'The Third Intifada has already begun'

[WildCat]

Hmmm... we've been here before... after a fashion.

Bear in mind that the ultimate source of authority in the West Bank is not the PA, it is the PLO.

I'm going to modify McHrozni's question a little bit, and ask... "Would the PLO modify ITS covenant if it resulted in peace ? "

Well, we know the answer to that. One condition of being included in the Oslo peace accords was that The PLO modify its covenant to remove all the bits about Israel being an illegal state that must be destroyed by violence, and the bits about "no peace treaties".

We had the famous "exchange of letters" between Arafat and Yitzahk Rabin, in which Arafat promised to amend the PLO Covenant to remove the "offensive" bits. The Palestinian National Committee duly convened and approved unspecified changes to the Covenant, and called for a legal committee to draft a new Covenant.

The entire World cheered at this unprecedented move towards peace. (except for some people in the Federated States of Micronesia, who didn't hear about it until a year later)

Except... it was, of course, all a lie. Arafat lied to President Clinton, the European Union, and the World. The "committee" never sat, and the Covenant was never changed. (it is VERY similar to the HAMAS charter).

Even today, the PLO is committed to the destruction of Israel as a state, and committed to the use of violence to accomplish this, with peace treaties being explicitly repudiated. (again, very much like the HAMAS charter).

So, history would suggest that McHrozni's challenge is a reasonable one. The PLO does NOT have a track record of honoring its commitments, nor has it proven willing in the past to amend its constitution.

Then, as now, it is committed to the destruction of Israel.

With that in mind, the "Palestinian people" are doomed to a life of suffering for so long as the PLO remains in charge.

Yep, they promised they'd go through the process to change it and never did, and there's people on this very forum who insist that the letters are enough and that they really changed their Charter, it's just sooper-sekrit or something and that's why no amended Charter exists.

 

[Roofgardener]

The letters most certainly are NOT enough. Only the PNC can change the covenant, and they didn't. Like you said Wildcat; try and find a copy of the ammended charter ANYWHERE. It doesn't exist, because it was never written.

 

[Jules Galen]

Yep, they promised they'd go through the process to change it and never did, and there's people on this very forum who insist that the letters are enough and that they really changed their Charter, it's just sooper-sekrit or something and that's why no amended Charter exists.

When Israel stops occupying Palestine, Brutalizing Palestinians, Stealing Palestinian Land - and gives back what they stole - then this "Charter Thingy" could be an issue. Until then, it is just a another sick Israeli excuse to brutalize the helpless.

 

[McHrozni]

The letters most certainly are NOT enough. Only the PNC can change the covenant, and they didn't. Like you said Wildcat; try and find a copy of the ammended charter ANYWHERE. It doesn't exist, because it was never written.

Promising to do something in writing and refusing to do so later demonstrates you're an unreliable partner. You're quite right, PLO and Hamas are very similar in crucial points.

McHrozni

 

[Ziggurat]

When Israel stops occupying Palestine, Brutalizing Palestinians, Stealing Palestinian Land - and gives back what they stole - then this "Charter Thingy" could be an issue. Until then, it is just a another sick Israeli excuse to brutalize the helpless.

Again, what's with the weird capitalization? This typographical tic appears to be an indicator that this is cant rather than a reasoned argument.

 

[Jules Galen]

Again, what's with the weird capitalization? This typographical tic appears to be an indicator that this is cant rather than a reasoned argument.

It seems like you will say anything to take the focus off of Israel's Land Stealing, Brutalization and Occupation of Palestine.

 

[Ziggurat]

It seems like you will say anything to take the focus off of Israel's Land Stealing, Brutalization and Occupation of Palestine.

I couldn't have asked for better proof of exactly my point. Thank you, Jules. But next time, I suggest using size="7". You'll be more than twice as convincing.

 

[Jules Galen]

Israel Calls a Man Its Soldiers Killed a “Terrorist”: Until They Realized He Was an Israeli Jew

https://theintercept.com/2015/10/22...st-until-they-realized-he-was-an-israeli-jew/

And on an even stranger note....it appears thatHasbara has not died after all:

Former 'queen of porn' at forefront of Hasbara

http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-4712761,00.html

 

[The Fool]

Yep, they promised they'd go through the process to change it and never did, and there's people on this very forum who insist that the letters are enough and that they really changed their Charter, it's just sooper-sekrit or something and that's why no amended Charter exists.

Still can't work out the difference between redrafted and amended?


Still, its been a while so you can probably reboot and start a charter diversion all over again.

 

[The Fool]

The letters most certainly are NOT enough. Only the PNC can change the covenant, and they didn't. Like you said Wildcat; try and find a copy of the ammended charter ANYWHERE. It doesn't exist, because it was never written.

The constant recurring bickering over this revolting document has been a feature of this forum for quite some time.

If you don't accept that the charter has been amended then thats your choice but please....lets get the terms sorted out.

amended does not mean the same thing as redrafted.....The US constitution has been amended many times but never redrafted. So the fact that the Palestinian documents have not been redrafted doesn't mean they were not amended.

There is divided opinion on the amended or not amended issue.

 

[McHrozni]

So the fact that the Palestinian documents have not been redrafted doesn't mean they were not amended.

Do you have a copy of an amended PLO charter available for refference, perhaps? One that endorses peace with Israel, that is.

McHrozni

 

[The Fool]

Do you have a copy of an amended PLO charter available for refference, perhaps? One that endorses peace with Israel, that is.

McHrozni

do you mean a redrafted charter? No redrafted charter exists.



If you believe that a redrafted charter has to exist or its not amended I can't agree with you...

 

[McHrozni]

do you mean a redrafted charter? No redrafted charter exists.

No, I mean the amended charter you imply exists. Do you have any evidence for that?

McHrozni

 

[caveman1917]

It seems like you will say anything to take the focus off of Israel's Land Stealing, Brutalization and Occupation of Palestine.

Of course they will. Just ignore it.

 

[The Fool]

No, I mean the amended charter you imply exists. Do you have any evidence for that?

McHrozni

I wish I had a dollar for every time this has been answered.

Maybe we can take this in stages

Stage 1 is an assumption that you accept that the charter exists.

Stage 2 is an assumption that you accept that Arafat declared that the charter is amended in a letter.

Stage 3 is an assumption that you don,t accept that this was a valid way for them to amend their own charter


How are we going so far?

Stage 4 is that the amendment was accepted by all of the parties involved, the Israeli government, the US government and the Palestinians.....but not you and a number of other commentators.


ok..I think it's about time for someone to ask again for a link to a redrafted charter?? Off we go on another lap.

 

[McHrozni]

ok..I think it's about time for someone to ask again for a link to a redrafted charter?? Off we go on another lap.

No need. But you could give us a link to the currently valid PLO charter and point out the amendmends that were made.

McHrozni

 

[WildCat]

I wish I had a dollar for every time this has been answered.

Maybe we can take this in stages

Stage 1 is an assumption that you accept that the charter exists.

Stage 2 is an assumption that you accept that Arafat declared that the charter is amended in a letter.

Stage 3 is an assumption that you don,t accept that this was a valid way for them to amend their own charter


How are we going so far?

Stage 4 is that the amendment was accepted by all of the parties involved, the Israeli government, the US government and the Palestinians.....but not you and a number of other commentators.


ok..I think it's about time for someone to ask again for a link to a redrafted charter?? Off we go on another lap.

And the amended Charter is located...?

Do you have any official Palestinian source showing the amended Charter? Is there any evidence at all that the Palestinians went through the necessary legal process to amend the Charter? You do know that Arafat had no authority to do it by himself, don't you?

So, your evidence the Charter was ever amended is...?

 

[theprestige]

Amendments must go through some kind of ratification process, right?

 

[Roofgardener]

I wish I had a dollar for every time this has been answered.

Maybe we can take this in stages
[/qutoes]
Oh yes, LETS. Sadly, I can't (yet) provide you with direct links, as I am a newbie on this forum, but hopefully I should be able to soon.

Stage 1 is an assumption that you accept that the charter exists.

Do you deny that it exists ?

avalon.law.yale.edu/20th_century/plocov.asp

Stage 2 is an assumption that you accept that Arafat declared that the charter is amended in a letter.

Arafat did indeed write that letter. several letters. He also confirmed it verbally. But Arafat is not authorised to change the Charter. Only the Palestinian National Council can do that. (PLO Constitution, Article 33). The Congress duly met in 1996 and voted to amend unspecified sections of the Charter, and agreed to commission a legal committee to draft a new Charter for PNC approval. The committee was never appointed, never met, never drafted anything, and nothing was approved. The existing "Israel must be destroyed" charter remained in force.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Palestinian_National_Council#History

Stage 3 is an assumption that you don,t accept that this was a valid way for them to amend their own charter

As above, it was NOT a valid way, and the charter was not amended.

How are we going so far?

Not terribly well, I'm afraid ?

Stage 4 is that the amendment was accepted by all of the parties involved, the Israeli government, the US government and the Palestinians.....

No, it was not. Israel complained about non-compliance at the 1995 "Oslo II" meeting, and the PLO re-affirmed its intention to amend the constitution. (two years late, by the way). But they never did.

ok..I think it's about time for someone to ask again for a link to a redrafted charter?? Off we go on another lap.

I think I've covered all of your points, The Fool ?

 

[WildCat]

Amendments must go through some kind of ratification process, right?

Yep:

Article 33:

This Charter shall not be amended save by [vote of] a majority of two-thirds of the total membership of the National Congress of the Palestine Liberation Organization [taken] at a special session convened for that purpose.

And there's no evidence whatsoever that this ever occurred.