Palestinian Talks, lectures, & interviews.

[P F Tinmore]

RE: Palestinian Talks, lectures, & interviews.
SUBTOPIC: The Obligation that wasn't there.
⁜→ P F Tinmore, et al,

I think you got it; or, are getting there.


(COMMENT)
.
They don't sign it at all. The recommendation is not a requirement or application.

They either follow the recommendation, reject the recommendation, or choose the pieces they want to implement. And they can do that together or individually. They can coordinate or proceed at their own pace.

But the only requirement are those that pertain to membership. And even those are flexible. There are no obligations and the path taken does not affect the civil and political rights of the day; including the Right to Self-Determination. But neither are they to interfere with the Rights of the other.

The A/RES/181 (II) represents the consensus of the Membership of the day that had an interest in the decision. Those that had no interest simply abstain.
.

Most Respectfully,
R

Nice word salad.

People can ignore signed contracts?

 

[RoccoR]

RE: Palestinian Talks, lectures, & interviews.
SUBTOPIC: A Model Government
⁜→ P F Tinmore, et al,

I am not a lawyer and I am not practicing law.

Nice word salad.

People can ignore signed contracts?

(COMMENT)
.
There are6 Essential Elements Of A Contract and A/RES/181 (II) simply does not meet that criterion.

1. The Offer. A contract begins when the other party extends an offer. ...
2. Acceptance. Must of us know that a contract refers to the unconditional agreement to the terms of an offer. ...
3. Consideration. Consideration refers to the act of exchanging something of value. ...
4. Legal Capacity. ...
5. Meeting of The Minds. ...
6. Legal elements of a contract. ...

Neither the Jewish nor the Arabs made either an offer or an acceptance. The Arab Palestinian always rejected any aspect of self-governance.

There is a condition. You must have a benefit for a benefit between the two parties (Arab and Israeli). Who offered what to whom? Was it theirs to offer?

Under Article 2 & 6, the two "entities in 1947 and prior to the outbreak of hostilities" the Vienna Convention for the Law of Treaties (and agreement - “treaty” means an international agreement concluded between States in written form and governed by international law). The rule is every STATE has the capacity to enter into a treaty. The UN Trusteeship had the authority, the two entities (Jewish and Arab) did not.

I don't know if the Arabs and Jewish ever had a meeting of the minds with reasonably clear comprehension and mutual agreement of all obligations relative to A/RES/181 (II).

There is simply no intent under A/RES/181 (II) to be a contract. Certainly not by the trusteeship.

---

( ? )

I'm trying to understand where you might have picked up this idea that there was a contractual element in the mix.
.

Most Respectfully,
R

 

[P F Tinmore]

RE: Palestinian Talks, lectures, & interviews.
SUBTOPIC: A Model Government
⁜→ P F Tinmore, et al,

I am not a lawyer and I am not practicing law.


(COMMENT)
.
There are6 Essential Elements Of A Contract and A/RES/181 (II) simply does not meet that criterion.

1. The Offer. A contract begins when the other party extends an offer. ...
2. Acceptance. Must of us know that a contract refers to the unconditional agreement to the terms of an offer. ...
3. Consideration. Consideration refers to the act of exchanging something of value. ...
4. Legal Capacity. ...
5. Meeting of The Minds. ...
6. Legal elements of a contract. ...

Neither the Jewish nor the Arabs made either an offer or an acceptance. The Arab Palestinian always rejected any aspect of self-governance.

There is a condition. You must have a benefit for a benefit between the two parties (Arab and Israeli). Who offered what to whom? Was it theirs to offer?

Under Article 2 & 6, the two "entities in 1947 and prior to the outbreak of hostilities" the Vienna Convention for the Law of Treaties (and agreement - “treaty” means an international agreement concluded between States in written form and governed by international law). The rule is every STATE has the capacity to enter into a treaty. The UN Trusteeship had the authority, the two entities (Jewish and Arab) did not.

I don't know if the Arabs and Jewish ever had a meeting of the minds with reasonably clear comprehension and mutual agreement of all obligations relative to A/RES/181 (II).

There is simply no intent under A/RES/181 (II) to be a contract. Certainly not by the trusteeship.

---

( ? )

I'm trying to understand where you might have picked up this idea that there was a contractual element in the mix.
.

Most Respectfully,
R

Treaty, agreement, contract, call it what you want. It would have been a signed document that had obligations.

Doesn't matter. It flopped. It was a nothing anyway. No sense arguing about it.

 

[P F Tinmore]

RE: Palestinian Talks, lectures, & interviews.
SUBTOPIC: A Model Government
⁜→ P F Tinmore, et al,

I am not a lawyer and I am not practicing law.


(COMMENT)
.
There are6 Essential Elements Of A Contract and A/RES/181 (II) simply does not meet that criterion.

1. The Offer. A contract begins when the other party extends an offer. ...
2. Acceptance. Must of us know that a contract refers to the unconditional agreement to the terms of an offer. ...
3. Consideration. Consideration refers to the act of exchanging something of value. ...
4. Legal Capacity. ...
5. Meeting of The Minds. ...
6. Legal elements of a contract. ...

Neither the Jewish nor the Arabs made either an offer or an acceptance. The Arab Palestinian always rejected any aspect of self-governance.

There is a condition. You must have a benefit for a benefit between the two parties (Arab and Israeli). Who offered what to whom? Was it theirs to offer?

Under Article 2 & 6, the two "entities in 1947 and prior to the outbreak of hostilities" the Vienna Convention for the Law of Treaties (and agreement - “treaty” means an international agreement concluded between States in written form and governed by international law). The rule is every STATE has the capacity to enter into a treaty. The UN Trusteeship had the authority, the two entities (Jewish and Arab) did not.

I don't know if the Arabs and Jewish ever had a meeting of the minds with reasonably clear comprehension and mutual agreement of all obligations relative to A/RES/181 (II).

There is simply no intent under A/RES/181 (II) to be a contract. Certainly not by the trusteeship.

---

( ? )

I'm trying to understand where you might have picked up this idea that there was a contractual element in the mix.
.

Most Respectfully,
R

Now that you have deflected off my post, how about addressing it?

 

[P F Tinmore]

The Israel Lobby: What Everyone Needs to Know - Walter L. Hixson​

 

[rylah]

The Israel Lobby: What Everyone Needs to Know - Walter L. Hixson​

How could he forget the space lasers?

 

[P F Tinmore]

Is the Israel lobby losing its power?​

 

[RoccoR]

RE: Palestinian Talks, lectures, & interviews.
SUBTOPIC: A Model Government
⁜→ P F Tinmore, et al,

The Israel Lobby: What Everyone Needs to Know - Walter L. Hixson​

(COMMENT)
.
This is just more "sour grapes" on the part of the Arab Palestinians. Professor Hixson is (for some unknown reason to me) jumping on the standard 'apartheid, injustice, and suppressor of human rights' anti-Israel bandwagon → as if he is NOT the advocate for a foreign influence and act on behalf and in concert with multiple designated terrorist organization → just the very same advocate and suppressor of Customary and International Humanitarian Law (IHL). I do not say this to smear the man himself, but to counter the impression in his introduction before his appearance in the news blog.

I could go on about what every American Should Know about these anti-American → anti-Israeli accusations, but it would not change the mind of the anti-Israel Lobby and the fallacy as he makes an irrelevant attack on Israel. Professor Hixson undermines his own argument by not explaining how:

◈ How the Arab Palestinian violates IHL when they openly commit offenses which is solely intended to harm the Occupying Power (Israelis), (See Article 68, GCIV)​

​

◈ How the Arab Palestinian violates IHL when they seriously damage the property or the installations used by the Israelis. (See Article 68, GCIV)​

​

◈ How the Arab Palestinian violates IHL when they commit serious acts of sabotage against the installations of the Occupying Power or intentional offenses which caused the death of one or more persons. (See Article 68, GCIV)​

​

◈ How the Arab Palestinian violates IHL when they Location of Hostile Arab Palestinian (HoAP) Rocket Launch sites inside Densely Populated Areas so as to limit the retaliatory strike. Then if citizens of the densely populated ate get killed or injured, they can run to the media and say what criminals the Israelis are.​

(See IHL Rule #23)​

​

◈ How the Arab Palestinian violates IHL when they “utilizing the presence of a civilian render HoAP Activities, Palestinian Islamic Jihad forces immune from Israeli Defense Force countermeasures and operations. (See IHL Rule #97)​

​

◈ How the Arab Palestinian violates IHL that the Protected Person (Arab Palestinians) when they utilize the presence of civilians (in the thousand) to shield HoAP attempts to penetrate the border and launch incendiary devices into Israel. (See IHL Rule #97)​

(See 1997 International Convention for the Suppression of Terrorist Bombings)​

​

◈ How the Arab Palestinian violates IHL when. the HoAP fail to mention that what they call Colonial Settler sites in 'the West Bank, was actually approved and agreed to by the Arab Palestinians themselves. (See: (Para 3, A/PV.2268. 14 October 1974), agree to ANNEX III Protocol Concerning Civil Affairs • ARTICLE IV Special Provisions concerning Area "C" • which assigned Israel full civil and security control over Area “C") → Then the Arab Palestinians run to anyone who will listen, and cry on their shoulder about how unlawful it is. Which in turn violates the international citation that prohibits propaganda for war. (See Article 20 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights)​

​

◈ How the Arab Palestinian violates IHL when. the HoAP fails to mention that violating the citation that bars advocacy of national, racial, or religious hatred that constitutes incitement to discrimination, hostility or violence is prohibited by law. (See Article 20 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights)​

I could go on and on about what the HoAP has done to advance the conflict, as opposed to exercising conflict resolution practices. After all, it is of both HAMAS and Fatah that Armed struggle is the only way to liberate Palestine. As for the magnitude and size of the pro-Jewish advocate organizations in America today, the HoAP has these backbiting bloggers and University speakers and quasi-profession rabble-rousers, that go around justifying the conflict. The anti-Israeli and pro-Arab Palestinian right here have posted their "Jane Fonda" like activities on the net.

I know, you know, that their will be an opposing point of view. If there is an injustice, then it is incumbant for people like me to speak against the anti-Israel and pro-conflict advocates that think it is all right. We must all be vigileent for HoAP that pursues the philosophy that Arm Stuggle - by any means - is justified.
.

Most Respectfully,
R

 

[P F Tinmore]

I could go on and on

Indeed.

 

[P F Tinmore]

RE: Palestinian Talks, lectures, & interviews.
SUBTOPIC: A Model Government
⁜→ P F Tinmore, et al,

(COMMENT)
.
This is just more "sour grapes" on the part of the Arab Palestinians. Professor Hixson is (for some unknown reason to me) jumping on the standard 'apartheid, injustice, and suppressor of human rights' anti-Israel bandwagon → as if he is NOT the advocate for a foreign influence and act on behalf and in concert with multiple designated terrorist organization → just the very same advocate and suppressor of Customary and International Humanitarian Law (IHL). I do not say this to smear the man himself, but to counter the impression in his introduction before his appearance in the news blog.

I could go on about what every American Should Know about these anti-American → anti-Israeli accusations, but it would not change the mind of the anti-Israel Lobby and the fallacy as he makes an irrelevant attack on Israel. Professor Hixson undermines his own argument by not explaining how:

◈ How the Arab Palestinian violates IHL when they openly commit offenses which is solely intended to harm the Occupying Power (Israelis), (See Article 68, GCIV)​

​

◈ How the Arab Palestinian violates IHL when they seriously damage the property or the installations used by the Israelis. (See Article 68, GCIV)​

​

◈ How the Arab Palestinian violates IHL when they commit serious acts of sabotage against the installations of the Occupying Power or intentional offenses which caused the death of one or more persons. (See Article 68, GCIV)​

​

◈ How the Arab Palestinian violates IHL when they Location of Hostile Arab Palestinian (HoAP) Rocket Launch sites inside Densely Populated Areas so as to limit the retaliatory strike. Then if citizens of the densely populated ate get killed or injured, they can run to the media and say what criminals the Israelis are.​

(See IHL Rule #23)​

​

◈ How the Arab Palestinian violates IHL when they “utilizing the presence of a civilian render HoAP Activities, Palestinian Islamic Jihad forces immune from Israeli Defense Force countermeasures and operations. (See IHL Rule #97)​

​

◈ How the Arab Palestinian violates IHL that the Protected Person (Arab Palestinians) when they utilize the presence of civilians (in the thousand) to shield HoAP attempts to penetrate the border and launch incendiary devices into Israel. (See IHL Rule #97)​

(See 1997 International Convention for the Suppression of Terrorist Bombings)​

​

◈ How the Arab Palestinian violates IHL when. the HoAP fail to mention that what they call Colonial Settler sites in 'the West Bank, was actually approved and agreed to by the Arab Palestinians themselves. (See: (Para 3, A/PV.2268. 14 October 1974), agree to ANNEX III Protocol Concerning Civil Affairs • ARTICLE IV Special Provisions concerning Area "C" • which assigned Israel full civil and security control over Area “C") → Then the Arab Palestinians run to anyone who will listen, and cry on their shoulder about how unlawful it is. Which in turn violates the international citation that prohibits propaganda for war. (See Article 20 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights)​

​

◈ How the Arab Palestinian violates IHL when. the HoAP fails to mention that violating the citation that bars advocacy of national, racial, or religious hatred that constitutes incitement to discrimination, hostility or violence is prohibited by law. (See Article 20 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights)​

I could go on and on about what the HoAP has done to advance the conflict, as opposed to exercising conflict resolution practices. After all, it is of both HAMAS and Fatah that Armed struggle is the only way to liberate Palestine. As for the magnitude and size of the pro-Jewish advocate organizations in America today, the HoAP has these backbiting bloggers and University speakers and quasi-profession rabble-rousers, that go around justifying the conflict. The anti-Israeli and pro-Arab Palestinian right here have posted their "Jane Fonda" like activities on the net.

I know, you know, that their will be an opposing point of view. If there is an injustice, then it is incumbant for people like me to speak against the anti-Israel and pro-conflict advocates that think it is all right. We must all be vigileent for HoAP that pursues the philosophy that Arm Stuggle - by any means - is justified.
.

Most Respectfully,
R

All that and no mention of the Nakba.

 

[RoccoR]

RE: Palestinian Talks, lectures, & interviews.
SUBTOPIC: A Model Government
⁜→ P F Tinmore, et al,

◈ The Palestinian “Nakba” (“catastrophe” in Arabic) refers to the displacement of Arab Palestinians from Mandate for Palestine that began before the establishment of Independent Israel (1946-48).​

◈ In November 1947, the United Nations accepted a Partition Plan to allocate a portion of the territory under the Mandate to the proposed Jewish State as recommended by A/RES/181 (II). The vote (signaled for many Hostile Arab Palestinians (HoAP) the beginning of the great “catastrophe”) and triggered an outbreak of hostilities by HoAP.​

​

Indeed. All that and no mention of the Nakba.

(COMMENT)
.
The Nakba is an engagement of a "Civil War" nature, the conflict between citizens elements of the same territory subject to the Mandate for Palestine. If the Arab League had not interfered, the conflict would have been a straightforward Civil War [a Non-International Armed Conflict (NIAC)]. And the displaced people would have been within the very same territory formerly under the Mandate. But it was the external Arab League interference that altered the outcome of the Civil War.

The Civil War was a conflict between the "Arab Palestinians" (of the territory under the Mandate) and the "Jewish Palestinians" (of the territory under the Mandate). The Arab Palestinians (proponents of an Arab State) wanted to prevent the Jewish Palestinians from succeeding and establishing a separate nation through self-determination. The Arab League stepped in under the guise of saving the Arab Palestinians from being destroyed. However, the Arab League really wanted to capture as much territory they could and keep it for themselves (primarily Egypt and Jordan), which they did. The Gaza Strip became a Military Governorship of Egypt, and the West Bank fell under the protection of the Jordanians who soon Annexed the territory in 1950.

There was a mixed self-initiated refugee movement and a forced element. However, The Jewish militias and Israeli Defense Force did not force any displaced person to cross the Jordan River. The displaced refugees were moved to the unclaimed portion of the territory formerly under the Mandate. This was territory that the Arab Palestinian rejected as to be Arab self-goverrning.

Of course, there is always more to the story then a thumbnail portrayal can capture. And I'll stop here as a good place to digest the slim answer.
.

Most Respectfully,
R

 

[P F Tinmore]

But it was the external Arab League interference that altered the outcome of the Civil War.

The attack on the native population by foreign colonial settles is not a civil war

 

[RoccoR]

RE: Palestinian Talks, lectures, & interviews.
SUBTOPIC: Foreign Troops -- Native Population -- Colonialism
⁜→ P F Tinmore, et al,

BLUF: This is more manipulation by Hostile Arab Palestinians.

The attack on the native population by foreign colonial settles is not a civil war

(COMMENT)
.

◈ Foreign Troops? To be absolutely clear, what troops are you calling "Foreign Troops?" The Jewish People were invited by the Allied Power to which "the future of these territories being settled or to be settled by the parties concerned." (Artice 16, Section I • Territorial Clauses, Treaty of Lausanne)​

◈ What is your definition of a "Native Population?" I think you meant to say "Indigenous People." Just like there is no firm definition for "Native Population" - there is no definition found in A/RES/61/295 for Declaration on the Rights. The native inhabitants of a mandated territory had a status distinct from that of the nationality of the mandatory power. The Conventions on Indigenous and Tribal Peoples:​

​

​

1. This Convention applies to:​

​

(a) tribal peoples in independent countries whose social, cultural and economic conditions distinguish them from other sections of the national community, and whose status is regulated wholly or partially by their own customs or traditions or by special laws or regulations;​

​

(b) peoples in independent countries who are regarded as indigenous on account of their descent from the populations which inhabited the country, or a geographical region to which the country belongs, at the time of conquest or colonisation or the establishment of present state boundaries and who, irrespective of their legal status, retain some or all of their own social, economic, cultural and political institutions.​

​

2. Self-identification as indigenous or tribal shall be regarded as a fundamental criterion for determining the groups to which the provisions of this Convention apply.​

​

3. The use of the term peoples in this Convention shall not be construed as having any implications as regards the rights which may attach to the term under international law.​

​

​

This makes me think that the Israeli cannot claim indigenous status.​

​

◈ What is your definition of Colonial Power? Has the UN Special Committee (C-24) (AKA: Special Committee on Decolonization) on the the implementation of the Declaration on the Granting of Independence to Colonial Countries and Peoples (A/RES/15/15114 XV) identified:​

​

✦ What international Proceeding legally identifies Israel as a colonial Power? Does C-24?​

​

✦ Identified any territory in the Middle East (including the West Bank and Jerusalem) as a Non-Self-Governing Territory?​

​

✦ IWhen the Governments of Gaza or Ramallah indicate that they have requested self-governing institutions, when did they admit they are not self-governing?​

​

✦ IWhen the Jordanians cut all ties with the West; what governing power remained?​

.

Most Respectfully,
R

 

[P F Tinmore]

◈ Foreign Troops? To be absolutely clear, what troops are you calling "Foreign Troops?"

The Palestinians were attacked by recently imported colonial settlers who were funded by foreign money. They were under the command of foreigners.

 

[P F Tinmore]

✦ IWhen the Jordanians cut all ties with the West; what governing power remained?

The sovereignty of the Palestinian people remained.

 

[Hollie]

The Palestinians were attacked by recently imported colonial settlers who were funded by foreign money. They were under the command of foreigners.

"Foreign troops" morphed into "colonial settlers".

You just make this up as you go along.

 

[P F Tinmore]

RE: Palestinian Talks, lectures, & interviews.
SUBTOPIC: Foreign Troops -- Native Population -- Colonialism
⁜→ P F Tinmore, et al,

BLUF: This is more manipulation by Hostile Arab Palestinians.


(COMMENT)
.

◈ Foreign Troops? To be absolutely clear, what troops are you calling "Foreign Troops?" The Jewish People were invited by the Allied Power to which "the future of these territories being settled or to be settled by the parties concerned." (Artice 16, Section I • Territorial Clauses, Treaty of Lausanne)​

◈ What is your definition of a "Native Population?" I think you meant to say "Indigenous People." Just like there is no firm definition for "Native Population" - there is no definition found in A/RES/61/295 for Declaration on the Rights. The native inhabitants of a mandated territory had a status distinct from that of the nationality of the mandatory power. The Conventions on Indigenous and Tribal Peoples:​

​

​

​

​

This makes me think that the Israeli cannot claim indigenous status.​

​

◈ What is your definition of Colonial Power? Has the UN Special Committee (C-24) (AKA: Special Committee on Decolonization) on the the implementation of the Declaration on the Granting of Independence to Colonial Countries and Peoples (A/RES/15/15114 XV) identified:​

​

✦ What international Proceeding legally identifies Israel as a colonial Power? Does C-24?​

​

✦ Identified any territory in the Middle East (including the West Bank and Jerusalem) as a Non-Self-Governing Territory?​

​

✦ IWhen the Governments of Gaza or Ramallah indicate that they have requested self-governing institutions, when did they admit they are not self-governing?​

​

✦ IWhen the Jordanians cut all ties with the West; what governing power remained?​

.

Most Respectfully,
R

WCRC: Foucs: Palestine - 6. Is Israel A Settler Colonial State?​

 

[rylah]

The Palestinians were attacked by recently imported colonial settlers who were funded by foreign money. They were under the command of foreigners.

This is why Arab colonies like Najd and Masr,
literally, bear names of foreign lands.

Know the country Kuffiyeh
is called after?

 

[P F Tinmore]

WCRC: Focus: Palestine - 2. Meet The Palestinian Christians​

 

[rylah]

WCRC: Focus: Palestine - 2. Meet The Palestinian Christians​

What is your position on both Pal-Arab governments
issuing IDs that specify religion to differentiate Christians?