OK! What if . . . . . . ?

[docmauser1]

All Palestinians whose normal place of residence was inside what became Israel have the right to become Israeli citizens.

With the UNRWA, classifying any arab, who'd been settling-squatting in the mandate palestine for at least two years, as refugeester, and maintaining an exclusive club of the card-carrying, professional career "refugeez", we may dismiss the contention as bullish. And, before me forgets, one of the reasons palistanians have been making mucho noise only about a unilateral declaration of their "state", but don't follow through, is that they'll have to accept all those "refugeez", and the former don't want that, of course.

 

[docmauser1]

RoccoR - do you remember when we started a thread on proposed solutions to the IP conflict and creating 2 states? (or am I imagining things?) - I recall it was a good thread but can't find it. Might be nice to wake it up again and see what participation we can get

Palistanians should be resettled and that's it, of course.

 

[Hollie]

RoccoR - do you remember when we started a thread on proposed solutions to the IP conflict and creating 2 states? (or am I imagining things?) - I recall it was a good thread but can't find it. Might be nice to wake it up again and see what participation we can get

Palistanians should be resettled and that's it, of course.

The problem, of course, is the nations of origins of the beggars and squatters posing as "Pal'istanians" are refused the right of return by those nations.

The Black September event in Jordan was a disaster for the poser "Pal'istanians" in that every Arab nation saw the liability in accepting their homegrown Islamic terrorists.

 

[docmauser1]

The rules of international humanitarian law relevant to occupied
territories become applicable whenever territory comes under the effective control of hostile foreign armed forces, even if the occupation meets no armed resistance and there is no fighting.

Yeah, Carter's legal advisor, Hansell, had similarly ignored the Article 2 to please his boss and give him a "moral" horsie to ride, all that "puah 'n robbed" palistanian crapolio, of course.

 

[Coyote]

RoccoR - do you remember when we started a thread on proposed solutions to the IP conflict and creating 2 states? (or am I imagining things?) - I recall it was a good thread but can't find it. Might be nice to wake it up again and see what participation we can get

Palistanians should be resettled and that's it, of course.

Why?

As of 2014, there are approximately 4.4 million Palestinians: 1.7 million in the Gaza Strip and 2.7 million in the West Bank. In addition, there are (or were, since who knows the current state) approx 499,189 in refugee camps in Syria; 448,599 in Lebenon and 2,034,641 in camps in Jordan. You are looking at "resettling" 7.5 million people in a region where there are already over 4 million refugees and 7 million internally dispaced people (in Syria) , millions more in the conflicts in Yemen and Libya and Iraq.

You want to add to the crisis solely because Israel wants the entire territory?

The last person to suggest "resettling" an entire ethnic population was Hitler. It didn't end well.

 

[Coyote]

RoccoR - do you remember when we started a thread on proposed solutions to the IP conflict and creating 2 states? (or am I imagining things?) - I recall it was a good thread but can't find it. Might be nice to wake it up again and see what participation we can get

Palistanians should be resettled and that's it, of course.

The problem, of course, is the nations of origins of the beggars and squatters posing as "Pal'istanians" are refused the right of return by those nations.

The Black September event in Jordan was a disaster for the poser "Pal'istanians" in that every Arab nation saw the liability in accepting their homegrown Islamic terrorists.

Most originated in the areas called West Bank, Gaza, Israel. Silly to pretend otherwise unless you can prove they all came from what is now called Jordan.

 

[docmauser1]

RoccoR - do you remember when we started a thread on proposed solutions to the IP conflict and creating 2 states? (or am I imagining things?) - I recall it was a good thread but can't find it. Might be nice to wake it up again and see what participation we can get

Palistanians should be resettled and that's it, of course.

The problem, of course, is the nations of origins of the beggars and squatters posing as "Pal'istanians" are refused the right of return by those nations. The Black September event in Jordan was a disaster for the poser "Pal'istanians" in that every Arab nation saw the liability in accepting their homegrown Islamic terrorists.

Who cares. The EU palistan-cheerleaders found a way to accomodate all those wonderful ME-looking folks, let'em think about palistanians too, of course.

 

[Coyote]

RoccoR - do you remember when we started a thread on proposed solutions to the IP conflict and creating 2 states? (or am I imagining things?) - I recall it was a good thread but can't find it. Might be nice to wake it up again and see what participation we can get

Palistanians should be resettled and that's it, of course.

The problem, of course, is the nations of origins of the beggars and squatters posing as "Pal'istanians" are refused the right of return by those nations. The Black September event in Jordan was a disaster for the poser "Pal'istanians" in that every Arab nation saw the liability in accepting their homegrown Islamic terrorists.

Who cares. The EU palistan-cheerleaders found a way to accomodate all those wonderful ME-looking folks, let'em think about palistanians too, of course.

Ok, at least you are honest about your view on humanitarian concerns and Israel's greed.

 

[Phoenall]

NO why should theJews be kicked out of their country that was granted legally. No one is asking for 2/3 of the arab muslims to be kicked out of their countries as part of a peace plan are they ?

2/3 have already been kicked out and not allowed to return.

When did this happen and who kicked them out ?

And how does this refute my words ?

So you cant answer, why aren't I surprised at your silence.............

Stupid question. You got to be how old and know nothing. That is quite remarkable.

So how does this refute my words, and stop deflecting because you have been shown to be unable to answer

Israel did not end the occupation. It just moved it to the edges. Israel still patrols Gaza regularly. It still attacks and sometimes kills Palestinians inside Gaza. It regularly destroys private property inside Gaza. It still controls the population registry, ID cards, Passports and travel. It controls all imports and exports. It keeps 90% of factories from operating. It keeps 1/3 of Gaza's farmland out of production.

The Palestinians can control what's left.

If they move to Israel then they are no longer in full control and gaza is no longer occupied. Israel does not enter gaza unless they are fighting the terrorists and they need to close down tunnels. It only attacks in response to terrorist attacks and while the Palestinians fire from civilian areas then then are culpable for civilian deaths. It destroys terrorist facilities. How about a link as hamas will tell you it doesn't. Yes and that is legal. No that is the Palestinians. No that is hamas.

This is the only part you have right.

 

[Phoenall]

And yet hamas swore that gaza was not occupied and had not been since 2005. So who is the better authority, and why does international law show that Israel does not occupy gaza

Which international law would that be then Phoney?

This one



Occupation and international humanitarian law: questions and answers

Article 42 of the 1907 Hague Regulations (HR) states that a " territory is considered occupied when it is actually placed under the authority of the hostile army. The occupation extends only to the territory where such authority has been established and can be exercised. "



So is gaza completely under the control of the Israeli army 24/7, which would mean no tunnels, illegal rockets or attacks on Israel.

Gaza is not "completely" under the control of Israel... But then that is NOT a stipulation within your linked article is it!

However, as you know, Israel controls Gazan air and sea plus it controls the movement in and out of Gaza, not just of Palestinians but also foreign nationals.

The UN and a significant number of countries still consider Gaza as occupied based upon the above facts.



Taking the cherry picked quote you have made from your linked article, it is very clear that Gazan territory is still occupied by Israel as it is Israel who continues to maintain control of air and sea.

Furthermore, quoting from your linked article, it is very clear that Israel breaks this law on a number of examples... I won't cherry pick them all as, undoutably, you have read the whole article so will know this as fact!

"The main rules of the law applicable in case of occupation state that:

• The occupant does not acquire sovereignty over the territory.
  
  
• Occupation is only a temporary situation, and the rights of the occupant are limited to the extent of that period.
• 
  
  

Try again as that is what the link says. The occupation extends only to the territory where such authority has been established and can be exercised

So the Israelis don't occupy gaza as they do not have authority over any of the land, and do not have military personel stationed in gaza.

Not cherry picked at all as it is the first definition that is on the page detailing actual international law




Israel has not acquired sovereignty over gaza

the occupating ended in 2005 making it temporary, now it is blockaded because of islamonazi terrorism and violence

This one is a really funny Phoney fail...

The 'convenient' exchange of the word "territory" as stated in your link replaced by YOUR word "land"...

You will find that territory extends beyond JUST "land"...

You and all the other zionuts can call it what you like... Fact remains that Israel has significant control over Gazan territory and its people... That's why those that matter consider Gaza still being occupied!

Means the same thing idiot

Does it then do explain ?

Still does not have full control as stipulated in the international law provided so legally gaza is not occupied. Argue with the ICC/ICJ if you have any doubts on this matter

 

[Phoenall]

This one



Occupation and international humanitarian law: questions and answers

Article 42 of the 1907 Hague Regulations (HR) states that a " territory is considered occupied when it is actually placed under the authority of the hostile army. The occupation extends only to the territory where such authority has been established and can be exercised. "

So is gaza completely under the control of the Israeli army 24/7, which would mean no tunnels, illegal rockets or attacks on Israel.

Israel has "effective control" over the entire area. They control 80% of what goes in to and out of Gaza. Gazans cannot leave by air or sea without Israeli permission. It is a prison.

It also satisfy's the laws of occupation.

No as it has to be 100% MILITARY CONTROL only having 80% control proves under international law that gaza is not occupied.

Thats you making shit up again Phoney...

It does NOT say that in your link!

Yes it does



1. What is occupation?
Article 42 of the 1907 Hague Regulations (HR) states that a " territory is considered occupied when it is actually placed under the authority of the hostile army. The occupation extends only to the territory where such authority has been established and can be exercised. "


So unless the IDF fully control gaza militarily then it is not occupied. The wording is explicit

 

[Phoenall]

I see no problem with that at all. After all, the Arabs that stayed in Israel and did not become part of the newly created (or want to be) 'Palestinian' identity do enjoy equal rights. They have members in the Knesset and on the Israeli Supreme court.

Whatever the Palestinian's identify with, is none of your (or Israel's) god-damn business!

You have no right, denying them, they're rights. Period.

What rights are they then, as there is no legal right to be an Israeli citizen

Yes there is. All Palestinians whose normal place of residence was inside what became Israel have the right to become Israeli citizens.

Says who. what law makes it so and when did this law come into effect ?

 

[Humanity]

This one



Occupation and international humanitarian law: questions and answers

Article 42 of the 1907 Hague Regulations (HR) states that a " territory is considered occupied when it is actually placed under the authority of the hostile army. The occupation extends only to the territory where such authority has been established and can be exercised. "

So is gaza completely under the control of the Israeli army 24/7, which would mean no tunnels, illegal rockets or attacks on Israel.

Israel has "effective control" over the entire area. They control 80% of what goes in to and out of Gaza. Gazans cannot leave by air or sea without Israeli permission. It is a prison.

It also satisfy's the laws of occupation.

No as it has to be 100% MILITARY CONTROL only having 80% control proves under international law that gaza is not occupied.

Thats you making shit up again Phoney...

It does NOT say that in your link!

Yes it does



1. What is occupation?
Article 42 of the 1907 Hague Regulations (HR) states that a " territory is considered occupied when it is actually placed under the authority of the hostile army. The occupation extends only to the territory where such authority has been established and can be exercised. "


So unless the IDF fully control gaza militarily then it is not occupied. The wording is explicit

Good grief....

In your ever so nicely enlarged and emboldened text can you please show me where this "it has to be 100% MILITARY CONTROL" appears?

That is what YOU have stated and it is clearly NOT in your text your have pasted...

So, yet again, Phoney fails!

 

[Phoenall]

This one

Occupation and international humanitarian law: questions and answers

Article 42 of the 1907 Hague Regulations (HR) states that a " territory is considered occupied when it is actually placed under the authority of the hostile army. The occupation extends only to the territory where such authority has been established and can be exercised. "

Since you provided the correct link regarding the laws of occupation, I've taken the liberty of using YOUR link to show those laws you are in violation of...


The main rules o f the law applicable in case of occupation state that:

• The occupant does not acquire sovereignty over the territory.
  
• Occupation is only a temporary situation, and the rights of the occupant are limited to the extent of that period.
• Collective or individual forcible transfers of population from and within the occupied territory are prohibited.
  
• Transfers of the civilian population of the occupying power into the occupied territory, regardless whether forcible or voluntary, are prohibited.
  
• Collective punishment is prohibited.
• The taking of hostages is prohibited.
• Reprisals against protected persons or their property are prohibited.
  
• The confiscation of private property by the occupant is prohibited.
• The destruction or seizure of enemy property is prohibited, unless absolutely required by military necessity during the conduct of hostilities.

And more specifically regarding "effective control"...

still from your link...

2. When does the law of occupation start to apply?

The rules of international humanitarian law relevant to occupied
territories become applicable whenever territory comes under the effective control of hostile foreign armed forces, even if the occupation meets no armed resistance and there is no fighting.​

LINK to show this has happened

Link to show this has happened


Without actual evidence of my being involved you are just making a fool of yourself and could end up getting banned for faslse accusations

 

[montelatici]

RoccoR - do you remember when we started a thread on proposed solutions to the IP conflict and creating 2 states? (or am I imagining things?) - I recall it was a good thread but can't find it. Might be nice to wake it up again and see what participation we can get

Palistanians should be resettled and that's it, of course.

The problem, of course, is the nations of origins of the beggars and squatters posing as "Pal'istanians" are refused the right of return by those nations.

The Black September event in Jordan was a disaster for the poser "Pal'istanians" in that every Arab nation saw the liability in accepting their homegrown Islamic terrorists.

As usual the Zionazis make up their own history and ignore the fact that the squatters are the invading Jews as official records prove. It is amazing how effective their brain washing has been. The ignorant, uneducated dimwits haven't a clue how to perform proper research.

From the official documents:

UNITED

NATIONS

A​

General Assembly


A/364

3 September 1947


OFFICIAL RECORDS OF THE SECOND SESSION OF

THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY



SUPPLEMENT No. 11




UNITED NATIONS

SPECIAL COMMITTEE

ON PALESTINE




REPORT TO THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY


VOLUME 1





​

Lake Success
New York
1947​

​

"11. The most striking demographic features of Palestine are, first, the rate at which the total population has grown in the last twenty-five years; second, the manner in which the proportions of the two major national groups, the Arabs and Jews, have changed; and third, the relative importance of immigration and rate of natural increase in their effect on the total population and on the proportion of Jews to Arabs. These are the essential and dynamic elements of what is, in detail, a very complicated matter. In addition, it is important to consider briefly the present regional distribution of the population.

12. The total settled population of Palestine at the end of 1946 was estimated to be nearly 1,846,000.42/ This is nearly three times the total population as revealed by the census of 1922 or, more exactly, an increase of 184 per cent.


13. Since the main lines of conflict in Palestine are between Jews and Arabs as conscious national groups, it is of some importance to distinguish the population according to this classification. On this basis, the population at the end of 1946 was estimated as follows:

Arabs, 1,203,000; Jews, 608,000; others, 35,000; Total, 1,846,000.

14. It will have been noticed that not only has there been a remarkably rapid increase in the total population of Palestine but also the proportion of Jews in the total has greatly increased, from 12.91 -per cent in 1922 to 32.96 per cent in 1946. Conversely, of course, the Arab proportion has fallen since 1922. The Moslem proportion of the population (almost entirely Arab) has fallen from about 75 per cent of the total to 60 per cent, and the Christian proportion (very largely Arab) from 11 per cent to 8 per cent. Thus, at the present time about one-third of the total settled population is Jewish.

(b)IMMIGRATION AND NATURAL INCREASE

15. These changes in the population have been brought about by two forces: natural increase and immigration. The great increase in the Jewish population is due in the main to immigration. From 1920 to 1946, the total number of recorded Jewish immigrants into Palestine was about 376,000, or an average of over 8,000 per year. The flow has not been regular, however, being fairly high in 1924 to 1926, falling in the next few years (there was a net emigration in 1927) and rising to even higher levels between 1933 and 1936 as a result of the Nazi persecution in Europe. Between the census year of 1931 and the year 1936, the proportion of Jews to the total population rose from 18 per cent to nearly 30 per cent.

16. The Arab population has increased almost entirely as a result of an excess of births over deaths. Indeed, the natural rate of increase of Moslem Arabs in Palestine is the highest in recorded statistics,1 a phenomenon explained by very high fertility rates coupled with a marked decline in death rates as a result of improved conditions of life and public health, The natural rate of increase of Jews is also relatively high, but is conditioned by a favorable age distribution of the population due to the high rate of immigration.

 

[Phoenall]

This one



Occupation and international humanitarian law: questions and answers

Article 42 of the 1907 Hague Regulations (HR) states that a " territory is considered occupied when it is actually placed under the authority of the hostile army. The occupation extends only to the territory where such authority has been established and can be exercised. "

So is gaza completely under the control of the Israeli army 24/7, which would mean no tunnels, illegal rockets or attacks on Israel.

Israel has "effective control" over the entire area. They control 80% of what goes in to and out of Gaza. Gazans cannot leave by air or sea without Israeli permission. It is a prison.

It also satisfy's the laws of occupation.

No as it has to be 100% MILITARY CONTROL only having 80% control proves under international law that gaza is not occupied.

Thats you making shit up again Phoney...

It does NOT say that in your link!

Yes it does



1. What is occupation?
Article 42 of the 1907 Hague Regulations (HR) states that a " territory is considered occupied when it is actually placed under the authority of the hostile army. The occupation extends only to the territory where such authority has been established and can be exercised. "


So unless the IDF fully control gaza militarily then it is not occupied. The wording is explicit

Good grief....

In your ever so nicely enlarged and emboldened text can you please show me where this "it has to be 100% MILITARY CONTROL" appears?

That is what YOU have stated and it is clearly NOT in your text your have pasted...

So, yet again, Phoney fails!

Highlighted so that even morons like you can read it better

of the hostile army

 

[Humanity]

Israel has "effective control" over the entire area. They control 80% of what goes in to and out of Gaza. Gazans cannot leave by air or sea without Israeli permission. It is a prison.

It also satisfy's the laws of occupation.

No as it has to be 100% MILITARY CONTROL only having 80% control proves under international law that gaza is not occupied.

Thats you making shit up again Phoney...

It does NOT say that in your link!

Yes it does



1. What is occupation?
Article 42 of the 1907 Hague Regulations (HR) states that a " territory is considered occupied when it is actually placed under the authority of the hostile army. The occupation extends only to the territory where such authority has been established and can be exercised. "


So unless the IDF fully control gaza militarily then it is not occupied. The wording is explicit

Good grief....

In your ever so nicely enlarged and emboldened text can you please show me where this "it has to be 100% MILITARY CONTROL" appears?

That is what YOU have stated and it is clearly NOT in your text your have pasted...

So, yet again, Phoney fails!

Highlighted so that even morons like you can read it better

of the hostile army

Highlighted beautifully to prove you are a liar...

Where in your highlighted text does it state "it has to be 100% MILITARY CONTROL"?

 

[docmauser1]

RoccoR - do you remember when we started a thread on proposed solutions to the IP conflict and creating 2 states? (or am I imagining things?) - I recall it was a good thread but can't find it. Might be nice to wake it up again and see what participation we can get

Palistanians should be resettled and that's it, of course.

Why?

Why not?

As of 2014, there are approximately 4.4 million Palestinians: 1.7 million in the Gaza Strip and 2.7 million in the West Bank. In addition, there are (or were, since who knows the current state) approx 499,189 in refugee camps in Syria; 448,599 in Lebenon and 2,034,641 in camps in Jordan. You are looking at "resettling" 7.5 million people in a region where there are already over 4 million refugees and 7 million internally dispaced people (in Syria) , millions more in the conflicts in Yemen and Libya and Iraq.

Cool, but what has all that to do with "Other Arabs From The Same General Area Who Are In Deep Denial About Never Being Able To Accomplish Anything In Life And Would Rather Wrap Themselves In The Seductive Melodrama Of Eternal Struggle And Death."? It has nothing to do with those palistanian folks, whose singular raison d'etre isn't getting a life and a job, like nations do, but the destruction and looting of what others built, of course.

You want to add to the crisis solely because Israel wants the entire territory?

As distinct from the palistanian wet dream of having palistan and Israel too?

The last person to suggest "resettling" an entire ethnic population was Hitler.

Funny, after him the Potsdam conference allowed for the removal of 11 mln. to 15 mln of ethnic germans between 1945 and 1950. How 'bout'em apples?

It didn't end well.

So, what the latest excuse the eurohypocrites concoct?

 

[docmauser1]

RoccoR - do you remember when we started a thread on proposed solutions to the IP conflict and creating 2 states? (or am I imagining things?) - I recall it was a good thread but can't find it. Might be nice to wake it up again and see what participation we can get

Palistanians should be resettled and that's it, of course.

The problem, of course, is the nations of origins of the beggars and squatters posing as "Pal'istanians" are refused the right of return by those nations. The Black September event in Jordan was a disaster for the poser "Pal'istanians" in that every Arab nation saw the liability in accepting their homegrown Islamic terrorists.

Most originated in the areas called West Bank, Gaza, Israel. Silly to pretend otherwise unless you can prove they all came from what is now called Jordan.

Poor "indigenous" settlers-squatters from the hood.

 

[docmauser1]

RoccoR - do you remember when we started a thread on proposed solutions to the IP conflict and creating 2 states? (or am I imagining things?) - I recall it was a good thread but can't find it. Might be nice to wake it up again and see what participation we can get

Palistanians should be resettled and that's it, of course.

The problem, of course, is the nations of origins of the beggars and squatters posing as "Pal'istanians" are refused the right of return by those nations. The Black September event in Jordan was a disaster for the poser "Pal'istanians" in that every Arab nation saw the liability in accepting their homegrown Islamic terrorists.

Who cares. The EU palistan-cheerleaders found a way to accomodate all those wonderful ME-looking folks, let'em think about palistanians too, of course.

Ok, at least you are honest about your view on humanitarian concerns and Israel's greed.

As distinct from the palistanian "humanitarian" wet dream of having palistan and Israel too?