Do Palestinians Have the Right to Defend Themselves?

[RoccoR]

P F Tinmore, et al,

There is a difference between Occupied Territory and Sovereign Territory.

P F Tinmore, et al,

Yes --- a good question.

Post #337

The question was in my post 343.

I've answered that question before. Acquiring territory has nothing to do with declaring independence and practising self - determination. I never once read that Israel had to have acquired territory to declare independence. .Have you ?

Sure.

ARTICLE 1

The state as a person of international law should possess the following qualifications: a ) a permanent population; b ) a defined territory; c ) government; and d) capacity to enter into relations with the other states.

The Avalon Project Convention on Rights and Duties of States inter-American December 26 1933​

Where is Israel's defined territory?

(COMMENT)

What is "defined territory;" it is undefined. It is given to be the territory that a nation has sovereign control over. Israel has has had, and continues to have, sovereign control over its established perimeter.

Most Respectfully,
R

That is only half true. A nation can also have control over occupied territory.

The answers to my questions will clarify that.

(COMMENT)

You are still wrong. There is a difference between sovereign control and effective control.

Most Respectfully,
R

 

[P F Tinmore]

P F Tinmore, et al,

There is a difference between Occupied Territory and Sovereign Territory.

P F Tinmore, et al,

Yes --- a good question.

The question was in my post 343.

I've answered that question before. Acquiring territory has nothing to do with declaring independence and practising self - determination. I never once read that Israel had to have acquired territory to declare independence. .Have you ?

Sure.

ARTICLE 1

The state as a person of international law should possess the following qualifications: a ) a permanent population; b ) a defined territory; c ) government; and d) capacity to enter into relations with the other states.

The Avalon Project Convention on Rights and Duties of States inter-American December 26 1933​

Where is Israel's defined territory?

(COMMENT)

What is "defined territory;" it is undefined. It is given to be the territory that a nation has sovereign control over. Israel has has had, and continues to have, sovereign control over its established perimeter.

Most Respectfully,
R

That is only half true. A nation can also have control over occupied territory.

The answers to my questions will clarify that.

(COMMENT)

You are still wrong. There is a difference between sovereign control and effective control.

Most Respectfully,
R

Isn't sovereign control over territory that is yours and effective control over territory that is not?

 

[RoccoR]

P F Tinmore, et al,

You get half credit.

How does that answer my question ?? You said Israel needed to have acquired territory. Where in the link that you posted say anything about acquiring territory ??

Do Palestinians Have the Right to Defend Themselves Page 35 US Message Board - Political Discussion Forum

Do try to keep up.

Man , you are beyond confused. I know what you posted, why are you giving me a link to that post again ??

Now, you said Israel needed to have acquired territory in order to declare independence. I asked you where is it you read about this 'acquiring territory' crap ?
You responded by posting a link that does not back up your claim

A state should have a defined territory.

Where is Israel's defined territory?

When did it legally acquire that territory?

I can't make it any simpler than that.

Now you're deflecting. You're asking the wrong questions. Acquiring territory has nothing to do with ANYTHING. It is simply a Tinmore pre requisite.
You keep avoiding my question: Where did you read that Israel needed to have acquired territory to legally declare independence ??

If you want to see Israels territory, look at a map.

Armistice lines are not borders. They do not define anything.

(COMMENT)

You are correct in that an Armistice Line is note a border. It is an International Demarcation Line.

A/RES/25/2625 Declaration on Principles of International Law concerning Friendly Relations and Co-operation among States

• 
  The principle that States 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

Every State likewise has the duty to refrain from the threat or use of force to violate international lines of demarcation, such as armistice lines, established by or pursuant to an international agreement to which it is a party or which it is otherwise bound to respect. Nothing in the foregoing shall be construed as prejudicing the positions of the parties concerned with regard to the status and effects of such lines under their special regimes or as affecting their temporary character.​

Most Respectfully,
R

 

[toastman]

P F Tinmore, et al,

There is a difference between Occupied Territory and Sovereign Territory.

P F Tinmore, et al,

Yes --- a good question.

I've answered that question before. Acquiring territory has nothing to do with declaring independence and practising self - determination. I never once read that Israel had to have acquired territory to declare independence. .Have you ?

Sure.

ARTICLE 1

The state as a person of international law should possess the following qualifications: a ) a permanent population; b ) a defined territory; c ) government; and d) capacity to enter into relations with the other states.

The Avalon Project Convention on Rights and Duties of States inter-American December 26 1933​

Where is Israel's defined territory?

(COMMENT)

What is "defined territory;" it is undefined. It is given to be the territory that a nation has sovereign control over. Israel has has had, and continues to have, sovereign control over its established perimeter.

Most Respectfully,
R

That is only half true. A nation can also have control over occupied territory.

The answers to my questions will clarify that.

(COMMENT)

You are still wrong. There is a difference between sovereign control and effective control.

Most Respectfully,
R

Isn't sovereign control over territory that is yours and effective control over territory that is not?

Good question, I would like to know the answer as well...

 

[Roudy]

montelatici, et al,

Absolutely --- montelatici is correct. All refugees in the world are cared for by one agency UNHRC except Palestinians. While the UNHCR has found solutions for many many refugees, the UNRWA is a failed agency and has not found a solution for a single Palestinian that claims refugee status under CERI, but would not otherwise be considered a refugee. Advisory Commission was created by UN Resolution 302 (IV) on 8 December 1949, has not shown a single solution, and the United Nations Conciliation Commission for Palestine has also failed in this regard. Despite the lack of progress, the commission still exists and the General Assembly still continues to pass annual resolutions calling on it to continue its efforts to carry out its original mandate.

This is a Palestinian Slight of hand. Under this regime, not only will the UNRWA not place a single refugee, but it will be the only refugee program which generates more refugees.

Firstly, you are attempting to use 1951 Refugee Convention Article 3C (which indicates that a refugee accepting refugee status loses refugee status).

Palestinian refugees were specifically excluded from the 1951 Refugee Convention in Article 1D, wherein:

“This Convention shall not apply to persons who are at present receiving from organs or agencies of the United Nations other than the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees protection or assistance. When such protection or assistance has ceased for any reason, without the position of such persons being definitively settled in accordance with the relevant resolutions adopted by the General Assembly of the United Nations, these persons shall ipso facto be entitled to the benefits of this convention.”

Of course, the Palestinian refugees were and are still receiving "protection/assistance" from the
United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees (UNRWA) at the time. UNRWA was established to comply with UN Resolution 194 which states:

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

Instructs the Conciliation Commission to facilitate the repatriation, resettlement and economic and social rehabilitation of the refugees and the payment of compensation, and to maintain close relations with the Director of the United Nations Relief for Palestine Refugees and, through him, with the appropriate organs and agencies of the United Nations;"

It is UNRWA that dictates the refugee status of the Palestinians and it includes all those refugees that wish to return to their homes and/or want to be compensated, per the resolution. UNRWA's charter assigns refugee status to the actual refugees and male descendants (and their dependents).

It always amazes me how the Zionist propaganda machine is able to fool even a relatively well informed person like Rocco.

(COMMENT)

The UNRWA is established pursuant to General Assembly 302 (IV), a resolution that does not supersede international law. No organization established on a temporary basis is going to be funded forever. Once the funding is withdrawn, the UNRWA simply melts away. It was originally suppose to terminated not later than 31 December 1950.

The Convention is superior to the CERI (UNRWA Consolidated and Eligibility Registration Instructions). CERI is a UNRWA specific instruction, it is not a law, intended to facilitate the Agency’s operations.

The UNRWA has no official Charter only continuing resolutions. It has self-generated instructions CERI. But no universal law behind it. And while the UNHCR has found durable solutions for more that 3 million real refugees --- the UNRWA has found zero. Eventually, the funding will stop for the UNRWA. And since its numbers never go down, but always up --- eventually someone will notice.

Most Respectfully,
R

The UN has passed several resolution attempting to address the refugee problem.

Which was caused by Arab aggression.

 

[P F Tinmore]

Do Palestinians Have the Right to Defend Themselves Page 35 US Message Board - Political Discussion Forum

Do try to keep up.

Man , you are beyond confused. I know what you posted, why are you giving me a link to that post again ??

Now, you said Israel needed to have acquired territory in order to declare independence. I asked you where is it you read about this 'acquiring territory' crap ?
You responded by posting a link that does not back up your claim

A state should have a defined territory.

Where is Israel's defined territory?

When did it legally acquire that territory?

I can't make it any simpler than that.

Now you're deflecting. You're asking the wrong questions. Acquiring territory has nothing to do with ANYTHING. It is simply a Tinmore pre requisite.
You keep avoiding my question: Where did you read that Israel needed to have acquired territory to legally declare independence ??

If you want to see Israels territory, look at a map.

Armistice lines are not borders. They do not define anything.

What do armistice lines have to do with anything ?

All maps define Israeli territory with armistice lines. Armistice lines are specifically not to be political or territorial boundaries.

 

[RoccoR]

P F Tinmore, et al,

Close again.

Isn't sovereign control over territory that is yours and effective control over territory that is not?

(COMMENT)

Sovereign Control has the characteristic that all laws and legislation are domestically derived.

Occupied Territory has the characteristic that it is subject to either International Laws/Conventions or under the law of the occupied territory in force before the occupation began. The Occupying Power does not exercise Legislative Authority to institute laws.

Most Respectfully,
R

 

[P F Tinmore]

P F Tinmore, et al,

Close again.

Isn't sovereign control over territory that is yours and effective control over territory that is not?

(COMMENT)

Sovereign Control has the characteristic that all laws and legislation are domestically derived.

Occupied Territory has the characteristic that it is subject to either International Laws/Conventions or under the law of the occupied territory in force before the occupation began. The Occupying Power does not exercise Legislative Authority to institute laws.

Most Respectfully,
R

I don't see where you post is relevant. An occupying power can do whatever it wants. It has the guns, remember.

 

[toastman]

Man , you are beyond confused. I know what you posted, why are you giving me a link to that post again ??

Now, you said Israel needed to have acquired territory in order to declare independence. I asked you where is it you read about this 'acquiring territory' crap ?
You responded by posting a link that does not back up your claim

A state should have a defined territory.

Where is Israel's defined territory?

When did it legally acquire that territory?

I can't make it any simpler than that.

Now you're deflecting. You're asking the wrong questions. Acquiring territory has nothing to do with ANYTHING. It is simply a Tinmore pre requisite.
You keep avoiding my question: Where did you read that Israel needed to have acquired territory to legally declare independence ??

If you want to see Israels territory, look at a map.

Armistice lines are not borders. They do not define anything.

What do armistice lines have to do with anything ?

All maps define Israeli territory with armistice lines. Armistice lines are specifically not to be political or territorial boundaries.

Which maps are you talking about ? Current maps of Israel show Israel's international borders with Egypt and Jordan, Blue line with Lebanon (2000), Purple line with Syria. (1974)
The latter two are demarcation lines, which are ' temporary geopolitical borders, often agreed upon as part of an armistice or ceasefire'
Demarcation line - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia

But they are NOT the Armistice lines of 1949

 

[toastman]

P F Tinmore, et al,

Close again.

Isn't sovereign control over territory that is yours and effective control over territory that is not?

(COMMENT)

Sovereign Control has the characteristic that all laws and legislation are domestically derived.

Occupied Territory has the characteristic that it is subject to either International Laws/Conventions or under the law of the occupied territory in force before the occupation began. The Occupying Power does not exercise Legislative Authority to institute laws.

Most Respectfully,
R

I don't see where you post is relevant. An occupying power can do whatever it wants. It has the guns, remember.

Not really. There are rules.

 

[RoccoR]

P F Tinmore, et al,

Again, you are almost correct.

Armistice lines are not borders. They do not define anything.

What do armistice lines have to do with anything ?

All maps define Israeli territory with armistice lines. Armistice lines are specifically not to be political or territorial boundaries.[/QUOTE]
(COMMENT)

First, whether or not you have seen Maps with Israel Defensive Control Zone, or Navigational Limits, Border Controls or whatever, they do exist.

Second, there are two logged and registered international peace treaties with Egypt and Jordan that establish International Borders and Boundaries. That is just fact, a matter of record.

Most Respectfully,
R

 

[P F Tinmore]

P F Tinmore, et al,

Again, you are almost correct.

Armistice lines are not borders. They do not define anything.

What do armistice lines have to do with anything ?

All maps define Israeli territory with armistice lines. Armistice lines are specifically not to be political or territorial boundaries.

(COMMENT)

First, whether or not you have seen Maps with Israel Defensive Control Zone, or Navigational Limits, Border Controls or whatever, they do exist.

Second, there are two logged and registered international peace treaties with Egypt and Jordan that establish International Borders and Boundaries. That is just fact, a matter of record.

Most Respectfully,
R[/QUOTE]
And that leads us full circle to the question I had a few pages ago that was ducked.

 

[toastman]

P F Tinmore, et al,

Again, you are almost correct.

Armistice lines are not borders. They do not define anything.

What do armistice lines have to do with anything ?

All maps define Israeli territory with armistice lines. Armistice lines are specifically not to be political or territorial boundaries.

(COMMENT)

First, whether or not you have seen Maps with Israel Defensive Control Zone, or Navigational Limits, Border Controls or whatever, they do exist.

Second, there are two logged and registered international peace treaties with Egypt and Jordan that establish International Borders and Boundaries. That is just fact, a matter of record.

Most Respectfully,
R

And that leads us full circle to the question I had a few pages ago that was ducked.[/QUOTE]
What question? It better not be the 'acquiring territory' one

 

[RoccoR]

P F Tinmore, et al,

If this is the border question, I answered that.

P F Tinmore, et al,

Again, you are almost correct.

Armistice lines are not borders. They do not define anything.

What do armistice lines have to do with anything ?

All maps define Israeli territory with armistice lines. Armistice lines are specifically not to be political or territorial boundaries.

(COMMENT)

First, whether or not you have seen Maps with Israel Defensive Control Zone, or Navigational Limits, Border Controls or whatever, they do exist.

Second, there are two logged and registered international peace treaties with Egypt and Jordan that establish International Borders and Boundaries. That is just fact, a matter of record.

Most Respectfully,
R

And that leads us full circle to the question I had a few pages ago that was ducked.[/QUOTE]
(COMMENT)

Just because you don't want to believe an answer, does not mean it is wrong.

(ANSWERS)

• Where is Israel's defined territory?
  • It is given to be the territory that a nation has sovereign control over. Israel has has had, and continues to have, sovereign control over its established perimeter. Any reasonable map of today will tell you were that is.
• When did it legally acquire that territory?
  • Territory does not have to be "legally acquired." (Where ever did you get that idea?) Israel was declared by right if self-determination, pursuant to the advise and assistance of the UN and the established "Steps Preparatory to Independence." Since that time, the rule body of Israel, like any other country, determines where they establish and control their sovereignty.

Legally has nothing to do with the establishment of sovereignty. You don't think that China is going to give back Tibet or allow Taiwan to go independent. You don't think Russia is going to give back the Crimea. Heavens no... They establish sovereign control and keep it.

Most Respectfully,
R

 

[P F Tinmore]

P F Tinmore, et al,

If this is the border question, I answered that.

P F Tinmore, et al,

Again, you are almost correct.

Armistice lines are not borders. They do not define anything.

What do armistice lines have to do with anything ?

All maps define Israeli territory with armistice lines. Armistice lines are specifically not to be political or territorial boundaries.

(COMMENT)

First, whether or not you have seen Maps with Israel Defensive Control Zone, or Navigational Limits, Border Controls or whatever, they do exist.

Second, there are two logged and registered international peace treaties with Egypt and Jordan that establish International Borders and Boundaries. That is just fact, a matter of record.

Most Respectfully,
R

And that leads us full circle to the question I had a few pages ago that was ducked.

(COMMENT)

Just because you don't want to believe an answer, does not mean it is wrong.

(ANSWERS)

• Where is Israel's defined territory?
  • It is given to be the territory that a nation has sovereign control over. Israel has has had, and continues to have, sovereign control over its established perimeter. Any reasonable map of today will tell you were that is.
• When did it legally acquire that territory?
  • Territory does not have to be "legally acquired." (Where ever did you get that idea?) Israel was declared by right if self-determination, pursuant to the advise and assistance of the UN and the established "Steps Preparatory to Independence." Since that time, the rule body of Israel, like any other country, determines where they establish and control their sovereignty.

Legally has nothing to do with the establishment of sovereignty. You don't think that China is going to give back Tibet or allow Taiwan to go independent. You don't think Russia is going to give back the Crimea. Heavens no... They establish sovereign control and keep it.

Most Respectfully,
R[/QUOTE]
A state should have a defined territory.

Now you are saying that is not necessary. That people can set up shop wherever they want.

 

[toastman]

P F Tinmore, et al,

If this is the border question, I answered that.

P F Tinmore, et al,

Again, you are almost correct.

Armistice lines are not borders. They do not define anything.

What do armistice lines have to do with anything ?

All maps define Israeli territory with armistice lines. Armistice lines are specifically not to be political or territorial boundaries.

(COMMENT)

First, whether or not you have seen Maps with Israel Defensive Control Zone, or Navigational Limits, Border Controls or whatever, they do exist.

Second, there are two logged and registered international peace treaties with Egypt and Jordan that establish International Borders and Boundaries. That is just fact, a matter of record.

Most Respectfully,
R

And that leads us full circle to the question I had a few pages ago that was ducked.

(COMMENT)

Just because you don't want to believe an answer, does not mean it is wrong.

(ANSWERS)

• Where is Israel's defined territory?
  • It is given to be the territory that a nation has sovereign control over. Israel has has had, and continues to have, sovereign control over its established perimeter. Any reasonable map of today will tell you were that is.
• When did it legally acquire that territory?
  • Territory does not have to be "legally acquired." (Where ever did you get that idea?) Israel was declared by right if self-determination, pursuant to the advise and assistance of the UN and the established "Steps Preparatory to Independence." Since that time, the rule body of Israel, like any other country, determines where they establish and control their sovereignty.

Legally has nothing to do with the establishment of sovereignty. You don't think that China is going to give back Tibet or allow Taiwan to go independent. You don't think Russia is going to give back the Crimea. Heavens no... They establish sovereign control and keep it.

Most Respectfully,
R

A state should have a defined territory.

Now you are saying that is not necessary. That people can set up shop wherever they want.[/QUOTE]
Israel is a sovereign state. A sovereign state has defined territory. Therefore, Israel has defined territory. It's that simple.

 

[Phoenall]

P F Tinmore, et al,

Because the Principle Arab Combatants (Egypt, Lebanon, Jordan, and Syria) crossed their borders and entered the territory in which the Mandate formerly applied.

P F Tinmore, et al,

You just don't get it.

Phoenall, P F Tinmore, et al,

I see that you both are a little off-target here.

(CLARIFICATION)

The question posed was:
(COMMENT)

The UN Charter on territorial Integrity is written as a prohibition.

Article 2 UN CHARTER
The Organization and its Members, in pursuit of the Purposes stated in Article 1, shall act in accordance with the following Principles.

4. 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.
​

You have to look at it in terms of "elements of the offense." In this case, you don't prove the "status of who ("Members shall refrain") was violated" (ie "crossing into Israel"); but instead who "did not refrain" (from the charter), what was use in violation ("force"), under what intent ("against the territorial integrity or political independence").

• The Arab Combatants (Principle Arab Combatants are: Egypt, Lebanon, Jordan, and Syria) did not refrain from the use of military force.
• The Arab Combatants used the force outside their respective and individual territorial sovereignties; beyond their jurisdiction "against the territorial integrity" of another.
• The Arab Combatants used force, outside their jurisdiction, against the territory not sovereign to them, in which another peoples have declared "political independence."

There are very few official maps that track, moment to moment, how the Forward Edge of Battle (FEBA) moves back and forth. What we have seen are Maps or Agreements that indicate the Armistice Lines (a demarcation between forces that separate the belligerents). In the case of the third party non-combatants (The Palestinians), it is a pause in which the opposing force allow political forces to establish a more permanent peace.

There is not question that the Arab Forces (Principle Arab Combatants are: Egypt, Lebanon, Jordan, and Syria) were locked in combat. There is not question where, by mutual agreement, the FEBA for each of these force came to rest (Armistice Lines). And, as far as the West Bank and the Gaza Strip are concerned, the permanent international borders as described and ratified by the Israelis and the hostile parties of Egypt and Jordan, are established.

If there is a question to be asked, the question would be, where is the State of Palestine, since the boundaries between Israel and the borders of Egypt and Jordan are established. Well the answer is: That Israel allowed the Palestinians to exercise their self-determination and declare independence. But the recognized international borders are as defined by treaty between the sovereign nations that were locked in conflict.

Most Respectfully,
R

WOW, all that verbosity while ducking the question.

How about posting a 1948 map of Israel so we can see where that territorial integrity was violated?

(COMMENT)

The Arab Forces (Principle Arab Combatants are: Egypt, Lebanon, Jordan, and Syria) left their territory. That is the violation. On May 15 1948, the approximate borders were represented by the Annex A Plan of Partition with Economic Union; until the Principle Arab Combatants (Egypt, Lebanon, Jordan, and Syria) illegally departed their countries and entered territory Declared Independent by Israel or under Trusteeship to the UN May 15 1948. Immediately the Arab Forces invaded. At the conclusion of hostilities, four Armistice Agreements were concluded. At the end of hostilities and war, with Egypt and Jordan, two Peace Treaties were concluded, each depicting the Permanent Boundaries.

That is where it is today. The Gaza Strip is inside the boundary between Israel - with the Permanent International Boundary with Israel. The West Bank is inside the International Boundary between Israel and Jordan.

There is no such thing as a 1948 Map of Israel because Israel was lock in combat with the Principle Arab Combatants (Egypt, Lebanon, Jordan, and Syria). As previously stated.

You are asking for something that does not exist (that I know of). But that still does not make the intrusion of the Principle Arab Combatants (Egypt, Lebanon, Jordan, and Syria) and unauthorized use of force.

Most Respectfully,
R

There is no such thing as a 1948 Map of Israel...​

Then how do you know its territorial integrity was violated?

(COMMENT)

Israel Declared Independence over the initial territory outlined in the Annex A Plan of Partition with Economic Union; as specified in Part II --- Boundaries. However, those borders did not last very long as the Israelis pushed back Arab Offensive and began to reshape the position and move the FEBA forward.

• The Arabs did capture and Annex the West Bank.
• The Egyptians captured and placed the Gaza Strip under Military Occupation.
• The Lebanese and Syria lost gained control of a further 25% of the Arab apportioned in the Partition Plan.

While the Israelis were defending themselves and their new state, the Arab Forces fought to capture as much territory as they could to ad to their sovereignty.

Most Respectfully,
R

Israel Declared Independence over the initial territory outlined in the Annex A Plan of Partition with Economic Union;...​

No it didn't.

Then what did it do ?

 

[Phoenall]

M14 Shooter, P F Tinmore, et al,

Yes, this comment by our friend M14 Shooter is extremely important.

WOW, all that verbosity while ducking the question.
How about posting a 1948 map of Israel so we can see where that territorial integrity was violated?

None of that matters any more.
Israel invaded Jordan in a war Israel did not start. In doing so, it captured and then occupied the West Bank. part of the state of Jordan.
In 1988, Jordan gave up the West Bank, reaffirming this cession of territory, by treaty, in 1994.
And so, regardless of anything laid down by the UN in 1947/48, the West Bank, under international law, belongs to Israel.

(COMMENT)

This makes any Palestinian who was a refugee in the 1948-49 War of Israeli Independence who moved to the West Bank as "no longer Refugees;" losing their "right of return" when they became Jordanian Citizens in April 1950.

Most Respectfully,
R

Firstly, you are attempting to use 1951 Refugee Convention Article 3C (which indicates that a refugee accepting refugee status loses refugee status).

Palestinian refugees were specifically excluded from the 1951 Refugee Convention in Article 1D, wherein:

“This Convention shall not apply to persons who are at present receiving from organs or agencies of the United Nations other than the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees protection or assistance. When such protection or assistance has ceased for any reason, without the position of such persons being definitively settled in accordance with the relevant resolutions adopted by the General Assembly of the United Nations, these persons shall ipso facto be entitled to the benefits of this convention.”

Of course, the Palestinian refugees were and are still receiving "protection/assistance" from the
United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees (UNRWA) at the time. UNRWA was established to comply with UN Resolution 194 which states:

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

Instructs the Conciliation Commission to facilitate the repatriation, resettlement and economic and social rehabilitation of the refugees and the payment of compensation, and to maintain close relations with the Director of the United Nations Relief for Palestine Refugees and, through him, with the appropriate organs and agencies of the United Nations;"

It is UNRWA that dictates the refugee status of the Palestinians and it includes all those refugees that wish to return to their homes and/or want to be compensated, per the resolution. UNRWA's charter assigns refugee status to the actual refugees and male descendants (and their dependents).

It always amazes me how the Zionist propaganda machine is able to fool even a relatively well informed person like Rocco.

They weren't as they were full citizens of Jordan and as such received no assistance from any UN source

And if you read your cut and paste it prohibits the Palestinians from returning to Israel because it clearly states

Resolves that the refugees wishing to return to their homes and live at peace with their neighbours should be permitted to do so at the earliest practicable date,

This is something the Palestinians refuse to do point blank.


Another fail by Abdul because he does not read his own links

 

[Phoenall]

P F Tinmore, et al,

Because the Principle Arab Combatants (Egypt, Lebanon, Jordan, and Syria) crossed their borders and entered the territory in which the Mandate formerly applied.

P F Tinmore, et al,

You just don't get it.

WOW, all that verbosity while ducking the question.

How about posting a 1948 map of Israel so we can see where that territorial integrity was violated?

(COMMENT)

The Arab Forces (Principle Arab Combatants are: Egypt, Lebanon, Jordan, and Syria) left their territory. That is the violation. On May 15 1948, the approximate borders were represented by the Annex A Plan of Partition with Economic Union; until the Principle Arab Combatants (Egypt, Lebanon, Jordan, and Syria) illegally departed their countries and entered territory Declared Independent by Israel or under Trusteeship to the UN May 15 1948. Immediately the Arab Forces invaded. At the conclusion of hostilities, four Armistice Agreements were concluded. At the end of hostilities and war, with Egypt and Jordan, two Peace Treaties were concluded, each depicting the Permanent Boundaries.

That is where it is today. The Gaza Strip is inside the boundary between Israel - with the Permanent International Boundary with Israel. The West Bank is inside the International Boundary between Israel and Jordan.

There is no such thing as a 1948 Map of Israel because Israel was lock in combat with the Principle Arab Combatants (Egypt, Lebanon, Jordan, and Syria). As previously stated.

You are asking for something that does not exist (that I know of). But that still does not make the intrusion of the Principle Arab Combatants (Egypt, Lebanon, Jordan, and Syria) and unauthorized use of force.

Most Respectfully,
R

There is no such thing as a 1948 Map of Israel...​

Then how do you know its territorial integrity was violated?

(COMMENT)

Israel Declared Independence over the initial territory outlined in the Annex A Plan of Partition with Economic Union; as specified in Part II --- Boundaries. However, those borders did not last very long as the Israelis pushed back Arab Offensive and began to reshape the position and move the FEBA forward.

• The Arabs did capture and Annex the West Bank.
• The Egyptians captured and placed the Gaza Strip under Military Occupation.
• The Lebanese and Syria lost gained control of a further 25% of the Arab apportioned in the Partition Plan.

While the Israelis were defending themselves and their new state, the Arab Forces fought to capture as much territory as they could to ad to their sovereignty.

Most Respectfully,
R

Israel Declared Independence over the initial territory outlined in the Annex A Plan of Partition with Economic Union;...​

No it didn't.

You can argue with Rocco and his litany of ligase, I say break it down to a simple logic of Human understanding...

Did the UN or anybody else have the right in 1948 to displace an indigenous population by force via political fiat?

For me, its not right and I don't think it was legal under UN Laws...

Yes it did as it was already embodied in International law, and the rights of today have no jurisdiction on the rights of 1948.

 

[Phoenall]

M14 Shooter, P F Tinmore, et al,

Yes, this comment by our friend M14 Shooter is extremely important.

WOW, all that verbosity while ducking the question.
How about posting a 1948 map of Israel so we can see where that territorial integrity was violated?

None of that matters any more.
Israel invaded Jordan in a war Israel did not start. In doing so, it captured and then occupied the West Bank. part of the state of Jordan.
In 1988, Jordan gave up the West Bank, reaffirming this cession of territory, by treaty, in 1994.
And so, regardless of anything laid down by the UN in 1947/48, the West Bank, under international law, belongs to Israel.

(COMMENT)

This makes any Palestinian who was a refugee in the 1948-49 War of Israeli Independence who moved to the West Bank as "no longer Refugees;" losing their "right of return" when they became Jordanian Citizens in April 1950.

Most Respectfully,
R

Firstly, you are attempting to use 1951 Refugee Convention Article 3C (which indicates that a refugee accepting refugee status loses refugee status).

Palestinian refugees were specifically excluded from the 1951 Refugee Convention in Article 1D, wherein:

“This Convention shall not apply to persons who are at present receiving from organs or agencies of the United Nations other than the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees protection or assistance. When such protection or assistance has ceased for any reason, without the position of such persons being definitively settled in accordance with the relevant resolutions adopted by the General Assembly of the United Nations, these persons shall ipso facto be entitled to the benefits of this convention.”

Of course, the Palestinian refugees were and are still receiving "protection/assistance" from the
United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees (UNRWA) at the time. UNRWA was established to comply with UN Resolution 194 which states:

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

Instructs the Conciliation Commission to facilitate the repatriation, resettlement and economic and social rehabilitation of the refugees and the payment of compensation, and to maintain close relations with the Director of the United Nations Relief for Palestine Refugees and, through him, with the appropriate organs and agencies of the United Nations;"

It is UNRWA that dictates the refugee status of the Palestinians and it includes all those refugees that wish to return to their homes and/or want to be compensated, per the resolution. UNRWA's charter assigns refugee status to the actual refugees and male descendants (and their dependents).

It always amazes me how the Zionist propaganda machine is able to fool even a relatively well informed person like Rocco.

I like Rocco, to me he's polite but spreads his agenda, but logic is logic. How can it be right to give a land occupied for a Millennia to displaced people, especially by military and political force after the very UN political farce that became the lackey of the WWll powers? None of the indigenous people voted for this travesty of Justice!

Simple because the so called indigenous were recent illegal immigrants and the European Jews were the legal land owners under International law. As the legal land owners they had the right to evict the illegal occupiers from their land and re claim it.