Hypocrisy, stemming from the same well that ensured that no Palestinian Arab would be crying about "occupation" or demanding a state in the West Bank and Gaza while they were occupied by Jordan and Egypt between 1948 and 1967. "Interview: Refugees will not be citizens of new state," by Annie Slemrod for The Daily Star, September 15 (thanks to Wimpy):
BEIRUT: Palestinian refugees will not become citizens of a new Palestinian state, according to Palestine’s ambassador to Lebanon.From behind a desk topped by a miniature model of Palestine’s hoped-for blue United Nations chair, Ambassador Abdullah Abdullah spoke to The Daily Star Wednesday about Palestine’s upcoming bid for U.N. statehood.
The ambassador unequivocally says that Palestinian refugees would not become citizens of the sought for U.N.-recognized Palestinian state, an issue that has been much discussed. “They are Palestinians, that’s their identity,” he says. “But … they are not automatically citizens.”
This would not only apply to refugees in countries such as Lebanon, Egypt, Syria and Jordan or the other 132 countries where Abdullah says Palestinians reside. Abdullah said that “even Palestinian refugees who are living in [refugee camps] inside the [Palestinian] state, they are still refugees. They will not be considered citizens.”
Abdullah said that the new Palestinian state would “absolutely not” be issuing Palestinian passports to refugees.
Neither this definitional status nor U.N. statehood, Abdullah says, would affect the eventual return of refugees to Palestine. “How the issue of the right of return will be solved I don’t know, it’s too early [to say], but it is a sacred right that has to be dealt with and solved [with] the acceptance of all.” He says statehood “will never affect the right of return for Palestinian refugees.”
The right of return that Abdullah says is to be negotiated would not only apply to those Palestinians whose origins are within the 1967 borders of the state, he adds. “The state is the 1967 borders, but the refugees are not only from the 1967 borders. The refugees are from all over Palestine. When we have a state accepted as a member of the United Nations, this is not the end of the conflict. This is not a solution to the conflict. This is only a new framework that will change the rules of the game.”
The Palestinian Liberation Organization would remain responsible for refugees, and Abdullah says that UNRWA would continue its work as usual....
A U.S. veto in the Security Council, Abdullah says, would only harm the great power. “The United States is propagating that it is the champion of freedom and democracy around the world, and if it denies the Palestinians the right to be free, to be democratic, and to live in dignity, it is not a good sign for the U.S. It leaves a dark stain … It’s not good for America,” he says. “America deserves better.”
He says the U.S. should be mindful of “signals in the region … that are ringing a bell.” He mentions the tension between Turkey and Israel and the recent eruption of protests at the Israeli embassy in Cairo.
“If wrong policies are adopted in the U.S., it will only give a freer hand to extremism. It only empowers negative forces. And this will make it more difficult and complicated for rational forces to prevail.”...
Threat noted.
The ultimate religion of the one true merciful God once again shames us with its humanity toward Palestinian refugees.
"When we have a state accepted as a member of the United Nations, this is not the end of the conflict. This is not a solution to the conflict. This is only a new framework that will change the rules of the game.”
If the surrounding Arab states really cared about the "refugees", they would have repatriated them decades ago. A real "solution" would deprive the islamic world of what it has really wanted all along -- a political football around which to promote its islamic supremacist, jew-hating agenda. The closer they get to achieving the "statehood" red herring, the more they'll backpedal. And the more the leftard western governments will cave in to new demands.
What can we expect in future from a nation that will happily start it's existance with the wholly unessesary continuation of suffering of it's own people for the sake of an unobtainable future goal?
A Palestinian state should not be established while it has leaders who would enact such a callous policy.
The countries who vote yeah will be consigning palestinian refugees living in camps to several more generations of misery.
But the countries that vote yeah don't really care about arab suffering. They will vote yeah because they prefer hating Jews to showing compassion to arabs.
So, the "Palestinian" ambassador to Lebanon's name is 'Slave of Allah Slave of Allah'.
Great. Bodes well. Can't wait for the bright future...
The Palestinian Liberation Organization would remain responsible for refugees, and Abdullah says that UNRWA would continue its work as usual....
The Parasiticians need to maintain its refugees status in order to get the billions in UNRWA aid.
Other conflicts after 1967 - from Vietnam to Sri Lanka and to Africa had produced much more refugees than Palestine, yet today those refugees are very much settled in their own or other countries. Only Palestinian remains today. Arafat had siphoned millions of the aid while blaming Israel for their woes. Despite revelations that aid money had gone to suicide bombers' families, the aid continue to flow. UNRWA USAID and other western world continue to feed this Palestinian addiction.
I've been wait for the pro-hamas Palestinians in canada to get a State and go back home so they can spew their hatred and have public protests to use children and human shields .
I don't mind the peaceful Palestinians in canada, but it's the hamas supporting losers that enjoy our Welfare and Health Care as a Victim but then bring their battle to candian soil and smear the image of those from that region.
Oddly though, a large portion of Refugees from Palestine are the Christians that fled from the oppression and death thrats fro mIslam and Hamas. But the MSM is still quiet over the Gay Muslims from that Region that get Refugee status in canada as a minority within an oppressive islamic/muslim dominated society.
This issue will never be solved until all former mandates and resolutions are clarified and accepted or discarded and rewritten.
The UN is so biased they aren't qualified to determine anything.Creating a committee would be complicated.You would need to isolated each member,educate them completely ,on history,archeology ,binding and non binding resolutions,British failures etcetc.with no bias.
One of the most contentious points is easy to solve.The right to return.
December 1947-March 1948 "Palestinians" fled.
UN General Assembly Resolution 194 passed on 11 December 1948 which provided (Article 11):
Resolves that the refugees wishing to return to their homes and live at peace with their neighbours should be permitted to do so at the earliest practicable date, and that compensation should be paid for the property of those choosing not to return and for loss of or damage to property which, under principles of international law or in equity, should be made good by the Governments or authorities responsible.
The Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR) article 13 states that "[e]veryone has the right to freedom of movement and residence within the borders of each State. Everyone has the right to leave any country, including his own, and to return to his country."
UN General Assembly Resolution 3236, passed on 22 November 1974 declared the right of return to be an "inalienable right".
1.These non binding international laws were established AFTER the event.
2.They grant the right to return to a home state,country,homeland.
3."refugees wishing to return to their homes and live at peace with their neighbours "
If these are acceptable resolutions,they would have to be recognized as retroactive to include Palestine refuges ,hence it would be retroactive for everyone world wide with no time limit.
Palestine has never been a state or country and the only official designation it has as a homeland is in the Balfour Declaration-British Mandate,as the homeland of the Jews.
Proof of property/home ownership,live in PEACE.
1,000,000 Jews were expelled from their homes or forced to flee Arab countries from 1948 until the early 1970s.Property,businesses and bank accounts confiscated by the Arabs totaled over $1b USD and land equal to four times the size of todays Israel .
To repeat.
http://www.newenglishreview.org/blog_direct_link.cfm/blog_id/37916
Saturday, 17 September 2011
Martin Sherman On The "Anti-Nation" Pushed By The "Palestinian" Arabs
From the Jerusalem Post:
"UN-nation; un-nation; non-nation; anti-nation".
And:
http://www.newenglishreview.org/blog_direct_link.cfm/blog_id/36458
Thursday, 14 July 2011
"Fitzgerald: Identities Constructed Here" (re-posted from 2007).
An article that should have been circulated long ago - translated, as necessary - to the representatives of every non-Muslim country that has a seat in the UN. And to every elected representative in every non-Muslim country.
Just a sample of what Hugh has to say, to encourage the new readers here to click on the link and read the rest.
"The war in the Middle East is that between Arabs and Jews, not between “Israelis” and “Palestinians”.
"Long before there was an Israel, there were Jews living in Yemen, in Iraq, in Syria, in North Africa, in Iran (before expelled by the Muslims from the Jazirat al-Arab, they were even on the Arabian Peninsula; Hebrew lettering has been found on ruins in northwestern Saudi Arabia, Land of the Midianites).
"The appropriation of the term "Palestinian" -- as in "Palestinian people" -- and its deliberate promotion from adjective to noun (as in "the 'Palestinians'") -- was a deliberate and tendentious act of propaganda.
"The term "Israeli" per contra, is nothing more than a description of "the citizens of a nation-state called Israel" (not all of whom, by the way, are Jews), and it would be far more accurate to describe the business in Annapolis, or Camp David, and the conflict itself, as being not between "Israeli" and "Palestinian" but between Arab and Jew,
" or still more accurately, between Believer and Infidel,
"for the source of the conflict is to be located in Islam, and the refusal in Islam to countenance an Infidel state or power, of any size, controlling land, of any amount, that was once ruled over by Muslims.
"If Israel happens to have been at the forefront of Arab Muslim efforts, that hardly means that the same claim is not made on Spain, Sicily, the Balkans, Greece, Bulgaria, Rumania, much of Hungary, almost all of India, and so on.
(And that is why copies of this article, pointedly highlighted, should have been given, particularly, to Spain, to Italy, to Greece, Serbia, Macedonia, Bulgaria, Romania, Hungary, India...and Russia - dda).
"Nor, of course, does the fact that places formerly part of Dar al-Islam are at the top of the Islamic To-Do List (Recover Lands),
"mean that the claim to the rest of the known world has disappeared, or would disappear, if the denizens of Dar al-Islam managed to recapture every inch of land once part of Dar al-Islam.
" No, they have bigger fish to fry -- the whole world.
"And surely at the SOAS there are books, if not courses, that will let you in on that not-exactly well-kept secret."
One may note that George Habash - supposedly communist scion of dhimmi 'Palestinian' Christians, and chief thug of the thuggish PFLP - told Oriana Fallaci exactly that, when she interviewed him, years ago; he openly proclaimed the Arab (which is, in effect, the Msulim) intention of Total World Conquest and Total World Domination. Not Deutschland but Arabia/ Islamia Uber Alles. She describes that interview in 'The Force of Reason'.
And then there is Martha Gellhorn's classic 1961 article, 'The Arabs of Palestine'.
http://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/1969/12/the-arabs-of-palestine/4203/
http://www.theatlantic.com/doc/196110/gellhorn
Observe, toward the end, her prescient analogy of the 'Palestinian' Arabs, and the use that she could see would be made of them, with the Sudetendeutsch and the use that was made of them by Hitler.
This alone is enough reason for me to lose ALL sympathy for the Falastin Arab cause.
If, for the sake of argument, something bad were to happen to Canada [and I say this thinking, with a fundamentalistically Christian shudder, GOD FORBID!], and the USA got flooded with Canadian refugees, I'm sure they'd be out of camps within a year, and by the end of the legally stipulated period, they'd be applying for and getting naturalization. And, our "racist" polity probably wouldn't even deign to notice that the non-white Canadian refugees would be naturalizing, too.
Worse yet, the Falastin street gets worked up how America is the big, bad Shaitan in their plight, and dances when our buildings are brought down and our people killed. Yet we have given passport-holding, consular-protected, voting-rights citizenship to their people who washed up on our shores--and they are not willing to do the same for their supposed "brothers". This leads me to suspect that even after the Falastin Arabs throw the Jews into the Mediterannean, their "country" will be one of the world's worst Hell-holes, a self-made Jahanum for themselves.
I know I'm stating the obvious, but it is important to be clear:
The "palestinian refugees" CANNOT and MUST NOT be given citizenship in any future "state" Why? Simple.
_________________________________
If "refugees" (trans-jordanians) are given citizenship, it makes moot their desire for the DESTRUCTION OF ISRAEL.
_________________________________
These dummies have boxed themselves in and Abbas has made a huge mistake.The cat's out of the bag, now, for all the world to see.
Hamas has been "frank" in their insistence that "we don't need UN approval for a state". Not granting citizenship plays right into their murderous hands.
Again, these trans-jordanians have painted themselves into a "logic" corner out of which they simply cannot escape, without recognizing Israel and renouncing violence, which they cannot do, at the risk of losing power over their Fatah constituency.
Heres an idea.
Not A "two -State" but A 'two-Stage" Solution
by Tawfik Hamid
www.tawfikhamid.com
All attempts over several decades to create a two-state solution for the Arab-Israeli conflict have ended in failure.
On one hand, the Israelis ask themselves a basic question: Why should we accept the statehood of people who shamelessly promote in their media, educational systems, and public speeches our annihilation and destruction?
On the other hand, the Palestinians want to play a trick by gaining statehood without accepting the legitimacy of Israel as a Jewish state in the region. This refusal lays the groundwork for a Palestinian state to continue its stated goal, since the time of Arafat, of taking over all the land of Israel. It is this reality that has and will continue to prevent the two state solution.
High levels of Anti-Semitism in all the surrounding Arab countries further impede hope for any solution, as Israel's security concerns are totally realistic.
Further attempts to create a two state solution in the current atmosphere of anti-Semitism from the Palestinian side and mistrust from the Israeli side are likely to be about as effective as banging our heads against the proverbial brick wall.
The only situation that has resulted in some resolution for an Arab-Israeli conflict occurred when President Sadat of Egypt accepted the existence of Israel and expressed a true desire to live in peace beside the Israelis. The offer of President Sadat was welcomed by the Israelis and resulted in the returning of Sinai back to Egypt.
The following "two-Stage" solution may help resolving the conflict:
Stage 1: Palestinians would offer to accept the existence of Israel as Jewish state, criminalize anti-Semitic remarks in their societies, and teach educational curricula that promote living in peace with the Israelis.
This stage would need to last for 2-3 years to prove that the Palestinians are genuinely interested in peace with their Israeli neighbors, not in deception.
Stage 2: After the Palestinians has demonstrated true ability to live peacefully beside and with acceptance of the state of Israel, border disputes could be addressed and resolved. The atmosphere of peace and relationships of trust must however be created first.
We have to accept the reality that Israel's peace treaty with Egypt and return of Sinai to Egypt has not yet achieved true normalization of their relationship. Israelis are therefore understandably suspicious about future peace deals with Arab nations. Palestinians would need to prove their commitment to peace and accept international monitoring to verify their actions.
In sum, a two-stage solution rather than the traditional two-state solution may offer more potential for solving the Arab-Israeli conflict.