Netanyahu steps up appeal to French Jews after attacks

What kind of a slogan are you using... really...
Oslo one and Oslo two have already been derailed by no other than Abbas (Abu Mazen) who as a treasurer then (during the reign of Arafat) funded the Murders of the Israeli Athletes at Munich.
Abbas leader of the PA - by going to the ICC derailed Oslo I and Oslo II...
Please go and peruse both accords.

 

It was illegal for Israel to annex East Jerusalem, and it will be illegal if they annex Area C.

But, if they do annex Area C, they MUST offer citizenship to all Arabs living there.

- - - Updated - - -

such an illegal act would lead to the physical destruction of Israel and the deaths of millions of Jews.

- - - Updated - - -

yes, Jordan's annexation of the West Bank was illegal, just as Israel's annexation of East Jerusalem and the Golan Heights is illegal.

But Jordan's Occupation of the West Bank was not illegal.

 

Thanks for the retort, I want to emphasize that the Israeli Arabs, the Christians, the Druze, the Bedouins and other minorities who volunteer and serve in the IDF are Israelis in all the meaning of that word.

 

compared to the views of the ICJ, UNSC, and Israeli Supreme Court, their views are inconsequential.

 

The only plan that do exist for the solution states that the Arabs in Area C will get Israeli citizenship.

So you say that Fourth Geneva Convention is wrong? Because as I showed you, Prof. Stone regarded what was written in Fourth Geneva Convention to show that Jordan occupation had no legal justification. And also Sir Elihu Lauterpacht supported it.

 

The 4th GC says nothing about Jordan's legal Occupation of the West Bank.

and yes, the Occupation was legal.

- - - Updated - - -

such annexation would still be illegal under international law. Just as the annexation of East Jerusalem and the Golan Heights was illegal.

 

Once again you are forcing me to repeat myself:
Judge, Sir Elihu Lauterpacht wrote in June 1968:

Also according to Prof. Stone:

Source: https://books.google.co.il/books?id=...ation.&f=false

The Jews have legal right over the West Bank according to" The Mandate for Palestine" (which is valid). Are you ignoring UN historical document?
Moreoevr, Are you against that Jews land would be retrn to Jewish hands? because you wrote to me in your thread- http://www.politicalforum.com/middle-east/390416-united-nation-declares-west-bank-occupied-5.html, that's you agree with giving back lands that Jews legal bought back to Jewish hands.

 

Posters who alter the text of other people's posts have no credibility whatsoever.

 

The Israel Supreme Court, the ICJ, the UNSC, all believe that the West Bank is under Israeli Occupation.

The legal counsel to the Israel Foreign Ministry in 1967 said that Israeli civilian settlements in the West Bank would be illegal.

The UNSC has called the annexation of East Jerusalem by Israel "illegal", and as a member of the UN Israel is obligated to follow UNSC resolutions.

I'm sorry, but your two lawyers opinions have been outweighed by much more significant legal and international institutions.

the Palestine Mandate's goal of a Jewish state in Palestine was fulfilled in 1948. The Mandate for Palestine expired in 1948.

If Jewish private property owners who had private land taken from them by Jordan from 1949-1967 wish to reclaim stolen land, they are welcome to do so. However, the Israeli govt. and military has no right, under international law, to confiscate former Jewish private land in the West Bank and use it for their own purposes.

It is illegal for an Occupying Power to seize private land in Occupied Territory and use it for non-security/military purposes.

 

So are you call "The Mandate for Palestine", a valid historical document, nonsense?
So you say that the legal Jewish lands in the West Bank are not need to be retrned?

The state of Israel has nothing to do with "The Mandate for Palestine". If it was then the state of Israel would be existed in the West Bank and Gaza. This historical document says that the Jews have the legal right to settle there and the Jewish state need to be fulfilled there, something that yet been fulfilled.
Article 80 of the UN charter keeps the Mandate valid.

According to the laws that still exist in the West Bank, any private land that became state lands, the state can use it. Are you ignoring the laws?

 

I guess you refer to me.
But the thing is that I dont alter anything! I'm replying according to what you or anyone else who qouted me wrote.
I guess it's more easier for you to ignore (which you already stated).

 

no, but it did expire in 1948.

if you took the time to read my post, you wouldn't be asking this silly question.

the Palestine Mandate called for the creation of a Jewish state in Palestine, and that's what Israel is.

Palestine Mandate never said that the WHOLE of Palestine would become the Jewish state.

however, if you want Israel to annex the West Bank and Gaza, then every single Palestinian has to be offered citizenship.

no it does not. You clearly have never read Article 80 of the UN Charter.

according to International law, it is illegal for an Occupying Power to sieze private land and use it for purely civilian settlements.

this is the view of the UN Security Council, the Israel Supreme Court, and the former legal counsel to the Israel Foreign Ministry.

 

and btw, if Israel is only entitled to the lands of Palestine, then they need to give back the Golan Heights as it was never part of Palestine.

 

Do are you calling Article 80 is nonsense?

I'm reading everything you provide me. And I know you aleady wrote that the Jewish lands need to be returned to Jewish hands, But then after that you write something that dontridact this statement.

Then according to you the state of Israel is existing in Gaza and the West Bank. BUT if the state of Israel is not existing there, then the Mandate wasnt fulfilled!

So are you saying that the West Bank wasnt part of the Land of Israel (which you call it "Palestine)? If so, then the Atabic will of an Arab state in 67' lines are also cant be fulfilled, because the West Bank, according to you, wasnt part of "Palestine".

BUt, if you say that the West Bank was part of "Palestine" (= the Land of Israel), then the Mandate is regarding this area as well, therefore, the Mandate wasnt been fulfilled.

Who said I want to annax whole the West Bank and Gaza to Israel? I want that every legal Jewish lands that Arabs are holding will be return to Jewish hands, like you agree with me (in the West Bank and Gaza) + Area C + offering the Arabs in area C citizenship. The rest of the areas will be belong to the Arabs. And what the legal right for those actions? "The Mandate for Palestine".

I read it, and even provided in your thread- http://www.politicalforum.com/middle-east/390416-united-nation-declares-west-bank-occupied-5.html. It's really sad that you ignore what I provided you.

Israel is using state lands (there is alot of private lands in the West Bank that became according to the Laws, like the Jordanian, there state lands). Are you ignoring those laws?

So are you saying that The Mandate for Palestine" is nonsense?
Are you saying that Sir Elihu Lauterpacht and Prof. Stone are talking nonsense? if so, then does 4th Geneva Convention is nonsense? if not, then these people are not talking nonsense.

 

you don't even know what it says.

- - - Updated - - -

Palestine Mandate never says which exact lands will become the Jewish state.

- - - Updated - - -

lol!!! all you're doing now is trolling & baiting.

let me know when you want to have a mature discussion.

 

I do. I already provided it in your thread- http://www.politicalforum.com/middle...ccupied-5.html. It's really sad that you ignore what I provided you.

It says that "Palestine" (= The Land of Israel) will become a Jewish state.

It says:

(I already gave the source)

The Mandate stated that the Jewish state will be reconstituting in "Palestine" (= The Land of Israel). BUT if you say that the West Bank (or Gaza) is not part of that land, then you bassiacly contridact the will of the Arabs for Arab state in 67' lines. Because, according to you, the West Bank is not part of "Palestine".

Those are mature question according to what you wrote. But I guess it's more easier for you to ignore it and accuse me on something that I didnt do.

Debating maturely is to reply to information that provided to you, without ignoring them or try avoiding them by falsely accusing people. I urge you to try that.

 

you clearly don't understand what Article 80 of the UN Charter says.

It does NOT say that the rights of League of Nation mandates last forever, till the end of time.

- - - Updated - - -

No it does not. It says that a Jewish homeland will be created in Palestine, as long as the civil rights of non-Jews are protected.

It never says ALL of Palestine will become a Jewish nation.

- - - Updated - - -

I never said that. Not once. If you are going to misrepresent my posts, we are done talking as I don't talk to folks who can't discuss these issues maturely and honestly.

 

I know that. Still doesnt cntradict what I wrote.

Here's what Prof. Eugene Rostow, an expert in International law stated:

source: https://books.google.co.il/books?id... entirely lacked legal justification.&f=false

You are forcing me to repeat myself:

If you would would read the rest of the comment, without just refering to this part, you will notice that I say that if you agree that the West Bank is part of "Palestine" it means that the "Mandate for Palestine" is refering to the West Bank as well.

 

I've said it in the past I will say it again but I preface my remark again stating only the Israelis and Palestinians on the West Bank and in Gaza can determine their future I do not ever presume to speak for either.

1-the terrorist cells all 300 of them disarm as did the IRA in Nothern Ireland;
2-the Arab League of nations and the Palestinian Authority and all the terror cells agree to recognize the right of Israel to be a Jewish state;
3-the above give up the notion that Palestinians can return back to Israel and become automatic citizens;
4-in return for the above, Israel drops any requests for compensation for the 900,000 displaced Jews forced out of the Arab League nations;
5-the state of Israel pulls out all settlers and moves to behind the security wall;
6-Israel, Palestine and Jordan form a common market as part of that common market Palestinians have the right of expedited passage through Jordan and Israel and may use either's airports; as part of this common market they have access to Israeli ports to export their products;
7-as part of that common market all three share and engage in water and energy exchange and sharing programs;
8-as part of that common market all three share intelligence on international crimes regarding drugs, prostitution, child sex slavery;
9-the Palestinians have an internal security force that work in cooperation with Israeli and Jordanian federal police forces;
10-Israel and Jordan agree to safeguard Palestine's borders from any external threats or attacks;
11-the holy sites in Jerusalem are accessible by all, monitored by a non profit religious organization made up of Christian, Jewish and Muslim scholars with built in mediation and alternative dispute resolution procedures.

Talking of the above at this time is pointless. The Palestinian leaders have made it clear they will not under any circumstance recognize the right of Israel to be Jewish and give up the notion of taking it back and absorbing it into a greater Palestinian state.Mr. Abbas has said that repeatedly and as we speak all the other cells are in a state of war with Israel and Hamas is rebuilding tunnels to infiltrate Israel with the cement being sent into rebuild homes.

 

The International Court of Justice, the UN Security Council, the Israeli Supreme Court and the legal counsel to the Israel Foreign Ministry in 1967, all disagree with Proff. Rostow.



- - - Updated - - -

Palestine Mandate never promised all of Palestine would be a Jewish homeland.

 

So are you saying that Prof. Eugene Rostow, an expert in International law, us talking nonsense?
So you say that 4th Geneva Convention (the one that Prof. Stone refered and Sir Elihu supported) is nonsense?
And as I wrote to you already:

You are forcing me to repeat myself:

 

lol!!!!!!

stop accusing me of libel.

Im sure Mr. Rostow was a very smart guy.

However, his opinions are outweighed by the official views and judgements of the Israel Supreme Court, International Court of Justice, and the United Nations Security Council.

You don't like this fact, but its a fact.

 

I'm not accusing you of anything! I just asked a simple queastions, which you prefered to ignore.

Once again:

+

Are you saying that "The Mandate for Palestine" and Article 80 that keeps it valid are all nonsense?
Are you saying that when the ICJ set Article 80 in 1950, 1971 and 2004 is nonsense?

It's not what I like or dont like. It's about when you've been asked questions regarding what you wrote, you prefer to repeat yourself.
I urge you to answer those questions. Those are simple "Yes or No" questions.
You already answered my question about Attorney Howard Grief (he was the legal adviser in matters of international law pertaining to the Land of Israel and Jewish rights thereto) that you said he lied. In your thread- http://www.politicalforum.com/showthread.php?t=390416&page=7&p=1064630927#post1064630927

Now I'm expecting your answers about the rest of the question!

But be careful!! If you say that whole of those question are "Yes"- nonsenses, then you are ignoring Fourth Geneca Convention, UN Charter, historical UN document, ICJ (when they set Article 80) and saying that the respected experts dont know what they are talking about.

 

sure you are.

You have asked me and others, again and again, if Rostow is lying, if Howard Grief is lying, if Prof. Stone is lying. Its your childish way of trying to bait people into agreeing with you or attacking you.

No one is lying. They are simply WRONG.

Can you comprehend that? Can you understand that? That they are simply WRONG and the UN Security Council, the International Court of Justice, and the Israeli Supreme Court is RIGHT?

can you?

 

Let' establish something very important.

When the UN Security Council, Israeli Supreme Court, and the International Court of Justice all agree on something, that agreement outweighs the views of virtually unknown, miniscule legal "experts".


you know what I think about legal experts who say the UNSC, Israeli Supreme Court, and the ICJ are all wrong...but he is right? I think such a person is arrogant, obnoxious, and full of themselves.

and they are unable to recognize it.