Solar Power pays off for enterprising Palestinians.

[P F Tinmore]

P F Tinmore, et al,

Come on, quit being intentionally dense.

Where does it say that there was no nation of Palestine?

(COMMENT)

I gave you the citation (in Posting #156) for the Successor Government (Palestine as defined as the territory under the mandate).

I gave you the citations that indicate that immigration was to facilitate the reconstruction of the new Jewish National Home, and all jewish people willing to contribute.

What are you trying to prove here?

Most Respectfully,
R

So, there is a temporarily appointed government that held Palestine in trust. Nothing saying that there was no nation of Palestine.

 

[Moonglow]

Solar power pays off for enterprising Palestinians - Al-Monitor: the Pulse of the Middle East

...

 

[Mindful]

Solar power pays off for enterprising Palestinians - Al-Monitor: the Pulse of the Middle East

...

Oh. You again.

 

[Moonglow]

Solar power pays off for enterprising Palestinians - Al-Monitor: the Pulse of the Middle East

...

Oh. You again.

 

[Mindful]

Solar power pays off for enterprising Palestinians - Al-Monitor: the Pulse of the Middle East

...

Oh. You again.

Well it's better than looking at your backside.

Got nothing much to do this Saturday morning?

You could always mention Palestinian Arab solar power, without mentioning the Z word.

 

[Moonglow]

Solar power pays off for enterprising Palestinians - Al-Monitor: the Pulse of the Middle East

...

Oh. You again.

Well it's better than looking at your backside.

Got nothing much to do this Saturday morning?

You could always mention Palestinian Arab solar power, without mentioning the Z word.

Zombie? They have plenty of sunshine and should use every means of exploiting it..

 

[Mindful]

Solar power pays off for enterprising Palestinians - Al-Monitor: the Pulse of the Middle East

...

Oh. You again.

Well it's better than looking at your backside.

Got nothing much to do this Saturday morning?

You could always mention Palestinian Arab solar power, without mentioning the Z word.

Zombie? They have plenty of sunshine and should use every means of exploiting it..

Try again. You didn't fool me.

 

[Moonglow]

...

Oh. You again.

Well it's better than looking at your backside.

Got nothing much to do this Saturday morning?

You could always mention Palestinian Arab solar power, without mentioning the Z word.

Zombie? They have plenty of sunshine and should use every means of exploiting it..

Try again. You didn't fool me.

You know that one can't fool a fool...

 

[Mindful]

Oh. You again.

Well it's better than looking at your backside.

Got nothing much to do this Saturday morning?

You could always mention Palestinian Arab solar power, without mentioning the Z word.

Zombie? They have plenty of sunshine and should use every means of exploiting it..

Try again. You didn't fool me.

You know that one can't fool a fool...

Can't be bothered.

 

[Phoenall]

Which they realised after the event to have been an illegal act, and so changed the UN charter to rectify it. Giving the International laws of 1920, 1921, 1923 and 1924 further power in 1949 when the UN reaffirmed their existence and gave 100% support to the Jewish NATIONal home on Jewish Palestine lands.

Do you have links to all that crap?

Why didn't you read them the last 100 or so times I posted them.


I will start you with the treaty of Sevres, treaty of Lausanne, mandate of Palestine and the UN charter, abridged 1949.

All say that the land delineated in the mandate of Palestine as the Jewish NATIONal home is law, and that there was no nation of Palestine.

The "Jewish National Home" was to give Palestinian citizenship to immigrating Jews.

Where does it say that in any of the LoN minutes, treaties or mandates.

You are confusing two separate entries again in your childish need to be right all the time.

The terms of the Mandate were to



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



ART 7

The Administration of Palestine shall be responsible for enacting a nationality law. There shall be included in this law provisions framed so as to facilitate the acquisition of Palestinian citizenship by Jews who take up their permanent residence in Palestine.

Where does it say that there was no nation of Palestine?

Where does it say that there was, as other LoN treaties state that there was never any nation of Palestine.

 

[Phoenall]

P F Tinmore, et al,

Come on, quit being intentionally dense.

Where does it say that there was no nation of Palestine?

(COMMENT)

I gave you the citation (in Posting #156) for the Successor Government (Palestine as defined as the territory under the mandate).

I gave you the citations that indicate that immigration was to facilitate the reconstruction of the new Jewish National Home, and all jewish people willing to contribute.

What are you trying to prove here?

Most Respectfully,
R

So, there is a temporarily appointed government that held Palestine in trust. Nothing saying that there was no nation of Palestine.

WRONG there was a temporarily appointed government that held the MANDATE OF PALESTINE in trust. Why do you omit the words MANDATE OF when you know they are the qualifying terms. This in itself says there was no nation just the Mandate.

 

[RoccoR]

Phoenall, P F Tinmore, et al,

It is not about what (this or that document, treaty, resolution, law or convention) said or what they didn't say (ie: where it says this or that). This is about what will unroll into the future. The UN is all about securing and maintaining the peace. Failing in securing the peace, it attempts to contain and mitigate the spread of the hostile conflict.

Where does it say that there was no nation of Palestine?

Where does it say that there was, as other LoN treaties state that there was never any nation of Palestine.

(COMMENT)

You don't list all the possible countries that could not be created or were not established; hell, that would be an infinite list. If you are thinking in explicit terms, you state clearly and in detail, with no confusion or room for error and doubt. The use of generalized concepts and languages, implied though not plainly expressed, is a way of giving options and alternatives without being committed to a specific requirements. For each ambiguous concept, there is the political latitude to re-shape the outcomes as is necessary to achieve the political or diplomatic objectives.

(DELIBERATE CONFUSION)

There is an indeterminate flip-flop (one of many) by the Arab Palestinian, that they choose to vacillate over, depending on what they see is being to their best advantage. One of the key goals of the pro-Palestinian movement is to plant the seed that Article 22 (or some related authority) explicitly creates a Palestinian State, as opposed to the passing the Title and Rights relinquished to the Allied Powers which established the post-War Successor Government under the appointed Mandatory.

Most Respectfully,
R

 

[P F Tinmore]

Do you have links to all that crap?

Why didn't you read them the last 100 or so times I posted them.


I will start you with the treaty of Sevres, treaty of Lausanne, mandate of Palestine and the UN charter, abridged 1949.

All say that the land delineated in the mandate of Palestine as the Jewish NATIONal home is law, and that there was no nation of Palestine.

The "Jewish National Home" was to give Palestinian citizenship to immigrating Jews.

Where does it say that in any of the LoN minutes, treaties or mandates.

You are confusing two separate entries again in your childish need to be right all the time.

The terms of the Mandate were to



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



ART 7

The Administration of Palestine shall be responsible for enacting a nationality law. There shall be included in this law provisions framed so as to facilitate the acquisition of Palestinian citizenship by Jews who take up their permanent residence in Palestine.

Where does it say that there was no nation of Palestine?

Where does it say that there was, as other LoN treaties state that there was never any nation of Palestine.

Links?

 

[irosie91]

P F Tinmore, et al,

Again, you are 100% Wrong.

(COMMENT)

In the case you cited (as an example) of the Egyptian Armistice and Peace Treaty, the Peace Treaty completely replaces the Armistice.

• Egyptian-Israeli Armistice: Article XII

2. This Agreement having been negotiated and concluded in pursuance of the resolution of the Security Council of 16 November 1948 calling for the establishment of an armistice in order to eliminate the threat to the peace in Palestine and to facilitate the transition from the present truce to permanent peace in Palestine, shall remain in force until a peaceful settlement between the Parties is achieved, except as provided in paragraph 3 of this Article.
​

• Egyptian-Israeli Peace Treaty: Article II

The permanent boundary between Egypt and Israel in the recognized international boundary between Egypt and the former mandated territory of Palestine, as shown on the map at Annex II, without prejudice to the issue of the status of the Gaza Strip. The Parties recognize this boundary as inviolable. Each will respect the territorial integrity of the other, including their territorial waters and airspace.
​

There is a difference between "Palestine" (as you wrote) and the "former mandated territory of Palestine" (as written in the Peace Treaty. There is no reference or relationship to the 1949 Armistice Line --- in the --- 1979 Permanent International Boundary.

(THE BIG CHANGE)

As has been pointed out many (many) times, the 1988 UN General Assembly Resolution 43/177 specifically states:

3. 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;
​

Most Respectfully,
R

You are dancing around the issues in my post.

NOPE we are pointing out that you are a LIAR as the peace treaty spells it out

The permanent boundary between Egypt and Israel in the recognized international boundary between Egypt and the former mandated territory of Palestine

Understand yet that there was no nation of Palestine to have borders until they negotiate them

You could say the same thing about Lebanon, Syria, Jordan, and Iraq. They were all former mandated territories.

So?

I am not saying it am I, it is the world saying that the treaty says the border of Israel and Egypt is the same as that of the former mandated territory of Palestine .



Once again international laws and treaties say that you are a LIAR and that the nation of Palestine did not exist until 1988

Guided
by the purposes and principles of the Charter,

Recalling its relevant resolutions which affirm the right of the Palestinian people to self-determination,

1. Reaffirms the inalienable rights of the Palestinian people in Palestine, including:

(a) The right to self-determination without external interference;

(b) The right to national independence and sovereignty;

2. Reaffirms also the inalienable right of the Palestinians to return to their homes and property from which they have been displaced and uprooted, and calls for their return;

3. Emphasizes that full respect for and the realization of these inalienable rights of the Palestinian people are indispensable for the solution of the question of Palestine;

4. Recognizes that the Palestinian people is a principal party in the establishment of a just and lasting peace in the Middle East;

5. Further recognizes the right of the Palestinian people to regain its rights by all means in accordance with the purposes and principles of the Charter of the United Nations;

6. Appeals to all States and international organizations to extend their support to the Palestinian people in its struggle to restore its rights, in accordance with the Charter;

UN General Assembly Resolution 3236 and UN General Assembly Resolution 3237​

Why would the UN use the term "in Palestine" in 1974 unless there was a Palestine?

Israel has always denied the existence of Palestine. You are reading from Israel's playbook.

there has been an area of the world called
PALESTINE----since about 70 ad when the Romans sacked Jerusalem and around that time renamed Israel/Judea PALESTINA----
that's history---tinman. The term
PALESTINIAN ----meant Jew living in Palestine until about 50 years ago when
a whole bunch of OTHER people suddenly decided to call themselves PALESTINIANS-----and steal ISRAEL/JUDEA------you have a problem with words---BLAME TITUS

 

[P F Tinmore]

Phoenall, P F Tinmore, et al,

It is not about what (this or that document, treaty, resolution, law or convention) said or what they didn't say (ie: where it says this or that). This is about what will unroll into the future. The UN is all about securing and maintaining the peace. Failing in securing the peace, it attempts to contain and mitigate the spread of the hostile conflict.

Where does it say that there was no nation of Palestine?

Where does it say that there was, as other LoN treaties state that there was never any nation of Palestine.

(COMMENT)

You don't list all the possible countries that could not be created or were not established; hell, that would be an infinite list. If you are thinking in explicit terms, you state clearly and in detail, with no confusion or room for error and doubt. The use of generalized concepts and languages, implied though not plainly expressed, is a way of giving options and alternatives without being committed to a specific requirements. For each ambiguous concept, there is the political latitude to re-shape the outcomes as is necessary to achieve the political or diplomatic objectives.

(DELIBERATE CONFUSION)

There is an indeterminate flip-flop (one of many) by the Arab Palestinian, that they choose to vacillate over, depending on what they see is being to their best advantage. One of the key goals of the pro-Palestinian movement is to plant the seed that Article 22 (or some related authority) explicitly creates a Palestinian State, as opposed to the passing the Title and Rights relinquished to the Allied Powers which established the post-War Successor Government under the appointed Mandatory.

Most Respectfully,
R

It is Israel who confuses the issue. For the first 50 years after the creation of Israel, Israel held the dominant narrative in the media and the halls of governments. They used this time to spread misinformation about the conflict.

The conflict is really quite simple. But now that the truth is getting out Israel is desperately trying to shut down free speech.

 

[irosie91]

Phoenall, P F Tinmore, et al,

It is not about what (this or that document, treaty, resolution, law or convention) said or what they didn't say (ie: where it says this or that). This is about what will unroll into the future. The UN is all about securing and maintaining the peace. Failing in securing the peace, it attempts to contain and mitigate the spread of the hostile conflict.

Where does it say that there was no nation of Palestine?

Where does it say that there was, as other LoN treaties state that there was never any nation of Palestine.

(COMMENT)

You don't list all the possible countries that could not be created or were not established; hell, that would be an infinite list. If you are thinking in explicit terms, you state clearly and in detail, with no confusion or room for error and doubt. The use of generalized concepts and languages, implied though not plainly expressed, is a way of giving options and alternatives without being committed to a specific requirements. For each ambiguous concept, there is the political latitude to re-shape the outcomes as is necessary to achieve the political or diplomatic objectives.

(DELIBERATE CONFUSION)

There is an indeterminate flip-flop (one of many) by the Arab Palestinian, that they choose to vacillate over, depending on what they see is being to their best advantage. One of the key goals of the pro-Palestinian movement is to plant the seed that Article 22 (or some related authority) explicitly creates a Palestinian State, as opposed to the passing the Title and Rights relinquished to the Allied Powers which established the post-War Successor Government under the appointed Mandatory.

Most Respectfully,
R

It is Israel who confuses the issue. For the first 50 years after the creation of Israel, Israel held the dominant narrative in the media and the halls of governments. They used this time to spread misinformation about the conflict.

The conflict is really quite simple. But now that the truth is getting out Israel is desperately trying to shut down free speech.

can you provide details on the SHUT DOWN OF FREE SPEECH?

 

[Phoenall]

Why didn't you read them the last 100 or so times I posted them.


I will start you with the treaty of Sevres, treaty of Lausanne, mandate of Palestine and the UN charter, abridged 1949.

All say that the land delineated in the mandate of Palestine as the Jewish NATIONal home is law, and that there was no nation of Palestine.

The "Jewish National Home" was to give Palestinian citizenship to immigrating Jews.

Where does it say that in any of the LoN minutes, treaties or mandates.

You are confusing two separate entries again in your childish need to be right all the time.

The terms of the Mandate were to



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



ART 7

The Administration of Palestine shall be responsible for enacting a nationality law. There shall be included in this law provisions framed so as to facilitate the acquisition of Palestinian citizenship by Jews who take up their permanent residence in Palestine.

Where does it say that there was no nation of Palestine?

Where does it say that there was, as other LoN treaties state that there was never any nation of Palestine.

Links?

Posted already in the last 36 hours, shows how much notice you actually take on what is posted.

 

[Phoenall]

Phoenall, P F Tinmore, et al,

It is not about what (this or that document, treaty, resolution, law or convention) said or what they didn't say (ie: where it says this or that). This is about what will unroll into the future. The UN is all about securing and maintaining the peace. Failing in securing the peace, it attempts to contain and mitigate the spread of the hostile conflict.

Where does it say that there was no nation of Palestine?

Where does it say that there was, as other LoN treaties state that there was never any nation of Palestine.

(COMMENT)

You don't list all the possible countries that could not be created or were not established; hell, that would be an infinite list. If you are thinking in explicit terms, you state clearly and in detail, with no confusion or room for error and doubt. The use of generalized concepts and languages, implied though not plainly expressed, is a way of giving options and alternatives without being committed to a specific requirements. For each ambiguous concept, there is the political latitude to re-shape the outcomes as is necessary to achieve the political or diplomatic objectives.

(DELIBERATE CONFUSION)

There is an indeterminate flip-flop (one of many) by the Arab Palestinian, that they choose to vacillate over, depending on what they see is being to their best advantage. One of the key goals of the pro-Palestinian movement is to plant the seed that Article 22 (or some related authority) explicitly creates a Palestinian State, as opposed to the passing the Title and Rights relinquished to the Allied Powers which established the post-War Successor Government under the appointed Mandatory.

Most Respectfully,
R

It is Israel who confuses the issue. For the first 50 years after the creation of Israel, Israel held the dominant narrative in the media and the halls of governments. They used this time to spread misinformation about the conflict.

The conflict is really quite simple. But now that the truth is getting out Israel is desperately trying to shut down free speech.

How about some LINKS to your RACIST CLAIMS then, and do try and find some that are not islamonazi propaganda.

 

[P F Tinmore]

Phoenall, P F Tinmore, et al,

It is not about what (this or that document, treaty, resolution, law or convention) said or what they didn't say (ie: where it says this or that). This is about what will unroll into the future. The UN is all about securing and maintaining the peace. Failing in securing the peace, it attempts to contain and mitigate the spread of the hostile conflict.

Where does it say that there was no nation of Palestine?

Where does it say that there was, as other LoN treaties state that there was never any nation of Palestine.

(COMMENT)

You don't list all the possible countries that could not be created or were not established; hell, that would be an infinite list. If you are thinking in explicit terms, you state clearly and in detail, with no confusion or room for error and doubt. The use of generalized concepts and languages, implied though not plainly expressed, is a way of giving options and alternatives without being committed to a specific requirements. For each ambiguous concept, there is the political latitude to re-shape the outcomes as is necessary to achieve the political or diplomatic objectives.

(DELIBERATE CONFUSION)

There is an indeterminate flip-flop (one of many) by the Arab Palestinian, that they choose to vacillate over, depending on what they see is being to their best advantage. One of the key goals of the pro-Palestinian movement is to plant the seed that Article 22 (or some related authority) explicitly creates a Palestinian State, as opposed to the passing the Title and Rights relinquished to the Allied Powers which established the post-War Successor Government under the appointed Mandatory.

Most Respectfully,
R

It is Israel who confuses the issue. For the first 50 years after the creation of Israel, Israel held the dominant narrative in the media and the halls of governments. They used this time to spread misinformation about the conflict.

The conflict is really quite simple. But now that the truth is getting out Israel is desperately trying to shut down free speech.

can you provide details on the SHUT DOWN OF FREE SPEECH?

The Palestine Exception to Free Speech

 

[RoccoR]

P F Tinmore, et al,

The use of the terminology and phrasing "Palestine Exception to Free Speech" is dangerously close to disinformation --- and is clearly intended to incite the emotions of the patriot.

I saw this in the "Law and Justice" Group and the Discussion of the same title (Post #1: The Palestine Exception to Free Speech). I was going to contribute my two-cents, but find myself in a dilemma. My oratory skills don't actually reach that far to give justice to the intrinsic topics of:

• Speech meant to promote ostracize one culture over another for political gain (hate speech vs free speech);
• Speech promoting civil discontent, trending against the established order --- gradually rising to subversion;
• Exploiting the "notion of inciting by words or writings disaffection towards the state or constituted authority, intended or calculated to provoke a false justification of violence, civil disobedience or hatred in the general public, against a group of persons (with a different ethnic persuasion) for political purposes;"
​

These actions and this form of speech intended to exploit the people and to create domestic division, hatred, contempt or to excite disaffection is difficult for someone like myself to bring together and demonstrate just how dangerous it is.

can you provide details on the SHUT DOWN OF FREE SPEECH?

The Palestine Exception to Free Speech

(COMMENT)

But I don't see that there is any attack on the rights of "free speech" in the US; and I don't see any particular selective enforcement against the Palestinian-American community. What I do find interesting is that Palestinians advocate the intentional and direct targeting of civilians (including women, children, old and/or infirm), and turns around and tell us what a bad people Americans are for encouraging Israel to affecting in-flight safety, to prevent the seizure of an aircraft or to attempt to do control a commercial aircraft. I find it relatively disturbing that the Palestinians would kidnap and Murder teenagers and then complain when Israel takes such measures to Prevent, Combat and Eradicate the Illicit Trade in Small Arms and Light Weapons in All Its Aspects.

The entire discussion on Propaganda is tough to say the least. But there is a strategy.

Most Respectfully,
R