All The News Anti-Israel Posters Will Not Read Or Discuss

[P F Tinmore]

UNRWA has a working definition of something they made up called "Palestine refugees" that have nothing to do with actual refugee status and is entirely for UNRWA to determine who is eligible to receive their services.

UNRWA does not define who is a refugee. It is an aid agency and its definition only defines who qualifies for aid.

Resolution 194 says refugees are those wishing to return to their homes. I assume that means anyone no longer living in their home. There is nothing saying anything about why they left.

 

[P F Tinmore]

carry out attacks as an act of "legitimate resistance to the occupation," reject the legitimacy of Israel's existence and sovereignty over Jerusalem.

Uhh, Jerusalem is occupied territory.

 

[Indeependent]

carry out attacks as an act of "legitimate resistance to the occupation," reject the legitimacy of Israel's existence and sovereignty over Jerusalem.

Uhh, Jerusalem is occupied territory.

Of course it's occupied...people live there.

 

[Sixties Fan]

WATCH: High Quality Video Of Kay Wilson’s Magnificent Speech At Al Quds London Counter Protest

 

[Sixties Fan]

UNRWA has a working definition of something they made up called "Palestine refugees" that have nothing to do with actual refugee status and is entirely for UNRWA to determine who is eligible to receive their services.

UNRWA does not define who is a refugee. It is an aid agency and its definition only defines who qualifies for aid.

Resolution 194 says refugees are those wishing to return to their homes. I assume that means anyone no longer living in their home. There is nothing saying anything about why they left.

What 194 actually means:

Israel’s chief reservation regarding the Arab Peace Initiative is the way in which the text addresses the issue of Palestinian refugees. Specifically, the Initiative calls upon Israel to affirm: “achievement of a just solution to the Palestinian refugee problem to be agreed upon in accordance with U.N. General Assembly Resolution 194.” Israelis have largely rejected this passage, believing that it in effect is calling for the “right of return” of Palestinian refugees to Israel, something that would destroy the Jewish character of the state. But a closer look at the Initiative indicates that its mention of 194 need not be the Achilles’ heel that Israel has made it out to be.

The Arab states’ — and Palestinians’ — inclusion in the Initiative of UNGA Resolution 194, adopted in the wake of the 1948 Arab-Israeli War, is less about the text of the resolution and more about the principle it represents. Resolution 194 addressed the refugee issue as follows:

“Resolves that refugees wishing to return to their homes and live at peace with their neighbors should be permitted to do so at the earliest practicable date, and that compensation should be paid for the property of those choosing not to return and for loss of or damage to property, which, under principles of international law or inequity, should be made good by the Governments or authorities responsible.”

To be sure, the Arab states have used this passage in Res. 194 in an effort to make the refugee issue fundamental to any Arab-Israeli peace agreement, and to further extract and mobilize sympathy from the Arab public. However, the Arab states are not chiefly concerned with Israel accepting the exact wording of 194, after all the text also calls for United Nations control over Jerusalem. They do, however, want Israel to accept the principle of addressing the plight of Palestinian refugees in the context of a comprehensive solution to the Arab-Israeli conflict.

In this regard, Israelis should not be fearful of the Arab Peace Initiative’s mention of UNGA Res. 194. The resolution was adopted by the United Nations General Assembly — not the Security Council — and as such is not binding. Furthermore, it has not been accepted by all of the parties to the conflict.

(full article online)

Resolution 194 -- the Achilles' Heel of the Arab Peace Initiative | HuffPost



[All of those Non Binding Resolutions people insist are legal and binding, to make it go down the Jewish throats one way or another......tsk....tsk....tsk]

[Palestinians are to be compensated if they do not get to return to their homes and lands? Well, so do the nearly 1 Million Jews who were made to leave Arab conquered lands from 1920 on. Fair is fair ]

 

[P F Tinmore]

The resolution was adopted by the United Nations General Assembly — not the Security Council — and as such is not binding. Furthermore, it has not been accepted by all of the parties to the conflict.

Indeed, but the international law they apply is binding.

 

[Indeependent]

The resolution was adopted by the United Nations General Assembly — not the Security Council — and as such is not binding. Furthermore, it has not been accepted by all of the parties to the conflict.

Indeed, but the international law they apply is binding.

I find it fascinating that you are the only person on earth who has smoked enough cannabis to believe Israel doesn't exist.

 

[montelatici]

The International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (16 December 1966)



The right to return is most clearly enshrined in the 1966 International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR)(1) under its provisions on the right to freedom of movement (Article 12). Freedom of movement has two main components: an internal aspect, relating to freedom of movement within a country (Article 12 (1)); and an external aspect comprising freedom of movement between States. The latter includes the right to leave one's country (Article 12 (2)), and the right to enter one's "own country" (Article 12 (4)).


"Article 12 of the ICCPR states:

1. Everyone lawfully within the territory of a State shall, within that territory, have the right to liberty of movement and freedom to choose his residence.
   
2. Everyone shall be free to leave any country, including his own.
   
3. The above-mentioned rights shall not be subject to any restrictions except those which are provided by law, are necessary to protect national security, public order (ordre public), public health or morals or the rights and freedoms of others, and are consistent with the other rights recognized in the present Covenant.
   
4. No one shall be arbitrarily deprived of the right to enter his own country."

The U.S. ratified the ICCPR in 1992. Upon ratification, the ICCPR became the "supreme law of the land" under the Supremacy Clause of the U.S. Constitution, which gives acceded treaties the status of federal law. The U.S. must comply with and implement the provisions of the treaty just as it would any other domestic law, subject to Reservations, Understandings and Declarations (RUDs) entered when it ratified the treaty. Though the government retains the obligation to comply with the ICCPR, one of the RUDs attached by the U.S. Senate is a "not self-executing" Declaration, intended to limit the ability of litigants to sue in court for direct enforcement of the treaty.

The International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (Right to Return - Human Rights Watch Policy Page)

 

[Hollie]

The International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (16 December 1966)



The right to return is most clearly enshrined in the 1966 International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR)(1) under its provisions on the right to freedom of movement (Article 12). Freedom of movement has two main components: an internal aspect, relating to freedom of movement within a country (Article 12 (1)); and an external aspect comprising freedom of movement between States. The latter includes the right to leave one's country (Article 12 (2)), and the right to enter one's "own country" (Article 12 (4)).


"Article 12 of the ICCPR states:

1. Everyone lawfully within the territory of a State shall, within that territory, have the right to liberty of movement and freedom to choose his residence.
   
2. Everyone shall be free to leave any country, including his own.
   
3. The above-mentioned rights shall not be subject to any restrictions except those which are provided by law, are necessary to protect national security, public order (ordre public), public health or morals or the rights and freedoms of others, and are consistent with the other rights recognized in the present Covenant.
   
4. No one shall be arbitrarily deprived of the right to enter his own country."

The U.S. ratified the ICCPR in 1992. Upon ratification, the ICCPR became the "supreme law of the land" under the Supremacy Clause of the U.S. Constitution, which gives acceded treaties the status of federal law. The U.S. must comply with and implement the provisions of the treaty just as it would any other domestic law, subject to Reservations, Understandings and Declarations (RUDs) entered when it ratified the treaty. Though the government retains the obligation to comply with the ICCPR, one of the RUDs attached by the U.S. Senate is a "not self-executing" Declaration, intended to limit the ability of litigants to sue in court for direct enforcement of the treaty.

The International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (Right to Return - Human Rights Watch Policy Page)

How nice. The Monty is going to champion the rights of Jews who have been driven out of his islamic paradises.

 

[Hollie]

It's so cute when the Death Cultists rattle on.

There is an article here: Families Of Deceased Palestinians Arrange "Wedding in Heaven"

that describes something I find truly disturbing, even by the standards, such as they are, surrounding the Arab-Moslem Death Cultists.

For some strange reason, perhaps something to do with the earth’s magneticfield, there is a peculiar confluence of splodeydopes and splodeydope enablers and abettors within Islamism.


And then there's this:

Ynetnews News - Study: Female suicide bombers seek atonement

Study: Female suicide bombers seek atonement
Main motivation for women to carry out suicide attacks is to repent for past sins, new study reveals; women bombers are beneficial to terror groups - they receive greater media coverage, cause more deaths.


And then, the usual:


PFLP: Blood oath to Palestinians to establish "Palestine" from River to Sea - PMW Bulletins

PLO-member party PFLP claimed responsibility
for murder of Israeli policewoman in Jerusalem attack

Attack part of "blood oath to the Palestinian people
to... [establish] our state...
from the [Jordan] River to the Mediterranean [Sea]"

PFLP about terrorists:
"The heroic Martyrs fulfilled their wish to die as Martyrs
on the streets of Jerusalem"

 

[Sixties Fan]

• The current policy of the PA leadership is to avoid alienating the Trump administration by continuing to pretend that Abbas and his cronies are serious about achieving peace with Israel. This is why Abbas's representatives are careful not to criticize Trump or his envoys.
  
  
• When Israel does not comply with their list of demands, the Palestinians will accuse it of "destroying" the peace process. Worse still, the Palestinians will use this charge as an excuse to redouble their terror against Israelis. The Palestinian claim, as always, will be that they are being forced to resort to terrorism in light of the failure of yet another US-sponsored peace process.
  
  
• No doubt, Abbas cannot find it within himself to clarify to the American envoys that he lacks a mandate from his people to make any step toward peace with Israel. Abbas knows, even if the American representatives do not, that any move in that direction would end his career, and very possibly his life. Abbas also does not wish to go down in Palestinian history as the treacherous leader who "sold out to the Jews." Moreover, someone can come along later and say, quite correctly, that as Abbas has exceeded his legitimate term in office, any deal he makes is illegal and illegitimate.
  
  (full article online)
  

The Ongoing Drama of Palestinian Lies

 

[Sixties Fan]

When I visited the Gaza Strip a few months later, I again saw the difference between how journalists portray a place and reality. Reading about Gaza in the news, you’d think the whole place was rubble, that it looks more or less like Homs or Aleppo. In fact Gaza is no different in appearance from anywhere else in the Arab World. During eight days in the Strip, I didn’t see a single war-damaged building until I specifically asked my fixer to show me one. In response, she drove me to Shujaya, a neighborhood of Gaza City that’s a known Hamas stronghold and is still visibly damaged from the 2014 war.

Was the destruction in Shujaya shocking? Yes. But it was very localized, and not at all indicative of the rest of Gaza. The rest of Gaza is not so different from many developing countries: people are poor but they manage to provide for themselves, and even to dress well and be happy most of the time. Actually, there are parts of the Strip that are quite nice. I went out to eat at restaurants where the tables are made from marble and the waiters wear vests and ties. I saw huge villas on the beach that wouldn’t be out of place in Malibu, and – right across the street from those villas – I visited a new, $4 million mosque.

(full article online)

EXCLUSIVE: How Reporting From Israel Changed My Worldview Forever | HonestReporting

 

[Sixties Fan]

HonestReporting’s study on The Independent’s bias against Israel in March 2017 broke new ground in exposing the systemic bias against Israel in one publication. We now present a broader comparison of the Israel-related media cultures in Britain and the United States.

Many observers identify Britain – from the House of Commons to academia– as home to more prejudiced anti-Israel activity than the United States. But what causes this discrepancy? According to a new HonestReporting analysis, the heavily negative reporting of Israel in British newspapers may play a large role in determining the disturbingly frequent anti-Israel stance of British public institutions.

(full article online)

Bias by the Numbers - April-May 2017 | HonestReporting

 

[montelatici]

The bias in the U.S. media is overwhelmingly pro-Israel. That's how Americans have been brainwashed into supporting Israel. The neutral coverage in the rest of the makes it difficult for the Zionists to brainwash the rest of the world.

"Evolving conversations on the ground demand probing questions on-air. So why does TV news look like a Netanyahu ad?

An analysis by Punditfact of CNN coverage during the first two weeks of the latest Gaza crisis showed that appearances by Israeli officials outnumbered Palestinian officials by more than four-to-one. There were substantially more interviews with what Punditfact called Palestinian “laymen”, but they included the relatives of a Palestinian-American beaten by Israeli soldiers that offered little insight into the bigger picture.......

American media's new pro-Israel bias: the same party line at the wrong time | Chris McGreal

 

[Sixties Fan]

[Noooooo ! Really? ]

Appendix

The PA salaries to imprisoned terrorists is not humanitarian or social welfare for families but is in fact a salary to the terrorist prisoner himself
PA payments to terrorists are not social welfare for the families but are salaries to the terrorists themselves. The PA law itself uses the term "salary" [See: Palestinian Authority Government resolution # 23 of 2010 and Al-Hayat Al-Jadida, April 15, 2011]; an attempt by some PA members to change the language of the law from "salary" to "social assistance" was blocked and the law remained unchanged [See: Minister of Prisoners' Affairs Issa Karake - WAFA news agency, Dec. 27, 2012 and Chairman of the Prisoners' Club Qadura Fares - Al-Quds Internet edition, Dec. 27, 2012]; the payment is paid based on "time served" by the terrorist and irrespective of financial needs of the family of the terrorist [See: Al-Quds, Jan. 3, 2010, Al-Hayat Al-Jadida, April 15, 2011] and is subject to income tax [Al-Hayat Al-Jadida, June 19, 2011]. Single prisoners receive the same basic high salaries as those married with children. While social welfare benefits are universally calculated as a portion of the minimum or average salary, the salaries paid to the terrorists are quite clearly not social welfare benefits, as they are based on the number of years a prisoner has served time in jail.

(full article online)

Special Report: PA abuses goodwill of International Red Cross to pay salaries to Palestinian terrorists in Israeli prisons - PMW Bulletins

 

[Sixties Fan]

 

[Sixties Fan]

In the past 24 hours, according to Arab media, 38 Jews visited the Temple Mount.



This is, of course, terrible. How can Jews peacefully visit their holiest site? Clearly it is a violation of Muslim rights.

Also in the past 24 hours, according to the same Islamic Waqf that zealously counts every Jew, some 300,000 Muslims visited the same site.



Yet the Muslims complain about restrictions to their freedom of religion.

38 Jews and 300,000 Muslims ~ Elder Of Ziyon - Israel News

 

[P F Tinmore]

The PA salaries to imprisoned terrorists is not humanitarian or social welfare for families but is in fact a salary to the terrorist prisoner himself

Where do the Palestinians say they pay terrorists?

Link?

 

[Sixties Fan]

Speaking at the annual Herzliya Conference, Lt. Gen. Gadi Eisenkot said that Hezbollah was ensconced in some 240 villages and towns in southern Lebanon, and remains the most immediate threat to Israel. He added that the Islamist group receives sophisticated weaponry from Iran, some of which is supplied by Russia.

Another Israeli military official warned on Wednesday that if Hezbollah launches an attack against Israel, “thousands” of Lebanese would be put at risk when Israel strikes back. Major-General Amir Eshel, commander of the Israeli Air Force, explained that Hezbollah has established thousands of bases in Beirut, the Bekaa Valley, and southern Lebanon, both “above and below live civilians whom we have nothing against — a kind of human shield.”

“And that is where the war will be,” he added. “That is where we will have to fight in order to stop it and win. Whoever stays in these bases will simply be hit and will risk their lives. And whoever goes out will live.”

Jonathan Schanzer, senior vice president of the Foundation for Defense of Democracies, explained in July of last year that Hezbollah’s widely-reported tactic of hiding military assets in civilian areas would lead to mass casualties. Reports emerged in 2013 that Hezbollah was offering reduced-price housing to Shiite families who allow the terrorist group to store rocket launchers in their homes. An Israeli defense official told The New York Times in May 2015 that the buildup of Hezbollah’s terror infrastructure in southern Lebanese villages meant that “civilians are living in a military compound” and that their lives were at risk. A few days later, a newspaper linked to Hezbollah bolstered the Israeli assessment.

Hezbollah hasn’t just embedded its military infrastructure among civilians; it is also increasingly entrenched within Lebanon’s government.

(full article online)

IDF Chief of Staff: Hezbollah Has Forces in “Every 3rd or 4th House” in Southern Lebanon

 

[montelatici]

Hezbollah is understandably implementing defensive infrastructure as a deterent against yet another Israeli invasion. Israel has invaded Lebanon 5 times since the 70s, and occupied the southern part of Lebanon for years. Israel still occupies a part of Lebanon today.

With that kind of history, Lebanon and Hezbollah whose people inhabit southern Lebanon would be crazy not to prepare for another Israeli invasion.