Should A Woman Be Allowed to hold the office of President of the USA?

[webfact]

U.S. wants PLO's Washington office to stay open - State Department

 

A woman walks past the Palestine Liberation Organization office in Washington, U.S., November 19, 2017. REUTERS/Yuri Gripas

 

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The United States wants the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO) to keep its Washington office open and is in talks with Palestinian officials about the issue despite a U.S. decision that could trigger its closure, the State Department said on Tuesday.

 

A State Department official on Saturday said under U.S. law, Secretary of State Rex Tillerson could not renew a certification for the PLO office to operate "given certain statements made by the Palestinian leaders about the International Criminal Court."

 

Under the law, the PLO, the main Palestinian umbrella political body, cannot operate a Washington office if it urges the ICC to prosecute Israelis for alleged crimes against Palestinians.

 

In September, Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas at the United Nations called on the ICC "to open an investigation and to prosecute Israeli officials for their involvement in settlement activities and aggressions against our people."

 

Speaking at a briefing, State Department spokeswoman Heather Nauert said the matter was under discussion and that, as far as she knew, the office was up and running for now.

 

"We are in contact with the Palestinian officials about the status of that PLO office. I don't want reporters to get ahead of themselves in reporting on this," she added, suggesting that talk of the office's closure might be premature. "We'd like for them to be able to keep it open."

 

According to a weekend report by the official Palestinian news agency WAFA, the Palestinian presidency expressed surprise at the U.S. certification decision, first reported by the Associated Press.

 

WAFA quoted Palestinian Foreign Minister Riyad Al-Maliki as saying that Palestinian leaders would not give in to blackmail or pressure regarding the operation of the PLO office or negotiations on an Israeli-Palestinian peace agreement.

 

It was not immediately clear what effect the State Department's move might have on the Trump administration's efforts to revive peace talks between Israel and the Palestinians, which are led by Jared Kushner, the U.S. president's son-in-law and senior adviser.

 

The PLO office in Washington did not immediately respond to requests for comment.

 

A source familiar with the matter said that the office remained open and that Arab television channels had taken footage of the Palestinian ambassador entering the building this week.

 

(Reporting by Arshad Mohammed; Editing by Tom Brown and Sandra Maler)

 

-- © Copyright Reuters 2017-11-22

[boomerangutang]

That photo brings memories of Wash D.C. Georgetown area.  I resided there. Great city.

 

On topic:  yea, keep the office open.  Dialog is better than silence.   The delegates will probably just go out and party in Georgetown - most of the time.  A doozy place to get posted if you're a Palestinian, I'm sure.   

[boomerangutang]

Who's gonna pay for the property and support for the Palestinians and staff? 

 

The property rental is probably close to $12k/month.  Assuming there are six staffers, and in D.C. it costs about $150k/yr for a person to have a residence and live comfortably, that mullah adds up.  The Gaza Strip and West Bank hardly generate any revenue.  Indeed, they're probably on the equivalent of welfare and food stamps hand-outs from western countries.   

 

So, I wouldn't be surprised if the US gov't quietly pays the approx. $2 million/yr for a small staff of Palestinians to maintain an office in a posh part of D.C.   I know, on a US federal level, $2 million isn't even pocket change.  The feds pay that much in any given minute.   It probably cost about that much for Pence to fly to Indianapolis to walk in and walk out of a ball game, with his entire entourage.  Feds have no idea about money.  They spend it as easily as pissing down a toilet.

[darksidedog]

16 minutes ago, webfact said:

Under the law, the PLO, the main Palestinian umbrella political body, cannot operate a Washington office if it urges the ICC to prosecute Israelis for alleged crimes against Palestinians.

That sounds pretty bullshit. I thought the whole idea of a court was to examine evidence and make a ruling. If you have a grievance, but are not allowed to even voice it, or ask the court to examine it, just how are you supposed to find justice if wrongs truly have been committed? This simply allows Israel to do what the hell it likes with total impunity.

[ezzra]

2 hours ago, darksidedog said:

just how are you supposed to find justice if wrongs truly have been committed? This simply allows Israel to do what the hell it likes with total impunity.

Who says you have to have a posh office to ' find justice'? they have been trying to find justice for 70 years now, and for 70 years 'Palestinian refugees' are still living in squalid camps because it looks good for propaganda purposes while the leadership lives in opulent riches.....

 

[dexterm]

28 minutes ago, ezzra said:

Who says you have to have a posh office to ' find justice'? they have been

trying to find justice for 70 years now, and for 70 years 'Palestinian refugees'

are still living in squalid camps because it looks good for propaganda

purposes while the leadership lives in opulent riches.....

 

In your simplistic analysis of the pursuit of Palestinian justice you seem to have omitted one small detail...the Zionist mainly European colonizers who ethnically cleansed Palestinians 70 years ago and made them refugees, while stealing their land.

 

Which is the case the Palestinians want to put before the ICC
from the OP...
'In September, Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas at the United Nations called on the ICC "to open an investigation and to prosecute Israeli officials for their involvement in settlement activities and aggressions against our people."'

 

It is somewhat ironic that the land of the free is threatening to close down an office because the Palestinians are peacefully seeking human and civil rights through the courts.

[Morch]

2 hours ago, boomerangutang said:

Who's gonna pay for the property and support for the Palestinians and staff? 

 

The property rental is probably close to $12k/month.  Assuming there are six staffers, and in D.C. it costs about $150k/yr for a person to have a residence and live comfortably, that mullah adds up.  The Gaza Strip and West Bank hardly generate any revenue.  Indeed, they're probably on the equivalent of welfare and food stamps hand-outs from western countries.   

 

So, I wouldn't be surprised if the US gov't quietly pays the approx. $2 million/yr for a small staff of Palestinians to maintain an office in a posh part of D.C.   I know, on a US federal level, $2 million isn't even pocket change.  The feds pay that much in any given minute.   It probably cost about that much for Pence to fly to Indianapolis to walk in and walk out of a ball game, with his entire entourage.  Feds have no idea about money.  They spend it as easily as pissing down a toilet.

 

Just another one of your rants, posted without having much regard to facts. Palestinian missions abroad are supported through the Palestinian National Fund, with enough money so that "$2 million/yr" would indeed by "pocket change".

[Morch]

2 hours ago, darksidedog said:

That sounds pretty bullshit. I thought the whole idea of a court was to examine evidence and make a ruling. If you have a grievance, but are not allowed to even voice it, or ask the court to examine it, just how are you supposed to find justice if wrongs truly have been committed? This simply allows Israel to do what the hell it likes with total impunity.

 

It may sound like a whole lot of things, doesn't mean it is.

 

One of the conditions specified was that issues will be resolved by negotiation, rather by unilateral appeals to such bodies as the ICC. If the Palestinian choose the ICC path, that's quite alright - but it might carry some diplomatic consequences.

 

Seems like what happened here was the PA was either careless with regard to statements made, or over-confident with regard to possible reactions and consequences. Unless much mistaken, the issue was already raised right after Abbas's comments.

 

I have no doubt that the State Department would have preferred this to be swept under the carpet, given that the Trump administration is about to present its fabled "ultimate deal" peace plan. 

[Morch]

 

@dexterm

 

I don't think that what Abbas said, or the Palestinian ICC efforts are similar to your usual hateful all encompassing propaganda posts. They do not, as far as I recall, or as the OP specifies, and you yourself quoted - include the first part of your post.

 

It may be ironic that the USA does not bend it's laws in order to fit your views, but it is what it is. Ignore it all you like, spin in whichever way - the Palestinian side agreed to certain guidelines and are aware of the diplomatic penalties involved.

[kamahele]

5 hours ago, boomerangutang said:

Who's gonna pay for the property and support for the Palestinians and staff? 

 

The property rental is probably close to $12k/month.  Assuming there are six staffers, and in D.C. it costs about $150k/yr for a person to have a residence and live comfortably, that mullah adds up.  The Gaza Strip and West Bank hardly generate any revenue.  Indeed, they're probably on the equivalent of welfare and food stamps hand-outs from western countries.   

 

So, I wouldn't be surprised if the US gov't quietly pays the approx. $2 million/yr for a small staff of Palestinians to maintain an office in a posh part of D.C.   I know, on a US federal level, $2 million isn't even pocket change.  The feds pay that much in any given minute.   It probably cost about that much for Pence to fly to Indianapolis to walk in and walk out of a ball game, with his entire entourage.  Feds have no idea about money.  They spend it as easily as pissing down a toilet.

That's okay. A few million dollars in tax dollars is peanuts compared with the billions we funnel into Israeli pockets every year.

[Srikcir]

3 hours ago, Morch said:

the Palestinian National Fund,

The PNF is responsible for managing financial aid coming from a variety of sources: funds from Arab states, contributions from wealthy Palestinians, and a "liberation tax" levied on Palestinians working in Arab countries

http://www.encyclopedia.com/politics/dictionaries-thesauruses-pictures-and-press-releases/palestinian-national-fund

So no US funding.

[Srikcir]

6 hours ago, webfact said:

Tillerson could not renew a certification for the PLO office to operate "given certain statements made by the Palestinian leaders about the International Criminal Court."

The US is not a participant in the ICC.

It joins China, Iraq, Israel, Libya, Qatar, and Yemen as nonparticipants - such great company.

[spidermike007]

It is this very issue that is causing so much chaos. There is no consistently when it comes to Trump policy. It changes from one day to the next, and is never based on moral, or ethical considerations. It is always based on partisanship, politics, and party. Never, ever about the good of the nation, or doing something because it is the right thing to do.

 

This man is dangerous. He is unstable. He is unfit for the office, and demonstrates that every day, by doing things like coming out and voicing support for Roy Moore. Party over principal. 

 

He has single handedly repopulated the swamp, with his own brand of crocodiles.

[Morch]

24 minutes ago, Srikcir said:

The PNF is responsible for managing financial aid coming from a variety of sources: funds from Arab states, contributions from wealthy Palestinians, and a "liberation tax" levied on Palestinians working in Arab countries

http://www.encyclopedia.com/politics/dictionaries-thesauruses-pictures-and-press-releases/palestinian-national-fund

So no US funding.

 

Quoting what it's supposed to do is all very well. You may want to dig deeper than that. The PNF is concerned with a whole lot more than managing foreign aid and funds. It is also not very transparently managed.

[Morch]

20 minutes ago, Srikcir said:

The US is not a participant in the ICC.

It joins China, Iraq, Israel, Libya, Qatar, and Yemen as nonparticipants - such great company.

 

India too, Russia as well, Malaysia, Indonesia ...and then there are countries which did not ratify - Iran, Thailand...

 

[Morch]

21 minutes ago, spidermike007 said:

It is this very issue that is causing so much chaos. There is no consistently when it comes to Trump policy. It changes from one day to the next, and is never based on moral, or ethical considerations. It is always based on partisanship, politics, and party. Never, ever about the good of the nation, or doing something because it is the right thing to do.

 

This man is dangerous. He is unstable. He is unfit for the office, and demonstrates that every day, by doing things like coming out and voicing support for Roy Moore. Party over principal. 

 

He has single handedly repopulated the swamp, with his own brand of crocodiles.

 

The blunder here is mainly Palestinian. Inconceivable that they weren't aware of this to begin with, and idiotic that it wasn't tackled beforehand. There will be the unified indignant stance adopted, but pretty sure Zomlot will get a private hiding from Abbas (without Abbas taking responsibility, of course).

 

The Trump administration needed this like a bullet in the head. Not a very good timing, considering the plans to roll out the designs for the "ultimate deal" peace plan. Perhaps not a crisis of their own making (the stipulation was there long before), but a properly functioning State Department would have tried to sort this out in advance...oh, wait...

 

Given the sorry state the State Department is in under Tillerson, and the two novice negotiators (Kushner and  Greenblatt), perhaps not all that surprising. Guess they'll be the target of one of Trump tantrums as well (and rightly so).

 

And now Abbas gets into a drama mode...

 

Palestinians Cut Donald Trump and Jared Kushner Contact After Closure of Washington Office

http://www.newsweek.com/palestinians-cut-trump-and-kushner-contacts-after-closure-washington-office-718050

 

Pence's upcoming visit will probably not actually be boycotted, but still, totally unneeded distraction which could have been averted with a wee bit more attention and professionalism.

[Srikcir]

1 hour ago, Morch said:

 

Quoting what it's supposed to do is all very well. You may want to dig deeper than that. The PNF is concerned with a whole lot more than managing foreign aid and funds. It is also not very transparently managed.

I responded to the claim that the US is covertly funding PNF. There is no evidence that it is and no need to dig deeper. You're off to another track.

[Morch]

7 minutes ago, Srikcir said:

I responded to the claim that the US is covertly funding PNF. There is no evidence that it is and no need to dig deeper. You're off to another track.

 

You responded to my post, which did not raise such a claim, quite the opposite. My comment was that the Palestinians pay for it themselves, through the PNF (and the same goes for other missions abroad).

 

[dexterm]

6 hours ago, Morch said:

 

@dexterm

 

I don't think that what Abbas said, or the Palestinian ICC efforts are similar to your usual hateful all encompassing propaganda posts. They do not, as far as I recall, or as the OP specifies, and you yourself quoted - include the first part of your post.

 

It may be ironic that the USA does not bend it's laws in order to fit your views, but it is what it is. Ignore it all you like, spin in whichever way - the Palestinian side agreed to certain guidelines and are aware of the diplomatic penalties involved.

It would be more helpful if you quoted my words rather than selectively paraphrasing what you think I said..which is against forum rules.

 

How dare the Palestinians seek justice for Israeli war crimes?

 

>>It may be ironic that the USA does not bend it's laws in order to fit your views, but it is what it is. 
...Laws are not set in stone, especially when this particular law heavily influenced by the Israeli lobby was contrived to protect Israel's stonewalling on peace negotiations. In addition the direct negotiations that the USA apparently so vehemently and sincerely insists upon have been dragging on now for 50-70 years of illegal occupation. About time the most powerful nation in the world exercised a bit of clout...if it really wanted to. I can understand the Palestinians' frustration at the lack of progress after so many decades of procrastination.

 

The USA appears to be punctilious in the law it framed to protect Israel from investigation of its war crimes, especially settlement building, in the ICC.

Why is it not equally adamant that Israel should cease thumbing its nose at the spirit of the Oslo accords?

 

If the US wants to be an honest broker and is so keen on direct meaningful negotiations betwen Israel and the Palestinians then it should similarly insist that Israel call a moratorium on building illegal settlements in the occupied West Bank ( a condition Palestinians have been calling for for years as an act of goodwill for serious negotiations) , or otherwise threaten to close the Israeli embassy in Washington.

 

Bottom line as the OP suggests is that this is all talk and the office won't close. The threat is probably the result of pressure exerted by the Israeli ambassador in Washington and Netanyahu on Tillerson. If only because Trump would then schizophrenically have to close the PLO office and summon back his son-in-law Kushner who is supposedly negotiating his ultimate peace deal. 

http://jfjfp.com/?p=96533

 

Who knows...maybe that's what Trump wants, and could use the PLO office as a scapegoat for yet another Trump fail.

 

Edited November 22, 2017 by dexterm

[Morch]

 

@dexterm

 

It would be more helpful if you'd stop making things up - there was no "selectively paraphrasing", and nothing against forum rules.

 

There was nothing said to the effect that the Palestinian may not continue their efforts on the ICC front, just that such a course of action comes with consequences. Of course, your standing position seems to be that such things do not apply when it comes to the Palestinians, but alas, reality is somewhat different - rile as you may.

 

 Laws are indeed not set in stone, but currently USA law is what it is. That you wish it to be otherwise doesn't make it so, nor is your opinion a provision allowing to ignore it. Apparently, you believe that USA laws should be optional when it comes to your adopted cause, which is again, not the case.

 

Once more, that "50-70 years" bit exposes your true views - which essentially do not recognize Israel's legitimacy, and, if official versions are to be believed, is a more extreme position than that held by the Palestinian Authority. As said earlier, there quite a difference in approach when citing this or that time frame. That you cite "procrastination" or "lack of progress" without any reference whatsoever to Arab and Palestinian rejectionism is just the usual one-sided and dishonest presentation.

 

One of the main principals involved in various USA attempts to block unilateral Palestinian efforts is that going this way basically shuts the door on the possibility of negotiations. And no, it isn't that Israeli governments (particularly recent ones) were much interested - but any such action by the Palestinian side provides another credible argument for avoiding discussions. There can't be both negotiation and such legal proceedings at the same time. So, once more - if the Palestinian side wishes to go this way, that's alright - it just need to be understood that it comes with a price, something which you seem to have trouble accepting.

 

The USA is not about to radically change its foreign policy on these matters, not under Trump's administration, anyway. So while you may find interest in fantasizing or lamenting about what USA policy ought to be, it may be more to the point to focus on what it is.

 

As for your assertions regarding Israel's involvement - the two articles in your link (not the source of either, by the way) do not suggest that Tillerson was "pressured", but rather, that's the Palestinian point of view cited in one of them (the article goes on to provide another interpretation). That you quote Palestinian view as fact doesn't make it so. And if, indeed, Israel's ambassador was investing some efforts in this, well - that's sort of what ambassadors do (which is also covered in the article itself). What was that said about "selective paraphrasing"?

 

[Trouble]

13 hours ago, darksidedog said:

That sounds pretty bullshit. I thought the whole idea of a court was to examine evidence and make a ruling. If you have a grievance, but are not allowed to even voice it, or ask the court to examine it, just how are you supposed to find justice if wrongs truly have been committed? This simply allows Israel to do what the hell it likes with total impunity.

Yes it does seem like bullshit.  

Edited November 22, 2017 by Trouble

[Jingthing]

13 hours ago, boomerangutang said:

That photo brings memories of Wash D.C. Georgetown area.  I resided there. Great city.

 

On topic:  yea, keep the office open.  Dialog is better than silence.   The delegates will probably just go out and party in Georgetown - most of the time.  A doozy place to get posted if you're a Palestinian, I'm sure.   

I was curious and you're right, it's on Wisconsin Avenue in Georgetown.

[dexterm]

5 hours ago, Morch said:

 

@dexterm

 

It would be more helpful if you'd stop making things up - there was no "selectively paraphrasing", and nothing against forum rules.

 

There was nothing said to the effect that the Palestinian may not continue their efforts on the ICC front, just that such a course of action comes with consequences. Of course, your standing position seems to be that such things do not apply when it comes to the Palestinians, but alas, reality is somewhat different - rile as you may.

 

 Laws are indeed not set in stone, but currently USA law is what it is. That you wish it to be otherwise doesn't make it so, nor is your opinion a provision allowing to ignore it. Apparently, you believe that USA laws should be optional when it comes to your adopted cause, which is again, not the case.

 

Once more, that "50-70 years" bit exposes your true views - which essentially do not recognize Israel's legitimacy, and, if official versions are to be believed, is a more extreme position than that held by the Palestinian Authority. As said earlier, there quite a difference in approach when citing this or that time frame. That you cite "procrastination" or "lack of progress" without any reference whatsoever to Arab and Palestinian rejectionism is just the usual one-sided and dishonest presentation.

 

One of the main principals involved in various USA attempts to block unilateral Palestinian efforts is that going this way basically shuts the door on the possibility of negotiations. And no, it isn't that Israeli governments (particularly recent ones) were much interested - but any such action by the Palestinian side provides another credible argument for avoiding discussions. There can't be both negotiation and such legal proceedings at the same time. So, once more - if the Palestinian side wishes to go this way, that's alright - it just need to be understood that it comes with a price, something which you seem to have trouble accepting.

 

The USA is not about to radically change its foreign policy on these matters, not under Trump's administration, anyway. So while you may find interest in fantasizing or lamenting about what USA policy ought to be, it may be more to the point to focus on what it is.

 

As for your assertions regarding Israel's involvement - the two articles in your link (not the source of either, by the way) do not suggest that Tillerson was "pressured", but rather, that's the Palestinian point of view cited in one of them (the article goes on to provide another interpretation). That you quote Palestinian view as fact doesn't make it so. And if, indeed, Israel's ambassador was investing some efforts in this, well - that's sort of what ambassadors do (which is also covered in the article itself). What was that said about "selective paraphrasing"?

 

It would be helpful when criticizing my posts if you actually quoted my words, rather than paraphrasing them. I question why you don't simply click "Quote"..so easy, actually takes you less key strokes than writing @dexterm. But maybe you have a different obfuscatory agenda than simply addressing my post.

 

>>There can't be both negotiation and such legal proceedings at the same time. 
..why not?
Why should Israel be blanket absolved of war crimes just so that pretend negotiations (of 50 - 70 years procrastinatory duration now) should continue?

Edited November 22, 2017 by dexterm

[Thorgal]

Quote from OP :

'It was not immediately clear what effect the State Department's move might have on the Trump administration's efforts to revive peace talks between Israel and the Palestinians, which are led by Jared Kushner, the U.S. president's son-in-law and senior adviser.'

 

Would be politial suicide if Jared Kushner was a Muslim and closed the Likud office somewhere in the USA...

[dexterm]

Looks like the US is trying hard to disqualifying itself as an honest broker. The US routinely turns a blind eye to Israel's disregard for international law, puts no pressure on Israel to encourage direct negotiations, but is suddenly a stickler for its dusty rules when it comes to the Palestinians. 

 

"Instead of holding Israel liable for its persistent violations of international law and conventions, the U.S. administration and Congress are threatening to punish the Palestinian people because of statements made by President Mahmoud Abbas at the United Nations and other leaders pertaining to ICC accountability for Israel and for its war crimes in  Palestine. It is ironic that the U.S. is taking steps to punish the victim (the occupied) and not the perpetrator of the crime (the occupier). Conditioning the renewal of the waiver on the Palestinians’ sticking to ‘direct and meaningful negotiations with Israel’ is actually superfluous since negotiations are nonexistent, and the current U.S. administration has yet to present any kind of peace initiative."
http://mondoweiss.net/2017/11/administration-palestinians-
washington/

 

Trump has 90 days to renew the waiver. Perhaps his peace initiative will be on the table by then and this current threat will all be hot intimidatory air.

[Morch]

9 hours ago, dexterm said:

It would be helpful when criticizing my posts if you actually quoted my words, rather than paraphrasing them. I question why you don't simply click "Quote"..so easy, actually takes you less key strokes than writing @dexterm. But maybe you have a different obfuscatory agenda than simply addressing my post.

 

>>There can't be both negotiation and such legal proceedings at the same time. 
..why not?
Why should Israel be blanket absolved of war crimes just so that pretend negotiations (of 50 - 70 years procrastinatory duration now) should continue?

 

You spend a whole paragraph obfuscating and whine about "less key strokes". Just saying. Obviously much easier to go this way than to actually address things posted. There is no requirement nor obligation to fully quote all of your tiresome, repetitive tirades in order to address and debunk them.

 

As for your nonsense question, the easy answer would be that these are the terms. If the Palestinians do not wish to accept them, that's alright. Just that choosing this option comes with consequences. Another answer would be that if sides are to engage in negotiations, it would be more conductive to do so while refraining from further antagonizing each other.

 

That you make wholesale pronouncements doesn't actually make things real: Israel is not "absolved" of anything, and "war crimes" are not decided according to your views. As for "pretending", that would be, again, something injected by yourself, without necessarily being correct. But when it comes to "50-70 years procrastinatory duration" it's simply dishonesty on your part. Things haven't dragged out this long just on account of Israel - whether you care to admit it or not. And citing 70 years, rather than 50, is another telltale of your true, but often denied, view. Namely that Israel 's existence is illegitimate and unaccepted. With these kind of views, you have no business going on about negotiations, "pretend" or otherwise.

[dexterm]

14 minutes ago, Morch said:

 

You spend a whole paragraph obfuscating and whine about "less key strokes". Just saying. Obviously much easier to go this way than to actually address things posted. There is no requirement nor obligation to fully quote all of your tiresome, repetitive tirades in order to address and debunk them.

 

As for your nonsense question, the easy answer would be that these are the terms. If the Palestinians do not wish to accept them, that's alright. Just that choosing this option comes with consequences. Another answer would be that if sides are to engage in negotiations, it would be more conductive to do so while refraining from further antagonizing each other.

 

That you make wholesale pronouncements doesn't actually make things real: Israel is not "absolved" of anything, and "war crimes" are not decided according to your views. As for "pretending", that would be, again, something injected by yourself, without necessarily being correct. But when it comes to "50-70 years procrastinatory duration" it's simply dishonesty on your part. Things haven't dragged out this long just on account of Israel - whether you care to admit it or not. And citing 70 years, rather than 50, is another telltale of your true, but often denied, view. Namely that Israel 's existence is illegitimate and unaccepted. With these kind of views, you have no business going on about negotiations, "pretend" or otherwise.

I forgot how pedantic you are.

 

Sorry. It's 69 years not 70 years since the first UN resolution that Israel ignored in 1948. But no penalties from US for that or any of the other international law Israel scoffs at.

 

The Resolution 194 defined principles for reaching a final settlement and returning Palestine refugees to their homes. It resolved that “refugees wishing to return to their homes and live at peace with their neighbours should be permitted to do so at the earliest practicable date, and that compensation should be paid for the property of those choosing not to return and for loss of or damage to property which, under principles of international law or equity, should be made good by the Governments or authorities responsible.” (Article 11)

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Nations_General_Assembly_Resolution_194

Edited November 23, 2017 by dexterm

[Morch]

6 minutes ago, dexterm said:

I forgot how pedantic you are.

 

Sorry. It's 69 years not 70 years since the first UN resolution that Israel ignored in 1948. But no penalties from US for that or any of the other international law Israel scoffs at.

 

The Resolution 194 defined principles for reaching a final settlement and returning Palestine refugees to their homes. It resolved that “refugees wishing to return to their homes and live at peace with their neighbours should be permitted to do so at the earliest practicable date, and that compensation should be paid for the property of those choosing not to return and for loss of or damage to property which, under principles of international law or equity, should be made good by the Governments or authorities responsible.” (Article 11)

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Nations_General_Assembly_Resolution_194

 

And you talk about obfuscations....

 

Your citing of the the 70 years time frame, and coupling it with "occupation" is yet another indication for your true views - that Israel's existence to be illegitimate and unacceptable. As for citing UN resolutions, seems that you pick and choose as fits - the same UN voted favorably with regard to Israel's creation. Officially (at least) the Palestinian position is not as extreme as yours. Your views are anathema to negotiation or compromise.

[dexterm]

29 minutes ago, Morch said:

 

And you talk about obfuscations....

 

Your citing of the the 70 years time frame, and coupling it with "occupation" is yet another indication for your true views - that Israel's existence to be illegitimate and unacceptable. As for citing UN resolutions, seems that you pick and choose as fits - the same UN voted favorably with regard to Israel's creation. Officially (at least) the Palestinian position is not as extreme as yours. Your views are anathema to negotiation or compromise.

I regard all land and homes of Palestinians whom Israel ethnically cleansed in 1947 and 1967, as illegally occupied land. The PLO is willing to compromise by agreeing to peace on the 67 borders. Israel gets to keep the land it stole in 1947.

 

And for their generosity in compromise the PLO office is now threatened with closure because of a statute passed by US lawmakers heavily influence by the Israeli lobby which could be easily abolished or waivered, while Israel steals more land and builds more illegal settlements with impunity. The US and EU have done nothing to halt this apart from 69 years of words. In frustration the PLO decided to take the matter to an independent tribunal.

 

My "true views" (you imply they are some sort of secret) have been public knowledge on this forum for 4 years. The racist supremacist ideology of Zionism that is the basis of modern Israel is illegitimate and unacceptable. I want all the peoples in Palestine: Jews Muslims Christians and atheists to live together in a secular democracy, just like most of the members on this forum probably do. No apologies for that. Do you want my true views any more overt than that?

Edited November 23, 2017 by dexterm

[Morch]

 

@dexterm

 

The combo of hateful and nonsense views which comprise your "position" is indeed well known, and was addressed on many a topic. Same goes for the repetitive one-sided misrepresentations engaged in.

 

Spin it however you like, it all comes back to the same thing - you are set against Israel's existence, and you are perfectly willing to ignore anything which reflects negatively on the Palestinian side.

 

The views you spew go well beyond even the official positions of the Palestinians themselves (that is, the PA version). Your ongoing inflammatory style has nothing to do with a desire for peaceful resolution, compromise or even negotiation. It is about revenge, turning back time, and "winning". Nothing more.

 

The standing multiculturalism "vision" rubbish is just that. There is nothing in your posts which suggests either a clue as to how this could be achieved or how it is even realizable given the context of the ME. Nothing whatsoever.