The Status of Jeruselum and double standards

Status
Not open for further replies.
In this case, the Oslo accords created a new legal border structure. By mutual agreement and treaty.
Oslo was not a treaty. It was a declaration of principles.

International law and rights under international law were excluded.

Land and borders were excluded.

The refugees were excluded.

All of that was supposed to be negotiated into a treaty that never happened. Since treaties must conform to international law there will never be one. Israel insists that law does not matter because it is on the wrong side of it.

The world keeps banging on about the 1967 occupation while the 1948 occupation is never mentioned.
 
So...over and over we are told that recognition and borders must be done through negotiation between the parties.

In 2012, the Palestinians sought to be upgraded to "non-member observer state" status - a move widely condemned by the US and Israel and a few others.

Diplomatic recognition - Wikipedia
On Thursday, 29 November 2012, in a 138–9 vote (with 41 abstaining) General Assembly resolution 67/19 passed, upgrading Palestine to "non-member observer state" status in the United Nations.[76][77] The new status equates Palestine's with that of the Holy See. The change in status was described by The Independent as "de facto recognition of the sovereign state of Palestine".[78] Voting "no" were Canada, the Czech Republic, Israel, the Marshall Islands, the Federated States of Micronesia, Nauru, Palau, Panama and the United States of America.


The vote was an important benchmark for the partially recognized State of Palestine and its citizens, while it was a diplomatic setback for Israel and the United States. Status as an observer state in the UN will allow the State of Palestine to join treaties and specialized UN agencies,[79] the Law of the Seas treaty, and the International Criminal Court. It will permit Palestine to pursue legal rights over its territorial waters and air space as a sovereign state recognized by the UN, and allow the Palestinian people the right to sue for sovereignty over their territory in the International Court of Justice and to bring "crimes against humanity" and war-crimes charges, including that of unlawfully occupying the territory of State of Palestine, against Israel in the International Criminal Court.[80][81]


The UN has, after the resolution was passed, permitted Palestine to title its representative office to the UN as "The Permanent Observer Mission of the State of Palestine to the United Nations",[82] seen by many as a reflexion of the UN's de facto position of recognizing the State of Palestine's sovereignty under international law,[76] and Palestine has started to re-title its name accordingly on postal stamps, official documents and passports.[77][83] The Palestinian authorities have also instructed its diplomats to officially represent the "State of Palestine", as opposed to the "Palestine National Authority".[77] Additionally, on 17 December 2012, UN Chief of Protocol Yeocheol Yoon decided that "the designation of "State of Palestine" shall be used by the Secretariat in all official United Nations documents",[34] recognizing the "State of Palestine" as the official name of the Palestinian nation.


On Thursday 26 September 2013 at the United Nations, Mahmoud Abbas was given the right to sit in the General Assembly's beige chair which is reserved for heads of state waiting to take the podium and address the General Assembly.[84]

Israel's reaction
Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu responded to the debate, in particular Abbas' speech, in saying: "The world watched a defamatory and venomous speech that was full of mendacious propaganda against the Israel Defense Forces and the citizens of Israel. Someone who wants peace does not talk in such a manner.[5] The way to peace between Jerusalem and Ramallah [sic] is in direct negotiations, without preconditions, and not in one-sided U.N. decisions. By going to the U.N., the Palestinians have violated the agreements with Israel and Israel will act accordingly."[46] Israeli critics[vague] of the resolution, said it enshrined the principle of a Palestinian state based on the pre-1967 borders, a position rejected by the Israeli government, while upholding the Palestinian claim for refugees' right of return. An unnamed official said: "They got a state without end of conflict. This sets new terms of reference that will never allow negotiations to start.[47] "[48] Ynetnews suggested Netanyahu and Israel would accept the resolution in return for U.S. support in regards to joint opposition to the Iranian nuclear programme.[49]


In response to the Palestinian move at the UN, Israel authorised the construction of 3,000 more housing units in a Palestinian area of East Jerusalem and the West Bank, In addition, planning will be furthered for the area, known administratively as the E1 Plan.[50][51] Israeli Finance Minister Yuval Steinitz stated that the tax payments collected on behalf of the Palestinian Authority that month would be used to offset what he said was Palestinian debt to the Israel Electric Corporation.[52] In protest at Israeli settlement development, Spain, the United Kingdom, France, Sweden and Denmark summoned the Israeli ambassador and Germany, Italy and Russia criticised the move; meanwhile Mayor of Chicago Rahm Emanuel, and U.S. President Barack Obama's former chief of staff, described the behaviour of Benjamin Netanyahu as "unfathomable".[51][53][54] MKs Michael Ben-Ari and Aryeh Eldad called for the public burnings of Palestinian flags in response to the passage of the resolution, but were prevented from doing so by the Israeli police.[48][55]


Former UN ambassador Yoram Ettinger called the resolution a "violation of the 1993 Oslo Accords", and that Israel should embrace the former Supreme Court Justice Edmund Levy's Levy Report, which asserted that the West Bank was not "occupied territory" since no foreign entity was sovereign in the area in 1967.[56]


Netanyahu visited Prague, Czech Republic where he told his counterpart Petr Nečas: "Thank you for your country’s opposition to the one-sided resolution at the United Nations; thank you for your friendship; thank you for your courage.[57] On 2 December 2012, Netanyahu also thanked Canadian Prime Minister Stephen Harper saying that he had "thanked Canada for its friendship and principled position this week at the UN."[58]

So essentially Israel's reaction was a form of collective punishment (taking the the tax money and amping up settlement building in East Jerusalem.

Now fast forward to the UNILATERAL decision by the US to recognize Jerusalem (in entirety) as the capital of Israel and then it's use of the bully pulpit in an attempt to punish those who push back on said unilateral decision.

So much for the idea that these things should be negotiated - that does not seem to be applied even handedly at all. Israel is rewarded. Palestine is punished. The requirement for these things to be negotiated only seems to apply to the Palestinians.


This was never going to be negotiated, the Arabs would never have negotiated anyway.

What there will be is a country born in the exact same manor as all others. Through victory.

The surrounding bigots, racists and anti semites have failed, they just don't have the courage to admit it yet.

Israel IS the ancient Judea, Jerusalem IS the ancient capitol.

I'm not even sure where the Arab argument lies as there is not one shred of historical evidence to support their mythical pally diatribe
They are not "Arabs" dumbazz they are "Palestinians".

Get that straight.
Are you saying that the people who call themselves Palestinians are not Arabs?

If so, that would be news to them and the whole Arab Nation, and yes, the Arabs do call themselves a Nation.
 
So far no pragmatic "workable" solution to the Palestinian problem has been proposed by anybody, neither by Israel nor by the Palestinians nor by any other Nation on Earth.

Ultimately some kind of Pakistan/India proposal might be made and gain traction.

The sooner both sides realize that they cannot live together, the sooner they will finally want to get out of each other's hair.

Jerusalem belongs to the Jews. They found it in the gutter and they picked it up with their bayonets. That's gone forever as far as the Palestinians are concerned.
You seem to have missed the 1937 and 1947 Partition proposals which the Jews accepted and the Arabs rejected.

And the Arab rejection of every plan ever since.

But thank you for saying that Jerusalem does belong to the Jews.
The Hashemite Arabs and all other Arabs and Muslims (Turks) never cared for it, for the 1300 years they held it.

And we do know the state it was in when Israel got the Jewish Quarter back in 1967.

And not one Arab was expelled from it, as all the Jews were expelled from it in 1948, as well as from all of Judea and Samaria.

Do we know for sure what the Arab Palestinians are willing to accept, which is not written in their charters?
 
Now fast forward to the UNILATERAL decision by the US to recognize Jerusalem (in entirety) as the capital of Israel and then it's use of the bully pulpit in an attempt to punish those who push back on said unilateral decision.

So much for the idea that these things should be negotiated - that does not seem to be applied even handedly at all. Israel is rewarded. Palestine is punished. The requirement for these things to be negotiated only seems to apply to the Palestinians.
The US doesn't recognize Jerusalem in entirety. It's your interpretation.
General Assembly resolution 67/19 (and many others) call East Jerusalem "occupied Palestinian territory". Was it negotiated? Wasn't it a unilateral decision?
 
In this case, the Oslo accords created a new legal border structure. By mutual agreement and treaty.
Oslo was not a treaty. It was a declaration of principles.

International law and rights under international law were excluded.

Land and borders were excluded.

The refugees were excluded.

All of that was supposed to be negotiated into a treaty that never happened. Since treaties must conform to international law there will never be one. Israel insists that law does not matter because it is on the wrong side of it.

The world keeps banging on about the 1967 occupation while the 1948 occupation is never mentioned.

Because the world is beyond that. Time moves on. Israel will never self-destruct. The only question is whether there will be a Palestine alongside it, that can live in peace with Israel.
 
In this case, the Oslo accords created a new legal border structure. By mutual agreement and treaty.
Oslo was not a treaty. It was a declaration of principles.

International law and rights under international law were excluded.

Land and borders were excluded.

The refugees were excluded.

All of that was supposed to be negotiated into a treaty that never happened. Since treaties must conform to international law there will never be one. Israel insists that law does not matter because it is on the wrong side of it.

The world keeps banging on about the 1967 occupation while the 1948 occupation is never mentioned.

Yawn.,,,, Here we go again. He wants Israel wiped off the map
 
So...over and over we are told that recognition and borders must be done through negotiation between the parties.

In 2012, the Palestinians sought to be upgraded to "non-member observer state" status - a move widely condemned by the US and Israel and a few others.

Diplomatic recognition - Wikipedia
On Thursday, 29 November 2012, in a 138–9 vote (with 41 abstaining) General Assembly resolution 67/19 passed, upgrading Palestine to "non-member observer state" status in the United Nations.[76][77] The new status equates Palestine's with that of the Holy See. The change in status was described by The Independent as "de facto recognition of the sovereign state of Palestine".[78] Voting "no" were Canada, the Czech Republic, Israel, the Marshall Islands, the Federated States of Micronesia, Nauru, Palau, Panama and the United States of America.


The vote was an important benchmark for the partially recognized State of Palestine and its citizens, while it was a diplomatic setback for Israel and the United States. Status as an observer state in the UN will allow the State of Palestine to join treaties and specialized UN agencies,[79] the Law of the Seas treaty, and the International Criminal Court. It will permit Palestine to pursue legal rights over its territorial waters and air space as a sovereign state recognized by the UN, and allow the Palestinian people the right to sue for sovereignty over their territory in the International Court of Justice and to bring "crimes against humanity" and war-crimes charges, including that of unlawfully occupying the territory of State of Palestine, against Israel in the International Criminal Court.[80][81]


The UN has, after the resolution was passed, permitted Palestine to title its representative office to the UN as "The Permanent Observer Mission of the State of Palestine to the United Nations",[82] seen by many as a reflexion of the UN's de facto position of recognizing the State of Palestine's sovereignty under international law,[76] and Palestine has started to re-title its name accordingly on postal stamps, official documents and passports.[77][83] The Palestinian authorities have also instructed its diplomats to officially represent the "State of Palestine", as opposed to the "Palestine National Authority".[77] Additionally, on 17 December 2012, UN Chief of Protocol Yeocheol Yoon decided that "the designation of "State of Palestine" shall be used by the Secretariat in all official United Nations documents",[34] recognizing the "State of Palestine" as the official name of the Palestinian nation.


On Thursday 26 September 2013 at the United Nations, Mahmoud Abbas was given the right to sit in the General Assembly's beige chair which is reserved for heads of state waiting to take the podium and address the General Assembly.[84]

Israel's reaction
Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu responded to the debate, in particular Abbas' speech, in saying: "The world watched a defamatory and venomous speech that was full of mendacious propaganda against the Israel Defense Forces and the citizens of Israel. Someone who wants peace does not talk in such a manner.[5] The way to peace between Jerusalem and Ramallah [sic] is in direct negotiations, without preconditions, and not in one-sided U.N. decisions. By going to the U.N., the Palestinians have violated the agreements with Israel and Israel will act accordingly."[46] Israeli critics[vague] of the resolution, said it enshrined the principle of a Palestinian state based on the pre-1967 borders, a position rejected by the Israeli government, while upholding the Palestinian claim for refugees' right of return. An unnamed official said: "They got a state without end of conflict. This sets new terms of reference that will never allow negotiations to start.[47] "[48] Ynetnews suggested Netanyahu and Israel would accept the resolution in return for U.S. support in regards to joint opposition to the Iranian nuclear programme.[49]


In response to the Palestinian move at the UN, Israel authorised the construction of 3,000 more housing units in a Palestinian area of East Jerusalem and the West Bank, In addition, planning will be furthered for the area, known administratively as the E1 Plan.[50][51] Israeli Finance Minister Yuval Steinitz stated that the tax payments collected on behalf of the Palestinian Authority that month would be used to offset what he said was Palestinian debt to the Israel Electric Corporation.[52] In protest at Israeli settlement development, Spain, the United Kingdom, France, Sweden and Denmark summoned the Israeli ambassador and Germany, Italy and Russia criticised the move; meanwhile Mayor of Chicago Rahm Emanuel, and U.S. President Barack Obama's former chief of staff, described the behaviour of Benjamin Netanyahu as "unfathomable".[51][53][54] MKs Michael Ben-Ari and Aryeh Eldad called for the public burnings of Palestinian flags in response to the passage of the resolution, but were prevented from doing so by the Israeli police.[48][55]


Former UN ambassador Yoram Ettinger called the resolution a "violation of the 1993 Oslo Accords", and that Israel should embrace the former Supreme Court Justice Edmund Levy's Levy Report, which asserted that the West Bank was not "occupied territory" since no foreign entity was sovereign in the area in 1967.[56]


Netanyahu visited Prague, Czech Republic where he told his counterpart Petr Nečas: "Thank you for your country’s opposition to the one-sided resolution at the United Nations; thank you for your friendship; thank you for your courage.[57] On 2 December 2012, Netanyahu also thanked Canadian Prime Minister Stephen Harper saying that he had "thanked Canada for its friendship and principled position this week at the UN."[58]

So essentially Israel's reaction was a form of collective punishment (taking the the tax money and amping up settlement building in East Jerusalem.

Now fast forward to the UNILATERAL decision by the US to recognize Jerusalem (in entirety) as the capital of Israel and then it's use of the bully pulpit in an attempt to punish those who push back on said unilateral decision.

So much for the idea that these things should be negotiated - that does not seem to be applied even handedly at all. Israel is rewarded. Palestine is punished. The requirement for these things to be negotiated only seems to apply to the Palestinians.


Tell us please what your definition is of “ negotiate” lol Abbas has stated over and over again he does not recognize ANY Jewish presence or Jewish History in E. Jerusalem. Prior to ‘67 the Israelis couldn’t even visit their Holy Sites. Israel has offered many times MOST of what they want which has been rejected. Tell us please, what have the Palestinians proposed that Israel rejected? There will be no response


The Palestinians are told they can not unilaterally go directly to the UN, that any resolutions must be "negotiated" with Israel. Israel punished them for that. Yet Israel with the US can unilaterally claim all of Jerusalem for it's capital.

You're trying to change the subject.
Israel has the military power but no legal authority to tell the Palestinians what they can or cannot do.

I agree. The Palestinians have no legal authority to demand Israel accept borders that were never accepted before and “ legal” or deny them the Rights to their Holy Sites the way Jordan did
The world is crazy.They keep talking about "67 borders" that never existed.

Thank you! So there is no reason for Israel to “ negotiate” the way the International Community demands. The Arab World never recognized any boundaries
 
I am afraid Goebbles is returned from the afterlife.

Joseph Goebbels

 
  • Thread starter
  • Moderator
  • #51
Now fast forward to the UNILATERAL decision by the US to recognize Jerusalem (in entirety) as the capital of Israel and then it's use of the bully pulpit in an attempt to punish those who push back on said unilateral decision.

So much for the idea that these things should be negotiated - that does not seem to be applied even handedly at all. Israel is rewarded. Palestine is punished. The requirement for these things to be negotiated only seems to apply to the Palestinians.
The US doesn't recognize Jerusalem in entirety. It's your interpretation.
General Assembly resolution 67/19 (and many others) call East Jerusalem "occupied Palestinian territory". Was it negotiated? Wasn't it a unilateral decision?
The UN is a multilateral body. The presidents statement said Jerusalem not part of it. So what did he mean? Jerusalem is claimed by two factions is it not?

Why the double standard where the Palestinians are punished for unilateral actions and Israel rewarded?
 
  • Thread starter
  • Moderator
  • #52
So...over and over we are told that recognition and borders must be done through negotiation between the parties.

In 2012, the Palestinians sought to be upgraded to "non-member observer state" status - a move widely condemned by the US and Israel and a few others.

Diplomatic recognition - Wikipedia
On Thursday, 29 November 2012, in a 138–9 vote (with 41 abstaining) General Assembly resolution 67/19 passed, upgrading Palestine to "non-member observer state" status in the United Nations.[76][77] The new status equates Palestine's with that of the Holy See. The change in status was described by The Independent as "de facto recognition of the sovereign state of Palestine".[78] Voting "no" were Canada, the Czech Republic, Israel, the Marshall Islands, the Federated States of Micronesia, Nauru, Palau, Panama and the United States of America.


The vote was an important benchmark for the partially recognized State of Palestine and its citizens, while it was a diplomatic setback for Israel and the United States. Status as an observer state in the UN will allow the State of Palestine to join treaties and specialized UN agencies,[79] the Law of the Seas treaty, and the International Criminal Court. It will permit Palestine to pursue legal rights over its territorial waters and air space as a sovereign state recognized by the UN, and allow the Palestinian people the right to sue for sovereignty over their territory in the International Court of Justice and to bring "crimes against humanity" and war-crimes charges, including that of unlawfully occupying the territory of State of Palestine, against Israel in the International Criminal Court.[80][81]


The UN has, after the resolution was passed, permitted Palestine to title its representative office to the UN as "The Permanent Observer Mission of the State of Palestine to the United Nations",[82] seen by many as a reflexion of the UN's de facto position of recognizing the State of Palestine's sovereignty under international law,[76] and Palestine has started to re-title its name accordingly on postal stamps, official documents and passports.[77][83] The Palestinian authorities have also instructed its diplomats to officially represent the "State of Palestine", as opposed to the "Palestine National Authority".[77] Additionally, on 17 December 2012, UN Chief of Protocol Yeocheol Yoon decided that "the designation of "State of Palestine" shall be used by the Secretariat in all official United Nations documents",[34] recognizing the "State of Palestine" as the official name of the Palestinian nation.


On Thursday 26 September 2013 at the United Nations, Mahmoud Abbas was given the right to sit in the General Assembly's beige chair which is reserved for heads of state waiting to take the podium and address the General Assembly.[84]

Israel's reaction
Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu responded to the debate, in particular Abbas' speech, in saying: "The world watched a defamatory and venomous speech that was full of mendacious propaganda against the Israel Defense Forces and the citizens of Israel. Someone who wants peace does not talk in such a manner.[5] The way to peace between Jerusalem and Ramallah [sic] is in direct negotiations, without preconditions, and not in one-sided U.N. decisions. By going to the U.N., the Palestinians have violated the agreements with Israel and Israel will act accordingly."[46] Israeli critics[vague] of the resolution, said it enshrined the principle of a Palestinian state based on the pre-1967 borders, a position rejected by the Israeli government, while upholding the Palestinian claim for refugees' right of return. An unnamed official said: "They got a state without end of conflict. This sets new terms of reference that will never allow negotiations to start.[47] "[48] Ynetnews suggested Netanyahu and Israel would accept the resolution in return for U.S. support in regards to joint opposition to the Iranian nuclear programme.[49]


In response to the Palestinian move at the UN, Israel authorised the construction of 3,000 more housing units in a Palestinian area of East Jerusalem and the West Bank, In addition, planning will be furthered for the area, known administratively as the E1 Plan.[50][51] Israeli Finance Minister Yuval Steinitz stated that the tax payments collected on behalf of the Palestinian Authority that month would be used to offset what he said was Palestinian debt to the Israel Electric Corporation.[52] In protest at Israeli settlement development, Spain, the United Kingdom, France, Sweden and Denmark summoned the Israeli ambassador and Germany, Italy and Russia criticised the move; meanwhile Mayor of Chicago Rahm Emanuel, and U.S. President Barack Obama's former chief of staff, described the behaviour of Benjamin Netanyahu as "unfathomable".[51][53][54] MKs Michael Ben-Ari and Aryeh Eldad called for the public burnings of Palestinian flags in response to the passage of the resolution, but were prevented from doing so by the Israeli police.[48][55]


Former UN ambassador Yoram Ettinger called the resolution a "violation of the 1993 Oslo Accords", and that Israel should embrace the former Supreme Court Justice Edmund Levy's Levy Report, which asserted that the West Bank was not "occupied territory" since no foreign entity was sovereign in the area in 1967.[56]


Netanyahu visited Prague, Czech Republic where he told his counterpart Petr Nečas: "Thank you for your country’s opposition to the one-sided resolution at the United Nations; thank you for your friendship; thank you for your courage.[57] On 2 December 2012, Netanyahu also thanked Canadian Prime Minister Stephen Harper saying that he had "thanked Canada for its friendship and principled position this week at the UN."[58]

So essentially Israel's reaction was a form of collective punishment (taking the the tax money and amping up settlement building in East Jerusalem.

Now fast forward to the UNILATERAL decision by the US to recognize Jerusalem (in entirety) as the capital of Israel and then it's use of the bully pulpit in an attempt to punish those who push back on said unilateral decision.

So much for the idea that these things should be negotiated - that does not seem to be applied even handedly at all. Israel is rewarded. Palestine is punished. The requirement for these things to be negotiated only seems to apply to the Palestinians.


This was never going to be negotiated, the Arabs would never have negotiated anyway.

What there will be is a country born in the exact same manor as all others. Through victory.

The surrounding bigots, racists and anti semites have failed, they just don't have the courage to admit it yet.

Israel IS the ancient Judea, Jerusalem IS the ancient capitol.

I'm not even sure where the Arab argument lies as there is not one shred of historical evidence to support their mythical pally diatribe

That ceased to exist thousands of years ago. You can’t reinvent impose ancient countries on modern landscapes and claim rights based on that. Israel’s claims and rights are relevant only by its status as a modern nation based on its successes today.
 
Now fast forward to the UNILATERAL decision by the US to recognize Jerusalem (in entirety) as the capital of Israel and then it's use of the bully pulpit in an attempt to punish those who push back on said unilateral decision.

So much for the idea that these things should be negotiated - that does not seem to be applied even handedly at all. Israel is rewarded. Palestine is punished. The requirement for these things to be negotiated only seems to apply to the Palestinians.
The US doesn't recognize Jerusalem in entirety. It's your interpretation.
General Assembly resolution 67/19 (and many others) call East Jerusalem "occupied Palestinian territory". Was it negotiated? Wasn't it a unilateral decision?
The UN is a multilateral body. The presidents statement said Jerusalem not part of it. So what did he mean? Jerusalem is claimed by two factions is it not?

Why the double standard where the Palestinians are punished for unilateral actions and Israel rewarded?
The Jewish People have claimed Jerusalem for 3000 years.

The Arabs, Muslims or Christians, have been on the land for 1400 years.

At what point did the Arabs decide that Jerusalem was important to them and chose to treat it as such?

What care did they give to her? What protection?

What protection of Jerusalem did they ask the Crusaders or the Ottomans?

What is the real significance of Jerusalem to Arabs?

The Hashemite clan made it clear that Jerusalem had no importance to them.

How many Arab clans see Jerusalem as important to Islam, and how long have they been thinking that way?
 
  • Thread starter
  • Moderator
  • #54
So...over and over we are told that recognition and borders must be done through negotiation between the parties.

In 2012, the Palestinians sought to be upgraded to "non-member observer state" status - a move widely condemned by the US and Israel and a few others.

Diplomatic recognition - Wikipedia
On Thursday, 29 November 2012, in a 138–9 vote (with 41 abstaining) General Assembly resolution 67/19 passed, upgrading Palestine to "non-member observer state" status in the United Nations.[76][77] The new status equates Palestine's with that of the Holy See. The change in status was described by The Independent as "de facto recognition of the sovereign state of Palestine".[78] Voting "no" were Canada, the Czech Republic, Israel, the Marshall Islands, the Federated States of Micronesia, Nauru, Palau, Panama and the United States of America.


The vote was an important benchmark for the partially recognized State of Palestine and its citizens, while it was a diplomatic setback for Israel and the United States. Status as an observer state in the UN will allow the State of Palestine to join treaties and specialized UN agencies,[79] the Law of the Seas treaty, and the International Criminal Court. It will permit Palestine to pursue legal rights over its territorial waters and air space as a sovereign state recognized by the UN, and allow the Palestinian people the right to sue for sovereignty over their territory in the International Court of Justice and to bring "crimes against humanity" and war-crimes charges, including that of unlawfully occupying the territory of State of Palestine, against Israel in the International Criminal Court.[80][81]


The UN has, after the resolution was passed, permitted Palestine to title its representative office to the UN as "The Permanent Observer Mission of the State of Palestine to the United Nations",[82] seen by many as a reflexion of the UN's de facto position of recognizing the State of Palestine's sovereignty under international law,[76] and Palestine has started to re-title its name accordingly on postal stamps, official documents and passports.[77][83] The Palestinian authorities have also instructed its diplomats to officially represent the "State of Palestine", as opposed to the "Palestine National Authority".[77] Additionally, on 17 December 2012, UN Chief of Protocol Yeocheol Yoon decided that "the designation of "State of Palestine" shall be used by the Secretariat in all official United Nations documents",[34] recognizing the "State of Palestine" as the official name of the Palestinian nation.


On Thursday 26 September 2013 at the United Nations, Mahmoud Abbas was given the right to sit in the General Assembly's beige chair which is reserved for heads of state waiting to take the podium and address the General Assembly.[84]

Israel's reaction
Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu responded to the debate, in particular Abbas' speech, in saying: "The world watched a defamatory and venomous speech that was full of mendacious propaganda against the Israel Defense Forces and the citizens of Israel. Someone who wants peace does not talk in such a manner.[5] The way to peace between Jerusalem and Ramallah [sic] is in direct negotiations, without preconditions, and not in one-sided U.N. decisions. By going to the U.N., the Palestinians have violated the agreements with Israel and Israel will act accordingly."[46] Israeli critics[vague] of the resolution, said it enshrined the principle of a Palestinian state based on the pre-1967 borders, a position rejected by the Israeli government, while upholding the Palestinian claim for refugees' right of return. An unnamed official said: "They got a state without end of conflict. This sets new terms of reference that will never allow negotiations to start.[47] "[48] Ynetnews suggested Netanyahu and Israel would accept the resolution in return for U.S. support in regards to joint opposition to the Iranian nuclear programme.[49]


In response to the Palestinian move at the UN, Israel authorised the construction of 3,000 more housing units in a Palestinian area of East Jerusalem and the West Bank, In addition, planning will be furthered for the area, known administratively as the E1 Plan.[50][51] Israeli Finance Minister Yuval Steinitz stated that the tax payments collected on behalf of the Palestinian Authority that month would be used to offset what he said was Palestinian debt to the Israel Electric Corporation.[52] In protest at Israeli settlement development, Spain, the United Kingdom, France, Sweden and Denmark summoned the Israeli ambassador and Germany, Italy and Russia criticised the move; meanwhile Mayor of Chicago Rahm Emanuel, and U.S. President Barack Obama's former chief of staff, described the behaviour of Benjamin Netanyahu as "unfathomable".[51][53][54] MKs Michael Ben-Ari and Aryeh Eldad called for the public burnings of Palestinian flags in response to the passage of the resolution, but were prevented from doing so by the Israeli police.[48][55]


Former UN ambassador Yoram Ettinger called the resolution a "violation of the 1993 Oslo Accords", and that Israel should embrace the former Supreme Court Justice Edmund Levy's Levy Report, which asserted that the West Bank was not "occupied territory" since no foreign entity was sovereign in the area in 1967.[56]


Netanyahu visited Prague, Czech Republic where he told his counterpart Petr Nečas: "Thank you for your country’s opposition to the one-sided resolution at the United Nations; thank you for your friendship; thank you for your courage.[57] On 2 December 2012, Netanyahu also thanked Canadian Prime Minister Stephen Harper saying that he had "thanked Canada for its friendship and principled position this week at the UN."[58]

So essentially Israel's reaction was a form of collective punishment (taking the the tax money and amping up settlement building in East Jerusalem.

Now fast forward to the UNILATERAL decision by the US to recognize Jerusalem (in entirety) as the capital of Israel and then it's use of the bully pulpit in an attempt to punish those who push back on said unilateral decision.

So much for the idea that these things should be negotiated - that does not seem to be applied even handedly at all. Israel is rewarded. Palestine is punished. The requirement for these things to be negotiated only seems to apply to the Palestinians.

Um. You did read that the tax withholding was to offset Palestinian debt, yes? Its not collective punishment. Its an assertion of rights. And Israel has administrative control in Jerusalem. Are trying to suggest that not a single new house EVER be built in Jerusalem until negotiations are complete? Even with natural growth? That seems at odds with humanitarian concerns.



Also, the US did NOT recognize Jerusalem as exclusively and undividedly part of Israel.
The tax withholding was conveniently timed so I am not buying the superficial rational.

As for building ... have any new settlements for Palestinians been allowed in West Jerusalem? There is a lot of Jewish housing going up in East Jerusalem.
 
So...over and over we are told that recognition and borders must be done through negotiation between the parties.

In 2012, the Palestinians sought to be upgraded to "non-member observer state" status - a move widely condemned by the US and Israel and a few others.

Diplomatic recognition - Wikipedia
On Thursday, 29 November 2012, in a 138–9 vote (with 41 abstaining) General Assembly resolution 67/19 passed, upgrading Palestine to "non-member observer state" status in the United Nations.[76][77] The new status equates Palestine's with that of the Holy See. The change in status was described by The Independent as "de facto recognition of the sovereign state of Palestine".[78] Voting "no" were Canada, the Czech Republic, Israel, the Marshall Islands, the Federated States of Micronesia, Nauru, Palau, Panama and the United States of America.


The vote was an important benchmark for the partially recognized State of Palestine and its citizens, while it was a diplomatic setback for Israel and the United States. Status as an observer state in the UN will allow the State of Palestine to join treaties and specialized UN agencies,[79] the Law of the Seas treaty, and the International Criminal Court. It will permit Palestine to pursue legal rights over its territorial waters and air space as a sovereign state recognized by the UN, and allow the Palestinian people the right to sue for sovereignty over their territory in the International Court of Justice and to bring "crimes against humanity" and war-crimes charges, including that of unlawfully occupying the territory of State of Palestine, against Israel in the International Criminal Court.[80][81]


The UN has, after the resolution was passed, permitted Palestine to title its representative office to the UN as "The Permanent Observer Mission of the State of Palestine to the United Nations",[82] seen by many as a reflexion of the UN's de facto position of recognizing the State of Palestine's sovereignty under international law,[76] and Palestine has started to re-title its name accordingly on postal stamps, official documents and passports.[77][83] The Palestinian authorities have also instructed its diplomats to officially represent the "State of Palestine", as opposed to the "Palestine National Authority".[77] Additionally, on 17 December 2012, UN Chief of Protocol Yeocheol Yoon decided that "the designation of "State of Palestine" shall be used by the Secretariat in all official United Nations documents",[34] recognizing the "State of Palestine" as the official name of the Palestinian nation.


On Thursday 26 September 2013 at the United Nations, Mahmoud Abbas was given the right to sit in the General Assembly's beige chair which is reserved for heads of state waiting to take the podium and address the General Assembly.[84]

Israel's reaction
Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu responded to the debate, in particular Abbas' speech, in saying: "The world watched a defamatory and venomous speech that was full of mendacious propaganda against the Israel Defense Forces and the citizens of Israel. Someone who wants peace does not talk in such a manner.[5] The way to peace between Jerusalem and Ramallah [sic] is in direct negotiations, without preconditions, and not in one-sided U.N. decisions. By going to the U.N., the Palestinians have violated the agreements with Israel and Israel will act accordingly."[46] Israeli critics[vague] of the resolution, said it enshrined the principle of a Palestinian state based on the pre-1967 borders, a position rejected by the Israeli government, while upholding the Palestinian claim for refugees' right of return. An unnamed official said: "They got a state without end of conflict. This sets new terms of reference that will never allow negotiations to start.[47] "[48] Ynetnews suggested Netanyahu and Israel would accept the resolution in return for U.S. support in regards to joint opposition to the Iranian nuclear programme.[49]


In response to the Palestinian move at the UN, Israel authorised the construction of 3,000 more housing units in a Palestinian area of East Jerusalem and the West Bank, In addition, planning will be furthered for the area, known administratively as the E1 Plan.[50][51] Israeli Finance Minister Yuval Steinitz stated that the tax payments collected on behalf of the Palestinian Authority that month would be used to offset what he said was Palestinian debt to the Israel Electric Corporation.[52] In protest at Israeli settlement development, Spain, the United Kingdom, France, Sweden and Denmark summoned the Israeli ambassador and Germany, Italy and Russia criticised the move; meanwhile Mayor of Chicago Rahm Emanuel, and U.S. President Barack Obama's former chief of staff, described the behaviour of Benjamin Netanyahu as "unfathomable".[51][53][54] MKs Michael Ben-Ari and Aryeh Eldad called for the public burnings of Palestinian flags in response to the passage of the resolution, but were prevented from doing so by the Israeli police.[48][55]


Former UN ambassador Yoram Ettinger called the resolution a "violation of the 1993 Oslo Accords", and that Israel should embrace the former Supreme Court Justice Edmund Levy's Levy Report, which asserted that the West Bank was not "occupied territory" since no foreign entity was sovereign in the area in 1967.[56]


Netanyahu visited Prague, Czech Republic where he told his counterpart Petr Nečas: "Thank you for your country’s opposition to the one-sided resolution at the United Nations; thank you for your friendship; thank you for your courage.[57] On 2 December 2012, Netanyahu also thanked Canadian Prime Minister Stephen Harper saying that he had "thanked Canada for its friendship and principled position this week at the UN."[58]

So essentially Israel's reaction was a form of collective punishment (taking the the tax money and amping up settlement building in East Jerusalem.

Now fast forward to the UNILATERAL decision by the US to recognize Jerusalem (in entirety) as the capital of Israel and then it's use of the bully pulpit in an attempt to punish those who push back on said unilateral decision.

So much for the idea that these things should be negotiated - that does not seem to be applied even handedly at all. Israel is rewarded. Palestine is punished. The requirement for these things to be negotiated only seems to apply to the Palestinians.


This was never going to be negotiated, the Arabs would never have negotiated anyway.

What there will be is a country born in the exact same manor as all others. Through victory.

The surrounding bigots, racists and anti semites have failed, they just don't have the courage to admit it yet.

Israel IS the ancient Judea, Jerusalem IS the ancient capitol.

I'm not even sure where the Arab argument lies as there is not one shred of historical evidence to support their mythical pally diatribe

That ceased to exist thousands of years ago. You can’t reinvent impose ancient countries on modern landscapes and claim rights based on that. Israel’s claims and rights are relevant only by its status as a modern nation based on its successes today.

Israel's claims are relevant by the existence, and continued existence of the Jewish People. They never ceased to exist, the same way as most Indigenous people have not ceased to exist, and
not one of them has ever renounced their rights to their ancient lands.

Israel was a viable Nation 2000 years ago. It is now, again.

The Jewish rights to their ancient homeland have not been revoked by any of the invading powers, and that includes the Arabs pre Mandate for Palestine.

The Arabs were offered and multiple times have rejected and continue to reject any Arab State next to a "Jewish one".

Instead of continuing to fight Israel and its right to exist (not you) others, including the UN and the Muslims need to work on making the Arabs and Iran stop with their war against the Jews and their right to their ancient land.

Are we not aware that 80% of the Jewish homeland in Muslim hands has not been enough for the Arabs?
 
  • Thread starter
  • Moderator
  • #57
Now fast forward to the UNILATERAL decision by the US to recognize Jerusalem (in entirety) as the capital of Israel and then it's use of the bully pulpit in an attempt to punish those who push back on said unilateral decision.

So much for the idea that these things should be negotiated - that does not seem to be applied even handedly at all. Israel is rewarded. Palestine is punished. The requirement for these things to be negotiated only seems to apply to the Palestinians.
The US doesn't recognize Jerusalem in entirety. It's your interpretation.
General Assembly resolution 67/19 (and many others) call East Jerusalem "occupied Palestinian territory". Was it negotiated? Wasn't it a unilateral decision?
The UN is a multilateral body. The presidents statement said Jerusalem not part of it. So what did he mean? Jerusalem is claimed by two factions is it not?

Why the double standard where the Palestinians are punished for unilateral actions and Israel rewarded?
The Jewish People have claimed Jerusalem for 3000 years.

The Arabs, Muslims or Christians, have been on the land for 1400 years.

At what point did the Arabs decide that Jerusalem was important to them and chose to treat it as such?

What care did they give to her? What protection?

What protection of Jerusalem did they ask the Crusaders or the Ottomans?

What is the real significance of Jerusalem to Arabs?

The Hashemite clan made it clear that Jerusalem had no importance to them.

How many Arab clans see Jerusalem as important to Islam, and how long have they been thinking that way?
Those kingdoms ceased to exist thousands of years ago.

I will make the same argument I made on behalf of the Jewish right to the Temple Mount. It doesn’t matter what you think, It matters what people believe. Jerusalem is one of the important cities for Islam. Otherwise why is Israel so careful to preserve Muslim access to the holy sites?
 
So...over and over we are told that recognition and borders must be done through negotiation between the parties.

In 2012, the Palestinians sought to be upgraded to "non-member observer state" status - a move widely condemned by the US and Israel and a few others.

Diplomatic recognition - Wikipedia
On Thursday, 29 November 2012, in a 138–9 vote (with 41 abstaining) General Assembly resolution 67/19 passed, upgrading Palestine to "non-member observer state" status in the United Nations.[76][77] The new status equates Palestine's with that of the Holy See. The change in status was described by The Independent as "de facto recognition of the sovereign state of Palestine".[78] Voting "no" were Canada, the Czech Republic, Israel, the Marshall Islands, the Federated States of Micronesia, Nauru, Palau, Panama and the United States of America.


The vote was an important benchmark for the partially recognized State of Palestine and its citizens, while it was a diplomatic setback for Israel and the United States. Status as an observer state in the UN will allow the State of Palestine to join treaties and specialized UN agencies,[79] the Law of the Seas treaty, and the International Criminal Court. It will permit Palestine to pursue legal rights over its territorial waters and air space as a sovereign state recognized by the UN, and allow the Palestinian people the right to sue for sovereignty over their territory in the International Court of Justice and to bring "crimes against humanity" and war-crimes charges, including that of unlawfully occupying the territory of State of Palestine, against Israel in the International Criminal Court.[80][81]


The UN has, after the resolution was passed, permitted Palestine to title its representative office to the UN as "The Permanent Observer Mission of the State of Palestine to the United Nations",[82] seen by many as a reflexion of the UN's de facto position of recognizing the State of Palestine's sovereignty under international law,[76] and Palestine has started to re-title its name accordingly on postal stamps, official documents and passports.[77][83] The Palestinian authorities have also instructed its diplomats to officially represent the "State of Palestine", as opposed to the "Palestine National Authority".[77] Additionally, on 17 December 2012, UN Chief of Protocol Yeocheol Yoon decided that "the designation of "State of Palestine" shall be used by the Secretariat in all official United Nations documents",[34] recognizing the "State of Palestine" as the official name of the Palestinian nation.


On Thursday 26 September 2013 at the United Nations, Mahmoud Abbas was given the right to sit in the General Assembly's beige chair which is reserved for heads of state waiting to take the podium and address the General Assembly.[84]

Israel's reaction
Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu responded to the debate, in particular Abbas' speech, in saying: "The world watched a defamatory and venomous speech that was full of mendacious propaganda against the Israel Defense Forces and the citizens of Israel. Someone who wants peace does not talk in such a manner.[5] The way to peace between Jerusalem and Ramallah [sic] is in direct negotiations, without preconditions, and not in one-sided U.N. decisions. By going to the U.N., the Palestinians have violated the agreements with Israel and Israel will act accordingly."[46] Israeli critics[vague] of the resolution, said it enshrined the principle of a Palestinian state based on the pre-1967 borders, a position rejected by the Israeli government, while upholding the Palestinian claim for refugees' right of return. An unnamed official said: "They got a state without end of conflict. This sets new terms of reference that will never allow negotiations to start.[47] "[48] Ynetnews suggested Netanyahu and Israel would accept the resolution in return for U.S. support in regards to joint opposition to the Iranian nuclear programme.[49]


In response to the Palestinian move at the UN, Israel authorised the construction of 3,000 more housing units in a Palestinian area of East Jerusalem and the West Bank, In addition, planning will be furthered for the area, known administratively as the E1 Plan.[50][51] Israeli Finance Minister Yuval Steinitz stated that the tax payments collected on behalf of the Palestinian Authority that month would be used to offset what he said was Palestinian debt to the Israel Electric Corporation.[52] In protest at Israeli settlement development, Spain, the United Kingdom, France, Sweden and Denmark summoned the Israeli ambassador and Germany, Italy and Russia criticised the move; meanwhile Mayor of Chicago Rahm Emanuel, and U.S. President Barack Obama's former chief of staff, described the behaviour of Benjamin Netanyahu as "unfathomable".[51][53][54] MKs Michael Ben-Ari and Aryeh Eldad called for the public burnings of Palestinian flags in response to the passage of the resolution, but were prevented from doing so by the Israeli police.[48][55]


Former UN ambassador Yoram Ettinger called the resolution a "violation of the 1993 Oslo Accords", and that Israel should embrace the former Supreme Court Justice Edmund Levy's Levy Report, which asserted that the West Bank was not "occupied territory" since no foreign entity was sovereign in the area in 1967.[56]


Netanyahu visited Prague, Czech Republic where he told his counterpart Petr Nečas: "Thank you for your country’s opposition to the one-sided resolution at the United Nations; thank you for your friendship; thank you for your courage.[57] On 2 December 2012, Netanyahu also thanked Canadian Prime Minister Stephen Harper saying that he had "thanked Canada for its friendship and principled position this week at the UN."[58]

So essentially Israel's reaction was a form of collective punishment (taking the the tax money and amping up settlement building in East Jerusalem.

Now fast forward to the UNILATERAL decision by the US to recognize Jerusalem (in entirety) as the capital of Israel and then it's use of the bully pulpit in an attempt to punish those who push back on said unilateral decision.

So much for the idea that these things should be negotiated - that does not seem to be applied even handedly at all. Israel is rewarded. Palestine is punished. The requirement for these things to be negotiated only seems to apply to the Palestinians.

Um. You did read that the tax withholding was to offset Palestinian debt, yes? Its not collective punishment. Its an assertion of rights. And Israel has administrative control in Jerusalem. Are trying to suggest that not a single new house EVER be built in Jerusalem until negotiations are complete? Even with natural growth? That seems at odds with humanitarian concerns.



Also, the US did NOT recognize Jerusalem as exclusively and undividedly part of Israel.
The tax withholding was conveniently timed so I am not buying the superficial rational.

As for building ... have any new settlements for Palestinians been allowed in West Jerusalem? There is a lot of Jewish housing going up in East Jerusalem.
There are no Palestinians living in JERUSALEM. It is not East, West, North or South.
(Why ignore the fact that all Jews were expelled from the Jewish Quarter of Jerusalem in 1948, but no Arabs were expelled from that quarter once Israel got that Quarter back? )

There are Arabs who live in Jerusalem and YES, many homes have been built for them in Jerusalem. And many Arabs in Jerusalem are applying to become Israeli citizens because they DO NOT WANT TO become citizens of the "State of Palestine".
 
The Arabs were offered and multiple times have rejected and continue to reject any Arab State next to a "Jewish one".
Let's say I steal your house. Some friends and I walk in, point guns at you and your family, offer you the choice to leave or die and then make a hugely generous offer that would allow you to stay in your basement as long as we could rule over you?
 
  • Thread starter
  • Moderator
  • #60
So...over and over we are told that recognition and borders must be done through negotiation between the parties.

In 2012, the Palestinians sought to be upgraded to "non-member observer state" status - a move widely condemned by the US and Israel and a few others.

Diplomatic recognition - Wikipedia
On Thursday, 29 November 2012, in a 138–9 vote (with 41 abstaining) General Assembly resolution 67/19 passed, upgrading Palestine to "non-member observer state" status in the United Nations.[76][77] The new status equates Palestine's with that of the Holy See. The change in status was described by The Independent as "de facto recognition of the sovereign state of Palestine".[78] Voting "no" were Canada, the Czech Republic, Israel, the Marshall Islands, the Federated States of Micronesia, Nauru, Palau, Panama and the United States of America.


The vote was an important benchmark for the partially recognized State of Palestine and its citizens, while it was a diplomatic setback for Israel and the United States. Status as an observer state in the UN will allow the State of Palestine to join treaties and specialized UN agencies,[79] the Law of the Seas treaty, and the International Criminal Court. It will permit Palestine to pursue legal rights over its territorial waters and air space as a sovereign state recognized by the UN, and allow the Palestinian people the right to sue for sovereignty over their territory in the International Court of Justice and to bring "crimes against humanity" and war-crimes charges, including that of unlawfully occupying the territory of State of Palestine, against Israel in the International Criminal Court.[80][81]


The UN has, after the resolution was passed, permitted Palestine to title its representative office to the UN as "The Permanent Observer Mission of the State of Palestine to the United Nations",[82] seen by many as a reflexion of the UN's de facto position of recognizing the State of Palestine's sovereignty under international law,[76] and Palestine has started to re-title its name accordingly on postal stamps, official documents and passports.[77][83] The Palestinian authorities have also instructed its diplomats to officially represent the "State of Palestine", as opposed to the "Palestine National Authority".[77] Additionally, on 17 December 2012, UN Chief of Protocol Yeocheol Yoon decided that "the designation of "State of Palestine" shall be used by the Secretariat in all official United Nations documents",[34] recognizing the "State of Palestine" as the official name of the Palestinian nation.


On Thursday 26 September 2013 at the United Nations, Mahmoud Abbas was given the right to sit in the General Assembly's beige chair which is reserved for heads of state waiting to take the podium and address the General Assembly.[84]

Israel's reaction
Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu responded to the debate, in particular Abbas' speech, in saying: "The world watched a defamatory and venomous speech that was full of mendacious propaganda against the Israel Defense Forces and the citizens of Israel. Someone who wants peace does not talk in such a manner.[5] The way to peace between Jerusalem and Ramallah [sic] is in direct negotiations, without preconditions, and not in one-sided U.N. decisions. By going to the U.N., the Palestinians have violated the agreements with Israel and Israel will act accordingly."[46] Israeli critics[vague] of the resolution, said it enshrined the principle of a Palestinian state based on the pre-1967 borders, a position rejected by the Israeli government, while upholding the Palestinian claim for refugees' right of return. An unnamed official said: "They got a state without end of conflict. This sets new terms of reference that will never allow negotiations to start.[47] "[48] Ynetnews suggested Netanyahu and Israel would accept the resolution in return for U.S. support in regards to joint opposition to the Iranian nuclear programme.[49]


In response to the Palestinian move at the UN, Israel authorised the construction of 3,000 more housing units in a Palestinian area of East Jerusalem and the West Bank, In addition, planning will be furthered for the area, known administratively as the E1 Plan.[50][51] Israeli Finance Minister Yuval Steinitz stated that the tax payments collected on behalf of the Palestinian Authority that month would be used to offset what he said was Palestinian debt to the Israel Electric Corporation.[52] In protest at Israeli settlement development, Spain, the United Kingdom, France, Sweden and Denmark summoned the Israeli ambassador and Germany, Italy and Russia criticised the move; meanwhile Mayor of Chicago Rahm Emanuel, and U.S. President Barack Obama's former chief of staff, described the behaviour of Benjamin Netanyahu as "unfathomable".[51][53][54] MKs Michael Ben-Ari and Aryeh Eldad called for the public burnings of Palestinian flags in response to the passage of the resolution, but were prevented from doing so by the Israeli police.[48][55]


Former UN ambassador Yoram Ettinger called the resolution a "violation of the 1993 Oslo Accords", and that Israel should embrace the former Supreme Court Justice Edmund Levy's Levy Report, which asserted that the West Bank was not "occupied territory" since no foreign entity was sovereign in the area in 1967.[56]


Netanyahu visited Prague, Czech Republic where he told his counterpart Petr Nečas: "Thank you for your country’s opposition to the one-sided resolution at the United Nations; thank you for your friendship; thank you for your courage.[57] On 2 December 2012, Netanyahu also thanked Canadian Prime Minister Stephen Harper saying that he had "thanked Canada for its friendship and principled position this week at the UN."[58]

So essentially Israel's reaction was a form of collective punishment (taking the the tax money and amping up settlement building in East Jerusalem.

Now fast forward to the UNILATERAL decision by the US to recognize Jerusalem (in entirety) as the capital of Israel and then it's use of the bully pulpit in an attempt to punish those who push back on said unilateral decision.

So much for the idea that these things should be negotiated - that does not seem to be applied even handedly at all. Israel is rewarded. Palestine is punished. The requirement for these things to be negotiated only seems to apply to the Palestinians.

Um. You did read that the tax withholding was to offset Palestinian debt, yes? Its not collective punishment. Its an assertion of rights. And Israel has administrative control in Jerusalem. Are trying to suggest that not a single new house EVER be built in Jerusalem until negotiations are complete? Even with natural growth? That seems at odds with humanitarian concerns.



Also, the US did NOT recognize Jerusalem as exclusively and undividedly part of Israel.
The tax withholding was conveniently timed so I am not buying the superficial rational.

As for building ... have any new settlements for Palestinians been allowed in West Jerusalem? There is a lot of Jewish housing going up in East Jerusalem.
There are no Palestinians living in JERUSALEM. It is not East, West, North or South.
(Why ignore the fact that all Jews were expelled from the Jewish Quarter of Jerusalem in 1948, but no Arabs were expelled from that quarter once Israel got that Quarter back? )

There are Arabs who live in Jerusalem and YES, many homes have been built for them in Jerusalem. And many Arabs in Jerusalem are applying to become Israeli citizens because they DO NOT WANT TO become citizens of the "State of Palestine".

It isn't ignoring it. But you can't unbreak eggs once their broken. Half the problem here is going back with what about what about what about.

And Arabs HAVE been expelled through somewhat more devious means like absentee land owner laws and the expansion of Jerusalem's borders.

What do you mean there are no Palestinians living in Jerusalem.

It's good that they are applying to become citizens - but what percentage actualy get citizenship?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Forum List

Back
Top