The Fable of the siege.

[Daniyel]

OK, but how did that negate the Palestinian's inalienable rights?

Nope, but why you keep asking the same questions over and over again?

 

[Sweet_Caroline]

Nope, but why you keep asking the same questions over and over again?

I call him a goldfish because he has a five second memory.

 

[RoccoR]

P F Tinmore, et al,

I apologize Paul, I almost missed this.

OK, but how did that negate the Palestinian's inalienable rights?

(COMMENT)

The "inalienable rights" of the Palestinian were not negated by Israel.

The Arab Palestinians (while under the influence of the Arab League) exercised their "right to self-determination" by rejecting participation and the plan. This Arab Rejection did not truncate or obstruct the Jewish people from exercising their "right to self-determination." The Plan clearly stated "either." It did not require acceptance by "both."

F. ADMISSION TO MEMBERSHIP IN THE UNITED NATIONS
When the independence of either the Arab or the Jewish State as envisaged in this plan has become effective and the declaration and undertaking, as envisaged in this plan, have been signed by either of them, sympathetic consideration should be given to its application for admission to membership in the United Nations in accordance with Article 4 of the Charter of the United Nations.

SOURCE: A/RES/181(II) 29 November 1947

I know that many pro-Palestinian discussion participants point to the Cable of 28 September, 1948, from the All Palestine Government (APG), as if it had some significants. However, the Jewish Agency had already establish the State of Israel using the UN Steps Preparatory to Independence in accordance with the Partition Plan. The Arab Higher Committee Delegation had already declined with threats in telegraphic response was received by the Secretary-General on 19 January 1948, as amplified further in the communication of 6 February 1948 Communicated to the Secretary-General by Mr. Isa Nakhleh, Representative of the Arab Higher Committee (AHC).

• 
  “ARAB HIGHER COMMITTEE IS DETERMINED PERSIST IN REJECTION PARTITION AND IN REFUSAL RECOGNIZE UNO RESOLUTION THIS RESPECT AND ANYTHING DERIVING THEREFROM. FOR THESE REASONS IT IS UNABLE ACCEPT INVITATION”

The APG was not affiliated with the AHC. The AHC as reconstituted in 1945, was an action arm of the Arab League. The APG was under the guidance and protection of the Egyptian Government (an external influence and interference).

If anyone circumvented of denied the Arab Palestinian their rights, it would have been the Egyptians or the Greater Arab League; but not Israel. Israel was following the Plan under the guidance of the UN Palestine Commission.

14. The Commission shall be guided in its activities by the recommendations of the General Assembly and by such instructions as the Security Council may consider necessary to issue.

The measures taken by the Commission, within the recommendations of the General Assembly, shall become immediately effective unless the Commission has previously received contrary instructions from the Security Council.

The Commission shall render periodic monthly progress reports, or more frequently if desirable, to the Security Council.​

SOURCE: A/RES/181(II) 29 November 1947

Most Respectfully,
R

 

[P F Tinmore]

P F Tinmore, et al,

I apologize Paul, I almost missed this.

OK, but how did that negate the Palestinian's inalienable rights?

(COMMENT)

The "inalienable rights" of the Palestinian were not negated by Israel.

The Arab Palestinians (while under the influence of the Arab League) exercised their "right to self-determination" by rejecting participation and the plan. This Arab Rejection did not truncate or obstruct the Jewish people from exercising their "right to self-determination." The Plan clearly stated "either." It did not require acceptance by "both."

F. ADMISSION TO MEMBERSHIP IN THE UNITED NATIONS
When the independence of either the Arab or the Jewish State as envisaged in this plan has become effective and the declaration and undertaking, as envisaged in this plan, have been signed by either of them, sympathetic consideration should be given to its application for admission to membership in the United Nations in accordance with Article 4 of the Charter of the United Nations.

SOURCE: A/RES/181(II) 29 November 1947

I know that many pro-Palestinian discussion participants point to the Cable of 28 September, 1948, from the All Palestine Government (APG), as if it had some significants. However, the Jewish Agency had already establish the State of Israel using the UN Steps Preparatory to Independence in accordance with the Partition Plan. The Arab Higher Committee Delegation had already declined with threats in telegraphic response was received by the Secretary-General on 19 January 1948, as amplified further in the communication of 6 February 1948 Communicated to the Secretary-General by Mr. Isa Nakhleh, Representative of the Arab Higher Committee (AHC).

• 
  “ARAB HIGHER COMMITTEE IS DETERMINED PERSIST IN REJECTION PARTITION AND IN REFUSAL RECOGNIZE UNO RESOLUTION THIS RESPECT AND ANYTHING DERIVING THEREFROM. FOR THESE REASONS IT IS UNABLE ACCEPT INVITATION”

The APG was not affiliated with the AHC. The AHC as reconstituted in 1945, was an action arm of the Arab League. The APG was under the guidance and protection of the Egyptian Government (an external influence and interference).

If anyone circumvented of denied the Arab Palestinian their rights, it would have been the Egyptians or the Greater Arab League; but not Israel. Israel was following the Plan under the guidance of the UN Palestine Commission.

14. The Commission shall be guided in its activities by the recommendations of the General Assembly and by such instructions as the Security Council may consider necessary to issue.

The measures taken by the Commission, within the recommendations of the General Assembly, shall become immediately effective unless the Commission has previously received contrary instructions from the Security Council.

The Commission shall render periodic monthly progress reports, or more frequently if desirable, to the Security Council.​

SOURCE: A/RES/181(II) 29 November 1947

Most Respectfully,
R

Are you saying that "sympathetic consideration" is a legal term.

Israel lied about the partition as it had violate the major tenets before its declaration. The UN did nothing to implement resolution 181.

 

[RoccoR]

P F Tinmore, et al,

I often have to wonder how you pick these points.

Are you saying that "sympathetic consideration" is a legal term.

(COMMENT)

It is diplomaticese (the language of diplomacy). It is the same language that established "Palestine" to start with:

The High Contracting Parties agree to entrust, by application of the provisions of Article 22, the administration of Palestine, within such boundaries as may be determined by the Principal Allied Powers, to a Mandatory to be selected by the said Powers.​

Israel lied about the partition as it had violate the major tenets before its declaration.

(COMMENT)

Everyone is aware of the outbreak of hostilities prior to the end of the Mandate. That was over a half century ago; spilt milk. I recommend you move on into the 21st Century.

The UN did nothing to implement resolution 181.

(COMMENT)

There is more to creating a nation then just the declaration.

There are over 300 Issues the UNPC addressed in the implementation process. They cover all the essentials a new emerging nation needs to begin self-government. UN Archive Index and Registry A/AC.21/12/Rev.1 25 May 1948 is an index to the last report to the Security Council. They cover, budget and banking issues, food and logistics, communications, finance, security, diplomatic engagement and Consular Affairs, taxation, Postal Services, and a whole host of other issues and relationships.

To say that the UNPC did nothing is simply irresponsible conjecture.

Most Respectfully,
R

 

[Phoenall]

P F TINMORE, et al,

I'm not confused at all.

In 1948, the Gaza Strip was occupied by Egypt; the All Palestine Government (APG) was the client state administrator (a merged element of the Egyptian Military Administration) for Egypt, back by Egyptian Occupation Forces. This remained so until 1959 when the President of Egypt annulled the APG and the Occupation was transferred to the Egyptian Military Constabulary (Military Governorship). This remained the status quo until the Egyptian forces were pushed-out by the advance of the Israeli Defense Force (IDF) in 1967.

As the IDF advanced over the Egyptian Occupation, and control was established, Israel assumed responsibility over the territory formerly occupied by the Egyptians.

Most Respectfully,
R

OK, but how did that negate the Palestinian's inalienable rights?

It didn't as you well know, it was the Palestinians themselves that negated their own inalienable rights when they were not allowed to form a state under the control of the occupying powers of Egypt and Jordan. Nothing to do with the Jews, Zionist or Israelis and all to do with the arab nationalists

 

[Sunni Man]

It doesn't matter, instead of investing and rebuilding economy they decided to invest in rockets and tunnels again, this is why Israel decided to place a blockade and designate Gaza as Hostile, closing the borders is fully legitimate action, placing the partially blockade is also fully legitimate action.
Now they complain about a siege or blockade but Israel didn't closed any border and have zero problem with Rafah checkpoint being opened or closed, Kerem Shalom should've been close but Israel didn't!

....................................^^ Paid hasbara shill

 

[Daniyel]

It doesn't matter, instead of investing and rebuilding economy they decided to invest in rockets and tunnels again, this is why Israel decided to place a blockade and designate Gaza as Hostile, closing the borders is fully legitimate action, placing the partially blockade is also fully legitimate action.
Now they complain about a siege or blockade but Israel didn't closed any border and have zero problem with Rafah checkpoint being opened or closed, Kerem Shalom should've been close but Israel didn't!

....................................^^ Paid hasbara shill

.................................^^ massive IQ reduction upon converting to Islam.

 

[Phoenall]

P F Tinmore, et al,

I apologize Paul, I almost missed this.

OK, but how did that negate the Palestinian's inalienable rights?

(COMMENT)

The "inalienable rights" of the Palestinian were not negated by Israel.

The Arab Palestinians (while under the influence of the Arab League) exercised their "right to self-determination" by rejecting participation and the plan. This Arab Rejection did not truncate or obstruct the Jewish people from exercising their "right to self-determination." The Plan clearly stated "either." It did not require acceptance by "both."

F. ADMISSION TO MEMBERSHIP IN THE UNITED NATIONS
When the independence of either the Arab or the Jewish State as envisaged in this plan has become effective and the declaration and undertaking, as envisaged in this plan, have been signed by either of them, sympathetic consideration should be given to its application for admission to membership in the United Nations in accordance with Article 4 of the Charter of the United Nations.

SOURCE: A/RES/181(II) 29 November 1947

I know that many pro-Palestinian discussion participants point to the Cable of 28 September, 1948, from the All Palestine Government (APG), as if it had some significants. However, the Jewish Agency had already establish the State of Israel using the UN Steps Preparatory to Independence in accordance with the Partition Plan. The Arab Higher Committee Delegation had already declined with threats in telegraphic response was received by the Secretary-General on 19 January 1948, as amplified further in the communication of 6 February 1948 Communicated to the Secretary-General by Mr. Isa Nakhleh, Representative of the Arab Higher Committee (AHC).

• 
  “ARAB HIGHER COMMITTEE IS DETERMINED PERSIST IN REJECTION PARTITION AND IN REFUSAL RECOGNIZE UNO RESOLUTION THIS RESPECT AND ANYTHING DERIVING THEREFROM. FOR THESE REASONS IT IS UNABLE ACCEPT INVITATION”

The APG was not affiliated with the AHC. The AHC as reconstituted in 1945, was an action arm of the Arab League. The APG was under the guidance and protection of the Egyptian Government (an external influence and interference).

If anyone circumvented of denied the Arab Palestinian their rights, it would have been the Egyptians or the Greater Arab League; but not Israel. Israel was following the Plan under the guidance of the UN Palestine Commission.

14. The Commission shall be guided in its activities by the recommendations of the General Assembly and by such instructions as the Security Council may consider necessary to issue.

The measures taken by the Commission, within the recommendations of the General Assembly, shall become immediately effective unless the Commission has previously received contrary instructions from the Security Council.

The Commission shall render periodic monthly progress reports, or more frequently if desirable, to the Security Council.​

SOURCE: A/RES/181(II) 29 November 1947

Most Respectfully,
R

Are you saying that "sympathetic consideration" is a legal term.

Israel lied about the partition as it had violate the major tenets before its declaration. The UN did nothing to implement resolution 181.

You forget that the Palestinians also violated the major tenets before its implementation and had been doing so since the mandate first came into force.
The UN were never tasked with implementing 181 if you bother to read it, it was all down to the parties involved. This was the Jews and the arab muslims and at no time was the UN to be involved in the implementation of 181.

 

[Sunni Man]

It doesn't matter, instead of investing and rebuilding economy they decided to invest in rockets and tunnels again, this is why Israel decided to place a blockade and designate Gaza as Hostile, closing the borders is fully legitimate action, placing the partially blockade is also fully legitimate action.
Now they complain about a siege or blockade but Israel didn't closed any border and have zero problem with Rafah checkpoint being opened or closed, Kerem Shalom should've been close but Israel didn't!

....................................^^ Paid hasbara shill

.................................^^ massive IQ reduction upon converting to Islam.

LOL........even of my IQ went down 50% it would still be twice as high as yours. ...

 

[Phoenall]

It doesn't matter, instead of investing and rebuilding economy they decided to invest in rockets and tunnels again, this is why Israel decided to place a blockade and designate Gaza as Hostile, closing the borders is fully legitimate action, placing the partially blockade is also fully legitimate action.
Now they complain about a siege or blockade but Israel didn't closed any border and have zero problem with Rafah checkpoint being opened or closed, Kerem Shalom should've been close but Israel didn't!

....................................^^ Paid hasbara shill

Better than being a brainwashed ISLAMONAZI TERRORIST DEFENDER the way things are going with your brothers you could be facing arrest and possible unlimited detention. Now about the Egyptian border why is that closed to Palestinians ?

 

[Phoenall]

It doesn't matter, instead of investing and rebuilding economy they decided to invest in rockets and tunnels again, this is why Israel decided to place a blockade and designate Gaza as Hostile, closing the borders is fully legitimate action, placing the partially blockade is also fully legitimate action.
Now they complain about a siege or blockade but Israel didn't closed any border and have zero problem with Rafah checkpoint being opened or closed, Kerem Shalom should've been close but Israel didn't!

....................................^^ Paid hasbara shill

.................................^^ massive IQ reduction upon converting to Islam.

LOL........even of my IQ went down 50% it would still be twice as high as yours. ...

A pity then that it is now running at the same level as that of an Amoeba................

 

[Daniyel]

It doesn't matter, instead of investing and rebuilding economy they decided to invest in rockets and tunnels again, this is why Israel decided to place a blockade and designate Gaza as Hostile, closing the borders is fully legitimate action, placing the partially blockade is also fully legitimate action.
Now they complain about a siege or blockade but Israel didn't closed any border and have zero problem with Rafah checkpoint being opened or closed, Kerem Shalom should've been close but Israel didn't!

....................................^^ Paid hasbara shill

.................................^^ massive IQ reduction upon converting to Islam.

LOL........even of my IQ went down 50% it would still be twice as high as yours. ...

What do you really know about me genius? So you want to make a comparison with Jews? Fine go ahread and tell me the biggest achievements Arab Muslims(inventors of Islam) or simply Muslims ever made.

 

[docmauser1]

They could have shipped by air. Oops, Israel bombed the airport. They could have shipped by sea. Oops, Israel bombed the port. Any other suggestions?

Submarine shipping!

 

[docmauser1]

Farmers can't farm. Fishermen can't fish.

Farming IEDs and fishing barrels of war materiel are hazardous occupations, indeed.

Almost all of the factories are closed because of the siege. Nothing can be exported.

See, exporting rockets is a hazardous occupation too.

Where should they invest?

How'bout they get a life and a job?

 

[docmauser1]

This is like watching children squabbling in the playground with nothing very much to say on either side except the same BS that is always said...It's exactly this that stops any chance of negotiation of peace...

It pays to always remember the memorable words of Bassem Tibi "The dialogue is not proceeding well because of the two-facedness of most Muslim interlocutors on the one hand and the gullibility of well-meaning Western idealists on the other, ..."

To coin a phrase... "Its like watching paint dry!"

Indeed, in memorable words of Winnie Churchill "Left to themselves, the Arabs of Palestine would not in a thousand years have taken effective steps towards the irrigation and electrification of Palestine. They would have been quite content to dwell—a handful of philosophic people—in wasted sun-drenched plains, letting the waters of the Jordan flow unbridled and unharnessed into the Dead Sea.". And they still watch that paint, of course, on the international donors' dime.

 

[aris2chat]

P F Tinmore, et al,

I apologize Paul, I almost missed this.

OK, but how did that negate the Palestinian's inalienable rights?

(COMMENT)

The "inalienable rights" of the Palestinian were not negated by Israel.

The Arab Palestinians (while under the influence of the Arab League) exercised their "right to self-determination" by rejecting participation and the plan. This Arab Rejection did not truncate or obstruct the Jewish people from exercising their "right to self-determination." The Plan clearly stated "either." It did not require acceptance by "both."

F. ADMISSION TO MEMBERSHIP IN THE UNITED NATIONS
When the independence of either the Arab or the Jewish State as envisaged in this plan has become effective and the declaration and undertaking, as envisaged in this plan, have been signed by either of them, sympathetic consideration should be given to its application for admission to membership in the United Nations in accordance with Article 4 of the Charter of the United Nations.

SOURCE: A/RES/181(II) 29 November 1947

I know that many pro-Palestinian discussion participants point to the Cable of 28 September, 1948, from the All Palestine Government (APG), as if it had some significants. However, the Jewish Agency had already establish the State of Israel using the UN Steps Preparatory to Independence in accordance with the Partition Plan. The Arab Higher Committee Delegation had already declined with threats in telegraphic response was received by the Secretary-General on 19 January 1948, as amplified further in the communication of 6 February 1948 Communicated to the Secretary-General by Mr. Isa Nakhleh, Representative of the Arab Higher Committee (AHC).

• 
  “ARAB HIGHER COMMITTEE IS DETERMINED PERSIST IN REJECTION PARTITION AND IN REFUSAL RECOGNIZE UNO RESOLUTION THIS RESPECT AND ANYTHING DERIVING THEREFROM. FOR THESE REASONS IT IS UNABLE ACCEPT INVITATION”

The APG was not affiliated with the AHC. The AHC as reconstituted in 1945, was an action arm of the Arab League. The APG was under the guidance and protection of the Egyptian Government (an external influence and interference).

If anyone circumvented of denied the Arab Palestinian their rights, it would have been the Egyptians or the Greater Arab League; but not Israel. Israel was following the Plan under the guidance of the UN Palestine Commission.

14. The Commission shall be guided in its activities by the recommendations of the General Assembly and by such instructions as the Security Council may consider necessary to issue.

The measures taken by the Commission, within the recommendations of the General Assembly, shall become immediately effective unless the Commission has previously received contrary instructions from the Security Council.

The Commission shall render periodic monthly progress reports, or more frequently if desirable, to the Security Council.​

SOURCE: A/RES/181(II) 29 November 1947

Most Respectfully,
R

Are you saying that "sympathetic consideration" is a legal term.

Israel lied about the partition as it had violate the major tenets before its declaration. The UN did nothing to implement resolution 181.

>>.......non-binding recommendation to partition Palestine, whose implementation hinged on acceptance by both parties...................

transcript of the General Assembly plenary meeting on November 29, 1947 speak for themselves:
“Mr. JAMALI (Iraq): … We believe that the decision which we have now taken … undermines peace, justice and democracy. In the name of my Government, I wish to state that it feels that this decision is antidemocratic, illegal, impractical and contrary to the Charter … Therefore, in the name of my Government, I wish to put on record that Iraq does not recognize the validity of this decision, will reserve freedom of action towards its implementation, and holds those who were influential in passing it against the free conscience of mankind responsible for the consequences.”
“Amir. ARSLAN (Syria): … Gentlemen, the Charter is dead. But it did not die a natural death; it was murdered, and you all know who is guilty. My country will never recognize such a decision [Partition]. It will never agree to be responsible for it. Let the consequences be on the heads of others, not on ours.”
“H. R. H. Prince Seif El ISLAM ABDULLAH (Yemen): The Yemen delegation has stated previously that the partition plan is contrary to justice and to the Charter of the United Nations. Therefore, the Government of Yemen does not consider itself bound by such a decision … and will reserve its freedom of action towards the implementation of this decision.”8..................

By the time armistice agreements were reached in 1949 between Israel and its immediate Arab neighbors (Egypt, Lebanon, Syria and Trans-Jordan) with the assistance of UN Mediator Dr. Ralph Bunche, Resolution 181 had become irrelevant, and the armistice agreements addressed new realities created by the war. Over subsequent years, the UN simply abandoned the recommendations of Resolution 181, as its ideas were drained of all relevance by subsequent events. Moreover, the Arabs continued to reject 181 after the war when they themselves controlled the West Bank (1948-1967) which Jordan invaded in the course of the war and annexed illegally.
Attempts by Palestinians to roll back the clock and resuscitate Resolution 181 more than six decades after they rejected it as if nothing had happened are a baseless ploy designed to use Resolution 181 as leverage to bring about a greater Israeli withdrawal from parts of western Palestine and to gain a broader base from which to continue to attack an Israel with even less defendable borders. Both Palestinians and their Arab brethren in neighboring countries rendered the plan null and void by their own subsequent aggressive actions...............<<

http://www.mythsandfacts.org/conflict/10/resolution-181.pdf

 

[P F Tinmore]

P F Tinmore, et al,

I apologize Paul, I almost missed this.

OK, but how did that negate the Palestinian's inalienable rights?

(COMMENT)

The "inalienable rights" of the Palestinian were not negated by Israel.

The Arab Palestinians (while under the influence of the Arab League) exercised their "right to self-determination" by rejecting participation and the plan. This Arab Rejection did not truncate or obstruct the Jewish people from exercising their "right to self-determination." The Plan clearly stated "either." It did not require acceptance by "both."

F. ADMISSION TO MEMBERSHIP IN THE UNITED NATIONS
When the independence of either the Arab or the Jewish State as envisaged in this plan has become effective and the declaration and undertaking, as envisaged in this plan, have been signed by either of them, sympathetic consideration should be given to its application for admission to membership in the United Nations in accordance with Article 4 of the Charter of the United Nations.

SOURCE: A/RES/181(II) 29 November 1947

I know that many pro-Palestinian discussion participants point to the Cable of 28 September, 1948, from the All Palestine Government (APG), as if it had some significants. However, the Jewish Agency had already establish the State of Israel using the UN Steps Preparatory to Independence in accordance with the Partition Plan. The Arab Higher Committee Delegation had already declined with threats in telegraphic response was received by the Secretary-General on 19 January 1948, as amplified further in the communication of 6 February 1948 Communicated to the Secretary-General by Mr. Isa Nakhleh, Representative of the Arab Higher Committee (AHC).

• 
  “ARAB HIGHER COMMITTEE IS DETERMINED PERSIST IN REJECTION PARTITION AND IN REFUSAL RECOGNIZE UNO RESOLUTION THIS RESPECT AND ANYTHING DERIVING THEREFROM. FOR THESE REASONS IT IS UNABLE ACCEPT INVITATION”

The APG was not affiliated with the AHC. The AHC as reconstituted in 1945, was an action arm of the Arab League. The APG was under the guidance and protection of the Egyptian Government (an external influence and interference).

If anyone circumvented of denied the Arab Palestinian their rights, it would have been the Egyptians or the Greater Arab League; but not Israel. Israel was following the Plan under the guidance of the UN Palestine Commission.

14. The Commission shall be guided in its activities by the recommendations of the General Assembly and by such instructions as the Security Council may consider necessary to issue.

The measures taken by the Commission, within the recommendations of the General Assembly, shall become immediately effective unless the Commission has previously received contrary instructions from the Security Council.

The Commission shall render periodic monthly progress reports, or more frequently if desirable, to the Security Council.​

SOURCE: A/RES/181(II) 29 November 1947

Most Respectfully,
R

Are you saying that "sympathetic consideration" is a legal term.

Israel lied about the partition as it had violate the major tenets before its declaration. The UN did nothing to implement resolution 181.

>>.......non-binding recommendation to partition Palestine, whose implementation hinged on acceptance by both parties...................

transcript of the General Assembly plenary meeting on November 29, 1947 speak for themselves:
“Mr. JAMALI (Iraq): … We believe that the decision which we have now taken … undermines peace, justice and democracy. In the name of my Government, I wish to state that it feels that this decision is antidemocratic, illegal, impractical and contrary to the Charter … Therefore, in the name of my Government, I wish to put on record that Iraq does not recognize the validity of this decision, will reserve freedom of action towards its implementation, and holds those who were influential in passing it against the free conscience of mankind responsible for the consequences.”
“Amir. ARSLAN (Syria): … Gentlemen, the Charter is dead. But it did not die a natural death; it was murdered, and you all know who is guilty. My country will never recognize such a decision [Partition]. It will never agree to be responsible for it. Let the consequences be on the heads of others, not on ours.”
“H. R. H. Prince Seif El ISLAM ABDULLAH (Yemen): The Yemen delegation has stated previously that the partition plan is contrary to justice and to the Charter of the United Nations. Therefore, the Government of Yemen does not consider itself bound by such a decision … and will reserve its freedom of action towards the implementation of this decision.”8..................

By the time armistice agreements were reached in 1949 between Israel and its immediate Arab neighbors (Egypt, Lebanon, Syria and Trans-Jordan) with the assistance of UN Mediator Dr. Ralph Bunche, Resolution 181 had become irrelevant, and the armistice agreements addressed new realities created by the war. Over subsequent years, the UN simply abandoned the recommendations of Resolution 181, as its ideas were drained of all relevance by subsequent events. Moreover, the Arabs continued to reject 181 after the war when they themselves controlled the West Bank (1948-1967) which Jordan invaded in the course of the war and annexed illegally.
Attempts by Palestinians to roll back the clock and resuscitate Resolution 181 more than six decades after they rejected it as if nothing had happened are a baseless ploy designed to use Resolution 181 as leverage to bring about a greater Israeli withdrawal from parts of western Palestine and to gain a broader base from which to continue to attack an Israel with even less defendable borders. Both Palestinians and their Arab brethren in neighboring countries rendered the plan null and void by their own subsequent aggressive actions...............<<

http://www.mythsandfacts.org/conflict/10/resolution-181.pdf

Good post, thanks.

The only thing I take issue with: "Attempts by Palestinians to roll back the clock and resuscitate Resolution 181 more than six decades after they rejected it..." is that the PLO has been getting farther away from the Palestinians since the "70s. You can't say "the Palestinians" when referencing the PLO, Abbas, or the PA.

 

[docmauser1]

Good post, thanks.

The only thing I take issue with: "Attempts by Palestinians to roll back the clock and resuscitate Resolution 181 more than six decades after they rejected it..." is that the PLO has been getting farther away from the Palestinians since the "70s. You can't say "the Palestinians" when referencing the PLO, Abbas, or the PA.

Funny. Aren't they all OTS arabs?

 

[Billo_Really]

Hello again,

Here in would like to share a very interesting article to all the people thinking that removing the blockade could bring peace
Israel Hayom | The fable of the Gaza siege

The fable of the Gaza siege
By Uri Heitner.

According to the reports out of Cairo, one of the main issues in the negotiations, maybe the biggest one, is Hamas' demand to remove the Israeli blockade on Gaza. The Palestinian narrative of the "siege" has taken roots in the public consciousness, to the point where we have also fallen into the trap. Is Gaza really under a siege?

The "siege" narrative was born after Israel's disengagement from Gaza in the summer of 2005 to replace the Palestinian narrative of "occupation," as an excuse for terrorism against Israel. After the withdrawal from Gaza, when the settlements were uprooted and every last trace of every last Jew eradicated, the Palestinians couldn't cling to their claim of "occupation." So ever since they have painted Gaza as an area under a "brutal siege."



Is this a siege? This is how the dictionary defines "siege": "The act or process of surrounding and attacking a fortified place in such a way as to isolate it from help and supplies, for the purpose of lessening the resistance of the defenders and thereby making capture possible." Does this bear any resemblance to the reality on the Gaza border?

Moreover, Israel does not even have the ability to keep Gaza under siege, because Gaza shares a border with Egypt. The Gazans and the Egyptians belong to the same people. Thousands of rockets have not been fired at Egypt from Gaza. Siege? Let Egypt open its Gaza border crossings.

The whole siege story is nothing more than a fable made up to sway world opinion against Israel.

Israel evacuated all Israeli towns in Gaza, negotiated, all under fire even when there was no blockade, under Fatah (Abbas) rule and under Hamas rule, now you seriously expect us to break the law and remove the blockade putting all the southern Israelis as Human Shields?

It is alleged, Israel officially left Gaza on November 8, 2005. However, they still maintained control over the airspace and territorial waters. So how is that leaving?

Furthermore, during the month of December 2005, there were:

9 incidents of rocket attacks from Gaza into Israel.​

And during that same period, there were:

42 incidents of Israeli attacks, arrests and extra-judicial killings.​