Solar Power pays off for enterprising Palestinians.

[Hollie]

P F Tinmore, et al,

Again, you are 100% Wrong.

(COMMENT)

In the case you cited (as an example) of the Egyptian Armistice and Peace Treaty, the Peace Treaty completely replaces the Armistice.

• Egyptian-Israeli Armistice: Article XII

2. This Agreement having been negotiated and concluded in pursuance of the resolution of the Security Council of 16 November 1948 calling for the establishment of an armistice in order to eliminate the threat to the peace in Palestine and to facilitate the transition from the present truce to permanent peace in Palestine, shall remain in force until a peaceful settlement between the Parties is achieved, except as provided in paragraph 3 of this Article.
​

• Egyptian-Israeli Peace Treaty: Article II

The permanent boundary between Egypt and Israel in 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.
​

There is a difference between "Palestine" (as you wrote) and the "former mandated territory of Palestine" (as written in the Peace Treaty. There is no reference or relationship to the 1949 Armistice Line --- in the --- 1979 Permanent International Boundary.

(THE BIG CHANGE)

As has been pointed out many (many) times, the 1988 UN General Assembly Resolution 43/177 specifically states:

3. Decides that, effective as of 15 December 1988, the designation "Palestine" should be used in place of the designation "Palestine Liberation Organization" in the United Nations system, without prejudice to the observer status and functions of the Palestine Liberation Organization within the United Nations system, in conformity with relevant United Nations resolutions and practice;
​

Most Respectfully,
R

You are dancing around the issues in my post.

NOPE we are pointing out that you are a LIAR as the peace treaty spells it out

The permanent boundary between Egypt and Israel in the recognized international boundary between Egypt and the former mandated territory of Palestine

Understand yet that there was no nation of Palestine to have borders until they negotiate them

You could say the same thing about Lebanon, Syria, Jordan, and Iraq. They were all former mandated territories.

So?

I am not saying it am I, it is the world saying that the treaty says the border of Israel and Egypt is the same as that of the former mandated territory of Palestine .



Once again international laws and treaties say that you are a LIAR and that the nation of Palestine did not exist until 1988

It was not a world or UN treaty. It was a treaty bought for Israel by the US. The wording is what the US and Israel wanted. Nobody else had anything to do with it. It is a "say so" border.

When your attempt at argument fails, you typically retreat to conspiracy theories.

 

[Hollie]

P F Tinmore, et al,

Again, you are 100% Wrong.

(COMMENT)

In the case you cited (as an example) of the Egyptian Armistice and Peace Treaty, the Peace Treaty completely replaces the Armistice.

• Egyptian-Israeli Armistice: Article XII

2. This Agreement having been negotiated and concluded in pursuance of the resolution of the Security Council of 16 November 1948 calling for the establishment of an armistice in order to eliminate the threat to the peace in Palestine and to facilitate the transition from the present truce to permanent peace in Palestine, shall remain in force until a peaceful settlement between the Parties is achieved, except as provided in paragraph 3 of this Article.
​

• Egyptian-Israeli Peace Treaty: Article II

The permanent boundary between Egypt and Israel in 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.
​

There is a difference between "Palestine" (as you wrote) and the "former mandated territory of Palestine" (as written in the Peace Treaty. There is no reference or relationship to the 1949 Armistice Line --- in the --- 1979 Permanent International Boundary.

(THE BIG CHANGE)

As has been pointed out many (many) times, the 1988 UN General Assembly Resolution 43/177 specifically states:

3. Decides that, effective as of 15 December 1988, the designation "Palestine" should be used in place of the designation "Palestine Liberation Organization" in the United Nations system, without prejudice to the observer status and functions of the Palestine Liberation Organization within the United Nations system, in conformity with relevant United Nations resolutions and practice;
​

Most Respectfully,
R

You are dancing around the issues in my post.

NOPE we are pointing out that you are a LIAR as the peace treaty spells it out

The permanent boundary between Egypt and Israel in the recognized international boundary between Egypt and the former mandated territory of Palestine

Understand yet that there was no nation of Palestine to have borders until they negotiate them

You could say the same thing about Lebanon, Syria, Jordan, and Iraq. They were all former mandated territories.

So?

I am not saying it am I, it is the world saying that the treaty says the border of Israel and Egypt is the same as that of the former mandated territory of Palestine .



Once again international laws and treaties say that you are a LIAR and that the nation of Palestine did not exist until 1988

Guided
by the purposes and principles of the Charter,

Recalling its relevant resolutions which affirm the right of the Palestinian people to self-determination,

1. Reaffirms the inalienable rights of the Palestinian people in Palestine, including:

(a) The right to self-determination without external interference;

(b) The right to national independence and sovereignty;

2. Reaffirms also the inalienable right of the Palestinians to return to their homes and property from which they have been displaced and uprooted, and calls for their return;

3. Emphasizes that full respect for and the realization of these inalienable rights of the Palestinian people are indispensable for the solution of the question of Palestine;

4. Recognizes that the Palestinian people is a principal party in the establishment of a just and lasting peace in the Middle East;

5. Further recognizes the right of the Palestinian people to regain its rights by all means in accordance with the purposes and principles of the Charter of the United Nations;

6. Appeals to all States and international organizations to extend their support to the Palestinian people in its struggle to restore its rights, in accordance with the Charter;

UN General Assembly Resolution 3236 and UN General Assembly Resolution 3237​

Why would the UN use the term "in Palestine" in 1974 unless there was a Palestine?

Israel has always denied the existence of Palestine. You are reading from Israel's playbook.

I found it interesting that the link you posted includes criticism of the language used regarding the Arabs-Moslems in the disputed territories.


From your link:


Introduction

In 1974, the UN General Assembly invited Yasser Arafat, Chairman of the Palestine Liberation Organization, to address the General Assembly during the annual debate on Palestine. Arafat appeared before the UN in fatigue uniform, with his pistol showing. This period, following the Yom Kippur war, marked the ascendancy of the Palestinian in the UN for many years, and culminated in the Zionism is Racism resolution in 1975. On November 22, the UN General Assembly passed two resolutions 3326 and 3327, that recognized the cause of Palestinian self-determination and the status of the PLO as representing the Palestinian people, and gave the PLO observer status at the UN.

Particularly interesting and problematic is the following:

5. Further recognizes the right of the Palestinian people to regain its rights by all means in accordance with the purposes and principles of the Charter of the United Nations;

The above phrase is a masterpiece of ambiguity. It could mean that the Palestinians have the right to use all means (including indiscriminate terror against civilians) to attain their rights, in accordance with the fact that the UN Charter supports self-determination. However, it could mean that they have the right to attain their rights only using means that are in accordance with the purposes and principles of the charter, which does not support war crimes. Though it is hard to believe, since at the time of adoption of the resolution, the PLO and other Palestinian groups were engaged in hijacking air planes and killing school children, the former interpretation may be the correct one.

 

[P F Tinmore]

You are dancing around the issues in my post.

NOPE we are pointing out that you are a LIAR as the peace treaty spells it out

The permanent boundary between Egypt and Israel in the recognized international boundary between Egypt and the former mandated territory of Palestine

Understand yet that there was no nation of Palestine to have borders until they negotiate them

You could say the same thing about Lebanon, Syria, Jordan, and Iraq. They were all former mandated territories.

So?

I am not saying it am I, it is the world saying that the treaty says the border of Israel and Egypt is the same as that of the former mandated territory of Palestine .



Once again international laws and treaties say that you are a LIAR and that the nation of Palestine did not exist until 1988

Guided
by the purposes and principles of the Charter,

Recalling its relevant resolutions which affirm the right of the Palestinian people to self-determination,

1. Reaffirms the inalienable rights of the Palestinian people in Palestine, including:

(a) The right to self-determination without external interference;

(b) The right to national independence and sovereignty;

2. Reaffirms also the inalienable right of the Palestinians to return to their homes and property from which they have been displaced and uprooted, and calls for their return;

3. Emphasizes that full respect for and the realization of these inalienable rights of the Palestinian people are indispensable for the solution of the question of Palestine;

4. Recognizes that the Palestinian people is a principal party in the establishment of a just and lasting peace in the Middle East;

5. Further recognizes the right of the Palestinian people to regain its rights by all means in accordance with the purposes and principles of the Charter of the United Nations;

6. Appeals to all States and international organizations to extend their support to the Palestinian people in its struggle to restore its rights, in accordance with the Charter;

UN General Assembly Resolution 3236 and UN General Assembly Resolution 3237​

Why would the UN use the term "in Palestine" in 1974 unless there was a Palestine?

Israel has always denied the existence of Palestine. You are reading from Israel's playbook.

I found it interesting that the link you posted includes criticism of the language used regarding the Arabs-Moslems in the disputed territories.


From your link:


Introduction

In 1974, the UN General Assembly invited Yasser Arafat, Chairman of the Palestine Liberation Organization, to address the General Assembly during the annual debate on Palestine. Arafat appeared before the UN in fatigue uniform, with his pistol showing. This period, following the Yom Kippur war, marked the ascendancy of the Palestinian in the UN for many years, and culminated in the Zionism is Racism resolution in 1975. On November 22, the UN General Assembly passed two resolutions 3326 and 3327, that recognized the cause of Palestinian self-determination and the status of the PLO as representing the Palestinian people, and gave the PLO observer status at the UN.

Particularly interesting and problematic is the following:

5. Further recognizes the right of the Palestinian people to regain its rights by all means in accordance with the purposes and principles of the Charter of the United Nations;

The above phrase is a masterpiece of ambiguity. It could mean that the Palestinians have the right to use all means (including indiscriminate terror against civilians) to attain their rights, in accordance with the fact that the UN Charter supports self-determination. However, it could mean that they have the right to attain their rights only using means that are in accordance with the purposes and principles of the charter, which does not support war crimes. Though it is hard to believe, since at the time of adoption of the resolution, the PLO and other Palestinian groups were engaged in hijacking air planes and killing school children, the former interpretation may be the correct one.

They did not use the term disputed territories. Disputed territories is an Israeli propaganda term.

However the UN did say:

4. All armed action or repressive measures of all kinds directed against dependent peoples shall cease

in order to enable them to exercise peacefully and freely their right to complete independence, and the integrity of their national territory shall be respected.

5. Immediate steps shall be taken, in Trust and Non-Self-Governing Territories or all other territories which have not yet attained independence, to transfer all powers to the peoples of those territories, without any conditions or reservations, in accordance with their freely expressed will and desire, without any distinction as to race, creed or colour, in order to enable them to enjoy complete independence and freedom.

6. Any attempt aimed at the partial or total disruption of the national unity and the territorial integrity of a country is incompatible with the purposes and principles of the Charter of the United Nations.

The United Nations and Decolonization - Declaration​

It is Israel that can take no action against the Palestinians.

 

[Hollie]

NOPE we are pointing out that you are a LIAR as the peace treaty spells it out

The permanent boundary between Egypt and Israel in the recognized international boundary between Egypt and the former mandated territory of Palestine

Understand yet that there was no nation of Palestine to have borders until they negotiate them

You could say the same thing about Lebanon, Syria, Jordan, and Iraq. They were all former mandated territories.

So?

I am not saying it am I, it is the world saying that the treaty says the border of Israel and Egypt is the same as that of the former mandated territory of Palestine .



Once again international laws and treaties say that you are a LIAR and that the nation of Palestine did not exist until 1988

Guided
by the purposes and principles of the Charter,

Recalling its relevant resolutions which affirm the right of the Palestinian people to self-determination,

1. Reaffirms the inalienable rights of the Palestinian people in Palestine, including:

(a) The right to self-determination without external interference;

(b) The right to national independence and sovereignty;

2. Reaffirms also the inalienable right of the Palestinians to return to their homes and property from which they have been displaced and uprooted, and calls for their return;

3. Emphasizes that full respect for and the realization of these inalienable rights of the Palestinian people are indispensable for the solution of the question of Palestine;

4. Recognizes that the Palestinian people is a principal party in the establishment of a just and lasting peace in the Middle East;

5. Further recognizes the right of the Palestinian people to regain its rights by all means in accordance with the purposes and principles of the Charter of the United Nations;

6. Appeals to all States and international organizations to extend their support to the Palestinian people in its struggle to restore its rights, in accordance with the Charter;

UN General Assembly Resolution 3236 and UN General Assembly Resolution 3237​

Why would the UN use the term "in Palestine" in 1974 unless there was a Palestine?

Israel has always denied the existence of Palestine. You are reading from Israel's playbook.

I found it interesting that the link you posted includes criticism of the language used regarding the Arabs-Moslems in the disputed territories.


From your link:


Introduction

In 1974, the UN General Assembly invited Yasser Arafat, Chairman of the Palestine Liberation Organization, to address the General Assembly during the annual debate on Palestine. Arafat appeared before the UN in fatigue uniform, with his pistol showing. This period, following the Yom Kippur war, marked the ascendancy of the Palestinian in the UN for many years, and culminated in the Zionism is Racism resolution in 1975. On November 22, the UN General Assembly passed two resolutions 3326 and 3327, that recognized the cause of Palestinian self-determination and the status of the PLO as representing the Palestinian people, and gave the PLO observer status at the UN.

Particularly interesting and problematic is the following:

5. Further recognizes the right of the Palestinian people to regain its rights by all means in accordance with the purposes and principles of the Charter of the United Nations;

The above phrase is a masterpiece of ambiguity. It could mean that the Palestinians have the right to use all means (including indiscriminate terror against civilians) to attain their rights, in accordance with the fact that the UN Charter supports self-determination. However, it could mean that they have the right to attain their rights only using means that are in accordance with the purposes and principles of the charter, which does not support war crimes. Though it is hard to believe, since at the time of adoption of the resolution, the PLO and other Palestinian groups were engaged in hijacking air planes and killing school children, the former interpretation may be the correct one.

They did not use the term disputed territories. Disputed territories is an Israeli propaganda term.

However the UN did say:

4. All armed action or repressive measures of all kinds directed against dependent peoples shall cease

in order to enable them to exercise peacefully and freely their right to complete independence, and the integrity of their national territory shall be respected.

5. Immediate steps shall be taken, in Trust and Non-Self-Governing Territories or all other territories which have not yet attained independence, to transfer all powers to the peoples of those territories, without any conditions or reservations, in accordance with their freely expressed will and desire, without any distinction as to race, creed or colour, in order to enable them to enjoy complete independence and freedom.

6. Any attempt aimed at the partial or total disruption of the national unity and the territorial integrity of a country is incompatible with the purposes and principles of the Charter of the United Nations.

The United Nations and Decolonization - Declaration​

It is Israel that can take no action against the Palestinians.

Nice dodge.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Treaties were signed Between Palestine and surrounding Arab nations, and only the Arab nations signed?

Are you sure?

Do you have something to the contrary?

There were two separate lines. There was the armistice line between Egyptian and Israeli forces. Then there is the international border between Egypt and Palestine. The armistice line laid on top of the border (except Gaza) and since it was specifically not to be a political or territorial boundary, it did not replace or otherwise change that border.

The 1949 UN Armistice Agreement specified that that is Palestine's international border. It also says that the territory inside that border is Palestine.

Now Israel and Egypt can have a peace agreement and do whatever with the armistice line but neither has any authority over Palestine's border.

I only see your claim that Egypt and Israel signed the Armistice agreement.
Were you lying?

I don't understand your question.

Egypt and Israel signed the agreement. Palestine didn't.
So were you lying?

That's what I said.

Why didn't they sign?

 

[Phoenall]

NOPE we are pointing out that you are a LIAR as the peace treaty spells it out

The permanent boundary between Egypt and Israel in the recognized international boundary between Egypt and the former mandated territory of Palestine

Understand yet that there was no nation of Palestine to have borders until they negotiate them

You could say the same thing about Lebanon, Syria, Jordan, and Iraq. They were all former mandated territories.

So?

I am not saying it am I, it is the world saying that the treaty says the border of Israel and Egypt is the same as that of the former mandated territory of Palestine .



Once again international laws and treaties say that you are a LIAR and that the nation of Palestine did not exist until 1988

Guided
by the purposes and principles of the Charter,

Recalling its relevant resolutions which affirm the right of the Palestinian people to self-determination,

1. Reaffirms the inalienable rights of the Palestinian people in Palestine, including:

(a) The right to self-determination without external interference;

(b) The right to national independence and sovereignty;

2. Reaffirms also the inalienable right of the Palestinians to return to their homes and property from which they have been displaced and uprooted, and calls for their return;

3. Emphasizes that full respect for and the realization of these inalienable rights of the Palestinian people are indispensable for the solution of the question of Palestine;

4. Recognizes that the Palestinian people is a principal party in the establishment of a just and lasting peace in the Middle East;

5. Further recognizes the right of the Palestinian people to regain its rights by all means in accordance with the purposes and principles of the Charter of the United Nations;

6. Appeals to all States and international organizations to extend their support to the Palestinian people in its struggle to restore its rights, in accordance with the Charter;

UN General Assembly Resolution 3236 and UN General Assembly Resolution 3237​

Why would the UN use the term "in Palestine" in 1974 unless there was a Palestine?

Israel has always denied the existence of Palestine. You are reading from Israel's playbook.

I found it interesting that the link you posted includes criticism of the language used regarding the Arabs-Moslems in the disputed territories.


From your link:


Introduction

In 1974, the UN General Assembly invited Yasser Arafat, Chairman of the Palestine Liberation Organization, to address the General Assembly during the annual debate on Palestine. Arafat appeared before the UN in fatigue uniform, with his pistol showing. This period, following the Yom Kippur war, marked the ascendancy of the Palestinian in the UN for many years, and culminated in the Zionism is Racism resolution in 1975. On November 22, the UN General Assembly passed two resolutions 3326 and 3327, that recognized the cause of Palestinian self-determination and the status of the PLO as representing the Palestinian people, and gave the PLO observer status at the UN.

Particularly interesting and problematic is the following:

5. Further recognizes the right of the Palestinian people to regain its rights by all means in accordance with the purposes and principles of the Charter of the United Nations;

The above phrase is a masterpiece of ambiguity. It could mean that the Palestinians have the right to use all means (including indiscriminate terror against civilians) to attain their rights, in accordance with the fact that the UN Charter supports self-determination. However, it could mean that they have the right to attain their rights only using means that are in accordance with the purposes and principles of the charter, which does not support war crimes. Though it is hard to believe, since at the time of adoption of the resolution, the PLO and other Palestinian groups were engaged in hijacking air planes and killing school children, the former interpretation may be the correct one.

They did not use the term disputed territories. Disputed territories is an Israeli propaganda term.

However the UN did say:

4. All armed action or repressive measures of all kinds directed against dependent peoples shall cease

in order to enable them to exercise peacefully and freely their right to complete independence, and the integrity of their national territory shall be respected.

5. Immediate steps shall be taken, in Trust and Non-Self-Governing Territories or all other territories which have not yet attained independence, to transfer all powers to the peoples of those territories, without any conditions or reservations, in accordance with their freely expressed will and desire, without any distinction as to race, creed or colour, in order to enable them to enjoy complete independence and freedom.

6. Any attempt aimed at the partial or total disruption of the national unity and the territorial integrity of a country is incompatible with the purposes and principles of the Charter of the United Nations.

The United Nations and Decolonization - Declaration​

It is Israel that can take no action against the Palestinians.

Which you have been shown does not apply as there are no non self governing peoples in the M.E.

You will use any old crap that you think can be used to demonise the Jews and end up covered in egg. In this case by a non binding resolution from 1960 when the Palestinians were self governing

 

[RoccoR]

P F Tinmore, et al,

Again, your interpretation and application of this resolution is 100% wrong.

There is no colonial assets in the Middle East at all.

The General Assembly with the purpose of monitoring the implementation of the Declaration (General Assembly Resolution 1514 (XV) of 14 December 1960) established the Committee of 24.

The Special Committee annually reviews the list of Territories to which the Declaration is applicable and makes recommendations as to its implementation. Just because YOU think 1988 State of Palestine (or any territory that was once formerly subject to the Mandate) should be considered a colonial assets, does not mean it is.

The United Nations and Decolonization - Declaration​

It is Israel that can take no action against the Palestinians.

(REFERENCE)

Text of United Nations Security Council Resolution 1397:
“The Security Council, (2002)

“Recalling all its previous relevant resolutions, in particular resolutions 242 (1967) and 338 (1973),

“Affirming a vision of a region where two States, Israel and Palestine, live side by side within secure and recognized borders,

“Expressing its grave concern at the continuation of the tragic and violent events that have taken place since September 2000, especially the recent attacks and the increased number of casualties,

“Stressing the need for all concerned to ensure the safety of civilians,

“Stressing also the need to respect the universally accepted norms of international humanitarian law,

“Welcoming and encouraging the diplomatic efforts of special envoys from the United States of America, the Russian Federation, the European Union and the United Nations Special Coordinator and others to bring about a comprehensive, just and lasting peace in the Middle East,

“Welcoming the contribution of Saudi Crown Prince Abdullah,

“1. Demands immediate cessation of all acts of violence, including all acts of terror, provocation, incitement and destruction;

“2. Calls upon the Israeli and Palestinian sides and their leaders to cooperate in the implementation of the Tenet work plan and Mitchell Report recommendations with the aim of resuming negotiations on a political settlement;

“3. Expresses support for the efforts of the Secretary-General and others to assist the parties to halt the violence and to resume the peace process;

“4. Decides to remain seized of the matter.”

(COMMENT)

Much of the disturbance in the occupied Palestinian territories (oPt) is self-inflicted. The Hostile Arab Palestinians (HoAP) have left no political or diplomatic impression that they intend to pursue a resolution through peaceful means. In fact, they advocate the exact opposite of the Hague Regulation (1907) and the Fourth Geneva Convention (1949 as amended).

Noting that the Hague Regulation (Article #43), as supplemented by Article #64 --- and --- Article #68, of the Fourth Geneva Convention, requires the Occupying Force to restore, and then maintain, law and order over the territory, and the authority to augment or change local laws if (and only if) necessary to perform this function.
​

Your assertion that the non-binding Decolonization Declaration prohibits Israeli activity to take what measures may be necessary to counter HoAP security threats – ranging from organized armed groups participating in an ongoing international armed conflict to ordinary criminal activity – by state sponsored and independent jihadist, radicals, insurgents and other asymmetric elements is totally erroneous.

There is no argument from either side that the HoAP from the beginning of the war in 1948, until the present, have engaged in such activity to obstruct and reverse the UN Recommendations adopted in 1947, and continue to be directly involved in the incitement to commit acts of terrorism, rendering safe haven to those HoAP for which there is credible criminal information.

Israel is well within its rights, and is in fact obligated to, take whatever measures are necessary to meet the International Law.

Most Respectfully,
R

 

[montelatici]

P F Tinmore, et al,

Again, your interpretation and application of this resolution is 100% wrong.

There is no colonial assets in the Middle East at all.

The General Assembly with the purpose of monitoring the implementation of the Declaration (General Assembly Resolution 1514 (XV) of 14 December 1960) established the Committee of 24.

The Special Committee annually reviews the list of Territories to which the Declaration is applicable and makes recommendations as to its implementation. Just because YOU think 1988 State of Palestine (or any territory that was once formerly subject to the Mandate) should be considered a colonial assets, does not mean it is.

The United Nations and Decolonization - Declaration​

It is Israel that can take no action against the Palestinians.

(REFERENCE)

Text of United Nations Security Council Resolution 1397:
“The Security Council, (2002)

“Recalling all its previous relevant resolutions, in particular resolutions 242 (1967) and 338 (1973),

“Affirming a vision of a region where two States, Israel and Palestine, live side by side within secure and recognized borders,

“Expressing its grave concern at the continuation of the tragic and violent events that have taken place since September 2000, especially the recent attacks and the increased number of casualties,

“Stressing the need for all concerned to ensure the safety of civilians,

“Stressing also the need to respect the universally accepted norms of international humanitarian law,

“Welcoming and encouraging the diplomatic efforts of special envoys from the United States of America, the Russian Federation, the European Union and the United Nations Special Coordinator and others to bring about a comprehensive, just and lasting peace in the Middle East,

“Welcoming the contribution of Saudi Crown Prince Abdullah,

“1. Demands immediate cessation of all acts of violence, including all acts of terror, provocation, incitement and destruction;

“2. Calls upon the Israeli and Palestinian sides and their leaders to cooperate in the implementation of the Tenet work plan and Mitchell Report recommendations with the aim of resuming negotiations on a political settlement;

“3. Expresses support for the efforts of the Secretary-General and others to assist the parties to halt the violence and to resume the peace process;

“4. Decides to remain seized of the matter.”

(COMMENT)

Much of the disturbance in the occupied Palestinian territories (oPt) is self-inflicted. The Hostile Arab Palestinians (HoAP) have left no political or diplomatic impression that they intend to pursue a resolution through peaceful means. In fact, they advocate the exact opposite of the Hague Regulation (1907) and the Fourth Geneva Convention (1949 as amended).

Noting that the Hague Regulation (Article #43), as supplemented by Article #64 --- and --- Article #68, of the Fourth Geneva Convention, requires the Occupying Force to restore, and then maintain, law and order over the territory, and the authority to augment or change local laws if (and only if) necessary to perform this function.
​

Your assertion that the non-binding Decolonization Declaration prohibits Israeli activity to take what measures may be necessary to counter HoAP security threats – ranging from organized armed groups participating in an ongoing international armed conflict to ordinary criminal activity – by state sponsored and independent jihadist, radicals, insurgents and other asymmetric elements is totally erroneous.

There is no argument from either side that the HoAP from the beginning of the war in 1948, until the present, have engaged in such activity to obstruct and reverse the UN Recommendations adopted in 1947, and continue to be directly involved in the incitement to commit acts of terrorism, rendering safe haven to those HoAP for which there is credible criminal information.

Israel is well within its rights, and is in fact obligated to, take whatever measures are necessary to meet the International Law.

Most Respectfully,
R

All of the disturbance in Palestine between Jews and non-Jews is caused by the colonization of Palestine by the Jews who came from elsewhere.

Certainly the native Christian and Muslims had every right to try to obstruct the UN's plan to dispossess them of their homeland and establish a European colony. Rather, they had a duty to do so on behalf of their children and heirs.

 

[P F Tinmore]

P F Tinmore, et al,

Again, your interpretation and application of this resolution is 100% wrong.

There is no colonial assets in the Middle East at all.

The General Assembly with the purpose of monitoring the implementation of the Declaration (General Assembly Resolution 1514 (XV) of 14 December 1960) established the Committee of 24.

The Special Committee annually reviews the list of Territories to which the Declaration is applicable and makes recommendations as to its implementation. Just because YOU think 1988 State of Palestine (or any territory that was once formerly subject to the Mandate) should be considered a colonial assets, does not mean it is.

The United Nations and Decolonization - Declaration​

It is Israel that can take no action against the Palestinians.

(REFERENCE)

Text of United Nations Security Council Resolution 1397:
“The Security Council, (2002)

“Recalling all its previous relevant resolutions, in particular resolutions 242 (1967) and 338 (1973),

“Affirming a vision of a region where two States, Israel and Palestine, live side by side within secure and recognized borders,

“Expressing its grave concern at the continuation of the tragic and violent events that have taken place since September 2000, especially the recent attacks and the increased number of casualties,

“Stressing the need for all concerned to ensure the safety of civilians,

“Stressing also the need to respect the universally accepted norms of international humanitarian law,

“Welcoming and encouraging the diplomatic efforts of special envoys from the United States of America, the Russian Federation, the European Union and the United Nations Special Coordinator and others to bring about a comprehensive, just and lasting peace in the Middle East,

“Welcoming the contribution of Saudi Crown Prince Abdullah,

“1. Demands immediate cessation of all acts of violence, including all acts of terror, provocation, incitement and destruction;

“2. Calls upon the Israeli and Palestinian sides and their leaders to cooperate in the implementation of the Tenet work plan and Mitchell Report recommendations with the aim of resuming negotiations on a political settlement;

“3. Expresses support for the efforts of the Secretary-General and others to assist the parties to halt the violence and to resume the peace process;

“4. Decides to remain seized of the matter.”

(COMMENT)

Much of the disturbance in the occupied Palestinian territories (oPt) is self-inflicted. The Hostile Arab Palestinians (HoAP) have left no political or diplomatic impression that they intend to pursue a resolution through peaceful means. In fact, they advocate the exact opposite of the Hague Regulation (1907) and the Fourth Geneva Convention (1949 as amended).

Noting that the Hague Regulation (Article #43), as supplemented by Article #64 --- and --- Article #68, of the Fourth Geneva Convention, requires the Occupying Force to restore, and then maintain, law and order over the territory, and the authority to augment or change local laws if (and only if) necessary to perform this function.
​

Your assertion that the non-binding Decolonization Declaration prohibits Israeli activity to take what measures may be necessary to counter HoAP security threats – ranging from organized armed groups participating in an ongoing international armed conflict to ordinary criminal activity – by state sponsored and independent jihadist, radicals, insurgents and other asymmetric elements is totally erroneous.

There is no argument from either side that the HoAP from the beginning of the war in 1948, until the present, have engaged in such activity to obstruct and reverse the UN Recommendations adopted in 1947, and continue to be directly involved in the incitement to commit acts of terrorism, rendering safe haven to those HoAP for which there is credible criminal information.

Israel is well within its rights, and is in fact obligated to, take whatever measures are necessary to meet the International Law.

Most Respectfully,
R

“Affirming a vision of a region where two States, Israel and Palestine, live side by side within secure and recognized borders
​

Not a legal requirement or a political reality. The whole resolution is just a bunch of blabber that they have no intention of doing anything about anyway.

You tend to ignore what they were planning on partitioning.

 

[Phoenall]

P F Tinmore, et al,

Again, your interpretation and application of this resolution is 100% wrong.

There is no colonial assets in the Middle East at all.

The General Assembly with the purpose of monitoring the implementation of the Declaration (General Assembly Resolution 1514 (XV) of 14 December 1960) established the Committee of 24.

The Special Committee annually reviews the list of Territories to which the Declaration is applicable and makes recommendations as to its implementation. Just because YOU think 1988 State of Palestine (or any territory that was once formerly subject to the Mandate) should be considered a colonial assets, does not mean it is.

The United Nations and Decolonization - Declaration​

It is Israel that can take no action against the Palestinians.

(REFERENCE)

Text of United Nations Security Council Resolution 1397:
“The Security Council, (2002)

“Recalling all its previous relevant resolutions, in particular resolutions 242 (1967) and 338 (1973),

“Affirming a vision of a region where two States, Israel and Palestine, live side by side within secure and recognized borders,

“Expressing its grave concern at the continuation of the tragic and violent events that have taken place since September 2000, especially the recent attacks and the increased number of casualties,

“Stressing the need for all concerned to ensure the safety of civilians,

“Stressing also the need to respect the universally accepted norms of international humanitarian law,

“Welcoming and encouraging the diplomatic efforts of special envoys from the United States of America, the Russian Federation, the European Union and the United Nations Special Coordinator and others to bring about a comprehensive, just and lasting peace in the Middle East,

“Welcoming the contribution of Saudi Crown Prince Abdullah,

“1. Demands immediate cessation of all acts of violence, including all acts of terror, provocation, incitement and destruction;

“2. Calls upon the Israeli and Palestinian sides and their leaders to cooperate in the implementation of the Tenet work plan and Mitchell Report recommendations with the aim of resuming negotiations on a political settlement;

“3. Expresses support for the efforts of the Secretary-General and others to assist the parties to halt the violence and to resume the peace process;

“4. Decides to remain seized of the matter.”

(COMMENT)

Much of the disturbance in the occupied Palestinian territories (oPt) is self-inflicted. The Hostile Arab Palestinians (HoAP) have left no political or diplomatic impression that they intend to pursue a resolution through peaceful means. In fact, they advocate the exact opposite of the Hague Regulation (1907) and the Fourth Geneva Convention (1949 as amended).

Noting that the Hague Regulation (Article #43), as supplemented by Article #64 --- and --- Article #68, of the Fourth Geneva Convention, requires the Occupying Force to restore, and then maintain, law and order over the territory, and the authority to augment or change local laws if (and only if) necessary to perform this function.
​

Your assertion that the non-binding Decolonization Declaration prohibits Israeli activity to take what measures may be necessary to counter HoAP security threats – ranging from organized armed groups participating in an ongoing international armed conflict to ordinary criminal activity – by state sponsored and independent jihadist, radicals, insurgents and other asymmetric elements is totally erroneous.

There is no argument from either side that the HoAP from the beginning of the war in 1948, until the present, have engaged in such activity to obstruct and reverse the UN Recommendations adopted in 1947, and continue to be directly involved in the incitement to commit acts of terrorism, rendering safe haven to those HoAP for which there is credible criminal information.

Israel is well within its rights, and is in fact obligated to, take whatever measures are necessary to meet the International Law.

Most Respectfully,
R

All of the disturbance in Palestine between Jews and non-Jews is caused by the colonization of Palestine by the Jews who came from elsewhere.

Certainly the native Christian and Muslims had every right to try to obstruct the UN's plan to dispossess them of their homeland and establish a European colony. Rather, they had a duty to do so on behalf of their children and heirs.

So what caused the problems prior to the UN plans then, going back to 70 C.E. when the Catholics started the pogroms against the Jews. You know those foreign invaders from Rome who colonised the lands and made it a European colony.

You don't half talk some shite sometimes freddy..................

 

[Phoenall]

P F Tinmore, et al,

Again, your interpretation and application of this resolution is 100% wrong.

There is no colonial assets in the Middle East at all.

The General Assembly with the purpose of monitoring the implementation of the Declaration (General Assembly Resolution 1514 (XV) of 14 December 1960) established the Committee of 24.

The Special Committee annually reviews the list of Territories to which the Declaration is applicable and makes recommendations as to its implementation. Just because YOU think 1988 State of Palestine (or any territory that was once formerly subject to the Mandate) should be considered a colonial assets, does not mean it is.

The United Nations and Decolonization - Declaration​

It is Israel that can take no action against the Palestinians.

(REFERENCE)

Text of United Nations Security Council Resolution 1397:
“The Security Council, (2002)

“Recalling all its previous relevant resolutions, in particular resolutions 242 (1967) and 338 (1973),

“Affirming a vision of a region where two States, Israel and Palestine, live side by side within secure and recognized borders,

“Expressing its grave concern at the continuation of the tragic and violent events that have taken place since September 2000, especially the recent attacks and the increased number of casualties,

“Stressing the need for all concerned to ensure the safety of civilians,

“Stressing also the need to respect the universally accepted norms of international humanitarian law,

“Welcoming and encouraging the diplomatic efforts of special envoys from the United States of America, the Russian Federation, the European Union and the United Nations Special Coordinator and others to bring about a comprehensive, just and lasting peace in the Middle East,

“Welcoming the contribution of Saudi Crown Prince Abdullah,

“1. Demands immediate cessation of all acts of violence, including all acts of terror, provocation, incitement and destruction;

“2. Calls upon the Israeli and Palestinian sides and their leaders to cooperate in the implementation of the Tenet work plan and Mitchell Report recommendations with the aim of resuming negotiations on a political settlement;

“3. Expresses support for the efforts of the Secretary-General and others to assist the parties to halt the violence and to resume the peace process;

“4. Decides to remain seized of the matter.”

(COMMENT)

Much of the disturbance in the occupied Palestinian territories (oPt) is self-inflicted. The Hostile Arab Palestinians (HoAP) have left no political or diplomatic impression that they intend to pursue a resolution through peaceful means. In fact, they advocate the exact opposite of the Hague Regulation (1907) and the Fourth Geneva Convention (1949 as amended).

Noting that the Hague Regulation (Article #43), as supplemented by Article #64 --- and --- Article #68, of the Fourth Geneva Convention, requires the Occupying Force to restore, and then maintain, law and order over the territory, and the authority to augment or change local laws if (and only if) necessary to perform this function.
​

Your assertion that the non-binding Decolonization Declaration prohibits Israeli activity to take what measures may be necessary to counter HoAP security threats – ranging from organized armed groups participating in an ongoing international armed conflict to ordinary criminal activity – by state sponsored and independent jihadist, radicals, insurgents and other asymmetric elements is totally erroneous.

There is no argument from either side that the HoAP from the beginning of the war in 1948, until the present, have engaged in such activity to obstruct and reverse the UN Recommendations adopted in 1947, and continue to be directly involved in the incitement to commit acts of terrorism, rendering safe haven to those HoAP for which there is credible criminal information.

Israel is well within its rights, and is in fact obligated to, take whatever measures are necessary to meet the International Law.

Most Respectfully,
R

“Affirming a vision of a region where two States, Israel and Palestine, live side by side within secure and recognized borders
​

Not a legal requirement or a political reality. The whole resolution is just a bunch of blabber that they have no intention of doing anything about anyway.

You tend to ignore what they were planning on partitioning.

Which they realised after the event to have been an illegal act, and so changed the UN charter to rectify it. Giving the International laws of 1920, 1921, 1923 and 1924 further power in 1949 when the UN reaffirmed their existence and gave 100% support to the Jewish NATIONal home on Jewish Palestine lands.

 

[P F Tinmore]

P F Tinmore, et al,

Again, your interpretation and application of this resolution is 100% wrong.

There is no colonial assets in the Middle East at all.

The General Assembly with the purpose of monitoring the implementation of the Declaration (General Assembly Resolution 1514 (XV) of 14 December 1960) established the Committee of 24.

The Special Committee annually reviews the list of Territories to which the Declaration is applicable and makes recommendations as to its implementation. Just because YOU think 1988 State of Palestine (or any territory that was once formerly subject to the Mandate) should be considered a colonial assets, does not mean it is.

The United Nations and Decolonization - Declaration​

It is Israel that can take no action against the Palestinians.

(REFERENCE)

Text of United Nations Security Council Resolution 1397:
“The Security Council, (2002)

“Recalling all its previous relevant resolutions, in particular resolutions 242 (1967) and 338 (1973),

“Affirming a vision of a region where two States, Israel and Palestine, live side by side within secure and recognized borders,

“Expressing its grave concern at the continuation of the tragic and violent events that have taken place since September 2000, especially the recent attacks and the increased number of casualties,

“Stressing the need for all concerned to ensure the safety of civilians,

“Stressing also the need to respect the universally accepted norms of international humanitarian law,

“Welcoming and encouraging the diplomatic efforts of special envoys from the United States of America, the Russian Federation, the European Union and the United Nations Special Coordinator and others to bring about a comprehensive, just and lasting peace in the Middle East,

“Welcoming the contribution of Saudi Crown Prince Abdullah,

“1. Demands immediate cessation of all acts of violence, including all acts of terror, provocation, incitement and destruction;

“2. Calls upon the Israeli and Palestinian sides and their leaders to cooperate in the implementation of the Tenet work plan and Mitchell Report recommendations with the aim of resuming negotiations on a political settlement;

“3. Expresses support for the efforts of the Secretary-General and others to assist the parties to halt the violence and to resume the peace process;

“4. Decides to remain seized of the matter.”

(COMMENT)

Much of the disturbance in the occupied Palestinian territories (oPt) is self-inflicted. The Hostile Arab Palestinians (HoAP) have left no political or diplomatic impression that they intend to pursue a resolution through peaceful means. In fact, they advocate the exact opposite of the Hague Regulation (1907) and the Fourth Geneva Convention (1949 as amended).

Noting that the Hague Regulation (Article #43), as supplemented by Article #64 --- and --- Article #68, of the Fourth Geneva Convention, requires the Occupying Force to restore, and then maintain, law and order over the territory, and the authority to augment or change local laws if (and only if) necessary to perform this function.
​

Your assertion that the non-binding Decolonization Declaration prohibits Israeli activity to take what measures may be necessary to counter HoAP security threats – ranging from organized armed groups participating in an ongoing international armed conflict to ordinary criminal activity – by state sponsored and independent jihadist, radicals, insurgents and other asymmetric elements is totally erroneous.

There is no argument from either side that the HoAP from the beginning of the war in 1948, until the present, have engaged in such activity to obstruct and reverse the UN Recommendations adopted in 1947, and continue to be directly involved in the incitement to commit acts of terrorism, rendering safe haven to those HoAP for which there is credible criminal information.

Israel is well within its rights, and is in fact obligated to, take whatever measures are necessary to meet the International Law.

Most Respectfully,
R

“Affirming a vision of a region where two States, Israel and Palestine, live side by side within secure and recognized borders
​

Not a legal requirement or a political reality. The whole resolution is just a bunch of blabber that they have no intention of doing anything about anyway.

You tend to ignore what they were planning on partitioning.

Which they realised after the event to have been an illegal act, and so changed the UN charter to rectify it. Giving the International laws of 1920, 1921, 1923 and 1924 further power in 1949 when the UN reaffirmed their existence and gave 100% support to the Jewish NATIONal home on Jewish Palestine lands.

Do you have links to all that crap?

 

[Phoenall]

P F Tinmore, et al,

Again, your interpretation and application of this resolution is 100% wrong.

There is no colonial assets in the Middle East at all.

The General Assembly with the purpose of monitoring the implementation of the Declaration (General Assembly Resolution 1514 (XV) of 14 December 1960) established the Committee of 24.

The Special Committee annually reviews the list of Territories to which the Declaration is applicable and makes recommendations as to its implementation. Just because YOU think 1988 State of Palestine (or any territory that was once formerly subject to the Mandate) should be considered a colonial assets, does not mean it is.

The United Nations and Decolonization - Declaration​

It is Israel that can take no action against the Palestinians.

(REFERENCE)

Text of United Nations Security Council Resolution 1397:
“The Security Council, (2002)

“Recalling all its previous relevant resolutions, in particular resolutions 242 (1967) and 338 (1973),

“Affirming a vision of a region where two States, Israel and Palestine, live side by side within secure and recognized borders,

“Expressing its grave concern at the continuation of the tragic and violent events that have taken place since September 2000, especially the recent attacks and the increased number of casualties,

“Stressing the need for all concerned to ensure the safety of civilians,

“Stressing also the need to respect the universally accepted norms of international humanitarian law,

“Welcoming and encouraging the diplomatic efforts of special envoys from the United States of America, the Russian Federation, the European Union and the United Nations Special Coordinator and others to bring about a comprehensive, just and lasting peace in the Middle East,

“Welcoming the contribution of Saudi Crown Prince Abdullah,

“1. Demands immediate cessation of all acts of violence, including all acts of terror, provocation, incitement and destruction;

“2. Calls upon the Israeli and Palestinian sides and their leaders to cooperate in the implementation of the Tenet work plan and Mitchell Report recommendations with the aim of resuming negotiations on a political settlement;

“3. Expresses support for the efforts of the Secretary-General and others to assist the parties to halt the violence and to resume the peace process;

“4. Decides to remain seized of the matter.”

(COMMENT)

Much of the disturbance in the occupied Palestinian territories (oPt) is self-inflicted. The Hostile Arab Palestinians (HoAP) have left no political or diplomatic impression that they intend to pursue a resolution through peaceful means. In fact, they advocate the exact opposite of the Hague Regulation (1907) and the Fourth Geneva Convention (1949 as amended).

Noting that the Hague Regulation (Article #43), as supplemented by Article #64 --- and --- Article #68, of the Fourth Geneva Convention, requires the Occupying Force to restore, and then maintain, law and order over the territory, and the authority to augment or change local laws if (and only if) necessary to perform this function.
​

Your assertion that the non-binding Decolonization Declaration prohibits Israeli activity to take what measures may be necessary to counter HoAP security threats – ranging from organized armed groups participating in an ongoing international armed conflict to ordinary criminal activity – by state sponsored and independent jihadist, radicals, insurgents and other asymmetric elements is totally erroneous.

There is no argument from either side that the HoAP from the beginning of the war in 1948, until the present, have engaged in such activity to obstruct and reverse the UN Recommendations adopted in 1947, and continue to be directly involved in the incitement to commit acts of terrorism, rendering safe haven to those HoAP for which there is credible criminal information.

Israel is well within its rights, and is in fact obligated to, take whatever measures are necessary to meet the International Law.

Most Respectfully,
R

“Affirming a vision of a region where two States, Israel and Palestine, live side by side within secure and recognized borders
​

Not a legal requirement or a political reality. The whole resolution is just a bunch of blabber that they have no intention of doing anything about anyway.

You tend to ignore what they were planning on partitioning.

Which they realised after the event to have been an illegal act, and so changed the UN charter to rectify it. Giving the International laws of 1920, 1921, 1923 and 1924 further power in 1949 when the UN reaffirmed their existence and gave 100% support to the Jewish NATIONal home on Jewish Palestine lands.

Do you have links to all that crap?

Why didn't you read them the last 100 or so times I posted them.


I will start you with the treaty of Sevres, treaty of Lausanne, mandate of Palestine and the UN charter, abridged 1949.

All say that the land delineated in the mandate of Palestine as the Jewish NATIONal home is law, and that there was no nation of Palestine.

 

[P F Tinmore]

P F Tinmore, et al,

Again, your interpretation and application of this resolution is 100% wrong.

There is no colonial assets in the Middle East at all.

The General Assembly with the purpose of monitoring the implementation of the Declaration (General Assembly Resolution 1514 (XV) of 14 December 1960) established the Committee of 24.

The Special Committee annually reviews the list of Territories to which the Declaration is applicable and makes recommendations as to its implementation. Just because YOU think 1988 State of Palestine (or any territory that was once formerly subject to the Mandate) should be considered a colonial assets, does not mean it is.

The United Nations and Decolonization - Declaration​

It is Israel that can take no action against the Palestinians.

(REFERENCE)

Text of United Nations Security Council Resolution 1397:
“The Security Council, (2002)

“Recalling all its previous relevant resolutions, in particular resolutions 242 (1967) and 338 (1973),

“Affirming a vision of a region where two States, Israel and Palestine, live side by side within secure and recognized borders,

“Expressing its grave concern at the continuation of the tragic and violent events that have taken place since September 2000, especially the recent attacks and the increased number of casualties,

“Stressing the need for all concerned to ensure the safety of civilians,

“Stressing also the need to respect the universally accepted norms of international humanitarian law,

“Welcoming and encouraging the diplomatic efforts of special envoys from the United States of America, the Russian Federation, the European Union and the United Nations Special Coordinator and others to bring about a comprehensive, just and lasting peace in the Middle East,

“Welcoming the contribution of Saudi Crown Prince Abdullah,

“1. Demands immediate cessation of all acts of violence, including all acts of terror, provocation, incitement and destruction;

“2. Calls upon the Israeli and Palestinian sides and their leaders to cooperate in the implementation of the Tenet work plan and Mitchell Report recommendations with the aim of resuming negotiations on a political settlement;

“3. Expresses support for the efforts of the Secretary-General and others to assist the parties to halt the violence and to resume the peace process;

“4. Decides to remain seized of the matter.”

(COMMENT)

Much of the disturbance in the occupied Palestinian territories (oPt) is self-inflicted. The Hostile Arab Palestinians (HoAP) have left no political or diplomatic impression that they intend to pursue a resolution through peaceful means. In fact, they advocate the exact opposite of the Hague Regulation (1907) and the Fourth Geneva Convention (1949 as amended).

Noting that the Hague Regulation (Article #43), as supplemented by Article #64 --- and --- Article #68, of the Fourth Geneva Convention, requires the Occupying Force to restore, and then maintain, law and order over the territory, and the authority to augment or change local laws if (and only if) necessary to perform this function.
​

Your assertion that the non-binding Decolonization Declaration prohibits Israeli activity to take what measures may be necessary to counter HoAP security threats – ranging from organized armed groups participating in an ongoing international armed conflict to ordinary criminal activity – by state sponsored and independent jihadist, radicals, insurgents and other asymmetric elements is totally erroneous.

There is no argument from either side that the HoAP from the beginning of the war in 1948, until the present, have engaged in such activity to obstruct and reverse the UN Recommendations adopted in 1947, and continue to be directly involved in the incitement to commit acts of terrorism, rendering safe haven to those HoAP for which there is credible criminal information.

Israel is well within its rights, and is in fact obligated to, take whatever measures are necessary to meet the International Law.

Most Respectfully,
R

“Affirming a vision of a region where two States, Israel and Palestine, live side by side within secure and recognized borders
​

Not a legal requirement or a political reality. The whole resolution is just a bunch of blabber that they have no intention of doing anything about anyway.

You tend to ignore what they were planning on partitioning.

Which they realised after the event to have been an illegal act, and so changed the UN charter to rectify it. Giving the International laws of 1920, 1921, 1923 and 1924 further power in 1949 when the UN reaffirmed their existence and gave 100% support to the Jewish NATIONal home on Jewish Palestine lands.

Do you have links to all that crap?

Why didn't you read them the last 100 or so times I posted them.


I will start you with the treaty of Sevres, treaty of Lausanne, mandate of Palestine and the UN charter, abridged 1949.

All say that the land delineated in the mandate of Palestine as the Jewish NATIONal home is law, and that there was no nation of Palestine.

The "Jewish National Home" was to give Palestinian citizenship to immigrating Jews.

 

[Hollie]

P F Tinmore, et al,

Again, your interpretation and application of this resolution is 100% wrong.

There is no colonial assets in the Middle East at all.

The General Assembly with the purpose of monitoring the implementation of the Declaration (General Assembly Resolution 1514 (XV) of 14 December 1960) established the Committee of 24.

The Special Committee annually reviews the list of Territories to which the Declaration is applicable and makes recommendations as to its implementation. Just because YOU think 1988 State of Palestine (or any territory that was once formerly subject to the Mandate) should be considered a colonial assets, does not mean it is.

(REFERENCE)

Text of United Nations Security Council Resolution 1397:
“The Security Council, (2002)

“Recalling all its previous relevant resolutions, in particular resolutions 242 (1967) and 338 (1973),

“Affirming a vision of a region where two States, Israel and Palestine, live side by side within secure and recognized borders,

“Expressing its grave concern at the continuation of the tragic and violent events that have taken place since September 2000, especially the recent attacks and the increased number of casualties,

“Stressing the need for all concerned to ensure the safety of civilians,

“Stressing also the need to respect the universally accepted norms of international humanitarian law,

“Welcoming and encouraging the diplomatic efforts of special envoys from the United States of America, the Russian Federation, the European Union and the United Nations Special Coordinator and others to bring about a comprehensive, just and lasting peace in the Middle East,

“Welcoming the contribution of Saudi Crown Prince Abdullah,

“1. Demands immediate cessation of all acts of violence, including all acts of terror, provocation, incitement and destruction;

“2. Calls upon the Israeli and Palestinian sides and their leaders to cooperate in the implementation of the Tenet work plan and Mitchell Report recommendations with the aim of resuming negotiations on a political settlement;

“3. Expresses support for the efforts of the Secretary-General and others to assist the parties to halt the violence and to resume the peace process;

“4. Decides to remain seized of the matter.”

(COMMENT)

Much of the disturbance in the occupied Palestinian territories (oPt) is self-inflicted. The Hostile Arab Palestinians (HoAP) have left no political or diplomatic impression that they intend to pursue a resolution through peaceful means. In fact, they advocate the exact opposite of the Hague Regulation (1907) and the Fourth Geneva Convention (1949 as amended).

Noting that the Hague Regulation (Article #43), as supplemented by Article #64 --- and --- Article #68, of the Fourth Geneva Convention, requires the Occupying Force to restore, and then maintain, law and order over the territory, and the authority to augment or change local laws if (and only if) necessary to perform this function.
​

Your assertion that the non-binding Decolonization Declaration prohibits Israeli activity to take what measures may be necessary to counter HoAP security threats – ranging from organized armed groups participating in an ongoing international armed conflict to ordinary criminal activity – by state sponsored and independent jihadist, radicals, insurgents and other asymmetric elements is totally erroneous.

There is no argument from either side that the HoAP from the beginning of the war in 1948, until the present, have engaged in such activity to obstruct and reverse the UN Recommendations adopted in 1947, and continue to be directly involved in the incitement to commit acts of terrorism, rendering safe haven to those HoAP for which there is credible criminal information.

Israel is well within its rights, and is in fact obligated to, take whatever measures are necessary to meet the International Law.

Most Respectfully,
R

“Affirming a vision of a region where two States, Israel and Palestine, live side by side within secure and recognized borders
​

Not a legal requirement or a political reality. The whole resolution is just a bunch of blabber that they have no intention of doing anything about anyway.

You tend to ignore what they were planning on partitioning.

Which they realised after the event to have been an illegal act, and so changed the UN charter to rectify it. Giving the International laws of 1920, 1921, 1923 and 1924 further power in 1949 when the UN reaffirmed their existence and gave 100% support to the Jewish NATIONal home on Jewish Palestine lands.

Do you have links to all that crap?

Why didn't you read them the last 100 or so times I posted them.


I will start you with the treaty of Sevres, treaty of Lausanne, mandate of Palestine and the UN charter, abridged 1949.

All say that the land delineated in the mandate of Palestine as the Jewish NATIONal home is law, and that there was no nation of Palestine.

The "Jewish National Home" was to give Palestinian citizenship to immigrating Jews.

You do understand that there are threads dedicated specifically for your musings about this mythical Pal'istan, right?

 

[RoccoR]

P F Tinmore, et al,

Actually this is backwards.

The "Jewish National Home" was to give Palestinian citizenship to immigrating Jews.

(REFERENCES)

• Preamble (Clause 3) Mandate for Palestine

Whereas recognition has thereby been given to the historical connection of the Jewish people with Palestine and to the grounds for reconstituting their national home in that country;
​

• Article 4 Mandate for Palestine

An appropriate Jewish agency shall be recognised as a public body for the purpose of advising and co-operating with the Administration of Palestine in such economic, social and other matters as may affect the establishment of the Jewish national home and the interests of the Jewish population in Palestine, ... ... ...

... ... ... It shall take steps in consultation with His Britannic Majesty's Government to secure the co-operation of all Jews who are willing to assist in the establishment of the Jewish national home.
​

• Article 6 Mandate for Palestine

The Administration of Palestine, while ensuring that the rights and position of other sections of the population are not prejudiced, shall facilitate Jewish immigration under suitable conditions and shall encourage, in co-operation with the Jewish agency referred to in Article 4, close settlement by Jews on the land, including State lands and waste lands not required for public purposes.
​

• Article 7 Mandate for Palestine

The Administration of Palestine shall be responsible for enacting a nationality law. There shall be included in this law provisions framed so as to facilitate the acquisition of Palestinian citizenship by Jews who take up their permanent residence in Palestine.
​

• Paragraph 7, Succession to Government - Administrator - Oath to be taken by the Administrator - Palestine Order in Council

Whenever the office of High Commissioner is vacant or if the High Commissioner become incapable or be absent from Palestine, or be from any cause prevented from acting in the duties of his office, the person appointed to be Chief Secretary to the Government of Palestine, or if there be no such officer therein, or such officer be unable to act, then such person or persons as His Majesty may appoint under His Sign Manual and Signet and in default of such appointment the Senior Member of the Executive Council shall during His Majesty's pleasure administer the by the Administrator. Government of Palestine, first taking the oaths hereinbefore directed to be taken by the High Commissioner and in the manner herein prescribed,
which being done, the Chief Secretary or any other such Administrator as aforesaid is hereby authorised, empowered and commanded to do and execute during His Majesty's pleasure, all things that belong to the
office of the High Commissioner according to the tenour of this Order, and according to His Majesty's Instructions as aforesaid, and the laws of Palestine.
​

• Paragraph 2, Palestine Legislative Council Election Order

Palestinian citizenship, the following persons shall be deemed to be Palestinian citizens:

(a) Turkish subjects habitually resident in the territory of Palestine at the date of commencement of this Order.

(b) All persons of other than Turkish nationality habitually resident in the territory of Palestine at the said date, who shall within two calendar months of the said date make application for Palestinian citizenship in such form and before such officer as may be prescribed by the High Commissioner.
​

(COMMENT)

One of the primary objectives set by the Mandate in the Preamble (2) was the establishment in Palestine of a national home for the Jewish people, AND the protection of the civil and religious rights of the "non-Jewish communities in Palestine." (Whatever those civil and religious rights of the "non-Jewish Community" were defined in 1922.) In this case, we are most concerned with the definition as the "civil rights" in that era.

​

​

Page #66, World Encyclopedia of Law - Ballentine Law Dictionary - 1916 Edition
​

What do you preceive the "civil rights" to be in 1922?

Most Respectfully,
R

 

[Phoenall]

P F Tinmore, et al,

Again, your interpretation and application of this resolution is 100% wrong.

There is no colonial assets in the Middle East at all.

The General Assembly with the purpose of monitoring the implementation of the Declaration (General Assembly Resolution 1514 (XV) of 14 December 1960) established the Committee of 24.

The Special Committee annually reviews the list of Territories to which the Declaration is applicable and makes recommendations as to its implementation. Just because YOU think 1988 State of Palestine (or any territory that was once formerly subject to the Mandate) should be considered a colonial assets, does not mean it is.

(REFERENCE)

Text of United Nations Security Council Resolution 1397:
“The Security Council, (2002)

“Recalling all its previous relevant resolutions, in particular resolutions 242 (1967) and 338 (1973),

“Affirming a vision of a region where two States, Israel and Palestine, live side by side within secure and recognized borders,

“Expressing its grave concern at the continuation of the tragic and violent events that have taken place since September 2000, especially the recent attacks and the increased number of casualties,

“Stressing the need for all concerned to ensure the safety of civilians,

“Stressing also the need to respect the universally accepted norms of international humanitarian law,

“Welcoming and encouraging the diplomatic efforts of special envoys from the United States of America, the Russian Federation, the European Union and the United Nations Special Coordinator and others to bring about a comprehensive, just and lasting peace in the Middle East,

“Welcoming the contribution of Saudi Crown Prince Abdullah,

“1. Demands immediate cessation of all acts of violence, including all acts of terror, provocation, incitement and destruction;

“2. Calls upon the Israeli and Palestinian sides and their leaders to cooperate in the implementation of the Tenet work plan and Mitchell Report recommendations with the aim of resuming negotiations on a political settlement;

“3. Expresses support for the efforts of the Secretary-General and others to assist the parties to halt the violence and to resume the peace process;

“4. Decides to remain seized of the matter.”

(COMMENT)

Much of the disturbance in the occupied Palestinian territories (oPt) is self-inflicted. The Hostile Arab Palestinians (HoAP) have left no political or diplomatic impression that they intend to pursue a resolution through peaceful means. In fact, they advocate the exact opposite of the Hague Regulation (1907) and the Fourth Geneva Convention (1949 as amended).

Noting that the Hague Regulation (Article #43), as supplemented by Article #64 --- and --- Article #68, of the Fourth Geneva Convention, requires the Occupying Force to restore, and then maintain, law and order over the territory, and the authority to augment or change local laws if (and only if) necessary to perform this function.
​

Your assertion that the non-binding Decolonization Declaration prohibits Israeli activity to take what measures may be necessary to counter HoAP security threats – ranging from organized armed groups participating in an ongoing international armed conflict to ordinary criminal activity – by state sponsored and independent jihadist, radicals, insurgents and other asymmetric elements is totally erroneous.

There is no argument from either side that the HoAP from the beginning of the war in 1948, until the present, have engaged in such activity to obstruct and reverse the UN Recommendations adopted in 1947, and continue to be directly involved in the incitement to commit acts of terrorism, rendering safe haven to those HoAP for which there is credible criminal information.

Israel is well within its rights, and is in fact obligated to, take whatever measures are necessary to meet the International Law.

Most Respectfully,
R

“Affirming a vision of a region where two States, Israel and Palestine, live side by side within secure and recognized borders
​

Not a legal requirement or a political reality. The whole resolution is just a bunch of blabber that they have no intention of doing anything about anyway.

You tend to ignore what they were planning on partitioning.

Which they realised after the event to have been an illegal act, and so changed the UN charter to rectify it. Giving the International laws of 1920, 1921, 1923 and 1924 further power in 1949 when the UN reaffirmed their existence and gave 100% support to the Jewish NATIONal home on Jewish Palestine lands.

Do you have links to all that crap?

Why didn't you read them the last 100 or so times I posted them.


I will start you with the treaty of Sevres, treaty of Lausanne, mandate of Palestine and the UN charter, abridged 1949.

All say that the land delineated in the mandate of Palestine as the Jewish NATIONal home is law, and that there was no nation of Palestine.

The "Jewish National Home" was to give Palestinian citizenship to immigrating Jews.

Where does it say that in any of the LoN minutes, treaties or mandates.

You are confusing two separate entries again in your childish need to be right all the time.

The terms of the Mandate were to



The Council of the League of Nations:
Whereas the Principal Allied Powers have agreed, for the purpose of giving effect to the provisions of Article 22 of the Covenant of the League of Nations, to entrust to a Mandatory selected by the said Powers the administration of the territory of Palestine, which formerly belonged to the Turkish Empire, within such boundaries as may be fixed by them; and

Whereas the Principal Allied Powers have also agreed that the Mandatory should be responsible for putting into effect the declaration originally made on November 2nd, 1917, by the Government of His Britannic Majesty, and adopted by the said Powers, in favor of the establishment in Palestine of a national home for the Jewish people, it being clearly understood that nothing should be done which might prejudice the civil and religious rights of existing non-Jewish communities in Palestine, or the rights and political status enjoyed by Jews in any other country; and

Whereas recognition has thereby been given to the historical connection of the Jewish people with Palestine and to the grounds for reconstituting their national home in that country; and

Whereas the Principal Allied Powers have selected His Britannic Majesty as the Mandatory for Palestine; and

Whereas the mandate in respect of Palestine has been formulated in the following terms and submitted to the Council of the League for approval



ART 7

The Administration of Palestine shall be responsible for enacting a nationality law. There shall be included in this law provisions framed so as to facilitate the acquisition of Palestinian citizenship by Jews who take up their permanent residence in Palestine.

 

[P F Tinmore]

P F Tinmore, et al,

Actually this is backwards.

The "Jewish National Home" was to give Palestinian citizenship to immigrating Jews.

(REFERENCES)

• Preamble (Clause 3) Mandate for Palestine

Whereas recognition has thereby been given to the historical connection of the Jewish people with Palestine and to the grounds for reconstituting their national home in that country;
​

• Article 4 Mandate for Palestine

An appropriate Jewish agency shall be recognised as a public body for the purpose of advising and co-operating with the Administration of Palestine in such economic, social and other matters as may affect the establishment of the Jewish national home and the interests of the Jewish population in Palestine, ... ... ...

... ... ... It shall take steps in consultation with His Britannic Majesty's Government to secure the co-operation of all Jews who are willing to assist in the establishment of the Jewish national home.
​

• Article 6 Mandate for Palestine

The Administration of Palestine, while ensuring that the rights and position of other sections of the population are not prejudiced, shall facilitate Jewish immigration under suitable conditions and shall encourage, in co-operation with the Jewish agency referred to in Article 4, close settlement by Jews on the land, including State lands and waste lands not required for public purposes.
​

• Article 7 Mandate for Palestine

The Administration of Palestine shall be responsible for enacting a nationality law. There shall be included in this law provisions framed so as to facilitate the acquisition of Palestinian citizenship by Jews who take up their permanent residence in Palestine.
​

• Paragraph 7, Succession to Government - Administrator - Oath to be taken by the Administrator - Palestine Order in Council

Whenever the office of High Commissioner is vacant or if the High Commissioner become incapable or be absent from Palestine, or be from any cause prevented from acting in the duties of his office, the person appointed to be Chief Secretary to the Government of Palestine, or if there be no such officer therein, or such officer be unable to act, then such person or persons as His Majesty may appoint under His Sign Manual and Signet and in default of such appointment the Senior Member of the Executive Council shall during His Majesty's pleasure administer the by the Administrator. Government of Palestine, first taking the oaths hereinbefore directed to be taken by the High Commissioner and in the manner herein prescribed,
which being done, the Chief Secretary or any other such Administrator as aforesaid is hereby authorised, empowered and commanded to do and execute during His Majesty's pleasure, all things that belong to the
office of the High Commissioner according to the tenour of this Order, and according to His Majesty's Instructions as aforesaid, and the laws of Palestine.
​

• Paragraph 2, Palestine Legislative Council Election Order

Palestinian citizenship, the following persons shall be deemed to be Palestinian citizens:

(a) Turkish subjects habitually resident in the territory of Palestine at the date of commencement of this Order.

(b) All persons of other than Turkish nationality habitually resident in the territory of Palestine at the said date, who shall within two calendar months of the said date make application for Palestinian citizenship in such form and before such officer as may be prescribed by the High Commissioner.
​

(COMMENT)

One of the primary objectives set by the Mandate in the Preamble (2) was the establishment in Palestine of a national home for the Jewish people, AND the protection of the civil and religious rights of the "non-Jewish communities in Palestine." (Whatever those civil and religious rights of the "non-Jewish Community" were defined in 1922.) In this case, we are most concerned with the definition as the "civil rights" in that era.

View attachment 77023
Page #66, World Encyclopedia of Law - Ballentine Law Dictionary - 1916 Edition
​

What do you preceive the "civil rights" to be in 1922?

Most Respectfully,
R

I will start you with the treaty of Sevres, treaty of Lausanne, mandate of Palestine and the UN charter, abridged 1949.

All say that the land delineated in the mandate of Palestine as the Jewish NATIONal home is law, and that there was no nation of Palestine.

The "Jewish National Home" was to give Palestinian citizenship to immigrating Jews.

My statement is correct. His statement is unfounded.

What part of your post refutes that?

 

[P F Tinmore]

“Affirming a vision of a region where two States, Israel and Palestine, live side by side within secure and recognized borders
​

Not a legal requirement or a political reality. The whole resolution is just a bunch of blabber that they have no intention of doing anything about anyway.

You tend to ignore what they were planning on partitioning.

Which they realised after the event to have been an illegal act, and so changed the UN charter to rectify it. Giving the International laws of 1920, 1921, 1923 and 1924 further power in 1949 when the UN reaffirmed their existence and gave 100% support to the Jewish NATIONal home on Jewish Palestine lands.

Do you have links to all that crap?

Why didn't you read them the last 100 or so times I posted them.


I will start you with the treaty of Sevres, treaty of Lausanne, mandate of Palestine and the UN charter, abridged 1949.

All say that the land delineated in the mandate of Palestine as the Jewish NATIONal home is law, and that there was no nation of Palestine.

The "Jewish National Home" was to give Palestinian citizenship to immigrating Jews.

Where does it say that in any of the LoN minutes, treaties or mandates.

You are confusing two separate entries again in your childish need to be right all the time.

The terms of the Mandate were to



The Council of the League of Nations:
Whereas the Principal Allied Powers have agreed, for the purpose of giving effect to the provisions of Article 22 of the Covenant of the League of Nations, to entrust to a Mandatory selected by the said Powers the administration of the territory of Palestine, which formerly belonged to the Turkish Empire, within such boundaries as may be fixed by them; and

Whereas the Principal Allied Powers have also agreed that the Mandatory should be responsible for putting into effect the declaration originally made on November 2nd, 1917, by the Government of His Britannic Majesty, and adopted by the said Powers, in favor of the establishment in Palestine of a national home for the Jewish people, it being clearly understood that nothing should be done which might prejudice the civil and religious rights of existing non-Jewish communities in Palestine, or the rights and political status enjoyed by Jews in any other country; and

Whereas recognition has thereby been given to the historical connection of the Jewish people with Palestine and to the grounds for reconstituting their national home in that country; and

Whereas the Principal Allied Powers have selected His Britannic Majesty as the Mandatory for Palestine; and

Whereas the mandate in respect of Palestine has been formulated in the following terms and submitted to the Council of the League for approval



ART 7

The Administration of Palestine shall be responsible for enacting a nationality law. There shall be included in this law provisions framed so as to facilitate the acquisition of Palestinian citizenship by Jews who take up their permanent residence in Palestine.

Where does it say that there was no nation of Palestine?

 

[RoccoR]

P F Tinmore, et al,

Come on, quit being intentionally dense.

Where does it say that there was no nation of Palestine?

(COMMENT)

I gave you the citation (in Posting #156) for the Successor Government (Palestine as defined as the territory under the mandate).

I gave you the citations that indicate that immigration was to facilitate the reconstruction of the new Jewish National Home, and all jewish people willing to contribute.

What are you trying to prove here?

Most Respectfully,
R