Commenter Profile

Total number of comments: 7196 (since 2010-02-26 10:49:56)

talknic

An old Jewish guy in Oz. Tired of the fallacies surrounding the I/P issue We were given the territory for a homeland state, with more than enough room for every Jewish person on the planet, even today Since proclaiming its frontiers in the May 15th 1948 in the Israeli Government plea for international recognition, Israel has illegally acquired by force and occupied more and more territory outside of it's proclaimed and recognized Sovereign territory. None of which has ever been legally ceded to or legally annexed to Israel by any agreement or legal instrument The occupied have a right to violent resistance against armed citizens of the Occupying Power. However, no one has a right or excuse for committing acts of terrorism against innocent civilians. To that end: I condemn all forms of terrorism, murder and any other harmful crime by any individual, group, organization or state and; condemn any government, individual or organization who purposefully encourages the illegally settlement of territories held under occupation thereby purposefully endangering its own citizens by using them to create illegal facts on the ground Today the State of Israel continues to encourage Israeli civilians to create illegal settlements, illegal facts on the ground, breaking law that was adopted by the UN and International Comity in large part because of the treatment of our Jewish fellows under the Nazis. Law adopted to protect all civilians including those of an Occupying Power from the expected violent consequences of occupying another people and their territory Israel demands the swap of non-Israeli territory for non-Israeli territory so it can keep non-Israeli territory in a future settlement. There is no legal basis for the demand nor is there for the disarmament of a future Palestinian state. All states have equal right to self defense. Likewise, there is no legal basis for the demand to be recognized as the Jewish state. Israeli demands have no legal precedence or validity The Palestinians have no legal, moral or ethical obligation to forgo any of their legal rights. Negotiations mean only one thing, the Palestinians forgoing legal rights so Israel can benefit Were Israel to adhere to the law, it can easily protect itself, grow and prosper. It'd have no UN resolutions against it. No need to continuing to corrupt US politicians in order to maintain a UNSC veto vote. No need to lie to and endanger its citizens I've received too many threats for opposing Israel's policies towards the Palestinians, broken windows, graffiti'd walls, hate mail, I'd prefer to remain anonymous, if that's OK. Who I am is irrelevant. Reliable information is essential to informed dialogue towards resolving the I/P issue. Propaganda has no place in struggle for peace

Website: http://talknic.wordpress.com

Showing comments 200 - 101
Page:

  • US to differentiate between 'personally displaced' Palestinian refugees and their descendants
    • playforpalestine May 30, 2012 at 12:46 am

      Max Abrahms / Washington Institute for Near East Policy. Is not a neutral organization.

      Your UN Link is to a letter containing accusations. Accusations are not evidence nor are they a UNSC resolution.

      " none of your citations or links actually directly proved any of your assertions"

      Show how you reach this conclusion

      "At least one of them offered evidence refuting what you wrote:

      Cherry picking is cute..

    • Hostage May 27, 2012 at 6:04 pm

      "That Chapter is like the senescent provisions of the US Constitution regarding the practice of slavery. After the Declaration on the Granting of Independence to Colonial Peoples, the trusteeship system was phased-out and shutdown. There is no possibility that the UN will ever again appoint a state to govern another people’s territory."

      They're different Chapters. Chapt XII " The United Nations shall establish under its authority an international trusteeship system for the administration and supervision of such territoriesas may be placed thereunder by subsequent individual agreements

      Not military occupation

      Chapt XI is "Members of the United Nations which have or assume responsibilities for the administration of territories whose peoples have not yet attained a full measure of self-governmentrecognize the principle that the interests of the inhabitants of these territories are paramount, and accept as a sacred trust the obligation to promote to the utmost, within the system of international peace and security established by the present Charter, the well-being of the inhabitants of these territories, and, to this end... etc etc"

      Israel has assumed and has the role of Occupying Power via various Armistice and Peace Agreements. None with the Palestinians.

      UNSC res 476 - 3."Reconfirms that all legislative and administrative measures and actions taken by Israel, the occupying Power..."

      Yes, East Timor had huge problems, never the less East Timore's sovereignty over its territories were eventually restored.

      (diversion)
      It would appear through a deal with Indonesia, Australia and the US, whereby Australia would get to exploit East Timore gas for sale to the US, receiving huge US investment in the infrastructure for both the East Timore gas fields and the infrastructure for exporting uranium, gas from Australia. A railway line from Adelaide to Darwin, Port rebuilding and facilities in Darwin etc etc and various arms deals. It also played a big part in Australia following the US into Afghanistan and Iraq, under the Howard Government. Without gas from the East Timore Sea gas fields, Australia's aggregate output was worth the US considering investment. With the ET gas fields, Australia is able to supply Japan, the US and China.

      In return for getting to be able to deal with East Timore and exploit the East Timore Sea gas reserves, both the US and Australia would turn a blind eye to Indonesian atrocities in West Papua.

      At the time China was making offers to East Timore. The US desired to keep the Chinese out of the region. Very advantageou$ for Au$tralia.

      Sorry, I'm not familiar with Kosovo. Never the less I don't think either East Timore or Kosovo were under the United Nations Trusteeship Council.

      ---

      To your PS. Yes. It ain't pretty.

    • Fredblogs May 27, 2012 at 7:12 pm

      "It buys weapons from the U.S. Of course Israel receives weapons. Wouldn’t be much point buying them if they didn’t receive them. "

      Couldn't 'buy' them at all if there was no US military aid. You're arguing around in circles.

    • playforpalestine May 30, 2012 at 6:11 am

      //“Can you cite any UNSC resolution condemning any Arab UN Member State for invading or attacking ‘Jewish’ land or Israeli territory?”//

      "Aren’t you proving his point here? "

      He has no point

      "Why isn’t there any resolution?"

      The Arab States didn't invade Israel according to this web site... they invaded "Palestine".... don't you trust it?

      You want the UNSC to pass a resolution on the Arab States for something they didn't do?

    • playforpalestine May 30, 2012 at 3:14 am

      "Based on your argument does that mean that you also support the rights of settlers to repopulate formerly Jewish areas within the OPT?"

      LOL The arguments become more and more bizarre

      You mean Israeli citizens in "territories occupied" and never unoccupied, "outside the State of Israel"?

      The UNSC says your 'settlers' are illegal.

    • Fredblogs
      May 28, 2012 at 8:02 pm

      " there has never been an independent country of Palestine"

      So what? Palestine was a Provisional State according to the LoN Charter Article 22 , reiterated in the LoN Mandate for Palestine, FIRST line of the text.

      Israel wasn't anything, didn't exist until we were granted, completely free the 'territory' for a state.

      Palestine has been under occupation in part or whole for over 2,000 years from the Roman era. Israel is the last Occupying Power in a long list of Occupying Powers. A country cannot declare independence whilst under occupation in part or in total and Israel has occupied parts of Palestine since 1948 . All the while illegally claiming Palestinian territory for itself.

      "If the Palestinians ever decide that peace is a better option than forever demanding a RoR that they are never going to get then there might someday be an independent Palestine. Barring that, its the status quo for the foreseeable future"

      While Israel keeps breaking International Law, illegally acquiring territory, illegally annexing, illegally settling, there will be no peace.

      Only Israel's refusal to end the occupation and end it's vile land grabbing policies prevents Independent Palestinian Statehood. Only the US veto vote in the UNSC protects Israel from the law.

      The Jewish state was granted recognition whilst it was waging war on what remained of Palestine after Israel was declared independent of Palestine, per UNGA res 181 which Israel considered "binding"

      Israel was granted recognition while Jewish terrorists were operating "outside the State of Israel", in Palestine.

      The Law actually comes down on the side of the Palestinians. It has been Israel collecting hand over fist numerous UNSC resolutions. Not the Arab States.

      The only thing Israel has is the US veto vote in the UNSC. Nothing else. All them precious eggs in one precious basket which is slowly being unwoven by the power of the internet, where people can read factual information

      Drip by drip, step by step, the Hasbara is having it's loose ends pulled apart, only to find there's nothing there but bullsh*te!

    • Hostage May 26, 2012 at 5:29 pm

      Gracias y sí

      To my mind the UN has put it in as close as one can get in lay man's language in Chapt XI, with no mention of 'nation'

      CHAPTER XI: DECLARATION REGARDING NON-SELF-GOVERNING TERRITORIES
      Article 73

      Members of the United Nations which have or assume responsibilities for the administration of territories whose peoples have not yet attained a full measure of self-government recognize the principle that the interests of the inhabitants of these territories are paramount, and accept as a sacred trust the obligation to promote to the utmost, within the system of international peace and security established by the present Charter, the well-being of the inhabitants of these territories, and, to this end:

      Non-self-governing territory (could be an autonomous province / an undeclared territory / Provisional State / protectorate / under occupation in part or whole)

      It is only the US UNSC veto vote preventing UN admission of Palestine and the end of occupation in both Palestine and Syria. Then and only then will Deuteronomy 20:15 be finally put to rest.

    • Fredblogs May 25, 2012 at 7:24 pm

      "For thousands of years, and even since then for anyone who isn’t Jewish, land was taken by force"

      Since at least 1945 it has been against the UN Charter and International Law

      "The Arabs even approved of that since they tried to take Jewish land by force after rejecting partition that would have left a slight majority of Jews in the Jewish areas"

      Can you cite any UNSC resolution condemning any Arab UN Member State for invading or attacking 'Jewish' land or Israeli territory?

      "But as soon as Jews get some land, suddenly and retroactively its “international law says no”"

      Strange, 1945 is BEFORE 1947, 1948, 1967

    • playforpalestine May 25, 2012 at 10:00 pm

      "I thought you were arguing that Palestine is now its own nation, as it was recognized by several dozen nations in 1988?"

      There's no such thing as official recognition of 'nation' and; recognition of statehood is not the same as recognition of independent statehood.

      Palestine has never in its entire history been free of some form of occupation in whole or in part, thus, never independent. Contrary to the Hasbara bullsh*te, there has never been an opportunity for Palestine to declare independent statehood. Never an opportunity to miss.

      It has in fact been the Zionist Federation and its agencies who have missed (#&*ked up) every opportunity for Jewish folk to live anywhere in their 'historic homeland' by demanding a separate Jewish state. Missed opportunity after missed opportunity, because now a part of the 'historic homeland ' is Palestine and Israel is less than the 'historic homeland'. Which means the 'historic homeland' is just that, an 'historic' homeland.

      The territory of Israel on the other hand, was free of all occupation when the Israeli Declaration came into effect May 15th 1948, AFTER the LoN Mandate for Palestine (British Occupation) expired 14th May 1948, and by the 15th May 1948 Jewish forces were already in control of territory allocated for the Arab State, outside of that allocated to the State of Israel.

      The Arabs had until Oct 1948 to declare Independence if they wished, it wasn't nor could it ever have been obligatory on them or anyone else to declare 'independence'. Israel is still the occupying Palestinian territories. Until occupation ends, independent Palestinian statehood cannot be seen as effective.

      " If that’s the case, that Palestine gained independence when Jordan dissolved their union..."

      Uh? Israel became the Occupying Power over the non-self-governing territory of Palestine in '67. Still no 'independence' for Palestine

      "Isn’t the generally accepted rule that one ceases to be a refugee once citizenship and residency in a new state is obtained?"

      Uh? If they're refugees in Palestine, A) Palestine is NOT the country of return so; B) why should they accept citizenship elsewhere, even in Palestine, if they wish to return as is their right, to their former place of residence?

      Anything else you need to distort, lie about, deny, feign ignorance or obfuscate on? Because I can guarantee, what ever it is, it will be full of holes, seeping Zionist bullsh*te.

    • Fredblogs May 25, 2012 at 12:51 pm

      "We know what was done with the money given to Israel. Most of it went to U.S. weapons manufacturers"

      And Israel doesn't get anything. AMAZING!!! I'd have thought Israel would have received like .... weapons or something.

    • playforpalestine May 25, 2012 at 10:48 pm

      "Where did you get this revisionist history from?"

      Can you point to precisely what I have actually 'revised'?

      "there is no such thing as an actual RIGHT of return"

      I see... I guess no Jewish folk had a right of return to the Arab States then and; Germany's legislation giving RoR for Jewish folk even though they are no longer refugees, AND their lineal descendants, is meaningless. Meanwhile the UN disagrees with your unsourced opinion... http://unispal.un.org/UNISPAL.NSF/0/418E7BC6931616B485256CAF00647CC7 .... http://unispal.un.org/UNISPAL.NSF/0/C758572B78D1CD0085256BCF0077E51A

      " Israel is under no obligation to allow them a right of return"

      Israel signed Armistice Agreements and; Peace Treaties with Jordan and Egypt and; Israel is a UN Member State... No?

      "a large amount of the refugees in question were Jordanian citizens between 1950 and 1988. They should have lost their refugee status then"

      Jordan annexed what became officially known as the West Bank as a temporary trustee only (Session: 12-II Date: May 1950) at the instance of the Arab States. As such Jordan offered temporary citizenship whilst it was the trustee and; agreed to relinquish its role to Israel in the ISRAEL-JORDAN PEACE TREATY

      "UNRWA allows Palestinians to become citizens of another state while retaining their refugee status"

      UNRWA 's mandate doesn't extend to such matters

      "Polls suggest they would be very happy to have citizenship wherever they are currently"

      Are these neutral polls? Put them up.... thx ... I'll wait ...

      "While I think it’s great that they said these things, when they actually invaded"

      They didn't invade Palestine to create a state. Poor reading are obviously a prerequisite for propagandists

      "they immediately ethnically cleansed all of the Jews from territory they held on to"

      The US, the UK, Australia deported or interred Japanese, Germans during the war. It's quite common, those countries either released or allowed their return after the war.

      Meanwhile under Plan Dalet, Jewish forces ethnically cleansed in the weeks BEFORE Israel was declared and Israeli/Jewish forces PERMANENTLY ethnically cleansed areas "outside of the State of Israel" after Israel was declared.

      "Jordan expelled all of the Jews"

      None fled the violence to the safety of Israel of their own volition? AMAZING!!

      " and then got to work demolishing .."

      How much was actually destroyed in the normal course of warfare? How much was partially destroyed and a danger and as a consequence was demolished?

      Jews and Christians were barred from entering East Jerusalem and having access to any of the holy sites under Jordan’s control":

      Israeli emergency ordinance attached to the law of entry of 1948 (still in force) prevented/s Israeli residents and citizens from entering the territory of a hostile state. How many Japanese were allowed to enter the US in WWII? Germans allowed to enter Britain were they? A common occurrence in war.

      "That document also said this: “The Governments of the Arab States recognise that the independence of Palestine.... They alone should exercise the attributes of their independence, through their own means and without any kind of foreign interference, immediately after peace, security, and the rule of law have been restored to the country.”

      Obviously we know that Jordan remained and annexed the WB and EJ for itself, denying the Palestinians the self-determination it had assured them of."

      Odd ... The West Bank as it is now known, was legally annexed at the request of the Palestinians and; as I have shown above, only as a temporary trustee at the insistence of the other Arab States. They didn't invade to form a state. They invaded to protect and restore order in what remained of Palestine after Israel was declared independent of Palestine. There is no UNSC resolution condemning the Arab States invasion of Palestine BTW. Certainly no UNSC resolution condemning them for invading Israel.

      "Basically nothing you cited here has any validity"

      Uh huh .. I've actually 'cited' and provided sources. You have 'cited' NO THING. Providing only unsourced opinion.

    • ritzl "a referendum to clarify the illegality of the occupation"

      Illegality is determined by Law, the UN Charter, Conventions, Armistice & Peace agreements.

      The occupation is by agreement between Israel and the various Arab States, giving Israel military control of the non-self-governing territories through Armistice Agreements or in the case of Israel/Egypt & Jordan, Peace Agreements.

      The 'actions' of the Occupying Power are in breach of the responsibilities of " Members of the United Nations which have or assume responsibilities for the administration of territories whose peoples have not yet attained a full measure of self-government..." (CHAPTER XI: DECLARATION REGARDING NON-SELF-GOVERNING TERRITORIES
      Article 73). Which is why there are so many UNSC Resolutions against Israel.

      As to the circular arguments put forward by Israel, of course.... As long as a legal matter is in dispute, it's not resolved. E.g., While the argument over 'the' or 'all' in UNSC res 242 raged on, there was no resolution for Israel or anyone else to be held to.

      After UNSC res 242 was adopted, then came the bizarre arguments over what it meant, even though it took countless hours to ensure it only said exactly what it meant.

      Logic tells us "territories occupied" and never unoccupied, are still occupied territories. It's reflected in UNSC Res 252 and its SIX reminders. Perhaps best encapsulated in its entirety in UNSC Res 476. The Israel/Egypt/Jordan Peace agreements show us the purpose of UNSC Res 242 (and 338).

      Put through the Ziofier, UNSC Res 242 comes out as 'the Palestinians must negotiate borders with Israel'. Yet UNSC Res 242 doesn't mention Palestine, Palestinians or contain the word 'negotiate'. It had nothing to do with Palestinian Statehood. It was a resolution to end hostilities between already existing states, all of which had existing borders determined BEFORE Israel was declared.

    • seafoid

      I am aware of and in no way condone the population transfers, forced resettlement and expulsions visited on the various populations during and after the war.

      I was however, specifically addressing the 'acquisition' of 'territory' by war with the creation of the UN 24 October 1945 as a base line. Territories were 'acquired' by being ceded and annexed through treaties and agreements. Some before the creation of the UN...

      A Feb 1945 agreement where Russia would annex a portion of Eastern Poland & Poland would take part of Eastern Germany.... an Aug 1945 treaty between the Polish Govt & Russia to formally cede territories which were then annexed to Russia .... Needless to say not all were fair or worked out in the long term

    • Fredblogs May 25, 2012 at 1:05 pm

      "I don’t think anyone counts the Jews in general as refugees"

      Correct. Having taken citizenship in countries other than that of return, they are no longer refugees.

      Any country that wants to is free to offer Palestinians, or Muslims generally, automatic citizenship"

      Indeed. If they want it. The Palestinians have maintained a desire to return.

      <em"Israel chooses to offer citizenship to Jews, not because they are refugees, but simply because Israel wants to"

      The operative word now is more likely "needs" to. A) In order to maintain a Jewish majority B) to keep feeding the illegal settlement industry. Where a state sells territory OUTSIDE of it's recognized sovereign extent, to developers and duped illegal Israeli settlers who think, or want to believe, they're living in Israel.

    • Fredblogs May 25, 2012 at 1:25 pm

      "Totally different animal. “Head of the family” and “_DEPENDENTS_” not “DESCENDANTS”. "

      All families are made up of lineal descendants.

      "That means that if an actual refugee has young children the young children can get help while the parents are getting help, not that refugee status passes from generation to generation without limit"

      A person living in a refugee camp is a refugee.

      "If you are a child, the heads of the family are your parents. Once you grow up, that is no longer the head of your family, you are"

      And if you're living in a refugee camp, have no state, you're a refugee. Except of course in the diseased mind of a Ziocaine addict building little strawmen everywhere they go.

    • Fredblogs May 25, 2012 at 12:26 pm

      “Territory can’t be taken by force”

      Who are you quoting? What was actually said is still there. "acquired"

      "Also China"

      Indeed, fine company Israel keeps.

      "the U.S., Spain"

      They've 'acquired' which territories by war, post 1945?

      "the countries that took chunks of German territory after WWII"

      Under treaties and agreements and; East and West Germany were occupied, not "acquired" by the Occupying Powers.

      "and every other country in the world, which all took territory by force"

      Since 1945... AMAZING!! Got any more straw. Perhaps you should get some reading glasses for your guide dog.

      Rpt ... // legal annexation is only via a referendum of the legitimate citizens of the territory to be annexed, sans the citizens of the Occupying Power. The legal annexation of Texas by the US, via a referendum of the MEXICAN citizens of Texas 1845, was a precursor to legal annexation becoming Customary International Law (thru being adopted by a majority of States) before the UN Charter of 1945 //

      You come bearing gifts of straw, combined with poor reading skills.

      But let's say your decrepit strawmen stood up. A) How many wrongs make a right? B) If the countries you mentioned had not, as you have alleged "taken territory by force", Israel would then turn around and return all the territory it has illegally 'acquired' by war, never legally annexed and illegally settled, post 1948 (which is post 1945).

      Please clarify....thx

    • OlegR May 25, 2012 at 5:16 am

      "UNRWA was set up yo help the refugees rehabilitation"

      UN General Assembly Resolution 302 (IV), of 8 December 1949 tells us exactly why it was set up. (No results for: "rehabilitation" "rehabilitate" "rehabilitated" "rehabilitating" "rehab")

      "This suits perfectly the Arab countries in which they are residing since it absolves them from any kind of responsibility for people (their Arab brothers )that live in their territories for 60 years now without even a semblance of any kind of rights"

      Your Hasbarrow has a huge gaping hole, eaten away by the crap you load it up with ....

      The very fact that they are residing in the Arab States as refugees, shows the Arab States are abiding by at least their basic responsibilities and obligations to refugees. They're not asylum seekers or seeking to immigrate. The host countries for refugees are not obliged to offer refugees citizenship.

      No one gets full citizenship rights in ANY COUNTRY unless they take up citizenship in that country and; if they take up citizenship in any country other than the country of return, as Jewish refugees did in Israel and many other countries around the planet, people are no longer considered refugees and they lose their Right of Return.

      The Arab States have voluntarily hosted Palestine refugees for 64 years at enormous costs. They have changed their legislature to accommodate the Palestine refugees desire to maintain RoR.

      The Arab States have fought wars on behalf of the Palestinians against the 'peace loving' neighbour who has illegally acquired Palestinian territory by war, illegally annexed Palestinian territory and illegally settled Palestinian territory.

      The Arab States for 27 years from 1920 to 1947, fought the legal battle for self determination for all of Palestine's legitimate citizens, including Palestinian Jews until circa 1936, when the Zionist Federation first set foot in the region. (the Zionist Federation and its founders were not even from the region even though at the time the federation was founded, Jewish folk could have gone to Palestine, immigrated, bought land, settled anywhere in Palestine. Not even Herzl bothered)

      Even on the 15th May 1948 in the Declaration on the Invasion of Palestine, the Arab States guaranteed democracy and freedom of religion almost word for word with the LoN Mandate for Palestine, esp Article 7

      "the establishment of a unitary Palestinian State, in accordance with democratic principles, whereby its inhabitants will enjoy complete equality before the law, [and whereby] minorities will be assured of all the guarantees recognised in democratic constitutional countries, and [whereby] the holy places will be preserved and the right of access thereto guaranteed."

      There is nothing in your Hasbarrow olde chap. There is no valid justification for Israel's illegal behaviour, nor has there ever been. There is only the US veto vote in the UNSC. All of Israel's illegally acquired eggs are in one precious basket.

    • Seems our Hasbaristas are ignorant of the chronological sequence of events which show their Ziocaine addled strawmen to be nothing but disembodied Ziochaff, poor lil' darls.

      Let's start with their UNRWA nonsense because it's so easily shown to be the same olde same olde BULLSH*TE pushed by Israel.

      The UNRWA definition does not cover final status. It only provides, as its name suggests, relief and works whilst people are refugees. It's on the UNRWA site. I'm sure they and Professor Ruth Lapidoth would have found it had they actually cared for facts or really wanted to understand or shine light on the actual situation, instead of spreading their bullsh*te far and wide.

      To the chronology of official events, statements and claims; (for our straw bringing friends, chronology means one should look at the dates to see what comes before and after)

      The official Palestinian claim is based on UNGA res 194, adopted 11 December 1948, a year before any UNRWA definition could possibly have been written and before UNRWA came into existence on the 8 December 1949.

      RoR under UNGA res 194 is based on this definition, which does not include lineal descendants. It also included Jewish folk on the same basis. However any person who takes up citizenship in a country other than that of return, is no longer a refugee. There are no longer any Jewish refugees from Arab States, who were not dispossessed by the Palestinians, nor did the Palestinians vote for the leaders of those regimes. In fact, the Palestinians of today were at best small children in 1948. Unless of course one uses Ziomaths.

      Nor were Jews expelled from Palestine by the Palestine refugees of 1948. Unless of course one uses Ziologic. They're refugees because instead of fighting, they fled, as was the right of all civilians and; as civilians have the Right to Return.

      Furthermore, UNGA res 194 was adopted before the 31st Aug 1949, when Israel made its first official claim to territories it held under occupation via the 1948/49 war. ( Israeli Govt Statements on occupation here May 22nd 1948 and here Aug 12th 1948)

      Territories "outside the State of Israel" were not recognized as Israeli territory in 1948, 1949 or ever. Territory cannot not be acquired by force, only by legal annexation or agreement.

      There has never been an agreement with Palestine and; legal annexation is only via a referendum of the legitimate citizens of the territory to be annexed, sans the citizens of the Occupying Power. The legal annexation of Texas by the US, via a referendum of the MEXICAN citizens of Texas 1845, was a precursor to legal annexation becoming Customary International Law (thru being adopted by a majority of States) before the UN Charter of 1945.

      RoR to the actual legally recognized sovereign territory of the State of Israel, applies only to about 25,000 or so Palestine refugees, (my estimate) who are all an absolute minimum age of 64 yrs , beyond the age of rampant procreation.

      RoR to territories illegally acquired by war by Israel in 1948/49 and 1967, none of which has ever been legally annexed to Israel, presents a completely different set of issues which will depend on how generous the Palestinians are in helping Israel get out of the deep dark illegal sh*t hole Israel has dug for itself through 64 years of ignoring International Law, deceiving Israelis, itself and attempting to deceive the rest of the world.

      It also presents a quagmire for the US. Because the US recognized the legal extent of Israeli Sovereignty on the 15th of May 1948 as being "an independent republic within frontiers approved by the General Assembly of the United Nations in its Resolution of November 29, 1947, and that a provisional government has been charged to assume the rights and duties of government for preserving law and order within the boundaries of Israel, for defending the state against external aggression, and for discharging the obligations of Israel to the other nations of the world in accordance with international law. " The US has never recognized any other territory as being Sovereign to Israel. Which is perhaps why the 30,000 US estimate is much the same as my own.

      It also explains why the US supports a negotiated settlement between Israel and the Palestinians. Were Israel made to face the full effect of the law, the official US recognition of Israel is only "within frontiers approved by the General Assembly of the United Nations in its Resolution of November 29, 1947". So the US is left only with the option of vetoing Chapt VII resolutions against Israel.

      Were Israel made to face the law, it would be sent bankrupt for decades and likely erupt into civil war as it attempted to relocate millions of Israelis back to Sovereign Israeli territory. Unfortunately such a civil war would be fought predominantly outside of the State of Israel, as such the other Regional Powers would have a right, as they did in 1948, to intervene.

      Had Israel adhered to the Law, been satisfied with its lot, the situation would not be as it is. It has only itself to blame. It has the generosity of the Palestinians to thank for even considering the so called '67 borders.

  • Senate fight today over the number of Palestinian refugees
    • Fredblogs May 24, 2012 at 2:38 pm

      "Actually, are there any other people in the world where the descendants of refugees are considered refugees?"

      Yes. German legislation grants RoR for Jewish folk and their lineal descendants, which is beyond the requirement.

      Yes. All lineal descendants of refugees who're in a refugee camp are considered to be refugees.

    • playforpalestine May 25, 2012 at 10:42 am

      "The big difference is that nowhere else are there states so morally bankrupt as the Arab states who refuse to allow any Palestinian refugees to become citizens of any of their states"

      Palestinian refugees don't want to become citizens of the Arab States. They'd rather maintain their RoR. Nor do the Arab States have any obligation to offer refugees citizenship if they don't want it.

      " (except for Jordan, which later reneged anyway)"

      Jordan offered limited citizenship to Palestinians when it was the Occupying Power over the West Bank in AGREEMENT with Israel under the 1949 Armistice AGREEMENT and; Jordan offered specifically limited citizenship to Palestine refugees in Jordanian refugee camps, without infringing on their RoR

      Israel is now the Occupying Power of the West Bank under the Israeli / Jordan Peace Treaty.

      "Not only that but they created a separate UN organization dedicated JUST to the Palestinians. "

      In fact it was for all refugees from Palestine. People can check. Pity you don't. It doesn't say "Palestinian" anywhere.

      "UNRWA concerns itself primarily with politics"

      Politics and final status are not within its mandate.

      "For example, it has refuse on many occasions prevented states like Israel from building modern brick structures in Gaza refugee camps"

      Quote the official offer ... You'll find it involved swapping Palestinian land for Palestinian land with the Palestinians, in order that Israel could get prime Palestinian land for illegal Israeli settlers.

    • playforpalestine

      Uh huh... Problem... East Jerusalem isn't in Israel. Try UNSC res 476

  • The occupier's agenda: divorcing Gaza from the West Bank
  • Video: Israeli mob demands all African refugees be deported from the country (and anyone who disagrees deserves to be raped)
    • dimadok May 24, 2012 at 7:08 am

      "How about UK- visited any deportation centers recently?"

      Where people can be deported for what exactly?

    • dimadok May 24, 2012 at 7:34 am

      "Sorry -I’ve should used a quotation marks."

      You're kicking your own strawman while he's down. Who would you have been quoting?

      dimadok May 23, 2012 at 11:09 pm

      " Oh my, those horrible, horrible Jews!!! How dare are they!"

      Mind if I quote your Antisemitic remark?

      "You are always happy to beat the old drum of “horrible” Israel"

      Quoting yourself!

  • Did Israeli Eurovision contestant watch too much Juliano Mer Khamis?
  • Affirming a Judaism and Jewish identity without Zionism
  • Israeli judge to issue verdict in Rachel Corrie case
    • Fred..

      Can't see to work through metal either.

    • Rachel Corrie turns the bile levels in supporters of the illegal Greater Israel into a torrent of blinding hatred

      Perhaps because she was a young woman brave enough to challenge the IDF to adhere to its own regulations and the standard regulations for operating heavy machinery. They failed and;
      although unfortunate, her death is perhaps even more effective in the long run than stopping one bulldozer from demolishing one house

      If one is to believe the likes of Fred and the driver could not see a person purposefully wearing bright colours and purposefully doing everything in her power to be seen, one wonders just how anyone could effectively operate the machinery at all.

    • Fredblogs
      "I love the overblown language though: “kept pieces of her body”. Like he has her head on a stick in his office or something rather than routine samples"

      I love the overblown language. A single cell is a part of a body Fred.

      Why the need for taking any samples at all, when the cause of her death was rather obvious.

      Histological testing is an essential process in organ harvesting BTW.

  • March of the Flags
  • The Messiah's Donkey: Settlers fire on Palestinian villagers as the Israeli military watches
  • Danish right-wing: ‘Made in settlement’ labels preempt Israel’s expanding borders
    • The resources of a non-self-governing territory are the "property" of its legitimate citizens.

      Israel is obliged as the "Occupying Power" Laws of War Art. 55. “The occupying State shall be regarded only as administrator and usufructuary of public buildings, real estate, forests, and agricultural estates belonging to the hostile State, and situated in the occupied country. It must safeguard the capital of these properties, and administer them in accordance with the rules of usufruct.”

      It is a war crime to use Palestinian resources to benefit illegal settlers.

  • U. of Haifa stops Nakba commemoration, as prof writes hate post calling for 'Many Nakbas'
    • Fredblogs May 18, 2012 at 8:01 pm //“Israelis are demons from Hell” Tanaka for one) isn’t that racist. //

      Israelis aren't a race, it's a nationality.

  • Killing Without Consequence: New campaign challenges Israeli impunity
    • "i consider myself to be a moral man who wouldn’t hurt another human being without due provocation "

      That's odd Fred, you're here busy justifying the illegal acquisition of Palestinian territory and anything Israel does to anyone who gets in the way of the Greater Israel project.

      Now please, list the Palestinian 'provocation' committed by today's Palestinians pre - 1897. That is when the Zionist Federation, who were not from Palestine or in Palestine, decided to colonize Palestine. Pre the Balfour Declaration, pre the LoN Mandate for Palestine, pre the Holocaust which was over 65 years ago and in which Palestinians of today took absolutely no part.

      The Zionist Federation colonization project however, hasn't stopped. It continues long after we were given territory, completely FREE, for a Jewish state. TODAY, Palestinians are being dispossessed in their own territory by Israel's refusal to abide by the UN Charter and International Law.

      BTW it's interesting to note Herzl never lived in the region, although in his life time he could have immigrated and bought land and settled anywhere in Palestine. Now he's buried in Palestine, "outside the State of Israel"

  • Neverending Nakba: Israel breaks lull, attacks Gazan farmers
  • International attention must be paid to the Palestinian nonviolent movement
    • giladg

      "In 1967, after the Six Day War, Israel was in a position to change the status-quo in Jerusalem"

      UNSC res 252 and SIX reminders say you're spouting the holey olde Hasbara

      "what did Israel do?"

      Other than agree to an Armistice Agreement, then illegally annex and illegally settle, illegally claiming territory for itself?

      " Israel ... allowed the Muslim Wakaf to continue it administrative control of this shared site"

      "allowed"? Was obliged. The arrogance of some people has no boundaries... Israel had no say in changing the status of any religious site in "territories occupied" under the Armistice Agreement.

      "Remember this is the holiest site for Jews"

      Uh huh... But it isn't in Israeli territory. You have to flip from Israel to Jews, then flop back again, desperately trying to justify. It's hilarious.

      "on top of the ruins of those Temples, Muslims build mosques."

      Quite. Muslims built a house of worship to the same G-od. Muslims build Mosques. Muslims should have built a synagogue? AMAZING!!!

      BTW it was Israeli Emergency Law of 1948 that forbade Israelis, Jewish and non-Jewish, from entering the territory of a hostile state, that prevented Jews from visiting the Temple Mount from 1948 to 1967. It's still in force BTW, simply disregarded when it comes to Jewish Israelis entering "territories occupied".

      "Jews have already made the compromise"

      "Jews" now is it? Israel has made NO compromises. Not one in 64 years. It has only taken, against International Law and its obligations to the UN Charter, purposefully setting out to deceive

      "Now go and demand the same from the Palestinians"

      Like what? They have no thing of Israel's. No Israeli territory, no Israeli prisoners, no illegal settlements in Israel. Nada, nil, zip.

      Israel's demands for recognition of the Jewish State has no legal foundation what so ever. No entity can be forced to recognize another. It's a unilateral decision to recognize. No other entity has ever been asked to recognize the "Jewish State" and no entity has recognized Israel other than as its official name "THE STATE OF ISRAEL"

      Can you answer me these four simple questions honestly?
      1) What countries did Israel recognize before statehood?
      2) How many countries has Israel officially recognized in 64 years?
      3) How many countries have recognized Palestine?
      4) How many countries recognized Israel before it was admitted into the UN?

  • Rep. Pitts in damage control mode following call for Arafat-Sharon negotiations
  • Nakba 64 years later, we will never forget
    • Sherri Munnerlyn

      You could also point out this little caveat from the Hamas Charter
      http://www.mideastweb.org/hamas.htm
      Article Thirty-One: “As to those who have not borne arms against you on account of religion, nor turned you out of your dwellings, Allah forbiddeth you not to deal kindly with them, and to behave justly towards them; for Allah loveth those who act justly.”

      The Lukid Charter has no such provision.

  • I Want My NPT: A weekend review of Iran nuclear program propaganda
  • The neocon machine
    • PNAC 1998 Letter to Clinton.

      Nothing has changed and with the US withdrawing from both Iraq and Afghanistan one can only wonder if it is preparation for the next step. The Military–industrial complex is a hungry beast

  • In power shortages, cuts should go to 'Gaza first,' says Israeli minister
    • Tree

      Quite. People who support a Greater Israel don't care what they say, how big a lie is, how many they tell or how utterly stupid they make themselves look. They're purpose is to spread propaganda, muddy the waters, waste your time and frustrate.

      Whatever they write, it's an opportunity to show other folk who might be reading how vile .... twisted ..... and illogical are the tricks they try to use.

      They're a great foil, on which you can hone your arguments

      A classic is the argument about whether Arabs have a deed (Civil Law) to real estate (property), when Israel is in breech of International Law regarding "territories".

      "property" (real estate) and "territory" are two separate words in UNGA and UNSC resolutions and in the UN Charter Chapt XI. 'territory' belongs to all its legitimate citizens, whether they own 'real estate', rent or lease 'real estate' or are bums living under a bridge.

      Another classic is "why can't Jews build homes in Jerusalem. (occupied territory since Aug 1948 BTW). Israeli citizens, be they Jewish OR non-Jewish, are prohibited from illegally settling in "territories occupied" under the GC's. Furthermore the GC's are there to protect ALL civilians, Israeli and Palestinian from the consequences of war. By ignoring the GC's thru encouraging illegal settlement, the Israeli Government is purposefully placing Israeli citizens in danger and escalating the cost of occupation by then having to protect them.

      The bottom line is, there is no valid reason or explanation or justification what so ever for the illegal acquisition of Palestinian territory outside the Internationally recognized sovereign extent of the State of Israel.

      Israel's first leaders decided to start with deceit by purposefully not mentioning borders in the Declaration for the Establishment of the State of Israel. Once you lie there are only two ways to go A) admit the deceit or; B) keep lying.

      Truth needs no explanation. The statements by the Israeli Government of 1948/1949 on record in the UN/UNSC have not changed since they were made. The Hasbara moves from lie to lie. From one invalid point to another

    • High five Annie ..

      The propaganda peddlers seem to think folk won't check what they obviously don't check?

      There's nothing in their rickety olde Hasbarrows but an endless supply of straw.

    • OlegR May 14, 2012 at 5:31 am

      Oooooops!! What a lame Hasbarabot

      "and (iii) Israeli destruction of Palestinian power system facilities by military action, such as the June 2006 attack on the Gaza Power Plant that created a serious short-term crisis for power users in Gaza. These actions undermine Palestinian efforts to attract investment to its energy sector."

      Next

    • asherpat / OlegR
      " occupied palestine"

      All the territory Israel has acquired by war and never legally annexed to Israel. Israel has never legally annexed ANY territory "outside the State of Israel, it's one third of the territory Israel now illegally claims as its own.

      There has been no official international recognition of Israel as anything other than "within frontiers approved by the General Assembly of the United Nations in its Resolution of November 29, 1947"

      Have you any evidence of Israel legally acquiring any territory outside of the State of Israel?

      I have heaps of evidence that it HASN'T! And that it acknowledged it's borders with Palestine, before ever claiming any territory http://wp.me/pDB7k-KL

    • asherpat
      "So if one party does not transfer a resourse to another, than the former is considered as occupying the latter?"

      If you say so. No one else is. Meanwhile UNSC Res 1860 ...ever read it? It says something about "occupied" wasn't Egypt..

      Israel has been occupying Palestinian territory since 1948 BTW. Never legally annexed, never un'occupied'.

      Egypt has the 2005 agreement with Israel. Still in force ... ever read it? Israel has the last say as to what goes in and out of Gaza. Israel will not allow the materials for infrastructure to build a line from Egypt to Gaza. Egypt hasn't yet cancelled the Israel/Egypt Peace Treaty... would you like Egypt to breech the Peace Agreement?

      I'll bet you haven't read GC IV either //Art. 59. If the whole or part of the population of an occupied territory is inadequately supplied, the Occupying Power shall agree to relief schemes on behalf of the said population, and shall facilitate them by all the means at its disposal.//

      Sorry to poke more holes in your holey olde Hasbara. Next...

  • Artifacts of the early Israel lobby: 1917 map for American consumption
  • House support for Israel damages prospects for peace
    • Fredblogs

      "If the Palestinians don’t want to be used as a test case for iron dome, the solution is simple. Stop firing missiles at Israel."

      Israel's illegally acquisition of Palestinian territory began way before any home made rockets were fired at Israel....

      The down fall of colonialist empires is the expense of protecting their ill gotten gains. USSR, Spanish, Brits, Portuguese, Romans .... Kingdom of David

    • OlegR
      "The faster Hamas understands the futility of his attempts to pressure Israel via military means the faster it will change his tactics to a more peaceful ones the better everybody will be"

      All peaceful means have been blocked by the US veto vote in the UNSC for far longer than Hamas has existed....

      Say...... Did Irgun et al, stop their pre-state terrorist activities?

      Did you realize: Israel was declared while Jewish terrorists were OUTSIDE of the territory slated for the Jewish State, busy razing non-Jewish villages and homes

      Did you realize: the State of Israel was recognized while it was waging a war on Palestine after Israel was declared.

      Did you realize: Israel had not recognized ANY STATE before being granted UN Membership? Which reminds me, exactly how many countries has Israel officially recognized in 64 years?

      Did you realize: the official name of "THE STATE OF ISRAEL" and no State has ever recognized Israel as "the Jewish State""

      Did you realize: Israel has never renounced violence either as a means of self defense or aggression ?

      Did you realize: The Palestinians have a right to oppose an Occupying Power by force of arms?

      Did you realize: Israel is in breech of hundreds of UNSC Resolutions. The Arab States are not.

      "Cast Lead 2/3/4 etc. means more Palestinian casualties."

      Civilian casualties actually. Only civilians were killed by Israel preventing civilians from fleeing the war zone. A war crime --- Although it gave forewarning, Israel had all the crossings closed, under the 2005 agreement with Egypt, only possible to have such an agreement as an Occupying Power, thereby preventing civilians from fleeing a war zone, BEFORE attacking, which is illegal under Geneva Convention 1V…Section II..Occupied territories..Art49…The Occupying Power shall not detain protected persons in an area particularly exposed to the dangers of war unless the security of the population or imperative military reasons so demand.

      Civilians could not even flee into the sea, because Israel controls the Palestinian territorial waters.//

      Did you know: the GCs do apply according to the UNSC

      OlegR, there is no thing in your rickety olde Hasbarrow that actually justifies ANY illegal acquisition of Palestinian territory by Israel, ANY illegal annexation of Palestinian territory, ANY illegal settlements in "territories occupied" or ANY of Israel's demands on the Palestinians. Israeli demands and stupid justificationshave absolutely no basis in law.

      When you start with a lie, you can only admit the lie or keep lying. Israel has chosen lie upon lie upon lie in its insane attempts to justify its illegal activities. All the while screwing unwitting Israeli citizens and those to stupid to check

      The Palestinians only claim their rights under the laws Israel agreed to uphold. Israel wants to keep Palestinian territory it has absolutely no right to under the very same laws.

      Of course you can't possibly acknowledge any of the above. There are too many loose ends dangling from the lies you need to perpetuate for a Greater Israel. Pick at one and your whole 'Israel can do no wrong' propaganda mantra will unravel

  • The Israeli consul is selling 'brand Israel', but very few in one upper west side synagogue are buying
    • The holey olde Hasbarrow is filled with denial, fantasy, irrelevant nonsense, misquotes, strawmen, 'other words' and outright lies, all too often repeated. People are starting to look at the 'explanations' only to find 'justifications' that simply don't pass scrutiny.

      Changing the label on a bucket of sh*te doesn't make it edible.

  • Settlers knew Ulpana was built on privately-owned Palestinian land but went ahead
  • US military officers taught to target civilians and wage 'total war' on Islam
  • Right of Return key goes on tour
    • tree

      " Of the “Jewish State” in the Partition Plan, the UN counted roughly 500,000 Jews and 400,000 Arabs, but also listed 100,000 Bedouins, who were counted separately from those 400,000 Arabs"

      There were Jewish Bedouin.

      "Since Israel grabbed more than its allotted amount, and conquered an additional 23% (roughly half of the “Arab State”) of Mandate Palestine.."

      Mandate ended May 14th midnight. Israel was declared May 15th. From that moment two entities existed. Mandate Palestine did not. The "State of Israel" and "Palestine", were acknowledged by the Provisional Govt of Israel on May 22nd 1948. Israel illegally acquired by war an additional 50% of Palestine (what remained of Palestine after Israel was declared independent of Palestine)

      "that means that the territory it conquered totally shifted the real demographic balance in the new state of Israel in favor of the Palestinian Arabs"

      The extra territory was never legally annexed to Israel. The right to territory by conquest was illegal in 1945 before Israel was declared. In order to make sense of the figures one cannot include territory that was never Sovereign to Israel.

      "Estimates of those who fled or were expelled and not allowed to return range from 750,000 to 900,000"

      Indeed, but they were from BOTH Sovereign Israeli territory AND territory slated for the Arab State. The 750,000 to 900,000 estimate is not applicable to those who fled from Israel's recognized sovereignty of May 15th 1948.

      Those who fled Israel were only a PART of the Arab population of the territory that legally became Israel. Israel had already been recognized and was a UN Member state BEFORE making any claim to any territories outside the State of Israel (31st Aug 1949)

      "Estimates of the number remaining in Israel after 1950 are around 150,000, with the number being roughly divided between 50,000 who had never left, 50,000 who had managed to return undetected to their homes, and 50,000 who were included in the territory that Jordan turned over to Israel under an armistice agreement. "

      Includes territory never legally annexed to Israel, "outside the State of Israel" and "occupied"... Also occupied by May 22nd 1948 according to the Laws of War .

      " If Israel had kept all its claimed territory and not expelled its Palestinian inhabitants, Israeli demographics would have been roughly on the order of at least 900,000 Palestinian Arabs (using the low figure for refugees) and only 600,000 Jews"

      But it's not the figure for the actual Sovereign territory of Israel. It includes refugees who fled from areas outside of Israel.

      "Hence the ethnic cleansing, which the Zionist leadership always knew would be necessary"

      Seems so. http://wp.me/pDB7k-l5

    • Fredblogs

      "Security Council resolutions aren’t law."

      UNSC Resolutions are based on the law and the UN Charter

      "The U.N. is not the legislature of some world government"

      The UN has a Charter to which all UN Members are obliged in its entirety, no exceptions. The Charter is the law of the UN, governing all UN Member States.

    • Fredblogs

      "In the partition area set aside for Israel, Jews were in a majority before the partition. Self-determination for that area would put have put the Jews in charge. That’s why the Arabs rejected the partition."

      Nice try ... but nonsense... Arab rejection was based on the lack of self determination and consultation of the legitimate citizens of Palestine to have any of Palestine partitioned. (sans TransJordan, independent 1946, UNGA res 181 was 1947). Especially as the Lon Mandate for Palestine tasked the British with forming a state called Palestine, in which Jews could under Article 7, obtain Palestinian citizenship.

      "I’ve read the GA resolution admitting Israel. There is nothing conditional about it"

      United Nations General Assembly Resolution 273 //
      Noting furthermore the declaration by the State of Israel that it "unreservedly accepts the obligations of the United Nations Charter and undertakes to honour them from the day when it becomes a member of the United Nations,"

      Recalling its resolutions of 29 November 1947 and 11 December 1948and taking note of the declarations and explanations made by the representative of the Government of Israel before the Ad Hoc Political Committee in respect of the implementation of the said resolutions//

      UNGA Res 194 //5. Calls upon the Governments and authorities concerned to extend the scope of the negotiations provided for in the Security Council's resolution of 16 November 1948 1/ and to seek agreement by negotiations conducted either with the Conciliation Commission or directly, with a view to the final settlement of all questions outstanding between them//

      UNGA res 181 //F. ADMISSION TO MEMBERSHIP IN THE UNITED NATIONS - When the independence of either the Arab or the Jewish State as envisaged in this plan has become effective and the declaration and undertaking, as envisaged in this plan, have been signed by either of them, sympathetic consideration should be given to its application for admission to membership in the United Nations in accordance with article 4 of the Charter of the United Nations.//

      "It mentions allowing the Palestinians to return as a good idea:

      No it doesn't. It was about Israel being accepted into the UN.

      "but absolutely nothing in it says that Israel is only allowed into the UN if the Palestinians are allowed to return"

      Israel had already agreed to implement UNGA res 194, before 11 December 1948

      "Why else do you think that a UN now full of Israel haters"

      Israel is in breech of its obligations. The UN has a duty to censure all UN Member states in breech of their UN Obligations.

      "... and their lackeys hasn’t removed Israel from the UN?"

      The US veto vote in the UNSC would prevents any action being taken against Israel.

    • BTW http://domino.un.org/pdfs/AAC1432.pdf doesn't enumerate how many Jewish Bedouin were in the proposed Jewish State

    • giladg
      " when they rejected the UN partition plan that gave them everything"

      What 'everything' did it 'give' them? Israel got 54% of Palestine. Palestinians were 'given' 46% of their own land. The Ziocaine addict's notion of 'give' is a brain dive into a logic vacuum.

      " yet they chose war instead"

      Refugees flee. The Palestinians who fled their own land, didn't chose or wage war on anyone, didn't invade Israeli territory. They fled the violence. They weren't there. It's the right of all civilians to flee violence and return at the first practical opportunity.

      Nor did they elect any leaders of the Arab States who represented them. Not even Amin al-Husayni, appointed by a Jewish British High Commissioner, Sir Herbert Samuel. Nor did they vote for the regimes governing the Arab States who invaded "Palestine" May 15th 1948.

      "Had they accepted the UN plan, many lives would have been saved."

      They were not obliged to accept the plan. It was non-binding and; Jewish forces were already OUTSIDE of the territory allocated for the Jewish State BEFORE Israel was declared, cleansing, razing villages, dispossessing.

      Israel declared and was accepted into the UN on the basis that it had declared "as envisaged in" in UNGA 181, no reservations.

      "The Arabs must be held responsible for their mistake in 1948."

      Uh? The Palestinians could not declare independent sovereignty by the 1st October 1948 even had they wanted to. Israel had Palestinian territory, "outside the State of Israel" under military control by the 22nd May 1948. One can't declare independent sovereignty if one's territory is partially occupied by another entity.

      "Don’t sweep their actions under the carpet."

      Fair enough. But under which UNSC resolutions are these actions condemned? You must know, surely.

    • Blake.

      "The United Nation’s Partition Plan was a non-binding proposal that was never ratified or adopted by the Security Council"

      It didn't require ratification or adoption by the UNSC. The UNSC can only; demand of UN Member states or; advise UN Member states of how they may or may not behave towards non-members. The Jewish Agency and Palestinian representative were not UN Members.

      An entity can't be forced into declaring independence. The decision to and the act of declaring independence is by its very nature unilateral, 'independent'. Completely free of all control by any other entity. UNGA res 181 could not be binding.

      There was no article demanding a co-signature from the other party, nor could there be for either State to declare independence. The 'independence' of one could not be 'dependent' on the nay or yeh of either.

      The resolutions "When the independence of either the Arab or the Jewish State as envisaged in this plan has become effective and the declaration and undertaking, as envisaged in this plan , have been signed by either of them, sympathetic consideration should be given to its application for admission to membership in the United Nations in accordance with article 4 of the Charter of the United Nations. "

      The Jewish Agency accepted UNGA res 181 without reservation in 1947. Six months after the Arab States rejected it, Israel was declared independent by a declaration enshrining UNGA res 181. It's still there and;

      Israel could ONLY be accepted into the UN if it was independent as envisaged in this plan (UNGA res 181)

      Israel acknowledged the same on the 22nd May 1948

      For Israel to say UNGA res 181 is irrelevant, is blatant nonsense.

      By immediately recognizing Israel according to the borders UNGA res 181 recommended the US is now obliged to allow the passage of Chapt VI resolutions dealing with the legal extent of Israeli territory/borders. In support of Israel, it can only abstain.

      The only thing preventing the full effect of the law for Israel's breeches of the Law and UN Charter described in VI resolutions, is the US veto vote on Chapt VII resolutions in the UNSC.

      Little wonder Israel and the supporters of greater Israel dedicate so much to influencing US politics. All Israel's eggs are in one basket.

    • giladg

      "Anyone supporting the right of return of Palestinians..."

      ... is supporting a right all people have.

      "...the large majority of whom were born in their hosting countries"

      Irrelevant, they're not permanent citizens of of Jordan or citizens of their hosting countries.

      "...who have also made a point of insuring they live a miserable existence with few rights and many restrictions"

      Odd. The Arab States have fought wars on behalf of the Palestinians. For almost a century the Arab States have borne the cost of legally representing them through the legal minefield. For 64 years, the Arab States have hosted the Palestinians at a huge cost. They have adapted their legislations to accommodate the Palestinian desire to retain their RoR by not offering full citizenship rights and; on Black Sunday, the Jordanian Government had a duty to protect the majority of its permanent citizens, even from an armed uprising by militant refugees.

      Jewish refugees from the Arab states are: A) no longer refugees if they have taken up citizenship in a country other than that of return and; B) irrelevant to the Palestinian issue. The Palestinians didn't drive them out of the Arab States nor did they vote for the regimes in the Arab States.

      Of course you'd love them to be absorbed by their host nations, then they wouldn't be in the way of the Ghastly Greater Israel project.

      "..is saying that Israel, the single Jewish country on this planet, will no longer exist. Now that is just not right, and you know it"

      Yes, we know it isn't right. In fact it's bullsh*t. You've brought your straw man here to die.

      The Palestinians only official claim for RoR is under UNGA res 194. No more, no less. This is the definition used for UNGA res 194.

      And before you move onto the idiotic Hasbara spiel about UNRWA, UNGA res 194 was written before was an UNRWA to have a definition. The UNRWA definition isn't even applicable to the final status of refugees. The UNRWA definition is only to ascertain who is illegible for assistance while they are refugees. http://www.unrwa.org/etemplate.php?id=87#final_status

      Try some simple maths. Those who had their usual place of residence within Israel's actual borders of 1948 and who fled, were A) not the entire non-Jewish Arab population in the area encompassed by Israel's territory B) even combined, they were still a smaller in number than the Jewish population C) If this PART of the non-Jewish Arab population who fled, had returned in 1948, combined with those who didn't flee, they'd still have been smaller in number than the Jewish population = no demographic threat by returning in 1948.

      Returning now, ALL are over 64 yrs of age, minimum. They were children in 1948. Now they're past the age of rampant procreation, nearing the end of their time on this planet (the life expectancy of a Palestine refugee today is 73yrs, lower for those from 1948) and; those who "after 29 November 1947, left territory at present under the control of the Israel authorities and who were Palestinian citizens at that date" now number only a few thousand old people. It does not include lineal descendants born outside of Israel, in 1948 they were not "persons of Arab origin who, after 29 November 1947, left territory at present under the control of the Israel authorities and who were Palestinian citizens at that date."

      There is no demographic threat to Israel, nor was there ever. There has only been silly Israeli fearmongering for 64 years in order to prevent any return at all.

      There IS a demographic threat to a one state Greater Israel, which can only be a Jewish dominated majority by cleansing the Palestinians from their rightful territories OR convincing every Jew on the planet go live in a Greater Israel and procreate like crazy.

    • Charon

      "Why does Israel treat everything from the perspective of a lawyer? "

      Simple... as long as something is being disputed in law, it cannot be finalized.

    • Fred...
      It doesn’t have anything to define when something is "his country"

      OK let's take your word for it. Now apply it to Jews formerly from Arab States. Or apply it to Israelis were they ever to be dispossessed from Israel.

      BTW what you say is irrelevant

      Article 2.

      Everyone is entitled to all the rights and freedoms set forth in this Declaration, without distinction of any kind, such as race, colour, sex, language, religion, political or other opinion, national or social origin, property, birth or other status. Furthermore, no distinction shall be made on the basis of the political, jurisdictional or international status of the country or territory to which a person belongs, whether it be independent, trust, non-self-governing or under any other limitation of sovereignty.

      "A few general assembly resolutions do, but they aren’t binding. "

      More than a few UNGA resolutions reiterate Chapters from the UN Charter (binding in its entirety on ALL UN Members without exception) or emphasize International Law (binding on all states) / Customary International Law (binding on all states) / UNSC resolutions (binding on the parties) / relevant ratified Conventions (binding on all signatories) / Armistice Agreements (binding on all parties) / Peace Agreements (binding on all parties). They're all reminders of what IS binding.

      BTW before you start the usual idiotic Hasbara UNRWA spiel, UNGA res 194 was written before UNRWA came onto the scene. The legal definition per UNGA res 194

      "....the term “refugee” appearing in paragraph 11 of the resolution of 11 December 1948 can be defined as follows
      Article 1

      Are to be considered as refugees under paragraph 11 of the General Assembly resolution of 11 December 1948 persons of Arab origin who, after 29 November 1947, left territory at present under the control of the Israel authorities and who were Palestinian citizens at that date."

  • New 'Via Dolorosa': Palestinian patients face ordeal trying to reach East Jerusalem hospitals
  • Obama's next evolution: Nakba remembrance outside White House next Tuesday
    • How Annie? By inviting Israel and Caterpillar to come and rip the rose garden out?

      ---

      Oooops, sorry, you mean honor on behalf of the Palestinians

  • Akiva Tor: Arab Spring at fault for blocking a future Palestinian state
    • ritzl

      "40-year occupation"

      Even that is a blatant lie. It has in fact been 63 years.

      On May 22nd 1948, the Provisional Israeli Government stated territory "outside the State of Israel" was under the "military control" of Israeli forces. By definition of law 'occupied'. On 12 Aug 1948 an Israeli Government Proclamation says Jerusalem was “occupied”. Jerusalem Declared Israel-Occupied City- by Israeli Government Proclamation 12 Aug 1948. http://wp.me/pDB7k-T0

      Israel has never legally annexed any of these territories. Even the victor in a so called 'defensive' war must annex territories it has acquired. The US was instrumental in making it Customary International Law on annexation in the mid 1800's when it annexed parts of Mexico by a referendum of the MEXICAN citizens of Texas. Customary International Law requires no vote, when a legal process is individually adopted by a majority of states, it is automatically customary.

      At the time Israel occupied these 1948/49 territories , it was not a UN Member State, therefore the UNSC could not censure Israel directly for illegal acquisition. (Israel is not mentioned by name in UNSC resolutions prior to it becoming a UN Member). The crunch will come when Israel, now a UN Member State, attempts to annex these territories. The UNSC must declare it void and having no legal effect as it did Israel's illegal annexation of East Jerusalem, unless Israel can reach an agreement with the Palestinians.

      The Palestinians who only ask for their rights under the laws Israel agreed to uphold. It is in fact Israel who must negotiate an agreement with the Palestinians. Only an agreement can circumvent the law. Under the law, Israel would be required to withdraw from all occupied territories dating back to 1948, pay compensation.

      Little wonder the Israel lobby is so busy nurturing the US Veto vote in the UNSC in order to prevent the law from having its full effect. It would send Israel bankrupt for decades. Huge infrastructure and housing estate contracts would be worthless and billions of loverly Jewish and American dollars spent on supporting the illegal Greater Israel project over the last 64 years will have been wasted.

    • It's bizarre how blind the likes of Akiva Tor can appear to be.

      Indoctrination?
      Purposeful denial?
      Ignorance?
      Stupidity?
      Insanity?
      $$$$$?

      All the above?

      They simply do not acknowledge anything Israel has done in the past 64 years.

      More likely it's a well founded fear that once one admits there's a loose end, the whole holey mess will unravel.

  • Biden gives Israel the green light on Iran in speech to rabbinical convention
    • Rusty Pipes

      The US DOE looks at a map of the entire world 24 x 7 x 365 x 25 years ahead while facing off the enormous energy needs of Europe, Russia, China, India. One needs to look at a map and research contracts on oil industry sites. They're much more revealing and realistic than so called news services.

      Syria has no oil and except for its front onto the Mediterranean Sea, is surrounded by countries who do not want any war. Syria itself doesn't want a war. It hasn't even attempted to restore its rightful sovereignty over the Golan. It can be contained and it has no effective strategic position in the transportation of oil and gas from the region.

      The west will foment and allow it to implode in civil war. There are no US 'interests' in Syria as there were in Lybia and Iraq. The countries surrounding Syria are quite capable of handling any situation which might effect them. Syria has no territorial ambitions, except perhaps to restore the Golan.

      Iran on the other hand, has territorial frontage on the Caspian Sea. One should also consider which other countries have an interest in the Caspian region. Contracts in the Caspian are many and humungous http://www.casfactor.com/en/main/113.html.

      Iran has huge gas fields on its East, with India as its customer. http://www.gulfoilandgas.com/webpro1/projects/3dreport.asp?id=100730 (scroll down to the bottom of the page)

      Iran also has a front running the entire length of the Persian Gulf, including the Strait of Hormuz. A vital chokepoint http://205.254.135.7/countries/regions-topics.cfm?fips=WOTC

      Syria is nothing to the US picture. Iran is huge.

    • "Can anyone explain why Isreal can have nuclear weapons but Iran can’t?"

      Israel is an IAEA member state and receives the benefits of membership but hasn't signed the NPT. Like India, Pakistan.

      Iran is an IAEA Member State and receives the benefits of Membership, says it doesn't want nukes and has signed the NPT.

      Neither should have 'em or anyone else. They're useless unless used, so the act of having them is in fact a threat to use them, otherwise there is no point in having them. They are BTW the ultimate WMD and illegal. Except perhaps in self defense.

      Israel hasn't a hope in hades of effectively attacking Iran's nuclear facilities with conventional weapons even with US support. If it attacks with nukes, the world will be dragged into another senseless war started by mad men.

    • "They will not both be around two years from now, and my bet is that Ahmadinejad is gone."

      Uh huh. What a stupid statement.

      Iran regularly holds elections, they elect someone who does not in fact hold the reigns when it comes to war or much in the way of policy for that matter. Bush has also gone. He DID hold the reigns. BTW whatever happened to the poor sod? Back on the turps?

    • It stares people in the face. If a country wants nukies, it does not sign the NPT. If it has signed, there is a legal procedure in the NPT for leaving the NPT. Pakistan is an IAEA Member State, so too India, Israel, the USA, Russia. They all receive the benefits of IAEA Membership. They all have nukies.

      However, it seems the US hasn't deviated from the PNAC doctrine for a New American Century... and is now busy justifying Israel starting its dirty work. Meanwhile the US is busy getting out of Iraq and Aghanistan in preparation.

      If Israel attacks Iran and Iran rightfully engages, the US will be inevitably sucked in. Biden's courageous encouragement will only bear more strange fruit and he will be safely tucked away in the US, completely oblivious to the blood on his hands.

      It's insanity 101 to attack a country based only on accusations, which in themselves are not evidence except in the warped mind of a nutcase Zionist with either a short memory or a Ziocaine induced mental block on Iraq.

      Everything will be twisted out of shape. The IAEA statements on Iran, like the Iranian threat to allegedly "wipe Israel off the map", will be Ziofied until it's un-recognizable. In fact the UNSC said virtually the same thing as Iran
      1) “Israel must end the prolonged occupation of Arab territories occupied by Israel since 1967, including Jerusalem” 2) “The occupation regime over Jerusalem must be erased from the pages of time” (In full at http://wp.me/pDB7k-W8 )

  • It's Good to be the King: Netanyahu scraps elections, buys off opposition and cements power with new unity gov't
  • Operation Glass Houses: IDF agent provocateurs admit to throwing stones at the IDF in Bilin
    • Go Fred ... which ever way you want to paint it, they were military and not showing an insignia. Illegal belligerents. Perfidy is illegal under the Laws Israel obliged itself to uphold by becoming a member of the International Community of Nations and a UN Member State.

    • One wonders just how many decades this practice goes back?

      I long ago reached the point where I do not believe ANYTHING said by Israel, it's lobbyists, the settlers or their ghastly supporters without first giving it a thorough rinse.

      The propensity they have for disseminating blatant lies and deceit is simply amazing and so far away from the basic tenets of Judaism is there really any point in calling Israel the Jewish State.

      BTW This has just come to my notice http://something-stinks.com/Daily%20Dish/Mavi/knife_photoshop.htm

  • 'Let go of two-state solution insanity' -- says Illinois congressman who supports transfer
  • Bin Laden docs show that alleged Iran-Al Qaeda alliance is neocon hype
  • Michael Sfard: 'The Israeli government has declared war against the rule of law'
    • Talkback

      Anything that occurred or was said or promised, legal or illegal, prior to may 15th 1948 became irrelevant in the eyes of the law at one minute past midnight May 15th 1948 when the Declaration for the Establishment of the State of Israel came into effect. Israel drew and obliged itself to a line in the sand and to adhere to International Law.

      Recognition of states is like Customary International Law, created by a majority of the International Community of Nations adopting the same legal process. The majority recognized the state of Israel, over riding those who opposed. A democratic decision. Legal, like it or not.

      Israel was recognized "within frontiers approved by the General Assembly of the United Nations in its Resolution of November 29, 1947". No more no less.

      Since recognition however, successive Israeli Governments have spat in the eye of anyone and attempted to destroy anything in the path of a Greater Israel. Israel has been incriminating and delegitimizing itself for the last 64 years, creating a Greater and Greater quagmire for Israelis and Palestinians alike.

    • Samuel T "Regardless of the level of Government, land or property can be seized from the lawful owner for whatever purpose has been legitimized by that Government."

      How odd. The Jewish People's Council said otherwise. I believe they wrote the Declaration for the Establishment of the State of Israel. From the moment Israel was declared it would be faithful to the principles of the Charter of the United Nations and when accepted into the UN it agreed it would , "fulfill in good faith the obligations assumed by them in accordance with the present Charter" , including Chapt XI.

      The International Laws Israel agreed to, say an Occupying Power has only military control over 'territory'.

      Laws and Customs of War on Land (Hague IV); October 18, 1907 Art. 42 SECTION III
      "Territory is considered occupied when it is actually placed under the authority of the hostile army. The occupation extends only to the territory where such authority has been established and can be exercised.

      Art. 43.

      The authority of the legitimate power having in fact passed into the hands of the occupant, the latter shall take all the measures in his power to restore, and ensure, as far as possible, public order and safety, while respecting, unless absolutely prevented, the laws in force in the country . "

      'real estate' is governed by the civil laws of the 'territory/country', not the military laws of occupation and certainly not the civil laws of the Occupying Power.

      UN Member States who take on the responsibility of administrating non-self-governing 'territories', have a sacred trust.

      CHAPTER XI: DECLARATION REGARDING NON-SELF-GOVERNING TERRITORIES
      Article 73

      Members of the United Nations which have or assume responsibilities for the administration of territories whose peoples have not yet attained a full measure of self-government recognize the principle that the interests of the inhabitants of these territories are paramount, and accept as a sacred trust the obligation to promote to the utmost, within the system of international peace and security established by the present Charter, the well-being of the inhabitants of these territories , and, to this end: etc etc etc

      The Occupying Power has an obligation to enforce and adhere to the military laws of occupation in such a manner that the civil laws of the occupied territory/country can have full effect and; assist in the enabling of self government for the occupied.

      It is the same "sacred trust" often quoted by the Arab States (not the only time their views have been reflective of the UN Charter and UNSC)

      'land' is 'real estate' in a 'territory'. The territory belongs to the territory's legitimate citizens (sans the citizens of the Occupying Power) whether they own real estate/property, rent or lease real estate/property. Whether they're bums living under a bridge or just homeless after being bulldozed out by the Occupying Power in an act of collective punishment. As such, they have a right to attack the military of the Occupying Power. Even with the rocks that are all that remain of their homes.

      However, only a tiny minority of Palestinians have ever picked up a weapon of any kind. By far the majority have done nothing, to anyone, anywhere. They have taken nothing belonging to Israel. Israel has dispossessed them by the millions by denying them their rights under the UN Charter, by ignoring International Law, the GCs and numerous UNSC Resolutions.

      BTW I do enjoy your posts Samuel T. For people who're genuinely interested in a peace full coexistence, it's a pleasure poking holes in the holey olde Hasbara. Thanks for dropping in.

    • Samuel T

      Uh huh. Texas was legally annexed to the US via a referendum of the Mexican citizens of Texas. Texas is in the USA. The USA was instrumental in legal annexation via a referendum of the actual citizens of the territory to be annexed, becoming a part of Customary International Law.

      Israel has never legally annexed ANY of the Palestinian territory it has illegally acquired by war. Without legal annexation, Israeli civil law has no jurisdiction in territories occupied. This actually applies to some 50% of the Palestinian territories remaining after Israel was recognized and which Israel has illegally acquired by war over the last 64 years. NONE has ever been legally annexed to the State of Israel.

  • Israel destroys dairy farm in occupied Palestine
    • Fredblogs "Which doesn’t answer the question of whether the dairy farm that is the subject of this conversation was built on public land. Or the question of how much warning the farmers had of the demolition. "

      So start showing some evidence... The evidence we have is the statement by the IDF and hundreds of UNSC resolutions against Israel for what it is doing.

    • "the Palsetinian Aythority in the West Bank demolishes many more structures for illegal buidling than Israel does"

      Uh huh.... Statistics please .... thx I'll wait .....

  • 'Shame on You': Why I interrupted Obama counter-terrorism adviser John Brennan
    • "It’s easy to point a finger and a lot harder to pull a trigger."

      Israel does both with practiced ease. And the supporters of a Greater Israel, the same people for the most part who defend these ghastly war machines used by the USA half way around the world in someone else's country to further only its own 'interests', are also fantastic finger pointers.. 'oh look at what's happening in Sudan etc etc' any and every time Israel breaks the law again (and again and again)... As if it somehow lessens Israels crimes.

  • Obama working to postpone UN investigation into settlements until after 2012 elections
    • You are aware OlegR that membership on the UNHRC changes, regularly. Eventually every UN Member State will have been on it eventually... what will you say when Israel appears on the list?

      Meanwhile, what has been happening in the countries you cared to mention, is within their own sovereign territory, outside the mandate of the UN.

      Israel's crimes are NOT BEING PERPETUATED IN ISRAEL, they're being perpetuated OUTSIDE of Israel's recognized legal sovereign extent. It is the DUTY of the UN and its various bodies to be critical of states acting OUTSIDE their recognized sovereignty.

      Perhaps you should read the UN Charter and the hundreds of UNSC resolutions against Israel, which have only been issued because it has been acting outside of its recognized legal sovereignty for the last 63 years.

      Israel did AGREE to abide by the UN Charter, in its entirety.

      If it doesn't like what it agreed to, it can leave the UN and the many UN bodies it benefits from.

  • Dershowitz gets booed for warning Israel supporters not to boo Obama
    • Dersh should watch some of his own behaviour in debates.

      When I heard his cutesy warning here, I though: man this guy is so disillusioned he doesn't even realize who the audience are.

  • Israel closes investigation of those responsible for al Samouni family massacre, no legal action taken
    • WOW... OlegR read all that, then found some other evidence to the contrary, which of course he has not supplied and then replied in less than 4 minutes? AMAZING!

      Idiots for a Greater Israel seem to have an incredible talent for exposing themselves for what they really are

  • Video: #Flagwoman protester raises Palestinian flag on Israeli military vehicle outside Ofer prison
    • Thanks for the heads up on that one Denis.

      I've done a little expansion on it http://wp.me/pDB7k-WA

    • Odd Samuel T, I've not used any 'Palestinian ' sources. Not unexpected that you'd resort to a false accusation. So cute and predictable and so far away from the basic tenets of Judaism one might be forgiven for wondering why anyone bothers calling it the Jewish State.

      The instances I gave SHOW the relevant information Israel has omitted or changed or simply never mentions because it shows Israel to be lying, not only to the world, but to Israeli citizens.

      You on the other hand, bring only your own speculation and the usual holey justifications

      Both sides do not communicate a 'political' agenda. Israel does. Pumping out propaganda with its cherry picking, omitting or changing completely relevant information in order to justify the illegal acquisition of the Palestinians rightful territories. Rightful according to the Laws and Charter Israel AGREED to uphold. Which is BTW why there are so many UNSC resolutions condemning Israel.

      The activists stand against injustice. A moral stance. Morality is not political. They record Israel's tactics in order to show people the brutal face of the occupation and; the UNSC agrees with them

      The UNSC also agrees with Iran in respect to the regime illegally in Jerusalem. Read UNSC Res 476, it's written based on International Law , the UN Charter and GC IV. It says the regime in Jerusalem must end and Israel's actions constitute "a serious obstruction to achieving a comprehensive, just and lasting peace in the Middle East " It does not say the same of the Palestinians or Arab States. Furthermore, the UNSC actually threatens action if Israel doesn't abide by the law. Iran only made a prediction. It has never threatened any action except to retaliate if it is attacked first.

      Although the precious US veto vote stops the law from being given full effect, Israel is still in breech and; with all Israel's eggs in one basket case (sic), little wonder Israel and those who support its illegal actions spend so much time and money Ziofying the US senate

    • Israel edits in a manner even Goebbels would likely have been proud of. Once anything has gone through the Ziofier, it's un-recognizable.

      The IDF video of the Mavi Marmara was heavily edited ...
      The IDF radio transmissions were heavily edited ...
      Israel edits and cherry picks everything...
      Puts in words that simply do not exist...
      Thinks a regime illegally in Jerusalem is Israel... (note the UNSC agrees with Iran)
      Israel lies about its borders...
      It lies about what certain 'judges' are alleged to have said, when they were in fact only professors when they made the statements Israel has carefully pruned

      I could do this all day.

      Today Israeli politicians, propagandists and pundits rarely say the "State of Israel". States all have borders. It too has been edited to "the Land of Israel". (Which of course is drivel. The 'land of Israel' today is only the territory belonging to the State of Israel)

      A lone woman waved a flag against what she sees as an injustice. Israel employs an army, airforce, navy, special ops and a barrage of lobbyists around the world, to perpetuate an injustice, slaughtering and dispossessing people who get in the way of a Greater Israel.

    • Samuel T May 2, 2012 at 12:09 am

      Hilarious. Simply hilarious

  • Boots on the ground: Israel wants hikers with guns to visit renamed hilltops in West Bank
    • Talkback --

      LOL... No one I've asked has ever been able to verify this alleged "disputed" with a relevant UNSC resolution, Law or Convention. Instead they steadfastly remain incapable of reading UNSC Res 476. "1. Reaffirms the overriding necessity to end the prolonged occupation of Arab territories occupied by Israel since 1967, including Jerusalem;

      3. Reconfirms that all legislative and administrative measures and actions taken by Israel, the occupying Power, which purport to alter the character and status of the Holy City of Jerusalem have no legal validity and constitute a flagrant violation of the Fourth Geneva Convention relative to the Protection of Civilian Persons in Time of War and also constitute a serious obstruction to achieving a comprehensive, just and lasting peace in the Middle East;"

    • Israel has lost its marbles. The GCs are there to help protect the civilian population of the Occupying Power as well as the Occupied, by keeping their citizens OUT, safe, home, in Israel. Not in occupied Palestine at all.

      Armed persons in "territories occupied" are belligerents but only benefit under GC VI if they have a visible emblem and carry their arms openly. Even so, they become legitimate military targets.

  • Settlers raise Israeli flag over Hebron's Ibrahimi Mosque for the first time
  • Ulpana, high drama in the wild wild West (Bank)
    • So what Fred... Consecutive Israeli Governments have only taken Palestinian territory. None have returned any Palestinian territory. They've all followed the same Greater Israel script, perpetuated the same myths, told the same lies, ignored the same International Laws and UN Charter.

  • Video: Activists accompany Gazan farmers under Israeli fire
  • Israel responds to Palestinian call to restart talks by legalizing three West Bank settlement outposts
    • "Instead, like always, they didn’t miss the opportunity to miss an opportunity"

      The insanity of arrogance encapsulated in a sentence.

      The Palestinians have NEVER HAD an opportunity. For over 2,000 years or so, all or part of Palestine has been under the occupation of some entity or another. In fact, there has only been one minute in 2,000 odd yrs where Palestine was not under the control of another entity.

      A non-self Governing territory cannot declare independence for the simple reason that they're not independent. It's the very reason Israel was not declared until the British ended the Mandate, under which the British were the Occupying Power .

      It's the reason this message was conveyed "... the state of Israel has been proclaimed as an independent republic within frontiers approved by the General Assembly of the United Nations in its Resolution of November 29, 1947, and that a provisional government has been charged to assume the rights and duties of government for preserving law and order within the boundaries of Israel, for defending the state against external aggression, and for discharging the obligations of Israel to the other nations of the world in accordance with international law. The Act of Independence will become effective at one minute after six o’clock on the evening of 14 May 1948, Washington time"

      Palestine has been free of the control of any entity for only one minute in 2,000 years or more

      At the moment Israel was declared, with Jewish troops already controlling territory slated for the Arab State, the civil war that existed prior to declaration, became a war waged by the State of Israel on what remained of the non-self governing territory of Palestine.

      The Palestinians never had an opportunity to accept or reject the Partition Plan of 1947. The two parties invited to participate in UNGA res 181 were the Jewish Federation/Agency and the Arab States. NOT the Palestinians. They had no say.

      Demanding a Jewish state has resulted in missed opportunities for Jews to go live anywhere in Palestine, buy land settle and live life in relative peace.

      " They still have the opportunity to talk, just with building continuing"

      You're the kind of guy who's gonna negotiate with the thief who only wants to talk about how much of your car he can keep, as he's stealing it? Why TF should they bother talking to a state, which according to International Law and the UN Charter is stealing Palestinian territory?

      "just as peace talks often go on in active wars while fighting continues"

      Indeed. However, you're really stepping in it

      Israel was declared, recognized and accepted into the UN while it was waging war on the non-self governing territory of Palestine that remained after Israel was declared. It was not at peace it had not signed any peace agreements or armistice agreements nor had it recognized ANY other state and it had terrorists playing a major part, some of whom became Israeli's first leaders, not elected by the people who Israel was declared on behalf of, but the Provisional Government put in place by the Jewish People's Council, who were also never elected by the people they claimed to represent.

      It would appear there is one rule for the Jewish people's State but not for the Palestinian people's State.

      "There is no inherent reason they can’t talk now"

      There is however an inherent reason Israel should stop its ILLEGAL activities, even if the Palestinians are reluctant to discuss how much MORE of THEIR territory they're willing to concede in order to have peace

      "Are they any better off today for not talking since the settlement building restarted?"

      They can at least hold their heads high, whereas Israel has merely continued to act illegally, gaining more of a sh*te reputation as a belligerent, ignorant and greedy little jerk, protected only by the precious US veto vote in the UNSC.

    • Fred... Israel is LEGALLY OBLIGED to stop the settlements. Talks or no talks.

      Israel is a UN Member State and all UN Member States are obliged to the UN Charter in its entirety, including Chapt XI.

      Occupation is a position of TRUST. There is an OBLIGATION and a DUTY to PROTECT the occupied, their property and their territory.

  • Obama throws '67 borders under the (campaign) bus
    • Romney mashes what Obama said, replaced Obama's words with Romney spiel. Mondoweiss has fallen for it? Not once, but TWICE. Tch tch tch.

      You cannot say someone said something, then change what they said!!

      Obama has chosen his words carefully. In this clip he says "Israelis and Palestinians will negotiate a border that is different from the one that existed on June 4th 1967".
      The actual legal 'border' was the same in 1967 as it was in 1948.

      Armistice Demarcation Lines changed in June 1967.

      Obama is very precise with his words. In his speech before the State department he said "We believe the borders of Israel and Palestine should be based on the 1967 lines with mutually agreed swaps, so that secure and recognized borders are established for both states."

      The only '67 'lines' were Armistice Demarcation Lines.

      In this instance he has said borders will be negotiated, how the borders will be different from what pre-existed, without going into the detail of the 'lines' negotiations would be based on.

Showing comments 200 - 101
Page: