Trending Topics:
adamhorowitz
About Adam Horowitz

Adam Horowitz is Co-Editor of Mondoweiss.net.

Other posts by .


Posted In:

47 Responses

  1. W.Jones
    W.Jones
    November 19, 2013, 10:28 am

    The 194 is related to the first picture.

    • oneof5
      oneof5
      November 19, 2013, 1:59 pm

      In what way, for those of us not well-versed ?

      • gamal
        gamal
        November 19, 2013, 3:28 pm

        you could be colour blind, in a way they are all related, which is not all that surprising, the key to understanding w.jones, without flagging the barriers which separate us, or vice versa, is the aid memoire. i am useless at crosswords, aid is uncountably obscure, the rest is stupid.

        I wonder what algebraic formula would transform 1 to 4, it may well have universal applications, once the space is defined, I saw Thor in 3d last week, if only reality was 3d and in colour, I lamented.

      • ckg
        ckg
        November 19, 2013, 11:24 pm

        @gamal.
        you’re unintelligible. sober up

      • gamal
        gamal
        November 20, 2013, 10:45 am

        perhaps, but lack of sobriety has not a thing to do with it.

      • ckg
        ckg
        November 19, 2013, 4:38 pm

        UNGA Resolution 194 recognizes the Palestinian refugees’ right of return. Many refugees retain their original house keys as evidence of their determination to return.

      • talknic
        talknic
        November 19, 2013, 7:28 pm

        @ckg “Many refugees retain their original house keys as evidence of their determination to return”

        House keys and deeds are matters of ‘real estate’. People also have RoR if they only rented or leased ‘real estate’ or were homeless bums living under a bridge.

      • ckg
        ckg
        November 19, 2013, 10:25 pm

        @talknic. True indeed.

      • W.Jones
        W.Jones
        November 20, 2013, 1:11 am

        Surprisingly some of the keys still work in the doors.

      • tree
        tree
        November 19, 2013, 4:57 pm

        194 refers to UN Resolution 194, issued on December 11, 1948

        http://unispal.un.org/UNISPAL.NSF/0/C758572B78D1CD0085256BCF0077E51A

        Which states, among other things, that

        … the refugees wishing to return to their homes and live at peace with their neighbours should be permitted to do so at the earliest practicable date, and that compensation should be paid for the property of those choosing not to return and for loss of or damage to property which, under principles of international law or in equity, should be made good by the Governments or authorities responsible

        65 years and counting…

      • oneof5
        oneof5
        November 19, 2013, 7:11 pm

        Thanks – the specifics and the link will be useful in my efforts elsewhere.

      • NormanF
        NormanF
        November 19, 2013, 10:02 pm

        All of which applies equally to the Jewish as well as Arab refugees. And note that UNGA 194 nowhere speaks of Palestinian Arabs as a nationality nor does it confer upon them any rights in perpetuity, which go unmentioned.

        Its a weak reed for the anti-Israel crowd to lean upon.

      • Talkback
        Talkback
        November 20, 2013, 10:40 am

        NormanF: And note that UNGA 194 nowhere speaks of Palestinian Arabs as a nationality …

        Arab refugees from Palestine were citizens of Palestine, they were of “Palestinian” nationality.

        … nor does it confer upon them any rights in perpetuity, which go unmentioned.

        By that time nobody expected the Zionist Junta to become an Apartheid state who would keep these refugees and their descendents expelled in perpetuity to ensure the domination of the Jewish oligarchy for decades to come.

      • eljay
        eljay
        November 20, 2013, 10:47 am

        >> And note that UNGA 194 nowhere speaks of Palestinian Arabs as a nationality …

        The indigenous population of the geographic region of Palestine had and has a right to “self-determine” as one or more secular, democratic and egalitarian states.

        People of the Jewish faith – citizens of countries around the world – did not have and do not have a right to selfishly determine that they had or have a right to an oppressive, colonialist, expansionist and supremacist “Jewish State” in the geographic region of Palestine (or anywhere else, for that matter).

      • talknic
        talknic
        November 20, 2013, 8:35 pm

        @ NormanF “All of which applies equally to the Jewish as well as Arab refugees.”

        Uh huh. Equal conditions?

        ” And note that UNGA 194 nowhere speaks of Palestinian Arabs as a nationality nor does it confer upon them any rights in perpetuity, which go unmentioned”

        Same for Jewish folk?

        “Its a weak reed for the anti-Israel crowd to lean upon”

        Supporting the notion of people’s rights is “anti-Israel”. AMAZING!

      • Shingo
        Shingo
        November 20, 2013, 8:41 pm

        Amazing isn’t it Talknic?

        That human rights and equality is anti Israeli yet they insist that Israel is a democracy?

  2. LeaNder
    LeaNder
    November 19, 2013, 11:57 am

    December 11, 1948.

    Can you explain the third, I am not quite sure.

    • tree
      tree
      November 19, 2013, 4:59 pm

      Palestine… even if you say it is not there, it always will be….

      • just
        just
        November 19, 2013, 5:09 pm

        Always, and those that deny it are woefully misguided, blind, wrong, sick, thieves and are practicing genocide with a vengeance.

  3. mondonut
    mondonut
    November 19, 2013, 1:55 pm

    I suppose the 194 refers to UNGA 194 and the farcical belief that a General Assembly resolution confers rights to the Palestinians. Yeah, yeah, I know – it “codifies” International law into a nice easy to understand package and is therefore elevated into something binding. Which is of course, nonsense. Same goes for the Dorothy in Oz Theory that if it is repeated enough times, it becomes law. More nonsense.

    • just
      just
      November 19, 2013, 5:51 pm

      Your post is an exquisite example of “nonsense” and the plague of zionism, sir/madam.

      And your ‘appreciation of’, and ‘adherence to’, International Law is duly noted and dismissed. Your disparagement of law is basically at the root of your problem.

      Thanks anyway.

    • talknic
      talknic
      November 19, 2013, 7:25 pm

      @ mondonut

      “I suppose the 194 refers to UNGA 194 and the farcical belief that a General Assembly resolution confers rights to the Palestinians. Yeah, yeah, I know – it “codifies” International law into a nice easy to understand package and is therefore elevated into something binding. Which is of course, nonsense. “

      The nonsense is yours.

      FACT : All law is binding. The UN Charter is binding in its entirety. Conventions are binding on all ratifying states and on those who have ratified them and those who have not ratified them “in their mutual relations”. When the majority of states adopt a law as a legal custom or ratify a convention as a legal custom, it automatically passes into Customary International law, thereby making it binding on all states in “their mutual relations”

      FACT : All pre-existing Laws, UN Charter Articles and ratified conventions that are “re-affirmed” and “emphasized” in UN and UNSC resolutions are binding

      FACT : There are hundreds of UNSC resolutions reminding Israel of emphasized and reaffirmed pre-existing Laws, UN Charter Articles and ratified conventions

      • mondonut
        mondonut
        November 20, 2013, 2:05 am

        @talknic

        Fact: An entire reply without actually mentioning UNGA 194. Or the nature of GA resolutions. Hardly a reply at all.

        Fact: UN GA resolutions are non-binding. As your friends like to say, full stop. This is affirmed by the UN itself. http://www.un.org/cyberschoolbus/untour/subgen.htm

        Fsct: There is no pre-exisiting law that grants the Palestinians the RoR that they claim. If there were, the Palestinians would reference that and not UNGA194

      • talknic
        talknic
        November 20, 2013, 6:00 am

        @ mondonut

        ” An entire reply without actually mentioning UNGA 194. Or the nature of GA resolutions”

        The Laws, UN Charter Articles and relevant conventions re-affirmed and/or emphasized in UN and UNSC resolutions ARE BINDING!

        “Fact: UN GA resolutions are non-binding.”

        The Law, the UN Charter or relevant conventions being reaffirmed and/or emphasised in a non-binding resolution does not negate the Law, the UN Charter or relevant conventions. They’re still binding!

        “Fsct: There is no pre-exisiting law that grants the Palestinians the RoR that they claim.”

        Oh. OK. Have it your way. The same alleged lack of pre-existing law must also apply to Jewish folk from non Israeli territories, right?

        Meanwhile,

        6. The competence of the High Commissioner shall extend to:
        A.(i) Any person who has been considered a refugee under the arrangements of 12 May 1926 and of 30 June 1928 or under the Conventions of 28 October 1933 and 10 February 1938, the Protocol of 14 September 1939 or the Constitution of the International Refugee Organization http://www.refworld.org/docid/3ae6b3628.html

        DEFINITION OF A “REFUGEE”
        UNDER PARAGRAPH 11 OF THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY RESOLUTION
        OF 11 DECEMBER 1948 by the Legal Adviser after consultation with the political-juridical protection department of the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees.
        …..
        D. Persons assimilated to Refugees

        There are two other categories of persons who, although not refugees in the technical sense of the term, should be assimilated to them. Their rights, property and interests are identical with those of the refugees. The first category consists of persons of Arab origin and of Palestinian citizenship who left Palestine before 29 November 1947 and who had not acquired any other citizenship prior to that date. To this category must be added that of persons of Arab origin who left Palestine before 6 August 1925 and who opted for Palestinian citizenship in accordance with the provisions of the Palestine Citizenship Order referred to above. In effect, in the majority of cases those belonging to the second category are identical with those in the first. According to the Palestine Citizenship Order they were obliged to state, among other things, their intention to reside in Palestine. However, it can well be imagined that this intention was unrealizable for valid reasons. It is certain that vis-à-vis the State of Israel these two categories are considered as a single group, whatever the date of departure from Palestine. There would appear to be good grounds for applying to them the provisions of the resolution of 11 December 1948 and thus furnishing them with protection which they would not otherwise enjoy.

        It follows from the foregoing remarks that 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.

        Are also to be considered as refugees under the said paragraph stateless persons of Arab origin who after 29 November 1947 left the aforementioned territory where they had been settled up to that date.
        Article 2

        The following shall be considered as covered by the provisions of Article 1 above:
        1. Persons of Arab origin who left the said territory after 6 August 1924 and before 29 November 1947 and who at that latter date were Palestinian citizens;

        2. Persons of Arab origin who left the territory in question before 6 August 1924 and who, having opted for Palestinian citizenship, retained that citizenship up to 29 November 1947.
        http://unispal.un.org/UNISPAL.NSF/0/418E7BC6931616B485256CAF00647CC7

      • Shingo
        Shingo
        November 20, 2013, 6:40 am

        UN GA resolutions are non-binding.

        International law, one which UN Resolutions are based, is.

        There is no pre-exisiting law that grants the Palestinians the RoR that they claim.

        Yes there is.

    • ckg
      ckg
      November 19, 2013, 11:14 pm

      UNGA194 does not ‘confer’ rights. It *recognizes* rights.

  4. mcohen
    mcohen
    November 19, 2013, 3:04 pm

    So bright outta sight,adam-and eve n i can see the signals in the dots

    • ckg
      ckg
      November 19, 2013, 11:01 pm

      Er, thanks mcohen. If you want to talk about adam and eve, I think you have Mondoweiss confused with Foxnation

      • mcohen
        mcohen
        November 20, 2013, 4:16 pm

        ckg says:
        November 19, 2013 at 11:01 pm

        “confused with Foxnation”

        what is this foxnation,is it a hunting club

        maybe you mean foxination or foxication

        never heard of FOXNATION

  5. just
    just
    November 19, 2013, 4:38 pm

    How very wonderful, thanks Adam!

    (PS– The first is the key, the second is the odious wall, I think. Isn’t the third the Palestinian flag and the fourth for the push for membership at the UN for the State of Palestine ?)

    • gamal
      gamal
      November 19, 2013, 4:48 pm

      4th a resolution, a condition and a prerequisite? but not necessarily in that order.

    • talknic
      talknic
      November 19, 2013, 7:32 pm

      Key
      Separation wall
      Flag
      UNGA res 194

      • just
        just
        November 19, 2013, 8:21 pm

        That’s it.

        Now we must make it happen in solidarity with the indigenous Palestinians who have every right to live free– with their right of return.

  6. NormanF
    NormanF
    November 19, 2013, 9:59 pm

    GA resolutions are not legally binding and do not create international law.

    And the UN Charter specifically forbids the UN from interfering in the domestic affairs of states, such as their sovereignty, right to control their borders and to decide on citizenship and the rules of residence.

    The Palestinian Arabs are not citizens of Israel, have never lived there, have no claim of loyalty or allegiance to it and therefore are not entitled to assistance from it. All this is settled international law and UNGA 194 doesn’t create any collective right of return – it merely presented Israel with a recommendation that it was perfectly within its rights to disregard.

    • talknic
      talknic
      November 20, 2013, 6:11 am

      @ NormanF “GA resolutions are not legally binding and do not create international law”

      Correct, However, all the pre-existing Laws, UN Charter Articles and relevant conventions that are re-affirmed and/or emphasized in UNGA and UNSC resolutions ARE BINDING!

      “And the UN Charter specifically forbids the UN from interfering in the domestic affairs of states, such as their sovereignty, right to control their borders and to decide on citizenship and the rules of residence”

      Quite, however for 65 years Israel has been operating in territories the Israeli Government itself claimed were “outside the State of Israel” http://pages.citebite.com/x1r0b4d1y6mkv

      It has been illegal to acquire territory by war since at least 1933 http://pages.citebite.com/y1f0t4q1v4son

      Thus far Israel has not legally acquired ANY territory beyond what it proclaimed

      “MY DEAR MR. PRESIDENT: I have the honor to notify you that 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 …..” http://www.trumanlibrary.org/whistlestop/study_collections/israel/large/documents/newPDF/49.pdf

      • pjdude
        pjdude
        November 20, 2013, 7:27 pm

        well minus the whole thing that technically Israel decleration of independence was a statement of intent to conqueror lands. but me and you will continue to disagree about that. I still stand by the assessment that all of ISrael was gained via war and therefore illegal.

    • pjdude
      pjdude
      November 20, 2013, 7:25 pm

      no but they lived in the mandated state of palestine which Israel declared war on. Israel has no rights. ITs an illegall entity founded on an illegal attack on palestinian sovriegnty.

  7. kayq
    kayq
    November 20, 2013, 7:20 am

    This is great.

  8. jon s
    jon s
    November 20, 2013, 4:19 pm

    At the time all the Arab states voted AGAINST resolution 194. It’s somewhat amusing that these days it’s repeatedly cited by the Palestinian side.

    • Woody Tanaka
      Woody Tanaka
      November 20, 2013, 5:19 pm

      What kind of man “on the… left” is “amus[ed]” at the denial to a people based on their ethnicity??? Oh, the israeli kind. You should be ashamed of yourself.

      • jon s
        jon s
        November 21, 2013, 1:14 am

        Woody, maybe I shouldn’t have written “amusing”. “Ironic” would have been better.

      • Shmuel
        Shmuel
        November 21, 2013, 2:43 am

        At the time all the Arab states voted AGAINST resolution 194. It’s somewhat [ironic] that these days it’s repeatedly cited by the Palestinian side.

        1. Think legislation (works for international agreements too). You fight a bill because it does not go far enough in achieving what you want to achieve (or the negative outweighs the positive) and you vote against it, but it passes anyway. You later cite it because it gave you some of what you wanted and you were unable to get the law you really wanted passed. Happens every day.

        2. Circumstances and policies change. If a law or resolution is on the books and is in keeping with current policy, there is nothing “ironic” about citing it.

        3. If it guarantees certain Palestinian rights, why shouldn’t “the Palestinian side” cite it? Who cares what Egypt, Iraq, Lebanon, Saudi Arabia, Syria and Yemen did over 60 years ago?

        Excuse me if I’m reading too much into your comment, jon, but it reminds me of Abba Eban’s arrogant remarks on the subject of Arabs and opportunities.

      • Woody Tanaka
        Woody Tanaka
        November 21, 2013, 8:42 am

        Ironic is no better. The goal is liberation from the inhumane policies of you and your state. There is no irony in achieving that goal.

    • Shingo
      Shingo
      November 20, 2013, 7:11 pm

      Why is it amusing Jon?

      It was the AHC that opposed 194, not the Palestinians.

      • jon s
        jon s
        November 21, 2013, 1:17 am

        Shingo, I’ve retracted “amusing”. It’s really not funny.
        What’s AHC?

      • talknic
        talknic
        November 21, 2013, 3:56 am

        @ jon s “At the time all the Arab states voted AGAINST resolution 194.” says jon s as he espouses ‘knowledgeably’ in a conversation about resolution 194 and the Arab states
        ” …. It’s really not funny.
        What’s AHC?”

        It’s so funny one couldn’t make it up.

        GIYF Search : resolution 194 and the Arab states AHC

    • talknic
      talknic
      November 21, 2013, 2:51 am

      jon s “At the time all the Arab states voted AGAINST resolution 194”

      So what. It was adopted by the majority. Being UN Members, the Arab states are as obliged to it as any other UN Member state. They’re also perfectly right in requesting that the actions it does call for be implemented even though it didn’t go as far as they wanted..

      “It’s somewhat amusing that these days it’s repeatedly cited by the Palestinian side”

      Why is it “amusing”. They didn’t vote on it. It was adopted by the majority of the UN Membership and as such the Palestinians are perfectly entitled to hold the majority of the UN Membership to their word.

Leave a Reply