Lightbringer
Loves Me Some Souls
Hypothetically, what would happen?
USA Security Council abstention condemns neoZionism as illegal
- Thread starter moon
- Start date
Hypothetically, what would happen?
cancel2 2022
Canceled
moon
Satire for Sanity
https://www.theguardian.com/politic...kerry-comments-israel-palestine-un-resolution
Theresa May's criticism of John Kerry Israel speech sparks blunt US reply
State department voices surprise after PM’s spokesman says US secretary of state’s comments on settlements were ‘inappropriate’
So then- the unelected Brit crone is playing footsie with Trump. Why do people consistently vote for these duplicitous and hypocritical sleazebags ? Oh wait- nobody ever voted for this one.
cancel2 2022
Canceled
The PA and Hamas haven't held an election in ten years, but I'm sure that a bullshitter like you knows that already
Sent from my Lenovo K52e78 using Tapatalk
moon
Satire for Sanity
Arab nations back Kerry's vision for peace, including clause on Jewish State
http://www.i24news.tv/en/news/inter...on-for-peace-including-clause-on-jewish-state
As Israel's population comprises 25% Palestinian Arab Israelis any ' Jewish state ' is impossible under a democracy. So would the Israelis abandon democracy in exchange for theocratic fascism ?
Which Arab nations would back such unacceptable abandonment of Arabs ? There are over five million Palestinians in the refugee diaspora- all with the legal right to return to their homeland inside the current Israeli state. Putting these numbers together with the existing Palestinians in the West Bank and Gaza they vastly outnumber all of the Jews in what is currently Israel and the illegal squats. It would be a mistake of gargantuan proportions to think that the facilitation of any Jewish state would be a simple matter of removing one quarter of Israel's population.
It's high time that respectable Arab states disassociated themselves from the puppets and got solidly behind the Palestinians in order to consolidate a viable and contiguous state of Palestine on the pre-1967 borders - as supported by 138 United Nations members to just 9 against.
cancel2 2022
Canceled
Never in a million years! Israel will not move back to the 1967 borders and only fools like you think that will ever happen.
During the Six Day War Israel took military control over the Sinai, Gaza and the West Bank. In post Six Day War peace negotiations Israel gave back 94% of the land that came under IDF control.
-------
In post Six *Day War world, Israel has returned to the Palestinians a vast amount of formerly Israeli controlled territory.
To return back to the pre-1967 borders would be suicide for Israel. The Jewish state would lose its military security which is a necessity as long as Israel is adjoined to the Palestinian state under the control of the self-proclaimed terrorist organisation, Hamas.
Thus far Hamas has given Israel no indication that Israeli citizens will be free from terrorist attacks from radical Palestinians nor has Hamas renounced it failure to recognise the Jewish state or to back off from their goal to destroy Israel.*
Unless there is a change in the stance of Hamas, Israel can never go back to the pre-1967 borders for the sake of the security of the Jewish state and its citizens - both Arab and Jewish.
--------
http:thinkingoutsidetheblog.blogspot.co.uk/2011/06/why-israel-cannot-go-back-to-pre-1976.html?m=1
Sent from my Lenovo K52e78 using Tapatalk
Last edited:
moon
Satire for Sanity
Some new year's cheer - the Resolution emphasizing the illegality of Israel's occupation is not just lip service to justice. The best is yet to come..
Now then, Mr. Trump. Are you aware that your obligations under your membership pledges to the United Nations require that you do not render assistance to any state in breach of UN Resolutions ? Maybe that's just my pleasant dreaming.
Now then, Mr. Trump. Are you aware that your obligations under your membership pledges to the United Nations require that you do not render assistance to any state in breach of UN Resolutions ? Maybe that's just my pleasant dreaming.
Airstrip One
Completely Effed
You show those Jews, Moon!!
moon
Satire for Sanity
You show those Jews, Moon!!
Ah, the barrel-scrapings of 'anti-semitism ' . All done now ?
Good. Be aware that your position is that of the criminal and that the law is squarely with the Palestinians.
Criminals go to jail, Jewish or otherwise- and that the days or neoZionist fascists hiding behind Judaism are drawing to a close.
2017 looks quite chirpy already.
Airstrip One
Completely Effed
In the 1930s it became illegal to be Jewish in Germany.
Today it is becoming illegal to be Jewish in the West Bank/East Jerusalem.
cancel2 2022
Canceled
More like your wet dreams, you are spunky at least!
Sent from my Lenovo K52e78 using Tapatalk
Its a simple thing....just produce the 'ownership' papers granting title to a nation called Palestine. What? The self professed title granted by the PLO in 1988? LMAO This area of the world has never been anything other than a terrorist training camp for Islamic murderers.
Fake news
cancel2 2022
Canceled
As Churchill said:“The greatest lesson in life is to know that even fools are right sometimes.”
Sent from my Lenovo K52e78 using Tapatalk
Last edited:
moon
Satire for Sanity
Provide evidence of both claims or withdraw them. I'm always interested in ' laws ' which come sneaking up out of the swamp and announce themselves.
moon
Satire for Sanity
Although there are reams of title deeds to Palestinian property inside Israel - as well as inside Palestine- they will be used in civil cases after Israel has withdrawn behind the pre-1967 borders. I mention these borders because the Palestinian state has been recognised on those borders by 138 UN member states already- and Palestine was recognised as a non-member observer STATE in December of 2012. Recognition is the key- not ' ownership' as you appear to believe.
Quite obviously it is Israel which has done ten times as much killing- so your location of a ' terrorist training ground ' is askew, according to the GPS.
cancel2 2022
Canceled
Yes a bit like your claim that international law applies to Israel only and not to Russia or China, fucking idiot!!
Sent from my Lenovo K52e78 using Tapatalk
cancel2 2022
Canceled
Moonbat is truly deluded if he thinks Israel will ever go back to the pre-1967 borders. That is just not defensible with the narrowest point being just nine miles from the Mediterranean.
"Legally, they formed only an armistice line, not a recognized international border. No Palestinian state ever existed that could have claimed these prewar lines. Jordan occupied the West Bank after the Arab invasion, but its claim to sovereignty was not recognized by any U.N. members except Pakistan and the U.K. As Jordan's U.N. ambassador said before the war, the old armistice lines "did not fix boundaries." Thus the central thrust of Arab-Israeli diplomacy for more than 40 years was that Israel must negotiate an agreed border with its Arab neighbors.
The cornerstone of all postwar diplomacy was U.N. Security Council Resolution 242, passed in November 1967. It did not demand that Israel pull back completely to the pre-1967 lines. Its withdrawal clause only called on Israel to withdraw "from territories," not from all territories. Britain's foreign secretary at the time, George Brown, later underlined the distinction: "The proposal said 'Israel will withdraw from territories that were occupied,' and not from 'the' territories, which means that Israel will not withdraw from all the territories."
Prior to the Six Day War, Jerusalem had been sliced in two, and the Jewish people were denied access to the Old City and its holy sites. Jerusalem's Christian population also faced limitations. As America's ambassador to the U.N., Arthur Goldberg, would explain, Resolution 242 did not preclude Israel's reunification of Jerusalem. In fact, Resolution 242 became the only agreed basis of all Arab-Israeli peace agreements, from the 1979 Egyptian-Israeli Treaty of Peace to the 1993 Oslo Agreements between Israel and the Palestinians.
How were Israel's legal rights to new boundaries justified? A good explanation came from Judge Stephen Schwebel, who would later be an adviser to the State Department and then president of the International Court of Justice in The Hague. Writing in the American Journal of International Law in 1970, he noted that Israel's title to West Bank territory—in the event that it sought alterations in the pre-Six Day War lines—emanated from the fact that it had acted in lawful exercise of its right to self-defense. It was not the aggressor.
The flexibility for creating new borders was preserved for decades. Indeed, the 1993 Oslo Agreements, signed by Yitzhak Rabin and Yasser Arafat on the White House lawn, did not stipulate that the final borders between Israel and the Palestinians would be the 1967 lines. Borders were to be a subject for future negotiations. An April 2004 U.S. letter to Israel, backed by a bipartisan consensus in both houses of Congress, stipulated that Israel was not expected to fully withdraw, but rather was entitled to "defensible borders." U.S. secretaries of state from Henry Kissinger to Warren Christopher reiterated the same point in past letters of assurance.
If the borders between Israel and the Palestinians need to be negotiated, then what are the implications of a U.N. General Assembly resolution that states up front that those borders must be the 1967 lines? Some commentators assert that all Mr. Abbas wants to do is strengthen his hand in future negotiations with Israel, and that this does not contradict a negotiated peace. But is that really true? Why should Mr. Abbas ever negotiate with Israel if he can rely on the automatic majority of Third World countries at the U.N. General Assembly to back his positions on other points that are in dispute, like the future of Jerusalem, the refugee question, and security?
Mr. Abbas's unilateral move at the U.N. represents a massive violation of a core commitment in the Oslo Agreements in which both Israelis and Palestinians undertook that "neither side shall initiate or take any step that will change the status of the West Bank and the Gaza Strip pending the outcome of Permanent Status negotiations." Palestinian spokesmen counter that Israeli settlements violated this clause. Yet former Prime Minister Rabin was very specific while negotiating Oslo in preserving the rights of Israeli citizens to build their homes in these disputed areas, by insisting that the settlements would be one of the subjects of final status negotiations between the parties.
By turning to the U.N., Mr. Abbas wants to use the international community to change the legal status of the territories. Why should Israel rely on Mr. Abbas in the future after what is plainly a material breach of this core obligation?
The truth is that Mr. Abbas has chosen a unilateralist course instead of negotiations. For that reason he has no problem tying his fate to Hamas, the radical organization that is the antithesis of peace. Its infamous 1988 Charter calls for Israel's complete destruction and sees Islam in an historic battle with the Jewish people. In 2006, Dr. Mahmoud al-Zahar, the Hamas leader who attended the recent Cairo reconciliation ceremony with Mr. Abbas's Fatah movement, stated openly that Hamas was still committed to its 1988 Charter, noting, "the movement [would] not change a single word." Hamas's jihadist orientation was reconfirmed when Ismail Haniyeh, its prime minister in Gaza, condemned the U.S. for eliminating Osama bin Laden.
All Israeli prime ministers have spoken about negotiations as a vehicle for ending the Arab-Israeli conflict. There would be an end of claims. However, Mr. Abbas has now revealed his intention of using the U.N. for perpetuating the conflict. As he wrote this week: "Palestine's admission to the United Nations would pave the way for the internationalization of the conflict as a legal matter, not only a political one."
Mr. Abbas clearly is not prepared to make a historic compromise. By running to the U.N. and to Hamas, he is evading the hard choices he has to make, and he is leaving any resolution of the Arab-Israeli conflict far more difficult for future generations."
Mr. Gold, a former Israeli ambassador to the United Nations, is president of the Jerusalem Center for Public Affairs.
http://www.wsj.com/articles/SB10001424052748703421204576329373006279638
Sent from my Lenovo K52e78 using Tapatalk
WillReadmore
Verified User
False.
It is becoming illegal for Israelis (Jews or not) to steal the property of those living in West Bank.
And, apartheid in Israel is a separate issue.