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

[moon]

LyingFish

It's da Jews moonie, doos damn Jews.

Zionists, you Jew-hating s.o.b.

 

[Bigdog]

The Jews did agree- so it didn't matter- to the British- that the Arabs didn't.

The UN and British gov't say you are wrong. And You have no legal proof "that it didn't matter".

The British assisted in the development of 181, the UN implemented it

It is illegal for the UN to implement an UNGAR, Criminal.

The partitions , legal partitions developed

The partitions never became LAW.

Res 181 never became law.

 

[moon]

The UN and British gov't say you are wrong. And You have no legal proof "that it didn't matter".



It is illegal for the UN to implement an UNGAR, Criminal.



The partitions never became LAW.

Res 181 never became law.

You're simply repeating yourself out of frustration.
181 PASSED. Its recommendations were ACCEPTED. They were IMPLEMENTED. The partitions were CREATED. Israel unilaterally declared statehood in the Jewish partition. That is Israel's LEGAL and recognized boundary. It is NOT universally recognized. The Palestinians declared statehood in the Arab partition. That is Palestine's LEGAL boundary- the Green Line being accepted by the UN and 138 countries but is NOT universally recognized.
The LAW states that the Jews must NOT occupy Palestinian territory. The Jews are criminal occupiers. That is the Green Line contention. As for the West Bank squats- well, anybody supporting those is complicit in crime.
That's all you need to know, Bigdoggie. There will never be a ' greater Israel '. Palestine belongs to Palestinians.
Criminal Zionists should not be accepted to address Berkeley. Jews are OK.

If you come back with more inane repetition I'm not obliged to respond.

 

[Bigdog]

You're simply repeating yourself out of frustration.
181 PASSED. Its recommendations were ACCEPTED. They were IMPLEMENTED. The partitions were CREATED. Israel unilaterally declared statehood in the Jewish partition. That is Israel's LEGAL and recognized boundary. It is NOT universally recognized. The Palestinians declared statehood in the Arab partition. That is Palestine's LEGAL boundary- the Green Line being accepted by the UN and 138 countries but is NOT universally recognized.
The LAW states that the Jews must NOT occupy Palestinian territory. The Jews are criminal occupiers. That is the Green Line contention. As for the West Bank squats- well, anybody supporting those is complicit in crime.
That's all you need to know, Bigdoggie. There will never be a ' greater Israel '. Palestine belongs to Palestinians.
Criminal Zionists should not be accepted to address Berkeley. Jews are OK.

If you come back with more inane repetition I'm not obliged to respond.

When the British mandate ended, there was only one international border INSIDE
it.

A border that divided the Brit mandate into an Arab State and an Undecided State.

And the Res 181 peace plan did NOT pass into binding international law as all parties involved did not agree to it. And the U.N charter does NOT give the UNGA the authority to create international borders. 181 was passed as an "official" recommendation. It was non binding.



"General Assembly resolutions

reflect the views of the Member States,
provide policy recommendations,
assign mandates to the UN Secretariat and the subsidiary bodies of the General Assembly, and
decide on all questions regarding the UN budget.

With the exception of decisions regarding payments to the regular and peacekeeping budgets of the UN, General Assembly resolutions/decisions are not binding for Member States. The implementation of the policy recommendations contained in resolutions/decisions is the responsibility of each Member State. (Source: GA Handbook)"

https://ask.un.org/faq/14484



5 Muslim UN member States acted criminally when they invaded the Western mandate and illegally annexed the West Bank and Gaza Strip by military force.

 

[moon]

When the British mandate ended, there was only one international border INSIDE
it.

A border that divided the Brit mandate into an Arab State and an Undecided State.

You're being ridiculous. The British Mandate ended in May 1948.

 

[Bigdog]

You're being ridiculous. The British Mandate ended in May 1948.

Any your point?


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]

Been there, done that. You are simply repeating.
The independence recognition document presented to Truman is based upon the 181 borders - or it would never have been accepted.
Nobody recognizes a state without borders.
Good try, ben Gurion.

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

What's next in your Big Book of Repeated Failures ?

 

[Bigdog]

Been there, done that. You are simply repeating.
The independence recognition document presented to Truman is based upon the 181 borders - or it would never have been accepted.
Nobody recognizes a state without borders.
Good try, ben Gurion.

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

What's next in your Big Book of Repeated Failures ?

So YOU don't recognize the Palestinian State because their 1988 declaration did NOT include borders????



"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.

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

No contradiction with the Truman letter's "frontiers".

 

[moon]

So YOU don't recognize the Palestinian State because their 1988 declaration did NOT include borders????



"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.

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

No contradiction with the Truman letter's "frontiers".

Yes, the letter to Truman was more specific- as previously stated.



The Palestinian borders are described in 181. The Israeli borders are described in 181.

The declaration concerned the Palestine region, as defined by the borders of the British Mandate of Palestine, which includes the whole of the State of Israel as well as the West Bank and the Gaza strip (at the time part of the Israeli Civil Administration). It references the United Nations Partition Plan for Palestine of 1947 and "UN resolutions since 1947" in general as providing legitimacy to Palestinian statehood.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Palestinian_Declaration_of_Independence

Palestine is a recognized sovereign state. The Jewish fascists are required to withdraw, according to the law.

 

[Bigdog]

Been there, done that. You are simply repeating.
The independence recognition document presented to Truman is based upon the 181 borders - or it would never have been accepted.
Nobody recognizes a state without borders.
Good try, ben Gurion.

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

What's next in your Big Book of Repeated Failures ?

From your own link ...

"The declaration then proclaims a "State of Palestine on our Palestinian territory with its capital Jerusalem".[10][11] The borders of the state are not specified."



Evidence that you have two sets of standards; one for human beings and one for infidels.

 

[moon]

From your own link ...

"The declaration then proclaims a "State of Palestine on our Palestinian territory with its capital Jerusalem".[10][11] The borders of the state are not specified."



Evidence that you have two sets of standards; one for human beings and one for infidels.

That's right- the borders of the state are not specified in the document.
I haven't specified in this post that it's Friday.

181 described the borders- international law defends them. That includes Israel's.

 

[Bigdog]

That's right- the borders of the state are not specified in the document.
I haven't specified in this post that it's Friday.

181 described the borders- international law defends them. That includes Israel's.

You made the claim ... "Nobody recognizes a state without borders." Why are you wimping out now?

According to the UN, 181 is non binding if all parties do not agree. Why do you disagree with the UN????

Do you need me to post the UN's quote about UNGARs for you, again?

 

[moon]

You made the claim ... "Nobody recognizes a state without borders." Why are you wimping out now?

I'm not. Once again- Truman would never have recognized an Israeli state without borders. The Israelis referred to the borders of 181- because they were the accepted borders.
What you are suggesting is that the Israelis could have their state recognized on the legal borders of 181 and then pretend that their state included Palestine later on. Over 70 years later that notion is still being laughed at. Resolution 242 is also clear- the Israelis must withdraw. Their occupation is illegal.

Why don't you quit trying to sell Israeli crime ?

According to the UN, 181 is non binding if all parties do not agree. Why do you disagree with the UN????

You are defending Israeli criminality with nonsense.

Do you need me to post the UN's quote about UNGARs for you, again?

Do you want me to keep restating that UNGAR 181 was advisory but backed by the legal administrators of Palestine and cemented by irrefutable international law ?

Territory can never be gained by force. Suck it up.

 

[Bigdog]

I'm not. Once again- Truman would never have recognized an Israeli state without borders. The Israelis referred to the borders of 181- because they were the accepted borders.
What you are suggesting is that the Israelis could have their state recognized on the legal borders of 181 and then pretend that their state included Palestine later on. Over 70 years later that notion is still being laughed at. Resolution 242 is also clear- the Israelis must withdraw. Their occupation is illegal.

Why don't you quit trying to sell Israeli crime ?



You are defending Israeli criminality with nonsense.



Do you want me to keep restating that UNGAR 181 was advisory but backed by the legal administrators of Palestine and cemented by irrefutable international law ?

Territory can never be gained by force. Suck it up.

The letter to Truman did not mention the partitions, only "frontiers". And since when did writing a letter to a foreign president create international law??? You need to provide a citation for me to believe that.

242 only says withdrawal from the Gaza Strip and West Bank. It has nothing to do with the partitions. Why do use that false narrative to deceive and deflect?

The only territory illegally taken by force, was that taken by the Muslim nations that invaded the Mandate, and tried to commit a second holocaust.

According to the UN, 181 is non binding if all parties do not agree. Why do you disagree with the UN????

 

[moon]

The letter to Truman did not mention the partitions, only "frontiers". And since when did writing a letter to a foreign president create international law??? You need to provide a citation for me to believe that.

I don't give a hoot what you believe. I'm simply using your inane prosemitic protestations as an opportunity to convey the facts to others.

242 only says withdrawal from the Gaza Strip and West Bank. It has nothing to do with the partitions. Why do use that false narrative to deceive and deflect?

Your wriggling is becoming offensive. 242 requires the illegal invaders of Palestine to withdraw to the pre-1967 border.

The only territory illegally taken by force, was that taken by the Muslim nations that invaded the Mandate, and tried to commit a second holocaust.

You've been reduced to spouting hasbara twaddle.

According to the UN, 181 is non binding if all parties do not agree. Why do you disagree with the UN????

No, you've misrepresented the British position- again. Once could be an error. Twice makes you a liar. Fuck off.

 

[moon]

As far as the Israeli settlements are concerned, they are clearly illegal; an occupying power has no right to de facto annexation of portions of the territory by population transfers.

9. Overshadowing the arguments in Paragraph 8 above is the undeniable fact that the Kellogg-Briand Peace Pact of 1928, as definitively glossed by the International Tribunal at Nuremberg in 1948, has abolished forever the idea of acquisition of territory by military conquest. No matter who was the aggressor, international borders cannot change by the process of war. Resort to war is itself illegal, and while self-defense is of course legal, the self-defense cannot go so far as to constitute a new war of aggression all its own. And if it does, the land taken may at best be temporarily occupied, but cannot be annexed.

The Legal Boundaries of Israel in International Law
Anthony D'Amato
Leighton Professor of Law
Northwestern University School of Law

http://jurist.law.pitt.edu/world/israelborders.php

Begone, prosemitic pooch.

 

[Bigdog]

Begone, prosemitic pooch.

Back to your only source, ... a mocked and ridiculed, white lib nazi school teacher's OPINION.

The Peace Treaty of Lausanne (and Sevres) ceded the Ottoman's (and Turkey's) Arab lands to the League of Nations, ... and affirmed the Balfour Declaration. The Kellog Pact does not apply.

 

[moon]

Back to your only source, ... a mocked and ridiculed, white lib nazi school teacher's OPINION.

C'mon, D'Amato is a highly-respected expert in international law. Besides, his view is endorsed by UN resolutions. I'm aware that prosemitic supporters of neo-Zionist fascism, murder, ethnic cleansing and apartheid don't LIKE international law and concomitant UN resolutions....but hey...............tough tittie.

The Peace Treaty of Lausanne (and Sevres) ceded the Ottoman's (and Turkey's) Arab lands to the League of Nations, ... and affirmed the Balfour Declaration. The Kellog Pact does not apply.

Desperate twaddle. The Balfour Declaration was merely an imperialist's opinion. It had no legal validity.
You should change shysters. Your's sucks.


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

 

[Bigdog]

C'mon, D'Amato is a highly-respected expert in international law. Besides, his view is endorsed by UN resolutions. I'm aware that prosemitic supporters of neo-Zionist fascism, murder, ethnic cleansing and apartheid don't LIKE international law and concomitant UN resolutions....but hey...............tough tittie.



Desperate twaddle. The Balfour Declaration was merely an imperialist's opinion. It had no legal validity.
You should change shysters. Your's sucks.


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

"British Mandate for Palestine

The three principles of the British Balfour Declaration regarding Palestine were adopted in the Treaty of Sèvres:

Article 95"

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


So where is your evidence that the Kellogg Pact retroactively annulled peace treaties???

 

[moon]

The Balfour Declaration was a public statement issued by the British government in 1917 during the First World War announcing its support for the establishment of a "national home for the Jewish people" in Palestine,

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

As I said- just an opinion.

The Treaty of Sevres established the principle of the British Mandate for Palestine

The ceding of Eastern Mediterranean lands saw the introduction of novel polities, including the British Mandate for Palestine and the French Mandate for Syria and Lebanon.[
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Treaty_of_Sèvres


The Mandate for Palestine was a League of Nations mandate for British administration of the territories of Palestine
The mandate was assigned to Britain by the San Remo conference in April 1920
The Balfour Declaration was subsequently incorporated into the Mandate for Palestine to put the declaration into effect.[15] Unlike the declaration itself, the Mandate was legally binding on the British government.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mandate_for_Palestine

The declaration called for safeguarding the civil and religious rights for the Palestinian Arabs, who composed the vast majority of the local population,

The UN resolution 181 enabled the division of Palestine into a homeland for Jews and a homeland for indigenous Arabs. It provided a map of the divisions which was accepted by the Jews and passed by majority vote , disregarding Arab objections.

The modern borders of Israel exist as the result both of past wars and of diplomatic agreements between the State of Israel and its neighbours as well as colonial powers. Only two of Israel's five total potential land borders are internationally recognized and uncontested, while the other three remain disputed;
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Borders_of_Israel

No legal agreement has ever displaced the original 181 borders except minor changes agreed between Israel and neighbors.

The occupation of Palestinian territory was an illegal occupation and international law requires the Israelis to withdraw.

So the Israeli occupation is still illegal- as the ICC will again confirm in the near future.

Have another go.