The Myth of Occupied Territories

P F Tinmore, et al,

I think there is a misunderstanding as to the "right of self-determination" and what it is.

Good point. Rights are inherent not granted.
(COMMENT)

The right of "Self-Determination" is "the right of all peoples to be able to determine their own political future and also to be able to pursue their economic, social and cultural development and ambitions;" a freely expressed will of the peoples, not to be confused with secession of the state.

For a new state to be formed from another state there needs to be "consent of the parent state." The UN, as the trustee of the territory, acted on behalf of the World Body as that parent by Treaty and Mandate. The sovereignty of the existing State of Israel must be respected and its territorial integrity must be upheld. Palestinian Self-determination must duly comply with the principles of sovereignty exercised by Israel.
Nothing in the Palestinian "right of self-determination" should be construed as authorizing or encouraging any action which would dismember or impair the State of Israel with regard to its territorial integrity or the political unity. And by the same token, Israel has not, without just cause - demonstrated by threat, intimidation and direct lethal hostile action, limited the ability of the Palestinian to determine its own political future and pursue their economic, social and cultural development and ambitions; except as has been necessary to protect and defend the sovereignty of the existing State of Israel.

What does this mean in practical terms?

The Palestinians have NO inherent right to the territory, under the boundaries established by the former British Mandate. That territory is NOT an indivisible territorial unit. The Arab-Palestinian people possess no legal right to this territory (the entirety) and have NO right to determine the destiny already under the sovereignty of the State of Israel.​

Most Respectfully,
R

Again, you go off on a tangent...Show us the docs that the UN took over Sovereignty as a de-facto "Parent State, for the ME?"

Sure would like to see what the West concocted?


The second point, what Israeli Sovereignty over Palestine. Are you making this stuff up?
 
Last edited:
Folks believed the earth was flat too, of course. And the UN arab-muslim block bozos make it a circus.
The problem is, your position is so ridiculous, that you're running around telling anyone who'll listen, that the world really is flat.
That's how the UN represents the world, of course.
And all the satellite photos and eye-witness accounts from those who have been to the moon that are refuting what you claim, you insist that they're the "circus". Do you not see just how deranged that thinking is?
Then why are the UN arab-muslim block bozos insisting the earth is flat?
 
UNSC resolutions 242 and 338 disagree with you.
Palistanians aren't even mentioned in them. Funny, isn't it?
That's why I keep saying there's nothing to negotiate and no deals to be made with the Pals, the only issue here is that Israel comply's with international law. That's it.

As to their inherent rights, that was specifically addressed in a general assembly resolution 3236.


3236 (XXIX). Question of Palestine



The General Assembly,

Having considered the question of Palestine,

Having heard the statement of the Palestine Liberation Organization, the representative of the Palestinian people,

Having also heard other statements made during the debate,

Deeply concerned that no just solution to the problem of Palestine has yet been achieved and recognizing that the problem of Palestine continues to endanger international peace and security,

Recognizing that the Palestinian people is entitled to self-determination in accordance with the Charter of the United Nations,

Expressing its grave concern that the Palestinian people has been prevented from enjoying its inalienable rights, in particular its right to self-determination,

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;

7. Requests the Secretary-General to establish contacts with the Palestine Liberation Organization on all matters concerning the question of Palestine;

8. Requests the Secretary-General to report to the General Assembly at its thirtieth session on the implementation of the present resolution;

9. Decides to include the item entitled "Question of Palestine" in the provisional agenda of its thirtieth session.
Which basically says they should get the same rights everyone else enjoys.
 
UNSC resolutions 242 and 338 disagree with you.
Palistanians aren't even mentioned in them. Funny, isn't it?
That's why I keep saying there's nothing to negotiate and no deals to be made with the Pals, ...
Of course! A waste of time, indeed.
the only issue here is that Israel comply's with international law. That's it.
And what might that "international law" be?
As to their inherent rights, that was specifically addressed in a general assembly resolution 3236.
Which is a typical UN waste of words and paper, of course.
Which basically says they should get the same rights everyone else enjoys.
Is there anyone else in palistan beside palistanians?
 
UNSC resolutions 242 and 338 disagree with you.
Palistanians aren't even mentioned in them. Funny, isn't it?
That's why I keep saying there's nothing to negotiate and no deals to be made with the Pals, the only issue here is that Israel comply's with international law. That's it.

As to their inherent rights, that was specifically addressed in a general assembly resolution 3236.


3236 (XXIX). Question of Palestine
The General Assembly,

Having considered the question of Palestine,

Having heard the statement of the Palestine Liberation Organization, the representative of the Palestinian people,

Having also heard other statements made during the debate,

Deeply concerned that no just solution to the problem of Palestine has yet been achieved and recognizing that the problem of Palestine continues to endanger international peace and security,

Recognizing that the Palestinian people is entitled to self-determination in accordance with the Charter of the United Nations,

Expressing its grave concern that the Palestinian people has been prevented from enjoying its inalienable rights, in particular its right to self-determination,

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;

7. Requests the Secretary-General to establish contacts with the Palestine Liberation Organization on all matters concerning the question of Palestine;

8. Requests the Secretary-General to report to the General Assembly at its thirtieth session on the implementation of the present resolution;

9. Decides to include the item entitled "Question of Palestine" in the provisional agenda of its thirtieth session.
Which basically says they should get the same rights everyone else enjoys.
(COMMENT)

There is a "key" for you!

The Hostile Arab Palestinians (HoAP) have not:
  • Recognizing that the Israel people is entitled to self-determination in accordance with the Charter of the United Nations,
  • Expressing its grave concern that the Israel people has been prevented from enjoying its inalienable rights, in particular its right to self-determination,
  • Further recognizes the right of the Isreali people to regain its rights by all means in accordance with the purposes and principles of the Charter of the United Nations;
The conditions under which the Occupation continues is rooted in the HoAP objections stated in the original complaint of 1948:

Arab Higher Committee: said:
The Secretary-General has been informed by the Arab Higher Committee that is determined to persist in its rejection of the partition plan and in its refusal to recognize the resolution of the Assembly and “anything deriving therefrom”. The Subsequent communication of 6 February (1948) to the Secretary-General from the representative of the Arab Higher Committee set forth the following conclusions of the Arab Higher Committee Delegation:

“a. The Arabs of Palestine will never recognize the validity of the extorted partition recommendations or the authority of the United Nations to make them.

“b. The Arabs of Palestine consider that any attempt by the Jews or any power or group of powers to establish a Jewish State in Arab territory is an act of aggression which will be resisted in self-defense by force.

c. It is very unwise and fruitless to ask any commission to proceed to Palestine because not a single Arab will cooperate with the said commission.

d. The United Nations or its commission should not be misled to believe that its efforts in the partition plan will meet with any success. It will be far better for the eclipsed prestige of this organization not to start on this adventure.

e. The United Nations prestige will be better served by abandoning, not enforcing such an injustice.

f. The determination of every Arab in Palestine is to oppose in every way the partition of that country.

g. The Arabs of Palestine made a solemn declaration before the United Nations, before God and history, that they will never submit or yield to any power going to Palestine to enforce partition.
“The only way to establish partition is first to wipe them out – man women and child."​

SOURCE: A/AC.21/9 S/676 16 February 1948

The HoAP insisted then, as they do today, that 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. Thus the Israelis must exercise their right under the Charter:

Chapter VII: Action with Respect to Threats to the Peace said:
Article 51

Nothing in the present Charter shall impair the inherent right of individual or collective self-defense if an armed attack occurs against a Member of the United Nations, until the Security Council has taken measures necessary to maintain international peace and security. Measures taken by Members in the exercise of this right of self-defense shall be immediately reported to the Security Council and shall not in any way affect the authority and responsibility of the Security Council under the present Charter to take at any time such action as it deems necessary in order to maintain or restore international peace and security.

SOURCE: Chapter VII UN Charter

The Palestinian overstepped their authorities under the Charter and the Israelis responded.

The Question of Palestine and the United Nations Pages 9-10 said:
The first Arab-Israeli war, 1948-1949
On 14 May 1948, Britain relinquished its Mandate over Palestine and disengaged its forces. On the same day, the Jewish Agency proclaimed the establishment of the State of Israel on the territory allotted to it by the partition plan. Fierce hostilities immediately broke out between the Arab and Jewish communities. The next day, regular troops of the neighbouring Arab States entered the territory to assist the Palestinian Arabs.

The fighting was halted after several weeks, under a four-week truce called for by the Security Council on 29 May 1948. The truce went into effect on 11 June and was supervised by the United Nations Mediator with the assistance of a group of international military observers, which came to be known as the United Nations Truce Supervision Organization (UNTSO). Despite the efforts of the Mediator, no agreement could be reached on an extension of the truce, and fighting broke out again on 8 July.

On 15 July 1948, the Security Council decided in a resolution that the situation in Palestine constituted a threat to the peace. It ordered a ceasefire and declared that failure to comply would be construed as a breach of the peace requiring immediate consideration of enforcement measures under Chapter VII of the United Nations Charter. In accordance with the resolution, a second truce came into force. By that time, Israel controlled much of the territory allotted to the Arab State by the partition resolution, including the western part of Jerusalem.

SOURCE: The Question of Palestine and the United Nations

Today, the HoAP are associated with the organizing, instigating, facilitating, participating in, financing, encouraging terrorist activities, guerrilla operations and asymmetric warfare, and have used their territory as a base of operations for terrorist installations or training camps, or for the preparation or organization of terrorist acts intended to be committed against Israel and other States and their citizens.

The consequences are what you see today.

Most Respectfully,
R
 
RoccoR said:
“b. The Arabs of Palestine consider that any attempt by the Jews or any power or group of powers to establish a Jewish State in Arab territory is an act of aggression which will be resisted in self-defense by force.

Indeed, that would be illegal external interference.
 
RoccoR said:
Chapter VII: Action with Respect to Threats to the Peace said:
Article 51

Nothing in the present Charter shall impair the inherent right of individual or collective self-defense if an armed attack occurs against a Member of the United Nations, until the Security Council has taken measures necessary to maintain international peace and security. Measures taken by Members in the exercise of this right of self-defense shall be immediately reported to the Security Council and shall not in any way affect the authority and responsibility of the Security Council under the present Charter to take at any time such action as it deems necessary in order to maintain or restore international peace and security.

SOURCE: Chapter VII UN Charter

You say that the Palestinians are violating the "sovereignty and territorial integrity" of Israel.

When was there a complaint filed against the Palestinians and what was the outcome?
 
P F Tinmore, et al,

The establish a Jewish State was recommended and approved by the UN, not an external influence.

RoccoR said:
“b. The Arabs of Palestine consider that any attempt by the Jews or any power or group of powers to establish a Jewish State in Arab territory is an act of aggression which will be resisted in self-defense by force.

Indeed, that would be illegal external interference.
(COMMENT)

  • The attempt by the external Arab states would be an example of an external influence. It was an open attempt to defy the UN in the Partition Plan.
  • It was an open attempt by the external Arab states to deny the Israelis their right of self-determination.
  • It was an open attempt by the external Arab states to take territory by force; an act of aggression.

Most Respectfully,
R
 
P F Tinmore, et al,

The establish a Jewish State was recommended and approved by the UN, not an external influence.

RoccoR said:
“b. The Arabs of Palestine consider that any attempt by the Jews or any power or group of powers to establish a Jewish State in Arab territory is an act of aggression which will be resisted in self-defense by force.

Indeed, that would be illegal external interference.
(COMMENT)

  • The attempt by the external Arab states would be an example of an external influence. It was an open attempt to defy the UN in the Partition Plan.
  • It was an open attempt by the external Arab states to deny the Israelis their right of self-determination.
  • It was an open attempt by the external Arab states to take territory by force; an act of aggression.

Most Respectfully,
R

The establish a Jewish State was recommended and approved by the UN, not an external influence.

Only if the plan was approved by both sides.

No land was transferred to Israel. Israel declared its state inside Palestine where it remains.
 
P F Tinmore, et al,

I think there is a misunderstanding as to the "right of self-determination" and what it is.

Good point. Rights are inherent not granted.
(COMMENT)

The right of "Self-Determination" is "the right of all peoples to be able to determine their own political future and also to be able to pursue their economic, social and cultural development and ambitions;" a freely expressed will of the peoples, not to be confused with secession of the state.

For a new state to be formed from another state there needs to be "consent of the parent state." The UN, as the trustee of the territory, acted on behalf of the World Body as that parent by Treaty and Mandate. The sovereignty of the existing State of Israel must be respected and its territorial integrity must be upheld. Palestinian Self-determination must duly comply with the principles of sovereignty exercised by Israel.
Nothing in the Palestinian "right of self-determination" should be construed as authorizing or encouraging any action which would dismember or impair the State of Israel with regard to its territorial integrity or the political unity. And by the same token, Israel has not, without just cause - demonstrated by threat, intimidation and direct lethal hostile action, limited the ability of the Palestinian to determine its own political future and pursue their economic, social and cultural development and ambitions; except as has been necessary to protect and defend the sovereignty of the existing State of Israel.

What does this mean in practical terms?

The Palestinians have NO inherent right to the territory, under the boundaries established by the former British Mandate. That territory is NOT an indivisible territorial unit. The Arab-Palestinian people possess no legal right to this territory (the entirety) and have NO right to determine the destiny already under the sovereignty of the State of Israel.​

Most Respectfully,
R

Again, you go off on a tangent...Show us the docs that the UN took over Sovereignty as a de-facto "Parent State, for the ME?"

Sure would like to see what the West concocted?


The second point, what Israeli Sovereignty over Palestine. Are you making this stuff up?

Good point. When did the UN obtain sovereignty over Palestine?

If it was UN territory why didn't they just give it to the Jews without the Palestinian's consent?
 
P F Tinmore, et al,

There was no direct complaint from Israel. The outbreak of hostilities was immediately recognized by a number of operating agencies and commissions in the region.

You say that the Palestinians are violating the "sovereignty and territorial integrity" of Israel.

When was there a complaint filed against the Palestinians and what was the outcome?
(COMMENT)

The outbreak of hostilities was confirmed by a number of Arab States.
The Jewish Agency suggested an Armistice through the UN Truce Commission (S/759 20 May 1948).

The UN Security Council Resolution 50 of 29 May 1948 [S/801]

S/RES/50 (1948) S/801 29 May 1948 said:
The Security Council,

Desiring to bring about a cessation of hostilities in Palestine without prejudice to the rights, claims and position of either Arabs or Jews,

1. Calls upon all Governments and authorities concerned to order a cessation of all acts of armed force for a period of four weeks;

2. Calls upon all Governments and authorities concerned to undertake that they will not introduce fighting personnel into Palestine, Egypt, Iraq, Lebanon, Saudi Arabia, Syria, Transjordan and Yemen during the cease-fire;

3. Calls upon all Governments and authorities concerned, should men of military age be introduced into countries or territories under their control, to undertake not to mobilize or submit them to military training during the cease-fire;

4. Calls upon all Governments and authorities concerned to refrain from importing or exporting war material into or to Palestine, Egypt, Iraq, Lebanon, Saudi Arabia, Syria, Transjordan or Yemen during the cease-fire;

5. Urges all Governments and authorities concerned to take every possible precaution for the protection of the Holy Places and of the City of Jerusalem, including access to all shrines and sanctuaries for the purpose of worship by those who have an established right to visit and worship at them;

6. Instructs the United Nations Mediator in Palestine, in concert with the Truce Commission, to supervise the observance of the above provisions, and decides that they shall be provided with a sufficient number of military observers;

7. Instructs the United Nations Mediator to make contact with all parties as soon as the cease-fire is in force with a view to carrying out his functions as determined by the General Assembly;

8. Calls upon all concerned to give the greatest possible assistance to the United Nations Mediator;

9. Instructs the United Nations Mediator to make a weekly report to the Security Council during the cease-fire;

10. Invites the States members of the Arab League and the Jewish and Arab authorities in Palestine to communicate their acceptance of this resolution to the Security Council not later than 6 p.m. New York standard time on 1 June 1948;

11. Decides that if the present resolution is rejected by either party or by both, or if, having been accepted, it is subsequently repudiated or violated, the situation in Palestine will be reconsidered with a view to action under Chapter VII of the Charter of the United Nations;

12. Calls upon all Governments to take all possible steps to assist in the implementation of this resolution.​

SOURCE: S/RES/50 (1948) S/801 29 May 1948

Arab Political position as noted by the Arab Higher Committee (AHC):

  • UN Question (F) Have Jewish forces penetrated into the territory in which you claim to have authority?
    • AHC Answer: Arabs claim to have authority over all the area of Palestine as being the political representative of the overwhelming majority of the population. They regard Palestine a one unit. All forces that oppose majority wherever they may be are regarded as unlawful.
(OUTCOME)

During the course of establishing the Armistice Lines, it was determined that Israel, as a outcome of with Arab military aggressors, had established control of nearly 50% of the territory originally allotted, under the Partition Plan, for the Arab State.

Most Respectfully,
R
 
Last edited:
P F Tinmore, et al,

There was no direct complaint from Israel. The outbreak of hostilities was immediately recognized by a number of operating agencies and commissions in the region.

You say that the Palestinians are violating the "sovereignty and territorial integrity" of Israel.

When was there a complaint filed against the Palestinians and what was the outcome?
(COMMENT)

The outbreak of hostilities was confirmed by a number of Arab States.
The Jewish Agency suggested an Armistice through the UN Truce Commission (S/759 20 May 1948).

The UN Security Council Resolution 50 of 29 May 1948 [S/801]

S/RES/50 (1948) S/801 29 May 1948 said:
The Security Council,

Desiring to bring about a cessation of hostilities in Palestine without prejudice to the rights, claims and position of either Arabs or Jews,

1. Calls upon all Governments and authorities concerned to order a cessation of all acts of armed force for a period of four weeks;

2. Calls upon all Governments and authorities concerned to undertake that they will not introduce fighting personnel into Palestine, Egypt, Iraq, Lebanon, Saudi Arabia, Syria, Transjordan and Yemen during the cease-fire;

3. Calls upon all Governments and authorities concerned, should men of military age be introduced into countries or territories under their control, to undertake not to mobilize or submit them to military training during the cease-fire;

4. Calls upon all Governments and authorities concerned to refrain from importing or exporting war material into or to Palestine, Egypt, Iraq, Lebanon, Saudi Arabia, Syria, Transjordan or Yemen during the cease-fire;

5. Urges all Governments and authorities concerned to take every possible precaution for the protection of the Holy Places and of the City of Jerusalem, including access to all shrines and sanctuaries for the purpose of worship by those who have an established right to visit and worship at them;

6. Instructs the United Nations Mediator in Palestine, in concert with the Truce Commission, to supervise the observance of the above provisions, and decides that they shall be provided with a sufficient number of military observers;

7. Instructs the United Nations Mediator to make contact with all parties as soon as the cease-fire is in force with a view to carrying out his functions as determined by the General Assembly;

8. Calls upon all concerned to give the greatest possible assistance to the United Nations Mediator;

9. Instructs the United Nations Mediator to make a weekly report to the Security Council during the cease-fire;

10. Invites the States members of the Arab League and the Jewish and Arab authorities in Palestine to communicate their acceptance of this resolution to the Security Council not later than 6 p.m. New York standard time on 1 June 1948;

11. Decides that if the present resolution is rejected by either party or by both, or if, having been accepted, it is subsequently repudiated or violated, the situation in Palestine will be reconsidered with a view to action under Chapter VII of the Charter of the United Nations;

12. Calls upon all Governments to take all possible steps to assist in the implementation of this resolution.​

SOURCE: S/RES/50 (1948) S/801 29 May 1948

Arab Political position as noted by the Arab Higher Committee (AHC):

  • UN Question (F) Have Jewish forces penetrated into the territory in which you claim to have authority?
    • AHC Answer: Arabs claim to have authority over all the area of Palestine as being the political representative of the overwhelming majority of the population. They regard Palestine a one unit. All forces that oppose majority wherever they may be are regarded as unlawful.
(OUTCOME)

During the course of establishing the Armistice Lines, it was determined that Israel, as a outcome of with Arab military aggressors, had established control of nearly 50% of the territory originally allotted, under the Partition Plan, for the Arab State.

Most Respectfully,
R

Interesting that they did not mention Israel. Palestine was mentioned though.

BTW, the armistice lines were lines that were not to be crossed by military forces.

They specifically were not to be considered political or territorial boundaries. They did not define any state or territory.
 
P F Tinmore, et al,

I don't necessarily disagree with anything you said.

Interesting that they did not mention Israel. Palestine was mentioned though.

BTW, the armistice lines were lines that were not to be crossed by military forces.

They specifically were not to be considered political or territorial boundaries. They did not define any state or territory.
(COMMENT)

I think that everyone understood what happened, from the position the Arab Higher Committee had taken.
  • Israel completed the preparatory steps to independence, IAW GA/RES/181(II).
  • Israel declared independence as coordinated with the UN Palestine Commission.
  • The Arab League & Arab Higher Committee did not like the outcome.
  • The Arab League & Arab Higher Committee opened up Hostilities to take by military force, the territory they unilateral declared as theirs.
  • The military forces of The Arab League & irregular forces or the Arab Higher Committee had unsuccessful engagements and lost control of approximately 50% of the territory allocated by UN recommendation to the Arab State.
It is fairly plain.

Now after 60 years of conflict, the successors of the Arab Higher Committee are still trying to overturn the UN decisions through war and terrorism.

Remember, it was the Arab that tried to take is all, not the Israeli.

Most Respectfully,
R
 
Last edited:
P F Tinmore, et al,

I don't necessarily disagree with anything you said.

Interesting that they did not mention Israel. Palestine was mentioned though.

BTW, the armistice lines were lines that were not to be crossed by military forces.

They specifically were not to be considered political or territorial boundaries. They did not define any state or territory.
(COMMENT)

I think that everyone understood what happened, from the position the Arab Higher Committee had taken.
  • Israel completed the preparatory steps to independence, IAW GA/RES/181(II).
  • Israel declared independence as coordinated with the UN Palestine Commission.
  • The Arab League & Arab Higher Committee did not like the outcome.
  • The Arab League & Arab Higher Committee opened up Hostilities to take by military force, the territory they unilateral declared as theirs.
  • The military forces of The Arab League & irregular forces or the Arab Higher Committee had unsuccessful engagements and lost control of approximately 50% of the territory allocated by UN recommendation to the Arab State.
It is fairly plain.

Now after 60 years of conflict, the successors of the Arab Higher Committee are still trying to overturn the UN decisions through war and terrorism.

Remember, it was the Arab that tried to take is all, not the Israeli.

Most Respectfully,
R
I'm really getting sick of your efforts to put lipstick on a pig!

This is the whole story (in a nutshell), according to the UN, of how this conflict began...

The origins of the Palestine problem as an international issue, however, lie in events occurring towards the end of the First World War. These events led to a League of Nations decision to place Palestine under the administration of Great Britain as the Mandatory Power under the Mandates System adopted by the League. In principle, the Mandate was meant to be in the nature of a transitory phase until Palestine attained the status of a fully independent nation, a status provisionally recognized in the League's Covenant, but in fact the Mandate's historical evolution did not result in the emergence of Palestine as an independent nation.

The decision on the Mandate did not take into account the wishes of the people of Palestine, despite the Covenant's requirements that "the wishes of these communities must be a principal consideration in the selection of the Mandatory". This assumed special significance because, almost five years before receiving the mandate from the League of Nations, the British Government had given commitments to the Zionist Organization regarding the establishment of a Jewish national home in Palestine, for which Zionist leaders had pressed a claim of "historical connection" since their ancestors had lived in Palestine two thousand years earlier before dispersing in the "Diaspora".

During the period of the Mandate, the Zionist Organization worked to secure the establishment of a Jewish national home in Palestine. The indigenous people of Palestine, whose forefathers had inhabited the land for virtually the two preceding millennia felt this design to be a violation of their natural and inalienable rights. They also viewed it as an infringement of assurances of independence given by the Allied Powers to Arab leaders in return for their support during the war. The result was mounting resistance to the Mandate by Palestinian Arabs, followed by resort to violence by the Jewish community as the Second World War drew to a close.

After a quarter of a century of the Mandate, Great Britain submitted what had become "the Palestine problem" to the United Nations on the ground that the Mandatory Power was faced with conflicting obligations that had proved irreconcilable. At this point, when the United Nations itself was hardly two years old, violence ravaged Palestine. After investigating various alternatives the United Nations proposed the partitioning of Palestine into two independent States, one Palestinian Arab and the other Jewish, with Jerusalem internationalized. The partition plan did not bring peace to Palestine, and the prevailing violence spread into a Middle East war halted only by United Nations action. One of the two States envisaged in the partition plan proclaimed its independence as Israel and, in a series of successive wars, its territorial control expanded to occupy all of Palestine. The Palestinian Arab State envisaged in the partition plan never appeared on the world's map and, over the following 30 years, the Palestinian people have struggled for their lost rights.
The entire purpose of the Mandate was for two states and an international Jerusalem.

Are there two states? No.

Is Jerusalem and international city? No.

The Mandate also acknowledged that the indigenous people, who had been living there for 2000 years, had inalienable rights to that land.

Have you acknowledged those inalienable rights to that land? No.

And according to the UN, Zionists increased their territory through violence and jewish terrorism. Bottom line, you took what wasn't yours and you're still holding onto it. Over 60 years and 100 resolutions later, that is still the position of every nation on the planet.

You cannot produce one country that will back you up and say that's your land!
 
P F Tinmore, et al,

I don't necessarily disagree with anything you said.

Interesting that they did not mention Israel. Palestine was mentioned though.

BTW, the armistice lines were lines that were not to be crossed by military forces.

They specifically were not to be considered political or territorial boundaries. They did not define any state or territory.
(COMMENT)

I think that everyone understood what happened, from the position the Arab Higher Committee had taken.
  • Israel completed the preparatory steps to independence, IAW GA/RES/181(II).
  • Israel declared independence as coordinated with the UN Palestine Commission.
  • The Arab League & Arab Higher Committee did not like the outcome.
  • The Arab League & Arab Higher Committee opened up Hostilities to take by military force, the territory they unilateral declared as theirs.
  • The military forces of The Arab League & irregular forces or the Arab Higher Committee had unsuccessful engagements and lost control of approximately 50% of the territory allocated by UN recommendation to the Arab State.
It is fairly plain.

Now after 60 years of conflict, the successors of the Arab Higher Committee are still trying to overturn the UN decisions through war and terrorism.

Remember, it was the Arab that tried to take is all, not the Israeli.

Most Respectfully,
R

Was it Begin or Barak or both that said: "If I were a Palestinian, I would be a terrorist?"

What human being would not defend his indigenous home?
 
Billo_Really; et al,

Humm, reality is stranger than fiction.

Are there two states? No.

Is Jerusalem and international city? No.

The Mandate also acknowledged that the indigenous people, who had been living there for 2000 years, had inalienable rights to that land.

Have you acknowledged those inalienable rights to that land? No.

And according to the UN, Zionists increased their territory through violence and jewish terrorism. Bottom line, you took what wasn't yours and you're still holding onto it. Over 60 years and 100 resolutions later, that is still the position of every nation on the planet.

You cannot produce one country that will back you up and say that's your land!
(ANSWERS)

Billo_Really: Are there two states? No.

ANSWER: Correct --- and WHY?
As regards the Arab Higher Committee, the following telegraphic response was received by the Secretary-General on 19 January:

“ARAB HIGHER COMMITTEE IS DETERMINED PERSIST IN REJECTION PARTITION AND IN REFUSAL RECOGNIZE UNO RESOLUTION THIS RESPECT AND ANYTHING DERIVING THEREFROM. FOR THESE REASONS IT IS UNABLE ACCEPT INVITATION”

Arab Higher Committee to the questions addressed to them by the Security Council: said:
Q: Have Jewish forces penetrated into the territory in which you claim to have authority?

Answer: Arabs claim to have authority over all the area of Palestine as being the political representative of the overwhelming majority of the population. They regard Palestine a one unit. All forces that oppose majority wherever they may be are regarded as unlawful.​

SOURCE: S/775 24 May 1948
SOURCE: A/AC.21/7 29 January 1948

Billo_Really: Is Jerusalem and international city? No.

ANSWER: Correct --- and WHY?
Jerusalem was Occupied by Jordan from 1948 until 1967.​

Palestinian Declaration of Independence said:
The Palestine National Council hereby declares, in the Name of God and on behalf of the Palestinian Arab people, the establishment of the State of Palestine in the land of Palestine with its capital at Jerusalem.

SOURCE: A/43/827 S/20278 18 November 1988

Billo_Really:
The Mandate also acknowledged that the indigenous people, who had been living there for 2000 years, had inalienable rights to that land.

Have you acknowledged those inalienable rights to that land? No​
.

ANSWER: Wrong --- and WHY?
The Mandate does speaks to the "civil and religious rights of all the inhabitants of Palestine" (not inalienable right of indigenous people to that land) and have written commentary several times concerning the fact that the civil rights to land ownership is not the same as sovereignty over the land.​

Billo_Really:
And according to the UN, Zionists increased their territory through violence and jewish terrorism. Bottom line, you took what wasn't yours and you're still holding onto it. Over 60 years and 100 resolutions later, that is still the position of every nation on the planet.​

ANSWER: Disagree --- and WHY?
The State of Israel has not gained (annexed) any Arab territory (excluding a piece of Jerusalem) through either the 1967 War or the 1973 War. The Occupied Territory is has not been annexed.​

Most Respectfully,
R
 
P F Tinmore, et al,

I don't necessarily disagree with anything you said.

Interesting that they did not mention Israel. Palestine was mentioned though.

BTW, the armistice lines were lines that were not to be crossed by military forces.

They specifically were not to be considered political or territorial boundaries. They did not define any state or territory.
(COMMENT)

I think that everyone understood what happened, from the position the Arab Higher Committee had taken.
  • Israel completed the preparatory steps to independence, IAW GA/RES/181(II).
  • Israel declared independence as coordinated with the UN Palestine Commission.
  • The Arab League & Arab Higher Committee did not like the outcome.
  • The Arab League & Arab Higher Committee opened up Hostilities to take by military force, the territory they unilateral declared as theirs.
  • The military forces of The Arab League & irregular forces or the Arab Higher Committee had unsuccessful engagements and lost control of approximately 50% of the territory allocated by UN recommendation to the Arab State.
It is fairly plain.

Now after 60 years of conflict, the successors of the Arab Higher Committee are still trying to overturn the UN decisions through war and terrorism.

Remember, it was the Arab that tried to take is all, not the Israeli.

Most Respectfully,
R

Tell us under what Moral authority did the Arabs have to share anything, It had been under their control by Islamic Regimes for two millennia which protected the residents left there since the Diaspora.

Although I dearly sympathize with the plight of the Jews after WWll, why did the Arabs have to pay for atrocities against Jews by European Christians?

That's really the Moral crux of the matter. Two wrongs have never made a right.
 
P F Tinmore, et al,

I don't necessarily disagree with anything you said.

Interesting that they did not mention Israel. Palestine was mentioned though.

BTW, the armistice lines were lines that were not to be crossed by military forces.

They specifically were not to be considered political or territorial boundaries. They did not define any state or territory.
(COMMENT)

I think that everyone understood what happened, from the position the Arab Higher Committee had taken.
  • Israel completed the preparatory steps to independence, IAW GA/RES/181(II).
Maybe, but the UN did not. The UN did not establish borders and transfer land for the Jewish state. An absolute necessity in the creation of Israel.

  • Israel declared independence as coordinated with the UN Palestine Commission.
Not true. When Israel declared independence it had already violated the rights of the non Jewish population, violated the proposed borders, and violated the UN city of Jerusalem.

  • The Arab League & Arab Higher Committee did not like the outcome.
  • The Arab League & Arab Higher Committee opened up Hostilities to take by military force, the territory they unilateral declared as theirs.
  • The military forces of The Arab League & irregular forces or the Arab Higher Committee had unsuccessful engagements and lost control of approximately 50% of the territory allocated by UN recommendation to the Arab State.
It is fairly plain.

Now after 60 years of conflict, the successors of the Arab Higher Committee are still trying to overturn the UN decisions through war and terrorism.

Not true. It was the UN that abandoned resolution 181 without implementing it.

Remember, it was the Arab that tried to take is all, not the Israeli.

Ridiculous statement. The Palestinians wanting to "take" all of Palestine.:cuckoo:

Most Respectfully,
R
 

New Topics

Forum List

Back
Top