Who Are The Palestinians? Part 2

[Hollie]

Not surprisingly, facts and realities tend to so often confound the idea of competing Islamic terrorist enclaves meeting the standards of statehood.




Why the Palestinian case at The Hague took a big hit this past week

The notion that “Palestine” is a full-fledged state that can grant jurisdiction to the International Criminal Court was dealt a serious blow over the past week, as seven countries and many scholars of international law argued that the issue was not as simple as the Palestinians and their supporters would like to make it seem.

Even some countries that have formally recognized the “State of Palestine” along the pre-1967 lines argued that Palestine cannot necessarily be considered to have validly granted the ICC jurisdiction to probe war crimes allegedly committed on its territory.

 

[P F Tinmore]

RE: Who Are The Palestinians? Part 2
⁜→ Hollie, et al,

If those people in the picture are very representative of the crowd, I can only ask, "who in the crowd is old enough to return to someplace in Israel where they have once lived?"

Hamas official calls for 'intifada' against Israel
Hamas official in Gaza says "March of the Return" protests will resume next month.
Dalit Halevi, 20/02/20 02:15
.

(COMMENT)

What in the world do they think they are doing? And who in the hell do they think you are?


Most Respectfully,
R

I can only ask, "who in the crowd is old enough to return to someplace in Israel where they have once lived?"

Stupid post.

How many Israelis are old enough to "return" to someplace in Palestine where they have once lived?

A double standard of epic proportions.

 

[Hollie]

RE: Who Are The Palestinians? Part 2
⁜→ Hollie, et al,

If those people in the picture are very representative of the crowd, I can only ask, "who in the crowd is old enough to return to someplace in Israel where they have once lived?"

Hamas official calls for 'intifada' against Israel
Hamas official in Gaza says "March of the Return" protests will resume next month.
Dalit Halevi, 20/02/20 02:15
.

(COMMENT)

What in the world do they think they are doing? And who in the hell do they think you are?


Most Respectfully,
R

I can only ask, "who in the crowd is old enough to return to someplace in Israel where they have once lived?"

Stupid post.

How many Israelis are old enough to "return" to someplace in Palestine where they have once lived?

A double standard of epic proportions.

There's no double standard. You don't understand the context.

 

[P F Tinmore]

RE: Who Are The Palestinians? Part 2
⁜→ Hollie, et al,

If those people in the picture are very representative of the crowd, I can only ask, "who in the crowd is old enough to return to someplace in Israel where they have once lived?"

Hamas official calls for 'intifada' against Israel
Hamas official in Gaza says "March of the Return" protests will resume next month.
Dalit Halevi, 20/02/20 02:15
.

(COMMENT)

What in the world do they think they are doing? And who in the hell do they think you are?


Most Respectfully,
R

I can only ask, "who in the crowd is old enough to return to someplace in Israel where they have once lived?"

Stupid post.

How many Israelis are old enough to "return" to someplace in Palestine where they have once lived?

A double standard of epic proportions.

There's no double standard. You don't understand the context.

Could you point out where I am incorrect?

 

[Hollie]

RE: Who Are The Palestinians? Part 2
⁜→ Hollie, et al,

If those people in the picture are very representative of the crowd, I can only ask, "who in the crowd is old enough to return to someplace in Israel where they have once lived?"

Hamas official calls for 'intifada' against Israel
Hamas official in Gaza says "March of the Return" protests will resume next month.
Dalit Halevi, 20/02/20 02:15
.

(COMMENT)

What in the world do they think they are doing? And who in the hell do they think you are?


Most Respectfully,
R

I can only ask, "who in the crowd is old enough to return to someplace in Israel where they have once lived?"

Stupid post.

How many Israelis are old enough to "return" to someplace in Palestine where they have once lived?

A double standard of epic proportions.

There's no double standard. You don't understand the context.

Could you point out where I am incorrect?

The Mandate for Palestine.

 

[Hollie]

It’s actually comical when Islamic terrorists start screeching about some claimed of breached “international law”.

Why aren’t the Islamic terrorists boycotting the Great Satan entity of Amazon?



Palestine to take legal action against Amazon

The Palestinian Authority (PA) announced yesterday that it is to take legal action against Amazon over its discrimination against Palestinians, Wafa news agency reported.

Amazon said it would make shipping free for Palestinians if they list their country as Israel.

The ministry sent legal notices to the company calling on it to immediately stop this policy or face legal accountability before international courts.





I would be curious to know what international crime has been committed that would warrant the involvement of international courts.

 

[RoccoR]

RE: Who Are The Palestinians? Part 2
⁜→ P F Tinmore, Hollie, et al,

Here you are again with the unknown "talking points" comment.

You know as well as I do, that the status on the Question of Palestinian Statehood is still not confirmed by the courts. I cannot count the number of times I have mentioned this in commentary on the Situation in the State of Palestine. Did YOU READ Hollie's commentary on the subject (Posting #15841)?

It has been a month (or so) that the ICC Pre-Trial Chamber invites Palestine, Israel, interested States and others to submit observations and an amicus curiae.

See: No.: ICC-01/18 Date:13 February 2020.

I can only ask, "who in the crowd is old enough to return to someplace in Israel where they have once lived?"

Stupid post.

How many Israelis are old enough to "return" to someplace in Palestine where they have once lived?

A double standard of epic proportions.

(COMMENT)

I would ask you to open your eyes. It appears that at least six countries have filed an amicus brief that argues the court’s jurisdiction did not extend to the Palestinian territories.

What you consider to be "facts" about the Status of Palestine, may not be fact at all. But what I find interesting is that The Grand Duchy of Luxembourg, which is trying to rally for the Arab Palestinians is not having much luck. Although they condemn Germany's amicus brief, it is unclear if the Grand Duchy has submitted a brief of its own position.

(ON THE MATTER OF THE RIGHT OF RETURN)

The Customary Law on the concept of the "Right of Return" (RoR) is based on the Customary Law on the definition of the refugee, the displaced person, or the application of Civil and Political Rights. None of which are the same as what you give in context. The simplest of these is the Covenant:

Article 12
• International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights •

1. Everyone lawfully within the territory of a State shall, within that territory, have the right to liberty of movement and freedom to choose his residence.

⁜→ You would be hard pressed to find anyone in that picture that is 70 years old or older. That is how old you have to be in order to be even remotely considered under the Cuswtomary RoR. This is not a double standard because, since 1948, it was sovereign Israeli Territory with its own domestic laws. Something that the Arab Palestinians have not yet established.
​

2. Everyone shall be free to leave any country, including his own.

⁜→ Everyone is free to leave Israel. And just as similar, everyone is free to leave the West Bank, Jerusalem, and the Gaza Strip. BUT, non-Israeli citizens need Israeli permission to transit Israeli Territory. This is the exact same principle that is used in almost every country in the Middle East and North Africa; the US, the UK, the Russian Federation, etc, etc, etc....
​

3. The above-mentioned rights shall not be subject to any restrictions except those which are provided by law, are necessary to protect national security, public order (order public), public health or morals or the rights and freedoms of others, and are consistent with the other rights recognized in the present Covenant.

⁜→ The travel, entry and exit of Israel is covered by domestic law --- the same as nearly every country in the Northern Hemisphere. ​

4. No one shall be arbitrarily deprived of the right to enter his own country.

⁜→ Israeli domestic law on these matter are very specific and NOT arbitrary.​

There is no law, domestic or international that singles-out that Arab Palestinians for special restrictions. If they meet the criteria, they can get permission to enter. BUT keep in mind that the Covenant on Civil and Political Rights also says:

Article 20

1. Any propaganda for war shall be prohibited by law.

2. Any advocacy of national, racial or religious hatred that constitutes incitement to discrimination, hostility or violence shall be prohibited by law.

Article 21

The right of peaceful assembly shall be recognized. No restrictions may be placed on the exercise of this right other than those imposed in conformity with the law and which are necessary in a democratic society in the interests of national security or public safety, public order, the protection of public health or morals or the protection of the rights and freedoms of others.
​

That means that most Arab Palestinians are going to have trouble with the national security or public safety, public order issues. And Any Arab Palestinian who commit an offense which is solely intended to harm the Occupying Power, is going to have trouble meeting the entry criteria under international law; before they are even considered under Israeli domestic Law. In fact, most of the Arab Palestinians that have been pictured in these photos will never be able to transit Israeli Sovereign Territory without a very close scrutiny. The same can be said for those that have been arrested for any of the 19 International Counter-Terrorism Covenants.

(DOUBLE STANDARD)

None!


Most Respectfully,
R

 

[P F Tinmore]

Not surprisingly, facts and realities tend to so often confound the idea of competing Islamic terrorist enclaves meeting the standards of statehood.




Why the Palestinian case at The Hague took a big hit this past week

The notion that “Palestine” is a full-fledged state that can grant jurisdiction to the International Criminal Court was dealt a serious blow over the past week, as seven countries and many scholars of international law argued that the issue was not as simple as the Palestinians and their supporters would like to make it seem.

Even some countries that have formally recognized the “State of Palestine” along the pre-1967 lines argued that Palestine cannot necessarily be considered to have validly granted the ICC jurisdiction to probe war crimes allegedly committed on its territory.

Not surprisingly, facts and realities tend to so often confound the idea of competing Islamic terrorist enclaves meeting the standards of statehood.

A lot of political opinions.

Brazil goes on to argue that the “complex Israeli-Palestinian question needs to be addressed through political dialogue between the parties and not through an international criminal process, which would be detrimental to both justice and peace.”​

Only states can negotiate peace agreements.

 

[P F Tinmore]

RE: Who Are The Palestinians? Part 2
⁜→ P F Tinmore, Hollie, et al,

Here you are again with the unknown "talking points" comment.

You know as well as I do, that the status on the Question of Palestinian Statehood is still not confirmed by the courts. I cannot count the number of times I have mentioned this in commentary on the Situation in the State of Palestine. Did YOU READ Hollie's commentary on the subject (Posting #15841)?

It has been a month (or so) that the ICC Pre-Trial Chamber invites Palestine, Israel, interested States and others to submit observations and an amicus curiae.

See: No.: ICC-01/18 Date:13 February 2020.

I can only ask, "who in the crowd is old enough to return to someplace in Israel where they have once lived?"

Stupid post.

How many Israelis are old enough to "return" to someplace in Palestine where they have once lived?

A double standard of epic proportions.

(COMMENT)

I would ask you to open your eyes. It appears that at least six countries have filed an amicus brief that argues the court’s jurisdiction did not extend to the Palestinian territories.

What you consider to be "facts" about the Status of Palestine, may not be fact at all. But what I find interesting is that The Grand Duchy of Luxembourg, which is trying to rally for the Arab Palestinians is not having much luck. Although they condemn Germany's amicus brief, it is unclear if the Grand Duchy has submitted a brief of its own position.

(ON THE MATTER OF THE RIGHT OF RETURN)

The Customary Law on the concept of the "Right of Return" (RoR) is based on the Customary Law on the definition of the refugee, the displaced person, or the application of Civil and Political Rights. None of which are the same as what you give in context. The simplest of these is the Covenant:

Article 12
• International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights •

1. Everyone lawfully within the territory of a State shall, within that territory, have the right to liberty of movement and freedom to choose his residence.

⁜→ You would be hard pressed to find anyone in that picture that is 70 years old or older. That is how old you have to be in order to be even remotely considered under the Cuswtomary RoR. This is not a double standard because, since 1948, it was sovereign Israeli Territory with its own domestic laws. Something that the Arab Palestinians have not yet established.
​

2. Everyone shall be free to leave any country, including his own.

⁜→ Everyone is free to leave Israel. And just as similar, everyone is free to leave the West Bank, Jerusalem, and the Gaza Strip. BUT, non-Israeli citizens need Israeli permission to transit Israeli Territory. This is the exact same principle that is used in almost every country in the Middle East and North Africa; the US, the UK, the Russian Federation, etc, etc, etc....
​

3. The above-mentioned rights shall not be subject to any restrictions except those which are provided by law, are necessary to protect national security, public order (order public), public health or morals or the rights and freedoms of others, and are consistent with the other rights recognized in the present Covenant.

⁜→ The travel, entry and exit of Israel is covered by domestic law --- the same as nearly every country in the Northern Hemisphere. ​

4. No one shall be arbitrarily deprived of the right to enter his own country.

⁜→ Israeli domestic law on these matter are very specific and NOT arbitrary.​

There is no law, domestic or international that singles-out that Arab Palestinians for special restrictions. If they meet the criteria, they can get permission to enter. BUT keep in mind that the Covenant on Civil and Political Rights also says:

Article 20

1. Any propaganda for war shall be prohibited by law.

2. Any advocacy of national, racial or religious hatred that constitutes incitement to discrimination, hostility or violence shall be prohibited by law.

Article 21

The right of peaceful assembly shall be recognized. No restrictions may be placed on the exercise of this right other than those imposed in conformity with the law and which are necessary in a democratic society in the interests of national security or public safety, public order, the protection of public health or morals or the protection of the rights and freedoms of others.
​

That means that most Arab Palestinians are going to have trouble with the national security or public safety, public order issues. And Any Arab Palestinian who commit an offense which is solely intended to harm the Occupying Power, is going to have trouble meeting the entry criteria under international law; before they are even considered under Israeli domestic Law. In fact, most of the Arab Palestinians that have been pictured in these photos will never be able to transit Israeli Sovereign Territory without a very close scrutiny. The same can be said for those that have been arrested for any of the 19 International Counter-Terrorism Covenants.

(DOUBLE STANDARD)

None!


Most Respectfully,
R

Israeli bullshit, of course.

2. Everyone shall be free to leave any country, including his own.

⁜→ Everyone is free to leave Israel. And just as similar, everyone is free to leave the West Bank, Jerusalem, and the Gaza Strip. BUT, non-Israeli citizens need Israeli permission to transit Israeli Territory. This is the exact same principle that is used in almost every country in the Middle East and North Africa; the US, the UK, the Russian Federation, etc, etc, etc....

Nobody needs to enter Israel to leave Palestine.

 

[Hollie]

A lot of political opinions.

Acts of Islamic terrorism committed by Hamas / Fatah are not opinions.

 

[P F Tinmore]

RE: Who Are The Palestinians? Part 2
⁜→ P F Tinmore, Hollie, et al,

Here you are again with the unknown "talking points" comment.

You know as well as I do, that the status on the Question of Palestinian Statehood is still not confirmed by the courts. I cannot count the number of times I have mentioned this in commentary on the Situation in the State of Palestine. Did YOU READ Hollie's commentary on the subject (Posting #15841)?

It has been a month (or so) that the ICC Pre-Trial Chamber invites Palestine, Israel, interested States and others to submit observations and an amicus curiae.

See: No.: ICC-01/18 Date:13 February 2020.

I can only ask, "who in the crowd is old enough to return to someplace in Israel where they have once lived?"

Stupid post.

How many Israelis are old enough to "return" to someplace in Palestine where they have once lived?

A double standard of epic proportions.

(COMMENT)

I would ask you to open your eyes. It appears that at least six countries have filed an amicus brief that argues the court’s jurisdiction did not extend to the Palestinian territories.

What you consider to be "facts" about the Status of Palestine, may not be fact at all. But what I find interesting is that The Grand Duchy of Luxembourg, which is trying to rally for the Arab Palestinians is not having much luck. Although they condemn Germany's amicus brief, it is unclear if the Grand Duchy has submitted a brief of its own position.

(ON THE MATTER OF THE RIGHT OF RETURN)

The Customary Law on the concept of the "Right of Return" (RoR) is based on the Customary Law on the definition of the refugee, the displaced person, or the application of Civil and Political Rights. None of which are the same as what you give in context. The simplest of these is the Covenant:

Article 12
• International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights •

1. Everyone lawfully within the territory of a State shall, within that territory, have the right to liberty of movement and freedom to choose his residence.

⁜→ You would be hard pressed to find anyone in that picture that is 70 years old or older. That is how old you have to be in order to be even remotely considered under the Cuswtomary RoR. This is not a double standard because, since 1948, it was sovereign Israeli Territory with its own domestic laws. Something that the Arab Palestinians have not yet established.
​

2. Everyone shall be free to leave any country, including his own.

⁜→ Everyone is free to leave Israel. And just as similar, everyone is free to leave the West Bank, Jerusalem, and the Gaza Strip. BUT, non-Israeli citizens need Israeli permission to transit Israeli Territory. This is the exact same principle that is used in almost every country in the Middle East and North Africa; the US, the UK, the Russian Federation, etc, etc, etc....
​

3. The above-mentioned rights shall not be subject to any restrictions except those which are provided by law, are necessary to protect national security, public order (order public), public health or morals or the rights and freedoms of others, and are consistent with the other rights recognized in the present Covenant.

⁜→ The travel, entry and exit of Israel is covered by domestic law --- the same as nearly every country in the Northern Hemisphere. ​

4. No one shall be arbitrarily deprived of the right to enter his own country.

⁜→ Israeli domestic law on these matter are very specific and NOT arbitrary.​

There is no law, domestic or international that singles-out that Arab Palestinians for special restrictions. If they meet the criteria, they can get permission to enter. BUT keep in mind that the Covenant on Civil and Political Rights also says:

Article 20

1. Any propaganda for war shall be prohibited by law.

2. Any advocacy of national, racial or religious hatred that constitutes incitement to discrimination, hostility or violence shall be prohibited by law.

Article 21

The right of peaceful assembly shall be recognized. No restrictions may be placed on the exercise of this right other than those imposed in conformity with the law and which are necessary in a democratic society in the interests of national security or public safety, public order, the protection of public health or morals or the protection of the rights and freedoms of others.
​

That means that most Arab Palestinians are going to have trouble with the national security or public safety, public order issues. And Any Arab Palestinian who commit an offense which is solely intended to harm the Occupying Power, is going to have trouble meeting the entry criteria under international law; before they are even considered under Israeli domestic Law. In fact, most of the Arab Palestinians that have been pictured in these photos will never be able to transit Israeli Sovereign Territory without a very close scrutiny. The same can be said for those that have been arrested for any of the 19 International Counter-Terrorism Covenants.

(DOUBLE STANDARD)

None!


Most Respectfully,
R

There is no law, domestic or international that singles-out that Arab Palestinians for special restrictions. If they meet the criteria, they can get permission to enter.

The Right of Return has nothing to do with tourism or immigration. It is about where people belong under international law.

 

[Hollie]

Only states can negotiate peace agreements.

That would seem to be a problem for the Islamic terrorist franchises in Gaza and the West Bank.

I guess we can agree that any “state of Pal’istan” attacking Israel would have to accept that acts of war carry the consequence of a retaliatory response.

 

[Hollie]

RE: Who Are The Palestinians? Part 2
⁜→ P F Tinmore, Hollie, et al,

Here you are again with the unknown "talking points" comment.

You know as well as I do, that the status on the Question of Palestinian Statehood is still not confirmed by the courts. I cannot count the number of times I have mentioned this in commentary on the Situation in the State of Palestine. Did YOU READ Hollie's commentary on the subject (Posting #15841)?

It has been a month (or so) that the ICC Pre-Trial Chamber invites Palestine, Israel, interested States and others to submit observations and an amicus curiae.

See: No.: ICC-01/18 Date:13 February 2020.

I can only ask, "who in the crowd is old enough to return to someplace in Israel where they have once lived?"

Stupid post.

How many Israelis are old enough to "return" to someplace in Palestine where they have once lived?

A double standard of epic proportions.

(COMMENT)

I would ask you to open your eyes. It appears that at least six countries have filed an amicus brief that argues the court’s jurisdiction did not extend to the Palestinian territories.

What you consider to be "facts" about the Status of Palestine, may not be fact at all. But what I find interesting is that The Grand Duchy of Luxembourg, which is trying to rally for the Arab Palestinians is not having much luck. Although they condemn Germany's amicus brief, it is unclear if the Grand Duchy has submitted a brief of its own position.

(ON THE MATTER OF THE RIGHT OF RETURN)

The Customary Law on the concept of the "Right of Return" (RoR) is based on the Customary Law on the definition of the refugee, the displaced person, or the application of Civil and Political Rights. None of which are the same as what you give in context. The simplest of these is the Covenant:

Article 12
• International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights •

1. Everyone lawfully within the territory of a State shall, within that territory, have the right to liberty of movement and freedom to choose his residence.

⁜→ You would be hard pressed to find anyone in that picture that is 70 years old or older. That is how old you have to be in order to be even remotely considered under the Cuswtomary RoR. This is not a double standard because, since 1948, it was sovereign Israeli Territory with its own domestic laws. Something that the Arab Palestinians have not yet established.
​

2. Everyone shall be free to leave any country, including his own.

⁜→ Everyone is free to leave Israel. And just as similar, everyone is free to leave the West Bank, Jerusalem, and the Gaza Strip. BUT, non-Israeli citizens need Israeli permission to transit Israeli Territory. This is the exact same principle that is used in almost every country in the Middle East and North Africa; the US, the UK, the Russian Federation, etc, etc, etc....
​

3. The above-mentioned rights shall not be subject to any restrictions except those which are provided by law, are necessary to protect national security, public order (order public), public health or morals or the rights and freedoms of others, and are consistent with the other rights recognized in the present Covenant.

⁜→ The travel, entry and exit of Israel is covered by domestic law --- the same as nearly every country in the Northern Hemisphere. ​

4. No one shall be arbitrarily deprived of the right to enter his own country.

⁜→ Israeli domestic law on these matter are very specific and NOT arbitrary.​

There is no law, domestic or international that singles-out that Arab Palestinians for special restrictions. If they meet the criteria, they can get permission to enter. BUT keep in mind that the Covenant on Civil and Political Rights also says:

Article 20

1. Any propaganda for war shall be prohibited by law.

2. Any advocacy of national, racial or religious hatred that constitutes incitement to discrimination, hostility or violence shall be prohibited by law.

Article 21

The right of peaceful assembly shall be recognized. No restrictions may be placed on the exercise of this right other than those imposed in conformity with the law and which are necessary in a democratic society in the interests of national security or public safety, public order, the protection of public health or morals or the protection of the rights and freedoms of others.
​

That means that most Arab Palestinians are going to have trouble with the national security or public safety, public order issues. And Any Arab Palestinian who commit an offense which is solely intended to harm the Occupying Power, is going to have trouble meeting the entry criteria under international law; before they are even considered under Israeli domestic Law. In fact, most of the Arab Palestinians that have been pictured in these photos will never be able to transit Israeli Sovereign Territory without a very close scrutiny. The same can be said for those that have been arrested for any of the 19 International Counter-Terrorism Covenants.

(DOUBLE STANDARD)

None!


Most Respectfully,
R

There is no law, domestic or international that singles-out that Arab Palestinians for special restrictions. If they meet the criteria, they can get permission to enter.

The Right of Return has nothing to do with tourism or immigration. It is about where people belong under international law.

Did you see that on a YouTube video?

 

[RoccoR]

RE: Who Are The Palestinians? Part 2
⁜→ P F Tinmore, et al,

I did not mention either "tourism or immigration." But the same set of domestic laws that govern "tourism or immigration" govern Border Protection. The same set of laws also govern acceptable types of Border Crossing Documentation.

There is no law, domestic or international that singles-out that Arab Palestinians for special restrictions. If they meet the criteria, they can get permission to enter.

The Right of Return has nothing to do with tourism or immigration. It is about where people belong under international law.

(COMMENT)

If you are looking for some right that just allows someone to walk across the frontier without a challenge - forget it. If you think that there is no global effort “Denying Safe Haven to those who Finance, Plan, Support or Commit Terrorist Acts, or Provide Safe Havens, and Preventing Terrorists from Abusing the Asylum System, in Conformity with International Law,” you've lost your mind.

IF you remember --- Resolution S/RES/1373 (2001) called upon States to take appropriate measures, in conformity with the relevant provisions of national and international law, “before granting refugee status, for the purpose of ensuring that those that have planned, facilitated or participated in the commission of terrorist acts, ”as well as to ensure that refugee status “is not abused by the perpetrators, organizers or facilitators of terrorist acts, the extradition of alleged terrorists.” Not only does Israel have a responsibility, but the State of Palestine (the Ramallah Government) has a responsibility to prevent the attempt of such people and to prosecute them.


Most Respectfully,
R

 

[Hollie]

Those state worthy folks calling themselves Palestinians have plumbed new depths of depravity. I know, just when you think the Cult can’t get any more depraved, they manage to plow new furrows.



PA encourages suicide bombings: "Life is insignificant... God, grant us Martyrdom"
Nan Jacques Zilberdik | Feb 23, 2020



The Palestinian Authority encourages suicide bombings and promotes female suicide bombers as role models for Palestinians.

Official PA TV rebroadcast a music video that promotes death for Allah as Martyrs for Al-Aqsa and encourages suicide bombings. The song teaches Palestinians that “life is insignificant” when the Al-Aqsa Mosque calls them, and that dying for Allah is preferable to living: “God, grant us Martyrdom… A million grooms and brides… have written the marriage contract in blood.”

 

[P F Tinmore]

RE: Who Are The Palestinians? Part 2
⁜→ P F Tinmore, et al,

I did not mention either "tourism or immigration." But the same set of domestic laws that govern "tourism or immigration" govern Border Protection. The same set of laws also govern acceptable types of Border Crossing Documentation.

There is no law, domestic or international that singles-out that Arab Palestinians for special restrictions. If they meet the criteria, they can get permission to enter.

The Right of Return has nothing to do with tourism or immigration. It is about where people belong under international law.

(COMMENT)

If you are looking for some right that just allows someone to walk across the frontier without a challenge - forget it. If you think that there is no global effort “Denying Safe Haven to those who Finance, Plan, Support or Commit Terrorist Acts, or Provide Safe Havens, and Preventing Terrorists from Abusing the Asylum System, in Conformity with International Law,” you've lost your mind.

IF you remember --- Resolution S/RES/1373 (2001) called upon States to take appropriate measures, in conformity with the relevant provisions of national and international law, “before granting refugee status, for the purpose of ensuring that those that have planned, facilitated or participated in the commission of terrorist acts, ”as well as to ensure that refugee status “is not abused by the perpetrators, organizers or facilitators of terrorist acts, the extradition of alleged terrorists.” Not only does Israel have a responsibility, but the State of Palestine (the Ramallah Government) has a responsibility to prevent the attempt of such people and to prosecute them.


Most Respectfully,
R

If you are looking for some right that just allows someone to walk across the frontier without a challenge

You have a lot of problems with the meaning of this so called frontier. The Green Line was drawn through Palestine. The line was to keep Israeli and Jordanian troops from attacking each other. Since the line was specifically not to be a political or territorial boundary, it did not say that it was one country on one side and another country on the other. And, since it was not a border, it was still Palestine on both sides.

What authority can keep the Palestinians from traveling freely within their own country?

 

[rylah]

RE: Who Are The Palestinians? Part 2
⁜→ P F Tinmore, Hollie, et al,

Here you are again with the unknown "talking points" comment.

You know as well as I do, that the status on the Question of Palestinian Statehood is still not confirmed by the courts. I cannot count the number of times I have mentioned this in commentary on the Situation in the State of Palestine. Did YOU READ Hollie's commentary on the subject (Posting #15841)?

It has been a month (or so) that the ICC Pre-Trial Chamber invites Palestine, Israel, interested States and others to submit observations and an amicus curiae.

See: No.: ICC-01/18 Date:13 February 2020.

I can only ask, "who in the crowd is old enough to return to someplace in Israel where they have once lived?"

Stupid post.

How many Israelis are old enough to "return" to someplace in Palestine where they have once lived?

A double standard of epic proportions.

(COMMENT)

I would ask you to open your eyes. It appears that at least six countries have filed an amicus brief that argues the court’s jurisdiction did not extend to the Palestinian territories.

What you consider to be "facts" about the Status of Palestine, may not be fact at all. But what I find interesting is that The Grand Duchy of Luxembourg, which is trying to rally for the Arab Palestinians is not having much luck. Although they condemn Germany's amicus brief, it is unclear if the Grand Duchy has submitted a brief of its own position.

(ON THE MATTER OF THE RIGHT OF RETURN)

The Customary Law on the concept of the "Right of Return" (RoR) is based on the Customary Law on the definition of the refugee, the displaced person, or the application of Civil and Political Rights. None of which are the same as what you give in context. The simplest of these is the Covenant:

Article 12
• International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights •

1. Everyone lawfully within the territory of a State shall, within that territory, have the right to liberty of movement and freedom to choose his residence.

⁜→ You would be hard pressed to find anyone in that picture that is 70 years old or older. That is how old you have to be in order to be even remotely considered under the Cuswtomary RoR. This is not a double standard because, since 1948, it was sovereign Israeli Territory with its own domestic laws. Something that the Arab Palestinians have not yet established.
​

2. Everyone shall be free to leave any country, including his own.

⁜→ Everyone is free to leave Israel. And just as similar, everyone is free to leave the West Bank, Jerusalem, and the Gaza Strip. BUT, non-Israeli citizens need Israeli permission to transit Israeli Territory. This is the exact same principle that is used in almost every country in the Middle East and North Africa; the US, the UK, the Russian Federation, etc, etc, etc....
​

3. The above-mentioned rights shall not be subject to any restrictions except those which are provided by law, are necessary to protect national security, public order (order public), public health or morals or the rights and freedoms of others, and are consistent with the other rights recognized in the present Covenant.

⁜→ The travel, entry and exit of Israel is covered by domestic law --- the same as nearly every country in the Northern Hemisphere. ​

4. No one shall be arbitrarily deprived of the right to enter his own country.

⁜→ Israeli domestic law on these matter are very specific and NOT arbitrary.​

There is no law, domestic or international that singles-out that Arab Palestinians for special restrictions. If they meet the criteria, they can get permission to enter. BUT keep in mind that the Covenant on Civil and Political Rights also says:

Article 20

1. Any propaganda for war shall be prohibited by law.

2. Any advocacy of national, racial or religious hatred that constitutes incitement to discrimination, hostility or violence shall be prohibited by law.

Article 21

The right of peaceful assembly shall be recognized. No restrictions may be placed on the exercise of this right other than those imposed in conformity with the law and which are necessary in a democratic society in the interests of national security or public safety, public order, the protection of public health or morals or the protection of the rights and freedoms of others.
​

That means that most Arab Palestinians are going to have trouble with the national security or public safety, public order issues. And Any Arab Palestinian who commit an offense which is solely intended to harm the Occupying Power, is going to have trouble meeting the entry criteria under international law; before they are even considered under Israeli domestic Law. In fact, most of the Arab Palestinians that have been pictured in these photos will never be able to transit Israeli Sovereign Territory without a very close scrutiny. The same can be said for those that have been arrested for any of the 19 International Counter-Terrorism Covenants.

(DOUBLE STANDARD)

None!


Most Respectfully,
R

There is no law, domestic or international that singles-out that Arab Palestinians for special restrictions. If they meet the criteria, they can get permission to enter.

The Right of Return has nothing to do with tourism or immigration. It is about where people belong under international law.

Nice try, but there's no such right.
Legally a nation cannot be forced to accept a hostile population.

 

[rylah]

RE: Who Are The Palestinians? Part 2
⁜→ P F Tinmore, et al,

I did not mention either "tourism or immigration." But the same set of domestic laws that govern "tourism or immigration" govern Border Protection. The same set of laws also govern acceptable types of Border Crossing Documentation.

There is no law, domestic or international that singles-out that Arab Palestinians for special restrictions. If they meet the criteria, they can get permission to enter.

The Right of Return has nothing to do with tourism or immigration. It is about where people belong under international law.

(COMMENT)

If you are looking for some right that just allows someone to walk across the frontier without a challenge - forget it. If you think that there is no global effort “Denying Safe Haven to those who Finance, Plan, Support or Commit Terrorist Acts, or Provide Safe Havens, and Preventing Terrorists from Abusing the Asylum System, in Conformity with International Law,” you've lost your mind.

IF you remember --- Resolution S/RES/1373 (2001) called upon States to take appropriate measures, in conformity with the relevant provisions of national and international law, “before granting refugee status, for the purpose of ensuring that those that have planned, facilitated or participated in the commission of terrorist acts, ”as well as to ensure that refugee status “is not abused by the perpetrators, organizers or facilitators of terrorist acts, the extradition of alleged terrorists.” Not only does Israel have a responsibility, but the State of Palestine (the Ramallah Government) has a responsibility to prevent the attempt of such people and to prosecute them.


Most Respectfully,
R

If you are looking for some right that just allows someone to walk across the frontier without a challenge

You have a lot of problems with the meaning of this so called frontier. The Green Line was drawn through Palestine. The line was to keep Israeli and Jordanian troops from attacking each other. Since the line was specifically not to be a political or territorial boundary, it did not say that it was one country on one side and another country on the other. And, since it was not a border, it was still Palestine on both sides.

What authority can keep the Palestinians from traveling freely within their own country?

Israel, the Jewish Nation State can do that,
as the sole nation vested with sovereignty over Palestine under international law.

 

[P F Tinmore]

RE: Who Are The Palestinians? Part 2
⁜→ P F Tinmore, Hollie, et al,

Here you are again with the unknown "talking points" comment.

You know as well as I do, that the status on the Question of Palestinian Statehood is still not confirmed by the courts. I cannot count the number of times I have mentioned this in commentary on the Situation in the State of Palestine. Did YOU READ Hollie's commentary on the subject (Posting #15841)?

It has been a month (or so) that the ICC Pre-Trial Chamber invites Palestine, Israel, interested States and others to submit observations and an amicus curiae.

See: No.: ICC-01/18 Date:13 February 2020.

I can only ask, "who in the crowd is old enough to return to someplace in Israel where they have once lived?"

Stupid post.

How many Israelis are old enough to "return" to someplace in Palestine where they have once lived?

A double standard of epic proportions.

(COMMENT)

I would ask you to open your eyes. It appears that at least six countries have filed an amicus brief that argues the court’s jurisdiction did not extend to the Palestinian territories.

What you consider to be "facts" about the Status of Palestine, may not be fact at all. But what I find interesting is that The Grand Duchy of Luxembourg, which is trying to rally for the Arab Palestinians is not having much luck. Although they condemn Germany's amicus brief, it is unclear if the Grand Duchy has submitted a brief of its own position.

(ON THE MATTER OF THE RIGHT OF RETURN)

The Customary Law on the concept of the "Right of Return" (RoR) is based on the Customary Law on the definition of the refugee, the displaced person, or the application of Civil and Political Rights. None of which are the same as what you give in context. The simplest of these is the Covenant:

Article 12
• International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights •

1. Everyone lawfully within the territory of a State shall, within that territory, have the right to liberty of movement and freedom to choose his residence.

⁜→ You would be hard pressed to find anyone in that picture that is 70 years old or older. That is how old you have to be in order to be even remotely considered under the Cuswtomary RoR. This is not a double standard because, since 1948, it was sovereign Israeli Territory with its own domestic laws. Something that the Arab Palestinians have not yet established.
​

2. Everyone shall be free to leave any country, including his own.

⁜→ Everyone is free to leave Israel. And just as similar, everyone is free to leave the West Bank, Jerusalem, and the Gaza Strip. BUT, non-Israeli citizens need Israeli permission to transit Israeli Territory. This is the exact same principle that is used in almost every country in the Middle East and North Africa; the US, the UK, the Russian Federation, etc, etc, etc....
​

3. The above-mentioned rights shall not be subject to any restrictions except those which are provided by law, are necessary to protect national security, public order (order public), public health or morals or the rights and freedoms of others, and are consistent with the other rights recognized in the present Covenant.

⁜→ The travel, entry and exit of Israel is covered by domestic law --- the same as nearly every country in the Northern Hemisphere. ​

4. No one shall be arbitrarily deprived of the right to enter his own country.

⁜→ Israeli domestic law on these matter are very specific and NOT arbitrary.​

There is no law, domestic or international that singles-out that Arab Palestinians for special restrictions. If they meet the criteria, they can get permission to enter. BUT keep in mind that the Covenant on Civil and Political Rights also says:

Article 20

1. Any propaganda for war shall be prohibited by law.

2. Any advocacy of national, racial or religious hatred that constitutes incitement to discrimination, hostility or violence shall be prohibited by law.

Article 21

The right of peaceful assembly shall be recognized. No restrictions may be placed on the exercise of this right other than those imposed in conformity with the law and which are necessary in a democratic society in the interests of national security or public safety, public order, the protection of public health or morals or the protection of the rights and freedoms of others.
​

That means that most Arab Palestinians are going to have trouble with the national security or public safety, public order issues. And Any Arab Palestinian who commit an offense which is solely intended to harm the Occupying Power, is going to have trouble meeting the entry criteria under international law; before they are even considered under Israeli domestic Law. In fact, most of the Arab Palestinians that have been pictured in these photos will never be able to transit Israeli Sovereign Territory without a very close scrutiny. The same can be said for those that have been arrested for any of the 19 International Counter-Terrorism Covenants.

(DOUBLE STANDARD)

None!


Most Respectfully,
R

There is no law, domestic or international that singles-out that Arab Palestinians for special restrictions. If they meet the criteria, they can get permission to enter.

The Right of Return has nothing to do with tourism or immigration. It is about where people belong under international law.

Nice try, but there's no such right.
Legally a nation cannot be forced to accept a hostile population.

You missed the point.

No surprise.

 

[rylah]

RE: Who Are The Palestinians? Part 2
⁜→ P F Tinmore, Hollie, et al,

Here you are again with the unknown "talking points" comment.

You know as well as I do, that the status on the Question of Palestinian Statehood is still not confirmed by the courts. I cannot count the number of times I have mentioned this in commentary on the Situation in the State of Palestine. Did YOU READ Hollie's commentary on the subject (Posting #15841)?

It has been a month (or so) that the ICC Pre-Trial Chamber invites Palestine, Israel, interested States and others to submit observations and an amicus curiae.

See: No.: ICC-01/18 Date:13 February 2020.

I can only ask, "who in the crowd is old enough to return to someplace in Israel where they have once lived?"

Stupid post.

How many Israelis are old enough to "return" to someplace in Palestine where they have once lived?

A double standard of epic proportions.

(COMMENT)

I would ask you to open your eyes. It appears that at least six countries have filed an amicus brief that argues the court’s jurisdiction did not extend to the Palestinian territories.

What you consider to be "facts" about the Status of Palestine, may not be fact at all. But what I find interesting is that The Grand Duchy of Luxembourg, which is trying to rally for the Arab Palestinians is not having much luck. Although they condemn Germany's amicus brief, it is unclear if the Grand Duchy has submitted a brief of its own position.

(ON THE MATTER OF THE RIGHT OF RETURN)

The Customary Law on the concept of the "Right of Return" (RoR) is based on the Customary Law on the definition of the refugee, the displaced person, or the application of Civil and Political Rights. None of which are the same as what you give in context. The simplest of these is the Covenant:

Article 12
• International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights •

1. Everyone lawfully within the territory of a State shall, within that territory, have the right to liberty of movement and freedom to choose his residence.

⁜→ You would be hard pressed to find anyone in that picture that is 70 years old or older. That is how old you have to be in order to be even remotely considered under the Cuswtomary RoR. This is not a double standard because, since 1948, it was sovereign Israeli Territory with its own domestic laws. Something that the Arab Palestinians have not yet established.
​

2. Everyone shall be free to leave any country, including his own.

⁜→ Everyone is free to leave Israel. And just as similar, everyone is free to leave the West Bank, Jerusalem, and the Gaza Strip. BUT, non-Israeli citizens need Israeli permission to transit Israeli Territory. This is the exact same principle that is used in almost every country in the Middle East and North Africa; the US, the UK, the Russian Federation, etc, etc, etc....
​

3. The above-mentioned rights shall not be subject to any restrictions except those which are provided by law, are necessary to protect national security, public order (order public), public health or morals or the rights and freedoms of others, and are consistent with the other rights recognized in the present Covenant.

⁜→ The travel, entry and exit of Israel is covered by domestic law --- the same as nearly every country in the Northern Hemisphere. ​

4. No one shall be arbitrarily deprived of the right to enter his own country.

⁜→ Israeli domestic law on these matter are very specific and NOT arbitrary.​

There is no law, domestic or international that singles-out that Arab Palestinians for special restrictions. If they meet the criteria, they can get permission to enter. BUT keep in mind that the Covenant on Civil and Political Rights also says:

Article 20

1. Any propaganda for war shall be prohibited by law.

2. Any advocacy of national, racial or religious hatred that constitutes incitement to discrimination, hostility or violence shall be prohibited by law.

Article 21

The right of peaceful assembly shall be recognized. No restrictions may be placed on the exercise of this right other than those imposed in conformity with the law and which are necessary in a democratic society in the interests of national security or public safety, public order, the protection of public health or morals or the protection of the rights and freedoms of others.
​

That means that most Arab Palestinians are going to have trouble with the national security or public safety, public order issues. And Any Arab Palestinian who commit an offense which is solely intended to harm the Occupying Power, is going to have trouble meeting the entry criteria under international law; before they are even considered under Israeli domestic Law. In fact, most of the Arab Palestinians that have been pictured in these photos will never be able to transit Israeli Sovereign Territory without a very close scrutiny. The same can be said for those that have been arrested for any of the 19 International Counter-Terrorism Covenants.

(DOUBLE STANDARD)

None!


Most Respectfully,
R

There is no law, domestic or international that singles-out that Arab Palestinians for special restrictions. If they meet the criteria, they can get permission to enter.

The Right of Return has nothing to do with tourism or immigration. It is about where people belong under international law.

Nice try, but there's no such right.
Legally a nation cannot be forced to accept a hostile population.

You missed the point.

No surprise.

But nothing to refute,
how surprising.

Got more of that wisdom?