In Support Of A Palestinian State

[Phoenall]

So true. He also has this constant argument that the Muslims & Christians were the indigenous Palestinains. So I guess the Israelites were created in 1948. Amazing what we can learn from Monte.

Of course the Palestinians are descendants of the people that have always lived there. Converting to the religion of the rulers, especially when it was the law to worship the state religion (Christianity) in the case of Byzantine Palestine, or convenience in the case of Islam, doesn't change the ethnicity of the people. Do you think that for some strange reason Palestine is different from any other area of the world that has seen rulers change?

It must do as they call themselves arab muslims now, so how can they be Jews, Romans or Greeks one day and the next arabs if you cant change your ethnicity ?

You really come out with some stupid comments don't you to justify your Jew hatred and Nazi ideology

 

[Phoenall]

Hamas= Hezbollah= IDF on Steroids.

Oh for goodness sake. Have a heart. Have mercy on the poor Palestinians victimized by Israel's brutal treatment of peace offerings, security fence & land concessions keepiing the Paili's captives under Israeli rule. At least let them have their own Palestinian State with self determination far far away from Israel. Don't you agree dear?

Israel won't be happy til the last of the Canaanites are dead.

Canaanites are an extinct people.

I think its the Hebrews who died out.

YOU WISH, but as the evidence shows the Jews from India, Ethiopia and Palestine have the same DNA as the Jews from America and Europe.

 

[Phoenall]

So true. He also has this constant argument that the Muslims & Christians were the indigenous Palestinains. So I guess the Israelites were created in 1948. Amazing what we can learn from Monte.

Of course the Palestinians are descendants of the people that have always lived there. Converting to the religion of the rulers, especially when it was the law to worship the state religion (Christianity) in the case of Byzantine Palestine, or convenience in the case of Islam, doesn't change the ethnicity of the people. Do you think that for some strange reason Palestine is different from any other area of the world that has seen rulers change?

How can the Pal'stanians (an invented people) be the descendants of people who have always lived there when varying groups of different ethnicities and religions (some of which had come and gone), have lived there?

Because the Palestinians are not an invented people and are the descendants of the people that have always lived in Palestine. The different elites that ruled Palestine did not change the ethnicity of the people. It resulted in conversion to other religions, the first conversion was to Christianity. The people did not magically become Byzantine Romans when they converted, by force, to Christianity. LOL

Not according to the reports you have linked to. Why even Churchill stated that the arab muslims where recent illegal immigrants at the same time he produced his white paper

 

[Phoenall]

So true. He also has this constant argument that the Muslims & Christians were the indigenous Palestinains. So I guess the Israelites were created in 1948. Amazing what we can learn from Monte.

Of course the Palestinians are descendants of the people that have always lived there. Converting to the religion of the rulers, especially when it was the law to worship the state religion (Christianity) in the case of Byzantine Palestine, or convenience in the case of Islam, doesn't change the ethnicity of the people. Do you think that for some strange reason Palestine is different from any other area of the world that has seen rulers change?

How can the Pal'stanians (an invented people) be the descendants of people who have always lived there when varying groups of different ethnicities and religions (some of which had come and gone), have lived there?

Because the Palestinians are not an invented people and are the descendants of the people that have always lived in Palestine. The different elites that ruled Palestine did not change the ethnicity of the people. It resulted in conversion to other religions, the first conversion was to Christianity. The people did not magically become Byzantine Romans when they converted, by force, to Christianity. LOL

The Pal'istanians certainly are an invented people. Invented in 1967 by Yassir "I'm Egyptian" Arafat. The different Arab and Turk invaders / colonizers certainly did change the ethnicity of the people.

Do you know what ethnicity means? LOL.

The Romans, Arabians, Persians, European Crusaders, Mamluks and Ottomans were not colonial settlers, they were rulers. They did not change the ethnicity of the people.

Why do you insist on looking the fool. In 1922 the Palestinians were in communication with the British Colonial Office as the People of Palestine. I have all the facts and the sources from the various archives which I can and do provide links to. You will always look the fool when you dispute the facts I present.


From 1922.

"PALESTINE.
CORRESPONDENCE WITH THE PALESTINE ARAB
DELEGATION AND THE ZIONIST ORGANISATION.


No. 1.
The Palestine Arab Delegation to the Secretary of State for the Colonies.


HOTEL CECIL,
London, W.C.,
February 21st, 1922.
Sir,
We wish to express our thanks to the Right Honourable the Secretary of State for the Colonies, for his courtesy in allowing us to see the draft of a proposed Palestine Order in Council embodying a scheme of Government for Palestine, and to discuss the same in our capacity of representatives of the Arab People of Palestine.

• 
  
  We would, therefore, submit the following observations:—

Whilst the position in Palestine is, as it stands to-day, with the British Government holding authority by an occupying force, and using that authority to impose upon the people against their wishes a great immigration of alien Jews, many of them of a Bolshevik revolutionary type, no constitution which would fall short of giving the People of Palestine full control of their own affairs could be acceptable.
If the British Government would revise their present policy in Palestine, end the Zionist con-dominium, put a stop to all alien immigration and grant the People of Palestine — who by Right and Experience are the best judges of what is good and bad to their country — Executive and Legislative powers, the terms of a constitution could be discussed in a different atmosphere. If to-day the People of Palestine assented to any constitution which fell short of giving them full control of their own affairs they would be in the position of agreeing to an instrument of Government which might, and probably would, be used to smother their national life under a flood of alien immigration."

https://unispal.un.org/DPA/DPR/unispal.nsf/0/48A7E5584EE1403485256CD8006C3FBE

Irrelevent and meaningless as they turned down the right to represent the interests of the arab muslims. So going to Britain with threats just showed them for what they are.


They lost the war and lost the rights of sovereignty in the process. They received 78% of Palestine, but wanted 100% of the world

 

[Phoenall]

Of course the Palestinians are descendants of the people that have always lived there. Converting to the religion of the rulers, especially when it was the law to worship the state religion (Christianity) in the case of Byzantine Palestine, or convenience in the case of Islam, doesn't change the ethnicity of the people. Do you think that for some strange reason Palestine is different from any other area of the world that has seen rulers change?

How can the Pal'stanians (an invented people) be the descendants of people who have always lived there when varying groups of different ethnicities and religions (some of which had come and gone), have lived there?

Because the Palestinians are not an invented people and are the descendants of the people that have always lived in Palestine. The different elites that ruled Palestine did not change the ethnicity of the people. It resulted in conversion to other religions, the first conversion was to Christianity. The people did not magically become Byzantine Romans when they converted, by force, to Christianity. LOL

The Pal'istanians certainly are an invented people. Invented in 1967 by Yassir "I'm Egyptian" Arafat. The different Arab and Turk invaders / colonizers certainly did change the ethnicity of the people.

Do you know what ethnicity means? LOL.

The Romans, Arabians, Persians, European Crusaders, Mamluks and Ottomans were not colonial settlers, they were rulers. They did not change the ethnicity of the people.

Why do you insist on looking the fool. In 1922 the Palestinians were in communication with the British Colonial Office as the People of Palestine. I have all the facts and the sources from the various archives which I can and do provide links to. You will always look the fool when you dispute the facts I present.


From 1922.

"PALESTINE.
CORRESPONDENCE WITH THE PALESTINE ARAB
DELEGATION AND THE ZIONIST ORGANISATION.


No. 1.
The Palestine Arab Delegation to the Secretary of State for the Colonies.


HOTEL CECIL,
London, W.C.,
February 21st, 1922.
Sir,
We wish to express our thanks to the Right Honourable the Secretary of State for the Colonies, for his courtesy in allowing us to see the draft of a proposed Palestine Order in Council embodying a scheme of Government for Palestine, and to discuss the same in our capacity of representatives of the Arab People of Palestine.

• 
  
  We would, therefore, submit the following observations:—

Whilst the position in Palestine is, as it stands to-day, with the British Government holding authority by an occupying force, and using that authority to impose upon the people against their wishes a great immigration of alien Jews, many of them of a Bolshevik revolutionary type, no constitution which would fall short of giving the People of Palestine full control of their own affairs could be acceptable.
If the British Government would revise their present policy in Palestine, end the Zionist con-dominium, put a stop to all alien immigration and grant the People of Palestine — who by Right and Experience are the best judges of what is good and bad to their country — Executive and Legislative powers, the terms of a constitution could be discussed in a different atmosphere. If to-day the People of Palestine assented to any constitution which fell short of giving them full control of their own affairs they would be in the position of agreeing to an instrument of Government which might, and probably would, be used to smother their national life under a flood of alien immigration."

UK correspondence with Palestine Arab Delegation and Zionist Organization/British policy in Palestine: "Churchill White Paper" - UK documentation Cmd. 1700/Non-UN document (excerpts) (1 July 1922)

It's comical. When you get flummoxed at being unable to support your argument, your reaction is to start feverishly cutting and pasting anything you can scour from the web.

Even Arafat couldn't convince anyone there were these mythical Pal'istanians in a mythical place called Pal'istan back in 1967 when he assigned a national identity to the welfare fraud he called Pal'istanians.

You find the facts unpalatable but the invading / colonizing Turks followed by the invading / squatting Egyptian, Syrian and Lebanese were obviously not Pal'istanians.

He is trying to deflect away from the topic because he knows he cant win. That is why he produces a letter to the British government that has no link to the topic. Note he never links to the reply ?

 

[Phoenall]

So true. He also has this constant argument that the Muslims & Christians were the indigenous Palestinains. So I guess the Israelites were created in 1948. Amazing what we can learn from Monte.

Of course the Palestinians are descendants of the people that have always lived there. Converting to the religion of the rulers, especially when it was the law to worship the state religion (Christianity) in the case of Byzantine Palestine, or convenience in the case of Islam, doesn't change the ethnicity of the people. Do you think that for some strange reason Palestine is different from any other area of the world that has seen rulers change?

How can the Pal'stanians (an invented people) be the descendants of people who have always lived there when varying groups of different ethnicities and religions (some of which had come and gone), have lived there?

Because the Palestinians are not an invented people and are the descendants of the people that have always lived in Palestine. The different elites that ruled Palestine did not change the ethnicity of the people. It resulted in conversion to other religions, the first conversion was to Christianity. The people did not magically become Byzantine Romans when they converted, by force, to Christianity. LOL

The Pal'istanians certainly are an invented people. Invented in 1967 by Yassir "I'm Egyptian" Arafat. The different Arab and Turk invaders / colonizers certainly did change the ethnicity of the people.

Do you know what ethnicity means? LOL.

The Romans, Arabians, Persians, European Crusaders, Mamluks and Ottomans were not colonial settlers, they were rulers. They did not change the ethnicity of the people.

Why do you insist on looking the fool. In 1922 the Palestinians were in communication with the British Colonial Office as the People of Palestine. I have all the facts and the sources from the various archives which I can and do provide links to. You will always look the fool when you dispute the facts I present.


From 1922.

"PALESTINE.
CORRESPONDENCE WITH THE PALESTINE ARAB
DELEGATION AND THE ZIONIST ORGANISATION.


No. 1.
The Palestine Arab Delegation to the Secretary of State for the Colonies.


HOTEL CECIL,
London, W.C.,
February 21st, 1922.
Sir,
We wish to express our thanks to the Right Honourable the Secretary of State for the Colonies, for his courtesy in allowing us to see the draft of a proposed Palestine Order in Council embodying a scheme of Government for Palestine, and to discuss the same in our capacity of representatives of the Arab People of Palestine.

• 
  
  We would, therefore, submit the following observations:—

Whilst the position in Palestine is, as it stands to-day, with the British Government holding authority by an occupying force, and using that authority to impose upon the people against their wishes a great immigration of alien Jews, many of them of a Bolshevik revolutionary type, no constitution which would fall short of giving the People of Palestine full control of their own affairs could be acceptable.
If the British Government would revise their present policy in Palestine, end the Zionist con-dominium, put a stop to all alien immigration and grant the People of Palestine — who by Right and Experience are the best judges of what is good and bad to their country — Executive and Legislative powers, the terms of a constitution could be discussed in a different atmosphere. If to-day the People of Palestine assented to any constitution which fell short of giving them full control of their own affairs they would be in the position of agreeing to an instrument of Government which might, and probably would, be used to smother their national life under a flood of alien immigration."

UK correspondence with Palestine Arab Delegation and Zionist Organization/British policy in Palestine: "Churchill White Paper" - UK documentation Cmd. 1700/Non-UN document (excerpts) (1 July 1922)

The reply from the same link


SIR,
I am directed by Mr. Secretary Churchill to acknowledge receipt of your letter of the 21st February on the subject of the draft Orders in Council providing for the Constitution of Palestine. Mr. Churchill has carefully considered this letter and has instructed me to offer the following observations upon it:—
2. I am to point out in the first place that, while your Delegation is recognised by Mr. Churchill as representing a large section of the Moslem and Christian inhabitants of Palestine, and while the Secretary of State is anxious to discuss his present proposals informally with recognised representatives, such as yourselves, of any important section of the community, he is not in a position to negotiate officially with you or with any other body which claims to represent the whole or, part of the people of Palestine, since no official machinery for representation has as yet been constituted. It is with the object of providing the people of Palestine with a constitutional channel for the expression of their opinions and wishes that the draft constitution has been framed.
3. Mr. Churchill regrets to observe that his personal explanations have apparently failed to convince your Delegation that His Majesty's Government have no intention "of repudiating the obligations into which they have entered towards the Jewish people. He has informed you on more than one occasion that he cannot discuss the future of Palestine upon any other basis than that of the letter addressed by the Right Honourable A. J. Balfour to Lord Rothschild on the 2nd November, 1917, commonly known as the "Balfour Declaration." You state in your letter that the people of Palestine cannot accept this Declaration as a basis for discussion. Mr. Churchill is unable for the reasons stated above to regard your Delegation as officially representing the People of Palestine. He presumes that your statement is not in any case intended to apply to the existing Jewish population of Palestine, which, so far as he is aware, your Delegation makes no claim to represent.
4. With regard to Article 22 of the Covenant of the League of Nations, I am to observe that this Article, in so far as it applies to territories severed from the Ottoman Empire, has been interpreted by the Principal Allied Powers in Articles 94 to 97 of the Treaty of Sevres, Syria and Iraq are explicitly referred to in Article 94 of that Treaty as having been provisionally recognised as Independent States, in accordance with the fourth paragraph of Article 22 of the Covenant of the League of Nations. Article 95, on the other hand, makes no such reference to Palestine. The reason for this is that, as stated in that Article, the Mandatory is to be responsible for putting into effect the Declaration originally made on the 2nd November, 1917, by the British Government, and adopted by the other Allied Powers, in favour of the establishment in Palestine of a National Home for the Jewish people, it being clearly understood that nothing should be done which might prejudice the civil and religious rights of existing non-Jewish communities in Palestine, and the rights and political status enjoyed by Jews in any other country. There is no question of treating the people of Palestine as less advanced than their neighbours in Iraq and Syria; the position is that His Majesty's Government are bound by a pledge which is antecedent to the Covenant of the League of Nations, and they cannot allow a constitutional position to develop in a country for which they have accepted responsibility to the Principal Allied Powers, which may make it impracticable to carry into effect a solemn undertaking given by themselves and their Allies.
5. For this reason Mr. Churchill is unable to accede to the second of the six requests made by your Delegation at the close of your letter under reply. If your Delegation really represents the present attitude of the majority of the Arab population of Palestine, and Mr. Churchill has no grounds for suggesting that this is not the case, it is quite clear that the creation at this stage of a national Government would preclude the fulfilment of the pledge made by the British Government to the Jewish people. It follows that the Principal Allied Powers, concerned as they were to ensure the fulfilment of a policy adopted before the Covenant was drafted, were well advised in applying to Palestine a somewhat different interpretation of paragraph 4 of Article 22 of the Covenant than was applied to the neighbouring countries of Iraq and Syria. His Majesty's Government are ready and willing to grant to the people of Palestine the greatest measure of independence consistent with the fulfilment of the pledges referred to. They readily endorse the five remaining requests made at the close of your letter, and it is in the hope of ensuring their realisation that the Secretary of State has invited your Delegation to discuss with him and with members of his department the practical steps which shall be taken to attain these objects.
6. The references in your letter under reply to "a great immigration of alien Jews," "a flood of alien immigration," and "a flood of alien Jewish immigration," coupled with the request that the British Government should "put a stop to all alien immigration," and the reference to the Zionist Organisation in Clause 2 of paragraph (d) of your letter, indicate that your Delegation and the community which they represent, imperfectly apprehend the interpretation placed by His Majesty's Government upon the policy of the National Home for the Jewish people. This interpretation was publicly given in Palestine on the 3rd June, 1921, by the High Commissioner in the following words :—

• 
  
  " These words (National Home) mean that the Jews, who are a people scattered throughout the world, but whose hearts are always turned to Palestine should be enabled to found here their home, and that some amongst them, within the limits fixed by numbers and the interests of the present population, should come to Palestine in order to help by their resources and efforts to develop the country to the advantage of all its inhabitants."

This interpretation was endorsed by the Secretary of State in his speech to the House of Commons on the 14th June, 1921. Mr. Churchill is reluctant to believe that your Delegation, or the people whom they represent, can entertain any objection in principle to the policy as thus interpreted.
7. Mr. Churchill has derived the impression from his interviews with your Delegation that it is not so much the policy itself, as defined in the preceding paragraph, that arouses misgiving, as the unfounded apprehension that the policy will not in practice follow the lines indicated. However this may be, he fully realises that the non-Jewish population of Palestine are entitled to claim from the Mandatory not only assurances but adequate safeguards that the establishment of the National Home, and the consequent Jewish immigration, shall not be conducted in such a manner as to prejudice their civil or religious rights.
8. In so far as the establishment of the Jewish National Home is concerned, Article 4 of the draft Mandate provides that the Zionist Organisation, so long as its organisation and constitution are in the opinion of the Mandatory appropriate, shall be recognised as a public body for the purpose of advising and cooperating with the administration of Palestine in such economic, social and other matters as may affect the establishment of the Jewish National Home and the interests of the Jewish population in Palestine, and that, subject always to the control of the administration, it shall assist and take part in the development of the country. In case your Delegation are under the impression that this advice and cooperation will be offered or accepted in such a manner as to infringe the provisions of the proposed Constitution, Mr. Churchill takes this opportunity of explaining to you that no administrative action will be taken in Palestine, whether on the advice of the Zionist Organisation or otherwise, except through the constitutional channels ultimately prescribed by the Constitution in its final form. He is ready if it is considered necessary to insert a provision to this effect in the draft Order in Council.
9. The question of immigration stands on a somewhat different footing. Mr. Churchill is inclined to the view that all questions of immigration policy should be reserved from discussion by the Legislative Council and decided by the High Commissioner in Council, after reference to His Majesty's Government. Immigration is of such vital concern to all sections of the population that there are strong grounds for dealing specially with it and for setting up some regular machinery by which the interests of the existing population of Palestine should be represented, without the infusion of any official element. One method that occurs to him to ensure this result would be the formation of an immigration board, which would be representative of Palestinians of all classes. The business of this board would be to advise the High Commissioner on all immigration questions from the point of view of the inhabitants of the country. The point of view of the Zionist Organisation would be placed before the High Commissioner by the representatives of the Organisation in Palestine. In the event of irreconcilable differences of opinion arising, the points at issue would be referred to His Majesty's Government for decision. Mr. Churchill would be glad of your observations on this suggestion, which is put forward in the hope of arriving at a reasonable solution of the main difficulty.
10. Having now explained the reasons why His Majesty's Government propose to adhere to the policy of a National Home for the Jewish people, and having outlined the extent to which they are prepared to meet your Delegation's objections to what they anticipate will be the effects of this policy, the Secretary of State wishes me to reply in detail to the points raised in your letter under reply. He considers that these points could more suitably have been discussed orally with members of this Department but since it appears from your letter that your reluctance to adopt this course is partly based upon an erroneous conception of the general spirit of the draft Order, he wishes to do everything in his power to remove all possible sources of misunderstanding and thus to place your Delegation in a position to reassure their supporters on their return to Palestine.
11. Paragraph (a).—Mr. Churchill has nothing to add to the general explanation given in paragraph 3 above.
Paragraph (b).—I am to inform you that you are under a misapprehension in stating that Palestine is "considered as a colony of the lowest order." There are many colonies in the British Empire in which there are no elected members on the Legislative Council. The majority of colonies are in the same position that Palestine would enjoy under the draft Constitution, i.e., they have a Legislative Council, the constitution of which provides for an official majority. In Palestine there will be a number of elected members on the Legislative Council whose views will necessarily carry great weight: the whole population of the country will be represented by means of a very liberal franchise : and the majority of official and nominated members over the rest of the Council will only be effective by virtue of the casting vote of the High Commissioner. Upon the question of the constitution of the proposed Legislative Council, I am to refer you to the reply to clause (i) of your paragraph (d) below. With regard to the reference to paragraph 4 of Article 22 of the Covenant of the League of Nations, I am to refer you to the comments in paragraph 4 of this letter above.
Paragraph (c).—Mr. Churchill has already explained in paragraph 4 of this letter why His Majesty's Government are not prepared at the present stage to provide for the creation of a national independent Government in Palestine, and why they consider it necessary to adopt the constitutional procedure which experience in all parts of the British Empire has shown to be the most practicable and convenient method of combining a large measure of popular representation with the necessary degree of control to ensure that the policy of the Government is not thereby stultified.
Paragraph (d), Clause (i).—The assumption made in your letter that the votes of the two members nominated by the High Commissioner will be commanded by him is not borne out by experience of the working of the Advisory Council. All members of the Advisory Council are nominated, but there have been many instances of members of the Advisory Council recording a vote against the Government. Mr. Churchill is, however, prepared to discuss with you the composition of the proposed Legislative Council and to consider the desirability of modifying the provision as regards nominated members. If the latter were eliminated, the elected representatives of the people could on every occasion on which they were unanimous carry a measure against the Government.
Clause (ii).—The references to immigration and to the Zionist Organisation have already been dealt with in paragraphs 6 to 9 of this letter. It is not correct to state that the High Commissioner is a member of the Zionist Organisation. Mr. Churchill observes with regret the allegation, now made for the first time, that the present High Commissioner is not impartial. The High Commissioner and his officers will undoubtedly carry out the policy of His Majesty's Government, so far as they are constitutionally empowered to do so, but the suggestion that the High Commissioner either has a policy of his own in contradistinction to that of His Majesty's Government, or that, if this were so, His Majesty's Government would permit him to carry it out, would be foreign to all the traditions of British administration.
Clause (iii).—Mr. Churchill is prepared to insert a provision that the High Commissioner must call a new Council within a stated time, as suggested in your letter.
Clause (iv).—I am to point out that neither Article 23 nor Article 24 gives to the High Commissioner the unrestricted right to veto any measure passed by the Council. Article 25 provides that he shall in any case reserve for the signification- of the pleasure of His Majesty any Ordinance which concerns matters dealt with specifically by the provisions of the Mandate. This limitation of the power of veto has been expressly inserted in the draft Order to meet the peculiar circumstances of Palestine.
Clause (v).—Reference is invited to comments on paragraph (c) above.
Clause (vi).—Mr. Churchill finds it difficult to conceive any circumstances in which none but the official members would find it possible to be present. The quorum was fixed after careful consideration, and Mr. Churchill must accordingly adhere to his proposal that the Council shall be competent to proceed to dispose of business if ten members are present.
Paragraph (e).—Article 33 is in the same category as Articles 34 and 35, to which no exception is taken by the Delegation. These three Articles merely provide for the application of certain British statutes to Palestine, and do not in any way affect the status of that country. Such application cannot legally be brought into force except by Order in Council. These provisions are included in the present draft for convenience, and there would be no objection in principle to their forming the subject of a separate Order in Council, though the Secretary of State thinks that this complicated procedure is unnecessary.
Article 46 is inserted in the interests of a condemned person, in order that the High Commissioner may have an opportunity of reviewing the evidence and deciding whether he shall exercise the prerogative of mercy delegated to him under Article 16, to which no exception is taken by the Delegation.
The Secretary of State is prepared to give careful consideration to the comments offered upon Article 67, and will be happy to discuss the question further with the Delegation when he is satisfied that some advance has been made towards a friendly understanding.
Paragraph (f).—The recognition of Hebrew as an official language is provided for in Article 22 of the draft Mandate for Palestine, in pursuance of the policy of the establishment in that country of a National Home for the Jewish People. Mr. Churchill does not agree that the expense involved is a sufficient reason for this provision to be reconsidered.
Paragraph (g).—The intention of Article 81 is not to give the High Commissioner power to obstruct an appeal to the League of Nations, but to give the population of Palestine the right to make such an appeal in accordance with the procedure which the League of Nations has itself accepted. I am to point out that in the event of the High Commissioner deciding that the memorandum shall not be forwarded, the petitioners will have the remedy of publicity, and it is with this object that the provision has been made that no memorandum shall be returned without a written reason being given by the High Commissioner for its rejection.
Paragraph (h).—Mr. Churchill is confident that on reconsideration of Article 83 your Delegation will realise that this Article, which is of a purely temporary character, will give no power to the High Commissioner to render the Order in Council "as if it had not been." The provisions of this, Article are intended to supply a simple method of remedying any inaccuracies of drafting which may appear when the Order is brought into active operation, and of explaining any provisions which may then appear to require further definition. Experience has shown that the period of one year within which the proclamation must be made is a convenient period for practical purposes.
12. The Secretary of State trusts that this letter will show your Delegation that sympathetic consideration is being given to your point of view, which is fully appreciated by His Majesty's Government. I am to take this opportunity of repeating the assurance that the draft Order in Council is susceptible to alteration, and of renewing Mr. Churchill's invitation to your Delegation to discuss the various points raised in this letter with members of his Department, and subsequently with himself.
13. Mr. Churchill observes that a summary of your letter of the 21st February has already been communicated to the press. He now proposes to publish the full text of your letter and of his reply. He presumes that you will have no objection to this course.

• 
  I am, etc.,
  • 
    
    J. E. SHUCKBTURGH.

 

[Phoenall]

How can the Pal'stanians (an invented people) be the descendants of people who have always lived there when varying groups of different ethnicities and religions (some of which had come and gone), have lived there?

Because the Palestinians are not an invented people and are the descendants of the people that have always lived in Palestine. The different elites that ruled Palestine did not change the ethnicity of the people. It resulted in conversion to other religions, the first conversion was to Christianity. The people did not magically become Byzantine Romans when they converted, by force, to Christianity. LOL

The Pal'istanians certainly are an invented people. Invented in 1967 by Yassir "I'm Egyptian" Arafat. The different Arab and Turk invaders / colonizers certainly did change the ethnicity of the people.

Do you know what ethnicity means? LOL.

The Romans, Arabians, Persians, European Crusaders, Mamluks and Ottomans were not colonial settlers, they were rulers. They did not change the ethnicity of the people.

Why do you insist on looking the fool. In 1922 the Palestinians were in communication with the British Colonial Office as the People of Palestine. I have all the facts and the sources from the various archives which I can and do provide links to. You will always look the fool when you dispute the facts I present.


From 1922.

"PALESTINE.
CORRESPONDENCE WITH THE PALESTINE ARAB
DELEGATION AND THE ZIONIST ORGANISATION.


No. 1.
The Palestine Arab Delegation to the Secretary of State for the Colonies.


HOTEL CECIL,
London, W.C.,
February 21st, 1922.
Sir,
We wish to express our thanks to the Right Honourable the Secretary of State for the Colonies, for his courtesy in allowing us to see the draft of a proposed Palestine Order in Council embodying a scheme of Government for Palestine, and to discuss the same in our capacity of representatives of the Arab People of Palestine.

• 
  
  We would, therefore, submit the following observations:—

Whilst the position in Palestine is, as it stands to-day, with the British Government holding authority by an occupying force, and using that authority to impose upon the people against their wishes a great immigration of alien Jews, many of them of a Bolshevik revolutionary type, no constitution which would fall short of giving the People of Palestine full control of their own affairs could be acceptable.
If the British Government would revise their present policy in Palestine, end the Zionist con-dominium, put a stop to all alien immigration and grant the People of Palestine — who by Right and Experience are the best judges of what is good and bad to their country — Executive and Legislative powers, the terms of a constitution could be discussed in a different atmosphere. If to-day the People of Palestine assented to any constitution which fell short of giving them full control of their own affairs they would be in the position of agreeing to an instrument of Government which might, and probably would, be used to smother their national life under a flood of alien immigration."

https://unispal.un.org/DPA/DPR/unispal.nsf/0/48A7E5584EE1403485256CD8006C3FBE

It's comical. When you get flummoxed at being unable to support your argument, your reaction is to start feverishly cutting and pasting anything you can scour from the web.

Even Arafat couldn't convince anyone there were these mythical Pal'istanians in a mythical place called Pal'istan back in 1967 when he assigned a national identity to the welfare fraud he called Pal'istanians.

You find the facts unpalatable but the invading / colonizing Turks followed by the invading / squatting Egyptian, Syrian and Lebanese were obviously not Pal'istanians.

You have a problem with reality. The archive I access is the UN archive, not the Hasbara sites you use to create your reality.

You just don't have the facts. Making things up puts you at a disadvantage.

There were no Turkish settlers, nor Egyptians, nor Syrians nor Lebanese.

Which means nothing as there are still LIES and BLOOD LIBELS in that archive. All it is is a collection of reports for the people of the future to read and take heed of. It is not a repository of international law as you seem to think

 

[Phoenall]

How can the Pal'stanians (an invented people) be the descendants of people who have always lived there when varying groups of different ethnicities and religions (some of which had come and gone), have lived there?

Because the Palestinians are not an invented people and are the descendants of the people that have always lived in Palestine. The different elites that ruled Palestine did not change the ethnicity of the people. It resulted in conversion to other religions, the first conversion was to Christianity. The people did not magically become Byzantine Romans when they converted, by force, to Christianity. LOL

The Pal'istanians certainly are an invented people. Invented in 1967 by Yassir "I'm Egyptian" Arafat. The different Arab and Turk invaders / colonizers certainly did change the ethnicity of the people.

Do you know what ethnicity means? LOL.

The Romans, Arabians, Persians, European Crusaders, Mamluks and Ottomans were not colonial settlers, they were rulers. They did not change the ethnicity of the people.

Why do you insist on looking the fool. In 1922 the Palestinians were in communication with the British Colonial Office as the People of Palestine. I have all the facts and the sources from the various archives which I can and do provide links to. You will always look the fool when you dispute the facts I present.


From 1922.

"PALESTINE.
CORRESPONDENCE WITH THE PALESTINE ARAB
DELEGATION AND THE ZIONIST ORGANISATION.


No. 1.
The Palestine Arab Delegation to the Secretary of State for the Colonies.


HOTEL CECIL,
London, W.C.,
February 21st, 1922.
Sir,
We wish to express our thanks to the Right Honourable the Secretary of State for the Colonies, for his courtesy in allowing us to see the draft of a proposed Palestine Order in Council embodying a scheme of Government for Palestine, and to discuss the same in our capacity of representatives of the Arab People of Palestine.

• 
  
  We would, therefore, submit the following observations:—

Whilst the position in Palestine is, as it stands to-day, with the British Government holding authority by an occupying force, and using that authority to impose upon the people against their wishes a great immigration of alien Jews, many of them of a Bolshevik revolutionary type, no constitution which would fall short of giving the People of Palestine full control of their own affairs could be acceptable.
If the British Government would revise their present policy in Palestine, end the Zionist con-dominium, put a stop to all alien immigration and grant the People of Palestine — who by Right and Experience are the best judges of what is good and bad to their country — Executive and Legislative powers, the terms of a constitution could be discussed in a different atmosphere. If to-day the People of Palestine assented to any constitution which fell short of giving them full control of their own affairs they would be in the position of agreeing to an instrument of Government which might, and probably would, be used to smother their national life under a flood of alien immigration."

https://unispal.un.org/DPA/DPR/unispal.nsf/0/48A7E5584EE1403485256CD8006C3FBE

It's comical. When you get flummoxed at being unable to support your argument, your reaction is to start feverishly cutting and pasting anything you can scour from the web.

Even Arafat couldn't convince anyone there were these mythical Pal'istanians in a mythical place called Pal'istan back in 1967 when he assigned a national identity to the welfare fraud he called Pal'istanians.

You find the facts unpalatable but the invading / colonizing Turks followed by the invading / squatting Egyptian, Syrian and Lebanese were obviously not Pal'istanians.

You have a problem with reality. The archive I access is the UN archive, not the Hasbara sites you use to create your reality.

You just don't have the facts. Making things up puts you at a disadvantage.

There were no Turkish settlers, nor Egyptians, nor Syrians nor Lebanese.

Read Churchils report to the House of Commons in which he states that the Arab immigration to Palestine during the British Mandate was so large that their numbers grew in such proportion that even if all Jews immigrated to Palestine they could not reach that number…


Was originally part of his white paper that you drool over

 

[P F Tinmore]

Creating a state is the dream of a few oligarchs around Ramallah. The Palestinians have a different view.

 

[MJB12741]

Isn't it interesting how the Pali's & their supporters protest Israel's peace offerings, security fence & land concessions so they can remain in Israel & yet has ANYONE EVER heard a single Palestinian or Pali supporter complaint on Jordan's Black September? When will Israel ever learn? LET THERE BE PEACE ALREADY!

 

[Hollie]

Isn't it interesting how the Pali's & their supporters protest Israel's peace offerings, security fence & land concessions so they can remain in Israel & yet has ANYONE EVER heard a single Palestinian or Pali supporter complaint on Jordan's Black September? When will Israel ever learn? LET THERE BE PEACE ALREADY!

To be fair, I understand that Jordan's Summer Camps For The Unwanted Rabble.... err, umm, I mean their 'Pal'istanian' problem are lovely accommodations for those who the Jordanians would prefer to be rid of.

 

[MJB12741]

Isn't it interesting how the Pali's & their supporters protest Israel's peace offerings, security fence & land concessions so they can remain in Israel & yet has ANYONE EVER heard a single Palestinian or Pali supporter complaint on Jordan's Black September? When will Israel ever learn? LET THERE BE PEACE ALREADY!

To be fair, I understand that Jordan's Summer Camps For The Unwanted Rabble.... err, umm, I mean their 'Pal'istanian' problem are lovely accommodations for those who the Jordanians would prefer to be rid of.

Pali supporters have made me realize that there can be no peace until Israel abandons its brutal Zionist agenda of peace offerings, security fence & land concessions & starts treating the Palestinians with the same Arab country love, justice & respect the Palestinians are so well accustiomed to --- And so well deserve. LET THERE BE PEACE ALREADY!

 

[Phoenall]

Creating a state is the dream of a few oligarchs around Ramallah. The Palestinians have a different view.

True their dream is the massacre of the Jews and the return of the caliphate to the M.E. under daesh

 

[MJB12741]

Isn't it interesting how the Pali's & their supporters protest Israel's peace offerings, security fence & land concessions so they can remain in Israel & yet has ANYONE EVER heard a single Palestinian or Pali supporter complaint on Jordan's Black September? When will Israel ever learn? LET THERE BE PEACE ALREADY!

To be fair, I understand that Jordan's Summer Camps For The Unwanted Rabble.... err, umm, I mean their 'Pal'istanian' problem are lovely accommodations for those who the Jordanians would prefer to be rid of.

Indeed, Jordan made a wise decision refusing Israel's offer to return the West Bank after the 67 war so they could dump their Palestinians on Israel to deal with.

 

[independent minded]

Lets not.

Lets join together against terrorism rather than rewarding terrorism.

No third state in the mandate area.

Jordan and Israel are the two state solution

I think that if the Palestinians had the pleasure and responsibility of running their own independent, sovereign nation-state, and were therefore in the position to control their own destiny, they might not think of lobbing rockets or whatever into Israel.

Also, the State of Israel would benefit by withdrawing from West Bank, Gaza Strip and East Jerusalem and allowing the Palestinians to create their own independent, sovereign nation-state for several reasons:

A) While there's no absolute guarantee that there wouldn't be any more conflagrations between Israelis and Palestinians, Israel would be better able to protect a smaller area of land (her own country) and her people in the event of any more conflagrations.

B) Israel would regain much of the international sympathy and support that she lost, by giving West Bank, Gaza Strip and East Jerusalem back to the Palestinians.

C) Israel would be relieved of the burden of having to rule over another group of people and to occupy a foreign territory.

D) The Palestinians would benefit by having their own state, and therefore, self-determination, which both peoples have the right to.

 

[independent minded]

Problem is not a single surrounding Arab country wants Palestinians. Gosh I wondeer if Mecca would be a nice place for a Palestinian State?

While what you're saying is very true, other people in the region, meaning the Arab States, as well as Israel, are going to have to accept the formation of an independent, sovereign Palestinian nation-state that's comprised of the West Bank, Gaza Strip and East Jerusalem, whether they want the Palestinians around or not.

 

[independent minded]

What makes anyone thing the Arab Muslims in Israel are capable of handling the affairs of state in a responsible manor.

Look at what happened in Gaza, Its cess pool of violence and anarchy

Then they will need to take lessons and very quickly, when the UN forces them to stand up and be counted in a few short months. When they are given what they demand and find that they have lost what they most need in the process. Who will pay the bills then when UNWRA is disbanded as there will be no more Palestinian refugees.
GIVE THEM THEIR NATION AND THEIR FREE DETERMINATION AND WATCH THEM DESTROY THEMSELVES IN THE FIRST MONTH

Sure but give them that nation somewhere else. Israel is already the smallest nation of the mandated areas with the Arab Muslims already having something like 99% of west Africa.

Let them set up camp in Jordan somewhere ;--)

Sorry to break this to you Boston1, but Jordan, a country that already has a large Palestinian population majority, has long been adamant about not taking any more Palestinians into their country. Jordan doesn't want them, and neither do the other countries in the region.

 

[Hollie]

Lets not.

Lets join together against terrorism rather than rewarding terrorism.

No third state in the mandate area.

Jordan and Israel are the two state solution

I think that if the Palestinians had the pleasure and responsibility of running their own independent, sovereign nation-state, and were therefore in the position to control their own destiny, they might not think of lobbing rockets or whatever into Israel.

Also, the State of Israel would benefit by withdrawing from West Bank, Gaza Strip and East Jerusalem and allowing the Palestinians to create their own independent, sovereign nation-state for several reasons:

A) While there's no absolute guarantee that there wouldn't be any more conflagrations between Israelis and Palestinians, Israel would be better able to protect a smaller area of land (her own country) and her people in the event of any more conflagrations.

B) Israel would regain much of the international sympathy and support that she lost, by giving West Bank, Gaza Strip and East Jerusalem back to the Palestinians.

C) Israel would be relieved of the burden of having to rule over another group of people and to occupy a foreign territory.

D) The Palestinians would benefit by having their own state, and therefore, self-determination, which both peoples have the right to.

"I think that if the Palestinians had the pleasure and responsibility of running their own independent, sovereign nation-state, and were therefore in the position to control their own destiny, they might not think of lobbing rockets or whatever into Israel."


If you review your islamo-history, you will discover that the Arabs-Moslems occupying the disputed territories had precisely the opportunity you describe. Israel's withdrawal from Gaza in 2005 was an opportunity for the Arabs-Moslems to make an attempt at building a working society. However, as one would expect from Islamic terrorists, Israel's withdrawal during August of 2005 was met with rocket fire in September.

What else would one expect from Islamic terrorists?

 

[independent minded]

Lets not.

Lets join together against terrorism rather than rewarding terrorism.

No third state in the mandate area.

Jordan and Israel are the two state solution

I think that if the Palestinians had the pleasure and responsibility of running their own independent, sovereign nation-state, and were therefore in the position to control their own destiny, they might not think of lobbing rockets or whatever into Israel.

Also, the State of Israel would benefit by withdrawing from West Bank, Gaza Strip and East Jerusalem and allowing the Palestinians to create their own independent, sovereign nation-state for several reasons:

A) While there's no absolute guarantee that there wouldn't be any more conflagrations between Israelis and Palestinians, Israel would be better able to protect a smaller area of land (her own country) and her people in the event of any more conflagrations.

B) Israel would regain much of the international sympathy and support that she lost, by giving West Bank, Gaza Strip and East Jerusalem back to the Palestinians.

C) Israel would be relieved of the burden of having to rule over another group of people and to occupy a foreign territory.

D) The Palestinians would benefit by having their own state, and therefore, self-determination, which both peoples have the right to.

"I think that if the Palestinians had the pleasure and responsibility of running their own independent, sovereign nation-state, and were therefore in the position to control their own destiny, they might not think of lobbing rockets or whatever into Israel."



If you review your islamo-history, you will discover that the Arabs-Moslems occupying the disputed territories had precisely the opportunity you describe. Israel's withdrawal from Gaza in 2005 was an opportunity for the Arabs-Moslems to make an attempt at building a working society. However, as one would expect from Islamic terrorists, Israel's withdrawal during August of 2005 was met with rocket fire in September.

What else would one expect from Islamic terrorists?

Israel did withdraw her settlers from Gaza Strip back in 2005, but Israel still controls Gaza Strip's air space and water, which they should give up...now, and withdraw its troops, as well.

 

[independent minded]

Let us all join togetrher in support of a Palestinian State. A haven for terrorists to destroy their land, ruin their own economy & kill each other. LET THERE BE PEACE ALREADY!

Sultan Knish: It's Time for a Palestinian State

You should warn us before you post from a hate filled Zionist propagandist site from an Zionist hateful person who writes crap and he calls himself a journalist. The Palestinians have more right to that land than those who pretend to have any links to the Levant. They are all Russians and Ukrainians.

You Zionist are dirty in thought word and deed.

This:

"You Zionists are dirty in thought, word and deed."

is about as hate-filled and nasty as one can get.