Andrew Winkler, Editor/Publisher, TheRebel.Org, Gets his ass handed to him during a debate.
Since you know so much more than me on the history of 'the region', could you please give me your expert opinion on the following facts:
First, the Nov. 29, 1947, "Partition Plan (UN General Assembly Resolution 181) was never ratified by the Security Council, and thus any division of Palestine into Jewish and non-Jewish areas was never legal. Moreover, a UNGA Resolution is only binding if all parties to it agree to be bound by its terms, which in this case did not happen.
Second, the General Assembly had no right under the UN Charter to take land from one people (Arabs) and give it to another people (European Jews).
Three, David ben Gurion declared Israeli statehood on May 15, 1948, even though the term of UNGA Res. 181 had not expired. Therefore, the creation of Israel was a land grab contrary to the UN and international law.
Four, Israel was admitted to the UN on May 11, 1949, only after it agreed to sign UNGA Res. 273, by which it recognized the right of all Palestinians to return to their homes and receive compensation.
In my lay opinion, this leads to the conclusion that Israel is a criminal entity that has never had a moral, legal or political right to exist. That's why it needs to be replaced with a unified, secular Palestine with equal rights and opportunities for both Arabs and Jews. I realise that most Jews would prefer the 'American Solutions', that is ethnic cleansing, apartheid and locking up of the 'Arab natives' in lifeless reservations.
Andrew Winkler
Editor/Publisher
TheRebel.Org
Andrew Winkler | Homepage | 02.03.06 - 4:31 am | #
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
As every International attorney knows, 181 is not of concern. In fact, Israel's legitimacy derives from the 1921 League of Nations Mandate, which carries the weight of international law, not UNGA 181, which as a General Assembly Resolution does not.
This makes your second question moot. Thus it requires no answer as it no longer has any bearing on the question.
Guess what? You guessed it, #3 is also superflous as 181 doesn't matter.
4 - UNGA Res. 273 is a resolution wherein the in the judgment of the Security Council, Israel is a peace-loving State and is able and willing to carry out the obligations contained in the Charter. Nothing more. I think you got the wrong article, but that's your tough luck.
Anonymous | 02.03.06 - 5:13 am | #
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Since you know so much more than me on the history of 'the region', could you please give me your expert opinion on the following facts:
First, the Nov. 29, 1947, "Partition Plan (UN General Assembly Resolution 181) was never ratified by the Security Council, and thus any division of Palestine into Jewish and non-Jewish areas was never legal. Moreover, a UNGA Resolution is only binding if all parties to it agree to be bound by its terms, which in this case did not happen.
Second, the General Assembly had no right under the UN Charter to take land from one people (Arabs) and give it to another people (European Jews).
Three, David ben Gurion declared Israeli statehood on May 15, 1948, even though the term of UNGA Res. 181 had not expired. Therefore, the creation of Israel was a land grab contrary to the UN and international law.
Four, Israel was admitted to the UN on May 11, 1949, only after it agreed to sign UNGA Res. 273, by which it recognized the right of all Palestinians to return to their homes and receive compensation.
In my lay opinion, this leads to the conclusion that Israel is a criminal entity that has never had a moral, legal or political right to exist. That's why it needs to be replaced with a unified, secular Palestine with equal rights and opportunities for both Arabs and Jews. I realise that most Jews would prefer the 'American Solutions', that is ethnic cleansing, apartheid and locking up of the 'Arab natives' in lifeless reservations.
Andrew Winkler
Editor/Publisher
TheRebel.Org
Andrew Winkler | Homepage | 02.03.06 - 4:31 am | #
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
As every International attorney knows, 181 is not of concern. In fact, Israel's legitimacy derives from the 1921 League of Nations Mandate, which carries the weight of international law, not UNGA 181, which as a General Assembly Resolution does not.
This makes your second question moot. Thus it requires no answer as it no longer has any bearing on the question.
Guess what? You guessed it, #3 is also superflous as 181 doesn't matter.
4 - UNGA Res. 273 is a resolution wherein the in the judgment of the Security Council, Israel is a peace-loving State and is able and willing to carry out the obligations contained in the Charter. Nothing more. I think you got the wrong article, but that's your tough luck.
Anonymous | 02.03.06 - 5:13 am | #
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
posted by Ibrahamav at 5:49 PM
0 comments
