The Europeans move in for the kill

Frank Sutton

...are these morally bankrupt European politicians evil, or just very, very stupid?
another question: how many of them - such as Baroness Ashdown, the EU's 'foreign secretary' - are unelected?

Hoob

Mell, you need to do a big piece on it. Can you do it in the Guardian or the New York Times as I doubt that all these morally bankrupt EU politicians have the courage to read any real newspaper that actually writes about reality?

jpeeps

"… it refuses to halt building homes which are said to be illegal but are not". I am intrigued to know why these homes are not illegal.

Davieboy

Evil & wicked.

David Lindsay

As Europe prepares to recognise a Palestinian declaration of independence, here's hoping that that declaration will explicitly lay claim to the whole of the viable Palestinian State created on both sides of the Jordan in 1948. Here's hoping that, mirroring Lebanon, it will guarantee the Presidency to a Christian while guaranteeing the Premiership to a Muslim, as would in would in the latter case have happened electorally anyway.

And here's hoping that it will place the new state under the protection, both of each and all of the remaining sacral monarchies, there being no other kind, of the Dar al-Islam (other than the one in Palestine east of the Jordan, perhaps), and of each and all of those in Christendom. As much as anything else, that would make the protection of Palestine a unifying force among the Christian and the Muslim traditional leaders still recognised at local level in several countries of Africa, where relations between Christians and Muslims are not currently at their best.

Bill

Melanie, in answer to your final question: Stupid, stupid, stupid, stupid, stupid.

C.Gee

Israel should declare its own borders, now, before any declaration of a Palestinian state. Declare them (to include all of Jerusalem and whatever settlements it is prepared to defend), and secure them. How would Abbas and his European - and American - backers respond to that?

Ken Bevakasha

jpeeps,

Have a butchers at this...

http://www.palestinefacts.org/pf_current_settlements.php

Ken Bevakasha

Jpeeps,

And this...

http://articles.latimes.com/2009/dec/11/opinion/la-oe-rozenman11-2009dec11

AF

So the European pogroms continue,albeit slightly veiled.
No Arab state wishes to embrace the Palistinians to their homeland(whatever their suffering),and wherever the Palistinians have ghettoed in Arab lands they are detested.They make great neighbours.

Veracity

How about a temporary freeze on all communications with the West bank along the cease fir lines. let the Europeans take control. Hope they don't run away though like they did when they were guarding prisoners in Jericho. After all israel is damned if it does and damned if it doesn't

SamP

"I am intrigued to know why these homes are not illegal."

Because under The Mandate for Palestine the whole of Palestine was designated as The Jewish National Home recognising the rights of Jews to construct the institutions of governing and also recognising the rights of Arabs to live in that area and have equal freedoms of worship, education, law, health etc In 1948, although a Partition was offered it was rejected by the Arab side who proceeded to attack the Jews to wipe them out and take it all. The Arabs gained control of West Bank and East Jerusalem and in fact Jordan illegally occupied that territory. Israel declared Independence along the lines of the original Mandate but not in terms of territory.

No formal international recognition was made of the occupation of West Bank and Jerusalem by the Jorsanians since it was illegal.

In 1967 the Arabs tried another war and lost control of West Bank and East Jerusalem. This meant that Israel (Jews) regained the control ascribed to them under The Mandate. As such they held the only legally binding claim to West Bank and Jerusalem.

It is a stitch-up that the International courts call this "illegal occupation" since there was no legal ownership by Arabs. Ownership is "disputed".

Israel has never formally annexed this land as "Israel" and awaits the conclusion of Res 242 to establish its borders since 1967.

To make a stand over settlements is to predict the conclusion of a peace negotiation before it has taken place. Are we to assume that while Israel is a country in which Jews, Muslims and Christians exist, a Palestinian State is intended to be Judenrein? Is it NO to "Let Jews live in the West Bank even if its a Palestinian State?"

Melanie is 100% correct. They had ten months of settlement freeze to come to the table and they found excuse after excuse. Building settlements shouldn't be held up. They had their chance

maxsceptic

Evil and very, very stupid.

JOHN ROOSEVELT

jpeeps
December 14th, 2010 5:14pm
"… it refuses to halt building homes which are said to be illegal but are not". I am intrigued to know why these homes are not illegal."

...and I am intrigued to know why these homes are illegal..

Can you help, Jpeeps?

Augustus

An independent Palestinian state? What's that? Ah yes, it's a place which Israel will no longer need to control.

Less than three generations after WW2 and the establishment of modern Israel, and Israelis are yet again confronted with the oldest organized bigotry in Europe - anti-Semitism - resuscitated anew by the deep-seated emnity of Arabs and Muslims against Jews. What these hypocrites demand of Israelis, and the scrutiny Israel is subjected to by them,
they would not dare make of any other nation. This anti-Semitic revival and support for Palestinian 'rights' is indeed an evil that refuses to die and leave Jews in peace. It is the fallen nature of our modern world that shows Israel up to be
a light unto nations capable of confounding anti-Semites endlessly. May the open, normal
and fun-loving Israelis always triumph over those nations and leaders who brazenly broadcast their anti-Jew bigotry and evil
designs.

Adam B.

See the two most recent articles here:

http://www.robinshepherdonline.com/

MikeW

Can someone explain why its a problem to recognise the palestinian state? Also why does this act punish Israel?

Presumably Israel won't recognise it anyway and keep on building.

Are all people that fail to agree to be regarded as evil or stupid?

cityca

Is it time to write to our MEPs to ask them to act on this? They headed off the vote against Shechita (Kosher meat) for a while. Perhaps we can ask them to mention the crux of what Melanie has written above.

As to Mel's question, both evil, stupid and also totally credulous.

Roger K

All European politicians are highly vote driven and most are anti-Israel because the state of Israel reminds them of their own horrendous history in regards ti the Jewish people.
But also Israel must look at itself as to how it is handling things. Melanie you have commented time again on the division within the Jewish community and the lack of articulateness in Canadian Jews.
I would refer readers to Daniel Pipes who gave a recent interview "Israel Has No Policy" published on his blog. In it he says,
"It's an internal problem. From 1948 untill 1993 Israel had a policy of deterrence that implied a goal of victory. In 1993 the leaders adopted a policy of appeasement, i.e give something to your enemy in the hope he will leave you alone. Appeasement was abandoned 2000 in favour of unilateral withdrawals which ended in 2006. Now there is no policy at all.

There is no place the government of Israel is trying to go. What is it trying to do in Gaza, for example? Is it trying to get rid of Hamas? Trying to get Egypt to take over the place? Or trying to Gilat Shalit released? I discern this the lack of policy objectives. This not a an issue of outside pressure."

In most repects Daniel Pipes is right. While the Palestinians and the Middle East countries know what they want and where they are going, even allowing for differences, Israel does not.
I would like to see Israel have clear objectives and goals put hte muscle back in where needed and for goodness sake where is the swift subtle multifaceted talents which are the hallmark of such a gifted people?
Take back the war of words and communications and leave the buffoons of European ministers as mere pawns of their electorates.

David Lindsay

MikeW, Israel wouldn't recognise it, just as no one would recognise any Israeli action as advocated by C.Gee.

But I have had some very interesting communications since posting my last comment. Lest we forget that 18 of the monarchs of Christendom (of Antigua and Barbuda, of Australia, of The Bahamas, of Barbados, of Belize, of Canada, of the Cook Islands, of Grenada, of Jamaica, of New Zealand, of Papua New Guinea, of Saint Kitts and Nevis, of Saint Lucia, of Saint Vincent and the Grenadines, of the Solomon Islands, of Tuvalu, of the United Kingdom, and the office of Paramount Chief of the Great Council of Chiefs of Fiji) are the same person.

Furthermore, any appeal to any and every country that regarded either or both of Islam and Christianity as fundamental to its identity, especially if such an appeal appeared over the names of Catholic and Orthodox hierarchs as such (from the very Holy Land, no less), as well as of their elite-friendly Anglican and Lutheran counterparts, would place the United States in a very difficult position indeed. Oh, yes, I have had some very interesting communications since posting my last comment.

Baron

am I missing something? Isn't Jordan Palestine?

pterodactyl

Democracy in Europe has meant the stupid have elected the wicked.

Alex Bensky

If the occupation is illegal, the question must be answsered: Who should be in rightful possession of the land? Not the Palestinian Arabs; they refused the 1947 partition plan; had they done so, of course, the sum total of Arabs displaced by Israel would have been none.

Not Jordan, certainly, although Jordan did annex the area it took during the 1948 war--curiously enough, of course, they and the Egyptians in Gaza could have set up the Palestinian state any time they wanted and yet no one, and I mean no one, ever made a fuss about this prior to 1967.

As to the exact borders, the Arabs said from the get-go in 1949 that they did not recognize any borders for Israel and would not do so; they stressed time and again that these were merely cease-fire lines along which they had for the moment agreed to stop fighting. But they would resume military action when the time came to destroy the Zionist entity. Why these lines have suddenly become holy and sacred is an open question.

But anyone who doesn't see Jordan's hold on the West Bank as illegal or Egypt's hold on Gaza as illegal cannot consistently claim that Israel's occupation of the territories is illegal.

That's, of course, logically. But as we all know there is a tacit proviso to every statement, "except for Jews."

Brian O'Connor

Question: are these morally bankrupt European politicians evil, or just very, very stupid?

They are simply the products of a postmodern educational system. They have been taught the postmodern canon and have absorbed it completely.

What's terrifying to me is that canon is nothing new.

And I marvel at my own stupidity.

I grew up in the '50s and '60s, where WW-II and the holocaust were front and center.

I naively believed that the centuries of anti-semitism and persecution of Jews which preceded holocaust had ended: we'd all been horrified by the demonization of Jews and the subsequent slaughter of millions of them, and, now that we saw where anti-semitism led, were comforted by our foolish belief that the conditions leading to the holocaust could never again occur.

And so it was, for 2 or 3 decades . . .

But no longer. The world is right back where it was in the early part of the 20th C.

The conditions for another holocaust are developing right before our eyes.

elixelx

@jpeeps
Is there anything anybody anywhere could say, or show, or demonstrate or prove that would or could persuade you to change your mind?
"He who is convinced against his will is of the same opinion still" (disputed)
Is your mind really open jpeeps? Do you really not know and are you really seeking enlightenment?
Or are you just engaging in some guerilla activity, playing the agent provocateur?
And if this last, WHY?
Stop being a hypocrite while playing the ignoramus!
This is an ongoing legal battle. Nothing has been decided. Illegal is a term in Law which indicates that the Law has been decided and set in stone. THAT'S WHY nobody can declare house-building ANYWHERE in the former Jordanian-ruled parts of Palestine illegal INTERNATIONALLY.
Of course, if you don't have a building permit that makes it illegal, but I don't believe that municipal illegality is what you mean by "illegal"!
There now, are you convinced? No? Well now we know why you asked!

Hawkeye

Its evil Melanie. They know what they are doing.

cuffleyburgers

The EU has an unblemished record at seizing and holding the Moral Low ground

just Louise

See this Melanie, for the delegitimisation of Israel in Europe by the Arab lobby:
edgar1981.blogspot.com/.../lse-s-new-middle-east-centre-eradicates.html

john

A book that is a must-read is the lengthy essay by the French Philosopher, Jean-Claude Milner, "The Criminal Leanings of Democratic Europe" in which he clearly deciphers Europe's unfinished argument with the Jewish People. Israel now represents the obstacle to Europe's unfinished business.

Derek BLADES

"Question: are these morally bankrupt European politicians evil, or just very, very stupid?"

Interesting question Melanie. Let me give you my answer.

European governments have now come to the conclusion that the Netanyahu government is intent on incorporating the West Bank into a greater Israel, has no interest in making any kind of peace agreement with the Palestinians nor of making any kind of compensation to the Arab people whose land was stolen from them when Israel was founded. They also see that President Obama has his hands tied by the pro-Israeli lobby in Washington and they are coming to his assistance, presumably with his connivance or even encouragement, by threatening to recognise an independent Palestine under President Abbas.

European politicians are not “morally bankrupt”: they understand that the displaced Arabs living in refugee camps have a moral claim on the Western powers who colluded in the founding of Israel. They are not “evil”: what they seek, an independent viable Palestine, is in the long-term interests of Israel and the world at large. They are not “stupid”: that is word that applies to those blinded by a “my country right or wrong” view of life.

Roger Kaye

"...within territories which during these past nine decades it has been entitled to settle under international law..."

Where does M.P. get her facts from? Which International Law is she referring to?..Even the US considers the West bank settlements illegal and NO state recognises Israel's anexation of East Jerusalem!

Jerry

Derek BLADES wrote,

The Netanyahu Government has "no interest in making any kind of peace agreement with the Palestinians "

Given the lack of compromise offered by the Palestinians, you might just as well have concluded the same thing about the Palestinians, but you did not!

Derek BLADES wrote, "the Netanyahu government is intent on incorporating the West Bank into a greater Israel"

Given the clearly stated goals of the Palestinians to eliminate Israel, you might have stated the argument to favor the Israelis, but you did not!

Derek BLADES wrote, "[an] independent viable Palestine is in the long-term interests of Israel"

Given the experience with Gaza, Lebanon, and Egypt you might have written the opposite, but you did not.

In short, there is no proof or even a hint that Israel would be better off with an independent Palestinian state. Indeed, if you were open-minded, you would soon have to admit that the Palestinians would be better off without a corrupt government of their peers and better off with an Israeli government who has minimal interest in their internal machinations.

I conclude that by any reasonable measure you are more interested in reducing or eliminating Israel than you are in aiding the poor Palestinians.

GaryL

It's just a new game while nothing much is happening. It's a manouver to take another hill, ready for the next time anything serious gets placed on the table. A Palestinian state at present would put Palestinians in a really awkward position.

The Arab League isn't prepared to accept such a radical change. They would have to re-appraise their complaints about Israel.

All the UN committees and funding organisations would have to come up with new charters to save themselves from being disbanded.

Israel would have no reason any more to assist with Palestinian health, economy, communications, water.

Harold

This is the Europe that has preferential trade agreements with Israel, welcomed Israel's entry into the OECD, coordinates its national and NATO military plans and exercises with Israel. Europe presumably wants the UN resolutions to be observed to put an end to this dispute, even if only by giving the Palestinians an unviable enclave, so that it can carry on its long-standing alliance with Israel unfettered by unfinished business (however inequitable the outcome may be to its victims, the Palestinians). There are also very strict limits to the disobedience the US will permit Europe to get away with.

David Lindsay

Baron, of course Jordan is Palestine: the entirely viable state created on both sides of the Jordan in 1948. Why would anyone design Jordan as currently constituted? No one ever did.

Beast Watcher

I vote "evil" for these European jerks!

C.Gee

Jerry -

Well said.

John.

If Turkey is allowed to hold on to that part of Eastern Greece and Constantinople that it took after being attacked by Greece after the end of the Great War, what is so wrong with Israel holding on to what it took after itself being attacked yet again?

John.

If Turkey is allowed to hold on to that part of Eastern Greece and Constantinople that it took after being attacked by Greece after the end of the Great War, what is so wrong with Israel holding on to what it took after itself being attacked yet again?

elixelx

"Even the US considers the West bank settlements illegal and NO state recognises Israel's anexation of East Jerusalem!" Roger K.
"EVEN the US..?" "EVEN THE US..!!"
Roger are you suggesting that everything and everybody the US "considers" illegal is de facto illegal? And its corollary, that everything the US "considers" legal--Gitmo, Liberation of Iraq, Mexican immigrants--is legal?
You don't have much respect or use for the legal justice system, national or international, do you Roger?
As if that were not silly enough, you say that no country recognizes Israel's annexation of east Jerusalem. How can any country recognize something that has not yet been formalised?
Yes Israel occupies East Jerusalem, after winning it in a defensive War and after Jordan ceded all rights to it; but show me a formal declaration by Israel of the "Annexation of East Jerusalem" please.
There is, however, one part of East Jerusalem (abandoned by Jordan) which Israel de facto and de jure has annexed, and that would be the Western Wall, which the Muslim Jordanians, in their infinite tolerance for other religions, turned into a pissoir; and I defy you to show me which countries have objected to that particular annexation!
You are nothing more than a propagandist, Roger, who cannot face facts and only repeats garbage. May your opinions suffer the same fate on Melanie's blog as the Western Wall did under the Jordanians!
I for one have used it as such!

Moll

Many years ago, Hannah Arendt wrote that "evil is banal". Europeans, including EU politicians of today, just like in the '30s, are taking ideological positions simply as a function of immature common-minded thoughtlessness—the tendency of common minds to "conform" to popular, faddish mass opinion without critically thinking about the immediate and/or ultimate, results of their actions or inaction.

Frenchy

There is already a Palestinian state and its main city is Amman!
There will be perhaps another one and perhaps a third one. How lucky are the Palestinians! There are many muslim countries but there is only one Jewish state struggling for its life.

Adam B.

John. similarly, Prussia is no longer in Germany, as Poland's border was moved westwards at the end of WWII, and all ethnic Germans expelled - as with the Sudetenland and the Czech Republic. In both cases, the ethnic Germans were expelled. When Israel took Judea and Samaria after being attacked from those very territories, it did NOT expel anyone. Yet the haters jump up and down that Israel should withdraw (despite no promise of peace in return) - whilst everyone just accepts the situation with Poland and the Czech republic. A clear double standard.

C.Gee

It would be enlightening to have David Lindsay, or any of the others who like to use the term, what a"viable" state means? Particularly when it describes a state of Palestine.

Roger K

elixelx Dec 15 7.10pm
Whoa, be careful my friend we are batting on the same side I believe. There is a vast difference between me, Roger K, who has used that name on this blog for a couple of years now, happy supporter of Israel and Roger Kaye, a useful idiot.

Truthtriumphs

Harold.

This is the Europe whose citizens in Germany, Austria etc. etc. screamed at their Jewish citizens "Go back to Palestine", in the 1930s and before. Note the judicious use of the word "back".
Now, when the Jews obliged and went back to Palestine, and because they have done rather well their and turned deserts and swamps into fertile lands, the cry from Europe is "Jew, get out of Palestine".
It is their and your way of saying, "Jew, there is no place for you in this world".
Go and hang your head in shame!

Brian O'Connor

Derek BLADES

I'm trying hard to understand you and where you're coming from, and this post by Mel might help me.

Do you believe that Israel has a right to exist?

A simple "yes" or "no" will suffice.

Thanks in advance.

Roger

elixelx...The July 9th, 2004 ICJ ruling stated: "Recalling that the Security Council described Israel's policy of establishing settlements in that territory as a “flagrant violation” of the Fourth Geneva Convention, the Court finds that those settlements have been established in breach of international law".....Which international law do you base your belief on?

Harold

Is it that the Palestinians are trying to do what the Zionists did in 1948, and rely on a UN resolution to garner recognition for a unilateral declaration of independence. Of course, the Palestinians do not have the military power to defend themselves and conquer others. And the UN that has passed all the resolutions on the Palestinians is more representative than in 1948, when a large part of the world was not represented, all the Muslim states understandably voted against, and many of those who voted for were bullied or bribed. But, in essentials, what is the difference?

Harold

Truthtriumphs
December 16th, 2010 1:32am
As I pointed out, Europe is a staunch supporter of Israel. It has even backed away from any idea of recognising a unilateral declaration by the Palestinians. Your remark is idiotic.

Truthtriumphs

Blades.

The western powers that "colluded" in the re-etablishment of the Jewish state also "colluded" in the creation of Iraq, Trans-Jordan and lebanon--- but that's OK in your book, isn't it?

Israel, was legally brought into being by
the league of Nations, endorsed by the UN (the only country in the world to be endorsed in this way).The decision to craete Israel was defied by the Arabs, who then attacked the legal state of Israel, and lost.
It is the accepted way that when an entity attacks without provocation, and loses, then a loss of real estate results.

Further, you are remakably untroubled that Pakistan, a country that had never previously existed, created a year before Israel, on land genuinely stolen from India, evicted some 10,000,000 Hindus, whose land it was.
Oh, I forgot, they weren't Jews.

And btw, when talking about compensation, you coyly omit to mention that the 3/4 million Jews evicted from Arab lands where they had lived for more than 1,000 years, were brutally thrown out, stripped of their posessions, and lost the land they owned, which amounted to an area 6 times present day Israel.
How about demanding compensation for them?
Oh no, they're Jews, Blades, aren't they?

elixelx

Roger, my sincerest apologies. In my hurry to join battle I should have paid more attention to the identity of the enemy and not been so lazy about calling him out by his correct name.
May I suggest changing your handle to "Roger K, good guy!" since that will more truly reflect your standing here!

Truthtriumphs

Harold.

Wrong on every count!

Consult the history books.

Eliyana

Kosova all over again

Truthtriumphs

Harold.

What business is it of the EU to meddle in ME politics?

If it doesn't like the idea of "occupation", let it sort out the occupations within its own territory, as Adam B rightly pointed out.

Roger

elixelx - Truth will out....
"...... I should have paid more attention to the identity of the enemy"......Most bigots think "identity" more important than "principle"......I care not whether you consider yourself enemy, friend, or man-in-the-moon....All I ask is your support your claim that Israeli settlements are legal....Which International Law supports your claim?

Harold

Truthtriumphs
December 16th, 2010 11:29am
There is something hugely enjoyable about being advised by you of all people to consult the history books! I will return the compliment. For once in your career of blundering propagandising, read the history.

John.

Adam B.: Absolutely right. Perhaps it is time for Israel to begin to emulate Poland and Czcheckoslavakia and expel these troublesome people.

Harold

Truthtriumphs
December 16th, 2010 12:10pm
"What business is it of the EU to meddle in ME politics?"

- I take it from this comment that you have moved on from the absurdity of comparing Europe now with Europe in the 1930s. But do you mean Europe should withdraw its material, military and diplomatic support from Israel?

elixelx

Ah, Roger, a man without enemies, given he's never taken a position on anything! Loved by all those he hurts!
He doesn't care who I am, what life I've led. All he cares is that I answer him, demands I answer him...
Roger, I prefer being a bigot-an interesting bigot to be sure-- to being a boorish pedant. And tho' a bigot I will take a minute to answer your untrammelled foolishness.
SHOW ME, ROGER, A SINGLE COURT OF LAW, WHICH HAS DECLARED THE SETTLEMENTS ILLEGAL!
NO OPINIONS, NO "EVENS THE US", NO THEORIES, YOU IGNORANT PEASANT, SHOW ME ONE SINGLE LAW-DECIDING BODY, ANYWHERE, THAT SAYS THAT ISRAEL'S ONLY PIECE OF ANNEXED TERRITORY, THE WESTERN WALL, IS ILLEGAL!
And that's the part Israel's annexed! Much less can you claim that the un-annexed parts--the settlements--are illegal. How can they be illegal; the land belongs to no state, no person, no entity!
To try to ameliorate your blinding ignorance my son, since bigots like me try always try teach ignoramuses like you: Two rabbinical students are standing in front of a wall:
"My Rabbi is SO powerful," says the one, "if he told that wall to fall down, it would!"
"That's nothing," says the second; "if my Rabbi told the wall not to fall down, it wouldn't!!"
You, Roger, are as devious as that second student, asking me to disprove the negative! But devious is not always smart; cockroaches are devious too, yet they always lose out and get crushed by bigots with brooms!
And yes, you are my enemy, and I really love you!

Roger

JOHN R,SamP,elixelx, et al
...I am pleased to help you out...M.L has got it wrong...Israeli settlements are illegal under International Law...See the ICJ July 9th 2004 ruling: " Recalling that the Security Council described Israel's policy of establishing settlements in that territory as a “flagrant violation” of the Fourth Geneva Convention, the Court finds that those settlements have been established in breach of international law."

If anyone on this board has a International Law ruling in favour of settlements I should very much like to see it....Even the Israeli MFA cannot do better than claim legality based on the 1922 British Mandate!

JOHN ROOSEVELT

MikeW
December 14th, 2010 11:17pm
Can someone explain why its a problem to recognise the palestinian state? Also why does this act punish Israel?

Presumably Israel won't recognise it anyway and keep on building.

Are all people that fail to agree to be regarded as evil or stupid?"

Well you certainly seem to be, for starters.

Even the anti Zionist's best friend - Netanyahu - recognises the Palestinians should have a state..but there is still the minor detail of what its boarders should be, and what to do about the refugee question.

Get it?

JOHN ROOSEVELT

Derek Blades: "Derek BLADES
December 15th, 2010 11:08am
"Question: are these morally bankrupt European politicians evil, or just very, very stupid?"

Interesting question Melanie. Let me give you my answer.

European governments have now come to the conclusion that the Netanyahu government is intent on incorporating the West Bank into a greater Israel, has no interest in making any kind of peace agreement with the Palestinians nor of making any kind of compensation to the Arab people whose land was stolen from them when Israel was founded. They also see that President Obama has his hands tied by the pro-Israeli lobby in Washington and they are coming to his assistance, presumably with his connivance or even encouragement, by threatening to recognise an independent Palestine under President Abbas."

Derek Blades : you are a bigger nong that I imagined. You not only manifest what, i think, should justly because the Alzheimer's Perspective, but you you are under the impression that crass, deliberate lying is a substitute for the truth if only you can assert it brazenly enough.

You need to be Pilgered or Fisked, I think...but, no, they wouldn't do that to a rabid anti zionist, I forgot..or Saddam...or Id Amin, no doubt.

..but we do have C. Gee...::)))Mmmm...

Twaddlemeister in Wonderland....

JOHN ROOSEVELT

Harold: Let the Palestinians do what they want and Ahmedinjad...But you/they cannot have it both ways.

I say, let;s stop the bulls&&t. Let's celebrate Wikileaks and know that duplictiy and twaddle rule...and do what we all have to do to survive.

Dialogue with anyone like you is impossible, as it is with most Arab and moslem elites - for whatever reasons, right or wrong.

Let the war continue...and for goodness sake stop whingeing when you are defeated...

JOHN ROOSEVELT

Harold: Let the Palestinians do what they want and Ahmedinjad...But you/they cannot have it both ways.

I say, let;s stop the bulls&&t. Let's celebrate Wikileaks and know that duplictiy and twaddle rule...and do what we all have to do to survive.

Dialogue with anyone like you is impossible, as it is with most Arab and moslem elites - for whatever reasons, right or wrong.

Let the war continue...and for goodness sake stop whingeing when you are defeated...

JOHN ROOSEVELT

Roger: you're referring to the Hague's ruling on the Wall?

Frankly, Roger, the Israel vilifiers couldn't care less about the Law unless they can use it to smack Israel. Whenever it supports Israel, it is invalid, because it is only, then, the toy of the Imperialists.

The Arabs and moslems have been defying Intenrational Law by attacking Jews for decades. The Jews have to fight back anyway they can and will...It really is simple. The Wall hasn't always been there, nor needed to be. Jews have better things to do with their money...

There has never been peace; nor can there be peace in the Middle East..Forget your twaddle. It will not make any difference nor should it.

Adam B.

Yes Roger, the ICJ ruling arrived at by a Chinese judge who rose through the ranks of the Communist dictatorship to become a judge in a system which routinely tortures and locks up political prisoners, is involved with the occupation and suppression of Tibet, and a judicial system which executes more people than the rest of the world combined.

Yes, I bow before such a moral and legal authority.

Shame that you do.

elixelx

Roger, I'm still looking for the citation of July 9th 2004 (I wouldn't be surprised if you made it up!) but in the meantime I visited the ICJ site which advises that there are two JURISDICTION categories, namely "Contentious and Advisory" and goes on tho describe the two.
So pray tell, Roger, which of the two did your judgement fall under, or are you lying?

"Only States may apply to and appear before the International Court of Justice. International organizations, other collectivities and private persons are not entitled to institute proceedings before the Court."
http://www.icj-cij.org/jurisdiction/index.php?p1=5&p2=1
Which State brought a case before the ICJ on the legality of settlements, Roger?

"Since States alone have capacity to appear before the Court, public (governmental) international organizations cannot as such be parties to any case before it. A special procedure, the advisory procedure, is, however, available to such organizations and to them alone."
http://www.icj-cij.org/jurisdiction/index.php?p1=5&p2=2
Does July 9 2004 constitute a special procedure, Roger?

"Contrary to judgments, and except in rare cases where it is stipulated beforehand that they shall have binding effect (for example, as in the Convention on the Privileges and Immunities of the United Nations, in the Convention on the Privileges and Immunities of the specialized agencies of the United Nations, and the Headquarters Agreement between the United Nations and the United States of America), the Court's advisory opinions have no binding effect. The requesting organ, agency or organization remains free to decide, by any means open to it, what effect to give to these opinions.Although without binding effect, the advisory opinions of the Court nevertheless carry great legal weight and moral authority. They are often an instrument of preventive diplomacy and have peace-keeping virtues. Advisory opinions also, in their way, contribute to the elucidation and development of international law and thereby to the strengthening of peaceful relations between States."
http://www.icj-cij.org/jurisdiction/index.php?p1=5&p2=2
Ah! An "advisory opinion" given by a UN Body, concerning Israel is always, as we all know, well worth the toilet paper it's written on! Opinions aren't Law, Roger, albeit given by august(hahaha) bodies like the ICJ.

That's the ICJ for you Roger. I am still looking for the July 2004 ruling. Do please give us the link, Roger! Roger? ROGER?

Pat Dolan

Baron
December 15th, 2010 12:10am

am I missing something? Isn't Jordan Palestine?

That's what I thought. ??

Brian O'Connor

I wrote:

Brian O'Connor
December 16th, 2010 4:05am
Derek BLADES

I'm trying hard to understand you and where you're coming from, and this post by Mel might help me.

Do you believe that Israel has a right to exist?

A simple "yes" or "no" will suffice.

Thanks in advance.

Derek, in case you somehow missed this, I'm posting it again.

I look forward to your answer.

DavidSI

Brian O'Connor: You won't get an answer to your question (which has been asked several times before). Sorry, but I thought you might want to know and just move on.

BTW: C.Gee: I enjoy reading your posts. They're well argued and balanced.

Happy Christmas to you all.

John.

Roger: How is it then that, for example, the UN says nothing whatsoever about the land annexed from Northern India by China? Or ideed about the invasion and annexing of Tibet and of East Turkestan, (now Xinjiang), by China. Is China immune from a law that singles out Israel?

Derek BLADES

John Roosevelt. Please confirm that you were influenced by alcohol, a prescription medicine or a banned substance when you wrote this:

"you are a bigger nong (translation please) that (sic)I imagined. You not only manifest what, i (sic) think, should justly because (sic) the Alzheimer's Perspective, but you you (sic)are under the impression that crass, deliberate lying is a substitute for the truth if only you can assert it brazenly enough.

You need to be Pilgered or Fisked,(never met either gentleman) I think...but, no, they wouldn't do that (what did they have inb lind?)to a rabid anti zionist (sic), I forgot..or Saddam...or Id (sic)Amin, no doubt.

Derek BLADES

Brian O'Connor asks me:

"Do you believe that Israel has a right to exist?" And then shows the shallowness of his thinking by seeking the answer all fools want- a simple "yes" or "no."

I am not sure that any country has a "right to exist". I have never thought of countries as having "rights to exist" and I do not see any advantage to thinking in those terms. About 200 political entities are presently recognised by the United Nations and Israel is among them. Under its present government I would classify Israel among the rogue nations like Sudan, North Korea, Sao Tome and Ivory Coast that should be subjected to international pressure to behave themselves. But whether they do so or not I expect that most of the rogue nations will continue to exist, and there is little doubt that Israel, armed to the teeth with American death-technology and with its own inventory of 100 or so nuclear weapons, will be among the survivors.

I hope that answer your question, Brian

In any event let me join DavidSI in wishing a Happy Christmas and prosperous New Year to all contributors who have disagreed with me in 2010. May they see the error of their ways in 2011.

C.Gee

Brian O'Connor:

You will, naturally, draw your own conclusions about the rationality manifested by anyone who places Israel with North Korea, Ivory Coast, and Sudan as a rogue nation. When dealing with such a mind, it is indeed futile to ask of it a "yes" or a "no", as its words may mean their own opposites, depending on context, manifesting the newspeak antinomianism.

What such a mind intends by "Happy Christmas and a prosperous New Year", I will not analyse without a glass of brandy nearby.

In the spirit of reason and good fellowship, though, one might respond with a hearty "Ho Ho Ho."

amerchristian

H. Clinton spoke to Netenyahu where they discussed various ways to go about a freeze. The
O administration was to get back to them with final decisions in writing. They did not, and then accused Israel of refusing all offers.

Miranda Rose Smith

If the EU recognizes "Palestine," I think Israel should return the favor and recognize Bretagne, Gascony, Flanders, Roussillon, Catalonia, Andalusia, Wales, Cornwall and Lappland. Don't these people, who want to recognize a "Palestinian" state, besides Jordan, just in order to insult and threaten Israel, and who don't give a hoot in hell about the now-so-called "Palestinians," except as cat's paws to finish off Israel for them, realize that if they ever get their wish and Israel is, G-d forbid, destroyed, EUROPE, where they LIVE, is next on Iran's hit list?

Off topic: Ms. Phillips, I am surprised that a woman as moral and decent as you, a firm believer in the rule of law, has yet to mention that what Wikileaks did was ILLEGAL.

More off-topic: For all of you who fasted on the 10th of Tevet, I hope you had an easy one.

Sergey

Legality of any sovereign state is, according to Westphalia Treaty, is based on recognition by this state of sovereinity of its neibour states and lack of territorial disputes with them. Since PA never recognized Israel as sovereign state and has territorial disputes with her, any recognition of Palestinian State would be illegal and violating the most basic principle of international law. That is, it can and should be ignored.

Miranda Rose Smith

Off topic: Ms. Phillips, I am surprised that a woman as moral and decent as you, a firm believer in the rule of law, has yet to mention that what Wikileaks did was ILLEGAL.

Dear Ms. Phillips: You mentioned it in your column today. Thanks.

JOHN ROOSEVELT

Derek Blades: "Derek BLADES
December 18th, 2010 6:12pm
John Roosevelt. Please confirm that you were influenced by alcohol, a prescription medicine or a banned substance when you wrote this:"

Oh Derek, dear, the answer is even simpler than you imagine. I was merely influenced by your crass (sic)post/s.

You are neck and neck with Harold, I think, in the twaddlemeister (sic) stakes.

btw: a "nong" is a peculiar variant of twit (sic), one with a penchant for gross deceit(sic) and faux considerations for anything but cant (sic). You are a very big nong (sic), like Harold (sic), and the two of you are condemned to gurgle in twaddle (sic)...an unhappy fate for such aspirant "thinkers".

norm

how the hell are buidling these setlements not illegal? when israel is holding palistine or in palistine illegaly