What's new

Indonesia Leaders : We Stand With The People of Palestine

You are supporting a genocide right now? no other way anyone can defend massacre of innocent civilians.

Secondly i didn't answer you question because i am waiting for your answer since last 3 days....what is your religion? are you ashamed of your religion?


Illegal Settlement Growth, Widespread Hopelessness among Youth Eroding Middle East Peace Prospects, Under-Secretary-General Tells Security Council


UN resolution 446

The Security Council,

Having heard
the statement of the Permanent Representative of Jordan and other statements made before the Council,

Stressing the urgent need to achieve a comprehensive, just and lasting peace in the Middle East,

Affirming once more that the Fourth Geneva Convention relative to the Protection of Civilian Persons in Time of War of 12 August 1949 1/ is applicable to the Arab territories occupied by Israel since 1967, including Jerusalem,

1. Determines that the policy and practices of Israel in establishing settlements in the Palestinian and other Arab territories occupied since 1967 have no legal validity and constitute a serious obstruction to achieving a comprehensive, just and lasting peace in the Middle East;

2. Strongly deplores the failure of Israel to abide by Security Council resolutions 237 (1967) of 14 June 1967, 252 (1968) of 21 May 1968 and 298 (1971) of 25 September 1971 and the consensus statement by the President of the Security Council on 11 November 1976 2/ and General Assembly resolutions 2253 (ES-V) and 2254 (ES-V) of 4 and 14 July 1967, 32/5 of 28 October 1977 and 33/113 of 18 December 1978;

3. Calls once more upon Israel, as the occupying Power, to abide scrupulously by the 1949 Fourth Geneva Convention, to rescind its previous measures and to desist from taking any action which would result in changing the legal status and geographical nature and materially affecting the demographic composition of the Arab territories occupied since 1967, including Jerusalem, and, in particular, not to transfer parts of its own civilian population into the occupied Arab territories;

4. Establishes a Commission consisting of three members of the Security Council, to be appointed by the President of the Council after consultations with the members of the Council, to examine the situation relating to settlements in the Arab territories occupied since 1967, including Jerusalem;

5. Requests the Commission to submit its report to the Security Council by 1 July 1979;

6. Requests the Secretary-General to provide the Commission with the necessary facilities to enable it to carry out its mission.

7. Decides to keep the situation in the occupied territories under constant and close scrutiny and to reconvene in July 1979 to review the situation in the light of the findings of the Commission.


Adopted at the 2134th meeting by 12 votes to none, with 3 abstentions (Norway, United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, United States of America).


__________________________
1/ United Nations, Treaty Series, vol. 75, p. 287.
2/ Official Records of the Security Council, Thirty-first Year, 1969th meeting.





Resolution 452 (1979)
of 20 July 1979

The Security Council,

Taking note
of the report and recommendations of the Security Council Commission established under resolution 446 (1979) to examine the situation relating to settlements in the Arab territories occupied since 1967, including Jerusalem, contained in document S/13450,

Strongly deploring the lack of co-operation of Israel with the Commission,

Considering that the policy of Israel in establishing settlements in the occupied Arab territories has no legal validity and constitutes a violation of the Fourth Geneva Convention relative to the Protection of Civilian Persons in Time of War of 12 August 1949,

Deeply concerned by the practices of the Israeli authorities in implementing that settlements policy in the occupied Arab territories, including Jerusalem, and its consequences for the local Arab and Palestinian population,

Emphasizing the need for confronting the issue of the existing settlements and the need to consider measures to safeguard the impartial protection of property seized,

Bearing in mind the specific status of Jerusalem, and reconfirming pertinent Security Council resolutions concerning Jerusalem and in particular the need to protect and preserve the unique spiritual and religious dimension of the Holy Places in that city,

Drawing attention to the grave consequences which the settlements policy is bound to have on any attempt to reach a peaceful solution in the Middle East,

1. Commends the work done by the Commission in preparing the report on the establishment of Israeli settlements in the Arab territories occupied since 1967, including Jerusalem;

2. Accepts the recommendations contained in the above-mentioned report of the Commission;

3. Calls upon the Government and people of Israel to cease, on an urgent basis, the establishment, construction and planning of settlements in the Arab territories occupied since 1967, including Jerusalem;

4. Requests the Commission, in view of the magnitude of the problem of settlements, to keep under close survey the implementation of the present resolution and to report back to the Security Council before 1 November 1979.


Adopted at the 2159th meeting by 14 votes to none, with 1 abstention (United States of America).



Resolution 465 (1980)
Adopted by the Security Council at its 2203rd meeting
on 1 March 1980

The Security Council,

Taking note
of the reports of the Commission of the Security Council established under resolution 446 (1979) to examine the situation relating to settlements in the Arab territories occupied since 1967, including Jerusalem, contained in documents S/13450 and Corr. 1 and S/13679,

Taking note also of letters from the Permanent Representative of Jordan (S/13801) and the Permanent Representative of Morocco, Chairman of the Islamic Group (S/13802),

Strongly deploring the refusal by Israel to co-operate with the Commission and regretting its formal rejection of resolutions 446 (1979) and 452 (1979),

Affirming once more that the Fourth Geneva Convention relative to the Protection of Civilian Persons in Time of War of 12 August 1949 is applicable to the Arab territories occupied by Israel since 1967, including Jerusalem,

Deploring the decision of the Government of Israel to officially support Israeli settlement in the Palestinian and other Arab territories occupied since 1967,

Deeply concerned over the practices of the Israeli authorities in implementing that settlement policy in the occupied Arab territories, including Jerusalem, and its consequences for the local Arab and Palestinian population,

Taking into account the need to consider measures for the impartial protection of private and public land and property, and water resources,

Bearing in mind the specific status of Jerusalem and, in particular, the need for protection and preservation of the unique spiritual and religious dimension of the Holy Places in the city,

Drawing attention to the grave consequences which the settlement policy is bound to have on any attempt to reach a comprehensive, just and lasting peace in the Middle East,

Recalling pertinent Security Council resolutions, specifically resolutions 237 (1967) of 14 June 1967, 252 (1968) of 21 May 1968, 267 (1969) of 3 July 1969, 271 (1969) of 15 September 1969 and 298 (1971) of 25 September 1971, as well as the consensus statement made by the President of the Security Council on 11 November 1976,

Having invited Mr. Fahd Qawasmeh, Mayor of Al-Khalil (Hebron), in the occupied territory, to supply it with information pursuant to rule 39 of the provisional rules of procedure,

1. Commends the work done by the Commission in preparing the report contained in document S/13679;

2. Accepts the conclusions and recommendations contained in the above-mentioned report of the Commission;

3. Calls upon all parties, particularly the Government of Israel, to co-operate with the Commission;

4. Strongly deplores the decision of Israel to prohibit the free travel of Mayor Fahd Qawasmeh in order to appear before the Security Council, and requests Israel to permit his free travel to the United Nations headquarters for that purpose;


5. Determines that all measures taken by Israel to change the physical character, demographic composition, institutional structure or status of the Palestinian and other Arab territories occupied since 1967, including Jerusalem, or any part thereof, have no legal validity and that Israel's policy and practices of settling parts of its population and new immigrants in those territories constitute a flagrant violation of the Fourth Geneva Convention relative to the Protection of Civilian Persons in Time of War and also constitute a serious obstruction to achieving a comprehensive, just and lasting peace in the Middle East;

6. Strongly deplores the continuation and persistence of Israel in pursuing those policies and practices and calls upon the Government and people of Israel to rescind those measures, to dismantle the existing settlements and in particular to cease, on an urgent basis, the establishment, construction and planning of settlements in the Arab territories occupied since 1967, including Jerusalem;

7. Calls upon all States not to provide Israel with any assistance to be used specifically in connexion with settlements in the occupied territories;

8. Requests the Commission to continue to examine the situation relating to settlements in the Arab territories occupied since 1967, including Jerusalem, to investigate the reported serious depletion of natural resources, particularly the water resources, with a view to ensuring the protection of those important natural resources of the territories under occupation, and to keep under close scrutiny the implementation of the present resolution;

9. Requests the Commission to report to the Security Council before 1 September 1980, and decides to convene at the earliest possible date thereafter in order to consider the report and the full implementation of the present resolution.




Resolution 471 (1980)
of 5 June 1980

The Security Council,

Recalling once again
the Geneva Convention relative to the Protection of Civilian Persons in Time of War, of 12 August 1949, and in particular article 27, which reads,
  • "Protected persons are entitled, in all circumstances, to respect for their persons... They shall at all times be humanely treated, and shall be protected especially against all acts of violence or threats thereof ... ",
Reaffirming the applicability of the Geneva Convention relative to the Protection of Civilian Persons in Time of War to the Arab territories occupied by Israel since 1967, including Jerusalem,

Recalling also its resolutions 468 (1980) and 469 (1980),

Reaffirming its resolution 465 (1980), by which the Security Council determined "that all measures taken by Israel to change the physical character, demographic composition, institutional structure or status of the Palestinian and other Arab territories occupied since 1967, including Jerusalem, or any part thereof have no legal validity and that Israel's policy and practices of settling parts of its population and new immigrants in those territories constitute a flagrant violation of the Geneva Convention relative to the Protection of Civilian Persons in Time of War and also constitute a serious obstruction to achieving a comprehensive, just and lasting peace in the Middle East" and strongly deplored the "continuation and persistence of Israel in pursuing those policies and practices",

Shocked by the assassination attempts against the Mayors of Nablus, Ramallah and Al Bireh,

Deeply concerned that the Jewish settlers in the occupied Arab territories are allowed to carry arms, thus enabling them to perpetrate crimes against the civilian Arab population,

1. Condemns the assassination attempts against the Mayors of Nablus, Ramallah and Al Bireh and calls for the immediate apprehension and prosecution of the perpetrators of these crimes;

2. Expresses deep concern that Israel, as the occupying Power, has failed to provide adequate protection to the civilian population in the occupied territories in conformity with the provisions of the Geneva Convention relative to the Protection of Civilian Persons in Time of War;

3. Calls upon the Government of Israel to provide the victims with adequate compensation for the damages suffered as a result of these crimes;

4. Calls again upon the government of Israel to respect and to comply with the provisions of the Geneva Convention relative to the Protection of Civilian Persons in Time of War, as well as with the relevant resolutions of the Security Council;

5. Calls once again upon all States not to provide Israel with any assistance to be used specifically in connexion with settlements in the occupied territories;

6. Reaffirms the overriding necessity to end the prolonged occupation of Arab territories occupied by Israel since 1967, including Jerusalem;

7. Requests the Secretary-General to report on the implementation of the present resolution.
Adopted at the 2226th meeting
by 14 votes to none,
with 1 abstention (United States of America)



Resolution 476 (1980)

Adopted by the Security Council at its 2242nd meeting
on 30 June 1980

The Security Council,

Having considered
the letter of 28 May 1980 from the representative of Pakistan, the current Chairman of the Organization of the Islamic Conference, as contained in document S/13966 of 28 May 1980,

Reaffirming that acquisition of territory by force is inadmissible,

Bearing in mind the specific status of Jerusalem and, in particular, the need for protection and preservation of the unique spiritual and religious dimension of the Holy Places in the city,

Reaffirming its resolutions relevant to the character and status of the Holy City of Jerusalem, in particular resolutions 252 (1968) of 21 May 1968, 267 (1969) of 3 July 1969, 271 (1969) of 15 September 1969, 298 (1971) of 25 September 1971 and 465 (1980) of 1 March 1980,

Recalling the Fourth Geneva Convention of 12 August 1949 relative to the Protection of Civilian Persons in Time of War,

Deploring the persistence of Israel, in changing the physical character, demographic composition, institutional structure and the status of the Holy City of Jerusalem,

Gravely concerned over the legislative steps initiated in the Israeli Knesset with the aim of changing the character and status of the Holy City of Jerusalem,

1. Reaffirms the overriding necessity to end the prolonged occupation of Arab territories occupied by Israel since 1967, including Jerusalem;

2. Strongly deplores the continued refusal of Israel, the occupying Power, to comply with the relevant resolutions of the Security Council and the General Assembly;

3. Reconfirms that all legislative and administrative measures and actions taken by Israel, the occupying Power, which purport to alter the character and status of the Holy City of Jerusalem have no legal validity and constitute a flagrant violation of the Fourth Geneva Convention relative to the Protection of Civilian Persons in Time of War and also constitute a serious obstruction to achieving a comprehensive, just and lasting peace in the Middle East;

4. Reiterates that all such measures which have altered the geographic, demographic and historical character and status of the Holy City of Jerusalem are null and void and must be rescinded in compliance with the relevant resolutions of the Security Council;

5. Urgently calls on Israel, the occupying Power, to abide by this and previous Security Council resolutions and to desist forthwith from persisting in the policy and measures affecting the character and status of the Holy city of Jerusalem;

6. Reaffirms its determination in the event of non-compliance by Israel with this resolution, to examine practical ways and means in accordance with relevant provisions of the Charter of the United Nations to secure the full implementation of this resolution.




Resolution

The full text of resolution 2334 (2016) reads as follows:


The Security Council,

Reaffirming its relevant resolutions, including resolutions 242 (1967), 338 (1973), 446 (1979), 452 (1979), 465 (1980), 476 (1980), 478 (1980), 1397 (2002), 1515 (2003), and 1850 (2008),

Guided by the purposes and principles of the Charter of the United Nations, and reaffirming, inter alia, the inadmissibility of the acquisition of territory by force,

Reaffirming the obligation of Israel, the occupying Power, to abide scrupulously by its legal obligations and responsibilities under the Fourth Geneva Convention relative to the Protection of Civilian Persons in Time of War, of 12 August 1949, and recalling the advisory opinion rendered on 9 July 2004 by the International Court of Justice,

Condemning all measures aimed at altering the demographic composition, character and status of the Palestinian Territory occupied since 1967, including East Jerusalem, including, inter alia, the construction and expansion of settlements, transfer of Israeli settlers, confiscation of land, demolition of homes and displacement of Palestinian civilians, in violation of international humanitarian law and relevant resolutions,

Expressing grave concern that continuing Israeli settlement activities are dangerously imperilling the viability of the two-State solution based on the 1967 lines,

Recalling the obligation under the Quartet Roadmap, endorsed by its resolution 1515 (2003), for a freeze by Israel of all settlement activity, including “natural growth”, and the dismantlement of all settlement outposts erected since March 2001,

Recalling also the obligation under the Quartet roadmap for the Palestinian Authority Security Forces to maintain effective operations aimed at confronting all those engaged in terror and dismantling terrorist capabilities, including the confiscation of illegal weapons,

Condemning all acts of violence against civilians, including acts of terror, as well as all acts of provocation, incitement and destruction,

Reiterating its vision of a region where two democratic States, Israel and Palestine, live side by side in peace within secure and recognized borders,

Stressing that the status quo is not sustainable and that significant steps, consistent with the transition contemplated by prior agreements, are urgently needed in order to (i) stabilize the situation and to reverse negative trends on the ground, which are steadily eroding the two-State solution and entrenching a one-State reality, and (ii) to create the conditions for successful final status negotiations and for advancing the two-State solution through those negotiations and on the ground,

“1. Reaffirms that the establishment by Israel of settlements in the Palestinian territory occupied since 1967, including East Jerusalem, has no legal validity and constitutes a flagrant violation under international law and a major obstacle to the achievement of the two-State solution and a just, lasting and comprehensive peace;

“2. Reiterates its demand that Israel immediately and completely cease all settlement activities in the occupied Palestinian territory, including East Jerusalem, and that it fully respect all of its legal obligations in this regard;

“3. Underlines that it will not recognize any changes to the 4 June 1967 lines, including with regard to Jerusalem, other than those agreed by the parties through negotiations;

“4. Stresses that the cessation of all Israeli settlement activities is essential for salvaging the two-State solution, and calls for affirmative steps to be taken immediately to reverse the negative trends on the ground that are imperilling the two-State solution;

“5. Calls upon all States, bearing in mind paragraph 1 of this resolution, to distinguish, in their relevant dealings, between the territory of the State of Israel and the territories occupied since 1967;

“6. Calls for immediate steps to prevent all acts of violence against civilians, including acts of terror, as well as all acts of provocation and destruction, calls for accountability in this regard, and calls for compliance with obligations under international law for the strengthening of ongoing efforts to combat terrorism, including through existing security coordination, and to clearly condemn all acts of terrorism;

“7. Calls upon both parties to act on the basis of international law, including international humanitarian law, and their previous agreements and obligations, to observe calm and restraint, and to refrain from provocative actions, incitement and inflammatory rhetoric, with the aim, inter alia, of de-escalating the situation on the ground, rebuilding trust and confidence, demonstrating through policies and actions a genuine commitment to the two-State solution, and creating the conditions necessary for promoting peace;

“8. Calls upon all parties to continue, in the interest of the promotion of peace and security, to exert collective efforts to launch credible negotiations on all final status issues in the Middle East peace process and within the time frame specified by the Quartet in its statement of 21 September 2010;

“9. Urges in this regard the intensification and acceleration of international and regional diplomatic efforts and support aimed at achieving, without delay a comprehensive, just and lasting peace in the Middle East on the basis of the relevant United Nations resolutions, the Madrid terms of reference, including the principle of land for peace, the Arab Peace Initiative and the Quartet Roadmap and an end to the Israeli occupation that began in 1967; and underscores in this regard the importance of the ongoing efforts to advance the Arab Peace Initiative, the initiative of France for the convening of an international peace conference, the recent efforts of the Quartet, as well as the efforts of Egypt and the Russian Federation;

“10. Confirms its determination to support the parties throughout the negotiations and in the implementation of an agreement;

“11. Reaffirms its determination to examine practical ways and means to secure the full implementation of its relevant resolutions;

“12. Requests the Secretary-General to report to the Council every three months on the implementation of the provisions of the present resolution;

“13. Decides to remain seized of the matter.”



there are many more resulotion from UN, european union, Internatinal criminal court but that would make this post extremely long...so i posted some of them.



Leave everything aside, my only question to you is what is your religion?


I've told you many times .... there is no relevance between your answer for "genocide" and "my religion", except you want to discuss it from the religion point of view, do you? but you said you discuss it from humanity point of view ... so why inconsistent and ignorant? :rofl:

Now back to the topic of genocide;

First, illegal settlement although it is "illegal" it is not the same as genocide. Israel is viewed illegal by world by transferring her own population into another area; transferring people is not allowed under Fourth Geneva Convention.

Second, United Nations resolutions are formal expressions of the opinion or will of United Nations organs, not a legal binding law nor ICC verdict. citation: https://www.un.org/securitycouncil/content/resolutions-0
Against this resolution, Israel has proposed her own argumentation that they were not violating Fourth Geneva Convention, as following:

Israel argues that it is not in violation of it. Firstly, Israel argues that the article was created in the context of World War II only.​
Secondly, it is only intended to cover forcible transfers and to protect the local population from displacement. Article 49(1)of the Convention specifically covers "individual or mass forcible transfers" whereas the Israelis who live in the settlements have moved there voluntarily, and argue that settlements are not intended to, nor have ever resulted in, the displacement of Palestinians from the area. However, Article 49(6) also prohibits Israel to 'transfer parts of its own civilian population into the territory it occupies', which would cover the Israeli settlements.[15][16][17]

Thirdly, Israel claims that some of the settlers have returned to areas where Jewish settlements existed before 1948 (such as Gush Etzion) and therefore it is an entirely different issue.
Fourthly, Israel claims that the Geneva Convention only applies in the absence of an operative peace agreement and between two powers accepting the convention. Since the Oslo Accords leave the issue of settlements to be negotiated later, proponents of this view argue that the Palestinians accepted the temporary presence of Israeli settlements pending further negotiation, and that there is no basis for declaring them illegal.[16][18]
Next time, if your article is too long please put it into spoiler.
 
Last edited:
The outsiders have to leave this Issue, seriously saying.
What does a Vietnamese subservient know of Quds and Islamic reputation? Better to keep silent and not play the Smart a** game with us. Israelis will pay the price, Hamas defending Quds has nothing to do with being puppet to Iran or any other country. The goodness of our relations with our allies is that there is no Boss among us but only the one who guides us to where he wants.
Also, the Vietnamese better to Stick to their old role, lick American boots while knowing the fact that Americans had dishonored your women and killed your warriors poisoned them with Agent Orange which is still taking lives of Vietnamese new born kids. Such a shame to see low lives defending an international criminals and Mass murderers of USA.
 
I've told you many times .... there is no relevance between your answer for "genocide" and "my religion", except you want to discuss it from the religion point of view, do you? but you said you discuss it from humanity point of view ... so why inconsistent and ignorant? :rofl:

Now back to the topic of genocide;

First, illegal settlement although it is "illegal" it is not the same as genocide. Israel is viewed illegal by world by transferring her own population into another area; transferring people is not allowed under Fourth Geneva Convention.

Second, United Nations resolutions are formal expressions of the opinion or will of United Nations organs, not a legal binding law nor ICC verdict. citation: https://www.un.org/securitycouncil/content/resolutions-0
Against this resolution, Israel has proposed her own argumentation that they were not violating Fourth Geneva Convention, as following:

Israel argues that it is not in violation of it. Firstly, Israel argues that the article was created in the context of World War II only.​
Secondly, it is only intended to cover forcible transfers and to protect the local population from displacement. Article 49(1)of the Convention specifically covers "ndividual or mass forcible transfers" whereas the Israelis who live in the settlements have moved there voluntarily, and argue that settlements are not intended to, nor have ever resulted in, the displacement of Palestinians from the area. However, Article 49(6) also prohibits Israel to 'transfer parts of its own civilian population into the territory it occupies', which would cover the Israeli settlements.[15][16][17]

Thirdly, Israel claims that some of the settlers have returned to areas where Jewish settlements existed before 1948 (such as Gush Etzion) and therefore it is an entirely different issue.
Fourthly, Israel claims that the Geneva Convention only applies in the absence of an operative peace agreement and between two powers accepting the convention. Since the Oslo Accords leave the issue of settlements to be negotiated later, proponents of this view argue that the Palestinians accepted the temporary presence of Israeli settlements pending further negotiation, and that there is no basis for declaring them illegal.[16][18]
Next time, if your article is too long please put it into spoiler.
Why didn't they build Israel somewhere in Germany where Jews were burnt alive?
 
Why didn't they build Israel somewhere in Germany where Jews were burnt alive?


Germany region already belong to Germany state.
Except there were quite many Jews community concentrated in certain area and wanted to make referendum to seperate from Germany state to be independent Jewish state, but the situation was not like that.
 
Last edited:
Israel is illegal by any international standard. The Issue hasn't been the Jewish right to live in Palestine but only existence of Israel. As already mentioned by Muslim leaders, Israel is a cancerous tumor and requires operation.
Hamas being able to withstand the Israeli attacks was the first step to Israeli demise.
Israel was able to stay alive through terrorism and show of force to poorly armed Palestinians the true inhabitants of Palestine. Its not so anymore, today, Hamas not only defends Gaza but also takes the responsibility of west bank. Israel with all those shiny weapons, land force, airforce, navy had to propose peace agreement to Hamas leaders. Hamas is now fighting face to face with savages armed to the teeth. That's called bravery which will end Israel even with simple rockets.
 
Israel is illegal by any international standard. The Issue hasn't been the Jewish right to live in Palestine but only existence of Israel. As already mentioned by Muslim leaders, Israel is a cancerous tumor and requires operation.
Hamas being able to withstand the Israeli attacks was the first step to Israeli demise.
Israel was able to stay alive through terrorism and show of force to poorly armed Palestinians the true inhabitants of Palestine. Its not so anymore, today, Hamas not only defends Gaza but also takes the responsibility of west bank. Israel with all those shiny weapons, land force, airforce, navy had to propose peace agreement to Hamas leaders. Hamas is now fighting face to face with savages armed to the teeth. That's called bravery which will end Israel even with simple rockets.


We have been discussing it high and low through pages, there is no international legal/law/standard that is against Israel state existence; if there is please show. Israel existence is only against Arab nations will.

Their existence is recognized by UN, and their territory is legal under the UN Recognition 1948, UN Partition Plan 1947, and Oslo Accord 1993.
 
We have been discussing it high and low through pages, there is no international legal/law/standard that is against Israel state existence; if there is please show. Israel existence is only against Arab nations will.

Their existence is recognized by UN, and their territory is legal under the UN Recognition 1948, UN Partition Plan 1947, and Oslo Accord 1993.
Palestine is an Issue of Islam and humanity.

Your ideas? Put in my 2 penny worth. We will continue to fight and you can keep on ranting. No one gives a free rein to it.
 
Palestine is an Issue of Islam and humanity.

Your ideas? Put in my 2 penny worth. We will continue to fight and you can keep on ranting. No one gives a free rein to it.

Right.
But Islam perspective and humanity perspective may not be the same. From humanity perspective, existence of Israel state is alligned with humanity while expectation of Arab nations to eliminate Israel from middle east is against humanity.
 
Last edited:
I've told you many times .... there is no relevance between your answer for "genocide" and "my religion", except you want to discuss it from the religion point of view, do you? but you said you discuss it from humanity point of view ... so why inconsistent and ignorant? :rofl:

Now back to the topic of genocide;

First, illegal settlement although it is "illegal" it is not the same as genocide. Israel is viewed illegal by world by transferring her own population into another area; transferring people is not allowed under Fourth Geneva Convention.

Second, United Nations resolutions are formal expressions of the opinion or will of United Nations organs, not a legal binding law nor ICC verdict. citation: https://www.un.org/securitycouncil/content/resolutions-0
Against this resolution, Israel has proposed her own argumentation that they were not violating Fourth Geneva Convention, as following:

Israel argues that it is not in violation of it. Firstly, Israel argues that the article was created in the context of World War II only.​
Secondly, it is only intended to cover forcible transfers and to protect the local population from displacement. Article 49(1)of the Convention specifically covers "individual or mass forcible transfers" whereas the Israelis who live in the settlements have moved there voluntarily, and argue that settlements are not intended to, nor have ever resulted in, the displacement of Palestinians from the area. However, Article 49(6) also prohibits Israel to 'transfer parts of its own civilian population into the territory it occupies', which would cover the Israeli settlements.[15][16][17]

Thirdly, Israel claims that some of the settlers have returned to areas where Jewish settlements existed before 1948 (such as Gush Etzion) and therefore it is an entirely different issue.
Fourthly, Israel claims that the Geneva Convention only applies in the absence of an operative peace agreement and between two powers accepting the convention. Since the Oslo Accords leave the issue of settlements to be negotiated later, proponents of this view argue that the Palestinians accepted the temporary presence of Israeli settlements pending further negotiation, and that there is no basis for declaring them illegal.[16][18]
Next time, if your article is too long please put it into spoiler.
you are still avoiding my question, this is 7th time i am asking you,,,are you ashamed of your religion?
 
Then why dont you answer my question? If you have logical reason then I will answer my religion.
what was your question? i don't deflect like you do, i am asking you a simple question since last week and you don't have the courage to answer it...what is your religion? are you ashamed to about it?
 
what was your question? i don't deflect like you do, i am asking you a simple question since last week and you don't have the courage to answer it...what is your religion? are you ashamed to about it?

You are deflecting discussion with religion and other irrelevant things.

My question.

1. You said: you want to discuss it from humanity point of view not from religion, but you are asking my religion. Do you want to change the discussion into religion point of view now?

2. Otherwise, what is your point asking my religion to do with discussion. Give me logical answer

3. Which part of land that Israel sit illegally? evidence?

4. What kind of genocide did Israel do? evidence?
 
You are deflecting discussion with religion and other irrelevant things.

My question.

1. You said: you want to discuss it from humanity point of view not from religion, but you are asking my religion. Do you want to change the discussion into religion point of view now?

2. Otherwise, what is your point asking my religion to do with discussion. Give me logical answer

3. Which part of land that Israel sit illegally? evidence?

4. What kind of genocide did Israel do? evidence?

Don't just make absurd claims, i never said i was discussing this from a religious or humanitarian point of view. My question question is a very simple one, it shouldn't effect your claims if you are so righteous.

I posted freakin 5 resolutions from UN, did you not read them? they all talk about occupied land, in my personal opinion two state solution is also unfair to Palestinians because it was their land and Zionists took it over by force and the help of brits.

Army killing civilians is a genocide.

Now i answered your questions, tell me your religion or you are a courage-less person who only runs his mouth.
 
Don't just make absurd claims, i never said i was discussing this from a religious or humanitarian point of view. My question question is a very simple one, it shouldn't effect your claims if you are so righteous.

You havent answer my question at all.
What is your point asking my religion to do with discussion. Give me logical answer


I posted freakin 5 resolutions from UN, did you not read them? they all talk about occupied land, in my personal opinion two state solution is also unfair to Palestinians because it was their land and Zionists took it over by force and the help of brits.

Army killing civilians is a genocide.

Now i answered your questions, tell me your religion or you are a courage-less person who only runs his mouth.


LOL. There is none UN resolution that you post saying Israel did genocide, it is your own delusion.

Genocide definition is not as simple as army killing civilians; you are twisting the definition of genocide.
 
You havent answer my question at all.
What is your point asking my religion to do with discussion. Give me logical answer
i am just asking you a simple question why are you salty about it? are you ashamed of your religion?
LOL. There is none UN resolution that you post saying Israel did genocide, it is your own delusion.

Genocide definition is not as simple as army killing civilians; you are twisting the definition of genocide.
All of those resolutions use the word "Occupation" and if you invade a country and kill their people that is called a genocide.
 
Back
Top Bottom