Netanyahu Calls on Abbas to Start Direct Peace Talks

[ido_]

I am not talking about in Israeli elections.
A Vote for East Jerusalem Arabs? - The Washington Post | Encyclopedia.com

Ah, well ok, that doesn't counterdicts what I was saying, most of them are RESIDENTS, this is not the same as CITIZEN, it means they enjoy all Citizen rights except for voting to the goverment elections, they do however vote for the municipality as residents of Jerusalem.

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.

They can refuse the Israeli ID card if they wish, Israel didn't obligate them to recieve one. If they chose to recieve the benefits of an Israeli they should also follow the law.

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?

Israel did no such thing, it was the council of the town of Jerusalem, The Israeli goverment already said the plan will be postponed if needed.

 

[donsutherland1]

i would submit that any peace accord negotiated by abbas would not be found credible/acceptable to the Palestinian people...

Perhaps not. Any peace agreement would either be ratified by the appropriate legislature (Knesset in Israel; Palestinian Legislative Council for the Palestinians) or a referendum (probably more likely among the Palestinians). Personally, I am not sure that President Abbas is indispendable to the peace process. However, Hamas has continually refused the Madrid Quartet's path that would allow it a seat at the table. As it continues to reject Israel's right to exist, it can't negotiate. Negotiations require a minimum understanding of each party's right of existence.

Imagine, to flip the situation, if Israel took a new position that it rejected the establishment of a Palestinian state and would only focus on limited aspects that fall far short of the creation of a Palestinian state. Israel has not adopted such a course. It has repeatedly reaffirmed its willingness to negotiate with one of the key outcomes being the establishment of a fully sovereign Palestinian state.

In contrast, Hamas remains bent on a rejectionist course and has been unwavering in its rejection of Israel's right of existence. It will accept a long-term (10-year) hudna (truce)--a feint that has seduced some to believe that Hamas is willing to agree to a peace treaty--if the Palestinians are given all the territory within the pre-1967 war boundaries. Afterward, it would restart its pursuit of its ultimate objective of Israel's elimination. In other words, for Hamas, negotiations are merely about shaping the end game for Israel's elimination. They are not intended to create a framework of peace and coexistence. The Hamas hudna would grant the Palestinians concrete gains (territory) without achieving peace or secure boundaries for Israel. It is a non-starter.

 

[Degreez]

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.

Municipality - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

In Israel, a municipality generally takes one of three forms: city councils, which governs a large municipality, local councils, which governs a small municipality, and regional councils, which governs a group of communities, often but not necessarily of a rural nature.[/qoute]
You have no idea what you are talking about. Educate yourself before attempting your silly spin techniques.

The Jerusalem Municipality, perhaps?

Which is part of the Israeli government. It operates under Israeli laws.

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.

Nice try with the spin. Time to educate yourself some more:
Article 25 of the UN Charter:

"The Members of the United Nations agree to accept and carry out the decisions of the Security Council in accordance with the present Charter".

So yes, Security Council Resolutions are laws in the sense that Israel must abide by them. That you do not care for international law is of no consequence to a member of the UN rejecting its Charter.

And besides that, the entire Middle East is in violation of resolution 242, not just Israel.

Evidence? UNSCR 242 has to do with Israel, Jordan, Egypt, Syria, and Lebanon. You seem to be missing Iraq, Saudi Arabia, Yemen, the UAE, Oman, Kuwait, Qatar, etc. In short, you are horribly wrong.

Again, refer to that law.

Read above.

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.

Then it can learn to accept that doing so is a violation of international law.

Not true.
According to Wikipedia:

Figuratively, not literally.

Actually that's all that is relevant when speaking about "on the ground" issues.
Still waiting for that reference I've been asking for.
Read above. Actually that's all that is relevant when speaking about "on the ground" issues.

Read above. Or are you incapable because of personal bias?

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.

Again, Israel's opinion on the matter is irrelevant. It is inadmissible to acquire territory by war. Israel's opinion remains just that. An opinion.

Those who do see it as an occupied territory will say it's in violation.

So everyone but you.

Still waiting for that reference.
Read above. Actually that's all that is relevant when speaking about "on the ground" issues.
Still waiting for that reference.

Read above.

The Soviet Union and Nazi Gemrnay have also had the letter 'I' in their states' names.

So does Israel.

You need to educate yourself on the hierarchy of a state and who governs who.

You try to spin it so that just because Israel illegally annexed East Jerusalem, it can govern it as a local municipality. It does not work like that. It must govern it with the laws regulating Occupying Powers.