UNESCO Passes Resolution Critical of Israeli Conduct in Jerusalem and Gaza

so where is the Trusteeship Agreement for Palestine?

 

It does not mention article 2 ANYWHERE!
It does not mention why the Geneva Conventions does not apply to Israel ANYWHERE!


told you so.

 

thats a lie, again.

many Jews chose to leave Germany after 1933.

nobody forced them to go. it was their choice.

 

You can find Article 2 in the official commentary of the Red Cross, page 17.

 

Hitler's agenda in 1933 was to transfer all the Jews from Germany. One of the places he thought to transfer them is the Land of Israel. Therefore Eichmann visited the Land of Israel to exmine such posibility.

 

so you're saying the Nazis were Zionists?

 

source?

You're making it up

 

Irrelevant. Everybody must be able to return to their homes when they want to.
Israel violates those rights, protected by the UN Charter.

 

source it

Also... the UN over rules the Red Cross.
The UN SC over rules the Red Cross
The ICJ over rules the Red Cross.

 

International Red Cross is not an internation treaty, so it doesnt matter

 

So far, I have not seen anything where the Red Cross even says anything about article 2.
Besides that I have not seen anything where the UN/UNSC/ICJ is more important than the Red Cross.

 

its pure idiocy to think the Red Cross has more legal weight than the ICJ

 

No. I'm saying that one of the proposed palces to transfer the Jews was the Land of Israel.

 

Tokyo Draft of 1932, that were created by the Red Cross made the way for creating a binding convention regarding the protection of civillians in enemy territory, since the convention of 1929 was limited itself for recommendation to issue a convention on the protection of civilians in enemy territory and in enemy occupied territory. The Tokyo Draft that the Rod Cross created in 1932 was needed to be submitted in 1940 to a diplomatic conference but WWII postponed it. The events of WWII showed the disastrous consequences of the absence of a convention for the protection of civilians in wartime, and thus finally the process that was needed to be completed in a convention in 1940, was finally fulfilled in 1949 when the Fourth Geneva Convention created:

Source: https://ihl-databases.icrc.org/ihl/INTRO/380

Therefore, the Rod Cross has a crucial part of the creation of the Fourth Geneva Convention, as it can be read above.

 

which makes the Nazis, Zionists.

this is what you are saying

 

You can find it in the official commentary of the Red Cross, pafe 17.

Tokyo Draft of 1932, that were created by the Red Cross made the way for creating a binding convention regarding the protection of civillians in enemy territory, since the convention of 1929 was limited itself for recommendation to issue a convention on the protection of civilians in enemy territory and in enemy occupied territory. The Tokyo Draft that the Rod Cross created in 1932 was needed to be submitted in 1940 to a diplomatic conference but WWII postponed it. The events of WWII showed the disastrous consequences of the absence of a convention for the protection of civilians in wartime, and thus finally the process that was needed to be completed in a convention in 1940, was finally fulfilled in 1949 when the Fourth Geneva Convention created:

Source: https://ihl-databases.icrc.org/ihl/INTRO/380

Therefore, the Rod Cross has a crucial part of the creation of the Fourth Geneva Convention, as it can be read above.

 

so the Red Cross has more legal weight than the International Court of Justice?

 

Not really. The Nazis also wanted to controll the Land of Israel, and the Nazis also made an action for it but thankfully the Brits stopped them in the border of Lybia and Egypt. If the Brits wouldnt stop the Nazis, they would probably control the Land of Israel. So no, they werent Zionists.

 

I'm only saying that the Rod Cross has a crucial part of the creation of the Fourth Geneva Convention, and therefore needs to be taken seriously regarding the Fourth Geneva Convention.

 

but you said the Nazis wanted the Jews to go to Palestine.

thats means the Nazis were Zionists.

 

I already sourced it when I provided the source that direct everyone that would click on it to the official commentary of the Red Cross.

 

Not really. The Nazis also wanted to controll the Land of Israel, and the Nazis also made an action for it but thankfully the Brits stopped them in the border of Lybia and Egypt. If the Brits wouldnt stop the Nazis, they would probably control the Land of Israel. So no, they werent Zionists.

 

that means the Nazis were Zionists

 

Israel was not evecuated all of the Arabs. Alot of them left by choice.

 

Not really, as I explained earlier.