Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Unlock unbeatable offers today. Shop here: https://amzn.to/4cEkqYs 🎁
OFF TOPIC
SherriMunnerlyn, et al,
Part and parcel of the "right of self-determination" is the flip-side to that coin, which is to "take responsibility for the consequences to your actions."
The People of Gaza, and Palestinians in general, have chosen a path for war with Israel. The people have adopted a Charter that, for all intent and purposes, calls for the destruction of Israel and the establishment of a Islamic Caliph over the land. The people selected this hostile government, support this hostile government, and promote this hostile government that has used both asymmetric and conventional warfare strategies against the Israels. And in doing so, effectively establish a quasi-state of war.
In doing so, both the government and the people that put them in power and maintain their legitimacy, and the will to further hostile activities, must also accept the consequences of their actions. They can neither hide behind their deaths, or law. For over six decades, the Palestinian People have promoted hostilities at their own discretion with Israel. The responsibility for their casualties is theirs; and their alone. The casualties stop if the discretionary warlike activities stop. It is their choice; and has always been their choice. To continue fruitless efforts at hostilities, and then to philosophically hide behind the casualties (especially the bodies of children) so that they can freely conduct further hostilities without reprisals is futile.
If the Palestinians do not want to accept the responsibilities of war, and the subsequent consequences, then they should cease all further action that warrant reprisals.
(COMMENT)What I find amazing is how any person with any degree of intelligence does not see that most of the unlawful violence in this conflict is carried out by Israel, not Hamas.That explains how Israel killed close to 500 Palestinian children in the past 5 years, while Hamas killed only 1 Israeli child in that same 5 year time period.
In war, which the Palestinians created, there is a cost; as I've discussed. But there is also these hidden agendas. One of the agendas to to create a false atmosphere of sympathy. HAMAS allows rockets to be fired from built-up residencial areas because they know that this is where the Israelis will return fire. It is an intentional attempt to create casualties. If Hamas did not want casualties, they would not select launch cites that are surrounded by civilian noncombatants.
Let you in on a little secret. The Israeli C-RAM RADAR knows the Point of Origin (POO) for every rocket launched; before it hits the ground. And Hamas knows this all to well. Hamas knows that is where they are going to start their search. That's way the rocket teams run like hell after they fire. They don't care what civilians are left behind to be killed. They do it intentionally to make a media event for sympathy.
Everyone except that Palestinians civilians know this. Otherwise, they wouldn't stick-around after a rocket launch.
If there is anyone that should be held accountable, it is the Palestinian people. They are the ones that are funding and supporting the cause, and create the conditions that result in civilian casualties (including the children).
You can whine all you want about the poor little children killed. Surely, it is a tragedy. But the real culprits are your own people. It is your own people that want the war. They go out of their way to find justification for it. Every day I hear them say, it is our right to conduct the war against the evil Israelis. Well, if you believe that, be prepared and responsible for the consequences.
Most Respectfully,
R
In war, which the Palestinians created...
Are you saying that a hundred years ago the Palestinians went to Europe and attacked the Zionists?
(COMMENT)In war, which the Palestinians created...
Are you saying that a hundred years ago the Palestinians went to Europe and attacked the Zionists?
- FATIH SULTAN MEHMED (Born) 1429 - (Deceased) 1481 CE
- MEHMED II, THE CONQUEROR (FATIH) Reigned from 1444 to 1446 until his father took over on account of war. He came again to throne in 1451. He conquered Constantinople in 1453. The oppressed Jews were relieved to see him occupy the city. He allowed Jews from today's Greek Islands and Crete to settle in Istanbul. Fatih's declaration is as follows: "Listen sons of the Hebrew who live in my country...May all of you who desire come to Constantinople and may the rest of your people find here a shelter". The Bavarian King Ludwig the III, under the influence of the Italian Monk Jean de Capistrano expelled the Jews out and forced them to settle on the banks of the Danube River, Capistrano helped John Hunyadi in 1456 when the Ottomans besieged Belgrade. In 1410 Jean Huss was excommunicated and burned on order of the pope Alexander the V. The pope Nicholas the V, summoned Jean de Capistrano to go to Slovakia and fight the followers of Jean Huss. Of course Capistrano did not forget the Jews and as a result, by order of the Sultan, a regiment called "The sons of Moses" was formed. Since Capistrano also prepared a crusade against the Ottomans, the same regiment participated in the war which ensued. The doctors Isak Pasa Galeon and Ribbi Sonsino were also appointed to that regiment. Before being killed, Ribbi Sonsino chopped away the head of Jean de Capistrano and the church declared the latter a saint. After the war Mehmed II (Fatih) invited the Ashkenazi Jews of Transylvania and Slovakia to the Ottoman Empire. The synagogues Ahrida, Karaferya, Yanbol and Cuhadji which were damaged due to a fire have been repaired on Fatih's order. According to a votive foundation document dated 1451-1481, the doctors Moses Hamon, Isak Pas a Galeon, Hekim Yakup, Ephraim Sandji and Hekim Abraham were appointed as palace doctors.
- SULTAN II BAYEZID (Born) 1447 - (Deceased) 1512 CE
- During the years 1490 to 1497 Sultan Bayezid II accepted the exiled Jews from Italy, Spain and Portugal. In 1492 Kemal Reis and his fleet were sent to Cadiz to take the Jews in charge. During the reign of Bayezid II, the king and queen of Spain, Ferdinand and Isabella, signed an edict of expulsion for the Jews. The edict was issued under the pressure of the church on the 31st of March 1492 and the Jews had to leave the country until the 2nd of August 1492. The last lot of Jews gathered in the port of Cadiz faced a dilemma: Those who left port were attacked by the pirates, those who went on land were burned at the stake by the inquisition. About a thousand people waited in anguish. At the last minute arrived a small fleet manned by the Turkish admiral Kemal Reis who took the refugees under his protection. Thus organizing a convoy of Jewish immigrants towards the Ottoman empire. Of the approximately 600,000 Spanish Jews, half were baptized, 100,000 went to Portugal, some went to the Netherlands, Italy, North Africa and the New World. But, the biggest lot reached the Ottoman Empire, numbering about 150,000 people. When the Jews who went to Portugal were exiled too in 1497, a big majority of them found refuge in the Ottoman Empire. Whereas the migration of forcibly converted Jews to Ottoman lands lasted several decades. In 1501 he accepted the Jews who fled from France. At a later period, the Jews of Spanish and Portuguese origin who went to Brazil were tracked by the inquisition who persecuted and compelled them to emigrate to New Amsterdam, today's New York. The immigrants met in the Ottoman Empire about 50,000 Romaniot, Karaite and Ashkenazi Jews. The Jews which may have entered Anatolia following the collapse of the Khazars; those who may have followed Alp Arslan after his entry to Anatolia and the communities which existed in the south-east since ancient times are not part of the estimated figures.
SOURCE: Ottoman Sultans and Their Jewish Subjects
P F Tinmore, et al,
Well, this is reaching back for a bone to pick. More folklore.
(COMMENT)In war, which the Palestinians created...
Are you saying that a hundred years ago the Palestinians went to Europe and attacked the Zionists?
This circles back to the claim that the Jewish People invaded the Ottoman Empire. The Ottoman's didn't think of it that way; and clearly the UK didn't think of it when the territories were renounced by Turkey (the successor state) to the Mandates of the Allied Powers.
As a side note, during the reign of both FATIH SULTAN MEHMED and SULTAN II BAYEZID, (or as you say: hundreds of years ago) when the Jews were cast out from the Christian European States --- Sultan Mehmed issued a formal invitation to come back to the Empire --- that Jews might return to their native land and have a place to live in peace.
A little piece of history for you former Ottomans:
- FATIH SULTAN MEHMED (Born) 1429 - (Deceased) 1481 CE
- MEHMED II, THE CONQUEROR (FATIH) Reigned from 1444 to 1446 until his father took over on account of war. He came again to throne in 1451. He conquered Constantinople in 1453. The oppressed Jews were relieved to see him occupy the city. He allowed Jews from today's Greek Islands and Crete to settle in Istanbul. Fatih's declaration is as follows: "Listen sons of the Hebrew who live in my country...May all of you who desire come to Constantinople and may the rest of your people find here a shelter". The Bavarian King Ludwig the III, under the influence of the Italian Monk Jean de Capistrano expelled the Jews out and forced them to settle on the banks of the Danube River, Capistrano helped John Hunyadi in 1456 when the Ottomans besieged Belgrade. In 1410 Jean Huss was excommunicated and burned on order of the pope Alexander the V. The pope Nicholas the V, summoned Jean de Capistrano to go to Slovakia and fight the followers of Jean Huss. Of course Capistrano did not forget the Jews and as a result, by order of the Sultan, a regiment called "The sons of Moses" was formed. Since Capistrano also prepared a crusade against the Ottomans, the same regiment participated in the war which ensued. The doctors Isak Pasa Galeon and Ribbi Sonsino were also appointed to that regiment. Before being killed, Ribbi Sonsino chopped away the head of Jean de Capistrano and the church declared the latter a saint. After the war Mehmed II (Fatih) invited the Ashkenazi Jews of Transylvania and Slovakia to the Ottoman Empire. The synagogues Ahrida, Karaferya, Yanbol and Cuhadji which were damaged due to a fire have been repaired on Fatih's order. According to a votive foundation document dated 1451-1481, the doctors Moses Hamon, Isak Pas a Galeon, Hekim Yakup, Ephraim Sandji and Hekim Abraham were appointed as palace doctors.
- SULTAN II BAYEZID (Born) 1447 - (Deceased) 1512 CE
- During the years 1490 to 1497 Sultan Bayezid II accepted the exiled Jews from Italy, Spain and Portugal. In 1492 Kemal Reis and his fleet were sent to Cadiz to take the Jews in charge. During the reign of Bayezid II, the king and queen of Spain, Ferdinand and Isabella, signed an edict of expulsion for the Jews. The edict was issued under the pressure of the church on the 31st of March 1492 and the Jews had to leave the country until the 2nd of August 1492. The last lot of Jews gathered in the port of Cadiz faced a dilemma: Those who left port were attacked by the pirates, those who went on land were burned at the stake by the inquisition. About a thousand people waited in anguish. At the last minute arrived a small fleet manned by the Turkish admiral Kemal Reis who took the refugees under his protection. Thus organizing a convoy of Jewish immigrants towards the Ottoman empire. Of the approximately 600,000 Spanish Jews, half were baptized, 100,000 went to Portugal, some went to the Netherlands, Italy, North Africa and the New World. But, the biggest lot reached the Ottoman Empire, numbering about 150,000 people. When the Jews who went to Portugal were exiled too in 1497, a big majority of them found refuge in the Ottoman Empire. Whereas the migration of forcibly converted Jews to Ottoman lands lasted several decades. In 1501 he accepted the Jews who fled from France. At a later period, the Jews of Spanish and Portuguese origin who went to Brazil were tracked by the inquisition who persecuted and compelled them to emigrate to New Amsterdam, today's New York. The immigrants met in the Ottoman Empire about 50,000 Romaniot, Karaite and Ashkenazi Jews. The Jews which may have entered Anatolia following the collapse of the Khazars; those who may have followed Alp Arslan after his entry to Anatolia and the communities which existed in the south-east since ancient times are not part of the estimated figures.
SOURCE: Ottoman Sultans and Their Jewish Subjects
There was no invasion. The Jews were part of the Ottoman Empire for your "hundreds of years."
Most Respectfully,
R
P F Tinmore, et al,
Well, this is reaching back for a bone to pick. More folklore.
(COMMENT)Are you saying that a hundred years ago the Palestinians went to Europe and attacked the Zionists?
This circles back to the claim that the Jewish People invaded the Ottoman Empire. The Ottoman's didn't think of it that way; and clearly the UK didn't think of it when the territories were renounced by Turkey (the successor state) to the Mandates of the Allied Powers.
As a side note, during the reign of both FATIH SULTAN MEHMED and SULTAN II BAYEZID, (or as you say: hundreds of years ago) when the Jews were cast out from the Christian European States --- Sultan Mehmed issued a formal invitation to come back to the Empire --- that Jews might return to their native land and have a place to live in peace.
A little piece of history for you former Ottomans:
- FATIH SULTAN MEHMED (Born) 1429 - (Deceased) 1481 CE
- MEHMED II, THE CONQUEROR (FATIH) Reigned from 1444 to 1446 until his father took over on account of war. He came again to throne in 1451. He conquered Constantinople in 1453. The oppressed Jews were relieved to see him occupy the city. He allowed Jews from today's Greek Islands and Crete to settle in Istanbul. Fatih's declaration is as follows: "Listen sons of the Hebrew who live in my country...May all of you who desire come to Constantinople and may the rest of your people find here a shelter". The Bavarian King Ludwig the III, under the influence of the Italian Monk Jean de Capistrano expelled the Jews out and forced them to settle on the banks of the Danube River, Capistrano helped John Hunyadi in 1456 when the Ottomans besieged Belgrade. In 1410 Jean Huss was excommunicated and burned on order of the pope Alexander the V. The pope Nicholas the V, summoned Jean de Capistrano to go to Slovakia and fight the followers of Jean Huss. Of course Capistrano did not forget the Jews and as a result, by order of the Sultan, a regiment called "The sons of Moses" was formed. Since Capistrano also prepared a crusade against the Ottomans, the same regiment participated in the war which ensued. The doctors Isak Pasa Galeon and Ribbi Sonsino were also appointed to that regiment. Before being killed, Ribbi Sonsino chopped away the head of Jean de Capistrano and the church declared the latter a saint. After the war Mehmed II (Fatih) invited the Ashkenazi Jews of Transylvania and Slovakia to the Ottoman Empire. The synagogues Ahrida, Karaferya, Yanbol and Cuhadji which were damaged due to a fire have been repaired on Fatih's order. According to a votive foundation document dated 1451-1481, the doctors Moses Hamon, Isak Pas a Galeon, Hekim Yakup, Ephraim Sandji and Hekim Abraham were appointed as palace doctors.
- SULTAN II BAYEZID (Born) 1447 - (Deceased) 1512 CE
- During the years 1490 to 1497 Sultan Bayezid II accepted the exiled Jews from Italy, Spain and Portugal. In 1492 Kemal Reis and his fleet were sent to Cadiz to take the Jews in charge. During the reign of Bayezid II, the king and queen of Spain, Ferdinand and Isabella, signed an edict of expulsion for the Jews. The edict was issued under the pressure of the church on the 31st of March 1492 and the Jews had to leave the country until the 2nd of August 1492. The last lot of Jews gathered in the port of Cadiz faced a dilemma: Those who left port were attacked by the pirates, those who went on land were burned at the stake by the inquisition. About a thousand people waited in anguish. At the last minute arrived a small fleet manned by the Turkish admiral Kemal Reis who took the refugees under his protection. Thus organizing a convoy of Jewish immigrants towards the Ottoman empire. Of the approximately 600,000 Spanish Jews, half were baptized, 100,000 went to Portugal, some went to the Netherlands, Italy, North Africa and the New World. But, the biggest lot reached the Ottoman Empire, numbering about 150,000 people. When the Jews who went to Portugal were exiled too in 1497, a big majority of them found refuge in the Ottoman Empire. Whereas the migration of forcibly converted Jews to Ottoman lands lasted several decades. In 1501 he accepted the Jews who fled from France. At a later period, the Jews of Spanish and Portuguese origin who went to Brazil were tracked by the inquisition who persecuted and compelled them to emigrate to New Amsterdam, today's New York. The immigrants met in the Ottoman Empire about 50,000 Romaniot, Karaite and Ashkenazi Jews. The Jews which may have entered Anatolia following the collapse of the Khazars; those who may have followed Alp Arslan after his entry to Anatolia and the communities which existed in the south-east since ancient times are not part of the estimated figures.
SOURCE: Ottoman Sultans and Their Jewish Subjects
There was no invasion. The Jews were part of the Ottoman Empire for your "hundreds of years."
Most Respectfully,
R
All that then you duck out of the question.
P F Tinmore, et al,
Well, this is reaching back for a bone to pick. More folklore.
(COMMENT)
This circles back to the claim that the Jewish People invaded the Ottoman Empire. The Ottoman's didn't think of it that way; and clearly the UK didn't think of it when the territories were renounced by Turkey (the successor state) to the Mandates of the Allied Powers.
As a side note, during the reign of both FATIH SULTAN MEHMED and SULTAN II BAYEZID, (or as you say: hundreds of years ago) when the Jews were cast out from the Christian European States --- Sultan Mehmed issued a formal invitation to come back to the Empire --- that Jews might return to their native land and have a place to live in peace.
A little piece of history for you former Ottomans:
There was no invasion. The Jews were part of the Ottoman Empire for your "hundreds of years."
Most Respectfully,
R
All that then you duck out of the question.
Speaking of ducking questions, you never answered this one, despite being asked to you several times:
Who gave the Palestinians sovereignty ?
All that then you duck out of the question.
Speaking of ducking questions, you never answered this one, despite being asked to you several times:
Who gave the Palestinians sovereignty ?
When the League of Nations created the new state of Palestine the inhabitants had the right to self determination without external interference. Any external interference is illegal.
Speaking of ducking questions, you never answered this one, despite being asked to you several times:
Who gave the Palestinians sovereignty ?
When the League of Nations created the new state of Palestine the inhabitants had the right to self determination without external interference. Any external interference is illegal.
YOu didn't really answer my question.
Who gave the Palestinians sovereignty (which you constantly claim they had/have) and please provide a reference
Speaking of ducking questions, you never answered this one, despite being asked to you several times:
Who gave the Palestinians sovereignty ?
When the League of Nations created the new state of Palestine the inhabitants had the right to self determination without external interference. Any external interference is illegal.
YOu didn't really answer my question.
Who gave the Palestinians sovereignty (which you constantly claim they had/have) and please provide a reference
When the League of Nations created the new state of Palestine the inhabitants had the right to self determination without external interference. Any external interference is illegal.
YOu didn't really answer my question.
Who gave the Palestinians sovereignty (which you constantly claim they had/have) and please provide a reference
The right to self determination without external interference is fundamental international law.
YOu didn't really answer my question.
Who gave the Palestinians sovereignty (which you constantly claim they had/have) and please provide a reference
The right to self determination without external interference is fundamental international law.
Translation : I have no link because I am making up this bullshit as I go along
Well thats nice and all, but still doesnt answer my question.
so lets try again.
who gave the Palestinians sovereignty ?whe i wake up tommorow morning, you better have an answer, or im flunking you
(COMMENT)P F Tinmore, et al,
Well, this is reaching back for a bone to pick. More folklore.
(COMMENT)Are you saying that a hundred years ago the Palestinians went to Europe and attacked the Zionists?
This circles back to the claim that the Jewish People invaded the Ottoman Empire.
All that then you duck out of the question.
P F Tinmore, et al,
No, I didn't duck the question.
(COMMENT)P F Tinmore, et al,
Well, this is reaching back for a bone to pick. More folklore.
(COMMENT)
This circles back to the claim that the Jewish People invaded the Ottoman Empire.
All that then you duck out of the question.
While the Palestinian did not migrate to Europe for hostile purposes, neither did the Jews migrate to the Ottoman Territory of Palestine for hostile purposes.
The clash between the two may have (in some minds) started several hundred years ago, but that again is folklore. The general Jewish Population was invited to return back to the sovereignty of the Sultan.
It wasn't Palestinian sovereignty being challenge. It Ottoman sovereignty being extended to Jews being expelled from Europe. But as usual, the Palestinians deny this and call it an invasion.
Again, with the intent of the establishment of a Jewish National Home being clear, the Mandate further extended that invitation and was to "facilitate Jewish immigration under suitable conditions" and "encourage" the Jewish immigration that begun under the Ottoman Empire. The Palestinians simply were greedy and didn't want to share.
The Palestinians made up this folklore that perpetuates the idea that the Jewish mounted some sort of invasion, triggering hostilities. No, that is not the case at all.
Most Respectfully,
R
The Palestinians simply were greedy and didn't want to share.
(COMMENT)The right to self determination without external interference is fundamental international law.
Translation : I have no link because I am making up this bullshit as I go along
The right to self-determination
There is a recognised right to self-determination in international law. It is controversial whether a positive right to armed struggle to fulfil this right exists. It is clearly illegal under international law to deprive a people of their right to self-determination by using forcible actions including use of violence.
UN Charter definition
By virtue of the principle of equal rights and self-determination of peoples enshrined in the Charter of the United Nations, all peoples have the right freely to determine, without external interference, their political status and to pursue their economic, social and cultural development, and every State has the duty to respect this right in accordance with the provisions of the Charter.
The right to self-determination was first recognised in the context of decolonisation; however, numerous human rights instruments, including conventional law, such as common Article 1 of ICCPR and ICESCR, as well as several GA Resolutions coupled with state practice, have extended its application beyond the colonial context, for example to South Africans under the apartheid regime. Some scholars also affirmed its application to analogous cases, such as peoples under belligerent occupation.
Criteria for the right to self-determination
A people can be said to have realised its right to self-determination when they have either (1) established a sovereign and independent state; (2) freely associated with another state or (3) integrated with another state after freely having expressed their will to do so . The definition of realisation of self-determination was confirmed in the Declaration of Friendly Relations .
The right to self-determination - IHL
(COMMENT)It was clear that there was going to be no share. The Zionists wanted all of Palestine without the Palestinians. This was their stated goal confirmed by facts on the ground.
The Palestinians were at home minding their own business when the Zionists invaded to take over the country. The Zionist invasion was the start of the war. There is no other way to look at it.
P F Tinmore, et al,
This is a gross misinterpretation of Article I of the Charter, hijacked by the Palestinian cause.
(COMMENT)Translation : I have no link because I am making up this bullshit as I go along
The right to self-determination
There is a recognised right to self-determination in international law. It is controversial whether a positive right to armed struggle to fulfil this right exists. It is clearly illegal under international law to deprive a people of their right to self-determination by using forcible actions including use of violence.
UN Charter definition
By virtue of the principle of equal rights and self-determination of peoples enshrined in the Charter of the United Nations, all peoples have the right freely to determine, without external interference, their political status and to pursue their economic, social and cultural development, and every State has the duty to respect this right in accordance with the provisions of the Charter.
The right to self-determination was first recognised in the context of decolonisation; however, numerous human rights instruments, including conventional law, such as common Article 1 of ICCPR and ICESCR, as well as several GA Resolutions coupled with state practice, have extended its application beyond the colonial context, for example to South Africans under the apartheid regime. Some scholars also affirmed its application to analogous cases, such as peoples under belligerent occupation.
Criteria for the right to self-determination
A people can be said to have realised its right to self-determination when they have either (1) established a sovereign and independent state; (2) freely associated with another state or (3) integrated with another state after freely having expressed their will to do so . The definition of realisation of self-determination was confirmed in the Declaration of Friendly Relations .
The right to self-determination - IHL
No General Assembly member is advocating the right to "civil war" or the right of one people to invade the sovereignty of another (outside influence) for the purpose of territorial gain. No General Assembly member is advocating that a dysfunctional culture is allowed to establish a 100 year campaign of violence because they feel that someone owes them more territory. And don't start with that tired folklore that the Jews invaded the fictitious country of Palestine. We simply know that is not true.
Israel having "established a sovereign and independent state;" (IAW the protocols of the UN, and having been recognized by the General Assembly as having done so) is now being pressured, through threats and force, by the Palestinians (a localized external influence), the Arab League (a Regional external influence), and the Iranians (a distant external influence), to surrender their sovereignty.
The Palestinians, the Arab League, and the Persians, are attempting to twist the peaceful intent of the Charter and Humanitarian Law in such a way as to use it to justify force and violence against Israel. It is a very effective campaign, but none the less, a campaign to foster violence. The Charter and Humanitarian Law are all about using peaceful means to resolve disputes. The Palestinians are attempting the exact opposite.
The Palestinians (and their hostile alliance) are not pursuing a peaceful endeavor, but trying to further a deadly feud. They have never even attempted, in good faith, to establish peace. --- Don't attempt to twist the wisdom of the Charter or IHL to justify a unjust war and campaign of violence.
After six decades of terrorist attacks, wars and insurrections, hostile fatwas, charters advocating force and violence, the Palestinians have establish a pattern of abnormal behaviors and built a reputation for being the evil aggressor that uses the philosophy that the "ends justifies the means." Everyone who examines the facts understands that anytime the Palestinian attempts to use the UN Charter of IHL --- they soil it in their argument.
Most Respectfully,
R
No General Assembly member is advocating the right to "civil war" or the right of one people to invade the sovereignty of another (outside influence) for the purpose of territorial gain.
(COMMENT)P F Tinmore, et al,
This is a gross misinterpretation of Article I of the Charter, hijacked by the Palestinian cause.
(COMMENT)The right to self-determination
There is a recognised right to self-determination in international law. It is controversial whether a positive right to armed struggle to fulfil this right exists. It is clearly illegal under international law to deprive a people of their right to self-determination by using forcible actions including use of violence.
UN Charter definition
By virtue of the principle of equal rights and self-determination of peoples enshrined in the Charter of the United Nations, all peoples have the right freely to determine, without external interference, their political status and to pursue their economic, social and cultural development, and every State has the duty to respect this right in accordance with the provisions of the Charter.
The right to self-determination was first recognised in the context of decolonisation; however, numerous human rights instruments, including conventional law, such as common Article 1 of ICCPR and ICESCR, as well as several GA Resolutions coupled with state practice, have extended its application beyond the colonial context, for example to South Africans under the apartheid regime. Some scholars also affirmed its application to analogous cases, such as peoples under belligerent occupation.
Criteria for the right to self-determination
A people can be said to have realised its right to self-determination when they have either (1) established a sovereign and independent state; (2) freely associated with another state or (3) integrated with another state after freely having expressed their will to do so . The definition of realisation of self-determination was confirmed in the Declaration of Friendly Relations .
The right to self-determination - IHL
No General Assembly member is advocating the right to "civil war" or the right of one people to invade the sovereignty of another (outside influence) for the purpose of territorial gain. No General Assembly member is advocating that a dysfunctional culture is allowed to establish a 100 year campaign of violence because they feel that someone owes them more territory. And don't start with that tired folklore that the Jews invaded the fictitious country of Palestine. We simply know that is not true.
Israel having "established a sovereign and independent state;" (IAW the protocols of the UN, and having been recognized by the General Assembly as having done so) is now being pressured, through threats and force, by the Palestinians (a localized external influence), the Arab League (a Regional external influence), and the Iranians (a distant external influence), to surrender their sovereignty.
The Palestinians, the Arab League, and the Persians, are attempting to twist the peaceful intent of the Charter and Humanitarian Law in such a way as to use it to justify force and violence against Israel. It is a very effective campaign, but none the less, a campaign to foster violence. The Charter and Humanitarian Law are all about using peaceful means to resolve disputes. The Palestinians are attempting the exact opposite.
The Palestinians (and their hostile alliance) are not pursuing a peaceful endeavor, but trying to further a deadly feud. They have never even attempted, in good faith, to establish peace. --- Don't attempt to twist the wisdom of the Charter or IHL to justify a unjust war and campaign of violence.
After six decades of terrorist attacks, wars and insurrections, hostile fatwas, charters advocating force and violence, the Palestinians have establish a pattern of abnormal behaviors and built a reputation for being the evil aggressor that uses the philosophy that the "ends justifies the means." Everyone who examines the facts understands that anytime the Palestinian attempts to use the UN Charter of IHL --- they soil it in their argument.
Most Respectfully,
R
No General Assembly member is advocating the right to "civil war" or the right of one people to invade the sovereignty of another (outside influence) for the purpose of territorial gain.
I am not calling for that. The Palestinians are not calling for that.
Where did you get that?
P F Tinmore, et al,
I got it from the fact that you cite it as if it were a justification for the Palestinians to attack a sovereign nation (the State of Israel).
(COMMENT)P F Tinmore, et al,
This is a gross misinterpretation of Article I of the Charter, hijacked by the Palestinian cause.
(COMMENT)
No General Assembly member is advocating the right to "civil war" or the right of one people to invade the sovereignty of another (outside influence) for the purpose of territorial gain. No General Assembly member is advocating that a dysfunctional culture is allowed to establish a 100 year campaign of violence because they feel that someone owes them more territory. And don't start with that tired folklore that the Jews invaded the fictitious country of Palestine. We simply know that is not true.
Israel having "established a sovereign and independent state;" (IAW the protocols of the UN, and having been recognized by the General Assembly as having done so) is now being pressured, through threats and force, by the Palestinians (a localized external influence), the Arab League (a Regional external influence), and the Iranians (a distant external influence), to surrender their sovereignty.
The Palestinians, the Arab League, and the Persians, are attempting to twist the peaceful intent of the Charter and Humanitarian Law in such a way as to use it to justify force and violence against Israel. It is a very effective campaign, but none the less, a campaign to foster violence. The Charter and Humanitarian Law are all about using peaceful means to resolve disputes. The Palestinians are attempting the exact opposite.
The Palestinians (and their hostile alliance) are not pursuing a peaceful endeavor, but trying to further a deadly feud. They have never even attempted, in good faith, to establish peace. --- Don't attempt to twist the wisdom of the Charter or IHL to justify a unjust war and campaign of violence.
After six decades of terrorist attacks, wars and insurrections, hostile fatwas, charters advocating force and violence, the Palestinians have establish a pattern of abnormal behaviors and built a reputation for being the evil aggressor that uses the philosophy that the "ends justifies the means." Everyone who examines the facts understands that anytime the Palestinian attempts to use the UN Charter of IHL --- they soil it in their argument.
Most Respectfully,
R
No General Assembly member is advocating the right to "civil war" or the right of one people to invade the sovereignty of another (outside influence) for the purpose of territorial gain.
I am not calling for that. The Palestinians are not calling for that.
Where did you get that?
What is the application the Palestinians are using here in this citation. Remembering of course it is the Palestinians that are attempting to undermine the sovereignty of Israel.
Most Respectfully,
R
I got it from the fact that you cite it as if it were a justification for the Palestinians to attack a sovereign nation (the State of Israel).
