Is Israel the Same as South Africa?

[P F Tinmore]

P F Tinmore, et al,

You do realize the enormous risk and danger you are asking the Israeli's to assume in a total withdrawal behind the the wall? That's not to mention the sacrifice of their national aspiration to a connection to Jerusalem, unobstructed by Arab Palestinian dominance. You're asking for something similar to blockading Mecca, in a religious sense.

P F Tinmore, et al,

Yes, exactly. To an extent --- there is some agreement here.


(COMMENT)

This is a question of which comes first.

Does Israel assume the risk and unilaterally withdraw?
------------------------------ or -------------------------------
Does the Palestinian adopt the peace, and induce withdrawal?​

Which comes first?

The only thing preventing peace is the occupation. The resistance to the occupation will continue until the occupation ends.

(COMMENT)

I'm not at all a religious person, an in being unaffiliated with an organized belief (no conviction to a specific deity), I cannot say I understand the affinity for either Jerusalem or Mecca. But I have seen, first hand, what men of conviction in a religious struggle will do to one another in the name of righteousness in their belief. If it were up to me, I give-up any aspirations the Israeli's might have for Jerusalem; but I don't see that happening; any more than I see the Arab relinquishing Mecca. I'll admit, I don understand fanatical mysticism (on either side). So that is something that is very tough for one like me to resolve.

In terms of the 1949 Armistice Agreements (Green Line) and the need (in this hypothetical) for Israel making territorial and political concessions; there must be some means of underwriting the agreement that is both swift and effective. Currently, the Palestinians have no credibility in adhering to any agreement they make. This is a very grave risk.

Most Respectfully,
R

Currently, the Palestinians have no credibility in adhering to any agreement they make.

Like what?

 

[Hossfly]

When you say "occupation," Tinnie, are you speaking about the West Bank or about Israel proper too as being occupied. In many of your posts you have inferred that Israel is on land that is actually part of Palestine.

It is.

'tis deja-vu time, yet again ​

I know, Caroline. Tinnie is under the impression that his relatives owned lots of land and other assets and those bad Jews took it all away from them. By the way, I wonder if any of the Gazans have taken up one of the Egyptian officlals advice that they should come home to Egypt.

 

[P F Tinmore]

P F Tinmore, et al,

Damn, Paul --- didn't you just watch the video and see how combat chicken, which have not been demilitarized, are dangerous and can be used offensively?

Are Palestinian Chickens A Threat to Israel?

(COMMENT)

I cannot honestly tell you what the strategy was at that time. But I find it hard to feel sympathy. Again, when the question was asked of the Olympic Massacre, or the Achille Lauro, incidents, did the Palestinians believe that the Olympic Team was part of the IDF? Did the Palestinians believe the Italian Cruise Liner was really a Israeli warship?

Much of what is done in war is to break the will of the opponent to press-on with the conflict. I doubt that all the ideas work. But I would rather see them destroy a cement factory or a Chicken Farm, then something far worse. All that can be replaced.

Most Respectfully,
R

Israel systematically destroys Palestinian civilian infrastructure. Sometimes entire villages. Israel regularly destroys food and water resources. These are not only war crimes, they are also acts of genocide.

I don't recall you ever calling for arrests and prosecutions.

 

[RoccoR]

P F Tinmore, et al,

I think I might have not expressed this well.

Currently, the Palestinians have no credibility in adhering to any agreement they make.

Like what?

(OBSERVATION)

Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas’s credibility has been damaged to a point where it’s hard to envision a situation where he would be able to convince even a handful of Palestinians to accept any agreement he strikes with Israel.

SOURCE: Palestinian Affairs: Abbas?s credibility problem | JPost | Israel News

Abbas's credibility, supporters and critics say, is wholly tied to those negotiations. If progress is not imminent -- whether in the shape of a final agreement or at least something tangibly felt among Palestinians -- his shaky hold on power could collapse, a setback for those who favor a moderate course.

SOURCE: Abbas's Credibility Problem - Washington Post

(COMMENT)

The credibility issue is a risk which goes both ways:

• With the Palestinian support for any agreement he might come strike with the Israeli.
• With the Israelis if they cannot make a good faith offer to which Abbas can accept.

Most Respectfully,
R

 

[P F Tinmore]

Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas’s credibility has been damaged to a point where it’s hard to envision a situation where he would be able to convince even a handful of Palestinians to accept any agreement he strikes with Israel.

Indeed, Abbas left the government in 2007 and his official term in office expired in 2009.

Fatah lost the nationwide elections in Palestine in 2006. Why are they still ruling the West Bank?

Abbas is widely viewed as an Israeli tool.

 

[Bloodrock44]

Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas’s credibility has been damaged to a point where it’s hard to envision a situation where he would be able to convince even a handful of Palestinians to accept any agreement he strikes with Israel.

Indeed, Abbas left the government in 2007 and his official term in office expired in 2009.

Fatah lost the nationwide elections in Palestine in 2006. Why are they still ruling the West Bank?

Abbas is widely viewed as an Israeli tool.

Because the West Bank is FUBAR.

 

[RoccoR]

P F Tinmore, et al,

Make the case before the court.

Israel systematically destroys Palestinian civilian infrastructure. Sometimes entire villages. Israel regularly destroys food and water resources. These are not only war crimes, they are also acts of genocide.

I don't recall you ever calling for arrests and prosecutions.

(COMMENT)

Commitment to the truth is as important --- as is --- the commitment to the peace.

Most Respectfully,
R

 

[P F Tinmore]

P F Tinmore, et al,

Make the case before the court.

Israel systematically destroys Palestinian civilian infrastructure. Sometimes entire villages. Israel regularly destroys food and water resources. These are not only war crimes, they are also acts of genocide.

I don't recall you ever calling for arrests and prosecutions.

(COMMENT)

Commitment to the truth is as important --- as is --- the commitment to the peace.

Most Respectfully,
R

Indeed.

 

[P F Tinmore]

P F Tinmore, et al,

Make the case before the court.

Israel systematically destroys Palestinian civilian infrastructure. Sometimes entire villages. Israel regularly destroys food and water resources. These are not only war crimes, they are also acts of genocide.

I don't recall you ever calling for arrests and prosecutions.

(COMMENT)

Commitment to the truth is as important --- as is --- the commitment to the peace.

Most Respectfully,
R

Make the case before the court.

It is a matter of recorded history.

Why do you think Israel is so freaked about Palestine being recognized as a state?

 

[RoccoR]

P F Tinmore, et al,

You are misinterpreting the events as they happened.

P F Tinmore, et al,

Make the case before the court.

Israel systematically destroys Palestinian civilian infrastructure. Sometimes entire villages. Israel regularly destroys food and water resources. These are not only war crimes, they are also acts of genocide.

I don't recall you ever calling for arrests and prosecutions.

(COMMENT)

Commitment to the truth is as important --- as is --- the commitment to the peace.

Most Respectfully,
R

Make the case before the court.

It is a matter of recorded history.

Why do you think Israel is so freaked about Palestine being recognized as a state?

(COMMENT)

Israel is not "freaked out" about Palestine being recognized as a state; it is a little late for that now. WOW, sometimes I think you guys don't know your own history.

Palestine has been (officially) the State of Palestine since 15 November 1988 [Annex II - Declaration of Independence (A/43/827 S/20278 18 November 1988)] which has been acknowledged by the United Nations. The UN further gave the in its (first) "capacity as observer" (A/RES/52/250 13 July 1998) on 7 July 1998.

You are confusing the second change in status, where the UN "accord to Palestine non-member observer State status in the United Nations, without prejudice to the acquired rights, privileges and role of the Palestine Liberation Organization in the United Nations as the representative of the Palestinian people, in accordance with the relevant resolutions and practice." This was to give President Abbas just as much authenticity as possible.

The current problem with the application for admission to the UN is the wording and language of the Palestinian National Charter; which was suppose to be changed after the Oslo Accords, but with the change being rejected by the Palestinian Executive Committee. The Charter contains language which cannot be certified by the Security Council as meeting the peaceful intent of the United Nations.

At a news conference in Geneva on 14 December, Yasser Arafat accepts General Assembly resolution 181 (II) (1947) and Security Council 242 (1967), recognizes Israel ’s right to exist and renounces terrorism. On the same day, the U.S. government issues a statement in which the president authorizes the State Department to enter into a substantive dialogue with PLO representatives.

The U.N. General Assembly, on 15 December, adopts resolution 43/177 in which it acknowledges the proclamation of a state of Palestine by the PNC and decides that the designation Palestine should be used instead of PLO in the U.N. system.

On 7 July 1998, the General Assembly adopts resolution 52/250, entitled “Participation of Palestine in the work of the United Nations,” voting overwhelmingly to upgrade Palestine ’s representation at the United Nations to a unique and unprecedented level. The resolution conferred upon Palestine additional rights and privileges of participation that had traditionally been exclusive to Member States.

SOURCE: State of Palestine Permanent Observer... | History of Palestine

Most Respectfully,
R

 

[P F Tinmore]

The current problem with the application for admission to the UN is the wording and language of the Palestinian National Charter; which was suppose to be changed after the Oslo Accords, but with the change being rejected by the Palestinian Executive Committee. The Charter contains language which cannot be certified by the Security Council as meeting the peaceful intent of the United Nations.

Of course they could do what Israel did.

Just lie.

Palestine is not a threat to any of its neighbors.

 

[RoccoR]

P F Tinmore, et al,

I don't think you understand.

The current problem with the application for admission to the UN is the wording and language of the Palestinian National Charter; which was suppose to be changed after the Oslo Accords, but with the change being rejected by the Palestinian Executive Committee. The Charter contains language which cannot be certified by the Security Council as meeting the peaceful intent of the United Nations.

Of course they could do what Israel did.

Just lie.

Palestine is not a threat to any of its neighbors.

(COMMENT)

Palestine is an admitted threat to Israel.

• The UN set the conditions for Israeli statehood.
  • The Palestinians oppose those decisions;
    • The Palestinians have decided to use force to challenge the UN decision.
    • The Palestinians have decided to use force to challenge sovereignty of Israeli. statehood.

The Palestinian concept is diametrically opposed to the Rule of Law (RoL).

• Article 2: Palestine, with the boundaries it had during the British Mandate, is an indivisible territorial unit.
• Article 19: The partition of Palestine in 1947, and the establishment of the state of Israel are entirely illegal, regardless of the passage of time, because they were contrary to the will of the Palestinian people and its natural right in their homeland, and were inconsistent with the principles embodied in the Charter of the United Nations, particularly the right to self-determination.
  
  • Article 51: Nothing in the present Charter shall impair the inherent right of individual or collective self-defence if an armed attack occurs against a Member of the United Nations,
    
  • Every State has the duty to refrain from the threat or use of force to violate the existing international boundaries of another State or as a means of solving international disputes, including territorial disputes and problems concerning frontiers of States.

• Article 9: Armed struggle is the only way to liberate Palestine. This is the overall strategy, not merely a tactical phase. The Palestinian Arab people assert their absolute determination and firm resolution to continue their armed struggle and to work for an armed popular revolution for the liberation of their country and their return to it.
  
  • 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.
    
  • Every State has the duty to refrain from organizing or encouraging the organization of irregular forces or armed bands including mercenaries, for incursion into the territory of another State.

• Article 10: Commando (Feday'ee) action constitutes the nucleus of the Palestinian popular liberation war. This requires its escalation, comprehensiveness, and the mobilization of all the Palestinian popular and educational efforts and their organization and involvement in the armed Palestinian revolution.
  
  • Every State has the duty to refrain from organizing, instigating, facilitating, participating in, financing, encouraging or tolerating terrorist activities and to take appropriate practical measures to ensure that our respective territories are not used for terrorist installations or training camps, or for the preparation or organization of terrorist acts intended to be committed against other States or their citizens.
  • Every State has the duty to refrain from organizing, instigating, assisting or participating in acts of civil strife or terrorist acts in another State or acquiescing in
    organized activities within its territory directed towards the commission of such acts, when the acts referred to in the present paragraph involve a threat or use of force.

• Article 20: The Balfour Declaration, the Palestine Mandate, and everything that has been based on them, are deemed null and void. Claims of historical or religious ties of Jews with Palestine are incompatible with the facts of history and the conception of what constitutes statehood. Judaism, being a religion, is not an independent nationality. Nor do Jews constitute a single nation with an identity of their own; they are citizens of the states to which they belong.
  
  • All States shall comply in good faith with their obligations under the generally recognized principles and rules of international law with respect to the maintenance of international peace and security, and shall endeavor to make the United Nations security system based on the Charter more effective.

• Article 21: The Arab Palestinian people, expressing themselves by armed Palestinian revolution, reject all solutions which are substitutes for the total liberation of Palestine and reject all proposals aimed at the liquidation of the Palestinian cause, or at its internationalization.
  
  • Every State shall settle its international disputes with other States by peaceful means in such a manner that international peace and security and justice are not endangered. States shall accordingly seek early and just settlement of their international disputes by negotiation, inquiry, mediation, conciliation, arbitration, judicial settlement, resort to regional agencies or arrangements or other peaceful means of their choice. In seeking such a settlement the parties shall agree upon such peaceful means as may be appropriate to the circumstances and nature of the dispute.

I think this makes the point. The State of Palestine, while today, only says it challenges Israel, in reality, its logic and reasoning opposes the entire concept of international law.

Most Respectfully,
R

 

[P F Tinmore]

P F Tinmore, et al,

I don't think you understand.

The current problem with the application for admission to the UN is the wording and language of the Palestinian National Charter; which was suppose to be changed after the Oslo Accords, but with the change being rejected by the Palestinian Executive Committee. The Charter contains language which cannot be certified by the Security Council as meeting the peaceful intent of the United Nations.

Of course they could do what Israel did.

Just lie.

Palestine is not a threat to any of its neighbors.

(COMMENT)

Palestine is an admitted threat to Israel.

• The UN set the conditions for Israeli statehood.
  • The Palestinians oppose those decisions;
    • The Palestinians have decided to use force to challenge the UN decision.
    • The Palestinians have decided to use force to challenge sovereignty of Israeli. statehood.

The Palestinian concept is diametrically opposed to the Rule of Law (RoL).

• Article 2: Palestine, with the boundaries it had during the British Mandate, is an indivisible territorial unit.
• Article 19: The partition of Palestine in 1947, and the establishment of the state of Israel are entirely illegal, regardless of the passage of time, because they were contrary to the will of the Palestinian people and its natural right in their homeland, and were inconsistent with the principles embodied in the Charter of the United Nations, particularly the right to self-determination.
  
  • Article 51: Nothing in the present Charter shall impair the inherent right of individual or collective self-defence if an armed attack occurs against a Member of the United Nations,
    
  • Every State has the duty to refrain from the threat or use of force to violate the existing international boundaries of another State or as a means of solving international disputes, including territorial disputes and problems concerning frontiers of States.

• Article 9: Armed struggle is the only way to liberate Palestine. This is the overall strategy, not merely a tactical phase. The Palestinian Arab people assert their absolute determination and firm resolution to continue their armed struggle and to work for an armed popular revolution for the liberation of their country and their return to it.
  
  • 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.
    
  • Every State has the duty to refrain from organizing or encouraging the organization of irregular forces or armed bands including mercenaries, for incursion into the territory of another State.

• Article 10: Commando (Feday'ee) action constitutes the nucleus of the Palestinian popular liberation war. This requires its escalation, comprehensiveness, and the mobilization of all the Palestinian popular and educational efforts and their organization and involvement in the armed Palestinian revolution.
  
  • Every State has the duty to refrain from organizing, instigating, facilitating, participating in, financing, encouraging or tolerating terrorist activities and to take appropriate practical measures to ensure that our respective territories are not used for terrorist installations or training camps, or for the preparation or organization of terrorist acts intended to be committed against other States or their citizens.
  • Every State has the duty to refrain from organizing, instigating, assisting or participating in acts of civil strife or terrorist acts in another State or acquiescing in
    organized activities within its territory directed towards the commission of such acts, when the acts referred to in the present paragraph involve a threat or use of force.

• Article 20: The Balfour Declaration, the Palestine Mandate, and everything that has been based on them, are deemed null and void. Claims of historical or religious ties of Jews with Palestine are incompatible with the facts of history and the conception of what constitutes statehood. Judaism, being a religion, is not an independent nationality. Nor do Jews constitute a single nation with an identity of their own; they are citizens of the states to which they belong.
  
  • All States shall comply in good faith with their obligations under the generally recognized principles and rules of international law with respect to the maintenance of international peace and security, and shall endeavor to make the United Nations security system based on the Charter more effective.

• Article 21: The Arab Palestinian people, expressing themselves by armed Palestinian revolution, reject all solutions which are substitutes for the total liberation of Palestine and reject all proposals aimed at the liquidation of the Palestinian cause, or at its internationalization.
  
  • Every State shall settle its international disputes with other States by peaceful means in such a manner that international peace and security and justice are not endangered. States shall accordingly seek early and just settlement of their international disputes by negotiation, inquiry, mediation, conciliation, arbitration, judicial settlement, resort to regional agencies or arrangements or other peaceful means of their choice. In seeking such a settlement the parties shall agree upon such peaceful means as may be appropriate to the circumstances and nature of the dispute.

I think this makes the point. The State of Palestine, while today, only says it challenges Israel, in reality, its logic and reasoning opposes the entire concept of international law.

Most Respectfully,
R

OK, what doesn't comply with international law?

 

[RoccoR]

P F Tinmore,

P F Tinmore, et al,

I don't think you understand.

Of course they could do what Israel did.

Just lie.

Palestine is not a threat to any of its neighbors.

(COMMENT)

Palestine is an admitted threat to Israel.

• The UN set the conditions for Israeli statehood.
  • The Palestinians oppose those decisions;
    • The Palestinians have decided to use force to challenge the UN decision.
    • The Palestinians have decided to use force to challenge sovereignty of Israeli. statehood.

The Palestinian concept is diametrically opposed to the Rule of Law (RoL).

• Article 2: Palestine, with the boundaries it had during the British Mandate, is an indivisible territorial unit.
• Article 19: The partition of Palestine in 1947, and the establishment of the state of Israel are entirely illegal, regardless of the passage of time, because they were contrary to the will of the Palestinian people and its natural right in their homeland, and were inconsistent with the principles embodied in the Charter of the United Nations, particularly the right to self-determination.
  
  • Article 51: Nothing in the present Charter shall impair the inherent right of individual or collective self-defence if an armed attack occurs against a Member of the United Nations,
    
  • Every State has the duty to refrain from the threat or use of force to violate the existing international boundaries of another State or as a means of solving international disputes, including territorial disputes and problems concerning frontiers of States.

• Article 9: Armed struggle is the only way to liberate Palestine. This is the overall strategy, not merely a tactical phase. The Palestinian Arab people assert their absolute determination and firm resolution to continue their armed struggle and to work for an armed popular revolution for the liberation of their country and their return to it.
  
  • 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.
    
  • Every State has the duty to refrain from organizing or encouraging the organization of irregular forces or armed bands including mercenaries, for incursion into the territory of another State.

• Article 10: Commando (Feday'ee) action constitutes the nucleus of the Palestinian popular liberation war. This requires its escalation, comprehensiveness, and the mobilization of all the Palestinian popular and educational efforts and their organization and involvement in the armed Palestinian revolution.
  
  • Every State has the duty to refrain from organizing, instigating, facilitating, participating in, financing, encouraging or tolerating terrorist activities and to take appropriate practical measures to ensure that our respective territories are not used for terrorist installations or training camps, or for the preparation or organization of terrorist acts intended to be committed against other States or their citizens.
  • Every State has the duty to refrain from organizing, instigating, assisting or participating in acts of civil strife or terrorist acts in another State or acquiescing in
    organized activities within its territory directed towards the commission of such acts, when the acts referred to in the present paragraph involve a threat or use of force.

• Article 20: The Balfour Declaration, the Palestine Mandate, and everything that has been based on them, are deemed null and void. Claims of historical or religious ties of Jews with Palestine are incompatible with the facts of history and the conception of what constitutes statehood. Judaism, being a religion, is not an independent nationality. Nor do Jews constitute a single nation with an identity of their own; they are citizens of the states to which they belong.
  
  • All States shall comply in good faith with their obligations under the generally recognized principles and rules of international law with respect to the maintenance of international peace and security, and shall endeavor to make the United Nations security system based on the Charter more effective.

• Article 21: The Arab Palestinian people, expressing themselves by armed Palestinian revolution, reject all solutions which are substitutes for the total liberation of Palestine and reject all proposals aimed at the liquidation of the Palestinian cause, or at its internationalization.
  
  • Every State shall settle its international disputes with other States by peaceful means in such a manner that international peace and security and justice are not endangered. States shall accordingly seek early and just settlement of their international disputes by negotiation, inquiry, mediation, conciliation, arbitration, judicial settlement, resort to regional agencies or arrangements or other peaceful means of their choice. In seeking such a settlement the parties shall agree upon such peaceful means as may be appropriate to the circumstances and nature of the dispute.

I think this makes the point. The State of Palestine, while today, only says it challenges Israel, in reality, its logic and reasoning opposes the entire concept of international law.

Most Respectfully,
R

OK, what doesn't comply with international law?

(COMMENT)

In the Posting above, I noted the specific language is challenged; indented and below it I posted the RoL that it violates.

Most Respectfully,
R

 

[georgephillip]

Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas’s credibility has been damaged to a point where it’s hard to envision a situation where he would be able to convince even a handful of Palestinians to accept any agreement he strikes with Israel.

Indeed, Abbas left the government in 2007 and his official term in office expired in 2009.

Fatah lost the nationwide elections in Palestine in 2006. Why are they still ruling the West Bank?

Abbas is widely viewed as an Israeli tool.

Why are rich corrupt parasites ruling on the West Bank?
For exactly the same reason they rule in Tel Aviv.

"Since the establishment of limited Palestinian self-rule in the West Bank and Gaza Strip in the mid-1990s, the U.S. government has committed over $4 billion in bilateral assistance to the Palestinians, who are among the world’s largest per capita recipients of international foreign aid..."

Because rich and corrupt parasites in the greatest purveyor of violence on the planet profit by dividing Jew and Arab in Palestine in the same way they profit from the division of Sunni and Shia in Iraq.

U.S. Foreign Aid to the Palestinians (FY 2012-2013)

 

[RoccoR]

georgephillip, et al,

To some degree, you are probably correct.

While we recognize the plight of the Palestinian, we also feel the backlash they torque our way. It may be that we are throwing good money after bad in any assistance we give the Palestinians. Already, the government has to keep the public awareness obscure to how much we give Palestinians, for fear that public outcry will force an end to it. There have been lawsuits already against the government for funding Palestinian which were portrayed to be all terrorists, or supporting constituents of terrorists.

Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas’s credibility has been damaged to a point where it’s hard to envision a situation where he would be able to convince even a handful of Palestinians to accept any agreement he strikes with Israel.

Indeed, Abbas left the government in 2007 and his official term in office expired in 2009.

Fatah lost the nationwide elections in Palestine in 2006. Why are they still ruling the West Bank?

Abbas is widely viewed as an Israeli tool.

Why are rich corrupt parasites ruling on the West Bank?
For exactly the same reason they rule in Tel Aviv.

"Since the establishment of limited Palestinian self-rule in the West Bank and Gaza Strip in the mid-1990s, the U.S. government has committed over $4 billion in bilateral assistance to the Palestinians, who are among the world’s largest per capita recipients of international foreign aid..."

Because rich and corrupt parasites in the greatest purveyor of violence on the planet profit by dividing Jew and Arab in Palestine in the same way they profit from the division of Sunni and Shia in Iraq.

(COMMENT)

From a political-economic standpoint, you must be careful not to suggest that the "rich and corrupt parasites" created the division between Jew-Arab or Sunni-Shia. They merely capitalize on it. I might also suggest you change the word "parasites" to "profiteers." There are all sorts of conflict and war profiteers, but the "parasites" are those that demand everything and contribute little in return.

Palestinians are the parasites in the Arab-Israeli conflict; not intentionally, but because they generationally did not productively develop. About four generations emerged in an atmosphere where war was made more important than cultural advancements.

Most Respectfully,
R

 

[Bumberclyde]

P F Tinmore, et al,

I don't think you understand.

The current problem with the application for admission to the UN is the wording and language of the Palestinian National Charter; which was suppose to be changed after the Oslo Accords, but with the change being rejected by the Palestinian Executive Committee. The Charter contains language which cannot be certified by the Security Council as meeting the peaceful intent of the United Nations.

Of course they could do what Israel did.

Just lie.

Palestine is not a threat to any of its neighbors.

(COMMENT)

Palestine is an admitted threat to Israel.

• The UN set the conditions for Israeli statehood.
  • The Palestinians oppose those decisions;
    • The Palestinians have decided to use force to challenge the UN decision.
    • The Palestinians have decided to use force to challenge sovereignty of Israeli. statehood.

The Palestinian concept is diametrically opposed to the Rule of Law (RoL).

• Article 2: Palestine, with the boundaries it had during the British Mandate, is an indivisible territorial unit.
• Article 19: The partition of Palestine in 1947, and the establishment of the state of Israel are entirely illegal, regardless of the passage of time, because they were contrary to the will of the Palestinian people and its natural right in their homeland, and were inconsistent with the principles embodied in the Charter of the United Nations, particularly the right to self-determination.
  
  • Article 51: Nothing in the present Charter shall impair the inherent right of individual or collective self-defence if an armed attack occurs against a Member of the United Nations,
    
  • Every State has the duty to refrain from the threat or use of force to violate the existing international boundaries of another State or as a means of solving international disputes, including territorial disputes and problems concerning frontiers of States.

• Article 9: Armed struggle is the only way to liberate Palestine. This is the overall strategy, not merely a tactical phase. The Palestinian Arab people assert their absolute determination and firm resolution to continue their armed struggle and to work for an armed popular revolution for the liberation of their country and their return to it.
  
  • 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.
    
  • Every State has the duty to refrain from organizing or encouraging the organization of irregular forces or armed bands including mercenaries, for incursion into the territory of another State.

• Article 10: Commando (Feday'ee) action constitutes the nucleus of the Palestinian popular liberation war. This requires its escalation, comprehensiveness, and the mobilization of all the Palestinian popular and educational efforts and their organization and involvement in the armed Palestinian revolution.
  
  • Every State has the duty to refrain from organizing, instigating, facilitating, participating in, financing, encouraging or tolerating terrorist activities and to take appropriate practical measures to ensure that our respective territories are not used for terrorist installations or training camps, or for the preparation or organization of terrorist acts intended to be committed against other States or their citizens.
  • Every State has the duty to refrain from organizing, instigating, assisting or participating in acts of civil strife or terrorist acts in another State or acquiescing in
    organized activities within its territory directed towards the commission of such acts, when the acts referred to in the present paragraph involve a threat or use of force.

• Article 20: The Balfour Declaration, the Palestine Mandate, and everything that has been based on them, are deemed null and void. Claims of historical or religious ties of Jews with Palestine are incompatible with the facts of history and the conception of what constitutes statehood. Judaism, being a religion, is not an independent nationality. Nor do Jews constitute a single nation with an identity of their own; they are citizens of the states to which they belong.
  
  • All States shall comply in good faith with their obligations under the generally recognized principles and rules of international law with respect to the maintenance of international peace and security, and shall endeavor to make the United Nations security system based on the Charter more effective.

• Article 21: The Arab Palestinian people, expressing themselves by armed Palestinian revolution, reject all solutions which are substitutes for the total liberation of Palestine and reject all proposals aimed at the liquidation of the Palestinian cause, or at its internationalization.
  
  • Every State shall settle its international disputes with other States by peaceful means in such a manner that international peace and security and justice are not endangered. States shall accordingly seek early and just settlement of their international disputes by negotiation, inquiry, mediation, conciliation, arbitration, judicial settlement, resort to regional agencies or arrangements or other peaceful means of their choice. In seeking such a settlement the parties shall agree upon such peaceful means as may be appropriate to the circumstances and nature of the dispute.

I think this makes the point. The State of Palestine, while today, only says it challenges Israel, in reality, its logic and reasoning opposes the entire concept of international law.

Most Respectfully,
R

So Roc, if a gang of people with weapons come to your house and give you 5 minutes to get out or they'll kill you and your whole family, would you accept it peacefully and let them take your house and land and then send you to a Warsaw Ghetto style camp, or would you be pissed off and want to fight to get it back?

 

[georgephillip]

georgephillip, et al,

To some degree, you are probably correct.

While we recognize the plight of the Palestinian, we also feel the backlash they torque our way. It may be that we are throwing good money after bad in any assistance we give the Palestinians. Already, the government has to keep the public awareness obscure to how much we give Palestinians, for fear that public outcry will force an end to it. There have been lawsuits already against the government for funding Palestinian which were portrayed to be all terrorists, or supporting constituents of terrorists.

Indeed, Abbas left the government in 2007 and his official term in office expired in 2009.

Fatah lost the nationwide elections in Palestine in 2006. Why are they still ruling the West Bank?

Abbas is widely viewed as an Israeli tool.

Why are rich corrupt parasites ruling on the West Bank?
For exactly the same reason they rule in Tel Aviv.

"Since the establishment of limited Palestinian self-rule in the West Bank and Gaza Strip in the mid-1990s, the U.S. government has committed over $4 billion in bilateral assistance to the Palestinians, who are among the world’s largest per capita recipients of international foreign aid..."

Because rich and corrupt parasites in the greatest purveyor of violence on the planet profit by dividing Jew and Arab in Palestine in the same way they profit from the division of Sunni and Shia in Iraq.

(COMMENT)

From a political-economic standpoint, you must be careful not to suggest that the "rich and corrupt parasites" created the division between Jew-Arab or Sunni-Shia. They merely capitalize on it. I might also suggest you change the word "parasites" to "profiteers." There are all sorts of conflict and war profiteers, but the "parasites" are those that demand everything and contribute little in return.

Palestinians are the parasites in the Arab-Israeli conflict; not intentionally, but because they generationally did not productively develop. About four generations emerged in an atmosphere where war was made more important than cultural advancements.

Most Respectfully,
R

How would you reasonably expect productive development in Palestine when Israel controls air, land, and water resources? Zionism made no secret of its dependence on English bayonets to lay the infrastructure of the Jewish state, and their descendants remain indebted, to say the least, to US cover at the UN and $8 million a day welfare from the American taxpayer.

 

[P F Tinmore]

Palestine is an admitted threat to Israel.

• The UN set the conditions for Israeli statehood.
  • The Palestinians oppose those decisions;
    • The Palestinians have decided to use force to challenge the UN decision.
    • The Palestinians have decided to use force to challenge sovereignty of Israeli. statehood.

The UN can only give political recognition to "states." This has nothing to do with legalities.

Switzerland did not become a member of the UN until 2002. Does that mean it was not a state before then?

Israel is recognized as a state but about 30 (?) UN member states do not recognize Israel.

Palestine is recognized as a state but Israel and the US say no.

Just because the UN recognizes a state does not require others to do so.

 

[P F Tinmore]

The Palestinian concept is diametrically opposed to the Rule of Law (RoL).

• Article 2: Palestine, with the boundaries it had during the British Mandate, is an indivisible territorial unit.
• Article 19: The partition of Palestine in 1947, and the establishment of the state of Israel are entirely illegal, regardless of the passage of time, because they were contrary to the will of the Palestinian people and its natural right in their homeland, and were inconsistent with the principles embodied in the Charter of the United Nations, particularly the right to self-determination.

I don't see a problem here.

• Article 51: Nothing in the present Charter shall impair the inherent right of individual or collective self-defence if an armed attack occurs against a Member of the United Nations,
  
• Every State has the duty to refrain from the threat or use of force to violate the existing international boundaries of another State or as a means of solving international disputes, including territorial disputes and problems concerning frontiers of States.

All people have the right to self defense. UN membership is not necessary.

Israel's "international boundaries" are inside Palestine. How can Palestine violate boundaries that are inside Palestine? How can that be deemed international?