Palestinians Reject Two State Solution

[P F Tinmore]

Before the coordinated attack, the Israelis use the the territory outlined for the Jewish State in the Partition Plan.

Not true.

Israel told the US that Israel was declared on the proposed resolution 181 borders to dupe them into recognizing Israel.

No borders were mentioned in Israel's declaration of independence. Israel never recognized those as its borders. Nobody else did either because resolution 181 was never implemented.

At the time Israel was lying to the US about its borders, they had already blown past them and was ethnically cleansing Palestinians from the proposed Arab state and the International territory of Jerusalem.

 

[Hollie]

Before the coordinated attack, the Israelis use the the territory outlined for the Jewish State in the Partition Plan.

Not true.

Israel told the US that Israel was declared on the proposed resolution 181 borders to dupe them into recognizing Israel.

No borders were mentioned in Israel's declaration of independence. Israel never recognized those as its borders. Nobody else did either because resolution 181 was never implemented.

At the time Israel was lying to the US about its borders, they had already blown past them and was ethnically cleansing Palestinians from the proposed Arab state and the International territory of Jerusalem.

When all else fails, float a conspiracy theory.

 

[montelatici]

montelatici, et al,

Let us start by remembering that the fundamental purposes of the UN as an organization is to maintain international peace and security. The UN tries to act in the furtherance of prevention and removal of threats to the peace. This is the very meaning behind Chapter I of the UN Charter with the intent to suppress acts of aggression and the outbreak of hostilities.

Cablegram from the Secretary-General (SG) of the League of Arab States (LAS) to the Secretary-General of the United Nations (1948)

On the occasion of the intervention of Arab States in Palestine to restore law and order and to prevent disturbances prevailing in Palestine from spreading into their territories and to check further bloodshed, I have the honour to request your Excellency to bring following statement before General Assembly and Security Council.​

.......The Arab States recognize that the independence and sovereignty of Palestine which was so far subject to the British Mandate has now, with the termination of the Mandate, become established in fact, and maintain that the lawful inhabitants of Palestine are alone competent and entitled to set up an administration in Palestine for the discharge of all governmental functions without any external interference. ​

Arab League Declaration on the intervention in Palestine, 15 May 1948 | Religion :: Science :: Peace

(COMMENT)

The first dynamic to International Diplomacy at the policy level is the concept for a "Just War." Technically, today, the FIRST USE of armed force by a State in contravention of the Charter I Article 2(4) shall constitute prima facie evidence of an act of aggression.

The excerpt of the Cablegram (To SG - From LAS) is essentially a confession (prima facie evidence) to the act of FIRST USE. Technically, there were at least seven counts. Today, it would be Seven Counts in contravention of Chapter I/UN Charter --- and --- Seven Count in violation of Rome Statue - Article 8 bis Crime of aggression. However, in the 1948 invasion by LAS Armed Forces against the sovereignty, territorial integrity or political independence of Israel.

• The remarkable thing here is the fact that it must be a State(s) against State(s) - remembering that there was no State of Palestine at that time - AND - that it is an "invasion" OR "attack" against a sovereignty.
​

The "Just War" Defense given by the LAS is that:

• Jewish aggression was the proximate cause of Peace and order having been completely upset in Palestine.
• To prevent Jewish Forces from committing excessive (war crimes like) acts upon those peaceful Arabs and villagers of Deer Yasheen, Tiberias, and other places.
• That the sovereignty and independence of the Jewish State was improperly establish and that only the lawful inhabitants of Palestine are alone competent and entitled to set up an administration.
​

The underlying opposition against the LAS justification for aggression rests with:

• Chapter I is interpreted to include the concept that no consideration of whatever may be granted to the LAS in the nature of the intervention; whether political, economic, military or otherwise. None may serve as a justification for aggression.
• Chapter VII provides for the Jewish State to initiate defensive actions with Respect to Threats to the Peace, Breaches of the Peace and Acts of Aggression by the FIRST USE of armed force against Israeli declared sovereignty.
​

Most Respectfully,
R

That would mean that the Jewish aggression, the attack and capture of Jaffa (part of the Arab partition) prior to the establishment of the Israeli state (or the Arab League intervention) was proper since it was not state against state. Israel declared itself a state on 14 May 1948, yet Jaffa, part of the "Arab" partition surrendered on May 12, 1948. How long had the Jews been invading the Arab partition before the surrender? Who attacked who?

"On May 12, a deputation of Arab notables from Jaffa arrived at Haganah headquarters in Tel Aviv and, after negotiations, signed a surrender agreement."

THE CONQUEST OF JAFFA
Note: This is a Zionist site.

I'll have to check, but the Arab League forces were active within the Arab partition and the international sector (Jerusalem), not within the Jewish part of the partition. So which state did the Arab League actually invade?

Anyway Rocco, keep bullshitting.

 

[P F Tinmore]

The "Just War" Defense given by the LAS is that:

• Jewish aggression was the proximate cause of Peace and order having been completely upset in Palestine.
• To prevent Jewish Forces from committing excessive (war crimes like) acts upon those peaceful Arabs and villagers of Deer Yasheen, Tiberias, and other places.
• That the sovereignty and independence of the Jewish State was improperly establish and that only the lawful inhabitants of Palestine are alone competent and entitled to set up an administration.

Looks OK to me. Do you have a problem with it?

 

[Shusha]

No, the Christians of Palestine remained Christian and were the majority of the people in Palestine for centuries after the (Arab) conquest, and only slowly converted to Islam as it became increasingly socially and economically beneficial to adopt the religion (and culture) of the ruling class.

This is the very definition of colonialism. You obviously don't have a problem with colonialism. You not only accept it, you justify it as a viable way to change sovereignty and political power.

Oh wait. Until you think the Jews do it. (They didn't). Something reeks.

 

[Shusha]

Then, as now, its the rejection of the principle of self-determination and self-government for BOTH peoples

The Palestinians are Muslims, Christians, and Jews. They are one people.

Seriously?

 

[P F Tinmore]

Before the coordinated attack, the Israelis use the the territory outlined for the Jewish State in the Partition Plan.

Not true.

Israel told the US that Israel was declared on the proposed resolution 181 borders to dupe them into recognizing Israel.

No borders were mentioned in Israel's declaration of independence. Israel never recognized those as its borders. Nobody else did either because resolution 181 was never implemented.

At the time Israel was lying to the US about its borders, they had already blown past them and was ethnically cleansing Palestinians from the proposed Arab state and the International territory of Jerusalem.

When all else fails, float a conspiracy theory.

Its true. Look it up.

 

[Hollie]

Before the coordinated attack, the Israelis use the the territory outlined for the Jewish State in the Partition Plan.

Not true.

Israel told the US that Israel was declared on the proposed resolution 181 borders to dupe them into recognizing Israel.

No borders were mentioned in Israel's declaration of independence. Israel never recognized those as its borders. Nobody else did either because resolution 181 was never implemented.

At the time Israel was lying to the US about its borders, they had already blown past them and was ethnically cleansing Palestinians from the proposed Arab state and the International territory of Jerusalem.

When all else fails, float a conspiracy theory.

Its true. Look it up.

I just chuckle when I read your hysterical claims of "ethnic cleansing of Pal'istanians". Would these be the Invented Pal'istanians from your invented country of Pal'istan?

 

[Shusha]

Nobody attacked Israel.

Only because you are playing silly word games claiming that Israel did not exist. What the Arab States did, in contravention of the Charter, was gain control, using military force, of territory which was NOT under their sovereignty.

 

[Hollie]

Then, as now, its the rejection of the principle of self-determination and self-government for BOTH peoples

The Palestinians are Muslims, Christians, and Jews. They are one people.

Seriously?

He means they're one people.... minus the Jews, Christians and every other ethnic / religious minority that the Arabs-Moslems have expelled.

 

[P F Tinmore]

Nobody attacked Israel.

Only because you are playing silly word games claiming that Israel did not exist. What the Arab States did, in contravention of the Charter, was gain control, using military force, of territory which was NOT under their sovereignty.

You didn't read the links I posted for you.

Palestinians Reject Two State Solution

 

[Shusha]

Nobody attacked Israel.

Only because you are playing silly word games claiming that Israel did not exist. What the Arab States did, in contravention of the Charter, was gain control, using military force, of territory which was NOT under their sovereignty.

You didn't read the links I posted for you.

Palestinians Reject Two State Solution

You make no sense. What's your point? That the Arab States (Jordan, Egypt and Syria, in particular) did NOT have international borders defining their territory? Your usual argument is that "it wasn't Israel, it was Palestine". Which makes not a bit of difference to my comment.

 

[P F Tinmore]

Nobody attacked Israel.

Only because you are playing silly word games claiming that Israel did not exist. What the Arab States did, in contravention of the Charter, was gain control, using military force, of territory which was NOT under their sovereignty.

You didn't read the links I posted for you.

Palestinians Reject Two State Solution

You make no sense. What's your point? That the Arab States (Jordan, Egypt and Syria, in particular) did NOT have international borders defining their territory? Your usual argument is that "it wasn't Israel, it was Palestine". Which makes not a bit of difference to my comment.

The premise was that Israel was attacked. It was not.

 

[Shusha]

Nobody attacked Israel.

Only because you are playing silly word games claiming that Israel did not exist. What the Arab States did, in contravention of the Charter, was gain control, using military force, of territory which was NOT under their sovereignty.

You didn't read the links I posted for you.

Palestinians Reject Two State Solution

You make no sense. What's your point? That the Arab States (Jordan, Egypt and Syria, in particular) did NOT have international borders defining their territory? Your usual argument is that "it wasn't Israel, it was Palestine". Which makes not a bit of difference to my comment.

The premise was that Israel was attacked. It was not.

As I said, word games. Israel was not attacked, because, in your mind, Israel did not and can not exist.

So, the Jewish people, who had right by treaty and international law, who fulfilled the necessary steps to independence, who declared said independence, were attacked by Arab States who crossed out of their own sovereign territory into territory not under their sovereignty in order to claim and occupy said territory using military force, in contravention of the Charter.

Better?

 

[P F Tinmore]

Nobody attacked Israel.

Only because you are playing silly word games claiming that Israel did not exist. What the Arab States did, in contravention of the Charter, was gain control, using military force, of territory which was NOT under their sovereignty.

You didn't read the links I posted for you.

Palestinians Reject Two State Solution

You make no sense. What's your point? That the Arab States (Jordan, Egypt and Syria, in particular) did NOT have international borders defining their territory? Your usual argument is that "it wasn't Israel, it was Palestine". Which makes not a bit of difference to my comment.

The premise was that Israel was attacked. It was not.

As I said, word games. Israel was not attacked, because, in your mind, Israel did not and can not exist.

So, the Jewish people, who had right by treaty and international law, who fulfilled the necessary steps to independence, who declared said independence, were attacked by Arab States who crossed out of their own sovereign territory into territory not under their sovereignty in order to claim and occupy said territory using military force, in contravention of the Charter.

Better?

But none of that matters.

Nobody attacked Israel.

 

[Hollie]

Only because you are playing silly word games claiming that Israel did not exist. What the Arab States did, in contravention of the Charter, was gain control, using military force, of territory which was NOT under their sovereignty.

You didn't read the links I posted for you.

Palestinians Reject Two State Solution

You make no sense. What's your point? That the Arab States (Jordan, Egypt and Syria, in particular) did NOT have international borders defining their territory? Your usual argument is that "it wasn't Israel, it was Palestine". Which makes not a bit of difference to my comment.

The premise was that Israel was attacked. It was not.

As I said, word games. Israel was not attacked, because, in your mind, Israel did not and can not exist.

So, the Jewish people, who had right by treaty and international law, who fulfilled the necessary steps to independence, who declared said independence, were attacked by Arab States who crossed out of their own sovereign territory into territory not under their sovereignty in order to claim and occupy said territory using military force, in contravention of the Charter.

Better?

But none of that matters.

Nobody attacked Israel.

Are you not paying attention?

 

[P F Tinmore]

You didn't read the links I posted for you.

Palestinians Reject Two State Solution

You make no sense. What's your point? That the Arab States (Jordan, Egypt and Syria, in particular) did NOT have international borders defining their territory? Your usual argument is that "it wasn't Israel, it was Palestine". Which makes not a bit of difference to my comment.

The premise was that Israel was attacked. It was not.

As I said, word games. Israel was not attacked, because, in your mind, Israel did not and can not exist.

So, the Jewish people, who had right by treaty and international law, who fulfilled the necessary steps to independence, who declared said independence, were attacked by Arab States who crossed out of their own sovereign territory into territory not under their sovereignty in order to claim and occupy said territory using military force, in contravention of the Charter.

Better?

But none of that matters.

Nobody attacked Israel.

Are you not paying attention?

Sure, nobody has shown where Israel was attacked.

 

[montelatici]

No, the Christians of Palestine remained Christian and were the majority of the people in Palestine for centuries after the (Arab) conquest, and only slowly converted to Islam as it became increasingly socially and economically beneficial to adopt the religion (and culture) of the ruling class.

This is the very definition of colonialism. You obviously don't have a problem with colonialism. You not only accept it, you justify it as a viable way to change sovereignty and political power.

Oh wait. Until you think the Jews do it. (They didn't). Something reeks.

No problem at all now that you accept that today's native Christians and Muslims of Palestine, whose ancestors practiced Roman, Judaic and other religions, were colonized by Romans, Arabians, European Crusaders, Turks, British and now European Jews.

 

[Hollie]

No, the Christians of Palestine remained Christian and were the majority of the people in Palestine for centuries after the (Arab) conquest, and only slowly converted to Islam as it became increasingly socially and economically beneficial to adopt the religion (and culture) of the ruling class.

This is the very definition of colonialism. You obviously don't have a problem with colonialism. You not only accept it, you justify it as a viable way to change sovereignty and political power.

Oh wait. Until you think the Jews do it. (They didn't). Something reeks.

No problem at all now that you accept that today's native Christians and Muslims of Palestine, whose ancestors practiced Roman, Judaic and other religions, were colonized by Romans, Arabians, European Crusaders, Turks, British and now European Jews.

What you're befuddled with is the reality that the Arab-Moslem invaders are the most recent invaders.

 

[montelatici]

Not very accurate since the most recent invaders came from Europe.