Recognition not territory

[Phoenall]

P F Tinmore, et al,

Oh, come on --- get with it. Just as a point of clarification and correction: The Gaza Strip was the Palestinian, as defined by the order in Council, land before, during, and after Egyptian occupation.

Not true. Egypt never annexed the Gaza strip into Egypt. Egypt relinquished control not sovereignty. The Gaza Strip was Palestinian land before, during, and after Egyptian occupation.

(COMMENT)

First, I never said that Egypt Annexed anything. IF you go back to Posting #76, you will find that I mentioned the Egyptian Military Governorship and not annexation. Below are excepts from three independent sources.

At first the Gaza Strip was officially administered by the All-Palestine Government, established by the Arab League in September 1948. All-Palestine in the Gaza Strip was managed under the military authority of Egypt, functioning as puppet state, until it officially merged into the United Arab Republic and dissolved in 1959. From the time of the dissolution of the All-Palestine Government until 1967, the Gaza Strip was directly administered by an Egyptian military governor. Israel captured the Gaza Strip from Egypt in the Six-Day War in 1967.

Gaza came under Egyptian rule until it was occupied by Israel during the 1967 Six Day War. Gaza became a center of political resistance during the First Intifada, and under the Oslo Accords of 1993, it was assigned to be under the direct control of the newly established Palestinian Authority.

The Gaza Strip was under Egyptian military rule from 1949 to 1956 and again from 1957 to 1967.
​

Even the Arab Palestinians declined to declare independence (another example of Arab Palestinian "right to self-determination").

Not true. The Palestinians declared independence in 1948. That was after the Mandate left Palestine and the UNPC failed to take control. And it was before the UN officially divided Palestine into three areas of occupation in the 1949 armistice agreements.

(COMMENT)

This is so screwed-up that it needs scrapped and rewritten. Lets just make this clear. No matter what the All-Palestine Government (APG) is claimed to represent, in order to endow the government with legitimacy, a Palestinian National Council was convened in Gaza on 30 September 1948, under the chairmanship of the Mufti of Jerusalem. The council, in a mood of great elation, passed a series of resolutions culminating in a declaration of independence over the whole of Palestine. BUT, there are two flaws that collapse the APG theory of legitimacy:

• The Israeli Provisional Government declared independence over a portion of the territory formerly under the Mandate of Palestine. Whereas, the APG declaration of independence over the entire landscape of Palestine.

∆ No matter what "rights" the Arab Palestinians claim, Palestinian "rights" cannot negate the freedom of the the Jewish People to exercise their "right of self-determination" and their freedom to establish the Jewish National Home.
​

• A right to independence exercised in May 1948 pursuant to the UN Steps Preparatory to Independence, supersedes.

∆ The APG failed to legitimize their September 1948 claim over the May 1948 claim by the Israelis.
​

In Cairo, the Government of All-Palestine gradually fell apart because of its impotence, ending up four years later as a department of the Arab League. Thereafter, it continued to exist in name only until Egypt's President Gamal Abdel Nasser closed its offices in 1959.

Most Respectfully,
R

• The Israeli Provisional Government declared independence over a portion of the territory formerly under the Mandate of Palestine. Whereas, the APG declaration of independence over the entire landscape of Palestine.

What was Israel's defined territory? Is there any definition or map of this territory?

How did Israel legally acquire its defined territory?

Why does every map of Israel use the 1949 armistice lines (that are specifically not the be political or territorial boundaries?) Why don't they use the borders of Israel's defined territory?

P F Tinmore, et al,

You keep dredging up this old argument, as if it has been discussed ten dozen times.

What was Israel's defined territory? Is there any definition or map of this territory?

(COMMENT)

On the 15 MAY 1952, the Provisional Government of Israel filed a message in accordance with the Steps Preparatory to Independence, making a Declaratory Statement of Independence with the boundaries as outlined in Part 2 - Boundaries. The Arab League launch 5 Armies simultaneously towards the new State of Israel, violating Chapter I of the UN Charter; constituting acts of aggression and the inappropriate use of actual force on the territorial integrity of Israel.

How did Israel legally acquire its defined territory?

(COMMENT)

Israel seized control of territory while in hot pursuit of the Arab League forces retreated.

Why does every map of Israel use the 1949 armistice lines (that are specifically not the be political or territorial boundaries?) Why don't they use the borders of Israel's defined territory?

(COMMENT)

Actually, thee international community, less the Arab League, use the International Boundaries that are actually maintained by the Peace Treaties with Jordan and Egypt. The countries of Syria and Lebanon, still maintaining the Three-No's Doctrine, still use Armistice Lines as temporary boundaries, as is done elsewhere in the world.

Without clear answers to the above, the Palestinians had every right to declare independence in all of Palestine as defined by its international borders.

(COMMENT)

The All-Palestine Government does not exist. It's invalid 1948 claim dissolved with APG. It was dissolved back in 1959. It was not until 1988 that the PLO Declared Independence and it is generally recognized by the UN as the territory occupied since 1967.

Part of being a defined border is that you must be able to articulate it on the ground and actually control the boundary.

Normally, boundaries are established by some agreement (not always). The Palestinians have no agreements with either Egypt or Jordan. However Israel does and has internationally recognized boundaries by treaty.

Most Respectfully,
R

Part of being a defined border is that you must be able to articulate it on the ground and actually control the boundary.​

Not true.

ARTICLE 4

States are juridically equal, enjoy the same rights, and have equal capacity in their exercise. The rights of each one do not depend upon the power which it possesses to assure its exercise, but upon the simple fact of its existence as a person under international law.

The Avalon Project : Convention on Rights and Duties of States (inter-American); December 26, 1933​

Link does not apply as it only deals with the America's and not the rest of the world.

 

[Phoenall]

P F Tinmore, et al,

You keep dredging up this old argument, as if it has been discussed ten dozen times.

What was Israel's defined territory? Is there any definition or map of this territory?

(COMMENT)

On the 15 MAY 1952, the Provisional Government of Israel filed a message in accordance with the Steps Preparatory to Independence, making a Declaratory Statement of Independence with the boundaries as outlined in Part 2 - Boundaries. The Arab League launch 5 Armies simultaneously towards the new State of Israel, violating Chapter I of the UN Charter; constituting acts of aggression and the inappropriate use of actual force on the territorial integrity of Israel.

How did Israel legally acquire its defined territory?

(COMMENT)

Israel seized control of territory while in hot pursuit of the Arab League forces retreated.

Why does every map of Israel use the 1949 armistice lines (that are specifically not the be political or territorial boundaries?) Why don't they use the borders of Israel's defined territory?

(COMMENT)

Actually, thee international community, less the Arab League, use the International Boundaries that are actually maintained by the Peace Treaties with Jordan and Egypt. The countries of Syria and Lebanon, still maintaining the Three-No's Doctrine, still use Armistice Lines as temporary boundaries, as is done elsewhere in the world.

Without clear answers to the above, the Palestinians had every right to declare independence in all of Palestine as defined by its international borders.

(COMMENT)

The All-Palestine Government does not exist. It's invalid 1948 claim dissolved with APG. It was dissolved back in 1959. It was not until 1988 that the PLO Declared Independence and it is generally recognized by the UN as the territory occupied since 1967.

Part of being a defined border is that you must be able to articulate it on the ground and actually control the boundary.

Normally, boundaries are established by some agreement (not always). The Palestinians have no agreements with either Egypt or Jordan. However Israel does and has internationally recognized boundaries by treaty.

Most Respectfully,
R

Actually, thee international community, less the Arab League, use the International Boundaries that are actually maintained by the Peace Treaties with Jordan and Egypt.​

Interesting that you should bring those up. The UN says that the land inside those borders is Palestine.

Mandate of palestine land until such a time as the mandate is fulfilled. Still mandate of palesti8ne land until Israelo claims what is hers by right.

 

[Phoenall]

P F Tinmore, et al,

The UN has never defined Palestine except as in regards to the 1988 Declaration.

Actually, thee international community, less the Arab League, use the International Boundaries that are actually maintained by the Peace Treaties with Jordan and Egypt.​

Interesting that you should bring those up. The UN says that the land inside those borders is Palestine.

(COMMENT)

The designation "Palestine" for the PLO was adopted by the United Nations in 1988 in acknowledgment of the Palestinian declaration of independence, but the proclaimed state still has no formal status within the system.

A/RES/43/177 15 December 1988 Question of Palestine

Decides that, effective as of 15 December 1988, the designation "Palestine" should be used in place of the designation "Palestine Liberation Organization" in the United Nations system, without prejudice to the observer status and functions of the Palestine Liberation Organization within the United Nations system, in conformity with relevant United Nations resolutions and practice;
​

As you well know, I've explained it enough, the UN system uses "Palestine" to replace the designation PLO.

Most Respectfully,
R

OK, so what does that have to do with my post?

It destroys the very foundations of your whole POV is what it does, but you are too stupid to accept that you are wrong and have been led up the garden path by islamonazi propaganda

 

[Phoenall]

P F Tinmore, et al,

You said that: "The UN says that the land inside those borders is Palestine."

P F Tinmore, et al,

The UN has never defined Palestine except as in regards to the 1988 Declaration.

Actually, thee international community, less the Arab League, use the International Boundaries that are actually maintained by the Peace Treaties with Jordan and Egypt.​

Interesting that you should bring those up. The UN says that the land inside those borders is Palestine.

(COMMENT)

The designation "Palestine" for the PLO was adopted by the United Nations in 1988 in acknowledgment of the Palestinian declaration of independence, but the proclaimed state still has no formal status within the system.

A/RES/43/177 15 December 1988 Question of Palestine

Decides that, effective as of 15 December 1988, the designation "Palestine" should be used in place of the designation "Palestine Liberation Organization" in the United Nations system, without prejudice to the observer status and functions of the Palestine Liberation Organization within the United Nations system, in conformity with relevant United Nations resolutions and practice;
​

As you well know, I've explained it enough, the UN system uses "Palestine" to replace the designation PLO.

Most Respectfully,
R

OK, so what does that have to do with my post?

(COMMENT)

I then quoted the UN Resolution that acknowledged the self-determination and independence of the Arab Palestinian. That "Palestine" should be used in place of the designation "Palestine Liberation Organization" in the United Nations system.

UN SYSTEM --- the 1988 term of Palestine replaces the PLO designation.

Within the UN System that acknowledged the proclamation of the "State of Palestine" by the "Palestine National Council" on 15 November 1988; Palestine = the replacement for PLO. It has no negotiated borders.
THAT IS WHAT IT HAS TO DO WITH YOUR POST. The International Boundaries that are actually maintained by the Peace Treaties with Jordan and Egypt; are Israel. The Permanent Status of Negotiations has to settle the issue of borders, as one of many issues. The Arab Palestinians keep holding out.

The Paulette-Newcombe//Sykes-Picot Agreements originally set the "territories to which the former Mandate for Palestine applied. Which (of course) comes from the Palestine Order in Council.

Most Respectfully,
R

I am still curious as to what this has to do with my post.

Try thinking about what is in the replies and you will see just how stupid you look to the rest of the board with your same inane questions that you hope will be obliterated by islamonazi hackers from the internet. They are copied to cloud servers and will not be removed leaving you looking like a moron

 

[P F Tinmore]

P F Tinmore, et al,

You said that: "The UN says that the land inside those borders is Palestine."

P F Tinmore, et al,

The UN has never defined Palestine except as in regards to the 1988 Declaration.

Interesting that you should bring those up. The UN says that the land inside those borders is Palestine.

(COMMENT)

The designation "Palestine" for the PLO was adopted by the United Nations in 1988 in acknowledgment of the Palestinian declaration of independence, but the proclaimed state still has no formal status within the system.

A/RES/43/177 15 December 1988 Question of Palestine

Decides that, effective as of 15 December 1988, the designation "Palestine" should be used in place of the designation "Palestine Liberation Organization" in the United Nations system, without prejudice to the observer status and functions of the Palestine Liberation Organization within the United Nations system, in conformity with relevant United Nations resolutions and practice;
​

As you well know, I've explained it enough, the UN system uses "Palestine" to replace the designation PLO.

Most Respectfully,
R

OK, so what does that have to do with my post?

(COMMENT)

I then quoted the UN Resolution that acknowledged the self-determination and independence of the Arab Palestinian. That "Palestine" should be used in place of the designation "Palestine Liberation Organization" in the United Nations system.

UN SYSTEM --- the 1988 term of Palestine replaces the PLO designation.

Within the UN System that acknowledged the proclamation of the "State of Palestine" by the "Palestine National Council" on 15 November 1988; Palestine = the replacement for PLO. It has no negotiated borders.
THAT IS WHAT IT HAS TO DO WITH YOUR POST. The International Boundaries that are actually maintained by the Peace Treaties with Jordan and Egypt; are Israel. The Permanent Status of Negotiations has to settle the issue of borders, as one of many issues. The Arab Palestinians keep holding out.

The Paulette-Newcombe//Sykes-Picot Agreements originally set the "territories to which the former Mandate for Palestine applied. Which (of course) comes from the Palestine Order in Council.

Most Respectfully,
R

I am still curious as to what this has to do with my post.

Try thinking about what is in the replies and you will see just how stupid you look to the rest of the board with your same inane questions that you hope will be obliterated by islamonazi hackers from the internet. They are copied to cloud servers and will not be removed leaving you looking like a moron

My post in reference to the borders with Egypt and Jordan was:

Interesting that you should bring those up. The UN says that the land inside those borders is Palestine.

Where was that mentioned in the subsequent posts?

 

[RoccoR]

P F Tinmore, et al,

Your post is wrong. In the UN System, "Palestine" means something else entirely.

UN SYSTEM --- the 1988 term of Palestine replaces the PLO designation.

My post in reference to the borders with Egypt and Jordan was:

Interesting that you should bring those up. The UN says that the land inside those borders is Palestine.

Where was that mentioned in the subsequent posts?

(COMMENT)

UN SYSTEM --- the 1988 term of Palestine replaces the PLO designation.

Most Respectfully,
R

 

[Phoenall]

P F Tinmore, et al,

You said that: "The UN says that the land inside those borders is Palestine."

P F Tinmore, et al,

The UN has never defined Palestine except as in regards to the 1988 Declaration.

(COMMENT)

The designation "Palestine" for the PLO was adopted by the United Nations in 1988 in acknowledgment of the Palestinian declaration of independence, but the proclaimed state still has no formal status within the system.

A/RES/43/177 15 December 1988 Question of Palestine

Decides that, effective as of 15 December 1988, the designation "Palestine" should be used in place of the designation "Palestine Liberation Organization" in the United Nations system, without prejudice to the observer status and functions of the Palestine Liberation Organization within the United Nations system, in conformity with relevant United Nations resolutions and practice;
​

As you well know, I've explained it enough, the UN system uses "Palestine" to replace the designation PLO.

Most Respectfully,
R

OK, so what does that have to do with my post?

(COMMENT)

I then quoted the UN Resolution that acknowledged the self-determination and independence of the Arab Palestinian. That "Palestine" should be used in place of the designation "Palestine Liberation Organization" in the United Nations system.

UN SYSTEM --- the 1988 term of Palestine replaces the PLO designation.

Within the UN System that acknowledged the proclamation of the "State of Palestine" by the "Palestine National Council" on 15 November 1988; Palestine = the replacement for PLO. It has no negotiated borders.
THAT IS WHAT IT HAS TO DO WITH YOUR POST. The International Boundaries that are actually maintained by the Peace Treaties with Jordan and Egypt; are Israel. The Permanent Status of Negotiations has to settle the issue of borders, as one of many issues. The Arab Palestinians keep holding out.

The Paulette-Newcombe//Sykes-Picot Agreements originally set the "territories to which the former Mandate for Palestine applied. Which (of course) comes from the Palestine Order in Council.

Most Respectfully,
R

I am still curious as to what this has to do with my post.

Try thinking about what is in the replies and you will see just how stupid you look to the rest of the board with your same inane questions that you hope will be obliterated by islamonazi hackers from the internet. They are copied to cloud servers and will not be removed leaving you looking like a moron

My post in reference to the borders with Egypt and Jordan was:

Interesting that you should bring those up. The UN says that the land inside those borders is Palestine.

Where was that mentioned in the subsequent posts?

When I pointed out the correct term was mandate of palestine and never nation or state of palestine. A concept you seem to ignore repeatedly because it goes against what you have been told to believe. Every day you are given the links proving that you are wrong in regards to this and you just carry on making a complete fool of yourself. Even when you produce links to support your claims they state that it is the mandate of palestine and not the nation or state of palestine.

 

[Phoenall]

P F Tinmore, et al,

Your post is wrong. In the UN System, "Palestine" means something else entirely.

UN SYSTEM --- the 1988 term of Palestine replaces the PLO designation.

My post in reference to the borders with Egypt and Jordan was:

Interesting that you should bring those up. The UN says that the land inside those borders is Palestine.

Where was that mentioned in the subsequent posts?

(COMMENT)

UN SYSTEM --- the 1988 term of Palestine replaces the PLO designation.

Most Respectfully,
R

He will never admit that he is wrong on this subject because he has been brainwashed into believing islamonazi propaganda

 

[P F Tinmore]

P F Tinmore, et al,

Your post is wrong. In the UN System, "Palestine" means something else entirely.

UN SYSTEM --- the 1988 term of Palestine replaces the PLO designation.

My post in reference to the borders with Egypt and Jordan was:

Interesting that you should bring those up. The UN says that the land inside those borders is Palestine.

Where was that mentioned in the subsequent posts?

(COMMENT)

UN SYSTEM --- the 1988 term of Palestine replaces the PLO designation.

Most Respectfully,
R

Is that like the Palestine that never was like your Israeli propagandists are always blabbering about? A black hole in the ME just waiting for a people without a land to come and make the desert bloom.

 

[Phoenall]

P F Tinmore, et al,

Your post is wrong. In the UN System, "Palestine" means something else entirely.

UN SYSTEM --- the 1988 term of Palestine replaces the PLO designation.

My post in reference to the borders with Egypt and Jordan was:

Interesting that you should bring those up. The UN says that the land inside those borders is Palestine.

Where was that mentioned in the subsequent posts?

(COMMENT)

UN SYSTEM --- the 1988 term of Palestine replaces the PLO designation.

Most Respectfully,
R

Is that like the Palestine that never was like your Israeli propagandists are always blabbering about? A black hole in the ME just waiting for a people without a land to come and make the desert bloom.

And you have failed to provide any evidence of a palestinian state existing prior to 1988. All you have is LoN and UN minutes that talk about the mandate of palestine and the Jews being granted land for a national home at the same time as the arab muslims were.

 

[RoccoR]

P F Tinmore, et al,

When you ask the definition or the orientation of a phrase or word like "Palestine," you have to observe its temporal shift. In this case, you have to ask: What does "Palestine" mean with respect to what?

In this case you specified with respect to the UN. It was embedded in your counterpoint: "The UN says that the land inside those borders is Palestine." Palestine in respect to the UN.

P F Tinmore, et al,

Your post is wrong. In the UN System, "Palestine" means something else entirely.

UN SYSTEM --- the 1988 term of Palestine replaces the PLO designation.

My post in reference to the borders with Egypt and Jordan was:

Interesting that you should bring those up. The UN says that the land inside those borders is Palestine.

Where was that mentioned in the subsequent posts?

(COMMENT)

UN SYSTEM --- the 1988 term of Palestine replaces the PLO designation.

Most Respectfully,
R

Is that like the Palestine that never was like your Israeli propagandists are always blabbering about? A black hole in the ME just waiting for a people without a land to come and make the desert bloom.

(COMMENT)

Sometimes you will hear the legal eagles talk about Nations or States as if they had the quality of a person. The issue of "sovereignty" is in the frame for that kind of consideration.

With respect to the UN, "Palestine" is not a territory; even one such as defined by the old Palestine Order in Council.

Within the UN System: Palestine is not a place. (I SAY AGAIN) Palestine is not a place.​

It is designated just as the UN General Assembly has laid-out.

The "State of Palestine" (SoP) or the "Government of Palestine" (GoP) has never negotiated its international boundaries. Remember that the PLO (as the sole legitimate representative) is now known as "PALESTINE" in the UN System, and has agreed that:

Article V(3). It is understood that these negotiations (Permanent Status Negotiations) shall cover remaining issues, including: Jerusalem, refugees, settlements, security arrangements, borders, relations and co-operation with other neighbors, and other issues of common interest.
​

Most Respectfully,
R

 

[P F Tinmore]

P F Tinmore, et al,

When you ask the definition or the orientation of a phrase or word like "Palestine," you have to observe its temporal shift. In this case, you have to ask: What does "Palestine" mean with respect to what?

In this case you specified with respect to the UN. It was embedded in your counterpoint: "The UN says that the land inside those borders is Palestine." Palestine in respect to the UN.

P F Tinmore, et al,

Your post is wrong. In the UN System, "Palestine" means something else entirely.

UN SYSTEM --- the 1988 term of Palestine replaces the PLO designation.

My post in reference to the borders with Egypt and Jordan was:

Interesting that you should bring those up. The UN says that the land inside those borders is Palestine.

Where was that mentioned in the subsequent posts?

(COMMENT)

UN SYSTEM --- the 1988 term of Palestine replaces the PLO designation.

Most Respectfully,
R

Is that like the Palestine that never was like your Israeli propagandists are always blabbering about? A black hole in the ME just waiting for a people without a land to come and make the desert bloom.

(COMMENT)

Sometimes you will hear the legal eagles talk about Nations or States as if they had the quality of a person. The issue of "sovereignty" is in the frame for that kind of consideration.

With respect to the UN, "Palestine" is not a territory; even one such as defined by the old Palestine Order in Council.

Within the UN System: Palestine is not a place. (I SAY AGAIN) Palestine is not a place.​

It is designated just as the UN General Assembly has laid-out.

The "State of Palestine" (SoP) or the "Government of Palestine" (GoP) has never negotiated its international boundaries. Remember that the PLO (as the sole legitimate representative) is now known as "PALESTINE" in the UN System, and has agreed that:

Article V(3). It is understood that these negotiations (Permanent Status Negotiations) shall cover remaining issues, including: Jerusalem, refugees, settlements, security arrangements, borders, relations and co-operation with other neighbors, and other issues of common interest.
​

Most Respectfully,
R

The Palestinians do not need to negotiate anything. The only reason for negotiations is for the Palestinians to negotiate away their rights.

 

[Shusha]

The Palestinians do not need to negotiate anything. The only reason for negotiations is for the Palestinians to negotiate away their rights.

Negotiate away their rights to whom? Other Palestinians?

Why would one group of Palestinians have rights that the other group of Palestinians don't have?

 

[Roudy]

P F Tinmore, et al,

When you ask the definition or the orientation of a phrase or word like "Palestine," you have to observe its temporal shift. In this case, you have to ask: What does "Palestine" mean with respect to what?

In this case you specified with respect to the UN. It was embedded in your counterpoint: "The UN says that the land inside those borders is Palestine." Palestine in respect to the UN.

P F Tinmore, et al,

Your post is wrong. In the UN System, "Palestine" means something else entirely.

UN SYSTEM --- the 1988 term of Palestine replaces the PLO designation.

My post in reference to the borders with Egypt and Jordan was:

Where was that mentioned in the subsequent posts?

(COMMENT)

UN SYSTEM --- the 1988 term of Palestine replaces the PLO designation.

Most Respectfully,
R

Is that like the Palestine that never was like your Israeli propagandists are always blabbering about? A black hole in the ME just waiting for a people without a land to come and make the desert bloom.

(COMMENT)

Sometimes you will hear the legal eagles talk about Nations or States as if they had the quality of a person. The issue of "sovereignty" is in the frame for that kind of consideration.

With respect to the UN, "Palestine" is not a territory; even one such as defined by the old Palestine Order in Council.

Within the UN System: Palestine is not a place. (I SAY AGAIN) Palestine is not a place.​

It is designated just as the UN General Assembly has laid-out.

The "State of Palestine" (SoP) or the "Government of Palestine" (GoP) has never negotiated its international boundaries. Remember that the PLO (as the sole legitimate representative) is now known as "PALESTINE" in the UN System, and has agreed that:

Article V(3). It is understood that these negotiations (Permanent Status Negotiations) shall cover remaining issues, including: Jerusalem, refugees, settlements, security arrangements, borders, relations and co-operation with other neighbors, and other issues of common interest.
​

Most Respectfully,
R

The Palestinians do not need to negotiate anything. The only reason for negotiations is for the Palestinians to negotiate away their rights.

What "rights" do you speak of? The right to destroy the Jewish state using terror and murder, while complaining about the rights of the Israelis to defend themselves?

 

[RoccoR]

P F Tinmore, et al,

This is a very typical position to take if you believe that the Arab Palestinians had the "Title and Rights" to something. But what if the "Title and Rights" were in the possession of another.

The Palestinians do not need to negotiate anything. The only reason for negotiations is for the Palestinians to negotiate away their rights.​

(COMMENT)

The only reason for negotiation, inquiry, mediation, conciliation, arbitration, or judicial settlement of their international disputes (by peaceful means) would be to set the conditions for international peace and security.

IF you actually believe that the Arab Palestinians have "Inalienable rights" (that cannot be infringed upon, rights not subject to sale or those that cannot be transferred negotiation, mediation, conciliation, arbitration, or surrendered under judicial settlement); THEN the defense that the Arab Palestinians might to negotiate away their rights is impossible (bogus).

The reason for rejecting negotiation, inquiry, mediation, conciliation, arbitration, or judicial settlement is to maintain the status quo and continue the conflict. This is the perspective the Arab Palestinians hold: "Armed Struggle is the only way to liberate Palestine."

Most Respectfully,
R​

 

[P F Tinmore]

P F Tinmore, et al,

This is a very typical position to take if you believe that the Arab Palestinians had the "Title and Rights" to something. But what if the "Title and Rights" were in the possession of another.

The Palestinians do not need to negotiate anything. The only reason for negotiations is for the Palestinians to negotiate away their rights.​

(COMMENT)

The only reason for negotiation, inquiry, mediation, conciliation, arbitration, or judicial settlement of their international disputes (by peaceful means) would be to set the conditions for international peace and security.

IF you actually believe that the Arab Palestinians have "Inalienable rights" (that cannot be infringed upon, rights not subject to sale or those that cannot be transferred negotiation, mediation, conciliation, arbitration, or surrendered under judicial settlement); THEN the defense that the Arab Palestinians might to negotiate away their rights is impossible (bogus).

The reason for rejecting negotiation, inquiry, mediation, conciliation, arbitration, or judicial settlement is to maintain the status quo and continue the conflict. This is the perspective the Arab Palestinians hold: "Armed Struggle is the only way to liberate Palestine."

Most Respectfully,
R​

You believe that the citizens in a territory have no rights in that territory.

You have never proven that to be true.

 

[RoccoR]

P F Tinmore, et al,

Well, --- you almost have it right. But I think your understanding is still weak.

This is a very typical position to take if you believe that the Arab Palestinians had the "Title and Rights" to something. But what if the "Title and Rights" were in the possession of another.

You believe that the citizens in a territory have no rights in that territory.
You have never proven that to be true.

(COMMENT)

• You believe that the citizens in a territory have no rights in that territory.

∆ That would be entirely wrong. The Arab Palestinians what the exact same rights as every other person --- everywhere else. These rights are not territorial specific as you imply in your assumption about what I think. What the Arab Palestinian do not have is the right to subvert or confiscate the "title and rights" that belong to another; including the Israelis today, and those "title and rights" renounced in favor of the Allied Powers.

§ This is in part, explained in the The Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR): (The UDHR, together with the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights and its two Optional Protocols, and the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, form the so-called International Bill of Human Rights. The UDHR holds neither the status of a convention, treaty, international agreement, or binding resolution. The UN has also been the locus for the development of new advisory (non-binding) standards, such as the Universal Declaration of Human Rights --- it has not ascended into law. Oddly enough, the UDHR is not considered a core international human rights treaty.)

Article 2.

Everyone is entitled to all the rights and freedoms set forth in this Declaration, without distinction of any kind, such as race, colour, sex, language, religion, political or other opinion, national or social origin, property, birth or other status. Furthermore, no distinction shall be made on the basis of the political, jurisdictional or international status of the country or territory to which a person belongs, whether it be independent, trust, non-self-governing or under any other limitation of sovereignty.
​

• You have never proven that to be true.

You are absolutely correct. I've never proven this to be true, because I never said that. There is a big, Big, BIG difference between having "rights in a territory" and that of having the "Title and Rights to a territory." As I have said, All human beings are born free and equal in dignity and rights; without regard to the territory in which they stand in. In that regard, the Arab Palestinian think that they have something special conferred upon them; giving them some special authority over a territory that they which to that was never relinquished to them, which they did not establish the boundaries to, and which they never establish a functioning government over.
​

Most Respectfully,
R

 

[Phoenall]

P F Tinmore, et al,

When you ask the definition or the orientation of a phrase or word like "Palestine," you have to observe its temporal shift. In this case, you have to ask: What does "Palestine" mean with respect to what?

In this case you specified with respect to the UN. It was embedded in your counterpoint: "The UN says that the land inside those borders is Palestine." Palestine in respect to the UN.

P F Tinmore, et al,

Your post is wrong. In the UN System, "Palestine" means something else entirely.

UN SYSTEM --- the 1988 term of Palestine replaces the PLO designation.

My post in reference to the borders with Egypt and Jordan was:

Where was that mentioned in the subsequent posts?

(COMMENT)

UN SYSTEM --- the 1988 term of Palestine replaces the PLO designation.

Most Respectfully,
R

Is that like the Palestine that never was like your Israeli propagandists are always blabbering about? A black hole in the ME just waiting for a people without a land to come and make the desert bloom.

(COMMENT)

Sometimes you will hear the legal eagles talk about Nations or States as if they had the quality of a person. The issue of "sovereignty" is in the frame for that kind of consideration.

With respect to the UN, "Palestine" is not a territory; even one such as defined by the old Palestine Order in Council.

Within the UN System: Palestine is not a place. (I SAY AGAIN) Palestine is not a place.​

It is designated just as the UN General Assembly has laid-out.

The "State of Palestine" (SoP) or the "Government of Palestine" (GoP) has never negotiated its international boundaries. Remember that the PLO (as the sole legitimate representative) is now known as "PALESTINE" in the UN System, and has agreed that:

Article V(3). It is understood that these negotiations (Permanent Status Negotiations) shall cover remaining issues, including: Jerusalem, refugees, settlements, security arrangements, borders, relations and co-operation with other neighbors, and other issues of common interest.
​

Most Respectfully,
R

The Palestinians do not need to negotiate anything. The only reason for negotiations is for the Palestinians to negotiate away their rights.

WRONG as it is part of the steps prepatory to independence as detailed in the UN charter and resolutions. They gave a solemn promise to do so in 1988 and have refused to do so, meaning they should be evicted from the UN and the land thrown open to colonisation.
If the palestinians are stupid enough to negotiate away their rights then they dont deserve to have any do they, and it is time they found someone capable of negotiating in good faith and not someone who refuses to talk until their demands are met. This just leads to them losing more and they will soon be all crammed into gaza with no hope of ever achieving anything

 

[Phoenall]

P F Tinmore, et al,

This is a very typical position to take if you believe that the Arab Palestinians had the "Title and Rights" to something. But what if the "Title and Rights" were in the possession of another.

The Palestinians do not need to negotiate anything. The only reason for negotiations is for the Palestinians to negotiate away their rights.​

(COMMENT)

The only reason for negotiation, inquiry, mediation, conciliation, arbitration, or judicial settlement of their international disputes (by peaceful means) would be to set the conditions for international peace and security.

IF you actually believe that the Arab Palestinians have "Inalienable rights" (that cannot be infringed upon, rights not subject to sale or those that cannot be transferred negotiation, mediation, conciliation, arbitration, or surrendered under judicial settlement); THEN the defense that the Arab Palestinians might to negotiate away their rights is impossible (bogus).

The reason for rejecting negotiation, inquiry, mediation, conciliation, arbitration, or judicial settlement is to maintain the status quo and continue the conflict. This is the perspective the Arab Palestinians hold: "Armed Struggle is the only way to liberate Palestine."

Most Respectfully,
R​

You believe that the citizens in a territory have no rights in that territory.

You have never proven that to be true.

They dont have any rights until they exercise those rights, and when they get morons to whine about their stupidity you know they have surrenderd those rights for all time.

Now what rights do the arab muslims calling themselves palestininas have in the land they occupy granted to the Jews as their NATIONal home under INTERNATIONAL LAW ?


You have never proven that the 22% of palestine granted to the Jews was ever known as the nation of palestine and that it was given to the Jews of the world in 1923 along with the 78% given to the arab muslims under INTERNATIONAL LAW