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

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


The British Government, like other EU partners, does not recognise the annexation of East
(COMMENT)

International Law states: The political existence of the state is independent of recognition by the other states.

It really does not matter what the UK or what the EU has to say about it. If, like the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO), can independently claim:

"...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)​

We consider these territories to be under occupation and that Israel is obliged to administer them under the terms of the Fourth Geneva Convention, which prohibits forcible deportations,
(COMMENT)

Since the Six-Day War of 1967, I can find no record of "forcible deportations" from Israel into the West Bank or Gaza Strip.

Since the Six-Day War of 1967, I can find no record of "forcible deportations" from the West Bank or Gaza Strip to any other sovereign territory (Arab State immediately adjacent to the territories under dispute).

All settlements of Israelis into Area "C" in which Israel has full civil and security control by agreement with the Arab Palestinians, was done on a voluntary basis. At no time has the Arab Palestinian raised the formal dispute process on the issue, nor has formal negotiations be opened under the "Permanent Status of Negotiations" been opened.
Rule 130. States may not deport or transfer parts of their own civilian population into a territory they occupy. (SOURCE: Article 8(2)(b)(viii) Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court) (SOURCE: Article 49, Fourth Geneva Convention)​

detention without trial,
(COMMENT)

The Parties to the conflict shall not intern protected persons, except in accordance with the provisions of Articles 41 [ Link ] , 42 [ Link ] , 43 [ Link ] , 68 [ Link ] and 78 [ Link ] .

Article 42: The internment or placing in assigned residence of protected persons may be ordered only if the security of the Detaining Power makes it absolutely necessary.​
If any person, acting through the representatives of the Protecting Power, voluntarily demands internment and if his situation renders this step necessary, he shall be interned by the Power in whose hands he may be.​

destruction of property,
(COMMENT)

ARTICLE 53. — Any destruction by the Occupying Power of real or personal property belonging individually or collectively to private persons, or to the State, or to other public authorities, or to social or co-operative organizations, is prohibited, except where such destruction is rendered absolutely necessary by military operations.

Israel has full civil and security control by agreement with the Arab Palestinians. Destruction of unlawful construction is not prohibited.

Deny safe haven to any persons with respect to whom there is credible and relevant information giving serious reasons for considering that they have been guilty of such conduct;

denial of access to food, health
(COMMENT)

ARTICLE 55 — To the fullest extent of the means available to it, the Occupying Power has the duty of ensuring the food and medical supplies of the population; it should, in particular, bring in the necessary foodstuffs, medical stores and other articles if the resources of the occupied territory are inadequate.

The Gaza Regime refused to accept two shipments of medical supplies for Gaza hospitals, after seeing they were sent by Israel.

Palestinian Authority has the responsibility for delivering health care to Palestinians. There is no precedent for Israel providing health care for the Palestinian population during a public health crisis. In fact, in Gaza, you’re always looking at 30 percent of essential medicines being unavailable. There were already multiple issues with access to health care in Palestine before COVID.

and education
(COMMENT)

Should the local institutions be inadequate for the purpose, the Occupying Power shall make arrangements for the maintenance and education, if possible by persons of their own nationality,
language and religion, of children who are orphaned or separated from their parents as a result of the war and who cannot be adequately cared for by a near relative or friend.

The Arab Palestinians claim to have a functional government. To date, I know of no instance that the Ramallah or Gaza Governments have claimed that they are NOT capable to perform this normal governmental function.

(EPILOG)

UNRWA is a United Nations agency established by the General Assembly in 1949 and is mandated to provide assistance and protection to a population of some 5 million registered Palestine refugees. Its mission is to help Palestine refugees in Jordan, Lebanon, Syria, West Bank and the Gaza Strip to achieve their full potential in human development, pending a just solution to their plight. UNRWA’s services encompass education, health care, relief and social services, camp infrastructure and improvement, microfinance and emergency assistance. UNRWA is the largest UN operation in the Middle East with more than 30,000 staff. UNRWA is funded almost entirely by voluntary contributions.

1611604183365.png

Most Respectfully,
R
 
Since the Six-Day War of 1967, I can find no record of "forcible deportations" from Israel into the West Bank or Gaza Strip.
Thousands of Palestinians have been forcibly deported from East Jerusalem. Thousands of Palestinians have been deported from area C.
 
RE: All The News Anti-Palestinian Posters Will Not Read Or Discuss
SUBTOPIC: Expanded
⁜→ P F Tinmore, et al,


BLUF: Your position that "It is illegal to annex occupied territory" is an assumption held by many people, and those people (and yourself) would be wrong. It is an exaggerated statement, wherein the actual prohibition extends from four principle reference:

UN Charter (1945) Chapter I, Article 2(3): “All Members shall settle their international disputes by peaceful means in such a manner that peace and security, and justice are not endangered.”
◈ UN Charter (1945) Chapter I, Article 2(4): “All Members shall refrain in their international relations from the threat or use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of any state, or in any other manner inconsistent with the Purposes of the United Nations.”
These first two references from the UN Charter are fairly clear and distinct. But neither comes anywhere close to your premise "illegal to annex occupied territory."
◈ Preamble S/RES/242 (1967) 22 November 1967: Emphasizing the inadmissibility of the acquisition of territory by war and the need to work for a just and lasting peace in which every State in the area can live in security,​
The Security Council Resolution 242 is ambiguous at best and does not show true intent (what ever that intend might be). This is explained quite well in the commentary by the Drafters of the resolution. There are two additional international law protocols that must be considered: (See Articles 22 and 24, Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court;

(a) Nullum crimen sine lege:​
The definition of a crime shall be strictly construed and shall not be extended by analogy. In case of ambiguity, the definition shall be interpreted in favour of the person being investigated, prosecuted or convicted.​
(b) Non-retroactivity ratione personae:

No person shall be criminally responsible under this Statute for conduct prior to the entry into force of the Statute.​

In the event of a change in the law applicable to a given case prior to a final judgement, the law more favourable to the person being investigated, prosecuted or convicted shall apply.​
◈ Paragraph 1a(1) • A/RES/25/2625 24 October 1970, Declaration on Principles of International Law concerning Friendly Relations (DoPIL) and Co-operation among States in accordance with the Charter of the United Nations: “Every State has the duty to refrain in its international relations from the threat or use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of any State, or in any other manner inconsistent with the purposes of the United Nations. Such a threat or use of force constitutes a violation of international law and the Charter of the United Nations and shall never be employed as a means of settling international issues.“
The General Assembly Resolution A/RES/25/2625 was never entered into force of law or individually enforceable under the law. It is derivative from the UN Charter.

International Law states: The political existence of the state is independent of recognition by the other states.
It is illegal to annex occupied territory.
(COMMENT)

Your statement is bogus! You will not find that entered anywhere within International Law.

Furthermore: Israel did not seize any territory (formerly under the Administration of the Mandate) in either 1949 or 1967. There was no institution or entity of Arab Palestinian Government. What was not under the ceasefire control of the Israelis, was under the control of the Arab League (excluding the Arab Palestinians). In 1967, no territory of Arab Palestinian Sovereignty (whatever that might be) was seized by Israel. The West Bank, including Jerusalem, was under the sovereign control of the Jordanians and the Gaza Strip was under an Egyptian Military Governorship.


On 31 July 1988 (twenty years after the 1967 War and a half-century ago), the Jordanian Government abandon all rights and claims to the sovereignty of the West Bank, including holdings in Jerusalem. Since that time, a Treaty of Peace has been established between Israel and Jordan. There was no hand-off, by the Jordanians, to any institution or entity of Arab Palestinian Government, to assume control. It was left in the hands of the Israel (equivalent to Terra Nullus); the territory having been Sovereign to Jordan, and the next day not.

The expression “terra nullius ” was a legal term of art employed in connection with “occupation” as one of the accepted legal methods of acquiring sovereignty over territory. “Occupation” being legally an original means of peacefully acquiring sovereignty over territory otherwise than by cession or succession, it was a cardinal condition of a valid “occupation” that the territory should be terra nullius— a territory belonging to no-one—at the time of the act alleged to constitute the “occupation” . . .​

1611604183365.png

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

Destruction of unlawful construction is not prohibited.
Where does it say that?
Link?
(COMMENT)

So your theory is an Argument (my statement is false) because I cannot show that the corrective action to something illegal is authorized.


1611604183365.png


Most Respectfully,
R
 
But neither comes anywhere close to your premise "illegal to annex occupied territory."
“International law is very clear: annexation and territorial conquest are forbidden by the Charter of the United Nations,” said Michael Lynk, the UN Special Rapporteur on the situation of human rights in the Palestinian territory occupied since 1967. “The Security Council, beginning with Resolution 242 in November 1967, has expressly affirmed the inadmissibility of the acquisition of territory by war or force on eight occasions, most recently in 2016.”

This reflects the seminal observation of Lassa Oppenheim, a renowned scholar of international law, who wrote in 1917, amidst the bloodbath of the First World War, that: “There is not an atom of sovereignty in the authority of the occupying power.”

The Special Rapporteur observed that the absolute prohibition against annexation applies whether the occupied territory was acquired through a war of aggression or a defensive war.

 
The Avalon Project : Hamas Covenant 1988

Israel will exist and will continue to exist until Islam will obliterate it, just as it obliterated others before it" (The Martyr, Imam Hassan al-Banna, of blessed memory).


Article Eleven:
The Islamic Resistance Movement believes that the land of Palestine is an Islamic Waqf consecrated for future Moslem generations until Judgement Day. It, or any part of it, should not be squandered: it, or any part of it, should not be given up. Neither a single Arab country nor all Arab countries, neither any king or president, nor all the kings and presidents, neither any organization nor all of them, be they Palestinian or Arab, possess the right to do that. Palestine is an Islamic Waqf land consecrated for Moslem generations until Judgement Day. This being so, who could claim to have the right to represent Moslem generations till Judgement Day?
Since Mohammed was a pedophile warlord and Allah is Satan ,is it any wonder? The so-called "Palistinians" colluded with Hitler. Anything else? Oh ,yes. When the UN FINALLY Recognized Israel , the terrorists who call themselves "Palistinians" deserted their homes so the Arab Empire could wipe Israel out. But something happened. The fuckin' ARABS got their asses kicked. So the people who deserted their homes to abet another genocide have no fuckin' RIGHT to that land.
 
"International law is very clear: annexation and territorial conquest are forbidden by the Charter of the United Nations,”

If that's true, you might want to advise Hamas to consult an international lawyer about that waqf thing that they believe grants the right to annexation and territorial conquest of Israel.

Or,

Is it for conveniences sake that you don't apply the law to islamic terrorists.
 

Jordanian Deputy Prime Minister and Foreign Minister Ayman Safadi on Wednesday submitted documents to Palestinian Authority (PA) President Mahmoud Abbas proving Palestinian ownership of Jerusalem's neighbourhood of Sheikh Jarrah, Wafa news agency reported.


"We have provided all the documents that we have, which can help the Palestinian residents to preserve their full rights," Safadi asserted, referring to documents related to ownership of the homes in Sheikh Jarrah.
 

Forum List

Back
Top