Palestinian terrorism in Tel-Aviv ( 20 Israeli citizens are wounded )

Both France and England were not prepared for war.. The French in particular had NO manpower.. They had lost many men in WW1 and between the wars their birthrate was flat.

 

This is incorrect Margot. In 1939 the French regular army numbered some 900,000 men with a total reserve of military age approaching 5 million. What defeated the French was outdated strategy, a hide-bound, short-sighted and archaic military leadership and an unwillingness to take the fight to the Germans. The French had both the manpower and arms-including superior tanks to the Germans-to stop Hitler in his tracks.

 

You are correct. I misread the article I was using for source material ironically so I would get the dates correct.

reva

 

The fall of France rest squarely on the shoulder of one man: Gamelin

 

No in fact they didn't the Palestinians did. Its clearly seen in the survey and the photographs.

Indeed at the same time contravening the principles of equality and self determination.

Jordan is their country just as Palestine is.
Indeed it doesn't mention it because Palestine is the Arabs country and didn't need to be divided. As you said.

According to history, Britain and everyone else Palestine is their country. No haifa was built by Arabs. They didn't need money.

Why should they have accepted the division of Palestine?

And also recognising occupied territory.

No they simply understand it better than you.

Bought lands are irrelevant as they are not to be Israeli lands.
And state land can't be settled by Israelis because that is De facto annexation. Thus they break the laws.

Abu Mazen control the Arab population in Area A and B- another evidence that Israel's letting the Arabs fulfill it.
The elections that were in Gaza after Israel disangagment is another evidence that Israel let the Arabs fulfill it.
[/QUOTE]
Palestinians couldn't vote to stop israeli settlers. Or anything else.

No when they were a majority in Palestine their political rights were ignored in favour of an imposed Jewish political right to settle and create a home.

Yes that was simple invalid discrimination and bigotry on the part of European nations and zionist lobbies. Not grounded in actual reality or the principles of international law. Like all other forms of discrimination. Since then the UN has learned a lot about Palestinians.

Uh yes they are. And they are built for israeli settlers too. Which is illegal.

Palestinians in the west bank can not vote for Israelis to leave their settlements. Nor can gazans vote for Isrealis to leave. Nor can Arab Israelis vote for the return of their Arab relations while Jews have freedom to come to Israel.

In fact it does contradict what Clinton wrote in his book. Clinton tried to paint arafat as an obstacle to peace. Ben Ami doesn't.

Both events are part of the same process involving the same partcipants and thus are indeed what we are talking about.

Still Arafat was part of both Oslo and Camp David. Ben ami doesn't condemn him here and neither does Clayton swisher. Indeed Ben ami agrees that the Palestine people made enormous concessions.

 

While your home is being degraded and raped you cover up by your futile desperate statements on Israel. (BTW there is ONLY one Israel/Palestine and the Arabs have 22!
Here is my response to what Dutch wrote about the UK and I do concur... You must clean your own backyard fella.

Here is the Dutch post I retorted to.

 

lol!!!!! that's impossible, as the Mandate precedes the UN Charter by more than 20 years.

the Mandate says that the rights of non-Jews need to be respected and protected in Jewish Palestine.

...You said that they need to be in their country, and according to Britain Jordan is their country.
Jews and their money built up that country. Like Haifa, Rishon Le Tzion, tel Aviv, Nes Tziona, Rehovot etc....[/quote]

all built by Arab labor and Arab hands.

ICJ says the West Bank is under Israeli Occupation and all Jewish settlements are illegal, and annexation of East Jerusalem was illegal.

you have no proof that all the private land that settlements were built on, was bought by Jews.

Israel used Arab private land to build Jewish settlements, until 1979.

 

Rishon Le Tzion was founded in 1882 by the Jews who came to the Land of Israel. Haim Amzaleg bought the land.
Rehovot was founded in 1890 by Polish Jews.
Nes Tziona was founded in 1883 by the Jews who came and established Rishon Le Tzion.
Tel Aviv was founded in 1909 by the organization "Achozat Beit".
So on.

I said that Jordan is their country, according to you. Becuase you said that they need to be in their country, and according to Britain, Jordan is their country. Which you agree with me in this part:

Until the Brits came in the Land of Israel, hifa was only a small village.
Haifa, by the way, wasnt founded by Arabs. History cant shows us who was the one who built up Haifa as a small village, but archeaology takes up until the 15th century BC with finds about vary small community, but dont have connection much to nowadays Haifa.
In the 2nd century Haifa was a small village. Before the Arabs came to the Land of Israel.
Haifa was already existed when the Arabs were in the Land of Israel.

The partition plan wasnt talked about Jordan. They could rejected it if they didnt want divided country. But if so, then they have not divided country, which is Jordan.
BUT if the Arabs dont care what size and if it will be divided country then they should accepted the partition plan.

This is the problem. The ICJ cant ALSO recognizes Judea and Samaria as "occupied territory" if they already recognized the Mandate, then the Mandate is contradicting that Jodea and Samaria is occupied.
The ICJ by recognizing the both, they are contradicting themselves. If they think that the area is occupied then they should recognized the Mandate and once they did recognize the Mandate they cant now say something that would contradict that recognition.
No they simply understand it better than you.

According to intrantnioal law the PA needs to bring back all land that were bought be Jews and kept their status. Which means that if so, then it's contradicting what you are now saying.
The lands that Jews bought are rightfuly theirs. Moreover, Israel is obeying the laws in the West Bank, like the Jordanian.

But of course, if you think that it is breaking the laws, then the same for the Arab lands. Because the land (The West Bank) wasnt their (according to the Mandate).

The dont need to vote, they simply need to go to the Israel Supreme Court and complain about the Israeli settlers that they taking lands that belong to the Arabs. Then if the court says that the land is really Arab private land then the settlers are been evecuated.
They already did it so hardly to believe they will have a problem to do that again.

So blame the Turkes that ruled here and the Brits that came after the Turkes.
Israel as a state was only from 1948, until then it was the responsibility of the Brits, and before them the Turkes.
Jews settled according to international document which the Brits needed to imposed. But still with that document the Brits stopped it for the Jews (AKA the white books).

If there was such nation then the League of Nations needed to know about. Like they knew about the Jews, the Brits, the Americans, the Franch, the Italians etc. Esspecialy in an international document.

So are you saying that to build for the Arabs is ok but for the Jews (that also live there) is not ok? Or in other words, are you calling to descriminate the Jews in the West Bank? If not then the indrestractures in the West Bank needed to be avilable for the Arabs as the Jews. And if when the Jews are using it is illegal, then also when the Arabs use it is illegal.

Gazens dont need to vote for that because Israel left the Gazens for their own. Israel is not controling what is happening inside of Gaza- Hamas is.

And for the rest regarding the West Bank- it's all needed to be solved in an agreement (AKA peace talks). These are not for voting but for agreement between two leaders.

Ben Ami didnt paint anyone for an obstacle for peace, which means that he didnt contradicted Clinton.
As Ben Ami didnt paint Arafat as an obstacle, he did the same when he didnt paint Israel as one.

So if you are saying that when the two participents take part of a peace agreements, then it can be connected. BUT the problem here is that Oslo and Camp David cant be connected (according to your locig), becuase in Oslo and Camp David was different participents.
In Oslo was Rabin and Arafat, and in Camp David Barak and Arafat- two different Israeli participent, thus have no connection to Oslo.

It metnioned articles from the Covenant of the League of Nations.

And their rights are been protected.

all built by Arab labor and Arab hands.[/QUOTE]

Rishon Le Tzion was founded in 1882 by the Jews who came to the Land of Israel. Haim Amzaleg bought the land.
Rehovot was founded in 1890 by Polish Jews.
Nes Tziona was founded in 1883 by the Jews who came and established Rishon Le Tzion.
Tel Aviv was founded in 1909 by the organization "Achozat Beit".
So on.

This is the problem. The ICJ cant ALSO recognizes Judea and Samaria as "occupied territory" if they already recognized the Mandate, then the Mandate is contradicting that Jodea and Samaria is occupied.
The ICJ by recognizing the both, they are contradicting themselves. If they think that the area is occupied then they should recognized the Mandate and once they did recognize the Mandate they cant now say something that would contradict that recognition.
No they simply understand it better than you.

A research "The Legal Status of Lands Acquired by Israelis before 1948 in the West Bank, Gaza Strip and East Jerusalem" by Eyal Zamir , Eyal Benvenisti.

As I said:
When there are proofs that a settlement is illegal then Israel evecuates it. Israel done it and continue to.

 

no they don't.

 

Israel is the country of all people who live on its territory, including Arabs.

- - - Updated - - -

The ICJ never recognized that the Mandate of Palestine is still in effect.

You have no proof of this, can't prove it, and won't prove it

 

#1. Israel is violating Jordanian laws in the West Bank.

#2. As the West Bank is under Occupation, it is governed by International Law, being the 4th Geneva Conventions. This supercedes Jordanian law.

Israel has stolen much more land from the Arabs, than the Arabs have taken from the Jews.

When Israel gives back all private land that was stolen to build settlements, then the Arabs should guve back Jewish land.

 

So Israel didnt evecuated Elon Moreh from the land it was existed on?
Israel also evecuated Migron.
Israel evecuated Jews that were illegally came to houses in Hebron.
Israel evecuated religious school for girls near Ramallah
ETC.

 

Ariel Sharon pledged to give retro-active legality, to illegally built settlements

http://www.haaretz.com/print-editio...s-built-on-private-palestinian-land-1.346329#


......but only for Jews, never for Arabs.

 

Right, and Israel is respecting their rights.

The ICJ recognized the Mandate.

I can prove that the Mandate is still in effect- Article 80.

Israel is respecting and obeying the laws in the West Bank. And yes it means also the Jordanian. I showed here to you bumerous of times, and yet you prefer to ignore it.

already showed here about how Israel is NOT violating 4th Geneva Convention, but one more time:
According to the 4th Geneva Convention:
* The occupant does not acquire sovereignty over the territory- Israel does not implement sovereignty over the area A and In area B there is not Israeli civilian rule- which means DONE
* Occupation is only a temporary situation, and the rights of the occupant are limited to the extent of that period - Israel across their history tried to implement a peace treaty with the Arabs according to the West Bank and Gaza but there was always Arab opposition about it, and you could sew it when Olmert seggested to Abu-Mazen the most generous preliminary agreement and Abu-Mazen didnt signed with him, or even whole of the things that Arafat wanted was suggested to him and he didnt want to sign.
* The occupying power must respect the laws in force in the occupied territory, unless they constitute a threat to its security or an obstacle to the application of the international law of occupation.- done, the IDF never interepted the laws that the PA ruled inside of Areas A and B, they only does things that threat Israel's security.
* The occupying power must take measures to restore and ensure, as far as possible, public order and safety.- the IDF does the exact thing and only takes measures on terrorists, and also of course the Oslo Accords.
* To the fullest extent of the means available to it, the occupying power must ensure sufficient hygiene and public health standards, as well as the provision of food and medical care to the population under occupation- done- Israel sends ingredients either Gaza nor the West Bank and also provide medical care, and in the West Bank if Arab gets hurt the soldiers there give him madical care.


* The population in occupied territory cannot be forced to enlist in the occupiers armed forces- they dont want and it doesnt happen.
*Collective or individual forcible transfer of population from and within the occupied territory are prohibited- the IDF doesnt do it, maybe it did but no longer.
* Transfers of the civilian population of the occupying power into the occupied territory, regardless whether forcible or voluntary, are prohibited- Israel is building houses in Area C, but as we all know Area C is under civilian and military rule, so it means that is not an occupeid territory (Oslo Accords)- DONE
* Collective punishment is prohibited- the IDF doesnt do it
* The taking of hostages is prohibited- the IDF only takes terrorists for investigation, but not as hostage, several hours after the investigation they let the terrorist go- DONE
* Reprisals against protected persons and their property are prohibited- Israel doesnt encourage it, on the contrary, Israel is arresting individuals that do it.
* The destruction or seizure of enemy property is prohibited, unless absolutely required by military necessity during the conduct of hostilities- the IDF doesnt do it, and when they did do it it was ok because it was required be military necessity- DONE
* Cultural property must be respected- Israel doesnt encourage it, on the contrary, Israel is arresting individuals that do it.
* People accused of criminal offences shall be provided with proceedings respecting internationally recognized judicial guarantees (for example, they must be informed of the reason for their arrest, charged with a specific offence and given a fair trial as quickly as possible)- the IDF arrests those who been charged with a specific offence and the IDF puts them on a trial- DONE
* Personnel of the International Red Cross/Red Crescent Movement must be allowed to carry out their humanitarian activities. The ICRC, in particular, must be given access to all protected persons, wherever they are, whether or not they are deprived of their liberty- the IDF allows International Red Cross to carry out their humanitarian activities (and I sew it with my own eyes)

Source: http://www.icrc.org/eng/resources/do...isc/634kfc.htm

The thing is that Israel is evecuating settlements that were proven as illegal, like they need to do for the illegal Arab setllements.
BUT if you are saying that this is not the case, then this is hypocracy! Because then you are saying that the Jewish settlements are illegal but the illegal Arab settlements are ok.

But Israel is giving back lands that were proven as Arab private lands (AKA Elon Moreh).

- - - Updated - - -

Sharon can do it because he is dead.

 

prove it.

- - - Updated - - -

Article 80 says rights of a Mandate terminate when a Mandate is concluded.

Palestine Mandate concluded in 1948.

 

The ICJ talked about the validity of Article 80 in their Advisory Opinion of June 21, 1971:

The ICJ also did it in their advisory opinion from 2004. It can shows in the reply for that advisory opinion when it was refered to the two conflicting positions of the ICK in that opinion:

Source1: https://books.google.co.il/books?id... entirely lacked legal justification.&f=false
Source2: http://www.mandateforpalestine.org/02mm--mandate-is-valid.html

Not according the ICJ advisory opinion from 1971 regarding the validity of Article 80, as I showed here.
But if you are still saying that it is because it been fullfil, then it means that the West Bank is part of the state of Israel.

 

Yes it is. In fact 25% of Israel population are non Jews.
Israel is a true multiculture state in more ways most people imagine.

 

the ICJ never specifically stated that the rights of the Palestine Mandate are still in effect.

Article 80 of the UN Charter says the rights of a Mandate terminate when such Mandate is concluded.

Palestine Mandate concluded in 1948.

 

Palestinian Terrorists are a clear and present danger to the State of Israel. We will use all available means to defend ourselves from the IslamoTerroristic Nazis.

 

Israeli thieves are a danger to world peace and will be dealt with by all means neccessary.

 

Palestinian Terrorists are a danger to world peace and will be dealt with by all means necessary.

 

The British Mandate was tarminated in 1948, not the "Mandate for Palestine".

 

The Mandate for Palestine was terminated and concluded in May, 1948.

Sorry if you refuse to accept the truth.

 

You are confusing. The British Mandate was indeed concluded in 1948 but the Mandate wasnt. Article 80 keeps it, like the ICJ said in 1971 like I showed you.

 

“Now, every human being on earth who cares about facts and can tell a lie from a truth knows that there was no such thing as “Palestinian nationalism” until modern Zionism created it out of whole cloth, by placing enormous value on a piece of land that used to seem as precious to its landlords as a rat-ridden empty lot in a burnt-out neighborhood in the middle of nowhere, in the suburbs of nothing.

The Jews gradually got possession of an arid stony wasteland… complete with the odd picturesque, crumbling, dirty town; and they loved it. They turned it into a gleaming, thriving, modern nation, not only a military but an intellectual powerhouse.
And so it is only natural that the “former owners’ descendants want it back, and remember how much their ancestors loved it, and how the new owners only got possession by wickedness and deceit. Such memories have the strange property of growing clearer instead of cloudier every day….

There is no irreconcilable difference in the fight between Israel and the Palestinians, no bone-deep dispute that will haunt humanity forever. There is only greed and envy. They never disappear, but can easily move from one target to the next. The problem will be solved as soon as the world stops trying to solve it.

DAVID GELERNTER
The Weekly Standard
January 19, 2009”

Excerpt From: Gilder, George. “The Israel Test.” Encounter Books, 2012. iBooks