I can not understand the laws regarding 'Right of Return.' The hypocisy seems prodigious. Experts?

[BulletProof]

I support the right of return but not unlimited. Those who were expelled have that right. But not their descendents. And the reason is how far back do you go and do you create more injustices

Fair enough, except all Israel has to do is wait for all Palestinians alive in 1948 to die off, and then you'll give Israel a pass on an evil with which you claim to disagree.

Fair enough, except Israel extends "right of return" to Jews who never lived in Israel, nor even any of their ancestors.

Fair enough, excect nearly all countries extend citizenship to people born of citizens, even when born abroad.

 

[BulletProof]

Nobody wants Palestinians --- nasty, violent people. Certainly not Israel. Knifers, bombthrowers. Really, Israel should run them into Syria, as they did before, now that Syria is depopulated. It's a perfect solution.

Granted, Palestinians tend toward being nggers. Does the US get to put walls around ngger communities?

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Right of Return

Here is the contradiction in your position.

I support the right of return but not unlimited. Those who were expelled have that right. But not their descendents. And the reason is how far back do you go and do you create more injustices

My ancesters came from many countries but that doesnt convey inherent rights over anyone else who might want to go there.

And I apply that to both Palistinians and Jews.

Now you call for the right of return for the Palestinians. Do you also apply that to the Jewish people?

Nationality is inherited. Children are the nationality of their parents. Everybody has the right to return to their nation-to their country.

Excellent point. No nation of Palestine in history, no right for anyone to return to Palestine.

Perhaps "Palestinians" should return to the seat of the Ottoman Empire.
I hear Ankara is very nice.
Or perhaps return to the origins of Islam?
I hear there are no pesky Jews in Mecca.......

 

[rylah]

Right of Return

Here is the contradiction in your position.

I support the right of return but not unlimited. Those who were expelled have that right. But not their descendents. And the reason is how far back do you go and do you create more injustices

My ancesters came from many countries but that doesnt convey inherent rights over anyone else who might want to go there.

And I apply that to both Palistinians and Jews.

Now you call for the right of return for the Palestinians. Do you also apply that to the Jewish people?

Nationality is inherited. Children are the nationality of their parents. Everybody has the right to return to their nation-to their country.

Arab Palestine should grant the right to each Palestinian Arab abroad, and settle the issue of those camps they keep the refugees in for decades.

Especially since the PA promotes the removal of every Jew from their future state, the issue of Arab refugees ceases to be Israel's concern.

 

[Shusha]

Nationality is inherited. Children are the nationality of their parents. Everybody has the right to return to their nation-to their country.

Actually, no. Where do you come up with this stuff? Nationality is determined by nationality laws, created by each nation. There are two primary types: jus soli and jus sanguinis -- nationality through place of birth and nationality through "blood" (parent's nationality). Nationality can also be acquired through various means, according to the laws of each State.

 

[teddyearp]

Forgive me, but cannot and perhaps never will understand the OP's lack of logical discourse.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Forgive me, but cannot and perhaps never will understand the OP's lack of logical discourse.

Too much cousin marriage......makes the Muzzies stupid.

 

[RoccoR]

RE: I can not understand the laws regarding 'Right of Return.' The hypocisy seems prodigious. Experts?
※→ abi, et al,

I often chuckle on this issue of the "Right of Return" (RoR); most misunderstanding it. If you would observe the gentlemen holding the sign below: "Give Palestinians our Right of Return." To be a displaced person from the 1948 War, he would have tyo be all most 70 years old.

IN PHOTOS ~~ SAYING NO TO BIRTHRIGHT

(COMMENT)

You will often hear pro-Palestinians say: "and descendants." It comes from the Consolidated Eligibility and Registration Instructions (CERI) [I think(?) the latest edition is the 2006 version]; and not international law. The CERI says that "persons whose normal place of residence was Palestine during the period 1 June 1946 to 15 May 1948, and who lost both home and means of livelihood as a result of the 1948 conflict. Palestine Refugees, and descendants of Palestine refugee males, including legally adopted children, are eligible to register for service from the UN Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees (UNRWA) in the Near East services (which is one of several category). But again, the use and application of "descendants" is an issue inherited UNRWA services (generational dependency).

The authority for RoR is often associated with these specific passages contained in these key International Instruments. None of these instruments extend the alleges RoR to descendants that never lived in the territory to which the claimant is trying to apply the RoR; nor is it implied that the RoR is inherited by descendants::

✪ 1948 Universal Declaration of Human Rights, (Not in Force)

• Article 13.

• 
  (1) Everyone has the right to freedom of movement and residence within the borders of each state.
  
  (2) Everyone has the right to leave any country, including his own, and to return to his country.

✪ A/RES/194 (III) 11 December 1948 (Non-binding General Assemble Resolution)

• Paragraph 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;​

✪ 1949 Fourth Geneva Convention. The Geneva Conventions, (Entered into Force 21 October 1950)

• Article 49(1)

Individual or mass forcible transfers, as well as deportations of protected persons from occupied territory to the territory of the Occupying Power or to that of any other country, occupied or not, are prohibited, regardless of their motive.​

✪ 1966 International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR), [entry into force 23 March 1976 (Treaty Law)]

• Article 12(4)

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

It has been pointed out by those party to the discussion that there have been quite a few Resolutions that “affirmation” or "re-affirm" RoR. The use of thise terminology → means merely a declarative statement of sentiment. what we say in here in the US as: a "Sense of Congress" or a "Sense of the Senate." It does not imply a previously "binding" obligation.

The ICJ reserves the expression ‘decision’ for binding resolutions and ‘recommendation’ for non-binding ones. A resolution is ‘binding’ when it is capable of creating obligations on its addressee(s). A General Assembly Resolution that uses the terminology outside its charter authority hold no specific or additional legal strength.

Although GA resolutions are, as a rule, pass on recommendations, especially regarding external relations with Member States, the Court has recognized the binding legal effect of GA decisions pertaining to the admission of new Member States, voting procedure, or apportionment of the budget, and in general has confirmed that the Court possesses certain powers of decision.

If a International Agreement or Treaty comes in conflict between the obligations of the Members of the United Nations under the present Charter and their obligations under any other international agreement, their obligations under the present Charter shall prevail. So on maters that involve an active defense against credible military threat or aggressor action Articles 2 and 51 prevail; without regard to any other obligation; as outlined in Article 103 of the Charter.

Now there are other direct arguments concerning each of the key International Instruments; but I thought this one question on the matter of applicability would be sufficient. I know that there have been enough resolutions published, and what not, to level a small forest; but most of them are not actually worth the paper they are printed on.

Most Respectfully,
R

 

[abi]

Right of return, end the occupation, problem solved.

 

[RoccoR]

RE: I can not understand the laws regarding 'Right of Return.' The hypocisy seems prodigious. Experts?
※→ P F Tinmore, et al,

Yes, this is your opportunity to teach me.

The Idea of the "Right of Return" stems back to nonbinding UN Resolution 194 (III) 11 December 1948. It is not a blanket "right" but carries a condition or requirement that is demanded as part of an agreement:

Nice duck.

Resolution194 is based on international law that is binding.

You can't deny people their right to return based on an assumption.

(QUESTION)

A/RES/194 (III) was published in 1948. What "international law" (are you suggesting) on the matter of the "Right of Return" was the resolution based?

(COMMENT)

Now, there is the Treaty of Westphalia, the precursor to most of the customary law we have today. And (surprisingly enough) there is in the Treaty of Westphalia (Peace Treaty between the Holy Roman Emperor and the King of France and their respective Allies) → the original law on the Right of Return.

Article → XLIV.

But for those who are Subjects and Hereditary Vassals of the Emperor, and of the House of Austria, they shall really have the benefit of the Amnesty, as for their Persons, Life, Reputation, Honours: and they may return with Safety to their former Country; but they shall be oblig'd to conform, and submit themselves to the Laws of the Realms, or particular Provinces they shall belong to.​

This doesn't really benefit the Arab Palestinians. While the language and syntax may be different, it is broader in its requirements that A/RES/194 (III).

※ It does contain the ideas of:

• return to their homes
• live at peace​

✪ It does not contain the ideas of:

• compensation should be paid for the property of those choosing not to return
• compensation for loss of or damage to property​

✪ AND there are the additional requirements of:

• shall be obligated to conform
• submit themselves to the Laws of the Realms​

The Treaty of Westphalia also documents restitution, compensation, and reparations to the Victory of the Conflict. It would not be in Israels best interest to respond in any way that would suggest or mimic capitulation. That would forfeit any chance of receiving restitution, compensation, and reparations from the Arab Palestinians for the seven decades of asymmetric warfare and the general costs diverted for safety and security in the face of the Arab Palestinian threat. It may well pen the doors to the Arab Palestinians to try a reverse claim.

Most Respectfully,
R

 

[Indeependent]

Right of return, end the occupation, problem solved.

You lost once you put this entire Israel issue on the table based on the Torah.

 

[MaryL]

The only thing Arab Palestinians need do is be respectful and stop this incessant violence. I don't understand this resistance to a Jewish homeland when they have multiple Arab home lands. Why?

 

[abi]

The only thing Arab Palestinians need do is be respectful and stop this incessant violence. I don't understand this resistance to a Jewish homeland when they have multiple Arab lands. Why?

End the occupation, right of return, problem solved.

 

[Indeependent]

The only thing Arab Palestinians need do is be respectful and stop this incessant violence. I don't understand this resistance to a Jewish homeland when they have multiple Arab lands. Why?

End the occupation, right of return, problem solved.

You lost once you put this entire Israel issue on the table based on the Torah.

 

[MaryL]

The only thing Arab Palestinians need do is be respectful and stop this incessant violence. I don't understand this resistance to a Jewish homeland when they have multiple Arab lands. Why?

End the occupation, right of return, problem solved.

That simple is it?

 

[abi]

That simple is it?

I really think so; if the goal is peace, that is.

 

[Coyote]

That simple is it?

I really think so; if the goal is peace, that is.

OK. Assuming you allow several million Palestinians to flood into Israel - how does that achieve a "peace" and for whom?

 

[MaryL]

The only thing Arab Palestinians need do is be respectful and stop this incessant violence. I don't understand this resistance to a Jewish homeland when they have multiple Arab lands. Why?

End the occupation, right of return, problem solved.

You lost once you put this entire Israel issue on the table based on the Torah.

Didn't say that. 1918 the British Balfour declaration carved up the Mideast and made "Palestine " a Jewish homeland.....Palestine didn't exist officially before then. Who claims Jerusalem is the default ruler?

 

[abi]

I wont assume anything and it will bring peace to the entire region. We may see it again like it was before the zionists arrived.

 

[Coyote]

I wont assume anything and it will bring peace to the entire region. We may see it again like it was before the zionists arrived.

The only reason it was "peaceful" for a time was it was under the rule of an authoritarian monarch.