# Can Palestinian's and Israeli's ever be friends?



## Billo_Really (Sep 1, 2015)

Is there any chance these two groups can settle their differences and bury the hatchet?

That was the question that popped into my head when I saw the following picture...







...of Civil War veterans from the North and the South, coming together in 1913 to shake hands.

I'm thinking, if they can do it, why can't Palestinian's and Israeli's?


----------



## S.J. (Sep 1, 2015)

They could (and WOULD) if the rest of the world would leave them alone to work out their differences.


----------



## ILOVEISRAEL (Sep 1, 2015)

S.J. said:


> They could (and WOULD) if the rest of the world would leave them alone to work out their differences.




That will never happen. The " Arab Peace Plan" calls for the destruction of Israel


----------



## Phoenall (Sep 1, 2015)

Billo_Really said:


> Is there any chance these two groups can settle their differences and bury the hatchet?
> 
> That was the question that popped into my head when I saw the following picture...
> 
> ...







 Because the Palestinians don't want peace they want Israel and the Jews dead. That is their mantra and they will die by their thousands to achieve that end.


----------



## S.J. (Sep 1, 2015)

ILOVEISRAEL said:


> S.J. said:
> 
> 
> > They could (and WOULD) if the rest of the world would leave them alone to work out their differences.
> ...


True.  I'm just saying they COULD, but I know they won't.


----------



## Billo_Really (Sep 1, 2015)

S.J. said:


> They could (and WOULD) if the rest of the world would leave them alone to work out their differences.


We could send Don King to mediate.


----------



## Billo_Really (Sep 1, 2015)

ILOVEISRAEL said:


> That will never happen. The " Arab Peace Plan" calls for the destruction of Israel


I thought it was end the occupation and the right of return?


----------



## Phoenall (Sep 1, 2015)

Billo_Really said:


> ILOVEISRAEL said:
> 
> 
> > That will never happen. The " Arab Peace Plan" calls for the destruction of Israel
> ...







 Then you would be wrong again and refuse to see the true proposals because they sit with your Jew Hatred

 read the full peace plan here



BBC NEWS | Middle East | Text: Arab peace plan of 2002


1. Requests Israel to reconsider its policies and declare that a just peace is its strategic option as well.
2. Further calls upon Israel to affirm:
a. Full Israeli withdrawal from all the territories occupied since 1967, including the Syrian Golan Heights to the lines of June 4, 1967 as well as the remaining occupied Lebanese territories in the south of Lebanon.
b. Achievement of a just solution to the Palestinian Refugee problem to be agreed upon in accordance with UN General Assembly Resolution 194.
c. The acceptance of the establishment of a Sovereign Independent Palestinian State on the Palestinian territories occupied since the 4th of June 1967 in the West Bank and Gaza strip, with East Jerusalem as its capital.
3. Consequently, the Arab Countries affirm the following:
a. Consider the Arab-Israeli conflict ended, and enter into a peace agreement with Israel, and provide security for all the states of the region.
b. Establish normal relations with Israel in the context of this comprehensive peace.
4. Assures the rejection of all forms of Palestinian patriation which conflict with the special circumstances of the Arab host countries.
5. Calls upon the Government of Israel and all Israelis to accept this initiative in order to safeguard the prospects for peace and stop the further shedding of blood, enabling the Arab Countries and Israel to live in peace and good neighborliness and provide future generations with security, stability, and prosperity.
6. Invites the International Community and all countries and Organizations to support this initiative.
7. Requests the Chairman of the Summit to form a special committee composed of some of its concerned member states and the Secretary General of the League of Arab States to pursue the necessary contacts to gain support for this initiative at all levels, particularly from the United Nations, the Security Council, the United States of America, the Russian Federation, the Muslim States and the European Union.





 Now we all know that for the occupation to end the Palestinians need to lay down their arms and give up terrorism, violence and belligerence. Just as we all know that the UN resolutions do not say that the Palestinians have the right to return, just that they have the right to apply to return and that all parties to the war in 1947 are equally responsible for payment and reparation to the refugees.


----------



## Hollie (Sep 1, 2015)

Billo_Really said:


> ILOVEISRAEL said:
> 
> 
> > That will never happen. The " Arab Peace Plan" calls for the destruction of Israel
> ...


There's no occupation. 

Egypt, Jordan, Syria, etc., will not accept the return of their former citizens, now falsely labeled as "Palestinians".


----------



## Humanity (Sep 1, 2015)

Phoenall said:


> Billo_Really said:
> 
> 
> > ILOVEISRAEL said:
> ...



Just two points...

There is no mention of the "destruction of Israel"...

We ALL know that Israel will NEVER end the occupation no matter what the Palestinians do!


----------



## rylah (Sep 1, 2015)

Unbelievers are described by Muhammad (in the Qur'an) as "the vilest of animals" and "losers."  *Christians and Jews are hated by Allah* to the extent that they are destined for eternal doom as a result of their beliefs.  It would make no sense for Muhammad to then recommend them to be taken in as friends by Muslims.  In fact, the Qur'an plainly commands believers not to take unbelievers as friends.

*The Qur'an:*

Qur'an (5:51) - _"O you who believe! do not take the Jews and the Christians for friends; they are friends of each other; and whoever amongst you takes them for a friend, then surely he is one of them; surely Allah does not guide the unjust people."_

Qur'an (5:80)_ - "You will see many of them befriending those who disbelieve; certainly evil is that which their souls have sent before for them, that Allah became displeased with them and in chastisement shall they abide." _Those Muslims who befriend unbelievers will abide in hell.

Qur'an (1:5-7) - _"Show us the straight path, The path of those whom Thou hast favoured; Not the (path) of those who earn Thine anger nor of those who go astray"_  This is a prayer that Muslims are supposed to repeat each day.  "Those who earn Thine anger" specifically refers to Jews and "those who go astray" refers to Christians (see Bukhari (12:749)).

TheReligionofPeace - Islam: Befriending Christians and Jews


The balestinins can't stop killing and torturing each other, how can they become friends with their enemies?


----------



## Phoenall (Sep 1, 2015)

Humanity said:


> Phoenall said:
> 
> 
> > Billo_Really said:
> ...







Did I say there was, or is this just you putting words in that were never there ?

 Or are you getting confused with the palestinian charters that call for the death of all Jews and the destruction of Israel


----------



## Penelope (Sep 1, 2015)

rylah said:


> Unbelievers are described by Muhammad (in the Qur'an) as "the vilest of animals" and "losers."  *Christians and Jews are hated by Allah* to the extent that they are destined for eternal doom as a result of their beliefs.  It would make no sense for Muhammad to then recommend them to be taken in as friends by Muslims.  In fact, the Qur'an plainly commands believers not to take unbelievers as friends.
> 
> *The Qur'an:*
> 
> ...



Really quoting the Quran to justify anything. Seems the Jews had a problem with everyone in the OT and ever since.


----------



## Penelope (Sep 1, 2015)

Israel will not have peace, they want more land and to do that they need enemies of Syria, Lebanon and well the W. Bank and Gaza.


----------



## Hollie (Sep 1, 2015)

Penelope said:


> Israel will not have peace, they want more land and to do that they need enemies of Syria, Lebanon and well the W. Bank and Gaza.


Pointless. 

Israel has a demonstrated history of giving up land in exchange for peace. 

Your goofy slogans only speak to your profound ignorance about events.


----------



## Rehmani (Sep 1, 2015)

ILOVEISRAEL said:


> S.J. said:
> 
> 
> > They could (and WOULD) if the rest of the world would leave them alone to work out their differences.
> ...


Israeli attitude will destroy Israel, to change their attitude they have to be free from their elders who are using them by their brain wash; please see my signature comments.


----------



## Penelope (Sep 1, 2015)

Hollie said:


> Penelope said:
> 
> 
> > Israel will not have peace, they want more land and to do that they need enemies of Syria, Lebanon and well the W. Bank and Gaza.
> ...



Israel never had land to give up. Israel never was, till now, you must remember the Egyptian, Persian, Greek, Roman , Ottoman Empires,  (read about them)did I leave Jewish empire out , no  why?  its a new invention , a Zionist invention.


----------



## P F Tinmore (Sep 1, 2015)




----------



## Humanity (Sep 1, 2015)

Phoenall said:


> Humanity said:
> 
> 
> > Phoenall said:
> ...



You will see that one of your brethren suggested in this very thread that you responded to....



ILOVEISRAEL said:


> That will never happen. The " Arab Peace Plan" calls for the destruction of Israel


----------



## Phoenall (Sep 1, 2015)

Penelope said:


> rylah said:
> 
> 
> > Unbelievers are described by Muhammad (in the Qur'an) as "the vilest of animals" and "losers."  *Christians and Jews are hated by Allah* to the extent that they are destined for eternal doom as a result of their beliefs.  It would make no sense for Muhammad to then recommend them to be taken in as friends by Muslims.  In fact, the Qur'an plainly commands believers not to take unbelievers as friends.
> ...






 Whats wrong pit stop don't like seeing it from the horses mouth that the Palestinians being muslims have it as their religion to kill the Jews. Their own religion justifies their killing, violence and terrorism doesn't it


----------



## Phoenall (Sep 1, 2015)

Penelope said:


> Israel will not have peace, they want more land and to do that they need enemies of Syria, Lebanon and well the W. Bank and Gaza.






 So why did they give up land in the Sinai then that they had control over and could keep ?


----------



## Phoenall (Sep 1, 2015)

Rehmani said:


> ILOVEISRAEL said:
> 
> 
> > S.J. said:
> ...






 HOGWASH and islaminazi propaganda because they know they are unable to defeat the Jews. They have tried and failed many times, and even the combined forces of 5 arab nations could not beat Jewish farmers fighting with farm tools and 19C guns.


----------



## Phoenall (Sep 1, 2015)

Penelope said:


> Hollie said:
> 
> 
> > Penelope said:
> ...







 So in 1967 they did not overrun Egyptian, Jordanian and Syrian forces and occupy a land area 3 times the size of Israel. Only you are talking about a Jewish empire here in a futile attempt at deflecting away from the reality.


----------



## Phoenall (Sep 1, 2015)

P F Tinmore said:


>







 When they are muslim yes as they steal and cause trouble all the time


----------



## Phoenall (Sep 1, 2015)

Humanity said:


> Phoenall said:
> 
> 
> > Humanity said:
> ...






 You replied to me not them implying that I said it, and now you have been proven to be a LIAR you are back pedaling as only an islamonazi stooge can


----------



## RoccoR (Sep 1, 2015)

Billo_Reilly, et al,

That is actually two different questions.

The answer to each is YES, but for much different reasons.



			
				Billo_Reilly said:
			
		

> Q1:   Can Palestinian's and Israeli's ever be friends?
> Q2:  Is there any chance these two groups can settle their differences and bury the hatchet?


(COMMENT)


A1:  "Can" they?"  "Friends?"
In understanding the "can they aspect" one has to remember that is is truly a matter of possibilities.  It is just one of several states in which the mutual relationship between the two peoples might hold.  There is no sociological, social psychological, anthropological, and philosophical barrier that presents itself to prevent the condition.

A2:  It is a mutual and simultaneous relationship expressing and exchanging interpersonal bond and affection between two  peoples.  Can this happen?  Again it is just one of several states in the realm of possibility.​
In both cases, there are powerful forces at work, attempt to minimize those possibilities.  But it probably will not happen in my lifetime.

Most Respectfully,
R


----------



## P F Tinmore (Sep 1, 2015)

RoccoR said:


> Billo_Reilly, et al,
> 
> That is actually two different questions.
> 
> ...


There is no sociological, social psychological, anthropological, and philosophical barrier that presents itself to prevent the condition.​
Indeed, the only thing in the way is Israel's policies.


----------



## Challenger (Sep 1, 2015)

ILOVEISRAEL said:


> S.J. said:
> 
> 
> > They could (and WOULD) if the rest of the world would leave them alone to work out their differences.
> ...


The "Israeli Peace Plan" calls for the destruction of Palestine, so what? Everyone needs a starting position.


----------



## Challenger (Sep 1, 2015)

RoccoR said:


> Billo_Reilly, et al,
> 
> That is actually two different questions.
> 
> ...


They probably said something like that about South Africa, Ireland/Northern Ireland and the former Yugoslavia. All it takes is the will to achieve a just equitable settlement and the rest will follow.


----------



## Humanity (Sep 1, 2015)

Phoenall said:


> Humanity said:
> 
> 
> > Phoenall said:
> ...



Proven a LIAR? How so Phoney?

You are an idiot boy... 

You should leave grown up conversations to the grown ups!


----------



## Phoenall (Sep 1, 2015)

P F Tinmore said:


> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> > Billo_Reilly, et al,
> ...






 Not arab nationalist policies then that sees the whole of the world as being muslim ?


----------



## Phoenall (Sep 1, 2015)

Challenger said:


> ILOVEISRAEL said:
> 
> 
> > S.J. said:
> ...






 How about a LINK then rat boy


----------



## Phoenall (Sep 1, 2015)

Challenger said:


> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> > Billo_Reilly, et al,
> ...





 So this is why there is no peace in South Africa, N.I and the former yugoslavia


----------



## Phoenall (Sep 1, 2015)

Humanity said:


> Phoenall said:
> 
> 
> > Humanity said:
> ...






 You replied to me as if I had said the arab oeace plan calls for the destruction of Israel when I said no such thing. Then admitted that I did not say that making you a LIAR.       SIMPLES really


----------



## RoccoR (Sep 1, 2015)

P F Tinmore,  et al,

The absence or placement of policies is neither a condition for --- or obstacle to --- a positive mutual exchange between two  peoples.  It is merely an excuse used to perpetuate the conflict.



P F Tinmore said:


> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> > Billo_Reilly, et al,
> ...


*(REFERENCE)*

Mr Khalid Meshaal, Chief of the Political Bureau, Islamic Resistance Movement (Hamas) Principle Position Paper
*SOURCE:*  Conference --- Al-Zaytouna Centre for Studies & Consultations, Beirut, on 28-29 November 2012.
*Download the full document*

*(COMMENT)*

While there are some differences between what HAMAS considers "Israel;" and what other, more moderate Palestinians consider "Israel;" --- they each lead to chaos in the diplomatic construct.

As long as the Palestinians believe that it is proper to teach, now the fifth generation of Palestinians, that there "is no solution for the Palestinian question except through Jihad" ---- the likelihood that a mutual friendship will be achieved is low.

Most Respectfully,
R


----------



## rylah (Sep 1, 2015)

Rehmani said:


> ILOVEISRAEL said:
> 
> 
> > S.J. said:
> ...



Jews would be free once they all remembered their ancestors and the elders and prosper even more. That's the sole purpose of Israel today.
The freedom You're talking about is sold in Europe under the guise of "rights"...Israel seems to know the game of ME better.


----------



## P F Tinmore (Sep 1, 2015)

RoccoR said:


> P F Tinmore,  et al,
> 
> The absence or placement of policies is neither a condition for --- or obstacle to --- a positive mutual exchange between two  peoples.  It is merely an excuse used to perpetuate the conflict.
> 
> ...


Hamas is a product of Israeli policies.


----------



## rylah (Sep 1, 2015)

Penelope said:


> rylah said:
> 
> 
> > Unbelievers are described by Muhammad (in the Qur'an) as "the vilest of animals" and "losers."  *Christians and Jews are hated by Allah* to the extent that they are destined for eternal doom as a result of their beliefs.  It would make no sense for Muhammad to then recommend them to be taken in as friends by Muslims.  In fact, the Qur'an plainly commands believers not to take unbelievers as friends.
> ...



Really everyone?
Any problems with Russians, Chinese, Swedes, Germans or Indians in the Torah?
And by problems You mean wars against neighboring tribes or riots against foreign empires?

Hmm..now let's see who actually has a problem with ALL infidels,
looks to conquer the world?...ISLAMISTS






Muslim conquests - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


----------



## Penelope (Sep 1, 2015)

rylah said:


> Penelope said:
> 
> 
> > rylah said:
> ...



What is your point, even the Jews and Romans had civil wars.


----------



## rylah (Sep 1, 2015)

Penelope said:


> rylah said:
> 
> 
> > Penelope said:
> ...



Did I mention civil war? Stop playing stupid

Who has the vision of spreading religion by sword all over the world?


----------



## Penelope (Sep 1, 2015)

rylah said:


> Penelope said:
> 
> 
> > rylah said:
> ...



Every empire, and after the Muslim, came the Ottoman and then the British, we now , if we are powerful use money and power, sanctions, and we don't use swords, we just bankrupt a country or  do a coup , or fly over and drop bombs.

I get your jealous that you never had an empire, but the Jews also fought among themselves for years , and well preferred to live among others, to go and move where the money was to be made. Babylon was really the Jewish capital for many years, and at the time of Jesus you loved Alexandria, Egypt.


----------



## Penelope (Sep 1, 2015)

*PM Says He is 'Ready' to Meet with Abbas for Negotiations*

Netanyahu tells Women Wage Peace activists that he is ready to go to Ramallah to forge the solution *'two states for two people.'*


The Prime Minister expressed his desire to return to the negotiating table and said, "*I have no preconditions for negotiations.* I am ready now to go to Ramallah or any other place in order to meet and hold direct negotiations without preconditions." 

"We want to conduct negotiations with the Palestinians," he continued. "The solution is two states for two peoples - *a demilitarized Palestinian state that recognizes the national state of the Jewish People."* 

PM Says He is 'Ready' to Meet with Abbas for Negotiations

He knows the Palestinians will never go for it,  So my answer is no. Two states for two people but no military for you, and you recognize us as the nations state of the Jewish People.


----------



## rylah (Sep 1, 2015)

Penelope said:


> rylah said:
> 
> 
> > Penelope said:
> ...



1.When saying: _"I get your jealous that you never had an empire "_
You mean the jews right? Or just me?

2.Hebrews had kingdoms only in Israel and Judea thousands of years before muslims conquered lands across continents. Israel gave lands it conquered in war-for peace treaties with musims. So who wants more land?

3. Jews didn't PREFER to be exiled  from their land by foreign empires numerous times. But they always kept coming back to their homeland.
Those in exile prayed with every oter jew facing Jerusalem 3 times a days for THOUSANDS OF YEARS wishing see Jerusalem rebuilt.

While muslims face Mecca, thei asses to Jerusalem and don't have a word meaning 'Jerusalem' in their holy book.


----------



## RoccoR (Sep 1, 2015)

P F Tinmore,  et al,

HAMAS is a product, not of Israeli Policy, but a resulting consequences of Palestinian politico-military actions.



P F Tinmore said:


> Hamas is a product of Israeli policies.


*(COMMENT)*

When HAMAS (AUG 1988) was born, the month before the State of Palestine (NOV 1988) was declared.  The basic content and position of HAMAS has not changed since it was first formally articulated in A/AC.21/10 16 February 1948.  In the basic threat issued by the Arab Higher Committee (AHC), it is really the foundational content of the the 1988 Covenant.   Take the basic points outline in the AHC Threat Letter, and wrap them around fundamentalist Islamic Radical Rhetoric, and you have most of the HAMAS Covenant.  And those fundamentals are merely updated and polished a little more in the Political Bureau, Islamic Resistance Movement (Hamas) Principle Position Paper of 2012.

In August 1988, when HAMAS published the Covenant, there was no Palestinian Territory in Occupation.  It was formerly Jordanian Territory which had been severed and abandoned from the nation by Royal Decree.

What we all observe today, is a consequence of the Israeli necessity for a security deterrent against Palestinian Jihadist and Insurgents. 

Most Respectfully,
R


----------



## ILOVEISRAEL (Sep 1, 2015)

Billo_Really said:


> ILOVEISRAEL said:
> 
> 
> > That will never happen. The " Arab Peace Plan" calls for the destruction of Israel
> ...


 
You and I agree!! The above especially the " Right of Return" with NJA in Palestine would eventually annex Israel to the Palestinian State and the destruction of Israel


----------



## proudveteran06 (Sep 1, 2015)

Billo_Really said:


> ILOVEISRAEL said:
> 
> 
> > That will never happen. The " Arab Peace Plan" calls for the destruction of Israel
> ...





Billo_Really said:


> ILOVEISRAEL said:
> 
> 
> > That will never happen. The " Arab Peace Plan" calls for the destruction of Israel
> ...



Analysis of the Arab League "Peace Plan" | Jewish Virtual Library

  Know when a Pro Palestinian lies?  When he opens his mouth


----------



## Kondor3 (Sep 1, 2015)

Humanity said:


> ...We ALL know that Israel will NEVER end the occupation no matter what the Palestinians do!


True.

Best for the so-called Palestinians to pack up and leave.

There is no future for you in Gaza and the West Bank.

Zero.

Time to change the fortunes and prospects of your family and to give them a new and safer and better life elsewhere.

The sooner you leave, the more of your family will survive, and the sooner you can begin building that new and happier life.

Go.

Now.


----------



## Billo_Really (Sep 1, 2015)

ILOVEISRAEL said:


> You and I agree!! The above especially the " Right of Return" with NJA in Palestine would eventually annex Israel to the Palestinian State and the destruction of Israel


This is how stupid that_ "destruction of Israel"_ rap is...


----------



## rylah (Sep 2, 2015)

Billo_Really said:


> ILOVEISRAEL said:
> 
> 
> > You and I agree!! The above especially the " Right of Return" with NJA in Palestine would eventually annex Israel to the Palestinian State and the destruction of Israel
> ...



Arabs control 99.75% of the Middle East.

Quiet the opposite, tiny Israel stands against the vast arab world,
while balestinians get all the support from the arabs and everyone dreams of destroying Israel to cure their own inadequacy


----------



## rylah (Sep 2, 2015)

All this post is a blood libel keeping the circle of hatred going. 
People care about baestinians only when they need a justification to point their fingers at Israel
No one cares about them being left jobless with the help of BDS..but of course i's the joooos.


----------



## ILOVEISRAEL (Sep 2, 2015)

Humanity said:


> Phoenall said:
> 
> 
> > Billo_Really said:
> ...


 
Just four points;

There are over 8 Million " Palestinians" who will have the OPTION to " return" There aren't even that many Jews in Israel . If they can't destroy Israel through Violence they will do it from within

  They refuse to recognize  Israel as a Jewish State. 

 The Arabs initiated the 67 War 

 Tell us exactly what " negotiations" the Palestinians have proposed that the Israelis have rejected .


----------



## Phoenall (Sep 2, 2015)

P F Tinmore said:


> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> > P F Tinmore,  et al,
> ...






 COWFLOP hamas is a product of islamonazi religious adherence by extremists shipped into the area by the arab league


----------



## Phoenall (Sep 2, 2015)

Penelope said:


> *PM Says He is 'Ready' to Meet with Abbas for Negotiations*
> 
> Netanyahu tells Women Wage Peace activists that he is ready to go to Ramallah to forge the solution *'two states for two people.'*
> 
> ...







 AND what is wrong with the Palestinians accepting the UN charter fully that says Israel is the Jewish state ? If Arafat could do it why cant the scum in charge today.


----------



## Phoenall (Sep 2, 2015)

Billo_Really said:


> ILOVEISRAEL said:
> 
> 
> > You and I agree!! The above especially the " Right of Return" with NJA in Palestine would eventually annex Israel to the Palestinian State and the destruction of Israel
> ...






 You have the captions the wrong way round as the Palestinians surround Israel, just that Israel has means of keeping them at arms length. Keep it up and gaza will be a forgotten wilderness inhabited by ghosts in 5 years time, all down to hamas.


----------



## ILOVEISRAEL (Sep 2, 2015)

Phoenall said:


> Penelope said:
> 
> 
> > *PM Says He is 'Ready' to Meet with Abbas for Negotiations*
> ...



The AIDS infected Palestiinian Scumbag DIDN''T do it


----------



## Phoenall (Sep 2, 2015)

ILOVEISRAEL said:


> Phoenall said:
> 
> 
> > Penelope said:
> ...






 It might have been the virus affecting his actions but he did accept Israel as the Jewish state.



Arafat recognises Jewish state and limit to return of refugees


Video: Yasser Arafat Recognizes Israel as a Jewish State


----------



## rylah (Sep 2, 2015)

Why Arabs in Israel can develop and use their opportunities but
Arab-bestinians build tunnels for war?


----------



## Humanity (Sep 2, 2015)

ILOVEISRAEL said:


> Tell us exactly what " negotiations" the Palestinians have proposed that the Israelis have rejected .



Leave occupied territory!


----------



## Lipush (Sep 2, 2015)

Billo_Really said:


> Is there any chance these two groups can settle their differences and bury the hatchet?
> 
> That was the question that popped into my head when I saw the following picture...
> 
> ...



Simple:

*"For The Day of Judgement will not come about until Muslims fight the Jews and slay them, when the Jew will hide behind stones and trees, and the stones and trees will say- O Muslims, O Abdullah, there is a Jew behind me, come and kill him."*


----------



## ILOVEISRAEL (Sep 2, 2015)

Humanity said:


> ILOVEISRAEL said:
> 
> 
> > Tell us exactly what " negotiations" the Palestinians have proposed that the Israelis have rejected .
> ...



" Negotiations" means compromise on both sides. STILL haven't told us what proposals the Palestinians have offered.  That's because you can't .

They even refuse to even recognize Israel as a Jewish State. Your answer?


----------



## Phoenall (Sep 2, 2015)

Humanity said:


> ILOVEISRAEL said:
> 
> 
> > Tell us exactly what " negotiations" the Palestinians have proposed that the Israelis have rejected .
> ...






 And rightly so as the Palestinians know what International law says about the occupation. Stop all belligerence, vilence and terrorism and agree mutual borders and the occupation will be lifted


----------



## frigidweirdo (Sep 2, 2015)

Billo_Really said:


> Is there any chance these two groups can settle their differences and bury the hatchet?
> 
> That was the question that popped into my head when I saw the following picture...
> 
> ...



Yes it could happen. 

The problem is it requires some things to happen.

Firstly it requires peace for a while. It requires prosperity of the Palestinians. It requires education.

For peace you'd need the right on both sides to stop playing silly beggars. They need the conflict to feel important and to make their life easier to get re-elected or for people to acknowledge them as leaders.


----------



## Humanity (Sep 2, 2015)

Phoenall said:


> Humanity said:
> 
> 
> > ILOVEISRAEL said:
> ...



Utter bull crap!

Occupation will continue as long as Israel is allowed to get away with it!

When Germany occupied France did they say "Yeah, well, stop all belligerence, violence and terrorism and agree mutual borders and the occupation will be lifted"?

No of course not... 

Israel has NO intention of leaving occupied territory!

The occupation will last forever, Netanyahu clarifies | +972 Magazine


----------



## rylah (Sep 2, 2015)

frigidweirdo said:


> Billo_Really said:
> 
> 
> > Is there any chance these two groups can settle their differences and bury the hatchet?
> ...



Stop pretending to know the ME...talking about playing silly...
A good sample is Europe, but for the Jews they have a special plan.
What part of this didn't You understand:

_"The Day of Judgement will not come about until Muslims fight the Jews, when the Jew will hide behind stones and trees. The stones and trees will say O Muslims, O Abdullah, there is a Jew behind me, come and kill him. Only the Gharkad tree, (the Boxthorn tree) would not do that because it is one of the trees of the Jews. (related by al-Bukhari and Muslim)"_
.Sahih Muslim, 41:6985


----------



## frigidweirdo (Sep 2, 2015)

rylah said:


> frigidweirdo said:
> 
> 
> > Billo_Really said:
> ...



The part I don't understand started with "Stop" and ended with "understand:"


----------



## Billo_Really (Sep 2, 2015)

rylah said:


> Arabs control 99.75% of the Middle East.
> 
> Quiet the opposite, tiny Israel stands against the vast arab world,
> while balestinians get all the support from the arabs and everyone dreams of destroying Israel to cure their own inadequacy



Israel is the only nuclear power in the ME.  They're the big dog on campus.  No other country is capable of destroying them.  And the last one that tried, got their ass kicked in 6 days.


----------



## rylah (Sep 2, 2015)

Islamism is a religious political movement, it's thirsty for the blood of the Jews in Europe,Israel and the whole ME. 

The "peace" You suggest is a clear sign of weakness in their view-
look at Europe.


----------



## Billo_Really (Sep 2, 2015)

rylah said:


> All this post is a blood libel keeping the circle of hatred going.
> People care about baestinians only when they need a justification to point their fingers at Israel
> No one cares about them being left jobless with the help of BDS..but of course i's the joooos.


This isn't a religious issue and doesn't have a god-damn thing to do with Jews!  People point fingers at Israel, because of the shit things Israel has done and is doing.  At the very least, be a responsible adult and take ownership over the things you have done.  1) the occupation and 2) the blockade.  Those are on you.  Those are your fault.  Your decision.  Fucking own it!


----------



## Billo_Really (Sep 2, 2015)

rylah said:


> Islamism is a religious political movement, it's thirsty for the blood of the Jews in Europe,Israel and the whole ME.
> 
> The "peace" You suggest is a clear sign of weakness in their view-
> look at Europe.


Islam is just another way people worship.  It's no different than Catholicism, Judaism, Hinduism, etc.

It's just a way some people pray.


----------



## Billo_Really (Sep 2, 2015)

frigidweirdo said:


> The part I don't understand started with "Stop" and ended with "understand:"


They have to make every criticism about Jews, because they cannot defend Israeli atrocities.


----------



## rylah (Sep 2, 2015)

Billo_Really said:


> rylah said:
> 
> 
> > Arabs control 99.75% of the Middle East.
> ...



So do You suggest balestinians will be bombed by an atomic bomb by Israel?

Or would it be that the balestinians will suffer from the deeds of their partners if they dare to bomb the reactor?


----------



## Billo_Really (Sep 2, 2015)

rylah said:


> So do You suggest balestinians will be bombed by an atomic bomb by Israel?
> 
> Or would it be that the balestinians will suffer from the deeds of their partners if they dare to bomb the reactor?


I'm saying Israel is the 4th most militarized country on the planet.  There is no country in the ME that can even come close to that kind of firepower.


----------



## rylah (Sep 2, 2015)

Billo_Really said:


> rylah said:
> 
> 
> > All this post is a blood libel keeping the circle of hatred going.
> ...



More blood libels, ridiculous parroting...

1. Arabs from Syria, Egypt and Saudi occupied the land of Israel.

2.The blockade was the result of suicide bombings, and was implemented by Egypt too quiet successfully. It's the decision of Hamas and their electors-the balestinians who gave their children the explosive vests.

3. When saying _"you have done", _do You mean just me, all the jews or Israeli citizens all-together?

4. What about owning Your decision to support a terrorist organization which steals UN aid meant for Gazans and WB citizens?


----------



## Phoenall (Sep 2, 2015)

Humanity said:


> Phoenall said:
> 
> 
> > Humanity said:
> ...







 What do you mean by "Israel is allowed to get away with it" when International law and IHL say it is allowable.

 Different thing all together and the law has changed since then, Germany invaded France with the sole intent of taking over. Israel did not invade Palestine and has consistently offered the land back in exchange for peace.

 Your source is biased against the Jews so has no validity. If they had no intention of leaving Occupied territory then why did they leave the Sinai that was rich in everything they wanted, then the parts of Syria and Lebanon they occupied. The TRUTH proves that you are just spouting islamonazi LIES and PROPAGANDA


----------



## Phoenall (Sep 2, 2015)

Billo_Really said:


> rylah said:
> 
> 
> > Arabs control 99.75% of the Middle East.
> ...






 And no sign of nuclear weapons in the process, just modern non nuclear ones.   So what is your point ?


----------



## rylah (Sep 2, 2015)

Billo_Really said:


> rylah said:
> 
> 
> > Islamism is a religious political movement, it's thirsty for the blood of the Jews in Europe,Israel and the whole ME.
> ...




No those religions are definitely not the same.
Their goals and morals are totally different.

A Jew waits for G-d to send the anointed either when all of Israel is righteous or when a great war on Jerusalem is waged. A Jew doesn't have to convert people or conquer empires for his redemption.

While for Muslims the Judgement Day won't start until they slaughter the Jews and submit the infidels around the world, as quoted from Hadth:

_"The Day of Judgement will not come about until Muslims fight the Jews, when the Jew will hide behind stones and trees. The stones and trees will say O Muslims, O Abdullah, there is a Jew behind me, come and kill him. Only the Gharkad tree, (the Boxthorn tree) would not do that because it is one of the trees of the Jews. (related by al-Bukhari and Muslim)"_
.Sahih Muslim, 41:6985

BIG DIFFERENCE


----------



## Humanity (Sep 2, 2015)

Phoenall said:


> Humanity said:
> 
> 
> > Phoenall said:
> ...



Which international laws would they be Phoney?

So, "occupied territory" was taken by what means? Israel has NO intention of removing itself from "occupied territory"...

Whether YOU consider my source biased or otherwise is immaterial... It is what is stated by Netanyahu that matters.... Facts that are undeniable from ANY source!

The TRUTH eludes you Phoney! As you were sucked into neo marxism you are now sucked into zionism.... Feeble of mind? What's next Phoney? Neo Thatcherism?


----------



## Phoenall (Sep 2, 2015)

Billo_Really said:


> rylah said:
> 
> 
> > All this post is a blood libel keeping the circle of hatred going.
> ...






 Then why do the Palestinians use islam as the cornerstone of their fight against Israel. Why do they invoke their God and religion all the time.
 It has everything to do with religion and the Jews and then LIE about what Israel is doing and has done rather than try and live peacefully. How about the shit things the US has done thousands of times worse than anything Israel has done, just look at Iraq and Afghanistan or even Vietnam. So while you allow that to happen you are not in a position to complain about anyone else.  The US mantra during Vietnam was if it moves it is VC, does it still apply in Afghanistan  ?

The occupation is for defence which makes it legal, the only other solution would be UN troops stationed in Palestine with the remit to shoot to kill.
 The blockade is in reply to Palestinians violence and terrorism and so is legal,

 Both are the fault of the Palestinians and it is within their power to have both lifted. The Palestinians decided to wage war on Israel so now they are reaping the rewards.


----------



## Phoenall (Sep 2, 2015)

Billo_Really said:


> rylah said:
> 
> 
> > Islamism is a religious political movement, it's thirsty for the blood of the Jews in Europe,Israel and the whole ME.
> ...







 This shows that you don't have a clue about islam and what it preaches, from rape to murder for example. It is based on a pagan cult of moon worshippers that engaged in blood rituals, and they still do to this day.

 Try reading the koran and hadiths and see what they say ?


----------



## Phoenall (Sep 2, 2015)

Billo_Really said:


> frigidweirdo said:
> 
> 
> > The part I don't understand started with "Stop" and ended with "understand:"
> ...






 What Jewish atrocities are those then, maybe this time you will answer using unbiased and non partisan sources for your links. All you have used up to now is islamonazi propaganda sites and Nazi sources that have no back up of their material.

 How about the Palestinian atrocities then like the cold blooded murder of 3 young boys last year ?


----------



## Penelope (Sep 2, 2015)

Lipush said:


> Billo_Really said:
> 
> 
> > Is there any chance these two groups can settle their differences and bury the hatchet?
> ...



Your cherry picking is ignorance .


----------



## Penelope (Sep 2, 2015)

Phoenall said:


> ILOVEISRAEL said:
> 
> 
> > Phoenall said:
> ...



Read it all and not tidbits:

The White House

Bush Demands Arafat's Ouster Before U.S. Backs a New State; Israelis Welcome Tough Line

By ELISABETH BUMILLER and DAVID E. SANGER

Published: June 25, 2002

http://www.nytimes.com/2002/06/25/international/middleeast/25PREX.html


A Jewish state? `Definitely' - Features


Sharon started the 2000 intifada, when he and 1000 IDF went to the temple mount and claimed it as Israel's.

There is much speculation of how Arafat died, poison? Also he wanted 97% of the West Bank, and was upset about Russian immigrant return, while 200,000 Palestinians were remaining in Lebanon.

BUT THE LAST THING ISRAEL'S WANT'S IF PEACE.


----------



## Phoenall (Sep 2, 2015)

Billo_Really said:


> rylah said:
> 
> 
> > So do You suggest balestinians will be bombed by an atomic bomb by Israel?
> ...






That is just tough isn't it, that is what happens when you constantly wage war against a nation that is prepared to defend itself from attack. And right from the start the arab muslims ganged up on the Jews and promptly got their butts kicked big time. That then set the scene for Israel to become a militarised force to see of any further arab muslim attacks. Like all Jew haters you want the Jews to just lay down and be walked all over by the arab muslims until there are no Jews left and the arab muslims are firing nuclear weapons at the US. 

 Your Jew Hatred shows in every single post you make based on LIES, PROPAGANDA and BLOOD LIBELS.


----------



## Penelope (Sep 2, 2015)

Phoenall said:


> Billo_Really said:
> 
> 
> > rylah said:
> ...



Your arab hatred shows in every single post you make, which are based on lies , propaganda and blood.


----------



## Phoenall (Sep 2, 2015)

Humanity said:


> Phoenall said:
> 
> 
> > Humanity said:
> ...





The Geneva conventions of course, that you seem to have a problem in understanding when they support Israeli actions.

 By armed response to armed attack from the arab muslims, or don't you see acts of war as armed attacks ?

 Only if he did say what your source claims, if it was something else or it has been subject to literary licence then it is not valid.

No the truth eludes you as I can see the reality that you refuse to admit, this is shown by your use of biased and partisan sources because they preach your beliefs.


----------



## Phoenall (Sep 2, 2015)

Penelope said:


> Phoenall said:
> 
> 
> > ILOVEISRAEL said:
> ...






The intifada started well before Sharron went to the Temple mount, which he had every right to do.

 He died of AIDS as the latest report shows, and it is from French doctors not Israeli/Zionist sources.   He was offered 97% of Palestine with negotiations over the remaining 3%. Was he also upset about the migration of Jews from M.E. Islamic nations returning to Israel ?   That was the Palestinians problems and if they had curbed their violence and belligerence they would have lived in prosperity.


 LINK from a trusted unbiased source


----------



## Phoenall (Sep 2, 2015)

Penelope said:


> Phoenall said:
> 
> 
> > Billo_Really said:
> ...






 And you are wrong as I don't hate arab's, I hate muslims that follow the koran's every word and rape, murder and steal because that is what it says to them.


----------



## Rehmani (Sep 2, 2015)

Phoenall said:


> Rehmani said:
> 
> 
> > ILOVEISRAEL said:
> ...





Phoenall said:


> Rehmani said:
> 
> 
> > ILOVEISRAEL said:
> ...


How silly. Must be you are not Jewish.


----------



## Rehmani (Sep 2, 2015)

rylah said:


> Rehmani said:
> 
> 
> > ILOVEISRAEL said:
> ...


Jewish don't anything they are brain wash by their elders.


----------



## Rehmani (Sep 2, 2015)

Kondor3 said:


> Rehmani said:
> 
> 
> > ...Jewish don't anything they are brain wash by their elders.
> ...


Only "Know" is missing and you should not be that dump to complete the sentence.


----------



## Humanity (Sep 2, 2015)

Phoenall said:


> The Geneva conventions of course, that you seem to have a problem in understanding when they support Israeli actions.



You mean this....

Article 49 of the Fourth Geneva Convention relative to the protection of civilian persons in time of war states: *"The occupying power shall not deport or transfer parts of its own population into the territories it occupies."*

The position that the 4th Geneva Convention does apply to the West Bank, Gaza and Golan Heights is supported by the International Committee of the Red Cross, UN bodies, and the International Court of Justice.

The Israeli Supreme Court "The general point of departure of all parties - which is also our point of departure - is that Israel holds the area in belligerent occupation (occupatio bellica)."



Phoenall said:


> Only if he did say what your source claims, if it was something else or it has been subject to literary licence then it is not valid.



Do you have an unbiased link to suggested that he DIDN'T say it?


----------



## Phoenall (Sep 2, 2015)

Rehmani said:


> Phoenall said:
> 
> 
> > Rehmani said:
> ...





 Correct I am not Jewish but I support and defend their right to defend themselves from attacks and terrorism. Just as I support and defend the people of Syria's right to defend against attack and terrorism.


----------



## Phoenall (Sep 2, 2015)

Humanity said:


> Phoenall said:
> 
> 
> > The Geneva conventions of course, that you seem to have a problem in understanding when they support Israeli actions.
> ...






 Which it hasn't and you have been unable to prove they have, The people moved back to their property stolen in 1949 as is their legal right. Then there is Oslo which granted Israel the legal right to settle the land so article 49 does not apply.

 No do you have an unbiased link to say he did ?


----------



## Humanity (Sep 2, 2015)

Phoenall said:


> Humanity said:
> 
> 
> > Phoenall said:
> ...



Focus Phoney, focus....

You stated the Geneva Conventions is the "International Law" that gives the right to occupy territory... Proven a LIE.... Now it's Oslo because Geneva doesn't apply?.... Getting jumpy me thinks! Where does it state in the Oslo Accords that the "occupied territories" are legal?

There is only ONE country that does not consider the territory "occupied"... Which one do you think that might be?

Nah, didn't think you would be able to come up with any evidence to refute the words of Netanyahu...


----------



## P F Tinmore (Sep 2, 2015)

Phoenall said:


> Humanity said:
> 
> 
> > Phoenall said:
> ...


A treaty is void if, at the time of its conclusion, it conflicts with a peremptory norm of general international law.

http://www.treatylaw.org/vienna-con...ns-international-organizations/#_Toc253643621​


----------



## Phoenall (Sep 2, 2015)

Humanity said:


> Phoenall said:
> 
> 
> > Humanity said:
> ...







 Who was the sovereign owners of the land of Palestine when Israel occupied it ?

 If it was the UN then the Geneva conventions don't apply, if it was Jordan again the Geneva conventions do not apply. But if it was Palestinian sovereign land then the Geneva conventions do apply and they take into account any agreements made between the two parties. The Oslo accords are one such agreement that give Israel free reign in areas of Palestine

 The Oslo II Accord (1995). Division of the West Bank into Areas, in effect fragmenting it into numerous enclaves and banning the Palestinians from some 60% of the West Bank. Redeployment of Israeli troops from Area A and from other areas through "Further Re-deployments". Election of the Palestinian Legislative Council (Palestinian parliament, PLC), replacing the PA upon its inauguration. Deployment of Palestinian Police replacing Israeli military forces in Area A. Safe passage between West Bank and Gaza. Most importantly, start of negotiations on a final settlement of remaining issues, to be concluded before 4 May 1999.

 As Roccor has explained many times the Geneva conventions do not apply if the Palestinians are the occupied people


----------



## Phoenall (Sep 2, 2015)

P F Tinmore said:


> Phoenall said:
> 
> 
> > Humanity said:
> ...






 And what " peremptory norm of general international law " does Oslo conflict with. Give the law and its date of implementation and how Oslo applies ?


----------



## P F Tinmore (Sep 2, 2015)

Phoenall said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> > Phoenall said:
> ...


Civilians are at all times entitled to respect for their persons, honour,
family rights, religious convictions, and manners and customs. Their
private property is protected.

The civilian population is in a tense and vulnerable position. The law
states that it must be humanely treated in all circumstances and pro-
tected from any acts of violence, including by third parties. The occupying
power may only put in place such measures of control and security as
may be necessary as a result of the conflict. Collective penalties, measures
of intimidation, terrorism and hostage-taking are prohibited.

*The legal rights of the inhabitants of occupied territory cannot be curtailed*
*by any agreement or other arrangement between the occupying power*
*and the authorities of the occupied territory. *This is intended to prevent
national authorities from being put under pressure to make conces-
sions which might not be in the population’s best interests or weaken
its legal rights.

Similarly, the inhabitants of the occupied territory cannot renounce their
rights under the Fourth Geneva Convention. This again is a safeguard.
It prevents the occupying power from exploiting the vulnerability of the
occupied territory by exerting undue pressure to undermine and weaken
the protection which the law affords.

*Individual or mass forcible transfers and deportations of the civilian*
*population from occupied territory are prohibited.*

*The occupying power must not deport or transfer parts of its own civilian*
*population into the territory it occupies.*

*Destruction of property.*
*The occupying power is not allowed to destroy real or personal property belonging individually or collectively to private persons, to the State, to other public authorities or to social or co-operative organizations, except where such destruction is made absolutely necessary by military operations.*

https://www.icrc.org/eng/assets/files/other/law9_final.pdf


----------



## P F Tinmore (Sep 2, 2015)

RoccoR said:


> P F Tinmore,  et al,
> 
> HAMAS is a product, not of Israeli Policy, but a resulting consequences of Palestinian politico-military actions.
> 
> ...


Thanks for the link. It is a good read.

A/AC.21/10 of 16 February 1948

It explains why the UN abandoned resolution 181.

BTW, the rest of your post is a pantload.


----------



## RoccoR (Sep 2, 2015)

P F Tinmore,  et al,

You cut'n'paste well.   But do you know what it means and how to apply it?



P F Tinmore said:


> And what " peremptory norm of general international law " does Oslo conflict with. Give the law and its date of implementation and how Oslo applies ?
> Civilians are at all times entitled to respect for their persons, honour,
> family rights, religious convictions, and manners and customs. Their
> private property is protected.
> ...


*(COMMENT)*

The Oslo Accords are in no way preempting the application of something otherwise legal.  What the passage on the concept of a " peremptory norm of general international law " is trying to convey --- is that you cannot (for example) you cannot enforce a contract (the legal instrument) to murder, since murder is always illegal. 

Now you might have a case for the exploitation of the influence held by an Occupation Power.  But even that is estranged from the truth.  Yes, the Oslo Accord I (1993)(Declaration of Principles (DoP) on Interim Self-Government Arrangements) where were put together by Ron Pundak (Israeli), who just passed away in the last year.  In diplomatic circles, he was known as the "Warrior for Peace."   Pundak was the General Director of an NGO known as the Peres Center for Peace, from 2001 to 2012, focused on improving relations between Israelis and Palestinians.   While the DoP was a product of an Israeli, the negotiation effort was not one of coercive atmosphere.  The DoP was more than just a framework for the agreements.  In it Israel accepted the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO) as the representative of the Palestinians, and the PLO renounced terrorism and recognized Israel’s right to exist in peace. Both sides agreed that a Palestinian Authority (PA) would be established and assume governing responsibilities in the West Bank and Gaza Strip.

Now there were then, as there has been since 1948, very powerful and influential Arab interests, both inside and outside Palestine, that focus all their efforts into derailing any mutual agreement between the two belligerents, that would lead to peace.  These same powerful and influential Arab interests and are engaged in a deliberate effort to alter by force that which has been made so far and any attempt to make a reasonable effort to negotiate a peaceful settlement in the future.  HAMAS is just but one such force, using asymmetric warfare to achieve their political ends that have otherwise been out of reach.

I understand that there are some Arab Palestinians that periodically reaffirm here that the Arab Palestine will not recognize the Balfour Declaration, the San Remo Convention, the Mandate of Palestine, and Resolution 181(II), or any outcome that is derived from them.  But this again, is the obstinacy of the Arab Palestinian people that want to undermine the decisions made by the Council of the League, the Allied Powers, and the General Assembly.  They want to use complaints and conflict, instigated by there own hand, to coerce and pressure set the conditions for ever more fruitless conflict. 

Most Respectfully,
R


----------



## RoccoR (Sep 2, 2015)

P F Tinmore,  et al,

The UN did not "abandon" General Assembly Resolution 181(II)



P F Tinmore said:


> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> > P F Tinmore,  et al,
> ...


*(COMMENT)*

I know that you want people to believe that, but it is simply not true.  One of the more relevant example is:


"_Recalling_ its resolution 181 (II) of 29 November 1947," used in the 2012 Resolution on the Status of Palestine.
"_Recalling_ its resolution 181 (II) of 29 November 1947, in which, _inter alia_, it recommended the partition of Palestine into a Jewish State and an Arab State, with Jerusalem as a _corpus separatum_, in the 1998 Resolution on the Participation of Palestine in the work of the United Nations.

But even the Arab Palestinians recognize it:


"The Palestinian side adheres to international legitimacy and respects General Assembly resolution 181 (II), as well as Security Council resolution 242 (1967), the implementation of which is the aim of the current Middle East peace process."  Letter dated 25 March 1999 from the Permanent Observer  of Palestine to the United Nations addressed to the Secretary-General."

I know that it is an inconvenient truth, yet one that demonstrates how confused and segmented the Arab Palestinians are on the issues.

PS:  What in Post #44 was inaccurate???

Most Respectfully,
R


----------



## P F Tinmore (Sep 2, 2015)

RoccoR said:


> P F Tinmore,  et al,
> 
> You cut'n'paste well.   But do you know what it means and how to apply it?
> 
> ...


I understand that there are some Arab Palestinians that periodically reaffirm here that the Arab Palestine will not recognize the Balfour Declaration, the San Remo Convention, the Mandate of Palestine, and Resolution 181(II), or any outcome that is derived from them.​
And that was one of the biggest successes for the Palestinians. None of those were successful in creating a Jewish state. When the Mandate left Palestine there was nothing legitimate for the Zionists to hang their hat on.

No government was established by the Mandate. Israel had acquired no land from any of those previous activities. No borders were defined. No legitimacy for a Jewish state had been established. There was a lot of talk but all actions had failed.


----------



## P F Tinmore (Sep 2, 2015)

RoccoR said:


> P F Tinmore,  et al,
> 
> The UN did not "abandon" General Assembly Resolution 181(II)
> 
> ...


All that about land and borders have to be defined by treaty. If the Palestinians had agreed, there would have been a valid treaty. Without the agreement by the Palestinian's, they had nothing. Imposing partition on Palestine by force would have violated the UN's own charter.

Resolution 181 had died and the US was offering a different proposal when the 1948 war broke out making the whole plan moot.
------------
You mentioned in post 44 that the West Bank was Jordanian territory. That is not true. It is illegal to annex occupied territory.

The annexation of conquered territory is prohibited by international law. This necessarily means that if one State achieves power over parts of another State’s territory by force or threat of force, the situation must be considered temporary by international law.

https://www.icrc.org/eng/assets/files/other/law9_final.pdf​
It can also be said (and I have) that Israel illegally annexed territory that it occupied in the 1948 war. Israel supporters have danced around this question for years.


----------



## RoccoR (Sep 2, 2015)

P F Tinmore,  et al,

Arab Palestinians claim everything is illegal if they don't agree with it.



P F Tinmore said:


> All that about land and borders have to be defined by treaty. If the Palestinians had agreed, there would have been a valid treaty. Without the agreement by the Palestinian's, they had nothing. Imposing partition on Palestine by force would have violated the UN's own charter.


*(COMMENT)*

First, borders do not require a treaty.  Second, only two countries can enter into a Treaty (Part I, Article 2a, Law of Treaties).   The Palestinians had no country and therefore could not enter into a treaty.  The Arab Palestinians had not established sovereignty over the territory in question, therefore could not enter a treaty.

Resolution 181(II) did not impose any partition.  It was a set of Steps Preparatory to Independence.  The actual country was established under the Charter 1, Article 1(2).  The right of self-determination, for the establishment of the Jewish State, was recorded by official cablegram from the Provisional Government pursuant to the Step Preparatory to Independence.



P F Tinmore said:


> Resolution 181 had died and the US was offering a different proposal when the 1948 war broke out making the whole plan moot.


*(COMMENT)*

Yes, this is always the claim.  Yet it could not be further from the truth.



EXCERPT UN/PAL169 17 May 1948 UNPC]  "In fact the resolution of last November 29 has been implemented." [/quote]

[QUOTE="P F Tinmore said:


> You mentioned in post 44 that the West Bank was Jordanian territory. That is not true. It is illegal to annex occupied territory.
> 
> The annexation of conquered territory is prohibited by international law. This necessarily means that if one State achieves power over parts of another State’s territory by force or threat of force, the situation must be considered temporary by international law.
> 
> ...


*(COMMENT)*

This is another mistake of fact.  The Jordanian King DID NOT annex the West Bank; it was the Joint Jordanian/Palestinian Parliament.



			
				Official History of the Hashemite Kingdom said:
			
		

> On April 11, 1950, elections were held for a new *Jordanian parliament in which the Palestinian Arabs of the West Bank were equally represented*. Thirteen days later, Parliament unanimously approved a motion to unite the two banks of the Jordan River, constitutionally expanding the Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan in order to safeguard what was left of the Arab territory of Palestine from further Zionist expansion.
> _*SOURCE:*_ Unification of the Two Banks



In fact, this was the Arab Palestinians using their "right of self-determination."

Most Respectfully,
R


----------



## Billo_Really (Sep 2, 2015)

rylah said:


> More blood libels, ridiculous parroting...


You know, I couldn't give a shit what labels you want to put on things, we both know the reason you do it, is because you're too pussy to be a responsible adult.




rylah said:


> 1. Arabs from Syria, Egypt and Saudi occupied the land of Israel.


We're not talking about them.  We're talking about the indigenous, non-Jewish population, that has lived in that area for over 2000 years.




rylah said:


> 2.The blockade was the result of suicide bombings, and was implemented by Egypt too quiet successfully. It's the decision of Hamas and their electors-the balestinians who gave their children the explosive vests.


Wrong!  The blockade started because Israel didn't like the results of a fair and democratic election, which BTW, was none of their god-damn business!




rylah said:


> 3. When saying _"you have done", _do You mean just me, all the jews or Israeli citizens all-together?


Israeli citizens all-together.  You're responsible for everything your government does.  Just like I am with mine. 

I have been against the Iraq war from day one, but that doesn't change the fact that, as an American citizen, I am responsible for the death and destruction that were caused by our illegal and immoral invasion of that country.




rylah said:


> 4. What about owning Your decision to support a terrorist organization which steals UN aid meant for Gazans and WB citizens?


I don't support anything on that side of the planet.  Fuck Hamas and fuck Israel!  Fuck both of them and fuck you!  I could care less about either side.  I just don't like someone looking me in the eye and trying to tell me, _"the emperor has new clothes"._  And that's what you're doing.


----------



## Billo_Really (Sep 2, 2015)

rylah said:


> Jews would be free once they all remembered their ancestors and the elders and prosper even more. That's the sole purpose of Israel today.


And to think you accuse Muslims of living in the 7th century?




rylah said:


> The freedom You're talking about is sold in Europe under the guise of "rights"...Israel seems to know the game of ME better.


Where it deny's the rights of others.


----------



## Billo_Really (Sep 2, 2015)

Rehmani said:


> Jewish don't anything they are brain wash by their elders.


Not all Jews.  Israel is losing a lot of their younger Jewish population, because they don't want to be associated with what their government is doing.  And as time goes on, more and more of the Jewish population around the world, is starting to speak out against the foreign policies of the Israeli government.  Groups like Jewish Voices for Peace (JVP) and Rabbi's for Human Rights, are two that comes to mind.

But getting back to your comment, _"...they are brain wash by their elders...",_ makes me think, in contrast,  the comments of the Iranian population (who 70% of them are under the age of 30), say they can't wait for their elders to die off.  I remember when I was in my 20's, I didn't listen to anyone over 30.

Without getting too far off topic, this is the Iran today, which looks the same as spring break in Panama City.


----------



## Billo_Really (Sep 2, 2015)

Phoenall said:


> Correct I am not Jewish but I support and defend their right to defend themselves from attacks and terrorism. Just as I support and defend the people of Syria's right to defend against attack and terrorism.


So you are officially stating your support for the Assad government?


----------



## P F Tinmore (Sep 2, 2015)

RoccoR said:


> P F Tinmore,  et al,
> 
> Arab Palestinians claim everything is illegal if they don't agree with it.
> 
> ...


First, borders do not require a treaty.​
Link?


----------



## P F Tinmore (Sep 2, 2015)

RoccoR said:


> P F Tinmore,  et al,
> 
> Arab Palestinians claim everything is illegal if they don't agree with it.
> 
> ...


The Arab Palestinians had not established sovereignty over the territory in question, therefore could not enter a treaty.​
They had no sovereignty over territory 20 years ago but they signed Oslo.

They have no sovereignty over territory now but they are negotiating a treaty now including borders.

They had no sovereignty over the West Bank but they could authorize their annexation to Jordan.

They had no sovereignty in 1948 so their declaration of independence was invalid.

They had no sovereignty in 1988 yet their declaration of independence was valid.


----------



## Phoenall (Sep 3, 2015)

P F Tinmore said:


> Phoenall said:
> 
> 
> > P F Tinmore said:
> ...






 As I said what " peremptory norm of general international law " does Oslo conflict with. Give the law and its date of implementation and how Oslo applies


 But looking at your link we find this


After effective occupation of territory, members of the territory’s armed forces who have not surrendered, organized resistance movements and genuine national liberation movements may resist the occupation. If they do so, they must distinguish themselves from the civilian population, or on the basis of GP I, at least carry their weapons openly during attacks and deployments.
Civilians who take a direct part in such hostilities lose their protection against attack for the time of their direct participation, but not their civilian status

 Which the Palestinians are in breach of so they are valid targets while doing so.


 Then this which covers the settlements in part


REQUISITION OF CIVILIAN RESOURCES AND SERVICES
Civilian resources and services may be requisitioned in occupied territory in accordance with strict rules. They must only be requisitioned if they are needed by the armed forces of occupation or public utility services, or to feed, shelter, clothe, transport or care for the population of the occupied country, and then only if they are indispensable for these purposes. In addition, foodstuffs, general articles and medical supplies may not be requisitioned unless the requirements of the civilian population have been adequately met. This is logical since under the law the occupying power is obliged to guarantee that the occupied territory is provided with foodstuffs and medical supplies.


This

REQUISITION/SEIZURE OF PROPERTY
The law of occupation is very detailed about the requisitioning/seizure of government, military and private property. The main points are discussed below.
Movable government property that can be used for military purposes becomes spoils of war. It can be freely seized by the occupying power, whose property it becomes without the need for compensation. Such property includes, for example, cash, other financial assets, realizable securities, all military equipment, and means of military transport.
Fixed government property such as telecommunication and transportation systems (railways, public transport, airlines) may be seized. They must be restored and compensation paid when peace is made.
The occupying power does not acquire ownership of public buildings, real estate and agricultural estates in occupied territory. 
Fixed government property should be managed and maintained by the occupying power. The proceeds may be used only for the administration of the occupied territory.
Private property cannot be confiscated. An exception is made for items that can be used for military purposes, commodities designed for consumption, and businesses such as airlines, railways, road transport networks and telecommunications. After the conflict has ended, seized property of this type must be returned and, if appropriate, compensation paid.

Destruction of property. The occupying power is not allowed to destroy real or personal property belonging individually or collectively to private
persons, to the State, to other public authorities or to social or co-operative organizations, *except where such destruction is made absolutely necessary by military operations.


 Now when has Israel 
The occupying power must not deport or transfer parts of its own civilian
population into the territory it occupies.

As the people migrated themselves to land that was theirs.

 But once again you deflect from the question asked and give a totally wrong answer because you know the Israeli's have done nothing wrong.*


----------



## Phoenall (Sep 3, 2015)

P F Tinmore said:


> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> > P F Tinmore,  et al,
> ...






 How so when it was debated 3 months before the British left Palestine and 2 years before the UN accepted 181 as being fulfilled in part. Guess you are clutching at straws


----------



## Phoenall (Sep 3, 2015)

P F Tinmore said:


> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> > P F Tinmore,  et al,
> ...






S/RES/242 (1967) of 22 November 1967


 This calls for the negotiations of mutual borders, which has been done with 3 of the 5 nations involved, only Syria and Lebanon have not agreed mutual borders yet.


1. _Affirms_ that the fulfilment of Charter principles requires the establishment of a just and lasting peace in the Middle East which should include the application of both the following principles:

 (i) Withdrawal of Israel armed forces from territories occupied in the recent conflict;

 (ii) Termination of all claims or states of belligerency and respect for and acknowledgment of the sovereignty, territorial integrity and political independence of every State in the area and their right to live in peace *within secure and recognized boundaries free from threats or acts of force;*


----------



## Phoenall (Sep 3, 2015)

P F Tinmore said:


> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> > P F Tinmore,  et al,
> ...






 By declaring independence they had accepted sovereignty in 1988. they just refused to act on this aspect

 See above and read their declaration.

 Correct as they refused to do so until 1988

 Correct as they refused to do so until 1988

 Wrong as they declared their sovereignty then for all the world to see, they just refused to act on it


Palestinian Declaration of Independence - 1988



And in exercise by the Palestinian Arab people of its rights to self-determination, political independence and sovereignty over its territory,

The Palestine National Council, in the name of God, and in the name of the Palestinian Arab people, hereby proclaims the establishment of the State of Palestine on our Palestinian territory with its capital Jerusalem (Al-Quds Ash-Sharif).


----------



## P F Tinmore (Sep 3, 2015)

Phoenall said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> > RoccoR said:
> ...


Where does it say anything about negotiating borders?

Lebanon had borders. Syria had borders. Jordan had borders. Egypt had borders. Palestine had borders. All of them undisputed.

What was there to negotiate?


----------



## Phoenall (Sep 3, 2015)

P F Tinmore said:


> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> > P F Tinmore,  et al,
> ...






 Once again you make your false claims without any support from any sources, not even biased partisan islamonazi ones.

 The Mandate was successful in creating a Jewish state as it enabled the Jews to declare independence of the mandate in 1948. Resolution 181 accepted the Jewish declaration and instituted the nation by UN resolution in 1949. The mandate having been taken over by the UN did establish the Jewish government and gave the nation of Israel legitimacy.
 The mandate of Palestine defined the borders of arab Palestine ( trans Jordan ) and Jewish Palestine ( Israel, gaaza, west bank, Jerusalem and the Golan heights ) and these are the International borders as agreed by the LoN  in 1923. There was no nation of Palestine prior to 1988


----------



## Phoenall (Sep 3, 2015)

P F Tinmore said:


> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> > P F Tinmore,  et al,
> ...







 Not if the inhabitants agree to accept the annexation and become nationals of that nation

 Now when did this become International law, and provide a proper link not some classroom study piece that is neither use nor ornament.

 By the way just because you say something does mean it is true, as you have been shown many times in the past.


----------



## P F Tinmore (Sep 3, 2015)

Phoenall said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> > RoccoR said:
> ...


So you are saying the the Palestinians declared a state in 1988 on land that was given to the Jews in 1923?

You don't make any sense.


----------



## Phoenall (Sep 3, 2015)

Billo_Really said:


> rylah said:
> 
> 
> > More blood libels, ridiculous parroting...
> ...






 That would be you then

 No they moved into the area sometime in the 19C after the Ottomans invited European Jews to own and work the land. No arab muslim existed until 625CE, and they were evicted from Palestine in 1099 never to return until the mid 1800's.

Wrong as the blockade was in place before the elections and was caused by the arab muslims violence and terrorism, it was increased in 2007 when hamas started their violence and terrorism. By your criteria what happens in Palestine is none of your business either is it ?

 So you are responcible for some of the worst atrocities in recent years including Vietnam, Iraq, Afghanistan and Korea.


 And you are not seeing them are you, but still supporting terrorism and child murder because you are nothing more than a NAZI JEW HATER.


----------



## P F Tinmore (Sep 3, 2015)

Phoenall said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> > RoccoR said:
> ...


Not if the inhabitants agree to accept the annexation and become nationals of that nation​
So the people have the sovereignty over their land even though they do not have an independent state.

That's good to know.


----------



## Phoenall (Sep 3, 2015)

Billo_Really said:


> rylah said:
> 
> 
> > Jews would be free once they all remembered their ancestors and the elders and prosper even more. That's the sole purpose of Israel today.
> ...






 Because they do, and show it every minute of every day of every year.

 Rights that never existed until idiots like you decided to grant them. Then take them away from half of the population because of racial hatreds and brainwashing.  Who has the most rights a murderer who kills for pleasure or a hard working family man doing the best for his family. In your world the murderer because he is a palestinian


----------



## Phoenall (Sep 3, 2015)

Billo_Really said:


> Phoenall said:
> 
> 
> > Correct I am not Jewish but I support and defend their right to defend themselves from attacks and terrorism. Just as I support and defend the people of Syria's right to defend against attack and terrorism.
> ...





 No I am stating my support for the Syrian people to defend themselves from islamonazi terrorists. If they be Assad's troops or IS scum


----------



## Phoenall (Sep 3, 2015)

P F Tinmore said:


> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> > P F Tinmore,  et al,
> ...


----------



## Phoenall (Sep 3, 2015)

P F Tinmore said:


> Phoenall said:
> 
> 
> > P F Tinmore said:
> ...







 The highlighted part of course

 Until they engaged in all out war and those borders became non existent. Palestine the mandate had borders, not Palestine the nation.

 Mutual borders that would then enter into International law, Or don't you see the need to set in stone immovable borders ?


----------



## Phoenall (Sep 3, 2015)

P F Tinmore said:


> Phoenall said:
> 
> 
> > P F Tinmore said:
> ...






 That is what happened  because of 181. In the real world the UN should have told the arab muslims to either accept Israel to the 1923 borders or pack their bags and go


----------



## Phoenall (Sep 3, 2015)

P F Tinmore said:


> Phoenall said:
> 
> 
> > P F Tinmore said:
> ...





No not until they declare their intentions, until that time the International laws of the period are in force.


----------



## Billo_Really (Sep 3, 2015)

Phoenall said:


> No I am stating my support for the Syrian people to defend themselves from islamonazi terrorists.


That would be the Assad government.  And government troops.  I don't know if they teach political science in the UK, but the "government" in a democracy, represents the "people".  That's why whenever someone is prosecuted for a crime in this country, it's the _"People for the State of..."_ vs __________ .

In summary, you support the Assad government and Israel supports the ISIS rebels.  You just admitted you're an enemy of Israel.  Fucking anti-Semite, Jew-hater!




Phoenall said:


> If they be Assad's troops or IS scum


If you don't know the difference between government troops and ISIS rebels, why are you even commenting on this subject?

Do you enjoy talking about things you know nothing about?


----------



## Billo_Really (Sep 3, 2015)

P F Tinmore said:


> So you are saying the the Palestinians declared a state in 1988 on land that was given to the Jews in 1923?
> 
> You don't make any sense.


I think you just discovered a new reality show................._*Phun with Phoen!*_


----------



## Phoenall (Sep 3, 2015)

Billo_Really said:


> Phoenall said:
> 
> 
> > No I am stating my support for the Syrian people to defend themselves from islamonazi terrorists.
> ...






 Shows that you cant understand English as democracy as we know it does not represent all the people, just those in power.

 Your twisting of my words shows that you have lost another argument and are no longer worth bothering with, but then you will no longer be the centre of attention and could do something stupid

 I know the difference alright, but do you ?


----------



## Phoenall (Sep 3, 2015)

Billo_Really said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> > So you are saying the the Palestinians declared a state in 1988 on land that was given to the Jews in 1923?
> ...





 Are you disputing historical facts ?


----------



## P F Tinmore (Sep 3, 2015)

Phoenall said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> > Phoenall said:
> ...


It doesn't say anything about negotiating or changing any borders.



> Until they engaged in all out war and those borders became non existent. Palestine the mandate had borders, not Palestine the nation.


Wars cannot change borders. Subsequent peace treaties can though not a requirement.

The Mandate was an appointed administration not a place. It had no land or borders.



> Mutual borders that would then enter into International law, Or don't you see the need to set in stone immovable borders ?



There were already undisputed international borders. I don't see your point.


----------



## RoccoR (Sep 3, 2015)

P F Tinmore,  et al,

Generally speaking, laws do not tell "what you can do" --- but rather --- "what you cannot do."  I'm sure that Iwent over this before.

*(COMMENT)*

For several millennium --- the most common means was "discovery."  However, no new land has been discovered in a century.   Today  --- there are five primary modes of acquisition of territorial sovereignty which are typically dubbed the ‘original’ or ‘traditional’ methods.  Each mode of acquisition - is different:

*NOTE:*  Recognizing the importance of the international regulation of territorial disputes, international law has established a range of mechanisms for peaceful settlement. Whether binding in law as such or not or involving third parties such as courts or international organizations or not, such mechanisms will be briefly reviewed in this lecture. ​
•  Occupation:  Occupation is the intentional acquisition by a state over a territory which at the time of claim not under the sovereignty of any state. There are two requirements:

(1) the territory subject of claim must not be under the sovereignty of any state _(terra nullius)_; and
(2) the state must have effectively occupied the territory, that is, the state claiming the territory must have exercised immediate occupation _(corpus occupandi)_ on the territory after it displayed its intention to occupy (_animus occupandi_).

Special Source Note:  "g. With regard to acquisition of sovereignty by military occupation, in the case of the Ottoman Empire pre-1918 of the Red Sea islands, the Award of the Arbitral Tribunal in the first stage of proceedings, Territorial Sovereignty and Scope of the Dispute, in the case of Eritrea versus Yemen, October 9, 1998, stated that “title had been secured by military occupation, which was lawful by reference to the international law of the day.” (See Page 7 )"

“maps merely constitute information which varies in accuracy from case to case; of themselves, and by virtue solely of their existence, they cannot constitute a territorial title, that is, a document endowed by international law with intrinsic legal force for the purpose of establishing territorial rights."​_Attribution:  INTERNATIONAL LEGAL RULES FOR DECIDING SOVEREIGNTY DISPUTES by J. Ashley Roach_​•  Accretion, is the attainment of sovereignty over new land due to slow movement of natural forces.  A contemporary example is the movement of the Rio Grande River between the US and Mexico, in favor of the US.

•  Cession, is the transfer of territory usually by treaty from one state to another. Concomitant of transfer of territory is the transfer of sovereignty from the owner state to another state. And since cession is a bilateral transaction, the parties involved are states. Cession may also be in the form of exchange of territory or in the form gift or donation or devise.

•  Conquest:  is acquiring territory by the use of force. The practice before was after conquest, the conqueror annexed the conquered territory to his state. Thus, conquest first takes place followed by annexation. But with the establishment of the United Nations, conquest is no longer acceptable in the international community.  However, it is actually still in use today.  A classic example is the Crimean Territory.  There was first the case of Russian Annexation of Crimea by the Russian Empire (1783); and then (most recently) the Annexation of Crimea by the Russian Federation (2014).

•  Prescription: means continued occupation over a long period of time by one state of territory actually and originally belonging to another state. There are four requirements of prescription:

(1) the possession must be exercised in the form of actual exercise of sovereign authority;
(2) the possession must be peaceful and uninterrupted;
(3) the possession must be public; and
(4) the possession must be for a long period of time.​
Most Respectfully,
R


----------



## Rehmani (Sep 3, 2015)

Phoenall said:


> Rehmani said:
> 
> 
> > Phoenall said:
> ...


How silly again, jewish invade Palestine and you defending them. They are killing innocent  empty handed people and you are defending them, correct yourself you are more faithful than a jewish.


----------



## Rehmani (Sep 3, 2015)

Billo_Really said:


> Rehmani said:
> 
> 
> > Jewish don't anything they are brain wash by their elders.
> ...


For your knowledge Iran was jewish first home 2000 years ago.


----------



## Phoenall (Sep 3, 2015)

P F Tinmore said:


> Phoenall said:
> 
> 
> > P F Tinmore said:
> ...






 So you missed the highlighted part   "*within secure and* recognized *boundaries free from threats or acts of force;"

Then how did WW1 change the borders of Turkey when they were defeated. Also the borders of Germany were changed after WW1, and after WW2 when Russia took half of Germany.

 NOT SO  there where the borders of the various mandates and old borders agreed by treaty. The mandate did not say they were set in stone. And sorry to say Palestine as a nation was not included in any borders. 

 If as you claim they were undisputed why are the arab muslims kicking up such a fuss over the Israeli borders ?
*


----------



## Phoenall (Sep 3, 2015)

Rehmani said:


> Phoenall said:
> 
> 
> > Rehmani said:
> ...






 When did the Jewish invade Jewish land then ?  remember International law stated that the land was Jewish in 1923.


----------



## Phoenall (Sep 3, 2015)

Rehmani said:


> Billo_Really said:
> 
> 
> > Rehmani said:
> ...






 How about a link to your claim from an unbiased and non partisan source ?


----------



## P F Tinmore (Sep 3, 2015)

Phoenall said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> > Phoenall said:
> ...


What Israeli borders are they fussing over?


----------



## Phoenall (Sep 3, 2015)

P F Tinmore said:


> Phoenall said:
> 
> 
> > P F Tinmore said:
> ...





 The ones delineated in the Mandate for Palestine that I have given you many times in the past are in the Mandate


----------



## P F Tinmore (Sep 3, 2015)

Phoenall said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> > Phoenall said:
> ...


The Mandate was an appointed administration not a place. It had no land or borders.


----------



## Billo_Really (Sep 3, 2015)

Rehmani said:


> For your knowledge Iran was jewish first home 2000 years ago.


And there's approximately 29,000 of them living there now without any problems.


----------



## Phoenall (Sep 3, 2015)

P F Tinmore said:


> Phoenall said:
> 
> 
> > P F Tinmore said:
> ...






 You are confusing the British mandate and the Mandate of Palestine again. Two completely seperate and different things


----------



## P F Tinmore (Sep 3, 2015)

Phoenall said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> > Phoenall said:
> ...


Links?


----------



## Phoenall (Sep 3, 2015)

Billo_Really said:


> Rehmani said:
> 
> 
> > For your knowledge Iran was jewish first home 2000 years ago.
> ...







 Down from 1.5 million just a few years ago when the ayotallas took over Iran and forced them to leave. Now they live in abject fear of early morning raids, beatings, rapes and recriminations. Those managing to escape have told all about their treatment at the hands of the Iranians, but you don't believe them do you as you are so immersed in your Nazi Jew hatred and anti Semitism that it rules your every second of your life


----------



## Phoenall (Sep 3, 2015)

P F Tinmore said:


> Phoenall said:
> 
> 
> > P F Tinmore said:
> ...






 Like these

 Mandate for Palestine


The Avalon Project : The Palestine Mandate


 British mandate


British Mandate for Palestine (legal instrument) - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


----------



## P F Tinmore (Sep 3, 2015)

Phoenall said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> > Phoenall said:
> ...


Two sources for the same thing.

What is the difference?


----------



## Phoenall (Sep 3, 2015)

P F Tinmore said:


> Phoenall said:
> 
> 
> > P F Tinmore said:
> ...






 Did you read them and see what the difference are, or are you just spouting your shit again



*The Council of the League of Nations:*
Whereas the Principal Allied Powers have agreed, for the purpose of giving effect to the provisions of Article 22 of the Covenant of the League of Nations, to entrust to a Mandatory selected by the said Powers the administration of the territory of Palestine, which formerly belonged to the Turkish Empire, within such boundaries as may be fixed by them; and


The British mandate was the enactment of the Mandate for Palestine, and they were solely caretakers until the Jews and arab muslims had declared free determination on their respective allotted lands.


----------



## Billo_Really (Sep 3, 2015)

Phoenall said:


> Down from 1.5 million just a few years ago when the ayotallas took over Iran and forced them to leave. Now they live in abject fear of early morning raids, beatings, rapes and recriminations. Those managing to escape have told all about their treatment at the hands of the Iranians, but you don't believe them do you as you are so immersed in your Nazi Jew hatred and anti Semitism that it rules your every second of your life


That's not what they say.


----------



## Humanity (Sep 3, 2015)

Phoenall said:


> Billo_Really said:
> 
> 
> > Rehmani said:
> ...



The Islamic Revolution in 1979, at a time when the Jewish population was less than 100,000, Jews were not forced to leave..... Quite the contrary....

Ayatollah Khomeini declared that "We recognize our Jews as separate from those godless, bloodsucking Zionists." and issued a _fatwa_ decreeing that the Jews were to be protected.

But you won't believe that! Too immersed in your zionist, racist brainwashing...


----------



## P F Tinmore (Sep 3, 2015)

RoccoR said:


> P F Tinmore,  et al,
> 
> Generally speaking, laws do not tell "what you can do" --- but rather --- "what you cannot do."  I'm sure that Iwent over this before.
> 
> ...


Good post. Thank you for proving my point.


----------



## Daniyel (Sep 4, 2015)

Palestinians Attempt To Lynch Five American Tourists In Hebron

I Just hope you could see the lesson.


----------



## Phoenall (Sep 4, 2015)

Billo_Really said:


> Phoenall said:
> 
> 
> > Down from 1.5 million just a few years ago when the ayotallas took over Iran and forced them to leave. Now they live in abject fear of early morning raids, beatings, rapes and recriminations. Those managing to escape have told all about their treatment at the hands of the Iranians, but you don't believe them do you as you are so immersed in your Nazi Jew hatred and anti Semitism that it rules your every second of your life
> ...







That is exactly what they say and here is the proof



Persecuted Iranian Jews


Read it and see what is really happening in iran

 Then we have the population figures that show



Jews of Iran | Jewish Virtual Library


Jewish Population
1948: 100,000   |   2014: 10,000

A 90% decline in numbers due to forced expulsion and mass murder


----------



## Humanity (Sep 4, 2015)

Phoenall said:


> A 90% decline in numbers due to forced expulsion and mass murder


----------



## Billo_Really (Sep 4, 2015)

Phoenall said:


> That is exactly what they say and here is the proof
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Do you have a un-biased, non-partisan source?


----------



## Challenger (Sep 4, 2015)

Daniyel said:


> Palestinians Attempt To Lynch Five American Tourists In Hebron
> 
> I Just hope you could see the lesson.



What lesson? They were Jewish yeshiva students that took a wrong turn....oh, you mean this lesson,

*"The five Americans were rescued by a local Arab resident who sheltered them in his home. Two of the students were lightly to moderately wounded in the attack."*

Got It! Thanks.


----------



## Phoenall (Sep 4, 2015)

Humanity said:


> Phoenall said:
> 
> 
> > A 90% decline in numbers due to forced expulsion and mass murder







 See above as the links are there for you, that is if you can read them


----------



## Phoenall (Sep 4, 2015)

Billo_Really said:


> Phoenall said:
> 
> 
> > That is exactly what they say and here is the proof
> ...






 Given as far as I am aware, care to show how the link is biased and partisan ?


----------



## Phoenall (Sep 4, 2015)

Challenger said:


> Daniyel said:
> 
> 
> > Palestinians Attempt To Lynch Five American Tourists In Hebron
> ...






 So because they were American Jews it is acceptable in your fantasy world to attack them.    Shows just how much you HATE the Jews


----------



## Humanity (Sep 4, 2015)

Phoenall said:


> Humanity said:
> 
> 
> > Phoenall said:
> ...



So, again you post random links that don't support your blathering!

Can you post a link that clearly states that 90,000 Jews have been "forced expulsion and mass murder"?


----------



## Rehmani (Sep 4, 2015)

Phoenall said:


> Rehmani said:
> 
> 
> > Phoenall said:
> ...


Soon international Law maker will intervene and change and I am sure you will accept the new Law instead.


----------



## Rehmani (Sep 4, 2015)

Phoenall said:


> Billo_Really said:
> 
> 
> > Rehmani said:
> ...


One Phoenall and Two jews are innocent in this world, is it correct Phoenall?


----------



## Rehmani (Sep 4, 2015)

But 


Humanity said:


> Phoenall said:
> 
> 
> > Billo_Really said:
> ...


But jews are supporting Zionists in Israel and occupation is continue over Land of Palestine and killing innocent empty hand people and jews are continuously grabbing Palestinian land and forcing them in small camps, Humanity you are behaving hypocritically.


----------



## Humanity (Sep 4, 2015)

Rehmani said:


> Humanity you are behaving hypocritically



How so?


----------



## Rehmani (Sep 4, 2015)

Humanity said:


> Rehmani said:
> 
> 
> > Humanity you are behaving hypocritically
> ...


As You are defending trouble maker israel, ignoring all that killing by jews.


----------



## Humanity (Sep 4, 2015)

Rehmani said:


> Humanity said:
> 
> 
> > Rehmani said:
> ...



I do not defend the government of Israel nor their policies... 

I do not defend the zionists who, in my opinion, are no better than Hamas extremists...

I do defend the right of Jews to have a homeland...

You understand the differences between Israel, zionism and Jews?


----------



## Daniyel (Sep 4, 2015)

Challenger said:


> Daniyel said:
> 
> 
> > Palestinians Attempt To Lynch Five American Tourists In Hebron
> ...


*Exactly*. By mindlessly encouraging hate and sparking violence - we achieve nothing but death and sorrow.
All acts from the outside world is always followed by hidden agendas and interests that only serve the ones initiating them.
Solution is real only with clear and calm thinking, regardless of hatred or distrust, but it's the last straw of backing one side for these acts that turns people blind.


----------



## Billo_Really (Sep 4, 2015)

Phoenall said:


> Given as far as I am aware, care to show how the link is biased and partisan ?


Why?  Seeing how you never do, think I'll just sit back and call you (and your sources) names. You get what you give.

But I did do something you don't do, I actually went to your links and read them in their entirety. So if (and when) I decide to comment on them, I'll know what I'm talking about.


----------



## Billo_Really (Sep 4, 2015)

Daniyel said:


> *Exactly*. By mindlessly encouraging hate and sparking violence - we achieve nothing but death and sorrow.
> All acts from the outside world is always followed by hidden agendas and interests that only serve the ones initiating them.
> Solution is real only with clear and calm thinking, regardless of hatred or distrust, but it's the last straw of backing one side for these acts that turns people blind.


You need to end the occupation and blockade and get your fucking ass off land that isn't yours.  The occupation is the central cause of all the violence.  That is YOUR fault!  As long as you maintain this brutal occupation, you need to stop blaming others for the violence.  Once you end the occupation, you can finally say,_ "Hey, it's not me!"_


----------



## Billo_Really (Sep 4, 2015)

Rehmani said:


> But jews are supporting Zionists in Israel...


Just right wing Jews.  Left wing Jews are cool.  But the Likud Party is no different than al Qaeda and ISIS.  In fact, they're providing material support to them in Syria.

Israeli PM Netanfuckyou can go to hell!  He's a fucking megalomaniac, who's giving Jews a bad reputation all over the world.


----------



## Phoenall (Sep 4, 2015)

Humanity said:


> Phoenall said:
> 
> 
> > Humanity said:
> ...






 Read the links again, or are you having a problem doing so



 According to the narrative of the Iranian regime and its apologists, Jews are free to leave Iran if they want to. Yet many Iranian Jews have risked their lives and/or were killed when trying to flee Iran. For example, helping Jews to emigrate to Israel is punishable by death. Iranians including Jews are forbidden from any contact with Israel. The regime in Iran doesn’t allow whole Jewish families to go to Israel.




Rehmani said:


> Phoenall said:
> 
> 
> > Rehmani said:
> ...






 No International Law Maker but the people, and if they say no then the law will not stand. And the law stands today even after islamonazi scum tried to get it changed and failed. The only way is to negotiate a lasting peace and mutual borders with Israel


----------



## Phoenall (Sep 4, 2015)

Billo_Really said:


> Daniyel said:
> 
> 
> > *Exactly*. By mindlessly encouraging hate and sparking violence - we achieve nothing but death and sorrow.
> ...






 The land is Jewish or don't you think that International law applies in Israel's favour.

 Once the arab muslims stop being violent the occupation will end, as soon as they start being violent again they will face occupation and war again.


----------



## Phoenall (Sep 4, 2015)

Billo_Really said:


> Rehmani said:
> 
> 
> > But jews are supporting Zionists in Israel...
> ...






 You mean the N.K. who have it as their end times that all non Jews will die a horrible death and only they will get to heaven


----------



## Humanity (Sep 4, 2015)

Phoenall said:


> Humanity said:
> 
> 
> > Phoenall said:
> ...



I have read your weak links...

There is NOTHING to support your claims of "forced expulsion and mass murder"...

Read them again? Look for something you are making up?

I don't think so.... Phoney by name phoney by nature!


----------



## Humanity (Sep 4, 2015)

Phoenall said:


> The land is Jewish or don't you think that International law applies in Israel's favour.



Let me ask you this Phoney...

Why is it that every country, excluding Israel, naturally, believes that the territory is illegally occupied by Israel?


----------



## RoccoR (Sep 4, 2015)

P F Tinmore,  et al,

Most people understand that, not until 1988, could the Palestinians be in a position to acquire territory.



P F Tinmore said:


> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> > P F Tinmore,  et al,
> ...


*(COMMENT)*

I believe that the Jewish State of Israel does not want to annex either the Gaza Strip or the West Bank, for much the same reason that Jordan gave it up.  Israel does not want the burden of sustaining a State in which the people are belligerent and the State itself is not self-sustaining and parasitic (being a nation of people existing on donor handouts).  I don't believe that the West Bank or Gaza Strip should be --- in any way --- concerned that these territories will be absorbed by Israel.  The "Occupation," if we can truly call it that, is purely a defensive posture.

As for the 1948/1948 establishment of Israel, the right of self-determination was used to support the Cession of a portion of the territory to which Mandate of Palestine formerly applied.  In most cases no formalities need to be complied with to affect cession.   However, in the case of the Jewish State of Palestine, the "original intent" was to conform to the "Steps Preparatory to Independence" established by the UN.  This was intentionally interrupted through the use of force by multiple Arab States to take control of the territory (conquest) for their own agenda.  

*Our friend "P_F Tinmore" is correct by implying that under International Law the act of Cession is usually marked by Treaty (customarily).*  However, in the case of Israel, it is assembled by several different means.  Officially, the 1948/49 War of Independence is not completely over.  Yes, there is an "Armistice" (marking the end of open hostilities) between several warring parties, only Treaties between Israel and two Arab States (Egypt & Jordan) have been concluded.  These two treaties establish the International Boundaries.   In 1988, while Israel "Occupied" the territory formerly controlled by Egypt & Jordan (West Bank or Gaza Strip), the Arab Palestinians Declared Independence in the territory now identified as the "occupied Palestinian territories" (oPt), at the time defined as the "West Bank or Gaza Strip" or the "territory occupied since 1967."  While Israel recognizes the international legitimacy of the UN Acknowledgement, the UN was unable to proved such security necessary to establish law and order or a defense deterrent against future Arab attacks on Israel.  And the Arab Palestinians have not been able to actual "exercise of sovereign authority" over the oPt, such that further hostilities could be enforced and prevented.

Again, I don't think that Israel have any intention of annexing the oPt --- or extending their sovereign control over the oPt.

Most Respectfully,
R


----------



## P F Tinmore (Sep 4, 2015)

RoccoR said:


> P F Tinmore,  et al,
> 
> Most people understand that, not until 1988, could the Palestinians be in a position to acquire territory.
> 
> ...


*Our friend "P_F Tinmore" is correct by implying that under International Law the act of Cession is usually marked by Treaty (customarily).* However, in the case of Israel, it is assembled by several different means.


What other means are there besides treaty. Acquisition of territory cannot be just say so or some back door approach.

I believe that conquest would be more applicable. Of course conquest was illegal when Israel drove out the Palestinians and set up shop.


----------



## Phoenall (Sep 4, 2015)

Humanity said:


> Phoenall said:
> 
> 
> > Humanity said:
> ...





 Take your islamonazi rose tinted glasses of and look again


----------



## Phoenall (Sep 4, 2015)

Humanity said:


> Phoenall said:
> 
> 
> > The land is Jewish or don't you think that International law applies in Israel's favour.
> ...



 Because they are not aware of the real facts and only get too hear the islamonazi version of accounts, that and the fact that many nations are run by left wing government that know they can never stamp out Judaism without stamping out the Jews first


----------



## Phoenall (Sep 4, 2015)

P F Tinmore said:


> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> > P F Tinmore,  et al,
> ...






 Under what law as the land was there to be taken by who got in first. Which nation owned the sovereignty of the land and so owned the land until Israel declared independence ?


----------



## Billo_Really (Sep 4, 2015)

Phoenall said:


> Because they are not aware of the real facts and only get too hear the islamonazi version of accounts, that and the fact that many nations are run by left wing government that know they can never stamp out Judaism without stamping out the Jews first


Oh, shut up!

This issue has nothing to do with Judaism.

You try to make it about Jews, because you can't defend Israeli atrocities.  And soon, Israel won't be able to defend Israeli atrocities.  It's no secret Israel is helping ISIS rebels in Syria against the Assad government.  Well, as they say in boxing, Israel is about to move up in weight class.  It has been reported, Russian troops are now fighting in Syria.  And if there's an escalation, don't get all butt hurt Israel gets its head handed to them.


----------



## Phoenall (Sep 4, 2015)

Billo_Really said:


> Phoenall said:
> 
> 
> > Because they are not aware of the real facts and only get too hear the islamonazi version of accounts, that and the fact that many nations are run by left wing government that know they can never stamp out Judaism without stamping out the Jews first
> ...






 It is all about Judaism as you make it all about the Jews, you see without Judaism there at=re no Jews and no Zionists. No left wing Jews, right wing Jews, centrist Jews and extremist Jews.  It might not be a secret in your conspiracy theory/ neo Nazi group but it is to the rest of the world. You might even get a surprise when hamas gets its head handed on a plate by IS, then finds that Israel is not the pushover the US is these days. Now back to topic the left wing neo Marxist scum are running scared of organised religion, just as they did in Russia and Germany, as they know they cant stamp it out completely. Just look at Russia with over 100 years of communism, and the rise of Catholicism as soon as the communists were removed from office. Well it is the same with Judaism in the west and the muslims and their friends know that they need more support from the rest of the world before they can move on the Jews and wipe them out. They know that this is the only way they can control the world and need idiots to spread the LIES and BLOOD LIBELS, and boy have they found an idiot in you to do their dirty work for them


----------



## RoccoR (Sep 4, 2015)

P F Tinmore,  et al,

I assume you are talking about the 1948 Declaration of Independence of the Jewish State --- in which on or about midnight on 14 May 1948, the Provisional Government of Israel proclaimed a new State of Israel.  On 15 May 1948, the first day of Israeli Independence _(exactly one year after UNSCOP was established)_ Arab armies invaded Israel and the first Arab-Israeli war began.



P F Tinmore said:


> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> > *Our friend "P_F Tinmore" is correct by implying that under International Law the act of Cession is usually marked by Treaty (customarily).*
> ...


*(COMMENT)*

Like nearly every tenant of the UN Charter, most most actions are suppose to be undertaken in a way which will not threaten international peace and security; it seldom works out that way.  Just as each State has the duty not to use of force in solving international disputes, including territorial disputes; this does not always happen.

Your assumption is partially correct.  The assuming territorial sovereignty over the land --- a state just cannot say:  "it's mine."--- A nation or people must be able to defend their claim.  When Israel assumed control of their territory, it did not violate the  existing nation-states' borders.  And in a the post–World War II environment, one of the considerations in the new political era was the concept to inviolability of existing states borders; regardless of how and when they were determined.  In the case of the Jewish State of Israel, the territory it assumed in 1948 were a remnant of the territorial concessions made by the Ottoman Empire and Turkish government following the first World War.  The territory was ceded to the Allied Powers_ (NOT the indigenous Arab population)_.  

With the rise of the concept of self-determination, the Arab Palestinians (and indeed much of the international community) are confused.  The international community has failed to define exactly who is entitled to claim of self-determination — Like you say, it is not just the "say so or some back door approach" a group, a people, or a nation— confers upon itself or the territory in question.

“It is only through the realization of this very basic right of people to determine, with no compulsion or coercion, their own future, political status and independence that we can begin to address others such as dignity, justice, progress and equity,” 
said the representative of Maldives. 
--------------------------------------------------------------------
Those looking for "the" definition of self-determination will be disappointed, for many of the texts are deliberately ambiguous or even contradictory. Nonetheless, we must ultimately try to articulate the international norm of self-determination in terms that are sufficiently precise so that it continues to be relevant in the post-colonial era.
_The Princeton Encyclopedia of Self-Determination_​
I am struck by the fact that in "Wikipedia" the contributor phased it like this under *Cession*:  "Since the emergence of self-determination as a recognised principle of international law, a state may need to consult the inhabitants of a territory (if any) before they may cede sovereignty over it."

Conquest implies a nation initiated the subjugation and assumption of control of a territory and its people by use of military force.  Israel does not want to bring either the West Bank or Gaza Strip  under subjugation, control or governance under the extension of sovereignty; either peacefully or by military measures.  It is a security measure for the survival if their nation.

But, if you don't believe that acquisition by conquest is not a valid political play, just ask the People of the Crimea; or when Indonesia invaded and annexed the former Portuguese colony of East Timor (1975).  The idea that the international law is interpreted to mean that member nations are obligated not to recognize territorial acquisitions achieved by aggressive war has never been tested in court; nor is it likely to be tested.

Most Respectfully,
R


----------



## P F Tinmore (Sep 4, 2015)

RoccoR said:


> P F Tinmore,  et al,
> 
> I assume you are talking about the 1948 Declaration of Independence of the Jewish State --- in which on or about midnight on 14 May 1948, the Provisional Government of Israel proclaimed a new State of Israel.  On 15 May 1948, the first day of Israeli Independence _(exactly one year after UNSCOP was established)_ Arab armies invaded Israel and the first Arab-Israeli war began.
> 
> ...


With the rise of the concept of self-determination, the Arab Palestinians (and indeed much of the international community) are confused. The international community has failed to define exactly who is entitled to claim of self-determination — Like you say, it is not just the "say so or some back door approach" a group, a people, or a nation— confers upon itself or the territory in question.​
Indeed, you do seem to be confused. I think it is perfectly clear. Why do you have a problem with such a straightforward principle?


----------



## Billo_Really (Sep 4, 2015)

Phoenall said:


> It is all about Judaism as you make it all about the Jews, you see without Judaism there at=re no Jews and no Zionists. No left wing Jews, right wing Jews, centrist Jews and extremist Jews.  It might not be a secret in your conspiracy theory/ neo Nazi group but it is to the rest of the world. You might even get a surprise when hamas gets its head handed on a plate by IS, then finds that Israel is not the pushover the US is these days. Now back to topic the left wing neo Marxist scum are running scared of organised religion, just as they did in Russia and Germany, as they know they cant stamp it out completely. Just look at Russia with over 100 years of communism, and the rise of Catholicism as soon as the communists were removed from office. Well it is the same with Judaism in the west and the muslims and their friends know that they need more support from the rest of the world before they can move on the Jews and wipe them out. They know that this is the only way they can control the world and need idiots to spread the LIES and BLOOD LIBELS, and boy have they found an idiot in you to do their dirty work for them


Judaism has nothing to do with Zionism.

Zionists use it, like a whore uses a tampon.


----------



## Billo_Really (Sep 4, 2015)

P F Tinmore said:


> With the rise of the concept of self-determination, the Arab Palestinians (and indeed much of the international community) are confused. The international community has failed to define exactly who is entitled to claim of self-determination — Like you say, it is not just the "say so or some back door approach" a group, a people, or a nation— confers upon itself or the territory in question.​
> Indeed, you do seem to be confused. I think it is perfectly clear. Why do you have a problem with such a straightforward principle?


That's by design.

Or maybe he's being paid to think that way?


----------



## Phoenall (Sep 5, 2015)

P F Tinmore said:


> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> > P F Tinmore,  et al,
> ...






 Because it is not straightforward is it, when you have 2 or more groups separated by religion occupying the same land and only one has a valid legal claim to that land. So which one has the better claim the one using forced and violence to remove the valid claimants or the one with the might of International law behind them ?


----------



## Phoenall (Sep 5, 2015)

Billo_Really said:


> Phoenall said:
> 
> 
> > It is all about Judaism as you make it all about the Jews, you see without Judaism there at=re no Jews and no Zionists. No left wing Jews, right wing Jews, centrist Jews and extremist Jews.  It might not be a secret in your conspiracy theory/ neo Nazi group but it is to the rest of the world. You might even get a surprise when hamas gets its head handed on a plate by IS, then finds that Israel is not the pushover the US is these days. Now back to topic the left wing neo Marxist scum are running scared of organised religion, just as they did in Russia and Germany, as they know they cant stamp it out completely. Just look at Russia with over 100 years of communism, and the rise of Catholicism as soon as the communists were removed from office. Well it is the same with Judaism in the west and the muslims and their friends know that they need more support from the rest of the world before they can move on the Jews and wipe them out. They know that this is the only way they can control the world and need idiots to spread the LIES and BLOOD LIBELS, and boy have they found an idiot in you to do their dirty work for them
> ...






 Wrong again dildo as Zionism is a fundamental part of Judaism, it is embodied in many of the religions actions. Why do followers of Judaism say " next year in Jerusalem" if they are not Zionists ?
 As much as you want to alter the truth you fail repeatedly to understand that Zionism as a concept has been part of Judaism since the time of Christ


----------



## Phoenall (Sep 5, 2015)

Billo_Really said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> > With the rise of the concept of self-determination, the Arab Palestinians (and indeed much of the international community) are confused. The international community has failed to define exactly who is entitled to claim of self-determination — Like you say, it is not just the "say so or some back door approach" a group, a people, or a nation— confers upon itself or the territory in question.​
> ...





 Or maybe team Palestine cant get their heads round what free determination really means and why the arab muslims fail to exercise it in the manner team Palestine believe is the only right way. Who has a bigger claim to declare free determination in the U.S.,  YOU THE ARMED INVADER or the FIRST NATIONS PEOPLE ?


----------



## Humanity (Sep 5, 2015)

Phoenall said:


> Humanity said:
> 
> 
> > Phoenall said:
> ...



So, Phoney is right and the rest of the world is wrong?

You need to seek some psychiatric help immediately!

What a schmuck!


----------



## Humanity (Sep 5, 2015)

Phoenall said:


> Zionism is a fundamental part of Judaism



No it isnt!

Why you cannot understand this is beyond everyone on this forum!


----------



## RoccoR (Sep 5, 2015)

Billo_Really,  P F Tinmore,  et al,

I would be very pleased if you could point to an authority that can define "self-determination" such that it can answer the questions:

Who has the right to self-determination?
What does self-determination impart on the people?
I have used the ICJ CR 2009/32 on the  Accordance with International Law of the Unilateral Declaration of Independence by the Provisional Institutions of Self-Government of Kosovo, as a guide of sorts in the post-colonization context.  I do not believe that the "right of self-determination" is such a "straightforward principle" as you claim.  It must be remembered that in terms of _external self-determination_ the outcome is independence or secession for the given people that exercise that right.



Billo_Really said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> > With the rise of the concept of self-determination, the Arab Palestinians (and indeed much of the international community) are confused. The international community has failed to define exactly who is entitled to claim of self-determination — Like you say, it is not just the "say so or some back door approach" a group, a people, or a nation— confers upon itself or the territory in question.​
> ...


*(COMMENT)*

•  If you say all people(s), you are then implying that the Jewish People that immigrated to and became citizens of Palestine; under the Mandate criteria?

•  If you are implying that the Jewish People did not have the right to self-determination, then where are the limitations defined?

"In the 2010 Kosovo decision, the International Court of Justice decided that "general international law contains no applicable prohibition of declarations of independence." (*Wikipedia*)(ICJ ADVISORY OPINION OF 22 JULY 2010)  And so the question becomes:

•  Is it unlawful for the Arab Palestinian factions to challenge the Jewish State of Israel territorial integrity?
•  Was it illegal for the Jewish National Council to Declare Independence for the State of Israel in 1948 under the right of self-determination and pursuant to the Steps Preparatory to Independence; as outlined in the General Assembly Resolution?


The Court recalls that the principle of territorial integrity is an important part of the international legal order and is enshrined in the Charter of the United Nations, in particular in Article 2, paragraph 4, _(as well as General Assembly resolution 2625 (XXV), entitled “Declaration on Principles of International Law concerning Friendly Relations and Co-operation among States)_ which provides that: “All Members shall refrain in their international relations from the threat or use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of any State, or in any other manner inconsistent with the Purposes of the United Nations.”​
•  Under what context does the Arab Palestinian claim a superior right to self-determination?

Most Respectfully,
R


----------



## Phoenall (Sep 5, 2015)

Humanity said:


> Phoenall said:
> 
> 
> > Humanity said:
> ...






 I must be as you fail to provide any conclusive evidence to counter my posts. What was it Lenin called religion again ?


----------



## Phoenall (Sep 5, 2015)

Humanity said:


> Phoenall said:
> 
> 
> > Zionism is a fundamental part of Judaism
> ...






 Instead of just deny it how about you bring proof so that we can all have a good laugh ?

 Since the Roman invasion of Israel the Jews have had the concept of Zionism as part of Judaism.


----------



## P F Tinmore (Sep 5, 2015)

RoccoR said:


> Billo_Really,  P F Tinmore,  et al,
> 
> I would be very pleased if you could point to an authority that can define "self-determination" such that it can answer the questions:
> 
> ...


In every incident that I have ever seen the right to self determination applies to the people, the natives, the indigenous, or inhabitants of a specified territory. The right to self determination consistently applies to the people of the place.

At no time have I seen the right to self determination applied to foreigners.


----------



## Humanity (Sep 6, 2015)

Phoenall said:


> Humanity said:
> 
> 
> > Phoenall said:
> ...



*Zionism* (Hebrew: צִיּוֹנוּת, IPA: [t͡sijo̞ˈnut], translit. Tziyonut, after Zion) is a nationalist and political movement of Jews and Jewish culture that supports the re-establishment of a Jewish homeland in the territory defined as the historic Land of Israel (also referred to as Palestine, Canaan or the Holy Land).

*Judaism* is an ancient monotheistic religion, with the Torah as its foundational text (part of the larger text known as the Tanakh or Hebrew Bible), and supplemental oral tradition represented by later texts such as the Midrash and the Talmud.

Not all those who follow Judaism are zionists.... Not all zionists are Jews....


----------



## Phoenall (Sep 6, 2015)

P F Tinmore said:


> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> > Billo_Really,  P F Tinmore,  et al,
> ...






 So that means that none of the Palestinians can declare free determination as they are all descended from foreigners. And if you read the mandate for Palestine you will see that the Jews were automatically declared Palestinian citizens. So they had the right under INTERNATIONAL LAW. Why is every time International law supports the Jews and Israel you lot go into meltdown and demand changes.

 Get over it Israel is here to stay and the name can never be changed without changing the UN charter


----------



## Phoenall (Sep 6, 2015)

Humanity said:


> Phoenall said:
> 
> 
> > Humanity said:
> ...






 And how does your cut and paste show that Zionism is not now a fundamental part of judaism


----------



## Humanity (Sep 6, 2015)

Phoenall said:


> Humanity said:
> 
> 
> > Phoenall said:
> ...



Other than your BS words can YOU prove its a fundamental part of Judaism?

Not all those who follow Judaism are zionists.... Not all zionists are Jews....


----------



## Phoenall (Sep 6, 2015)

Humanity said:


> Phoenall said:
> 
> 
> > Humanity said:
> ...






 True but it still does not alter the facts that all followers of Judaism practice Zionism when the repeat the mantra " next year in Jerusalem".
 You fail again because you don't do the research and just use islamonazi propaganda sources.


----------



## Humanity (Sep 6, 2015)

Phoenall said:


> Humanity said:
> 
> 
> > Phoenall said:
> ...



What a schmuck you are Phoney....

You contradict yourself in a single sentence!

Not all those who follow Judaism are zionists.... Not all zionists are Jews.... TRUE...

You cannot then carry on with "all followers of Judaism practice Zionism".... NOT TRUE....

Another Phoney Phail.... Idiot!


----------



## Phoenall (Sep 6, 2015)

Humanity said:


> Phoenall said:
> 
> 
> > Humanity said:
> ...






 LIKE NOT ALL MUSLIMS ARE TERRORISTS, BUT NEARLY ALL TERRORISTS ARE MUSLIMS

 Not all Catholics agree with no birth control even though it is a fundamental part of their religion. Same with muslims that eat pig and drink alcohol even though it is banned in islam. So all Jews that are practising Jews also practise Zionism even though they are against it.     " NEXT YEAR IN JERUSALEM" is the Zionist mantra spoken by all Jews during. And might I point you top Psalm 137 that is from the Babylonian era, showing that Zionism at its most fundamental was practised even back then.


----------



## Humanity (Sep 6, 2015)

Phoenall said:


> all Jews that are practising Jews also practise Zionism



HAHAHAHAHA WHAT A FOOL!


----------



## Rehmani (Sep 6, 2015)

Humanity said:


> Rehmani said:
> 
> 
> > Humanity said:
> ...


I do understand that you are hypocrite and you are supporting force invasion and keep killing innocent people by Israel.


----------



## Rehmani (Sep 6, 2015)

Billo_Really said:


> Rehmani said:
> 
> 
> > But jews are supporting Zionists in Israel...
> ...


But jews have bad reputation around the world and in the history as well.


----------



## RoccoR (Sep 6, 2015)

P F Tinmore,  et al,

Your first mistake is that you are relying on what you --- "have ever seen."  What you "have ever seen" is a mighty short history considering that the Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples (RoIP) did not come about until 2007; less than a decade ago.  While the right of self-determination is a concept somewhat older, by half a Century, to that of the RoIP, it was not universal _(limited internal to UN members and undefined)_.  That is, it was not considered for inclusion in the Resolution adopted by the General Assembly 217 A (III) - Universal Declaration of Human Rights.  REMEMBERING:  Considering the diversity of indigenous peoples, an official definition of “indigenous” has not been adopted by any UN-system body.

Your second mistake is that the "right of self-determination" is not delimited and applies to all people ---- including the Israelis.  While there was a concern expressed, in the 21st Century _(more than half a Century later)_, pertaining to the suffering of indigenous peoples and the historic injustices associated with them, as a result of their colonization and dispossession of their lands, territories and resources, it is a historic concern and not a retroactive concept that can be applied to decisions made in the 20th Century.  Nothing in the RoIP changes the effect of decisions made prior to the adoption of the RoIP.

Your third mistake is, that you erroneously injected the idea that the Jewish Citizens of the Territory to which the Mandate applied, were "foreigners."  They were citizens of the territory to the same degree as any Arab Palestinian.  It must be remembered that in 1922, the definition of foreigner did was made by the process of elimination,

For the purpose of this part of the (Palestine) Order (in Council) the expression "foreigner" means any person who is a national or subject of a European or American State or of Japan, but shall not include:

(i) Native inhabitants of a territory protected by or administered under a mandate granted to a European State.

(ii) Ottoman subjects.

(iii) Persons who have lost Ottoman nationality and have not acquired any other nationality.​
However, by 1925, The Palestinian Citizenship Order in Council which was made in August, 1925, provides for the acquisition of Palestinian citizenship by persons habitually resident in the country who were Ottoman subjects, and persons who were foreign subjects and take up permanent residence.  Thus anyone granted citizenship to the under the Order was no longer considered a "foreigner."

Article 5 of the Order facilitates the acquisition of citizenship by Jews who opted therefor under Article 2 of the Palestine Legislative Council Election Order in Council, 1922. The qualifications for naturalization are simple: two years' residence in Palestine out of the three years preceding application, good character, and the declared intention to settle in Palestine; knowledge of Hebrew is accepted under the literacy qualification. In special cases the High Commissioner is empowered to grant naturalization even if the period of residence has not been within the three years preceding application. Special naturalization offices have already been opened in Jerusalem, Haifa and Tiberias; and an officer is visiting the Jewish agricultural settlements in the north to receive applications on the spot.​


P F Tinmore said:


> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> > Billo_Really,  P F Tinmore,  et al,
> ...


*(COMMENT)*

If you examine the Resolution adopted by the General Assembly - 61/295 - United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples (RoIP), a 21st Century doctrine (2007), you will note a couple of concepts in play.  But in the case of the Israeli-Palestinian Conflict, the RoIP comes 9 decades later, and cannot be applied to the intent expressed in the Balfour Declaration _(1917 intent for a Jewish "National Home" in what was known as Palestine)_ or the decisions made by the Allied Powers at San Remo _(1920 delineating the responsible to put into effect the declaration the intent of the Balfour Declaration)_, to establish in Palestine a National Home for the Jewish people.

Indigenous peoples are equal to all other peoples,

•••  Whether the Arab Palestinian make the distinction of being different from the Jewish Immigrants _(the right of all peoples to be different, to consider themselves different in the RoIP)_, their rights are not changed by this distinction --- either increased or diminished.​All doctrines, policies and practices based on or advocating superiority of peoples or individuals on the basis of national origin or racial, religious, ethnic or cultural differences are racist, scientifically false, legally *invalid*, morally condemnable and socially unjust.

•••  You cannot advocate the position that the citizens (who happen to consider themselves Arab Palestinian) hold a superior position just because their heredity is longer in the territory.  All rights are equally applied because all citizen share equally in the exercise of their right.​And, very importantly, the retroactive application of the RoIP and other resolution adopted after the fact, impairs vested rights acquired under under the law existing at that time, and creates new obligations. A retroactive UN Decree attaches a new and different legal effect to past decisions, actions, transactions or considerations the were assumed at that time; representing a change in the commitment prior to the enactment.

The inverse is also true.  In the case of the Israel-Palestinian Conflict, the Palestinians cannot - on a again / off again - adjust their recognition of the 1947 Resolution A/RES/181 (II) relative to the Partition Plan.  And the UN Body-system cannot establish a criteria known as the "Steps Preparatory to Independence" and acknowledge and accept recognition of a State --- then say:  The establishment of the state is invalid, after the fact.  Nor, can the UN General Assembly or the International Court of Justice say on the one hand, that the Armistice Line is a _de facto_ border _(when it was never a border or intended to be a final border)_; and on the other hand say it is a border and give the Arab Palestinians some special recognition of governance and sovereignty.  Nor can the UN recognize the flip-flop between one faction of Arab Palestinian that recognize the State of Israel, and then later --- not recognize the same state.

Finally, the continued reference to the Israeli People as "foreigners" and "colonialist"  and attempting to apply the criteria adopted by General Assembly Resolution 1514 (XV) of 14 December 1960, more that a decade later, is false logic.  The establishment of the Jewish State of Israel was not undertaken by a foreign power or distant parent state _(ie - a colonial power)_.  In 1948, the creation of conditions of stability and well-being Israel and the Jewish People; peaceful and friendly relations based on respect for the principles of equal rights and self-determination of all peoples.  The subsequence invasion by multiple forces of the Arab League, was not an example of allowing the Jewish People the right to self-determination without external interference; pursuant to the UN Steps Preparatory to Independence. 

Very Respectfully,
R​


----------



## P F Tinmore (Sep 6, 2015)

RoccoR said:


> Billo_Really,  P F Tinmore,  et al,
> 
> I would be very pleased if you could point to an authority that can define "self-determination" such that it can answer the questions:
> 
> ...


Kosovo and Palestine were two completely different scenarios. Kosovo declared independence under considerable legal and political baggage. Palestine, however, had no legal baggage when it declared independence in 1948.

Neither the LoN nor the Mandate claimed possession of Palestine. They merely held Palestine in trust until the people could stand alone. The mandate could not and did not change Palestine's legal status.

Britain failed to accomplish any of its goals and otherwise fucked up so bad that they transferred its trusteeship to UNSCOP and left. UNSCOP failed to assume its responsibilities.

The people, the land, and the international borders remained unchanged. Palestine remained a non self governing territory. As the native population the Palestinians have the right to self determination without external interference, the right to independence and sovereignty, and the right to territorial integrity as subsequent UN resolutions have confirmed.

This is the backdrop for Palestine's 1948 declaration of independence that was in complete compliance with international law.


----------



## Humanity (Sep 6, 2015)

Rehmani said:


> Humanity said:
> 
> 
> > Rehmani said:
> ...



Odd response to my comment... Did you actually READ my comment?


----------



## Phoenall (Sep 6, 2015)

P F Tinmore said:


> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> > Billo_Really,  P F Tinmore,  et al,
> ...






 Didn't the muslims declare on land that belonged to another nation/people and weren't they mainly recent immigrants from all over the Islamic world. So if they could do it in Yugoslavia why couldn't the Jews do it in Palestine ?

 No the LoN were the sovereign rulers of the M.E, not just Palestine, and they could do with the land as they saw fit. You see in 1917 Palestine had no legal status other than that granted under the terms of the Mandate.

 Britain had no goals other than to be guides for the people of the M.E.  in declaring themselves fit for purpose, it they were not fit for purpose then their declaration was denied. There were no international borders of the land of Palestine only the two mandates of Palestine. The people were in a state of flux and came and went with the seasons. Yes all 20 factions of the Palestinians had the right to independence and sovereignty but only after they had shown they were capable of doing so.

 It was the all Palestine government that was an arab league concoction that tried to declare independence on land that was already in the hands of another indigenous people, so it was in breach of the UN charter and the Mandate of Palestine. There is no international law that I or anyone else knows of that granted them the land. Care to produce your evidence of this international law ?


----------



## Phoenall (Sep 6, 2015)

Humanity said:


> Rehmani said:
> 
> 
> > Humanity said:
> ...






 Well his/her reply was right on the button so they must have


----------



## RoccoR (Sep 6, 2015)

P F Tinmore,  et al,

Baggage or no baggage, the rule of law and the precedent for the ruling does not change.



P F Tinmore said:


> Kosovo and Palestine were two completely different scenarios. Kosovo declared independence under considerable legal and political baggage. Palestine, however, had no legal baggage when it declared independence in 1948.


*(COMMENT)*

That is not true.  The declaration of the All Palestine Government (APG) in 1948, was as bogus as it gets.  

•  One people (APG) cannot claim independence (September 1948) over an area claimed previously declared independent (May 1948) by another people (National Council for the State of Israel).
•  The APG cannot declare independence over territory it did not control.  The Israeli Defense Force controlled a substantial portion of the territory identified as the recommended allocation for the Jewish State.
•  The APG was political curiosity established by the Arab League _(not a Palestinian Provisional Government and controlled by the Egyptian Military governorship)_ on 22 September 1948 during the 1948 Arab-Israeli War.  The APG was dissoleved in 1959 by the Egyptian Government _(not a Palestinian Provisional Government)._​


P F Tinmore said:


> Neither the LoN nor the Mandate claimed possession of Palestine. They merely held Palestine in trust until the people could stand alone. The mandate could not and did not change Palestine's legal status.


*(COMMENT)*

Well, you almost have it right.  First it was not held in trust for the Palestinian People.  The League of Nations Covenant said: "*Certain communities*" formerly belonging to the Turkish Empire have reached a stage of development where their existence as independent nations can be provisionally recognised subject to the rendering of administrative advice and assistance by a Mandatory until such time as they are able to stand alone."  The term "Certain Communities" is not necessarily inclusive of the Palestinian People.

Nowhere in the League of Nation Covenant is the phrase "held in trust" used or implied.  The Covenant says:  "To those colonies and territories which as a consequence of the late war have ceased to be under the sovereignty of the States which formerly governed them and which are inhabited by peoples not yet able to stand by themselves under the strenuous conditions of the modern world, there should be applied the principle that the well-being and development of such peoples form a sacred trust of civilisation and that securities for the performance of this trust should be embodied in this Covenant. 

*Part II - Mandate Regime --- Series of League of Nations Publications  VI.A. MANDATES 1945. VI.A. 1
*
The _Palestine_ Mandate is of a very special character. While it follows the main lines laid down by the Covenant for "A" Mandates, it also contains a number of provisions designed to apply the policy defined by the "Balfour Declaration" of November 2nd, 1917. By this declaration, the British Government had announced its intention to encourage the establishment in Palestine of a national home for the Jewish people, it being clearly understood that nothing should be done which might prejudice the civil and religious rights of existing non-Jewish communities in Palestine, or the rights and political status enjoyed by Jews in any other country. The Mandate reproduces the Balfour Declaration almost in full in its preamble and states that "recognition has thereby been given to the historical connection of the Jewish people with Palestine and to the grounds for reconstituting their national home in that country". 

Accordingly, under the terms of the Mandate, the Mandatory is to be responsible for placing the country under such political, administrative and economic conditions as will secure the establishment of the Jewish national home, and the development of self-governing institutions, and also for safeguarding the civil and religious rights of all the inhabitants of Palestine, irrespective of race and religion. The Mandate also provides for the recognition as a public body of a Jewish agency which is to advise and co-operate with the administration of Palestine in such economic, social and other matters as may affect the establishment of the Jewish national home and the interests of the Jewish population in Palestine, and, subject always to the control of the Administration, to assist and take part in the development of the country. At first and in accordance with the terms of the Mandate, this role was entrusted to the Zionist Organisation; later, however, from 1929 onwards, that organisation was replaced by the "Jewish Agency for Palestine", which includes representatives not only of the Zionist Organisation but also of other Jewish bodies in various countries. In consultation with the Mandatory, this agency takes steps to secure the co-operation of all Jews willing to assist in the establishment of the Jewish national home. While ensuring that the rights and position of other sections of the population are not prejudiced, the Administration, for its part, must facilitate Jewish immigration under suitable conditions and, in co-operation with the Jewish agency, encourage close settlement by Jews on the land, including State lands and waste lands not required for public purposes. A nationality law is to be enacted containing provisions framed so as to facilitate the acquisition of Palestinian citizenship by Jews who take up their permanent residence in Palestine.​
The League of Nation Covenant does not address the Mandates specifically, nor any specific territory assigned to Palestine.  



P F Tinmore said:


> Britain failed to accomplish any of its goals and otherwise fucked up so bad that they transferred its trusteeship to UNSCOP and left. UNSCOP failed to assume its responsibilities.


*(COMMENT)*

The "Successor Government" immediately after the British Mandate was the UN Palestine Commission (UNPC).  Many times you have made the accusation that the UNPCdid not accomplish its tasks; never taking into account that the Arab League Armies opened their offensive on the same day (15 May 1948) that the UNPC was to assume governmental responsibilities.  One of the purpose to the Hostile Offensive by the Arab League was to defying the resolution of the General Assembly and engaged in a deliberate effort to politically alter by force the Partition Program through external interference.  The UN _Relieved_ the Palestine Commission from the further exercise of responsibilities under resolution 181 (II) of 29 November 1947 and HAVING ADOPTED a resolution providing for the appointment of a United Nations Mediator in Palestine, which relieves the United Nations Palestine Commission from the further exercise of its responsibilities,



P F Tinmore said:


> The people, the land, and the international borders remained unchanged. Palestine remained a non self governing territory. As the native population the Palestinians have the right to self determination without external interference, the right to independence and sovereignty, and the right to territorial integrity as subsequent UN resolutions have confirmed.
> 
> This is the backdrop for Palestine's 1948 declaration of independence that was in complete compliance with international law.


*(COMMENT)*

The general inference you mention is a split citation from the Declaration on the Granting of Independence to Colonial Countries and Peoples Adopted by General Assembly Resolution 1514 (XV) of 14 December 1960; and Chapter XI (UN Charter) Declarations Regarding non-Self-governeing Territories.  It changes nothing in that the non-self-governing territory after the conclusion of the Mandate (May 1948), was declared independent by the National Council and Provisional Government of Israel.  This was well before the APG declaration of September 1948.   The territory controlled by Israel was no longer non-self-governing.  

Most Respectfully,
R


----------



## P F Tinmore (Sep 6, 2015)

RoccoR said:


> P F Tinmore,  et al,
> 
> Baggage or no baggage, the rule of law and the precedent for the ruling does not change.
> 
> ...


That is not true. The declaration of the All Palestine Government (APG) in 1948, was as bogus as it gets.​
Could it be more bogus than the the government of Israel declared by the foreign Jewish Agency that was created in Zurich by the foreign World Zionist Organization.

Israel is a foreign government established in Palestine against the wishes of the vast majority of the people.


----------



## Hollie (Sep 6, 2015)

P F Tinmore said:


> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> > P F Tinmore,  et al,
> ...


The "vast majority" of the people you're referring to are Egyptian, Syrian, Jordanian beggars and squatters.


----------



## P F Tinmore (Sep 6, 2015)

RoccoR said:


> P F Tinmore,  et al,
> 
> Baggage or no baggage, the rule of law and the precedent for the ruling does not change.
> 
> ...


• One people (APG) cannot claim independence (September 1948) over an area claimed previously declared independent (May 1948) by another people (National Council for the State of Israel).​
Oh really. What was Israel's defined territory and how was it acquired? It has to be more than just say so.


----------



## RoccoR (Sep 6, 2015)

P F Tinmore,  et al,

Oh you have it so misinterpreted.



P F Tinmore said:


> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> > That is not true. The declaration of the All Palestine Government (APG) in 1948, was as bogus as it gets.
> ...


*(COMMENT)*

The Jewish Agency was a brain-child of the Allied Powers at the San Remo Conference of 24 April 1920 under the League of Nations and imbedded requirement of Article 4, Mandate for Palestine, originally called the *Palestine Office* (Zionist Organization) in 1908.  The Palestine Office was renamed and organized in 1929 to meet the Mandate requirement for an appropriate agency as a public body for the purpose of advising and co-operating with the Administration of Palestine in such economic, social and other matters as may affect the establishment of the Jewish national home; and a non-governmental organization (NGO) subject to the control of the Administration of Palestine by the Mandatory. This agency need sanctioned as an "appropriate agency" by the Zionist Organization.  This appropriateness was also a requirement set forth in the San Remo Agreement nine years before it was created.  

The association between the Jewish Agency and the World Zionist Organization (WZO) was purely mandate requirement set forth by the Allied Powers.   Not an invention of the WZO.   The implication that it was a Jewish Inspired foreign activity is misinformation (not telling the whole story) by a anti-Zionist propaganda machine.

It should also be noted that by 1923, three separate attempts by the Mandatory were made was to establish an "Arab Agency" in Palestine, analogous to the Jewish Agency.  However, the Arab Palestinians were not interested at that time in the Mandatory's effort to advance the establishment self-government in Palestine.

The establishment of Israel was pursuant to the guidance adopted by the UN.  It was not a foreign government.  It was a move by the Jewish Constituents which were all citizens of the territory under the UN guidance.  This was not a foreign government.  Again, that is misinformation by a propaganda machine "designed or likely to provoke or encourage and threat to the peace, breach of the peace, or act of aggression."  (Resolution adopted by the General Assembly 110 (II) (1947)--- Measures to be taken against propaganda and the inciters of a new war.)

Most Respectfully,
R


----------



## P F Tinmore (Sep 6, 2015)

RoccoR said:


> P F Tinmore,  et al,
> 
> Oh you have it so misinterpreted.
> 
> ...


The creation of a Jewish state was a foreign project from day one.

All of that other crapola is irrelevant. It is all just part of the scam.


----------



## RoccoR (Sep 6, 2015)

P F Tinmore,  et al,

Yes, this is often claimed by pro-Palestinians.



P F Tinmore said:


> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> > • One people (APG) cannot claim independence (September 1948) over an area claimed previously declared independent (May 1948) by another people (National Council for the State of Israel).​
> ...


*(COMMENT)*

Originally, at the time of the midnight 14/15 May 1948 cablegram declaring independence, the Declaration was made pursuant to the recommendations adopted and outlined in A/RES/181(II) - Future Government of Palestine.  


Chapter 2: The Partition Plan and the end of the British mandate
At the first special session of the General Assembly, which began on 28 April 1947, five Arab countries — Egypt, Iraq, Lebanon, Saudi Arabia and Syria — tried unsuccessfully to include in the agenda an item that would address “the termination of the Mandate over Palestine and the declaration of its independence”. The Jewish case was presented by the Jewish Agency for Palestine, while the Arab Higher Committee spoke for the Palestinian Arabs.  -----  The adoption of resolution 181 (II) was followed by outbreaks of violence in Palestine. As the situation deteriorated, the Security Council called for a special session of the General Assembly, which then met from 16 April to 14 May 1948.  -----  On 14 May 1948, Britain relinquished its Mandate over Palestine and disengaged its forces. On the same day, the Jewish Agency proclaimed the establishment of the State of Israel on the territory allotted to it by the partition plan. Fierce hostilities immediately broke out between the Arab and Jewish communities. The next day, regular troops of the neighboring Arab States entered the territory to force by armed interference a different political outcome.  On 15 July 1948, the Security Council decided in a resolution that the situation in Palestine constituted a threat to the peace. It ordered a ceasefire and declared that failure to comply would be construed as a breach of the peace requiring immediate consideration of enforcement measures under Chapter VII of the United Nations Charter. In accordance with the resolution, a second truce came into force. By that time, Israel controlled much of the territory allotted to the Arab State by the partition resolution, including the western part of Jerusalem. Egypt and Jordan respectively controlled the remaining portions of the Gaza district and the West Bank of the Jordan River. More fighting took place in October 1948 and March 1949, during which Israel took over other areas, some of which had been allotted to the Arab State.​
Israel was a product of self-determination, Recommendations of the General Assembly, and the force armed conflict initiated by the local Arabs and the armies of the Arab League.

The territory was acquired through "Cession:" as explained in *Post #132*.

Most Respectfully,
R


----------



## Hollie (Sep 6, 2015)

P F Tinmore said:


> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> > P F Tinmore,  et al,
> ...


'All of that other crapola". 

Compelling, insightful and persuasive testimony, tinny. Your flailing about  is so typical of the drop ten and punt, last gasp of desperation when your argument has failed and been stripped to its core element of rabid Joooooo hatreds,

Not facts, or demonstration or reasoned argument can convince you that your feverish and delusional preconceived notions are hopelessly derelict.


----------



## RoccoR (Sep 6, 2015)

P F Tinmore,  et al,

That is a unsophisticated description.



P F Tinmore said:


> The creation of a Jewish state was a foreign project from day one.
> 
> All of that other crapola is irrelevant. It is all just part of the scam.


*(COMMENT)*
•  *Mudros Agreement: Armistice with Turkey (October 30, 1918)*
.....ARTICLE 16. — Surrender of all garrisons in Hedjaz, Assir, Yemen, Syria, and Mesopotamia to the nearest Allied Commander; and the withdrawal of troops from Cicilia, except those necessary to maintain order, as will be determined under Clause V.​•  *Treaty of Sevres Part III (1920)*
.....ARTICLE 97 --- Turkey hereby undertakes, in accordance with the provisions of Article 132, to accept any decisions which may be taken in relation to the questions dealt with in this Section.
.....ARTICLE 132 ---  Outside her frontiers as fixed by the present Treaty Turkey hereby renounces in favour of the Principal Allied Powers all rights and title which she could claim on any ground over or concerning any territories outside Europe which are not otherwise disposed of by the present Treaty.   Turkey undertakes to recognise and conform to the measures which may be taken now or in the future by the Principal Allied Powers, in agreement where necessary with third Powers, in order to carry the above stipulation into effect.​•  *Lausanne Treaty: Part I (1924)*
.....ARTICLE 16  --- Turkey hereby renounces all rights and title whatsoever over or respecting the territories situated outside the frontiers laid down in the present Treaty and the islands other than those over which her sovereignty is recognised by the said Treaty, the future of these territories and islands being settled or to be settled by the parties concerned.  The provisions of the present Article do not prejudice any special arrangements arising from neighbourly relations which have been or may be concluded between Turkey and any limitrophe countries.​
No matter when you look or where you look, it becomes immediately obvious to even the most casual of observers --- that that the territory in question was handed over to the Principal Allied Powers _(not to the Palestinians in any way shape or form)_.  It wasn't a mistake.  The disposition of territory by the Allied Powers was no more "foreign" than the disposition of the territory was with the Ottoman Empire _(the sovereign before the surrender)_.

Most Respectfully,
R


----------



## P F Tinmore (Sep 6, 2015)

RoccoR said:


> P F Tinmore,  et al,
> 
> That is a unsophisticated description.
> 
> ...


how does all of this verbosity relate to my post?


----------



## P F Tinmore (Sep 6, 2015)

RoccoR said:


> P F Tinmore,  et al,
> 
> Yes, this is often claimed by pro-Palestinians.
> 
> ...


All that and you did not answer my question.


----------



## P F Tinmore (Sep 6, 2015)

RoccoR said:


> P F Tinmore,  et al,
> 
> Yes, this is often claimed by pro-Palestinians.
> 
> ...


You need to get off of your resolution 181 shtick.

Israel was violating resolution 181 since before its declaration and continued to violate it since.

Israel never had any intention of abiding by resolution 181. It just lied about it to gain political recognition.


----------



## theliq (Sep 6, 2015)

RoccoR said:


> P F Tinmore,  et al,
> 
> Oh you have it so misinterpreted.
> 
> ...


Now you are talking Crap Rocco......just STOP LYING  steve


----------



## Phoenall (Sep 7, 2015)

P F Tinmore said:


> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> > P F Tinmore,  et al,
> ...






Read the mandate and see that the LoN accepted the Zionist were accepted as representing the interests of the Jews. The APG constantly refused to be part of the action and so were not seen as the representatives of the arab muslims..

 Israel; was formed under the rules of the Mandate by Jews who were citizens of Palestine, you have failed to show even once that Israel is invalid and that a nation of Palestine existed prior to 1988


----------



## Phoenall (Sep 7, 2015)

P F Tinmore said:


> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> > P F Tinmore,  et al,
> ...





 There was no defined territory as there were no treaties in place defining the territory. It was acquired by a declaration of independence in line with the terms of the Mandate of Palestine.

 How was the APG claim arrived at and how could they declare on land that was not available to them ?


----------



## Phoenall (Sep 7, 2015)

P F Tinmore said:


> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> > P F Tinmore,  et al,
> ...






 Then you would be able to find legal documents saying just that after all these years, so why have none ever existed ?

 Just more of your islamonazi propaganda that has no foundation in truth and reality


----------



## Phoenall (Sep 7, 2015)

P F Tinmore said:


> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> > P F Tinmore,  et al,
> ...






 Because it shows that you are spouting islamonazi propaganda lies without any legal footing. From the time of the Ottoman empire arab muslims held no sovereignty over the M.E. until the LoN gave them the means to do so. Then they gave the sovereignty to foreign princes from another country which you claim is wrong. The treaties all say the same thing that the sovereignty of the M.E. was transferred to the LoN who could then do as they wished with the land.

 Do you understand yet that you are wrong and the evidence is right


----------



## Phoenall (Sep 7, 2015)

P F Tinmore said:


> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> > P F Tinmore,  et al,
> ...






 Yes he did, he just did not give the answer you wanted.......................


----------



## Phoenall (Sep 7, 2015)

theliq said:


> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> > P F Tinmore,  et al,
> ...






 So now irrefutable evidence of the legal claim is lying because it goes against your brainwashing. Sure sounds like islamonazi jurisprudence  to me muslim right even when he is wrong


----------



## Phoenall (Sep 7, 2015)

P F Tinmore said:


> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> > P F Tinmore,  et al,
> ...






 How did Israel violate 181, and don't forget this can only have happened after May 14 1948


----------



## theliq (Sep 7, 2015)

Phoenall said:


> theliq said:
> 
> 
> > RoccoR said:
> ...


You Are Not My Equal and Never Will Be.....Address me as Sir from now onwards


----------



## RoccoR (Sep 7, 2015)

theliq,  et al,

Humm...  I must have touched a nerve.



theliq said:


> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> > P F Tinmore,  et al,
> ...


*(QUESTION*)

Just what about my commentary did you believe is untrue?

v/r
R


----------



## rylah (Sep 7, 2015)

Billo_Really said:


> rylah said:
> 
> 
> > More blood libels, ridiculous parroting...
> ...




1. So who are those indigenous people of Palestine if Jews, Saudis, Egyptians and Syrians in Palestine aren't?

2. Yeah 'fair and democratic'..say when were the last elections?

3. Remind me this time Arab-Israelis are responsible for what? 

4. I got it 'f**k everyone'...balestinians, Israelis...
I don't know about some magic emperor but Your ill motivation is for everyone to see.


----------



## rylah (Sep 7, 2015)

Billo_Really said:


> rylah said:
> 
> 
> > Jews would be free once they all remembered their ancestors and the elders and prosper even more. That's the sole purpose of Israel today.
> ...



Remembering the Elders is not the same as demanding everyone to live by the rules of those times. However many laws in the west are based on the Jewish law. All this happened before Arab Muslims existed.
In the 7th century while Arabs were still burring their daughters alive 
and worshiping idols in Mecca, Jews were living in Israel and Judea for centuries having a distinct monotheistic religion, The one later Christianity and Islam were based upon.

What about the rights of the Europeans not to hear
'Hitler was right" on the streets?


----------



## P F Tinmore (Sep 7, 2015)

Phoenall said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> > RoccoR said:
> ...


There are several but here is one to chew on.

1. Citizenship Palestinian citizens residing in Palestine outside the City of Jerusalem, as well as Arabs and Jews who, not holding Palestinian citizenship, reside in Palestine outside the City of Jerusalem shall, upon the recognition of independence, become citizens of the State in which they are resident and enjoy full civil and political rights.

The Avalon Project : UN General Assembly Resolution 181

All Palestinians whose normal residence was  in the territory that became Israel would become Israeli citizens. This reiterates international law so it is true whether there is a resolution 181 or not. The criterion is normal residence not physical presence so that would include refugees.


----------



## Hollie (Sep 7, 2015)

_*Can Palestinian's and Israeli's ever be friends?*_

No. Obviously. Islamo-ideology carries with it hate for all things and that includes other moslems when they are the "wrong kind" of moslems.

Islamist history is one of perpetual war and conquest. Islam has always been expansionist, bellicose, and xenophobic. It has always been spread by the sword, and through rapine. And, as we see with words and actions from the very islamist "scholars" (past and present) you are in thrall to, islamism is still thoroughly outraged at the ascendency of the infidel and their outrageous behavior of daring to interrupt muhammud's (swish), cult-like embrace of an expansionist ideology that is focused on brute force and ultimately, subjugation of any infidel society within reach. Islamists have kept this indigant grudge smoldering for 1,300 years.

Islam's wars of aggression have been going on-going ever since muhammud's (swish) armies spilled out of the Arabian Peninsula. From the time a violent, power-hungry Arab warlord with grandiose delusions went out on a raid against the merchant caravan of his own people, through the holy war incursions into old Europe that prompted the Crusades, to the moslem slaughter of moslems just in the last few days, jihad has been the reliable vehicle by which Moslems have always carried their message of hate for all things infidel and the decree of making Islamism supreme in all lands


----------



## P F Tinmore (Sep 7, 2015)

rylah said:


> Billo_Really said:
> 
> 
> > rylah said:
> ...


1. So who are those indigenous people of Palestine...​
There is no debate. International law, the Treaty of Lausanne, and the Palestinian citizenship order all say the same thing.


----------



## Hollie (Sep 7, 2015)

P F Tinmore said:


> rylah said:
> 
> 
> > Billo_Really said:
> ...



There is no debate. Shame on you arabs-moslems for displacing all those indigenous Egyptian, Syrian and Lebanese beggars / squatters / land grabbers when your hoped-for Jew genocide was attempted back in 1948.


----------



## rylah (Sep 7, 2015)

P F Tinmore said:


> rylah said:
> 
> 
> > Billo_Really said:
> ...



What Turks, Syrians, Egyptians and Saudis are indigenous to Palestine?


----------



## RoccoR (Sep 7, 2015)

P F Tinmore,  et al,

Oh you're so close; but, wrong.



P F Tinmore said:


> There are several but here is one to chew on.
> 
> 1. Citizenship Palestinian citizens residing in Palestine outside the City of Jerusalem, as well as Arabs and Jews who, not holding Palestinian citizenship, reside in Palestine outside the City of Jerusalem shall, upon the recognition of independence, become citizens of the State in which they are resident and enjoy full civil and political rights.
> 
> ...


*(COMMENT)*

First off:  Nowhere in *Chapter 3 --- *_Citizenship, international conventions and financial obligations, _A/RES/181(II), does it stipulate that "criterion is normal residence not physical presence?" *(Does it really say that?  Or did you interpret that?) *In fact the words "normal or habitual" are not used in this non-binding resolution.  Although the intent may include your assumption.  Below, I demonstrate how Israel meets this requirement.

More importantly, there is no international citizenship or nationality laws prior to:

*NATIONALITY, STATELESSNESS, ASYLUM AND REFUGEES*​

Convention on the Reduction of Statelessness
Convention relating to the Status of Stateless Persons
Convention relating to the Status of Refugees
Protocol relating to the Status of Refugees
Declaration on the Human Rights of Individuals who are not nationals of the country in which they live

What the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR) A/RES/217(III), says is:

Article 15.

(1) Everyone has the right to a nationality.

(2) No one shall be arbitrarily deprived of his nationality nor denied the right to change his nationality.​The European Convention on Nationality (Strasbourg, 6.XI.1997)(ECN) is a bit more definitive.

Chapter VI – State succession and nationality

Article 18 – Principles



In matters of nationality in cases of State succession, each State Party concerned shall respect the principles of the rule of law, the rules concerning human rights and the principles contained in Articles 4 and 5 of this Convention and in paragraph 2 of this article, in particular in order to avoid statelessness.

In deciding on the granting or the retention of nationality in cases of State succession, each State Party concerned shall take account in particular of:
the genuine and effective link of the person concerned with the State;
the habitual residence of the person concerned at the time of State succession;
the will of the person concerned;
the territorial origin of the person concerned.


Where the acquisition of nationality is subject to the loss of a foreign nationality, the provisions of Article 16 of this Convention shall apply.

Article 19 – Settlement by international agreement

In cases of State succession, States Parties concerned shall endeavour to regulate matters relating to nationality by agreement amongst themselves and, where applicable, in their relationship with other States concerned. Such agreements shall respect the principles and rules contained or referred to in this chapter.

Article 20 – Principles concerning non-nationals


Each State Party shall respect the following principles:
nationals of a predecessor State habitually resident in the territory over which sovereignty is transferred to a successor State and who have not acquired its nationality shall have the right to remain in that State;
persons referred to in sub-paragraph a shall enjoy equality of treatment with nationals of the successor State in relation to social and economic rights.


Each State Party may exclude persons considered under paragraph 1 from employment in the public service involving the exercise of sovereign powers.

However, the ECN was written in 1997 and is not relevant as a legal precedent prior to that time; including the Arab-Israel Wars of 1948, 1967, and 1973.

Second, the rule of thumb for Refugees is very different than you assert.  CERI is not "law".  It is and Administrative Guide.  Most Palestinians registered under CERI are not true refugees, living off the dole.

Third, no one in the West Bank or Gaza Strip is either a stateless person or a true refugee.  And Palestinians of the West Bank and Gaza Strip who have acquired a new nationality (that of the State of Palestine) or held a previous nationality (citizen of the Hashemite Kingdom), and enjoyed the protection of that nation, is well beyond the consideration of Israel.

Fourth:  (I am not an expert of Israeli Law.)  But my understanding is that current Israeli Citizenship and Nationality Law cover:

(a) A person who, immediately before the establishment of the State, was a Palestinian citizen and who does not become a Israel national under section 2, shall become an Israel national with effect from the day of the establishment of the State if -
(1) he was registered on the 4th Adar, 5712 (1st March 1952) as an inhabitant under the Registration of Inhabitants Ordinance, 5709-1949(2); and
(2) he is an inhabitant of Israel on the day of the coming into force of this Law; and
(3) he was in Israel, or in an area which became Israel territory after the establishment of the State, from the day of the establishment of the State to the day of the coming into force of this Law, or entered Israel legally during that period.

(b) A person born after the establishment of the State who is an inhabitant of Israel on the day of the coming into force of this Law, and whose father or mother becomes an Israel national under subsection (a), shall become an Israel national with effect from the day of his birth.
I believe that *NATIONALITY LAW*, 5712-1952* PART ONE: ACQUISITION OF NATIONALITY conforms to the general stipulations under the UDHR A/RES/217(III), pertaining to Nationality.

Most Respectfully,
R


----------



## RoccoR (Sep 7, 2015)

P F Tinmore,  et al,

The status of "indigenous people" confers no special rights of privileges.  In fact the UN says:

"Considering the diversity of indigenous peoples, an official definition of “indigenous” has not been adopted by any UN-system body."



P F Tinmore said:


> 1. So who are those indigenous people of Palestine...​
> There is no debate. International law, the Treaty of Lausanne, and the Palestinian citizenship order all say the same thing.


*(COMMENT)*

They may very well.  But that has nothing to do with being a citizen of Israel or the State of Palestine (alla 1988).

Most Respectfully,
R


----------



## Billo_Really (Sep 7, 2015)

rylah said:


> 1. So who are those indigenous people of Palestine if Jews, Saudis, Egyptians and Syrians in Palestine aren't?


Who are those indigenous people?  They are the people who had been living there indigenously.  What kind of a dumbass question is that?  People were living in that area for generations.  It doesn't matter "who" they were, they're the indigenous population and they have the right to self-determination.  A right that was denied to the non-Jewish residents.




rylah said:


> 2. Yeah 'fair and democratic'..say when were the last elections?


I hear you on that.  It's not cool.  But the one they were elected in, was.




rylah said:


> 3. Remind me this time Arab-Israelis are responsible for what?


Arab-Israeli's are responsible for the same things Jewish-Israeli's are.  And that is everything their government does.




rylah said:


> 4. I got it 'f**k everyone'...balestinians, Israelis...
> I don't know about some magic emperor but Your ill motivation is for everyone to see.


You've never heard that story?

*The Emperor's New Clothes*​
It's a pretty good story, if you got time to read it.  It's not that long at all.


----------



## P F Tinmore (Sep 7, 2015)

RoccoR said:


> P F Tinmore,  et al,
> 
> Oh you're so close; but, wrong.
> 
> ...


It's getting pretty smoky in here. We need to clear the air.
-----------------
Drawing up the framework of nationality, Article 30 of the Treaty of Lausanne stated:

“Turkish subjects habitually resident in territory which in accordance with the provisions of the present Treaty is detached from Turkey will become _ipso facto_, in the conditions laid down by the local law, nationals of the State to which such territory is transferred.”​
Article 30 is of a great significance. It constituted a declaration of existing international law and the standard practice of states. This was despite the absence of a definite international law rule of state succession under which the nationals of predecessor state could _ipso facto_ acquire the nationality of the successor.

Genesis of Citizenship in Palestine and Israel​------------------
Then resolution 181 reiterates this same principle.

1. Citizenship Palestinian citizens residing in Palestine outside the City of Jerusalem, as well as Arabs and Jews who, not holding Palestinian citizenship, reside in Palestine outside the City of Jerusalem shall, upon the recognition of independence, become citizens of the State in which they are resident and enjoy full civil and political rights.

The Avalon Project : UN General Assembly Resolution 181​
The question was if Israel is violating resolution 181?

Now, if both sides agreed to resolution 181 it would be a valid treaty of cession and Israel would be in violation of this treaty obligation.

• Cession, is the transfer of territory usually by treaty from one state to another.​
Rocco claims that resolution 181 is valid. I say it is not.


----------



## P F Tinmore (Sep 7, 2015)

RoccoR said:


> P F Tinmore,  et al,
> 
> The status of "indigenous people" confers no special rights of privileges.  In fact the UN says:
> 
> ...


Indeed, the rights of the indigenous people apply to territories that were conquered before it was illegal to do so. That does not apply to Palestine.


----------



## rylah (Sep 8, 2015)

Billo_Really said:


> rylah said:
> 
> 
> > 1. So who are those indigenous people of Palestine if Jews, Saudis, Egyptians and Syrians in Palestine aren't?
> ...



1. A simple question, yet so much air and no answer.
Non Jews in Israel have full citizenship, what stops those 'indigenous'
to determine themselves? Who are they? How did they end up in Palestine and dd thy have any distinct palestinian culture and religion?

2.This elections between the two gangs started with violence, continues with it and is the reason why they didn't have elections since.


3.This is the the exact argument used by terrorists to justify murders of civilians in clubs,hospitals, buses and so on... You're a sheeple thinking You have rights and control over Your govt. 

4. the naked king here is You, after stating that You care not for Israel or the balestinians You still spit all the hatred and blood libels based on Your hurt ego some thousand miles away having no clue about the ME.
Cursing all the time is a sign of weakness and stress, Do You have any reason to take this conflict pesonally?


----------



## Phoenall (Sep 8, 2015)

P F Tinmore said:


> Phoenall said:
> 
> 
> > P F Tinmore said:
> ...







 So where did Israel breach that rule then as they offered that to all non Jews on condition they revoke their violence and terrorism. Those that refused or assisted in the planned destruction of Israel would be taken out of the offer in line with the international law of that time.

So you have nothing but your usual islamonazi propaganda based on false premise and wrongly interpreted UN resolutions that are nothing more than recommendations and have no power in law


----------



## Challenger (Sep 8, 2015)

Hollie said:


> _*Can Palestinian's and Israeli's ever be friends?*_
> 
> No. Obviously. Islamo-ideology carries with it hate for all things and that includes other moslems when they are the "wrong kind" of moslems.
> 
> ...


----------



## Phoenall (Sep 8, 2015)

P F Tinmore said:


> rylah said:
> 
> 
> > Billo_Really said:
> ...







 Which international law, please be specific as to the one that applies and what date it was implemented?

 No mention of anything like that in the treaty of Lausanne applying to Palestine, want to give the details ?

 cant find any mention in the Palestinian citizenship order either


----------



## Phoenall (Sep 8, 2015)

P F Tinmore said:


> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> > P F Tinmore,  et al,
> ...






 Sorry but it does as the land of Palestine was conquered in 1917 and it was not illegal to do so until after 1949


----------



## Phoenall (Sep 8, 2015)

Billo_Really said:


> rylah said:
> 
> 
> > 1. So who are those indigenous people of Palestine if Jews, Saudis, Egyptians and Syrians in Palestine aren't?
> ...







 So that means the Jews who were Palestinian citizens then ?

 Even though they are now dictators

 So the Palestinians are fully responsible for the terrorism and illegal weapons because they are done by their elected government. You do realise that you have just made every Palestinian a valid and legal military target the next time Israel responds to the violence.

Have you because you seem to have it back-asswards


----------



## Phoenall (Sep 8, 2015)

P F Tinmore said:


> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> > P F Tinmore,  et al,
> ...







 And which state was the land transferred to, and what date did that take place ?   Once you answer that honestly you will see where you have been wrong all these years


----------



## P F Tinmore (Sep 8, 2015)

Phoenall said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> > RoccoR said:
> ...


Britain ended its occupation of Palestine in 1948.


----------



## Hollie (Sep 8, 2015)

Challenger said:


> Hollie said:
> 
> 
> > _*Can Palestinian's and Israeli's ever be friends?*_
> ...



Hit 'em with the facts!

That's the best remedy for dealing with ignorant Islamos. 

It leaves them with no options but to spam the board with their pointless cartoons.


----------



## Hollie (Sep 8, 2015)

P F Tinmore said:


> Phoenall said:
> 
> 
> > P F Tinmore said:
> ...


But the occupying squatter Egyptians, Syrians and Lebanese did not.


----------



## RoccoR (Sep 8, 2015)

P F Tinmore, et al,

Let's be clear, your timeline is screwed-up.



P F Tinmore said:


> It's getting pretty smoky in here. We need to clear the air.
> -----------------
> Drawing up the framework of nationality, Article 30 of the Treaty of Lausanne stated:
> 
> ...


​*(COMMENT)*

The Treaty of Lausanne says that "nationals of the State to which such territory is transferred."  _(To whom was the territory transferred?)(Article 16 of the Lausanne Treaty --- 
Turkey hereby renounces all rights and title whatsoever over or respecting the territories situated outside the frontiers laid down in the present Treaty and the islands other than those over which her sovereignty is recognised by the said Treaty, the future of these territories and islands being settled or to be settled by the parties concerned.)_
That is, the people become citizens of the Territory to which the Mandate of Palestine applied.  The Mandatory became the successor government was that established by the Allied Powers.  It confers no special rights beyond citizenship established by the citizenship order.

Article 30 of the Lausanne Treaty, authored by the Allied Powers, is totally satisfied by the outcomes of the Citizenship Order of 1925; by the very same authors.  The impact of the Lausanne Treaty does not establish an obligation beyond the first successor (Turkey to Allied Powers).  It has no implications beyond the Mandatory.
------------------


P F Tinmore said:


> Then resolution 181 reiterates this same principle.
> 
> 1. Citizenship Palestinian citizens residing in Palestine outside the City of Jerusalem, as well as Arabs and Jews who, not holding Palestinian citizenship, reside in Palestine outside the City of Jerusalem shall, upon the recognition of independence, become citizens of the State in which they are resident and enjoy full civil and political rights.
> 
> ...


*(COMMENT)*

First you cannot violate a "non-binding" resolution.  You either agree or disagree to comply with it.  But a non-binding resolution is not international law that you can violate.  And Resolution 181 is not a Treaty.

Actually, it is NOT Rocco that claims Resolution 181(II) is valid; but that of the PLO (sole legitimate representative of the Palestinian people in any Palestinian territory that is liberated) and the Arab Palestinian that hold to the position that recognizes the legitimacy of Resolution 181.

Letter dated 25 March 1999 from the Permanent Observer
of Palestine to the United Nations addressed to the
Secretary-General​

Yesterday, the Israeli representative to the United Nations made some comments to the media on the issue of General Assembly resolution 181 (II) of 29 November 1947, as well as on a statement previously made by President Arafat on the subject. The Israeli representative repeated what the Israeli Foreign Minister said a few days ago, namely that resolution 181 (II) was "null and void". These are pathetic statements involving illegal positions with far-reaching and serious consequences.

For the Palestinian side, and since the strategic decision to forge a peace on the basis of coexistence, resolution 181 (II) has become acceptable. The resolution provides the legal basis for the existence of both the Jewish and the Arab States in Mandated Palestine. According to the resolution, Jerusalem should become a corpus separatum, which the Palestinian side is willing to take into consideration and to reconcile with the Palestinian position that East Jerusalem is part of the Palestinian territory and the capital of the Palestinian State. The Palestinian side adheres to international legitimacy and respects General Assembly resolution 181 (II), as well as Security Council resolution 242 (1967), the implementation of which is the aim of the current Middle East peace process.​
Declaration of Independence​Pursuant to the resolutions of the Arab Summit Conferences and on the basis of the international legitimacy embodied in the resolutions of the United Nations since 1947, and

Through the exercise by the Palestinian Arab people of its right to self-determination, political independence and sovereignty over its territory:

The Palestine National Council hereby declares, in the Name of God and on behalf of the Palestinian Arab people, the establishment of the State of Palestine in the land of Palestine with its capital at Jerusalem.​
The development of citizenship and nationality laws _(both international and domestic)_ are designed to eliminate the growth of "stateless persons" and protect domestic immigration _(a variation of territorial sovereignty)_ in the name of the people. 

Finally, there were two (2) very important points laid-out in A/RES/67/19 4 December 2012, which upgraded the Status of Palestine.

_Reaffirming its commitment_, in accordance with international law, to the *two-State solution* of an independent, sovereign, democratic, viable and contiguous State of Palestine living side by side with Israel in peace and security on the basis of the pre-1967 borders,
_Reaffirms_ the right of the Palestinian people to self-determination and to *independence in their State of Palestine on the Palestinian territory occupied since 1967*;

The Two-State Solution and the territory occupied since 1967.  This is different from the demand for all the territory prior to the termination of the Mandate.

Most Respectfully,
R


----------



## Phoenall (Sep 8, 2015)

P F Tinmore said:


> Phoenall said:
> 
> 
> > P F Tinmore said:
> ...






 But handed it over to the UN as part of the mandate, which is still in force until the arab muslims prove they are capable of free determination and able to govern themselves.


----------



## RoccoR (Sep 8, 2015)

P_F Tinmore,  et al,

Well, not exactly correct.



P F Tinmore said:


> Phoenall said:
> 
> 
> > P F Tinmore said:
> ...


*(COMMENT)*


The *Occupied Enemy Territory Administration* or OETA was a joint British and French military administration over Levantine and Mesopotamian provinces of the former Ottoman Empire between 1918–20, set up following the Sinai and Palestine Campaign of World War I. The administration ended following the assignment of the French Mandate of Syria and Lebanon and British Mandate for Palestine at the 19–26 April 1920 San Remo conference.
*SOURCE:* Open Source Encyclopedia​
You will no doubt note, that the INTERIM REPORT ON THE CIVIL ADMINISTRATION OF PALESTINE, --- makes clear that the Civil Administration began 1 JULY 1920; almost immediately following the San Remo Convention (25 April 1920) by the Allied Powers.

It is more accurate for you to say that the UK terminated responsibilities as the Mandatory in May 1948.

Most Respectfully,
R


----------



## P F Tinmore (Sep 8, 2015)

Phoenall said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> > RoccoR said:
> ...


The land was transferred to Palestine.

The Treaty of Lausanne required the newly created states that acquired the territory to pay annuities on the Ottoman public debt, and to assume responsibility for the administration of concessions that had been granted by the Ottomans. A dispute regarding the status of the territories was settled by an Arbitrator appointed by the Council of the League of Nations. *It was decided that Palestine and Transjordan were newly created states according to the terms of the applicable post-war treaties.*

State of Palestine - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia​


----------



## P F Tinmore (Sep 8, 2015)

RoccoR said:


> P_F Tinmore,  et al,
> 
> Well, not exactly correct.
> 
> ...


Indeed, Britain occupied Palestine. In 1920 Britain *changed the name* to civil administration. However, Palestine remained under military occupation. Britain even increased its troop strength in the late '30s.

Why did Britain need 30 years of military control? If they had followed the LoN Covenant, a handful of civilians could have been in and out of there in 10-15 years.


----------



## Phoenall (Sep 8, 2015)

P F Tinmore said:


> Phoenall said:
> 
> 
> > P F Tinmore said:
> ...







 Did you read this in your link

  The Mandate was administered as two territories: Palestine and Transjordan,[42] with the Jordan River being the boundary between them. The boundaries under the Mandate also did not follow those sought by the Jewish community, which sought the inclusion of the east bank of the Jordan into the Palestinian territory, to which the objective of the Mandate for a homeland for the Jewish people would apply. It was made clear from before the commencement of the Mandate, and a clause to that effect was inserted in the Mandate, that the objective set out in the Mandate would not apply to Transjordan

When did the state of Palestine come into being and who were its representatives  ?


 Cant find your highlighted part in the link you gave to the islamonazi propaganda wiki entry


----------



## Phoenall (Sep 8, 2015)

P F Tinmore said:


> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> > P_F Tinmore,  et al,
> ...






 Because of arab muslim violence and terrorism.

 The covenant did not say what you have stated


----------



## P F Tinmore (Sep 8, 2015)

Phoenall said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> > RoccoR said:
> ...


Britain created all of the violence by not following the Covenant.


----------



## Challenger (Sep 8, 2015)

Hollie said:


> Challenger said:
> 
> 
> > Hollie said:
> ...





Hollie said:


> Hit 'em with the facts!



Oh, please, stop! There goes another rib! Facts  will be forever strangers to Hasbara Hollie.


----------



## Hollie (Sep 8, 2015)

Challenger said:


> Hollie said:
> 
> 
> > Challenger said:
> ...


Your continued stalking doesn't hide the fact that you're unable to address the salient points in my posted comments. 

You're really getting quite desperate.


----------



## Hollie (Sep 8, 2015)

P F Tinmore said:


> Phoenall said:
> 
> 
> > P F Tinmore said:
> ...


Yes tinny. You are demonstrating that attribute we call "victim complex". Everything is always someone else's fault. 

For as long as your refuse to take responsibility for your actions, you will always be the impotent victim you choose to be.


----------



## Phoenall (Sep 8, 2015)

P F Tinmore said:


> Phoenall said:
> 
> 
> > P F Tinmore said:
> ...






 The violence started before the covenant so why do you LIE


----------



## Hollie (Sep 8, 2015)

Phoenall said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> > Phoenall said:
> ...


Apparently, we're supposed to ignore the brutality of the Islamist Ottoman Crusaders who ravaged the area as a part of islam's gee-had.


----------



## Challenger (Sep 8, 2015)

Hollie said:


> Challenger said:
> 
> 
> > Hollie said:
> ...





Hollie said:


> Challenger said:
> 
> 
> > Hollie said:
> ...


----------



## Rehmani (Sep 8, 2015)

Humanity said:


> Rehmani said:
> 
> 
> > Humanity said:
> ...


As Jew already living happily around the world, 13 million visible and 100 million not visible regardless muslim countries and non muslim countries. Means they don't need homeland and they have no right to displace whole Palestinian nation to pursue their desire to have home.


----------



## P F Tinmore (Sep 8, 2015)

Hollie said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> > Phoenall said:
> ...


Like civilians under military occupation.

Good choice.


----------



## Phoenall (Sep 8, 2015)

Rehmani said:


> Humanity said:
> 
> 
> > Rehmani said:
> ...






 What Palestinian nation was that, when did it come into existence and who was its leader ?


----------



## Phoenall (Sep 8, 2015)

P F Tinmore said:


> Hollie said:
> 
> 
> > P F Tinmore said:
> ...






 What civilians as dildo has shown that all Palestinians are terrorists and militia


----------



## Humanity (Sep 8, 2015)

Rehmani said:


> Humanity said:
> 
> 
> > Rehmani said:
> ...



Sorry, you are wrong....

Everyone has a 'right' to a homeland...

The issue arises when they want to steal someone else homeland.

Whatever the sky wizard allegedly told some bloke about going and killing everyone in a specified region and taking the land for eternity.... Utter shite!

And, to be honest, I really don't care if SOME of them lived there previously... Like 3,000 years ago... I think the world has moved on since then! 

Trying to 'claim' a region that has been conquered, inhabited, reconquered, re-inhabited throughout the millennia by several different dynasties/civilisations is utterly ridiculous....

 However, there is NOTHING wrong in people wanting a 'homeland'... Just not at the expense of others!


----------



## RoccoR (Sep 8, 2015)

P F Tinmore,  et al,

Well, your interpretation is completely wrong.



P F Tinmore said:


> The land was transferred to Palestine.
> 
> The Treaty of Lausanne required the newly created states that acquired the territory to pay annuities on the Ottoman public debt, and to assume responsibility for the administration of concessions that had been granted by the Ottomans. A dispute regarding the status of the territories was settled by an Arbitrator appointed by the Council of the League of Nations. *It was decided that Palestine and Transjordan were newly created states according to the terms of the applicable post-war treaties.*
> 
> State of Palestine - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia​


*(COMMENT)*

The Lausanne Treaty does not mention Palestine or Trans-Jordan by name.  It is assumed that it is included in the Article 3 description:
From the Mediterranean to the frontier of Persia, the frontier of Turkey is laid down as follows:   With Syria:  The frontier described in Article 8 of the Franco-Turkish Agreement of the 20th October, 1921.

Which Treaty are you talking about that decides by name that "Palestine and Trans-Jordan" were newly created states.  While it is true that the Treaty of Sevres does make reference to "Palestine" --- it does not mention Trans-Jordan.  The Treaty of Sevres was superseded by the Treaty of Lausanne. 

To my knowledge, there is no Treaty between Turkey and the Palestinians transferring and territory to them or creating a new State. 

I would be ever so grateful if your were to identify that treaty.

Most Respectfully,
R


----------



## RoccoR (Sep 8, 2015)

P F Tinmore,  et al,

I don't think the High Commissioner was subject to your simplified questions.



P F Tinmore said:


> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> > P_F Tinmore,  et al,
> ...


*(COMMENT)*

Your mistake is in your interpretation of "military Control."  The Civil Administration was under the control of the High Commissioner; not the military commander.

*The Political History of Palestine under*
*British Administration*​
1. The territory now known as Palestine formed part of the Ottoman empire until it was occupied, in 1917-19, by British forces under the command of General Allenby. A military administration, under the title of Occupied Enemy Territory Administration, was established with headquarters in Jerusalem at the end of 1917.

2. It was decided at the Paris Peace Conference in 1919 that the mandates system, outlined in article 22 of the covenant of the League of Nations should be applied to the non-Turkish portions of the Ottoman Empire. The Mandate for Palestine was assigned to the United Kingdom by the Supreme Council of the Allied Powers at San Reno on the 25th April, 1920. Shortly afterwards, on the 1st July, 1920, the military regime was replaced by a civil administration under a High Commission. The northern frontier of Palestine was determined in accordance with an Anglo-French Convention of the 23rd December, 1920, and its eastern frontier by virtue of the recognition, in 1923, of the existence of an independent Government in Transjordan.​
From 1 July 1920 to the termination of the Mandate, the territory was under "civil" administration and not military control or occupation.

Most Respectfully,
R


----------



## RoccoR (Sep 8, 2015)

P F Tinmore,  et al,

Again, I think you misunderstand.



P F Tinmore said:


> Phoenall said:
> 
> 
> > P F Tinmore said:
> ...


*(COMMENT)*

The Covenant makes no specific reference, promise or obligation to the regional inhabitance that would come to be known later as Arab Palestinians.  The Covenant refers to "Certain communities formerly belonging to the Turkish Empire."  What constituted the territory of Palestine in 1919, had not been decided yet.  The "certain communities" may or may not have included Palestine, within such boundaries as may have been determined later by the Principal Allied Powers.

The obligations of the Mandatory, written by the same authors as wrote the Covenant, were articulated in the Mandate issued by the Allied Powers.


The principal obligations of the mandatory Power are defined in Article 2 of the Mandate.  This Article appears to give equal weight to three obligations: 

(i) the creation of conditions which would secure the establishment of the Jewish national home; 

(ii) the creation of conditions which would secure the development of self-governing institutions; and 

(iii) the safeguarding of the civil and religious rights of all the inhabitants.​

Most Respectfully,
R


----------



## P F Tinmore (Sep 8, 2015)

RoccoR said:


> P F Tinmore,  et al,
> 
> Well, your interpretation is completely wrong.
> 
> ...


The Lausanne Treaty does not mention Palestine or Trans-Jordan by name.​
Indeed, it does mention successor states without mentioning any of them by name. If it mentioned all of them except for Palestine you may have a point.

You are grasping at straws and going deep into Israeli propaganda territory.


----------



## RoccoR (Sep 8, 2015)

P F Tinmore,  et al,

Does "Treaty of Lausanne" really it says:  "successor states" ???  I believe it says:  "the State to which such territory is transferred."



P F Tinmore said:


> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> > P F Tinmore,  et al,
> ...


*(COMMENT)*

The _de facto_ government for the territory subject to the Mandate of Palestine was the Mandatory; as directed by the Allied Powers.

Most Respectfully,
R


----------



## P F Tinmore (Sep 8, 2015)

RoccoR said:


> P F Tinmore,  et al,
> 
> Again, I think you misunderstand.
> 
> ...


What does that have to do with Britain maintaining a military presence for basically a civilian mandate?


----------



## RoccoR (Sep 8, 2015)

P F Tinmore,  et al,

Occupation is defined by the Hague Convention.



P F Tinmore said:


> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> > P F Tinmore,  et al,
> ...


*(COMMENT)*

The Allied Powers THEN (just the same as now) have a military presence in many theaters and countries around the world.  It doesn't mean that the presences constitutes an "Occupation Force."

The military presence is to lend what support is necessary for the maintenance of law and order for the Civil Administration, and a defensive deterrent.

Most Respectfully,
R


----------



## P F Tinmore (Sep 8, 2015)

RoccoR said:


> P F Tinmore,  et al,
> 
> Occupation is defined by the Hague Convention.
> 
> ...


Are you saying that the Palestinians did not already have local governments with police departments that were, more or less, sufficient for their needs?

Palestine was an A mandate it was already a functioning country. They needed some assistance, that the mandate was to provide, to set up a national government.

After 30 years Britain had still not established a functioning government.


----------



## Phoenall (Sep 9, 2015)

P F Tinmore said:


> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> > P F Tinmore,  et al,
> ...






 And in every account the successor states where France, Britain and Russia for the most part. With Saudi, Egypt and Lebanon bringing up the rear.

 It is you clutching at straws because the evidence is destroying you POV and undermining your stance


----------



## Phoenall (Sep 9, 2015)

P F Tinmore said:


> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> > P F Tinmore,  et al,
> ...






 Where does it say that it was  "basically a civilian mandate" then.  Time to produce the evidence from the LoN mandate or UN to show this. The mandate explicitly states that Britain would be a MILITARY PRESENSE in Palestine and not a civilian one.  As this from the mandate shows



*ARTICLE 1.*
The Mandatory shall have full powers of legislation and of administration, save as they may be limited by the terms of this mandate.

*ART. 2.*
The Mandatory shall be responsible for placing the country under such political, administrative and economic conditions as will secure the establishment of the Jewish national home, as laid down in the preamble, and the development of self-governing institutions, and also for safeguarding the civil and religious rights of all the inhabitants of Palestine, irrespective of race and religion.

*ART. 15.*
The Mandatory shall see that complete freedom of conscience and the free exercise of all forms of worship, subject only to the maintenance of public order and morals, are ensured to all. No discrimination of any kind shall be made between the inhabitants of Palestine on the ground of race, religion or language. No person shall be excluded from Palestine on the sole ground of his religious belief.

The right of each community to maintain its own schools for the education of its own members in its own language, while conforming to such educational requirements of a general nature as the Administration may impose, shall not be denied or impaired.

*ART. 17.*
The Administration of Palestine may organist on a voluntary basis the forces necessary for the preservation of peace and order, and also for the defence of the country, subject, however, to the supervision of the Mandatory, but shall not use them for purposes other than those above specified save with the consent of the Mandatory. Except for such purposes, no military, naval or air forces shall be raised or maintained by the Administration of Palestine.

Nothing in this article shall preclude the Administration of Palestine from contributing to the cost of the maintenance of the forces of the Mandatory in Palestine.

*The Mandatory shall be entitled at all times to use the roads, railways and ports of Palestine for the movement of armed forces* and the carriage of fuel and supplies


----------



## Phoenall (Sep 9, 2015)

P F Tinmore said:


> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> > P F Tinmore,  et al,
> ...






How about a official declaration then from the LoN saying that Palestine was an A mandate.

 It was not the mandatories job to set up a government but the inhabitants, and it was the Jewish inhabitants that took the first step in may 1948.

 Why do you try and alter what the mandate says when it is in the Jews favour


----------



## Rehmani (Sep 9, 2015)

Phoenall said:


> Rehmani said:
> 
> 
> > Humanity said:
> ...


Definitely it is your job not to accept the facts.


----------



## Rehmani (Sep 9, 2015)

Humanity said:


> Rehmani said:
> 
> 
> > Humanity said:
> ...


_Israel is created at the expense of others and they used others shoulders too._


----------



## RoccoR (Sep 9, 2015)

P F Tinmore,  et al,

What was to be defined as Palestine, was not self-governing --- able to stand alone.  It was not necessarily an Article 22 "Certain Communities."  



P F Tinmore said:


> Are you saying that the Palestinians did not already have local governments with police departments that were, more or less, sufficient for their needs?
> 
> Palestine was an A mandate it was already a functioning country. They needed some assistance, that the mandate was to provide, to set up a national government.


*(COMMENT)*

To some extent, this was true.  The Arabs did participate in some government functions.  But the management of government and the infrastructure development were not driven or maintained by the Arabs.  It was the Ottoman Empire that formed the backbone of the government --- developed and maintained the the essential government policies and procedures, and extended the rule of law scheme that connected national laws with local authority requirements.  Jerusalem, somewhat special, received its financial and administrative support and guidance from the capital in Constantinople.  

We normally say that the territory of Palestine, to which the mandate applied, was govern under the Administrative Division of the Ottoman Vilayet of Syria from Damascus.  That is because the what we call Trans-Jordan comprised three-quarters of the Mandate territory. Saying the Vilayet of Syria was close enough given the order in which the surrender of Ottoman garrisons _(Hejaz, Assir, Yemen, Syria, and Mesopotamia)_ occurred in October 1918 _(Mudros Armistice)_; indeed the Treaty of Lausanne referred to it all as Syria.  But to be more accurate, in 1918, the territories of Israel, the West Bank and Gaza Strip _(everything from the Jordan River, west to the Mediterranean Sea)_ was actually govern either under the Vilayet of Beirut _(including the Sanjuk of Acre and Sanjuk Balqa)_ --- or --- by the Independent Sanjuk of Jerusalem _(which would have encompassed the West Bank and Gaza Strip)_. 

While Arabs worked inside the government as civil servants, the principle executive decisions were beyond local government and the hand of local Arabs.



P F Tinmore said:


> After 30 years Britain had still not established a functioning government.


*(COMMENT)*

And even today, the pro-Palestinians and the Islamic Resistance still blame the Mandatory (UK) for the lack in establishing self-government.  But that is just the childish notion that "everything wrong is someone else's fault _(the perpetual victim)_.  However, the Arab Palestinians and the Arab League were just as much at fault for any failures (if not more) than were any missteps by the Mandatory were to account.

*The Political History of Palestine under British Administration*
A/AC.14/8   2 October 1947

Later in 1923, a third attempt was made to establish an institution through which the Arab population of Palestine could be brought into cooperation with the government. The mandatory Power now proposed “the establishment of an Arab Agency in Palestine which will occupy a position exactly analogous to that accorded to the Jewish Agency”. The Arab Agency would have the right to be consulted on all matters relating to immigration, on which it was recognised that “the views of the Arab community were entitled to special consideration”. The Arab leaders declined that this offer on the ground that it would not satisfy the aspirations of the Arab people. They added that, never having recognised the status of the Jewish Agency, they had no desire for the establishment of an Arab Agency on the same basis.

“The British Government desired to establish a self-government in Palestine, but to proceed in this direction by stages…. It had been announced that the nominated Advisory Council was to be the first stage. The second stage would have been a Legislative Council without an Arab majority. If this worked satisfactorily, the third stage, after a lapse of perhaps same years, would have been a constitution on more democratic lines.”​In practice it proved impossible even to initiate this policy of gradual constitutional development. From 1922 until the present day, the High Commissioner has governed Palestine with the aid of Councils consisting exclusively of British officials.​
Even in the very early years of the Mandate Period, there were emerging powerful Arab interests, internal and external to Palestine, defying any attempt for the Mandate to be successful in accomplishing the San Remo intent or honor the Faisal-Weizmann Agreement pertaining to "the consummation of their national aspirations."

Most Respectfully,
R


----------



## Phoenall (Sep 9, 2015)

Rehmani said:


> Phoenall said:
> 
> 
> > Rehmani said:
> ...





 What facts as Palestine did not become a nation until 1988 and then in name only.   Now that is a fact

 The Jewish national home became a nation in 1948 based on international law of 1923. that is another fact

 The arab muslims were given the chance of colonising Palestine in the early 1800's not once but 3 times. And each time they left and went back to their own countries.   yet another fact

The European Jews were offered the same deal in around 1850 and took it making the desert bloom   And yet another fact.

See I accept facts that are provable beyond reasonable doubt, I don't accept islamonazi lies that have no covenance


----------



## Humanity (Sep 9, 2015)

Rehmani said:


> Humanity said:
> 
> 
> > Rehmani said:
> ...



Israel was created at the expense of many.... And continues, at the expense of many....

But that is a very different issue to whether Jews should have a 'homeland' or not....

Hence, I do not support Israel or the Israeli government!


----------



## Phoenall (Sep 9, 2015)

Rehmani said:


> Humanity said:
> 
> 
> > Rehmani said:
> ...








 Who's expense as no one paid any price to Israel for the declaration of independence. The arab muslims paid a heavy price to the arab league that illegally invaded and tried to wipe out the Jews and destroy Israel


----------



## Phoenall (Sep 9, 2015)

Humanity said:


> Rehmani said:
> 
> 
> > Humanity said:
> ...







 Only if you subscribe to islamonazi propaganda and lies. The expense was created by the arab league when they illegally invaded Palestine with the intentions of wiping out the Jews and destroying Israel.
 If you do not support Israel or its government then you cant support the Jews having a homeland as that mean an Israeli bation with an Israeli government.

 It was only a matter of time before you made the disclosure once and for all that you are just an islamonazi Jew hater


----------



## Humanity (Sep 9, 2015)

Phoenall said:


> Humanity said:
> 
> 
> > Rehmani said:
> ...



Yes, well your brainwashed zionut mentality is clear for all to see Phoney...

You simply cannot differentiate between, people and politics can you!

What a moronic schmuck!


----------



## Billo_Really (Sep 9, 2015)

Humanity said:


> Yes, well your brainwashed zionut mentality is clear for all to see Phoney...
> 
> You simply cannot differentiate between, people and politics can you!
> 
> What a moronic schmuck!


He's just a 15 year old kid.

Like that bumper sticker...

*"I wish I had all of life's problems when I 
was a teenager and knew everything!"*​


----------



## Phoenall (Sep 9, 2015)

Humanity said:


> Phoenall said:
> 
> 
> > Humanity said:
> ...






 It is yiou that cant differentiate as Israel is the people not the government, unless you want to run with your claim that the government are the people and so all Israelis are responsible for the deaths in gaza and so they are all war criminals.


----------



## Phoenall (Sep 9, 2015)

Billo_Really said:


> Humanity said:
> 
> 
> > Yes, well your brainwashed zionut mentality is clear for all to see Phoney...
> ...





 Puts me 5 years ahead of you then doesn't it........................................................


----------



## Billo_Really (Sep 9, 2015)

rylah said:


> 1. A simple question, yet so much air and no answer.


Oh, I answered.  You just didn't like it.




rylah said:


> Non Jews in Israel have full citizenship, what stops those 'indigenous'
> to determine themselves? Who are they? How did they end up in Palestine and dd thy have any distinct palestinian culture and religion?


Non-Jewish Israeli's are treated like 2nd class citizens.

I was referring to the indigenous people living in the West Bank.




rylah said:


> 2.This elections between the two gangs started with violence, continues with it and is the reason why they didn't have elections since.


Except for the fact that they stopped their violence long enough to create a unity government, but Israel attacked Gaza in order to break up that government.  Israel doesn't want Fatah and Hamas to settle their differences and become a political movement.




rylah said:


> 3.This is the the exact argument used by terrorists to justify murders of civilians in clubs,hospitals, buses and so on... You're a sheeple thinking You have rights and control over Your govt.


I didn't say "rights and control", I said you are "responsible".

Do you call yourself a democracy?  Do you vote for your elected leaders? Do those leaders do things in your name?  Then you are responsible.

Stop electing fascists and megalomaniacs like Netanfuckyou.




rylah said:


> 4. the naked king here is You, after stating that You care not for Israel or the balestinians You still spit all the hatred and blood libels based on Your hurt ego some thousand miles away having no clue about the ME.
> Cursing all the time is a sign of weakness and stress, Do You have any reason to take this conflict pesonally?


No.  Not at all.  And since I could care less, why would it hurt my ego?

BTW, in regards to the profanity, that's just the way I talk.


----------



## Humanity (Sep 9, 2015)

Phoenall said:


> Humanity said:
> 
> 
> > Phoenall said:
> ...



No Phoney...

Israel is a country!

Jeez and they still pay you for posts like that?

They will be after their money back! 

Such an idiot Phoney!


----------



## Billo_Really (Sep 9, 2015)

Phoenall said:


> Puts me 5 years ahead of you then doesn't it........................................................


Okay, so you're also bad at math.


----------



## Phoenall (Sep 9, 2015)

Billo_Really said:


> rylah said:
> 
> 
> > 1. A simple question, yet so much air and no answer.
> ...





No you did not answer it, you just wrote garbage

Would that be the indigenous Jews as well that were forcibly evicted and all their property stolen by the Palestinians in 1949 ?

 When was this as since 2007 there has been no unity government as one side or the other finds a way to stop the talks.

 So all palestinians are responsible for the terrorist attacks on Israel, meaning that they are all valid military targets. So we wont hear your whinging about farmers and fishermen getting fired on anymore will we. Guess you just shot yourself in the foot again ! ! ! !



 Like the trailer park trash you are


----------



## Phoenall (Sep 9, 2015)

Humanity said:


> Phoenall said:
> 
> 
> > Humanity said:
> ...





 Not as much an idiot as you who has just admitted that you are a Jew hater.
 Yes Israel is a country and you admit to hating it as a country, which means that you also hate all the people who live there.
 Now I don't hate any muslim country, just the extremists that live there and cause untold suffering for every one else. So what does this make me ?


----------



## Phoenall (Sep 9, 2015)

Billo_Really said:


> Phoenall said:
> 
> 
> > Puts me 5 years ahead of you then doesn't it........................................................
> ...





 No it means you post like a 10 year old


----------



## Humanity (Sep 9, 2015)

Phoenall said:


> Humanity said:
> 
> 
> > Phoenall said:
> ...



Unfortunately it is YOU who is the extremist Phoney... An immature, uneducated juvenile extremist...

If you are unable to differentiate between a country and a people then you are not capable of holding an adult debate....

Just how old are you Phoney?

Not old enough to be commenting on grown up conversations!

Perhaps this is more to your intellectual capacity...


----------



## RoccoR (Sep 9, 2015)

Humanity,  et al,

*(SLIGHTLY OFF TOPIC)*

Teach me about this!



Humanity said:


> If you are unable to differentiate between a country and a people then you are not capable of holding an adult debate....
> 
> Just how old are you Phoney?
> 
> ...


*(QUESTION)*

Can a country exist without a people to establish either the distinct political entity; or people relative to a particular political geography???

When you say "country" are you not "denoting groupings of people or objects?"

I don't know.  Maybe you could shed some light on this question and give me an example of a country that does not imply "independent or differently associated peoples with distinct political characteristics."

Most Respectfully,
R

*(PONDERING)*


A *country* is a region that is identified as a distinct entity in political geography. A country may be an independent sovereign state or one that is occupied by another state, as a non-sovereign or formerly sovereign political division, or a geographic region associated with sets of previously independent or differently associated peoples with distinct political characteristics.​
*•  POLITICAL ENTITY*

*Dictionary entry overview: What does political entity mean?*
The noun *POLITICAL ENTITY* has 1 sense:
*1.* a unit with political responsibilities
_Familiarity information: *POLITICAL ENTITY* used as a noun is very rare._​*Meaning:*
A unit with political responsibilities​*Classified under:*
Nouns denoting groupings of people or objects​*Synonyms:*
political entity; political unit​*Hypernyms ("political entity" is a kind of...):*
social unit; unit (an organization regarded as part of a larger social group)​*Hyponyms (each of the following is a kind of "political entity"):*
body politic; commonwealth; country; land; nation; res publica; state (a politically organized body of people under a single government)

revolutionary group (a political unit organized to promote revolution)

lunatic fringe (a political unit with extreme and fanatical views)

amphictyony (an association of neighboring states or tribes in ancient Greece; established originally to defend a common religious center)

cadre; cell (a small unit serving as part of or as the nucleus of a larger political movement)

Palestine Authority; Palestine National Authority; Palestinian National Authority(combines the Gaza Strip and the West Bank under a political unit with limited autonomy and a police force; created in 1993 by an agreement between Israel and the PLO)

union (a political unit formed from previously independent people or organizations)

Holy Roman Empire (a political entity in Europe that began with the papal coronation of Otto I as the first emperor in 962 and lasted until 1806 when it was dissolved by Napoleon)

•  lobby; pressure group; third house (a group of people who try actively to influence legislation)​*Holonyms ("political entity" is a member of...):*
•  form of government; political system (the members of a social organization who are in power)​


----------



## rylah (Sep 9, 2015)

Billo_Really said:


> rylah said:
> 
> 
> > 1. A simple question, yet so much air and no answer.
> ...



1. You still fail to answer. Stating that the question is 'dumbass' 
doesn't make it irrelevant, especially since You brought the matter first.

2. Hamas and Fatah will never unite because the they'll actually have to take responsibility for their crimes against balestinians. It's much more natural for them to filling their pockets with aid money and blame the jooooooz. Don't shoot rockets into Israel to justify your dictatorship in Gaza, don't kidnap and kill children- the balestinians won't suffer.

3. How can You be responsible for something You don't have control over?  I don't call myself 'democracy' and speak only for myself, I don't vote,didn't serve either, no-one does things in my name except those who work for me.

On the other hand- You fail to take responsibility for your actions,word and blood libels against Israelis, Balestinians and Americans.

4. You could care less?? Wouldn't be wasting your time here..might save some lives actually...


----------



## Phoenall (Sep 10, 2015)

Humanity said:


> Phoenall said:
> 
> 
> > Humanity said:
> ...







 As I said it is you with that mentality as you said you hate Israel meaning that you admit to being a RACIST ISLAMONAZI JEW HATING POS. And now you are trying to deflect away from your slip up and put the blame elsewhere.


----------



## theliq (Sep 10, 2015)

Phoenall said:


> Billo_Really said:
> 
> 
> > rylah said:
> ...


You are just NASTY Pheo...........leave the abusing to me Dickhead,you just are no good at it at all....Call Me SIR..LOL


----------



## Phoenall (Sep 10, 2015)

theliq said:


> Phoenall said:
> 
> 
> > Billo_Really said:
> ...






 I prefer to call you what you are shite


----------



## theliq (Sep 10, 2015)

Phoenall said:


> theliq said:
> 
> 
> > Phoenall said:
> ...


As I said you are just NASTY......shite is not abuse Dickhead.............Now Kneel and call ME SIR......LOL


----------



## theliq (Sep 10, 2015)

RoccoR said:


> Humanity,  et al,
> 
> *(SLIGHTLY OFF TOPIC)*
> 
> ...


So Rocco,Israel has a Lunatic Fringe...even against its own country men and women..so what would a Country like that be called ??????? steve


----------



## Phoenall (Sep 10, 2015)

theliq said:


> Phoenall said:
> 
> 
> > theliq said:
> ...






 I am your superior in every way shite so prostrate yourself and be humbled in my presence. For the record dildo is trailer park trash descended from many trailer park scum, what we in the UK call Irish travellers


----------



## Phoenall (Sep 10, 2015)

theliq said:


> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> > Humanity,  et al,
> ...







 The same as all the other countries with a lunatic fringe of course. What do you call Australia with its lunatic fringe, or Iraq, Iran, Egypt, Brazil et al


----------



## theliq (Sep 10, 2015)

Phoenall said:


> theliq said:
> 
> 
> > Phoenall said:
> ...


I thought it was Tinkers.........Pheo Time to take that Silver Spoon Out of Your Arse,and Shove IT IN YOUR ABUSIVE MOUTH.......Now Address me as your King,King of Kings..............get up off the floor and stand like a Man for a change before me


----------



## theliq (Sep 10, 2015)

Phoenall said:


> theliq said:
> 
> 
> > RoccoR said:
> ...


Off Topic Yet Again...we are talking Israel....The Original and Worst Loony Fringe.....THE ZIONISTS........but then you ain't Jewish.so that makes you an IDIOT-ZIONISTA.......LOL


----------



## Billo_Really (Sep 10, 2015)

rylah said:


> 1. You still fail to answer. Stating that the question is 'dumbass'
> doesn't make it irrelevant, especially since You brought the matter first.


It just makes it dumb.



rylah said:


> 2. Hamas and Fatah will never unite because the they'll actually have to take responsibility for their crimes against balestinians. It's much more natural for them to filling their pockets with aid money and blame the jooooooz. Don't shoot rockets into Israel to justify your dictatorship in Gaza, don't kidnap and kill children- the balestinians won't suffer.


They did unite.  Israel attacked to break it up.

Don't want rockets?  End the occupation.



rylah said:


> 3. How can You be responsible for something You don't have control over?  I don't call myself 'democracy' and speak only for myself, I don't vote,didn't serve either, no-one does things in my name except those who work for me.


You're responsible for your government.  The fact that you don't vote, just says you're a shitty citizen.



rylah said:


> On the other hand- You fail to take responsibility for your actions,word and blood libels against Israelis, Balestinians and Americans.


I take responsibility for everything I say.  You obviously, feel differently.



rylah said:


> 4. You could care less?? Wouldn't be wasting your time here..might save some lives actually...


I'm not wasting my time.  This is what I do for kicks.  I enjoy getting in the face of some hypocritical Israeli kiss-ass.  It's my Disneyland!


----------



## rylah (Sep 10, 2015)

Billo_Really said:


> rylah said:
> 
> 
> > 1. You still fail to answer. Stating that the question is 'dumbass'
> ...



I get it it's all about You

So in conclusion:
-Failed to point at indigenous people of Palestine and their origin.
-Doesn't give a rat's ass about either Palestinians or Israeli's
-Drudges questions on topic to spread unrelated filth and blood lbels.

Isn't that a definition of a troll?


----------



## Phoenall (Sep 10, 2015)

theliq said:


> Phoenall said:
> 
> 
> > theliq said:
> ...






 Nope you are wrong again as Tinkers went from town to town mending and sharpening. Irish travellers are failed Aussies that lie, steal and destroy and then run back to their mansions when the heat gets too much.

Time for you to know who is the boss, so grovel like the worthless POS that you are


----------



## Phoenall (Sep 10, 2015)

Phoenall said:


> theliq said:
> 
> 
> > Phoenall said:
> ...





theliq said:


> Phoenall said:
> 
> 
> > theliq said:
> ...






 Nope on topic it is you and your islamonazi Jew hatred that is the epitome of the lunatic fringe.

 You have been told about using Zionist as a racist term so be warned


----------



## RoccoR (Sep 10, 2015)

theliq, et al,

Yes, a uninteresting question!



theliq said:


> So Rocco,Israel has a Lunatic Fringe...even against its own country men and women..so what would a Country like that be called ??????? steve


*(ANSWER)*

Well, if you are just describing the population and its varying characteristics, then you would say it is a "politically diverse" population; or ethnically or racially diverse; exposing the predominate characteristic(s) that make them different.  It may even be described _(sometimes)_ as multicultural; depending on the nature of the delineation in the differences.Whether the difference makes them confrontational is a separate distinguishing factor.

This is opposed to a "homogeneous population" when there is no auxiliary or specific data or description that can be used to distinguish between different population constituents; or _(sometimes more importantly)_ there is no auxiliary or specific data that the constituents themselves used as a differentiator.

The country is called by its generally accepted name that applies to a specific geopolitical territory.  The distinction of the country is based on the emphasis being presented.
•  Example
If you want to emphasize the religious aspect, you could describe Afghanistan and Iran as Islamic Republics. If you want a differentiator between the two Republics:
∆∆  Than you could say that Afghanistan is:

80% Sunni
20% Shi'ite​∆∆  Then you could say that Iran is:

10% Sunni
80% Shi'ite​
"So, what would a Country like that be called?"  Well it could be called "Islamic."  But that would be valid only for a set of discrete discriminator similar to what I set-out here.

*(COMMENT)*

Some believe that in the Region of the Middle East, Persian Gulf, and Near East Asia, the most deadly of confrontations is the conflict between the Sunni and Shi'ite factions of Islam.  This is a conflict that is --- as you say --- "even against its own country men and women."

BUT, what is more important to understand is that there are very few and very small place where the population is homogeneous and totally harmonious.  (It is the nature of the species to advance conflict.)

Most Respectfully,
R


----------



## Phoenall (Sep 10, 2015)

Billo_Really said:


> rylah said:
> 
> 
> > 1. You still fail to answer. Stating that the question is 'dumbass'
> ...






 Nope it makes you dumb

 When did the unite then, as even they say they cant be in the same room.

 Don't want the occupation or blockade stop the rockets and terrorism it is that easy to do.


----------



## Phoenall (Sep 10, 2015)

rylah said:


> Billo_Really said:
> 
> 
> > rylah said:
> ...






 Yep that is dildo to a "T"


----------



## Humanity (Sep 10, 2015)

Phoenall said:


> theliq said:
> 
> 
> > Phoenall said:
> ...



Nasty, racist little prick!

YOU may call them Irish travelers... The educated, non racist people in the UK do not!


----------



## Humanity (Sep 10, 2015)

Phoenall said:


> Billo_Really said:
> 
> 
> > rylah said:
> ...


----------



## AyeCantSeeYou (Sep 10, 2015)

Thread has run its course and is closed.

If you all would like to call each other names while kicking each others legs under the table, take it to the basement.


----------

