Boycott Israel

[RoccoR]

RE: Boycot Israel
SUBTOPIC: antisemitism
⁜→ P F Tinmre, et al,

You need to get it together → really!

Would we oppose a Jewish state in any part if the US?

(COMMENT)

The United States has more than 300 individual sovereign nations known as Indian Reservations. I think they are all west of the Mississippi River.

The mere fact that you ask that question demonstrates just how narcissistic Arab Palestinians can be.

When I was stationed in California, I visited one Sovereign Indian Cemetery that was twice the size (over 15 million acres) of the former territory subject to the Mandate. Try to understand the magnitude of the Palestinian problem. The Jewish Autonomous Oblast in the Russian Federation is
more than 6 times larger than the West Bank.

Outside the rarified gaseous environment of the Hostile Arab Palestinians, (who have the absurd idea that their problem is unique) are other nations of the world that have dealt with much larger issues.

Most Respectfully,
R

 

[P F Tinmore]

RE: Boycot Israel
SUBTOPIC: antisemitism
⁜→ P F Tinmre, et al,

You need to get it together → really!


(COMMENT)

The United States has more than 300 individual sovereign nations known as Indian Reservations. I think they are all west of the Mississippi River.

The mere fact that you ask that question demonstrates just how narcissistic Arab Palestinians can be.

When I was stationed in California, I visited one Sovereign Indian Cemetery that was twice the size (over 15 million acres) of the former territory subject to the Mandate. Try to understand the magnitude of the Palestinian problem. The Jewish Autonomous Oblast in the Russian Federation is
more than 6 times larger than the West Bank.

Outside the rarified gaseous environment of the Hostile Arab Palestinians, (who have the absurd idea that their problem is unique) are other nations of the world that have dealt with much larger issues.

Most Respectfully,
R

WOW, did you miss the point!

 

[RoccoR]

RE: Boycot Israel
SUBTOPIC: antisemitism
⁜→ P F Tinmre, et al,

Tell what point I missed.

WOW, did you miss the point!

(QUESTION)

What was the point?

(WHAT WAS THE INTENTION)

Is the point strictly about Jewish Autonomy? This would make the commentary objection about religion... (Is it about Religion?) Amerrica plays host to over a 150 million religions. Judaism is but just a single religion in a nation holds religious tolerance as a premium benefit - an aspect of American society. Synagogues number in a few thousand (more than 3K but less than 4K).

I thought it was a question of providing self-determination for a minority or indigenous people.

I find it distasteful that you shield your point and then critique the response.

You asked if America would respond to the Jewish need? Probably NOT. But did America, in a very similar situation, respond with the American Indian?

Israel with ≈ 9.31 million people is surrounded by an Arab Nation adjacent to every border having a combined population of ≈ 136 million people. Israel makes up ≈ 7% of the adjacent Arab population in the Levant.

Most Respectfully,
R

 

[P F Tinmore]

RE: Boycot Israel
SUBTOPIC: antisemitism
⁜→ P F Tinmre, et al,

Tell what point I missed.

View attachment 590773

(QUESTION)

What was the point?

(WHAT WAS THE INTENTION)

Is the point strictly about Jewish Autonomy? This would make the commentary objection about religion... (Is it about Religion?) Amerrica plays host to over a 150 million religions. Judaism is but just a single religion in a nation holds religious tolerance as a premium benefit - an aspect of American society. Synagogues number in a few thousand (more than 3K but less than 4K).

I thought it was a question of providing self-determination for a minority or indigenous people.

I find it distasteful that you shield your point and then critique the response.

You asked if America would respond to the Jewish need? Probably NOT. But did America, in a very similar situation, respond with the American Indian?

Israel with ≈ 9.31 million people is surrounded by an Arab Nation adjacent to every border having a combined population of ≈ 136 million people. Israel makes up ≈ 7% of the adjacent Arab population in the Levant.

Most Respectfully,
R

I was thinking more like if Israel took over Texas. The people would lose their birth certificates, drivers licenses, and passports. Their property stolen and the banks robbed. Then they would be marched to the border. And Israel had the military to hold that territory.

No problem, there are 49 other states to live in.

How would the Texans react?

 

[RoccoR]

RE: Boycot Israel
SUBTOPIC: antisemitism
⁜→ P F Tinmre, et al,

I was thinking more like if Israel took over Texas. The people would lose their birth certificates, drivers licenses, and passports. Their property stolen and the banks robbed. Then they would be marched to the border. And Israel had the military to hold that territory.

(COMMENT)

That is not at all how it works (not even close).

Generally speaking, when the sovereignty of a territory changes the people change with the new sovereignty unless they otherwise object. the new sovereignty will continue to accord to stateless persons the rights and benefits to which they were already entitled, in the absence of reciprocity, at the date of entry into force of this Convention for that State.

No problem, there are 49 other states to live in.

How would the Texans react?

(REFERENCES)

✪ The Convention Relating to the Status of Stateless Persons (1954)​

​

✪ The Convention Relating to the Status of Refugees (1950)​

The only people who might have problems are those that committed a crime against peace, a war crime, or a crime against humanity, as defined in the international instruments drawn up to make provisions in respect of such crimes;

No problem, there are 49 other states to live in.

How would the Texans react?

(COMMENT)

What do you think happened to the habitual resident of Alaska when they changed from Russian when Alaska became a state. Alaska formally uses the term Alaskan Indian (Alaskan Native People)(there are a half dozen plus Indian tribes) in reference to all indigenous groups. They are recognized as Russian Americans; without prejudice to how they see themselves. My understanding is that as recent as 2016, the Alaskan Native People voted to restore the original Indian name to the furthest settlement (or Town) to: Utqiagvik.

Funny you should mention Texas (formerly the Republic of Texas). The Republic of Texas seceded from the Mexican Federal Government and became a sovereign state of its own in 1836. And through some fancy political dancing, was annexed into the US in 1945 and immediately became a state (the 28th star). Texans became American Citizens. But on the other side of the coin, Texas was considered a rogue Mexican territory by the government in Mexico City.

There are all kinds of sovereignty issues around the world. Each of those stories on developed independence and self-determination would be good ground to inspire a novel or movie. Many of these stories of struggle and independence were happening in the same timeframe. The quasi-autonomous Kurdish Region of Iraq is another story, not to be confused with the Kurdish separatist movement in southern Turkey.

Most Respectfully,
R

 

[P F Tinmore]

Generally speaking, when the sovereignty of a territory changes the people change with the new sovereignty

Indeed, the rule of nationality and state succession. I have posted this before. This was in the Treaty of Lausanne, the Palistine Citizenship order and Resolution 181 that Israel referenced in its declaration of Independence. Resolution 181 states that all Palestinians who normally live in the territory that becomes the Jewish state shall become citizens of the Jewish state.

IOW, Palestine refugees, by international law, are citizens of Israel.

 

[Hollie]

Indeed, the rule of nationality and state succession. I have posted this before. This was in the Treaty of Lausanne, the Palistine Citizenship order and Resolution 181 that Israel referenced in its declaration of Independence. Resolution 181 states that all Palestinians who normally live in the territory that becomes the Jewish state shall become citizens of the Jewish state.

IOW, Palestine refugees, by international law, are citizens of Israel.

Indeed. 181 was never implemented. Indeed, 181 was non-binding.

Otherwise, selectively parsing "quotes" is dishonest.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

IOW, Palestine refugees, by international law, are citizens of Israel.

How many are left who fled in 1948-1949?
A couple of thousand?

 

[P F Tinmore]

How many are left who fled in 1948-1949?
A couple of thousand?

Doesn't matter. Children are born with the citizenship of their parents.

 

[P F Tinmore]

Indeed. 181 was never implemented. Indeed, 181 was non-binding.

Otherwise, selectively parsing "quotes" is dishonest.

I know but it did reference international law.

1. Citizenship. Palestinian citizens residing in Palestine outside the City of Jerusalem, as well as Arabs and Jews who, not holding Palestinian citizenship, reside in Palestine outside the City of Jerusalem shall, upon the recognition of independence, become citizens of the State in which they are resident and enjoy full civil and political rights.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Doesn't matter. Children are born with the citizenship of their parents.

Their parents refused Israeli citizenship. Why don't their fellow terrorist...err...Muslims keep them?

 

[RoccoR]

RE: Boycot Israel
SUBTOPIC: *****
⁜→ P F Tinmre, et al,

PREFACE: I am not an attorney and I am not practicing law or giving legal advice.

Your interpretation of the propaganda shaving does not eliminate all the exceptions to your Posting #9350 immediately above. The biggest of which is a criminal past. This exception is also noted in the Convention on Political and Civil Rights.

IOW, Palestine refugees, by international law, are citizens of Israel.

(COMMENT)

This would be wrong. In order to be Israeli, you would have had to be inside the borders (boots on the ground) that defined Israel in 1948.

(On the matter of State Succession)

This has to do with the status quote on the "acquired (or vested) rights" of the people on the change in sovereignty.
If you owned a house before the change, you own the house after the change. You have a vested interest or ownership.

Par of this concept is induced by the obligation to respect preexisting international frontiers, demarcations, or other adopted measures related to the succession. The "Customary Understanding" or sometimes in the formula behind uti possidetis.

​

I would like to call your attention to the optimum phrase:

"unless otherwise provided for by treaty; if such a treaty does not include conditions regarding the possession of property and territory taken during the war, then the principle of uti possidetis will prevail."​

Now I understand that there is an inverse theory that also has an impact on the situation: The Negative Succession Theory (of the late 1800s). And this has an impact when considering territorial abandonment.

And then, the curious thing about the succession of states revolves around the extent to which the rights and duties of the predecessor devolve on the successor - and that is both uncertain and very controversial.
(SOURCE: I Oppenheim 208 and 209)
(SOURCE: Vienna Convention on Succession of States in Respect of Treaties of 23 August 1978)

Now I consider the territory formerly under the Mandate to have been a “newly independent State” → and • means a successor State the territory of which immediately before the date of the succession of States was a dependent territory for the international relations of which the predecessor State was responsible. This complicates the interpretation you are making to be much more difficult. And it is a level of difficulty that I do not think you appreciate (fully).

The next level of "refugee status is that I do not think there are very many Arab Palestinian refugees. Why ? Because the vast majority of the Arab Palestinians who claim to be refugees are not refugees.

The first group of claimants we should filter out are:

1. (a) He has committed a crime against peace, a war crime, or a crime against humanity, as defined in the international instruments drawn up to make provision in respect of such crimes;
2. (b) He has committed a serious non-political crime outside the country of refuge prior to his admission to that country as a refugee;
3. (c) He has been guilty of acts contrary to the purposes and principles of the United Nations.

We can also filter out all those Arab Palestinians that we once Jordanian citizens and lost their citizenship when Jordan cut all ties to obligations west of the Jordan River (31 July 1988). They may be refugees, but they are not refugees from Israel, but rather refugees from Jordan. Similarly, the All Palestinian Government. (APG) that operated in the Gaza Strip under the protection of others. The APG, while totally ineffective as a national government, existed at least from 1922 until at least 1959.

Finally, Mahmoud Abbas declared himself as President of the State of Palestine (SoP). There is a debate as to whether the Palestine Liberation Organization, when it declared Independence, met the criteria of a government. And again, there is a question as to whether or not the achievement of Observer State status (A/RES/67/19 • 4 December 2012) was enough to achieve (though self-determination) statehood.

Most Respectfully,
R

 

[P F Tinmore]

This would be wrong. In order to be Israeli, you would have had to be inside the borders (boots on the ground) that defined Israel in 1948.

Israel changed the law to suit itself. That is not how international law works.

 

[RoccoR]

RE: Boycot Israel
SUBTOPIC: *****
⁜→ P F Tinmre, et al,

Doesn't matter. Children are born with the citizenship of their parents.

(COMMENT)

I think you should fact-check this. This is NOT found in the Convention on Civil and Political Rights. Citizenship is a matter of domestic law. Each sovereign nation decides what criteria they will accept.

To be an Israeli Citizen, you MUST meet the criteria and be accepted by the domestic authority.

Most Respectfully,
R

 

[P F Tinmore]

If you owned a house before the change, you own the house after the change. You have a vested interest or ownership.

Irrelevant. A farmer in Iowa, a renter in New York, or a homeless person in LA have the same right to their country.

 

[Hollie]

I know but it did reference international law.

1. Citizenship. Palestinian citizens residing in Palestine outside the City of Jerusalem, as well as Arabs and Jews who, not holding Palestinian citizenship, reside in Palestine outside the City of Jerusalem shall, upon the recognition of independence, become citizens of the State in which they are resident and enjoy full civil and political rights.

You like to invent terms such as "pally citizens" believing it gives credence to your silly claim that the Treaty of Lausanne invented a ''country of Pal'istan''.

 

[P F Tinmore]

I think you should fact-check this. This is NOT found in the Convention on Civil and Political Rights. Citizenship is a matter of domestic law. Each sovereign nation decides what criteria they will accept.

Only if Israel wants to piss on international law. They can choose citizenship for immigrants but not natural born citizens.

 

[Hollie]

Irrelevant. A farmer in Iowa, a renter in New York, or a homeless person in LA have the same right to their country.

That's because they live in a country.

Back to your silly claim that the Treaty of Lausanne invented the ''country of Pal'istan''.

That's what, a decade of the same phony claim?

 

[Hollie]

Only if Israel wants to piss on international law. They can choose citizenship for immigrants but not natural born citizens.

Islamic terrorists are not the best examples to use in your lecturing on international law.

 

[P F Tinmore]

You like to invent terms such as "pally citizens" believing it gives credence to your silly claim that the Treaty of Lausanne invented a ''country of Pal'istan''.

You have to remember that Palestine, according to the LoN and several courts, was created as a state in 1924. Palestinians got Palestinian citizenship by domestic law in1925.

No foreign power has the authority to change that.