Boycott Israel

[Kondor3]

..You keep saying that without offering any proof.

They don't need proof. They have the land. And the muscle to keep it.

It is inadmissible to acquire land through the threat or use of force.

If that is true, then you do not Clear TItle to the property that your own house stands on.

Please surrender your property to the Native Americans at once and depart for the country that your ancestors lived in before coming here.

Yeah... right...

It's been 68 years... how's that idea workin' out for your Hamas handlers so far?

 

[P F Tinmore]

SFSU Concludes Protest Targeted Israeli Policies, Not Jewish Student

An independent investigation finds widely publicized allegations against Palestinian student group to be unfounded

This case repeats an all too familiar pattern: Israel advocacy organizations broadcast allegations that student protests for Palestinian rights are threatening and anti-Semitic; in response, lengthy university investigations consistently find such charges to be unsubstantiated.

Just last week UC Irvine dismissed similar allegations against protesters from Students for Justice in Palestine after a thorough investigation could not substantiate them. In May 2016, Brooklyn College dismissed charges of anti-Semitism bought against student activists, finding them “not culpable,” but only after a lengthy hearing process. In 2013, the U.S. Department of Education dismissed similar allegations at UC Berkeley, UC Santa Cruz, and UC Irvine.

SFSU Concludes Protest Targeted Israeli Policies, Not Jewish Students

 

[Hollie]

SFSU Concludes Protest Targeted Israeli Policies, Not Jewish Student

An independent investigation finds widely publicized allegations against Palestinian student group to be unfounded

This case repeats an all too familiar pattern: Israel advocacy organizations broadcast allegations that student protests for Palestinian rights are threatening and anti-Semitic; in response, lengthy university investigations consistently find such charges to be unsubstantiated.

Just last week UC Irvine dismissed similar allegations against protesters from Students for Justice in Palestine after a thorough investigation could not substantiate them. In May 2016, Brooklyn College dismissed charges of anti-Semitism bought against student activists, finding them “not culpable,” but only after a lengthy hearing process. In 2013, the U.S. Department of Education dismissed similar allegations at UC Berkeley, UC Santa Cruz, and UC Irvine.

SFSU Concludes Protest Targeted Israeli Policies, Not Jewish Students

Interesting how the article refers to findings of an "impartial investigator" but never identifies who that is.

Such is to be expected from Islamic terrorist front groups.

 

[Phoenall]

No it isn't. It is about settler colonialism, dispossession, and all of the violence required to implement and maintain the project.

Indeed. The Hamas charter reiterates the framework for the settler, colonial waqf project that has defined islamo-history... The Hamas charter is simply restating the elements of islamo-entitlement that have driven the Peaceful Inner Strugglers ™ since the invention of Islamism.

Specifically (from the charter that TinHorn claims to be irrelevant):

"Israel will exist and will continue to exist until Islam will obliterate it, just as it obliterated others before it"

Islam is an obliterator of cultures and people who do not follow its viciously oppressive, misogynistic, ignorance-embracing precepts.

"Our struggle against the Jews is very great and very serious. It needs all sincere efforts. It is a step that inevitably should be followed by other steps. The Movement is but one squadron that should be supported by more and more squadrons from this vast Arab and Islamic world, until the enemy is vanquished and Allah's victory is realised."

A call for Holy War pitting 1.5 billion Muslims against 6 million Jews.

"The Islamic Resistance Movement [Hamas] is one of the wings of Moslem Brotherhood in Palestine."

Self explanatory.

"The Islamic Resistance Movement is a distinguished Palestinian movement, whose allegiance is to Allah, and whose way of life is Islam. It strives to raise the banner of Allah over every inch of Palestine."

A religious war with the specific aim of eliminating Israel.

"The Day of Judgement will not come about until Moslems fight the Jews (killing the Jews)."

Self explanatory.

"The Islamic Resistance Movement believes that the land of Palestine is an Islamic Waqf consecrated for future Moslem generations until Judgement Day."

Justification - even requirement - for religious war.

"Initiatives, and so-called peaceful solutions and international conferences, are in contradiction to the principles of the Islamic Resistance Movement."

Peaceful coexistence with Israel is not an option.

"There is no solution for the Palestinian question except through Jihad. Initiatives, proposals and international conferences are all a waste of time and vain endeavors."

Peaceful coexistence with Israel is not an option.

"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."

Call for religious war.

Only thing you omitted Say IS THAT ISRAEL IS AN OCCUPATION FORCE IN PALESTINE,leave,give Palestine to the Palestinians and all will be FINE..steve

The palestinians being the Jews of course, who had that title bestowed on them by the Roman empire back in 70 C.E. The arab muslims stole it in the 1960's on the command of their Soviet commanders, just like they have stolen everything else.

ARE YOU A BELIEVER IN INTERNATIONAL LAWS BEING FOLLOWED BY ALL PEOPLE ? BECAUSE IF YOU ARE THEN YOU WOULD KNOW THAT THE OCCUPIERS ARE THE ARAB MUSLIMS

You keep saying that without offering any proof.

Get it right it is you that refuses point blank to produce any proof of your claims. I have given the INTERNATIONAL LAWS and INTERNATIONAL TREATIES that put in place the ownership of 22% of palestine by the Jews. The rest is history and can be found in any history book from a valid non islamic source.



Now about the links you have been requested to provide will we see them any time soon.

OR WILL YOU DO YOUR PETULANT CHILD TRICK AND IGNORE THE REQUESTS

 

[Phoenall]

..You keep saying that without offering any proof.

They don't need proof. They have the land. And the muscle to keep it.

It is inadmissible to acquire land through the threat or use of force.

Since when has this been international law as muslims are still doing it today.


YOU KEEP SAYING THIS BUT NEVER PROVIDE ANY EVIDENCE TO SUPPORT IT

 

[Phoenall]

SFSU Concludes Protest Targeted Israeli Policies, Not Jewish Student

An independent investigation finds widely publicized allegations against Palestinian student group to be unfounded

This case repeats an all too familiar pattern: Israel advocacy organizations broadcast allegations that student protests for Palestinian rights are threatening and anti-Semitic; in response, lengthy university investigations consistently find such charges to be unsubstantiated.

Just last week UC Irvine dismissed similar allegations against protesters from Students for Justice in Palestine after a thorough investigation could not substantiate them. In May 2016, Brooklyn College dismissed charges of anti-Semitism bought against student activists, finding them “not culpable,” but only after a lengthy hearing process. In 2013, the U.S. Department of Education dismissed similar allegations at UC Berkeley, UC Santa Cruz, and UC Irvine.

SFSU Concludes Protest Targeted Israeli Policies, Not Jewish Students

What do you expect from neo marxist and islamonazi ran institutions. Put it to a fair and unbiased outside group to decide and see the left wing students cry when they are sent down.



By the way your source is your usual islamonazi pallywood productions media outlet that is totally biased against truth and reality

 

[P F Tinmore]

..You keep saying that without offering any proof.

They don't need proof. They have the land. And the muscle to keep it.

It is inadmissible to acquire land through the threat or use of force.

Since when has this been international law as muslims are still doing it today.


YOU KEEP SAYING THIS BUT NEVER PROVIDE ANY EVIDENCE TO SUPPORT IT

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.

Chapter I | United Nations

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,

S/RES/242 (1967) of 22 November 1967

The Zionists/Israel rolled their military across Palestine throwing Palestinian civilians out of their homes. About half of the 750,000 removed were ethnically cleansed before the beginning of the 1948 war.

 

[Kondor3]

...All Members shall refrain in their international relations...

Honest to God... in Websters, under "naive", it says "See Tinny"...

 

[RoccoR]

P F Tinmore, et al,

I take it that you did not read the notes by the authors of S/RES/242 (1967).

..You keep saying that without offering any proof.

They don't need proof. They have the land. And the muscle to keep it.

It is inadmissible to acquire land through the threat or use of force.

Since when has this been international law as muslims are still doing it today.

YOU KEEP SAYING THIS BUT NEVER PROVIDE ANY EVIDENCE TO SUPPORT IT

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.

Chapter I | United Nations

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,

S/RES/242 (1967) of 22 November 1967

The Zionists/Israel rolled their military across Palestine throwing Palestinian civilians out of their homes. About half of the 750,000 removed were ethnically cleansed before the beginning of the 1948 war.

(COMMENT)

Well most of the material on the pro-Palestinian side, is the same material they have reiterated for half a century.

These pro-Hostile Arab Palestinians making complaints and allegations --- totally ignore the commentary on the matter by the authors of the Security Council Resolution 242.

Remember (prior to 1967), the countries that needed a reminder were Egypt and Jordan. Jordan had Annexed the West Bank. The Egyptians placed the Gaza Strip under a Military Governorship. The inference on "inadmissibility of the acquisition of territory by war" is not the exact language held in the UN Charter which says: "refrain in their international relations from the threat or use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of any state:" which is just as applicable reference to the Arab League invasion of Israel.

Most Respectfully,
R

 

[Mindful]

It might be worth looking at the Arab Invasions:

The First Islamic Empire. During the seventh century the Arabs invaded North Africa three times, bringing not just a new religion but a language and customs that were alien to the native Berber tribes of the Sahara and Mediterranean hinterland.

 

[P F Tinmore]

P F Tinmore, et al,

I take it that you did not read the notes by the authors of S/RES/242 (1967).

..You keep saying that without offering any proof.

They don't need proof. They have the land. And the muscle to keep it.

It is inadmissible to acquire land through the threat or use of force.

Since when has this been international law as muslims are still doing it today.

YOU KEEP SAYING THIS BUT NEVER PROVIDE ANY EVIDENCE TO SUPPORT IT

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.

Chapter I | United Nations

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,

S/RES/242 (1967) of 22 November 1967

The Zionists/Israel rolled their military across Palestine throwing Palestinian civilians out of their homes. About half of the 750,000 removed were ethnically cleansed before the beginning of the 1948 war.

(COMMENT)

Well most of the material on the pro-Palestinian side, is the same material they have reiterated for half a century.

These pro-Hostile Arab Palestinians making complaints and allegations --- totally ignore the commentary on the matter by the authors of the Security Council Resolution 242.

Remember (prior to 1967), the countries that needed a reminder were Egypt and Jordan. Jordan had Annexed the West Bank. The Egyptians placed the Gaza Strip under a Military Governorship. The inference on "inadmissibility of the acquisition of territory by war" is not the exact language held in the UN Charter which says: "refrain in their international relations from the threat or use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of any state:" which is just as applicable reference to the Arab League invasion of Israel.

Most Respectfully,
R

"refrain in their international relations from the threat or use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of any state:"​

Do you mean the Zionist/Israeli attack against Palestine displacing 750,000 Palestinian civilians and taking their land?

 

[Mindful]

P F Tinmore, et al,

I take it that you did not read the notes by the authors of S/RES/242 (1967).

They don't need proof. They have the land. And the muscle to keep it.

It is inadmissible to acquire land through the threat or use of force.

Since when has this been international law as muslims are still doing it today.

YOU KEEP SAYING THIS BUT NEVER PROVIDE ANY EVIDENCE TO SUPPORT IT

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.

Chapter I | United Nations

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,

S/RES/242 (1967) of 22 November 1967

The Zionists/Israel rolled their military across Palestine throwing Palestinian civilians out of their homes. About half of the 750,000 removed were ethnically cleansed before the beginning of the 1948 war.

(COMMENT)

Well most of the material on the pro-Palestinian side, is the same material they have reiterated for half a century.

These pro-Hostile Arab Palestinians making complaints and allegations --- totally ignore the commentary on the matter by the authors of the Security Council Resolution 242.

Remember (prior to 1967), the countries that needed a reminder were Egypt and Jordan. Jordan had Annexed the West Bank. The Egyptians placed the Gaza Strip under a Military Governorship. The inference on "inadmissibility of the acquisition of territory by war" is not the exact language held in the UN Charter which says: "refrain in their international relations from the threat or use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of any state:" which is just as applicable reference to the Arab League invasion of Israel.

Most Respectfully,
R

"refrain in their international relations from the threat or use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of any state:"​

Do you mean the Zionist/Israeli attack against Palestine displacing 750,000 Palestinian civilians and taking their land?

 

[Phoenall]

..You keep saying that without offering any proof.

They don't need proof. They have the land. And the muscle to keep it.

It is inadmissible to acquire land through the threat or use of force.

Since when has this been international law as muslims are still doing it today.


YOU KEEP SAYING THIS BUT NEVER PROVIDE ANY EVIDENCE TO SUPPORT IT

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.

Chapter I | United Nations

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,

S/RES/242 (1967) of 22 November 1967

The Zionists/Israel rolled their military across Palestine throwing Palestinian civilians out of their homes. About half of the 750,000 removed were ethnically cleansed before the beginning of the 1948 war.

No the arab muslims invaded in 1947 after they denied UN Res 181 and the right of the Jews to their homeland. The Jews had followed Interntanional law when they declared the State of Isreal and the arab muslims had no legal right to attempt any form of outside influence.

As your inept use of links show there was no international laws until after 1967 that stopped the acquisition of land from another sovereign nation so making your first remark just sour grapes as palestine was not and never will be a sovereign nation. The 750,000 is a made up figure comprised of arab muslim immigrants that arrived in 1947 as members of the arab league armies, arab muslims living in gaza, arab muslims living in Jordan and arab muslims living in the west bank. The true number's expelled were no more than 50,000 who were all militia/terrorist/ arab league soldiers. The only reason the number of 750,000 is used is because that is the number of Jews who survived the death march across the deserts of the M.E. after being evicted from their lands and property by the arab muslims including the "palestinians".



This is what happens when you ignore international laws and think you are above everyone else, and when you rely on islamonazi propaganda as your only source of information you are easily shown to be wrong

 

[Phoenall]

P F Tinmore, et al,

I take it that you did not read the notes by the authors of S/RES/242 (1967).

They don't need proof. They have the land. And the muscle to keep it.

It is inadmissible to acquire land through the threat or use of force.

Since when has this been international law as muslims are still doing it today.

YOU KEEP SAYING THIS BUT NEVER PROVIDE ANY EVIDENCE TO SUPPORT IT

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.

Chapter I | United Nations

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,

S/RES/242 (1967) of 22 November 1967

The Zionists/Israel rolled their military across Palestine throwing Palestinian civilians out of their homes. About half of the 750,000 removed were ethnically cleansed before the beginning of the 1948 war.

(COMMENT)

Well most of the material on the pro-Palestinian side, is the same material they have reiterated for half a century.

These pro-Hostile Arab Palestinians making complaints and allegations --- totally ignore the commentary on the matter by the authors of the Security Council Resolution 242.

Remember (prior to 1967), the countries that needed a reminder were Egypt and Jordan. Jordan had Annexed the West Bank. The Egyptians placed the Gaza Strip under a Military Governorship. The inference on "inadmissibility of the acquisition of territory by war" is not the exact language held in the UN Charter which says: "refrain in their international relations from the threat or use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of any state:" which is just as applicable reference to the Arab League invasion of Israel.

Most Respectfully,
R

"refrain in their international relations from the threat or use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of any state:"​

Do you mean the Zionist/Israeli attack against Palestine displacing 750,000 Palestinian civilians and taking their land?

No as that was 20 years prior to UN res 242. And the muslims are still stealing land through force to this day in the M.E. Dont see you complaining about that on the M.E. board.


Once again I ask when did it become their land, have you a link providing the answer or are you going on islamonazi propaganda again as the real figure is only 50,000 mostly illegal immigrants and deserters from the arab league armies.

 

[RoccoR]

"P F Tinmore, et al,

Well, there are a couple of issues in the evaluation here.

,"refrain in their international relations from the threat or use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of any state:"

Do you mean the Zionist/Israeli attack against Palestine displacing 750,000 Palestinian civilians and taking their land?

(COMMENT)

Even though the Fourth Geneva Convention (GCIV)(1949) and the International Criminal Court (ICC)(2002) had NOT yet come into being, it is a still a matter of integrity (quality of the Jewish nation's character) to give proper consideration to the question.

The discussion of the "Displacement" and the "Right of Return," are tangential issues. It is based on the "Displacement" that the "Right of Return is claimed.

• Prior to May 1948, the applicability of the displacement was not attached as the displacement was not outside the territory formerly under the Mandate. It was all one territory.

• The 1948 Displacement, outside the territory declared independent - but inside the territory formerly under Mandate, the military advance, combat pursuit, and "Occupying Power may undertake total or partial evacuation of a given area if the security of the population or imperative military reasons so demand. Such evacuations may not involve the displacement of protected persons outside the bounds of the occupied territory except when for material reasons it is impossible to avoid such displacement." And in fact that displacement was not outside the territory outside the former under the Mandate; nor to any adjacent sovereignty.
​

The Hostile Arab Palestinians must act relatively soon to secure a peace. In another decade (2026), the probability of there will be any surviving Arab Palestinians that were former residents in the 1948 of Israel. It may only amount to a very small % of displaced persons ---- (probably) less than 20,000.

Most Respectfully,
R

 

[Phoenall]

"P F Tinmore, et al,

Well, there are a couple of issues in the evaluation here.

,"refrain in their international relations from the threat or use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of any state:"

Do you mean the Zionist/Israeli attack against Palestine displacing 750,000 Palestinian civilians and taking their land?

(COMMENT)

Even though the Fourth Geneva Convention (GCIV)(1949) and the International Criminal Court (ICC)(2002) had NOT yet come into being, it is a still a matter of integrity (quality of the Jewish nation's character) to give proper consideration to the question.

The discussion of the "Displacement" and the "Right of Return," are tangential issues. It is based on the "Displacement" that the "Right of Return is claimed.

• Prior to May 1948, the applicability of the displacement was not attached as the displacement was not outside the territory formerly under the Mandate. It was all one territory.

• The 1948 Displacement, outside the territory declared independent - but inside the territory formerly under Mandate, the military advance, combat pursuit, and "Occupying Power may undertake total or partial evacuation of a given area if the security of the population or imperative military reasons so demand. Such evacuations may not involve the displacement of protected persons outside the bounds of the occupied territory except when for material reasons it is impossible to avoid such displacement." And in fact that displacement was not outside the territory outside the former under the Mandate; nor to any adjacent sovereignty.
​

The Hostile Arab Palestinians must act relatively soon to secure a peace. In another decade (2026), the probability of there will be any surviving Arab Palestinians that were former residents in the 1948 of Israel. It may only amount to a very small % of displaced persons ---- (probably) less than 20,000.

Most Respectfully,
R

Unlike the displacement of the Jews from the surrounding islamic nations, and even further afield. The estimate is that over 1 million Jews were forcibly displaced with forfeiture of their property and bank accounts and sent on a death march to whatever country would take them in. They were set upon by arab muslims who stole everything but the clothes on their backs until they reached safety. Once they were safe they quickly assimilated into the society and became upstanding citizens

 

[P F Tinmore]

..You keep saying that without offering any proof.

They don't need proof. They have the land. And the muscle to keep it.

It is inadmissible to acquire land through the threat or use of force.

Since when has this been international law as muslims are still doing it today.


YOU KEEP SAYING THIS BUT NEVER PROVIDE ANY EVIDENCE TO SUPPORT IT

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.

Chapter I | United Nations

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,

S/RES/242 (1967) of 22 November 1967

The Zionists/Israel rolled their military across Palestine throwing Palestinian civilians out of their homes. About half of the 750,000 removed were ethnically cleansed before the beginning of the 1948 war.

No the arab muslims invaded in 1947 after they denied UN Res 181 and the right of the Jews to their homeland. The Jews had followed Interntanional law when they declared the State of Isreal and the arab muslims had no legal right to attempt any form of outside influence.

As your inept use of links show there was no international laws until after 1967 that stopped the acquisition of land from another sovereign nation so making your first remark just sour grapes as palestine was not and never will be a sovereign nation. The 750,000 is a made up figure comprised of arab muslim immigrants that arrived in 1947 as members of the arab league armies, arab muslims living in gaza, arab muslims living in Jordan and arab muslims living in the west bank. The true number's expelled were no more than 50,000 who were all militia/terrorist/ arab league soldiers. The only reason the number of 750,000 is used is because that is the number of Jews who survived the death march across the deserts of the M.E. after being evicted from their lands and property by the arab muslims including the "palestinians".



This is what happens when you ignore international laws and think you are above everyone else, and when you rely on islamonazi propaganda as your only source of information you are easily shown to be wrong

WOW, so many Israeli talking points in one post!

Good boy.

 

[P F Tinmore]

P F Tinmore, et al,

I take it that you did not read the notes by the authors of S/RES/242 (1967).

It is inadmissible to acquire land through the threat or use of force.

Since when has this been international law as muslims are still doing it today.

YOU KEEP SAYING THIS BUT NEVER PROVIDE ANY EVIDENCE TO SUPPORT IT

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.

Chapter I | United Nations

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,

S/RES/242 (1967) of 22 November 1967

The Zionists/Israel rolled their military across Palestine throwing Palestinian civilians out of their homes. About half of the 750,000 removed were ethnically cleansed before the beginning of the 1948 war.

(COMMENT)

Well most of the material on the pro-Palestinian side, is the same material they have reiterated for half a century.

These pro-Hostile Arab Palestinians making complaints and allegations --- totally ignore the commentary on the matter by the authors of the Security Council Resolution 242.

Remember (prior to 1967), the countries that needed a reminder were Egypt and Jordan. Jordan had Annexed the West Bank. The Egyptians placed the Gaza Strip under a Military Governorship. The inference on "inadmissibility of the acquisition of territory by war" is not the exact language held in the UN Charter which says: "refrain in their international relations from the threat or use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of any state:" which is just as applicable reference to the Arab League invasion of Israel.

Most Respectfully,
R

"refrain in their international relations from the threat or use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of any state:"​

Do you mean the Zionist/Israeli attack against Palestine displacing 750,000 Palestinian civilians and taking their land?

No as that was 20 years prior to UN res 242. And the muslims are still stealing land through force to this day in the M.E. Dont see you complaining about that on the M.E. board.


Once again I ask when did it become their land, have you a link providing the answer or are you going on islamonazi propaganda again as the real figure is only 50,000 mostly illegal immigrants and deserters from the arab league armies.

Palestine became the Palestinian's land when they became the legal citizens of Palestine.

Accordingly, sovereignty lies in the people, not in a government. The Israeli position is thus untenable because it ignores the possibility that the Palestinian people constitute the lawful reversioner of the territories.

Indeed, for all intent and purposes, Israel is a foreign occupying power of the Palestinian population. The Convention is part of international humanitarian law, the main purpose of which is protection of local populations regardless of whether a legitimate sovereign state exists.

http://scholarship.law.berkeley.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1299&context=bjil​

 

[Hollie]

P F Tinmore, et al,

I take it that you did not read the notes by the authors of S/RES/242 (1967).

Since when has this been international law as muslims are still doing it today.

YOU KEEP SAYING THIS BUT NEVER PROVIDE ANY EVIDENCE TO SUPPORT IT

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.

Chapter I | United Nations

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,

S/RES/242 (1967) of 22 November 1967

The Zionists/Israel rolled their military across Palestine throwing Palestinian civilians out of their homes. About half of the 750,000 removed were ethnically cleansed before the beginning of the 1948 war.

(COMMENT)

Well most of the material on the pro-Palestinian side, is the same material they have reiterated for half a century.

These pro-Hostile Arab Palestinians making complaints and allegations --- totally ignore the commentary on the matter by the authors of the Security Council Resolution 242.

Remember (prior to 1967), the countries that needed a reminder were Egypt and Jordan. Jordan had Annexed the West Bank. The Egyptians placed the Gaza Strip under a Military Governorship. The inference on "inadmissibility of the acquisition of territory by war" is not the exact language held in the UN Charter which says: "refrain in their international relations from the threat or use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of any state:" which is just as applicable reference to the Arab League invasion of Israel.

Most Respectfully,
R

"refrain in their international relations from the threat or use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of any state:"​

Do you mean the Zionist/Israeli attack against Palestine displacing 750,000 Palestinian civilians and taking their land?

No as that was 20 years prior to UN res 242. And the muslims are still stealing land through force to this day in the M.E. Dont see you complaining about that on the M.E. board.


Once again I ask when did it become their land, have you a link providing the answer or are you going on islamonazi propaganda again as the real figure is only 50,000 mostly illegal immigrants and deserters from the arab league armies.

Palestine became the Palestinian's land when they became the legal citizens of Palestine.

Accordingly, sovereignty lies in the people, not in a government. The Israeli position is thus untenable because it ignores the possibility that the Palestinian people constitute the lawful reversioner of the territories.

Indeed, for all intent and purposes, Israel is a foreign occupying power of the Palestinian population. The Convention is part of international humanitarian law, the main purpose of which is protection of local populations regardless of whether a legitimate sovereign state exists.

http://scholarship.law.berkeley.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1299&context=bjil​

You could make only a weak case that Pal'estan became an Islamist "state" in 1988.

Indeed, you are once again befuddled by not understanding the facts.

 

[Kondor3]

...Palestine became the Palestinian's land when they became the legal citizens of Palestine...

The descendants of The Great Arab Skeddadle of 1948 continue to delude themselves that this applies to them.

They should have accepted their piece of Old Palestine while they still could, rather than running like rabbits...

Too late now...

Sixty-eight years too late.

"He who pees his pants, then runs away, lives to regret it, for many a day."

His sons and grandsons live to regret it, too.

These underperforming losers, squatting in refugee camps and refugee towns, for an entire lifetime, aren't going to get diddly-squat now.

Nature has DE-selected them.

Might as well break-up and scatter voluntarily, rather than stupidly wait for the coup de grace...