Israel continues to spit in the face of international law

[jbg]

Israel continues to spit in the face of international law and jbg and Dogsonporch continue to make excuses for them.

It's interesting that you say that and didn't even bother to respond to my response to your opening post. I'll make it easy for you to find:

They continue to spit in the face of U.S., the international community and in the face of peace. However, this time they've chosen to make it as blatant as possible.

Yes. Naomi, by surviving in the face of odds that no one thought they could surmount, they have spit in the face of haters throughout the world and history. Haters exemplified by books such as the Protocols of the Elders of Zion, Mein Kampf, or people such as Khomeni (or pick your ayatollah or imam), Stalin, Hitler, Goebbels, et. al.

Care to respond, or aren't you able to?

[Oleg Bach]

a

Big Al pretty much put an end to the ol' Phoenician thing.

Oleg...I said Muslims...not Arabs.

You just can't win..If you say that the majority of gun crime in Toronto are the toss away children from aging Jamacian gangs then you are a racist. IF you call an ARAB a shemite...then people think you are pulling a fast one. IF I saw that the pure bred Scottish are just displaced old Jews with a cheap streak then I get pounced on...I trust my eyes as far a physical human construction-

-Old Scottish guys look exactly like old Jews- and the genetic stero-typical socio economic predisposition are a match..oh well- I guess if you go back far enough you are all Jews..and in turn...Arabs are the Jews that married black woman-- much like Scillians who will rip your face of if you say negroid genetics flow in their veins...And those in the south of France with their olive skin..

I could swear that French woman are the same screaming memees who had fathers that were Muslim Mooooooolahs....and don't forget the Ukrianians who all look like ASIANS---THEN send in a few black hated SEMITES..and the Ukraine in the mind of a STALIN is to be justly genocided..what a mess---and all over a basket of carrots and one brother screwing the other brothers wife.

[naomiglover]

It's interesting that you say that and didn't even bother to respond to my response to your opening post. I'll make it easy for you to find:

Care to respond, or aren't you able to?

You didn't give a response to Israel's continuous breaking of international law. You regurgitated and mentioned names that have nothing to do with Israel's responsibility to follow international law.

What kind of a so-called lawyer are you when you can't stand on the side of law?

[jbg]

You didn't give a response to Israel's continuous breaking of international law. You regurgitated and mentioned names that have nothing to do with Israel's responsibility to follow international law.

What kind of a so-called lawyer are you when you can't stand on the side of law?

The law is not a suicide pact. Especially when fighting enemies that themselves have no law.

[GostHacked]

The law is not a suicide pact. Especially when fighting enemies that themselves have no law.

Isreali law seems to govern even the occupied Palestinian territories. Since the Palestinians don't seem to have any kind of functioning government.

And still, no one has been able to refute my stance that it is indeed an occupation.

[DogOnPorch]

I already answered the 'why is Jerusalem sacred to Muslims' question I asked you myself.

Re: Occupation.

You can call beer 'wine' if you wish...it doesn't make it...errr...wine.

Edited May 21, 2010 by DogOnPorch

[jbg]

Since the Palestinians don't seem to have any kind of functioning government.

That is the strongest reason that Israel has to maintain a role. You've made my argument for me.

[GostHacked]

I already answered the 'why is Jerusalem sacred to Muslims' question I asked you myself.

The reasons for it being sacred to Muslims is kind of besides the point. And it does not answer my question or refute my claim. If all the land has been acquired during war, then Israel owns all the land in the area. This includes the Palestinian territories.

If they don't own the land but are administering it as they would their own land, then yes it's an occupation.

You can call beer 'wine' if you wish...it doesn't make it beer.

Even you say that Israel was 'left holding the bag'. It does not matter how else you frame how it happened, the end result is that the Palestinian territories are occupied and essentially controlled by Israel. Maybe we should just dispense of any borders and just call it all Israel or Palestine, or Palisisrael. Or Isrealistine.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Israeli-occupied_territories

Following Israeli withdrew from the Sinai Peninsula in 1982, as part of the 1979 Israel–Egypt Peace Treaty, that territory ceased to be considered occupied territory. Although Israel unilaterally disengaged from Gaza in September 2005, it continues to be designated the occupying power in the Gaza Strip by the United Nations, the United States, the United Kingdom and various human rights organizations.[citation needed] Israel disputes it is the occupying power in the Gaza Strip. Israel's annexation of East Jerusalem in 1980 and the Golan Heights in 1981[1] has not been recognised by any other country.[2]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Palestinian_territories

Following the signing of the Oslo Accords in 1993, portions of the territories have been governed in varying degrees by the Palestinian Authority. Israel does not consider East Jerusalem nor the former Israeli–Jordanian no man's land (the former annexed in 1980 and the latter in 1967) to be parts of the West Bank. Israel claims that both fall under full Israeli law and jurisdiction as opposed to the approximately 58% of the Israeli-defined West Bank that is ruled by the Israeli Judea and Samaria Civil Administration. This claim has not been recognized by any other country, based on unilateral annexation of territory being prohibited by customary and conventional international law.[2]

http://unispal.un.org/UNISPAL.NSF/0/FA669F53D20AF640852576740053B159

Numerous mentions of the territories being occupied by Israel.

Dog, you're up.

[DogOnPorch]

When is Poland going to give back East Prussia to Germany?

[GostHacked]

When is Poland going to give back East Prussia to Germany?

Let's stick to this issue shall we?

[DogOnPorch]

It's a perfect analogy.

[GostHacked]

It's a perfect analogy.

I'm not looking for analogies.

Germany occupied Poland, and then occupied some territory in the USSR. I don't think it would have been up to Poland to give any land back they did not acquire during war time. Poland was not an aggressor in WWII.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/East_Prussia

Following Nazi Germany's defeat in World War II in 1945, war-torn East Prussia was divided at Stalin's insistence between the Soviet Union (the Kaliningrad Oblast), the People's Republic of Poland (the Warmian-Masurian Voivodeship), and the Lithuanian SSR (the constituent counties of the Klaipėda Region).[4] The capital city Königsberg was renamed Kaliningrad in 1946. The German population of the province was largely evacuated during the war or expelled shortly thereafter in the expulsion of Germans after World War II. An estimated 300,000 (around one fifth of the population) died either in war time bombings raids or the battles to defend the province.[citation needed]

The Treaty of Versailles and Stalin were the reasons East Prussia was divided. All parties involved agreed to those terms. I don't see this as being the same for Israel and Palestine. Maybe you can clear that up for me. I don't think you can consider the Balfour Declaration as the same as the Treaty of Versailles. Britain's mess up of how they handled and administered the Palestinian Mandate also seems to be in question when it comes to the creation of Israel. I can't see these two scenarios as being the same.

[GostHacked]

That is the strongest reason that Israel has to maintain a role. You've made my argument for me.

Do you agree that it is an occupation? If not, why not.

[DogOnPorch]

I'm not looking for analogies.

Germany occupied Poland, and then occupied some territory in the USSR. I don't think it would have been up to Poland to give any land back they did not acquire during war time. Poland was not an aggressor in WWII.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/East_Prussia

The Treaty of Versailles and Stalin were the reasons East Prussia was divided. All parties involved agreed to those terms. I don't see this as being the same for Israel and Palestine. Maybe you can clear that up for me. I don't think you can consider the Balfour Declaration as the same as the Treaty of Versailles. Britain's mess up of how they handled and administered the Palestinian Mandate also seems to be in question when it comes to the creation of Israel. I can't see these two scenarios as being the same.

Israel wasn't the aggressor, either.

[Wilber]

The Treaty of Versailles and Stalin were the reasons East Prussia was divided. All parties involved agreed to those terms. I don't see this as being the same for Israel and Palestine. Maybe you can clear that up for me. I don't think you can consider the Balfour Declaration as the same as the Treaty of Versailles. Britain's mess up of how they handled and administered the Palestinian Mandate also seems to be in question when it comes to the creation of Israel. I can't see these two scenarios as being the same.

Seems pretty similar to me. In both cases the regions fate was determined by a group of third parties, the people who lived there got little or no say.

[GostHacked]

Seems pretty similar to me. In both cases the regions fate was determined by a group of third parties, the people who lived there got little or no say.

Wilber, I will agree to this.

[naomiglover]

The law is not a suicide pact. Especially when fighting enemies that themselves have no law.

What? The law on the borders has nothing to do with security. You're not making sense.

[jbg]

When is Poland going to give back East Prussia to Germany?

Let's stick to this issue shall we?

GostHacked, you're right.

Go here (link) to follow.

[GostHacked]

http://www.foxnews.com/world/2010/05/30/reports-israeli-ships-attack-aid-flotilla-dead/

I've been watching this the past week, and it came to a head. Any thoughts? I should not be surprised with Israel's response to the flotilla, but I am really wondering and would be surprised if they opened fire on the Israeli forces first or if they opened fire only after the ship was boarded by Israeli forces. If that was the case then I think Israel is in the wrong with boarding those ships. Being in international waters, I guess anything goes.

It seems most ships have been captured and brought to an Israeli port for processing before items are allowed into Gaza.

Several countries have called in their ambassadors to Israel. Turkey suspended a military exercise with Israel. And apparently there were a couple ships carrying the US flag as well.

But it seems there is no official or any report of any kind listing what Israel bans from the West Bank and Gaza. it is on a case by case situation. The amount of items allowed to enter into Gaza is very limited compared to before the blockade in 2007.

Thoughts?

[eyeball]

Thoughts?

More violence in the ME? Hmmm, go figure.

I hope that grey whale that's been seen off the coast of Israel doesn't get hurt in the cross fire.

[M.Dancer]

Being in international waters, I guess anything goes.

Ho hum....

Could be the synopsis of a black comedy...

flotilla of palestinian and palestinian supporters intentionally proke Israeli repsonse, hilarity ensues.

International maritime law covers this. Ships running blockades can be stopped and searched. This would have been avoided if the ship had called on either the Egyptian or ISraeli ports where they were invited to dock.

[myata]

Thoughts?

Old as this conflict itself:

1. Find an objective position based on facts and realities rather than ideological affinities and preferences

2. Work out fair principles of lasting settlement based on international law and communicate them to all parties involved

3. Cut all support other than basic humanitarian aid to any party that does not accept the principles, or acts contrary to them zero tolerance and regardless of ideological affinities and preferences

We could that eventually, is there anything to lose given how well our friendly biased mediation has been working so far?

[Sir Bandelot]

http://www.foxnews.com/world/2010/05/30/reports-israeli-ships-attack-aid-flotilla-dead/

I am really wondering and would be surprised if they opened fire on the Israeli forces first or if they opened fire only after the ship was boarded by Israeli forces.

So far reports indicate there were only two pistols found on board. Presumably a ships captain usually has at least one.

But, they may have had sharp pointed sticks...

[dre]

Exactly. All of jerusalem is on corpus separatum (which is a terrible spell at Hogwarts). That status became null when Jordan attacked Israel and the City was diveded. It was reunited in 1967, became the capital in 1980 and is recognized as such.

That legal status cant become null as a result of the war. And in any case corpus separatum came from a general assembly resolution which is not legally binding. The last legally binding allocation was the San Remos decision in the 1920's.

[bloodyminded]

So far reports indicate there were only two pistols found on board. Presumably a ships captain usually has at least one.

But, they may have had sharp pointed sticks...

Pretty scary...