Jews trying to get Americans killed - as usual

[Phoenall]

Human Rights laws do not permit states to make a citizen stateless, by depriving them of their nationality.

Yes, Britain has withdrawn / cancelled citizenship of nationals who have gone abroad to fight as mercenaries or Jihadists. However those citizens have initially dual nationality, so are not made stateless.

Five of the dual nationals deprived of their citizenship were British Pakistanis, while two were of dual British and Sudanese nationality. The remaining six were Australian, Iraqi, Russian, Egyptian and Lebanese dual nationals.

Does that answer your question Phoenall?

I never posed any question I stated as fact that you and your fellow ISLAMONAZI PROPAGANDISTS were wrong and that there is no International Law that says that a nation cant refuse to accept for citizenship. In the UK's case they have all been muslims

 

[Phoenall]

Do explain then why all nations have the right in law to define who gets to be a citizen, we do not live in a world without borders yet. So the USA can deny entry to anyone they like, and can also deny citizenship to anyone. The UK have withdrawn citizenship from foreign nationals who have travelled abroad to take part in terrorist activity

The U.S. nor the U.K. (nor any other EU state) discriminate based on religion as Israel, and I am sure, some Muslim states do. It is against the law.

Baaaaloney. Israel does not discriminate against it's 1.8 million Arab Muslim citizens. In fact they prefer to live in Israel more than any Arab Muslim shithole.

True story.

The UK for 17 years under a neo Marxist government discriminated against Christians in favour of muslims . They passed laws giving the muslims more rights and freedoms that were refused to all other ethnic/religious groups. At the borders muslims were waved through without a moments hesitation while American Christians were stopped and interviewed for hours regarding their visit.

That is a recent thing and has caused much concern over here when considered along with the muslims being protected against arrest for child sex abuse's

 

[Phoenall]

The U.S. nor the U.K. (nor any other EU state) discriminate based on religion as Israel, and I am sure, some Muslim states do. It is against the law.

Baaaaloney. Israel does not discriminate against it's 1.8 million Arab Muslim citizens. In fact they prefer to live in Israel more than any Arab Muslim shithole.

True story.

The discriminatory nature of Israel's citizenship law is posted on an Israeli Government website. You people are out of your minds.

So it is nothing like Islamic law then that prohibits ALL non muslims from practising their religion and from wearing white clothes and riding horses ?

 

[Phoenall]

Pyschopaths meet and it is love at first sight.

Isn't that illegal in islam ....................

 

[Phoenall]

Pyschopaths meet and it is love at first sight.

You met yourself?

No, Phony met Sally.

Me and Sally go back a long time on various message boards, even as far back as the old AOL boards that are now extinct. We were posting before you were a stain on the ground when the seed was spilled.
What we have is mutual respect and understanding, something the ISLAMONAZI's will never have.

 

[toastman]

Though thinking about it, I don't believe a nation does have the absolute right to define what qualifies as its citizens.

There is much international law to consider, not least Human Rights (I suppose Israel doesn't much like those of course.)

For example, Russia may have more success extraditing one of its own citizens from abroad, than a complete non-Russian.
How would you feel if you woke up tomorrow to find Russia had new criteria which defined YOU as a Russian citizen?

So no. Nations do not get to decide in isolation their definition of citizen.

Indeed, and this is an aspect that has not been mentioned yet.

In international law, when a state is dissolved and new states are established, “the population follows the change of sovereignty in matters of nationality.”5 As a rule, therefore, citizens of the former state should automatically acquire the nationality of the successor state in which they had already been residing.

5 Ian Brownlie, “The Relations of Nationality in Public International Law,” The British Year Book of International Law, 1963, p. 220.

So, citizens of Palestine who normally lived in the area that became Israel would automatically become Israelis. Refugees would fall into this category. Immigration would have nothing to do with it.

There was no Palestinian state that dissolved because Palestine was NOT A STATE when Israel declared independence. There were no 'citizens of the FORMER STATE' because Palestine was not a state then.

Once again, you post a link of some law that does not apply to Palestinians.

 

[Phoenall]

Though thinking about it, I don't believe a nation does have the absolute right to define what qualifies as its citizens.

There is much international law to consider, not least Human Rights (I suppose Israel doesn't much like those of course.)

For example, Russia may have more success extraditing one of its own citizens from abroad, than a complete non-Russian.
How would you feel if you woke up tomorrow to find Russia had new criteria which defined YOU as a Russian citizen?

So no. Nations do not get to decide in isolation their definition of citizen.

Indeed, and this is an aspect that has not been mentioned yet.

In international law, when a state is dissolved and new states are established, “the population follows the change of sovereignty in matters of nationality.”5 As a rule, therefore, citizens of the former state should automatically acquire the nationality of the successor state in which they had already been residing.

5 Ian Brownlie, “The Relations of Nationality in Public International Law,” The British Year Book of International Law, 1963, p. 220.

So, citizens of Palestine who normally lived in the area that became Israel would automatically become Israelis. Refugees would fall into this category. Immigration would have nothing to do with it.

Only if they were not enemies of the new state, then they would be told to take a hike. The muslins refused the offer of Israeli citizenship in may 1948 so they cant come back 66 years later demanding it, there are certain clauses that they need to be aware of and agree with before they can take up citizenship. I will leave it to you to find them

 

[P F Tinmore]

Though thinking about it, I don't believe a nation does have the absolute right to define what qualifies as its citizens.

There is much international law to consider, not least Human Rights (I suppose Israel doesn't much like those of course.)

For example, Russia may have more success extraditing one of its own citizens from abroad, than a complete non-Russian.
How would you feel if you woke up tomorrow to find Russia had new criteria which defined YOU as a Russian citizen?

So no. Nations do not get to decide in isolation their definition of citizen.

Indeed, and this is an aspect that has not been mentioned yet.

In international law, when a state is dissolved and new states are established, “the population follows the change of sovereignty in matters of nationality.”5 As a rule, therefore, citizens of the former state should automatically acquire the nationality of the successor state in which they had already been residing.

5 Ian Brownlie, “The Relations of Nationality in Public International Law,” The British Year Book of International Law, 1963, p. 220.

So, citizens of Palestine who normally lived in the area that became Israel would automatically become Israelis. Refugees would fall into this category. Immigration would have nothing to do with it.

There was no Palestinian state that dissolved because Palestine was NOT A STATE when Israel declared independence. There were no 'citizens of the FORMER STATE' because Palestine was not a state then.

Once again, you post a link of some law that does not apply to Palestinians.

Interesting premise.

One of the duties of the mandate for Palestine was to assist immigrating Jews in obtaining Palestinian citizenship. These Jews were to become citizens of what? Citizens of nothing as Israeli propaganda would have us to believe?

Something here makes no sense. Perhaps you could clear that up for us.

 

[Beelzebub]

Palestine was in fact in a pre-state stage.

The British mandate should have been extended, as they had failed to do what was envisaged in bringing Palestine to statehood, with all the necessary institutions.

This was due to both the interruption of WWII and terrorist groups such as Irgun and Haganah, which had murdered Arabs and British to prevent a state being created by the indigenous people.

Good old Ariel Sharon - you remember him , the war criminal - he had a big hand in that. Partly why the Zionists love him as he was one of their terrorists.

 

[P F Tinmore]

Palestine was in fact in a pre-state stage.

The British mandate should have been extended, as they had failed to do what was envisaged in bringing Palestine to statehood, with all the necessary institutions.

This was due to both the interruption of WWII and terrorist groups such as Irgun and Haganah, which had murdered Arabs and British to prevent a state being created by the indigenous people.

Good old Ariel Sharon - you remember him , the war criminal - he had a big hand in that. Partly why the Zionists love him as he was one of their terrorists.

Indeed, the British Mandate was a monumental flop. After 25 years of occupation...er...mandate they accomplished nothing. They did not even have any elected bodies in place. All they did was start a never-ending war and pass it on to the UN.

The UN recommended a partition plan that had been rejected 10 years earlier and was rejected again. That flopped too.

How can the world assemble so many worthless people in one place?

 

[Beelzebub]

Be fair P F Tinmore.

WWII was quite a distraction.
There was a lot of illicit immigration into Palestine with Nazi Germany teaming up with German Zionists to arm them, and force them into the Mandate area, massively in excess of permitted numbers, even in the 1930's.

Add to that American support for Zionism, muchly as an lever to reduce British influence, and the fact that Britain had spend most of its wealth fighting WWI, it was a tough job.

And, Palestine had NOTHING to begin, having been occupied continually by the Ottoman forces, who did nothing to educate or allow autonomous Palestinian institutions.

It was not like in India, where a relatively benign occupation had left the nation with many skilled and visionary leaders.

 

[P F Tinmore]

Be fair P F Tinmore.

WWII was quite a distraction.
There was a lot of illicit immigration into Palestine with Nazi Germany teaming up with German Zionists to arm them, and force them into the Mandate area, massively in excess of permitted numbers, even in the 1930's.

Add to that American support for Zionism, muchly as an lever to reduce British influence, and the fact that Britain had spend most of its wealth fighting WWI, it was a tough job.

And, Palestine had NOTHING to begin, having been occupied continually by the Ottoman forces, who did nothing to educate or allow autonomous Palestinian institutions.

It was not like in India, where a relatively benign occupation had left the nation with many skilled and visionary leaders.

I am being fair. Britain got the mandate to bring Palestine to independence. They fucked up so bad that they cut and ran leaving the problems they created to the UN.

And the dufus crowd at the UN has done nothing since to correct the problem.

 

[Beelzebub]

Yep. You could be right.

Can you put your finger on what was done wrong?

 

[P F Tinmore]

Yep. You could be right.

Can you put your finger on what was done wrong?

The purpose of the mandate was to bring Palestine to independence in the best interest of the native people. Instead they pushed the natives aside, like the good colonialists that they were, and pushed the agenda of foreigners. This violated the League of Nation Covenant, international law, and the rights of the native population.

The war they started continues today.

 

[aris2chat]

Indeed, and this is an aspect that has not been mentioned yet.



So, citizens of Palestine who normally lived in the area that became Israel would automatically become Israelis. Refugees would fall into this category. Immigration would have nothing to do with it.

There was no Palestinian state that dissolved because Palestine was NOT A STATE when Israel declared independence. There were no 'citizens of the FORMER STATE' because Palestine was not a state then.

Once again, you post a link of some law that does not apply to Palestinians.

Interesting premise.

One of the duties of the mandate for Palestine was to assist immigrating Jews in obtaining Palestinian citizenship. These Jews were to become citizens of what? Citizens of nothing as Israeli propaganda would have us to believe?

Something here makes no sense. Perhaps you could clear that up for us.

They were to be part of Eretz-Israel

 

[P F Tinmore]

There was no Palestinian state that dissolved because Palestine was NOT A STATE when Israel declared independence. There were no 'citizens of the FORMER STATE' because Palestine was not a state then.

Once again, you post a link of some law that does not apply to Palestinians.

Interesting premise.

One of the duties of the mandate for Palestine was to assist immigrating Jews in obtaining Palestinian citizenship. These Jews were to become citizens of what? Citizens of nothing as Israeli propaganda would have us to believe?

Something here makes no sense. Perhaps you could clear that up for us.

They were to be part of Eretz-Israel

Where was that term mentioned in the LoN covenant or the Mandate?

 

[Beelzebub]

Yep. You could be right.

Can you put your finger on what was done wrong?

The purpose of the mandate was to bring Palestine to independence in the best interest of the native people. Instead they pushed the natives aside, like the good colonialists that they were, and pushed the agenda of foreigners. This violated the League of Nation Covenant, international law, and the rights of the native population.

The war they started continues today.

That's hardly putting your finger on it.
You are just saying they didn't do it right.

What did they do that you would have done differently?
Told the League of Nations to go f*ck itself over Zionist aspirations?
Taken all the Palestinians off the fields and into college?

Or are you unsure of the detail of the history?

 

[montelatici]

There was no Palestinian state that dissolved because Palestine was NOT A STATE when Israel declared independence. There were no 'citizens of the FORMER STATE' because Palestine was not a state then.

Once again, you post a link of some law that does not apply to Palestinians.

Interesting premise.

One of the duties of the mandate for Palestine was to assist immigrating Jews in obtaining Palestinian citizenship. These Jews were to become citizens of what? Citizens of nothing as Israeli propaganda would have us to believe?

Something here makes no sense. Perhaps you could clear that up for us.

They were to be part of Eretz-Israel

Not according to the Mandate. As we all now know, after reading the source document, a Jewish National Home (not an independent state) was to be established within Palestine and the Jews were to become Palestinians as were the existing non-Jewish Palestinians per Article 7.

"The Administration of Palestine shall be responsible for enacting a nationality law. There shall be included in this law provisions framed so as to facilitate the acquisition of Palestinian citizenship by Jews who take up their permanent residence in Palestine."

The Avalon Project : The Palestine Mandate

 

[toastman]

Indeed, and this is an aspect that has not been mentioned yet.



So, citizens of Palestine who normally lived in the area that became Israel would automatically become Israelis. Refugees would fall into this category. Immigration would have nothing to do with it.

There was no Palestinian state that dissolved because Palestine was NOT A STATE when Israel declared independence. There were no 'citizens of the FORMER STATE' because Palestine was not a state then.

Once again, you post a link of some law that does not apply to Palestinians.

Interesting premise.

One of the duties of the mandate for Palestine was to assist immigrating Jews in obtaining Palestinian citizenship. These Jews were to become citizens of what? Citizens of nothing as Israeli propaganda would have us to believe?

Something here makes no sense. Perhaps you could clear that up for us.

What's with the deflection Tinmore? And why are you unable to accept simple facts??

 

[P F Tinmore]

There was no Palestinian state that dissolved because Palestine was NOT A STATE when Israel declared independence. There were no 'citizens of the FORMER STATE' because Palestine was not a state then.

Once again, you post a link of some law that does not apply to Palestinians.

Interesting premise.

One of the duties of the mandate for Palestine was to assist immigrating Jews in obtaining Palestinian citizenship. These Jews were to become citizens of what? Citizens of nothing as Israeli propaganda would have us to believe?

Something here makes no sense. Perhaps you could clear that up for us.

What's with the deflection Tinmore? And why are you unable to accept simple facts??

What fact are you talking about?