U.N. rights inquiry says Israel must remove settlers

[Lipush]

That would be the side that is not Pro-Palestinian.

 

[Billo_Really]

Hay Loiny, look at that, he sounds just like you. Just from our side. lol.

Who be he?

 

[Lipush]

Hay Loiny, look at that, he sounds just like you. Just from our side. lol.

Who be he?

Mr. thanatos144

 

[irosie91]

Hay Loiny, look at that, he sounds just like you. Just from our side. lol.

Would that be the side of Rothschild?

"The Balfour Declaration (dated 2 November 1917) was a letter from the United Kingdom's Foreign Secretary Arthur James Balfour to Baron Rothschild (Walter Rothschild, 2nd Baron Rothschild), a leader of the British Jewish community, for transmission to the Zionist Federation of Great Britain and Ireland.

"His Majesty's government view with favour the establishment in Palestine of a national home for the Jewish people, and will use their best endeavours to facilitate the achievement of this object, it being clearly understood that nothing shall be done which may prejudice the civil and religious rights of existing non-Jewish communities in Palestine..."

Balfour Declaration - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Why do you keep posting up this fragment of the Balfour Declaration georgie ?
It is because you like to RECALL the fact that it stimulated pogroms in so
many shariah cess pits and you ENJOY the memoriy of jewish babies
lying dead in the gutters with slit throats? Bad news-----the progroms did not
stop the progress Your favorite baby brain smashing nail bombs will
not win you the "caliphate" No matter how many hindu children you and yours
nail bomb off the planet----the MOGHUL EMPIRE is ----dead. No matter how
many hindu and christian children your JIHADISTS rape and behead-----
your efforts will get you more of the filth which you are

 

[Billo_Really]

Mr. thanatos144

Why does he sound like me? He makes irrational statements based on emotion with no evidence to back it up.

I make statements based on analytical research and logical deductive reasoning.

He's rooting for one side, I could care less about both.

 

[Urbanguerrilla]

[ame=http://youtu.be/grHUA9a5CDI]'Palestine can now sue Israel for illegal occupation' - YouTube[/ame]

 

[Lipush]

Mr. thanatos144

Why does he sound like me? He makes irrational statements based on emotion with no evidence to back it up.

I make statements based on analytical research and logical deductive reasoning.

He's rooting for one side, I could care less about both.

Why does he sound like me?

Cause he tells things straight in the open, no shit, just like you.

 

[georgephillip]

Hay Loiny, look at that, he sounds just like you. Just from our side. lol.

Would that be the side of Rothschild?

"The Balfour Declaration (dated 2 November 1917) was a letter from the United Kingdom's Foreign Secretary Arthur James Balfour to Baron Rothschild (Walter Rothschild, 2nd Baron Rothschild), a leader of the British Jewish community, for transmission to the Zionist Federation of Great Britain and Ireland.

"His Majesty's government view with favour the establishment in Palestine of a national home for the Jewish people, and will use their best endeavours to facilitate the achievement of this object, it being clearly understood that nothing shall be done which may prejudice the civil and religious rights of existing non-Jewish communities in Palestine..."

Balfour Declaration - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Why do you keep posting up this fragment of the Balfour Declaration georgie ?
It is because you like to RECALL the fact that it stimulated pogroms in so
many shariah cess pits and you ENJOY the memoriy of jewish babies
lying dead in the gutters with slit throats? Bad news-----the progroms did not
stop the progress Your favorite baby brain smashing nail bombs will
not win you the "caliphate" No matter how many hindu children you and yours
nail bomb off the planet----the MOGHUL EMPIRE is ----dead. No matter how
many hindu and christian children your JIHADISTS rape and behead-----
your efforts will get you more of the filth which you are

Because kosher shills like yourself never explain why rich Jews like the Rothschilds get away with prejudicing "the civil and religious rights of existing non-Jewish communities in Palestine..."

Moghuls, Hindus, and even your feces fetish have little to do with it.

"His Majesty's government view with favour the establishment in Palestine of a national home for the Jewish people, and will use their best endeavours to facilitate the achievement of this object, it being clearly understood that nothing shall be done which may prejudice the civil and religious rights of existing non-Jewish communities in Palestine, or the rights and political status enjoyed by Jews in any other country."

Balfour Declaration - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

[Billo_Really]

Cause he tells things straight in the open, no shit, just like you.

I have better tome.

 

[SherriMunnerlyn]

there is no Palestine....Why do you Jew haters fucks keep saying there is?

There is no Hate in Truth. Truthfully calling the land Palestine does not make us haters.

I had to go buy this book again I think for the third time. It is called The Life And Times of Jesus The Messiah, I almost missed finding it, it was in the Bible Commentaries section of Mardels, not the Reference section. It was written by a Messianic Jew named Alfred Edersheim, who lived from 1825 to 1889. It is a 1100 page volume, the standard work on the life of Christ for decades. Edersheim was born to Jewish parents in Vienna and became a convert to Christianity under John Duncan-Church of Scotland. This particular book is what he is most known for writing, he took 7 years to write this book, in which he isolated himself and devoted himself full time to the writing of this book.

And I read in Book 1, Chapter 1 (Entitled The Jewish World In The Days Of Christ-The Jewish Dispersion In The East), paragraph 2 of this book written by a Messianic Jew, a Jew who accepts Jesus as Messiah, a man llike the early apostles of Christ in being a Jewish believer in Christ, in the 1800s, I read about "the native Palestinians" of Palestine there when Jesus lived in Palestine:

"On the great blood-sprinkled altar of sacrifice smoked the daily and festive burnt-offerings, brought by all Israel, and for all Israel, wherever scattered; while the vast courts of the Temple were thronged not only by native Palestinians, but literally by Jews out of every nation under heaven."

pg 3 The Life And Times Of Jesus The Messiah Complete And Unabridged In One Volume, Alfred Edersheim

Sherri

 

[RoccoR]

SherriMunnerlyn, et al,

What is true and considered viable today (the temporal quality), was not necessarily considered true in 1917.

Today, we (collectively) have a very different view of Human Rights and Sovereignty than what was considered applicable in the early years of the 20th Century. The problem is, we cannot retroactively apply todays concepts and principles to the actions and events of a time - 50 to 100 years ago.

The supreme, absolute, and uncontrollable power by which an independent state is governed and from which all specific political powers are derived; the intentional independence of a state, combined with the right and power of regulating its internal affairs without foreign interference.

Sovereignty is the power of a state to do everything necessary to govern itself, such as making, executing, and applying laws; imposing and collecting taxes; making war and peace; and forming treaties or engaging in commerce with foreign nations.
Sovereign right legal definition of Sovereign right. Sovereign right synonyms by the Free Online Law Dictionary.

The Right Of Self determination is a well entrenched principle of intl law you seem to have no understanding of. When the Mandate started over 94% of the land was owned by the Indigenous Palestinian Arab peoples in the land and I think Jews made up no more than 10% of the population. So, the land was held in trust for the Arab indigenous peoples, the British never had sovereignty rights in the land to give it to anyone.

(COMMENT)

Sovereignty and the right of self determination are not always considered to extend down to the level of the citizen. In todays UN Charter (not in force at the time of the Palestine Mandate creation) eludes to this when it says: "The Organization is based on the principle of the sovereign equality of all its Members. (Art #2, Para #1) The members, in the case of the Charter, are the National Governments, not the people individually. This was intended to leaves a whole concerning "domestic" applications.

Consider, carefully, the implications of the following excerpt (Article 22) of the Covenant (in force at the time of the creation of the Palestine Mandate). It suggests that not all indigenous populations have the maturity of development as a collective to attain independent statehood. In those cases, the Mandate stands where the people are not considered capable.

... ... ...
The character of the mandate must differ according to the stage of the development of the people, the geographical situation of the territory, its economic conditions, and other similar circumstances.
Certain communities formerly belonging to the Turkish Empire have reached a stage of development where their existence as independent nations can be provisionally recognised subject to the rendering of administrative advice and assistance by a Mandatory until such time as they are able to stand alone. The wishes of these communities must be a principal consideration in the selection of the Mandatory.
... ... ...
The degree of authority, control, or administration to be exercised by the Mandatory shall, if not previously agreed upon by the Members of the League, be explicitly defined in each case by the Council.

The Palestine Mandate, stands alone in the face of the Arab indigenous population judged incapable and too immature to reach a stage of independent statehood. Its authorities and limitations are specified. While today, the principles of self determination stand in stark contrast to the concepts of the early 20th Century, clearly the Covenant did not consider it universally applicable to all peoples; and the Mandate reflected that sentiment.

ARTICLE 1: The Mandatory shall have full powers of legislation and of administration, save as they may be limited by the terms of this mandate.

ARTICLE 2: The Mandatory shall be responsible for placing the country under such political, administrative and economic conditions as will secure the establishment of the Jewish national home, as laid down in the preamble, and the development of self-governing institutions, and also for safeguarding the civil and religious rights of all the inhabitants of Palestine, irrespective of race and religion.

ARTICLE 3: The Mandatory shall, so far as circumstances permit, encourage local autonomy.

ARTICLE 4: An appropriate Jewish agency shall be recognised as a public body for the purpose of advising and co-operating with the Administration of Palestine in such economic, social and other matters as may affect the establishment of the Jewish national home and the interests of the Jewish population in Palestine, and, subject always to the control of the Administration to assist and take part in the development of the country.

The Zionist organization, so long as its organization and constitution are in the opinion of the Mandatory appropriate, shall be recognised as such agency. It shall take steps in consultation with His Britannic Majesty's Government to secure the co-operation of all Jews who are willing to assist in the establishment of the Jewish national home.

ARTICLE 5: The Mandatory shall be responsible for seeing that no Palestine territory shall be ceded or leased to, or in any way placed under the control of the Government of any foreign Power.

ARTICLE 6: The Administration of Palestine, while ensuring that the rights and position of other sections of the population are not prejudiced, shall facilitate Jewish immigration under suitable conditions and shall encourage, in co-operation with the Jewish agency referred to in Article 4, close settlement by Jews on the land, including State lands and waste lands not required for public purposes.

ARTICLE 7: The Administration of Palestine shall be responsible for enacting a nationality law. There shall be included in this law provisions framed so as to facilitate the acquisition of Palestinian citizenship by Jews who take up their permanent residence in Palestine.

This leads us back to the concept of sovereignty. When we research the concept we discover that "the state" or "government" has sovereign power which is universal. The concept that the people or the citizenry as a community that possesses and exercises the ultimate sovereignty is dependent on the type and kind of government; it is not universal. The Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, the Theocratic Tehran, and the Authoritarian Regime of Damascus, Communist States in Havana and Beijing, all exercise power quite differently than do the governments of London, Oslo, Ottawa, Tokyo, Seoul, and Washington. Under the Mandate, the Mandatory exercised legislative power to enact law, not the indigenous population.

And if one looks at the elements of the universal sovereignty "the state" or "government," as it applies to the Mandate of Palestine we see that:

• YES, the Mandate had a permanent population;
• YES, the Mandate had a defined territorial boundary;
• YES, the UK Mandatory exercised governmental responsibility over the territory;
• YES, the UK Mandatory had the capacity to enter into relations with other States.

In contrast, the population we call today, Palestinians:

• YES, had components of a transient and permanent population;
• NO, the boundaries of the Region known as Palestine was temporal, at the discretion of the powers in control; and even disputed at times by the indigenous population itself;
• NO, the governmental control of the region covered by the Mandate was not exercised by the Palestinians, as excepted by the Mandatory.
• NO, the Palestinians did not have unilateral authority to enter into relationships with other states or government.

While we don't say that the Mandatory was to act as the sovereignty because it was a transient authority, in effect, it was the de facto sovereign authority because during the term of the mandate, it exercised all the powers associated with an independent state.

So, as we see, while the words "sovereignty" and "self-determination" sound so simple, and has been written about extensively in these thread of the discussion group, the application and true meaning was often obscured; the true meaning lost in the rhetoric.

Most Respectfully,
R

 

[irosie91]

when reading the ramblings of the whore---
recall MORAL RELATIVISM ---Adolf
Eichmann defended himself in that he
acted within the law. The actions
of the people who ran the INQUISITION
were entirely LEGAL according to CANON
LAW. The armenian and the sudanese
genocide---both entirely legal under
shariah law. The isa respecting
institution AL AZHAR--has ruled that
it is entirely legal to kill any jew anywhere
in the world ----Egypt has vowed to base
its law on shariah law as defined by the
koranic scholars of Al Azhar. The
first bombing of the World Trade
Center 1993 was carried out by a highly
regarded and highly place scholar of
Al Azhar. Shaykh Abdel Rahman.---thus
the new president of Egypt MORSI
has demanded the release of this man
who murdered only seven and injured
hundreds in his attempt to murder
tens of thousands that day. What he
did was LEGAL according to "LAW"
-----any lawyer can argue his case in
a bonafide COURT OF LAW

it is important to know the above
in order to understand the ramblings
of sherri. Be not amazed----there are
people right here in the USA who argue
using the same logic

 

[Hossfly]

there is no Palestine....Why do you Jew haters fucks keep saying there is?

There is no Hate in Truth. Truthfully calling the land Palestine does not make us haters.

I had to go buy this book again I think for the third time. It is called The Life And Times of Jesus The Messiah, I almost missed finding it, it was in the Bible Commentaries section of Mardels, not the Reference section. It was written by a Messianic Jew named Alfred Edersheim, who lived from 1825 to 1889. It is a 1100 page volume, the standard work on the life of Christ for decades. Edersheim was born to Jewish parents in Vienna and became a convert to Christianity under John Duncan-Church of Scotland. This particular book is what he is most known for writing, he took 7 years to write this book, in which he isolated himself and devoted himself full time to the writing of this book.

And I read in Book 1, Chapter 1 (Entitled The Jewish World In The Days Of Christ-The Jewish Dispersion In The East), paragraph 2 of this book written by a Messianic Jew, a Jew who accepts Jesus as Messiah, a man llike the early apostles of Christ in being a Jewish believer in Christ, in the 1800s, I read about "the native Palestinians" of Palestine there when Jesus lived in Palestine:

"On the great blood-sprinkled altar of sacrifice smoked the daily and festive burnt-offerings, brought by all Israel, and for all Israel, wherever scattered; while the vast courts of the Temple were thronged not only by native Palestinians, but literally by Jews out of every nation under heaven."

pg 3 The Life And Times Of Jesus The Messiah Complete And Unabridged In One Volume, Alfred Edersheim

Sherri

I wonder if Frau Sherri would be willing to discuss Jesus with the Messanic Jews living in Israel today, such as the ones who publish the newsletter Israel Today. They might have different ideas from Frau Sherri. Meanwhile, I wonder (since Frau Sherri is supposedly a "good Christian woman)" if she has ever bothered to find any books written by the descendents of some of the original followers of Jesus whose countries, like Egypt) were taken over by the Muslims and whose ancestors were lucky enough to escape the slaughter and/or forced conversion to Islam and who nowadays can't even practice their religion in peace.

 

[Hossfly]

And that is why there are countries like Syria and Jordan inhabited by Arabs, land which was once controlled by the British.

We ain't talkin' bout Syria and Jordan.

Sure we are. Them's Palestinians.

 

[P F Tinmore]

RoccoR, You are blowing a lot of smoke on this issue. Let's look at what the League of Nations Covenant says about mandates.

Article 22 of the Covenant of the League of Nations, 28 June 1919

To those colonies and territories which as a consequence of the late war have ceased to be under the sovereignty of the States which formerly governed them and which are inhabited by peoples not yet able to stand by themselves under the strenuous conditions of the modern world, there should be applied the principle that the well-being and development of such peoples form a sacred trust of civilization and that securities for the formance of this trust should be embodied in this Covenant.

The best method of giving practical effect to this principle is that the tutelage of such peoples should be entrusted to advanced nations who by reason of their resources, their experience or their geographical position can best undertake this responsibility, and who are willing to accept it, and that this tutelage should be exercised by them as Mandatories on behalf of the League.

The character of the mandate must differ according to the stage of the development of the people, the geographical situation of the territory, its economic conditions and other similar circumstances.

Certain communities formerly belonging to the Turkish empire have reached a stage of development where their existence as independent nations can be provisionally recognized subject to the rendering of administrative advice and assistance by a Mandatory until such time as they are able to stand alone. The wishes of these communities must be a principal consideration in the selection of the Mandatory.

The League of Nations Mandate Provision

• To those colonies and territories which as a consequence of the late war have ceased to be under the sovereignty of the States which formerly governed them and which are inhabited by peoples not yet able to stand by themselves...

"inhabited by peoples" tells us the importance of the native people. "not yet able to stand by themselves" tells us that it is planned that they will be.

• ...there should be applied the principle that the well-being and development of such peoples form a sacred trust of civilization and that securities for the formance of this trust should be embodied in this Covenant.

I don't think there can be any confusion on what this means.

• The best method of giving practical effect to this principle is that the tutelage of such peoples should be entrusted to advanced nations...

Tutelage is assistance not sovereignty or ownership. This assistance is for the native people.

• ...can best undertake this responsibility, and who are willing to accept it, and that this tutelage should be exercised by them as Mandatories on behalf of the League.

The mandate should conform to the LoN Covenant.

• Certain communities formerly belonging to the Turkish empire have reached a stage of development where their existence as independent nations can be provisionally recognized subject to the rendering of administrative advice and assistance by a Mandatory until such time as they are able to stand alone.

The function of the mandate was to render administrative advice and assistance. There was no mention of sovereignty or ownership. The goal of the mandate was to develop an independent state.

• The wishes of these communities must be a principal consideration in the selection of the Mandatory.

No explanation required.

Britain pursued an agenda that did not conform to the LoN Covenant. If it did conform to the covenant we would not be looking at a hundred years of war.

 

[Billo_Really]

Sure we are. Them's Palestinians.

Alright, have it your way.

We ain't talkin' 'bout "Them Palestinian's", we're talkin' 'bout the ones living in Gaza, the West Bank, Golan Heights and East Jerusalem, not the ones living in Syria and Jordan.

 

[Hossfly]

Sure we are. Them's Palestinians.

Alright, have it your way.

We ain't talkin' 'bout "Them Palestinian's", we're talkin' 'bout the ones living in Gaza, the West Bank, Golan Heights and East Jerusalem, not the ones living in Syria and Jordan.

Sure we are.

 

[RoccoR]

P F Tinmore, et al,

Oh come now. You just repeating the references I cited and attempting to twist them to your agenda.

You are blowing a lot of smoke on this issue. Let's look at what the League of Nations Covenant says about mandates.

Britain pursued an agenda that did not conform to the LoN Covenant. If it did conform to the covenant we would not be looking at a hundred years of war.

(COMMENT)

The LoN Covenant speaks about many nations, cultures and people. It is intended as a document and set of principles that apply worldwide. But it made a extra effort to speak of a few regions with special needs. One of those, as you rightly regurgitated, was one which specifically spoke to the Palestinian region. It comes in two parts:

Certain communities formerly belonging to the Turkish empire have reached a stage of development where their existence as independent nations can be provisionally recognized subject to the rendering of administrative advice and assistance by a Mandatory until such time as they are able to stand alone.

The wishes of these communities must be a principal consideration in the selection of the Mandatory.

(COMMENT)

First it speaks to the fact that "some" have reach a stage to be independent (provisionally recognized with A&A by the mandatory). These few (or "some) where provisionally recognized as needing assistance to "stand-alone" (self-rule or self-determination). BUT! the passage also implies that "some" have not reach the point to be provisionally recognized; and need special care and nurturing by the Mandatory.

The second part says that these communities should have a say in the selection of the Mandatory. It doesn't address self-rule or self-determination.

Now that is at the LoN Covenant level. The actual Mandate goes into more detail; as it should.

While it sounds harsh, even at the LoN Covenant level, to be singled out a a region of people that has special needs, unable to stand alone without assistance, it a recognition of the fact that the region is not mature enough to be let loose on its own path to self-determination. And as it turns-out, the LoN correctly assessed the situation. Since being made the offer under GA Res 181 (III), and rejected it, they have been in conflict continuously for more than a half century. Like children - alternating between initiating a fight, then afterwards playing the victim because they lost. This special needs group seems to be always crying that someone else is at fault and broke the rules; ignoring that they avoided the opportunity for a peaceful settlement. It is this special needs group that rejects peace, that false claims that everyone else is at fault, that also suggests that it is their right under the law to use threats, or force, to violate the existing international boundaries of another State as a means of solving international disputes, including territorial disputes and problems concerning frontiers of States. Clearly operating outside the Principles of International Law concerning Friendly Relations and avoiding negotiation, inquiry, mediation, conciliation, arbitration, judicial settlement, or other peaceful means of their choice. Instead, the Palestinian consistently argue that it has a right to organizing, instigating, assisting or participating in acts of civil strife or terrorist acts.

Blowing smoke, maybe - if there is fire behind it.

Most Respectfully,
R

 

[Billo_Really]

Sure we are.

Get back on your meds. Your talking like Dorothy from Kansas, clicking her heals
together with her eyes closed saying, "There's no place like home".

 

[P F Tinmore]

P F Tinmore, et al,

Oh come now. You just repeating the references I cited and attempting to twist them to your agenda.

You are blowing a lot of smoke on this issue. Let's look at what the League of Nations Covenant says about mandates.

Britain pursued an agenda that did not conform to the LoN Covenant. If it did conform to the covenant we would not be looking at a hundred years of war.

(COMMENT)

The LoN Covenant speaks about many nations, cultures and people. It is intended as a document and set of principles that apply worldwide. But it made a extra effort to speak of a few regions with special needs. One of those, as you rightly regurgitated, was one which specifically spoke to the Palestinian region. It comes in two parts:

Certain communities formerly belonging to the Turkish empire have reached a stage of development where their existence as independent nations can be provisionally recognized subject to the rendering of administrative advice and assistance by a Mandatory until such time as they are able to stand alone.

The wishes of these communities must be a principal consideration in the selection of the Mandatory.

(COMMENT)

First it speaks to the fact that "some" have reach a stage to be independent (provisionally recognized with A&A by the mandatory). These few (or "some) where provisionally recognized as needing assistance to "stand-alone" (self-rule or self-determination). BUT! the passage also implies that "some" have not reach the point to be provisionally recognized; and need special care and nurturing by the Mandatory.

The second part says that these communities should have a say in the selection of the Mandatory. It doesn't address self-rule or self-determination.

Now that is at the LoN Covenant level. The actual Mandate goes into more detail; as it should.

While it sounds harsh, even at the LoN Covenant level, to be singled out a a region of people that has special needs, unable to stand alone without assistance, it a recognition of the fact that the region is not mature enough to be let loose on its own path to self-determination. And as it turns-out, the LoN correctly assessed the situation. Since being made the offer under GA Res 181 (III), and rejected it, they have been in conflict continuously for more than a half century. Like children - alternating between initiating a fight, then afterwards playing the victim because they lost. This special needs group seems to be always crying that someone else is at fault and broke the rules; ignoring that they avoided the opportunity for a peaceful settlement. It is this special needs group that rejects peace, that false claims that everyone else is at fault, that also suggests that it is their right under the law to use threats, or force, to violate the existing international boundaries of another State as a means of solving international disputes, including territorial disputes and problems concerning frontiers of States. Clearly operating outside the Principles of International Law concerning Friendly Relations and avoiding negotiation, inquiry, mediation, conciliation, arbitration, judicial settlement, or other peaceful means of their choice. Instead, the Palestinian consistently argue that it has a right to organizing, instigating, assisting or participating in acts of civil strife or terrorist acts.

Blowing smoke, maybe - if there is fire behind it.

Most Respectfully,
R

This sounds like the Israeli propaganda version.

The Palestinians rejected giving over half of their country to foreigners (resolution 181) and you act like that was an irresponsible thing to do. Name a country that would have accepted that offer.