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

[RoccoR]

RE: All The News Anti-Palestinian Posters Will Not Read Or Discuss
⁜→ P F Tinmore, et al,

BLUF: Again, this has been a revolving mistake with you.

the 18-year-old female Dalal Mughrabi travelled from Lebanon and killed an American tourist on the beach.

Israel does not have a border with Lebanon. Only an armistice line.

(COMMENT)

First, since Security Council resolution 425 (1978), there has been a very firm and strict respect for the territorial integrity, sovereignty and political independence of Lebanon within its internationally recognized boundaries.” The original “international boundary between Israel and Lebanon was established pursuant to the 1923 Agreement between France and Great Britain. Today, this boundary, with minor changes, has been maintained and was last reinforced by way of A/54/914 S/2000/564 12 June 2000 which the UNIFIL Peacekeepers Teams maintain today.

The current agreement, no matter what you call it, is the “international boundary between Israel and Lebanon" as we see it today.

​

Most Respectfully,
R

 

[P F Tinmore]

RE: All The News Anti-Palestinian Posters Will Not Read Or Discuss
⁜→ P F Tinmore, et al,

BLUF: Again, this has been a revolving mistake with you.

the 18-year-old female Dalal Mughrabi travelled from Lebanon and killed an American tourist on the beach.

Israel does not have a border with Lebanon. Only an armistice line.

(COMMENT)

First, since Security Council resolution 425 (1978), there has been a very firm and strict respect for the territorial integrity, sovereignty and political independence of Lebanon within its internationally recognized boundaries.” The original “international boundary between Israel and Lebanon was established pursuant to the 1923 Agreement between France and Great Britain. Today, this boundary, with minor changes, has been maintained and was last reinforced by way of A/54/914 S/2000/564 12 June 2000 which the UNIFIL Peacekeepers Teams maintain today.

The current agreement, no matter what you call it, is the “international boundary between Israel and Lebanon" as we see it today.

View attachment 366766
​

Most Respectfully,
R

First, since Security Council resolution 425 (1978), there has been a very firm and strict respect for the territorial integrity, sovereignty and political independence of Lebanon within its internationally recognized boundaries.”

Israeli boundaries were not mentioned

The original “international boundary between Israel and Lebanon was established pursuant to the 1923 Agreement between France and Great Britain.

Uhhh, there was no Israel in 1923.

 

[RoccoR]

RE: All The News Anti-Palestinian Posters Will Not Read Or Discuss
⁜→ P F Tinmore, et al,

BLUF: I see we are having a reading comprehension problem with you.

First, since Security Council resolution 425 (1978), there has been a very firm and strict respect for the territorial integrity, sovereignty and political independence of Lebanon within its internationally recognized boundaries.”

Israeli boundaries were not mentioned

The original “international boundary between Israel and Lebanon was established pursuant to the 1923 Agreement between France and Great Britain.

Uhhh, there was no Israel in 1923.

(COMMENT)

Look, you can try and rationalize the position you hold, 'til the cows come home. But in the end,

◈ each boundary has twp-sides to it. ​

◈ the 1923 agreement doesn't mention Israel and Lebanon, because there were NO such states. It was an agreement between two Allied Powers (France and Great Britain).​

◈ all the political actors understood that the territory after 1978 was divided between Lebanon, Syria, Jordan Egypt, and Israel.​

You are playing a hopeless effort to save oneself and one's argument in a face-saving measure. I can only go so many rounds of this childishness before it becomes a ridiculous effort. Anyone who reads the offerings and evidence I have submitted knows what the truth is.


Most Respectfully,
R

 

[P F Tinmore]

RE: All The News Anti-Palestinian Posters Will Not Read Or Discuss
⁜→ P F Tinmore, et al,

BLUF: I see we are having a reading comprehension problem with you.

First, since Security Council resolution 425 (1978), there has been a very firm and strict respect for the territorial integrity, sovereignty and political independence of Lebanon within its internationally recognized boundaries.”

Israeli boundaries were not mentioned

The original “international boundary between Israel and Lebanon was established pursuant to the 1923 Agreement between France and Great Britain.

Uhhh, there was no Israel in 1923.

(COMMENT)

Look, you can try and rationalize the position you hold, 'til the cows come home. But in the end,

◈ each boundary has twp-sides to it. ​

◈ the 1923 agreement doesn't mention Israel and Lebanon, because there were NO such states. It was an agreement between two Allied Powers (France and Great Britain).​

◈ all the political actors understood that the territory after 1978 was divided between Lebanon, Syria, Jordan Egypt, and Israel.​

You are playing a hopeless effort to save oneself and one's argument in a face-saving measure. I can only go so many rounds of this childishness before it becomes a ridiculous effort. Anyone who reads the offerings and evidence I have submitted knows what the truth is.


Most Respectfully,
R

◈ each boundary has twp-sides to it. ◈ the 1923 agreement doesn't mention Israel and Lebanon, because there were NO such states. It was an agreement between two Allied Powers (France and Great Britain).

Indeed, but there were by 1924 and still good in 1949.

Article V​

​

1. The Armistice Demarcation Line shall follow the international boundary between the Lebanon and Palestine.

The Avalon Project : Lebanese-Israeli General Armistice Agreement, March 23, 1949

So, what changed after 1949?

 

[RoccoR]

RE: All The News Anti-Palestinian Posters Will Not Read Or Discuss
⁜→ P F Tinmore, et al,

BLUF: Lebanon was given its Independence in November 1943 - on its release from the French Mandate.

◈ each boundary has twp-sides to it.
◈ the 1923 agreement doesn't mention Israel and Lebanon, because there were NO such states. It was an agreement between two Allied Powers (France and Great Britain).

Indeed, but there were by 1924 and still good in 1949.

Article V​

​

1. The Armistice Demarcation Line shall follow the international boundary between the Lebanon and Palestine.​

​

The Avalon Project : Lebanese-Israeli General Armistice Agreement, March 23, 1949

So, what changed after 1949?

(COMMENT)

Lebanon was dragged into the Arab-Israeli conflict, along with the rest of the Arab League in May 1948. Once the Arab Liberation Army (ALA) (formed by Fawzi al-Qawuqji, a former WWII Colonel of the Wehrmacht) was defeated in the Northern Galilee Region in late 1948 and early 1949, Lebanon accepted an Armistice with Israel (March 1949). The Israeli-Lebanese Armistice Line remained relatively uneventful until the outbreak of the Six-Day War (1967).

(WHAT CHANGED)

After the Six-Day War, and with the adoption of the 1969 Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties, the UN decided that every state had a duty to refrain from the threat or use of force to violate international lines of demarcation, such as armistice lines, established by or pursuant to an international agreement to which it is a party or which it is otherwise bound to respect. That agreement essentially changed the way Armistice Lines were treated relative to an international agreement concluded between States in written form and governed by international law, whether embodied in a single instrument or in two or more related instruments and whatever its particular designation.

(RECOGNITION • WHAT HAS NOT CHANGED)

The political existence of Israel is independent of recognition by the other state, including the Arab League. Israel has the right to defend its integrity and independence, to provide for its conservation and prosperity, and consequently to organize itself as it sees fit, to legislate upon its interests, administer its services, and to define the jurisdiction and competence of its courts. (Article 3 • Montevideo Convention 1933)

The insistent denial in the express use of the term "Israel" in connection with borders and treaties, is merely subterfuge by trying to attach some unspoken meaning to such a connection is meaningless. (Article 7 • The recognition of a state may be express or tacit.)

Most Respectfully,
R

 

[P F Tinmore]

RE: All The News Anti-Palestinian Posters Will Not Read Or Discuss
⁜→ P F Tinmore, et al,

BLUF: Lebanon was given its Independence in November 1943 - on its release from the French Mandate.

◈ each boundary has twp-sides to it.
◈ the 1923 agreement doesn't mention Israel and Lebanon, because there were NO such states. It was an agreement between two Allied Powers (France and Great Britain).

Indeed, but there were by 1924 and still good in 1949.

Article V​

​

1. The Armistice Demarcation Line shall follow the international boundary between the Lebanon and Palestine.​

​

The Avalon Project : Lebanese-Israeli General Armistice Agreement, March 23, 1949

So, what changed after 1949?

(COMMENT)

Lebanon was dragged into the Arab-Israeli conflict, along with the rest of the Arab League in May 1948. Once the Arab Liberation Army (ALA) (formed by Fawzi al-Qawuqji, a former WWII Colonel of the Wehrmacht) was defeated in the Northern Galilee Region in late 1948 and early 1949, Lebanon accepted an Armistice with Israel (March 1949). The Israeli-Lebanese Armistice Line remained relatively uneventful until the outbreak of the Six-Day War (1967).

(WHAT CHANGED)

After the Six-Day War, and with the adoption of the 1969 Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties, the UN decided that every state had a duty to refrain from the threat or use of force to violate international lines of demarcation, such as armistice lines, established by or pursuant to an international agreement to which it is a party or which it is otherwise bound to respect. That agreement essentially changed the way Armistice Lines were treated relative to an international agreement concluded between States in written form and governed by international law, whether embodied in a single instrument or in two or more related instruments and whatever its particular designation.

(RECOGNITION • WHAT HAS NOT CHANGED)

The political existence of Israel is independent of recognition by the other state, including the Arab League. Israel has the right to defend its integrity and independence, to provide for its conservation and prosperity, and consequently to organize itself as it sees fit, to legislate upon its interests, administer its services, and to define the jurisdiction and competence of its courts. (Article 3 • Montevideo Convention 1933)

The insistent denial in the express use of the term "Israel" in connection with borders and treaties, is merely subterfuge by trying to attach some unspoken meaning to such a connection is meaningless. (Article 7 • The recognition of a state may be express or tacit.)

Most Respectfully,
R

After the Six-Day War, and with the adoption of the 1969 Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties, the UN decided that every state had a duty to refrain from the threat or use of force to violate international lines of demarcation, such as armistice lines, established by or pursuant to an international agreement to which it is a party or which it is otherwise bound to respect.

Palestine was not a party to the armistice agreements.(The armistice agreements applied only to military forces in Palestine.) and is not subject to them. The armistice lines run through Palestine without dividing Palestine.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Palestine was not a party to the armistice agreements.

Why would a non-existent nation be a party to anything?

 

[RoccoR]

RE: All The News Anti-Palestinian Posters Will Not Read Or Discuss
⁜→ P F Tinmore, et al,

BLUF: I'm not sure this is telling us anything that is in dispute. Nor am I sure that this is contributing to the overall understanding of the situation. But it is important, in some measure, to understand the background to such long-running conflicts (tribal feuds creating a large chasm on the political and social landscape) that are in danger of being lost to future generations, where only the shell of hatred remains.

After the Six-Day War, and with the adoption of the 1969 Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties, the UN decided that every state had a duty to refrain from the threat or use of force to violate international lines of demarcation, such as armistice lines, established by or pursuant to an international agreement to which it is a party or which it is otherwise bound to respect.

Palestine was not a party to the armistice agreements.

(COMMENT)

No question, this is true. The Palestine Government transitioned from being maintained by the Mandate Authority to the UN Trusteeship on 15 May 1948; a legal entity but not be a sovereign state.

◈ The UN immediately allowed the National Council for the Jewish State to establish a Provisional Government (Israel).​

◈ The UN had been informed by the Arab Higher Committee that it rejected the notion of "partition" and all it implied.​

Palestine, as a "Region," remained. Part of the Region became the self-governing institution of Israel; with the remainder of the Region was enveloped by components of the Arab League.

The parties to the conflict did not include the "Entity of Palestine." And the "Entity of Palestine" possessed NO capacity to conclude such an agreement. And since 1949 (the years of the Armistice Agreements), no sustainable peace has been achieved.

The armistice lines run through Palestine without dividing Palestine.

(COMMENT)

This is "Dancing with Words." The "Entity of Palestine" sometimes referred to as the State of Palestine, speaks in terms of chaos and confusion. One thing is for sure. Palestine (by whatever name description) cannot be a State possessing the capacity to conclude treaties or to exercise sovereignty IF
its internal aspects is concerned with the identity of the bearer of supreme authority has been relinquished to "Israel."

◈ May 23, 2020 • Yumna Patel • Mondoweiss, President Abbas declares end to agreements with Israel, US; turns over responsibility on occupied lands to Israel, 19 May 2020.​

(NOT MENTIONED • RELATED)

The "Entity of Palestine" sometimes referred to as the "State of Palestine," periodically makes mention of UN Security Council Resolution (S/RES/1515) (2003) wherein the Security Council makes mention of:

◈ The immediate cessation of all acts of violence, including all acts of terrorism, provocation, incitement, and destruction.​

​

◈ Reaffirming its vision of a region where two States, Israel and Palestine, live side-by-side within secure and recognized borders.​

Please make note that in the near 20 years since S/RES/1515, the status of the "Entity of Palestine" has not become any clearer. And the effort towards the "Entity" becoming a viable national concern has worsened, → not been advanced.



Most Respectfully,
R

 

[P F Tinmore]

Israel’s Losing Battle: Palestine Advocacy in the University | Al-Shabaka

This commentary examines the history of the Palestine advocacy movement in the US and the emergence of college campus organizing.

al-shabaka.org

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Israel’s Losing Battle: Palestine Advocacy in the University | Al-Shabaka

This commentary examines the history of the Palestine advocacy movement in the US and the emergence of college campus organizing.

al-shabaka.org

That's awful!
No suppression of speech in any Muslim nation, eh?
Say anything you want in Gaza or the (ever shrinking) West Bank, right?

 

[P F Tinmore]

RE: All The News Anti-Palestinian Posters Will Not Read Or Discuss
⁜→ P F Tinmore, et al,

BLUF: I'm not sure this is telling us anything that is in dispute. Nor am I sure that this is contributing to the overall understanding of the situation. But it is important, in some measure, to understand the background to such long-running conflicts (tribal feuds creating a large chasm on the political and social landscape) that are in danger of being lost to future generations, where only the shell of hatred remains.

After the Six-Day War, and with the adoption of the 1969 Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties, the UN decided that every state had a duty to refrain from the threat or use of force to violate international lines of demarcation, such as armistice lines, established by or pursuant to an international agreement to which it is a party or which it is otherwise bound to respect.

Palestine was not a party to the armistice agreements.

(COMMENT)

No question, this is true. The Palestine Government transitioned from being maintained by the Mandate Authority to the UN Trusteeship on 15 May 1948; a legal entity but not be a sovereign state.

◈ The UN immediately allowed the National Council for the Jewish State to establish a Provisional Government (Israel).​

◈ The UN had been informed by the Arab Higher Committee that it rejected the notion of "partition" and all it implied.​

Palestine, as a "Region," remained. Part of the Region became the self-governing institution of Israel; with the remainder of the Region was enveloped by components of the Arab League.

The parties to the conflict did not include the "Entity of Palestine." And the "Entity of Palestine" possessed NO capacity to conclude such an agreement. And since 1949 (the years of the Armistice Agreements), no sustainable peace has been achieved.

The armistice lines run through Palestine without dividing Palestine.

(COMMENT)

This is "Dancing with Words." The "Entity of Palestine" sometimes referred to as the State of Palestine, speaks in terms of chaos and confusion. One thing is for sure. Palestine (by whatever name description) cannot be a State possessing the capacity to conclude treaties or to exercise sovereignty IF
its internal aspects is concerned with the identity of the bearer of supreme authority has been relinquished to "Israel."

◈ May 23, 2020 • Yumna Patel • Mondoweiss, President Abbas declares end to agreements with Israel, US; turns over responsibility on occupied lands to Israel, 19 May 2020.​

(NOT MENTIONED • RELATED)

The "Entity of Palestine" sometimes referred to as the "State of Palestine," periodically makes mention of UN Security Council Resolution (S/RES/1515) (2003) wherein the Security Council makes mention of:

◈ The immediate cessation of all acts of violence, including all acts of terrorism, provocation, incitement, and destruction.​

​

◈ Reaffirming its vision of a region where two States, Israel and Palestine, live side-by-side within secure and recognized borders.​

Please make note that in the near 20 years since S/RES/1515, the status of the "Entity of Palestine" has not become any clearer. And the effort towards the "Entity" becoming a viable national concern has worsened, → not been advanced.



Most Respectfully,
R

Palestine is Palestine. The Palestinians do not cater to the political opinion of foreigners.

 

[RoccoR]

RE: All The News Anti-Palestinian Posters Will Not Read Or Discuss
⁜→ P F Tinmore, et al,

Palestine is Palestine. The Palestinians do not cater to the political opinion of foreigners.

(QUESTION)

And how is that working out for them - so far?


Most Respectfully,
R

 

[P F Tinmore]

RE: All The News Anti-Palestinian Posters Will Not Read Or Discuss
⁜→ P F Tinmore, et al,

Palestine is Palestine. The Palestinians do not cater to the political opinion of foreigners.

(QUESTION)

And how is that working out for them - so far?


Most Respectfully,
R

Things are looking up.

 

[rylah]

RE: All The News Anti-Palestinian Posters Will Not Read Or Discuss
⁜→ P F Tinmore, et al,

BLUF: I'm not sure this is telling us anything that is in dispute. Nor am I sure that this is contributing to the overall understanding of the situation. But it is important, in some measure, to understand the background to such long-running conflicts (tribal feuds creating a large chasm on the political and social landscape) that are in danger of being lost to future generations, where only the shell of hatred remains.

After the Six-Day War, and with the adoption of the 1969 Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties, the UN decided that every state had a duty to refrain from the threat or use of force to violate international lines of demarcation, such as armistice lines, established by or pursuant to an international agreement to which it is a party or which it is otherwise bound to respect.

Palestine was not a party to the armistice agreements.

(COMMENT)

No question, this is true. The Palestine Government transitioned from being maintained by the Mandate Authority to the UN Trusteeship on 15 May 1948; a legal entity but not be a sovereign state.

◈ The UN immediately allowed the National Council for the Jewish State to establish a Provisional Government (Israel).​

◈ The UN had been informed by the Arab Higher Committee that it rejected the notion of "partition" and all it implied.​

Palestine, as a "Region," remained. Part of the Region became the self-governing institution of Israel; with the remainder of the Region was enveloped by components of the Arab League.

The parties to the conflict did not include the "Entity of Palestine." And the "Entity of Palestine" possessed NO capacity to conclude such an agreement. And since 1949 (the years of the Armistice Agreements), no sustainable peace has been achieved.

The armistice lines run through Palestine without dividing Palestine.

(COMMENT)

This is "Dancing with Words." The "Entity of Palestine" sometimes referred to as the State of Palestine, speaks in terms of chaos and confusion. One thing is for sure. Palestine (by whatever name description) cannot be a State possessing the capacity to conclude treaties or to exercise sovereignty IF
its internal aspects is concerned with the identity of the bearer of supreme authority has been relinquished to "Israel."

◈ May 23, 2020 • Yumna Patel • Mondoweiss, President Abbas declares end to agreements with Israel, US; turns over responsibility on occupied lands to Israel, 19 May 2020.​

(NOT MENTIONED • RELATED)

The "Entity of Palestine" sometimes referred to as the "State of Palestine," periodically makes mention of UN Security Council Resolution (S/RES/1515) (2003) wherein the Security Council makes mention of:

◈ The immediate cessation of all acts of violence, including all acts of terrorism, provocation, incitement, and destruction.​

​

◈ Reaffirming its vision of a region where two States, Israel and Palestine, live side-by-side within secure and recognized borders.​

Please make note that in the near 20 years since S/RES/1515, the status of the "Entity of Palestine" has not become any clearer. And the effort towards the "Entity" becoming a viable national concern has worsened, → not been advanced.



Most Respectfully,
R

Palestine is Palestine. The Palestinians do not cater to the political opinion of foreigners.

"Palestine is Palestine"...

Is that why most Arabs can't pronounce that word
without having to learn a foreign language?

 

[P F Tinmore]

Israeli occupation forces destroy a Palestinian industrial facility in al-Khalil, Occupied West Bank, today. Photo by Mashhour Wahwah.

This is why Palestinians have to work in Israel.

 

[P F Tinmore]

 

[P F Tinmore]

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Were the Palestinian rockets damaged?

 

[P F Tinmore]

 

[rylah]

So when she went on a rant specifically referring to "my Jewish colleagues",
it wasn't antisemitic or it wasn't about Jews?

Try less insult people's intelligence,
might help your stench of racism.