Did Israel Evict The Palestinians?

[P F Tinmore]

The British Mandate prevented the Palestinians from creating self governing institutions. The Mandate assisted the Zionists in their settler colonial project self governing institutions.

A number of things here strike me as proof that there were no new states at this time.

1. The requirement for a Mandate at all.
2. The documented ability of the Mandate to enter into agreements and treaties of the time.
3. The actual control of the Mandate government in the territory.
4. The admission that the territory of Palestine had no existing self-governing institutions (no government).

Further, it shows that the development of self-determination and self-governing institutions was intended and actualized for the Jewish people and no other people.

A State is not just an idea. Its a legal entity which exists in reality. So you've only demonstrated I am correct: between the abandonment of the territory by Turkey in the Treaty of Lausanne and the Declaration of Independence of Israel -- there was NO STATE in existence, making the entire territory terra nullius.

there was NO STATE in existence, making the entire territory terra nullius.

Unsubstantiated Israeli talking point.

 

[RoccoR]

RE: Did Israel Evict The Palestinians?
⁜→ Hollie, et al,


(REFERENCE)

ARTICLE 16.

Turkey hereby renounces all rights and title whatsoever over or respecting the territories situated outside the frontiers laid down in the present Treaty and the islands other than those over which her sovereignty is recognised by the said Treaty, the future of these territories and islands being settled or to be settled by the parties concerned.

The provisions of the present Article do not prejudice any special arrangements arising from neighbourly relations which have been or may be concluded between Turkey and any limitrophe countries.

I can't find any indication of a state of Palestine existing as a result of the Treaty so I'm left to ask "what territory was transferred to what states as a result of the Treaty"?

(COMMENT)

It is not "WE" who are circling the Cul-de-sac. Our friend "P F Tinmore" simply does not want to recognize the treaty. Nor does he want to recognize the concept of a "State." This horse is dead. We have to recognize that no matter how many ways we can refute the claim, the pro-Arab Palestinians will never acknowledge the fundamentals of the situation.

.
Most Respectfully,
R

 

[Shusha]

The British Mandate prevented the Palestinians from creating self governing institutions. The Mandate assisted the Zionists in their settler colonial project self governing institutions.

A number of things here strike me as proof that there were no new states at this time.

1. The requirement for a Mandate at all.
2. The documented ability of the Mandate to enter into agreements and treaties of the time.
3. The actual control of the Mandate government in the territory.
4. The admission that the territory of Palestine had no existing self-governing institutions (no government).

Further, it shows that the development of self-determination and self-governing institutions was intended and actualized for the Jewish people and no other people.

A State is not just an idea. Its a legal entity which exists in reality. So you've only demonstrated I am correct: between the abandonment of the territory by Turkey in the Treaty of Lausanne and the Declaration of Independence of Israel -- there was NO STATE in existence, making the entire territory terra nullius.

there was NO STATE in existence, making the entire territory terra nullius.

Unsubstantiated Israeli talking point.

On the contrary, its quite substantiated. Are you trying to argue that a State can come into being with no government, no control over territory, no ability to create infrastructure, laws, while completely under the control of another State?

Have you got a link for that?

 

[RoccoR]

RE: Did Israel Evict The Palestinians?
⁜→ P F Tinmore, et al,

This is just one of your nonsense answers.

Unsubstantiated Israeli talking point.

(COMMENT)

You cannot substantiate the existance of something (State of Palestine) that does not exist (State of Palestine).

........
Most Respectfully,
R

 

[P F Tinmore]

The British Mandate prevented the Palestinians from creating self governing institutions. The Mandate assisted the Zionists in their settler colonial project self governing institutions.

A number of things here strike me as proof that there were no new states at this time.

1. The requirement for a Mandate at all.
2. The documented ability of the Mandate to enter into agreements and treaties of the time.
3. The actual control of the Mandate government in the territory.
4. The admission that the territory of Palestine had no existing self-governing institutions (no government).

Further, it shows that the development of self-determination and self-governing institutions was intended and actualized for the Jewish people and no other people.

A State is not just an idea. Its a legal entity which exists in reality. So you've only demonstrated I am correct: between the abandonment of the territory by Turkey in the Treaty of Lausanne and the Declaration of Independence of Israel -- there was NO STATE in existence, making the entire territory terra nullius.

there was NO STATE in existence, making the entire territory terra nullius.

Unsubstantiated Israeli talking point.

On the contrary, its quite substantiated. Are you trying to argue that a State can come into being with no government, no control over territory, no ability to create infrastructure, laws, while completely under the control of another State?

Have you got a link for that?

Of course I do.

http://repository.law.umich.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1045&context=mjil

Do you have one to substantiate your blabber?

Of course not. It is just blabber.

 

[MJB12741]

Jews were indigenous inhabitants of the land in question be it called Israel or Palestine. Not a single Muslim squatter then to be found as there was no Islam religion until the 7th century C.E. And yet today's Palestinians claim "Israel is stealing (or occupying) their land." Very clever todays Zionists stealing their own land.

Are Jews Indigenous to the Land of Israel? Yes.

 

[MJB12741]

Or are we to believe the Palestinians are descendants of the Sumerian's, Akkadians, Philistines &/or Canaanites all of whom were around in the 7th century C.E. & converted to Islam?

 

[Shusha]

The British Mandate prevented the Palestinians from creating self governing institutions. The Mandate assisted the Zionists in their settler colonial project self governing institutions.

A number of things here strike me as proof that there were no new states at this time.

1. The requirement for a Mandate at all.
2. The documented ability of the Mandate to enter into agreements and treaties of the time.
3. The actual control of the Mandate government in the territory.
4. The admission that the territory of Palestine had no existing self-governing institutions (no government).

Further, it shows that the development of self-determination and self-governing institutions was intended and actualized for the Jewish people and no other people.

A State is not just an idea. Its a legal entity which exists in reality. So you've only demonstrated I am correct: between the abandonment of the territory by Turkey in the Treaty of Lausanne and the Declaration of Independence of Israel -- there was NO STATE in existence, making the entire territory terra nullius.

there was NO STATE in existence, making the entire territory terra nullius.

Unsubstantiated Israeli talking point.

On the contrary, its quite substantiated. Are you trying to argue that a State can come into being with no government, no control over territory, no ability to create infrastructure, laws, while completely under the control of another State?

Have you got a link for that?

Of course I do.

http://repository.law.umich.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1045&context=mjil

Do you have one to substantiate your blabber?

Of course not. It is just blabber.

Not that tired old zebra again.

 

[P F Tinmore]

The British Mandate prevented the Palestinians from creating self governing institutions. The Mandate assisted the Zionists in their settler colonial project self governing institutions.

A number of things here strike me as proof that there were no new states at this time.

1. The requirement for a Mandate at all.
2. The documented ability of the Mandate to enter into agreements and treaties of the time.
3. The actual control of the Mandate government in the territory.
4. The admission that the territory of Palestine had no existing self-governing institutions (no government).

Further, it shows that the development of self-determination and self-governing institutions was intended and actualized for the Jewish people and no other people.

A State is not just an idea. Its a legal entity which exists in reality. So you've only demonstrated I am correct: between the abandonment of the territory by Turkey in the Treaty of Lausanne and the Declaration of Independence of Israel -- there was NO STATE in existence, making the entire territory terra nullius.

there was NO STATE in existence, making the entire territory terra nullius.

Unsubstantiated Israeli talking point.

On the contrary, its quite substantiated. Are you trying to argue that a State can come into being with no government, no control over territory, no ability to create infrastructure, laws, while completely under the control of another State?

Have you got a link for that?

Of course I do.

http://repository.law.umich.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1045&context=mjil

Do you have one to substantiate your blabber?

Of course not. It is just blabber.

Not that tired old zebra again.

It is my link. Where is yours?

 

[Hollie]

The British Mandate prevented the Palestinians from creating self governing institutions. The Mandate assisted the Zionists in their settler colonial project self governing institutions.

A number of things here strike me as proof that there were no new states at this time.

1. The requirement for a Mandate at all.
2. The documented ability of the Mandate to enter into agreements and treaties of the time.
3. The actual control of the Mandate government in the territory.
4. The admission that the territory of Palestine had no existing self-governing institutions (no government).

Further, it shows that the development of self-determination and self-governing institutions was intended and actualized for the Jewish people and no other people.

A State is not just an idea. Its a legal entity which exists in reality. So you've only demonstrated I am correct: between the abandonment of the territory by Turkey in the Treaty of Lausanne and the Declaration of Independence of Israel -- there was NO STATE in existence, making the entire territory terra nullius.

there was NO STATE in existence, making the entire territory terra nullius.

Unsubstantiated Israeli talking point.

On the contrary, its quite substantiated. Are you trying to argue that a State can come into being with no government, no control over territory, no ability to create infrastructure, laws, while completely under the control of another State?

Have you got a link for that?

Of course I do.

http://repository.law.umich.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1045&context=mjil

Do you have one to substantiate your blabber?

Of course not. It is just blabber.

You cut and pasted an opinion.

What practical affect does that have?

 

[teddyearp]

Hey Joe Bruno welcome to the fray! You have already started to meet the regulars here, especially P F Tinmore. He seems to have a lot of one word and one line answers, he'll imply you're ignorant, post the same 2 hour long youtube videos over and over and over and over and over again and again and again, but when you get him to actually explain, his logic in this argument is like the most twisted pretzel ever. There used to be another Monti who has the same M.O. but with different links. then you'll find those that are down right nasty about it like Fanger and a couple others.

But it sums up like this. A Pasha in the Ottoman empire decided to enter WWI. the Ottoman's lost. Much of their former territory was split between the French and the British, and that mean all claims transferred. For Britain's part, they knew they were going to win and made promises to both the Jews and the Arabs of the area; for independent states within the area known as Palestine. After the spoils of war went to Britain, they kept their promise to the Arabs by splitting off 70% for the Arabs in the form of Jordan. The Arabs couldn't have just that, they wanted it all so they started causing the British so much trouble that they started to renege on their deal with the Jews. Well that pissed the jews off and so the Arabs and the Jews were fighting each other and the British too. Britain finally had enough and left. The U.N. decided to split what was left of the area known as Palestine again andthe Jews said O.K. and the immediately declared independence creating their own NATION. The Arabs again stomped their petty little feet and tried to do something about it, lol.

And they've been trying ever since. And failing every time. I don't see them ever getting their way unless they decide on peace instead of their hatred of the Jews. Hell, way back at the beginning of my story, there were actually some Arabs that welcomed the Jews back, realizing it was their ancestral homeland.

 

[Shusha]

A number of things here strike me as proof that there were no new states at this time.

1. The requirement for a Mandate at all.
2. The documented ability of the Mandate to enter into agreements and treaties of the time.
3. The actual control of the Mandate government in the territory.
4. The admission that the territory of Palestine had no existing self-governing institutions (no government).

Further, it shows that the development of self-determination and self-governing institutions was intended and actualized for the Jewish people and no other people.

A State is not just an idea. Its a legal entity which exists in reality. So you've only demonstrated I am correct: between the abandonment of the territory by Turkey in the Treaty of Lausanne and the Declaration of Independence of Israel -- there was NO STATE in existence, making the entire territory terra nullius.

there was NO STATE in existence, making the entire territory terra nullius.

Unsubstantiated Israeli talking point.

On the contrary, its quite substantiated. Are you trying to argue that a State can come into being with no government, no control over territory, no ability to create infrastructure, laws, while completely under the control of another State?

Have you got a link for that?

Of course I do.

http://repository.law.umich.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1045&context=mjil

Do you have one to substantiate your blabber?

Of course not. It is just blabber.

Not that tired old zebra again.

It is my link. Where is yours?

Your link is an rebuttal opinion of an opinion piece and in no way represents international law. It is poorly written and substantially neglects to provide sources, often with the author quoting his own opinions as "proof" that this opinion is valid. Its nothing more than a vague and unsubstantiated reference to constitutive theory, with no demonstration of how that applies to Palestine between 1922 and 1988.

 

[P F Tinmore]

Or are we to believe the Palestinians are descendants of the Sumerian's, Akkadians, Philistines &/or Canaanites all of whom were around in the 7th century C.E. & converted to Islam?

They are not?

Hmmm, seems logical.

 

[P F Tinmore]

Unsubstantiated Israeli talking point.

On the contrary, its quite substantiated. Are you trying to argue that a State can come into being with no government, no control over territory, no ability to create infrastructure, laws, while completely under the control of another State?

Have you got a link for that?

Of course I do.

http://repository.law.umich.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1045&context=mjil

Do you have one to substantiate your blabber?

Of course not. It is just blabber.

Not that tired old zebra again.

It is my link. Where is yours?

Your link is an rebuttal opinion of an opinion piece and in no way represents international law. It is poorly written and substantially neglects to provide sources, often with the author quoting his own opinions as "proof" that this opinion is valid. Its nothing more than a vague and unsubstantiated reference to constitutive theory, with no demonstration of how that applies to Palestine between 1922 and 1988.

Sorry it went over your head.

So, where is your link?

You made a statement now you are ducking.

 

[Hollie]

On the contrary, its quite substantiated. Are you trying to argue that a State can come into being with no government, no control over territory, no ability to create infrastructure, laws, while completely under the control of another State?

Have you got a link for that?

Of course I do.

http://repository.law.umich.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1045&context=mjil

Do you have one to substantiate your blabber?

Of course not. It is just blabber.

Not that tired old zebra again.

It is my link. Where is yours?

Your link is an rebuttal opinion of an opinion piece and in no way represents international law. It is poorly written and substantially neglects to provide sources, often with the author quoting his own opinions as "proof" that this opinion is valid. Its nothing more than a vague and unsubstantiated reference to constitutive theory, with no demonstration of how that applies to Palestine between 1922 and 1988.

Sorry it went over your head.

So, where is your link?

You made a statement now you are ducking.

Cutting and pasting a zebra doesn’t make Islamic terrorist enclaves a state.

An article you found on the Internet assigns statehood? That’s so silly.

Besides, the “Country of Pal’istan”, as we know, was invented by the Treaty of Lausanne. You have made that point dozens of times. The “Pal’istanians” were invented by Arafat in 1967.

There you have it. An invented “Country” inhabited by people invented by an Egyptian terrorist.

 

[member]

Or are we to believe the Palestinians are descendants of the Sumerian's, Akkadians, Philistines &/or Canaanites all of whom were around in the 7th century C.E. & converted to Islam?

They are not?

Hmmm, seems logical.

​

“. . .or, are we to believe Palestinians are descendants of…."

​

​

…obviously, they are now descendants of. . .:

"Descendants"
​

"Descendants"

"Descendant"

​

"Descendant"

. . .Terrorists

​

“Hmmm, seems logical. . .”
]​

 

[member]

And Israel did not acquire any territory through force, though she did successfully defend herself from illegal forceful invasions by Jordan, Egypt, Iraq, Syria and Lebanon. All territory currently under Israel's sovereignty was acquired through peaceful and legal means (treaties).

All territory currently under Israel's sovereignty was acquired through peaceful and legal means (treaties).

Links? Let's see those treaties.

Don’t be disingenuous. You know exactly which treaties I’m talking about. The fact that you continue to ignore them doesn’t make them cease to exist.

"Don’t be disingenuous. You know exactly which treaties I’m talking about. The fact that you continue to ignore them doesn’t make them cease to exist."



he’s muuuch better at ignoring:

​

 

[P F Tinmore]

Of course I do.

http://repository.law.umich.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1045&context=mjil

Do you have one to substantiate your blabber?

Of course not. It is just blabber.

Not that tired old zebra again.

It is my link. Where is yours?

Your link is an rebuttal opinion of an opinion piece and in no way represents international law. It is poorly written and substantially neglects to provide sources, often with the author quoting his own opinions as "proof" that this opinion is valid. Its nothing more than a vague and unsubstantiated reference to constitutive theory, with no demonstration of how that applies to Palestine between 1922 and 1988.

Sorry it went over your head.

So, where is your link?

You made a statement now you are ducking.

Cutting and pasting a zebra doesn’t make Islamic terrorist enclaves a state.

An article you found on the Internet assigns statehood? That’s so silly.

Besides, the “Country of Pal’istan”, as we know, was invented by the Treaty of Lausanne. You have made that point dozens of times. The “Pal’istanians” were invented by Arafat in 1967.

There you have it. An invented “Country” inhabited by people invented by an Egyptian terrorist.

Link?

 

[Hollie]

Not that tired old zebra again.

It is my link. Where is yours?

Your link is an rebuttal opinion of an opinion piece and in no way represents international law. It is poorly written and substantially neglects to provide sources, often with the author quoting his own opinions as "proof" that this opinion is valid. Its nothing more than a vague and unsubstantiated reference to constitutive theory, with no demonstration of how that applies to Palestine between 1922 and 1988.

Sorry it went over your head.

So, where is your link?

You made a statement now you are ducking.

Cutting and pasting a zebra doesn’t make Islamic terrorist enclaves a state.

An article you found on the Internet assigns statehood? That’s so silly.

Besides, the “Country of Pal’istan”, as we know, was invented by the Treaty of Lausanne. You have made that point dozens of times. The “Pal’istanians” were invented by Arafat in 1967.

There you have it. An invented “Country” inhabited by people invented by an Egyptian terrorist.

Link?

yassir arafat - Google Search

 

[P F Tinmore]

It is my link. Where is yours?

Your link is an rebuttal opinion of an opinion piece and in no way represents international law. It is poorly written and substantially neglects to provide sources, often with the author quoting his own opinions as "proof" that this opinion is valid. Its nothing more than a vague and unsubstantiated reference to constitutive theory, with no demonstration of how that applies to Palestine between 1922 and 1988.

Sorry it went over your head.

So, where is your link?

You made a statement now you are ducking.

Cutting and pasting a zebra doesn’t make Islamic terrorist enclaves a state.

An article you found on the Internet assigns statehood? That’s so silly.

Besides, the “Country of Pal’istan”, as we know, was invented by the Treaty of Lausanne. You have made that point dozens of times. The “Pal’istanians” were invented by Arafat in 1967.

There you have it. An invented “Country” inhabited by people invented by an Egyptian terrorist.

Link?

yassir arafat - Google Search

Late in the game.
---------------------------
The automatic, ipso facto, change from Ottoman to Palestinian nationality was dealt with in Article 1, paragraph 1, of the Citizenship Order, which declared:

“Turkish subjects habitually resident in the territory of Palestine upon the 1st day of August, 1925, shall become Palestinian citizens.”​

To qualify for Palestinian nationality by virtue of this paragraph, the person had to be: (1) a Turkish subject, or citizen; and (2) habitually resident in Palestine. While Palestinian nationality in accordance with international law (the Treaty of Lausanne) was created, as shown above, on 6 August 1924, the same nationality was effectively created on 1 August 1925 based on domestic law (the Palestinian Citizenship Order).

Genesis of Citizenship in Palestine and Israel