spidergoat
Valued Senior Member
How does this makes settlements in Jerusalem illegal? Who owns Jerusalem?
UN resolution 478, is HUGE!
- Thread starter Bishadi
- Start date
Yu know my purpose; i am against ignorance. I could care less about being accepted, liked or approved of by any.
I share reality at face value and have repeatedly tried on this very thread to avoid the conflicts.
This thread was started to share that no one needs to be biased to see the issue was addressed 3 decades ago but that few know about it.
(an eye opener)
my purpose?
like all of any post i share; to assist any in evolving beyond the complacent
i only post bits, so as not to put the 'amount of data' on the board, (an old warning by you) such as posting the actual pubs by the scientists often shares that what people have accepted is completely divergent from the reality
this thread was but a summary so any can go do the "look see" for themselves
are you contesting the summary?
are you contecting my opinion, that the settlement issue was basically already addressed many years ago?
Ben..... you have no right to insult me!
because it is a disputed land that was already entered into the UN (global body of countries) that israel does not own jeruselem or have that 'right'
no one OWNS jeruselem, them are people, human beings from a diverse range of people and beliefs from all over the world
and the global community has already addressed the land as not being OWNED by israel
nothing political about it; the globe has already combined to address the issue
at this point it is just a matter of educating the populations, to understand
simply put, to avoid the conflict only takes compassion and integrity
Ahh right I see. No need to be bothered with actual data.
Posting the entire text of the resolution isn't necessary, but one would hope that you'd see the importance in actually reading the original document.
spidergoat
Valued Senior Member
So, can Palestinians build homes there?
3. Determines that all legislative and administrative measures and actions taken by Israel, the occupying Power, which have altered or purport to alter the character and status of the Holy City of Jerusalem, and in particular the recent "basic law" on Jerusalem, are null and void and must be rescinded forthwith;
4. Affirms also that this action constitutes a serious obstruction to achieving a comprehensive, just and lasting peace in the Middle East;
5. Decides not to recognize the "basic law" and such other actions by Israel that, as a result of this law, seek to alter the character and status of Jerusalem and calls upon:
(a) All Member States to accept this decision;
(b) Those States that have established diplomatic missions at Jerusalem to withdraw such missions from the Holy City;
i guess the data i was reading was practically a copy of the Res itself.
http://domino.un.org/UNISPAL.NSF/0/dde590c6ff232007852560df0065fddb?OpenDocument
is this helpful to any who wish to read for themselves?
NO ONE OWNs the J site! (gateway of the gods: babilu)
4. Affirms also that this action constitutes a serious obstruction to achieving a comprehensive, just and lasting peace in the Middle East;
5. Decides not to recognize the "basic law" and such other actions by Israel that, as a result of this law, seek to alter the character and status of Jerusalem and calls upon:
(a) All Member States to accept this decision;
(b) Those States that have established diplomatic missions at Jerusalem to withdraw such missions from the Holy City;
i guess the data i was reading was practically a copy of the Res itself.
http://domino.un.org/UNISPAL.NSF/0/dde590c6ff232007852560df0065fddb?OpenDocument
is this helpful to any who wish to read for themselves?
NO ONE OWNs the J site! (gateway of the gods: babilu)
Ahh I see. The point is this, which is actually in UN Resolution 476, NOT resolution 478:
Here, ``character'' should be read (in the context of the document, I think) as cultural makeup.
So, ok---the UNSC has passed resolutions against Israeli settlements. They've also passed resolutions against terrorism.
Is this your only point?
UN Resolution 476 said:
Here, ``character'' should be read (in the context of the document, I think) as cultural makeup.
So, ok---the UNSC has passed resolutions against Israeli settlements. They've also passed resolutions against terrorism.
Is this your only point?
i dunno,
perhaps go look up the UN and be sure to read the doc so as not to offer evidence, that is not supportable
i was just wondering why a person who is the prime minister of a country, a globally recognized entity, was so ignorant to suggest jeruselem was the capital of israel (the very country he is PMing)
perhaps Ben should put the screws to him and make him verify the evidence, with links and be sure he can read what the global community, (maybe even copenhagen) has already addressed
jeruselem is not the capital of israel nor 'their' owned holy city.
i thought the thread was a pretty good one to at least set the tone towards reality versus anyone EVER CALLING ME ANTI SEMITIC......
ie..... i perhaps know the torah better than the best rabbi the earth ever knew......... (and yes, i have read a few versions)
i love the rules, i know better of the opinions accepted of the complacent (talmud)(right wingers)
spidergoat
Valued Senior Member
Israel doesn't recognize the legitimacy of that resolution, so it is not precisely correct to say that Jerusalem is not the capital of Israel.
what point? are you making another?
are you rewording the 'character' of the res?
said nothing about the settlements.
Jeruselem is not the capital of israel and to see the heading on the 476 link (UN Resolution 476 (1980) Condemning Israel's Occupation of East Jerusalem) perhaps the whole armed forces of israel should leave jeruselem
but thats a whole nutter thread
that's off topic
you got the point
israels PM is wrong to claim jeruselem as being the capital of israel
as well that makes the settlements illegal as of 3 decades ago
and then i was thinking, perhaps reparations for the damage and the olive orchards destroyed should be given to the existing 'character' residence could be a quality compassionate move of responsibility
what do you think on that?
is responsibility a good thing?
perhaps, you could use your rules of having scholastic integrity, to be the guidance of israel's prime minister....
spidergoat
Valued Senior Member
He's not wrong, it's just that the UN objects to it.
Sure and Israel is a member of the UN, plain and simple.
If there ever a time you dont have to pay taxes because you dont believe? (Government requires the consent of the governed.)
whereas, being a citizen, you will fall into place or be put into jail.
sure it is
Israel is not the capital. (should be Jeruselem is not the capital of Israel) (i edited but left the error)
i just said it and have more foundation for that truth, than you could even comprehend; reality!
Last edited:
spidergoat
Valued Senior Member
You are correct, Israel is not the capital of Israel, Jerusalem is. You may not like it, but it is the truth.
The fact of the matter is that illegal Jewish settlements are expanding in Jerusalem, and as we know possession is 9/10`s of the law. Israels current tactic.
Hot off the press, the EU perspective. It would seem Israel is utterly uninterested in the rule of law or peace initiatives. No surprise there. :m:
Hot off the press, the EU perspective. It would seem Israel is utterly uninterested in the rule of law or peace initiatives. No surprise there. :m:
You make a good point, but I think the point is irrelevant. The UN shouldn't be compared to the US precisely because there is no way to enforce people to obey ``laws''.
Either way, Israel's refusal to acknowledge the legitimacy of UNSC resolutions is about as flagrant as Iran's refusal (on at least two different issues), North Korea's refusal, Syria's refusal (...).
So if your only point is that ``Israel's actions are illegitimate because there is a 30 year old Security Council resolution against such actions'', you will probably find no disagreement. Yes, the UNSC did pass resolutions against Israel's expansion into Jerusalem.