Palestinian Peace Proposal

[MJB12741]

I can keep going if you'd like Tinmore...

Please don't confuse him with the facts or he won't be so entertaining anymore.

 

[P F Tinmore]

I can keep going if you'd like Tinmore...

I know, but:

The partition plan was not implemented.[11] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Nations_Partition_Plan_for_Palestine

The ICJ describes these scores of events in seven words: “The Plan of Partition was not implemented.”14 http://www.mythsandfacts.org/replyonlineedition/chapter-4.html

It was merely a recommendation that the Security Council did not implement.

 

[toastman]

I can keep going if you'd like Tinmore...

I know, but:

The partition plan was not implemented.[11] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Nations_Partition_Plan_for_Palestine

The ICJ describes these scores of events in seven words: “The Plan of Partition was not implemented.”14 http://www.mythsandfacts.org/replyonlineedition/chapter-4.html

It was merely a recommendation that the Security Council did not implement.

Both sides accepted it and used the resolution to declare independence. So yes, it was implemented.

 

[toastman]

I can keep going if you'd like Tinmore...

I know, but:

The partition plan was not implemented.[11] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Nations_Partition_Plan_for_Palestine

The ICJ describes these scores of events in seven words: “The Plan of Partition was not implemented.”14 http://www.mythsandfacts.org/replyonlineedition/chapter-4.html

It was merely a recommendation that the Security Council did not implement.

For the first link, you forgot to post what was written before:

"Immediately after adoption of the Resolution by the General Assembly, the civil war broke out. The partition plan was not implemented"
What it means is that at the time it was not implemented. It's referring to 1947.

 

[toastman]

"What resulted was Resolution 181, a non-binding recommendation to partition Palestine, whose implementation hinged on acceptance by both parties — Arabs and Jews"

http://www.think-israel.org/hertz.unresolutions181and242.html

Well since both sides accepted the resolution, it was implemented.

 

[Phoenall]

Actions have reactions.

Indeed they do. The Zionists started a never ending war.

Actually, the Arabs started the war. They started the initial war in 1947, and 5 Arab states started the war in 1948, which is what really started the main problems for the Palestinians. So much for the 5 Arab states trying to help the Palestinians

So the Zionists went to Palestine so the Arabs would start a war with them?

You are a hoot.

Not quite the Zionists were invited to Palestine by its sovereign owners because the land was devoid of life. Once they started to make the land fertile and capable of sustaining life the arab muslims migrated illegally. When they found the Jews were more hardy than those they were used to they decided to attack and steal their lands, only to be beaten back. So they started a series of lies and blood libels to blacken the Jews name and to attract more terrorists to their cause. The war has been ongoing since mohammed instigated the genocide of the Jewish tribe at Medina

Where is the treaty ceding land to Israel?

Link?

Mandate for Palestine for about the 100th time, don't you know how to read English.

 

[Phoenall]

Indeed they do. The Zionists started a never ending war.

Actually, the Arabs started the war. They started the initial war in 1947, and 5 Arab states started the war in 1948, which is what really started the main problems for the Palestinians. So much for the 5 Arab states trying to help the Palestinians

So the Zionists went to Palestine so the Arabs would start a war with them?

You are a hoot.

Not quite the Zionists were invited to Palestine by its sovereign owners because the land was devoid of life. Once they started to make the land fertile and capable of sustaining life the arab muslims migrated illegally. When they found the Jews were more hardy than those they were used to they decided to attack and steal their lands, only to be beaten back. So they started a series of lies and blood libels to blacken the Jews name and to attract more terrorists to their cause. The war has been ongoing since mohammed instigated the genocide of the Jewish tribe at Medina

Where is the treaty ceding land to Israel?

Link?

There is no treaty ceding land to Israel. This is not a real estate issue. Where does it say that there must be a treaty to cede land in order to declare independence ?

You keep bringing up this land transfer treaty as if it is a pre requisite to declare independence, but it's not.

There is ity is called the Mandate for Palestine that sets out 78% of Palestine for the arab muslims and 22% for the Jews. On contemporary maps they are called arab Palestine and Jewish Palestine.

 

[Phoenall]

P F Tinmore, et al,

This logic is a double-edged sword --- especially for the Palestinian Arab --- the enemy population in WWI and the enemy population in WWII.

In the first place the UN without the consent of the majority of the people of Palestine did not have the right to decide to partition Palestine or assign any part of its territory to a minority of alien immigrants in order for them to establish a state of their own.

(COMMENT)

When did the Arab Palestinian gain the authority over the area formerly under Mandate?

Despite that, by the narrowest of margins, and only after a rigged vote, the UN General Assembly did pass a resolution to partition Palestine and create two states, one Arab, one Jewish, with Jerusalem not part of either. But the General Assembly resolution was only a non-binding proposal – meaning that it could have no effect, would not become binding, until and unless it was approved by the Security Council.

The truth is that the General Assembly’s partition proposal never went to the Security Council for consideration. Why not? Because the US knew that, if approved, and because of Arab and other Muslim opposition, it could only be implemented by force; and President Truman was not prepared to use force to partition Palestine.

(COMMENT)

First --- the Partition Plan [A/RES/181 (II)] UN Voting (NOT by the Narrowest of Margins):

• Final vote
  • In favor, (33 countries, 72% of voting)
  • Against, (13 countries, 28% of voting)
  • Abstentions, (10 countries)
  • Absent, (1 country)

The truth is, the Partition Plan [A/RES/181 (II)] went to the UN Security Council; with the Security Council playing a vital role in the implementation of the Plan (Part I --- Section B Steps Preparatory to Independence):

14. The Commission shall be guided in its activities by the recommendations of the General Assembly and by such instructions as the Security Council may consider necessary to issue.

The measures taken by the Commission, within the recommendations of the General Assembly, shall become immediately effective unless the Commission has previously received contrary instructions from the Security Council.​

As it was put to me many years ago by Khalad al-Hassan, Fatah’s intellectual giant on the right, that legitimacy was “the only thing the Zionists could not take from us by force.”

The truth of history as summarised briefly above is the explanation of why, really, Zionism has always insisted that its absolute pre-condition for negotiations with more than a snowball’s chance in hell of a successful outcome (an acceptable measure of justice for the Palestinians and peace for all) is recognition of Israel’s right to exist. A right, it knows, it does not have and will never have unless the Palestinians grant it.

(COMMENT)

The Zionist, or any name by which the Arab wish to describe the Jewish immigrants willing to assist in the establishment of the Jewish National Home under the Mandate for Palestine, as citizens of Palestine, had the exact same rights to self-determination as the Arab and did not take the territory described under the Partition Plan by force. Instead, the conflict was triggered by Hostile Arab Palestinians represented "Powerful Arab interests, both inside and outside Palestine, defying the resolution [A/RES/181(II)] of the General Assembly and engaged in a deliberate effort to alter by force (as aggressor nations) the settlement envisaged therein."

Most Respectfully,
R

When did the Arab Palestinian gain the authority over the area formerly under Mandate?​

3. Reaffirms the inalienable right of the peoples of Namibia and Zimbabwe, of the Palestinian people and of all peoples under alien and colonial domination to self-determination, national independence, territorial integrity, and national unity and sovereignty without external interference;

A RES 33 24 of 29 November 1978

Prior to 1978.

At what time and under what circumstances did the Palestinians gain the right to territorial integrity?

When they declared independence under the terms of 181, which they have not exercised yet.

 

[Phoenall]

Actually, the Arabs started the war. They started the initial war in 1947, and 5 Arab states started the war in 1948, which is what really started the main problems for the Palestinians. So much for the 5 Arab states trying to help the Palestinians

So the Zionists went to Palestine so the Arabs would start a war with them?

You are a hoot.

Not quite the Zionists were invited to Palestine by its sovereign owners because the land was devoid of life. Once they started to make the land fertile and capable of sustaining life the arab muslims migrated illegally. When they found the Jews were more hardy than those they were used to they decided to attack and steal their lands, only to be beaten back. So they started a series of lies and blood libels to blacken the Jews name and to attract more terrorists to their cause. The war has been ongoing since mohammed instigated the genocide of the Jewish tribe at Medina

Where is the treaty ceding land to Israel?

Link?

There is no treaty ceding land to Israel. This is not a real estate issue. Where does it say that there must be a treaty to cede land in order to declare independence ?

You keep bringing up this land transfer treaty as if it is a pre requisite to declare independence, but it's not.

A state should have a "defined territory." Where did Israel get a defined territory?

From the League of Nations Mandate for Palestine which set in stone the defined territory of the Jewish national home. Link provided many times in the past.

 

[Phoenall]

Not quite the Zionists were invited to Palestine by its sovereign owners because the land was devoid of life. Once they started to make the land fertile and capable of sustaining life the arab muslims migrated illegally. When they found the Jews were more hardy than those they were used to they decided to attack and steal their lands, only to be beaten back. So they started a series of lies and blood libels to blacken the Jews name and to attract more terrorists to their cause. The war has been ongoing since mohammed instigated the genocide of the Jewish tribe at Medina

Where is the treaty ceding land to Israel?

Link?

There is no treaty ceding land to Israel. This is not a real estate issue. Where does it say that there must be a treaty to cede land in order to declare independence ?

You keep bringing up this land transfer treaty as if it is a pre requisite to declare independence, but it's not.

A state should have a "defined territory." Where did Israel get a defined territory?

Nice deflection.

Israel is a sovereign state. A sovereign state must have defined territory. Israel got it when they declared independence on that land (obviously(

Link defining the land Israel received in 1948.

UN res 181 and LoN mandate for Palestine 1923

 

[Phoenall]

Actions have reactions.

Indeed they do. The Zionists started a never ending war.

Actually, the Arabs started the war. They started the initial war in 1947, and 5 Arab states started the war in 1948, which is what really started the main problems for the Palestinians. So much for the 5 Arab states trying to help the Palestinians

So the Zionists went to Palestine so the Arabs would start a war with them?

You are a hoot.

So that;s the conclusion you came up with after reading my post? You have serious issues with reading comprehension.

The Zionists went to 'Palestine' to create a homeland for themselves, and were attacked by Arabs. I have proved this many many many MANY times. After declaring independence, 5 Arab states invaded the region and attacked Israel from all sides. How did Israel start a war ?

The Zionists went to 'Palestine' to create a homeland for themselves,​

You left something out.

The Zionists went to 'Palestine' to create a homeland for themselves, in Palestine.

And they do not want it there.

Yes Palestine the area on the maps, never a nation until 1988.

 

[Phoenall]

There is no treaty ceding land to Israel. This is not a real estate issue. Where does it say that there must be a treaty to cede land in order to declare independence ?

You keep bringing up this land transfer treaty as if it is a pre requisite to declare independence, but it's not.

A state should have a "defined territory." Where did Israel get a defined territory?

Nice deflection.

Israel is a sovereign state. A sovereign state must have defined territory. Israel got it when they declared independence on that land (obviously(

Link defining the land Israel received in 1948.

Israel didn't 'receive' land. They declared independence on the land allotted to her in the partition plan. That land then became known as 'Israel'. What's so hard to understand ?
You keep applying 'Tinmore Pre Requisites' to real life, If it was necessary for Israel to sign some sort of treaty to acquire land in order for them to declare independence, then the U.N certainly would not have approved of the creation of the new state and would not have made Israel a full member one year later...

They declared independence on the land allotted to her in the partition plan.​

That there was no allocation in the partition plan. It was just a plan that was not implemented.

UN LINK that says 181 was never implemented.

 

[Phoenall]

Nice deflection.

Israel is a sovereign state. A sovereign state must have defined territory. Israel got it when they declared independence on that land (obviously(

Link defining the land Israel received in 1948.

Israel didn't 'receive' land. They declared independence on the land allotted to her in the partition plan. That land then became known as 'Israel'. What's so hard to understand ?
You keep applying 'Tinmore Pre Requisites' to real life, If it was necessary for Israel to sign some sort of treaty to acquire land in order for them to declare independence, then the U.N certainly would not have approved of the creation of the new state and would not have made Israel a full member one year later...

They declared independence on the land allotted to her in the partition plan.​

That there was no allocation in the partition plan. It was just a plan that was not implemented.

Again Tinmore???? Remember, I have links that say otherwise... All you have are a bunch of ridiculous questions



"This Palestinian Declaration of Independence explicitly accepted the UN General Assembly’s Partition Resolution 181(II) of 1947"


Palestine Independence Day 24 Years Ago November 15 1988 Global Research - Centre for Research on Globalization

Israel lied about accepting resolution 181 to pretend to be legitimate.

It doesn't matter. they were riding a dead horse.

LINK from a non partisan source ?

 

[Phoenall]

I can keep going if you'd like Tinmore...

I know, but:

The partition plan was not implemented.[11] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Nations_Partition_Plan_for_Palestine

The ICJ describes these scores of events in seven words: “The Plan of Partition was not implemented.”14 http://www.mythsandfacts.org/replyonlineedition/chapter-4.html

It was merely a recommendation that the Security Council did not implement.

Yet your link clearly says that 181 is a legal pillar for Palestinian free determinastion

Had the recommendations of UN Resolution 181 been accepted and implemented by both parties, it would have been the foundation for the creation in Palestine of an Arab state and a Jewish state, and as a result would have terminated the Mandate for Palestine.


The Court’s careless ‘legal review’ of the status of the Territories reaches its apex in the way the ICJ relates to Resolution 181. The Court ignores Arab total rejectionism of the “Partition Plan” and views the recommendation of Resolution 181 as if it was a valid Security Council directive.

The ICJ cites Resolution 181 as one of the legal pillars supporting the right of Palestinian Arabs to self-determination alongside the “Mandate for Palestine.”

It appears that the ICJ was unaware of the fact that in November 1947, all Arab states voted as a bloc against Resolution 181 and kept their promise to defy its implementation by force.

The ICJ in its preamble states:

“Recalling relevant General Assembly resolutions, including resolution 181 (II) of 29 November 1947, which partitioned mandated Palestine into two States, one Arab and one Jewish, …”

In fact, Resolution 181 was a non-binding resolution that only recommended partition. It never “partitioned” or “mandated” anything as the ICJ tries to inject.

The 1947 “Partition Plan” was the last of a series of recommendations that had been drawn up over the years by the Mandator and by international commissions, plans designed to reach an historic compromise between Arabs and Jews in western Palestine. The first was in 1922 when Great Britain obtained the League of Nations’ approval under Article 25 of the Mandate for Palestine to cut away the territory east of the Jordan River – Trans-Jordan, today’s Jordan, for the benefit of the Arabs of Palestine. But this did not satisfy the Arabs who wanted the entire country.

Every scheme since 1922 has been rejected by the Arab side, including decidedly pro-Arab recommendations. This was not because the suggestions were “unbalanced,” as the ICJ has been told in Arab affidavits and as stated in paragraph 71 of the Court opinion, but because these plans recognized the Jews as a nation and gave the Jewish citizens of Mandate Palestine political dominance.

The ICJ’s use of the term “unbalanced” in describing the reason for Arab rejectionism of Resolution 181 hardly fits reality. 77 percent of the landmass of the original Mandate for the Jews was excised in 1922 to create a fourth Arab state: Trans-Jordan.

The ICJ assumes that Israel’s independence is a result of a partial implementation of the “Partition Plan.”

Sir Lauterpacht, a renowned expert on international law and editor of Oppenheim’s International Law, clarified that, from a legal standpoint, the 1947 UN Partition Resolution had no legislative character to vest territorial rights in either Jews or Arabs. In a monograph relating to one of the most complex aspects of the territorial issue, the status of Jerusalem,7 Lauterpacht wrote that to be a binding force, the “Partition Plan” would have had to arise from the principle pacta sunt servanda,8 that is, from agreement of the parties at variance to the proposed plan. In the case of Israel, Lauterpacht explains:

“… the coming into existence of Israel does not depend legally upon the Resolution. The right of a State to exist flows from its factual existence – especially when that existence is prolonged, shows every sign of continuance and is recognised by the generality of nations.”

Reviewing Lauterpacht’s arguments, Professor Stone added that Israel’s “legitimacy” or the “legal foundation” for its birth does not reside with the United Nations’ “Partition Plan,” which as a consequence of Arab actions became a dead issue. Professor Stone concluded:

“… The State of Israel is thus not legally derived from the partition plan, but rests (as do most other states in the world) on assertion of independence by its people and government, on the vindication of that independence by arms against assault by other states, and on the establishment of orderly government within territory under its stable control.

Such attempts by Palestinians (and now by the ICJ) to ‘roll back the clock’ and resuscitate Resolution 181 almost six decades after its rejection as if nothing had happened, are totally inadmissible. Both Palestinians and their Arab brethren in neighboring countries rendered the plan null and void by their own subsequent aggressive actions.

 

[Linkiloo]

The history is immaterial at this point. The Palestinians and their supporters have to accept that and move on. Their current approach isn't helping them.

 

[P F Tinmore]

Indeed they do. The Zionists started a never ending war.

Actually, the Arabs started the war. They started the initial war in 1947, and 5 Arab states started the war in 1948, which is what really started the main problems for the Palestinians. So much for the 5 Arab states trying to help the Palestinians

So the Zionists went to Palestine so the Arabs would start a war with them?

You are a hoot.

Not quite the Zionists were invited to Palestine by its sovereign owners because the land was devoid of life. Once they started to make the land fertile and capable of sustaining life the arab muslims migrated illegally. When they found the Jews were more hardy than those they were used to they decided to attack and steal their lands, only to be beaten back. So they started a series of lies and blood libels to blacken the Jews name and to attract more terrorists to their cause. The war has been ongoing since mohammed instigated the genocide of the Jewish tribe at Medina

Where is the treaty ceding land to Israel?

Link?

Mandate for Palestine for about the 100th time, don't you know how to read English.

When Britain left Palestine they handed the keys to the UNPC not Israel.

It is you who has a reading problem.

 

[Phoenall]

Actually, the Arabs started the war. They started the initial war in 1947, and 5 Arab states started the war in 1948, which is what really started the main problems for the Palestinians. So much for the 5 Arab states trying to help the Palestinians

So the Zionists went to Palestine so the Arabs would start a war with them?

You are a hoot.

Not quite the Zionists were invited to Palestine by its sovereign owners because the land was devoid of life. Once they started to make the land fertile and capable of sustaining life the arab muslims migrated illegally. When they found the Jews were more hardy than those they were used to they decided to attack and steal their lands, only to be beaten back. So they started a series of lies and blood libels to blacken the Jews name and to attract more terrorists to their cause. The war has been ongoing since mohammed instigated the genocide of the Jewish tribe at Medina

Where is the treaty ceding land to Israel?

Link?

Mandate for Palestine for about the 100th time, don't you know how to read English.

When Britain left Palestine they handed the keys to the UNPC not Israel.

It is you who has a reading problem.

AND what has that to do with the fact that the LoN granted 22% of Palestine as the Jewish national home, and it entered into International law in 1923. 25 years before Britain threw in the towel

 

[P F Tinmore]

P F Tinmore, et al,

This logic is a double-edged sword --- especially for the Palestinian Arab --- the enemy population in WWI and the enemy population in WWII.

In the first place the UN without the consent of the majority of the people of Palestine did not have the right to decide to partition Palestine or assign any part of its territory to a minority of alien immigrants in order for them to establish a state of their own.

(COMMENT)

When did the Arab Palestinian gain the authority over the area formerly under Mandate?

Despite that, by the narrowest of margins, and only after a rigged vote, the UN General Assembly did pass a resolution to partition Palestine and create two states, one Arab, one Jewish, with Jerusalem not part of either. But the General Assembly resolution was only a non-binding proposal – meaning that it could have no effect, would not become binding, until and unless it was approved by the Security Council.

The truth is that the General Assembly’s partition proposal never went to the Security Council for consideration. Why not? Because the US knew that, if approved, and because of Arab and other Muslim opposition, it could only be implemented by force; and President Truman was not prepared to use force to partition Palestine.

(COMMENT)

First --- the Partition Plan [A/RES/181 (II)] UN Voting (NOT by the Narrowest of Margins):

• Final vote
  • In favor, (33 countries, 72% of voting)
  • Against, (13 countries, 28% of voting)
  • Abstentions, (10 countries)
  • Absent, (1 country)

The truth is, the Partition Plan [A/RES/181 (II)] went to the UN Security Council; with the Security Council playing a vital role in the implementation of the Plan (Part I --- Section B Steps Preparatory to Independence):

14. The Commission shall be guided in its activities by the recommendations of the General Assembly and by such instructions as the Security Council may consider necessary to issue.

The measures taken by the Commission, within the recommendations of the General Assembly, shall become immediately effective unless the Commission has previously received contrary instructions from the Security Council.​

As it was put to me many years ago by Khalad al-Hassan, Fatah’s intellectual giant on the right, that legitimacy was “the only thing the Zionists could not take from us by force.”

The truth of history as summarised briefly above is the explanation of why, really, Zionism has always insisted that its absolute pre-condition for negotiations with more than a snowball’s chance in hell of a successful outcome (an acceptable measure of justice for the Palestinians and peace for all) is recognition of Israel’s right to exist. A right, it knows, it does not have and will never have unless the Palestinians grant it.

(COMMENT)

The Zionist, or any name by which the Arab wish to describe the Jewish immigrants willing to assist in the establishment of the Jewish National Home under the Mandate for Palestine, as citizens of Palestine, had the exact same rights to self-determination as the Arab and did not take the territory described under the Partition Plan by force. Instead, the conflict was triggered by Hostile Arab Palestinians represented "Powerful Arab interests, both inside and outside Palestine, defying the resolution [A/RES/181(II)] of the General Assembly and engaged in a deliberate effort to alter by force (as aggressor nations) the settlement envisaged therein."

Most Respectfully,
R

When did the Arab Palestinian gain the authority over the area formerly under Mandate?​

3. Reaffirms the inalienable right of the peoples of Namibia and Zimbabwe, of the Palestinian people and of all peoples under alien and colonial domination to self-determination, national independence, territorial integrity, and national unity and sovereignty without external interference;

A RES 33 24 of 29 November 1978

Prior to 1978.

At what time and under what circumstances did the Palestinians gain the right to territorial integrity?

When they declared independence under the terms of 181, which they have not exercised yet.

OK, so Israel accepted it and Palestine accepted it.

Now all we have to do is get the Security Council to implement it.

Let me know when that happens.

 

[MJB12741]

Actually, the Arabs started the war. They started the initial war in 1947, and 5 Arab states started the war in 1948, which is what really started the main problems for the Palestinians. So much for the 5 Arab states trying to help the Palestinians

So the Zionists went to Palestine so the Arabs would start a war with them?

You are a hoot.

Not quite the Zionists were invited to Palestine by its sovereign owners because the land was devoid of life. Once they started to make the land fertile and capable of sustaining life the arab muslims migrated illegally. When they found the Jews were more hardy than those they were used to they decided to attack and steal their lands, only to be beaten back. So they started a series of lies and blood libels to blacken the Jews name and to attract more terrorists to their cause. The war has been ongoing since mohammed instigated the genocide of the Jewish tribe at Medina

Where is the treaty ceding land to Israel?

Link?

Mandate for Palestine for about the 100th time, don't you know how to read English.

When Britain left Palestine they handed the keys to the UNPC not Israel.

It is you who has a reading problem.

Isn't it just awful how Israel caused the collapse of the Ottoman Empire giving rise to foreign power intervention. Shame on those Zionists for doing that. Right Tinmore?

 

[RoccoR]

P F Tinmore, et al,

I think you are ignoring some basic facts.

P F Tinmore, et al,

This logic is a double-edged sword --- especially for the Palestinian Arab --- the enemy population in WWI and the enemy population in WWII.

In the first place the UN without the consent of the majority of the people of Palestine did not have the right to decide to partition Palestine or assign any part of its territory to a minority of alien immigrants in order for them to establish a state of their own.

(COMMENT)

When did the Arab Palestinian gain the authority over the area formerly under Mandate?

Despite that, by the narrowest of margins, and only after a rigged vote, the UN General Assembly did pass a resolution to partition Palestine and create two states, one Arab, one Jewish, with Jerusalem not part of either. But the General Assembly resolution was only a non-binding proposal – meaning that it could have no effect, would not become binding, until and unless it was approved by the Security Council.

The truth is that the General Assembly’s partition proposal never went to the Security Council for consideration. Why not? Because the US knew that, if approved, and because of Arab and other Muslim opposition, it could only be implemented by force; and President Truman was not prepared to use force to partition Palestine.

(COMMENT)

First --- the Partition Plan [A/RES/181 (II)] UN Voting (NOT by the Narrowest of Margins):

• Final vote
  • In favor, (33 countries, 72% of voting)
  • Against, (13 countries, 28% of voting)
  • Abstentions, (10 countries)
  • Absent, (1 country)

The truth is, the Partition Plan [A/RES/181 (II)] went to the UN Security Council; with the Security Council playing a vital role in the implementation of the Plan (Part I --- Section B Steps Preparatory to Independence):

14. The Commission shall be guided in its activities by the recommendations of the General Assembly and by such instructions as the Security Council may consider necessary to issue.

The measures taken by the Commission, within the recommendations of the General Assembly, shall become immediately effective unless the Commission has previously received contrary instructions from the Security Council.​

As it was put to me many years ago by Khalad al-Hassan, Fatah’s intellectual giant on the right, that legitimacy was “the only thing the Zionists could not take from us by force.”

The truth of history as summarised briefly above is the explanation of why, really, Zionism has always insisted that its absolute pre-condition for negotiations with more than a snowball’s chance in hell of a successful outcome (an acceptable measure of justice for the Palestinians and peace for all) is recognition of Israel’s right to exist. A right, it knows, it does not have and will never have unless the Palestinians grant it.

(COMMENT)

The Zionist, or any name by which the Arab wish to describe the Jewish immigrants willing to assist in the establishment of the Jewish National Home under the Mandate for Palestine, as citizens of Palestine, had the exact same rights to self-determination as the Arab and did not take the territory described under the Partition Plan by force. Instead, the conflict was triggered by Hostile Arab Palestinians represented "Powerful Arab interests, both inside and outside Palestine, defying the resolution [A/RES/181(II)] of the General Assembly and engaged in a deliberate effort to alter by force (as aggressor nations) the settlement envisaged therein."

Most Respectfully,
R

When did the Arab Palestinian gain the authority over the area formerly under Mandate?​

3. Reaffirms the inalienable right of the peoples of Namibia and Zimbabwe, of the Palestinian people and of all peoples under alien and colonial domination to self-determination, national independence, territorial integrity, and national unity and sovereignty without external interference;

A RES 33 24 of 29 November 1978

Prior to 1978.

At what time and under what circumstances did the Palestinians gain the right to territorial integrity?

When they declared independence under the terms of 181, which they have not exercised yet.

OK, so Israel accepted it and Palestine accepted it.

Now all we have to do is get the Security Council to implement it.

Let me know when that happens.

(COMMENT)

Prior to 1978, and relative to the 1948 War of Independence, A/RES/33/34 has absolutely no impact. A non-binding resolution cannot be applied either conceptually or legally in a retroactive fashion three decades after the fact. If that were true, and laws made today applied to the past --- there would be no country that would have sovereign integrity; including all the Arab Countries established. In a very practical sense, there is a limit to the applicability of the Palestinian self-determination.

The Partition Plan was implemented, in as much as the portion that was accepted, in the view of the UN and UNPC --- the "resolution of last November 29 has been implemented" in 1948. Further, the Resolution A/RES/33/34 does not specify what particular activities Israel took that denied "the Palestinian people of their right to self-determination and independence." Nor does the 1978 resolution outline what is considered the territory to which the Palestinians should have territorial integrity. Remembering that in 1978, the territory of the West Bank was still Jordanian Sovereign Territory by Palestinian Self-determination of the Parliament.

Further, the Resolution adopted by the General Assembly on 26 November 2013 A/RES/68/12 - Committee on the Exercise of the Inalienable Rights of the Palestinian People recalls its resolutions 181 (II) of 29 November 1947, 194 (III) of 11 December 1948, 3236 (XXIX) of 22 November 1974, 3375 (XXX) and 3376 (XXX) of 10 November 1975, 31/20 of 24 November 1976 and all its subsequent relevant resolutions, including those adopted at its emergency special sessions and its resolution 67/20 of 30 November 2012, all of which "promote the realization of the inalienable rights of the Palestinian people, including their right to self-determination, to support the Middle East peace process for the achievement of the two-State solution on the basis of the pre-1967 borders." All of which is in direct contravention to the Hostile Arab Palestinian (HoAP) position that "Palestine" is defined as: "Palestine from the river to the sea, and from north to south, is a land of the Palestinian people and its homeland and its legitimate right, we may not a waiver an inch or any part thereof, no matter what the reasons and circumstances and pressures." This is true in the 2013 Islamic Resistance Movement position paper by Khaled Meshal [Chairman of the Political Bureau of the Islamic Resistance Movement (Hamas)], and is constant with the HoAP position held in 1966 with the boundaries it had during the British Mandate, is an indivisible territorial unit. The HoAP have made it clear that they cannot recognize the Balfour Declaration, the Mandate of Palestine or any situation arising or derived therefrom (everything that has been based upon them, are deemed null and void). They consider that imposing international alien immigrants on their country by force is nothing but an act of aggression and invasion, whether made by Jews themselves, through Great Britain, or by the United Nations. This was there position in 1948 and it is their position today. The HoAP Islamic Resistance Movement considers any position or consideration in contradiction to Islamic Sharia, where Palestine is concerned, is again --- null and void. It is the view held by HoAP Islamic Resistance Movement and the Fatah Fedayeen that there is no solution for the Palestinian question except through Jihad. Initiatives, proposals and international conferences are all a waste of time and vain endeavors; and the partition of Palestine in 1947 under Resolution 181(II) and the establishment of the State of Israel pursuant to the Steps Preparatory to Independence are entirely illegal. From the beggining, the HoAP stated (through the Arab High Committee) that the Arab Palestinian will never recognize the validity of the extorted partition recommendations or the authority of the United Nations to make them.

(SHORT-TERM)

Until such time that the HoAP alters its policies, it is not reasonable to assume that the attitude and conviction will approach any level of seriousness that will allow for each side to negotiate for a lasting peace.

Most Respectfully,
R