Palestine Today

[Ecocertifmrl]

Oh, and Israel actually does not claim Area C as hers. She claims it is disputed. She claims she has full civil and military control over it. Which is perfectly accurate.

No. You're wrong. But ill prove it some other time.

 

[Shusha]

Oh, and Israel actually does not claim Area C as hers. She claims it is disputed. She claims she has full civil and military control over it. Which is perfectly accurate.

No. You're wrong. But ill prove it some other time.

Wrong that Israel doesn't claim it? Or wrong that she has full civil and military control over it?

Because if its the latter, don't bother, easy enough to copy and paste Oslo to prove that one true.

Wrong that Israel doesn't claim it? Oh there are parts of it she is GOING to claim. There are talks in the Knesset of annexing certain blocs as recent as a few weeks ago.

But what you are trying to show is that there is some demarcation line IN LAW which differentiates land which is under Israeli sovereignty/civil control and land which is not. Good luck.

 

[P F Tinmore]

I'm sure you give no value to UN

The UN is virulently anti-semitic. But if you want to have a discussion about international law and certain UN resolutions, I'm game. Don't bother to bring up General Assembly resolutions, as they are non-binding. Other than that, feel free.

The UN has recognized Israel's taking land as illegal. Yet you clame it is yours.

The UN has recognized Israel as a sovereign Nation. Since there is no other sovereign Nation in the territory, it can only be Israel's. There is no border or treaty or agreement to say which is Israel's and which belongs to another political entity. Except Oslo, which grants Israel full sovereign control over Area C. So what land does not belong to Israel that they are taking? And what legal instrument are you using to prove that there is a defined border between that place and Israel?

And what legal instrument are you using to prove that there is a defined border between that place and Israel?

There are no borders around the West Bank or Gaza.

 

[Shusha]

There are no borders around the West Bank or Gaza.

Thank you! Now will you kindly let your fellow TPs know that?

 

[rylah]

I'm sure you give no value to UN

The UN is virulently anti-semitic. But if you want to have a discussion about international law and certain UN resolutions, I'm game. Don't bother to bring up General Assembly resolutions, as they are non-binding. Other than that, feel free.

The UN has recognized Israel's taking land as illegal. Yet you clame it is yours.

The UN has recognized Israel as a sovereign Nation. Since there is no other sovereign Nation in the territory, it can only be Israel's. There is no border or treaty or agreement to say which is Israel's and which belongs to another political entity. Except Oslo, which grants Israel full sovereign control over Area C. So what land does not belong to Israel that they are taking? And what legal instrument are you using to prove that there is a defined border between that place and Israel?

And what legal instrument are you using to prove that there is a defined border between that place and Israel?

There are no borders around the West Bank or Gaza.

Then I'm packing for Gaza beaches, they're beautiful this time of year,
especially when lit by Israeli electricity.

 

[RoccoR]

RE: Palestine Today
※→ P F Tinmore, et al,

The use of the term in these days is merely for the political purpose of exploitation and incitement. It is used to illicit a level of sympathy from those that don't exactly understand what: colonialism" actually means.

And just because one segment of society inaccurately uses the term, does not mean you have to follow suit, using that term --- unless it is your intent to further promote an adverse propaganda effort as opposed to accuracy.

This issue of "colonial projects" is so ridiculous that even the UN doesn't agree with such an anti-Israeli interpretation.

The settler colonial project is the only process that matches the facts on the ground. And remember, both the British and the Zionists openly called it colonialism all through the Mandate period.

(COMMENT)

The problem here is that the Arab Palestinians want the world to picture their territory to as being politically, militarily and economically dominated by the Israelis. While it is true that Israel has allowed the voluntary settlement (permanent and semi-permanent) of Israelis citizens into areas under the full control of Israel (Area C), as set out in the Oslo II Accord.

And, these settlements are not a case of forced displacement of Israeli Citizens or a matter of expulsion; including coercive acts. [Article 7(1d) RS-ICC or Article 49 of GCIV]

What this is → is a case of the migration of a population from Israeli Sovereignty to a new territory under which Israel has full administrative, legislative and legal controls.

I realize that this is a much more difficult set of conditions than the Area Palestinian propaganda machine is used to dealing with; but no one actually thought that the Arab Palestinians would talk any view other than one that was anti-Israel. Truth and accuracy are not a strong suit associated with the Arab Palestinian.

Most Respectfully,
R

 

[RoccoR]

RE: Palestine Today
※→ P F Tinmore, et al,

Partially true.

There are no borders around the West Bank or Gaza.

(COMMENT)

As a general rule, a border is a demarcation between two different sovereignties.

The reason this distinction is important is that the State of Palestine is questionable. What territory, if any, does the State of Palestine exercise full authority and power as a governing body to govern → without any interference from the outside.

Most Respectfully,
R

 

[P F Tinmore]

RE: Palestine Today
※→ P F Tinmore, et al,

Partially true.

There are no borders around the West Bank or Gaza.

(COMMENT)

As a general rule, a border is a demarcation between two different sovereignties.

The reason this distinction is important is that the State of Palestine is questionable. What territory, if any, does the State of Palestine exercise full authority and power as a governing body to govern → without any interference from the outside.

Most Respectfully,
R

Palestine in the poster child of outside interference. It was born under occupation and has not had a minute without occupation to this day.

The armistice lines around the West Bank and Gaza were specifically not to be political or territorial boundaries. I would take that to mean that it is the same country on both sides.

 

[P F Tinmore]

RE: Palestine Today
※→ P F Tinmore, et al,

The use of the term in these days is merely for the political purpose of exploitation and incitement. It is used to illicit a level of sympathy from those that don't exactly understand what: colonialism" actually means.

And just because one segment of society inaccurately uses the term, does not mean you have to follow suit, using that term --- unless it is your intent to further promote an adverse propaganda effort as opposed to accuracy.

This issue of "colonial projects" is so ridiculous that even the UN doesn't agree with such an anti-Israeli interpretation.

The settler colonial project is the only process that matches the facts on the ground. And remember, both the British and the Zionists openly called it colonialism all through the Mandate period.

(COMMENT)

The problem here is that the Arab Palestinians want the world to picture their territory to as being politically, militarily and economically dominated by the Israelis. While it is true that Israel has allowed the voluntary settlement (permanent and semi-permanent) of Israelis citizens into areas under the full control of Israel (Area C), as set out in the Oslo II Accord.

And, these settlements are not a case of forced displacement of Israeli Citizens or a matter of expulsion; including coercive acts. [Article 7(1d) RS-ICC or Article 49 of GCIV]

What this is → is a case of the migration of a population from Israeli Sovereignty to a new territory under which Israel has full administrative, legislative and legal controls.

I realize that this is a much more difficult set of conditions than the Area Palestinian propaganda machine is used to dealing with; but no one actually thought that the Arab Palestinians would talk any view other than one that was anti-Israel. Truth and accuracy are not a strong suit associated with the Arab Palestinian.

Most Respectfully,
R

Israeli colonial settlements are planned, constructed, subsidized, supported, and protected by the state of Israel. That people "voluntarily" moving there does not absolve Israel of its responsibility.

 

[P F Tinmore]

RE: Palestine Today
※→ P F Tinmore, et al,

The use of the term in these days is merely for the political purpose of exploitation and incitement. It is used to illicit a level of sympathy from those that don't exactly understand what: colonialism" actually means.

And just because one segment of society inaccurately uses the term, does not mean you have to follow suit, using that term --- unless it is your intent to further promote an adverse propaganda effort as opposed to accuracy.

This issue of "colonial projects" is so ridiculous that even the UN doesn't agree with such an anti-Israeli interpretation.

The settler colonial project is the only process that matches the facts on the ground. And remember, both the British and the Zionists openly called it colonialism all through the Mandate period.

(COMMENT)

The problem here is that the Arab Palestinians want the world to picture their territory to as being politically, militarily and economically dominated by the Israelis. While it is true that Israel has allowed the voluntary settlement (permanent and semi-permanent) of Israelis citizens into areas under the full control of Israel (Area C), as set out in the Oslo II Accord.

And, these settlements are not a case of forced displacement of Israeli Citizens or a matter of expulsion; including coercive acts. [Article 7(1d) RS-ICC or Article 49 of GCIV]

What this is → is a case of the migration of a population from Israeli Sovereignty to a new territory under which Israel has full administrative, legislative and legal controls.

I realize that this is a much more difficult set of conditions than the Area Palestinian propaganda machine is used to dealing with; but no one actually thought that the Arab Palestinians would talk any view other than one that was anti-Israel. Truth and accuracy are not a strong suit associated with the Arab Palestinian.

Most Respectfully,
R

The use of the term in these days is merely for the political purpose of exploitation and incitement. It is used to illicit a level of sympathy from those that don't exactly understand what: colonialism" actually means.

That the process perfectly matches the description makes me believe that the description is accurate.

 

[RoccoR]

RE: Palestine Today
※→ P F Tinmore, et al,

Well, that depends on whether or not you consider if the Arab Palestinians ever actually had total governmental control over; with a decision-making process separate and independently distinct from all other nations.

Question: Does the (so-called) State of Palestine claim to have:

→ possession of sovereign power?
→ supreme political authority?
→ paramount control of the constitution and frame of government and Its administration?
→ the self-sufficient source of political power, from which all specific political powers are derived?
→ the international independence of a state, combined with the right and power of regulating its internal affairs without foreign dictation?
• Featuring Black's Law Dictionary Free Online Legal Dictionary 2nd Ed •​

It is one of the great mysteries of the universe.

RE: Palestine Today
※→ P F Tinmore, et al,

Partially true.

There are no borders around the West Bank or Gaza.

(COMMENT)

As a general rule, a border is a demarcation between two different sovereignties.

The reason this distinction is important is that the State of Palestine is questionable. What territory, if any, does the State of Palestine exercise full authority and power as a governing body to govern → without any interference from the outside.

Most Respectfully,
R

Palestine in the poster child of outside interference. It was born under occupation and has not had a minute without occupation to this day.

(COMMENT)

The PA would agree to an extension negotiations if Israel agreed to:

1. announce the basis on which future talks will be held;
   
2. draw the outline of the borders of a Palestinian state within the next three months;
   
3. halt settlement construction;
   
4. withdraw Israeli troops from the West Bank’s Area C to the lines held before the Second Intifada;
5. release the fourth wave of prisoners that it has until now refused to set free;
   
6. end what he called “disruptions” in Jerusalem, and open Palestinian institutions in the city.
7. prisoner release.

Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas told Israeli opposition MKs visiting him in the West Bank city of Ramallah last Wednesday that if talks were extended, he would want the first three months “devoted to a serious discussion of borders,” Haaretz reported.

Source: Palestinians issue list of demands for extension of peace talks

The armistice lines around the West Bank and Gaza were specifically not to be political or territorial boundaries. I would take that to mean that it is the same country on both sides.

(COMMENT)

That, in fact, would NOT be a proper assumption (for a number of reasons).

Israel's Peace Treaty covering that territory reads:

The boundary is delimited as follows:

1. Jordan and Yarmouk Rivers
   
2. Dead Sea and Salt Pans
   
3. Wadi Araba/Emek Ha’arava
4. The Gulf of Aqaba

You should take note that the international permanent boundary DOES NOT follow the former 1949 Armistice Line. It should also be noted that in July 1988, the Hashemite Kingdom abandon its sovereignty of the West Bank into the vacuum of Isreali effective control. Upon seeing this, the PLO attempted to counter the move by declaring independence.

Israel has established its own limits to its sovereignty; a border (per say). On one side there is western side it is sovereign Israeli territory • and on the other side (West Bank side) there is "effective control."

Now the definition as to sovereign ground, effective control (now Area "C"), settlements, and borders are all disputed by the (so-called) State of Palestine.

Most Respectfully,
R

 

[P F Tinmore]

On one side there is western side it is sovereign Israeli territory • and on the other side (West Bank side) there is "effective control."

How can you have "sides" when there is no border?

 

[P F Tinmore]

in July 1988, the Hashemite Kingdom abandon its sovereignty of the West Bank

You put this clunker in many posts.

Jordan never had sovereignty over the West Bank. It was occupied Palestinian territory. It is still occupied Palestinian territory.

 

[RoccoR]

RE: Palestine Today
※→ P F Tinmore, et al,

OK, if you say so.

That the process perfectly matches the description makes me believe that the description is accurate.

(COMMENT)

• Settlements ARE NOT ongoing in Arab Palestinian Controlled Areas.
• They ARE ongoing in Areas under full Israeli control since 1967 (a half-century ago → two-decades BEFORE the PLO independence and → four-decades BEFORE it being accorded non-member observer State status in the United Nations).

Most Respectfully,
R

 

[P F Tinmore]

RE: Palestine Today
※→ P F Tinmore, et al,

OK, if you say so.

That the process perfectly matches the description makes me believe that the description is accurate.

(COMMENT)

• Settlements ARE NOT ongoing in Arab Palestinian Controlled Areas.
• They ARE ongoing in Areas under full Israeli control since 1967 (a half-century ago → two-decades BEFORE the PLO independence and → four-decades BEFORE it being accorded non-member observer State status in the United Nations).

Most Respectfully,
R

OK, so?

BTW, there are no Palestinian controlled areas.

 

[RoccoR]

RE: Palestine Today
※→ P F Tinmore, et al,

Don't play stupid.

On one side there is western side it is sovereign Israeli territory • and on the other side (West Bank side) there is "effective control."

How can you have "sides" when there is no border?

(COMMENT)

The border is where Israel has determined it's sovereignty ends. It is protected and marked. That is a THE difference between what is real and what is Arab Palestinian fantasy.

Most Respectfully,
R

 

[P F Tinmore]

RE: Palestine Today
※→ P F Tinmore, et al,

Don't play stupid.

On one side there is western side it is sovereign Israeli territory • and on the other side (West Bank side) there is "effective control."

How can you have "sides" when there is no border?

(COMMENT)

The border is where Israel has determined it's sovereignty ends. It is protected and marked. That is a THE difference between what is real and what is Arab Palestinian fantasy.

Most Respectfully,
R

A line of goons with guns does not define an international border.

 

[RoccoR]

RE: Palestine Today
※→ P F Tinmore, et al,

You just what to believe this.

in July 1988, the Hashemite Kingdom abandon its sovereignty of the West Bank

You put this clunker in many posts.

Jordan never had sovereignty over the West Bank. It was occupied Palestinian territory. It is still occupied Palestinian territory.

(COMMENT)

• Jordan Formally Annexes the West Bank •
Richard Cavendish describes the events leading up to Jordan's annexation of the West Bank, on April 24th, 1950.
Richard Cavendish | Published in History Today Volume 50 Issue 4 April 2000

Most Respectfully,
R

 

[P F Tinmore]

RE: Palestine Today
※→ P F Tinmore, et al,

Well, that depends on whether or not you consider if the Arab Palestinians ever actually had total governmental control over; with a decision-making process separate and independently distinct from all other nations.

Question: Does the (so-called) State of Palestine claim to have:

→ possession of sovereign power?
→ supreme political authority?
→ paramount control of the constitution and frame of government and Its administration?
→ the self-sufficient source of political power, from which all specific political powers are derived?
→ the international independence of a state, combined with the right and power of regulating its internal affairs without foreign dictation?
• Featuring Black's Law Dictionary Free Online Legal Dictionary 2nd Ed •​

It is one of the great mysteries of the universe.

RE: Palestine Today
※→ P F Tinmore, et al,

Partially true.

There are no borders around the West Bank or Gaza.

(COMMENT)

As a general rule, a border is a demarcation between two different sovereignties.

The reason this distinction is important is that the State of Palestine is questionable. What territory, if any, does the State of Palestine exercise full authority and power as a governing body to govern → without any interference from the outside.

Most Respectfully,
R

Palestine in the poster child of outside interference. It was born under occupation and has not had a minute without occupation to this day.

(COMMENT)

The PA would agree to an extension negotiations if Israel agreed to:

1. announce the basis on which future talks will be held;
   
2. draw the outline of the borders of a Palestinian state within the next three months;
   
3. halt settlement construction;
   
4. withdraw Israeli troops from the West Bank’s Area C to the lines held before the Second Intifada;
5. release the fourth wave of prisoners that it has until now refused to set free;
   
6. end what he called “disruptions” in Jerusalem, and open Palestinian institutions in the city.
7. prisoner release.

Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas told Israeli opposition MKs visiting him in the West Bank city of Ramallah last Wednesday that if talks were extended, he would want the first three months “devoted to a serious discussion of borders,” Haaretz reported.

Source: Palestinians issue list of demands for extension of peace talks

The armistice lines around the West Bank and Gaza were specifically not to be political or territorial boundaries. I would take that to mean that it is the same country on both sides.

(COMMENT)

That, in fact, would NOT be a proper assumption (for a number of reasons).

Israel's Peace Treaty covering that territory reads:

The boundary is delimited as follows:

1. Jordan and Yarmouk Rivers
   
2. Dead Sea and Salt Pans
   
3. Wadi Araba/Emek Ha’arava
4. The Gulf of Aqaba

You should take note that the international permanent boundary DOES NOT follow the former 1949 Armistice Line. It should also be noted that in July 1988, the Hashemite Kingdom abandon its sovereignty of the West Bank into the vacuum of Isreali effective control. Upon seeing this, the PLO attempted to counter the move by declaring independence.

Israel has established its own limits to its sovereignty; a border (per say). On one side there is western side it is sovereign Israeli territory • and on the other side (West Bank side) there is "effective control."

Now the definition as to sovereign ground, effective control (now Area "C"), settlements, and borders are all disputed by the (so-called) State of Palestine.

Most Respectfully,
R

Palestinians have the right: (According to the UN.) To self determination without external interference. To independence and sovereignty. To territorial integrity.

The violation of those rights by foreign powers do not negate those rights.

 

[P F Tinmore]

RE: Palestine Today
※→ P F Tinmore, et al,

You just what to believe this.

in July 1988, the Hashemite Kingdom abandon its sovereignty of the West Bank

You put this clunker in many posts.

Jordan never had sovereignty over the West Bank. It was occupied Palestinian territory. It is still occupied Palestinian territory.

(COMMENT)

• Jordan Formally Annexes the West Bank •
Richard Cavendish describes the events leading up to Jordan's annexation of the West Bank, on April 24th, 1950.
Richard Cavendish | Published in History Today Volume 50 Issue 4 April 2000

Most Respectfully,
R

Jordan ruled over the West Bank from 1948 until 1967. Jordan's annexation was never formally recognized by the international community, with the exception of the United Kingdom.[16][17]

West Bank - Wikipedia