Palestinians signed to join Rome Statute.

[P F Tinmore]

Indeed, Rocco does post links to all the illegal external interference.

Sure he does Tinmore, whatever you say

I posted a list.

You have refuted none of them.

List of what? You posted jibberish and din't even come close to refuting Rocco;s post. Your response was nothing but one big duck...
And again, when someone refutes your post, which happens every day, you refuse to admit it.

A song and dance does not a refute make.

Then why did you give Rocco just that in your response?

I asked some questions. I await his response.

 

[Phoenall]

P F Tinmore, et al,

This is a good point.

Do you mean like:

2. Reaffirms the legitimacy of the struggle of peoples for independence, territorial integrity, national unity and liberation from colonial and foreign domination and foreign occupation by all available means, particularly armed struggle;

3. Reaffirms the inalienable right of the peoples of Namibia and Zimbabwe, of the Palestinian people and of all peoples under alien and colonial domination to self-determination, national independence, territorial integrity, and national unity and sovereignty without external interference;
A RES 33 24 of 29 November 1978 ​

​

(COMMENT)

This was written a decade before the Palestinian People Declared Independence in 1988. At that time, they were citizens of the Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan and under Jordanian rule. At that time, it was not Israel that obstructed "independence, territorial integrity, and national unity;" as demonstrated when Jordan cut ties with the West Bank and the Palestinians Declared Independence without interference. You will take notice that in A/67/L.28 26 November 2012 (which Affirms its determination to contribute to the achievement of the inalienable rights of the Palestinian people and the attainment of a peaceful settlement in the Middle East that ends the occupation that began in 1967 and fulfils the vision of two States: an independent, sovereign, democratic, contiguous and viable State of Palestine living side by side in peace and security with Israel on the basis of the pre-1967 borders;) and again in A/RES/67/19 4 December 2012 (which Reaffirms the right of the Palestinian people to self-determination and to independence in their State of Palestine on the Palestinian territory occupied since 1967; and Decides to accord to Palestine non-member observer State status in the United Nations;) there is not mention of "recalling" A RES 33 24 of 29 November 1978.

In this observation you will notice that in both the November Affirmation and the December Decision that Resolution A/RES/25/2625 24 October 1970 (Declaration on Principles of International Law concerning Friendly Relations and Co-operation among States in accordance with the Charter of the United Nations) is recalled (not A RES 33 24 of 29 November 1978). Without regard to what A RES 33 24 of 29 November 1978 may be interpreted to imply --- the non-binding Resolution does not take precedence over the Hague Regulation, the Geneva Conventions, or Customary International Humanitarian Law. UN Security Council Resolution S/RES/1373 (2001), which is binding, (which Decides also that all States shall: (a) Refrain from providing any form of support, active or passive, to entities or persons involved in terrorist acts, including by suppressing recruitment of members of terrorist groups and eliminating the supply of weapons to terrorists;) does Reaffirming the principle established by the General Assembly in its Declaration on Principles of International Law of October 1970 (resolution 2625 (XXV) namely that every State has the duty to refrain from organizing, instigating, assisting or participating in terrorist acts in another State or acquiescing in organized activities within its territory directed towards the commission of such acts.

If there is a "false premise" here --- it is the idea that the Palestinians have been given such special dispensation to violate the Hague Regulation, the Geneva Conventions, or Customary International Humanitarian Law; and the laws against terrorism.

First: the critical links between development and security. Nothing can justify terrorism — ever. No grievance, no goal, no cause can excuse terrorist acts. At the same time, we must remove the conditions that feed the problem. Terrorism festers where conflicts are endemic and where human rights, human dignity and human life are not protected and impunity prevails. SG/SM/14764-SC/10883​

The Palestinians, no matter what cover they choose, cannot operate independent of the law, against Israeli civilians and where the human rights, human dignity and human life of the Israeli are not protected and impunity prevails.

Rocco, here is where you get into false premise territory. You assume that Israel has territorial integrity. It is Palestine that has the right to territorial integrity as stated above. There is no right to the territorial integrity of land you occupy.

One of the most important problems which must be cleared up be-
fore a lasting peace can be established in Palestine is the question of
the disposition of the more than 700,000 Arab refugees who during the
Palestine conflict fled from their homes in what is now Israeli occupied
territory and are at present living as refugees in Arab Palestine and
the neighboring Arab states.

FRUS Foreign relations of the United States 1949. The Near East South Asia and Africa Israel​

(COMMENT)

This is more of the same 1949 (more than half a century ago) era thinking; hardly relevant today. This was written before the United Nations Convention relating to the Status of Refugees, adopted in 1951, and the Palestinians often forget that:

C. This Convention shall cease to apply to any person falling under the terms of section A if:

(1) He has voluntarily re-availed himself of the protection of the country of his nationality; or
(2) Having lost his nationality, he has voluntarily re-acquired it; or
(3) He has acquired a new nationality, and enjoys the protection of the country of his new nationality; or
(4) He has voluntarily re-established himself in the country which he left or outside which he remained owing to fear of persecution;​

With very rare exceptions, there are no Palestinian Refugees in the West Bank or Gaza Strip after 16 November 1988, when the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO):

By virtue of the natural, historical and legal right of the Palestinian Arab people to its homeland, Palestine, and of the sacrifices of its succeeding generations in defence of the freedom and independence of that homeland,

Pursuant to the resolutions of the Arab Summit Conferences and on the basis of the international legitimacy embodied in the resolutions of the United Nations since 1947, and

Through the exercise by the Palestinian Arab people of its right to self-determination, political independence and sovereignty over its territory:

The Palestine National Council hereby declares, in the Name of God and on behalf of the Palestinian Arab people, the establishment of the State of Palestine in the land of Palestine with its capital at Jerusalem. (Annex III, A/43/827 S/20278 18 November 1988)​

When the PLO (designated the sole legitimate representative of the Palestinian people in any Palestinian territory that is liberated, by the Arab League) declared independence and established the State of Palestine, each Palestinian acquired a new nationality, and enjoys the protection of the country of his new nationality the State of Palestine as acknowledged by the UN (A/RES/43/177 15 December 1988); no longer falling under the UN definition of Refugee.

To support the Palestinian insistence (Jihadist and Fedayeen) that Israel has no "territorial integrity" is simply any way of promoting a continuation of hostilities. Whether we view it though the lenses of the Palestinian National Charter, the HAMAS Covenant, or the more recent Political Position Paper by HAMAS, the language is the same.

1. Palestine from the river to the sea, and from north to south, is a land of the Palestinian people and its homeland and its legitimate right, we may not a waiver an inch or any part thereof, no matter what the reasons and circumstances and pressures.

2. Palestine - all of Palestine - is a land of Islamic and Arab affiliation, a blessed sacred land, that has a major portion in the heart of every Arab and Muslim

3. No recognition of the legitimacy of the occupation whatever; this is a principled position, political and moral, and therefore do not recognize the legitimacy of the Israeli occupation of Palestine, and recognition of "Israel" and the legitimacy of its presence on any part of Palestine no matter how long; and it will not be long, God willing.​

This is a variation on the theme that: Israel has NO Right of Self-Defense against Palestine; because there is no territorial entity with borders called Israel.

First, let's understand what the PLO Negotiations Affairs Department (NAD) says:

Key Facts​

• 
  
  
  • • The 1967 border is the internationally-recognized border between Israel and the oPt.
    • A basic principle of international law is that no state may acquire territory by force. Israel has no valid claim to any part of the territory it occupied in 1967.
    • The international community does not recognize Israeli sovereignty over any part of the oPt, including East Jerusalem.

Israel has no valid claim to any part of the West Bank or Gaza Strip. However, in the interest of peace, we have been willing to discuss minor, equitable, and mutually-agreed territorial exchanges should we decide that it is in our interest to do so.​

Now there is a valid argument concerning Area "C" as stipulated and agreed upon by the Palestinians in Israeli-Palestinian Interim Agreement on the West Bank and the Gaza Strip (OSLO Accord II A/51/889 S/1997/357 5 May 1997).

As far as basic recognition is concerned, the sole legitimate representative of the Palestinian People (the PLO) Exchange of Letters between PM Rabin and Chairman Arafat relative to the mutual Israel-PLO Recognition and the "calls upon the Palestinian people in the West Bank and Gaza Strip to take part in the steps leading to the normalization of life, rejecting violence and terrorism, contributing to peace and stability and participating actively in shaping reconstruction, economic development and cooperation."

I believe that there are many pro-Palestinians today the which nothing more than to continue the armed struggle that existed prior to the Oslo Accords and the mutual recognition. Clear, the Unity Government is struggling to maintain a common political policy, with HAMAS not recognizing Israel and Fatah waffling on the issue.

Most Respectfully,
R

Rocco, you present your standard laundry list of shit but you always leave something out.

The West Bank became part of Jordan.

Did the Palestinians ratify that? That was after 80-some Palestinian leaders declared independence in all of Palestine in 1948.

PLO designated the leader of Palestine.

Did the Palestinians ratify that?

...and again in A/RES/67/19 4 December 2012 (which Reaffirms the right of the Palestinian people to self-determination and to independence in their State of Palestine on the Palestinian territory occupied since 1967;

Did the Palestinians ratify that?

1988 declaration of independence by the PLO.

Did the Palestinians ratify that?

The PA created by foreigners with rules by foreigners.

Did the Palestinians ratify that?

Recognition of Israel by foreign appointed leaders.

Did the Palestinians ratify that?

The signing of Oslo.

Did the Palestinians ratify that?

Where is the Palestinians right to self determination when they have had no say in anything since their creation? (Except rejecting resolution 181 that they had every right to do.)

The first chance they had to make their own decision was the elections of 2006 and we have been kicking their ass ever since because they did not elect the foreign approved stooges.

Have the Palestinians ratified the descent into terrorism and becoming terrorists and so leaving themselves open to being killed. Have the palestinians ratified becoming observers at the UN, if not then why are they there. Have the Palestinians ratified the singing of the Rome statutes, if not then why is the ICC bothering to take up their case.

For the record the Palestinians did ratify becoming part of Jordan when they became Jordanian citizens and took part in elections. They also ratified the PLO being their spokespeople when they took part in the elections prior to 2006 for the first P.A. So stop trying to alter the reality so it suits your twisted ISLAMONAZI views.

 

[Phoenall]

P F Tinmore, et al,

This is a good point.

Do you mean like:

2. Reaffirms the legitimacy of the struggle of peoples for independence, territorial integrity, national unity and liberation from colonial and foreign domination and foreign occupation by all available means, particularly armed struggle;

3. Reaffirms the inalienable right of the peoples of Namibia and Zimbabwe, of the Palestinian people and of all peoples under alien and colonial domination to self-determination, national independence, territorial integrity, and national unity and sovereignty without external interference;
A RES 33 24 of 29 November 1978 ​

​

(COMMENT)

This was written a decade before the Palestinian People Declared Independence in 1988. At that time, they were citizens of the Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan and under Jordanian rule. At that time, it was not Israel that obstructed "independence, territorial integrity, and national unity;" as demonstrated when Jordan cut ties with the West Bank and the Palestinians Declared Independence without interference. You will take notice that in A/67/L.28 26 November 2012 (which Affirms its determination to contribute to the achievement of the inalienable rights of the Palestinian people and the attainment of a peaceful settlement in the Middle East that ends the occupation that began in 1967 and fulfils the vision of two States: an independent, sovereign, democratic, contiguous and viable State of Palestine living side by side in peace and security with Israel on the basis of the pre-1967 borders;) and again in A/RES/67/19 4 December 2012 (which Reaffirms the right of the Palestinian people to self-determination and to independence in their State of Palestine on the Palestinian territory occupied since 1967; and Decides to accord to Palestine non-member observer State status in the United Nations;) there is not mention of "recalling" A RES 33 24 of 29 November 1978.

In this observation you will notice that in both the November Affirmation and the December Decision that Resolution A/RES/25/2625 24 October 1970 (Declaration on Principles of International Law concerning Friendly Relations and Co-operation among States in accordance with the Charter of the United Nations) is recalled (not A RES 33 24 of 29 November 1978). Without regard to what A RES 33 24 of 29 November 1978 may be interpreted to imply --- the non-binding Resolution does not take precedence over the Hague Regulation, the Geneva Conventions, or Customary International Humanitarian Law. UN Security Council Resolution S/RES/1373 (2001), which is binding, (which Decides also that all States shall: (a) Refrain from providing any form of support, active or passive, to entities or persons involved in terrorist acts, including by suppressing recruitment of members of terrorist groups and eliminating the supply of weapons to terrorists;) does Reaffirming the principle established by the General Assembly in its Declaration on Principles of International Law of October 1970 (resolution 2625 (XXV) namely that every State has the duty to refrain from organizing, instigating, assisting or participating in terrorist acts in another State or acquiescing in organized activities within its territory directed towards the commission of such acts.

If there is a "false premise" here --- it is the idea that the Palestinians have been given such special dispensation to violate the Hague Regulation, the Geneva Conventions, or Customary International Humanitarian Law; and the laws against terrorism.

First: the critical links between development and security. Nothing can justify terrorism — ever. No grievance, no goal, no cause can excuse terrorist acts. At the same time, we must remove the conditions that feed the problem. Terrorism festers where conflicts are endemic and where human rights, human dignity and human life are not protected and impunity prevails. SG/SM/14764-SC/10883​

The Palestinians, no matter what cover they choose, cannot operate independent of the law, against Israeli civilians and where the human rights, human dignity and human life of the Israeli are not protected and impunity prevails.

Rocco, here is where you get into false premise territory. You assume that Israel has territorial integrity. It is Palestine that has the right to territorial integrity as stated above. There is no right to the territorial integrity of land you occupy.

One of the most important problems which must be cleared up be-
fore a lasting peace can be established in Palestine is the question of
the disposition of the more than 700,000 Arab refugees who during the
Palestine conflict fled from their homes in what is now Israeli occupied
territory and are at present living as refugees in Arab Palestine and
the neighboring Arab states.

FRUS Foreign relations of the United States 1949. The Near East South Asia and Africa Israel​

(COMMENT)

This is more of the same 1949 (more than half a century ago) era thinking; hardly relevant today. This was written before the United Nations Convention relating to the Status of Refugees, adopted in 1951, and the Palestinians often forget that:

C. This Convention shall cease to apply to any person falling under the terms of section A if:

(1) He has voluntarily re-availed himself of the protection of the country of his nationality; or
(2) Having lost his nationality, he has voluntarily re-acquired it; or
(3) He has acquired a new nationality, and enjoys the protection of the country of his new nationality; or
(4) He has voluntarily re-established himself in the country which he left or outside which he remained owing to fear of persecution;​

With very rare exceptions, there are no Palestinian Refugees in the West Bank or Gaza Strip after 16 November 1988, when the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO):

By virtue of the natural, historical and legal right of the Palestinian Arab people to its homeland, Palestine, and of the sacrifices of its succeeding generations in defence of the freedom and independence of that homeland,

Pursuant to the resolutions of the Arab Summit Conferences and on the basis of the international legitimacy embodied in the resolutions of the United Nations since 1947, and

Through the exercise by the Palestinian Arab people of its right to self-determination, political independence and sovereignty over its territory:

The Palestine National Council hereby declares, in the Name of God and on behalf of the Palestinian Arab people, the establishment of the State of Palestine in the land of Palestine with its capital at Jerusalem. (Annex III, A/43/827 S/20278 18 November 1988)​

When the PLO (designated the sole legitimate representative of the Palestinian people in any Palestinian territory that is liberated, by the Arab League) declared independence and established the State of Palestine, each Palestinian acquired a new nationality, and enjoys the protection of the country of his new nationality the State of Palestine as acknowledged by the UN (A/RES/43/177 15 December 1988); no longer falling under the UN definition of Refugee.

To support the Palestinian insistence (Jihadist and Fedayeen) that Israel has no "territorial integrity" is simply any way of promoting a continuation of hostilities. Whether we view it though the lenses of the Palestinian National Charter, the HAMAS Covenant, or the more recent Political Position Paper by HAMAS, the language is the same.

1. Palestine from the river to the sea, and from north to south, is a land of the Palestinian people and its homeland and its legitimate right, we may not a waiver an inch or any part thereof, no matter what the reasons and circumstances and pressures.

2. Palestine - all of Palestine - is a land of Islamic and Arab affiliation, a blessed sacred land, that has a major portion in the heart of every Arab and Muslim

3. No recognition of the legitimacy of the occupation whatever; this is a principled position, political and moral, and therefore do not recognize the legitimacy of the Israeli occupation of Palestine, and recognition of "Israel" and the legitimacy of its presence on any part of Palestine no matter how long; and it will not be long, God willing.​

This is a variation on the theme that: Israel has NO Right of Self-Defense against Palestine; because there is no territorial entity with borders called Israel.

First, let's understand what the PLO Negotiations Affairs Department (NAD) says:

Key Facts​

• 
  
  
  • • The 1967 border is the internationally-recognized border between Israel and the oPt.
    • A basic principle of international law is that no state may acquire territory by force. Israel has no valid claim to any part of the territory it occupied in 1967.
    • The international community does not recognize Israeli sovereignty over any part of the oPt, including East Jerusalem.

Israel has no valid claim to any part of the West Bank or Gaza Strip. However, in the interest of peace, we have been willing to discuss minor, equitable, and mutually-agreed territorial exchanges should we decide that it is in our interest to do so.​

Now there is a valid argument concerning Area "C" as stipulated and agreed upon by the Palestinians in Israeli-Palestinian Interim Agreement on the West Bank and the Gaza Strip (OSLO Accord II A/51/889 S/1997/357 5 May 1997).

As far as basic recognition is concerned, the sole legitimate representative of the Palestinian People (the PLO) Exchange of Letters between PM Rabin and Chairman Arafat relative to the mutual Israel-PLO Recognition and the "calls upon the Palestinian people in the West Bank and Gaza Strip to take part in the steps leading to the normalization of life, rejecting violence and terrorism, contributing to peace and stability and participating actively in shaping reconstruction, economic development and cooperation."

I believe that there are many pro-Palestinians today the which nothing more than to continue the armed struggle that existed prior to the Oslo Accords and the mutual recognition. Clear, the Unity Government is struggling to maintain a common political policy, with HAMAS not recognizing Israel and Fatah waffling on the issue.

Most Respectfully,
R

Rocco, you present your standard laundry list of shit but you always leave something out.

The West Bank became part of Jordan.

Did the Palestinians ratify that? That was after 80-some Palestinian leaders declared independence in all of Palestine in 1948.

PLO designated the leader of Palestine.

Did the Palestinians ratify that?

...and again in A/RES/67/19 4 December 2012 (which Reaffirms the right of the Palestinian people to self-determination and to independence in their State of Palestine on the Palestinian territory occupied since 1967;

Did the Palestinians ratify that?

1988 declaration of independence by the PLO.

Did the Palestinians ratify that?

The PA created by foreigners with rules by foreigners.

Did the Palestinians ratify that?

Recognition of Israel by foreign appointed leaders.

Did the Palestinians ratify that?

The signing of Oslo.

Did the Palestinians ratify that?

Where is the Palestinians right to self determination when they have had no say in anything since their creation? (Except rejecting resolution 181 that they had every right to do.)

The first chance they had to make their own decision was the elections of 2006 and we have been kicking their ass ever since because they did not elect the foreign approved stooges.

"Rocco, you present your standard laundry list of shit but you always leave something out"

You're clearly frustrated because Rocco , once AGAIN, proved you to be wrong. And once again, you responded to his post by not even remotely refuting what he said. You mad??

Pfffft, Rocco posts smoke.

Sorry Rocco, nothing personal.

P F Tinmore, et al,

This is a good point.

​

(COMMENT)

This was written a decade before the Palestinian People Declared Independence in 1988. At that time, they were citizens of the Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan and under Jordanian rule. At that time, it was not Israel that obstructed "independence, territorial integrity, and national unity;" as demonstrated when Jordan cut ties with the West Bank and the Palestinians Declared Independence without interference. You will take notice that in A/67/L.28 26 November 2012 (which Affirms its determination to contribute to the achievement of the inalienable rights of the Palestinian people and the attainment of a peaceful settlement in the Middle East that ends the occupation that began in 1967 and fulfils the vision of two States: an independent, sovereign, democratic, contiguous and viable State of Palestine living side by side in peace and security with Israel on the basis of the pre-1967 borders;) and again in A/RES/67/19 4 December 2012 (which Reaffirms the right of the Palestinian people to self-determination and to independence in their State of Palestine on the Palestinian territory occupied since 1967; and Decides to accord to Palestine non-member observer State status in the United Nations;) there is not mention of "recalling" A RES 33 24 of 29 November 1978.

In this observation you will notice that in both the November Affirmation and the December Decision that Resolution A/RES/25/2625 24 October 1970 (Declaration on Principles of International Law concerning Friendly Relations and Co-operation among States in accordance with the Charter of the United Nations) is recalled (not A RES 33 24 of 29 November 1978). Without regard to what A RES 33 24 of 29 November 1978 may be interpreted to imply --- the non-binding Resolution does not take precedence over the Hague Regulation, the Geneva Conventions, or Customary International Humanitarian Law. UN Security Council Resolution S/RES/1373 (2001), which is binding, (which Decides also that all States shall: (a) Refrain from providing any form of support, active or passive, to entities or persons involved in terrorist acts, including by suppressing recruitment of members of terrorist groups and eliminating the supply of weapons to terrorists;) does Reaffirming the principle established by the General Assembly in its Declaration on Principles of International Law of October 1970 (resolution 2625 (XXV) namely that every State has the duty to refrain from organizing, instigating, assisting or participating in terrorist acts in another State or acquiescing in organized activities within its territory directed towards the commission of such acts.

If there is a "false premise" here --- it is the idea that the Palestinians have been given such special dispensation to violate the Hague Regulation, the Geneva Conventions, or Customary International Humanitarian Law; and the laws against terrorism.

First: the critical links between development and security. Nothing can justify terrorism — ever. No grievance, no goal, no cause can excuse terrorist acts. At the same time, we must remove the conditions that feed the problem. Terrorism festers where conflicts are endemic and where human rights, human dignity and human life are not protected and impunity prevails. SG/SM/14764-SC/10883​

The Palestinians, no matter what cover they choose, cannot operate independent of the law, against Israeli civilians and where the human rights, human dignity and human life of the Israeli are not protected and impunity prevails.

(COMMENT)

This is more of the same 1949 (more than half a century ago) era thinking; hardly relevant today. This was written before the United Nations Convention relating to the Status of Refugees, adopted in 1951, and the Palestinians often forget that:

C. This Convention shall cease to apply to any person falling under the terms of section A if:

(1) He has voluntarily re-availed himself of the protection of the country of his nationality; or
(2) Having lost his nationality, he has voluntarily re-acquired it; or
(3) He has acquired a new nationality, and enjoys the protection of the country of his new nationality; or
(4) He has voluntarily re-established himself in the country which he left or outside which he remained owing to fear of persecution;​

With very rare exceptions, there are no Palestinian Refugees in the West Bank or Gaza Strip after 16 November 1988, when the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO):

By virtue of the natural, historical and legal right of the Palestinian Arab people to its homeland, Palestine, and of the sacrifices of its succeeding generations in defence of the freedom and independence of that homeland,

Pursuant to the resolutions of the Arab Summit Conferences and on the basis of the international legitimacy embodied in the resolutions of the United Nations since 1947, and

Through the exercise by the Palestinian Arab people of its right to self-determination, political independence and sovereignty over its territory:

The Palestine National Council hereby declares, in the Name of God and on behalf of the Palestinian Arab people, the establishment of the State of Palestine in the land of Palestine with its capital at Jerusalem. (Annex III, A/43/827 S/20278 18 November 1988)​

When the PLO (designated the sole legitimate representative of the Palestinian people in any Palestinian territory that is liberated, by the Arab League) declared independence and established the State of Palestine, each Palestinian acquired a new nationality, and enjoys the protection of the country of his new nationality the State of Palestine as acknowledged by the UN (A/RES/43/177 15 December 1988); no longer falling under the UN definition of Refugee.

To support the Palestinian insistence (Jihadist and Fedayeen) that Israel has no "territorial integrity" is simply any way of promoting a continuation of hostilities. Whether we view it though the lenses of the Palestinian National Charter, the HAMAS Covenant, or the more recent Political Position Paper by HAMAS, the language is the same.

1. Palestine from the river to the sea, and from north to south, is a land of the Palestinian people and its homeland and its legitimate right, we may not a waiver an inch or any part thereof, no matter what the reasons and circumstances and pressures.

2. Palestine - all of Palestine - is a land of Islamic and Arab affiliation, a blessed sacred land, that has a major portion in the heart of every Arab and Muslim

3. No recognition of the legitimacy of the occupation whatever; this is a principled position, political and moral, and therefore do not recognize the legitimacy of the Israeli occupation of Palestine, and recognition of "Israel" and the legitimacy of its presence on any part of Palestine no matter how long; and it will not be long, God willing.​

This is a variation on the theme that: Israel has NO Right of Self-Defense against Palestine; because there is no territorial entity with borders called Israel.

First, let's understand what the PLO Negotiations Affairs Department (NAD) says:

Key Facts​

• 
  
  
  • • The 1967 border is the internationally-recognized border between Israel and the oPt.
    • A basic principle of international law is that no state may acquire territory by force. Israel has no valid claim to any part of the territory it occupied in 1967.
    • The international community does not recognize Israeli sovereignty over any part of the oPt, including East Jerusalem.

Israel has no valid claim to any part of the West Bank or Gaza Strip. However, in the interest of peace, we have been willing to discuss minor, equitable, and mutually-agreed territorial exchanges should we decide that it is in our interest to do so.​

Now there is a valid argument concerning Area "C" as stipulated and agreed upon by the Palestinians in Israeli-Palestinian Interim Agreement on the West Bank and the Gaza Strip (OSLO Accord II A/51/889 S/1997/357 5 May 1997).

As far as basic recognition is concerned, the sole legitimate representative of the Palestinian People (the PLO) Exchange of Letters between PM Rabin and Chairman Arafat relative to the mutual Israel-PLO Recognition and the "calls upon the Palestinian people in the West Bank and Gaza Strip to take part in the steps leading to the normalization of life, rejecting violence and terrorism, contributing to peace and stability and participating actively in shaping reconstruction, economic development and cooperation."

I believe that there are many pro-Palestinians today the which nothing more than to continue the armed struggle that existed prior to the Oslo Accords and the mutual recognition. Clear, the Unity Government is struggling to maintain a common political policy, with HAMAS not recognizing Israel and Fatah waffling on the issue.

Most Respectfully,
R

Rocco, you present your standard laundry list of shit but you always leave something out.

The West Bank became part of Jordan.

Did the Palestinians ratify that? That was after 80-some Palestinian leaders declared independence in all of Palestine in 1948.

PLO designated the leader of Palestine.

Did the Palestinians ratify that?

...and again in A/RES/67/19 4 December 2012 (which Reaffirms the right of the Palestinian people to self-determination and to independence in their State of Palestine on the Palestinian territory occupied since 1967;

Did the Palestinians ratify that?

1988 declaration of independence by the PLO.

Did the Palestinians ratify that?

The PA created by foreigners with rules by foreigners.

Did the Palestinians ratify that?

Recognition of Israel by foreign appointed leaders.

Did the Palestinians ratify that?

The signing of Oslo.

Did the Palestinians ratify that?

Where is the Palestinians right to self determination when they have had no say in anything since their creation? (Except rejecting resolution 181 that they had every right to do.)

The first chance they had to make their own decision was the elections of 2006 and we have been kicking their ass ever since because they did not elect the foreign approved stooges.

"Rocco, you present your standard laundry list of shit but you always leave something out"

You're clearly frustrated because Rocco , once AGAIN, proved you to be wrong. And once again, you responded to his post by not even remotely refuting what he said. You mad??

Pfffft, Rocco posts smoke.

Sorry Rocco, nothing personal.

Rocco refutes all your lies by providing valid links and excellent proof. So naturally, you would make a comment like that.

You find him a threat because you can't get people to believe your propaganda as long as he is here.

When I mention illegal external interference, his response is a list of things that foreigners did. That proves my point more than his.

Yep foriegners like Egypt, Jordan, Saudi, Iran, Styia etc.

 

[P F Tinmore]

P F Tinmore, et al,

This is a good point.

Do you mean like:

2. Reaffirms the legitimacy of the struggle of peoples for independence, territorial integrity, national unity and liberation from colonial and foreign domination and foreign occupation by all available means, particularly armed struggle;

3. Reaffirms the inalienable right of the peoples of Namibia and Zimbabwe, of the Palestinian people and of all peoples under alien and colonial domination to self-determination, national independence, territorial integrity, and national unity and sovereignty without external interference;
A RES 33 24 of 29 November 1978 ​

​

(COMMENT)

This was written a decade before the Palestinian People Declared Independence in 1988. At that time, they were citizens of the Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan and under Jordanian rule. At that time, it was not Israel that obstructed "independence, territorial integrity, and national unity;" as demonstrated when Jordan cut ties with the West Bank and the Palestinians Declared Independence without interference. You will take notice that in A/67/L.28 26 November 2012 (which Affirms its determination to contribute to the achievement of the inalienable rights of the Palestinian people and the attainment of a peaceful settlement in the Middle East that ends the occupation that began in 1967 and fulfils the vision of two States: an independent, sovereign, democratic, contiguous and viable State of Palestine living side by side in peace and security with Israel on the basis of the pre-1967 borders;) and again in A/RES/67/19 4 December 2012 (which Reaffirms the right of the Palestinian people to self-determination and to independence in their State of Palestine on the Palestinian territory occupied since 1967; and Decides to accord to Palestine non-member observer State status in the United Nations;) there is not mention of "recalling" A RES 33 24 of 29 November 1978.

In this observation you will notice that in both the November Affirmation and the December Decision that Resolution A/RES/25/2625 24 October 1970 (Declaration on Principles of International Law concerning Friendly Relations and Co-operation among States in accordance with the Charter of the United Nations) is recalled (not A RES 33 24 of 29 November 1978). Without regard to what A RES 33 24 of 29 November 1978 may be interpreted to imply --- the non-binding Resolution does not take precedence over the Hague Regulation, the Geneva Conventions, or Customary International Humanitarian Law. UN Security Council Resolution S/RES/1373 (2001), which is binding, (which Decides also that all States shall: (a) Refrain from providing any form of support, active or passive, to entities or persons involved in terrorist acts, including by suppressing recruitment of members of terrorist groups and eliminating the supply of weapons to terrorists;) does Reaffirming the principle established by the General Assembly in its Declaration on Principles of International Law of October 1970 (resolution 2625 (XXV) namely that every State has the duty to refrain from organizing, instigating, assisting or participating in terrorist acts in another State or acquiescing in organized activities within its territory directed towards the commission of such acts.

If there is a "false premise" here --- it is the idea that the Palestinians have been given such special dispensation to violate the Hague Regulation, the Geneva Conventions, or Customary International Humanitarian Law; and the laws against terrorism.

First: the critical links between development and security. Nothing can justify terrorism — ever. No grievance, no goal, no cause can excuse terrorist acts. At the same time, we must remove the conditions that feed the problem. Terrorism festers where conflicts are endemic and where human rights, human dignity and human life are not protected and impunity prevails. SG/SM/14764-SC/10883​

The Palestinians, no matter what cover they choose, cannot operate independent of the law, against Israeli civilians and where the human rights, human dignity and human life of the Israeli are not protected and impunity prevails.

Rocco, here is where you get into false premise territory. You assume that Israel has territorial integrity. It is Palestine that has the right to territorial integrity as stated above. There is no right to the territorial integrity of land you occupy.

One of the most important problems which must be cleared up be-
fore a lasting peace can be established in Palestine is the question of
the disposition of the more than 700,000 Arab refugees who during the
Palestine conflict fled from their homes in what is now Israeli occupied
territory and are at present living as refugees in Arab Palestine and
the neighboring Arab states.

FRUS Foreign relations of the United States 1949. The Near East South Asia and Africa Israel​

(COMMENT)

This is more of the same 1949 (more than half a century ago) era thinking; hardly relevant today. This was written before the United Nations Convention relating to the Status of Refugees, adopted in 1951, and the Palestinians often forget that:

C. This Convention shall cease to apply to any person falling under the terms of section A if:

(1) He has voluntarily re-availed himself of the protection of the country of his nationality; or
(2) Having lost his nationality, he has voluntarily re-acquired it; or
(3) He has acquired a new nationality, and enjoys the protection of the country of his new nationality; or
(4) He has voluntarily re-established himself in the country which he left or outside which he remained owing to fear of persecution;​

With very rare exceptions, there are no Palestinian Refugees in the West Bank or Gaza Strip after 16 November 1988, when the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO):

By virtue of the natural, historical and legal right of the Palestinian Arab people to its homeland, Palestine, and of the sacrifices of its succeeding generations in defence of the freedom and independence of that homeland,

Pursuant to the resolutions of the Arab Summit Conferences and on the basis of the international legitimacy embodied in the resolutions of the United Nations since 1947, and

Through the exercise by the Palestinian Arab people of its right to self-determination, political independence and sovereignty over its territory:

The Palestine National Council hereby declares, in the Name of God and on behalf of the Palestinian Arab people, the establishment of the State of Palestine in the land of Palestine with its capital at Jerusalem. (Annex III, A/43/827 S/20278 18 November 1988)​

When the PLO (designated the sole legitimate representative of the Palestinian people in any Palestinian territory that is liberated, by the Arab League) declared independence and established the State of Palestine, each Palestinian acquired a new nationality, and enjoys the protection of the country of his new nationality the State of Palestine as acknowledged by the UN (A/RES/43/177 15 December 1988); no longer falling under the UN definition of Refugee.

To support the Palestinian insistence (Jihadist and Fedayeen) that Israel has no "territorial integrity" is simply any way of promoting a continuation of hostilities. Whether we view it though the lenses of the Palestinian National Charter, the HAMAS Covenant, or the more recent Political Position Paper by HAMAS, the language is the same.

1. Palestine from the river to the sea, and from north to south, is a land of the Palestinian people and its homeland and its legitimate right, we may not a waiver an inch or any part thereof, no matter what the reasons and circumstances and pressures.

2. Palestine - all of Palestine - is a land of Islamic and Arab affiliation, a blessed sacred land, that has a major portion in the heart of every Arab and Muslim

3. No recognition of the legitimacy of the occupation whatever; this is a principled position, political and moral, and therefore do not recognize the legitimacy of the Israeli occupation of Palestine, and recognition of "Israel" and the legitimacy of its presence on any part of Palestine no matter how long; and it will not be long, God willing.​

This is a variation on the theme that: Israel has NO Right of Self-Defense against Palestine; because there is no territorial entity with borders called Israel.

First, let's understand what the PLO Negotiations Affairs Department (NAD) says:

Key Facts​

• 
  
  
  • • The 1967 border is the internationally-recognized border between Israel and the oPt.
    • A basic principle of international law is that no state may acquire territory by force. Israel has no valid claim to any part of the territory it occupied in 1967.
    • The international community does not recognize Israeli sovereignty over any part of the oPt, including East Jerusalem.

Israel has no valid claim to any part of the West Bank or Gaza Strip. However, in the interest of peace, we have been willing to discuss minor, equitable, and mutually-agreed territorial exchanges should we decide that it is in our interest to do so.​

Now there is a valid argument concerning Area "C" as stipulated and agreed upon by the Palestinians in Israeli-Palestinian Interim Agreement on the West Bank and the Gaza Strip (OSLO Accord II A/51/889 S/1997/357 5 May 1997).

As far as basic recognition is concerned, the sole legitimate representative of the Palestinian People (the PLO) Exchange of Letters between PM Rabin and Chairman Arafat relative to the mutual Israel-PLO Recognition and the "calls upon the Palestinian people in the West Bank and Gaza Strip to take part in the steps leading to the normalization of life, rejecting violence and terrorism, contributing to peace and stability and participating actively in shaping reconstruction, economic development and cooperation."

I believe that there are many pro-Palestinians today the which nothing more than to continue the armed struggle that existed prior to the Oslo Accords and the mutual recognition. Clear, the Unity Government is struggling to maintain a common political policy, with HAMAS not recognizing Israel and Fatah waffling on the issue.

Most Respectfully,
R

Rocco, you present your standard laundry list of shit but you always leave something out.

The West Bank became part of Jordan.

Did the Palestinians ratify that? That was after 80-some Palestinian leaders declared independence in all of Palestine in 1948.

PLO designated the leader of Palestine.

Did the Palestinians ratify that?

...and again in A/RES/67/19 4 December 2012 (which Reaffirms the right of the Palestinian people to self-determination and to independence in their State of Palestine on the Palestinian territory occupied since 1967;

Did the Palestinians ratify that?

1988 declaration of independence by the PLO.

Did the Palestinians ratify that?

The PA created by foreigners with rules by foreigners.

Did the Palestinians ratify that?

Recognition of Israel by foreign appointed leaders.

Did the Palestinians ratify that?

The signing of Oslo.

Did the Palestinians ratify that?

Where is the Palestinians right to self determination when they have had no say in anything since their creation? (Except rejecting resolution 181 that they had every right to do.)

The first chance they had to make their own decision was the elections of 2006 and we have been kicking their ass ever since because they did not elect the foreign approved stooges.

"Rocco, you present your standard laundry list of shit but you always leave something out"

You're clearly frustrated because Rocco , once AGAIN, proved you to be wrong. And once again, you responded to his post by not even remotely refuting what he said. You mad??

Pfffft, Rocco posts smoke.

Sorry Rocco, nothing personal.

Rocco, you present your standard laundry list of shit but you always leave something out.

The West Bank became part of Jordan.

Did the Palestinians ratify that? That was after 80-some Palestinian leaders declared independence in all of Palestine in 1948.

PLO designated the leader of Palestine.

Did the Palestinians ratify that?

...and again in A/RES/67/19 4 December 2012 (which Reaffirms the right of the Palestinian people to self-determination and to independence in their State of Palestine on the Palestinian territory occupied since 1967;

Did the Palestinians ratify that?

1988 declaration of independence by the PLO.

Did the Palestinians ratify that?

The PA created by foreigners with rules by foreigners.

Did the Palestinians ratify that?

Recognition of Israel by foreign appointed leaders.

Did the Palestinians ratify that?

The signing of Oslo.

Did the Palestinians ratify that?

Where is the Palestinians right to self determination when they have had no say in anything since their creation? (Except rejecting resolution 181 that they had every right to do.)

The first chance they had to make their own decision was the elections of 2006 and we have been kicking their ass ever since because they did not elect the foreign approved stooges.

"Rocco, you present your standard laundry list of shit but you always leave something out"

You're clearly frustrated because Rocco , once AGAIN, proved you to be wrong. And once again, you responded to his post by not even remotely refuting what he said. You mad??

Pfffft, Rocco posts smoke.

Sorry Rocco, nothing personal.

Rocco refutes all your lies by providing valid links and excellent proof. So naturally, you would make a comment like that.

You find him a threat because you can't get people to believe your propaganda as long as he is here.

When I mention illegal external interference, his response is a list of things that foreigners did. That proves my point more than his.

Yep foriegners like Egypt, Jordan, Saudi, Iran, Styia etc.

Indeed, and the US, Britain, the EU, Israel...

None of them are Palestinian and have no legitimate business in Palestinian internal affairs.

 

[toastman]

P F Tinmore, et al,

This is a good point.

​

(COMMENT)

This was written a decade before the Palestinian People Declared Independence in 1988. At that time, they were citizens of the Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan and under Jordanian rule. At that time, it was not Israel that obstructed "independence, territorial integrity, and national unity;" as demonstrated when Jordan cut ties with the West Bank and the Palestinians Declared Independence without interference. You will take notice that in A/67/L.28 26 November 2012 (which Affirms its determination to contribute to the achievement of the inalienable rights of the Palestinian people and the attainment of a peaceful settlement in the Middle East that ends the occupation that began in 1967 and fulfils the vision of two States: an independent, sovereign, democratic, contiguous and viable State of Palestine living side by side in peace and security with Israel on the basis of the pre-1967 borders;) and again in A/RES/67/19 4 December 2012 (which Reaffirms the right of the Palestinian people to self-determination and to independence in their State of Palestine on the Palestinian territory occupied since 1967; and Decides to accord to Palestine non-member observer State status in the United Nations;) there is not mention of "recalling" A RES 33 24 of 29 November 1978.

In this observation you will notice that in both the November Affirmation and the December Decision that Resolution A/RES/25/2625 24 October 1970 (Declaration on Principles of International Law concerning Friendly Relations and Co-operation among States in accordance with the Charter of the United Nations) is recalled (not A RES 33 24 of 29 November 1978). Without regard to what A RES 33 24 of 29 November 1978 may be interpreted to imply --- the non-binding Resolution does not take precedence over the Hague Regulation, the Geneva Conventions, or Customary International Humanitarian Law. UN Security Council Resolution S/RES/1373 (2001), which is binding, (which Decides also that all States shall: (a) Refrain from providing any form of support, active or passive, to entities or persons involved in terrorist acts, including by suppressing recruitment of members of terrorist groups and eliminating the supply of weapons to terrorists;) does Reaffirming the principle established by the General Assembly in its Declaration on Principles of International Law of October 1970 (resolution 2625 (XXV) namely that every State has the duty to refrain from organizing, instigating, assisting or participating in terrorist acts in another State or acquiescing in organized activities within its territory directed towards the commission of such acts.

If there is a "false premise" here --- it is the idea that the Palestinians have been given such special dispensation to violate the Hague Regulation, the Geneva Conventions, or Customary International Humanitarian Law; and the laws against terrorism.

First: the critical links between development and security. Nothing can justify terrorism — ever. No grievance, no goal, no cause can excuse terrorist acts. At the same time, we must remove the conditions that feed the problem. Terrorism festers where conflicts are endemic and where human rights, human dignity and human life are not protected and impunity prevails. SG/SM/14764-SC/10883​

The Palestinians, no matter what cover they choose, cannot operate independent of the law, against Israeli civilians and where the human rights, human dignity and human life of the Israeli are not protected and impunity prevails.

(COMMENT)

This is more of the same 1949 (more than half a century ago) era thinking; hardly relevant today. This was written before the United Nations Convention relating to the Status of Refugees, adopted in 1951, and the Palestinians often forget that:

C. This Convention shall cease to apply to any person falling under the terms of section A if:

(1) He has voluntarily re-availed himself of the protection of the country of his nationality; or
(2) Having lost his nationality, he has voluntarily re-acquired it; or
(3) He has acquired a new nationality, and enjoys the protection of the country of his new nationality; or
(4) He has voluntarily re-established himself in the country which he left or outside which he remained owing to fear of persecution;​

With very rare exceptions, there are no Palestinian Refugees in the West Bank or Gaza Strip after 16 November 1988, when the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO):

By virtue of the natural, historical and legal right of the Palestinian Arab people to its homeland, Palestine, and of the sacrifices of its succeeding generations in defence of the freedom and independence of that homeland,

Pursuant to the resolutions of the Arab Summit Conferences and on the basis of the international legitimacy embodied in the resolutions of the United Nations since 1947, and

Through the exercise by the Palestinian Arab people of its right to self-determination, political independence and sovereignty over its territory:

The Palestine National Council hereby declares, in the Name of God and on behalf of the Palestinian Arab people, the establishment of the State of Palestine in the land of Palestine with its capital at Jerusalem. (Annex III, A/43/827 S/20278 18 November 1988)​

When the PLO (designated the sole legitimate representative of the Palestinian people in any Palestinian territory that is liberated, by the Arab League) declared independence and established the State of Palestine, each Palestinian acquired a new nationality, and enjoys the protection of the country of his new nationality the State of Palestine as acknowledged by the UN (A/RES/43/177 15 December 1988); no longer falling under the UN definition of Refugee.

To support the Palestinian insistence (Jihadist and Fedayeen) that Israel has no "territorial integrity" is simply any way of promoting a continuation of hostilities. Whether we view it though the lenses of the Palestinian National Charter, the HAMAS Covenant, or the more recent Political Position Paper by HAMAS, the language is the same.

1. Palestine from the river to the sea, and from north to south, is a land of the Palestinian people and its homeland and its legitimate right, we may not a waiver an inch or any part thereof, no matter what the reasons and circumstances and pressures.

2. Palestine - all of Palestine - is a land of Islamic and Arab affiliation, a blessed sacred land, that has a major portion in the heart of every Arab and Muslim

3. No recognition of the legitimacy of the occupation whatever; this is a principled position, political and moral, and therefore do not recognize the legitimacy of the Israeli occupation of Palestine, and recognition of "Israel" and the legitimacy of its presence on any part of Palestine no matter how long; and it will not be long, God willing.​

This is a variation on the theme that: Israel has NO Right of Self-Defense against Palestine; because there is no territorial entity with borders called Israel.

First, let's understand what the PLO Negotiations Affairs Department (NAD) says:

Key Facts​

• 
  
  
  • • The 1967 border is the internationally-recognized border between Israel and the oPt.
    • A basic principle of international law is that no state may acquire territory by force. Israel has no valid claim to any part of the territory it occupied in 1967.
    • The international community does not recognize Israeli sovereignty over any part of the oPt, including East Jerusalem.

Israel has no valid claim to any part of the West Bank or Gaza Strip. However, in the interest of peace, we have been willing to discuss minor, equitable, and mutually-agreed territorial exchanges should we decide that it is in our interest to do so.​

Now there is a valid argument concerning Area "C" as stipulated and agreed upon by the Palestinians in Israeli-Palestinian Interim Agreement on the West Bank and the Gaza Strip (OSLO Accord II A/51/889 S/1997/357 5 May 1997).

As far as basic recognition is concerned, the sole legitimate representative of the Palestinian People (the PLO) Exchange of Letters between PM Rabin and Chairman Arafat relative to the mutual Israel-PLO Recognition and the "calls upon the Palestinian people in the West Bank and Gaza Strip to take part in the steps leading to the normalization of life, rejecting violence and terrorism, contributing to peace and stability and participating actively in shaping reconstruction, economic development and cooperation."

I believe that there are many pro-Palestinians today the which nothing more than to continue the armed struggle that existed prior to the Oslo Accords and the mutual recognition. Clear, the Unity Government is struggling to maintain a common political policy, with HAMAS not recognizing Israel and Fatah waffling on the issue.

Most Respectfully,
R

Rocco, you present your standard laundry list of shit but you always leave something out.

The West Bank became part of Jordan.

Did the Palestinians ratify that? That was after 80-some Palestinian leaders declared independence in all of Palestine in 1948.

PLO designated the leader of Palestine.

Did the Palestinians ratify that?

...and again in A/RES/67/19 4 December 2012 (which Reaffirms the right of the Palestinian people to self-determination and to independence in their State of Palestine on the Palestinian territory occupied since 1967;

Did the Palestinians ratify that?

1988 declaration of independence by the PLO.

Did the Palestinians ratify that?

The PA created by foreigners with rules by foreigners.

Did the Palestinians ratify that?

Recognition of Israel by foreign appointed leaders.

Did the Palestinians ratify that?

The signing of Oslo.

Did the Palestinians ratify that?

Where is the Palestinians right to self determination when they have had no say in anything since their creation? (Except rejecting resolution 181 that they had every right to do.)

The first chance they had to make their own decision was the elections of 2006 and we have been kicking their ass ever since because they did not elect the foreign approved stooges.

"Rocco, you present your standard laundry list of shit but you always leave something out"

You're clearly frustrated because Rocco , once AGAIN, proved you to be wrong. And once again, you responded to his post by not even remotely refuting what he said. You mad??

Pfffft, Rocco posts smoke.

Sorry Rocco, nothing personal.

"Rocco, you present your standard laundry list of shit but you always leave something out"

You're clearly frustrated because Rocco , once AGAIN, proved you to be wrong. And once again, you responded to his post by not even remotely refuting what he said. You mad??

Pfffft, Rocco posts smoke.

Sorry Rocco, nothing personal.

Rocco refutes all your lies by providing valid links and excellent proof. So naturally, you would make a comment like that.

You find him a threat because you can't get people to believe your propaganda as long as he is here.

When I mention illegal external interference, his response is a list of things that foreigners did. That proves my point more than his.

Yep foriegners like Egypt, Jordan, Saudi, Iran, Styia etc.

Indeed, and the US, Britain, the EU, Israel...

None of them are Palestinian and have no legitimate business in Palestinian internal affairs.

Then Palestinians should stop mooching money from them if they don't want them involved in their internal affairs.

 

[Phoenall]

P F Tinmore, et al,

This is a good point.

​

(COMMENT)

This was written a decade before the Palestinian People Declared Independence in 1988. At that time, they were citizens of the Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan and under Jordanian rule. At that time, it was not Israel that obstructed "independence, territorial integrity, and national unity;" as demonstrated when Jordan cut ties with the West Bank and the Palestinians Declared Independence without interference. You will take notice that in A/67/L.28 26 November 2012 (which Affirms its determination to contribute to the achievement of the inalienable rights of the Palestinian people and the attainment of a peaceful settlement in the Middle East that ends the occupation that began in 1967 and fulfils the vision of two States: an independent, sovereign, democratic, contiguous and viable State of Palestine living side by side in peace and security with Israel on the basis of the pre-1967 borders;) and again in A/RES/67/19 4 December 2012 (which Reaffirms the right of the Palestinian people to self-determination and to independence in their State of Palestine on the Palestinian territory occupied since 1967; and Decides to accord to Palestine non-member observer State status in the United Nations;) there is not mention of "recalling" A RES 33 24 of 29 November 1978.

In this observation you will notice that in both the November Affirmation and the December Decision that Resolution A/RES/25/2625 24 October 1970 (Declaration on Principles of International Law concerning Friendly Relations and Co-operation among States in accordance with the Charter of the United Nations) is recalled (not A RES 33 24 of 29 November 1978). Without regard to what A RES 33 24 of 29 November 1978 may be interpreted to imply --- the non-binding Resolution does not take precedence over the Hague Regulation, the Geneva Conventions, or Customary International Humanitarian Law. UN Security Council Resolution S/RES/1373 (2001), which is binding, (which Decides also that all States shall: (a) Refrain from providing any form of support, active or passive, to entities or persons involved in terrorist acts, including by suppressing recruitment of members of terrorist groups and eliminating the supply of weapons to terrorists;) does Reaffirming the principle established by the General Assembly in its Declaration on Principles of International Law of October 1970 (resolution 2625 (XXV) namely that every State has the duty to refrain from organizing, instigating, assisting or participating in terrorist acts in another State or acquiescing in organized activities within its territory directed towards the commission of such acts.

If there is a "false premise" here --- it is the idea that the Palestinians have been given such special dispensation to violate the Hague Regulation, the Geneva Conventions, or Customary International Humanitarian Law; and the laws against terrorism.

First: the critical links between development and security. Nothing can justify terrorism — ever. No grievance, no goal, no cause can excuse terrorist acts. At the same time, we must remove the conditions that feed the problem. Terrorism festers where conflicts are endemic and where human rights, human dignity and human life are not protected and impunity prevails. SG/SM/14764-SC/10883​

The Palestinians, no matter what cover they choose, cannot operate independent of the law, against Israeli civilians and where the human rights, human dignity and human life of the Israeli are not protected and impunity prevails.

(COMMENT)

This is more of the same 1949 (more than half a century ago) era thinking; hardly relevant today. This was written before the United Nations Convention relating to the Status of Refugees, adopted in 1951, and the Palestinians often forget that:

C. This Convention shall cease to apply to any person falling under the terms of section A if:

(1) He has voluntarily re-availed himself of the protection of the country of his nationality; or
(2) Having lost his nationality, he has voluntarily re-acquired it; or
(3) He has acquired a new nationality, and enjoys the protection of the country of his new nationality; or
(4) He has voluntarily re-established himself in the country which he left or outside which he remained owing to fear of persecution;​

With very rare exceptions, there are no Palestinian Refugees in the West Bank or Gaza Strip after 16 November 1988, when the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO):

By virtue of the natural, historical and legal right of the Palestinian Arab people to its homeland, Palestine, and of the sacrifices of its succeeding generations in defence of the freedom and independence of that homeland,

Pursuant to the resolutions of the Arab Summit Conferences and on the basis of the international legitimacy embodied in the resolutions of the United Nations since 1947, and

Through the exercise by the Palestinian Arab people of its right to self-determination, political independence and sovereignty over its territory:

The Palestine National Council hereby declares, in the Name of God and on behalf of the Palestinian Arab people, the establishment of the State of Palestine in the land of Palestine with its capital at Jerusalem. (Annex III, A/43/827 S/20278 18 November 1988)​

When the PLO (designated the sole legitimate representative of the Palestinian people in any Palestinian territory that is liberated, by the Arab League) declared independence and established the State of Palestine, each Palestinian acquired a new nationality, and enjoys the protection of the country of his new nationality the State of Palestine as acknowledged by the UN (A/RES/43/177 15 December 1988); no longer falling under the UN definition of Refugee.

To support the Palestinian insistence (Jihadist and Fedayeen) that Israel has no "territorial integrity" is simply any way of promoting a continuation of hostilities. Whether we view it though the lenses of the Palestinian National Charter, the HAMAS Covenant, or the more recent Political Position Paper by HAMAS, the language is the same.

1. Palestine from the river to the sea, and from north to south, is a land of the Palestinian people and its homeland and its legitimate right, we may not a waiver an inch or any part thereof, no matter what the reasons and circumstances and pressures.

2. Palestine - all of Palestine - is a land of Islamic and Arab affiliation, a blessed sacred land, that has a major portion in the heart of every Arab and Muslim

3. No recognition of the legitimacy of the occupation whatever; this is a principled position, political and moral, and therefore do not recognize the legitimacy of the Israeli occupation of Palestine, and recognition of "Israel" and the legitimacy of its presence on any part of Palestine no matter how long; and it will not be long, God willing.​

This is a variation on the theme that: Israel has NO Right of Self-Defense against Palestine; because there is no territorial entity with borders called Israel.

First, let's understand what the PLO Negotiations Affairs Department (NAD) says:

Key Facts​

• 
  
  
  • • The 1967 border is the internationally-recognized border between Israel and the oPt.
    • A basic principle of international law is that no state may acquire territory by force. Israel has no valid claim to any part of the territory it occupied in 1967.
    • The international community does not recognize Israeli sovereignty over any part of the oPt, including East Jerusalem.

Israel has no valid claim to any part of the West Bank or Gaza Strip. However, in the interest of peace, we have been willing to discuss minor, equitable, and mutually-agreed territorial exchanges should we decide that it is in our interest to do so.​

Now there is a valid argument concerning Area "C" as stipulated and agreed upon by the Palestinians in Israeli-Palestinian Interim Agreement on the West Bank and the Gaza Strip (OSLO Accord II A/51/889 S/1997/357 5 May 1997).

As far as basic recognition is concerned, the sole legitimate representative of the Palestinian People (the PLO) Exchange of Letters between PM Rabin and Chairman Arafat relative to the mutual Israel-PLO Recognition and the "calls upon the Palestinian people in the West Bank and Gaza Strip to take part in the steps leading to the normalization of life, rejecting violence and terrorism, contributing to peace and stability and participating actively in shaping reconstruction, economic development and cooperation."

I believe that there are many pro-Palestinians today the which nothing more than to continue the armed struggle that existed prior to the Oslo Accords and the mutual recognition. Clear, the Unity Government is struggling to maintain a common political policy, with HAMAS not recognizing Israel and Fatah waffling on the issue.

Most Respectfully,
R

Rocco, you present your standard laundry list of shit but you always leave something out.

The West Bank became part of Jordan.

Did the Palestinians ratify that? That was after 80-some Palestinian leaders declared independence in all of Palestine in 1948.

PLO designated the leader of Palestine.

Did the Palestinians ratify that?

...and again in A/RES/67/19 4 December 2012 (which Reaffirms the right of the Palestinian people to self-determination and to independence in their State of Palestine on the Palestinian territory occupied since 1967;

Did the Palestinians ratify that?

1988 declaration of independence by the PLO.

Did the Palestinians ratify that?

The PA created by foreigners with rules by foreigners.

Did the Palestinians ratify that?

Recognition of Israel by foreign appointed leaders.

Did the Palestinians ratify that?

The signing of Oslo.

Did the Palestinians ratify that?

Where is the Palestinians right to self determination when they have had no say in anything since their creation? (Except rejecting resolution 181 that they had every right to do.)

The first chance they had to make their own decision was the elections of 2006 and we have been kicking their ass ever since because they did not elect the foreign approved stooges.

"Rocco, you present your standard laundry list of shit but you always leave something out"

You're clearly frustrated because Rocco , once AGAIN, proved you to be wrong. And once again, you responded to his post by not even remotely refuting what he said. You mad??

Pfffft, Rocco posts smoke.

Sorry Rocco, nothing personal.

"Rocco, you present your standard laundry list of shit but you always leave something out"

You're clearly frustrated because Rocco , once AGAIN, proved you to be wrong. And once again, you responded to his post by not even remotely refuting what he said. You mad??

Pfffft, Rocco posts smoke.

Sorry Rocco, nothing personal.

Rocco refutes all your lies by providing valid links and excellent proof. So naturally, you would make a comment like that.

You find him a threat because you can't get people to believe your propaganda as long as he is here.

When I mention illegal external interference, his response is a list of things that foreigners did. That proves my point more than his.

Yep foriegners like Egypt, Jordan, Saudi, Iran, Styia etc.

Indeed, and the US, Britain, the EU, Israel...

None of them are Palestinian and have no legitimate business in Palestinian internal affairs.

LINKS ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?

 

[RoccoR]

P F Tinmore, et al,

Sorry for the delay.

The West Bank became part of Jordan.

Did the Palestinians ratify that? That was after 80-some Palestinian leaders declared independence in all of Palestine in 1948.

(COMMENT)

Yes.

On April 11, 1950, elections were held for a new Jordanian parliament in which the Palestinian Arabs of the West Bank were equally represented. Thirteen days later, Parliament unanimously approved a motion to unite the two banks of the Jordan River, constitutionally expanding the Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan in order to safeguard what was left of the Arab territory of Palestine from further Zionist expansion. Unification of the Two Banks​

Relative to the All Palestinian Government (APG) (an organization encapsulated into the Egyptian Occupation Government) that attempted to Declare Independence over the same territory that Israel declared Independence over four months prior, was annulled in 1959 by its parent political creator and benefactor (Egypt). This was an example of "external interference."

PLO designated the leader of Palestine.

Did the Palestinians ratify that?

(COMMENT)

Like the The Arab Higher Committee (AHC) [AKA: Higher National Committee (ANC)] it was established on 25 April 1936, on the initiative of Haj Amin al-Husayni, the Grand Mufti of Jerusalem (later associated with the APG), was outlawed in September 1937. The Arab League was establish in 1945, and the Arab League, seeing a need to reestablish a supreme executive body of Palestinian Arabs --- reconstituted the Arab Higher Committee. It was this AHC (the working hand of the Arab League) that rejected the Partition Plan; not "ratified" by the Arab Palestinians. The Arab League has always been the parent authority for the Arab Palestinian. And it was the Arab League that truly ignored the APG bit for Independence because they did not want a single country to control the Territory formerly under Mandate.

...and again in A/RES/67/19 4 December 2012 (which Reaffirms the right of the Palestinian people to self-determination and to independence in their State of Palestine on the Palestinian territory occupied since 1967;

Did the Palestinians ratify that?

(COMMENT)

The Arab League, as the parent executor of the Arab Palestinian, determined that the PLO would be the sole representative of the Arab Palestinian people. This was not contested by the Arab Palestinian in 1974 and it has yet to be questioned by any significant Palestinian body since. The was approved by Egypt (which annulled the APG), Jordan, Lebanon, Iraq, Saudi Arabia, and Yemen, (all of which contributed forces to engage Israel); as well as 132 other countries.

Was it ratified by the Arab Palestinian --- No. It was request by the "sole representative of the Palestinian People." I an sure that a number of countries would be willing to reconsider recognition, since --- the ramification would be significant. For one, if the all the agreements that Palestine signed, require statehood, to include the joining of the ICC, if the "ratification" were a reason to be challenged, then the Arab Palestinian would not be considered to have a politically competent government.

1988 declaration of independence by the PLO.

Did the Palestinians ratify that?

(COMMENT)

Again, it was signed by the "sole representative."

The PA created by foreigners with rules by foreigners.

Did the Palestinians ratify that?

(COMMENT)

The Palestinian Authority was created by agreement (Oslo Accords), signed by the "sole representative."

Recognition of Israel by foreign appointed leaders.

Did the Palestinians ratify that?

(COMMENT)

And here is the key. Your argument is to challenge the Arab League decision to establish a "sole legitimate representative of the Palestinian people."

The Arab Palestinian is not even capable of conducting elections according to their own Basic Law. For the last quarter of a century, the Arab Palestinian People have not been able to establish a stable and workable government that can transition from one administration to another in a timely and peaceful fashion. In the absence of such a government, who would represent the Arab Palestinian if it were not for the benevolent hand of the Arab League and their establishment of a "sole legitimate representative of the Palestinian people?"

The signing of Oslo.

Did the Palestinians ratify that?

(COMMENT)

Where is the Palestinians right to self determination when they have had no say in anything since their creation? (Except rejecting resolution 181 that they had every right to do.)

The first chance they had to make their own decision was the elections of 2006 and we have been kicking their ass ever since because they did not elect the foreign approved stooges.

(COMMENT)

Again, the "sole legitimate representative of the Palestinian people."

When I mention illegal external interference, his response is a list of things that foreigners did. That proves my point more than his.

Indeed, Rocco does post links to all the illegal external interference.

(COMMENT)

The Arab Palestinian has always had the Arab League to fall back on. The Arab Palestinian has yet to mature as a nation to a point that it can periodically elect a new government in a smooth and peaceful transition.

Most Respectfully,
R

 

[P F Tinmore]

Relative to the All Palestinian Government (APG) (an organization encapsulated into the Egyptian Occupation Government) that attempted to Declare Independence over the same territory that Israel declared Independence over four months prior, was annulled in 1959 by its parent political creator and benefactor (Egypt). This was an example of "external interference."

From what I can tell the Palestinians declared independence on Palestinian land. This was later confirmed by the UN.

 

[theliq]

Rocco, you present your standard laundry list of shit but you always leave something out.

The West Bank became part of Jordan.

Did the Palestinians ratify that? That was after 80-some Palestinian leaders declared independence in all of Palestine in 1948.

PLO designated the leader of Palestine.

Did the Palestinians ratify that?

...and again in A/RES/67/19 4 December 2012 (which Reaffirms the right of the Palestinian people to self-determination and to independence in their State of Palestine on the Palestinian territory occupied since 1967;

Did the Palestinians ratify that?

1988 declaration of independence by the PLO.

Did the Palestinians ratify that?

The PA created by foreigners with rules by foreigners.

Did the Palestinians ratify that?

Recognition of Israel by foreign appointed leaders.

Did the Palestinians ratify that?

The signing of Oslo.

Did the Palestinians ratify that?

Where is the Palestinians right to self determination when they have had no say in anything since their creation? (Except rejecting resolution 181 that they had every right to do.)

The first chance they had to make their own decision was the elections of 2006 and we have been kicking their ass ever since because they did not elect the foreign approved stooges.

"Rocco, you present your standard laundry list of shit but you always leave something out"

You're clearly frustrated because Rocco , once AGAIN, proved you to be wrong. And once again, you responded to his post by not even remotely refuting what he said. You mad??

Pfffft, Rocco posts smoke.

Sorry Rocco, nothing personal.

Pfffft, Rocco posts smoke.

Sorry Rocco, nothing personal.

Rocco refutes all your lies by providing valid links and excellent proof. So naturally, you would make a comment like that.

You find him a threat because you can't get people to believe your propaganda as long as he is here.

When I mention illegal external interference, his response is a list of things that foreigners did. That proves my point more than his.

Yep foriegners like Egypt, Jordan, Saudi, Iran, Styia etc.

Indeed, and the US, Britain, the EU, Israel...

None of them are Palestinian and have no legitimate business in Palestinian internal affairs.

Then Palestinians should stop mooching money from them if they don't want them involved in their internal affairs.

Why not,when Israel have receive over 67 billion........it is given by countries to help the Palestinians....please don't come back with the squab that Palestinians build tunnels...when Israel has spent Billions on state-of-the-art Weaponry......because it will make you Guys look like fools..steve

 

[theliq]

P F Tinmore, et al,

Sorry for the delay.

The West Bank became part of Jordan.

Did the Palestinians ratify that? That was after 80-some Palestinian leaders declared independence in all of Palestine in 1948.

(COMMENT)

Yes.

On April 11, 1950, elections were held for a new Jordanian parliament in which the Palestinian Arabs of the West Bank were equally represented. Thirteen days later, Parliament unanimously approved a motion to unite the two banks of the Jordan River, constitutionally expanding the Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan in order to safeguard what was left of the Arab territory of Palestine from further Zionist expansion. Unification of the Two Banks​

Relative to the All Palestinian Government (APG) (an organization encapsulated into the Egyptian Occupation Government) that attempted to Declare Independence over the same territory that Israel declared Independence over four months prior, was annulled in 1959 by its parent political creator and benefactor (Egypt). This was an example of "external interference."

PLO designated the leader of Palestine.

Did the Palestinians ratify that?

(COMMENT)

Like the The Arab Higher Committee (AHC) [AKA: Higher National Committee (ANC)] it was established on 25 April 1936, on the initiative of Haj Amin al-Husayni, the Grand Mufti of Jerusalem (later associated with the APG), was outlawed in September 1937. The Arab League was establish in 1945, and the Arab League, seeing a need to reestablish a supreme executive body of Palestinian Arabs --- reconstituted the Arab Higher Committee. It was this AHC (the working hand of the Arab League) that rejected the Partition Plan; not "ratified" by the Arab Palestinians. The Arab League has always been the parent authority for the Arab Palestinian. And it was the Arab League that truly ignored the APG bit for Independence because they did not want a single country to control the Territory formerly under Mandate.

...and again in A/RES/67/19 4 December 2012 (which Reaffirms the right of the Palestinian people to self-determination and to independence in their State of Palestine on the Palestinian territory occupied since 1967;

Did the Palestinians ratify that?

(COMMENT)

The Arab League, as the parent executor of the Arab Palestinian, determined that the PLO would be the sole representative of the Arab Palestinian people. This was not contested by the Arab Palestinian in 1974 and it has yet to be questioned by any significant Palestinian body since. The was approved by Egypt (which annulled the APG), Jordan, Lebanon, Iraq, Saudi Arabia, and Yemen, (all of which contributed forces to engage Israel); as well as 132 other countries.

Was it ratified by the Arab Palestinian --- No. It was request by the "sole representative of the Palestinian People." I an sure that a number of countries would be willing to reconsider recognition, since --- the ramification would be significant. For one, if the all the agreements that Palestine signed, require statehood, to include the joining of the ICC, if the "ratification" were a reason to be challenged, then the Arab Palestinian would not be considered to have a politically competent government.

1988 declaration of independence by the PLO.

Did the Palestinians ratify that?

(COMMENT)

Again, it was signed by the "sole representative."

The PA created by foreigners with rules by foreigners.

Did the Palestinians ratify that?

(COMMENT)

The Palestinian Authority was created by agreement (Oslo Accords), signed by the "sole representative."

Recognition of Israel by foreign appointed leaders.

Did the Palestinians ratify that?

(COMMENT)

And here is the key. Your argument is to challenge the Arab League decision to establish a "sole legitimate representative of the Palestinian people."

The Arab Palestinian is not even capable of conducting elections according to their own Basic Law. For the last quarter of a century, the Arab Palestinian People have not been able to establish a stable and workable government that can transition from one administration to another in a timely and peaceful fashion. In the absence of such a government, who would represent the Arab Palestinian if it were not for the benevolent hand of the Arab League and their establishment of a "sole legitimate representative of the Palestinian people?"

The signing of Oslo.

Did the Palestinians ratify that?

(COMMENT)

Where is the Palestinians right to self determination when they have had no say in anything since their creation? (Except rejecting resolution 181 that they had every right to do.)

The first chance they had to make their own decision was the elections of 2006 and we have been kicking their ass ever since because they did not elect the foreign approved stooges.

(COMMENT)

Again, the "sole legitimate representative of the Palestinian people."

When I mention illegal external interference, his response is a list of things that foreigners did. That proves my point more than his.

Indeed, Rocco does post links to all the illegal external interference.

(COMMENT)

The Arab Palestinian has always had the Arab League to fall back on. The Arab Palestinian has yet to mature as a nation to a point that it can periodically elect a new government in a smooth and peaceful transition.

Most Respectfully,
R

Ridiculous......and by your myopic insulation imply that Israel government does...Really R your posts get more bizarre the more you post...Not Good Enough.....with Respect,.steve

 

[theliq]

Rocco, you present your standard laundry list of shit but you always leave something out.

The West Bank became part of Jordan.

Did the Palestinians ratify that? That was after 80-some Palestinian leaders declared independence in all of Palestine in 1948.

PLO designated the leader of Palestine.

Did the Palestinians ratify that?

...and again in A/RES/67/19 4 December 2012 (which Reaffirms the right of the Palestinian people to self-determination and to independence in their State of Palestine on the Palestinian territory occupied since 1967;

Did the Palestinians ratify that?

1988 declaration of independence by the PLO.

Did the Palestinians ratify that?

The PA created by foreigners with rules by foreigners.

Did the Palestinians ratify that?

Recognition of Israel by foreign appointed leaders.

Did the Palestinians ratify that?

The signing of Oslo.

Did the Palestinians ratify that?

Where is the Palestinians right to self determination when they have had no say in anything since their creation? (Except rejecting resolution 181 that they had every right to do.)

The first chance they had to make their own decision was the elections of 2006 and we have been kicking their ass ever since because they did not elect the foreign approved stooges.

"Rocco, you present your standard laundry list of shit but you always leave something out"

You're clearly frustrated because Rocco , once AGAIN, proved you to be wrong. And once again, you responded to his post by not even remotely refuting what he said. You mad??

Pfffft, Rocco posts smoke.

Sorry Rocco, nothing personal.

Pfffft, Rocco posts smoke.

Sorry Rocco, nothing personal.

Rocco refutes all your lies by providing valid links and excellent proof. So naturally, you would make a comment like that.

You find him a threat because you can't get people to believe your propaganda as long as he is here.

When I mention illegal external interference, his response is a list of things that foreigners did. That proves my point more than his.

Yep foriegners like Egypt, Jordan, Saudi, Iran, Styia etc.

Indeed, and the US, Britain, the EU, Israel...

None of them are Palestinian and have no legitimate business in Palestinian internal affairs.

Then Palestinians should stop mooching money from them if they don't want them involved in their internal affairs.

Ho,Ho,Ho, Toastie......next you'll tell me Israel does.......your allied summation is quite ridiculous..steve...Get a Grip for Goodness Sake.

 

[toastman]

"Rocco, you present your standard laundry list of shit but you always leave something out"

You're clearly frustrated because Rocco , once AGAIN, proved you to be wrong. And once again, you responded to his post by not even remotely refuting what he said. You mad??

Pfffft, Rocco posts smoke.

Sorry Rocco, nothing personal.

Rocco refutes all your lies by providing valid links and excellent proof. So naturally, you would make a comment like that.

You find him a threat because you can't get people to believe your propaganda as long as he is here.

When I mention illegal external interference, his response is a list of things that foreigners did. That proves my point more than his.

Yep foriegners like Egypt, Jordan, Saudi, Iran, Styia etc.

Indeed, and the US, Britain, the EU, Israel...

None of them are Palestinian and have no legitimate business in Palestinian internal affairs.

Then Palestinians should stop mooching money from them if they don't want them involved in their internal affairs.

Why not,when Israel have receive over 67 billion........it is given by countries to help the Palestinians....please don't come back with the squab that Palestinians build tunnels...when Israel has spent Billions on state-of-the-art Weaponry......because it will make you Guys look like fools..steve

Once again, your post makes zero sense. What's the matter with you?

 

[RoccoR]

P F Tinmore, et al,

This would not be correct.

Relative to the All Palestinian Government (APG) (an organization encapsulated into the Egyptian Occupation Government) that attempted to Declare Independence over the same territory that Israel declared Independence over four months prior, was annulled in 1959 by its parent political creator and benefactor (Egypt). This was an example of "external interference."

From what I can tell the Palestinians declared independence on Palestinian land. This was later confirmed by the UN.

(COMMENT)

The language used by the All Palestine Government (APG) was:

DECLARE PALESTINE IN ITS ENTIRETY AND WITHIN ITS BOUNDARIES AS ESTABLISHED BEFORE THE TERMINATION OF THE BRITISH MANDATE AN INDEPENDENT STATE (A/C.1/330 14 October 1948)​

This APG declaration (28 September 1948) was interpreted to include the entire landscape of the territory formerly under the Mandate at the time of termination (excluding Jordan). This would include the landscape in the landscape the Jewish Agency, in agreement the UN Palestine Commission (the successor government to the Mandatory), declared independence over IAW Resolution 181(II), on 15 May 1948 (four month prior). To my knowledge, the UN gave no acknowledgement or concurrence to the APG declaration.

Most Respectfully,
R

 

[P F Tinmore]

P F Tinmore, et al,

This would not be correct.

Relative to the All Palestinian Government (APG) (an organization encapsulated into the Egyptian Occupation Government) that attempted to Declare Independence over the same territory that Israel declared Independence over four months prior, was annulled in 1959 by its parent political creator and benefactor (Egypt). This was an example of "external interference."

From what I can tell the Palestinians declared independence on Palestinian land. This was later confirmed by the UN.

(COMMENT)

The language used by the All Palestine Government (APG) was:

DECLARE PALESTINE IN ITS ENTIRETY AND WITHIN ITS BOUNDARIES AS ESTABLISHED BEFORE THE TERMINATION OF THE BRITISH MANDATE AN INDEPENDENT STATE (A/C.1/330 14 October 1948)​

This APG declaration (28 September 1948) was interpreted to include the entire landscape of the territory formerly under the Mandate at the time of termination (excluding Jordan). This would include the landscape in the landscape the Jewish Agency, in agreement the UN Palestine Commission (the successor government to the Mandatory), declared independence over IAW Resolution 181(II), on 15 May 1948 (four month prior). To my knowledge, the UN gave no acknowledgement or concurrence to the APG declaration.

Most Respectfully,
R

The Palestinians indirectly said that independence was to be inside their international borders. (Referencing the Mandate that was assigned to Palestine and therefore worked inside Palestine's borders.) Those borders seemed to be intact according to the 1949 UN armistice agreements.

The UN in its armistice agreements makes no note of, and actually contradicts, any land for Israel in Palestine.

 

[RoccoR]

P F Tinmore, et al,

Again, I think you are interpreting something in the Armistice Agreements between Israel and the four principle warring Arab Parties (Lebanon, Jordan, Syria, Egypt) that is not stated.

P F Tinmore, et al,

This would not be correct.

Relative to the All Palestinian Government (APG) (an organization encapsulated into the Egyptian Occupation Government) that attempted to Declare Independence over the same territory that Israel declared Independence over four months prior, was annulled in 1959 by its parent political creator and benefactor (Egypt). This was an example of "external interference."

From what I can tell the Palestinians declared independence on Palestinian land. This was later confirmed by the UN.

(COMMENT)

The language used by the All Palestine Government (APG) was:

DECLARE PALESTINE IN ITS ENTIRETY AND WITHIN ITS BOUNDARIES AS ESTABLISHED BEFORE THE TERMINATION OF THE BRITISH MANDATE AN INDEPENDENT STATE (A/C.1/330 14 October 1948)​

This APG declaration (28 September 1948) was interpreted to include the entire landscape of the territory formerly under the Mandate at the time of termination (excluding Jordan). This would include the landscape in the landscape the Jewish Agency, in agreement the UN Palestine Commission (the successor government to the Mandatory), declared independence over IAW Resolution 181(II), on 15 May 1948 (four month prior). To my knowledge, the UN gave no acknowledgement or concurrence to the APG declaration.

Most Respectfully,
R

The Palestinians indirectly said that independence was to be inside their international borders. (Referencing the Mandate that was assigned to Palestine and therefore worked inside Palestine's borders.) Those borders seemed to be intact according to the 1949 UN armistice agreements.

The UN in its armistice agreements makes no note of, and actually contradicts, any land for Israel in Palestine.

(COMMENT)

First, there is no Armistice Agreement with any entity known as "Palestine." There was no such party to the conflict. So, of course there would be no contradiction in the language.

Relative to the Armistice Agreements, the only two that remain in force are the one's with Syria and Lebanon. The Armistice Arrangements with both Egypt and Jordan were overtaken by Peace Treaties.

Originally Posted by Israeli-Egyptian Peace Treaty
Article II

The permanent boundary between Egypt and Israel is the recognized international boundary between Egypt and the former mandated territory of Palestine, as shown on the map at Annex II, without prejudice to the issue of the status of the Gaza Strip. The Parties recognize this boundary as inviolable. Each will respect the territorial integrity of the other, including their territorial waters and airspace.​

Originally Posted by Israeli-Jordanian Peace Treaty
Article 3 - International Boundary

1. The international boundary between Israel and Jordan is delimited with reference to the boundary definition under the Mandate as is shown in Annex I(a), on the mapping materials attached thereto and co-ordinates specified therein.​

Your will note that the language is quite different and most important to today's Palestinian, as this treaties actually have an impact on the West Bank and Gaza Strip. In the case of the Israeli-Egyptian Peace Treaty, the language used is: "the former mandated territory of Palestine." In the case of the Israeli-Jordanian Peace Treaty, the language used is: "definition under the Mandate." Again, there is no contradiction, because there was no entity known as "Palestine" involved in the treaty arrangement.

The borders you point out, "borders seemed to be intact according to the 1949 UN armistice agreements" were territorial borders that were formerly under the Mandate of Palestine, and have no bearing on the jurisdiction of the All Palestine Government claim.

Most Respectfully,
R

 

[P F Tinmore]

P F Tinmore, et al,

Again, I think you are interpreting something in the Armistice Agreements between Israel and the four principle warring Arab Parties (Lebanon, Jordan, Syria, Egypt) that is not stated.

P F Tinmore, et al,

This would not be correct.

Relative to the All Palestinian Government (APG) (an organization encapsulated into the Egyptian Occupation Government) that attempted to Declare Independence over the same territory that Israel declared Independence over four months prior, was annulled in 1959 by its parent political creator and benefactor (Egypt). This was an example of "external interference."

From what I can tell the Palestinians declared independence on Palestinian land. This was later confirmed by the UN.

(COMMENT)

The language used by the All Palestine Government (APG) was:

DECLARE PALESTINE IN ITS ENTIRETY AND WITHIN ITS BOUNDARIES AS ESTABLISHED BEFORE THE TERMINATION OF THE BRITISH MANDATE AN INDEPENDENT STATE (A/C.1/330 14 October 1948)​

This APG declaration (28 September 1948) was interpreted to include the entire landscape of the territory formerly under the Mandate at the time of termination (excluding Jordan). This would include the landscape in the landscape the Jewish Agency, in agreement the UN Palestine Commission (the successor government to the Mandatory), declared independence over IAW Resolution 181(II), on 15 May 1948 (four month prior). To my knowledge, the UN gave no acknowledgement or concurrence to the APG declaration.

Most Respectfully,
R

The Palestinians indirectly said that independence was to be inside their international borders. (Referencing the Mandate that was assigned to Palestine and therefore worked inside Palestine's borders.) Those borders seemed to be intact according to the 1949 UN armistice agreements.

The UN in its armistice agreements makes no note of, and actually contradicts, any land for Israel in Palestine.

(COMMENT)

First, there is no Armistice Agreement with any entity known as "Palestine." There was no such party to the conflict. So, of course there would be no contradiction in the language.

Relative to the Armistice Agreements, the only two that remain in force are the one's with Syria and Lebanon. The Armistice Arrangements with both Egypt and Jordan were overtaken by Peace Treaties.

Originally Posted by Israeli-Egyptian Peace Treaty
Article II

The permanent boundary between Egypt and Israel is the recognized international boundary between Egypt and the former mandated territory of Palestine, as shown on the map at Annex II, without prejudice to the issue of the status of the Gaza Strip. The Parties recognize this boundary as inviolable. Each will respect the territorial integrity of the other, including their territorial waters and airspace.​

Originally Posted by Israeli-Jordanian Peace Treaty
Article 3 - International Boundary

1. The international boundary between Israel and Jordan is delimited with reference to the boundary definition under the Mandate as is shown in Annex I(a), on the mapping materials attached thereto and co-ordinates specified therein.​

Your will note that the language is quite different and most important to today's Palestinian, as this treaties actually have an impact on the West Bank and Gaza Strip. In the case of the Israeli-Egyptian Peace Treaty, the language used is: "the former mandated territory of Palestine." In the case of the Israeli-Jordanian Peace Treaty, the language used is: "definition under the Mandate." Again, there is no contradiction, because there was no entity known as "Palestine" involved in the treaty arrangement.

The borders you point out, "borders seemed to be intact according to the 1949 UN armistice agreements" were territorial borders that were formerly under the Mandate of Palestine, and have no bearing on the jurisdiction of the All Palestine Government claim.

Most Respectfully,
R

"borders seemed to be intact according to the 1949 UN armistice agreements" were territorial borders that were formerly under the Mandate of Palestine,​

The armistice agreements did not mention the mandate. The mandate left Palestine almost a year before the armistice agreements. Palestine was still there. The borders were still there. Just as they were before the mandate. The mandate held Palestine in trust and had no authority to give away territory or change borders. Palestine belonged to the Palestinians as was the case before the mandate.

 

[Phoenall]

Relative to the All Palestinian Government (APG) (an organization encapsulated into the Egyptian Occupation Government) that attempted to Declare Independence over the same territory that Israel declared Independence over four months prior, was annulled in 1959 by its parent political creator and benefactor (Egypt). This was an example of "external interference."

From what I can tell the Palestinians declared independence on Palestinian land. This was later confirmed by the UN.

WRONG they declared independence on LoN mandate for Palestine land that had already been claimed by another party with a more valid claim. They tried to usurp International law, as they try to usurp international law today, and when they fail they turn to violence as a remedy for their failure.

 

[RoccoR]

P F Tinmore, et al,

The Armistice arrangements do not set the borders, rather it sets zone of military control.

P F Tinmore, et al,

Again, I think you are interpreting something in the Armistice Agreements between Israel and the four principle warring Arab Parties (Lebanon, Jordan, Syria, Egypt) that is not stated.

P F Tinmore, et al,

This would not be correct.

Relative to the All Palestinian Government (APG) (an organization encapsulated into the Egyptian Occupation Government) that attempted to Declare Independence over the same territory that Israel declared Independence over four months prior, was annulled in 1959 by its parent political creator and benefactor (Egypt). This was an example of "external interference."

From what I can tell the Palestinians declared independence on Palestinian land. This was later confirmed by the UN.

(COMMENT)

The language used by the All Palestine Government (APG) was:

DECLARE PALESTINE IN ITS ENTIRETY AND WITHIN ITS BOUNDARIES AS ESTABLISHED BEFORE THE TERMINATION OF THE BRITISH MANDATE AN INDEPENDENT STATE (A/C.1/330 14 October 1948)​

This APG declaration (28 September 1948) was interpreted to include the entire landscape of the territory formerly under the Mandate at the time of termination (excluding Jordan). This would include the landscape in the landscape the Jewish Agency, in agreement the UN Palestine Commission (the successor government to the Mandatory), declared independence over IAW Resolution 181(II), on 15 May 1948 (four month prior). To my knowledge, the UN gave no acknowledgement or concurrence to the APG declaration.

Most Respectfully,
R

The Palestinians indirectly said that independence was to be inside their international borders. (Referencing the Mandate that was assigned to Palestine and therefore worked inside Palestine's borders.) Those borders seemed to be intact according to the 1949 UN armistice agreements.

The UN in its armistice agreements makes no note of, and actually contradicts, any land for Israel in Palestine.

(COMMENT)

First, there is no Armistice Agreement with any entity known as "Palestine." There was no such party to the conflict. So, of course there would be no contradiction in the language.

Relative to the Armistice Agreements, the only two that remain in force are the one's with Syria and Lebanon. The Armistice Arrangements with both Egypt and Jordan were overtaken by Peace Treaties.

Originally Posted by Israeli-Egyptian Peace Treaty
Article II

The permanent boundary between Egypt and Israel is the recognized international boundary between Egypt and the former mandated territory of Palestine, as shown on the map at Annex II, without prejudice to the issue of the status of the Gaza Strip. The Parties recognize this boundary as inviolable. Each will respect the territorial integrity of the other, including their territorial waters and airspace.​

Originally Posted by Israeli-Jordanian Peace Treaty
Article 3 - International Boundary

1. The international boundary between Israel and Jordan is delimited with reference to the boundary definition under the Mandate as is shown in Annex I(a), on the mapping materials attached thereto and co-ordinates specified therein.​

Your will note that the language is quite different and most important to today's Palestinian, as this treaties actually have an impact on the West Bank and Gaza Strip. In the case of the Israeli-Egyptian Peace Treaty, the language used is: "the former mandated territory of Palestine." In the case of the Israeli-Jordanian Peace Treaty, the language used is: "definition under the Mandate." Again, there is no contradiction, because there was no entity known as "Palestine" involved in the treaty arrangement.

The borders you point out, "borders seemed to be intact according to the 1949 UN armistice agreements" were territorial borders that were formerly under the Mandate of Palestine, and have no bearing on the jurisdiction of the All Palestine Government claim.

Most Respectfully,
R

"borders seemed to be intact according to the 1949 UN armistice agreements" were territorial borders that were formerly under the Mandate of Palestine,​

The armistice agreements did not mention the mandate. The mandate left Palestine almost a year before the armistice agreements. Palestine was still there. The borders were still there. Just as they were before the mandate. The mandate held Palestine in trust and had no authority to give away territory or change borders. Palestine belonged to the Palestinians as was the case before the mandate.

(COMMENT)

The idea that Palestine (as determined by the Allied Powers) existed before the Mandate and was sovereign to the Palestinian People is simply wrong.

v/r
R

 

[Phoenall]

"Rocco, you present your standard laundry list of shit but you always leave something out"

You're clearly frustrated because Rocco , once AGAIN, proved you to be wrong. And once again, you responded to his post by not even remotely refuting what he said. You mad??

Pfffft, Rocco posts smoke.

Sorry Rocco, nothing personal.

Rocco refutes all your lies by providing valid links and excellent proof. So naturally, you would make a comment like that.

You find him a threat because you can't get people to believe your propaganda as long as he is here.

When I mention illegal external interference, his response is a list of things that foreigners did. That proves my point more than his.

Yep foriegners like Egypt, Jordan, Saudi, Iran, Styia etc.

Indeed, and the US, Britain, the EU, Israel...

None of them are Palestinian and have no legitimate business in Palestinian internal affairs.

Then Palestinians should stop mooching money from them if they don't want them involved in their internal affairs.

Why not,when Israel have receive over 67 billion........it is given by countries to help the Palestinians....please don't come back with the squab that Palestinians build tunnels...when Israel has spent Billions on state-of-the-art Weaponry......because it will make you Guys look like fools..steve

And paid back 60billion of that because they were in the form of loans. Your claims make you look like a fool because the Palestinians could have been on the same level as Israel as far back as 1948, but chose to become perpetual victims instead. They could have been world leaders in Pharmaceuticals, computers, agriculture, electronics etc., instead of propaganda, violence, terrorism etc. Israel happen to be world leaders in the design and manufacture of state-of-the-art weaponry because of the attacks by Palestinian terrorists. And yes Palestinians build tunnels under Israeli schools pack them with high explosives and hope to take out thousands of innocent children. Anyone that tries to use a cheap shot to lessen the grave danger posed by the Palestinians is even worse than the scum digging the tunnels.

 

[Phoenall]

P F Tinmore, et al,

Again, I think you are interpreting something in the Armistice Agreements between Israel and the four principle warring Arab Parties (Lebanon, Jordan, Syria, Egypt) that is not stated.

P F Tinmore, et al,

This would not be correct.

Relative to the All Palestinian Government (APG) (an organization encapsulated into the Egyptian Occupation Government) that attempted to Declare Independence over the same territory that Israel declared Independence over four months prior, was annulled in 1959 by its parent political creator and benefactor (Egypt). This was an example of "external interference."

From what I can tell the Palestinians declared independence on Palestinian land. This was later confirmed by the UN.

(COMMENT)

The language used by the All Palestine Government (APG) was:

DECLARE PALESTINE IN ITS ENTIRETY AND WITHIN ITS BOUNDARIES AS ESTABLISHED BEFORE THE TERMINATION OF THE BRITISH MANDATE AN INDEPENDENT STATE (A/C.1/330 14 October 1948)​

This APG declaration (28 September 1948) was interpreted to include the entire landscape of the territory formerly under the Mandate at the time of termination (excluding Jordan). This would include the landscape in the landscape the Jewish Agency, in agreement the UN Palestine Commission (the successor government to the Mandatory), declared independence over IAW Resolution 181(II), on 15 May 1948 (four month prior). To my knowledge, the UN gave no acknowledgement or concurrence to the APG declaration.

Most Respectfully,
R

The Palestinians indirectly said that independence was to be inside their international borders. (Referencing the Mandate that was assigned to Palestine and therefore worked inside Palestine's borders.) Those borders seemed to be intact according to the 1949 UN armistice agreements.

The UN in its armistice agreements makes no note of, and actually contradicts, any land for Israel in Palestine.

(COMMENT)

First, there is no Armistice Agreement with any entity known as "Palestine." There was no such party to the conflict. So, of course there would be no contradiction in the language.

Relative to the Armistice Agreements, the only two that remain in force are the one's with Syria and Lebanon. The Armistice Arrangements with both Egypt and Jordan were overtaken by Peace Treaties.

Originally Posted by Israeli-Egyptian Peace Treaty
Article II

The permanent boundary between Egypt and Israel is the recognized international boundary between Egypt and the former mandated territory of Palestine, as shown on the map at Annex II, without prejudice to the issue of the status of the Gaza Strip. The Parties recognize this boundary as inviolable. Each will respect the territorial integrity of the other, including their territorial waters and airspace.​

Originally Posted by Israeli-Jordanian Peace Treaty
Article 3 - International Boundary

1. The international boundary between Israel and Jordan is delimited with reference to the boundary definition under the Mandate as is shown in Annex I(a), on the mapping materials attached thereto and co-ordinates specified therein.​

Your will note that the language is quite different and most important to today's Palestinian, as this treaties actually have an impact on the West Bank and Gaza Strip. In the case of the Israeli-Egyptian Peace Treaty, the language used is: "the former mandated territory of Palestine." In the case of the Israeli-Jordanian Peace Treaty, the language used is: "definition under the Mandate." Again, there is no contradiction, because there was no entity known as "Palestine" involved in the treaty arrangement.

The borders you point out, "borders seemed to be intact according to the 1949 UN armistice agreements" were territorial borders that were formerly under the Mandate of Palestine, and have no bearing on the jurisdiction of the All Palestine Government claim.

Most Respectfully,
R

"borders seemed to be intact according to the 1949 UN armistice agreements" were territorial borders that were formerly under the Mandate of Palestine,​

The armistice agreements did not mention the mandate. The mandate left Palestine almost a year before the armistice agreements. Palestine was still there. The borders were still there. Just as they were before the mandate. The mandate held Palestine in trust and had no authority to give away territory or change borders. Palestine belonged to the Palestinians as was the case before the mandate.

Yes the MANDATE FOR PALESTINE was still there, as were the borders. But there was no nation of Palestine in existence. The Mandate very clearly spelt out that the land was for THE RESURECTED NATIONAL HOME OF THE JEWS and at no time mentioned any home for the arab muslims. So under CUSTOMARY INTERNATIONAL LAW of the time Palestine was destined to become what is now Israel, and all it needed was the Jews to declare their intentions of creating a state. Because of threats by the arab muslims the Jews held off until 1948 and then they say their window of opportunity and took it.

And yes the armistice agreements did mention the mandate as shown above, as clarification of what land was being talked about.