Well, they think they did, anyway.
Just like they think they're a sovereign country now.
While much of the rest of the world hides its contemptuous smiles and laughter.
I will not Bow!
- Thread starter pbel
- Start date
- Status
Just like they think they're a sovereign country now.
While much of the rest of the world hides its contemptuous smiles and laughter.
Hossfly
ZIONIST
Who told you that bald-faced lie, Billy? They've owned it since the Big March.
P F Tinmore
Diamond Member
- Dec 6, 2009
- 86,491
- 4,889
- 1,815
Irrelevant. Here is resolution 3236 in its entirety.
Where does it say that Palestine needs a particular status for the Palestinians to have rights?
- Banned
- #3,964
Shooting fireworks rockets at Israel gives them the status as war combattants, and until they realize that they've already lost the war, and they surrender, the only rights they have are the prisoner of war rights, which the arabs don't even recognize with their treatment of captured Israeli soldiers. So what rights are you looking for? The same right you have to keep indian land? Or are you a hypocrite? Enquiring minds want to know.
RoccoR
Gold Member
P F Tinmore, et al,
What is your purpose here? What is it, exactly, are you saying is being denied?
Remembering that the Resolution [A/RES/3236 (XXIX) 22 November 1974] was adopted a quarter of a century after the initial invasion by the external interference (Arab League Armies) and some nearly seven years after the 1967 War which liberated the West Bank from Jordanian control and the Gaza Strip from Egyptian control --- how doe this resolution relate?
What particular point are you attempting to challenge?
Most Respectfully,
R
What is your purpose here? What is it, exactly, are you saying is being denied?
(COMMENT)
Remembering that the Resolution [A/RES/3236 (XXIX) 22 November 1974] was adopted a quarter of a century after the initial invasion by the external interference (Arab League Armies) and some nearly seven years after the 1967 War which liberated the West Bank from Jordanian control and the Gaza Strip from Egyptian control --- how doe this resolution relate?
1. The right to self-determination without external interference; was not obstructed. The Palestinians declared independence in 1988.
2. The inalienable right of the Palestinians to return to their homes and property was NOT taken away, denied, or transferred by the Israeli. It was forfeited by the Palestinians themselves, as Hostile aggressors.
3. The Palestinians altered the solution of the question of Palestine but solemn declarations: the first by saying that "armed struggle is the only way to liberate Palestine" (Article 9 Charter), and second by declaring that: "there is no solution for the Palestinian question except through Jihad" (Article 13 Covenant).
4. The idea that "Palestinian people is a principal party in the establishment of a just and lasting peace in the Middle East" is a description of a political position which is proven false by item #3 above. Neither "Jihad" or "Armed Struggle" are a means to lasting peace.
5. The "right of the Palestinian people to regain its rights by all means in accordance with the Charter" does not include the use of terrorism and armed conflict.
6. The restoration of "rights" is a matter of adopting a peaceful solution.
7. The Israelis have been in contact, and are in contact now, with the Palestinian in attempts to achieve a peaceful solution.
2. The inalienable right of the Palestinians to return to their homes and property was NOT taken away, denied, or transferred by the Israeli. It was forfeited by the Palestinians themselves, as Hostile aggressors.
3. The Palestinians altered the solution of the question of Palestine but solemn declarations: the first by saying that "armed struggle is the only way to liberate Palestine" (Article 9 Charter), and second by declaring that: "there is no solution for the Palestinian question except through Jihad" (Article 13 Covenant).
4. The idea that "Palestinian people is a principal party in the establishment of a just and lasting peace in the Middle East" is a description of a political position which is proven false by item #3 above. Neither "Jihad" or "Armed Struggle" are a means to lasting peace.
5. The "right of the Palestinian people to regain its rights by all means in accordance with the Charter" does not include the use of terrorism and armed conflict.
6. The restoration of "rights" is a matter of adopting a peaceful solution.
7. The Israelis have been in contact, and are in contact now, with the Palestinian in attempts to achieve a peaceful solution.
What particular point are you attempting to challenge?
Most Respectfully,
R
Last edited:
No, Tinny, it's not irrelevant.
You were citing the use of the word 'country' in ancient documentation utilized in connection with the earlier British Mandate for Palestine, to create a fictitious moment in time when 'Palestine' became a nation.
I effectively countered that citation.
You cannot then jump ahead 26 years (1948 to 1974) to UN 3236 in order to define the state of affairs as that existed during the lifetime of the Mandate.
Jesus-H-Christ, Tinny, at least try to stay on the same Time-Space Continuum, eh?
Last edited:
P F Tinmore
Diamond Member
- Dec 6, 2009
- 86,491
- 4,889
- 1,815
Rocco,
The wording suggests that the Palestinians already had these rights before 1974.
At what point in time and under what circumstances did the Palestinians gain these rights?
The wording suggests that the Palestinians already had these rights before 1974.
At what point in time and under what circumstances did the Palestinians gain these rights?
- Banned
- #3,969
That'll only work if the arabs stop attacking Israel, and basically surrender. The only rights they have now during wartime are the prisoner of war rights.
pbel
Gold Member
- Feb 26, 2012
- 5,653
- 449
- 130
- Thread starter
- #3,970
What everyone seems to forget is, that this conflict has never been between the Palestinians and Israel in the Arab mind. Israel has thus far gone to war with all her Arab neighbors...The artificial peace they have signed is not something the Arab populations will ever accept...
Besides, Abbas has out maneuvered Netanyahu and signed the fifteen UN Convections...
Israel will tighten the noose, Palestinians will go to UN, the BDS will grow dramatically, even in America.
RoccoR
Gold Member
P F Tinmore, et al,
The concept behind the rights of "self-determination" and "national sovereignty" are not unique to the Arab or the Arab Palestinian. The concept is universally applicable to every cultural under the theory. And theoretically, it is part of the "natural law" (is a system of law that is determined by nature, and so is universal) behind humanity; applied to theories of ethics, theories of politics, theories of civil law, and theories of religious morality. (Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy)
The question, asks for qualities that arguably apply to the subject. In this case, you are essentially asking:
This goes back to the capacity of the Arab Palestinian to independently derive and comprehend what the qualities of "self-determination and sovereignty" are and mean, relative to their culture. Quite clearly, prior to the fall of the Ottoman Empire, the Arab-Palestinian was not implementing any of the qualities associated with "self-determination and sovereignty." The Sultan was the "sovereign" and there was no independent self-determination being exercised by the Arab Palestinian. While there were Arab leaders exercising various forms of "sovereignty" in the greater Middle East and Persian Gulf Regions, the influence of the Court of Sheiks (Sheik Sabah Kuwait), or the quasi-independent tribes under the banner of Abd al-Aziz ibn Saud (House of Saud), did not have that reach in terms of political projection. However, the Sharif and Emir of Mecca (Hussein bin Ali) did have some influence over that portion of the region.
Essential to understanding what the Arab Palestinian had, or did not have, in terms of the theoretical constructs of jurisprudence forming the concepts of "self-determination and sovereignty" rest with the understanding that the Arab-Palestinian was under the influence of either:
Even later --- the Arab Higher Committee (AHC), originally formed by the Mandatory, was under the influence other than the Arab Palestinian. However, as the Grand Mufti of Jerusalem (Haj Amin al-Husseini) became prominent as a leader, it was he that gradually began to introduce the idea of independence for Palestine as an Arab state. The Grand Mufti, himself a former member of the Ottoman Armed Forces during WWI, actively opposed Zionism, and the establishment of a national home for the Jewish people in Palestine.
(ANSWER)
While there were many embryonic Arab-Palestinian leaders that opposed Civil Administration by the Allied Powers, the experience Haj Amin al-Husseini gained in the service of the Ottoman Empire, and what he learned from the adjacent Arab Leaders (Sheik Sabah, Abd al-Aziz ibn Saud, and Hussein bin Ali) was the first Arab Palestinian Leader that independently understood and promoted "self-determination and sovereignty" (the Natural Law) for the Territorial Mandate as a separate Arab State. The ideas behind Haj Amin al-Husseini did not just mimic the position expressed by HRH the Emir Faisal (acting on behalf of the Arab Kingdom of Hejaz), but went well beyond.
Most Respectfully,
R
The concept behind the rights of "self-determination" and "national sovereignty" are not unique to the Arab or the Arab Palestinian. The concept is universally applicable to every cultural under the theory. And theoretically, it is part of the "natural law" (is a system of law that is determined by nature, and so is universal) behind humanity; applied to theories of ethics, theories of politics, theories of civil law, and theories of religious morality. (Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy)
- Key Features of Natural Law Theories
- Natural law and divine providence
- Natural law and practical rationality
- The substance of the natural law view
- Paradigmatic and nonparadigmatic natural law theories
- Theoretical Options for Natural Law Theorists
- Natural goodness
- Knowledge of the basic goods
- The catalog of basic goods
- From the good to the right
(COMMENT)
The question, asks for qualities that arguably apply to the subject. In this case, you are essentially asking:
- At what point did the concepts of "self-determination and sovereignty" (Natural Law) as theoretical constructs of jurisprudence, based on morality and ethics apply to the Palestinian?
This goes back to the capacity of the Arab Palestinian to independently derive and comprehend what the qualities of "self-determination and sovereignty" are and mean, relative to their culture. Quite clearly, prior to the fall of the Ottoman Empire, the Arab-Palestinian was not implementing any of the qualities associated with "self-determination and sovereignty." The Sultan was the "sovereign" and there was no independent self-determination being exercised by the Arab Palestinian. While there were Arab leaders exercising various forms of "sovereignty" in the greater Middle East and Persian Gulf Regions, the influence of the Court of Sheiks (Sheik Sabah Kuwait), or the quasi-independent tribes under the banner of Abd al-Aziz ibn Saud (House of Saud), did not have that reach in terms of political projection. However, the Sharif and Emir of Mecca (Hussein bin Ali) did have some influence over that portion of the region.
Essential to understanding what the Arab Palestinian had, or did not have, in terms of the theoretical constructs of jurisprudence forming the concepts of "self-determination and sovereignty" rest with the understanding that the Arab-Palestinian was under the influence of either:
- The Sultan
- The Sharif and Emir of Mecca
- The Court of Sheiks
- The House of Saud
Even later --- the Arab Higher Committee (AHC), originally formed by the Mandatory, was under the influence other than the Arab Palestinian. However, as the Grand Mufti of Jerusalem (Haj Amin al-Husseini) became prominent as a leader, it was he that gradually began to introduce the idea of independence for Palestine as an Arab state. The Grand Mufti, himself a former member of the Ottoman Armed Forces during WWI, actively opposed Zionism, and the establishment of a national home for the Jewish people in Palestine.
(ANSWER)
While there were many embryonic Arab-Palestinian leaders that opposed Civil Administration by the Allied Powers, the experience Haj Amin al-Husseini gained in the service of the Ottoman Empire, and what he learned from the adjacent Arab Leaders (Sheik Sabah, Abd al-Aziz ibn Saud, and Hussein bin Ali) was the first Arab Palestinian Leader that independently understood and promoted "self-determination and sovereignty" (the Natural Law) for the Territorial Mandate as a separate Arab State. The ideas behind Haj Amin al-Husseini did not just mimic the position expressed by HRH the Emir Faisal (acting on behalf of the Arab Kingdom of Hejaz), but went well beyond.
Most Respectfully,
R
Well, Pbel, you get full marks for being an optimist, in connection with the Palestinian cause and BDS.
BDS is going nowhere fast, and will continue in that mode for the foreseeable future.
Other than serving as a textbook baseline and negative example for how NOT to run an international boycott.
montelatici
Gold Member
- Feb 5, 2014
- 18,686
- 2,133
- 280
The boycott against Apartheid South Africa took a long time before its noose tightened enough to force the Boers to negotiate. BDS will take at least as much or more time, but it will eventually work.
In ten years, you will be saying the same thing
Billo_Really
Litre of the Band
So, according to your logic, it was okay for Hitler to annex Poland?
Poland is a sovereign country. Not even REMOTELY close of a comparison.
I wonder why you keep coming up with these idiotic comparisons that have no similarities. One would think that after you embaressed yourself by comparing thousands upon thousands of Jews being gassed to death to the IDF using tear gas for riot dispersal, that you would stop making them
Billo_Really
Litre of the Band
You can't give up inalienable rights, you dumbass!
You get them when you're born and have them until you die.
Billo_Really
Litre of the Band
In both cases, you're taking land (that isn't yours) by force of arms.Poland is a sovereign country. Not even REMOTELY close of a comparison.
I wonder why you keep coming up with these idiotic comparisons that have no similarities. One would think that after you embaressed yourself by comparing thousands upon thousands of Jews being gassed to death to the IDF using tear gas for riot dispersal, that you would stop making them
So what's the difference?
The separation between Afrikaaner and Native was of a racist nature.
The separation between Israeli and Palestinian is a matter of keeping apart different sides in a protracted civil war within the confines of Old Palestine.
The Boycott against South Africa worked because of post-WWII Euro-White Man's guilt over the colonizing and exploiting of the African continent over the span of a couple of centuries.
The Boycott against Israel is obliged to attempt to strong-arm a people (the Jews) who were the victims of one of the most horrific episodes of genocide in recorded history, and that within living memory, and who have been persecuted in both The Middle-East and The West for the better part of 2,000 years, and who were promised a 'national home' by the most recent past rulers of Old Palestine, and the most recent past global League, and who are presently engaged in the resurrection and reclamation of their (ancestral and/or spiritual) homeland, and who are merely nudging-aside a ragtag collection of 'natives' in order to complete that objective...
Natives who themselves have been engaging in acts of terror beyond the confines of Old Palestine for the past four decades or more and who have been refusing to compromise and make peace for most of the past seven decades and who have become a laughing-stock and who command very little respect on the world stage; and for whom the Arab world poured out blood and treasure intermittently for decades until donor-exhaustion set in. The Palestinians' time has come and gone.
A slightly different 'target', and a slightly different level of 'buy-in' needed in order to launch and sustain an effective Boycott.
Good luck with that.
Last edited:
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
New Topics
-
Zone1 Jews are just like whites, blacks or Muslims. If people want to criticize any of them it’s called free speech.- Started by Andrew_Jackson_FTW
- Replies: 0
-
SF human rights chief skimmed funds for luxe travel, UCLA tuition, parties — all courtesy of taxpayers- Started by excalibur
- Replies: 1
-
-
Kaitlin Bennet does a remarkable job making YouTube videos.- Started by Robert W
- Replies: 2
