• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Netanyahu Calls on Abbas to Start Direct Peace Talks

donsutherland1

DP Veteran
Joined
Oct 17, 2007
Messages
11,860
Reaction score
10,292
Location
New York
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Centrist
From Bloomberg.com:

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu called earlier today on Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas to immediately start direct peace talks.

Abbas rejected a call for talks without further peaceful moves from Israel, Jordan’s state news agency Petra said.

Netanyahu Calls on Abbas to Start Direct Peace Talks (Update3) - Bloomberg.com

As I have repeatedly noted in the past, Israel should refrain from granting the Palestinians unilateral concessions. Doing so only encourages Palestinian intransigence. Hence, it is not surprising that the Palestinians are seeking "payment" in order to enter direct talks. Despite frequent U.S. pressure to grant unilateral "good faith" concessions, such moves do not facilitate diplomacy. They create barriers. This new Palestinian demand for payment is just the latest example.
 

Degreez

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Jun 2, 2006
Messages
3,216
Reaction score
1,021
Location
Houston, TX
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Centrist
From Bloomberg.com:

Netanyahu Calls on Abbas to Start Direct Peace Talks (Update3) - Bloomberg.com

As I have repeatedly noted in the past, Israel should refrain from granting the Palestinians unilateral concessions. Doing so only encourages Palestinian intransigence. Hence, it is not surprising that the Palestinians are seeking "payment" in order to enter direct talks. Despite frequent U.S. pressure to grant unilateral "good faith" concessions, such moves do not facilitate diplomacy. They create barriers. This new Palestinian demand for payment is just the latest example.

In a speech today in Jerusalem, Netanyahu said Israel had taken measures to advance peace, such as removing roadblocks in the West Bank and imposing a freeze on building in Jewish settlements.

Weird. They don't seem to have a problem building in Arab neighborhoods in East Jerusalem:
Abbas, after talks with Jordanian King Abdullah in Amman, said Israel should lift the embargo on the Gaza Strip and criticized decisions to expel Palestinian legislators from Jerusalem and demolish 22 homes there, Petra said.

So basically this is what Netanyahu said:
"Let's talk about peace, but first I am going to demolish Palestinian homes in East Jerusalem so that direct talks can go underway." This is nothing but showboating while illegally annexing occupied territory.
 

ido_

DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 13, 2010
Messages
3,406
Reaction score
1,561
Location
Israel
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Liberal
Weird. They don't seem to have a problem building in Arab neighborhoods in East Jerusalem:


So basically this is what Netanyahu said:
"Let's talk about peace, but first I am going to demolish Palestinian homes in East Jerusalem so that direct talks can go underway." This is nothing but showboating while illegally annexing occupied territory.

Do your homework, the decision of the demolishion was taken in the municipality of Jerusalem and pushed by the mayor of Jerusalem not by the PM. Netanyahu already interfered and postponed this demolishion once and Barak said yesterday that it will be postponed again "if needed".
 

Apocalypse

DEATH TO ANTARCTICA!!!
DP Veteran
Joined
May 14, 2009
Messages
20,135
Reaction score
6,384
Location
Israel
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Centrist
Weird. They don't seem to have a problem building in Arab neighborhoods in East Jerusalem:


So basically this is what Netanyahu said:
"Let's talk about peace, but first I am going to demolish Palestinian homes in East Jerusalem so that direct talks can go underway." This is nothing but showboating while illegally annexing occupied territory.

What does this have to do with the government genius?
The decision to destroy 22 illegal houses in East Jerusalem was the decision of the Jerusalem municipality, and in that move the municipality is also intending on legalizing 66 other illegal houses.
 

Degreez

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Jun 2, 2006
Messages
3,216
Reaction score
1,021
Location
Houston, TX
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Centrist
Do your homework, the decision of the demolishion was taken in the municipality of Jerusalem and pushed by the mayor of Jerusalem not by the PM. Netanyahu already interfered and postponed this demolishion once and Barak said yesterday that it will be postponed again "if needed".

And the decision to expel Palestinian legislators from occupied East Jerusalem was left with who? When tensions are high and ties are strained, it is (in Ehud Barak's words) "poor common sense" to pull such a provocative move like the demolitions.`
 

Degreez

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Jun 2, 2006
Messages
3,216
Reaction score
1,021
Location
Houston, TX
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Centrist
What does this have to do with the government genius?
The decision to destroy 22 illegal houses in East Jerusalem was the decision of the Jerusalem municipality, and in that move the municipality is also intending on legalizing 66 other illegal houses.

Wait, earlier you were saying Jerusalem is Israel's capital and that this was recognized "by the world". Am I to understand that the Israeli government has no hand in the affairs of 'its capital city'?

And even then, the decision is a violation of international law:

International Humanitarian Law - Fourth 1949 Geneva Convention
Art. 53. Any destruction by the Occupying Power of real or personal property belonging individually or collectively to private persons, or to the State, or to other public authorities, or to social or cooperative organizations, is prohibited, except where such destruction is rendered absolutely necessary by military operations.

So yes, this very much has to do with the Israeli government young one. And it's funny that you call them "illegal houses". Israel is the Occupying Power in Occupied East Jerusalem. It chose to illegally annex East Jerusalem and include it under its administration. It is not Israeli territory, and they use discriminatory practices to keep Palestinians from owning homes in East Jerusalem. The houses are perfectly legal.
 

ido_

DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 13, 2010
Messages
3,406
Reaction score
1,561
Location
Israel
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Liberal
And the decision to expel Palestinian legislators from occupied East Jerusalem was left with who? When tensions are high and ties are strained, it is (in Ehud Barak's words) "poor common sense" to pull such a provocative move like the demolitions.`

And thats exactly the reason why this plan will not be executed.
 

ido_

DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 13, 2010
Messages
3,406
Reaction score
1,561
Location
Israel
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Liberal
So yes, this very much has to do with the Israeli government young one. And it's funny that you call them "illegal houses". Israel is the Occupying Power in Occupied East Jerusalem. It chose to illegally annex East Jerusalem and include it under its administration. It is not Israeli territory, and they use discriminatory practices to keep Palestinians from owning homes in East Jerusalem. The houses are perfectly legal.

They chose to accept permanent resident of Israel statuse and enjoy Israel's govermental benefits, they should also obey the rules of the country they live in. I agree that demolition of their houses is not the answear but building illegaly without permits from the municipality is not different from building illegal settlments in the west bank the way I see it. Building illegal houses is common in two populations in Israel, the Arab population and the Settlers population, both should be dealt with.
 

Degreez

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Jun 2, 2006
Messages
3,216
Reaction score
1,021
Location
Houston, TX
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Centrist
And thats exactly the reason why this plan will not be executed.

That's why the Jerusalem municipality has already approved of the plan and said that it would be "awhile" before it is implemented.
 

Degreez

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Jun 2, 2006
Messages
3,216
Reaction score
1,021
Location
Houston, TX
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Centrist
They chose to accept permanent resident of Israel statuse and enjoy Israel's govermental benefits, they should also obey the rules of the country they live in.
Israel granted those protected persons citizenship because they continuously try to illegally annex East Jerusalem. They are residents of an occupied territory, not Israel.
I agree that demolition of their houses is not the answear but building illegaly without permits from the municipality is not different from building illegal settlments in the west bank the way I see it.
Well how about a different perspective? East Jerusalem is not Israeli territory and applying Israeli laws in East Jerusalem is a violation of international law. It is only illegal according to Israel for protected persons to build in occupied territory.
Building illegal houses is common in two populations in Israel, the Arab population and the Settlers population, both should be dealt with.
Well one is only illegal according to Israel. The other is illegal according to international law governing occupied territories.

From the EU:

Israel annexing East Jerusalem, says EU | World news | The Guardian
"Israeli 'facts on the ground' - including new settlements, construction of the barrier, discriminatory housing policies, house demolitions, restrictive permit regime and continued closure of Palestinian institutions - increase Jewish Israeli presence in East Jerusalem, weaken the Palestinian community in the city, impede Palestinian urban development and separate East Jerusalem from the rest of the West Bank."

Separating East Jerusalem from the West Bank has been going for over a decade. If Israel was committed to the peace process, why would it not allow the Palestinian Authority autonomy over East Jerusalem and include in the West Bank's jurisdiction? Because it believes Occupied East Jerusalem is somehow theirs to grabs.
 

Apocalypse

DEATH TO ANTARCTICA!!!
DP Veteran
Joined
May 14, 2009
Messages
20,135
Reaction score
6,384
Location
Israel
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Centrist
Wait, earlier you were saying Jerusalem is Israel's capital and that this was recognized "by the world". Am I to understand that the Israeli government has no hand in the affairs of 'its capital city'?
You don't seem to understand the hierarchy of the state.
This was the decision of the Jerusalem municipality, it's not the government's role to order the destruction of illegal houses.
And even then, the decision is a violation of international law:
So you're saying that it's new to you that Israel sees East Jerusalem as an integral part of the country?
Where were you during the last 43 years?
So yes, this very much has to do with the Israeli government young one.
No it doesn't, you're making ridiculous assertions.
And it's funny that you call them "illegal houses". Israel is the Occupying Power in Occupied East Jerusalem. It chose to illegally annex East Jerusalem and include it under its administration. It is not Israeli territory, and they use discriminatory practices to keep Palestinians from owning homes in East Jerusalem. The houses are perfectly legal.
Whatever you say buddy, those houses were built illegally and without a permission, and to destroy them is to uphold the rule of law in the country.
The municipality did however grant the owners with legal permissions to rebuild their houses in a close location, and is intending to legalize the 66 other illegal houses in the neighborhood that would not be destroyed.
 

ido_

DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 13, 2010
Messages
3,406
Reaction score
1,561
Location
Israel
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Liberal
Israel granted those protected persons citizenship because they continuously try to illegally annex East Jerusalem. They are residents of an occupied territory, not Israel.
They are residents of Israel, if they didn't want to be residents of Israel they could refuse to accept the status of permanent resident and the Israeli ID card.

Well how about a different perspective? East Jerusalem is not Israeli territory and applying Israeli laws in East Jerusalem is a violation of international law. It is only illegal according to Israel for protected persons to build in occupied territory.

And still, those who enjoy the rights and privileges of the state of Israel should also obey its rules, you want to build a house - get a permit.

Well one is only illegal according to Israel. The other is illegal according to international law governing occupied territories.

From the EU:

Israel annexing East Jerusalem, says EU | World news | The Guardian

Separating East Jerusalem from the West Bank has been going for over a decade. If Israel was committed to the peace process, why would it not allow the Palestinian Authority autonomy over East Jerusalem and include in the West Bank's jurisdiction? Because it believes Occupied East Jerusalem is somehow theirs to grabs.

There are more places in Israel outside the west bank where Arab citizens live, the building of illegal houses is not limited to East Jerusalem, its mostly common in the Negev desert where there are even complete illegal villages.
 
Last edited:

Infinite Chaos

DP Veteran
Joined
Oct 28, 2007
Messages
18,897
Reaction score
8,834
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
-- Israel should refrain from granting the Palestinians unilateral concessions. Doing so only encourages Palestinian intransigence. Hence, it is not surprising that the Palestinians are seeking "payment" in order to enter direct talks.

Could you help clarify what you mean by "payment" please Don?

-- Despite frequent U.S. pressure --

The last time the US applied any "real" pressure on Israel and the Arabs was when James Baker served in the US Govt and that was 20 years ago.
 

Degreez

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Jun 2, 2006
Messages
3,216
Reaction score
1,021
Location
Houston, TX
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Centrist
You don't seem to understand the hierarchy of the state.
This was the decision of the Jerusalem municipality, it's not the government's role to order the destruction of illegal houses.
It is the government's role because they are the Occupying Power in an Occupied Territory. Their annexation of Occupied East Jerusalem is a violation of international law. The extension of Jerusalem's municipal boundries are a violation of international law.
So you're saying that it's new to you that Israel sees East Jerusalem as an integral part of the country?
Where were you during the last 43 years?
No, I'm saying that it is a violation of international law for Israel to demolish homes belonging to private residents of an Occupied Territory. Nice try with the spin though.
No it doesn't, you're making ridiculous assertions.
I quote Article 53 of the Fourth Geneva Convention and you say it is a ridiculous assertion that it is illegal to demolish homes in Occupied East Jerusalem. Your statement is devoid of any logical reasoning.
Whatever you say buddy, those houses were built illegally and without a permission, and to destroy them is to uphold the rule of law in the country.
Except that Occupied East Jerusalem is not a part of the country of Israel. You can't seem to understand this simple concept that it is illegal to annex an occupied territory. The houses were built illegaly according to Israel. According to international law, it is illegal for Israel to extend its municipality to Occupied East Jerusalem.
The municipality did however grant the owners with legal permissions to rebuild their houses in a close location, and is intending to legalize the 66 other illegal houses in the neighborhood that would not be destroyed.
In reality: An attempt to save face while still maintaining that you own Occupied East Jerusalem.

Come back when you can prove that Jerusalem is recognized as the capitial of Israel "by the world".
 

Degreez

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Jun 2, 2006
Messages
3,216
Reaction score
1,021
Location
Houston, TX
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Centrist
They are residents of Israel, if they didn't want to be residents of Israel they could refuse to accept the status of permanent resident and the Israeli ID card.
That's why the amount of eligible voters in East Jerusalem have been going down for the past decade. Israel's extension of its municipal boundries is a violation of international law, not even Israel's closest ally recognizes the Israel's grab of East Jerusalem (http://www.brookings.edu/~/media/Files/Press/Books/2005/peaceprocess3/peaceprocess_appendixM.ashx).

ido_;1058818734 And still said:
Except East Jerusalem is not a part of the state of Israel. It is an occupied territory, just like the West Bank, Gaza, and the Golan Heights.

ido_;1058818734 There are more places in Israel outside the west bank where Arab citizens live said:
So make a topic about them?
 

ido_

DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 13, 2010
Messages
3,406
Reaction score
1,561
Location
Israel
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Liberal
That's why the amount of eligible voters in East Jerusalem have been going down for the past decade. Israel's extension of its municipal boundries is a violation of international law, not even Israel's closest ally recognizes the Israel's grab of East Jerusalem (http://www.brookings.edu/~/media/Files/Press/Books/2005/peaceprocess3/peaceprocess_appendixM.ashx).

Permanent Residents don't have the right to vote for goverment, only the local athourity. I don't know how common it is of Arabs without a blue ID in east Jerusalem, if you have a source to back up what you are saying here it would be appreciated. Anyways, I saw those residents in the municipality meeting so I don't believe they don't posses a blue ID.

Except East Jerusalem is not a part of the state of Israel. It is an occupied territory, just like the West Bank, Gaza, and the Golan Heights.

It is according to Israeli law and they are Israeli.


So make a topic about them?
Why should I, I already made my point.
 

Apocalypse

DEATH TO ANTARCTICA!!!
DP Veteran
Joined
May 14, 2009
Messages
20,135
Reaction score
6,384
Location
Israel
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Centrist
It is the government's role because they are the Occupying Power in an Occupied Territory.
That the international community refers to East Jerusalem's status as occupied is one thing, assuming however that the govenment is the one behind every action in East Jerusalem is pure and simple ignorance.
Their annexation of Occupied East Jerusalem is a violation of international law.
Refer to the violated law.
The extension of Jerusalem's municipal boundries are a violation of international law.
Again, refer to the violated law.
No, I'm saying that it is a violation of international law for Israel to demolish homes belonging to private residents of an Occupied Territory. Nice try with the spin though.
The houses are illegally built and are hence to be destroyed.
I quote Article 53 of the Fourth Geneva Convention and you say it is a ridiculous assertion that it is illegal to demolish homes in Occupied East Jerusalem. Your statement is devoid of any logical reasoning.
What a spin, and a straw man argument.
It was quite clear that I was referring to your claim that the government is behind those actions with "this is a ridiculous assertion".
Except that Occupied East Jerusalem is not a part of the country of Israel.
In the eyes of the international community, not Israel.
Israel will act in East Jerusalem as it does in West Jerusalem, since it refers to it as an annexed territory.
You can't seem to understand this simple concept that it is illegal to annex an occupied territory.
Again, refer to the law.
The houses were built illegaly according to Israel.
And that's everything that matters to the Jerusalem municipality in order for it to uphold the rule of law.
According to international law, it is illegal for Israel to extend its municipality to Occupied East Jerusalem.
But Israel considers it annexed not occupied, and hence it doesn't consider this to be a violation.
Those who consider it to be occupied will consider it to be a violation.
In reality: An attempt to save face while still maintaining that you own Occupied East Jerusalem.
In reality: A gentle approach to a sensitive issue.
 

Degreez

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Jun 2, 2006
Messages
3,216
Reaction score
1,021
Location
Houston, TX
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Centrist
Permanent Residents don't have the right to vote for goverment, only the local athourity. I don't know how common it is of Arabs without a blue ID in east Jerusalem, if you have a source to back up what you are saying here it would be appreciated. Anyways, I saw those residents in the municipality meeting so I don't believe they don't posses a blue ID.
I gave you a source, it's in the part you quoted.
It remains the firm position of the United States that Jerusalem must never again be a divided city and that its final status should be decided by negotiations. Thus, we do not recognize Israel's annexation of east Jerusalem or the extension of its municipal boundaries, and we encourage all sides to avoid unilateral acts that would exacerbate local tensions or make negotiations more difficult or preempt their final outcome.
It is according to Israeli law and they are Israeli.
And according to international law Occupied East Jerusalem is not a part of Israel. This is simple.


Why should I, I already made my point.
Because this topic is about Netanyahu grandstanding while neglecting "facts on the ground".
 

Degreez

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Jun 2, 2006
Messages
3,216
Reaction score
1,021
Location
Houston, TX
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Centrist
That the international community refers to East Jerusalem's status as occupied is one thing, assuming however that the govenment is the one behind every action in East Jerusalem is pure and simple ignorance.
Umm, Jerusalem's municipality is part of the government. That they operate on different levels is another thing, mainly an obvious attempt by Israel to not abide by the rules of an Occupying Power in an Occupied Territory. If it's not the government behind the actions that took place in East Jerusalem, whose was it? Normal Israeli citiznens? Settlers in Occupied East Jerusalem?
Refer to the violated law.
The Avalon Project : United Nations Security Council Resolution 242
Emphasizing the inadmissibility of the acquisition of territory by war
...
Withdrawal of Israeli armed forces from territories occupied in the recent conflict
That you cannot understand something so simple is beyond me.
Again, refer to the violated law.
Read above. It is illegal to acquire territory by war. That you cannot understand something so simple is beyond me.
The houses are illegally built and are hence to be destroyed.
According to Israel. We've been through this. Israeli law does not trump international law. It is illegal to demolish homes in occupied territories. The houses are not illegal because Israel's role as the Occupying Power in Occupied East Jerusalem does not grant it authority to deem who can build/live where they want inside the Occupied Territory. That lies with the Jerusalem Governorate - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
What a spin, and a straw man argument.
You are the definition of spin, and the only time you can identify a straw man is when you engage in one.
It was quite clear that I was referring to your claim that the government is behind those actions with "this is a ridiculous assertion".
What is the Jerusalem municipality? A part of the Israeli government.
In the eyes of the international community, not Israel.
Israel's opinion on the matter is irrelevant because international law is clear on the acquistion of territory by war.
Israel will act in East Jerusalem as it does in West Jerusalem, since it refers to it as an annexed territory.
Read above. Israel's opinion is irrelevant.
Again, refer to the law.
Read above.
And that's everything that matters to the Jerusalem municipality in order for it to uphold the rule of law.
The rule of law it should be upholding is international law, since the territory in question is currently occupied by Israel. It should not take actions, such as demolishing homes in occupied territories, that in clear violations of international law.
But Israel considers it annexed not occupied, and hence it doesn't consider this to be a violation.
Read above. Israel's opinion is irrelevant.
Those who consider it to be occupied will consider it to be a violation.
Yes, because the territory is indeed occupied. Israel applying it owns laws in Occupied East Jerusalm is a violation of international. The Soviet Union and Nazi Germany also applied their own laws in Occupied Poland circa 1939-1945. You need to educate yourself on rules governing occupied territories.

Come back when you prove that Jerusalem is the capital of Israel, and that it is recognized as such "by the world".
 

ido_

DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 13, 2010
Messages
3,406
Reaction score
1,561
Location
Israel
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Liberal
I gave you a source, it's in the part you quoted.

I don't see where it says that there are less Arabs eligble to vote.


And according to international law Occupied East Jerusalem is not a part of Israel. This is simple.

Yes it is simple, they are Israeli and must follow the Israeli law.


Because this topic is about Netanyahu grandstanding while neglecting "facts on the ground".

I don't see how even this decision of the municipality of Jerusalem has anything to do with what Netanyahu said, from your first post:
"In a speech today in Jerusalem, Netanyahu said Israel had taken measures to advance peace, such as removing roadblocks in the West Bank and imposing a freeze on building in Jewish settlements."

Did Israel remove roadblocks? yes. Did Israel impose a freeze of building in west bank settlements? yes. He didn't say in any place "Israel refrained from demolishing illegal buildings in east Jerusalem" so your whole response is not relevant for this topic and my response is relevant to yours.
 

justabubba

long standing member
DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 22, 2005
Messages
53,898
Reaction score
35,218
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
From Bloomberg.com:



Netanyahu Calls on Abbas to Start Direct Peace Talks (Update3) - Bloomberg.com

As I have repeatedly noted in the past, Israel should refrain from granting the Palestinians unilateral concessions. Doing so only encourages Palestinian intransigence. Hence, it is not surprising that the Palestinians are seeking "payment" in order to enter direct talks. Despite frequent U.S. pressure to grant unilateral "good faith" concessions, such moves do not facilitate diplomacy. They create barriers. This new Palestinian demand for payment is just the latest example.

now that degreez has won the argument about the illegality of israeli actions in east jerusalem i was curious about the expression of israel identifying who will represent its "opponent" across the negotiating table at these proposed talks
why do they insist that abbas attend the talks as the representative of the Palestinian people. under what authority have the Palestinian people recognized abbas as their spokesmodel? it seems this is about like the Palestinians appealing for Noam Chomsky to attend peace talks as the representative of the people of israel
i would submit that any peace accord negotiated by abbas would not be found credible/acceptable to the Palestinian people

Americans should come to recognize this impacts us. israel is occupying Palestinian lands both criminally and inhumanely. it is America's business because the USA is complicit in these illegal acts. our actions provoke terrorist attacks against us. this is a primary cause for Americans to now be suffering and dying in afghanistan and iraq. many israeli supporters now urge a U.S. war against iran and expect U.S. support in any war they would want to provoke
we should recognize that most current American economic, security and military problems are due in large part to these unnecessary or badly managed wars conducted - in part - to enhance israel's security
it is time for the tail to quit wagging the dog
 

Apocalypse

DEATH TO ANTARCTICA!!!
DP Veteran
Joined
May 14, 2009
Messages
20,135
Reaction score
6,384
Location
Israel
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Centrist
Umm, Jerusalem's municipality is part of the government.
Since when?! What in heavens name are you talking about, since when is the municipality part of the government?
The municipality must answer to the government's rulings, but that doesn't mean that it's part of the government.
The municipality is the municipality and the government is the government.
Degreez said:
That they operate on different levels is another thing, mainly an obvious attempt by Israel to not abide by the rules of an Occupying Power in an Occupied Territory. If it's not the government behind the actions that took place in East Jerusalem, whose was it? Normal Israeli citiznens? Settlers in Occupied East Jerusalem?
The Jerusalem Municipality, perhaps?
Degreez said:
I've asked you to refer to the violated law. This is a UN resolution, not an international law.
International laws are treaties between countries such as the Geneva conventions.
International law is also bodies that are instructed to rule internationally, such as the international court at the Hague.
The UN is not international law, it's an international body that attempts to cast order amongst the nations while not really being a governing body.

And besides that, the entire Middle East is in violation of resolution 242, not just Israel.
Degreez said:
Read above. It is illegal to acquire territory by war. That you cannot understand something so simple is beyond me.
Again, refer to that law.
Degreez said:
According to Israel. We've been through this. Israeli law does not trump international law. It is illegal to demolish homes in occupied territories. The houses are not illegal because Israel's role as the Occupying Power in Occupied East Jerusalem does not grant it authority to deem who can build/live where they want inside the Occupied Territory. That lies with the Jerusalem Governorate - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
If Israel sees East Jerusalem as part of its lands then obviously it would act as if it is a part of its lands.
That Israel refers to East Jerusalem as part of itself is nothing new, and has been going on for 43 years now.
Degreez said:
You are the definition of spin
Not true.
According to Wikipedia:
An Apocalypse (Greek: Ἀποκάλυψις Apokálypsis; "lifting of the veil" or "revelation") is a disclosure of something hidden from the majority of mankind in an era dominated by falsehood and misconception, i.e. the veil to be lifted. The term also can refer to the eschatological final battle, the Armageddon, and the idea of an end of the world. These perceptions may better be related to the phrase apokalupsis eschaton, literally "revelation at [or of] the end of the æon, or age". In Christianity The Apocalypse of John is the Book of Revelation, the last book of the Bible.
Degreez said:
and the only time you can identify a straw man is when you engage in one.
I've just proven that one to be wrong when I've identified yours without engaging in a straw man argument.
Degreez said:
What is the Jerusalem municipality?
The Jerusalem Website
Degreez said:
Israel's opinion on the matter is irrelevant
Actually that's all that is relevant when speaking about "on the ground" issues.
Degreez said:
because international law is clear on the acquistion of territory by war.
Still waiting for that reference I've been asking for.
Degreez said:
Read above. Israel's opinion is irrelevant.
Read above. Actually that's all that is relevant when speaking about "on the ground" issues.
Degreez said:
Read above.
Read above.
Degreez said:
The rule of law it should be upholding is international law
But as far as Israel is concerned it is not in violation of international law since it doesn't see East Jerusalem as an occupied territory.
Those who do see it as an occupied territory will say it's in violation.
Degreez said:
since the territory in question is currently occupied by Israel. It should not take actions, such as demolishing homes in occupied territories, that in clear violations of international law.
Still waiting for that reference.
Degreez said:
Read above. Israel's opinion is irrelevant.
Read above. Actually that's all that is relevant when speaking about "on the ground" issues.
Degreez said:
Yes, because the territory is indeed occupied. Israel applying it owns laws in Occupied East Jerusalm is a violation of international.
Still waiting for that reference.
Degreez said:
The Soviet Union and Nazi Germany also applied their own laws in Occupied Poland circa 1939-1945.
The Soviet Union and Nazi Gemrnay have also had the letter 'I' in their states' names.
Degreez said:
You need to educate yourself on rules governing occupied territories.
You need to educate yourself on the hierarchy of a state and who governs who.
 

Degreez

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Jun 2, 2006
Messages
3,216
Reaction score
1,021
Location
Houston, TX
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Centrist
I don't see where it says that there are less Arabs eligble to vote.
I am not talking about in Israeli elections.
A Vote for East Jerusalem Arabs? - The Washington Post | Encyclopedia.com



Yes it is simple, they are Israeli and must follow the Israeli law.
They are not Israeli. That Israel granted them citizenship is of no consequence and does not change the political nature of the East Jerusalem citizens' Palestinian nationality.

I don't see how even this decision of the municipality of Jerusalem has anything to do with what Netanyahu said, from your first post:
"In a speech today in Jerusalem, Netanyahu said Israel had taken measures to advance peace, such as removing roadblocks in the West Bank and imposing a freeze on building in Jewish settlements."

Did Israel remove roadblocks? yes. Did Israel impose a freeze of building in west bank settlements? yes. He didn't say in any place "Israel refrained from demolishing illegal buildings in east Jerusalem" so your whole response is not relevant for this topic and my response is relevant to yours.
[/quote]
Replace the part I made bold with this:
Israel approved of plans that are a direct violation of international law.

How can you call for diplomacy when your actions are in clear contradiction of wanting any diplomacy?
 

ido_

DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 13, 2010
Messages
3,406
Reaction score
1,561
Location
Israel
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Liberal
Umm, Jerusalem's municipality is part of the government. That they operate on different levels is another thing, mainly an obvious attempt by Israel to not abide by the rules of an Occupying Power in an Occupied Territory. If it's not the government behind the actions that took place in East Jerusalem, whose was it? Normal Israeli citiznens? Settlers in Occupied East Jerusalem?

I'm unaware of events that took place in East Jerusalem lately. If by events you mean the decision to demolish illegal houses in east Jerusalem then the events took place in a meeting room in Jerusalem's municipality building which rests in western Jerusalem
 

Apocalypse

DEATH TO ANTARCTICA!!!
DP Veteran
Joined
May 14, 2009
Messages
20,135
Reaction score
6,384
Location
Israel
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Centrist
The PA has no authority over East Jerusalem.
To say that it's the designated capital of their future state is one thing, to say that East Jerusalem is an occupied territory is another thing, to imply that the PA controls it as of current and present time is simply wrong.
They are not Israeli. That Israel granted them citizenship is of no consequence and does not change the political nature of the East Jerusalem citizens' Palestinian nationality.
If they ask for an Israeli citizenship and Israel agrees to give them one then they become Israeli citizens.
Common sense really.
Replace the part I made bold with this:
Israel approved of plans that are a direct violation of international law.

How can you call for diplomacy when your actions are in clear contradiction of wanting any diplomacy?
That the Jerusalem municipality has decided to destroy 22 illegal houses in East Jerusalem, legalize 66 other illegal houses there, and give a permission to the owners of the destroyed houses to rebuild their houses at a close location does not imply that Israel is not interested in diplomacy.
 
Top Bottom