Gaza and Israel VII

Tom Vouloumanos wrote:

Saga Mr. Spector is right don't listen to me listen to the guy who's read everything and I mean everything...no seriously everything on the subject I'm talking about Norman Finkelstein:

source: http://www.counterpunch.com/finkelstein01132009.html

Every year, the United Nations General Assembly votes on a resolution entitled “Peaceful Settlement of the Palestine Question.” And every year the vote is the same: it’s the whole world on one side; Israel, the United States and some South Sea atolls and Australia on the other side. The vote this past year was 164-to-7. Every year since 1989—in 1989, the vote was 151-to-3, the whole world on one side, the United States, Israel and the island state of Dominica on the other side.

We have the Arab League, all twenty-two members of the Arab League, favoring a two-state settlement on the June 1967 border. We have the Palestinian Authority favoring that two-state settlement on the June 1967 border. We now have Hamas favoring that two-state settlement on the June 1967 border. The one and only obstacle is Israel, backed by the United States. That’s the problem.

 

...

 

The law is very clear. July 2004, the highest judicial body in the world, the International Court of Justice, ruled Israel has no title to any of the West Bank and any of Gaza. They have no title to Jerusalem. Arab East Jerusalem, according to the highest judicial body in the world, is occupied Palestinian territory. The International Court of Justice ruled all the settlements, all the settlements in the West Bank, are illegal under international law.

---

As you can see there is no controversy at all from the side of those who want peace, namely the entire world except for Israel backed by the US with this and that exception from time to time.

The record is actually very clear on this Saga and you can easily access the UN resolutions and the world court judgements.

As for who decides borders, well, borders, Saga are not decided unilaterally by states, they are decided by international law, actually Saga it's pretty much the no. 1 priority of international law since we have a world system based on states, these boundaries need to be defined and as you can see above, these boundaries are defined.

Israel and the US don't accept them, everyone else does, so does international law and the Palestinians accept them - they may hold in thier hearts something else, true, but not relevant - they have accepted these borders throughout.

Again, there is no controversy, just one single issue:  Israel does not recognize international law and consensus and continues to enslave Palestine.

There is no other story here

(oh, as for Jerusalem, Palestinians have repeatedly made concessions to only take back the east, the Arab league is in agreement..again no controversy).

Thanks Tom, and to FM and MS, "Don't listen to Tom" is rather ... um ... patronizing, methinks (for myself), not to mention unnecessarily dismissive of a good poster.

What I was getting at is 'what is the law', and Tom has answered that. If Israel does not acknowledge the International consensus and ruling of the International Court, that does not make it any less the law.

We do not change the law to suit warmongers. The law is not null and void because warmongers Israel and US refuse to obey it.

(By that reasoning, serial murderers are not accountable to the law because they still murder and get away with it. duh)

And that is my point. There is a consensus about the borders and there is law.

 Warmongers have laws imposed upon them. That's why we have international law: We do not wait for the agreement of war criminals.

There is a border agreement, 40 years old, and Israel constantly violates it, and in doing so, Israel is accountable to the International court, as well as the court of puiblic opinion.

Obfuscating that fact is playing into the hands of the criminal warmongers who want the world to excuse them, pleading 'special circumstances', but it doesn't wash. There is no legal excuse for Israel violating the border, oppressing the Palestinians who have every right to be there.

There is no legal justification or support for Israel's expansionism. It is racist Zionism, just as hateful as anti-Semitism and it is illegal.

imo

 Might does not make right.

So, we keep mouthing righteous words and twiddle our fingers waiting for Israel and the U.S. to obey "the law"?