Palestinians denied rights in Jordan for over 45 years

[teddyearp]

From the Ma'an news agency:

JERASH REFUGEE CAMP, Jordan (Ma'an) -- Born in Jordan, 27-year-old Muhammad’s life hardly resembles a typical Jordanian's. Lacking any political or civil rights, Muhammad explained that he is forbidden from working in most jobs, even a teacher at a public school. Muhammad faces these rigorous restrictions because his parents fled to Jordan from Gaza following the 1967 War.

In addition to the economic restrictions, refugees from Gaza enjoy no political rights. Unlike Palestinian refugees from the West Bank in 1948, 1967 refugees from Gaza cannot vote in Jordanian elections or serve in the parliament. Gazan refugees are provided with a two-year temporary passport, without a national number.

Jordanian leaders consistently express their verbal support for the Palestinian cause. After meeting with Palestinian Authority Prime Minister Rami Hamdalllah in June of 2015, Prime Minister Abdullah Ensour described the “brotherly and close ties” between Palestinians and Jordanians.

That last paragraph is the most telling. Now why would they on the one hand say that they support (and the current support for the Temple Mount goings on) and yet in practice treat them so poorly.

Link: Gazan refugees denied rights in Jordan for over 45 years

 

[Pete7469]

The rest of the ME considers palescumians as "trash arabs". No one really wants to help them because they don't do anything of value. The world will be a better place when they all die off.

 

[rylah]

From the Ma'an news agency:

JERASH REFUGEE CAMP, Jordan (Ma'an) -- Born in Jordan, 27-year-old Muhammad’s life hardly resembles a typical Jordanian's. Lacking any political or civil rights, Muhammad explained that he is forbidden from working in most jobs, even a teacher at a public school. Muhammad faces these rigorous restrictions because his parents fled to Jordan from Gaza following the 1967 War.

In addition to the economic restrictions, refugees from Gaza enjoy no political rights. Unlike Palestinian refugees from the West Bank in 1948, 1967 refugees from Gaza cannot vote in Jordanian elections or serve in the parliament. Gazan refugees are provided with a two-year temporary passport, without a national number.

Jordanian leaders consistently express their verbal support for the Palestinian cause. After meeting with Palestinian Authority Prime Minister Rami Hamdalllah in June of 2015, Prime Minister Abdullah Ensour described the “brotherly and close ties” between Palestinians and Jordanians.

That last paragraph is the most telling. Now why would they on the one hand say that they support (and the current support for the Temple Mount goings on) and yet in practice treat them so poorly.

Link: Gazan refugees denied rights in Jordan for over 45 years

Is there any Arab country in the world that treats palestinians (israeli arabs) as humanely as Israel???

Treatment and Rights in Arab Host States (Right to Return - Human Rights Watch Policy Page)

 

[RoccoR]

rylah, teddyearp, et al,

I'm a bit confused as well.

Lacking any political or civil rights, Muhammad explained that he is forbidden from working in most jobs, even a teacher at a public school. Muhammad faces these rigorous restrictions because his parents fled to Jordan from Gaza following the 1967 War.

In addition to the economic restrictions, refugees from Gaza enjoy no political rights. Unlike Palestinian refugees from the West Bank in 1948, 1967 refugees from Gaza cannot vote in Jordanian elections or serve in the parliament. Gazan refugees are provided with a two-year temporary passport, without a national number.

Link: Gazan refugees denied rights in Jordan for over 45 years

Is there any Arab country in the world that treats palestinians (israeli arabs) as humanely as Israel???
Treatment and Rights in Arab Host States (Right to Return - Human Rights Watch Policy Page)

(COMMENT)

I thought that on 31 July 1988 "King Hussein announced the severance of all administrative and legal ties with the occupied West Bank. Accordingly, electoral districts were redrawn to represent East Bank constituencies only." ---- "The decision to sever legal and administrative ties with the West Bank allowed Jordan’s electoral law to be changed, redrawing the map to include only East Bank districts." (See: Disengagement from West Bank) In effect, "NO" Palestinian from the West Bank or Gaza Strip should be able to make any rights or claims on the Hashemite Kingdom.

Theoretically, after 15 November 1988, no one from the West Bank or Gaza Strip should be considered a refugee or stateless person. With the declaration of independence for the State of Palestine, each Palestinian (from Gaza or the West Bank) falls under one of two conditions: • Having lost nationality, they have voluntarily re-acquired it as a citizen of the State of Palestine; or • they have acquired a new nationality, and enjoy the self-determination and protection of this new nationality the have acquired from the State of Palestine as acknowledged by the proclamation of the State of Palestine by the Palestine National Council on 15 November 1988 and Affirmed by the UN in the right of the Palestinian people to exercise their sovereignty over their territory occupied since 1967.

The question becomes, since the Palestinians (pursuant to the right of self-determination) have become sovereign unto themselves, under what authority do they have the right to claim or demand a benefit from the Hashemite Kingdom in which all administrative and legal ties have been announced and proclaimed; and for which the Palestinians contributed nothing in return for the right they demand??? Under what logic do the Palestinians demand anything from anyone that they have not contributed any work product toward???

What contribution have the Palestinians made in the industrial, economic, or development of infrastructure have the Palestinians made that would entitle them to a "demand" for any benefit from the Jordanian people?

I know that the Palestinian are damn near always making demands for things in which they have made no positive contribution towards, but this one really has me stumped. In fact, the Palestinians have done the exact opposite. It was in the early 1970's that the Palestinians actually attempted to hurt the Hashemite Kingdom:

The partnership with the Palestinians desired by King Hussein fell apart in September, 1970. The pervasive and chaotic presence of armed Palestinian fedayeen groups who expected immunity from Jordan’s laws was leading to a state of virtual anarchy throughout the Kingdom. Moderate Palestinian leaders were unable to reign in extremist elements, who ambushed the king’s motorcade twice and perpetrated a series of spectacular hijackings. Forced to respond decisively in order to preserve his country from anarchy, King Hussein ordered the army into action.​

How do we reconcile this?

Most Respectfully,
R

 

[aris2chat]

Citizens have rights in their country. Palestinians were offered citizenship in Jordan, but their answer was black september.

Palestinians have few or no right in any country where they are refugees. To give them rights wound end their refugee status. Their rights exist only within the refugee camps. Outside the camps they are illegals with no status.

 

[Billo_Really]

From the Ma'an news agency:

JERASH REFUGEE CAMP, Jordan (Ma'an) -- Born in Jordan, 27-year-old Muhammad’s life hardly resembles a typical Jordanian's. Lacking any political or civil rights, Muhammad explained that he is forbidden from working in most jobs, even a teacher at a public school. Muhammad faces these rigorous restrictions because his parents fled to Jordan from Gaza following the 1967 War.

In addition to the economic restrictions, refugees from Gaza enjoy no political rights. Unlike Palestinian refugees from the West Bank in 1948, 1967 refugees from Gaza cannot vote in Jordanian elections or serve in the parliament. Gazan refugees are provided with a two-year temporary passport, without a national number.

Jordanian leaders consistently express their verbal support for the Palestinian cause. After meeting with Palestinian Authority Prime Minister Rami Hamdalllah in June of 2015, Prime Minister Abdullah Ensour described the “brotherly and close ties” between Palestinians and Jordanians.

That last paragraph is the most telling. Now why would they on the one hand say that they support (and the current support for the Temple Mount goings on) and yet in practice treat them so poorly.

Link: Gazan refugees denied rights in Jordan for over 45 years

Because they're fucking assholes!

On another note, I just recently found out there are basically two groups of Palestinian's:

- '48 Pals
- '67 Pals​

...with different views on politics, the Israeli's, the future, etc.

I don't know if they're as bad as Crips and Bloods, but they definitely in two different camps, which your article alluded to.

 

[rylah]

From the Ma'an news agency:

JERASH REFUGEE CAMP, Jordan (Ma'an) -- Born in Jordan, 27-year-old Muhammad’s life hardly resembles a typical Jordanian's. Lacking any political or civil rights, Muhammad explained that he is forbidden from working in most jobs, even a teacher at a public school. Muhammad faces these rigorous restrictions because his parents fled to Jordan from Gaza following the 1967 War.

In addition to the economic restrictions, refugees from Gaza enjoy no political rights. Unlike Palestinian refugees from the West Bank in 1948, 1967 refugees from Gaza cannot vote in Jordanian elections or serve in the parliament. Gazan refugees are provided with a two-year temporary passport, without a national number.

Jordanian leaders consistently express their verbal support for the Palestinian cause. After meeting with Palestinian Authority Prime Minister Rami Hamdalllah in June of 2015, Prime Minister Abdullah Ensour described the “brotherly and close ties” between Palestinians and Jordanians.

That last paragraph is the most telling. Now why would they on the one hand say that they support (and the current support for the Temple Mount goings on) and yet in practice treat them so poorly.

Link: Gazan refugees denied rights in Jordan for over 45 years

Because they're fucking assholes!

On another note, I just recently found out there are basically two groups of Palestinian's:

- '48 Pals
- '67 Pals​

...with different views on politics, the Israeli's, the future, etc.

I don't know if they're as bad as Crips and Bloods, but they definitely in two different camps, which your article alluded to.

Yes actually many of them took the right decision and now prosper in Israel

 

[Billo_Really]

Yes actually many of them took the right decision and now prosper in Israel

That would be the '48 Pals.

 

[RoccoR]

Billo_Really, et al,

I think it is a bit more complicated than that.

Yes actually many of them took the right decision and now prosper in Israel

That would be the '48 Pals.

(COMMENT)

Depending on who is making the determinations, there could be five (5) or more distinct groups.

There was Palestinian movement prior to the establishment of Israel. That would be prior to Mid-night 14/15 May 48. This would be movement in the single territory, not from one sovereignty to another; essentially a non-International Armed Conflict (NIAC). (Group 1)

If recognition is given to Israel on Mid-night 14/15 May 48, then movement from Israel to beyond the Armistice Lines, then that could be considered movement under the conditions of an International Armed Conflict (IAC). (Group 2)

Then if there was movement between 1967 and 1988, but totally outside Israeli sovereign territory, but contained within the West Bank and Gaza Strip, then that would be inside one territory and could be considered another NIAC. (Group 3)

Any Palestinian movement as a result of the 1967 or 1973 conflict that crossed into Egyptian or Jordanian sovereignty would be an IAC. (Group 4)

Then there are any of these first four (4) groups that had, at one time or another, citizenship with either the State of Palestine (after NOV 1988) and/or the Hashemite Kingdom (after APR 1950 until AUG 1988). (Group 5)
​

It is either going to take some skilled and good faith effort negotiations, or some serious adjudication on the part of the legal system to sort this all out. Similarly, it will take a concerted effort to determine the impact of the Oslo Accords and the Letters of Mutual Recognition. What impact the two accords have on jurisdiction; and what (if any) impact the Permanent Status of Negotiations have.

I don't think the disputes are quite as simple as many believe they are.

Most Respectfully,
R

 

[aris2chat]

Billo_Really, et al,

I think it is a bit more complicated than that.

Yes actually many of them took the right decision and now prosper in Israel

That would be the '48 Pals.

(COMMENT)

Depending on who is making the determinations, there could be five (5) or more distinct groups.

There was Palestinian movement prior to the establishment of Israel. That would be prior to Mid-night 14/15 May 48. This would be movement in the single territory, not from one sovereignty to another; essentially a non-International Armed Conflict (NIAC). (Group 1)

If recognition is given to Israel on Mid-night 14/15 May 48, then movement from Israel to beyond the Armistice Lines, then that could be considered movement under the conditions of an International Armed Conflict (IAC). (Group 2)

Then if there was movement between 1967 and 1988, but totally outside Israeli sovereign territory, but contained within the West Bank and Gaza Strip, then that would be inside one territory and could be considered another NIAC. (Group 3)

Any Palestinian movement as a result of the 1967 or 1973 conflict that crossed into Egyptian or Jordanian sovereignty would be an IAC. (Group 4)

Then there are any of these first four (4) groups that had, at one time or another, citizenship with either the State of Palestine (after NOV 1988) and/or the Hashemite Kingdom (after APR 1950 until AUG 1988). (Group 5)
​

It is either going to take some skilled and good faith effort negotiations, or some serious adjudication on the part of the legal system to sort this all out. Similarly, it will take a concerted effort to determine the impact of the Oslo Accords and the Letters of Mutual Recognition. What impact the two accords have on jurisdiction; and what (if any) impact the Permanent Status of Negotiations have.

I don't think the disputes are quite as simple as many believe they are.

Most Respectfully,
R

>>I don't think the disputes are quite as simple as many believe they are. <<


Not by a long shot. Nothing in the area is.

 

[RoccoR]

aris2chat, et al,

I've also notice that many seem to believe that the "right of return" is legally binding. I've noticed that the pro-Palestinian movement pulls this "right" like it is some sort of absolute.

Billo_Really, et al,

I think it is a bit more complicated than that.

Yes actually many of them took the right decision and now prosper in Israel

That would be the '48 Pals.

(COMMENT)

Depending on who is making the determinations, there could be five (5) or more distinct groups.

There was Palestinian movement prior to the establishment of Israel. That would be prior to Mid-night 14/15 May 48. This would be movement in the single territory, not from one sovereignty to another; essentially a non-International Armed Conflict (NIAC). (Group 1)

If recognition is given to Israel on Mid-night 14/15 May 48, then movement from Israel to beyond the Armistice Lines, then that could be considered movement under the conditions of an International Armed Conflict (IAC). (Group 2)

Then if there was movement between 1967 and 1988, but totally outside Israeli sovereign territory, but contained within the West Bank and Gaza Strip, then that would be inside one territory and could be considered another NIAC. (Group 3)

Any Palestinian movement as a result of the 1967 or 1973 conflict that crossed into Egyptian or Jordanian sovereignty would be an IAC. (Group 4)

Then there are any of these first four (4) groups that had, at one time or another, citizenship with either the State of Palestine (after NOV 1988) and/or the Hashemite Kingdom (after APR 1950 until AUG 1988). (Group 5)
​

It is either going to take some skilled and good faith effort negotiations, or some serious adjudication on the part of the legal system to sort this all out. Similarly, it will take a concerted effort to determine the impact of the Oslo Accords and the Letters of Mutual Recognition. What impact the two accords have on jurisdiction; and what (if any) impact the Permanent Status of Negotiations have.

I don't think the disputes are quite as simple as many believe they are.

Most Respectfully,
R

>>I don't think the disputes are quite as simple as many believe they are. <<

Not by a long shot. Nothing in the area is.

(COMMENT)

I (personal opinion) don't believe that the "Right of Return" (RoR) is enforceable or binding international law.

The RoR is derived from Article 13 of the UDHR (Universal Declaration of Human Rights) --- A/RES/3/217 A (III) 10 December 1948. While it is a great reference document, it is not legally binding. And there is a huge argument as to whether or not it ever passed into Customary Law under Article 38(1)(b) of the Statute of the International Court of Justice. There are two very important and legally binding adoptions:

• International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (CESCR) --- General Assembly Resolution 2200A (XXI) of 16 December 1966 entry into force 3 January 1976
• International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (CCPR) --- General Assembly resolution 2200A (XXI) of 16 December 1966 entry into force 23 March 1976
​

And while the ICJ Article 38 might gather that facets of the UDHR may have passed into Customary Law via the CESCR and CCPR, neither of those adoptions have the equivalent to Article 13(2) of the UDHR (Everyone has the right to leave any country, including his own, and to return to his country.). Thus, the argument can be made that the UDHR and Article 13 are not a legally binding.

The secondary argument is that neither the CESCR or the CCPR came into force until well after the 1973 War. AND the 1951 Convention relating to the Status of Refugees does not give refugees a "right to return."

Most Respectfully,
R

 

[aris2chat]

aris2chat, et al,

I've also notice that many seem to believe that the "right of return" is legally binding. I've noticed that the pro-Palestinian movement pulls this "right" like it is some sort of absolute.

Billo_Really, et al,

I think it is a bit more complicated than that.

Yes actually many of them took the right decision and now prosper in Israel

That would be the '48 Pals.

(COMMENT)

Depending on who is making the determinations, there could be five (5) or more distinct groups.

There was Palestinian movement prior to the establishment of Israel. That would be prior to Mid-night 14/15 May 48. This would be movement in the single territory, not from one sovereignty to another; essentially a non-International Armed Conflict (NIAC). (Group 1)

If recognition is given to Israel on Mid-night 14/15 May 48, then movement from Israel to beyond the Armistice Lines, then that could be considered movement under the conditions of an International Armed Conflict (IAC). (Group 2)

Then if there was movement between 1967 and 1988, but totally outside Israeli sovereign territory, but contained within the West Bank and Gaza Strip, then that would be inside one territory and could be considered another NIAC. (Group 3)

Any Palestinian movement as a result of the 1967 or 1973 conflict that crossed into Egyptian or Jordanian sovereignty would be an IAC. (Group 4)

Then there are any of these first four (4) groups that had, at one time or another, citizenship with either the State of Palestine (after NOV 1988) and/or the Hashemite Kingdom (after APR 1950 until AUG 1988). (Group 5)
​

It is either going to take some skilled and good faith effort negotiations, or some serious adjudication on the part of the legal system to sort this all out. Similarly, it will take a concerted effort to determine the impact of the Oslo Accords and the Letters of Mutual Recognition. What impact the two accords have on jurisdiction; and what (if any) impact the Permanent Status of Negotiations have.

I don't think the disputes are quite as simple as many believe they are.

Most Respectfully,
R

>>I don't think the disputes are quite as simple as many believe they are. <<

Not by a long shot. Nothing in the area is.

(COMMENT)

I (personal opinion) don't believe that the "Right of Return" (RoR) is enforceable or binding international law.

The RoR is derived from Article 13 of the UDHR (Universal Declaration of Human Rights) --- A/RES/3/217 A (III) 10 December 1948. While it is a great reference document, it is not legally binding. And there is a huge argument as to whether or not it ever passed into Customary Law under Article 38(1)(b) of the Statute of the International Court of Justice. There are two very important and legally binding adoptions:

• International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (CESCR) --- General Assembly Resolution 2200A (XXI) of 16 December 1966 entry into force 3 January 1976
• International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (CCPR) --- General Assembly resolution 2200A (XXI) of 16 December 1966 entry into force 23 March 1976
​

And while the ICJ Article 38 might gather that facets of the UDHR may have passed into Customary Law via the CESCR and CCPR, neither of those adoptions have the equivalent to Article 13(2) of the UDHR (Everyone has the right to leave any country, including his own, and to return to his country.). Thus, the argument can be made that the UDHR and Article 13 are not a legally binding.

The secondary argument is that neither the CESCR or the CCPR came into force until well after the 1973 War.

Most Respectfully,
R

It a fallacy they wear like a mantel. A lot of what they believe is false but it has been drummed into them for so long they can't believe anything else could be true. "but we are told this" or "we are told that" and they won't accept evidence presented that tells then anything different. I used to get so frustrate because so much of the hate and violence is based on fiction not truths. It would have been so much easier to bring them to peace if they realized not everything they have been told by their leaders is based on reality or even common sense.

I tried

 

[aris2chat]

Most things in the region are shades and colors and layers piled on top of each other. Of one person, certain facts might be true, but not for everyone or even most. In another persons case, other facts might be true.

There are half truths, distortions, misconceptions, disagreement of perspectives................. and then there are the out right lies, rhetoric and libels that feed hate upon hate upon hate.

Neither side is totally without blame, but neither is absolutely right or just. Even if a few are willing to compromise, as a people both are hard as granite, but granite with fractures running through it.

There are so many groups and points of view each with their own beliefs, demands and expectation. Under it all, each believes god is on their side. God is everywhere and everyone sides in this historic, political, religious, humanitarian mess. Political parties fight political parties, religion fights religion, sect fights sect, clan fights clan, family fights family, individuals fight individuals.............. and this on every side.

There is nothing black of white anywhere. There is no absolute right to wrong. Everyone wants a different flavor of cake when all there is only plain bread.

So how do you make everyone or anyone happy with the end result?

It would take a peter pan imagination to convince them are getting what they want out of an empty plate.

Anyone have any fairy dust? A tank ship full? or two or three or four...

 

[Phoenall]

Yes actually many of them took the right decision and now prosper in Israel

That would be the '48 Pals.

Only the ones that had been there for a long time, they were the true Palestinian arab muslims. The others that are the cause of most of the problems are those that have migrated to the area looking for a fight since the grand mufti organised the massacre of Jews in Hebron.

 

[Billo_Really]

It a fallacy they wear like a mantel. A lot of what they believe is false but it has been drummed into them for so long they can't believe anything else could be true. "but we are told this" or "we are told that" and they won't accept evidence presented that tells then anything different. I used to get so frustrate because so much of the hate and violence is based on fiction not truths. It would have been so much easier to bring them to peace if they realized not everything they have been told by their leaders is based on reality or even common sense.

I tried

The occupation and blockade are realities.

Realities that are your fault, not theirs.

 

[Phoenall]

It a fallacy they wear like a mantel. A lot of what they believe is false but it has been drummed into them for so long they can't believe anything else could be true. "but we are told this" or "we are told that" and they won't accept evidence presented that tells then anything different. I used to get so frustrate because so much of the hate and violence is based on fiction not truths. It would have been so much easier to bring them to peace if they realized not everything they have been told by their leaders is based on reality or even common sense.

I tried

The occupation and blockade are realities.

Realities that are your fault, not theirs.

Wrong as they were imposed because od Palestinian violence, murder and terrorism. Israel could always ignore the UN and just flatten gaza the next time the Palestinians kick off, would that suit you seeing the Palestinians getting what they deserve.

Try looking at the real facts and not through your islamonazi jew hatred rose tinted glasses

 

[teddyearp]

<snip> A lot of what they believe is false but it has been drummed into them for so long they can't believe anything else could be true. "but we are told this" or "we are told that" and they won't accept evidence presented that tells then anything different. I used to get so frustrate because so much of the hate and violence is based on fiction not truths. It would have been so much easier to bring them to peace if they realized not everything they have been told by their leaders is based on reality or even common sense.

I tried

x2,000,000. Quoted for the absoluteness of the truth this one post holds. I still get so frustrated because so much of the posts here are based on these lies that have been told so many times over that they are taken as truth. That is why I disappeared for a while.

 

[teddyearp]

Plenty of good information and posts here in this thread, but my ulterior motive for starting it was to slap in the face those who call Israel Nazi's and an Apartheid state. Look at how Jordan and Lebanon treat the Pals.

 

[RoccoR]

teddyearp, et al,

Yes, well --- I think we have to look beyond the basic propaganda; although I appreciate your perspective.

Plenty of good information and posts here in this thread, but my ulterior motive for starting it was to slap in the face those who call Israel Nazi's and an Apartheid state. Look at how Jordan and Lebanon treat the Pals.

(COMMENT)

Lebanon has more than its share of trouble in the al-Bekaa Valley (Homeland of Hezbollah --- a coercive political party, beyond the police, and a paramilitary above the law). And while most of the Arab League remains silent on the issue, Jordan understands the potential for trouble the Hostile Arab Palestinians present for the future; as well as, the past history of criminal behaviors they have demonstrated as a pattern of undesirable activity.

It is not really a matter of NAZI like character or a variant apartheid nature. It is a matter of recognizing and avoiding trouble as a precaution any reasonable government would take.

Just My Thought,
R

 

[MJB12741]

Plenty of good information and posts here in this thread, but my ulterior motive for starting it was to slap in the face those who call Israel Nazi's and an Apartheid state. Look at how Jordan and Lebanon treat the Pals.

The Arab country treatment of their Palestinians is indeed hard to forgive. But let us not forget Israel's Zionist treatment to piss the Palestinians off as well with their damn peace offerings, security fence & land concessions instead of trying to help free the Pali's back to their native homelands.