Jeremy Corbyn and Stop The War deserve each other

Go down

Jeremy Corbyn and Stop The War deserve each other

Post by Guest on Fri Dec 11, 2015 7:25 pm

At around 7pm this evening, Jeremy Corbyn will arrive at the EV Restaurant, which is located just behind the back of Southwark Station. His entrance will be greeted with a spontaneous and sustained outpouring of cheers and applause. He will raise his hand, flash his trademark self-deprecating smile, and make his way to the head of the long table positioned at the end of the main dining room.Once there he will engage in a bit of small talk. He will explain that sadly, due to work commitments, he can’t stay for as long as he would like. He will decline the offer of a glass of wine and ask for a glass of water instead. He will sip it sparingly. Then he will remove a couple of crumpled pieces of A4 paper from his jacket pocket – the cue for one of his hosts to rise to their feet. They will call for quiet.

I seriously hope any effort to remove Corbyn is thwarted as with this quisling at the helm, there is never a chance of labour winning the next election. How on earth group can lay claim to being called Stop the War Coalition is nothing short of a joke. It certainly apporves of terrorism and violence claiming armed ressistance under occupation and yet clearly does not understand international law or Un resolutions.

These scum back groups that deny the basic of equal rights to women, homosexuals and other religious people non-Islamic and have the audacity to back terrorism against Israeli civillians claiming it is like the French ressistance against the Nazis/ Sorry fuckwits, many of the French resistance sold out many allies, because of their political affilliations and only after Paris was liberated that suddenlly every French person was claiming to be part of the resistance. Not only that they only really killed German soldiers though there was some attrocities against civillian Germans and also colloboratting French. But to use this as a means to claim they can murder israeli civillians, when by resolution 242 it is impossible for israel to be illegally there, shows how antisemitism is now the champion of the left.

When are people going to wake up to the derisive hatred of the regressive left. I do not mean all left by this, but the ones who further ensure that France will no doubt now end up with a Far right majority, due to their ignorance.

Faced with the greatest crisis in its 22-year history -- an influx of millions of migrants from the Middle East, Africa, and Afghanistan -- the European Union spent much of November on its long-debated policy of the labelling of products from the disputed territories of the West Bank, the Golan Heights and East Jerusalem. On November 11, it demanded that exports (mainly fruit and vegetables) from these areas no longer be labelled "produced in Israel." The four-page "Interpretative Notice on indication of origin of goods from the territories occupied by Israel since June 1967", issued by the EU's executive body, the 28-member European Commission, makes assumptions about Israel and the territories that have already been challenged by Israeli officials. It begins with the following paragraph:

(1) The European Union, in line with international law, does not recognise Israel's sovereignty over the territories occupied by Israel since June 1967, namely the Golan Heights, the Gaza Strip and the West Bank, including East Jerusalem, and does not consider them to be part of Israel's territory, irrespective of their legal status under domestic Israeli law. The Union has made it clear that it will not recognise any changes to pre-1967 borders, other than those agreed by the parties to the Middle East Peace Process (MEPP)

If this is the basis for a discriminatory measure, it has little or no legal basis. The claim that their interpretation of Israeli rights in the territories mentioned is "in line with international law" raises the simple question: "which international law?" Israel's occupation of the West Bank is fully legal under the terms of UN Resolution 242 (1967), which was carefully drafted to guarantee Israel's rights to remain there until such time as there is a "Termination of all claims or states of belligerency and respect for and acknowledgement of the sovereignty, territorial integrity and political independence of every State in the area and their right to live in peace within secure and recognized boundaries free from threats or acts of force."

As no secure and recognized boundaries have been established, despite numerous attempts by the government of Israel to bring them about, Israel's presence there remains entirely legal. And as only Israeli armed forces will be required to withdraw in the event that such boundaries are created, the presence of Israeli settlements there will remain legal under the terms of the original League of Nations Mandate for Palestine, which stipulates that there should be close Jewish settlement in all areas. Those Mandate provisions were incorporated into UN Resolution 181, which called for the establishment of a Jewish and an Arab state.

Similarly, the statement that the EU "will not recognise any changes to pre-1967 borders" is legally invalid as well as obnoxious. No such pre-1967 borders ever existed. The armistice lines, established in 1949 on the termination of the 1948-1949 war between Israel and its several Arab enemies, are not borders. And as the 1967 war was fought by Israel as a war of defence, its alleged "occupation" (which then included the Gaza Strip) of territories previously occupied by two of the belligerent states (Egypt in Gaza, and Jordan in the West Bank) is fully legal under the international laws of armed combat, principally under Article 51 of the UN Charter.


Back to top Go down

Back to top

- Similar topics

Permissions in this forum:
You cannot reply to topics in this forum