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

[Toddsterpatriot]

Do you mean Israel always whining about Palestinian resistance?

I mean Arab losers whining.

 

[P F Tinmore]

 

[P F Tinmore]

 

[Hollie]

Pallys were invented in 1967.

 

[P F Tinmore]

 

[P F Tinmore]

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

He does have a punchable head.

 

[RoccoR]

RE: All The News Anti-Palestinian Posters Will Not Read Or Discuss
SUBTOPIC: Situation of human rights in the Palestinian territories occupied since 1967*
⁜→ P F Tinmore, et al,

Situation of human rights in the Palestinian territories occupied since 1967*. A/77/356

FIRST: You have to remember that A/77/356 is NOT LAW. AND! The Special Rapporteur is by its very composition a Pro-Palestinian and anti-Israeli organization. Not one single Special Rapporteur Report is a balanced product.

SECOND: For Human Rights Organization, that is focused on the Palestinian people their failure on self-determination, and the claim of settler-colonialism through a prolonged Israeli occupation, is as slanted as a Kangaroo Court.

Francesca Albanese, UN Special Rapporteur oPt
@FranceskAlbs


"...because of the illegality of the Israeli occupation, owing to its prolonged, acquisitive & bad-faith nature, the obligation of cessation of the occupation cannot in any way be conditioned on negotiations" (A/77/356, para 63). 1/2

(COMMENT)

I want to point out a few angles to this political fight to sustain the fraudulent flow of donor contributions into the pockets of officials through the corrupt government.

◈ In 1967, the West Bank transitioned in status from being a sovereign Jordanian to being a Jordanian territory occupied by Israeli Forces.​

​

◈ In 1988, Jordan cut all ties with the West Bank and abandoned the population. At that time, the only governmental infrastructure remaining was the Occupation Force of Israelis.​

​

◈ In 1994, the international boundary between Israel and Jordan is delimited with reference to the boundary definition under the Mandate as is shown in Annex I (a) in the Government of the State of Israel and the Government of the Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan. In this treaty --- the boundary, as set out in Annex I (a), is the "permanent, secure and recognised international boundary between Israel and Jordan, without prejudice to the status of any territories that came under Israeli military government control in 1967."​

In the treaty, the entirety of the West Bank was given to Israeli control.

(QUESTION)

What particular LAW states the disputed occupation is "illegal?" And WHAT impact does the 1994 treaty have on the occupation? The 1994 Treaty relinquished the territory west of the Jordan River to the Israelis.

(QUESTION)

Is the Special Rapporteur intentionally spreading misleading information?

(QUESTION)

What impact (Para 3, A/PV.2268. 14 October 1974), agree to ANNEX III Protocol Concerning Civil Affairs • ARTICLE IV Special Provisions concerning Area "C" • which assigned Israel full civil and security control over Area “C" does the protocol have???

Most Respectfully,
R

 

[P F Tinmore]

RE: All The News Anti-Palestinian Posters Will Not Read Or Discuss
SUBTOPIC: Situation of human rights in the Palestinian territories occupied since 1967*
⁜→ P F Tinmore, et al,

Situation of human rights in the Palestinian territories occupied since 1967*. A/77/356

FIRST: You have to remember that A/77/356 is NOT LAW. AND! The Special Rapporteur is by its very composition a Pro-Palestinian and anti-Israeli organization. Not one single Special Rapporteur Report is a balanced product.

SECOND: For Human Rights Organization, that is focused on the Palestinian people their failure on self-determination, and the claim of settler-colonialism through a prolonged Israeli occupation, is as slanted as a Kangaroo Court.


(COMMENT)

I want to point out a few angles to this political fight to sustain the fraudulent flow of donor contributions into the pockets of officials through the corrupt government.

◈ In 1967, the West Bank transitioned in status from being a sovereign Jordanian to being a Jordanian territory occupied by Israeli Forces.​

​

◈ In 1988, Jordan cut all ties with the West Bank and abandoned the population. At that time, the only governmental infrastructure remaining was the Occupation Force of Israelis.​

​

◈ In 1994, the international boundary between Israel and Jordan is delimited with reference to the boundary definition under the Mandate as is shown in Annex I (a) in the Government of the State of Israel and the Government of the Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan. In this treaty --- the boundary, as set out in Annex I (a), is the "permanent, secure and recognised international boundary between Israel and Jordan, without prejudice to the status of any territories that came under Israeli military government control in 1967."​

In the treaty, the entirety of the West Bank was given to Israeli control.

(QUESTION)

What particular LAW states the disputed occupation is "illegal?" And WHAT impact does the 1994 treaty have on the occupation? The 1994 Treaty relinquished the territory west of the Jordan River to the Israelis.

(QUESTION)

Is the Special Rapporteur intentionally spreading misleading information?

(QUESTION)

What impact (Para 3, A/PV.2268. 14 October 1974), agree to ANNEX III Protocol Concerning Civil Affairs • ARTICLE IV Special Provisions concerning Area "C" • which assigned Israel full civil and security control over Area “C" does the protocol have???

Most Respectfully,
R

At that time, the only governmental infrastructure remaining was the Occupation Force of Israelis.

The reason this whole thing is so confusing to you is that you believe that governments have the sovereignty. That if there is no government, there is no sovereignty. If there is no government, the country is up for grabs.

This is not true. It is the people inside their defined territory who have the sovereignty. Palestine has suffered different occupations throughout its lifetime. However, occupations do not acquire sovereignty. That remains in the hands of the people.

Viewing Palestine through this lens gives a different history than that created by those who want Palestine to be up for grabs.

 

[P F Tinmore]

The reason this whole thing is so confusing to you is that you believe that governments have the sovereignty. That if there is no government, there is no sovereignty. If there is no government, the country is up for grabs.

This is not true. It is the people inside their defined territory who have the sovereignty. Palestine has suffered different occupations throughout its lifetime. However, occupations do not acquire sovereignty. That remains in the hands of the people.

Viewing Palestine through this lens gives a different history than that created by those who want Palestine to be up for grabs.

Under occupation law, the occupying power does not acquire sovereignty over the occupied territory and is required to respect the existing laws and institutions of the occupied territory as far as possible. It is presumed that occupation will be temporary and that the occupying power shall preserve the status quo ante in the occupied territory.

Contemporary challenges to IHL – Occupation: overview

Under IHL, there is occupation when a State exercises an unconsented-to effective control over a territory on which it has no sovereign title. Article 42 of The Hague Regulations of 1907 defines occupation as follows: “Territory is considered occupied when it is actually placed under the...

www.icrc.org

 

[Hollie]

Research institute publishes database of Palestinian child soldiers

The database exposes how Palestinian NGOs have deceitfully used young combatants to their advantage.

www.jpost.com

Israeli research institute publishes database of Palestinian child soldiers​

The database exposes how Palestinian NGOs have deceitfully used young combatants to their advantage.​

By ALDEN TABAC

Published: JULY 19, 2022 11:46
Updated: JULY 19, 2022 13:58

 

[RoccoR]

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

◈ I am not confused at all. I have been talking to you about Sovereign Territory. (Israeli Sovereign Territory and Jordanian Sovereign Territory)

✦ sovereignty ‘Sovereignty as a principle of international law must be sharply distinguished from other related uses of the term: sovereignty in its internal aspects and political sovereignty. Sovereignty in its internal aspects is concerned with the identity of the bearer of supreme authority within a State. Parry & Grant Encyclopaedic Dictionary of International Law. Copyright ˝ 2009 by Oxford University Press, Inc. p563​

​

※ Note: I would appreciate it if you would respond using the defined meaning instead of soft-political platitudes.​

.

The reason this whole thing is so confusing to you is that you believe that governments have the sovereignty. That if there is no government, there is no sovereignty. If there is no government, the country is up for grabs.

This is not true. It is the people inside their defined territory who have the sovereignty. Palestine has suffered different occupations throughout its lifetime. However, occupations do not acquire sovereignty. That remains in the hands of the people.

Viewing Palestine through this lens gives a different history than that created by those who want Palestine to be up for grabs.

(COMMENT)

I did not say that Israel claimed sovereignty over the entirety of the West Bank. Nor did I imply that Israel even wants to extend the rights and privileges of a normal Israeli citizen in an umbrella fashion over the entirety of the West Bank. (IMO That would be extraordinarily dangerous. It would place at risk local and regional security, which would serve to fire-up an even greater conflict like an accelerant.)

Again, we are talking about territorial sovereignty. By definition, under International Law, the Arab-Palestinian Government (Ramallah) is NOT the bearer of supreme authority within Area "C." It is questionable, as to the question in Area "B."
.

Under occupation law, the occupying power does not acquire sovereignty over the occupied territory and is required to respect the existing laws and institutions of the occupied territory as far as possible. It is presumed that occupation will be temporary and that the occupying power shall preserve the status quo ante in the occupied territory.

Contemporary challenges to IHL – Occupation: overview

Under IHL, there is occupation when a State exercises an unconsented-to effective control over a territory on which it has no sovereign title. Article 42 of The Hague Regulations of 1907 defines occupation as follows: “Territory is considered occupied when it is actually placed under the...

www.icrc.org

(COMMENT)

Again, I did not imply that occupation acquired territorial sovereignty. Having said that, occupation is often used as a first step if territorial acquisition is a goal.

It should be noted that Article 42 of the Hague Convention DOES NOT define when an "Occupation MUST END." And since the urban sustained terrorism has NOT ended and the Arab Palestinians have NOT taken any steps at all to neutralize the internationally recognized terrorist organizations within Area "A" - there is no reasonable expectation that the Arab Palestinians could safely bring such risks under heal if given total civil and political rights.

I am not aware of any legally binding document that places a temporal limitation on an Occupation. Can you give me a citation?
.

Most Respectfully,
R

 

[P F Tinmore]

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

◈ I am not confused at all. I have been talking to you about Sovereign Territory. (Israeli Sovereign Territory and Jordanian Sovereign Territory)

✦ sovereignty ‘Sovereignty as a principle of international law must be sharply distinguished from other related uses of the term: sovereignty in its internal aspects and political sovereignty. Sovereignty in its internal aspects is concerned with the identity of the bearer of supreme authority within a State. Parry & Grant Encyclopaedic Dictionary of International Law. Copyright ˝ 2009 by Oxford University Press, Inc. p563​

​

※ Note: I would appreciate it if you would respond using the defined meaning instead of soft-political platitudes.​

.

(COMMENT)

I did not say that Israel claimed sovereignty over the entirety of the West Bank. Nor did I imply that Israel even wants to extend the rights and privileges of a normal Israeli citizen in an umbrella fashion over the entirety of the West Bank. (IMO That would be extraordinarily dangerous. It would place at risk local and regional security, which would serve to fire-up an even greater conflict like an accelerant.)

Again, we are talking about territorial sovereignty. By definition, under International Law, the Arab-Palestinian Government (Ramallah) is NOT the bearer of supreme authority within Area "C." It is questionable, as to the question in Area "B."
.

(COMMENT)

Again, I did not imply that occupation acquired territorial sovereignty. Having said that, occupation is often used as a first step if territorial acquisition is a goal.

It should be noted that Article 42 of the Hague Convention DOES NOT define when an "Occupation MUST END." And since the urban sustained terrorism has NOT ended and the Arab Palestinians have NOT taken any steps at all to neutralize the internationally recognized terrorist organizations within Area "A" - there is no reasonable expectation that the Arab Palestinians could safely bring such risks under heal if given total civil and political rights.

I am not aware of any legally binding document that places a temporal limitation on an Occupation. Can you give me a citation?
.

Most Respectfully,
R

Again, we are talking about territorial sovereignty. By definition, under International Law, the Arab-Palestinian Government (Ramallah) is NOT the bearer of supreme authority within Area "C." It is questionable, as to the question in Area "B."

There you go again with that sovereignty needing a government thing.

Sovereignty in its internal aspects is concerned with the identity of the bearer of supreme authority within a State.

Are you talking about legal sovereignty or that military power "sovereignty?"

 

[RoccoR]

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

The International Definite for sovereignty was given in Posting #4832 above.

There you go again with that sovereignty needing a government thing.

Are you talking about legal sovereignty or that military power "sovereignty?"

(COMMENT)

Your syntax is wrong in that the "projection of "Military Power" does not in or by itself establish sovereignty. However, the "projection of "Military Power" can change the status of territory. The key to "territorial sovereignty" is: the identity of the bearer of supreme authority within the territory in question.

I gave you a copy of the definition of "sovereignty" from one of the popular international dictionary's from Oxford. But if you need a link for an expanded definition: Here you have it.

Territorial Sovereignty Under International Law - Law Corner​

Territorial sovereignty (or: 'full and exclusive authority) therefore implies that subject to applicable customary or conventional rules of law of countries, the respective State alone is entitled to exercise jurisdiction, mostly by subjecting the objects and the persons within its territory to domestic legislation and to enforce these rules.​

​

Territorial Sovereignty - World Encyclopedia of Law​

that being so, the territorial sovereign is at one and the same time vested with a dominium or authority over the territory, which culminates in a right to dispose of it, and with an imperium, or an authority via the territory over the persons or things within it and the situations that develop there; however, in the latter instance, territory …​

One explains it in terms of "full and exclusive authority." The other expresses the idea in saying "vested with a dominium or authority over the territory."

Most Respectfully,
R

 

[P F Tinmore]

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

The International Definite for sovereignty was given in Posting #4832 above.


(COMMENT)

Your syntax is wrong in that the "projection of "Military Power" does not in or by itself establish sovereignty. However, the "projection of "Military Power" can change the status of territory. The key to "territorial sovereignty" is: the identity of the bearer of supreme authority within the territory in question.

I gave you a copy of the definition of "sovereignty" from one of the popular international dictionary's from Oxford. But if you need a link for an expanded definition: Here you have it.

Territorial Sovereignty Under International Law - Law Corner​

Territorial sovereignty (or: 'full and exclusive authority) therefore implies that subject to applicable customary or conventional rules of law of countries, the respective State alone is entitled to exercise jurisdiction, mostly by subjecting the objects and the persons within its territory to domestic legislation and to enforce these rules.​

​

Territorial Sovereignty - World Encyclopedia of Law​

that being so, the territorial sovereign is at one and the same time vested with a dominium or authority over the territory, which culminates in a right to dispose of it, and with an imperium, or an authority via the territory over the persons or things within it and the situations that develop there; however, in the latter instance, territory …​

One explains it in terms of "full and exclusive authority." The other expresses the idea in saying "vested with a dominium or authority over the territory."

Most Respectfully,
R

The key to "territorial sovereignty" is: the identity of the bearer of supreme authority within the territory in question.

Indeed, but supreme authority can be violated by military power. The right to exercise sovereignty can be prevented by military occupation.

 

[RoccoR]

RE: All The News Anti-Palestinian Posters Will Not Read Or Discuss
SUBTOPIC: Sovereignty • Supreme Authority • Occupation • Civil Rights (Self-Determination) (S2OCR)
⁜→ P F Tinmore, et al,

While it seems simple enough to capitulate to the Arab Palestinian demands, the interaction of the various S2OCR will create even more open wounds. And there will be harmonics of the problems that exist today, that will resonate far beyond the little territorial boundary disputes that begin to roll through the political, social, economic, and general commercial activity that is now enjoyed by parties within the region. And the consequences will be hard to mend the new scars that will arise and will remain for decades.

Indeed, but supreme authority can be violated by military power. The right to exercise sovereignty can be prevented by military occupation.

(COMMENT)

Fortunately for the Arab Palestinians, they did have any Supreme Authority to be concerned over, except for Area "A". And no military action interdicted and hampered Arab Palestine's Right to Self-Determination. They made their choice and have complained about the outcomes ever since.

Most Respectfully,
R

 

[P F Tinmore]

RE: All The News Anti-Palestinian Posters Will Not Read Or Discuss
SUBTOPIC: Sovereignty • Supreme Authority • Occupation • Civil Rights (Self-Determination) (S2OCR)
⁜→ P F Tinmore, et al,

While it seems simple enough to capitulate to the Arab Palestinian demands, the interaction of the various S2OCR will create even more open wounds. And there will be harmonics of the problems that exist today, that will resonate far beyond the little territorial boundary disputes that begin to roll through the political, social, economic, and general commercial activity that is now enjoyed by parties within the region. And the consequences will be hard to mend the new scars that will arise and will remain for decades.


(COMMENT)

Fortunately for the Arab Palestinians, they did have any Supreme Authority to be concerned over, except for Area "A". And no military action interdicted and hampered Arab Palestine's Right to Self-Determination. They made their choice and have complained about the outcomes ever since.

Most Respectfully,
R

Could you interpret that word salad please.

 

[rylah]

Do Islamo-Nazis have anything to offer Canada?

 

[rylah]

So all US achievements in the last 60 years,
were the work of a pro-Israeli lobby,
or only the failures?

 

[RoccoR]

RE: All The News Anti-Palestinian Posters Will Not Read Or Discuss
SUBTOPIC: Sovereignty • Supreme Authority • Occupation • Civil Rights (Self-Determination) (S2OCR)
⁜→ P F Tinmore, et al,

Could you interpret that word salad please.

(COMMENT)

There is no question but that the Hostile Arab Palestinian (HoAP) DID NOT have any Supreme Authority over the territories during the period 1948 to the present; except for Area "A".

None whatsoever.

(REHASH - supra)
✦ sovereignty ‘Sovereignty as a principle of international law must be sharply distinguished from other related uses of the term: sovereignty in its internal aspects and political sovereignty. Sovereignty in its internal aspects is concerned with the identity of the bearer of supreme authority within a State. Parry & Grant Encyclopaedic Dictionary of International Law. Copyright ˝ 2009 by Oxford University Press, Inc. p563
Territorial Sovereignty Under International Law - Law Corner

Territorial Sovereignty Under International Law - Law Corner​

Territorial Sovereignty - World Encyclopedia of Law​

Most Respectfully,
R