The OLDER Official Discussion Thread for the creation of Israel, the UN and the British Mandate

[Sixties Fan]

Issa Amro describes himself as a "Palestinian activist based in Hebron, Palestine, Recognised Human Rights Defender by the UN and European Union."

He tweeted this on Monday:

The US consulate in Jerusalem was opened in 1844 to give services to the Palestinian people. after 175 years, Trump decided to emerge it to the US embassy in occupied Jerusalem. Last year he closed the Palestinian mission in the USA too, he is destroying the Palestinian cause.
— Issa Amro عيسى عمرو (@Issaamro) March 4, 2019


So I did a fact check. And everything he wrote was wrong, although in the end, in important ways, the US diplomats in Jerusalem helped create the Palestinian cause, but not until the 20th century.

All US Consulates in the Middle East in the 18th and 19th centuries were meant primarily to help the US increase trade with the region, and secondarily to help US travelers to the area. The main US consul in the first part of the 19th century was in Beirut, and all others reported to that one.

In 1844, based on the recommendation of a Congressman, US Secretary of State John Calhoun appointed a Judeophile named Warder Cresson as the first Consul of Jerusalem, a position Cresson desired. But he was considered a strange person by others who knew him - perhaps because of his love of Jews and his determination that their ingathering would help bring the Messiah in a few years - and the appointment was rescinded before Cresson took up the post, but after he divorced his wife and departed to the Holy Land.
-------------
It appears that during and after World War I, the American diplomatic role changed. Protestant missionaries and educators who went to Palestine became friendly with the local Arabs and soon became the backbone of the next generation of diplomats to Jerusalem, moving their pro-Arab ideas into the State Department, a tilt that remained for the next hundred years. On the other side of the coin, they taught their Arab friends about nationalism in the American-style schools they founded, and in that sense were a large reason for the emergence of Arab nationalism and anti-colonialism in the region in the 20th century. There is a lot about this in Michael Oren's book, Power, Faith and Fantasy.

(full article online)

The early US consuls in Jerusalem helped Jews a lot more than Arabs ~ Elder Of Ziyon - Israel News

 

[Sixties Fan]

Mizrahi Jewish spies built Israel, their descendants meet racism there

 

[Rehmani]

But who ever built israel, its illegal.

 

[rylah]

You are not trying to understand to sixty fan. Exactly Sixty fan told me too.

But I said, you are not jew and according to jew, they only believe in 6 prophets. And none of them ever visited Jerusalem and this confirmed by a Jew Rabbi.
And don't reply as this topic is not related to what we are talking here.

Either You misunderstood what was said, or he was not a Rabbi.
In anyway that is wrong, on every point, but You won't open a thread about it, because that bubble is too easy to burst for anyone with an average IQ.

As I said you are not jew. Lets talked about the topic that, is Israel legitimate?

Well, Israel has never had a defined territory. That is a key component of a legitimate state.

The territory signed for the self determination of the Jewish nation was specifically defined.
What followed was incremental and unlawful division of that land leading to 78% of that territory given to Arabian royalty.

That said, all of Palestine, on both banks of the river was defined as Jewish sovereign land,
anything negating that is an infringement of international law and the US constitution.

What you said is absolutely, 100% true, except for the U.S. Constitution part. What does that have to do with Israel, which was set up by the U.N., and of which Israel is a member state?

Good question! Let's clear some things about that statesmen ahi.

Israel was not set by UN but by the Jewish nation in which was vested the sovereignty over all of Palestine under international law, treaties.
The UN never had any sovereignty to create any state or decide any borders.

The Jewish nation was vested with that recognition and obligation through international treaties to which the US obligated by constitution (Supremacy Clause (Article VI, paragraph 2).

San Remo and Mandate recongizes those rights and sepicifically points to re-constitution, vesting sovereignty with no other nation, and mentioning no other beneficiary.
The Lodge-Fish Resolution and of 1922 and Anglo-American Convention of 1924 all mention the same international obligation "as a sacred trust of civilization" to the establishment of Jewish sovereignty over all of the land, again mentioning no other nation.

All those rights were recognized in international treaties approved by the league of nations and inherited by the UN. The later had no right to vary any of them. The 1947 UN plan only demarcated the cease fire lines, and had no legal force. In reality what they voted for was the creation of another Arab state within the 22% of the land that was left for a Jewish national homeland out of the whole territory. If they voted for no Jewish country at all, the Jewish natiion would still have the rights to self-determination on the west bank of the river, and the eastern; And effectively establish sovereignty between the river and the sea, as it was already defacto a fully functional government in the land by a decade prior to that minus what was unlawfully taken by the Hashemite Kingdom.

The Spremacy Clause of the US Constitution stats that "treaties should be the Law of the Land":

"This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in Pursuance thereof; and all Treaties made, or which shall be made, under the Authority of the United States, shall be the supreme Law of the Land; and the Judges in every State shall be bound thereby, any Thing in the Constitution or Laws of any State to the Contrary notwithstanding."

Article Six of the United States Constitution - Wikipedia

 

[P F Tinmore]

Either You misunderstood what was said, or he was not a Rabbi.
In anyway that is wrong, on every point, but You won't open a thread about it, because that bubble is too easy to burst for anyone with an average IQ.

As I said you are not jew. Lets talked about the topic that, is Israel legitimate?

Well, Israel has never had a defined territory. That is a key component of a legitimate state.

The territory signed for the self determination of the Jewish nation was specifically defined.
What followed was incremental and unlawful division of that land leading to 78% of that territory given to Arabian royalty.

That said, all of Palestine, on both banks of the river was defined as Jewish sovereign land,
anything negating that is an infringement of international law and the US constitution.

What you said is absolutely, 100% true, except for the U.S. Constitution part. What does that have to do with Israel, which was set up by the U.N., and of which Israel is a member state?

Good question! Let's clear some things about that statesmen ahi.

Israel was not set by UN but by the Jewish nation in which was vested the sovereignty over all of Palestine under international law, treaties.
The UN never had any sovereignty to create any state or decide any borders.

The Jewish nation was vested with that recognition and obligation through international treaties to which the US obligated by constitution (Supremacy Clause (Article VI, paragraph 2).

San Remo and Mandate recongizes those rights and sepicifically points to re-constitution, vesting sovereignty with no other nation, and mentioning no other beneficiary.
The Lodge-Fish Resolution and of 1922 and Anglo-American Convention of 1924 all mention the same international obligation "as a sacred trust of civilization" to the establishment of Jewish sovereignty over all of the land, again mentioning no other nation.

All those rights were recognized in international treaties approved by the league of nations and inherited by the UN. The later had no right to vary any of them. The 1947 UN plan only demarcated the cease fire lines, and had no legal force. In reality what they voted for was the creation of another Arab state within the 22% of the land that was left for a Jewish national homeland out of the whole territory. If they voted for no Jewish country at all, the Jewish natiion would still have the rights to self-determination on the west bank of the river, and the eastern; And effectively establish sovereignty between the river and the sea, as it was already defacto a fully functional government in the land by a decade prior to that minus what was unlawfully taken by the Hashemite Kingdom.

The Spremacy Clause of the US Constitution stats that "treaties should be the Law of the Land":

"This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in Pursuance thereof; and all Treaties made, or which shall be made, under the Authority of the United States, shall be the supreme Law of the Land; and the Judges in every State shall be bound thereby, any Thing in the Constitution or Laws of any State to the Contrary notwithstanding."

Article Six of the United States Constitution - Wikipedia

Interesting piece of foreign intervention.

 

[Sixties Fan]

As I said you are not jew. Lets talked about the topic that, is Israel legitimate?

Well, Israel has never had a defined territory. That is a key component of a legitimate state.

The territory signed for the self determination of the Jewish nation was specifically defined.
What followed was incremental and unlawful division of that land leading to 78% of that territory given to Arabian royalty.

That said, all of Palestine, on both banks of the river was defined as Jewish sovereign land,
anything negating that is an infringement of international law and the US constitution.

What you said is absolutely, 100% true, except for the U.S. Constitution part. What does that have to do with Israel, which was set up by the U.N., and of which Israel is a member state?

Good question! Let's clear some things about that statesmen ahi.

Israel was not set by UN but by the Jewish nation in which was vested the sovereignty over all of Palestine under international law, treaties.
The UN never had any sovereignty to create any state or decide any borders.

The Jewish nation was vested with that recognition and obligation through international treaties to which the US obligated by constitution (Supremacy Clause (Article VI, paragraph 2).

San Remo and Mandate recongizes those rights and sepicifically points to re-constitution, vesting sovereignty with no other nation, and mentioning no other beneficiary.
The Lodge-Fish Resolution and of 1922 and Anglo-American Convention of 1924 all mention the same international obligation "as a sacred trust of civilization" to the establishment of Jewish sovereignty over all of the land, again mentioning no other nation.

All those rights were recognized in international treaties approved by the league of nations and inherited by the UN. The later had no right to vary any of them. The 1947 UN plan only demarcated the cease fire lines, and had no legal force. In reality what they voted for was the creation of another Arab state within the 22% of the land that was left for a Jewish national homeland out of the whole territory. If they voted for no Jewish country at all, the Jewish natiion would still have the rights to self-determination on the west bank of the river, and the eastern; And effectively establish sovereignty between the river and the sea, as it was already defacto a fully functional government in the land by a decade prior to that minus what was unlawfully taken by the Hashemite Kingdom.

The Spremacy Clause of the US Constitution stats that "treaties should be the Law of the Land":

"This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in Pursuance thereof; and all Treaties made, or which shall be made, under the Authority of the United States, shall be the supreme Law of the Land; and the Judges in every State shall be bound thereby, any Thing in the Constitution or Laws of any State to the Contrary notwithstanding."

Article Six of the United States Constitution - Wikipedia

Interesting piece of foreign intervention.

And still you have not minded the foreign interference over the other 3 Mandates which gave only Muslim Arabs, and not the indigenous people of those areas, 99 % of previous Ottoman Empire land.

And you never will.

 

[rylah]

As I said you are not jew. Lets talked about the topic that, is Israel legitimate?

Well, Israel has never had a defined territory. That is a key component of a legitimate state.

The territory signed for the self determination of the Jewish nation was specifically defined.
What followed was incremental and unlawful division of that land leading to 78% of that territory given to Arabian royalty.

That said, all of Palestine, on both banks of the river was defined as Jewish sovereign land,
anything negating that is an infringement of international law and the US constitution.

What you said is absolutely, 100% true, except for the U.S. Constitution part. What does that have to do with Israel, which was set up by the U.N., and of which Israel is a member state?

Good question! Let's clear some things about that statesmen ahi.

Israel was not set by UN but by the Jewish nation in which was vested the sovereignty over all of Palestine under international law, treaties.
The UN never had any sovereignty to create any state or decide any borders.

The Jewish nation was vested with that recognition and obligation through international treaties to which the US obligated by constitution (Supremacy Clause (Article VI, paragraph 2).

San Remo and Mandate recongizes those rights and sepicifically points to re-constitution, vesting sovereignty with no other nation, and mentioning no other beneficiary.
The Lodge-Fish Resolution and of 1922 and Anglo-American Convention of 1924 all mention the same international obligation "as a sacred trust of civilization" to the establishment of Jewish sovereignty over all of the land, again mentioning no other nation.

All those rights were recognized in international treaties approved by the league of nations and inherited by the UN. The later had no right to vary any of them. The 1947 UN plan only demarcated the cease fire lines, and had no legal force. In reality what they voted for was the creation of another Arab state within the 22% of the land that was left for a Jewish national homeland out of the whole territory. If they voted for no Jewish country at all, the Jewish natiion would still have the rights to self-determination on the west bank of the river, and the eastern; And effectively establish sovereignty between the river and the sea, as it was already defacto a fully functional government in the land by a decade prior to that minus what was unlawfully taken by the Hashemite Kingdom.

The Spremacy Clause of the US Constitution stats that "treaties should be the Law of the Land":

"This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in Pursuance thereof; and all Treaties made, or which shall be made, under the Authority of the United States, shall be the supreme Law of the Land; and the Judges in every State shall be bound thereby, any Thing in the Constitution or Laws of any State to the Contrary notwithstanding."

Article Six of the United States Constitution - Wikipedia

Interesting piece of foreign intervention.

Indeed, it is interesting how the same people who demand an Arab state, have no problem with UN resolutions and Arabian kings infringing on sovereignty of nations, but will twist and deny international law the moment it recognizes the rights of the Jewish nation to the land.

 

[Rehmani]

Either You misunderstood what was said, or he was not a Rabbi.
In anyway that is wrong, on every point, but You won't open a thread about it, because that bubble is too easy to burst for anyone with an average IQ.

As I said you are not jew. Lets talked about the topic that, is Israel legitimate?

Well, Israel has never had a defined territory. That is a key component of a legitimate state.

The territory signed for the self determination of the Jewish nation was specifically defined.
What followed was incremental and unlawful division of that land leading to 78% of that territory given to Arabian royalty.

That said, all of Palestine, on both banks of the river was defined as Jewish sovereign land,
anything negating that is an infringement of international law and the US constitution.

What you said is absolutely, 100% true, except for the U.S. Constitution part. What does that have to do with Israel, which was set up by the U.N., and of which Israel is a member state?

Good question! Let's clear some things about that statesmen ahi.

Israel was not set by UN but by the Jewish nation in which was vested the sovereignty over all of Palestine under international law, treaties.
The UN never had any sovereignty to create any state or decide any borders.

The Jewish nation was vested with that recognition and obligation through international treaties to which the US obligated by constitution (Supremacy Clause (Article VI, paragraph 2).

San Remo and Mandate recongizes those rights and sepicifically points to re-constitution, vesting sovereignty with no other nation, and mentioning no other beneficiary.
The Lodge-Fish Resolution and of 1922 and Anglo-American Convention of 1924 all mention the same international obligation "as a sacred trust of civilization" to the establishment of Jewish sovereignty over all of the land, again mentioning no other nation.

All those rights were recognized in international treaties approved by the league of nations and inherited by the UN. The later had no right to vary any of them. The 1947 UN plan only demarcated the cease fire lines, and had no legal force. In reality what they voted for was the creation of another Arab state within the 22% of the land that was left for a Jewish national homeland out of the whole territory. If they voted for no Jewish country at all, the Jewish natiion would still have the rights to self-determination on the west bank of the river, and the eastern; And effectively establish sovereignty between the river and the sea, as it was already defacto a fully functional government in the land by a decade prior to that minus what was unlawfully taken by the Hashemite Kingdom.

The Spremacy Clause of the US Constitution stats that "treaties should be the Law of the Land":

"This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in Pursuance thereof; and all Treaties made, or which shall be made, under the Authority of the United States, shall be the supreme Law of the Land; and the Judges in every State shall be bound thereby, any Thing in the Constitution or Laws of any State to the Contrary notwithstanding."

Article Six of the United States Constitution - Wikipedia

But still I will say israel is not legitimate state. Israel is built by gun force behind like coalition.

 

[Rehmani]

Well, Israel has never had a defined territory. That is a key component of a legitimate state.

The territory signed for the self determination of the Jewish nation was specifically defined.
What followed was incremental and unlawful division of that land leading to 78% of that territory given to Arabian royalty.

That said, all of Palestine, on both banks of the river was defined as Jewish sovereign land,
anything negating that is an infringement of international law and the US constitution.

What you said is absolutely, 100% true, except for the U.S. Constitution part. What does that have to do with Israel, which was set up by the U.N., and of which Israel is a member state?

Good question! Let's clear some things about that statesmen ahi.

Israel was not set by UN but by the Jewish nation in which was vested the sovereignty over all of Palestine under international law, treaties.
The UN never had any sovereignty to create any state or decide any borders.

The Jewish nation was vested with that recognition and obligation through international treaties to which the US obligated by constitution (Supremacy Clause (Article VI, paragraph 2).

San Remo and Mandate recongizes those rights and sepicifically points to re-constitution, vesting sovereignty with no other nation, and mentioning no other beneficiary.
The Lodge-Fish Resolution and of 1922 and Anglo-American Convention of 1924 all mention the same international obligation "as a sacred trust of civilization" to the establishment of Jewish sovereignty over all of the land, again mentioning no other nation.

All those rights were recognized in international treaties approved by the league of nations and inherited by the UN. The later had no right to vary any of them. The 1947 UN plan only demarcated the cease fire lines, and had no legal force. In reality what they voted for was the creation of another Arab state within the 22% of the land that was left for a Jewish national homeland out of the whole territory. If they voted for no Jewish country at all, the Jewish natiion would still have the rights to self-determination on the west bank of the river, and the eastern; And effectively establish sovereignty between the river and the sea, as it was already defacto a fully functional government in the land by a decade prior to that minus what was unlawfully taken by the Hashemite Kingdom.

The Spremacy Clause of the US Constitution stats that "treaties should be the Law of the Land":

"This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in Pursuance thereof; and all Treaties made, or which shall be made, under the Authority of the United States, shall be the supreme Law of the Land; and the Judges in every State shall be bound thereby, any Thing in the Constitution or Laws of any State to the Contrary notwithstanding."

Article Six of the United States Constitution - Wikipedia

Interesting piece of foreign intervention.

And still you have not minded the foreign interference over the other 3 Mandates which gave only Muslim Arabs, and not the indigenous people of those areas, 99 % of previous Ottoman Empire land.

And you never will.

Arab are indigenous people not jew.

 

[Rehmani]

Well, Israel has never had a defined territory. That is a key component of a legitimate state.

The territory signed for the self determination of the Jewish nation was specifically defined.
What followed was incremental and unlawful division of that land leading to 78% of that territory given to Arabian royalty.

That said, all of Palestine, on both banks of the river was defined as Jewish sovereign land,
anything negating that is an infringement of international law and the US constitution.

What you said is absolutely, 100% true, except for the U.S. Constitution part. What does that have to do with Israel, which was set up by the U.N., and of which Israel is a member state?

Good question! Let's clear some things about that statesmen ahi.

Israel was not set by UN but by the Jewish nation in which was vested the sovereignty over all of Palestine under international law, treaties.
The UN never had any sovereignty to create any state or decide any borders.

The Jewish nation was vested with that recognition and obligation through international treaties to which the US obligated by constitution (Supremacy Clause (Article VI, paragraph 2).

San Remo and Mandate recongizes those rights and sepicifically points to re-constitution, vesting sovereignty with no other nation, and mentioning no other beneficiary.
The Lodge-Fish Resolution and of 1922 and Anglo-American Convention of 1924 all mention the same international obligation "as a sacred trust of civilization" to the establishment of Jewish sovereignty over all of the land, again mentioning no other nation.

All those rights were recognized in international treaties approved by the league of nations and inherited by the UN. The later had no right to vary any of them. The 1947 UN plan only demarcated the cease fire lines, and had no legal force. In reality what they voted for was the creation of another Arab state within the 22% of the land that was left for a Jewish national homeland out of the whole territory. If they voted for no Jewish country at all, the Jewish natiion would still have the rights to self-determination on the west bank of the river, and the eastern; And effectively establish sovereignty between the river and the sea, as it was already defacto a fully functional government in the land by a decade prior to that minus what was unlawfully taken by the Hashemite Kingdom.

The Spremacy Clause of the US Constitution stats that "treaties should be the Law of the Land":

"This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in Pursuance thereof; and all Treaties made, or which shall be made, under the Authority of the United States, shall be the supreme Law of the Land; and the Judges in every State shall be bound thereby, any Thing in the Constitution or Laws of any State to the Contrary notwithstanding."

Article Six of the United States Constitution - Wikipedia

Interesting piece of foreign intervention.

Indeed, it is interesting how the same people who demand an Arab state, have no problem with UN resolutions and Arabian kings infringing on sovereignty of nations, but will twist and deny international law the moment it recognizes the rights of the Jewish nation to the land.

It is israeli who are denying the international laws.

 

[rylah]

The territory signed for the self determination of the Jewish nation was specifically defined.
What followed was incremental and unlawful division of that land leading to 78% of that territory given to Arabian royalty.

That said, all of Palestine, on both banks of the river was defined as Jewish sovereign land,
anything negating that is an infringement of international law and the US constitution.

What you said is absolutely, 100% true, except for the U.S. Constitution part. What does that have to do with Israel, which was set up by the U.N., and of which Israel is a member state?

Good question! Let's clear some things about that statesmen ahi.

Israel was not set by UN but by the Jewish nation in which was vested the sovereignty over all of Palestine under international law, treaties.
The UN never had any sovereignty to create any state or decide any borders.

The Jewish nation was vested with that recognition and obligation through international treaties to which the US obligated by constitution (Supremacy Clause (Article VI, paragraph 2).

San Remo and Mandate recongizes those rights and sepicifically points to re-constitution, vesting sovereignty with no other nation, and mentioning no other beneficiary.
The Lodge-Fish Resolution and of 1922 and Anglo-American Convention of 1924 all mention the same international obligation "as a sacred trust of civilization" to the establishment of Jewish sovereignty over all of the land, again mentioning no other nation.

All those rights were recognized in international treaties approved by the league of nations and inherited by the UN. The later had no right to vary any of them. The 1947 UN plan only demarcated the cease fire lines, and had no legal force. In reality what they voted for was the creation of another Arab state within the 22% of the land that was left for a Jewish national homeland out of the whole territory. If they voted for no Jewish country at all, the Jewish natiion would still have the rights to self-determination on the west bank of the river, and the eastern; And effectively establish sovereignty between the river and the sea, as it was already defacto a fully functional government in the land by a decade prior to that minus what was unlawfully taken by the Hashemite Kingdom.

The Spremacy Clause of the US Constitution stats that "treaties should be the Law of the Land":

"This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in Pursuance thereof; and all Treaties made, or which shall be made, under the Authority of the United States, shall be the supreme Law of the Land; and the Judges in every State shall be bound thereby, any Thing in the Constitution or Laws of any State to the Contrary notwithstanding."

Article Six of the United States Constitution - Wikipedia

Interesting piece of foreign intervention.

Indeed, it is interesting how the same people who demand an Arab state, have no problem with UN resolutions and Arabian kings infringing on sovereignty of nations, but will twist and deny international law the moment it recognizes the rights of the Jewish nation to the land.

It is israeli who are denying the international laws.

You keep saying, but I'm not sure You know the meanings of those words.
International law is treaties between sovereign states, not popular votes in the UN.
You cannot vote out a country out of existence as much as You cannot vote it into existence.

If 2 billion Muslims all jump shout all together "Israel is illegitimate" for a year non-stop, it still exists and kicking.Tried that song for 70 years already, and all of You know how easy it is to push Israel to the edge now, and all of us know where it's going.

That thing about Messiah in Your signature, is what You're most afraid of, and what we're most expecting.
You can build the Mountain with us, or go to war against it, but it will be built, and all those who build it with the nation of Israel will only win.

 

[Rehmani]

What you said is absolutely, 100% true, except for the U.S. Constitution part. What does that have to do with Israel, which was set up by the U.N., and of which Israel is a member state?

Good question! Let's clear some things about that statesmen ahi.

Israel was not set by UN but by the Jewish nation in which was vested the sovereignty over all of Palestine under international law, treaties.
The UN never had any sovereignty to create any state or decide any borders.

The Jewish nation was vested with that recognition and obligation through international treaties to which the US obligated by constitution (Supremacy Clause (Article VI, paragraph 2).

San Remo and Mandate recongizes those rights and sepicifically points to re-constitution, vesting sovereignty with no other nation, and mentioning no other beneficiary.
The Lodge-Fish Resolution and of 1922 and Anglo-American Convention of 1924 all mention the same international obligation "as a sacred trust of civilization" to the establishment of Jewish sovereignty over all of the land, again mentioning no other nation.

All those rights were recognized in international treaties approved by the league of nations and inherited by the UN. The later had no right to vary any of them. The 1947 UN plan only demarcated the cease fire lines, and had no legal force. In reality what they voted for was the creation of another Arab state within the 22% of the land that was left for a Jewish national homeland out of the whole territory. If they voted for no Jewish country at all, the Jewish natiion would still have the rights to self-determination on the west bank of the river, and the eastern; And effectively establish sovereignty between the river and the sea, as it was already defacto a fully functional government in the land by a decade prior to that minus what was unlawfully taken by the Hashemite Kingdom.

The Spremacy Clause of the US Constitution stats that "treaties should be the Law of the Land":

"This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in Pursuance thereof; and all Treaties made, or which shall be made, under the Authority of the United States, shall be the supreme Law of the Land; and the Judges in every State shall be bound thereby, any Thing in the Constitution or Laws of any State to the Contrary notwithstanding."

Article Six of the United States Constitution - Wikipedia

Interesting piece of foreign intervention.

Indeed, it is interesting how the same people who demand an Arab state, have no problem with UN resolutions and Arabian kings infringing on sovereignty of nations, but will twist and deny international law the moment it recognizes the rights of the Jewish nation to the land.

It is israeli who are denying the international laws.

You keep saying, but I'm not sure You know the meanings of those words.
International law is treaties between sovereign states, not popular votes in the UN.
You cannot vote out a country out of existence as much as You cannot vote it into existence.

If 2 billion Muslims all jump shout all together "Israel is illegitimate" for a year non-stop, it still exists and kicking.Tried that song for 70 years already, and all of You know how easy it is to push Israel to the edge now, and all of us know where it's going.

That thing about Messiah in Your signature, is what You're most afraid of, and what we're most expecting.
You can build the Mountain with us, or go to war against it, but it will be built, and all those who build it with the nation of Israel will only win.

yours Mean, by force you are invade holly land and by force holly land will be freed.

 

[rylah]

Good question! Let's clear some things about that statesmen ahi.

Israel was not set by UN but by the Jewish nation in which was vested the sovereignty over all of Palestine under international law, treaties.
The UN never had any sovereignty to create any state or decide any borders.

The Jewish nation was vested with that recognition and obligation through international treaties to which the US obligated by constitution (Supremacy Clause (Article VI, paragraph 2).

San Remo and Mandate recongizes those rights and sepicifically points to re-constitution, vesting sovereignty with no other nation, and mentioning no other beneficiary.
The Lodge-Fish Resolution and of 1922 and Anglo-American Convention of 1924 all mention the same international obligation "as a sacred trust of civilization" to the establishment of Jewish sovereignty over all of the land, again mentioning no other nation.

All those rights were recognized in international treaties approved by the league of nations and inherited by the UN. The later had no right to vary any of them. The 1947 UN plan only demarcated the cease fire lines, and had no legal force. In reality what they voted for was the creation of another Arab state within the 22% of the land that was left for a Jewish national homeland out of the whole territory. If they voted for no Jewish country at all, the Jewish natiion would still have the rights to self-determination on the west bank of the river, and the eastern; And effectively establish sovereignty between the river and the sea, as it was already defacto a fully functional government in the land by a decade prior to that minus what was unlawfully taken by the Hashemite Kingdom.

The Spremacy Clause of the US Constitution stats that "treaties should be the Law of the Land":

"This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in Pursuance thereof; and all Treaties made, or which shall be made, under the Authority of the United States, shall be the supreme Law of the Land; and the Judges in every State shall be bound thereby, any Thing in the Constitution or Laws of any State to the Contrary notwithstanding."

Article Six of the United States Constitution - Wikipedia

Interesting piece of foreign intervention.

Indeed, it is interesting how the same people who demand an Arab state, have no problem with UN resolutions and Arabian kings infringing on sovereignty of nations, but will twist and deny international law the moment it recognizes the rights of the Jewish nation to the land.

It is israeli who are denying the international laws.

You keep saying, but I'm not sure You know the meanings of those words.
International law is treaties between sovereign states, not popular votes in the UN.
You cannot vote out a country out of existence as much as You cannot vote it into existence.

If 2 billion Muslims all jump shout all together "Israel is illegitimate" for a year non-stop, it still exists and kicking.Tried that song for 70 years already, and all of You know how easy it is to push Israel to the edge now, and all of us know where it's going.

That thing about Messiah in Your signature, is what You're most afraid of, and what we're most expecting.
You can build the Mountain with us, or go to war against it, but it will be built, and all those who build it with the nation of Israel will only win.

yours Mean, by force you are invade holly land and by force holly land will be freed.

It's already the most free country in the region,
if not an exemplary case for the entire world given the circumstances.
Certainly better than any Arab or Muslim run country You'll find.

No force is powerful to withstand G-d's decisions,
billions of Muslims who cannot stand Israel's revival, will attest to that.

 

[ForeverYoung436]

Interesting piece of foreign intervention.

Indeed, it is interesting how the same people who demand an Arab state, have no problem with UN resolutions and Arabian kings infringing on sovereignty of nations, but will twist and deny international law the moment it recognizes the rights of the Jewish nation to the land.

It is israeli who are denying the international laws.

You keep saying, but I'm not sure You know the meanings of those words.
International law is treaties between sovereign states, not popular votes in the UN.
You cannot vote out a country out of existence as much as You cannot vote it into existence.

If 2 billion Muslims all jump shout all together "Israel is illegitimate" for a year non-stop, it still exists and kicking.Tried that song for 70 years already, and all of You know how easy it is to push Israel to the edge now, and all of us know where it's going.

That thing about Messiah in Your signature, is what You're most afraid of, and what we're most expecting.
You can build the Mountain with us, or go to war against it, but it will be built, and all those who build it with the nation of Israel will only win.

yours Mean, by force you are invade holly land and by force holly land will be freed.

It's already the most free country in the region,
if not an exemplary case for the entire world given the circumstances.
Certainly better than any Arab or Muslim run country You'll find.

No force is powerful to withstand G-d's decisions,
billions of Muslims who cannot stand Israel's revival, will attest to that.

Besides which, Muslims are going against their own religion because even the Quran says that Israel belongs to the people of Moses. Several honest Muslim Quranic scholars have attested to this fact.

 

[Rehmani]

What you said is absolutely, 100% true, except for the U.S. Constitution part. What does that have to do with Israel, which was set up by the U.N., and of which Israel is a member state?

Good question! Let's clear some things about that statesmen ahi.

Israel was not set by UN but by the Jewish nation in which was vested the sovereignty over all of Palestine under international law, treaties.
The UN never had any sovereignty to create any state or decide any borders.

The Jewish nation was vested with that recognition and obligation through international treaties to which the US obligated by constitution (Supremacy Clause (Article VI, paragraph 2).

San Remo and Mandate recongizes those rights and sepicifically points to re-constitution, vesting sovereignty with no other nation, and mentioning no other beneficiary.
The Lodge-Fish Resolution and of 1922 and Anglo-American Convention of 1924 all mention the same international obligation "as a sacred trust of civilization" to the establishment of Jewish sovereignty over all of the land, again mentioning no other nation.

All those rights were recognized in international treaties approved by the league of nations and inherited by the UN. The later had no right to vary any of them. The 1947 UN plan only demarcated the cease fire lines, and had no legal force. In reality what they voted for was the creation of another Arab state within the 22% of the land that was left for a Jewish national homeland out of the whole territory. If they voted for no Jewish country at all, the Jewish natiion would still have the rights to self-determination on the west bank of the river, and the eastern; And effectively establish sovereignty between the river and the sea, as it was already defacto a fully functional government in the land by a decade prior to that minus what was unlawfully taken by the Hashemite Kingdom.

The Spremacy Clause of the US Constitution stats that "treaties should be the Law of the Land":

"This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in Pursuance thereof; and all Treaties made, or which shall be made, under the Authority of the United States, shall be the supreme Law of the Land; and the Judges in every State shall be bound thereby, any Thing in the Constitution or Laws of any State to the Contrary notwithstanding."

Article Six of the United States Constitution - Wikipedia

Interesting piece of foreign intervention.

Indeed, it is interesting how the same people who demand an Arab state, have no problem with UN resolutions and Arabian kings infringing on sovereignty of nations, but will twist and deny international law the moment it recognizes the rights of the Jewish nation to the land.

It is israeli who are denying the international laws.

You keep saying, but I'm not sure You know the meanings of those words.
International law is treaties between sovereign states, not popular votes in the UN.
You cannot vote out a country out of existence as much as You cannot vote it into existence.

If 2 billion Muslims all jump shout all together "Israel is illegitimate" for a year non-stop, it still exists and kicking.Tried that song for 70 years already, and all of You know how easy it is to push Israel to the edge now, and all of us know where it's going.

That thing about Messiah in Your signature, is what You're most afraid of, and what we're most expecting.
You can build the Mountain with us, or go to war against it, but it will be built, and all those who build it with the nation of Israel will only win.

As you are keep saying international laws, when these laws will change tomorrow you will refuse that too as you are rejecting UN because you don't have numbers now compare to 1949.

The masaya you are talking about we are not afraid of, you should be afraid of it because that is your end too. And start of Jesus PBUH and his followers but unfortunately you don't believe in any prophets and this is the reason I post my signature comments only for jew before time run out you should straight you path.

 

[Shusha]

Good question! Let's clear some things about that statesmen ahi.

Israel was not set by UN but by the Jewish nation in which was vested the sovereignty over all of Palestine under international law, treaties.
The UN never had any sovereignty to create any state or decide any borders.

The Jewish nation was vested with that recognition and obligation through international treaties to which the US obligated by constitution (Supremacy Clause (Article VI, paragraph 2).

San Remo and Mandate recongizes those rights and sepicifically points to re-constitution, vesting sovereignty with no other nation, and mentioning no other beneficiary.
The Lodge-Fish Resolution and of 1922 and Anglo-American Convention of 1924 all mention the same international obligation "as a sacred trust of civilization" to the establishment of Jewish sovereignty over all of the land, again mentioning no other nation.

All those rights were recognized in international treaties approved by the league of nations and inherited by the UN. The later had no right to vary any of them. The 1947 UN plan only demarcated the cease fire lines, and had no legal force. In reality what they voted for was the creation of another Arab state within the 22% of the land that was left for a Jewish national homeland out of the whole territory. If they voted for no Jewish country at all, the Jewish natiion would still have the rights to self-determination on the west bank of the river, and the eastern; And effectively establish sovereignty between the river and the sea, as it was already defacto a fully functional government in the land by a decade prior to that minus what was unlawfully taken by the Hashemite Kingdom.

The Spremacy Clause of the US Constitution stats that "treaties should be the Law of the Land":

"This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in Pursuance thereof; and all Treaties made, or which shall be made, under the Authority of the United States, shall be the supreme Law of the Land; and the Judges in every State shall be bound thereby, any Thing in the Constitution or Laws of any State to the Contrary notwithstanding."

Article Six of the United States Constitution - Wikipedia

Interesting piece of foreign intervention.

Indeed, it is interesting how the same people who demand an Arab state, have no problem with UN resolutions and Arabian kings infringing on sovereignty of nations, but will twist and deny international law the moment it recognizes the rights of the Jewish nation to the land.

It is israeli who are denying the international laws.

You keep saying, but I'm not sure You know the meanings of those words.
International law is treaties between sovereign states, not popular votes in the UN.
You cannot vote out a country out of existence as much as You cannot vote it into existence.

If 2 billion Muslims all jump shout all together "Israel is illegitimate" for a year non-stop, it still exists and kicking.Tried that song for 70 years already, and all of You know how easy it is to push Israel to the edge now, and all of us know where it's going.

That thing about Messiah in Your signature, is what You're most afraid of, and what we're most expecting.
You can build the Mountain with us, or go to war against it, but it will be built, and all those who build it with the nation of Israel will only win.

As you are keep saying international laws, when these laws will change tomorrow you will refuse that too as you are rejecting UN because you don't have numbers now compare to 1949.

The masaya you are talking about we are not afraid of, you should be afraid of it because that is your end too. And start of Jesus PBUH and his followers but unfortunately you don't believe in any prophets and this is the reason I post my signature comments only for jew before time run out you should straight you path.

In case there was any doubt about the ugliness of replacement theology.

 

[Rehmani]

Interesting piece of foreign intervention.

Indeed, it is interesting how the same people who demand an Arab state, have no problem with UN resolutions and Arabian kings infringing on sovereignty of nations, but will twist and deny international law the moment it recognizes the rights of the Jewish nation to the land.

It is israeli who are denying the international laws.

You keep saying, but I'm not sure You know the meanings of those words.
International law is treaties between sovereign states, not popular votes in the UN.
You cannot vote out a country out of existence as much as You cannot vote it into existence.

If 2 billion Muslims all jump shout all together "Israel is illegitimate" for a year non-stop, it still exists and kicking.Tried that song for 70 years already, and all of You know how easy it is to push Israel to the edge now, and all of us know where it's going.

That thing about Messiah in Your signature, is what You're most afraid of, and what we're most expecting.
You can build the Mountain with us, or go to war against it, but it will be built, and all those who build it with the nation of Israel will only win.

yours Mean, by force you are invade holly land and by force holly land will be freed.

It's already the most free country in the region,
if not an exemplary case for the entire world given the circumstances.
Certainly better than any Arab or Muslim run country You'll find.

No force is powerful to withstand G-d's decisions,
billions of Muslims who cannot stand Israel's revival, will attest to that.

That is exactly you people are you people create lies and then propagate it like a truth means make fool others and yourself. For example you call yourself special race but nobody else in the world consider you special.
Now As you are created g-d, but no body knows who the hell you are, who follow the g-d and then who gd is.
Now You appear from somewhere After 4 thousands years and created israel even Jacob PBUH didn't claim it actually who got the title of Israel, not the sinner yahuda.

Now And If you are comparing gd to GOD then again you are making fool to gd and yourself because you don't believe in Ala but in yourself.

Please follow my signature comments. It is written for jew only. Just look at your past and calculate that how many time you through from different type of difficult time.

When I look at Your history I felt like people are treating you, like kicking/pushing you around how un respectful life you people are leading but not learning.

The idea you people are chasing is a flop idea please give up 3/4 thousands years too much to learns. I am only trying to help you out and these things you can't see through your history, I am trying to show you.

Just learn from your history that how many time in history you people kicked around by others.

 

[Rigby5]

What you said is absolutely, 100% true, except for the U.S. Constitution part. What does that have to do with Israel, which was set up by the U.N., and of which Israel is a member state?

Good question! Let's clear some things about that statesmen ahi.

Israel was not set by UN but by the Jewish nation in which was vested the sovereignty over all of Palestine under international law, treaties.
The UN never had any sovereignty to create any state or decide any borders.

The Jewish nation was vested with that recognition and obligation through international treaties to which the US obligated by constitution (Supremacy Clause (Article VI, paragraph 2).

San Remo and Mandate recongizes those rights and sepicifically points to re-constitution, vesting sovereignty with no other nation, and mentioning no other beneficiary.
The Lodge-Fish Resolution and of 1922 and Anglo-American Convention of 1924 all mention the same international obligation "as a sacred trust of civilization" to the establishment of Jewish sovereignty over all of the land, again mentioning no other nation.

All those rights were recognized in international treaties approved by the league of nations and inherited by the UN. The later had no right to vary any of them. The 1947 UN plan only demarcated the cease fire lines, and had no legal force. In reality what they voted for was the creation of another Arab state within the 22% of the land that was left for a Jewish national homeland out of the whole territory. If they voted for no Jewish country at all, the Jewish natiion would still have the rights to self-determination on the west bank of the river, and the eastern; And effectively establish sovereignty between the river and the sea, as it was already defacto a fully functional government in the land by a decade prior to that minus what was unlawfully taken by the Hashemite Kingdom.

The Spremacy Clause of the US Constitution stats that "treaties should be the Law of the Land":

"This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in Pursuance thereof; and all Treaties made, or which shall be made, under the Authority of the United States, shall be the supreme Law of the Land; and the Judges in every State shall be bound thereby, any Thing in the Constitution or Laws of any State to the Contrary notwithstanding."

Article Six of the United States Constitution - Wikipedia

Interesting piece of foreign intervention.

Indeed, it is interesting how the same people who demand an Arab state, have no problem with UN resolutions and Arabian kings infringing on sovereignty of nations, but will twist and deny international law the moment it recognizes the rights of the Jewish nation to the land.

It is israeli who are denying the international laws.

You keep saying, but I'm not sure You know the meanings of those words.
International law is treaties between sovereign states, not popular votes in the UN.
You cannot vote out a country out of existence as much as You cannot vote it into existence.

If 2 billion Muslims all jump shout all together "Israel is illegitimate" for a year non-stop, it still exists and kicking.Tried that song for 70 years already, and all of You know how easy it is to push Israel to the edge now, and all of us know where it's going.

That thing about Messiah in Your signature, is what You're most afraid of, and what we're most expecting.
You can build the Mountain with us, or go to war against it, but it will be built, and all those who build it with the nation of Israel will only win.

International law is not votes at the UN.
Votes at the UN is a popularity contest, with bribes, threats, and a Security Counsel monopoly.
International law in the other hand is blind justice, based on simple principles of law and justice, that are codified ahead of time, to facilitate equality of application.
So it is not a popularity contest to claim Israel is illegitimate.
It is the basic rights of the native Palestinian people to have self determination and the return of their stolen homes.

Israel does not exist by law, justice, or even majority rule, but by might makes right.
Which is not a currently recognized principle, and instead is one universally denied and reviled.
The only hope for the continued existence of Israel is to somehow make amends, either allow the right of return, or make compensation or exchange of the land illegally taken from Palestinian natives in 1948.
There is no legal way those illegally displaced in 1948 can be ignored.

 

[Rehmani]

Indeed, it is interesting how the same people who demand an Arab state, have no problem with UN resolutions and Arabian kings infringing on sovereignty of nations, but will twist and deny international law the moment it recognizes the rights of the Jewish nation to the land.

It is israeli who are denying the international laws.

You keep saying, but I'm not sure You know the meanings of those words.
International law is treaties between sovereign states, not popular votes in the UN.
You cannot vote out a country out of existence as much as You cannot vote it into existence.

If 2 billion Muslims all jump shout all together "Israel is illegitimate" for a year non-stop, it still exists and kicking.Tried that song for 70 years already, and all of You know how easy it is to push Israel to the edge now, and all of us know where it's going.

That thing about Messiah in Your signature, is what You're most afraid of, and what we're most expecting.
You can build the Mountain with us, or go to war against it, but it will be built, and all those who build it with the nation of Israel will only win.

yours Mean, by force you are invade holly land and by force holly land will be freed.

It's already the most free country in the region,
if not an exemplary case for the entire world given the circumstances.
Certainly better than any Arab or Muslim run country You'll find.

No force is powerful to withstand G-d's decisions,
billions of Muslims who cannot stand Israel's revival, will attest to that.

Besides which, Muslims are going against their own religion because even the Quran says that Israel belongs to the people of Moses. Several honest Muslim Quranic scholars have attested to this fact.

How fool/simple you are. Israel never exist and Israel is a title given to Jacob PBUH. But foo people like you in the past reject Jacob PBUH/Israel and followed the sinner/commoner Yuhuda instead. You people should not give reference from Torah/Bible/Quran because you people never believe in Ala/God/Allah and consider special and reject prophets of God and how fool it is that you telling to prophet that you are not prophet.

Tell me. are you God?
And if not, then who the hell you are who rejecting the prophets of Allah/God/Ala.

 

[Rehmani]

Interesting piece of foreign intervention.

Indeed, it is interesting how the same people who demand an Arab state, have no problem with UN resolutions and Arabian kings infringing on sovereignty of nations, but will twist and deny international law the moment it recognizes the rights of the Jewish nation to the land.

It is israeli who are denying the international laws.

You keep saying, but I'm not sure You know the meanings of those words.
International law is treaties between sovereign states, not popular votes in the UN.
You cannot vote out a country out of existence as much as You cannot vote it into existence.

If 2 billion Muslims all jump shout all together "Israel is illegitimate" for a year non-stop, it still exists and kicking.Tried that song for 70 years already, and all of You know how easy it is to push Israel to the edge now, and all of us know where it's going.

That thing about Messiah in Your signature, is what You're most afraid of, and what we're most expecting.
You can build the Mountain with us, or go to war against it, but it will be built, and all those who build it with the nation of Israel will only win.

As you are keep saying international laws, when these laws will change tomorrow you will refuse that too as you are rejecting UN because you don't have numbers now compare to 1949.

The masaya you are talking about we are not afraid of, you should be afraid of it because that is your end too. And start of Jesus PBUH and his followers but unfortunately you don't believe in any prophets and this is the reason I post my signature comments only for jew before time run out you should straight you path.

In case there was any doubt about the ugliness of replacement theology.

Interesting piece of foreign intervention.

Indeed, it is interesting how the same people who demand an Arab state, have no problem with UN resolutions and Arabian kings infringing on sovereignty of nations, but will twist and deny international law the moment it recognizes the rights of the Jewish nation to the land.

It is israeli who are denying the international laws.

You keep saying, but I'm not sure You know the meanings of those words.
International law is treaties between sovereign states, not popular votes in the UN.
You cannot vote out a country out of existence as much as You cannot vote it into existence.

If 2 billion Muslims all jump shout all together "Israel is illegitimate" for a year non-stop, it still exists and kicking.Tried that song for 70 years already, and all of You know how easy it is to push Israel to the edge now, and all of us know where it's going.

That thing about Messiah in Your signature, is what You're most afraid of, and what we're most expecting.
You can build the Mountain with us, or go to war against it, but it will be built, and all those who build it with the nation of Israel will only win.

As you are keep saying international laws, when these laws will change tomorrow you will refuse that too as you are rejecting UN because you don't have numbers now compare to 1949.

The masaya you are talking about we are not afraid of, you should be afraid of it because that is your end too. And start of Jesus PBUH and his followers but unfortunately you don't believe in any prophets and this is the reason I post my signature comments only for jew before time run out you should straight you path.

In case there was any doubt about the ugliness of replacement theology.

Please read comments I just posted to Forever Young 4. And please learn sooner is better.