Israel vows to ignore world court verdict that West Bank bar

DreamTone7 · Joined: 20 Sep 2002 Posts: 2571

I don't blame Israel at all. They can't be convicted of anything for building something on their own land. Is Palestine a nation? No...never has been. It's a piece of land...the same way the Sahara Desert is a piece of land with no regards to specific nationality or national boundry. What year was Palestine recognized as a nation?

HKRockChick · No More Peas! Joined: 25 Nov 2003 Posts: 1513

story.news.yahoo.com/news...100536&e=1

JERUSALEM (AFP) - Israel said it has no intention of halting work on its West Bank barrier as the world court was set to rule it contravenes international law and that parts built on Palestinian land should be dismantled.

"Israel has no reason to submit to a plainly absurd decision which pays no account to the role of the security fence in the fight against terrorism," a senior government official told AFP on condition of anonymity as leaked copies of the verdict were widely published on the Internet.

The court said in a ruling, that is merely advisory, that "the construction of the wall being built by Israel, the occupying power, in the occupied Palestinian territory" was "contrary to international law", according to the leaks.

"It (Israel) is under an obligation to cease forthwith the works of construction of the wall being built in the Occupied Palestinian Territory, including in and around East Jerusalem, (and) to dismantle forthwith the structure therein situated."

The International Court of Justice (ICJ), the UN's highest legal body, also said in the much-anticipated verdict that Israel should pay compensation to Palestinians whose property had been damaged by the construction work.

"Israel is under an obligation to make reparation for all damage caused by the construction of the wall in the Occupied Palestinian Territory, including in and around East Jerusalem," it said.

It also called for the UN General Assembly and Security Council to take action to halt the construction work.

"The United Nations (news - web sites), and especially the General Assembly and the Security Council, should consider what further action is required to bring to an end the illegal situation resulting from the construction of the wall."

Even before reports of the verdict emerged, the Israeli government had made clear it had no intention of halting construction work which is due to be completed by the end of next year and should eventually stretch for some 700 kilometers (430 miles).

While the Palestinians say its route -- which often juts deep into the West Bank -- shows its real intent is to pre-empt the borders of their promised future state, the Israelis point to a marked downfall in suicide attacks as proof of its success so far.

Israeli government spokesman Avi Pazner said the ICJ had "no jurisdiction" to rule over the barrier and said that it should only come up for debate after Israel's planned pullout of the Gaza Strip (news - web sites) is completed next year.

"It will be up to us and the Palestinians, together, as part of an agreement that I hope will come after the withdrawal from Gaza to discuss all questions, including this anti-terrorist barrier," he told Radio France Internationale.

Justice Minister Tommy Lapid told reporters that "the only decision that matters for the government is the verdict of the supreme court".

Judges at Israel's highest court ruled last month that part of the barrier -- a montage of electric fencing, barbed wire and concrete wall -- should be rerouted north of Jerusalem because it infringed the rights of some 35,000 Palestinian inhabitants.

But the supreme court also confirmed in effect the government's right to build the barrier on security grounds.

A senior Palestinian official, who also requested anonymity, expressed delight at the prospect of the world court's verdict which he said represented "a great victory for the Palestinians".

The ICJ said in a statement that it was aware that "various documents are being disseminated on the Internet by a number of organizations regarding the advisory opinion which the court is to render on Friday", and emphasized that "the only authentic text is the official text issued by the court".

The opinion was scheduled to be read at a public hearing in The Hague (news - web sites) at 3:00 pm (1300 GMT), and was then to be posted on the ICJ's website.

The verdict comes after three days of hearings into the barrier's legality back in February that were boycotted by the Israelis.

On the domestic political front, opposition leader Shimon Peres said Friday he would insist the pullout from Gaza be coordinated with the Palestinians as his price for joining a new coalition government.

"We are going to demand that the withdrawal be accelerated and that it must be done in coordination with the Palestinians," Peres told public radio.

His comments come after Prime Minister Ariel Sharon (news - web sites) confirmed in a speech late Thursday that he had "scheduled a meeting with Shimon Peres for Sunday in order to discuss the possibility of widening the coalition."

In the latest violence, a suspected Palestinian militant was shot dead in the southern West Bank city of Hebron on Friday by Israeli soldiers who had come to arrest him, military sources said.

DreamTone7 · Joined: 20 Sep 2002 Posts: 2571

It's called politics, Galmin. When the world believes in a lie and is putting political pressure on you to do something, you most likely will respond to the lie as if it is the truth...regardless of what you believe. I hate politics...diplomacy is all too often the art of mutually agreeing to believe in each others lies. And I don't think that there is anything lucky for anyone about it...not even the Palestinians. BTW, you did not answer as to when Palestine was recognized as a nation, did you.

Galmin · The King has spoken! Joined: 30 Dec 2001 Posts: 1711

Quote:
They can't be convicted of anything for building something on their own land. Is Palestine a nation? No...never has been.

Luckily, Bush and Sharon do not share your view.

Quote:
Bush: Israel Must End 'Occupation'

Israel must negotiate an end to its occupation of Palestinian areas in the West Bank, the president said.

"A Palestinian state must be achieved by negotiating an end to occupation, but such a state cannot be based on a foundation of terror or corruption."

Quote:
Sharon: Israel must end its 'occupation'

May 27 2003

By Michael Dobbs, Mike Allen

Washington

Ariel Sharon after the peace-plan vote.

Prime Minister Ariel Sharon has defended Israeli approval of a US-backed "road map" peace plan to his rightist political party, saying Israel cannot keep 3.5 million Palestinians under occupation forever.

"We don't like the word, but this is occupation. To keep 3.5 million Palestinians under occupation is bad for Israel and the Palestinians . . . We need to get away from this in a way that won't hurt our security. This cannot continue forever,"

Edited by: Galmin at: 7/9/04 14:58

DreamTone7 · Joined: 20 Sep 2002 Posts: 2571

I beg to differ, Mike. Who are the Palestinians? They are Arabs, not a nation...who were not around when Israel drove out the Canaanites about 3500 years ago. (Where do you get this tenthousands figure?) That land has belonged to Israel, the NATION, ever since. Now they come back after being driven off to find "squatters" on the premisis, and politely allow them to stay. Then the squatters start making demands on what Israel should do with its own land. If Israel had simply driven them off Israel's land when they returned, there never would have been this problem...and there would be no Palestinians dying over land that is not theirs to begin with. The Palestinians were just an Arab opportunity to get its foot in the door of Israel...and now both Israel and the people living in the land that is called Palestine are now suffering for it.

MIKE BURN · Posted: Fri Jul 09, 2004 3:44 pm Post subject: Re: re

Palestine belongs to the Palestinians, for tenthousands of years.

Neither Palestine nor the Sahara ever belonged to the artificial state of Israel.

Now let's have a look on the subject:

Edited by: MIKE BURN at: 7/9/04 16:48

MIKE BURN · Posted: Fri Jul 09, 2004 3:51 pm Post subject: Re:

Quote:
They are Arabs, not a nation...who were not around when Israel drove out the Canaanites about 3500 years ago.

What a stupid nonsense.

Go visit some international museums or even have a closer look into some history books (please avoid Jewish history books of course):

Here's a starter:

Terra cotta

5000 BC

Tell Kashkashuk

National Museum, Aleppo

Deir ez Zor Museum

DreamTone7 · Joined: 20 Sep 2002 Posts: 2571

Mike - "What a stupid nonsense."

Actually, Mike, it's a matter of verified history. Verified by the unearthing of Jericho not long ago. I suggest you recheck your history books...but you could have read it in the Bible thousands of years before it appeared there.

Now, how, exactly, was this artifact supposedly tied to the same people who inhabit the land called Palestine?

MIKE BURN

This "artefact" just proves, that there were people not belonging to the Jewish culture on this land and region way before anybody thought about any 'testament' or 'thora'.

3,000 years at least, to be correct.

The U.N. probably took these historical facts under consideration in their strong condemnation of the Israeli 'tactis':

Quote:
U.N.: Israel barrier 'violates law'

Friday, July 9, 2004 Posted: 1403 GMT (2203 HKT)

The Tel Aviv newspaper Haaretz, quoting court documents, reported that by a 14-1 vote the judges found the barrier, along its planned route, "gravely infringes" on the rights of Palestinians and cannot be justified by military needs or national security, and violates international law.

The lone dissenter was U.S. judge Thomas Buerghenthal.

"Israel is under an obligation to terminate its breaches of international law; it is under an obligation to cease forthwith the works of construction of the wall being built in the Occupied Palestinian Territory, including in and around East Jerusalem, to dismantle forthwith the structure therein situated."

You know... I think the whole world knows, that the Jewish and Arab culture are not compatible.

Since the U.K. thought back in 1948 that it may be the best to deport all Jewish refugees of 2nd. World War somewhere where they have 'cultural' ties.

However, both cultures are not compatible and the Jewish people are not less innocent in this desaster than the Arabs.

To build a wall and (this is important) to create enclaves, Israeli walls separating Palestinian cities on Palestinian ground disregarding the border regulations of the U.N., 270,000 Palestinians affected in total, is a condemnable act.

I hope the U.N. are strong enough to make the Israelis realize, that they don't have eternal credit.

The wall has to fall and Israel has to bow down to international law, like any other "nation"

DreamTone7 · Joined: 20 Sep 2002 Posts: 2571

You being from Germany, I can see why you might have a little extra apprehension about "walls".

But I still think that Israel has the right to build whatever they want to on their own land...though perhaps it might be fair to compensate the people that had to be moved in some way. The UN is basically trying to tell Israel what to do with its own land, and that IS against all laws that I know of...International or otherwise. This is because the UN (along with most of the rest of the world) has accepted the lie that Palestine is a nation. I have yet to see ANY evidence that it is. With Jewish/Arab relations as they are, I also still think it would have been better for all concerned had the Israeli's simpley kicked the non-Israeli people living on Israeli land out of the country upon returning to it. All of this death and destruction could have been avoided.

MIKE BURN · Posted: Fri Jul 09, 2004 7:42 pm Post subject: Re:

You being from North-America should realize how weak your helpless arguments are when you think about the native Indians in your country.

So it's time for you to move or time for the Indians to built a wall around California, New-Mexico, Texas and Florida for a start.

DreamTone7 · Joined: 20 Sep 2002 Posts: 2571

You're sort of right. What was done to them was unfair and destroyed their way of life. But we cannot change the past.

On the other hand, they did not lay claim to the land...believing that it belonged to all. Though many did defend certain territories, it would have been tough to define what did and did not belong to a particular tribe. Building any kind of wall would have been counter-productive to their way of life as well.

questionnaire · Joined: 29 May 2003 Posts: 640

DT, I can no longer tolerate your ignorance.

You still drone on about this subject, but you know nothing about it. Did you read the two posts I put on the other thread about the history of the region, with information taken from bona fide historical research? The Philistines - the first Palestines - were there before the Hebrews, and the Hebrews only held political control of the region for a measly 78 years. They have no right to that land, and they are there because of a British/UN deal in the 1940s. They were tolerated by the Palestinians until 1967, when their land-grabbing started.

What's the point of posting if you completely ignore them, and what's the point of University history departments doing all this research if you just ignore it in favour of unreliable religious texts?

RonOnGuitar · Joined: 08 Jan 2003 Posts: 1916

Quote:
So it's time for you to move

That makes no sense, Mike. How do you suppose it happened that people in both the Americas speak (American) English, French and Spanish? "Montreal" doesn't come from any Native American (or "First Nation" in Canada, both mean "Indian") language that I know of!

And for that matter, if you check any current civilization Europe, Asia or whereever, you will see that it's the common world history that one civilisation replaces another. This is true in Germany as it is everywhere else, otherwise you would have to give Germany back to Italy (Rome)!

And you shouldn't rule out correct history no matter who it's from: Christians, Jews, Buddhists, Taoists and so on. I'll post an example of this - people can look at mutually verifiable ("gegenseitig nachweisbar"?) history and decide for themselves from the confirmable evidence in a logical way.

RonOnGuitar · Joined: 08 Jan 2003 Posts: 1916

Quote:
was this artifact supposedly tied to the same people

Yeah, I find it difficult to pin much signifigance to a piece of pottery sitting in the Syrian National Museum.

And if I were to use Mike's personal rule that Mike would exclude any evidence he believes is biased by religion, I would conclude that it (this old jug) is only of use as an ashtray for cigarettes since Syrian is an extreme Islamic dictatorship. Not a very balanced way to view history at all!