Page 9 of 9 FirstFirst ... 56789
Results 81 to 85 of 85

Thread: A structured legal analysis of the meaning of UNSC resolution 242

  1. #81

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by HBendor View Post
    Your interpretations is warped....
    This is the place to address the analysis of UNSC 242 and I've provided a very precise legal analysis of it based exactly upon what it states. I've not seen any rebuttal to that based upon the wording of the Resolution itself.
    PoliticalForum.com functions as a public forum website open to all individuals of all political persuasions that is centered on the discussion of politics in general. All walks of life are welcome to join the discussions in the tradition of vigorous respectful debate.

    I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it. ~Evelyn Beatrice Hall


  2. Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Shiva_TD View Post
    This is the place to address the analysis of UNSC 242 and I've provided a very precise legal analysis of it based exactly upon what it states. I've not seen any rebuttal to that based upon the wording of the Resolution itself.
    Read it again... from Territories and not from THE Territories,,,
    JUDEA & SAMARIA are clear and unquestionably JEWISH!
    Watch The Sword of Militant Islam here

    http://www.masada2000.org/islam.html
    "ARAB NATIONALISM IS CRIMINAL BY DEFAULT"
    ]

  3. Default

    Quote Originally Posted by HBendor View Post
    Read it again... from Territories and not from THE Territories,,,
    Read it again ... "For guaranteeing freedom of navigation through international waterways in the area" not the International waterways. According to you logic this means that Egypt could pick and choose WHICH international waterways to allow Isreal freedom of navigation to; it need not allow access to all of the waterways.

    Yeah, right!! Bullcrap reasoning, right?
    Same for "THE territories" in that case; same semantics, not so HBendor?
    Last edited by klipkap; Aug 18 2012 at 12:00 PM.
    I deal in facts. If anyone finds 'facts' to be anti-Semetic; Jew hating, neo-Nazi; Islamo-fascist, etc, I disclaim any responsibility for their delusions

  4. Likes Marlowe liked this post
  5. Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Shiva_TD View Post
    This is the place to address the analysis of UNSC 242 and I've provided a very precise legal analysis of it based exactly upon what it states. I've not seen any rebuttal to that based upon the wording of the Resolution itself.
    And for the record, that conclusion of yours still stands, Shiva, despite all the attempted strawman deflections.
    I deal in facts. If anyone finds 'facts' to be anti-Semetic; Jew hating, neo-Nazi; Islamo-fascist, etc, I disclaim any responsibility for their delusions

  6. #85

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by HBendor View Post
    Read it again... from Territories and not from THE Territories,,,
    Read it again, "Emphasizing the inadmissibility of the acquisition of territory by war"

    No territory can be acquired by an act of war which means ALL of the territory occupied by the Israeli military in 1967 is excluded from acquisition by Israel.

    Also read the Geneva Conventions again where it states, "The occupying power shall not deport or transfer parts of its own population into the territories it occupies."

    The Geneva Conventions prohibit the settlement of those territories occupied by the Israeli military in 1967 by the civilian population of Israel.
    Last edited by Shiva_TD; Aug 20 2012 at 03:32 AM.
    PoliticalForum.com functions as a public forum website open to all individuals of all political persuasions that is centered on the discussion of politics in general. All walks of life are welcome to join the discussions in the tradition of vigorous respectful debate.

    I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it. ~Evelyn Beatrice Hall

Page 9 of 9 FirstFirst ... 56789

Tags for this Thread

Bookmarks

Bookmarks