The Palestineans got a raw deal.

[RoccoR]

RE: Was it a Raw Deal?
SUBTOPIC: Thumbnail View
※→ fj1200, et al,

loss of their particular set of natural rights; life, liberty, property.

(COMMENT)

The Right to Life, Liberty, and Property Ownership are called "Negative Rights" in many countries (but not all countries). Negative rights are suppose to extend a protection from interference (acts by a government).

"Positive Rights" are given by the government to people.

A distinction between negative and positive rights is popular among some normative theorists, especially those with a bent toward libertarianism. The holder of a negative right is entitled to non-interference, while the holder of a positive right is entitled to provision of some good or service. A right against assault is a classic example of a negative right, while a right to welfare assistance is a prototypical positive right (Narveson 2001).
Since both negative and positive rights are passive rights, some rights are neither negative nor positive. Privileges and powers cannot be negative rights; and privileges, powers, and immunities cannot be positive rights. The (privilege-) right to enter a building, and the (power-) right to enter into a binding agreement, are neither negative nor positive.

SOURCE: Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy
First published Mon Dec 19, 2005; substantive revision Mon Feb 24, 2020

◈ Were those losses necessary?

◈ Did UN actions lead to those losses?

◈ Did they become merely political pawns because of Israel's Muslim neighbors and their action?

◈ I guess it comes down to can the problems of the past be helpful in a peaceful future for the Middle East and Israel as a whole?

(RESPONSE)


The "Rights" to "Life, Liberty, and Property" are not absolute. Each has limitations. There is no blanket explanation for each of these. It is situationally dependent and can be addressed only on a case-by-case basis.

The UN action (A/RES/181 II) was a recommendation on how to proceed. The adjacent Arab States took unilateral extraterritorial action. The Arab Attack was initiated after the Termination of the British Mandate. This UN General Assembly (GA) Resolution is not law. The GA Resolution without ratification cannot compel any nation to act or create any state.

After the various Armistice Agreements, none of the Arab Aggressors holding an "Occupation" over territory west of the Jordan River made any effort to returned territorial sovereignty to any Arab Provisional Government. In fact, Jordan Annexed the West Bank. Egypt established a Military Governor for the Gaza Strip. This was Prima Facie evidence that (without regard to their explanation about protecting the Arab Population) they planned to take the territory, formerly under mandate, and carve it up for themselves.

As long as the Hostile Arab Palestinians (HoAP), and associated designated terrorist organizations, are supported by the general populations - and teach each successive generation to hate Israel - peace will remain several generations into the future.

(ADDITIONAL COMMENT)

The The International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (CCPR) [Country Status State Party (173)
Signatory (6) No Action (18)] outlines the generally accepted CIVIL and POLITICAL Rights. You have to read it pretty carefully.


One more thought::

Article 68 - Penal legislation. V. Penalties. Death penalty

Protected persons who commit an offence which is solely intended to harm the Occupying Power, but which does not constitute an attempt on the life or limb of members of the occupying forces or administration, nor a grave collective danger, nor seriously damage the property of the occupying forces or administration or the installations used by them, shall be liable to internment or simple imprisonment, provided the duration of such internment or imprisonment is proportionate to the offence committed. Furthermore, internment or imprisonment shall, for such offences, be the only measure adopted for depriving protected persons of liberty. The courts provided for under Article 66 of the present Convention may at their discretion convert a sentence of imprisonment to one of internment for the same period.

The penal provisions promulgated by the Occupying Power in accordance with Articles 64and 65 may impose the death penalty on a protected person only in cases where the person is guilty of espionage, of serious acts of sabotage against the military installations of the Occupying Power or of intentional offences which have caused the death of one or more persons, provided that such offences were punishable by death under the law of the occupied territory in force before the occupation began.

Without regard to what the HoAP might say, they have no inherent right to conduct hostile operations against the Israelis:

• within there sovereign territory.

• within any territory where Israel continues to haveresponsibilities with regard to internal security and public order, as well as with regard to other powers and responsibilities not transferred.

The Arab Palestinian agreed to this and now (as Arab Politics demand) refuse to recognize this. See: Functional jurisdiction in Area C, as detailed in Article IV of Annex III. (Special Provisions concerning Area C)


Most Respectfully,
R

[Tyr-Ziu Saxnot]

RE: Was it a Raw Deal?
SUBTOPIC: Thumbnail View
※→ fj1200, et al,



(COMMENT)

The Right to Life, Liberty, and Property Ownership are called "Negative Rights" in many countries (but not all countries). Negative rights are suppose to extend a protection from interference (acts by a government).

"Positive Rights" are given by the government to people.





(RESPONSE)


The "Rights" to "Life, Liberty, and Property" are not absolute. Each has limitations. There is no blanket explanation for each of these. It is situationally dependent and can be addressed only on a case-by-case basis.

The UN action (A/RES/181 II) was a recommendation on how to proceed. The adjacent Arab States took unilateral extraterritorial action. The Arab Attack was initiated after the Termination of the British Mandate. This UN General Assembly (GA) Resolution is not law. The GA Resolution without ratification cannot compel any nation to act or create any state.

After the various Armistice Agreements, none of the Arab Aggressors holding an "Occupation" over territory west of the Jordan River made any effort to returned territorial sovereignty to any Arab Provisional Government. In fact, Jordan Annexed the West Bank. Egypt established a Military Governor for the Gaza Strip. This was Prima Facie evidence that (without regard to their explanation about protecting the Arab Population) they planned to take the territory, formerly under mandate, and carve it up for themselves.

As long as the Hostile Arab Palestinians (HoAP), and associated designated terrorist organizations, are supported by the general populations - and teach each successive generation to hate Israel - peace will remain several generations into the future.

(ADDITIONAL COMMENT)

The The International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (CCPR) [Country Status State Party (173)
Signatory (6) No Action (18)] outlines the generally accepted CIVIL and POLITICAL Rights. You have to read it pretty carefully.


One more thought::



Without regard to what the HoAP might say, they have no inherent right to conduct hostile operations against the Israelis:

• within there sovereign territory.

• within any territory where Israel continues to haveresponsibilities with regard to internal security and public order, as well as with regard to other powers and responsibilities not transferred.

The Arab Palestinian agreed to this and now (as Arab Politics demand) refuse to recognize this. See: Functional jurisdiction in Area C, as detailed in Article IV of Annex III. (Special Provisions concerning Area C)


Most Respectfully,
R

"""The Arab Palestinian agreed to this and now (as Arab Politics demand) refuse to recognize this."""
When dealing with such lying cowardly people any dealings are subject to the whims of their dishonor. --Tyr

[icansayit]

ANY recognition of Palestinians is just about equal to our Congress, recognizing ANTIFA as a viable, peaceful
organization...and including ANTIFA in any FUNDING by the American people.

For instance. Our Pentagon supplies ANTIFA with missiles to attack Anyone who disagrees with their Terror.

Think about it.

[Tyr-Ziu Saxnot]

ANY recognition of Palestinians is just about equal to our Congress, recognizing ANTIFA as a viable, peaceful
organization...and including ANTIFA in any FUNDING by the American people.

For instance. Our Pentagon supplies ANTIFA with missiles to attack Anyone who disagrees with their Terror.

Think about it.

Hey, that is a very good comparison my friend! --Tyr

[Gunny]

RE: Was it a Raw Deal?
SUBTOPIC: Thumbnail View
※→ fj1200, et al,



(COMMENT)

The Right to Life, Liberty, and Property Ownership are called "Negative Rights" in many countries (but not all countries). Negative rights are suppose to extend a protection from interference (acts by a government).

"Positive Rights" are given by the government to people.





(RESPONSE)


The "Rights" to "Life, Liberty, and Property" are not absolute. Each has limitations. There is no blanket explanation for each of these. It is situationally dependent and can be addressed only on a case-by-case basis.

The UN action (A/RES/181 II) was a recommendation on how to proceed. The adjacent Arab States took unilateral extraterritorial action. The Arab Attack was initiated after the Termination of the British Mandate. This UN General Assembly (GA) Resolution is not law. The GA Resolution without ratification cannot compel any nation to act or create any state.

After the various Armistice Agreements, none of the Arab Aggressors holding an "Occupation" over territory west of the Jordan River made any effort to returned territorial sovereignty to any Arab Provisional Government. In fact, Jordan Annexed the West Bank. Egypt established a Military Governor for the Gaza Strip. This was Prima Facie evidence that (without regard to their explanation about protecting the Arab Population) they planned to take the territory, formerly under mandate, and carve it up for themselves.

As long as the Hostile Arab Palestinians (HoAP), and associated designated terrorist organizations, are supported by the general populations - and teach each successive generation to hate Israel - peace will remain several generations into the future.

(ADDITIONAL COMMENT)

The The International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (CCPR) [Country Status State Party (173)
Signatory (6) No Action (18)] outlines the generally accepted CIVIL and POLITICAL Rights. You have to read it pretty carefully.


One more thought::



Without regard to what the HoAP might say, they have no inherent right to conduct hostile operations against the Israelis:

• within there sovereign territory.

• within any territory where Israel continues to haveresponsibilities with regard to internal security and public order, as well as with regard to other powers and responsibilities not transferred.

The Arab Palestinian agreed to this and now (as Arab Politics demand) refuse to recognize this. See: Functional jurisdiction in Area C, as detailed in Article IV of Annex III. (Special Provisions concerning Area C)


Most Respectfully,
R

Just a couple of thoughts. Not questioning what written law is; rather, what it means in reality.

IMO, Rights are an illusion extended by government to the People creating the perception that government has those Rights to give. In reality, the People have those Rights without government and government in fact, only infringes on one's freedoms by drawing parameters around them. The promise being that government will guarantee and protect those Rights. As we can clearly see, government is quite selective in whose Rights/freedoms are afforded its protection.

I make the distinction between rights and freedoms as the former is codified in law while the latter is inherent minus infringement.

I would be interested to see in contrast the official Palestinian legal argument it uses to make its case.

[RoccoR]

RE: Was it a Raw Deal?
SUBTOPIC: Thumbnail View
※→ gunny, et al,

SOME writers have so confounded society with government, as to leave little or no distinction between them; whereas they are not only different, but have different origins. Society is produced by our wants, and government by our wickedness; the former promotes our happiness positively by uniting our affections, the latter negatively by restraining our vices. The one encourages intercourse, the other creates distinctions. The first is a patron, the last a punisher.

Society in every state is a blessing, but government even in its best state is but a necessary evil; in its worst state an intolerable one; for when we suffer, or are exposed to the same miseries by a government, which we might expect in a country without government, our calamities is heightened by reflecting that we furnish the means by which we suffer.
SOURCE: Rights of Man; Common Sense; and other writings / Original Author Paine, Thomas, 1737-1809. Published in the United States by Oxford University Press Inc., New York Editorial matter © Mark Philp 1995, pg 5

... what it means in reality?

(COMMENT)

→ Gunny, I suspect you would have been in very good company had you served with American Leathernecks (1775-Present) during the Revolutionary War (1775-1783). The question has really never been answered; but fended-off with political and legal babel.

IMO, Rights are an illusion extended by government to the People creating the perception that government has those Rights to give. In reality, the People have those Rights without government and government in fact, only infringes on one's freedoms by drawing parameters around them. The promise being that government will guarantee and protect those Rights. As we can clearly see, government is quite selective in whose Rights/freedoms are afforded its protection.

(COMMENT)

The government has no "rights" of any kind. But it has been granted authority by the people. And that is where the citizenry has been confused. The general populations, in most nations govern by representatives (in America that would be the beltway snakes, liars, and roaches). And that is a growing problem. Often, what you think they said, is not what you heard.

I make the distinction between rights and freedoms as the former is codified in law while the latter is inherent minus infringement.
I would be interested to see in contrast the official Palestinian legal argument it uses to make its case.

(COMMENT)

Even that is a difficult question to address. President Mahmoud Abbas, in essence, rules by decree. President Abbas declared a State of Emergency, which nullified the Basic Law - then dismissed the Government. President Abbas has now served 18 years into his 4 year term. He is the Dictator for Life situated in Ramallah. He determines what laws are valid. I know that in Area "C" (Judea and Samaria) there are some Arab Local Courts. However, the PA has a system: LINK to PA Legal System.


Most Respectfully,
R

[Gunny]

RE: Was it a Raw Deal?
SUBTOPIC: Thumbnail View
※→ gunny, et al,



(COMMENT)

→ Gunny, I suspect you would have been in very good company had you served with American Leathernecks (1775-Present) during the Revolutionary War (1775-1783). The question has really never been answered; but fended-off with political and legal babel.


(COMMENT)

The government has no "rights" of any kind. But it has been granted authority by the people. And that is where the citizenry has been confused. The general populations, in most nations govern by representatives (in America that would be the beltway snakes, liars, and roaches). And that is a growing problem. Often, what you think they said, is not what you heard.


(COMMENT)

Even that is a difficult question to address. President Mahmoud Abbas, in essence, rules by decree. President Abbas declared a State of Emergency, which nullified the Basic Law - then dismissed the Government. President Abbas has now served 18 years into his 4 year term. He is the Dictator for Life situated in Ramallah. He determines what laws are valid. I know that in Area "C" (Judea and Samaria) there are some Arab Local Courts. However, the PA has a system: LINK to PA Legal System.


Most Respectfully,
R

I have not finished reading the contents at the link you provided. Best I can tell, to this point, the PA has screwed itself and the people that support it. In this case, government has most certainly failed its people. It has always been my personal belief that current government cannot serve the people, so it keeps them brainwashed and in a war they believe they need the PA to protect them from. Abbas and his minions are incapable of creating a society not based on a real-or-contrived enemy and war. Unfortunately, the only things the people get educated on are war and government propaganda.

I'm sure I could find worse company than that of Payne or the Continental Marines

[RoccoR]

RE: Arabs and Israelis discuss partnerships for progress.
SUBTOPIC: Why the prolonged low intensity conflict?
gunny, et al,

Yes, there is much to be said about this.

I have not finished reading the contents at the link you provided. Best I can tell, to this point, the PA has screwed itself and the people that support it. In this case, government has most certainly failed its people. It has always been my personal belief that current government cannot serve the people, so it keeps them brainwashed and in a war they believe they need the PA to protect them from. Abbas and his minions are incapable of creating a society not based on a real-or-contrived enemy and war. Unfortunately, the only things the people get educated on are war and government propaganda.

I'm sure I could find worse company than that of Payne or the Continental Marines

(COMMENT)
TheNone of the adjacent nations to Israel as long as the Hostile Arab Palestinians (HoAP) are contained by the Israelis. Lebanon, Jordan, Saudi Arabia and Egypt see the Israelis tending the problem. None of the adjacent state do not want the spread of the infestation (HoAP) to spill-over into their domain. Each has their own internal security concerns. The HoAP would be another that they don't need.

The adjacent states know that if the West Bank and Gaza Strip merge to for a single nation, they will have a new potential for terrorist violence carried out with the active support of national single national leadership that would use violent non-state actors.


Most Respectfully,
R

[Gunny]

Speaking of raw deals. Dick move on the Biden mafia's part. It does underscore one thing I've ranted on for years:

Trump produced Executive Orders by the bushels yet codified very little in law. As did GWB. Both needed a good dose of shaken baby syndrome applied to them until the marbles rattled into some sense. In each case, the follow-on Dem has just torn their EO's, and made sure they got most of their commie crap codified in law. Ironic since the only ones that follow the law are Republican't's.

Further, this screams unstable government to the people of this and every other country. One day we're your ally, but can't guarantee what the next dummy down the line will bring

https://www.timesofisrael.com/us-set...er-green-line/

[fj1200]

FJ, that calls for a moral judgement. The number of years being irrelevant in that regard.
I look at which one is a terrorist entity, The Pali's fit that bill to a certified T.--do they not?

We make moral judgements all the time. African slaves got a raw deal, American Indians got a raw deal. That doesn't mean that reparations are in order. That doesn't mean that Manhattan is going to be deeded back. Acknowledging a raw deal doesn't necessarily change the current. I don't think the current situation really gets changed in any way to what was.

No. Not all Palestineans belong to a terrorist entity or are terrorists.

[fj1200]

Can of worms

Most anything in history depends on the selection of a starting date.
...

Can apply the question to almost anything, right down to self. I consider current US government a raw deal based on what the US Constitution promises. And we are seeing daily just how much say we have in what the government is doing.

Makes one wonder what promise of reparations they'll never see that the Terrorist Government of Palestine is offering those that follow.

I don't disagree with those points.

@fj1200 Let's switch it around. Did the Jews get a raw deal by being offered their own Jewish nation right in the middle of a snae pit where everyone immediately tried to kill them all?

I just got to thinking and I don't recall seeing nor hearing of a single allied country welcoming home dispossessed/deported Jews after the war. No parades. No support groups. Just, what do we do about this now? Perhaps the "benefactors" could have chosen a better place?

No question the Jews are the poster children for some raw deals over history. My OP is related to could it have done differently/better/whatever that would have been a more positive outcome. I recognize that the answer could very well be no.

[AHZ]

I don't disagree with those points.



No question the Jews are the poster children for some raw deals over history. My OP is related to could it have done differently/better/whatever that would have been a more positive outcome. I recognize that the answer could very well be no.

revenge oppression is not the way to deal with oppression.

just like affirmative action racism is not the way to deal with past racial conflict.

[Gunny]

I don't disagree with those points.



No question the Jews are the poster children for some raw deals over history. My OP is related to could it have done differently/better/whatever that would have been a more positive outcome. I recognize that the answer could very well be no.

Good question. There is no solution as long as Man chooses to worship at the altar of the 7 Deadly Sins. Without them, there is no reason to send Jews anywhere.

[fj1200]

The Right to Life, Liberty, and Property Ownership are called "Negative Rights" in many countries (but not all countries). Negative rights are suppose to extend a protection from interference (acts by a government).

"Positive Rights" are given by the government to people.


The "Rights" to "Life, Liberty, and Property" are not absolute. Each has limitations. There is no blanket explanation for each of these. It is situationally dependent and can be addressed only on a case-by-case basis.

I'm guessing that the Palestineans just have not had that explained to them in just such a manner. I'm sure the loss of their Natural Rights would be no issue once that happens.

[Gunny]

I'm guessing that the Palestineans just have not had that explained to them in just such a manner. I'm sure the loss of their Natural Rights would be no issue once that happens.

"Natural rights"? No such thing.

Killing anything different from your tribe from envy, fear or greed comes more to mind. There would be no need to put anyone anywhere.

I am well aware I am speaking ideologically, but that's as close to reality as it gets.