Who Are The Palestinians?

[Challenger]

"There are now in the whole of Palestine hardly 700,000 people, a population much less than that of the province of Gallilee alone in the time of Christ.* (*See Sir George Adam Smith "Historical Geography of the Holy Land", Chap. 20.) Of these 235,000 live in the larger towns, 465,000 in the smaller towns and villages. Four-fifths of the whole population are Moslems. A small proportion of these are Bedouin Arabs; the remainder, although they speak Arabic and are termed Arabs, are largely of mixed race. Some 77,000 of the population are Christians, in large majority belonging to the Orthodox Church, and speaking Arabic. The minority are members of the Latin or of the Uniate Greek Catholic Church, or--a small number--are Protestants. The Jewish element of the population numbers 76,000. Almost all have entered Palestine during the last 40 years. Prior to 1850 there were in the country only a handful of Jews. - See more at: Mandate for Palestine - Interim report of the Mandatory to the League of Nations Balfour Declaration text 30 July 1921

And all arab settlers found, turned out to be "saudi sheikhs" to own(!) 90(%) of the mandate palestine!

There were few Arab settlers. The settlers were the Jews. There were no Saudi owners, quit making things up, Saudis didn't have a pot to piss in those days anyway you idiot. You need to get out more. Oh, now make you look like an idiot again as stated by the Mandatory Jew increase by migration, 245,433, Muslim increase thru migration 25,168, Christian increase thru migration 10,414. Nearly ten times more Jews migrated to Palestine than Christians and Muslims.

All religions.	Muslims	Jews	Christians.
Total increase of population Increase by migration Natural increase	631,272 281,339 349,933	286,770 25,168 261,602	302,294 245,433 56,861	38,305 10,414 27,891	3,903 324 3,579

[TBODY] [/TBODY]

- See more at: Mandate for Palestine - Report of the Mandatory to the LoN 31 December 1937

Once again an invalid source of information

Invalid how?

 

[docmauser1]

Invalid how?

Invalid big-time, of course.
"In addition to the lack of registration and underregistration of property, no map or cadastral survey accompanied the description of the lands registered. Boundaries in many instances were identified by roads, buildings or referenced to a local piece of history such as the "land of the great fight' or "land of the big rock." During the 1920s, the director of lands stated with complete frankness and accuracy that he was unable from registered information and the isolated plan that sometimes accompanied it, to locate the piece of land that a registered transaction purported to concern."
The Land Question In Palestine, 1917-1939 by Kenneth W. Stein, University of North Carolina Press, 1984.
Now, let's read more tall tales about major arab settlers from homelands they humped their camels in on about how they got to be all "saudi sheiks" to own(!) 90%(!) of the mandate palestine.

 

[aris2chat]

P F Tinmore, et al,

Yeah, this is argument over international borders is just subterfuge in an attempt to justify Jihadist action and Hostile Palestinian aggression.

How can that happen? There is nothing between what is called Israel and Gaza but an armistice line (That is specifically not to be a political or territorial border) that Egyptian and Israeli troops are not to cross.

This conclusion is based on false premise.

(COMMENT)

It is not a "false conclusion."

There are several concepts in play here.

First:

Every State likewise has the duty to refrain from the threat or use of force to violate international lines of demarcation, such as armistice lines, established by or pursuant to an international agreement to which it is a party or which it is otherwise bound to respect. Nothing in the foregoing shall be construed as prejudicing the positions of the parties concerned with regard to the status and effects of such lines under their special regimes or as affecting their temporary character. (Para 1, Clause 5, A/RES/25/2625, Codification of the Principles of International Law Concerning Friendly Relations and Co-operation Among States)​

Second:

Pursuant to the resolutions of the Arab Summit Conferences and on the basis of the international legitimacy embodied in the resolutions of the United Nations since 1947, and Through the exercise by the Palestinian Arab people of its right to self-determination, political independence and sovereignty over its territory: The Palestine National Council hereby declares, in the Name of God and on behalf of the Palestinian Arab people, the establishment of the State of Palestine in the land of Palestine with its capital at Jerusalem. (ANNEX III, Declaration of Independence, A/43/827 S/20278 18 November 1988)

1. Acknowledges the proclamation of the State of Palestine by the Palestine National Council on 15 November 1988;
2. Affirms the need to enable the Palestinian people to exercise their sovereignty over their territory occupied since 1967;
3. Decides that, effective as of 15 December 1988, the designation "Palestine" should be used in place of the designation "Palestine Liberation Organization" in the United Nations system, without prejudice to the observer status and functions of the Palestine Liberation Organization within the United Nations system, in conformity with relevant United Nations resolutions and practice; (A/RES/43/177 15 December 1988 "Question of Palestine" --- UN Acknowledgment and Recognition)​

The demarcation line is just as sound and valid as any other border or boundary. It is internationally protected by the Declaration of Principles. The fact that the State of Palestine has not initiated a Treaty, does not make the line any less valid; other than its temporal nature. The line is further promoted by the PLO/PNC in its Declaration of Independence and formally acknowledge by the General Assembly and Security Council. It is a reality; while some Hostile Arab Palestinians are in denial and challenge the legitimacy, it is none the less a reality that is physically manifested by a physical presence on the perimeter.

Does that mean that Gaza is in Israel?

Actually, there was a point in time (the period 26 March 1979 to 15 November 1988), where this could be argued; but has since been overtaken by events. During this brief period (nearly a decade), "[t]he permanent boundary between Egypt and Israel is the recognized international boundary between Egypt and the former mandated territory of Palestine, as shown on the map at Annex II, without prejudice to the issue of the status of the Gaza Strip. The Parties recognize this boundary as inviolable. Each will respect the territorial integrity of the other, including their territorial waters and airspace." There was no Palestinian hand in the agreement, lacking a competent government with "full powers" acting as a "state" with the ability to express the "consent of the State of Palestine to be bound by a treaty, or for accomplishing any other act with respect to a treaty" (1969 VIENNA CONVENTION ON THE LAW OF TREATIES). But again, this is a mute point as Israel did not contest the Palestinian Declaration of Independence of 1988 by the the sole legitimate representative of the Palestinian people (Seventh Arab League Summit Conference Resolution on Palestine Rabat, Morocco 28 october 1974).

Needless to say, the Gaza Strip is intrinsically tied to the West Bank, which together form the State of Palestine:

​

Recalling its resolution 181 (II) of 29 November 1947,

Affirms its determination to contribute to the achievement of the inalienable rights of the Palestinian people and the attainment of a peaceful settlement in the Middle East that ends the occupation that began in 1967 and fulfils the vision of two States: an independent, sovereign, democratic, contiguous and viable State of Palestine living side by side in peace and security with Israel on the basis of the pre-1967 borders;
SOURCE: A/RES/67/19 4 December 2012

There may have been a point in time, many decades ago, when the Palestinians could have made an issue of the demarkation lines, armistice lines and the recognition of international borders; but that time has long since past. We are concerned with contemprary views --- closer in terms of today, as opposed to the views held a half century ago.

The existence of a “Palestinian people” and the "State of Palestine" --- and that of the "People of Israel" and the "State of Israel" --- are no longer at issue. Such existence has been recognized by Israel and Palestine in the exchange of letters of 9 September 1993 between the President of the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO Yassar Arafat) and Israeli Prime Minister (Yitzhak Rabin). In that exchange the Chairman Arafat recognized “the right of the State of Israel to exist in peace and security” and PM Rabin recognize the PLO as the representative of the Palestinian people”. The Israeli-Palestinian Interim Agreement on the West Bank and the Gaza Strip of 28 September 1995 (Oslo Accord II) refers a to the Palestinian people and its “legitimate rights” (Preamble, paras. 4, 7, 8; Article II, para. 2; Article III, paras. 1 and 3; Article XXII, para. 2). This issue of where the lines are drawn is only an issue and of significant importance to those that are more interested in a justification for the continuation of the conflict, then the peace, security and prosperity of the citizenry on both sides. Under customary law, every State (Palestine included) has the duty to refrain from the threat or use of force (no rockets, mortars, attack of any kind are justified) to violate the existing international boundaries of another State or as a means of solving international disputes, including territorial disputes and problems concerning frontiers of States (Palestine included). Any other interpretation of the Declaration of Principles is simply an artificial excuse to promote Jihad. The discussion of the permanent boundaries, especially as presented here, is subterfuge.

Most Respectfully,
R

Most RESECTFULLY the JEWS ASSASINATED BOTH Yasser Arafat and the Great Jew,Prime Minister Rabin...........there was no respect in these instances.....they were SPITE MURDERS...........The Israelis Assassinated One of their OWN......and at this point lost ALL CREDIBILITY Worldwide,NEVER to regain it again. Most Respectfully steve

OMG, Arafat had liver cirrhosis. He was at one time a heavy drinker and ate rich foods. He had suffered serious head trauma years before and had parkinson's.
If you seriously get some proof Arafat was poisoned, you might want to look at the contentious relationship he had with Jibril.
They exhumed and tested arafat's body two out of three test found nothing, the third was inconclusive. There was not evidence, case was closed.
Stuff your CT where the sun does not shine. You are just trying to create an issue to attack others that you hate.

 

[Phoenall]

Phoenall -

No, they don't land and they never have and never will. The UN has never had that power, and neither did the League of Nations.

Likewise, the UN cannot make laws, cannot implement laws and cannot take over governments.

What you sare saying is simply nonsense - and I have to say this isn't the first time. Please check facts before you post, and also please acknowledge mistakes in your posts when they are pointed out to you.

Stop trying to put 2014 rules in place on things that happened in 1919. They don't work.

The Allies won WW1 and at the time it was Customary International Law to cease land as war booty and to take wealth from the losers. This is what happened in 1919 when the war was won, there were no Geneva conventions or UN charter in place just the spoils going to the winners. Now the winners had promised the arabs and Jews their land returning to them after a period of 1,000 years in other nations ownership and this was brought about by forming the LoN to administer the ownership if the land. It was not arab muslim, Jewish, Turkish muslim or even martian it was LoN land under 1919 customary international law.

If they did not own the land how could they then give it to two Saudi Sheiks to turn into nations ( Jordan and Syria ) or to a warlord to create Iraq. I check my facts and as I said you are trying to put 2014 spin on the world of 1919. When the UN came into existence in 1946 it absorbed the LoN along with its unresolved mandates making the UN the title holder of those mandates, until such time as the natives could show free determination and the ability to govern themselves. This came about in 1949 for the Jews and 1988 in part for the Palestinians. According to the UN Palestine is a nation in name only and will not be admitted as a full member until it can show free determination and the ability to govern itself

If you really checked your facts you'd know that Hussein bin Ali al Hashimi was not a member of the Saudi familly and was the Sharif of Mecca in the Hejaz. Someon'e using 2014 thinking on tyhings that happened in 1919....

Which makes him what ? As far as I am aware he and his brother were Saudis and were both sheiks. I did not mention being a member of the Saudi royal family did I.

 

[P F Tinmore]

It is not a "false conclusion."

There are several concepts in play here.

First:

Every State likewise has the duty to refrain from the threat or use of force to violate international lines of demarcation, such as armistice lines, established by or pursuant to an international agreement to which it is a party or which it is otherwise bound to respect.​

The armistice lines never divided Palestine from anybody else. In the case of the West Bank and Gaza, the lines ran through Palestine. How can the Palestinians violate a line that is Palestine on both sides?

 

[aris2chat]

It is not a "false conclusion."

There are several concepts in play here.

First:

Every State likewise has the duty to refrain from the threat or use of force to violate international lines of demarcation, such as armistice lines, established by or pursuant to an international agreement to which it is a party or which it is otherwise bound to respect.​

The armistice lines never divided Palestine from anybody else. In the case of the West Bank and Gaza, the lines ran through Palestine. How can the Palestinians violate a line that is Palestine on both sides?

There has yet to be a palestinian state. The need for talks with Israel are to possibly create a functional state for the palestinians.

 

[Penelope]

P F Tinmore, et al,

Yeah, this is argument over international borders is just subterfuge in an attempt to justify Jihadist action and Hostile Palestinian aggression.

How can that happen? There is nothing between what is called Israel and Gaza but an armistice line (That is specifically not to be a political or territorial border) that Egyptian and Israeli troops are not to cross.

This conclusion is based on false premise.

(COMMENT)

It is not a "false conclusion."

There are several concepts in play here.

First:

Every State likewise has the duty to refrain from the threat or use of force to violate international lines of demarcation, such as armistice lines, established by or pursuant to an international agreement to which it is a party or which it is otherwise bound to respect. Nothing in the foregoing shall be construed as prejudicing the positions of the parties concerned with regard to the status and effects of such lines under their special regimes or as affecting their temporary character. (Para 1, Clause 5, A/RES/25/2625, Codification of the Principles of International Law Concerning Friendly Relations and Co-operation Among States)​

Second:

Pursuant to the resolutions of the Arab Summit Conferences and on the basis of the international legitimacy embodied in the resolutions of the United Nations since 1947, and Through the exercise by the Palestinian Arab people of its right to self-determination, political independence and sovereignty over its territory: The Palestine National Council hereby declares, in the Name of God and on behalf of the Palestinian Arab people, the establishment of the State of Palestine in the land of Palestine with its capital at Jerusalem. (ANNEX III, Declaration of Independence, A/43/827 S/20278 18 November 1988)

1. Acknowledges the proclamation of the State of Palestine by the Palestine National Council on 15 November 1988;
2. Affirms the need to enable the Palestinian people to exercise their sovereignty over their territory occupied since 1967;
3. Decides that, effective as of 15 December 1988, the designation "Palestine" should be used in place of the designation "Palestine Liberation Organization" in the United Nations system, without prejudice to the observer status and functions of the Palestine Liberation Organization within the United Nations system, in conformity with relevant United Nations resolutions and practice; (A/RES/43/177 15 December 1988 "Question of Palestine" --- UN Acknowledgment and Recognition)​

The demarcation line is just as sound and valid as any other border or boundary. It is internationally protected by the Declaration of Principles. The fact that the State of Palestine has not initiated a Treaty, does not make the line any less valid; other than its temporal nature. The line is further promoted by the PLO/PNC in its Declaration of Independence and formally acknowledge by the General Assembly and Security Council. It is a reality; while some Hostile Arab Palestinians are in denial and challenge the legitimacy, it is none the less a reality that is physically manifested by a physical presence on the perimeter.

Does that mean that Gaza is in Israel?

Actually, there was a point in time (the period 26 March 1979 to 15 November 1988), where this could be argued; but has since been overtaken by events. During this brief period (nearly a decade), "[t]he permanent boundary between Egypt and Israel is the recognized international boundary between Egypt and the former mandated territory of Palestine, as shown on the map at Annex II, without prejudice to the issue of the status of the Gaza Strip. The Parties recognize this boundary as inviolable. Each will respect the territorial integrity of the other, including their territorial waters and airspace." There was no Palestinian hand in the agreement, lacking a competent government with "full powers" acting as a "state" with the ability to express the "consent of the State of Palestine to be bound by a treaty, or for accomplishing any other act with respect to a treaty" (1969 VIENNA CONVENTION ON THE LAW OF TREATIES). But again, this is a mute point as Israel did not contest the Palestinian Declaration of Independence of 1988 by the the sole legitimate representative of the Palestinian people (Seventh Arab League Summit Conference Resolution on Palestine Rabat, Morocco 28 october 1974).

Needless to say, the Gaza Strip is intrinsically tied to the West Bank, which together form the State of Palestine:

​

Recalling its resolution 181 (II) of 29 November 1947,

Affirms its determination to contribute to the achievement of the inalienable rights of the Palestinian people and the attainment of a peaceful settlement in the Middle East that ends the occupation that began in 1967 and fulfils the vision of two States: an independent, sovereign, democratic, contiguous and viable State of Palestine living side by side in peace and security with Israel on the basis of the pre-1967 borders;
SOURCE: A/RES/67/19 4 December 2012

There may have been a point in time, many decades ago, when the Palestinians could have made an issue of the demarkation lines, armistice lines and the recognition of international borders; but that time has long since past. We are concerned with contemprary views --- closer in terms of today, as opposed to the views held a half century ago.

The existence of a “Palestinian people” and the "State of Palestine" --- and that of the "People of Israel" and the "State of Israel" --- are no longer at issue. Such existence has been recognized by Israel and Palestine in the exchange of letters of 9 September 1993 between the President of the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO Yassar Arafat) and Israeli Prime Minister (Yitzhak Rabin). In that exchange the Chairman Arafat recognized “the right of the State of Israel to exist in peace and security” and PM Rabin recognize the PLO as the representative of the Palestinian people”. The Israeli-Palestinian Interim Agreement on the West Bank and the Gaza Strip of 28 September 1995 (Oslo Accord II) refers a to the Palestinian people and its “legitimate rights” (Preamble, paras. 4, 7, 8; Article II, para. 2; Article III, paras. 1 and 3; Article XXII, para. 2). This issue of where the lines are drawn is only an issue and of significant importance to those that are more interested in a justification for the continuation of the conflict, then the peace, security and prosperity of the citizenry on both sides. Under customary law, every State (Palestine included) has the duty to refrain from the threat or use of force (no rockets, mortars, attack of any kind are justified) to violate the existing international boundaries of another State or as a means of solving international disputes, including territorial disputes and problems concerning frontiers of States (Palestine included). Any other interpretation of the Declaration of Principles is simply an artificial excuse to promote Jihad. The discussion of the permanent boundaries, especially as presented here, is subterfuge.

Most Respectfully,
R

Most RESECTFULLY the JEWS ASSASINATED BOTH Yasser Arafat and the Great Jew,Prime Minister Rabin...........there was no respect in these instances.....they were SPITE MURDERS...........The Israelis Assassinated One of their OWN......and at this point lost ALL CREDIBILITY Worldwide,NEVER to regain it again. Most Respectfully steve

OMG, Arafat had liver cirrhosis. He was at one time a heavy drinker and ate rich foods. He had suffered serious head trauma years before and had parkinson's.
If you seriously get some proof Arafat was poisoned, you might want to look at the contentious relationship he had with Jibril.
They exhumed and tested arafat's body two out of three test found nothing, the third was inconclusive. There was not evidence, case was closed.
Stuff your CT where the sun does not shine. You are just trying to create an issue to attack others that you hate.

He had a minor tremors, so , and there is no proof he was an alky, so since poisoning is a common way to get rid of someone , that does seem more likely.
Read he had aids as well, all these stories made up to hide the real reason.

 

[aris2chat]

P F Tinmore, et al,

Yeah, this is argument over international borders is just subterfuge in an attempt to justify Jihadist action and Hostile Palestinian aggression.

How can that happen? There is nothing between what is called Israel and Gaza but an armistice line (That is specifically not to be a political or territorial border) that Egyptian and Israeli troops are not to cross.

This conclusion is based on false premise.

(COMMENT)

It is not a "false conclusion."

There are several concepts in play here.

First:

Every State likewise has the duty to refrain from the threat or use of force to violate international lines of demarcation, such as armistice lines, established by or pursuant to an international agreement to which it is a party or which it is otherwise bound to respect. Nothing in the foregoing shall be construed as prejudicing the positions of the parties concerned with regard to the status and effects of such lines under their special regimes or as affecting their temporary character. (Para 1, Clause 5, A/RES/25/2625, Codification of the Principles of International Law Concerning Friendly Relations and Co-operation Among States)​

Second:

Pursuant to the resolutions of the Arab Summit Conferences and on the basis of the international legitimacy embodied in the resolutions of the United Nations since 1947, and Through the exercise by the Palestinian Arab people of its right to self-determination, political independence and sovereignty over its territory: The Palestine National Council hereby declares, in the Name of God and on behalf of the Palestinian Arab people, the establishment of the State of Palestine in the land of Palestine with its capital at Jerusalem. (ANNEX III, Declaration of Independence, A/43/827 S/20278 18 November 1988)

1. Acknowledges the proclamation of the State of Palestine by the Palestine National Council on 15 November 1988;
2. Affirms the need to enable the Palestinian people to exercise their sovereignty over their territory occupied since 1967;
3. Decides that, effective as of 15 December 1988, the designation "Palestine" should be used in place of the designation "Palestine Liberation Organization" in the United Nations system, without prejudice to the observer status and functions of the Palestine Liberation Organization within the United Nations system, in conformity with relevant United Nations resolutions and practice; (A/RES/43/177 15 December 1988 "Question of Palestine" --- UN Acknowledgment and Recognition)​

The demarcation line is just as sound and valid as any other border or boundary. It is internationally protected by the Declaration of Principles. The fact that the State of Palestine has not initiated a Treaty, does not make the line any less valid; other than its temporal nature. The line is further promoted by the PLO/PNC in its Declaration of Independence and formally acknowledge by the General Assembly and Security Council. It is a reality; while some Hostile Arab Palestinians are in denial and challenge the legitimacy, it is none the less a reality that is physically manifested by a physical presence on the perimeter.

Does that mean that Gaza is in Israel?

Actually, there was a point in time (the period 26 March 1979 to 15 November 1988), where this could be argued; but has since been overtaken by events. During this brief period (nearly a decade), "[t]he permanent boundary between Egypt and Israel is the recognized international boundary between Egypt and the former mandated territory of Palestine, as shown on the map at Annex II, without prejudice to the issue of the status of the Gaza Strip. The Parties recognize this boundary as inviolable. Each will respect the territorial integrity of the other, including their territorial waters and airspace." There was no Palestinian hand in the agreement, lacking a competent government with "full powers" acting as a "state" with the ability to express the "consent of the State of Palestine to be bound by a treaty, or for accomplishing any other act with respect to a treaty" (1969 VIENNA CONVENTION ON THE LAW OF TREATIES). But again, this is a mute point as Israel did not contest the Palestinian Declaration of Independence of 1988 by the the sole legitimate representative of the Palestinian people (Seventh Arab League Summit Conference Resolution on Palestine Rabat, Morocco 28 october 1974).

Needless to say, the Gaza Strip is intrinsically tied to the West Bank, which together form the State of Palestine:

​

Recalling its resolution 181 (II) of 29 November 1947,

Affirms its determination to contribute to the achievement of the inalienable rights of the Palestinian people and the attainment of a peaceful settlement in the Middle East that ends the occupation that began in 1967 and fulfils the vision of two States: an independent, sovereign, democratic, contiguous and viable State of Palestine living side by side in peace and security with Israel on the basis of the pre-1967 borders;
SOURCE: A/RES/67/19 4 December 2012

There may have been a point in time, many decades ago, when the Palestinians could have made an issue of the demarkation lines, armistice lines and the recognition of international borders; but that time has long since past. We are concerned with contemprary views --- closer in terms of today, as opposed to the views held a half century ago.

The existence of a “Palestinian people” and the "State of Palestine" --- and that of the "People of Israel" and the "State of Israel" --- are no longer at issue. Such existence has been recognized by Israel and Palestine in the exchange of letters of 9 September 1993 between the President of the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO Yassar Arafat) and Israeli Prime Minister (Yitzhak Rabin). In that exchange the Chairman Arafat recognized “the right of the State of Israel to exist in peace and security” and PM Rabin recognize the PLO as the representative of the Palestinian people”. The Israeli-Palestinian Interim Agreement on the West Bank and the Gaza Strip of 28 September 1995 (Oslo Accord II) refers a to the Palestinian people and its “legitimate rights” (Preamble, paras. 4, 7, 8; Article II, para. 2; Article III, paras. 1 and 3; Article XXII, para. 2). This issue of where the lines are drawn is only an issue and of significant importance to those that are more interested in a justification for the continuation of the conflict, then the peace, security and prosperity of the citizenry on both sides. Under customary law, every State (Palestine included) has the duty to refrain from the threat or use of force (no rockets, mortars, attack of any kind are justified) to violate the existing international boundaries of another State or as a means of solving international disputes, including territorial disputes and problems concerning frontiers of States (Palestine included). Any other interpretation of the Declaration of Principles is simply an artificial excuse to promote Jihad. The discussion of the permanent boundaries, especially as presented here, is subterfuge.

Most Respectfully,
R

Most RESECTFULLY the JEWS ASSASINATED BOTH Yasser Arafat and the Great Jew,Prime Minister Rabin...........there was no respect in these instances.....they were SPITE MURDERS...........The Israelis Assassinated One of their OWN......and at this point lost ALL CREDIBILITY Worldwide,NEVER to regain it again. Most Respectfully steve

OMG, Arafat had liver cirrhosis. He was at one time a heavy drinker and ate rich foods. He had suffered serious head trauma years before and had parkinson's.
If you seriously get some proof Arafat was poisoned, you might want to look at the contentious relationship he had with Jibril.
They exhumed and tested arafat's body two out of three test found nothing, the third was inconclusive. There was not evidence, case was closed.
Stuff your CT where the sun does not shine. You are just trying to create an issue to attack others that you hate.

He had a minor tremors, so , and there is no proof he was an alky, so since poisoning is a common way to get rid of someone , that does seem more likely.
Read he had aids as well, all these stories made up to hide the real reason.

He drank Johnnie Walker Blue.
I knew him and saw him drink.

 

[P F Tinmore]

It is not a "false conclusion."

There are several concepts in play here.

First:

Every State likewise has the duty to refrain from the threat or use of force to violate international lines of demarcation, such as armistice lines, established by or pursuant to an international agreement to which it is a party or which it is otherwise bound to respect.​

The armistice lines never divided Palestine from anybody else. In the case of the West Bank and Gaza, the lines ran through Palestine. How can the Palestinians violate a line that is Palestine on both sides?

There has yet to be a palestinian state. The need for talks with Israel are to possibly create a functional state for the palestinians.

"A state" is not necessary. People in trust and other non self governing territories have the same rights.

And why negotiate with Israel?

It has even declared that "the inalienable rights of refugees and displaced people cannot be left to 'negotiations' between Israel and the Palestinian Authority. International law considers agreements between a military occupier and the occupied to be null and void if they deprive civilians of recognized human rights including the rights to repatriation and restitution."​

Read more: Articles The Jihad Lawyer

Any agreement that denies the Palestinian's rights would be null and void.

 

[montelatici]

Invalid how?

Invalid big-time, of course.
"In addition to the lack of registration and underregistration of property, no map or cadastral survey accompanied the description of the lands registered. Boundaries in many instances were identified by roads, buildings or referenced to a local piece of history such as the "land of the great fight' or "land of the big rock." During the 1920s, the director of lands stated with complete frankness and accuracy that he was unable from registered information and the isolated plan that sometimes accompanied it, to locate the piece of land that a registered transaction purported to concern."
The Land Question In Palestine, 1917-1939 by Kenneth W. Stein, University of North Carolina Press, 1984.
Now, let's read more tall tales about major arab settlers from homelands they humped their camels in on about how they got to be all "saudi sheiks" to own(!) 90%(!) of the mandate palestine.

Kenneth W. Stein, now that's an impartial source. LOL

 

[Roudy]

View attachment 32873
Palestine and Israel in the 19th and 20th Centuries

176 thousand arabs from 1922-31

So easy to embarass the bullshit artist. Now the shameless propogandist for IslamoNazism will post another irrlevant chart.

 

[Roudy]

You have it opposite you clown.

View attachment 32867
______________________________________________________________________________

View attachment 32870
__________________________________________________________________________
View attachment 32869

that is muslim increase by migration

Yikes! That chart evidencing Arab invasion just blew up Mohomod Latici's propoganda machine. I'm sure he's about to have a fart attack any minute now. Somebody call 9-11 and get an ambulance to the basement of Al Khara Mosque in Dearborn!

 

[montelatici]

It is hilarious how the Zionists lie and lie notwithstanding having the evidence in front of them. Oh well.

 

[Roudy]

It is hilarious how the Zionists lie and lie notwithstanding having the evidence in front of them. Oh well.

View attachment 32979

...and now for some true numbers:

______________________________________________________________________________

__________________________________________________________________________

that is muslim increase by migration.

 

[MJB12741]

P F Tinmore, et al,

Yeah, this is argument over international borders is just subterfuge in an attempt to justify Jihadist action and Hostile Palestinian aggression.

How can that happen? There is nothing between what is called Israel and Gaza but an armistice line (That is specifically not to be a political or territorial border) that Egyptian and Israeli troops are not to cross.

This conclusion is based on false premise.

(COMMENT)

It is not a "false conclusion."

There are several concepts in play here.

First:

Every State likewise has the duty to refrain from the threat or use of force to violate international lines of demarcation, such as armistice lines, established by or pursuant to an international agreement to which it is a party or which it is otherwise bound to respect. Nothing in the foregoing shall be construed as prejudicing the positions of the parties concerned with regard to the status and effects of such lines under their special regimes or as affecting their temporary character. (Para 1, Clause 5, A/RES/25/2625, Codification of the Principles of International Law Concerning Friendly Relations and Co-operation Among States)​

Second:

Pursuant to the resolutions of the Arab Summit Conferences and on the basis of the international legitimacy embodied in the resolutions of the United Nations since 1947, and Through the exercise by the Palestinian Arab people of its right to self-determination, political independence and sovereignty over its territory: The Palestine National Council hereby declares, in the Name of God and on behalf of the Palestinian Arab people, the establishment of the State of Palestine in the land of Palestine with its capital at Jerusalem. (ANNEX III, Declaration of Independence, A/43/827 S/20278 18 November 1988)

1. Acknowledges the proclamation of the State of Palestine by the Palestine National Council on 15 November 1988;
2. Affirms the need to enable the Palestinian people to exercise their sovereignty over their territory occupied since 1967;
3. Decides that, effective as of 15 December 1988, the designation "Palestine" should be used in place of the designation "Palestine Liberation Organization" in the United Nations system, without prejudice to the observer status and functions of the Palestine Liberation Organization within the United Nations system, in conformity with relevant United Nations resolutions and practice; (A/RES/43/177 15 December 1988 "Question of Palestine" --- UN Acknowledgment and Recognition)​

The demarcation line is just as sound and valid as any other border or boundary. It is internationally protected by the Declaration of Principles. The fact that the State of Palestine has not initiated a Treaty, does not make the line any less valid; other than its temporal nature. The line is further promoted by the PLO/PNC in its Declaration of Independence and formally acknowledge by the General Assembly and Security Council. It is a reality; while some Hostile Arab Palestinians are in denial and challenge the legitimacy, it is none the less a reality that is physically manifested by a physical presence on the perimeter.

Does that mean that Gaza is in Israel?

Actually, there was a point in time (the period 26 March 1979 to 15 November 1988), where this could be argued; but has since been overtaken by events. During this brief period (nearly a decade), "[t]he permanent boundary between Egypt and Israel is the recognized international boundary between Egypt and the former mandated territory of Palestine, as shown on the map at Annex II, without prejudice to the issue of the status of the Gaza Strip. The Parties recognize this boundary as inviolable. Each will respect the territorial integrity of the other, including their territorial waters and airspace." There was no Palestinian hand in the agreement, lacking a competent government with "full powers" acting as a "state" with the ability to express the "consent of the State of Palestine to be bound by a treaty, or for accomplishing any other act with respect to a treaty" (1969 VIENNA CONVENTION ON THE LAW OF TREATIES). But again, this is a mute point as Israel did not contest the Palestinian Declaration of Independence of 1988 by the the sole legitimate representative of the Palestinian people (Seventh Arab League Summit Conference Resolution on Palestine Rabat, Morocco 28 october 1974).

Needless to say, the Gaza Strip is intrinsically tied to the West Bank, which together form the State of Palestine:

​

Recalling its resolution 181 (II) of 29 November 1947,

Affirms its determination to contribute to the achievement of the inalienable rights of the Palestinian people and the attainment of a peaceful settlement in the Middle East that ends the occupation that began in 1967 and fulfils the vision of two States: an independent, sovereign, democratic, contiguous and viable State of Palestine living side by side in peace and security with Israel on the basis of the pre-1967 borders;
SOURCE: A/RES/67/19 4 December 2012

There may have been a point in time, many decades ago, when the Palestinians could have made an issue of the demarkation lines, armistice lines and the recognition of international borders; but that time has long since past. We are concerned with contemprary views --- closer in terms of today, as opposed to the views held a half century ago.

The existence of a “Palestinian people” and the "State of Palestine" --- and that of the "People of Israel" and the "State of Israel" --- are no longer at issue. Such existence has been recognized by Israel and Palestine in the exchange of letters of 9 September 1993 between the President of the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO Yassar Arafat) and Israeli Prime Minister (Yitzhak Rabin). In that exchange the Chairman Arafat recognized “the right of the State of Israel to exist in peace and security” and PM Rabin recognize the PLO as the representative of the Palestinian people”. The Israeli-Palestinian Interim Agreement on the West Bank and the Gaza Strip of 28 September 1995 (Oslo Accord II) refers a to the Palestinian people and its “legitimate rights” (Preamble, paras. 4, 7, 8; Article II, para. 2; Article III, paras. 1 and 3; Article XXII, para. 2). This issue of where the lines are drawn is only an issue and of significant importance to those that are more interested in a justification for the continuation of the conflict, then the peace, security and prosperity of the citizenry on both sides. Under customary law, every State (Palestine included) has the duty to refrain from the threat or use of force (no rockets, mortars, attack of any kind are justified) to violate the existing international boundaries of another State or as a means of solving international disputes, including territorial disputes and problems concerning frontiers of States (Palestine included). Any other interpretation of the Declaration of Principles is simply an artificial excuse to promote Jihad. The discussion of the permanent boundaries, especially as presented here, is subterfuge.

Most Respectfully,
R

Most RESECTFULLY the JEWS ASSASINATED BOTH Yasser Arafat and the Great Jew,Prime Minister Rabin...........there was no respect in these instances.....they were SPITE MURDERS...........The Israelis Assassinated One of their OWN......and at this point lost ALL CREDIBILITY Worldwide,NEVER to regain it again. Most Respectfully steve

OMG, Arafat had liver cirrhosis. He was at one time a heavy drinker and ate rich foods. He had suffered serious head trauma years before and had parkinson's.
If you seriously get some proof Arafat was poisoned, you might want to look at the contentious relationship he had with Jibril.
They exhumed and tested arafat's body two out of three test found nothing, the third was inconclusive. There was not evidence, case was closed.
Stuff your CT where the sun does not shine. You are just trying to create an issue to attack others that you hate.

He had a minor tremors, so , and there is no proof he was an alky, so since poisoning is a common way to get rid of someone , that does seem more likely.
Read he had aids as well, all these stories made up to hide the real reason.

I miss Arafat. What a great leader he was. He took his Palestinians from the toilet to the sewer, got them massacred over & over again by their own Arab brothers, embezzeled their money, died of AIDS & left his Palestinian living in ignorance & poverty with no hope for a Palestinian State. Who better than Arafat to deserve a Nobel Peace Prize for all the Palestinians who were killed because of him?

 

[montelatici]

It is hilarious how the Zionists lie and lie notwithstanding having the evidence in front of them. Oh well.

View attachment 32979

...and now for some true numbers:

______________________________________________________________________________

__________________________________________________________________________

that is muslim increase by migration.

Again the forgery, Transposing the columns. LOL

Here is the actual excerpt from the document:


6. The estimated total population has increased in the 15 years from 1922 to the middle of 1937, by 631,272 persons. The increase is due to immigration and to the excess of births over deaths, the allocation of the total increases between these two factors being estimated to be as follows:--

	All religions.	Moslems.	Jews.	Christians.	Others.
Total increase of population Increase by migration Natural increase	631,272 281,339 349,933	286,770 25,168 261,602	302,294 245,433 56,861	38,305 10,414 27,891	3,903 324 3,579

[TBODY] [/TBODY]

... - See more at: Mandate for Palestine - Report of the Mandatory to the LoN 31 December 1937

 

[Hossfly]

I just have to chuckle at this.

Well, I'm having a big belly laugh over the garbage you're spewing.

Reference: 31 May 2010 Flotilla Incident

It just so happens that the Report that Billo_Really is refering to was a panel of five UN Human Rights experts reporting to the UN Human Rights Council; and it was they that rejected that the Palmer Report conclusions. The UNHRC Panel based their conclusion of "international human rights and humanitarian law;" not Maritime Law.

You want maritime law? I'll give you maritime law!

underlying basic international law principle that applies is exclusive flag jurisdiction, as part of customary international law by the Permanent Court of International Justice in 1927:

“ – vessels on the high seas are subject to no authority except that of the State whose flag they fly”. ​

“[F]ailing the existence of a permissive rule to the contrary, [a State] may not exercise its power in any form in the territory of another State. In this sense jurisdiction is certainly territorial; it cannot be exercised by a State outside its territory except by virtue of a permissive rule derived from international custom or from a convention… …[V]essels on the high seas are subject to no authority except that of the State whose flag they fly. In virtue of the principle of the freedom of the seas, that is to say, the absence of any territorial sovereignty upon the high seas, no State may exercise any kind of jurisdiction over foreign vessels upon them.

That's the law of the seas.

The Palmer Report was an investigative "Panel of Inquiry" guided and adopted by the two former heads of state (Chair and Vice-Chair); published in September 2011 (a year after the UNHCR Report). It was a decidedly as different in character from the UNHCR Fact Finding Mission, as one could conceive.

• The Right Honorable Sir Geoffrey Palmer, KCMG AC QC, Chair, 33rd Prime Minister of New Zealand
• The Right Honorable Alvaro Uribe, Vice-Chair, 31st President of Colombia, studied Law at the University of Antioquia; attended Harvard University, receiving a Certificate of Special Studies in Administration and Management at Harvard Extension School and Certificate in Negotiation and Dispute Resolution at Harvard Law School; studied at St Antony's College, Oxford, England, on a Chevening-Simón Bolívar scholarship.

There is nothing "Honorable" about Alvaro Uribe.

the appointment of Mr Uribe who is accused of responsibility for widespread human rights violations during his period of office as President of Columbia. More relevant here are his associations with Israel. During his term of office Israel was Columbia’s top weapons supplier, while the American Jewish Committee gave him its ‘Light Unto The Nations’ award in 2007. This apparent conflict of interest is not addressed in the UN Panel’s report.

More on this bogus panel later.

The two reports are essentially evenly matched.

No they're not! One report (UNHCR-FFM) has experts in the field they were commissioned to review, the other (Palmer Report) does not. Pointing to the Palmer Report over the legality of the blockade, is the equivalent of asking an auto mechanic for medical advice.

Problems with the Palmer report are as follows:

- the Panel did not see any exhibits or meet any witnesses, but has based its findings on information provided by the two delegations in the dispute.

- The report repeatedly makes it clear that the Panel was not a court. The result is effectively an opinion of the leadership, with the qualified partisan support from their colleagues.

- the Panel has at times demonstrated naivety and a lack of knowledge, while some of its concerns exhibit a biased interest in and understanding of events in the Near East.

- In supporting its position on Israel’s need to defend itself by imposing the blockade, the Panel make several references to the firing of rockets in Gaza. Yet these attacks do not occur in a vacuum. While the report refers (para. 78) to “countless attacks, which at the time of writing have once again become more extensive and intensive” it makes no mention of Israeli violence. [The “time of writing” was probably April 2011. The use of the word “countless” is unprofessional: accurate figures are available from both Israeli and Palestinian sources.] Palestinian casualties occur every week as a result of the occupation.

- The Panel’s conclusions that the blockade is legal are based on false points and therefore suspect.

More on the bogus Palmer Report...
​

The so-called Palmer Report on the Israeli raid of May 2010 that killed nine Turkish activists said earlier this month that Israel had used unreasonable force in last year's raid, but its naval blockade of the Hamas-ruled strip was legal.

A panel of five independent U.N. rights experts reporting to the U.N. Human Rights Council rejected that conclusion, saying the blockade had subjected Gazans to collective punishment in "flagrant contravention of international human rights and humanitarian law."

And still more on your precious Palmer Report...

• In September 2011, the UN released the so-called Palmer Report on Israel's attack against the Freedom Flotilla in May 2010. The report deemed Israel's blockade legal, however it was widely considered to be a politicized whitewash and contained the crucial caveat that "its conclusions can not be considered definitive in either fact or law."

• Also in September 2011, shortly after the Palmer Report was released, an independent UN panel of experts released a report concluding that Israel's blockade of Gaza does indeed violate international law, stating that it amounts to collective punishment in "flagrant contravention of international human rights and humanitarian law."

• In reference to Palmer, the independent experts wrote: 'In pronouncing itself on the legality of the naval blockade, the Palmer Report does not recognize the naval blockade as an integral part of Israel's closure policy towards Gaza which has a disproportionate impact on the human rights of civilians.'

• Human rights organizations such as Amnesty International and the International Committee of the Red Cross also consider the blockade and siege to be acts of collective punishment that contravene international law.

Now, just for fun, let's throw out all the experts I just posted and see what "Jews" have to say about Palestine?

Forget what others say about Israel. Let’s listen to prominent Jewish voices.

313 Jewish survivors and descendants of survivors and victims of the Nazi genocide have signed a letter stating:

As Jewish survivors and descendants of survivors and victims of the Nazi genocide we unequivocally condemn the massacre of Palestinians in Gaza and the ongoing occupation and colonization of historic Palestine. We further condemn the United States for providing Israel with the funding to carry out the attack, and Western states more generally for using their diplomatic muscle to protect Israel from condemnation. Genocide begins with the silence of the world.

We are alarmed by the extreme, racist dehumanization of Palestinians in Israeli society, which has reached a fever-pitch. In Israel, politicians and pundits in The Times of Israel and The Jerusalem Post have called openly for genocide of Palestinians and right-wing Israelis are adopting Neo-Nazi insignia.​

***

Nothing can justify bombing UN shelters, homes, hospitals and universities. Nothing can justify depriving people of electricity and water.

We must raise our collective voices and use our collective power to bring about an end to all forms of racism, including the ongoing genocide of Palestinian people. We call for an immediate end to the siege against and blockade of Gaza. We call for the full economic, cultural and academic boycott of Israel. “Never again” must mean NEVER AGAIN FOR ANYONE!​

Those are the good Jews, not Zionist assholes shooting their evil, twisted, inhumane mouths off.


That outta toast Toasty's bimbo white bread!​

hooting their evil, inhumane, twisted mouths off like you ?

Look in the Mirror Toastie.....your comment is uncalled for...Billo is a Diamond

Steve, Billo is a lump of coal.

 

[Hossfly]

Billo_Really, et al,

All you have presented here, is the continuing dialog between adversaries arguing on behalf of one report over another. They are arguing over the same to reports.

At the end of the day, the UNHCR Report does not say that the blockade violates the UNCLOS Protocols. It condemns Israel on Humanitarian grounds. Similarly, the "Washington Blog" dialog you posted, is an accumulation of pro-Palestinians (pro-HAMAS) commentary and not a balanced view. Using the standard they outline, you would never suspect that the Palestinians have engaged in hijackings, piracy, suicide bombings, terrorist assaults, kidnapping and murder, etc, targeting primarily civilians.

[

Those are the good Jews, not Zionist assholes shooting their evil, twisted, inhumane mouths off.

That outta toast Toasty's bimbo white bread!​

(COMMENT)

This is a compilation of judgments made via media descriptions of events. Most nations of the world have some sort of anti-War protestors when the nation is engaged in a armed conflict. It is to be expected in a representative society. I have no doubt that there are Israelis that have sympathy for the trial and tribulations the Palestinians are going through; that to is to be expected. But I don't believe they represent a preponderance of the people or the popular view.

In your response you post from the Washington Blog:

Over 150 international legal experts – including two Former UN Special Rapporteurs on human rights situation in Palestine – have also signed a declaration stating:​

• • Israel has targeted civilians

• • Israel has inflicted collective punishment on the Palestinians

• • These are war crimes

• • The matter should be referred to the International Criminal Court (ICC)

Looking at this, it sounds so damaging. Yet it pales in comparison (much less serious or important) when stacked up against the war crimes and crimes against humanity that even the UNHCR made note of. Your argument has some merit, but it is not compelling. The basic issue still remains. And as far as going to court (ICC referral), it is a bit melodramatic (in the shadow of drama queens at play).

The Palestinians have opted for the continuation of the conflict. So be it. You cannot hope to win in court by stacking up the pages and pages of terrorist attacks, insurgent assaults, murder and kidnapping, rocket and mortar attacks, a majority of which were targeted against non-combatant civilians, and expect to win a case; even if there were isolated incidents of Israeli wrong doing.

The Palestinians Population, openly supporting and lending material assistance to the Jihadist of the land, accept the consequences of their actions; no matter how cowardly, no matter how vile, and no matter how they justify the violence --- they have to take responsibility for their actions --- and suffer the consequences. It is that simple.

The whining behind the theme that the Israelis are involved in some form of "collective punishment" is simply a misunderstanding of the criminal concept behind what "collective punishment" actually means. In fact, most people cannot define "collective punishment" or tell you what the "elements of the offense" are! So, exactly what are the drama queens of the Palestinian Virtual Victim Society actually claiming when they say --- they are subject to "collective punishment." What law are they using when they say it violates International Law?

Most Respectfully,
R

You are an apologist for the Zionists...........and a CURR,SIR.........Most Respectfully

Very uncouth, Steve. And did you mean 'cur'? Not nice.

 

[Roudy]

I just have to chuckle at this.

Well, I'm having a big belly laugh over the garbage you're spewing.

Reference: 31 May 2010 Flotilla Incident

It just so happens that the Report that Billo_Really is refering to was a panel of five UN Human Rights experts reporting to the UN Human Rights Council; and it was they that rejected that the Palmer Report conclusions. The UNHRC Panel based their conclusion of "international human rights and humanitarian law;" not Maritime Law.

You want maritime law? I'll give you maritime law!

underlying basic international law principle that applies is exclusive flag jurisdiction, as part of customary international law by the Permanent Court of International Justice in 1927:

“ – vessels on the high seas are subject to no authority except that of the State whose flag they fly”. ​

“[F]ailing the existence of a permissive rule to the contrary, [a State] may not exercise its power in any form in the territory of another State. In this sense jurisdiction is certainly territorial; it cannot be exercised by a State outside its territory except by virtue of a permissive rule derived from international custom or from a convention… …[V]essels on the high seas are subject to no authority except that of the State whose flag they fly. In virtue of the principle of the freedom of the seas, that is to say, the absence of any territorial sovereignty upon the high seas, no State may exercise any kind of jurisdiction over foreign vessels upon them.

That's the law of the seas.

The Palmer Report was an investigative "Panel of Inquiry" guided and adopted by the two former heads of state (Chair and Vice-Chair); published in September 2011 (a year after the UNHCR Report). It was a decidedly as different in character from the UNHCR Fact Finding Mission, as one could conceive.

• The Right Honorable Sir Geoffrey Palmer, KCMG AC QC, Chair, 33rd Prime Minister of New Zealand
• The Right Honorable Alvaro Uribe, Vice-Chair, 31st President of Colombia, studied Law at the University of Antioquia; attended Harvard University, receiving a Certificate of Special Studies in Administration and Management at Harvard Extension School and Certificate in Negotiation and Dispute Resolution at Harvard Law School; studied at St Antony's College, Oxford, England, on a Chevening-Simón Bolívar scholarship.

There is nothing "Honorable" about Alvaro Uribe.

the appointment of Mr Uribe who is accused of responsibility for widespread human rights violations during his period of office as President of Columbia. More relevant here are his associations with Israel. During his term of office Israel was Columbia’s top weapons supplier, while the American Jewish Committee gave him its ‘Light Unto The Nations’ award in 2007. This apparent conflict of interest is not addressed in the UN Panel’s report.

More on this bogus panel later.

The two reports are essentially evenly matched.

No they're not! One report (UNHCR-FFM) has experts in the field they were commissioned to review, the other (Palmer Report) does not. Pointing to the Palmer Report over the legality of the blockade, is the equivalent of asking an auto mechanic for medical advice.

Problems with the Palmer report are as follows:

- the Panel did not see any exhibits or meet any witnesses, but has based its findings on information provided by the two delegations in the dispute.

- The report repeatedly makes it clear that the Panel was not a court. The result is effectively an opinion of the leadership, with the qualified partisan support from their colleagues.

- the Panel has at times demonstrated naivety and a lack of knowledge, while some of its concerns exhibit a biased interest in and understanding of events in the Near East.

- In supporting its position on Israel’s need to defend itself by imposing the blockade, the Panel make several references to the firing of rockets in Gaza. Yet these attacks do not occur in a vacuum. While the report refers (para. 78) to “countless attacks, which at the time of writing have once again become more extensive and intensive” it makes no mention of Israeli violence. [The “time of writing” was probably April 2011. The use of the word “countless” is unprofessional: accurate figures are available from both Israeli and Palestinian sources.] Palestinian casualties occur every week as a result of the occupation.

- The Panel’s conclusions that the blockade is legal are based on false points and therefore suspect.

More on the bogus Palmer Report...
​

The so-called Palmer Report on the Israeli raid of May 2010 that killed nine Turkish activists said earlier this month that Israel had used unreasonable force in last year's raid, but its naval blockade of the Hamas-ruled strip was legal.

A panel of five independent U.N. rights experts reporting to the U.N. Human Rights Council rejected that conclusion, saying the blockade had subjected Gazans to collective punishment in "flagrant contravention of international human rights and humanitarian law."

And still more on your precious Palmer Report...

• In September 2011, the UN released the so-called Palmer Report on Israel's attack against the Freedom Flotilla in May 2010. The report deemed Israel's blockade legal, however it was widely considered to be a politicized whitewash and contained the crucial caveat that "its conclusions can not be considered definitive in either fact or law."

• Also in September 2011, shortly after the Palmer Report was released, an independent UN panel of experts released a report concluding that Israel's blockade of Gaza does indeed violate international law, stating that it amounts to collective punishment in "flagrant contravention of international human rights and humanitarian law."

• In reference to Palmer, the independent experts wrote: 'In pronouncing itself on the legality of the naval blockade, the Palmer Report does not recognize the naval blockade as an integral part of Israel's closure policy towards Gaza which has a disproportionate impact on the human rights of civilians.'

• Human rights organizations such as Amnesty International and the International Committee of the Red Cross also consider the blockade and siege to be acts of collective punishment that contravene international law.

Now, just for fun, let's throw out all the experts I just posted and see what "Jews" have to say about Palestine?

Forget what others say about Israel. Let’s listen to prominent Jewish voices.

313 Jewish survivors and descendants of survivors and victims of the Nazi genocide have signed a letter stating:

As Jewish survivors and descendants of survivors and victims of the Nazi genocide we unequivocally condemn the massacre of Palestinians in Gaza and the ongoing occupation and colonization of historic Palestine. We further condemn the United States for providing Israel with the funding to carry out the attack, and Western states more generally for using their diplomatic muscle to protect Israel from condemnation. Genocide begins with the silence of the world.

We are alarmed by the extreme, racist dehumanization of Palestinians in Israeli society, which has reached a fever-pitch. In Israel, politicians and pundits in The Times of Israel and The Jerusalem Post have called openly for genocide of Palestinians and right-wing Israelis are adopting Neo-Nazi insignia.​

***

Nothing can justify bombing UN shelters, homes, hospitals and universities. Nothing can justify depriving people of electricity and water.

We must raise our collective voices and use our collective power to bring about an end to all forms of racism, including the ongoing genocide of Palestinian people. We call for an immediate end to the siege against and blockade of Gaza. We call for the full economic, cultural and academic boycott of Israel. “Never again” must mean NEVER AGAIN FOR ANYONE!​

Those are the good Jews, not Zionist assholes shooting their evil, twisted, inhumane mouths off.


That outta toast Toasty's bimbo white bread!​

hooting their evil, inhumane, twisted mouths off like you ?

Look in the Mirror Toastie.....your comment is uncalled for...Billo is a Diamond

Steve, Billo is a lump of coal.

Coal is brown and smells like hell?

 

[toastman]

It is not a "false conclusion."

There are several concepts in play here.

First:

Every State likewise has the duty to refrain from the threat or use of force to violate international lines of demarcation, such as armistice lines, established by or pursuant to an international agreement to which it is a party or which it is otherwise bound to respect.​

The armistice lines never divided Palestine from anybody else. In the case of the West Bank and Gaza, the lines ran through Palestine. How can the Palestinians violate a line that is Palestine on both sides?

The armistice lines have little to do with Palestine. They were agreements between two sovereign states.

1949 Armistice Agreements - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia

Look at the map on the right. It clearly shows Israeli territory and Arab territory following the signing of the agreements.