Palestinian statehood bid .

It is NOT legal, because Israel has a very dubious claim to rule over the lands occupied in 1967. Israel's mandate to exist came from the UN (which is now ironically ignored by Israel) and was effectively set at the 1949 boundaries. The UN does not recognize border change by conquest in modern times (after the founding of the United Nations) and thus Israel is an illegal occupier of the 1967 Palestinian lands. It doesn't matter if the Palestinians were tribal cannibals living in a jungle, as long as the land they were occupying was not part of Israel at the time of the war.

How can people who in some cases have been living on their land five times longer than the State of Tennessee has existed not have a claim to that land? That's incredibly weird logic, even from RevAnarchist. As for the Palestinians rejecting every peace deal, what about the one which was effectively scuppered when Yitzak Rabin was assassinated by an extremist Jewish settler and his replacement Netanyahu (the same guy who is now leader of Israel) gradually scuppered the deal?

 

No problem. The palestinians can have their state ant day they agree to UN resolution 242. Only problem, the only body that was elected by the Palestinians is Hamas, and its charter declare its aim is to destroy Israel and eradicate the Jews.
Have a proper election, accept resolution 242, and the UN will declare the sate is two days.
The resolution say:
(i) Withdrawal of Israel armed forces from territories occupied in the recent conflict;

(ii) Termination of all claims or states of belligerency and respect for and acknowledgment of the sovereignty, territorial integrity and political independence of every State in the area and their right to live in peace within secure and recognized boundaries free from threats or acts of force."

 

Good post.. We don't have enough critical thinkers on the board. Everybody wants to be Glen Beck these days.

 

Just another step towards American irrevelency?

 

Not really, UNSCR 242 allows Israel to administer the lands it acquired as a result of the 1967 War as it it sees fit until it has negotiated final boundaries.

That's totally incorrect, UN General Assembly resolutions are unenforceable. They are also extremely political since the Islamic world hijacked the UN since in the 1970s and turned it into a weapon of mass destruction used incessantly to bash Israel ever since. Hence ,with respect to Israel, the UN is a totally illegitimate and bankrupt institution that has exactly zero credibility where Israel is concerned.

Don't be ridiculous, the 1949 Armistice lines that left Israel less than nine miles wide at its narrowest point were never intended to be permanent boundaries. Instead they were the front lines of fighting when the two sides agreed to the Armistice. The final boundaries were supposed to be determined through negotiations. However, the Islamic world refused to negotiate with the Jewish infidels in Israel because their jihad is permanent and will continue to be waged perpetually against the Jewish infidels in Israel as long as Israel continues to survive or until the West renders the Islamic world incapable of waging jihad.

What are you smoking? Have you ever heard of UNSCR 242?

In addition, in international law dating back to the 18th century and European laws of warfare, and re-iterated in more modern versions (such as the Charter of the League of Nations and the 4th Geneva Convention), any territory seized by an aggressor must be returned to its original sovereign at once. However, in a defensive war, if the defender takes over territory of the aggressor while defending itself against the aggressor, the disposition of that territory is decided by the terms of the peace treaty between the belligerents. In the absence of such treaty, the defender maintains legal sovereignty over the conquered territories. See http://www.jcpa.org/jl/vp470.htm for details and source references.

Since the 6-day war was a defensive war, where Israel employed a defensive pre-emptive strike, after trying to resolve via diplomacy (in the UN and asking the help of US President Lyndon Johnson) the crisis initiated by the Egyptians and the Syrians, and after Egypt and Syria and Jordan perpetrated five “casus belli“, Israel’s conquest of East Jerusalem, the West Bank, the Golan Heights and the Sinai peninsula, brought these territories under Israeli legal sovereignty.

In Jerusalem, Jordan began an artillery bombardment of West Jerusalem at 8:10 am of June 5, 1967. The Israeli government sent two messages to king Hussein of Jordan: one via the UN’s Colonel Od Bul, the Norwegian commander of the UN forces in the no-man’s land dividing East from West Jerusalem, and one via the Rumanian embassy (which had offices in both east and west Jerusalem). The messages said: ”stop the bombardment of the city and we will not retaliate. We will consider it a ‘salvo of honor’ and not respond”. Hussein’s fateful response was to order his Jordan Legion to march over the no-man’s land, as the UN soldiers stood aside, and to invade West Jerusalem. Only in response to the Jordanian incursion did Israel begin its entry into East Jerusalem and the West Bank. Hence Israel’s current sovereignty over united Jerusalem and the West Bank was the result of a defensive response and thus is legal sovereignty.

Since all Islamic countries rejected Israel’s offers made at the UN, on June 19, 1967, to cede these conquered territories back to their former sovereigns in the context of peace treaties, the continuation of Israeli sovereignty over these territories is completely legal.

The legality of Israel’s sovereignty over the newly conquered territories was canonized by the UN in its UNSCR 242, http://unispal.un.org/unispal.nsf/0/7D35E1F729DF491C85256EE700686136, as that resolution calls for all belligerents to make peace and to establish secure and recognized borders. The refusal of the Islamic states involved to engage in peace talks and to negotiate for the return of conquered territories rendered Israel’s control of these territories completely legal.

In 1995, the US Congress recognized the legitimacy of Israel’s sovereignty, and declared that united Jerusalem is the recognized capital of Israel. See “Jerusalem Embassy Act of 1995″ (Public Law, 104-45, 104th congress), and note too U.S. Letters of Assurance, 1998 (see:
http://www.unitedjerusalem.org/EMBASY_ACT_OF_1995/embasy_act_of_1995.asp for details.)

That's pure utter taqiyya (deception). The backwards assed Muslims couldn't live in the malaria infested swamps or the deserts that comprised Israel at the time until after the early Zionist infidels began returning in mass to Israel in the latter 19th and early 20th century with their modern Western technology and modern Western know how to drain the malaria infested swamps and to make the deserts bloom, which then attracted backwards assed Muslim from surrounding regions to migrate to Israel to fill the jobs created by the early Zionist infidels with their modern Western technology and modern Western know how. Had the early Zionist infidels never arrived with their modern Western technology and modern Western know how to drain the malaria infested swamps and to make the deserts bloom, the land that comprises Israel would still be largely uninhabited to this day.

 

Do try and keep up with events: http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2006/jan/12/israel

 

You can say that as fast as you want and it still doesn't make it true. The Six-Day War was a war of aggression because the Israelis attacked first.

You seem to be confused with the responsibility of an occupying nation to properly administer the lands it has seized and to make sure its civilians don't suffer, and the actual confiscation of lands and adding them to the conquering nation. Nowhere in UNSCR 242 is there authorization to confiscate lands of the conquered Palestinians: control does NOT equal ownership.

I would agree that this is the position of the United States of America on the matter, but that has exactly zero weight in international law. If Canada was to recognize Palestine with 1947 borders and full control of Jerusalem, that would have exactly the same validity on international law as that of the US Congress.

That's pure Israeli chutzpah, making the suggestion that virtually nobody lived in Palestine at the time the first Zionist settlers arrived. According to Ottoman statistics studied by Justin McCarthy (noted neutral historian of the time and place), the population of Palestine in the early 19th century was 350,000, in 1860 it was 411,000 and in 1900 about 600,000 of which 94% were Arabs. In 1914 Palestine had a population of 657,000 Muslim Arabs, 81,000 Christian Arabs, and 59,000 Jews. McCarthy estimates the non-Jewish population of Palestine at 452,789 in 1882, 737,389 in 1914, 725,507 in 1922, 880,746 in 1931 and 1,339,763 in 1946.

By those statistics, assuming that the native non-Jewish population actually had some children, there obviously was some non-Jewish immigration but at most 300,000 out of 880,746 in 1931 were immigrant Arabs (and that's a generous estimate). So as long as you're willing to ignore the 580,000 definite Palestinians in 1931 whose ancestors had been living there for a lot longer than ObamaYoMama's ancestors have been living in the USA, you could close your eyes and buy that argument. Even current Israeli scholars don't make that claim.

 

The European Jews were all originally from Palestine before they were expelled by the Romans and their properties seized and taken over by the Palestinians.

If Israel convert to Islam there will be no Palestinian just Israelistan and Hebrews, Palestinians will be degulated as a minority just like the Kurds and if the Palestinians leave Islam no Muslim country will support a none Muslim-Palestinian State.

The settlement was a result of the refusal of Muslims to recognize the State of Israel thus legitimizing Israel's right to those lands.

If the PA recognize Israel then Israel will have no reason to expand and no reason why the USA, UK, Canada and all other none Muslim government not to support the PA.

From the every begining in 1947 Muslims have refused to recognize Israel and have wage war to destroy Israel, as long as Muslims continue not to recognize Isreal and continue to teach hate and demonish the Jews, Israel will have every right to defend itself and the whole of Palestine by Muslum standard of trial by combat and God rightfully beloings to Israel.

Muslims have adapted the concept of trial by combat and religion and the result has gone against them several times but they refused to accept that result and now they are at it again this time trying to get UN recognition when the PA still can not or have the guts to distant itslef from Islamofacist and Hamas.

In fact Hamas is against this UN bid and if they have a seat they will vote against the Palestinian Authority this is how disfunctunctional the Palestinian situation is.

 

If PA declare independence with the absent of a peace treaty with Israel then Israel will have all the rights to annex West Bank and Gaza another reason being given to Israel by the PA just like why Isreal settlement have been expanding because the PA refused to recognize Israel and refused to stop Hamas from attacking Israel.

The PA can curve out their nation from Jordan and Syria since these are the two countries that betrayed them on the first place.

 

...........................

 

Demonstrate this, please.

 

Like these dancers? : [ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tRfhUezbKLw"]Five Dancing Israelis Arrested On 9/11 - YouTube[/ame]

 

The title is slighly incorrect. It is the US of Israel, not "Israel (and US)". American politicians need to shut down Washington DC and apply for work in Tel Aviv.

 

Nah ! that way the American public would wake up and no longer remain suckers (dumb Goyim) of the ZioNazi deception.

 

Bulldozers and tanks have gone on the rampage in Gaza tonight again.

What are they bulldozing now?

The UN nursery schools

 

Not according to the 1967 UN Security Council which found that Israel was the victim of five acts of war (casus belli) justifying Israel's self-defensive preemptive strike. If you have a dispute with their findings in 1967, then take it up with the 1967 UN Security Council.

If anyone is confused, not to mention gullible to the extreme, then go look in the mirror.

Who said it does? In any event, Israel is not in violation of any international laws and never violates international laws either, although it is constantly falsely accused of violating international laws by the biggest violators of international laws in the world.

In addition, when Muslim jihadists specifically target and murder in cold blood innocent Jewish non-combatants (something in which you support) that is a not only a violation of international law (something you ignore), but also a crime against humanity (something you could care less about as long as it is Jews).

Moreover, what is so ironic about the whole situation is that Muslims believe all international laws because they are manmade are abominations that must be obliterated and replaced by Sharia law, since Sharia law is divine because it emanates directly from Allah and is therefore, unlike manmade laws, infallible and perfectly just.

As a matter of fact, the only law Muslims adhere to is Sharia law, even when they migrate to the West and other non-Islamic countries. In fact, it's the reason that like clockwork Muslim immigrants form segregated Muslim no-go zones ruled by Sharia and in direct contravention to the laws of the states in which they reside.

Indeed, show me someone that is delusional enough to side with Muslim jihadists against the Jewish unbelievers in Israel and I'll show you someone that is completely oblivious of Islam. As only someone completely oblivious of Islam could be dumb enough to side with their own mortal enemies like useful idiots.

That lived on the other side of the Jordan River, but not in Israel you genius. Other unbiased historians more recently later studied both the Turkish and British archives too and found that most of the non-Jewish inhabitants of Israel at the time of Israel's creation consisted of almost entirely recent immigrants from many different parts of the former Ottoman Empire. Try again.

 

I thought you despised the UN-what with it, you know, being dominated by communist jihadists and all. Funny how you change your tune when it suits you. Not very consistent is it? So, answer me this, how is anyone supposed to take your ranting seriously when your hypocrisy is so stridently advertising itself?

 

America will veto the dreams of the Palestinians.

Then America will lose the affections of the world. Oh wait! We've already lost the affections of the world.

Well, maybe the Arabs will start killing us. Oh wait! The Arabs are already killing us.

Friends, America has nothing to lose by vetoing the Palestinian petition.

 

Well, if Americans seriously desire the racism you seem to seek, then you have a valid argument. Yet, such is fortunately not the case. More Americans are just become upset with their incompetent government.

 

The people who are up in arms are my crowd.

Veto time baby.

 

European Jews are Askenazi Jews. Askenazi Jews are not Semetic, which means they have no relations to the Jews living in the Middle East.

That's actually a really funny excuse to justify the settlements. Haven't heard that one before, I thought I heard them all. How does no recognizing "Israel" give "Israel" a right no build on other peoples land? lol......

Hamas is against the bid because they had no say in it......

A lot of Hasbara in that post.

The way you see "Israel" getting rights to do illegal and provocative things is strange....

The PA can curve out their nation from what was originally part of Palestine before Euro-Zionazi's infected the region. And actually, it wasn't Syria it was Egypt. Come on now...

 

People who condemn others to suffering with nothing to lose, should cease to exist or aim for something to gain.

The world has lost a voice of reason if America vetos.

 

America vetoing this will do more damage to the image of the country in the Middle East than both Afghan and Iraq wars put together.....

And their image around the world will also be damaged. Many countries support this.

It's "Israel" VS the world and unfotunately for America they are handcuffed to "Israel"... Kind of like AIPAC is saying, "if we are going down you're coming with us"...

Nice ally you got there.

 

I fear that the damage has already been done. America needs to shut down Washington DC and US politicians need to apply for jobs in Tel Aviv.

 

A lot has, but the main reason for so much anti-American hatred in the Middle East is because of the pro-Israel policies of the United States of America.

Vetoing this would be like nuking anything left between regular Arabs and the USA. Not vetoing it would help rebuild any potential for a relationship.

To be honest, the US has more to benefit by not vetoing the bid. But AIPAC doesn't care about whats best for America and Americans. It's "Israel" or nothing.

I'm glad AIPAC doesn't have such a strong grip on Canada. But then again, Harper kisses "Israels" @ss on his own.....

They might aswell, I mean they spend their summers in "Israel" anyway.