Israel attacks Gaza strip after Hamas armed wing parade

[Phoenall]

P F Tinmore, et al,

OH, don't be ridiculous.

Five Arab nations invaded territory in the former Palestinian mandate​

That would be Palestine not Israel.

(COMMENT)

We call this type of quibbling to be untruthful.

View attachment 86741 View attachment 86742​

(QUESTIONS)

• Are you saying that this did not happen?
• You are saying that no elements of the Arab League Forces entered into the territory declared independent by the Israeli Provisional Government?

* Are you saying that the Arab League DID NOT attempt to use Military Force to deny Israel the principle of equal rights and self-determination (Article 1(2) UN Charter)?
• Are you saying that the Arab League DID NOT used Military Force in an attempt to against the Provisional Government of Israel in an attempt to take control of the territory outlined in UN General Assembly Resolution 181 (II) and prevent its implementation?

You can quibble with the words: and pretend that your quibbling has some meaning. But in reality, you and others like you, do no great service to the Pro-Arab Palestinian Cause by attempting to alter the historical reality.

If you are arguing that the Arab League had some legal authority to marshal forces, and deploy them beyond their sovereignty and borders, into the territory for which the Allied Powers had been given title and rights, --- formerly under the Mandate for Palestine --- then state the case.

Most Respectfully,
R

There you go again basing your conclusions on false premise.

• You are saying that no elements of the Arab League Forces entered into the territory declared independent by the Israeli Provisional Government?​

Israel claimed independence on Palestinian land. When was that land ceded to Israel?

Link?

The Avalon Project : The Palestine Mandate


The Palestine Mandate
The Council of the League of Nations:
Whereas the Principal Allied Powers have agreed, for the purpose of giving effect to the provisions of Article 22 of the Covenant of the League of Nations, to entrust to a Mandatory selected by the said Powers the administration of the territory of Palestine, which formerly belonged to the Turkish Empire, within such boundaries as may be fixed by them; and

Whereas the Principal Allied Powers have also agreed that the Mandatory should be responsible for putting into effect the declaration originally made on November 2nd, 1917, by the Government of His Britannic Majesty, and adopted by the said Powers, in favor of the establishment in Palestine of a national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, or the rights and political status enjoyed by Jews in any other country; and

Whereas recognition has thereby been given to the historical connection of the Jewish people with Palestine and to the grounds for reconstituting their national home in that country; and

Whereas the Principal Allied Powers have selected His Britannic Majesty as the Mandatory for Palestine; and

Whereas the mandate in respect of Palestine has been formulated in the following terms and submitted to the Council of the League for approval; and

Whereas His Britannic Majesty has accepted the mandate in respect of Palestine and undertaken to exercise it on behalf of the League of Nations in conformity with the following provisions; and

Whereas by the afore-mentioned Article 22 (paragraph 8), it is provided that the degree of authority, control or administration to be exercised by the Mandatory, not having been previously agreed upon by the Members of the League, shall be explicitly defined by the Council of the League Of Nations;

confirming the said Mandate, defines its terms as follows:



The present instrument shall be deposited in original in the archives of the League of Nations and certified copies shall be forwarded by the Secretary-General of the League of Nations to all members of the League.

Done at London the twenty-fourth day of July, one thousand nine hundred and twenty-two.

 

[Phoenall]

P F Tinmore, et al,

The phrase "Palestinian Land" DOES NOT MEAN land under the sovereignty of the Arab Palestinian."

There you go again basing your conclusions on false premise.

• You are saying that no elements of the Arab League Forces entered into the territory declared independent by the Israeli Provisional Government?​

Israel claimed independence on Palestinian land. When was that land ceded to Israel?

Link?

(COMMENT)

The territory for which the Provisional Government of Israel was territory over which the Allied Powers had full Title and Right. This was acquired in Article 16 of the Lausanne Treaty.

The UNSCOP made a recommendation for the apportionment of this territory to which the Allied Powers had Title and Rights.

The General Assemble outline the preferred "Steps Preparatory to Independence."

The "Steps Preparatory to Independence," having been accomplished by the Provisional Government to the degree acceptable to the UN Palestine Commission, the declared independence Independence on the hour of the withdrawal of the Mandatory (termination of the Mandate).

The Arab League attacked the Provisional Government of Israel on the day the declaration was announced.

Without objection by the UN and recognizing the right to self-determination [Chapter I, Article 1(2)], and after the ceasefire and armistice arrangements were set in place, the General Assembly granted Israel membership into the United Nations. A/RES/273 (III) 11 May 1949

The question: • "When was that land ceded to Israel?" is a question that assumes the land was processed under some procedure called: "land ceded to Israel." No such process; the territory WAS NOT "ceded" (meaning yielded or formally surrender to another). The territory, recommended by the UNSCOP and approved by the General Assembly, was territory for which the Allied Powers had Title and Rights, was offered and passed on to the Mandatory and then passed on to the UN Trusteeship in the hands of the Successor Government of the UN Palestine Commission. The UN Palestine Commission, responsible for implementation of the UNSCOP Recommendations as approved, immediately allowed the Provisional Government to declare independence.

Most Respectfully,
R

The phrase "Palestinian Land" DOES NOT MEAN land under the sovereignty of the Arab Palestinian."​

Yes it does. Just because illegal external interference prevents them from exercising that right does not negate that right.

So how about a link detailing the ceding of LoN land to the arab muslims . I have searched every archive and all I find in islamonazi propaganda that alters the words mandate of palestine to nation of palestine.

 

[Phoenall]

P F Tinmore, et al,

The phrase "Palestinian Land" DOES NOT MEAN land under the sovereignty of the Arab Palestinian."

There you go again basing your conclusions on false premise.

• You are saying that no elements of the Arab League Forces entered into the territory declared independent by the Israeli Provisional Government?​

Israel claimed independence on Palestinian land. When was that land ceded to Israel?

Link?

(COMMENT)

The territory for which the Provisional Government of Israel was territory over which the Allied Powers had full Title and Right. This was acquired in Article 16 of the Lausanne Treaty.

The UNSCOP made a recommendation for the apportionment of this territory to which the Allied Powers had Title and Rights.

The General Assemble outline the preferred "Steps Preparatory to Independence."

The "Steps Preparatory to Independence," having been accomplished by the Provisional Government to the degree acceptable to the UN Palestine Commission, the declared independence Independence on the hour of the withdrawal of the Mandatory (termination of the Mandate).

The Arab League attacked the Provisional Government of Israel on the day the declaration was announced.

Without objection by the UN and recognizing the right to self-determination [Chapter I, Article 1(2)], and after the ceasefire and armistice arrangements were set in place, the General Assembly granted Israel membership into the United Nations. A/RES/273 (III) 11 May 1949

The question: • "When was that land ceded to Israel?" is a question that assumes the land was processed under some procedure called: "land ceded to Israel." No such process; the territory WAS NOT "ceded" (meaning yielded or formally surrender to another). The territory, recommended by the UNSCOP and approved by the General Assembly, was territory for which the Allied Powers had Title and Rights, was offered and passed on to the Mandatory and then passed on to the UN Trusteeship in the hands of the Successor Government of the UN Palestine Commission. The UN Palestine Commission, responsible for implementation of the UNSCOP Recommendations as approved, immediately allowed the Provisional Government to declare independence.

Most Respectfully,
R

The UN has no authority over land.

So they could not give land already ceded to the Jews in 1922 to the arab muslims in 1948. Thank you for admitting this is the case and that the arab muslims have no legal rights to the land.

 

[Phoenall]

P F Tinmore, et al,

The phrase "Palestinian Land" DOES NOT MEAN land under the sovereignty of the Arab Palestinian."

There you go again basing your conclusions on false premise.

• You are saying that no elements of the Arab League Forces entered into the territory declared independent by the Israeli Provisional Government?​

Israel claimed independence on Palestinian land. When was that land ceded to Israel?

Link?

(COMMENT)

The territory for which the Provisional Government of Israel was territory over which the Allied Powers had full Title and Right. This was acquired in Article 16 of the Lausanne Treaty.

The UNSCOP made a recommendation for the apportionment of this territory to which the Allied Powers had Title and Rights.

The General Assemble outline the preferred "Steps Preparatory to Independence."

The "Steps Preparatory to Independence," having been accomplished by the Provisional Government to the degree acceptable to the UN Palestine Commission, the declared independence Independence on the hour of the withdrawal of the Mandatory (termination of the Mandate).

The Arab League attacked the Provisional Government of Israel on the day the declaration was announced.

Without objection by the UN and recognizing the right to self-determination [Chapter I, Article 1(2)], and after the ceasefire and armistice arrangements were set in place, the General Assembly granted Israel membership into the United Nations. A/RES/273 (III) 11 May 1949

The question: • "When was that land ceded to Israel?" is a question that assumes the land was processed under some procedure called: "land ceded to Israel." No such process; the territory WAS NOT "ceded" (meaning yielded or formally surrender to another). The territory, recommended by the UNSCOP and approved by the General Assembly, was territory for which the Allied Powers had Title and Rights, was offered and passed on to the Mandatory and then passed on to the UN Trusteeship in the hands of the Successor Government of the UN Palestine Commission. The UN Palestine Commission, responsible for implementation of the UNSCOP Recommendations as approved, immediately allowed the Provisional Government to declare independence.

Most Respectfully,
R

The question: • "When was that land ceded to Israel?" is a question that assumes the land was processed under some procedure called: "land ceded to Israel." No such process; the territory WAS NOT "ceded" (meaning yielded or formally surrender to another).​

Indeed, thank you.

INCLUDING THE ARAB MUSLIMS NOW CALLING THEMSELVES PALESTINAINS

 

[dani67]

jew semitic against arab semitic . they are cousin . its not our bussiness

 

[Shusha]

The question: • "When was that land ceded to Israel?" is a question that assumes the land was processed under some procedure called: "land ceded to Israel." No such process; the territory WAS NOT "ceded" (meaning yielded or formally surrender to another).​

Indeed, thank you.

Well, of course the land was ceded. It was ceded by the Ottoman Empire.

1. Territory ceded by the Ottoman Empire to the Allied Powers.
2. Allied Powers accepted the territory, in trust, for the peoples of the territories, including a NATIONAL HOME for the Jewish people -- one of the peoples for whom the trust existed.
3. Peoples in question completed the steps necessary for independence and then declared independence.
4. Resultant States came into being.
5. State of Israel was attacked.

 

[RoccoR]

P F Tinmore, et al,

Ah, yes --- here we are again, raise objections about matters of fact.

The UN has no authority over land.

(COMMENT)

There is no record of any Arab Palestinian sovereignty (supreme power or authority) in the territory formerly under the Mandate of Palestine.

Quite right. I don't think that is what I said. When you twist the words around, you get a false answer.

Article 75
The United Nations shall establish under its authority an international trusteeship system for the administration and supervision of such territories as may be placed thereunder by subsequent individual agreements. These territories are hereinafter referred to as trust territories.

Article 77
1. The trusteeship system shall apply to such territories in the following categories as may be placed thereunder by means of trusteeship agreements:

a. territories now held under mandate;
b. territories which may be detached from enemy states as a result of the Second World War; and
c. territories voluntarily placed under the system by states responsible for their administration.
​

The phrase "Palestinian Land" DOES NOT MEAN land under the sovereignty of the Arab Palestinian."

Yes it does. Just because illegal external interference prevents them from exercising that right does not negate that right.

(COMMENT)

It is often important to remember that the phrase "Palestinian land laws" refers to "ownership of land" under the Palestinian Authority (PA)(a real estate matter).

The Palestinian Land Laws[1] are Palestinian Authority (PA) laws that prohibit Palestinians from selling Palestinian territory lands to Jews.[2][3][4][5] These land laws were originally enacted during the Jordanian occupation of the West Bank (1948–1967),[3] and are deemed by the Palestinian Authority as being necessary to prevent further expansion of Israeli settlements in the Palestinian territories and to "halt the spread of moral, political and security corruption".
SOURCE: definition - palestinian land laws

Most Respectfully,
R

 

[P F Tinmore]

P F Tinmore, et al,

Ah, yes --- here we are again, raise objections about matters of fact.

The UN has no authority over land.

(COMMENT)

There is no record of any Arab Palestinian sovereignty (supreme power or authority) in the territory formerly under the Mandate of Palestine.

Quite right. I don't think that is what I said. When you twist the words around, you get a false answer.

Article 75
The United Nations shall establish under its authority an international trusteeship system for the administration and supervision of such territories as may be placed thereunder by subsequent individual agreements. These territories are hereinafter referred to as trust territories.

Article 77
1. The trusteeship system shall apply to such territories in the following categories as may be placed thereunder by means of trusteeship agreements:

a. territories now held under mandate;
b. territories which may be detached from enemy states as a result of the Second World War; and
c. territories voluntarily placed under the system by states responsible for their administration.
​

The phrase "Palestinian Land" DOES NOT MEAN land under the sovereignty of the Arab Palestinian."

Yes it does. Just because illegal external interference prevents them from exercising that right does not negate that right.

(COMMENT)

It is often important to remember that the phrase "Palestinian land laws" refers to "ownership of land" under the Palestinian Authority (PA)(a real estate matter).

The Palestinian Land Laws[1] are Palestinian Authority (PA) laws that prohibit Palestinians from selling Palestinian territory lands to Jews.[2][3][4][5] These land laws were originally enacted during the Jordanian occupation of the West Bank (1948–1967),[3] and are deemed by the Palestinian Authority as being necessary to prevent further expansion of Israeli settlements in the Palestinian territories and to "halt the spread of moral, political and security corruption".
SOURCE: definition - palestinian land laws

Most Respectfully,
R

These land laws were originally enacted during the Jordanian occupation of the West Bank (1948–1967)​

Don't you consistently say that was sovereign Jordanian territory? I have always said it was occupied Palestinian territory. That is why it is still occupied Palestinian territory.

Some say that the West Bank is not occupied. (Common Israeli narrative.)

Some say that the territory outside the resolution 181 border is occupied. (Common during the time of Israel's statehood bid.)

Some say that all of Palestine is occupied. (Common Palestinian narrative.)

Is there any way to resolve this confusion?

 

[Phoenall]

P F Tinmore, et al,

Ah, yes --- here we are again, raise objections about matters of fact.

The UN has no authority over land.

(COMMENT)

There is no record of any Arab Palestinian sovereignty (supreme power or authority) in the territory formerly under the Mandate of Palestine.

Quite right. I don't think that is what I said. When you twist the words around, you get a false answer.

Article 75
The United Nations shall establish under its authority an international trusteeship system for the administration and supervision of such territories as may be placed thereunder by subsequent individual agreements. These territories are hereinafter referred to as trust territories.

Article 77
1. The trusteeship system shall apply to such territories in the following categories as may be placed thereunder by means of trusteeship agreements:

a. territories now held under mandate;
b. territories which may be detached from enemy states as a result of the Second World War; and
c. territories voluntarily placed under the system by states responsible for their administration.
​

The phrase "Palestinian Land" DOES NOT MEAN land under the sovereignty of the Arab Palestinian."

Yes it does. Just because illegal external interference prevents them from exercising that right does not negate that right.

(COMMENT)

It is often important to remember that the phrase "Palestinian land laws" refers to "ownership of land" under the Palestinian Authority (PA)(a real estate matter).

The Palestinian Land Laws[1] are Palestinian Authority (PA) laws that prohibit Palestinians from selling Palestinian territory lands to Jews.[2][3][4][5] These land laws were originally enacted during the Jordanian occupation of the West Bank (1948–1967),[3] and are deemed by the Palestinian Authority as being necessary to prevent further expansion of Israeli settlements in the Palestinian territories and to "halt the spread of moral, political and security corruption".
SOURCE: definition - palestinian land laws

Most Respectfully,
R

These land laws were originally enacted during the Jordanian occupation of the West Bank (1948–1967)​

Don't you consistently say that was sovereign Jordanian territory? I have always said it was occupied Palestinian territory. That is why it is still occupied Palestinian territory.

Some say that the West Bank is not occupied. (Common Israeli narrative.)

Some say that the territory outside the resolution 181 border is occupied. (Common during the time of Israel's statehood bid.)

Some say that all of Palestine is occupied. (Common Palestinian narrative.)

Is there any way to resolve this confusion?

Yes look at the facts based on international laws and historical documentation. When you do this you find that no nation of palestine has ever existed and the arab muslims have no legal or moral right to the land destined as the Jewish national home.

 

[Kondor3]

Israel attacks Gaza strip after Hamas armed wing parade

What a great opportunity for the Israelis to kill a gaggle of those stupid Neanderthal Nazi Hamas bastards, all conveniently bunched together, for excellent, high-yield targeting.

The more dead Hamas primitives the better... sounds like great fun.

 

[Hollie]

P F Tinmore, et al,

Ah, yes --- here we are again, raise objections about matters of fact.

The UN has no authority over land.

(COMMENT)

There is no record of any Arab Palestinian sovereignty (supreme power or authority) in the territory formerly under the Mandate of Palestine.

Quite right. I don't think that is what I said. When you twist the words around, you get a false answer.

Article 75
The United Nations shall establish under its authority an international trusteeship system for the administration and supervision of such territories as may be placed thereunder by subsequent individual agreements. These territories are hereinafter referred to as trust territories.

Article 77
1. The trusteeship system shall apply to such territories in the following categories as may be placed thereunder by means of trusteeship agreements:

a. territories now held under mandate;
b. territories which may be detached from enemy states as a result of the Second World War; and
c. territories voluntarily placed under the system by states responsible for their administration.
​

The phrase "Palestinian Land" DOES NOT MEAN land under the sovereignty of the Arab Palestinian."

Yes it does. Just because illegal external interference prevents them from exercising that right does not negate that right.

(COMMENT)

It is often important to remember that the phrase "Palestinian land laws" refers to "ownership of land" under the Palestinian Authority (PA)(a real estate matter).

The Palestinian Land Laws[1] are Palestinian Authority (PA) laws that prohibit Palestinians from selling Palestinian territory lands to Jews.[2][3][4][5] These land laws were originally enacted during the Jordanian occupation of the West Bank (1948–1967),[3] and are deemed by the Palestinian Authority as being necessary to prevent further expansion of Israeli settlements in the Palestinian territories and to "halt the spread of moral, political and security corruption".
SOURCE: definition - palestinian land laws

Most Respectfully,
R

These land laws were originally enacted during the Jordanian occupation of the West Bank (1948–1967)​

Don't you consistently say that was sovereign Jordanian territory? I have always said it was occupied Palestinian territory. That is why it is still occupied Palestinian territory.

Some say that the West Bank is not occupied. (Common Israeli narrative.)

Some say that the territory outside the resolution 181 border is occupied. (Common during the time of Israel's statehood bid.)

Some say that all of Palestine is occupied. (Common Palestinian narrative.)

Is there any way to resolve this confusion?

Your confusion is a continuing concern. You have a notion of some mythical entity you have entitled "Pal'istan" that never existed as a nation state. You have a notion of some people that you have invented with a national identity who you label as "Pal'istanians".

Is there any way to resolve your confusion?

 

[RoccoR]

P F Tinmore, et al,

In some tangential ways, there is some truth here.

1. These land laws were originally enacted during the Jordanian occupation of the West Bank (1948–1967)
2. Don't you consistently say that was sovereign Jordanian territory? I have always said it was occupied Palestinian territory. That is why it is still occupied Palestinian territory.
3. Some say that the West Bank is not occupied. (Common Israeli narrative.)
4. Some say that the territory outside the resolution 181 border is occupied. (Common during the time of Israel's statehood bid.)
5. Some say that all of Palestine is occupied. (Common Palestinian narrative.)
6. Is there any way to resolve this confusion?

(COMMENT)

• #1) Between the time of the Armistice and April 1950, Jordan was the Occupying Power over the West Bank (including Jerusalem).

• #2) The Arab Palestinians of the West Bank exercised their "right to self-determination" and choose to join with the Kingdom in April 1950 and choose to bond with the Kingdom; becoming sovereign Jordanian territory.

• #3) There is an argument to be made concerning the status of the territories:

•∆• The Israel does not maintain "effective control" over the Gaza Strip; nor is it in a position to "take all the measures in his power to restore, and ensure, as far as possible, public order and safety (as Required under Article 43 of the Hague Regulation). The International Community consistently calls for Israel to militarily withdraw from Gaza. THUS: There is an argument to be made that Israel does not maintain the capacity to be an "Occupying Power in Gaza.

•∆• In 1967, when Israel re-entered the West Bank in pursuit of Jordanian Armed Force, the West Bank was Sovereign Jordanian Territory. After 31 July 1988, the Jordanians cut all ties and politically abandon the West Bank. In doing so --- the West Bank became "a territory not be under the sovereignty of state [AKA: terra nullius ("nobody's land")]. The only power remaining in effective control under Article 43 was the Government of Israel (GOI); the Arabs had effectively left the West Bank in Israeli hands.

•∆• During the period 1993 thru1995, the GOI and the Palestinian Liberation Organization (PLO)(the designated sole legitimate representative of the Palestinian people) made some agreements pertaining to the governance over GAZA and the Governance over the West Bank (AKA: Oslo Accords). Part of this included the withdrawal from Gaza and part of this defined:

§ Area A (full civil and security control by the Palestinian Authority)
§ Area B (Palestinian civil control and joint Israeli-Palestinian security control)
§ Area C (full Israeli civil and security control)
​

While it is possible to open talks of the legitimacy of this agreements, it is difficult not to recognize given the fact the the international community overwhelmingly recognized them; even to the extent of the signatories being awarded a Nobel Peace Price for the accomplishment.​

• #4) Yes, some say that the General Assembly Resolution 181(II) still applies. others (most notably the pro-Hostile Arab Palestinians (HoAP), oppose that position. But whether or not the A/RES/181(II) is valid or not, the fact remains that after the Armistice of 1949, the GOI had control over more territory than originally recommended in A/RES/181(II). Between the 1949 and 1967, this was unchallenged by the international community.

• #5) While this is a theme "all of Palestine is occupied" (meaning the territory formerly under the Mandate for Palestine - West of the Jordan River), this is based more on folklore and wild interpretations of decisions made more than half a century ago. This is a second tier (imaginary) reality (fooling yourself), on which the HoAP Jihad is based. But the actual reality is that the GOI and its sovereignty which is marked by an enforced physical barrier (non-Imaginary non-Fictional).

• #6) Many things are possible given an actual good faith effort by belligerents in negotiation. However, neither side has elected to exercise the agreed upon Dispute Resolution Process, to open the Status of Permanent Negotiations, or to initiate proceedings offered by the Principles of International Law concerning Friendly Relations and Co-operation among States. But it is difficult to see any combination of existing political players that can clean the slate and open a dialog with no preconceived notions.

Most Respectfully,
R

 

[P F Tinmore]

P F Tinmore, et al,

Ah, yes --- here we are again, raise objections about matters of fact.

The UN has no authority over land.

(COMMENT)

There is no record of any Arab Palestinian sovereignty (supreme power or authority) in the territory formerly under the Mandate of Palestine.

Quite right. I don't think that is what I said. When you twist the words around, you get a false answer.

Article 75
The United Nations shall establish under its authority an international trusteeship system for the administration and supervision of such territories as may be placed thereunder by subsequent individual agreements. These territories are hereinafter referred to as trust territories.

Article 77
1. The trusteeship system shall apply to such territories in the following categories as may be placed thereunder by means of trusteeship agreements:

a. territories now held under mandate;
b. territories which may be detached from enemy states as a result of the Second World War; and
c. territories voluntarily placed under the system by states responsible for their administration.
​

The phrase "Palestinian Land" DOES NOT MEAN land under the sovereignty of the Arab Palestinian."

Yes it does. Just because illegal external interference prevents them from exercising that right does not negate that right.

(COMMENT)

It is often important to remember that the phrase "Palestinian land laws" refers to "ownership of land" under the Palestinian Authority (PA)(a real estate matter).

The Palestinian Land Laws[1] are Palestinian Authority (PA) laws that prohibit Palestinians from selling Palestinian territory lands to Jews.[2][3][4][5] These land laws were originally enacted during the Jordanian occupation of the West Bank (1948–1967),[3] and are deemed by the Palestinian Authority as being necessary to prevent further expansion of Israeli settlements in the Palestinian territories and to "halt the spread of moral, political and security corruption".
SOURCE: definition - palestinian land laws

Most Respectfully,
R

These land laws were originally enacted during the Jordanian occupation of the West Bank (1948–1967)​

Don't you consistently say that was sovereign Jordanian territory? I have always said it was occupied Palestinian territory. That is why it is still occupied Palestinian territory.

Some say that the West Bank is not occupied. (Common Israeli narrative.)

Some say that the territory outside the resolution 181 border is occupied. (Common during the time of Israel's statehood bid.)

Some say that all of Palestine is occupied. (Common Palestinian narrative.)

Is there any way to resolve this confusion?

Yes look at the facts based on international laws and historical documentation. When you do this you find that no nation of palestine has ever existed and the arab muslims have no legal or moral right to the land destined as the Jewish national home.

You wouldn't have links to that?

Of course not.

 

[P F Tinmore]

P F Tinmore, et al,

In some tangential ways, there is some truth here.

1. These land laws were originally enacted during the Jordanian occupation of the West Bank (1948–1967)
2. Don't you consistently say that was sovereign Jordanian territory? I have always said it was occupied Palestinian territory. That is why it is still occupied Palestinian territory.
3. Some say that the West Bank is not occupied. (Common Israeli narrative.)
4. Some say that the territory outside the resolution 181 border is occupied. (Common during the time of Israel's statehood bid.)
5. Some say that all of Palestine is occupied. (Common Palestinian narrative.)
6. Is there any way to resolve this confusion?

(COMMENT)

• #1) Between the time of the Armistice and April 1950, Jordan was the Occupying Power over the West Bank (including Jerusalem).

• #2) The Arab Palestinians of the West Bank exercised their "right to self-determination" and choose to join with the Kingdom in April 1950 and choose to bond with the Kingdom; becoming sovereign Jordanian territory.

• #3) There is an argument to be made concerning the status of the territories:

•∆• The Israel does not maintain "effective control" over the Gaza Strip; nor is it in a position to "take all the measures in his power to restore, and ensure, as far as possible, public order and safety (as Required under Article 43 of the Hague Regulation). The International Community consistently calls for Israel to militarily withdraw from Gaza. THUS: There is an argument to be made that Israel does not maintain the capacity to be an "Occupying Power in Gaza.

•∆• In 1967, when Israel re-entered the West Bank in pursuit of Jordanian Armed Force, the West Bank was Sovereign Jordanian Territory. After 31 July 1988, the Jordanians cut all ties and politically abandon the West Bank. In doing so --- the West Bank became "a territory not be under the sovereignty of state [AKA: terra nullius ("nobody's land")]. The only power remaining in effective control under Article 43 was the Government of Israel (GOI); the Arabs had effectively left the West Bank in Israeli hands.

•∆• During the period 1993 thru1995, the GOI and the Palestinian Liberation Organization (PLO)(the designated sole legitimate representative of the Palestinian people) made some agreements pertaining to the governance over GAZA and the Governance over the West Bank (AKA: Oslo Accords). Part of this included the withdrawal from Gaza and part of this defined:

§ Area A (full civil and security control by the Palestinian Authority)
§ Area B (Palestinian civil control and joint Israeli-Palestinian security control)
§ Area C (full Israeli civil and security control)
​

While it is possible to open talks of the legitimacy of this agreements, it is difficult not to recognize given the fact the the international community overwhelmingly recognized them; even to the extent of the signatories being awarded a Nobel Peace Price for the accomplishment.​

• #4) Yes, some say that the General Assembly Resolution 181(II) still applies. others (most notably the pro-Hostile Arab Palestinians (HoAP), oppose that position. But whether or not the A/RES/181(II) is valid or not, the fact remains that after the Armistice of 1949, the GOI had control over more territory than originally recommended in A/RES/181(II). Between the 1949 and 1967, this was unchallenged by the international community.

• #5) While this is a theme "all of Palestine is occupied" (meaning the territory formerly under the Mandate for Palestine - West of the Jordan River), this is based more on folklore and wild interpretations of decisions made more than half a century ago. This is a second tier (imaginary) reality (fooling yourself), on which the HoAP Jihad is based. But the actual reality is that the GOI and its sovereignty which is marked by an enforced physical barrier (non-Imaginary non-Fictional).

• #6) Many things are possible given an actual good faith effort by belligerents in negotiation. However, neither side has elected to exercise the agreed upon Dispute Resolution Process, to open the Status of Permanent Negotiations, or to initiate proceedings offered by the Principles of International Law concerning Friendly Relations and Co-operation among States. But it is difficult to see any combination of existing political players that can clean the slate and open a dialog with no preconceived notions.

Most Respectfully,
R

•∆• In 1967, when Israel re-entered the West Bank in pursuit of Jordanian Armed Force, the West Bank was Sovereign Jordanian Territory.​

The link you posted said that the West Bank was occupied by Jordan from 1948 to 1967. The world rejected that annexation. Again you base your conclusion on false premise.

 

[P F Tinmore]

P F Tinmore, et al,

In some tangential ways, there is some truth here.

1. These land laws were originally enacted during the Jordanian occupation of the West Bank (1948–1967)
2. Don't you consistently say that was sovereign Jordanian territory? I have always said it was occupied Palestinian territory. That is why it is still occupied Palestinian territory.
3. Some say that the West Bank is not occupied. (Common Israeli narrative.)
4. Some say that the territory outside the resolution 181 border is occupied. (Common during the time of Israel's statehood bid.)
5. Some say that all of Palestine is occupied. (Common Palestinian narrative.)
6. Is there any way to resolve this confusion?

(COMMENT)

• #1) Between the time of the Armistice and April 1950, Jordan was the Occupying Power over the West Bank (including Jerusalem).

• #2) The Arab Palestinians of the West Bank exercised their "right to self-determination" and choose to join with the Kingdom in April 1950 and choose to bond with the Kingdom; becoming sovereign Jordanian territory.

• #3) There is an argument to be made concerning the status of the territories:

•∆• The Israel does not maintain "effective control" over the Gaza Strip; nor is it in a position to "take all the measures in his power to restore, and ensure, as far as possible, public order and safety (as Required under Article 43 of the Hague Regulation). The International Community consistently calls for Israel to militarily withdraw from Gaza. THUS: There is an argument to be made that Israel does not maintain the capacity to be an "Occupying Power in Gaza.

•∆• In 1967, when Israel re-entered the West Bank in pursuit of Jordanian Armed Force, the West Bank was Sovereign Jordanian Territory. After 31 July 1988, the Jordanians cut all ties and politically abandon the West Bank. In doing so --- the West Bank became "a territory not be under the sovereignty of state [AKA: terra nullius ("nobody's land")]. The only power remaining in effective control under Article 43 was the Government of Israel (GOI); the Arabs had effectively left the West Bank in Israeli hands.

•∆• During the period 1993 thru1995, the GOI and the Palestinian Liberation Organization (PLO)(the designated sole legitimate representative of the Palestinian people) made some agreements pertaining to the governance over GAZA and the Governance over the West Bank (AKA: Oslo Accords). Part of this included the withdrawal from Gaza and part of this defined:

§ Area A (full civil and security control by the Palestinian Authority)
§ Area B (Palestinian civil control and joint Israeli-Palestinian security control)
§ Area C (full Israeli civil and security control)
​

While it is possible to open talks of the legitimacy of this agreements, it is difficult not to recognize given the fact the the international community overwhelmingly recognized them; even to the extent of the signatories being awarded a Nobel Peace Price for the accomplishment.​

• #4) Yes, some say that the General Assembly Resolution 181(II) still applies. others (most notably the pro-Hostile Arab Palestinians (HoAP), oppose that position. But whether or not the A/RES/181(II) is valid or not, the fact remains that after the Armistice of 1949, the GOI had control over more territory than originally recommended in A/RES/181(II). Between the 1949 and 1967, this was unchallenged by the international community.

• #5) While this is a theme "all of Palestine is occupied" (meaning the territory formerly under the Mandate for Palestine - West of the Jordan River), this is based more on folklore and wild interpretations of decisions made more than half a century ago. This is a second tier (imaginary) reality (fooling yourself), on which the HoAP Jihad is based. But the actual reality is that the GOI and its sovereignty which is marked by an enforced physical barrier (non-Imaginary non-Fictional).

• #6) Many things are possible given an actual good faith effort by belligerents in negotiation. However, neither side has elected to exercise the agreed upon Dispute Resolution Process, to open the Status of Permanent Negotiations, or to initiate proceedings offered by the Principles of International Law concerning Friendly Relations and Co-operation among States. But it is difficult to see any combination of existing political players that can clean the slate and open a dialog with no preconceived notions.

Most Respectfully,
R

• #5) While this is a theme "all of Palestine is occupied" (meaning the territory formerly under the Mandate for Palestine - West of the Jordan River), this is based more on folklore and wild interpretations of decisions made more than half a century ago. This is a second tier (imaginary) reality (fooling yourself), on which the HoAP Jihad is based. But the actual reality is that the GOI and its sovereignty which is marked by an enforced physical barrier (non-Imaginary non-Fictional).​

The enforcement of psychical barriers could also define an occupying power.

BTW, Mandates were administrators. They did not have any land or borders of their own.

 

[Hollie]

P F Tinmore, et al,

In some tangential ways, there is some truth here.

1. These land laws were originally enacted during the Jordanian occupation of the West Bank (1948–1967)
2. Don't you consistently say that was sovereign Jordanian territory? I have always said it was occupied Palestinian territory. That is why it is still occupied Palestinian territory.
3. Some say that the West Bank is not occupied. (Common Israeli narrative.)
4. Some say that the territory outside the resolution 181 border is occupied. (Common during the time of Israel's statehood bid.)
5. Some say that all of Palestine is occupied. (Common Palestinian narrative.)
6. Is there any way to resolve this confusion?

(COMMENT)

• #1) Between the time of the Armistice and April 1950, Jordan was the Occupying Power over the West Bank (including Jerusalem).

• #2) The Arab Palestinians of the West Bank exercised their "right to self-determination" and choose to join with the Kingdom in April 1950 and choose to bond with the Kingdom; becoming sovereign Jordanian territory.

• #3) There is an argument to be made concerning the status of the territories:

•∆• The Israel does not maintain "effective control" over the Gaza Strip; nor is it in a position to "take all the measures in his power to restore, and ensure, as far as possible, public order and safety (as Required under Article 43 of the Hague Regulation). The International Community consistently calls for Israel to militarily withdraw from Gaza. THUS: There is an argument to be made that Israel does not maintain the capacity to be an "Occupying Power in Gaza.

•∆• In 1967, when Israel re-entered the West Bank in pursuit of Jordanian Armed Force, the West Bank was Sovereign Jordanian Territory. After 31 July 1988, the Jordanians cut all ties and politically abandon the West Bank. In doing so --- the West Bank became "a territory not be under the sovereignty of state [AKA: terra nullius ("nobody's land")]. The only power remaining in effective control under Article 43 was the Government of Israel (GOI); the Arabs had effectively left the West Bank in Israeli hands.

•∆• During the period 1993 thru1995, the GOI and the Palestinian Liberation Organization (PLO)(the designated sole legitimate representative of the Palestinian people) made some agreements pertaining to the governance over GAZA and the Governance over the West Bank (AKA: Oslo Accords). Part of this included the withdrawal from Gaza and part of this defined:

§ Area A (full civil and security control by the Palestinian Authority)
§ Area B (Palestinian civil control and joint Israeli-Palestinian security control)
§ Area C (full Israeli civil and security control)
​

While it is possible to open talks of the legitimacy of this agreements, it is difficult not to recognize given the fact the the international community overwhelmingly recognized them; even to the extent of the signatories being awarded a Nobel Peace Price for the accomplishment.​

• #4) Yes, some say that the General Assembly Resolution 181(II) still applies. others (most notably the pro-Hostile Arab Palestinians (HoAP), oppose that position. But whether or not the A/RES/181(II) is valid or not, the fact remains that after the Armistice of 1949, the GOI had control over more territory than originally recommended in A/RES/181(II). Between the 1949 and 1967, this was unchallenged by the international community.

• #5) While this is a theme "all of Palestine is occupied" (meaning the territory formerly under the Mandate for Palestine - West of the Jordan River), this is based more on folklore and wild interpretations of decisions made more than half a century ago. This is a second tier (imaginary) reality (fooling yourself), on which the HoAP Jihad is based. But the actual reality is that the GOI and its sovereignty which is marked by an enforced physical barrier (non-Imaginary non-Fictional).

• #6) Many things are possible given an actual good faith effort by belligerents in negotiation. However, neither side has elected to exercise the agreed upon Dispute Resolution Process, to open the Status of Permanent Negotiations, or to initiate proceedings offered by the Principles of International Law concerning Friendly Relations and Co-operation among States. But it is difficult to see any combination of existing political players that can clean the slate and open a dialog with no preconceived notions.

Most Respectfully,
R

• #5) While this is a theme "all of Palestine is occupied" (meaning the territory formerly under the Mandate for Palestine - West of the Jordan River), this is based more on folklore and wild interpretations of decisions made more than half a century ago. This is a second tier (imaginary) reality (fooling yourself), on which the HoAP Jihad is based. But the actual reality is that the GOI and its sovereignty which is marked by an enforced physical barrier (non-Imaginary non-Fictional).​

The enforcement of psychical barriers could also define an occupying power.

BTW, Mandates were administrators. They did not have any land or borders of their own.

The enforcement of physical barriers can also define the boundaries of a sovereign nation.

 

[Fenton Lum]

How is their "parade" relevant to the air-force's response to Gaza's crimes yesterday?

Gaza Crimes? Targeting a water tower is collective punishment, A War crime

Not if it was used for terrorism, then according to INTERNATIONAL LAW it becomes a military target. Put a spotter on the top and you have just made it a valid target. Put a hamas terrorist at the top of a minaret to act as a range finder and the mosque becomes a military target. Fire a rocket fro the grounds of a mosque or water tower and it is a valid target.

There's always a good rationale for war and killing.

 

[Phoenall]

P F Tinmore, et al,

Ah, yes --- here we are again, raise objections about matters of fact.

The UN has no authority over land.

(COMMENT)

There is no record of any Arab Palestinian sovereignty (supreme power or authority) in the territory formerly under the Mandate of Palestine.

Quite right. I don't think that is what I said. When you twist the words around, you get a false answer.

Article 75
The United Nations shall establish under its authority an international trusteeship system for the administration and supervision of such territories as may be placed thereunder by subsequent individual agreements. These territories are hereinafter referred to as trust territories.

Article 77
1. The trusteeship system shall apply to such territories in the following categories as may be placed thereunder by means of trusteeship agreements:

a. territories now held under mandate;
b. territories which may be detached from enemy states as a result of the Second World War; and
c. territories voluntarily placed under the system by states responsible for their administration.
​

The phrase "Palestinian Land" DOES NOT MEAN land under the sovereignty of the Arab Palestinian."

Yes it does. Just because illegal external interference prevents them from exercising that right does not negate that right.

(COMMENT)

It is often important to remember that the phrase "Palestinian land laws" refers to "ownership of land" under the Palestinian Authority (PA)(a real estate matter).

The Palestinian Land Laws[1] are Palestinian Authority (PA) laws that prohibit Palestinians from selling Palestinian territory lands to Jews.[2][3][4][5] These land laws were originally enacted during the Jordanian occupation of the West Bank (1948–1967),[3] and are deemed by the Palestinian Authority as being necessary to prevent further expansion of Israeli settlements in the Palestinian territories and to "halt the spread of moral, political and security corruption".
SOURCE: definition - palestinian land laws

Most Respectfully,
R

These land laws were originally enacted during the Jordanian occupation of the West Bank (1948–1967)​

Don't you consistently say that was sovereign Jordanian territory? I have always said it was occupied Palestinian territory. That is why it is still occupied Palestinian territory.

Some say that the West Bank is not occupied. (Common Israeli narrative.)

Some say that the territory outside the resolution 181 border is occupied. (Common during the time of Israel's statehood bid.)

Some say that all of Palestine is occupied. (Common Palestinian narrative.)

Is there any way to resolve this confusion?

Yes look at the facts based on international laws and historical documentation. When you do this you find that no nation of palestine has ever existed and the arab muslims have no legal or moral right to the land destined as the Jewish national home.

You wouldn't have links to that?

Of course not.

Yes and unlike you I have posted them proving that in 1923 the legal sovereign land owners of the mandate of palestine granted 78% to the arab muslims called trans Jordan and 22% to the Jews called the Jewish national home. When trans Jordan was created the arab muslims demanded an amendment to the international laws giving them the land to the effect than no Jews would be allowed to live in Trans Jordan unless sanctioned by the rulers, and conversely that no arab muslims would be allowed to live in the Jewish national home unless allowed by the rulers. The links are the mandate of palestine and the minutes of the LoN annual meetings. Now be a good boy and read them to see just how brainless you are presenting yourself.



BY THE WAY WE ARE ALL STILL WAITING FOR YOUR LINKS TO THE NATION OF PALESTINE ExISTING SOMETIME IN 1923 ?

 

[Phoenall]

P F Tinmore, et al,

In some tangential ways, there is some truth here.

1. These land laws were originally enacted during the Jordanian occupation of the West Bank (1948–1967)
2. Don't you consistently say that was sovereign Jordanian territory? I have always said it was occupied Palestinian territory. That is why it is still occupied Palestinian territory.
3. Some say that the West Bank is not occupied. (Common Israeli narrative.)
4. Some say that the territory outside the resolution 181 border is occupied. (Common during the time of Israel's statehood bid.)
5. Some say that all of Palestine is occupied. (Common Palestinian narrative.)
6. Is there any way to resolve this confusion?

(COMMENT)

• #1) Between the time of the Armistice and April 1950, Jordan was the Occupying Power over the West Bank (including Jerusalem).

• #2) The Arab Palestinians of the West Bank exercised their "right to self-determination" and choose to join with the Kingdom in April 1950 and choose to bond with the Kingdom; becoming sovereign Jordanian territory.

• #3) There is an argument to be made concerning the status of the territories:

•∆• The Israel does not maintain "effective control" over the Gaza Strip; nor is it in a position to "take all the measures in his power to restore, and ensure, as far as possible, public order and safety (as Required under Article 43 of the Hague Regulation). The International Community consistently calls for Israel to militarily withdraw from Gaza. THUS: There is an argument to be made that Israel does not maintain the capacity to be an "Occupying Power in Gaza.

•∆• In 1967, when Israel re-entered the West Bank in pursuit of Jordanian Armed Force, the West Bank was Sovereign Jordanian Territory. After 31 July 1988, the Jordanians cut all ties and politically abandon the West Bank. In doing so --- the West Bank became "a territory not be under the sovereignty of state [AKA: terra nullius ("nobody's land")]. The only power remaining in effective control under Article 43 was the Government of Israel (GOI); the Arabs had effectively left the West Bank in Israeli hands.

•∆• During the period 1993 thru1995, the GOI and the Palestinian Liberation Organization (PLO)(the designated sole legitimate representative of the Palestinian people) made some agreements pertaining to the governance over GAZA and the Governance over the West Bank (AKA: Oslo Accords). Part of this included the withdrawal from Gaza and part of this defined:

§ Area A (full civil and security control by the Palestinian Authority)
§ Area B (Palestinian civil control and joint Israeli-Palestinian security control)
§ Area C (full Israeli civil and security control)
​

While it is possible to open talks of the legitimacy of this agreements, it is difficult not to recognize given the fact the the international community overwhelmingly recognized them; even to the extent of the signatories being awarded a Nobel Peace Price for the accomplishment.​

• #4) Yes, some say that the General Assembly Resolution 181(II) still applies. others (most notably the pro-Hostile Arab Palestinians (HoAP), oppose that position. But whether or not the A/RES/181(II) is valid or not, the fact remains that after the Armistice of 1949, the GOI had control over more territory than originally recommended in A/RES/181(II). Between the 1949 and 1967, this was unchallenged by the international community.

• #5) While this is a theme "all of Palestine is occupied" (meaning the territory formerly under the Mandate for Palestine - West of the Jordan River), this is based more on folklore and wild interpretations of decisions made more than half a century ago. This is a second tier (imaginary) reality (fooling yourself), on which the HoAP Jihad is based. But the actual reality is that the GOI and its sovereignty which is marked by an enforced physical barrier (non-Imaginary non-Fictional).

• #6) Many things are possible given an actual good faith effort by belligerents in negotiation. However, neither side has elected to exercise the agreed upon Dispute Resolution Process, to open the Status of Permanent Negotiations, or to initiate proceedings offered by the Principles of International Law concerning Friendly Relations and Co-operation among States. But it is difficult to see any combination of existing political players that can clean the slate and open a dialog with no preconceived notions.

Most Respectfully,
R

•∆• In 1967, when Israel re-entered the West Bank in pursuit of Jordanian Armed Force, the West Bank was Sovereign Jordanian Territory.​

The link you posted said that the West Bank was occupied by Jordan from 1948 to 1967. The world rejected that annexation. Again you base your conclusion on false premise.

But the arab muslims didn't and that was a show of free determination. So explain again how Israel has refused to allow the arab muslims their free determination ?

 

[Phoenall]

P F Tinmore, et al,

In some tangential ways, there is some truth here.

1. These land laws were originally enacted during the Jordanian occupation of the West Bank (1948–1967)
2. Don't you consistently say that was sovereign Jordanian territory? I have always said it was occupied Palestinian territory. That is why it is still occupied Palestinian territory.
3. Some say that the West Bank is not occupied. (Common Israeli narrative.)
4. Some say that the territory outside the resolution 181 border is occupied. (Common during the time of Israel's statehood bid.)
5. Some say that all of Palestine is occupied. (Common Palestinian narrative.)
6. Is there any way to resolve this confusion?

(COMMENT)

• #1) Between the time of the Armistice and April 1950, Jordan was the Occupying Power over the West Bank (including Jerusalem).

• #2) The Arab Palestinians of the West Bank exercised their "right to self-determination" and choose to join with the Kingdom in April 1950 and choose to bond with the Kingdom; becoming sovereign Jordanian territory.

• #3) There is an argument to be made concerning the status of the territories:

•∆• The Israel does not maintain "effective control" over the Gaza Strip; nor is it in a position to "take all the measures in his power to restore, and ensure, as far as possible, public order and safety (as Required under Article 43 of the Hague Regulation). The International Community consistently calls for Israel to militarily withdraw from Gaza. THUS: There is an argument to be made that Israel does not maintain the capacity to be an "Occupying Power in Gaza.

•∆• In 1967, when Israel re-entered the West Bank in pursuit of Jordanian Armed Force, the West Bank was Sovereign Jordanian Territory. After 31 July 1988, the Jordanians cut all ties and politically abandon the West Bank. In doing so --- the West Bank became "a territory not be under the sovereignty of state [AKA: terra nullius ("nobody's land")]. The only power remaining in effective control under Article 43 was the Government of Israel (GOI); the Arabs had effectively left the West Bank in Israeli hands.

•∆• During the period 1993 thru1995, the GOI and the Palestinian Liberation Organization (PLO)(the designated sole legitimate representative of the Palestinian people) made some agreements pertaining to the governance over GAZA and the Governance over the West Bank (AKA: Oslo Accords). Part of this included the withdrawal from Gaza and part of this defined:

§ Area A (full civil and security control by the Palestinian Authority)
§ Area B (Palestinian civil control and joint Israeli-Palestinian security control)
§ Area C (full Israeli civil and security control)
​

While it is possible to open talks of the legitimacy of this agreements, it is difficult not to recognize given the fact the the international community overwhelmingly recognized them; even to the extent of the signatories being awarded a Nobel Peace Price for the accomplishment.​

• #4) Yes, some say that the General Assembly Resolution 181(II) still applies. others (most notably the pro-Hostile Arab Palestinians (HoAP), oppose that position. But whether or not the A/RES/181(II) is valid or not, the fact remains that after the Armistice of 1949, the GOI had control over more territory than originally recommended in A/RES/181(II). Between the 1949 and 1967, this was unchallenged by the international community.

• #5) While this is a theme "all of Palestine is occupied" (meaning the territory formerly under the Mandate for Palestine - West of the Jordan River), this is based more on folklore and wild interpretations of decisions made more than half a century ago. This is a second tier (imaginary) reality (fooling yourself), on which the HoAP Jihad is based. But the actual reality is that the GOI and its sovereignty which is marked by an enforced physical barrier (non-Imaginary non-Fictional).

• #6) Many things are possible given an actual good faith effort by belligerents in negotiation. However, neither side has elected to exercise the agreed upon Dispute Resolution Process, to open the Status of Permanent Negotiations, or to initiate proceedings offered by the Principles of International Law concerning Friendly Relations and Co-operation among States. But it is difficult to see any combination of existing political players that can clean the slate and open a dialog with no preconceived notions.

Most Respectfully,
R

• #5) While this is a theme "all of Palestine is occupied" (meaning the territory formerly under the Mandate for Palestine - West of the Jordan River), this is based more on folklore and wild interpretations of decisions made more than half a century ago. This is a second tier (imaginary) reality (fooling yourself), on which the HoAP Jihad is based. But the actual reality is that the GOI and its sovereignty which is marked by an enforced physical barrier (non-Imaginary non-Fictional).​

The enforcement of psychical barriers could also define an occupying power.

BTW, Mandates were administrators. They did not have any land or borders of their own.

So the arab muslims are occupying Israel by your criteria then, as they enforce physical and psychical barriers.


Again you confuse the mandatory with the mandate. The mandatory was Great Britain who oversaw the mandate instigated by the LoN.


I ADVISE YOU TO LOOK AT THE LEGAL DOCUMENTS AGAIN AND GET A 10YEAR OLD TO EXPLAIN THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN MANDATE AND MADATORY