages in it. One of my most favorite of these is:
"Affirming that indigenous peoples are equal to all other peoples, while recognizing the right of all peoples to be different, to consider themselves different, and to be respected as such,"
Now we generally accept that Human Rights doctrines, policies and practices show not advocating superiority of peoples or individuals on the basis of national origin or racial, religious, ethnic or cultural differences are racist, scientifically false, legally invalid, morally condemnable and socially unjust. The application and interpretation of law pursuant to internationally recognized human rights age, race, color, gender, language, religion or belief, political or other opinion, national, ethnic or social origin, wealth, birth or other status.
But, as articulated in Article 1, DRIP: Indigenous peoples have the right to the full enjoyment, as a collective or as individuals, of all human rights and fundamental freedoms as recognized in the Charter of the United Nations, the UDHR and international human rights law. This is a prefect example of a "right" that has unattainable expectations. (I am willing to say that there are very few nations that have "full employment.") So the Arab Palestinian should understand that, "rights" are not a goal that is always in the category of achievable. Certainly not the Article 1 "Right to Full Employment;" and not the "Right of Return."
I have often had people raise the issues of Article 13(2) DRIP (as is Article 26) and the meaning of "take effective measures to ensure that this right is protected" --- and --- "or by other appropriate means." I don't know how much you can read into a phrase like that. But I'm sure it is not advocating for armed struggle and violence. But since the Resolution is unenforceable, I pay little attention to it. I don't know if it will ever be refined.
Most Respectfully,
R
It is bullshit talk like that which will ensure a permanent state of war.
You assume that nations will roll over and play dead.
Kim Jong Un says North Korea close to testing ICBM
They will obtain R-E-S-P-E-C-T by arming themselves and making the world unsafe. You stupid son of a bitch.
Soon Kim Jong Un will be able to deliver a nuclear device to your neck of the woods.
.
Thank you for expressing your personal opinion in the matter...
Facts on the ground, in Great Israel, however, indicate a different state of affairs and future...
Nations have ALREADY rolled over and played dead,fooltool...
And they aren't going to do jack-shit about Israel...
Especially when the United States has Israel's back, as it will again, full-force, after January 20, 2017...
Good God, the resemblance to Rebecca of Sunnybrook Farms is amazing...OK, but it is illegal to annex occupied territory.As the LoGWGs extends itself outward, lengthening the perimeter and expanding the territory within the closed geography,
And it is illegal to acquire territory by force.
Yeah, and even now, the UK is having second thoughts...Blah, blah, blah, endless phukking blah...They can have all the rights they want - on the east side of the Jordan... no future for them, on the west side.Are you trying to justify your belief that the Palestinians have no rights?P F Tinmore, et al,
I'm not at all sure that you understand what a "right" is. In the atmosphere of contemporary foreign politics, a "right" (to this or that) is not always compatible with reality (reality always wins). While it is often framed as a formal promise, guarantee or assurance (typically in writing) that certain conditions will be fulfilled. Well that is sometimes true and sometimes not.
You will take note that The Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR) (what Human Rights activist like to call the "first of these projected instruments") never actually became law. However, its sister elements [(International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights)(CCPR) and the (International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights)(CESCR)] did ascend into treaties; enforceable in 1976. And then there is this thing called the International Bill of Human Rights (IBR) which is what you get when you assemble all three (UDHR -- CCPR -- CESCR) together into one document. But let me assure you that if any of these "project instruments" ever comes in conflict with the best interest of a signatory, they can withdraw under Article 41(2) of the CCPR and Article 54 of the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties.
(COMMENT)
Now, I would be remiss if I did not mention the Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples (DRIP --- A/RES/61/295 of 13 SEP 07). It has not ascended into a Treatise and is, unenforceable, on a stand alone basis. It is a 21st Product. It has some strange, and maybe ambiguous passages in it. One of my most favorite of these is:
"Affirming that indigenous peoples are equal to all other peoples, while recognizing the right of all peoples to be different, to consider themselves different, and to be respected as such,"
Now we generally accept that Human Rights doctrines, policies and practices show not advocating superiority of peoples or individuals on the basis of national origin or racial, religious, ethnic or cultural differences are racist, scientifically false, legally invalid, morally condemnable and socially unjust. The application and interpretation of law pursuant to internationally recognized human rights age, race, color, gender, language, religion or belief, political or other opinion, national, ethnic or social origin, wealth, birth or other status.
But, as articulated in Article 1, DRIP: Indigenous peoples have the right to the full enjoyment, as a collective or as individuals, of all human rights and fundamental freedoms as recognized in the Charter of the United Nations, the UDHR and international human rights law. This is a prefect example of a "right" that has unattainable expectations. (I am willing to say that there are very few nations that have "full employment.") So the Arab Palestinian should understand that, "rights" are not a goal that is always in the category of achievable. Certainly not the Article 1 "Right to Full Employment;" and not the "Right of Return."
I have often had people raise the issues of Article 13(2) DRIP (as is Article 26) and the meaning of "take effective measures to ensure that this right is protected" --- and --- "or by other appropriate means." I don't know how much you can read into a phrase like that. But I'm sure it is not advocating for armed struggle and violence. But since the Resolution is unenforceable, I pay little attention to it. I don't know if it will ever be refined.
Most Respectfully,
R
It is bullshit talk like that which will ensure a permanent state of war.
You assume that nations will roll over and play dead.
Kim Jong Un says North Korea close to testing ICBM
They will obtain R-E-S-P-E-C-T by arming themselves and making the world unsafe. You stupid son of a bitch.
Soon Kim Jong Un will be able to deliver a nuclear device to your neck of the woods.
.
Thank you for expressing your personal opinion in the matter...
Facts on the ground, in Great Israel, however, indicate a different state of affairs and future...
Nations have ALREADY rolled over and played dead,fooltool...
And they aren't going to do jack-shit about Israel...
Especially when the United States has Israel's back, as it will again, full-force, after January 20, 2017...
Yo dinglebery
The ENTIRE UNSC voted against Israel.
Nations are getting tired or rolling over
.
The world community is sick and tired of seeing the Zionists abuse the Palestinians.
The Palestinians will take over Palestine and you bastards will be crushed.
.
Yeah, and even now, the UK is having second thoughts...Blah, blah, blah, endless phukking blah...They can have all the rights they want - on the east side of the Jordan... no future for them, on the west side.Are you trying to justify your belief that the Palestinians have no rights?
It is bullshit talk like that which will ensure a permanent state of war.
You assume that nations will roll over and play dead.
Kim Jong Un says North Korea close to testing ICBM
They will obtain R-E-S-P-E-C-T by arming themselves and making the world unsafe. You stupid son of a bitch.
Soon Kim Jong Un will be able to deliver a nuclear device to your neck of the woods.
.
Thank you for expressing your personal opinion in the matter...
Facts on the ground, in Great Israel, however, indicate a different state of affairs and future...
Nations have ALREADY rolled over and played dead,fooltool...
And they aren't going to do jack-shit about Israel...
Especially when the United States has Israel's back, as it will again, full-force, after January 20, 2017...
Yo dinglebery
The ENTIRE UNSC voted against Israel.
Nations are getting tired or rolling over
.
The world community is sick and tired of seeing the Zionists abuse the Palestinians.
The Palestinians will take over Palestine and you bastards will be crushed.
.
The Brit PM just bitch-slapped John Kerry's little hissy fit over Israel and the settlements...
You can wipe your ass with Resolution 2234... it's only value is as toilet paper.
You'll begin to appreciate that after January 20, 2017...
Your little micro-victory didn't last very long, did it?
And it accomplished exactly zero.
(COMMENT)Israel First or America First
By Patrick J. Buchanan
December 31, 2016
Donald Trump has a new best friend.
“President-elect Trump, thank you for your warm friendship and your clear-cut support of Israel,” gushed Bibi Netanyahu, after he berated John Kerry in a fashion that would once have resulted in a rupture of diplomatic relations.
Netanyahu accused Kerry of “colluding” in and “orchestrating” an anti-Israel, stab-in-the-back resolution in the Security Council, then lying about it. He offered to provide evidence of Kerry’s complicity and mendacity to President Trump."
Contumacious, et al,
I don't think that the title "Israel First of America First" even fits the overarching theme of the story by Buchanan.
(COMMENT)Israel First or America First
By Patrick J. Buchanan
December 31, 2016
Donald Trump has a new best friend.
“President-elect Trump, thank you for your warm friendship and your clear-cut support of Israel,” gushed Bibi Netanyahu, after he berated John Kerry in a fashion that would once have resulted in a rupture of diplomatic relations.
Netanyahu accused Kerry of “colluding” in and “orchestrating” an anti-Israel, stab-in-the-back resolution in the Security Council, then lying about it. He offered to provide evidence of Kerry’s complicity and mendacity to President Trump."
First, on the issue of the question in the title: -------> It is a trick question. And for the two-dimensional thinker, the dilemma is not immediately recognized. [When you draw a circle on a piece of paper (Height and Width of X and Y Axis) you may not realize that it is a 2D representation of a 3D object (a ball); it take a little more in the way of imagination. Asking the question "Israel First of America First" is like asking a father: which of your children do you love the most?
While trying to give a real answer to the question of face value (which you might think is a matter of patriotism) the hidden agenda and purpose of the question is not to derive an answer, but to create ill-will between the two siblings; AND cast doubt on the distribution of love from the father.
Some constructs of the mind are inexhaustible. You can love your wife and children simultaneously; just as is it possible to have more than one very good friends. In the two-dimensional "Flatland."
Most Respectfully,
R
This is the year of Israel, and has been since BC...Contumacious, et al,
I don't think that the title "Israel First of America First" even fits the overarching theme of the story by Buchanan.
(COMMENT)Israel First or America First
By Patrick J. Buchanan
December 31, 2016
Donald Trump has a new best friend.
“President-elect Trump, thank you for your warm friendship and your clear-cut support of Israel,” gushed Bibi Netanyahu, after he berated John Kerry in a fashion that would once have resulted in a rupture of diplomatic relations.
Netanyahu accused Kerry of “colluding” in and “orchestrating” an anti-Israel, stab-in-the-back resolution in the Security Council, then lying about it. He offered to provide evidence of Kerry’s complicity and mendacity to President Trump."
First, on the issue of the question in the title: -------> It is a trick question. And for the two-dimensional thinker, the dilemma is not immediately recognized. [When you draw a circle on a piece of paper (Height and Width of X and Y Axis) you may not realize that it is a 2D representation of a 3D object (a ball); it take a little more in the way of imagination. Asking the question "Israel First of America First" is like asking a father: which of your children do you love the most?
While trying to give a real answer to the question of face value (which you might think is a matter of patriotism) the hidden agenda and purpose of the question is not to derive an answer, but to create ill-will between the two siblings; AND cast doubt on the distribution of love from the father.
Some constructs of the mind are inexhaustible. You can love your wife and children simultaneously; just as is it possible to have more than one very good friends. In the two-dimensional "Flatland."
Most Respectfully,
R
The title is eminently appropriate.
Palestine has international borders.P F Tinmore, et al,
This is somewhat correct.
(COMMENT)The 1967 lines are not political or territorial borders as per the UN.
Until such time as the Arab Palestinians come to a Peace Agreement with Israel, the Palestinians have:
• NO Border,
• NO Sovereignty
I ask again! What is the border for Palestine? And don't give me that the boundary of the territory formerly under Mandate.
Most Respectfully,
R
The Mandate was an administration not a place. It had no territory.
You are just hawking Israeli propaganda.
Neither were subject to settler colonialism.Yeah right, self-government under military occupation and martial law imposed by foreigners. That makes sense. What a clown you are.
YOU ARE THE CLOWN AS GERMANY AND JAPAN MANAGED TO DO THAT AFTER WW2
That is not just Hamas.P F Tinmore, et al,
This is somewhat correct.
(COMMENT)The 1967 lines are not political or territorial borders as per the UN.
Until such time as the Arab Palestinians come to a Peace Agreement with Israel, the Palestinians have:
• NO Border,
• NO Sovereignty
I ask again! What is the border for Palestine? And don't give me that the boundary of the territory formerly under Mandate.
Most Respectfully,
R
Or his other one that he got from hamas
from the north to the south
from the river to the sea
that is the arab nation of palestine
The international borders of all of the new states in the region were defined by post war treaties. All of them were under a mandate. I have seen nothing that exempts Palestine.P F Tinmore,
OK, You make this claim; but you never defend it.
(QUESTION)Palestine has international borders.P F Tinmore, et al,
This is somewhat correct.
(COMMENT)The 1967 lines are not political or territorial borders as per the UN.
Until such time as the Arab Palestinians come to a Peace Agreement with Israel, the Palestinians have:
• NO Border,
• NO Sovereignty
I ask again! What is the border for Palestine? And don't give me that the boundary of the territory formerly under Mandate.
Most Respectfully,
R
The Mandate was an administration not a place. It had no territory.
You are just hawking Israeli propaganda.
IF you claim Palestine has International Borders; THEN what are they?
IF you cannot identify the border and the sovereignty, THEN quite making the claim...
Remember, the territory of Palestine during the Mandate Period was an artificial construct made by the Allied Powers --- not made by the Arabs; as is all the adjacent countries except Egypt.
Most Respectfully,
R
What is the border for Israel?I ask again! What is the border for Palestine?
Why are Israelis settling inside Palestinian borders? This is the large point.
I haven't been able to find a map of the West Bank/Israel borders in those links. Where is it to be found?See Posting #33, supra.
There was no Iraq, Transjordan, Syria, or Lebanon either.Prior to the 1924 Treaty of Lausanne and the earlier Treaty of Sevres, and before that the 1918 Mudros Armistice, and before even that, the Rule of the Ottoman Empire, there was no seat of government or political subdivision called "Palestine; NOT in a thousand years.
What is your point?
Occupation.Again the ground truth is had to deny. When you come up upon a boundary controlled by Israelis on one side and someone else on the other, it is what it is.
Indeed, I see nothing where a two state solution is required or allowed by international law.The recent UN Security Council Resolution 2334 (23DEC16) is interesting reading. It is all about the coercion of maintaining the Two-State Solution.
Are you saying the the people of Lebanon, Syria, Jordan, Iraq, and Palestine have no claim to their territory?P F Tinmore, et al,
The Allied Powers, after the Armistice of Mudros, did not have to wait for anything.
(COMMENT)There was no Iraq, Transjordan, Syria, or Lebanon either.Prior to the 1924 Treaty of Lausanne and the earlier Treaty of Sevres, and before that the 1918 Mudros Armistice, and before even that, the Rule of the Ottoman Empire, there was no seat of government or political subdivision called "Palestine; NOT in a thousand years.
What is your point?
While the Allied Powers knew that the Treaty of Sevres was coming, they did not envision the Treaty of Lausanne. All four (Iraq, Transjordan, Syria, or Lebanon) were Mandates and artificial constructs by the Allied Powers; just as Palestine. Palestine was as determined by the Allied Powers. The Arab Palestinians cannot use it as evidence of some claim to the territory. It was not.
Most Respectfully,
R
That is one of the thing that makes Oslo an illegal agreement.Do I need a permit from Canada to build in Ohio?Both Labor and Likud governments have funded settlers, many religious extremists, and gifted them the best land.
Meanwhile, Palestinians are denied building approval for homes, even a chicken coop. If in Area C they throw up a granny flat it's promptly demolished by army bulldozers.
The genius of the UN's resolution on Israeli settlements
Just as in the US when you try and build without the correct permits, your building gets demolished and you get the bill.
Does Canada have a treaty telling them they can issue such permits, because Israel does and not once have the arab muslims complained about this.
CHALK AND CHEESE again
