USA Security Council abstention condemns neoZionism as illegal

moon2012 said:
No- it is only ' disputed ' by Israel- and that's a well-known punt in itself. The occupation was condemned - unanimously- as illegal. Even that is simply a reaffirmation of the existing legal position.
Click to expand...
How long before this obnoxious Hamas Humper commits another rule 12 violation?

Sent from my Lenovo K52e78 using Tapatalk
 
Last edited:
moon2012 said:
The truth of the attack ?
Click to expand...

Unfortunately that is a blog. Someones opinion. The U.S.S. Liberty incident went through Naval inquiries, Senate hearings and investigations over decades. They all come up with the same conclusion. Mistaken identity and communication errors. By now if there was any kind of hidden evidence to the contrary, someone would have leaked it.
 
moon2012 said:
No- it is only ' disputed ' by Israel- and that's a well-known punt in itself. The occupation was condemned - unanimously- as illegal. Even that is simply a reaffirmation of the existing legal position.
Click to expand...

Unfortunately, simply because some like-minded parties agreed on something doesn't make the thing in question a reality.

What is their basis in International law that makes the territory 'occupied' as opposed to disputed?
 
Sailor said:
Unfortunately that is a blog. Someones opinion. The U.S.S. Liberty incident went through Naval inquiries, Senate hearings and investigations over decades. They all come up with the same conclusion. Mistaken identity and communication errors. By now if there was any kind of hidden evidence to the contrary, someone would have leaked it.
Click to expand...

You mean like some form of ..er..' leak' from the sailors actually onboard ?

let's review a few;


http://www.ussliberty.org/report/report.pdf

http://www.ussliberty.org/report/report.htm

"I was never satisfied with the Israeli explanation. . . . Through diplomatic channels we refused to accept their explanations. I didn't believe them then, and I don't believe them to this day. The attack was outrageous "
-- US Secretary of State Dean Rusk

http://www.ifamericansknew.org/us_ints/ussliberty.html

“Those men were then betrayed and left to die by our own government.” The survivors are still awaiting justice. "

Former Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Admiral Thomas Moorer,

The rage is still palpable, sailor. The Israelis murdered the US servicemen.
 
Darth Hussein Omar said:
Unfortunately, simply because some like-minded parties agreed on something doesn't make the thing in question a reality.

What is their basis in International law that makes the territory 'occupied' as opposed to disputed?
Click to expand...

Essentially.......because the occupied territory actually belongs to the Palestinians- by law. It's called Palestine and the Zionists were given over 50% of it in 1947. Check out UNGAR 181 of 1947. It doesn't matter that all the Arab states opposed it- it passed.
 
Sailor said:
Unfortunately that is a blog. Someones opinion. The U.S.S. Liberty incident went through Naval inquiries, Senate hearings and investigations over decades. They all come up with the same conclusion. Mistaken identity and communication errors. By now if there was any kind of hidden evidence to the contrary, someone would have leaked it.
Click to expand...
I used to be a member of the USS Liberty forum and there were quite a few actual crew on there. Not one was in any doubt that the attack was deliberate.

Sent from my Lenovo K52e78 using Tapatalk
 
Last edited:
Sailor said:
Unfortunately that is a blog. Someones opinion. The U.S.S. Liberty incident went through Naval inquiries, Senate hearings and investigations over decades. They all come up with the same conclusion. Mistaken identity and communication errors. By now if there was any kind of hidden evidence to the contrary, someone would have leaked it.
Click to expand...
I recommend that you watch and read this, it sheds some serious light on those events

http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/WRHARTICLES/ussliberty.html

Sent from my Lenovo K52e78 using Tapatalk
 
moon2012 said:
Essentially.......because the occupied territory actually belongs to the Palestinians- by law. It's called Palestine and the Zionists were given over 50% of it in 1947. Check out UNGAR 181 of 1947. It doesn't matter that all the Arab states opposed it- it passed.
Click to expand...

If you're talking about the Armistice Agreement it didn't define actual borders in the sense 'borders' are used to demarcate nation states. So what you are calling Palestine was a region that never had borders as the term is commonly understood. Nor did it have a capital or government seat.

Palestine sounds a bit like an invention.
 
Darth Hussein Omar said:
If you're talking about the Armistice Agreement it didn't define actual borders in the sense 'borders' are used to demarcate nation states. So what you are calling Palestine was a region that never had borders as the term is commonly understood. Nor did it have a capital or government seat.

Palestine sounds a bit like an invention.
Click to expand...

Palestine's borders are clearly defined under Resolution 181 and the British Mandate .
 
Israel Fears American, French Initiative in Paris Conference Before Obama Leaves Office


Jerusalem concerned that foreign ministers' meeting in Paris, scheduled for January 15, will result in a Security Council vote on the Israeli-Palestinian peace

process.http://www.haaretz.com/israel-news/1.761317
Click to expand...

What has Israel got to fear from peace ? Nothing. It is Zionism which cannot accept peace. Israel is drawing closer to having peace imposed upon it. Not before time.
 
Nadia Hijab, executive director of Al-Shabaka: The Palestinian Policy Network, notes the significance of paragraph 5, which calls on "all States … to distinguish, in their relevant dealings, between the territory of the State of Israel and the territories occupied since 1967". This, she told Al Jazeera, "is effectively a call to cease trade, economic and financial transactions with the settlements".

This is likely to boost growing efforts to subject Israel to various forms of boycotts, including the boycott, divestment, and sanctions (BDS) campaign - especially since, as Hijab notes, "the settlements are an integral part of the Israeli economy".

http://www.aljazeera.com/indepth/fe...tion-israeli-settlements-161225090953898.html
Click to expand...

How long would any US president last - or any world leader- who attempts to force their electorate to trade with illegal entities ?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top