The Jew Hating white lib LEFT ban Pro Israel speakers at Berkeley - Jew free zones

[moon]

You are bullshitting everyone.

No- but you have become , like so many others, a dodging obfuscation monkey.

UNGAR 181 did NOT create States or international borders.

Yes, so we've both been saying for pages past. What is your point in continually repeating it ?
REMINDER

Again, 181 proposed three partitions. It passed by majority UNGA vote with Jewish support in 1947. Thus homelands were created , one for Jews, one for Arabs along with the international territory of Jerusalem. The Resolution was the product of the dissolution of the British Mandate for Palestine and carried the legal authority of the Mandate which ended in 1948. The borders so described are protected to this day by the UN with the backing of international law.
I suggest that you don't even know which legal authority protects them- and that's why you continue to produce meaningless obfuscationary fluff. Prove me wrong or be silent.

Territory can never be gained by force. The Zionist invaders must withdraw.

UNGAR 181 partitioned Palestine, according to and backed by the British plan with the legal authority of their Mandate for Palestine, into three partitions- one for a Jewish homeland, one for the indigenous Arabs and the international territory of Jerusalem. Borders may not be changed by force and both invasion and annexation are illegal under international law.
Your criminal Zionists are required , by law, to withdraw from Palestine. They are also being investigated by the ICC


So then- let's see you outline your understanding of the international laws which protect the territories of Israel, Palestine and Jerusalem. The laws are BINDING so you're not going to escape them .
My guess is that you can't- and you'll be back with more repetitious obfuscation.

 

[Bigdog]

No- but you have become , like so many others, a dodging obfuscation monkey.



Yes, so we've both been saying for pages past. What is your point in continually repeating it ?
REMINDER


UNGAR 181 partitioned Palestine, according to and backed by the British plan with the legal authority of their Mandate for Palestine, into three partitions- one for a Jewish homeland, one for the indigenous Arabs and the international territory of Jerusalem. Borders may not be changed by force and both invasion and annexation are illegal under international law.
Your criminal Zionists are required , by law, to withdraw from Palestine. They are also being investigated by the ICC


So then- let's see you outline your understanding of the international laws which protect the territories of Israel, Palestine and Jerusalem. The laws are BINDING so you're not going to escape them .
My guess is that you can't- and you'll be back with more repetitious obfuscation.

Partitions are NOT international borders. The U.N. charter does NOT authorize the creation of States or international borders. The UNGA can only pass "official recommendations" NOT laws.


The Brits refused to implement the 181 plan.

"U.K. Accepts UNSCOP General Recommendations; Will Not Implement Policy Unacceptable by Both Arabs and Jews”

https://www.un.org/unispal/wp-content/uploads/1947/09/ecb5eae2e1d29ed08525686d00529256_gapal02.pdf





The Arabs also refused to implement the plan.
"The Arab Higher Committee, the Arab League and other Arab leaders and governments rejected it[7] and indicated an unwillingness to accept any form of territorial division,[8] arguing that it violated the principles of national self-determination in the UN Charter which granted people the right to decide their own destiny.[5][9] They announced their intention to take all necessary measures to prevent the implementation of the resolution.[10][11][12][13] Subsequently a civil war broke out in Palestine[14] and the plan was not implemented.[15]"

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Nations_Partition_Plan_for_Palestine




And, by UNGA passing 181, it only made it an "official" recommendation.
"The United Nations Partition Plan for Palestine was a proposal by the United Nations, which recommended a partition of Mandatory Palestine at the end of the British Mandate."

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Nations_Partition_Plan_for_Palestine

 

[moon]

Partitions are NOT international borders. The U.N. charter does NOT authorize the creation of States or international borders. The UNGA can only pass "official recommendations" NOT laws.


The Brits refused to implement the 181 plan.

"U.K. Accepts UNSCOP General Recommendations; Will Not Implement Policy Unacceptable by Both Arabs and Jews”

https://www.un.org/unispal/wp-content/uploads/1947/09/ecb5eae2e1d29ed08525686d00529256_gapal02.pdf





The Arabs also refused to implement the plan.
"The Arab Higher Committee, the Arab League and other Arab leaders and governments rejected it[7] and indicated an unwillingness to accept any form of territorial division,[8] arguing that it violated the principles of national self-determination in the UN Charter which granted people the right to decide their own destiny.[5][9] They announced their intention to take all necessary measures to prevent the implementation of the resolution.[10][11][12][13] Subsequently a civil war broke out in Palestine[14] and the plan was not implemented.[15]"

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Nations_Partition_Plan_for_Palestine




And, by UNGA passing 181, it only made it an "official" recommendation.
"The United Nations Partition Plan for Palestine was a proposal by the United Nations, which recommended a partition of Mandatory Palestine at the end of the British Mandate."

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Nations_Partition_Plan_for_Palestine

1)The partitions became international borders by way of the recognition of statehood. Both Israel and Palestine are recognized states.

2)The Brits didn't refuse to implement their own plan- they abstained because it was their own plan. Not proper, old boy.

One more strike and you're out

3)Arab agreement to 181 was not required in order for it to pass. It passed.


You're out.

Now then- you are missing a definition of international law ....and an example, please. You're under scrutiny.

 

[Bigdog]

1)The partitions became international borders by way of the recognition of statehood. Both Israel and Palestine are recognized states.

2)The Brits didn't refuse to implement their own plan- they abstained because it was their own plan. Not proper, old boy.

One more strike and you're out

3)Arab agreement to 181 was not required in order for it to pass. It passed.


You're out.

Now then- you are missing a definition of international law ....and an example, please. You're under scrutiny.

1. cite the international law that says that about creating borders
2. my source is the UN, yours is some nazi white lib prof
3. passing meant that it became an official recommendation.

You are bullshitting all the infidels.

You have no sources other than one nazi white lib's opinion.

 

[moon]

1. cite the international law that says that about creating borders
2. my source is the UN, yours is some nazi white lib prof
3. passing meant that it became an official recommendation.

You are bullshitting all the infidels.

You have no sources other than one nazi white lib's opinion.

No- MY source is the UN and you have no sources other than repeating irrelevant UN text.

It's too bad for you that your fascist Israelis are outlawed by the UN and international law- but territory cannot be gained by force. The Occupation of Palestine is illegal and must be corrected.

If you believe that the opposite is true, that anybody can legally land-grab whatever they want then provide the law that supports you- otherwise be silent.

You'll find links to the Paris Peace Pact above, along with other legal authorities that you've deliberately ignored.

Again, obfuscation-monkey, the law professor's paper simply refers to the relevant laws. He doesn't write them- as you seem to be fixated upon denying.

 

[Bigdog]

No- MY source is the UN and you have no sources other than repeating irrelevant UN text.

It's too bad for you that your fascist Israelis are outlawed by the UN and international law- but territory cannot be gained by force. The Occupation of Palestine is illegal and must be corrected.

If you believe that the opposite is true, that anybody can legally land-grab whatever they want then provide the law that supports you- otherwise be silent.

You'll find links to the Paris Peace Pact above, along with other legal authorities that you've deliberately ignored.

Again, obfuscation-monkey, the law professor's paper simply refers to the relevant laws. He doesn't write them- as you seem to be fixated upon denying.

You and your nazi white lib prof source are wrong.

Israel Declaration of Independence
"The borders were not specified in the Declaration, although its 14th paragraph indicated a willingness to cooperate in the implementation of the UN Partition Plan. The original draft had declared that the borders would be decided by the UN partition plan. While this was supported by Rosen and Bechor-Shalom Sheetrit, it was opposed by Ben-Gurion and Zisling, with Ben-Gurion stating, "We accepted the UN Resolution, but the Arabs did not. They are preparing to make war on us. If we defeat them and capture western Galilee or territory on both sides of the road to Jerusalem, these areas will become part of the state. Why should we obligate ourselves to accept boundaries that in any case the Arabs don't accept?"[8] The inclusion of the designation of borders in the text was dropped after the provisional government of Israel, the Minhelet HaAm, voted 5–4 against it.[9] The Revisionists, committed to a Jewish state on both sides of the Jordan River (that is, including Transjordan), wanted the phrase "within its historic borders" included, but were unsuccessful."

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Israeli_Declaration_of_Independence

 

[moon]

You and your nazi white lib prof source are wrong.

Israel Declaration of Independence
"The borders were not specified in the Declaration, although its 14th paragraph indicated a willingness to cooperate in the implementation of the UN Partition Plan. The original draft had declared that the borders would be decided by the UN partition plan. While this was supported by Rosen and Bechor-Shalom Sheetrit, it was opposed by Ben-Gurion and Zisling, with Ben-Gurion stating, "We accepted the UN Resolution, but the Arabs did not. They are preparing to make war on us. If we defeat them and capture western Galilee or territory on both sides of the road to Jerusalem, these areas will become part of the state. Why should we obligate ourselves to accept boundaries that in any case the Arabs don't accept?"[8] The inclusion of the designation of borders in the text was dropped after the provisional government of Israel, the Minhelet HaAm, voted 5–4 against it.[9] The Revisionists, committed to a Jewish state on both sides of the Jordan River (that is, including Transjordan), wanted the phrase "within its historic borders" included, but were unsuccessful."

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Israeli_Declaration_of_Independence

Yes, we've been over that already , obfuscation-monkey. The Zionist scumbags could make any statement on borders that they liked BUT THE BORDERS RECOGNIZED WERE AS THEY STATED IN THEIR LETTER TO TRUMAN, namely, the 181 partition.

Besides, they couldn't claim any other territory AS INTERNATIONAL LAW FORBADE IT.

Geez.

Where's your law that states that they could ? Oh dear- there aren't any. Too bad.

You're looking a tad piqued.

 

[Lionfish]

Yes, we've been over that already , obfuscation-monkey. The Zionist scumbags could make any statement on borders that they liked BUT THE BORDERS RECOGNIZED WERE AS THEY STATED IN THEIR LETTER TO TRUMAN, namely, the 181 partition.

Besides, they couldn't claim any other territory AS INTERNATIONAL LAW FORBADE IT.

Geez.

Where's your law law that states that they could ? Oh dear- there aren't any. Too bad.

You're looking a tad piqued.

It's dose damn Jews, Moonie, those Jews. I wonder how long your brain would last if Trump was a Jew.

 

[moon]

LyingFish

It's dose damn Jews, those Jews

You're simply enhancing your reputation as an idiot, you Jew-hating s.o.b.

 

[Bigdog]

Yes, we've been over that already , obfuscation-monkey. The Zionist scumbags could make any statement on borders that they liked BUT THE BORDERS RECOGNIZED WERE AS THEY STATED IN THEIR LETTER TO TRUMAN, namely, the 181 partition.

Besides, they couldn't claim any other territory AS INTERNATIONAL LAW FORBADE IT.

Geez.

Where's your law law that states that they could ? Oh dear- there aren't any. Too bad.

You're looking a tad piqued.

"The borders were not specified in the Declaration, although its 14th paragraph indicated a willingness to cooperate in the implementation of the UN Partition Plan."

Blows up your claim that statehood creates borders. As does the Palestinian 'borderless' declaration of 1988.

 

[moon]

"The borders were not specified in the Declaration, although its 14th paragraph indicated a willingness to cooperate in the implementation of the UN Partition Plan."

Blows up your claim that statehood creates borders. As does the Palestinian 'borderless' declaration of 1988.

It didn't matter that neither the Israeli nor Palestinian declarations stipulated borders as the legal basis for both declarations was UNGAR 181. No UNGAR 181= no Israel.

The Zionists stipulated the 181 borders in their letter to Truman in order to have their unilateral declaration recognized. The Palestinian declaration drew increasing support- despite US opposition- and now stands at 138 countries and the UN itself since 2012.

A state must have borders. UNGAR 181 provided borders for both Israel and Palestine. Israel's Occupation is, of course, illegal.

Israeli occupation of Palestinian territory illegal: UN rights commission

https://news.un.org/en/story/2022/10/1129722

You've lost. Accept it. There will never be a ' Greater Israel '.

 

[Bigdog]

It didn't matter that neither the Israeli nor Palestinian declarations stipulated borders as the legal basis for both declarations was UNGAR 181. No UNGAR 181= no Israel.

The Zionists stipulated the 181 borders in their letter to Truman in order to have their unilateral declaration recognized. The Palestinian declaration drew increasing support- despite US opposition- and now stands at 138 countries and the UN itself since 2012.

A state must have borders. UNGAR 181 provided borders for both Israel and Palestine. Israel's Occupation is, of course, illegal.



You've lost. Accept it. There will never be a ' Greater Israel '.

The Brits refused to create the partitions in the 181 plan.

"U.K. Accepts UNSCOP General Recommendations; Will Not Implement Policy Unacceptable by Both Arabs and Jews”

https://www.un.org/unispal/wp-content/uploads/1947/09/ecb5eae2e1d29ed08525686d00529256_gapal02.pdf

 

[moon]

The Brits refused to create the partitions in the 181 plan.

"U.K. Accepts UNSCOP General Recommendations; Will Not Implement Policy Unacceptable by Both Arabs and Jews”

https://www.un.org/unispal/wp-content/uploads/1947/09/ecb5eae2e1d29ed08525686d00529256_gapal02.pdf

So ? The recommendation was hotly supported by the Jews.

It passed the General Assembly vote. The Jews were handed a homeland in somebody else's country and the imperialist Brit assholes abstained.
The Arabs were a tad miffed to lose over half of their country to a bunch of pseudo-Jewish European Ashkenazim who had managed to inveigle themselves into the British Mandate.

Still- that's done and dusted. The Jews have a legal state - and so do the Palestinian Arabs. All that's required is for the Jews who are illegally occupying Palestine to fuck off back to Israel - as required by international law.

You lost. There will never be a ' Greater Israel '. Nor should there be.

 

[Bigdog]

So ? The recommendation was hotly supported by the Jews.

It passed the General Assembly vote. The Jews were handed a homeland in somebody else's country and the imperialist Brit assholes abstained.
The Arabs were a tad miffed to lose over half of their country to a bunch of pseudo-Jewish European Ashkenazim who had managed to inveigle themselves into the British Mandate.

Still- that's done and dusted. The Jews have a legal state - and so do the Palestinian Arabs. All that's required is for the Jews who are illegally occupying Palestine to fuck off back to Israel - as required by international law.

You lost. There will never be a ' Greater Israel '. Nor should there be.

181 was also supported by European antisemites. And many Jews did oppose it for being too small.

The Brits did NOT create the 181 partitions or the State of Israel as you claimed.

 

[moon]

181 was also supported by European antisemites. And many Jews did oppose it for being too small.

Irrelevant, even if true. 181 passed- with Jewish support.

The Brits did NOT create the 181 partitions or the State of Israel as you claimed.

181 created the partitions. It was able to do so because the British abrogated their responsibilities under the Mandate for Palestine to the UN . The British Mandate did not terminate until 1948 and the partitions themselves were formed by the UN according to data provided by the British. The British were, therefore, the prime movers in the creation of the partitions.

UNSCOP and subsequent committees and sub-committees based the proposed partions on a British report.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Nations_Partition_Plan_for_Palestine

They did not ' create a state of Israel ' , they provided the territory within which such a state could be created. I'll accept that your statement is innocently based upon misinformation - but if you continue to repeat it it becomes a lie.

UNGAR 181 thus became the legal basis for both a Jewish homeland and an Arab homeland. Territory is a requirement of statehood and 181 provided it. The Palestinians' right to statehood was thus established and has been tested and legally confirmed so do stop your pitiful challenges to international law. There is not, nor will there ever be, a ' Greater Israel '.

Resolution 181 as a legal basis for Palestinian statehood
In 1988, the Palestine Liberation Organization published the Palestinian Declaration of Independence relying on Resolution 181, arguing that the resolution continues to provide international legitimacy for the right of the Palestinian people to sovereignty and national independence.[152] A number of scholars have written in support of this view.[153][154][155]

A General Assembly request for an advisory opinion, Resolution ES-10/14 (2004), specifically cited resolution 181(II) as a "relevant resolution", and asked the International Court of Justice (ICJ) what are the legal consequences of the relevant Security Council and General Assembly resolutions. Judge Abdul Koroma explained the majority opinion: "The Court has also held that the right of self-determination as an established and recognized right under international law applies to the territory and to the Palestinian people. Accordingly, the exercise of such right entitles the Palestinian people to a State of their own as originally envisaged in resolution 181 (II) and subsequently confirmed."[156] In response, Prof. Paul De Waart said that the Court put the legality of the 1922 League of Nations Palestine Mandate and the 1947 UN Plan of Partition beyond doubt once and for all.[157]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Nations_Partition_Plan_for_Palestine

 

[moon]

The case for a termination of Zionist encroachments upon the sovereign state of Palestine having been made- and supported by international law- I propose that the thread title is deliberately misleading and calculated to appeal to criminal sentiment.

The Jew Hating white lib LEFT ban Pro Israel speakers at Berkeley - Jew free zones

1) The ' white lib left ' does not hate Jews.
2) there is no evidence that those who wanted to prevent the airing and promotion of Israeli criminality on their campus were exclusively ' white', 'lib' , ' left' or ' Jew -hating '
3) There are no ' Jew-free ' zones- although there are plenty of Zionist-established Palestinian-free zones in both Israel and Palestine.

Perhaps all major brands and all governments can now censure all those who deny the very existence of Palestinians and promote the criminal occupation of Palestinian territory by the sicko pseudo-Jewish racists that have no right whatsoever to be there.

Are you listening ?


Haw, haw, haw, haw, haw................................haw, haw, haw................................haw, haw.............................haw.

 

[Bigdog]

Irrelevant, even if true. 181 passed- with Jewish support.

181 created the partitions. It was able to do so because the British abrogated their responsibilities under the Mandate for Palestine to the UN . The British Mandate did not terminate until 1948 and the partitions themselves were formed by the UN according to data provided by the British. The British were, therefore, the prime movers in the creation of the partitions.

The partitions were recommendations, not a law, not international borders. Your argument that the Brits made the partitions into international borders is a fail.

They did not ' create a state of Israel ' , they provided the territory within which such a state could be created. I'll accept that your statement is innocently based upon misinformation - but if you continue to repeat it it becomes a lie.

Yep, I've been telling you that all along.

UNGAR 181 thus became the legal basis for both a Jewish homeland and an Arab homeland. Territory is a requirement of statehood and 181 provided it. The Palestinians' right to statehood was thus established and has been tested and legally confirmed so do stop your pitiful challenges to international law. There is not, nor will there ever be, a ' Greater Israel '.

UNGAR creates recommendations, not laws.

A General Assembly request for an advisory opinion, Resolution ES-10/14 (2004), specifically cited resolution 181(II) as a "relevant resolution", and asked the International Court of Justice (ICJ) what are the legal consequences of the relevant Security Council and General Assembly resolutions.

"Advisory proceedings conclude with the delivery of the advisory opinion at a public sitting.

Such opinions are essemtially advisory; in other words, unlike the Court’s judgments, they are not binding. The requesting organ, agency or organization remains free to give effect to the opinion as it sees fit, or not to do so at all. However, certain instruments or regulations provide that an advisory opinion by the Court does have binding force (e.g., the conventions on the privileges and immunities of the United Nations)."

https://www.icj-cij.org/en/how-the-court-works


So no, it has not been legally confirmed which is why it's just a Non-member Observer State. Or as you posted a "defacto state", ... defacto meaning 'in effect, not by right'.

What are the U.N. officially recognized borders of the State of Palestine?

 

[moon]

The partitions were recommendations, not a law, not international borders. Your argument that the Brits made the partitions into international borders is a fail.

You've invented an 'argument ' that I didn't make. Why ? Because your support fort Zionist criminality has been rejected by international law.

Yep, I've been telling you that all along.

I've been agreeing with your, oft repeated, claim

UNGAR creates recommendations, not laws.

I haven't said otherwise. However, UNGAR recommendations , when passed as Resolutions, are in agreement with binding international law- or they wouldn't pass, would they.

"Advisory proceedings conclude with the delivery of the advisory opinion at a public sitting.

Such opinions are essemtially advisory; in other words, unlike the Court’s judgments, they are not binding. The requesting organ, agency or organization remains free to give effect to the opinion as it sees fit, or not to do so at all. However, certain instruments or regulations provide that an advisory opinion by the Court does have binding force (e.g., the conventions on the privileges and immunities of the United Nations)."

https://www.icj-cij.org/en/how-the-court-works


So no, it has not been legally confirmed which is why it's just a Non-member Observer State. Or as you posted a "defacto state", ... defacto meaning 'in effect, not by right'.

What are the U.N. officially recognized borders of the State of Palestine?

Yes, Palestinian statehood has been ' legally confirmed ' as stated previously. Observer state status and the recognition of 138 countries kills forever the criminal Zionist dream of a ' Greater Israel '.
You fought the law- and the law won. Palestine is recognized on the pre-1967 borders- and the illegal invaders must withdraw as confirmed by Resolution 242 which is backed by binding international law. Territory can not be gained by force and occupation is illegal.

Tough tittie.

UN general assembly makes resounding vote in favour of Palestinian statehood

Overwhelming majority votes to recognise Palestine as non-member state as US and Israel are left to condemn decision

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2012/nov/29/united-nations-vote-palestine-state

 

[Bigdog]

Yes, Palestinian statehood has been ' legally confirmed ' as stated previously. Observer state status and the recognition of 138 countries kills forever the criminal Zionist dream of a ' Greater Israel '.
You fought the law- and the law won. Palestine is recognized on the pre-1967 borders- and the illegal invaders must withdraw as confirmed by Resolution 242 which is backed by binding international law. Territory can not be gained by force and occupation is illegal.

Tough tittie.
.

An UNGAR does NOT create international law. It is just an official non binding recommendation.

Give me a quote from the U.N. "statehood" Res. that says pre 1967 borders.

 

[moon]

Just adhere to the law, Bigdoggie- and all will be well in the Middle East. United Nations General Assembly resolution 67/19 recognizes the state of Palestine on the pre-1967 borders- and implicitly its sovereignty. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Nations_General_Assembly_resolution_67/19

Occupation is illegal. Annexation is illegal. The Zionists are illegal occupiers and their attempts at annexation will never be recognized. There will never be a ' Greater Israel '.
Zionists- go home- while you still have one.