• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

The Creation of Israel Violated the Palestinian Right to Self-Determination

The Great Zaganza said:
Yes, every American does.

Give it tons of money weapons and fight all its fights for it.

US lives are being lost for Israel despite Israel not really doing anything for the US.

Except industrial and military espionage on Americans on American soil with complete immunity of course.

Israel is treated as something unique special for no good reason.
Click to expand...

Then maybe some Americans could chime in and explain "so why do we need to treat it as something special".
 
Steve said:
The Creation of the USA Violated the Indigenous peoples Right to Self-Determination

The Creation of Australia Violated the Aborigenes Right to Self-Determination

The Creation of New Zealand Violated the Maori Right to Self-Determination

The Creation of South Africa Violated the .....
...
Israel is not special in this regard.
Click to expand...

I'm glad the point has been conceded. Israel need not be unique, of course, for its actions to be considered transgressive. There is one major difference, however, with the list you cite: ongoing genocide. Of that list, the case of South Africa was eventually addressed, albeit haphazardly, but its contemporary nature brought about support for policies to redress the harm. Strange you left that out.

The next important observation is that much is made of the events of 1948 and onward as if there had been a major Jewish population in the region. True, by early mid-20th century, there was a majority in Jerusalem. The claims to early legitimacy, and "the right to defend" the actions taken to deprive Palestinians of all rights in 1948 and onward are on very shaky ground, particularly given the egregious nature of the mass migration forced upon a British-occupied territory, uniquely intense in a short period of time. I stand corrected: the case of Israel is, in that sense quite unique.

Because of the false start, the brutal apartheid since, and now genocide, the preponderance of evidence as to who is the originating and persistent aggressor in a conflict now lasting three quarters of a century, operating outside the law, indicates that the main aggressor is Israel.

So, please, yawn and kick back in the lawn chair. The fact of the matter is this: there are those who can water their gardens outside the gates of Auschwitz, and there are those who would go in, arrest the guards, and free the prisoners.

When the full evidence of Israel's policies and actions is laid bare, this thread shall become a graveyard for signaled virtues.
 
Last edited:
Steve said:
Evidence for the genocide you claim is noticeably lacking.
Click to expand...

That is a question of intellectual honesty at this stage in the game. Time not only will tell, it is already shouting. To each his own.

We are at the beginning of a long series of even greater conflicts based on food and water scarcity. The failure today to adhere to principle, breaking the last remaining shred of credibility left to international law in this hyper-belicose 21st century, will come to haunt in ways that would freeze one in place. The rule of law actually has pragmatic value, go figure.
 
Last edited:
Hlafordlaes said:
Time passes, the font et origo of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict remains fully identified in the OP, as well as completely uncontested. No arguments of substance brought, ugly ad-homs on the rise. I'm surprised you all don't know me by now, thinking such things dissuasive. Tut! Lynch mobs make me smile and roll up my sleeves.
Click to expand...

Prescient!
 
Steve said:
Evidence for the genocide you claim is noticeably lacking.



I have no doubt you think so.
Click to expand...

Attempted genocide, is still genocide. A failed genocide is still genocide.

Israel tried to starve to death 2.5 million Palestinians in order to get back 200 hostages. They failed miserably but they did try and their Minister of Finance openly supported it.
 
Steve said:
The Creation of the USA Violated the Indigenous peoples Right to Self-Determination

The Creation of Australia Violated the Aborigenes Right to Self-Determination

The Creation of New Zealand Violated the Maori Right to Self-Determination
The Creation of South Africa Violated the .....

Etc.

Etc.

Israel is not special in this regard.
Click to expand...
Yes, it is. Every case is special.

In New Zealand we have the Treaty of Waitangi
...was drafted with the intention of establishing a British Governor of New Zealand, recognising Māori ownership of their lands, forests and other possessions, and giving Māori the rights of British subjects. It was intended by the British Crown to ensure that when Lieutenant Governor Hobson subsequently made the declaration of British sovereignty over New Zealand in May 1840, the Māori people would not feel that their rights had been ignored...

Beginning in the 1950s, Māori increasingly sought to use the treaty as a platform for claiming additional rights to sovereignty and to reclaim lost land, and governments in the 1960s and 1970s responded to these arguments, giving the treaty an increasingly central role in the interpretation of land rights and relations between Māori people and the state.

In 1975 the New Zealand Parliament passed the Treaty of Waitangi Act, establishing the Waitangi Tribunal as a permanent commission of inquiry tasked with interpreting the treaty, investigating breaches of the Principles of the Treaty of Waitangi by the Crown or its agents, and suggesting means of redress. In most cases, recommendations of the tribunal are not binding on the Crown, but settlements with a total value of roughly $1 billion have been awarded to various Māori groups.
Click to expand...
Does Israel have something like that which gives Palestinians means of redress when their rights have been violated?

Your other examples are special in their own ways too. South Africa eliminated Apartheid in the 1990's. With proportional representation and whites making up just 7% of the population, the 'Right to Self-Determination' of native South Africans is ensured - a very different situation to Israel.

Unlike the other countries you mentioned, Israel has done practically nothing to redress past violations and improve relations with Palestinians - in fact they have mostly done the opposite. The result was inevitable. Now would be a good time to change that, but I doubt anything will change while Israel has the upper hand. In the 67 years of my life I have seen other countries make efforts to redress past violations, but not Israel. Israel is special. It's been a festering sore my entire life, with no indication that it will get better. And attitudes like yours are part of the reason.
 
Steve said:
Evidence for the genocide you claim is noticeably lacking.
Click to expand...
Is genocide taking place?
The CPPCG was adopted by the UN General Assembly on 9 December 1948 and came into effect on 12 January 1951 (Resolution 260 (III)). It contains an internationally recognized definition of genocide which has been incorporated into the national criminal legislation of many countries and was also adopted by the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court, which established the International Criminal Court (ICC). Article II of the Convention defines genocide as... any of the following acts committed with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial or religious group, as such:
(a) Killing members of the group;
(b) Causing serious bodily or mental harm to members of the group;
(c) Deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part;
(d) Imposing measures intended to prevent births within the group;
(e) Forcibly transferring children of the group to another group.
Click to expand...

First, we might defer to the bodies charged with defending it, such as the ICJ.
It recently ruled: The court voted 15-2 on the order that Israel must take all measures in its power to stop anything in relation to genocide in Gaza. By 16 votes to 1, the court voted that Israel needs to take all measures within its powers to prevent and punish those involved with inciting genocide against Palestinians in the Gaza Strip. Also by a 16-1 vote, the court said that Israel must take "immediate and effective" measures to ensure the provision of urgently needed humanitarian aid and basic services. The court also ordered Israel to take effective measures to prevent destruction and ensure preservation of any evidence related to the charge of genocide. The court gave Israel 30 days to report back on measures taken.
Click to expand...
We might also consider becoming ourselves observers to see if and in what manner genocide may be taking place. Relating to the cited law, we have
Genocidal acts like murder, forcible transfer of children and forced sterilization are crimes themselves. What makes those crimes genocide is that they are committed with what has been called the "special intent". The special intent, in the terminology of genocide, is similar to the common law concept of specific intent. Antonio Cassese described it as "an aggravated criminal intent that must exist in addition to the criminal intent accompanying the underlying offense". Article II of the CPPCG defines the purpose of committing the acts: "to destroy in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial or religious group, as such". The specific intent is a core factor distinguishing genocide from other international crimes, such as war crimes or crimes against humanity.
Click to expand...
I submit that the evidence for special intent extends from the PM and President of Israel, the Israeli cabinet, the IDF, and the vast majority of Israelis surveyed, illustrated most disturbingly by the recent riots protecting IDF butt rapists. (Yeah, the noble IDF are on record as buffuks [cheering crowd noises].) There is a preponderance of evidence for genocidal intent.

Once special intent is in play, we might then consider if Palestinians are a protected group ("They are Arabs!" being the motto of those who so deny.)
In such a situation where a definitive answer based on objective markers is not clear, courts have turned to the subjective standard that "if a victim was perceived by a perpetrator as belonging to a protected group, the victim could be considered by the Chamber as a member of the protected group". Stigmatization of the group by the perpetrators through legal measures, such as withholding citizenship, requiring the group to be identified, or isolating them from the whole could show that the perpetrators viewed the victims as a protected group.
Click to expand...
Yes, they are a protected group. Israel has made that clear.

Finally, is the situation an exceptional historical moment, an aberration, or part of a pattern? The OP establishes a guiding or driving philosophy originating the I-P conflict, Zionism, and cites the clear recognition by one of Israel's founders that Palestinian rights are to be denied. As cited in one of the topic threads, we have:
Geneva Convention Article 49 - Deportations, transfers, evacuations
...The Occupying Power shall not deport or transfer parts of its own civilian population into the territory it occupies.
Click to expand...
Gross violation of the Convention has been going on since 1967, and is taking place as we speak on a daily basis.

So, we have declared intent, both historical and contemporary, a consistent ideology arguing for Israeli exceptionalism and a track record of implementing that policy, the highest government officials repeatedly making dehumanizing comments, and clearly stated actions and policies in both Gaza and the West Bank that amount to a consistent and ongoing policy of intentional genocide.
 
Last edited:
psionl0 said:
Why a single state? Why not a federation? (Not that either remedy will be acceptable on either side).
Click to expand...

I think that a variety of arrangements could be considered once the dismantling of the apartheid state is agreed. I do not think a full two-state solution is a good idea, as I would prefer the same security forces to be in play, apart from moving away from ethnically-based politics, thus a single state. Exceptionally, those security forces might temporarily consist of a mix of other nationalities, and a special high-speed set of tribunals be set up to handle any and all civil disturbance and related cases quickly and openly. Its border force would be charged with ensuring no entry of or commerce in weapons.
 
Last edited:
Steve said:
Evidence for the genocide you claim is noticeably lacking.



I have no doubt you think so.
Click to expand...

Well the latest genocide is happening right before our eyes in Gaza and ever so slightly hidden in the West Bank. It is far from the first.

The first objective history of Israel will draw the parallells between what it is doing to Palestine and the holocaust.
 
Hercules56 said:
Let's be frank: if the USA and the rest of the international community did not stand in their way, Israel would have indeed committed true acts of genocide in Gaza.
Click to expand...

In other words, there is no genocide occurring in Gaza.
Israelis are quite glad that we're clearing up that nasty mess in Aisle 8.

As for the topic of this thread -- MEH.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom