Israel's Legal Right To Exist

[Phoenall]

This last means that the Jews were seen as the natural rulers of that 22% of palestine and the arab muslims that did not want to live under the Jews could move to the 78% of palestine granted to them.

That is not how it works. The rulers (The people with the right to sovereignty.) were the people who became the citizens under international law after the Treaty of Lausanne. Those would be the people who were citizens of the Turkish Empire.

The division of territory between Palestine and Tranjordan does not matter. When the Treaty of Lausanne was signed Palestine and Transjordan were two separate successor states. The people who normally lived in Transjordan became citizens of Transjordan. Those who normally lived in Palestine became citizens of Palestine. There is no connection between the two. They are two separate states.

WRONG as you are using international laws retroactively to support your POV.

As is your usual case you ignore and deny the Jews rights to free determination. The Turkish citizens would not include the free loaders and illegal immigrants flooding in from the surrounding areas. The division of palestine does matter as it delineates what lands were allo0cated to which people, and the arab muslims were to get 78% of the best farmland while the Jews were to get swamp and desert. The people who lived in trans Jordan were evicted if they were Jews and sent west over the river, but there was no traffic coming out of the Jeish national home into Trans Jordan as the palestinians demanded. They did not become two separate states until 1948 when they were signed of by the British/UN.


Did you forget about your own link that stated all the above and you used as evidence against the Jews ?

Do you have links to all that shit?

WHY DIDNT YOU READ THEM THE LAST 100 TIMES THEY WERE GIVEN.

What was posted that says what you say they said?

The mandate of palestine and treaties that gave the lands to the LoN as reparations for war.

Have you forgotten your own link that stated the same things, or do you want to ignore that now ?

 

[montelatici]

montelatici, et al,

You did not read very well...

montelatici, et al,

Well, there is an dilemma here, you just might not recognize it.

(OBSERVATIONS & REFERENCES)

• Consolidated Eligibility and Registration Instructions (CERI) 2006 --- UN Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees in the Near East (UNRWA)

• 1951 Convention Relating to the Status of Refugees Text of the 1967 Protocol Relating to the Status of Refugees Resolution 2198 (XXI) adopted by the United Nations General Assembly

What is a refugee Rocco?

(COMMENT)

As "ubiquitous” as CERI is, it is not law; instruction for the eligibility and criteria for services.
Article 1A of the 1951 Convention sets out the detailed criteria for assessing whether an individual should be granted refugee status. This is true for all refugees, world-wide, except for Palestinians receiving from organs or agencies of the United Nations other than the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees protection or assistance (the UNRWA).

Why are Palestinians not refugees?

(COMMENT)

This is what is called and "engineered dilemma" in which a "refugee" is defined by the UNHRC, but the UNHCR does not apply to Palestinians because they receive services from the UNRWA. However, it should be noticed that if the UNRWA were to disband, the UNHRC picks-up the responsibility. (Which is a whole other topic.)

By 1991, the Arab League had seemingly abandoned its efforts to guarantee minimal legal protection to the Palestinian refugees in the Arab States. Its resolution 5093 (1991) conditioned the treatment of the Palestinians to the rules and laws in force in each state.

Although there is a strong perception that everyone registered with the UNRWA is a "refugee" --- the term "refugee" is really not applicable to the Palestinians. They were marginalized by the UNRWA which has the de facto guardians of the "Right of Return." (Which is a whole other topic.)

Most Respectfully,
R

You are again, incorrect. If the Palestinians were to be transferred from the auspices of UNRWA to UNHCR, nothing would change. Pursuant to Chapter 5 of the UNHCR's Procedural Standards for Refugee Status Determination, 5.1.2 states "the categories of persons who should be considered to be eligible for derivative status under the right to family unity include:" "all unmarried children of the Principal Applicant who are under 18 years."

Furthermore Chapter 5.1.1 makes it clear that this status is retained after the age of 18. It states "individuals who obtain derivative refugee status enjoy the same rights and entitlements as other recognised refugees and should retain this status notwithstanding the subsequent dissolution of the family through separation, divorce, death, or the fact that the child reaches the age of majority."

In addition, UNHCR cites the Palestinian refugee population number in their "State of the World‘s Refugees" This makes clear that the practice of registering descendants of refugees is not disputed by UNHCR.

So, back to the drawing board Rocco, you lose again.

(COMMENT)

Important safety tip for those of you at home!

Well, there is often a mix-up between the two words: dependent (a matter of support) and descendent (which is a matter of ancestry). The general term is a use is the "Principle Applicant;" Which our friend "montelatici" correctly uses. It is also important that in terms of the UNHSR there is a difference between "Refugee Status" and that of a Derivative Refugee Status.
​

While I did say this was "a whole other topic," I was very careful not step to out the snapshot in time and discuss a specific criteria. I am very familiar with both the "Procedural Standards for Refugee Status Determination (RSD) under UNHCR's Mandate" --- and --- Revised Note on the Applicability of Article 1D of the 1951 Convention relating to the Status of Refugees to Palestinian Refugees. I give you these links so that you understand what a Principle Applicant is and what a Derivative Applicant is. The Derivative Applicant, is based on the eligibility of the Principle. A family member that derived refugee status, but never lived in the area from which the family was displaced (born after displacement). After that, the RSD is based on the interview by UNHCR personnel. In other words, you Derivative Applicant cannot pass-on refugee status unless it falls into a special case. Like I said, it is complicated.

What I can say is that UNRWA Palestinians eligible under UNHCR Refugee Procedures if they have

• Committed a crimes international crimes (against peace, a war crime, or a crime against humanity)
• Committed a serious non-political crime outside the country of refuge prior to his admission to that country as a refugee;
• Been found guilty of acts contrary to the purposes and principles of the United Nations.
​

What does this mean... All those families of Jihadist, Deadly Fedayeen, Hostile Insurgent, Radicalized Islamist, and Asymmetric Fighters are out of luck.

Most Respectfully,
R

Wrong again. This is getting boring.

1. Freedom fighting is not a crime, it is a duty of the occupied people to resist occupation. The people in German occupied Europe that fought the occupation were granted refugee status, Jews included.

2. It's not complicated at all. Palestine refugees are entitled to a just and lasting solution to their plight. In the absence of and until there is a just solution, it stands to reason that their status as refugees remains.

Your questioning the passing of refugee status through generations stems from your inability to understand the international protection system. This sort of questioning, by ignorant Zionist racists, only distracts from the need to address the real reasons for the protracted Palestinian refugee situation, namely Israel's intransigence with respect to right of return of the refugees and ending the occupation, as required by various UNSC resolutions.

But to top it off, the UNHCR Handbook on Procedures and Criteria for determining Refugee Status states in paragraph 184: "If the head of a family meets the criteria of the definition, [for refugee status] his dependents are normally granted refugee status according to the principle of family unity."

 

[Phoenall]

montelatici, et al,

Well, there is an dilemma here, you just might not recognize it.

(OBSERVATIONS & REFERENCES)

• Consolidated Eligibility and Registration Instructions (CERI) 2006 --- UN Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees in the Near East (UNRWA)

• 1951 Convention Relating to the Status of Refugees Text of the 1967 Protocol Relating to the Status of Refugees Resolution 2198 (XXI) adopted by the United Nations General Assembly

What is a refugee Rocco?

(COMMENT)

As "ubiquitous” as CERI is, it is not law; instruction for the eligibility and criteria for services.
Article 1A of the 1951 Convention sets out the detailed criteria for assessing whether an individual should be granted refugee status. This is true for all refugees, world-wide, except for Palestinians receiving from organs or agencies of the United Nations other than the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees protection or assistance (the UNRWA).

Why are Palestinians not refugees?

(COMMENT)

This is what is called and "engineered dilemma" in which a "refugee" is defined by the UNHRC, but the UNHCR does not apply to Palestinians because they receive services from the UNRWA. However, it should be noticed that if the UNRWA were to disband, the UNHRC picks-up the responsibility. (Which is a whole other topic.)

By 1991, the Arab League had seemingly abandoned its efforts to guarantee minimal legal protection to the Palestinian refugees in the Arab States. Its resolution 5093 (1991) conditioned the treatment of the Palestinians to the rules and laws in force in each state.

Although there is a strong perception that everyone registered with the UNRWA is a "refugee" --- the term "refugee" is really not applicable to the Palestinians. They were marginalized by the UNRWA which has the de facto guardians of the "Right of Return." (Which is a whole other topic.)

Most Respectfully,
R

You are again, incorrect. If the Palestinians were to be transferred from the auspices of UNRWA to UNHCR, nothing would change. Pursuant to Chapter 5 of the UNHCR's Procedural Standards for Refugee Status Determination, 5.1.2 states "the categories of persons who should be considered to be eligible for derivative status under the right to family unity include:" "all unmarried children of the Principal Applicant who are under 18 years."

Furthermore Chapter 5.1.1 makes it clear that this status is retained after the age of 18. It states "individuals who obtain derivative refugee status enjoy the same rights and entitlements as other recognised refugees and should retain this status notwithstanding the subsequent dissolution of the family through separation, divorce, death, or the fact that the child reaches the age of majority."

In addition, UNHCR cites the Palestinian refugee population number in their "State of the World‘s Refugees" This makes clear that the practice of registering descendants of refugees is not disputed by UNHCR.

So, back to the drawing board Rocco, you lose again.

An interesting talk by a professor of international law and active lawyer of refugee and immigrant issues.

And there is no such beast as the arab states vetoed the law when they saw they would be giving up Mecca and Medina to the Jews. And still you claim it is law when you have been shown it isnt, proving that you dont accept the Jews have any rights and that international laws never work in their favour.

 

[P F Tinmore]

P F Tinmore, et al,

OK let's agree for the moment that these two concepts have this undefinable quality to them. How do you know it was not delivered?

• In 1919, what was the "well-being" of such people?

• In 1919, what was the "development" of such people?

Well, colonialism surely wasn't it.

(COMMENT)

Well, don't worry... It was not the place of the Arab Palestine to even make such a determination; was it ?

Most Respectfully,
R

There you go back to the standard colonialist canard that the natives have no rights.

Ok then why dont you show what rights they had in 1919 when all this took place.

They had the right to take part in talks and that was it

1907 Hague convention.

 

[P F Tinmore]

montelatici, et al,

Well, there is an dilemma here, you just might not recognize it.

(OBSERVATIONS & REFERENCES)

• Consolidated Eligibility and Registration Instructions (CERI) 2006 --- UN Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees in the Near East (UNRWA)

• 1951 Convention Relating to the Status of Refugees Text of the 1967 Protocol Relating to the Status of Refugees Resolution 2198 (XXI) adopted by the United Nations General Assembly

What is a refugee Rocco?

(COMMENT)

As "ubiquitous” as CERI is, it is not law; instruction for the eligibility and criteria for services.
Article 1A of the 1951 Convention sets out the detailed criteria for assessing whether an individual should be granted refugee status. This is true for all refugees, world-wide, except for Palestinians receiving from organs or agencies of the United Nations other than the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees protection or assistance (the UNRWA).

Why are Palestinians not refugees?

(COMMENT)

This is what is called and "engineered dilemma" in which a "refugee" is defined by the UNHRC, but the UNHCR does not apply to Palestinians because they receive services from the UNRWA. However, it should be noticed that if the UNRWA were to disband, the UNHRC picks-up the responsibility. (Which is a whole other topic.)

By 1991, the Arab League had seemingly abandoned its efforts to guarantee minimal legal protection to the Palestinian refugees in the Arab States. Its resolution 5093 (1991) conditioned the treatment of the Palestinians to the rules and laws in force in each state.

Although there is a strong perception that everyone registered with the UNRWA is a "refugee" --- the term "refugee" is really not applicable to the Palestinians. They were marginalized by the UNRWA which has the de facto guardians of the "Right of Return." (Which is a whole other topic.)

Most Respectfully,
R

You are again, incorrect. If the Palestinians were to be transferred from the auspices of UNRWA to UNHCR, nothing would change. Pursuant to Chapter 5 of the UNHCR's Procedural Standards for Refugee Status Determination, 5.1.2 states "the categories of persons who should be considered to be eligible for derivative status under the right to family unity include:" "all unmarried children of the Principal Applicant who are under 18 years."

Furthermore Chapter 5.1.1 makes it clear that this status is retained after the age of 18. It states "individuals who obtain derivative refugee status enjoy the same rights and entitlements as other recognised refugees and should retain this status notwithstanding the subsequent dissolution of the family through separation, divorce, death, or the fact that the child reaches the age of majority."

In addition, UNHCR cites the Palestinian refugee population number in their "State of the World‘s Refugees" This makes clear that the practice of registering descendants of refugees is not disputed by UNHCR.

So, back to the drawing board Rocco, you lose again.

An interesting talk by a professor of international law and active lawyer of refugee and immigrant issues.

And there is no such beast as the arab states vetoed the law when they saw they would be giving up Mecca and Medina to the Jews. And still you claim it is law when you have been shown it isnt, proving that you dont accept the Jews have any rights and that international laws never work in their favour.

 

[P F Tinmore]

And there is no such beast as the arab states vetoed the law when they saw they would be giving up Mecca and Medina to the Jews.

Link?

 

[Hollie]

montelatici, et al,

You did not read very well...

montelatici, et al,

Well, there is an dilemma here, you just might not recognize it.

(OBSERVATIONS & REFERENCES)

• Consolidated Eligibility and Registration Instructions (CERI) 2006 --- UN Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees in the Near East (UNRWA)

• 1951 Convention Relating to the Status of Refugees Text of the 1967 Protocol Relating to the Status of Refugees Resolution 2198 (XXI) adopted by the United Nations General Assembly

What is a refugee Rocco?

(COMMENT)

As "ubiquitous” as CERI is, it is not law; instruction for the eligibility and criteria for services.
Article 1A of the 1951 Convention sets out the detailed criteria for assessing whether an individual should be granted refugee status. This is true for all refugees, world-wide, except for Palestinians receiving from organs or agencies of the United Nations other than the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees protection or assistance (the UNRWA).

Why are Palestinians not refugees?

(COMMENT)

This is what is called and "engineered dilemma" in which a "refugee" is defined by the UNHRC, but the UNHCR does not apply to Palestinians because they receive services from the UNRWA. However, it should be noticed that if the UNRWA were to disband, the UNHRC picks-up the responsibility. (Which is a whole other topic.)

By 1991, the Arab League had seemingly abandoned its efforts to guarantee minimal legal protection to the Palestinian refugees in the Arab States. Its resolution 5093 (1991) conditioned the treatment of the Palestinians to the rules and laws in force in each state.

Although there is a strong perception that everyone registered with the UNRWA is a "refugee" --- the term "refugee" is really not applicable to the Palestinians. They were marginalized by the UNRWA which has the de facto guardians of the "Right of Return." (Which is a whole other topic.)

Most Respectfully,
R

You are again, incorrect. If the Palestinians were to be transferred from the auspices of UNRWA to UNHCR, nothing would change. Pursuant to Chapter 5 of the UNHCR's Procedural Standards for Refugee Status Determination, 5.1.2 states "the categories of persons who should be considered to be eligible for derivative status under the right to family unity include:" "all unmarried children of the Principal Applicant who are under 18 years."

Furthermore Chapter 5.1.1 makes it clear that this status is retained after the age of 18. It states "individuals who obtain derivative refugee status enjoy the same rights and entitlements as other recognised refugees and should retain this status notwithstanding the subsequent dissolution of the family through separation, divorce, death, or the fact that the child reaches the age of majority."

In addition, UNHCR cites the Palestinian refugee population number in their "State of the World‘s Refugees" This makes clear that the practice of registering descendants of refugees is not disputed by UNHCR.

So, back to the drawing board Rocco, you lose again.

(COMMENT)

Important safety tip for those of you at home!

Well, there is often a mix-up between the two words: dependent (a matter of support) and descendent (which is a matter of ancestry). The general term is a use is the "Principle Applicant;" Which our friend "montelatici" correctly uses. It is also important that in terms of the UNHSR there is a difference between "Refugee Status" and that of a Derivative Refugee Status.
​

While I did say this was "a whole other topic," I was very careful not step to out the snapshot in time and discuss a specific criteria. I am very familiar with both the "Procedural Standards for Refugee Status Determination (RSD) under UNHCR's Mandate" --- and --- Revised Note on the Applicability of Article 1D of the 1951 Convention relating to the Status of Refugees to Palestinian Refugees. I give you these links so that you understand what a Principle Applicant is and what a Derivative Applicant is. The Derivative Applicant, is based on the eligibility of the Principle. A family member that derived refugee status, but never lived in the area from which the family was displaced (born after displacement). After that, the RSD is based on the interview by UNHCR personnel. In other words, you Derivative Applicant cannot pass-on refugee status unless it falls into a special case. Like I said, it is complicated.

What I can say is that UNRWA Palestinians eligible under UNHCR Refugee Procedures if they have

• Committed a crimes international crimes (against peace, a war crime, or a crime against humanity)
• Committed a serious non-political crime outside the country of refuge prior to his admission to that country as a refugee;
• Been found guilty of acts contrary to the purposes and principles of the United Nations.
​

What does this mean... All those families of Jihadist, Deadly Fedayeen, Hostile Insurgent, Radicalized Islamist, and Asymmetric Fighters are out of luck.

Most Respectfully,
R

Wrong again. This is getting boring.

1. Freedom fighting is not a crime, it is a duty of the occupied people to resist occupation. The people in German occupied Europe that fought the occupation were granted refugee status, Jews included.

2. It's not complicated at all. Palestine refugees are entitled to a just and lasting solution to their plight. In the absence of and until there is a just solution, it stands to reason that their status as refugees remains.

Your questioning the passing of refugee status through generations stems from your inability to understand the international protection system. This sort of questioning, by ignorant Zionist racists, only distracts from the need to address the real reasons for the protracted Palestinian refugee situation, namely Israel's intransigence with respect to right of return of the refugees and ending the occupation, as required by various UNSC resolutions.

But to top it off, the UNHCR Handbook on Procedures and Criteria for determining Refugee Status states in paragraph 184: "If the head of a family meets the criteria of the definition, [for refugee status] his dependents are normally granted refugee status according to the principle of family unity."

Flailing your Pom Poms as a reward for acts of islamic terrorism is regrettable. You should acquaint yourself with the Hamas Charter. There is no suggestion of freedom fighting in that document. In fact, the Hamas Charter speaks to offensive gee-had and precepts such as insensate Jew hatred that are enshrined in the Islamic hate and war manual otherwise called the Koran.

The imposition of islamist fascism in no way can be described as promoting freedom for anyone.

 

[MJB12741]

montelatici, et al,

Well, there is an dilemma here, you just might not recognize it.

(OBSERVATIONS & REFERENCES)

• Consolidated Eligibility and Registration Instructions (CERI) 2006 --- UN Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees in the Near East (UNRWA)

• 1951 Convention Relating to the Status of Refugees Text of the 1967 Protocol Relating to the Status of Refugees Resolution 2198 (XXI) adopted by the United Nations General Assembly

What is a refugee Rocco?

(COMMENT)

As "ubiquitous” as CERI is, it is not law; instruction for the eligibility and criteria for services.
Article 1A of the 1951 Convention sets out the detailed criteria for assessing whether an individual should be granted refugee status. This is true for all refugees, world-wide, except for Palestinians receiving from organs or agencies of the United Nations other than the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees protection or assistance (the UNRWA).

Why are Palestinians not refugees?

(COMMENT)

This is what is called and "engineered dilemma" in which a "refugee" is defined by the UNHRC, but the UNHCR does not apply to Palestinians because they receive services from the UNRWA. However, it should be noticed that if the UNRWA were to disband, the UNHRC picks-up the responsibility. (Which is a whole other topic.)

By 1991, the Arab League had seemingly abandoned its efforts to guarantee minimal legal protection to the Palestinian refugees in the Arab States. Its resolution 5093 (1991) conditioned the treatment of the Palestinians to the rules and laws in force in each state.

Although there is a strong perception that everyone registered with the UNRWA is a "refugee" --- the term "refugee" is really not applicable to the Palestinians. They were marginalized by the UNRWA which has the de facto guardians of the "Right of Return." (Which is a whole other topic.)

Most Respectfully,
R

You are again, incorrect. If the Palestinians were to be transferred from the auspices of UNRWA to UNHCR, nothing would change. Pursuant to Chapter 5 of the UNHCR's Procedural Standards for Refugee Status Determination, 5.1.2 states "the categories of persons who should be considered to be eligible for derivative status under the right to family unity include:" "all unmarried children of the Principal Applicant who are under 18 years."

Furthermore Chapter 5.1.1 makes it clear that this status is retained after the age of 18. It states "individuals who obtain derivative refugee status enjoy the same rights and entitlements as other recognised refugees and should retain this status notwithstanding the subsequent dissolution of the family through separation, divorce, death, or the fact that the child reaches the age of majority."

In addition, UNHCR cites the Palestinian refugee population number in their "State of the World‘s Refugees" This makes clear that the practice of registering descendants of refugees is not disputed by UNHCR.

So, back to the drawing board Rocco, you lose again.

An interesting talk by a professor of international law and active lawyer of refugee and immigrant issues.

Why is it that no surrounding Arab country, who know the Palestinians best, will grant them any right of return?

 

[Mindful]

montelatici, et al,

Well, there is an dilemma here, you just might not recognize it.

(OBSERVATIONS & REFERENCES)

• Consolidated Eligibility and Registration Instructions (CERI) 2006 --- UN Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees in the Near East (UNRWA)

• 1951 Convention Relating to the Status of Refugees Text of the 1967 Protocol Relating to the Status of Refugees Resolution 2198 (XXI) adopted by the United Nations General Assembly

What is a refugee Rocco?

(COMMENT)

As "ubiquitous” as CERI is, it is not law; instruction for the eligibility and criteria for services.
Article 1A of the 1951 Convention sets out the detailed criteria for assessing whether an individual should be granted refugee status. This is true for all refugees, world-wide, except for Palestinians receiving from organs or agencies of the United Nations other than the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees protection or assistance (the UNRWA).

Why are Palestinians not refugees?

(COMMENT)

This is what is called and "engineered dilemma" in which a "refugee" is defined by the UNHRC, but the UNHCR does not apply to Palestinians because they receive services from the UNRWA. However, it should be noticed that if the UNRWA were to disband, the UNHRC picks-up the responsibility. (Which is a whole other topic.)

By 1991, the Arab League had seemingly abandoned its efforts to guarantee minimal legal protection to the Palestinian refugees in the Arab States. Its resolution 5093 (1991) conditioned the treatment of the Palestinians to the rules and laws in force in each state.

Although there is a strong perception that everyone registered with the UNRWA is a "refugee" --- the term "refugee" is really not applicable to the Palestinians. They were marginalized by the UNRWA which has the de facto guardians of the "Right of Return." (Which is a whole other topic.)

Most Respectfully,
R

You are again, incorrect. If the Palestinians were to be transferred from the auspices of UNRWA to UNHCR, nothing would change. Pursuant to Chapter 5 of the UNHCR's Procedural Standards for Refugee Status Determination, 5.1.2 states "the categories of persons who should be considered to be eligible for derivative status under the right to family unity include:" "all unmarried children of the Principal Applicant who are under 18 years."

Furthermore Chapter 5.1.1 makes it clear that this status is retained after the age of 18. It states "individuals who obtain derivative refugee status enjoy the same rights and entitlements as other recognised refugees and should retain this status notwithstanding the subsequent dissolution of the family through separation, divorce, death, or the fact that the child reaches the age of majority."

In addition, UNHCR cites the Palestinian refugee population number in their "State of the World‘s Refugees" This makes clear that the practice of registering descendants of refugees is not disputed by UNHCR.

So, back to the drawing board Rocco, you lose again.

An interesting talk by a professor of international law and active lawyer of refugee and immigrant issues.

Why is it that no surrounding Arab country, who know the Palestinians best, will grant them any right of return?

Good question.

Palestinians who have been languishing in Syrian refugee camps for years, have never been granted citizenship.

There were 6 million displaced persons in Europe following the end of WW2. What happened to those people? They must have been absorbed into different countries. Certainly no sign of camps, the present migrant situation notwithstanding.

 

[P F Tinmore]

montelatici, et al,

Well, there is an dilemma here, you just might not recognize it.

(OBSERVATIONS & REFERENCES)

• Consolidated Eligibility and Registration Instructions (CERI) 2006 --- UN Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees in the Near East (UNRWA)

• 1951 Convention Relating to the Status of Refugees Text of the 1967 Protocol Relating to the Status of Refugees Resolution 2198 (XXI) adopted by the United Nations General Assembly

What is a refugee Rocco?

(COMMENT)

As "ubiquitous” as CERI is, it is not law; instruction for the eligibility and criteria for services.
Article 1A of the 1951 Convention sets out the detailed criteria for assessing whether an individual should be granted refugee status. This is true for all refugees, world-wide, except for Palestinians receiving from organs or agencies of the United Nations other than the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees protection or assistance (the UNRWA).

Why are Palestinians not refugees?

(COMMENT)

This is what is called and "engineered dilemma" in which a "refugee" is defined by the UNHRC, but the UNHCR does not apply to Palestinians because they receive services from the UNRWA. However, it should be noticed that if the UNRWA were to disband, the UNHRC picks-up the responsibility. (Which is a whole other topic.)

By 1991, the Arab League had seemingly abandoned its efforts to guarantee minimal legal protection to the Palestinian refugees in the Arab States. Its resolution 5093 (1991) conditioned the treatment of the Palestinians to the rules and laws in force in each state.

Although there is a strong perception that everyone registered with the UNRWA is a "refugee" --- the term "refugee" is really not applicable to the Palestinians. They were marginalized by the UNRWA which has the de facto guardians of the "Right of Return." (Which is a whole other topic.)

Most Respectfully,
R

You are again, incorrect. If the Palestinians were to be transferred from the auspices of UNRWA to UNHCR, nothing would change. Pursuant to Chapter 5 of the UNHCR's Procedural Standards for Refugee Status Determination, 5.1.2 states "the categories of persons who should be considered to be eligible for derivative status under the right to family unity include:" "all unmarried children of the Principal Applicant who are under 18 years."

Furthermore Chapter 5.1.1 makes it clear that this status is retained after the age of 18. It states "individuals who obtain derivative refugee status enjoy the same rights and entitlements as other recognised refugees and should retain this status notwithstanding the subsequent dissolution of the family through separation, divorce, death, or the fact that the child reaches the age of majority."

In addition, UNHCR cites the Palestinian refugee population number in their "State of the World‘s Refugees" This makes clear that the practice of registering descendants of refugees is not disputed by UNHCR.

So, back to the drawing board Rocco, you lose again.

An interesting talk by a professor of international law and active lawyer of refugee and immigrant issues.

Why is it that no surrounding Arab country, who know the Palestinians best, will grant them any right of return?

Because they are not from those countries.

 

[Mindful]

montelatici, et al,

You did not read very well...

montelatici, et al,

Well, there is an dilemma here, you just might not recognize it.

(OBSERVATIONS & REFERENCES)

• Consolidated Eligibility and Registration Instructions (CERI) 2006 --- UN Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees in the Near East (UNRWA)

• 1951 Convention Relating to the Status of Refugees Text of the 1967 Protocol Relating to the Status of Refugees Resolution 2198 (XXI) adopted by the United Nations General Assembly

What is a refugee Rocco?

(COMMENT)

As "ubiquitous” as CERI is, it is not law; instruction for the eligibility and criteria for services.
Article 1A of the 1951 Convention sets out the detailed criteria for assessing whether an individual should be granted refugee status. This is true for all refugees, world-wide, except for Palestinians receiving from organs or agencies of the United Nations other than the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees protection or assistance (the UNRWA).

Why are Palestinians not refugees?

(COMMENT)

This is what is called and "engineered dilemma" in which a "refugee" is defined by the UNHRC, but the UNHCR does not apply to Palestinians because they receive services from the UNRWA. However, it should be noticed that if the UNRWA were to disband, the UNHRC picks-up the responsibility. (Which is a whole other topic.)

By 1991, the Arab League had seemingly abandoned its efforts to guarantee minimal legal protection to the Palestinian refugees in the Arab States. Its resolution 5093 (1991) conditioned the treatment of the Palestinians to the rules and laws in force in each state.

Although there is a strong perception that everyone registered with the UNRWA is a "refugee" --- the term "refugee" is really not applicable to the Palestinians. They were marginalized by the UNRWA which has the de facto guardians of the "Right of Return." (Which is a whole other topic.)

Most Respectfully,
R

You are again, incorrect. If the Palestinians were to be transferred from the auspices of UNRWA to UNHCR, nothing would change. Pursuant to Chapter 5 of the UNHCR's Procedural Standards for Refugee Status Determination, 5.1.2 states "the categories of persons who should be considered to be eligible for derivative status under the right to family unity include:" "all unmarried children of the Principal Applicant who are under 18 years."

Furthermore Chapter 5.1.1 makes it clear that this status is retained after the age of 18. It states "individuals who obtain derivative refugee status enjoy the same rights and entitlements as other recognised refugees and should retain this status notwithstanding the subsequent dissolution of the family through separation, divorce, death, or the fact that the child reaches the age of majority."

In addition, UNHCR cites the Palestinian refugee population number in their "State of the World‘s Refugees" This makes clear that the practice of registering descendants of refugees is not disputed by UNHCR.

So, back to the drawing board Rocco, you lose again.

(COMMENT)

Important safety tip for those of you at home!

Well, there is often a mix-up between the two words: dependent (a matter of support) and descendent (which is a matter of ancestry). The general term is a use is the "Principle Applicant;" Which our friend "montelatici" correctly uses. It is also important that in terms of the UNHSR there is a difference between "Refugee Status" and that of a Derivative Refugee Status.
​

While I did say this was "a whole other topic," I was very careful not step to out the snapshot in time and discuss a specific criteria. I am very familiar with both the "Procedural Standards for Refugee Status Determination (RSD) under UNHCR's Mandate" --- and --- Revised Note on the Applicability of Article 1D of the 1951 Convention relating to the Status of Refugees to Palestinian Refugees. I give you these links so that you understand what a Principle Applicant is and what a Derivative Applicant is. The Derivative Applicant, is based on the eligibility of the Principle. A family member that derived refugee status, but never lived in the area from which the family was displaced (born after displacement). After that, the RSD is based on the interview by UNHCR personnel. In other words, you Derivative Applicant cannot pass-on refugee status unless it falls into a special case. Like I said, it is complicated.

What I can say is that UNRWA Palestinians eligible under UNHCR Refugee Procedures if they have

• Committed a crimes international crimes (against peace, a war crime, or a crime against humanity)
• Committed a serious non-political crime outside the country of refuge prior to his admission to that country as a refugee;
• Been found guilty of acts contrary to the purposes and principles of the United Nations.
​

What does this mean... All those families of Jihadist, Deadly Fedayeen, Hostile Insurgent, Radicalized Islamist, and Asymmetric Fighters are out of luck.

Most Respectfully,
R

Wrong again. This is getting boring.

1. Freedom fighting is not a crime, it is a duty of the occupied people to resist occupation. The people in German occupied Europe that fought the occupation were granted refugee status, Jews included.

2. It's not complicated at all. Palestine refugees are entitled to a just and lasting solution to their plight. In the absence of and until there is a just solution, it stands to reason that their status as refugees remains.

Your questioning the passing of refugee status through generations stems from your inability to understand the international protection system. This sort of questioning, by ignorant Zionist racists, only distracts from the need to address the real reasons for the protracted Palestinian refugee situation, namely Israel's intransigence with respect to right of return of the refugees and ending the occupation, as required by various UNSC resolutions.

But to top it off, the UNHCR Handbook on Procedures and Criteria for determining Refugee Status states in paragraph 184: "If the head of a family meets the criteria of the definition, [for refugee status] his dependents are normally granted refugee status according to the principle of family unity."

Non countries can't be occupied.

 

[RoccoR]

P F Tinmore, MJB12741, et al,

Well this is not really honesty.

Because they are not from those countries.

(COMMENT)

All across Europe, from the UK to the Middle Eastern Coast, and all the neighboring states have had to deal with Islamic Immigrant and Refugees have been accepted. (Not an invasion.)

Most Respectfully,
R

 

[P F Tinmore]

montelatici, et al,

You did not read very well...

montelatici, et al,

Well, there is an dilemma here, you just might not recognize it.

(OBSERVATIONS & REFERENCES)

• Consolidated Eligibility and Registration Instructions (CERI) 2006 --- UN Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees in the Near East (UNRWA)

• 1951 Convention Relating to the Status of Refugees Text of the 1967 Protocol Relating to the Status of Refugees Resolution 2198 (XXI) adopted by the United Nations General Assembly

What is a refugee Rocco?

(COMMENT)

As "ubiquitous” as CERI is, it is not law; instruction for the eligibility and criteria for services.
Article 1A of the 1951 Convention sets out the detailed criteria for assessing whether an individual should be granted refugee status. This is true for all refugees, world-wide, except for Palestinians receiving from organs or agencies of the United Nations other than the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees protection or assistance (the UNRWA).

Why are Palestinians not refugees?

(COMMENT)

This is what is called and "engineered dilemma" in which a "refugee" is defined by the UNHRC, but the UNHCR does not apply to Palestinians because they receive services from the UNRWA. However, it should be noticed that if the UNRWA were to disband, the UNHRC picks-up the responsibility. (Which is a whole other topic.)

By 1991, the Arab League had seemingly abandoned its efforts to guarantee minimal legal protection to the Palestinian refugees in the Arab States. Its resolution 5093 (1991) conditioned the treatment of the Palestinians to the rules and laws in force in each state.

Although there is a strong perception that everyone registered with the UNRWA is a "refugee" --- the term "refugee" is really not applicable to the Palestinians. They were marginalized by the UNRWA which has the de facto guardians of the "Right of Return." (Which is a whole other topic.)

Most Respectfully,
R

You are again, incorrect. If the Palestinians were to be transferred from the auspices of UNRWA to UNHCR, nothing would change. Pursuant to Chapter 5 of the UNHCR's Procedural Standards for Refugee Status Determination, 5.1.2 states "the categories of persons who should be considered to be eligible for derivative status under the right to family unity include:" "all unmarried children of the Principal Applicant who are under 18 years."

Furthermore Chapter 5.1.1 makes it clear that this status is retained after the age of 18. It states "individuals who obtain derivative refugee status enjoy the same rights and entitlements as other recognised refugees and should retain this status notwithstanding the subsequent dissolution of the family through separation, divorce, death, or the fact that the child reaches the age of majority."

In addition, UNHCR cites the Palestinian refugee population number in their "State of the World‘s Refugees" This makes clear that the practice of registering descendants of refugees is not disputed by UNHCR.

So, back to the drawing board Rocco, you lose again.

(COMMENT)

Important safety tip for those of you at home!

Well, there is often a mix-up between the two words: dependent (a matter of support) and descendent (which is a matter of ancestry). The general term is a use is the "Principle Applicant;" Which our friend "montelatici" correctly uses. It is also important that in terms of the UNHSR there is a difference between "Refugee Status" and that of a Derivative Refugee Status.
​

While I did say this was "a whole other topic," I was very careful not step to out the snapshot in time and discuss a specific criteria. I am very familiar with both the "Procedural Standards for Refugee Status Determination (RSD) under UNHCR's Mandate" --- and --- Revised Note on the Applicability of Article 1D of the 1951 Convention relating to the Status of Refugees to Palestinian Refugees. I give you these links so that you understand what a Principle Applicant is and what a Derivative Applicant is. The Derivative Applicant, is based on the eligibility of the Principle. A family member that derived refugee status, but never lived in the area from which the family was displaced (born after displacement). After that, the RSD is based on the interview by UNHCR personnel. In other words, you Derivative Applicant cannot pass-on refugee status unless it falls into a special case. Like I said, it is complicated.

What I can say is that UNRWA Palestinians eligible under UNHCR Refugee Procedures if they have

• Committed a crimes international crimes (against peace, a war crime, or a crime against humanity)
• Committed a serious non-political crime outside the country of refuge prior to his admission to that country as a refugee;
• Been found guilty of acts contrary to the purposes and principles of the United Nations.
​

What does this mean... All those families of Jihadist, Deadly Fedayeen, Hostile Insurgent, Radicalized Islamist, and Asymmetric Fighters are out of luck.

Most Respectfully,
R

Wrong again. This is getting boring.

1. Freedom fighting is not a crime, it is a duty of the occupied people to resist occupation. The people in German occupied Europe that fought the occupation were granted refugee status, Jews included.

2. It's not complicated at all. Palestine refugees are entitled to a just and lasting solution to their plight. In the absence of and until there is a just solution, it stands to reason that their status as refugees remains.

Your questioning the passing of refugee status through generations stems from your inability to understand the international protection system. This sort of questioning, by ignorant Zionist racists, only distracts from the need to address the real reasons for the protracted Palestinian refugee situation, namely Israel's intransigence with respect to right of return of the refugees and ending the occupation, as required by various UNSC resolutions.

But to top it off, the UNHCR Handbook on Procedures and Criteria for determining Refugee Status states in paragraph 184: "If the head of a family meets the criteria of the definition, [for refugee status] his dependents are normally granted refugee status according to the principle of family unity."

Non countries can't be occupied.

OK? So, how were the West Bank and Gaza occupied from 1949 to 1967 by Jordan and Egypt.

 

[P F Tinmore]

P F Tinmore, MJB12741, et al,

Well this is not really honesty.

Because they are not from those countries.

(COMMENT)

All across Europe, from the UK to the Middle Eastern Coast, and all the neighboring states have had to deal with Islamic Immigrant and Refugees have been accepted. (Not an invasion.)

Most Respectfully,
R

 

[Mindful]

montelatici, et al,

You did not read very well...

montelatici, et al,

Well, there is an dilemma here, you just might not recognize it.

(OBSERVATIONS & REFERENCES)

• Consolidated Eligibility and Registration Instructions (CERI) 2006 --- UN Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees in the Near East (UNRWA)

• 1951 Convention Relating to the Status of Refugees Text of the 1967 Protocol Relating to the Status of Refugees Resolution 2198 (XXI) adopted by the United Nations General Assembly

(COMMENT)

As "ubiquitous” as CERI is, it is not law; instruction for the eligibility and criteria for services.
Article 1A of the 1951 Convention sets out the detailed criteria for assessing whether an individual should be granted refugee status. This is true for all refugees, world-wide, except for Palestinians receiving from organs or agencies of the United Nations other than the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees protection or assistance (the UNRWA).

(COMMENT)

This is what is called and "engineered dilemma" in which a "refugee" is defined by the UNHRC, but the UNHCR does not apply to Palestinians because they receive services from the UNRWA. However, it should be noticed that if the UNRWA were to disband, the UNHRC picks-up the responsibility. (Which is a whole other topic.)
Although there is a strong perception that everyone registered with the UNRWA is a "refugee" --- the term "refugee" is really not applicable to the Palestinians. They were marginalized by the UNRWA which has the de facto guardians of the "Right of Return." (Which is a whole other topic.)

Most Respectfully,
R

You are again, incorrect. If the Palestinians were to be transferred from the auspices of UNRWA to UNHCR, nothing would change. Pursuant to Chapter 5 of the UNHCR's Procedural Standards for Refugee Status Determination, 5.1.2 states "the categories of persons who should be considered to be eligible for derivative status under the right to family unity include:" "all unmarried children of the Principal Applicant who are under 18 years."

Furthermore Chapter 5.1.1 makes it clear that this status is retained after the age of 18. It states "individuals who obtain derivative refugee status enjoy the same rights and entitlements as other recognised refugees and should retain this status notwithstanding the subsequent dissolution of the family through separation, divorce, death, or the fact that the child reaches the age of majority."

In addition, UNHCR cites the Palestinian refugee population number in their "State of the World‘s Refugees" This makes clear that the practice of registering descendants of refugees is not disputed by UNHCR.

So, back to the drawing board Rocco, you lose again.

(COMMENT)

Important safety tip for those of you at home!

Well, there is often a mix-up between the two words: dependent (a matter of support) and descendent (which is a matter of ancestry). The general term is a use is the "Principle Applicant;" Which our friend "montelatici" correctly uses. It is also important that in terms of the UNHSR there is a difference between "Refugee Status" and that of a Derivative Refugee Status.
​

While I did say this was "a whole other topic," I was very careful not step to out the snapshot in time and discuss a specific criteria. I am very familiar with both the "Procedural Standards for Refugee Status Determination (RSD) under UNHCR's Mandate" --- and --- Revised Note on the Applicability of Article 1D of the 1951 Convention relating to the Status of Refugees to Palestinian Refugees. I give you these links so that you understand what a Principle Applicant is and what a Derivative Applicant is. The Derivative Applicant, is based on the eligibility of the Principle. A family member that derived refugee status, but never lived in the area from which the family was displaced (born after displacement). After that, the RSD is based on the interview by UNHCR personnel. In other words, you Derivative Applicant cannot pass-on refugee status unless it falls into a special case. Like I said, it is complicated.

What I can say is that UNRWA Palestinians eligible under UNHCR Refugee Procedures if they have

• Committed a crimes international crimes (against peace, a war crime, or a crime against humanity)
• Committed a serious non-political crime outside the country of refuge prior to his admission to that country as a refugee;
• Been found guilty of acts contrary to the purposes and principles of the United Nations.
​

What does this mean... All those families of Jihadist, Deadly Fedayeen, Hostile Insurgent, Radicalized Islamist, and Asymmetric Fighters are out of luck.

Most Respectfully,
R

Wrong again. This is getting boring.

1. Freedom fighting is not a crime, it is a duty of the occupied people to resist occupation. The people in German occupied Europe that fought the occupation were granted refugee status, Jews included.

2. It's not complicated at all. Palestine refugees are entitled to a just and lasting solution to their plight. In the absence of and until there is a just solution, it stands to reason that their status as refugees remains.

Your questioning the passing of refugee status through generations stems from your inability to understand the international protection system. This sort of questioning, by ignorant Zionist racists, only distracts from the need to address the real reasons for the protracted Palestinian refugee situation, namely Israel's intransigence with respect to right of return of the refugees and ending the occupation, as required by various UNSC resolutions.

But to top it off, the UNHCR Handbook on Procedures and Criteria for determining Refugee Status states in paragraph 184: "If the head of a family meets the criteria of the definition, [for refugee status] his dependents are normally granted refugee status according to the principle of family unity."

Non countries can't be occupied.

OK? So, how were the West Bank and Gaza occupied from 1949 to 1967 by Jordan and Egypt.

Annexed you mean.

 

[P F Tinmore]

montelatici, et al,

You did not read very well...

You are again, incorrect. If the Palestinians were to be transferred from the auspices of UNRWA to UNHCR, nothing would change. Pursuant to Chapter 5 of the UNHCR's Procedural Standards for Refugee Status Determination, 5.1.2 states "the categories of persons who should be considered to be eligible for derivative status under the right to family unity include:" "all unmarried children of the Principal Applicant who are under 18 years."

Furthermore Chapter 5.1.1 makes it clear that this status is retained after the age of 18. It states "individuals who obtain derivative refugee status enjoy the same rights and entitlements as other recognised refugees and should retain this status notwithstanding the subsequent dissolution of the family through separation, divorce, death, or the fact that the child reaches the age of majority."

In addition, UNHCR cites the Palestinian refugee population number in their "State of the World‘s Refugees" This makes clear that the practice of registering descendants of refugees is not disputed by UNHCR.

So, back to the drawing board Rocco, you lose again.

(COMMENT)

Important safety tip for those of you at home!

Well, there is often a mix-up between the two words: dependent (a matter of support) and descendent (which is a matter of ancestry). The general term is a use is the "Principle Applicant;" Which our friend "montelatici" correctly uses. It is also important that in terms of the UNHSR there is a difference between "Refugee Status" and that of a Derivative Refugee Status.
​

While I did say this was "a whole other topic," I was very careful not step to out the snapshot in time and discuss a specific criteria. I am very familiar with both the "Procedural Standards for Refugee Status Determination (RSD) under UNHCR's Mandate" --- and --- Revised Note on the Applicability of Article 1D of the 1951 Convention relating to the Status of Refugees to Palestinian Refugees. I give you these links so that you understand what a Principle Applicant is and what a Derivative Applicant is. The Derivative Applicant, is based on the eligibility of the Principle. A family member that derived refugee status, but never lived in the area from which the family was displaced (born after displacement). After that, the RSD is based on the interview by UNHCR personnel. In other words, you Derivative Applicant cannot pass-on refugee status unless it falls into a special case. Like I said, it is complicated.

What I can say is that UNRWA Palestinians eligible under UNHCR Refugee Procedures if they have

• Committed a crimes international crimes (against peace, a war crime, or a crime against humanity)
• Committed a serious non-political crime outside the country of refuge prior to his admission to that country as a refugee;
• Been found guilty of acts contrary to the purposes and principles of the United Nations.
​

What does this mean... All those families of Jihadist, Deadly Fedayeen, Hostile Insurgent, Radicalized Islamist, and Asymmetric Fighters are out of luck.

Most Respectfully,
R

Wrong again. This is getting boring.

1. Freedom fighting is not a crime, it is a duty of the occupied people to resist occupation. The people in German occupied Europe that fought the occupation were granted refugee status, Jews included.

2. It's not complicated at all. Palestine refugees are entitled to a just and lasting solution to their plight. In the absence of and until there is a just solution, it stands to reason that their status as refugees remains.

Your questioning the passing of refugee status through generations stems from your inability to understand the international protection system. This sort of questioning, by ignorant Zionist racists, only distracts from the need to address the real reasons for the protracted Palestinian refugee situation, namely Israel's intransigence with respect to right of return of the refugees and ending the occupation, as required by various UNSC resolutions.

But to top it off, the UNHCR Handbook on Procedures and Criteria for determining Refugee Status states in paragraph 184: "If the head of a family meets the criteria of the definition, [for refugee status] his dependents are normally granted refugee status according to the principle of family unity."

Non countries can't be occupied.

OK? So, how were the West Bank and Gaza occupied from 1949 to 1967 by Jordan and Egypt.

Annexed you mean.

Not so. Jordan attempted to annex the West Bank, but annexing occupied territory is illegal. The world never recognized that attempted annexation.

Egypt never attempted to annex Gaza.

 

[Mindful]

montelatici, et al,

You did not read very well...

(COMMENT)

Important safety tip for those of you at home!

Well, there is often a mix-up between the two words: dependent (a matter of support) and descendent (which is a matter of ancestry). The general term is a use is the "Principle Applicant;" Which our friend "montelatici" correctly uses. It is also important that in terms of the UNHSR there is a difference between "Refugee Status" and that of a Derivative Refugee Status.
​

While I did say this was "a whole other topic," I was very careful not step to out the snapshot in time and discuss a specific criteria. I am very familiar with both the "Procedural Standards for Refugee Status Determination (RSD) under UNHCR's Mandate" --- and --- Revised Note on the Applicability of Article 1D of the 1951 Convention relating to the Status of Refugees to Palestinian Refugees. I give you these links so that you understand what a Principle Applicant is and what a Derivative Applicant is. The Derivative Applicant, is based on the eligibility of the Principle. A family member that derived refugee status, but never lived in the area from which the family was displaced (born after displacement). After that, the RSD is based on the interview by UNHCR personnel. In other words, you Derivative Applicant cannot pass-on refugee status unless it falls into a special case. Like I said, it is complicated.

What I can say is that UNRWA Palestinians eligible under UNHCR Refugee Procedures if they have

• Committed a crimes international crimes (against peace, a war crime, or a crime against humanity)
• Committed a serious non-political crime outside the country of refuge prior to his admission to that country as a refugee;
• Been found guilty of acts contrary to the purposes and principles of the United Nations.
​

What does this mean... All those families of Jihadist, Deadly Fedayeen, Hostile Insurgent, Radicalized Islamist, and Asymmetric Fighters are out of luck.

Most Respectfully,
R

Wrong again. This is getting boring.

1. Freedom fighting is not a crime, it is a duty of the occupied people to resist occupation. The people in German occupied Europe that fought the occupation were granted refugee status, Jews included.

2. It's not complicated at all. Palestine refugees are entitled to a just and lasting solution to their plight. In the absence of and until there is a just solution, it stands to reason that their status as refugees remains.

Your questioning the passing of refugee status through generations stems from your inability to understand the international protection system. This sort of questioning, by ignorant Zionist racists, only distracts from the need to address the real reasons for the protracted Palestinian refugee situation, namely Israel's intransigence with respect to right of return of the refugees and ending the occupation, as required by various UNSC resolutions.

But to top it off, the UNHCR Handbook on Procedures and Criteria for determining Refugee Status states in paragraph 184: "If the head of a family meets the criteria of the definition, [for refugee status] his dependents are normally granted refugee status according to the principle of family unity."

Non countries can't be occupied.

OK? So, how were the West Bank and Gaza occupied from 1949 to 1967 by Jordan and Egypt.

Annexed you mean.

Not so. Jordan attempted to annex the West Bank, but annexing occupied territory is illegal. The world never recognized that attempted annexation.

Egypt never attempted to annex Gaza.

More blah blah.

 

[P F Tinmore]

Wrong again. This is getting boring.

1. Freedom fighting is not a crime, it is a duty of the occupied people to resist occupation. The people in German occupied Europe that fought the occupation were granted refugee status, Jews included.

2. It's not complicated at all. Palestine refugees are entitled to a just and lasting solution to their plight. In the absence of and until there is a just solution, it stands to reason that their status as refugees remains.

Your questioning the passing of refugee status through generations stems from your inability to understand the international protection system. This sort of questioning, by ignorant Zionist racists, only distracts from the need to address the real reasons for the protracted Palestinian refugee situation, namely Israel's intransigence with respect to right of return of the refugees and ending the occupation, as required by various UNSC resolutions.

But to top it off, the UNHCR Handbook on Procedures and Criteria for determining Refugee Status states in paragraph 184: "If the head of a family meets the criteria of the definition, [for refugee status] his dependents are normally granted refugee status according to the principle of family unity."

Non countries can't be occupied.

OK? So, how were the West Bank and Gaza occupied from 1949 to 1967 by Jordan and Egypt.

Annexed you mean.

Not so. Jordan attempted to annex the West Bank, but annexing occupied territory is illegal. The world never recognized that attempted annexation.

Egypt never attempted to annex Gaza.

More blah blah.

True. Look it up.

 

[Mindful]

Non countries can't be occupied.

OK? So, how were the West Bank and Gaza occupied from 1949 to 1967 by Jordan and Egypt.

Annexed you mean.

Not so. Jordan attempted to annex the West Bank, but annexing occupied territory is illegal. The world never recognized that attempted annexation.

Egypt never attempted to annex Gaza.

More blah blah.

True. Look it up.

Not to feed your sick obsession.

 

[RoccoR]

P F Tinmore, et al,

Well, you got part of this correct; I give you a D+.

montelatici, et al,

You did not read very well...

(COMMENT)

Important safety tip for those of you at home!

Well, there is often a mix-up between the two words: dependent (a matter of support) and descendent (which is a matter of ancestry). The general term is a use is the "Principle Applicant;" Which our friend "montelatici" correctly uses. It is also important that in terms of the UNHSR there is a difference between "Refugee Status" and that of a Derivative Refugee Status.
​

While I did say this was "a whole other topic," I was very careful not step to out the snapshot in time and discuss a specific criteria. I am very familiar with both the "Procedural Standards for Refugee Status Determination (RSD) under UNHCR's Mandate" --- and --- Revised Note on the Applicability of Article 1D of the 1951 Convention relating to the Status of Refugees to Palestinian Refugees. I give you these links so that you understand what a Principle Applicant is and what a Derivative Applicant is. The Derivative Applicant, is based on the eligibility of the Principle. A family member that derived refugee status, but never lived in the area from which the family was displaced (born after displacement). After that, the RSD is based on the interview by UNHCR personnel. In other words, you Derivative Applicant cannot pass-on refugee status unless it falls into a special case. Like I said, it is complicated.

What I can say is that UNRWA Palestinians eligible under UNHCR Refugee Procedures if they have

• Committed a crimes international crimes (against peace, a war crime, or a crime against humanity)
• Committed a serious non-political crime outside the country of refuge prior to his admission to that country as a refugee;
• Been found guilty of acts contrary to the purposes and principles of the United Nations.
​

What does this mean... All those families of Jihadist, Deadly Fedayeen, Hostile Insurgent, Radicalized Islamist, and Asymmetric Fighters are out of luck.

Most Respectfully,
R

Wrong again. This is getting boring.

1. Freedom fighting is not a crime, it is a duty of the occupied people to resist occupation. The people in German occupied Europe that fought the occupation were granted refugee status, Jews included.

2. It's not complicated at all. Palestine refugees are entitled to a just and lasting solution to their plight. In the absence of and until there is a just solution, it stands to reason that their status as refugees remains.

Your questioning the passing of refugee status through generations stems from your inability to understand the international protection system. This sort of questioning, by ignorant Zionist racists, only distracts from the need to address the real reasons for the protracted Palestinian refugee situation, namely Israel's intransigence with respect to right of return of the refugees and ending the occupation, as required by various UNSC resolutions.

But to top it off, the UNHCR Handbook on Procedures and Criteria for determining Refugee Status states in paragraph 184: "If the head of a family meets the criteria of the definition, [for refugee status] his dependents are normally granted refugee status according to the principle of family unity."

Non countries can't be occupied.

OK? So, how were the West Bank and Gaza occupied from 1949 to 1967 by Jordan and Egypt.

Annexed you mean.

Not so. Jordan attempted to annex the West Bank, but annexing occupied territory is illegal. The world never recognized that attempted annexation.

Egypt never attempted to annex Gaza.

(COMMENT)

• On 1 December 1948 some three thousand delegates attended a Palestinian Congress in Jericho, just north of the Dead Sea, and passed a resolution calling for the unification of Jordan and Palestine under Abdullah. A Palestinian conference in Ramallah personally attended by King Abdullah on 26 December 1948 declared its support for the Jericho Conference resolution, as did a subsequent Nablus conference, calling for unification of the two banks of the Jordan under the Hashemite crown.

• Out of the six resolutions the Arab Palestinians adopted, one of them was --- the desire for unity between Transjordan and Arab Palestine and therefore make known their wish that Arab Palestine be annexed immediately to Jordan; and further the Arab Palestinians supported the motion to recognize Abdullah as their King and request him proclaim himself King of new territory.

• "On April 11, 1950, elections were held for a new Jordanian parliament in which the Palestinian Arabs of the West Bank were equally represented. Thirteen days later, Parliament unanimously approved a motion to unite the two banks of the Jordan River (see A/AC.25/SR.148 28 April 1950 - Summary Record), constitutionally expanding the Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan in order to safeguard what was left of the Arab territory of Palestine from further Zionist expansion." The annexation went virtually unopposed.

• Without regard to what the UN/International Community had to say, this is part of the Arab Palestinian "Self-Determination." Further, the recognition of a state merely signifies that the state which recognizes it accepts the personality of the other with all the rights and duties determined by international law. Recognition is unconditional and irrevocable. (Article 6, Montevideo Conference 1933)

• Similarly the Gaza Strip was overtly administered (SEP 48) by the All Palestine Government (APG) to 1959. "The Gaza Strip was under Egyptian military rule from 1949 to 1956 and again from 1957 to 1967. From the beginning, the area’s chief economic and social problem was the presence of large numbers of Palestinian Arab refugees living in extreme poverty in squalid camps. The Egyptian government did not consider the area part of Egypt and did not allow the refugees to become Egyptian citizens or to migrate to Egypt or to other Arab countries where they might be integrated into the population. The APG was the first failed attempt to establish a Palestinian State. And while various sources describe it inception
differently (some say self-determination, some say on the authority of the Egyptian military, and still others say Egypt was the power behind the APG, they all universally accept that it was under Egyptian Authority that, in 1959, transferred the Administration of the APG to the Egyptian Military Governorship.

In both cases, by the time the 1967 Six-Day War was initiated, the West Bank and the Gaza Strip had two entirely different types of government exercising authority.

Most Respectfully,
R