BREAKING: The UN concludes that Israel has established an APARTHEID REGIME...

[TheParser]

For goodness' sake, why can't people just let that little country alone?

Yes, according to what I have read, the current government (and I'm guessing the majority of Israelis) wants the vast majority of people to be Jewish.

They do not want the population profile to be tilted in favor of the Palestinians, and -- quite honestly -- they do not want a large number of refugees from sub-Saharan Africa. (Israel has offered generous financial aid if they will leave. And Israel has even offered to find them a country in Europe that will welcome them.)

Does that constitute "apartheid"? Maybe it does. I do not know. But I feel that Israel has the right to pursue such a policy. Israel does not want the unpleasant ethnic situation that obtains in the United States and many European countries. Who can blame it?


(Yes, I realize this thread is two years old.)

 

[ESay]

Does that constitute "apartheid"? Maybe it does. I do not know. But I feel that Israel has the right to pursue such a policy. Israel does not want the unpleasant ethnic situation that obtains in the United States and many European countries. Who can blame it

Arab Muslim population comprises a third of the Israeli population. This exceeds by far the Muslim proportion of any West European country.

 

[Hollie]

BLUF: Once again you support a view which you cannot define. And in this segment, you posted a video that shows just how desperate the Arab Palestinians are to drive a wedge between Israel and America. But, as in the title of the discussion, you cannot demonstrate how Israel violates any international law pertaining to "Apartheid."

This is the most comprehensive critique of Israeli apartheid that I have seen. She covers all of the issues and arguments. If there are any issues that you disagree with, bring them up for discussion. (No data dumps please.)

It’s only comprehensive in the sense that it just reiterates a lot of tired, out of context slogans.

It’s just another YouTube video that that you repetitively cut and paste.

Don't want to refute any issues, huh?

So I take it you didn’t watch the pretentious YouTube video you frequently cut and paste into various threads?

 

[Hossfly]

BLUF: Once again you support a view which you cannot define. And in this segment, you posted a video that shows just how desperate the Arab Palestinians are to drive a wedge between Israel and America. But, as in the title of the discussion, you cannot demonstrate how Israel violates any international law pertaining to "Apartheid."

This is the most comprehensive critique of Israeli apartheid that I have seen. She covers all of the issues and arguments. If there are any issues that you disagree with, bring them up for discussion. (No data dumps please.)

It’s only comprehensive in the sense that it just reiterates a lot of tired, out of context slogans.

It’s just another YouTube video that that you repetitively cut and paste.

Don't want to refute any issues, huh?

What issues?

Hollie , has Tinmore ever told you about Balestine's International borders?

 

[P F Tinmore]

Israeli Apartheid From an Israeli Perspective with Ronnie Barkan

 

[RoccoR]

RE: BREAKING: The UN concludes that Israel has established an APARTHEID REGIME...
⁜→ P F Tinmore, et al,

In every open discussion on Apartheid, there will be those that know what the law is, and there will be those that do not have a clue. I have not heard the court speak on the matter. The creation of the Jewish State was a UN recommendation. So the question puts for the idea that the UN is an accomplice to the crime. (Non-sense) Just how does the Court expect the restitution (if any) be apportioned?

(COMMENT)

There is no such thing as Apartheid South Africa and Apartheid Israel. There is one international law (Article 7j • Crimes Against Humanity • Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court) and under the ICC Apartheid had only one meaning:

The crime of apartheid" means inhumane acts of a character similar to those referred to in paragraph 1, committed in the context of an institutionalized regime of systematic oppression and domination by one racial group over any other racial group or groups and committed with the intention of maintaining that regime; ​

Additionally, this non-sense that Israel was built on an "apartheid" framework from the beginning is absolute and TOTAL NON-SENSE. There is something that must be remembered about International Laws. International Laws have an enforcement date for the purpose of jurisdiction and application (ratione personae). For our purposes, that would be Article 24 • Part II • General Principles of Criminal Law • Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court:

Non-retroactivity​

​

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

​

2. In the event of a change in the law applicable to a given case prior to a final judgment, the law more favorable to the person being investigated, prosecuted, or convicted shall apply.​

The Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court did not go into force until 1 July 2002. That is a half-century AFTER Israel's implementation of Self-Determination and the UN Recommendation for a "Jewish State" [Part II • Boundaries • Section B • The Jewish State • A/RES/181 (II)]...

No matter what this guy says, no matter how he would like to frame it, it is a mistake of fact. There was no crime of "Apartheid" committed because the statute had not even been written yet.

So, you have to go back to the international law definition of "Apartheid" and layout the Elements of the Offense." Does it meet those criteria? I did not hear this addressed at all.

(∑ Ω)

The making of this video was a colossal waste of time... Listening to this video is time wasted that you will never get back.


Most Respectfully,
R

 

[P F Tinmore]

The Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court did not go into force until 1 July 2002. That is a half-century AFTER Israel's implementation of Self-Determination and the UN Recommendation for a "Jewish State" [Part II • Boundaries • Section B • The Jewish State • A/RES/181 (II)]...

No matter what this guy says, no matter how he would like to frame it, it is a mistake of fact. There was no crime of "Apartheid" committed because the statute had not even been written yet.

Resolution 181 was rejected and never implemented. If it was signed by both sides it would have been a land/border treaty but it was not. I don't know why you keep bringing it up.

Israel was created as an apartheid state. It was still apartheid when it was outlawed by the UN in 1974, Israel was still apartheid by the Rome Statute in 2002. It is still apartheid today.

 

[Hollie]

The Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court did not go into force until 1 July 2002. That is a half-century AFTER Israel's implementation of Self-Determination and the UN Recommendation for a "Jewish State" [Part II • Boundaries • Section B • The Jewish State • A/RES/181 (II)]...

No matter what this guy says, no matter how he would like to frame it, it is a mistake of fact. There was no crime of "Apartheid" committed because the statute had not even been written yet.

Resolution 181 was rejected and never implemented. If it was signed by both sides it would have been a land/border treaty but it was not. I don't know why you keep bringing it up.

Israel was created as an apartheid state. It was still apartheid when it was outlawed by the UN in 1974, Israel was still apartheid by the Rome Statute in 2002. It is still apartheid today.

Other than for the purpose of dumping your usual slogans, why is it that you fail to support your ''apartheid'' claim?

 

[Hollie]

BLUF: Once again you support a view which you cannot define. And in this segment, you posted a video that shows just how desperate the Arab Palestinians are to drive a wedge between Israel and America. But, as in the title of the discussion, you cannot demonstrate how Israel violates any international law pertaining to "Apartheid."

This is the most comprehensive critique of Israeli apartheid that I have seen. She covers all of the issues and arguments. If there are any issues that you disagree with, bring them up for discussion. (No data dumps please.)

It’s only comprehensive in the sense that it just reiterates a lot of tired, out of context slogans.

It’s just another YouTube video that that you repetitively cut and paste.

Don't want to refute any issues, huh?

What issues?

Hollie , has Tinmore ever told you about Balestine's International borders?

Why, yes. He has spent ten years pressing that conspiracy theory. It's on the handout he receives at the get out the gee-had rallies at his madrassah.

 

[RoccoR]

RE: BREAKING: The UN concludes that Israel has established an APARTHEID REGIME...
⁜→ P F Tinmore, et al,

BLUF: This is simply more deliberately deceptive information told over and over again.

The Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court did not go into force until 1 July 2002. That is a half-century AFTER Israel's implementation of Self-Determination and the UN Recommendation for a "Jewish State" [Part II • Boundaries • Section B • The Jewish State • A/RES/181 (II)]...

No matter what this guy says, no matter how he would like to frame it, it is a mistake of fact. There was no crime of "Apartheid" committed because the statute had not even been written yet.

Resolution 181 was rejected and never implemented. If it was signed by both sides it would have been a land/border treaty but it was not. I don't know why you keep bringing it up.

(COMMENT)

Point #1

​

The Jewish Agency accepted the resolution despite its dissatisfaction over such matters as Jewish emigration from Europe and the territorial limits set on the proposed Jewish State. The plan was not accepted by the Palestinian Arabs and the Arab States on the ground that it violated the provisions of the United Nations Charter, which granted people the right to decide their own destiny. They said that the Assembly had endorsed the plan under circumstances unworthy of the United Nations and that the Arabs of Palestine would oppose any scheme that provided for the dissection, segregation, or partition of their country, or which gave special and preferential rights and status to a minority.
SOURCE: Page 9, UN Blue Book • The Question of Palestine and the United Nations

Point #2

​

After the 15th May, 1948, the United Nations Commission will be the Government of Palestine. It does not seem very material whether it is considered to be the de facto or the de jure Government. In any case, its title to be the Government of Palestine will rest on the resolution of the General Assembly.
SOURCE: A/AC 21/UK/42Legal Meaning of the Termination of the Mandate 25 FEB 1948

​

During today's brief meeting, Dr. Eduardo Morgan (Panama) said that this resolution of the Assembly merely "relieves responsibility. The Commission has not been dissolved. In fact the resolution of last November 29 has been implemented."
SOURCE: UN PAL/169 17 May 1948

However, the Resolution 181 "was not a binding agreement." It was never intended to be a binding agreement. It has no enforcement date. It is a recommendation. And recommendations do not have the force of law behind them. Recommendations maybe accepted, rejected modifiyed or altered in anyway that you, me or Hollie want to make it. And so, the Arab Palestinians did not sign the "Recommendation," SO WHAT? That means absolutely nothing. Suppose that the Recommendation Resolution 181 had never been written? Does that in stop me from taking independent action? NO...

Israel was created as an apartheid state. It was still apartheid when it was outlawed by the UN in 1974, Israel was still apartheid by the Rome Statute in 2002. It is still apartheid today.

(COMMENT)

You are mistaken. The was NO LAW in 1974 that "outlawed" Apartheid. It was understood in early 1920 that the intention was to establish a Jewish National Home.

There are many laws today, that did not exist in eras before today. But we don't go backward to apply those laws. Even IF your argument had merit (which it doesn't) what two racial groups are locked in conflict - or - segregated one from the other? Remember, Israel is many more times diverse THAN any of the Regional Arab Countries.

But Israel was established and accepted by the International Community. IF anything, it is the Arab Palestinians that want an "Apartheid" establishment and not Israel:
..........................................“In a final resolution, we would not see the presence of a single Israeli
...................................................................civilian or soldier on our lands.”
......................................................................................................................................Mahmoud Abbas
.....................................................................................................Palestinian Authority Central Committee
.............................................................................................................Ramallah on January 14, 2018

This is all about the Arab Palestinians, after having made so many bad decisions, wanting to apply today's law to objectional decisions of a century ago.

It is a dilemma:

• IF the Arab Palestinians admit they made bad decisions a century ago, THEN they cannot claim it is Israel's fault today.​

​

• IF the Arab Palestinians claim they made go decisions a century ago, THEN they must accept their political outcome of today.​

​

Most Respectfully,
R

 

[P F Tinmore]

However, the Resolution 181 "was not a binding agreement." It was never intended to be a binding agreement. It has no enforcement date. It is a recommendation.

You claim that Resolution 181 was implemented which is strange since it was rejected.

However, this is the question that you always duck.

The resolution has many articles. Which ones were implemented?

 

[P F Tinmore]

RE: BREAKING: The UN concludes that Israel has established an APARTHEID REGIME...
⁜→ P F Tinmore, et al,

BLUF: This is simply more deliberately deceptive information told over and over again.

The Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court did not go into force until 1 July 2002. That is a half-century AFTER Israel's implementation of Self-Determination and the UN Recommendation for a "Jewish State" [Part II • Boundaries • Section B • The Jewish State • A/RES/181 (II)]...

No matter what this guy says, no matter how he would like to frame it, it is a mistake of fact. There was no crime of "Apartheid" committed because the statute had not even been written yet.

Resolution 181 was rejected and never implemented. If it was signed by both sides it would have been a land/border treaty but it was not. I don't know why you keep bringing it up.

(COMMENT)

Point #1

​

​

The Jewish Agency accepted the resolution despite its dissatisfaction over such matters as Jewish emigration from Europe and the territorial limits set on the proposed Jewish State. The plan was not accepted by the Palestinian Arabs and the Arab States on the ground that it violated the provisions of the United Nations Charter, which granted people the right to decide their own destiny. They said that the Assembly had endorsed the plan under circumstances unworthy of the United Nations and that the Arabs of Palestine would oppose any scheme that provided for the dissection, segregation, or partition of their country, or which gave special and preferential rights and status to a minority.​

SOURCE: Page 9, UN Blue Book • The Question of Palestine and the United Nations​

​

​

Point #2

​

​

After the 15th May, 1948, the United Nations Commission will be the Government of Palestine. It does not seem very material whether it is considered to be the de facto or the de jure Government. In any case, its title to be the Government of Palestine will rest on the resolution of the General Assembly.​

SOURCE: A/AC 21/UK/42Legal Meaning of the Termination of the Mandate 25 FEB 1948​

​

​

​

​

During today's brief meeting, Dr. Eduardo Morgan (Panama) said that this resolution of the Assembly merely "relieves responsibility. The Commission has not been dissolved. In fact the resolution of last November 29 has been implemented."​

SOURCE: UN PAL/169 17 May 1948​

​

​

However, the Resolution 181 "was not a binding agreement." It was never intended to be a binding agreement. It has no enforcement date. It is a recommendation. And recommendations do not have the force of law behind them. Recommendations maybe accepted, rejected modifiyed or altered in anyway that you, me or Hollie want to make it. And so, the Arab Palestinians did not sign the "Recommendation," SO WHAT? That means absolutely nothing. Suppose that the Recommendation Resolution 181 had never been written? Does that in stop me from taking independent action? NO...

Israel was created as an apartheid state. It was still apartheid when it was outlawed by the UN in 1974, Israel was still apartheid by the Rome Statute in 2002. It is still apartheid today.

(COMMENT)

You are mistaken. The was NO LAW in 1974 that "outlawed" Apartheid. It was understood in early 1920 that the intention was to establish a Jewish National Home.

There are many laws today, that did not exist in eras before today. But we don't go backward to apply those laws. Even IF your argument had merit (which it doesn't) what two racial groups are locked in conflict - or - segregated one from the other? Remember, Israel is many more times diverse THAN any of the Regional Arab Countries.

But Israel was established and accepted by the International Community. IF anything, it is the Arab Palestinians that want an "Apartheid" establishment and not Israel:
..........................................“In a final resolution, we would not see the presence of a single Israeli
...................................................................civilian or soldier on our lands.”
......................................................................................................................................Mahmoud Abbas
.....................................................................................................Palestinian Authority Central Committee
.............................................................................................................Ramallah on January 14, 2018

This is all about the Arab Palestinians, after having made so many bad decisions, wanting to apply today's law to objectional decisions of a century ago.

It is a dilemma:

• IF the Arab Palestinians admit they made bad decisions a century ago, THEN they cannot claim it is Israel's fault today.​

​

• IF the Arab Palestinians claim they made go decisions a century ago, THEN they must accept their political outcome of today.​

​

Most Respectfully,
R

The Jewish Agency accepted the resolution despite its dissatisfaction over such matters as Jewish emigration from Europe and the territorial limits set on the proposed Jewish State. The plan was not accepted by the Palestinian Arabs and the Arab States on the ground that it violated the provisions of the United Nations Charter, which granted people the right to decide their own destiny. They said that the Assembly had endorsed the plan under circumstances unworthy of the United Nations and that the Arabs of Palestine would oppose any scheme that provided for the dissection, segregation, or partition of their country, or which gave special and preferential rights and status to a minority.
SOURCE: Page 9, UN Blue Book • The Question of Palestine and the United Nations

OK, so? They had the right to reject the plan.

 

[RoccoR]

RE: BREAKING: The UN concludes that Israel has established an APARTHEID REGIME...
⁜→ P F Tinmore, et al,

BLUF: Here you go again with the dodge-ball thing... These are not my claims, but the claims of the UN.

You claim that Resolution 181 was implemented which is strange since it was rejected.

However, this is the question that you always duck.

The resolution has many articles. Which ones were implemented?

(COMMENT)

The recommendations were only outright rejected by the Arab Palestinians.

I honestly cannot tell you. But, again, there is no requirement to answer any A/RES/181 (II) recommendation. Because it is not binding. But they implemented more self-governing institutions than did the Arab Palestinians.

Obviously, the actions that the National Council for the Jewish State did enough to acquire FULL membership to the UN. Now what is important is that in the half-century (PLUS) to follow, all the Arab Palestinians have been able to get is a Parking Space at the UN and seeing the closing of the PLO representative office in Washington. In fact, does the US still even list the Palestinian Territories In the Near Eastern Affairs Region?

I'm not dodging or dancing around any question. I give a citation for every fact I make a point on, from an authoritative source.


Most Respectfully,
R

 

[P F Tinmore]

RE: BREAKING: The UN concludes that Israel has established an APARTHEID REGIME...
⁜→ P F Tinmore, et al,

BLUF: Here you go again with the dodge-ball thing... These are not my claims, but the claims of the UN.

You claim that Resolution 181 was implemented which is strange since it was rejected.

However, this is the question that you always duck.

The resolution has many articles. Which ones were implemented?

(COMMENT)

The recommendations were only outright rejected by the Arab Palestinians.

I honestly cannot tell you. But, again, there is no requirement to answer any A/RES/181 (II) recommendation. Because it is not binding. But they implemented more self-governing institutions than did the Arab Palestinians.

Obviously, the actions that the National Council for the Jewish State did enough toacquire FULL membership to the UN. Now what is important is that in the half-century (PLUS) to follow, all the Arab Palestinians have been able to get is a Parking Space at the UN and seeing the closing of the PLO representative office in Washington. In fact, does the US still even list the Palestinian Territories In theNear Eastern Affairs Region?

I'm not dodging or dancing around any question. I give a citation for every fact I make a point on, from an authoritative source.


Most Respectfully,
R

I was thinking about things like borders, Jerusalem, citizenship, security, constitution, etc. you know...the things you never mentioned.

Keep up the good duck.

 

[Hollie]

RE: BREAKING: The UN concludes that Israel has established an APARTHEID REGIME...
⁜→ P F Tinmore, et al,

BLUF: Here you go again with the dodge-ball thing... These are not my claims, but the claims of the UN.

You claim that Resolution 181 was implemented which is strange since it was rejected.

However, this is the question that you always duck.

The resolution has many articles. Which ones were implemented?

(COMMENT)

The recommendations were only outright rejected by the Arab Palestinians.

I honestly cannot tell you. But, again, there is no requirement to answer any A/RES/181 (II) recommendation. Because it is not binding. But they implemented more self-governing institutions than did the Arab Palestinians.

Obviously, the actions that the National Council for the Jewish State did enough toacquire FULL membership to the UN. Now what is important is that in the half-century (PLUS) to follow, all the Arab Palestinians have been able to get is a Parking Space at the UN and seeing the closing of the PLO representative office in Washington. In fact, does the US still even list the Palestinian Territories In theNear Eastern Affairs Region?

I'm not dodging or dancing around any question. I give a citation for every fact I make a point on, from an authoritative source.


Most Respectfully,
R

I was thinking about things like borders, Jerusalem, citizenship, security, constitution, etc. you know...the things you never mentioned.

Keep up the good duck.

You may or may not have been thinking about things.

You choose to sidestep and deflect when you’re tasked with presenting a coherent response.

 

[Hollie]

The Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court did not go into force until 1 July 2002. That is a half-century AFTER Israel's implementation of Self-Determination and the UN Recommendation for a "Jewish State" [Part II • Boundaries • Section B • The Jewish State • A/RES/181 (II)]...

No matter what this guy says, no matter how he would like to frame it, it is a mistake of fact. There was no crime of "Apartheid" committed because the statute had not even been written yet.

Resolution 181 was rejected and never implemented. If it was signed by both sides it would have been a land/border treaty but it was not. I don't know why you keep bringing it up.

Israel was created as an apartheid state. It was still apartheid when it was outlawed by the UN in 1974, Israel was still apartheid by the Rome Statute in 2002. It is still apartheid today.

Indeed, your frantic screeching about “apartheid” is rather embarrassing as you have failed to understand where that phony label came from.


Indeed, for those who haven’t seen the ESCWA hit piece yet, the frauds, antisemites and Islamic terrorist misfits who compiled the UN report claiming “apartheid” have an obvious agenda.


ESCWA comprises 18 Arab countries:Bahrain, Egypt, Iraq, Jordan, Kuwait, Lebanon, Libya, Mauritania, Morocco, Oman, the State of Palestine, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, the Sudan, the Syrian Arab Republic, Tunisia, the United Arab Emirates and Yemen.

The ESCWA is something of a roll call of Islamic backwaters including the “State of Pally’land”

UN chief rejects Richard Falk's ESCWA report accusing Israel of 'apartheid' - UN Watch

U.N. chief Antonió Guterres rejected a report published by ECSWA, a Beirut-based agency of the world body— ECSWA—comprised entirely of 18 Arab states, which accuses Israel of “apartheid.” The report’s chief author is Richard Falk, a former U.N. official who was condemned repeatedly by the UK and...

unwatch.org

U.N. chief Antonió Guterres rejected a report published by ECSWA, a Beirut-based agency of the world body— ECSWA—comprised entirely of 18 Arab states, which accuses Israel of “apartheid.”

The report’s chief author is Richard Falk, a former U.N. official who was condemned repeatedly by the UK and other governments for antisemitism.

In 2011, Falk was also denounced by his own boss, former U.N. chief Ban Ki-moon, for espousing 9/11 conspiracy theories which accused the U.S. government, instead of Al Qaeda, of perpetrating the 9/11 terror attacks.

The new report, said Guterres’ spokesman, “does not reflect the views of the Secretary‑General.”

U.S. ambassador Nikki Haley blasted the report, and called on the UN to withdraw it

 

[Hollie]

Abbas wants 'not a single Israeli' in future Palestinian state

Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas laid out his vision on Monday for the final status of Israeli-Palestinian relations ahead of peace talks due to resume in Washington for the first time in nearly three years.

www.reuters.com

“In a final resolution, we would not see the presence of a single Israeli - civilian or soldier - on our lands,” Abbas said in a briefing to mostly Egyptian journalists.

 

[P F Tinmore]

The Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court did not go into force until 1 July 2002. That is a half-century AFTER Israel's implementation of Self-Determination and the UN Recommendation for a "Jewish State" [Part II • Boundaries • Section B • The Jewish State • A/RES/181 (II)]...

No matter what this guy says, no matter how he would like to frame it, it is a mistake of fact. There was no crime of "Apartheid" committed because the statute had not even been written yet.

Resolution 181 was rejected and never implemented. If it was signed by both sides it would have been a land/border treaty but it was not. I don't know why you keep bringing it up.

Israel was created as an apartheid state. It was still apartheid when it was outlawed by the UN in 1974, Israel was still apartheid by the Rome Statute in 2002. It is still apartheid today.

Indeed, your frantic screeching about “apartheid” is rather embarrassing as you have failed to understand where that phony label came from.


Indeed, for those who haven’t seen the ESCWA hit piece yet, the frauds, antisemites and Islamic terrorist misfits who compiled the UN report claiming “apartheid” have an obvious agenda.


ESCWA comprises 18 Arab countries:Bahrain, Egypt, Iraq, Jordan, Kuwait, Lebanon, Libya, Mauritania, Morocco, Oman, the State of Palestine, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, the Sudan, the Syrian Arab Republic, Tunisia, the United Arab Emirates and Yemen.

The ESCWA is something of a roll call of Islamic backwaters including the “State of Pally’land”

UN chief rejects Richard Falk's ESCWA report accusing Israel of 'apartheid' - UN Watch

U.N. chief Antonió Guterres rejected a report published by ECSWA, a Beirut-based agency of the world body— ECSWA—comprised entirely of 18 Arab states, which accuses Israel of “apartheid.” The report’s chief author is Richard Falk, a former U.N. official who was condemned repeatedly by the UK and...

unwatch.org

U.N. chief Antonió Guterres rejected a report published by ECSWA, a Beirut-based agency of the world body— ECSWA—comprised entirely of 18 Arab states, which accuses Israel of “apartheid.”

The report’s chief author is Richard Falk, a former U.N. official who was condemned repeatedly by the UK and other governments for antisemitism.

In 2011, Falk was also denounced by his own boss, former U.N. chief Ban Ki-moon, for espousing 9/11 conspiracy theories which accused the U.S. government, instead of Al Qaeda, of perpetrating the 9/11 terror attacks.

The new report, said Guterres’ spokesman, “does not reflect the views of the Secretary‑General.”

U.S. ambassador Nikki Haley blasted the report, and called on the UN to withdraw it

I noticed that you did not say anything about a single thing in the report.

It was all about sliming the messenger.

 

[RoccoR]

RE: BREAKING: The UN concludes that Israel has established an APARTHEID REGIME...
⁜→ P F Tinmore, et al,

BLUF: Remember, the same day that the Provisional Government stood-up, the Arab League Forces invade3d.

I was thinking about things like borders, Jerusalem, citizenship, security, constitution, etc. you know...the things you never mentioned.

Keep up the good duck.

(COMMENT)

Yeah, well that is something that you'll have to just take for granted that the UN Palestine Commission (UNPC) had in place before the Arab Invasion.

All of that was turn-key available to Israel. If the Arab League had NOT invaded, the Arab State would have been quite large. But the Arag League forces took what territory that Israel did not have under control.

I always have to chuckle. With the demarcation on the Armistice Lines pre-4 June 1967, the Arab Palestinians had nothing. The entirety West Bank was Jordanian and the Gaza Strip was Egyptian.


Most Respectfully,
R

 

[P F Tinmore]

All of that was turn-key available to Israel. If the Arab League had NOT invaded, the Arab State would have been quite large. But the Arag League forces took what territory that Israel did not have under control.

You have to remenber that the Arab states did not attack Israel. And that the 1948 war was stopped by a UN Security Council Resolution. Thare were no losers to that war. And, a war by foreign Arab states have absolutely nothing to do with Palestinian land.