1,000 Jurists to EU: Settlements are Legal

[Bloodrock44]

Israel has never legally acquired any Palestinian land.

Uh, oh, here we go again

Anyone feel patient enough to dispute this theory of Tinmore's and explain history to him for the umpteenth time?
​

And nobody has posted any documents showing Israel ever legally acquiring any land.

Let me put it to you this way Tinman; Whether they acquired land legally or not, they possess it. Now if you and your arab buddies feel you have the gonads, take it back...legally or not.

 

[Hossfly]

Israel has never legally acquired any Palestinian land.

Uh, oh, here we go again

Anyone feel patient enough to dispute this theory of Tinmore's and explain history to him for the umpteenth time?
​

And nobody has posted any documents showing Israel ever legally acquiring any land.

Not to worry, Tinmore, Bibi and Abu Mazen are going to get this mess straightened out, toot sweet and you can stop worrying about it. Have faith in your leaders.

 

[P F Tinmore]

Uh, oh, here we go again

Anyone feel patient enough to dispute this theory of Tinmore's and explain history to him for the umpteenth time?
​

Personally, I'm sick and tired of it. Rocco, though, has the patience of a saint.

He certainly does.

Hopefully Rocco simply can make the Permalink to where Tinmore asked the same questions and Rocco gave the same answers. It should not be too difficult to find as it happens several times in different threads.

Rocco has never posted any documents of Israel legally acquiring any land.

 

[Sweet_Caroline]

Personally, I'm sick and tired of it. Rocco, though, has the patience of a saint.

He certainly does.

Hopefully Rocco simply can make the Permalink to where Tinmore asked the same questions and Rocco gave the same answers. It should not be too difficult to find as it happens several times in different threads.

Rocco has never posted any documents of Israel legally acquiring any land.

Ok, you show me where you dispute Israel legally acquired land.

I don't want a blog, I don't want a hate site,

I want proof that Israel illegally acquired land. Show me what law was broken.

 

[P F Tinmore]

He certainly does.

Hopefully Rocco simply can make the Permalink to where Tinmore asked the same questions and Rocco gave the same answers. It should not be too difficult to find as it happens several times in different threads.

Rocco has never posted any documents of Israel legally acquiring any land.

Ok, you show me where you dispute Israel legally acquired land.

I don't want a blog, I don't want a hate site,

I want proof that Israel illegally acquired land. Show me what law was broken.

Israel controls land that is not theirs.

The term for that is occupation.

 

[Bumberclyde]

He certainly does.

Hopefully Rocco simply can make the Permalink to where Tinmore asked the same questions and Rocco gave the same answers. It should not be too difficult to find as it happens several times in different threads.

Rocco has never posted any documents of Israel legally acquiring any land.

Ok, you show me where you dispute Israel legally acquired land.

I don't want a blog, I don't want a hate site,

I want proof that Israel illegally acquired land. Show me what law was broken.

You're the one claiming that the land was acquired legally. It's up to you to prove your statement.

 

[Sweet_Caroline]

Rocco has never posted any documents of Israel legally acquiring any land.

Ok, you show me where you dispute Israel legally acquired land.

I don't want a blog, I don't want a hate site,

I want proof that Israel illegally acquired land. Show me what law was broken.

You're the one claiming that the land was acquired legally. It's up to you to prove your statement.

No, again you are new, and you don't realize that Tinmore made the claim, and he must prove it.

You Bumberclye will go old and gray before he does though, so don't hold your breath.

 

[P F Tinmore]

Ok, you show me where you dispute Israel legally acquired land.

I don't want a blog, I don't want a hate site,

I want proof that Israel illegally acquired land. Show me what law was broken.

You're the one claiming that the land was acquired legally. It's up to you to prove your statement.

No, again you are new, and you don't realize that Tinmore made the claim, and he must prove it.

You Bumberclye will go old and gray before he does though, so don't hold your breath.

(d) In the sector from a point on the Dead Sea (MR 1925-0958) to the southernmost tip of Palestine, the Armistice Demarcation Line shall be determined by...

The Avalon Project : Jordanian-Israeli General Armistice Agreement, April 3, 1949

That land is Palestine. Israel claims that land.

When did that happen?

 

[Sweet_Caroline]

You're the one claiming that the land was acquired legally. It's up to you to prove your statement.

No, again you are new, and you don't realize that Tinmore made the claim, and he must prove it.

You Bumberclye will go old and gray before he does though, so don't hold your breath.

(d) In the sector from a point on the Dead Sea (MR 1925-0958) to the southernmost tip of Palestine, the Armistice Demarcation Line shall be determined by...

The Avalon Project : Jordanian-Israeli General Armistice Agreement, April 3, 1949

That land is Palestine. Israel claims that land.

When did that happen?

Watch, yet again. This must be the 5th time I have posted this. I do wish you lot would concentrate.

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ubDhnM0MUmY]Howard Grief - EC4I middle east conflict documentary: Give Peace A Chance - YouTube[/ame]

 

[RoccoR]

P F Tinmore, et al,

This is inverted (again). No one has ever posted a document that says the creation of Israel is illegal. I think the opposite is true. Israel is recognized as both a "state" and a member UN.

Border and boundary disputes do not make it "illegal." It only makes them in dispute.

Rocco has never posted any documents of Israel legally acquiring any land.

(PALESTINIAN MIND SETs)

There are six (6) key minds sets on the issue (whether you are HAMAS or FATAH). It is the first part of the basis for my disagreement with Paul Tinmore.

1. It is necessary to instill in the minds of the Moslem generations that the Palestinian problem is a religious problem, and should be dealt with on this basis.
2. In face of the Jews' usurpation of Palestine, it is compulsory that the banner of Jihad be raised.
3. Palestine, with the boundaries it had during the British Mandate, is an indivisible territorial unit.
4. The partition of Palestine in 1947, and the establishment of the state of Israel are entirely illegal, regardless of the passage of time, because they were contrary to the will of the Palestinian people and its natural right in their homeland, and were inconsistent with the principles embodied in the Charter of the United Nations, particularly the right to self-determination.
5. Initiatives, and so-called peaceful solutions and international conferences, are in contradiction to the principles of the Islamic Resistance Movement.
6. The Balfour Declaration, the Palestine Mandate, and everything that has been based on them, are deemed null and void.

The last two, which challenges the which challenge international decisions. It is important to remember that the Palestinian is very selective in it approach to what is illegal and proper.

In this discussion, we should look to Key Item #4, and the "partition of Palestine in 1947." Of course the mean selectively imply that while it is illegal [for General Assembly Resolution 181(II) of 1947] to establish Israel on this basis, they are careful not to imply that it is illegal to establish an Arab state.

However, it should be noticed that Yassar Arafat, Chairman of the Palestine Liberation Organization, used this authority when he declared Palestine independent and sovereign.

Despite the historical injustice done to the Palestinian Arab people in its displacement and in being deprived of the right to self-determination following the adoption of General Assembly resolution 181 (II) of 1947, which partitioned Palestine into an Arab and a Jewish State, that resolution nevertheless continues to attach conditions to international legitimacy that guarantee the Palestinian Arab people the right to sovereignty and national independence.

---------- ----------- ---------- ---------- ----------​

Pursuant to the resolutions of the Arab Summit Conferences and on the basis of the international legitimacy embodied in the resolutions of the United Nations since 1947, and

Through the exercise by the Palestinian Arab people of its right to self-determination, political independence and sovereignty over its territory:

The Palestine National Council hereby declares, in the Name of God and on behalf of the Palestinian Arab people, the establishment of the State of Palestine in the land of Palestine with its capital at Jerusalem.

SOURCE: A/43/827 S/20278 18 November 1988

Having considered the item entitled "Question of Palestine",

Recalling its resolution 181 (II) of 29 November 1947, in which, inter alia, it called for the establishment of an Arab State and a Jewish State in Palestine,

Mindful of the special responsibility of the United Nations to achieve a just solution to the question of Palestine,

Aware of the proclamation of the State of Palestine by the Palestine National Council in line with General Assembly resolution 181 (II) and in exercise of the inalienable rights of the Palestinian people,

1. Acknowledges the proclamation of the State of Palestine by the Palestine National Council on 15 November 1988;

2. Affirms the need to enable the Palestinian people to exercise their sovereignty over their territory occupied since 1967;

3. Decides that, effective as of 15 December 1988, the designation "Palestine" should be used in place of the designation "Palestine Liberation Organization" in the United Nations system, without prejudice to the observer status and functions of the Palestine Liberation Organization within the United Nations system, in conformity with relevant United Nations resolutions and practice;

4. Requests the Secretary-General to take the necessary action to implement the present resolution.​

SOURCE: A/RES/43/177 15 December 1988

(COMMENT)

Once a "mind set" is established, it becomes impossible to argue, no matter the facts in evidence, with a Palestinian that is fixated on a cause. One must agree to disagree and move-on. Once these beliefs are vocalized and established as policy, the solutions are limited.

"There is no solution for the Palestinian question except through Jihad."

"The Arab Palestinian people, expressing themselves by armed Palestinian revolution, reject all solutions which are substitutes for the total liberation of Palestine and reject all proposals aimed at the liquidation of the Palestinian cause, or at its internationalization."​

The presentation of logic and critical thinking becomes gravely impaired given this fait accompli.

It would appear that General Assembly resolution 181 (II) (or any other evidentiary documentation) only works for the Palestinian side of the equation.

Most Respectfully,
R

 

[RoccoR]

P F Tinmore; et al,

Yes! Absolutely....

You're the one claiming that the land was acquired legally. It's up to you to prove your statement.

No, again you are new, and you don't realize that Tinmore made the claim, and he must prove it.

You Bumberclye will go old and gray before he does though, so don't hold your breath.

(d) In the sector from a point on the Dead Sea (MR 1925-0958) to the southernmost tip of Palestine, the Armistice Demarcation Line shall be determined by...

The Avalon Project : Jordanian-Israeli General Armistice Agreement, April 3, 1949

That land is Palestine. Israel claims that land.

When did that happen?

(COMMENT)

It was the "territory of Palestine;" not the "country of Palestine."

With the exception of that portion allocated to the Jewish State and proclaimed the independent and sovereign "State of Israel," the remainder was still under the protection of the UN.

The "State of Palestine" was not recognized or declared sovereign or independent until November 1988.

(SIDEBAR)

The League of Arab States (LAS) Khartoum Resolution, 1 September 1967 predates the Security Council Resolution 242 (S/RES/242 22 November 1967) by almost three (3) months. Much of the rhetoric that Palestinians espouse today, owes its origin to The Khartoum Resolution; which sets the conditions by which many of the outstanding issues revolve:

3. The Arab Heads of State have agreed to unite their political efforts at the international and diplomatic level to eliminate the effects of the aggression and to ensure the withdrawal of the aggressive Israeli forces from the Arab lands which have been occupied since the aggression of June 5. This will be done within the framework of the main principles by which the Arab States abide, namely,

1. no peace with Israel,
2. no recognition of Israel,
3. no negotiations with it,
4. and insistence on the rights of the Palestinian people in their own country.

SOURCE: http://unispal.un.org/unispal.nsf/9...110007719e7?OpenDocument#sthash.D0JPgdYe.dpuf

In many respects, the Khartoum Resolution is what made US Military Base persona non grata in the Middle East leaving the State of Israel its only ally, and set the tone for future negotiations with Israel so difficult to kick-start. It is also the catalyst for the rhetoric that the "State of Israel" does not exist (calling the region "Palestine" instead) and the policy of the many terrorist organizations to adopt "Jihad" or continuous "armed struggles:"

• Article 13 of HAMAS Covenant: There is no solution for the Palestinian question except through Jihad.
• Article 9 of PNC Charter: Armed struggle is the only way to liberate Palestine.

Most Respectfully,
R

 

[pbel]

P F Tinmore, et al,

This is inverted (again). No one has ever posted a document that says the creation of Israel is illegal. I think the opposite is true. Israel is recognized as both a "state" and a member UN.

Border and boundary disputes do not make it "illegal." It only makes them in dispute.

Rocco has never posted any documents of Israel legally acquiring any land.

(PALESTINIAN MIND SETs)

There are six (6) key minds sets on the issue (whether you are HAMAS or FATAH). It is the first part of the basis for my disagreement with Paul Tinmore.

1. It is necessary to instill in the minds of the Moslem generations that the Palestinian problem is a religious problem, and should be dealt with on this basis.
2. In face of the Jews' usurpation of Palestine, it is compulsory that the banner of Jihad be raised.
3. Palestine, with the boundaries it had during the British Mandate, is an indivisible territorial unit.
4. The partition of Palestine in 1947, and the establishment of the state of Israel are entirely illegal, regardless of the passage of time, because they were contrary to the will of the Palestinian people and its natural right in their homeland, and were inconsistent with the principles embodied in the Charter of the United Nations, particularly the right to self-determination.
5. Initiatives, and so-called peaceful solutions and international conferences, are in contradiction to the principles of the Islamic Resistance Movement.
6. The Balfour Declaration, the Palestine Mandate, and everything that has been based on them, are deemed null and void.

The last two, which challenges the which challenge international decisions. It is important to remember that the Palestinian is very selective in it approach to what is illegal and proper.

In this discussion, we should look to Key Item #4, and the "partition of Palestine in 1947." Of course the mean selectively imply that while it is illegal [for General Assembly Resolution 181(II) of 1947] to establish Israel on this basis, they are careful not to imply that it is illegal to establish an Arab state.

However, it should be noticed that Yassar Arafat, Chairman of the Palestine Liberation Organization, used this authority when he declared Palestine independent and sovereign.

Despite the historical injustice done to the Palestinian Arab people in its displacement and in being deprived of the right to self-determination following the adoption of General Assembly resolution 181 (II) of 1947, which partitioned Palestine into an Arab and a Jewish State, that resolution nevertheless continues to attach conditions to international legitimacy that guarantee the Palestinian Arab people the right to sovereignty and national independence.

---------- ----------- ---------- ---------- ----------​

Pursuant to the resolutions of the Arab Summit Conferences and on the basis of the international legitimacy embodied in the resolutions of the United Nations since 1947, and

Through the exercise by the Palestinian Arab people of its right to self-determination, political independence and sovereignty over its territory:

The Palestine National Council hereby declares, in the Name of God and on behalf of the Palestinian Arab people, the establishment of the State of Palestine in the land of Palestine with its capital at Jerusalem.

SOURCE: A/43/827 S/20278 18 November 1988

Having considered the item entitled "Question of Palestine",

Recalling its resolution 181 (II) of 29 November 1947, in which, inter alia, it called for the establishment of an Arab State and a Jewish State in Palestine,

Mindful of the special responsibility of the United Nations to achieve a just solution to the question of Palestine,

Aware of the proclamation of the State of Palestine by the Palestine National Council in line with General Assembly resolution 181 (II) and in exercise of the inalienable rights of the Palestinian people,

1. Acknowledges the proclamation of the State of Palestine by the Palestine National Council on 15 November 1988;

2. Affirms the need to enable the Palestinian people to exercise their sovereignty over their territory occupied since 1967;

3. Decides that, effective as of 15 December 1988, the designation "Palestine" should be used in place of the designation "Palestine Liberation Organization" in the United Nations system, without prejudice to the observer status and functions of the Palestine Liberation Organization within the United Nations system, in conformity with relevant United Nations resolutions and practice;

4. Requests the Secretary-General to take the necessary action to implement the present resolution.​

SOURCE: A/RES/43/177 15 December 1988

(COMMENT)

Once a "mind set" is established, it becomes impossible to argue, no matter the facts in evidence, with a Palestinian that is fixated on a cause. One must agree to disagree and move-on. Once these beliefs are vocalized and established as policy, the solutions are limited.

"There is no solution for the Palestinian question except through Jihad."

"The Arab Palestinian people, expressing themselves by armed Palestinian revolution, reject all solutions which are substitutes for the total liberation of Palestine and reject all proposals aimed at the liquidation of the Palestinian cause, or at its internationalization."​

The presentation of logic and critical thinking becomes gravely impaired given this fait accompli.

It would appear that General Assembly resolution 181 (II) (or any other evidentiary documentation) only works for the Palestinian side of the equation.

Most Respectfully,
R

You say the UN made Israel legal yet the UN has stated many times that the Israeli Occupation is Illegal...There is no "land dispute."

 

[P F Tinmore]

It was the "territory of Palestine;" not the "country of Palestine."

Does that mean that the natives have no rights?

Got a link that says that?

 

[P F Tinmore]

Border and boundary disputes do not make it "illegal." It only makes them in dispute.

What dispute? Do you have some information? Was a complaint filed?

 

[Bloodrock44]

It was the "territory of Palestine;" not the "country of Palestine."

Does that mean that the natives have no rights?

Got a link that says that?

You are living in an alternative universe Tinman. Is a link going to give them rights?

 

[P F Tinmore]

It was the "territory of Palestine;" not the "country of Palestine."

Does that mean that the natives have no rights?

Got a link that says that?

You are living in an alternative universe Tinman. Is a link going to give them rights?

Rights are not given. They are inherent.

 

[Bloodrock44]

Does that mean that the natives have no rights?

Got a link that says that?

You are living in an alternative universe Tinman. Is a link going to give them rights?

Rights are not given. They are inherent.

Yes. Here in America they are. But not in places where your loyalties lie. We have a constitution. You have...well...the Hamas Charter.

 

[P F Tinmore]

You are living in an alternative universe Tinman. Is a link going to give them rights?

Rights are not given. They are inherent.

Yes. Here in America they are. But not in places where your loyalties lie. We have a constitution. You have...well...the Hamas Charter.

Does our constitution grant rights or protect existing rights?

 

[Hossfly]

Rights are not given. They are inherent.

Yes. Here in America they are. But not in places where your loyalties lie. We have a constitution. You have...well...the Hamas Charter.

Does our constitution grant rights or protect existing rights?

Well, we got Obama now. What's the question.

 

[georgephillip]

Of course settlements are absolutely legal. I and others have stated so on this forum many times. However of course the ignorant haters on here don't want to accept it so therefore dispute it.

________

1,000 Jurists to EU: Settlements are Legal

Mammoth petition delivered to Catherine Ashton states: '1967 lines' don't exist.
​

By Gil Ronen
First Publish: 8/4/2013, 7:16 PM


A mammoth jurists' petition delivered to European Union foreign policy chief Catherine Ashton states that the EU is wrong in holding that Jewish communities in Judea and Samaria are illegal, and that the term “1967 lines” does not exist in international law.

The letter is signed by over 1,000 jurists worldwide.

Among the signatories are former justice minister Prof. Yaakov Ne'eman; former UN Ambassaor Dr. Meir Rosen; Britain's Baroness Prof. Ruth Deech, Prof. Eliav Shochetman and Prof. Talia Einhorn. They include legal scholars from the U.S., Australia, Belgium, Bolivia, Brazil, Canada, Switzerland, Chile, Czechoslovakia, Greece, India, Ireland, Italy, Mexico, Malta, Holland, Norway, New Zealand, Peru, Singapore, Taiwan, South Africa, Sweden and, of course, Israel.

The man behind the initiative is Dr. Alan Baker, Israel's former ambassador to Canada and legal adviser to the Foreign Ministry, who currently heads the International Action Division of the Legal Forum for Israel.

Baker was also a member of the three-person committee headed by former Supreme Court judge Edmond Levy, known as the Levy Committee, which pronounced that Judea and Samaria were not occupied territory.

Dr. Baker explained to Arutz Sheva that there is “no such thing” as the 1967 lines. “There never was such a thing. The matter of the borders is on the agenda of the negotiations, The EU cannot dictate a subject that is on the agenda of the negotiations. The pre-1967 lines are (1949) armistice lines. These are not recognized lines or security lines. In the Oslo process, it was agreed between us and the Palestinians that the matter of borders will be negotiated. The term '1967 lines' does not appear anywhere in our agreement with the Palestinians, therefore it is a legal and factual aberration to determine that these are our lines.”

"The second thing is the determination that the settlements are illegal according to international law. It is true that most of the world thinks so, but that does not make it true legally. Legally, the clause in the Geneva Convention that they use to say that settlements are illegal, was not intended to refer to cases like our settlements, but to prevent the forced transfer of populations by the Nazis. This is not relevant to the Israeli settlements.”

1,000 Jurists to EU: Settlements are Legal - Global Agenda - News - Israel National News

From Wiki:

"Alan Baker (Hebrew: אלן בייקר*; born 1947) is an Israeli expert in international law and former ambassador of the state of Israel to Canada. He is the director of the Institute for Contemporary Affairs at the Jerusalem Center for Public Affairs and a former partner in the Tel Aviv law firm of Moshe, Bloomfield, Kobo, Baker & Co..."

"Baker explained the reference to the continued Israeli presence in the West Bank pursuant to the Oslo accords between the PLO and Israel in the interview as follows, [6] stating:

“'The legal claim today and the arguments rest on the Oslo accords. It was resolved - and the Palestinians agreed - that the settlements' fate would be determined in a future peace agreement.

"'After we signed those accords, which are still legally in force, we are no longer an occupying power, but we are instead present in the territories with their consent and subject to the outcome of negotiations.'[5]"

Since Dr. Baker lives beyond the Green Line, does that mean he has no permanent residence status in the Occupied Territories?

Alan Baker (diplomat) - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia