declared the formation of the relgious State of Israel. The partition
plan required that the proposed states grant full civil rights to all
people within their borders, regardless of race, religion or gender.
Although Israel acknowledged that obligation, legal scholars,
including Prof. James Crawford and Prof. William Thomas Mallison, have
noted that Israel did not comply with the prescribed conditions for
protection of minorities.
On Sep 24, 12:22 pm, Mark <markmka...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Not true Keith. Israel is against the acknowledgement of a new state without
> bi-lateral acknowledgement. Israel was carved out of the defunct Ottoman
> Empire/British Mandate Territory.
>
> Whereas the Principal Allied Powers have also agreed that the Mandatory
> should be responsible for putting into effect the declaration originally
> made on November 2nd,
> 1917<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Balfour_Declaration_of_1917>,
> by the Government of His Britannic Majesty, and adopted by the said Powers,
> in favour of the establishment in Palestine of a national home for the
> Jewish people<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_home_for_the_Jewish_people>,
> it being clearly understood that nothing should be done which might
> prejudice the civil and religious rights of existing non-Jewish communities
> in Palestine, or the rights and political status enjoyed by Jews in any
> other country.[4]<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/British_Mandate_of_Palestine#cite_note-A...>
>
> [the] Mandates were not the creation of the League, and they could not in
> substance be altered by the League. The League's duties were confined to
> seeing that the specific and detailed terms of the mandates were in
> accordance with the decisions taken by the Allied and Associated Powers, and
> that in carrying out these mandates the Mandatory Powers should be under the
> supervision—not under the control—of the League. A mandate was a
> self-imposed limitation by the conquerors on the sovereignty which they
> exercised over the conquered
> territory.[18]<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/British_Mandate_of_Palestine#cite_note-17>
>
> Actually a good article by Wiki....http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/British_Mandate_of_Palestine
>
> On Sat, Sep 24, 2011 at 10:14 AM, Keith In Köln <keithinta...@gmail.com>wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > By the same token, Israel is against the United Nations acknowledging
> > Palestine as a Nation-State....Uhm....The same mechanism that Israel was
> > acknowledged.
>
> > On Sat, Sep 24, 2011 at 4:18 PM, GregfromBoston <greg.vinc...@yahoo.com>wrote:
>
> >> So much for republicans being the Zionistas, eh? Maybe Rahm should
> >> have been a clue.
>
> >> "Palestine", wants to be recognized as a state, while refusing to
> >> recognize Israel as a state. Okey dokey.
>
> >> Bravo Mr President
>
> >> On Sep 24, 5:51 am, Moe <coates...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> > The biggest threat is the undermining of the representatives in the
> >> > Congress when it comes to decisions that affect the policies of the
> >> > United States. I was surprised to see a clip with Wolf Blitzer and
> >> > Netanyahu discussing the fact that during the speech of Netanyahu
> >> > before the Congress various Israeli politicians were sitting together
> >> > with American representatives to influence their voting. Blitzer asked
> >> > Netanyahu if this was correct and how would an Israeli react if Joe
> >> > Walsh sat in the parliament of Israel to assure that Israel walk the
> >> > line to American interest. Netanyahu said in a joking manner that he
> >> > has no control over the politicians in Israel. Netanyahu has gone so
> >> > far as to threaten various politicians about their re-election if they
> >> > did not pull the Israeli line. It is clear to everyone who can think,
> >> > Israel can do what it wants to disrupt the balance in the region. For
> >> > any mistake made then the USA will be called to bail Israel out. This
> >> > means US Taxpayers and members of the US Armed Forces will pay the
> >> > bill. This payment will be in the form of taxpayer's money and lives.
> >> > United States pays Israel 3.5 Billion Dollars per year in support.
> >> > They pay Palestine 500 million dollars a year. America does not have
> >> > this money. We should be investing in the USA. Look at the increased
> >> > costs due to securing the American interests on a worldwide basis.
> >> > American taxpayers cover the increased costs and the host countries
> >> > pay their part. After Obama took office, USA has reduced threats. Due
> >> > to recent actions by Israel, the threat level has increased for all of
> >> > America´s allies in addition to that of the US.
>
> >> > Israel is looking at Iran. Israel might take action to destroy these
> >> > plants. They have asked or oppressed the US for F-18s and the armament
> >> > to destroy the nuclear plants in Iran. Israel has received addition
> >> > armaments and cooperation from the United States to the level where
> >> > the interest of the United States are in question. Look at the case of
> >> > F-15 plans that Israel received from the United States. After USA
> >> > terminated the project, Israel then sold the plans to China. China
> >> > then had a great technological leap forward with their efforts to gain
> >> > American military expertise. Look at the spying cases of Jewish
> >> > Americans and the attempts to free the convicted individuals by
> >> > putting pressure on Congress members.
> >> > If you look at the Israeli population in Israel, 800.000 of their
> >> > register citizens are living in the United States. How many of
> >> > Israel's citizens are living else where due to the daily risk. The
> >> > amount of money made is tremendous for selling homes to Israelis in
> >> > who have USA, as their first address. Another case is the cheaper
> >> > access to the American market for medical devices and software
> >> > products. This costs the average American not only his job but also
> >> > increase taxes for services he is not getting. What is it costing us
> >> > for a government that has more interest in appeasing Israel and not
> >> > supporting the infrastructure of the United States? How many American
> >> > lives will be spend for any of the foolish steps that Israel might
> >> > take in the region? What are the additional costs to Europe and the
> >> > United States due to the Israeli failed action with the Turkish aid
> >> > ships? What is the cost of an American Congress that is more
> >> > interested in supporting Israel's follies than that of support the
> >> > interests of the American people?
>
> >> > On Sep 23, 2:26 pm, MJ <micha...@america.net> wrote:
>
> >> > > Biggest Losers in Palestine Veto? The American PeoplebyPhilip Giraldi,
> >> September 22, 2011
> >> > > If the Palestinian application for United Nations full membership
> >> actually takes place Friday and the United States uses its Security Council
> >> veto to stop the process, it will be the final step in a predictable and
> >> preventable tragedy playing out. Some are arguing that Washington might
> >> actually abstain, thereby gaining considerable favorable sentiment from much
> >> of the world and also sending a signal to Israel that there are limits to
> >> the bilateral relationship. But it is far more likely that President Barack
> >> Obama, who has stated over and over that he will protect Israel in
> >> international forums, will not flinch when he calls on Susan Rice to cast
> >> the fatal vote. Any expectation that the president might hesitate either
> >> because it is the right thing to do or because it benefits the United States
> >> is fanciful, particularly with a presidential election looming in 2012.
> >> > > Washington's attempts to "mediate" the situation have really been
> >> limited to pressuring the Palestinians to back off. Sending National
> >> Security Council officialDennis Ross, "Israel's lawyer," to Ramallah to talk
> >> around the Palestinian leadership should, if anything, indicate to the
> >> Palestinians that Washington is, as it always has been, firmly in the
> >> Israeli corner. So let us assume that Palestine will feel compelled to seek
> >> full U.N. membership as the world's 194th nation and that Washington will
> >> then veto the application. The first question then has to be whether the
> >> entire process had any meaning at all or it was just kabuki, a stylized show
> >> played out to an appreciative audience with a predictable ending. The short
> >> answer is that the Palestinians will certainly be on the losing end as they
> >> have been for more than 60 years but the real losers will be the United
> >> States and Israel.
> >> > > The mainstream media has echoed Israeli and American arguments that
> >> Palestinian statehood is meaningless without a negotiated settlement of
> >> issues on the ground. But Israel has made it clear that it has no desire to
> >> negotiate anything while it continues to occupy the West Bank, so the
> >> Palestinian choice is to accept the status quo, in which it is powerless and
> >> voiceless, or attempt to line up the international community more solidly
> >> behind it and shift the playing field.
> >> > > Israel has been working hard to stop the process, or, at worst, to
> >> mitigate its impact by having a number of important nations, mostly in
> >> Europe, either abstain on the vote or vote no. Prime Minister Benjamin
> >> Netanyahu made a glad-handtourof European capitals earlier this year with
> >> that express purpose, and he received positive signals from the Italians,
> >> the Dutch, the Poles, and the Germans, though it is by no means clear how
> >> they will vote. It was for Israel a top national priority, which it has
> >> conveyed clearly to its friends in the United States.
> >> > > Washington, at the urging of Israel, also joined in the effort,
> >> starting withwarningslate last year to Latin American nations that
> >> recognizing Palestine as a state would be "unacceptable." More recently, the
> >> State Department and the White House have repeatedly expressed their desire
> >> that the Palestinians shelve their plans to seek a U.N. seat, and they have
> >> been assiduously working both in front of the TV cameras in New York and
> >> Washington and behind the scenes to convince the Palestinian leadership to
> >> cease and desist. The dialogue has been given some teeth by Congress, which
> >> is determined tocut all aidto Palestine if the U.N. action goes through. One
> >> congressmen, Joe Walsh of Illinois, is preparing amotionthat will provide
> >> congressional support for an Israeli annexation of much of the West Bank if
> >> the Palestinians proceed. Walsh describes
>
> ...
>
> read more »
--
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum
* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.
No comments:
Post a Comment