gaza boys emerge from tunnel to stage mock execution of Israeli
-
- "East Jerusalem"—Jerusalem and its surroundings were envisioned as an international area under United Nations administration in the 1947 partition plan, which was accepted by the Jewish publicbut rejected by all Arab nations. In 1948, Jordan captured and annexed the eastern half of Jerusalem, while Israel captured and annexed the west. Following the Six-Day War in 1967, Israel annexed the eastern part, together with several villages around it. In 1980 the Israeli Knesset passed the Jerusalem Law stating that "Jerusalem, complete and united, is the capital of Israel".
- The Israeli Golan Heights Law of 1981 applied Israel's "laws, jurisdiction and administration" in theGolan Heights, captured from Syria in 1967. The public viewed the move as an annexation, but the law itself refrained from using the term officially.
- The Gaza Strip and West Bank form part of the areas offered by the UN to a prospective Arab state of Palestine in the Partition Plan, which was rejected by the Arabs. From 1948 until 1967, The Gaza Strip was occupied by Egypt and the West Bank was annexed by Jordan. Together with the annexation of East Jerusalem mentioned above, Jordan's annexation of the West Bank was not recognized internationally. Since 1967, the West Bank has been under military occupation. Gaza was also occupied in 1967, but after Israel's unilateral disengagement in 2005 the status has become disputed, with conflicting opinions on whether or not the occupation has ended.
The "international court" and the UN are rife with anti-Semitism, and you can take those two orgs and shove em.
-
Israel[edit]
The Israeli government's essential position is that rather than being "occupied territory," the West Bank is "disputed territory." Given that the Arab states prevented the formation of the sovereignty proposed by the 1947 partition resolution, Jordan's subsequent unrecognized annexation of the West Bank in 1950, as well as the fact that there has never been a Palestinian sovereignty in that territory, it has been posited that there is no legally recognized claim to who has sovereignty over the West Bank. Moreover, since the League of Nations Mandate for Palestine, with the intent to form a Jewish state between the sea and the Jordan river, included the area now known as the West Bank, Israel has at least as legitimate claim to the territory as any other state or group. Under the views of Howard Grief and others, according to Article 6 of The Anglo-American Treaty of 1924, Jewish Settlements are not illegal. The rights granted to and guaranteed by Mandate for Palestine survived the League of Nations and the Anglo-American Treaty of 1924 still has the force of law pursuant to Article 80 of the UN Charter by virtue of the 1969 Vienna Convention on the Laws of Treaties. Under this reasoning the Fourth Geneva Convention prohibits forced population transfers, something that Israel is not engaged in since Jewish settlers move to the disputed territories on an individual, voluntary basis.
In 1967, Theodor Meron, legal counsel to the Israeli Foreign Ministry stated in a legal opinion to Adi Yafeh, the Political Secretary of the Prime Minister, "My conclusion is that civilian settlement in theadministered territories contravenes the explicit provisions of the Fourth Geneva Convention."[57] The legal opinion, forwarded to Levi Eshkol, was not made public at the time, and the Labor cabinet progressively sanctioned settlements anyway; this action paved the way for future settlement growth. In 2007, Judge Meron stated that "I believe that I would have given the same opinion today."[58]Nevertheless, Israel considers its settlement policy to be consistent with international law, including the Fourth Geneva Convention, while recognizing that some of the smaller settlements have been constructed "illegally" in the sense of being in violation of Israeli law.[59] In 1998 the Israeli Minister of Foreign Affairs produced "The International Criminal Court Background Paper".[60] It concludes
International law has long recognised that there are crimes of such severity they should be considered "international crimes". Such crimes have been established in treaties such as the Genocide Convention and the Geneva Conventions.... The following are Israel's primary issues of concern [ie with the rules of the ICC]: – The inclusion of settlement activity as a "war crime" is a cynical attempt to abuse the Court for political ends. The implication that the transfer of civilian population to occupied territories can be classified as a crime equal in gravity to attacks on civilian population centres or mass murder is preposterous and has no basis in international law.Israel also argues that some of the settlements are built in areas where Jewish settlements existed before the 1948 Arab-Israeli War and violence prior, when many West Bank settlements were destroyed and the residents massacred or expelled, such as Hartuv, Kfar Etzion, Hebron, and the Jewish Quarterof Jerusalem, and therefore the application of the Geneva Convention is an entirely different issue.[61][62][63]
Some argue that according to international law Israel is the custodian of absentee property in the West Bank and may not give it to settlers. In 1997 the Civil Administration's legal adviser gave his opinion:
The Custodian of Absentee Property in the West Bank is nothing but a trustee looking after the property so it is not harmed while the owners are absent from the area ... the custodian may not make any transaction regarding the asset that conflicts with the obligation to safeguard the asset as stated, especially his obligation to return the asset to the owner upon his return to the region.Israel contends that the Geneva Convention only applies in the absence of an operative peace agreement and between two powers accepting the Convention. Since the Oslo Accords leave the issue of settlements to be negotiated later, proponents of this view argue that the Palestinians accepted the temporary presence of Israeli settlements pending further negotiation, and that there is no basis for declaring them illegal.[63][65][66]
Israel has justified its civilian settlements by stating that a temporary use of land and buildings for various purposes appears permissible under a plea of military necessity and that the settlements fulfilled security needs.[67] It is further argued that United Nations Security Council Resolution 242 calls for "secure and recognized boundaries", and that neither the 1949 armistice demarcation lines, nor the 1967 cease-fire lines have proved themselves secure.[68]
In 2002, the Israeli Ministry of Foreign Affairs reiterated that the settlements were being developed consistently with international law and that they did not violate any agreements with either the Palestinians or Jordan. They added that the settlements in the West Bank and Gaza Strip were recognised as legitimate by the Mandate for Palestine adopted by the League of Nations, and that the only administration that completely prohibited Jewish settlement was that of Jordan from 1948 to 1967. Regarding the Geneva Convention, they maintained that the Israeli government was not forcibly transferring its population into the territories. Neither had the land that was being settled been under the legitimate sovereignty of any state beforehand. It further highlighted that no clauses in the Convention could be used to prohibit the voluntary return of individuals to towns and villages from which they or their ancestors had been previously ejected by forcible means. It claimed the settlements had only been established after exhaustive investigations making sure none were built on private land.[15]
-
so, historically, (a lot of liberals hate history)... Israel and historical and legal
claim to the West Bank. That is where the Jewish settlements USED TO BE,
before war was declared on them, to wipe them out of the Middle East.
Note - Gaza was returned to Egypt in a peace deal...
no peace. and Israel is not creating settlements in Gaza, for that reason -
there is no claim of connections to Gaza as being Jewish settlements/territory
in the beginning.
Israel agreed to the "palestinians" having their own state. The stupiass hateful "palestinians"
were their own worst enemy and have lived in rancor ever since they completely rejected
having their own state, because the Jews would have their own, too.
sick and twisted haters created their own mess. Nothing about them is Israel's fault.
-
They're building settlements on land they just a few years ago agreed was palestinian land. You fall for their double speak
-
prove it.
Hamas Official: The 'Palestinians' Don't Exist |...www.frontpagemag.com/...official-palestinians-dont-exist<..."Brothers, half of the Palestinians are Egyptians and the other half are Saudis."
Palestinian Authority Head Admits "Palestinian...www.frontpagemag.com/point/259249/palestinian-authori...Palestinian Authority Head Admits "Palestinian People" Don't Exist 'one people living in two states' June 29, 2015 . Daniel Greenfield . The Palestinians are one of ...
- The Dirty Little Secret: Palestinians Don’t Exist!canadafreepress.com/article/50093
The “Palestinians” are bogus, a political show, and it’s time to pull the curtain on the charade. The Dirty Little Secret: Palestinians Don’t Exist!
- The Dirty Little Secret: Palestinians Don’t Exist!www.olivetreeviews.org/.../1957...palestinians-don’t-...
There is no such group as the Palestinian people. They have never existed, do not exist now, and will not exist in the future. They are the only peopl...
-
-
Video: “Palestinians” are asked where they originate from – hear the hesitant answers
“There is no such thing as Palestine in history, absolutely not.” — Arab Princeton Professor, Philip Hitti, before the Anglo-American Committee of Inquiry in Jerusalem in 1946. “Far from being persecuted the Arabs have crowded into the country (Israel) and multiplied.” — Former British Prime Minister Winston Churchill, 1939. “Brothers, half of the Palestinians are … Continue reading → -
Golda Meir
There were no such thing as Palestinians. When was there an independent Palestinian people with a Palestinian state? It was either southern Syria before the First World War, and then it was a Palestine including Jordan. It was not as though there was a Palestinian people in Palestine considering itself as a Palestinian people and we came and threw them out and took their country away from them.They did not exist.
- As quoted in Sunday Times (15 June 1969), also in The Washington Post (16 June 1969)
-
Oh the old "they didnt exist" arguments. So no one got thrown off their lands eh? No ones homes that stood for 1000 years got bulldozed huh? So why the refugee camp then? I mean this is exactly like holocaust denying. Except theres actual wvidence that parts of the holocaust were exaggerated so that nobody looked twice at a bunch of people getting booted off their lands tjat had nothing to do with ww2
-
Ur quoting golda meir....a former pm of israel. You think thats legit? Well than i beleive everything obama says cause he said it...snd you have tobeleive him too so enough of these nonsense threads
Lols
-
As a Jew you really piss me off you anti-semite bastard.
-
need to back up your assertions, Cleve. Ranting doesn't prove anything except
that you can't seem to ever back up what you rant about legitimately.
-
As a Jew you really piss me off you anti-semite bastard.
As a Jew you really piss me off you anti-semite bastard.
Why am i not surprised.....you've been grousier than usual as of late, price of gefilte skyrocketin? Cant find your fav schmear anymore?
Hello! It looks like you're interested in this conversation, but you don't have an account yet.
Getting fed up of having to scroll through the same posts each visit? When you register for an account, you'll always come back to exactly where you were before, and choose to be notified of new replies (either via email, or push notification). You'll also be able to save bookmarks and upvote posts to show your appreciation to other community members.
With your input, this post could be even better 💗
Register Login