The NEWER Official Discussion Thread for the creation of Israel, the UN and the British Mandate

[Shusha]

In 1948 about 80 Palestinian leaders from around the state declared independence from the Mandate for its own people, on its own land, and inside its own international borders.

Being under occupation does not negate a state. In 1949 the UN divided Palestine into three areas of occupation. Palestine has been occupied ever since.

Palestine has the right to defend its integrity and independence.

Declarations of independence don't have to be recognized to be valid, but they do have to be effective. No government, no control, no sovereignty over territory or people = no State.

 

[Sixties Fan]

In 1948 about 80 Palestinian leaders from around the state declared independence from the Mandate for its own people, on its own land, and inside its own international borders.

Being under occupation does not negate a state. In 1949 the UN divided Palestine into three areas of occupation. Palestine has been occupied ever since.

Palestine has the right to defend its integrity and independence.

Declarations of independence don't have to be recognized to be valid, but they do have to be effective. No government, no control, no sovereignty over territory or people = no State.

Not counting that they did so against the Mandate, which they refused twice, in 1937 and in 1948.

1) An Arab State was never a part of the original Mandate.
2) The extreme Arab Leaders ( Al Husseini ) refused any creation of a Jewish State on the Mandate created for them.
3) The extreme Arab leaders did not have an interest in any Arab State in the Mandate for Palestine in 1937, after so many riots, or in 1947 when the Partition was offered.
4) We do know that the Arabs had no intention of allowing any Jewish State to exist.
5) All other three Mandates were ARAB ONLY in nature, regardless of the indigenous people living in them, and the Arabs wanted the Mandate for Palestine to be equally Arab only with indigenous people living as they had done for the past 1300 years. UNDER Muslim power, be it Kurdish, Arab, or Turkish.

 

[P F Tinmore]

In 1948 about 80 Palestinian leaders from around the state declared independence from the Mandate for its own people, on its own land, and inside its own international borders.

Being under occupation does not negate a state. In 1949 the UN divided Palestine into three areas of occupation. Palestine has been occupied ever since.

Palestine has the right to defend its integrity and independence.

Declarations of independence don't have to be recognized to be valid, but they do have to be effective. No government, no control, no sovereignty over territory or people = no State.

So, foreigners with guns can prevent the people's right to declare independence.

Where is that legal?

Link?

 

[Sixties Fan]

In 1948 about 80 Palestinian leaders from around the state declared independence from the Mandate for its own people, on its own land, and inside its own international borders.

Being under occupation does not negate a state. In 1949 the UN divided Palestine into three areas of occupation. Palestine has been occupied ever since.

Palestine has the right to defend its integrity and independence.

Declarations of independence don't have to be recognized to be valid, but they do have to be effective. No government, no control, no sovereignty over territory or people = no State.

So, foreigners with guns can prevent the people's right to declare independence.

Where is that legal?

Link?

LOL

That is EXACTLY what foreigners called Arabs attempted to do in order to prevent the Jews from declaring Independence until May of 1948.

Stop making me laugh.....Please....

 

[Shusha]

So, foreigners with guns can prevent the people's right to declare independence.

Where is that legal?

Link?

Every word of that is wrong.

First, the Jewish people are not foreigners in their own homeland.

Second, it wasn't (and isn't) guns which gave the Jewish people the right to self-determination in their own homeland -- it is the inherent right of all peoples to self-determination and sovereignty. The guns only became necessary when hostile Arabs decided to prevent the Jewish people from exercising their inherent, inviolable right to self-determination, as confirmed and written in international law by the international community from 1920 onward. In fact, you are (again) inverting the truth. It is the Arabs who are STILL (!) attempting to use guns and violence to reverse and erase the actual, declared and recognized independence of Israel. With absolutely zero effect, except to entrench the Jewish peoples need for safety and security.

Third, no one is preventing the Arab Palestinians from declaring independence. In fact, they HAVE declared independence, in 1988. Their declaration is complete. And look! no one prevented it. In fact, Hamas can declare independence in Gaza today, tomorrow or next week. They meet the necessary criteria of: government, people, territory and treating with other states.

And to answer your question about legality: the accepted legal standard in the world where different, distinct ethnic/cultural groups within a territory are each vying for self-determination and sovereignty is to partition the territory. In other words, the accepted legal standard is that self-determination trumps territorial integrity. Witness former Ottoman Empire, Yugoslavia, Czechoslovakia, Sudan, etc, etc, etc. Its only the Arab Palestinians who insist on special treatment. Why is that, do you think?

 

[P F Tinmore]

So, foreigners with guns can prevent the people's right to declare independence.

Where is that legal?

Link?

Every word of that is wrong.

First, the Jewish people are not foreigners in their own homeland.

Second, it wasn't (and isn't) guns which gave the Jewish people the right to self-determination in their own homeland -- it is the inherent right of all peoples to self-determination and sovereignty. The guns only became necessary when hostile Arabs decided to prevent the Jewish people from exercising their inherent, inviolable right to self-determination, as confirmed and written in international law by the international community from 1920 onward. In fact, you are (again) inverting the truth. It is the Arabs who are STILL (!) attempting to use guns and violence to reverse and erase the actual, declared and recognized independence of Israel. With absolutely zero effect, except to entrench the Jewish peoples need for safety and security.

Third, no one is preventing the Arab Palestinians from declaring independence. In fact, they HAVE declared independence, in 1988. Their declaration is complete. And look! no one prevented it. In fact, Hamas can declare independence in Gaza today, tomorrow or next week. They meet the necessary criteria of: government, people, territory and treating with other states.

And to answer your question about legality: the accepted legal standard in the world where different, distinct ethnic/cultural groups within a territory are each vying for self-determination and sovereignty is to partition the territory. In other words, the accepted legal standard is that self-determination trumps territorial integrity. Witness former Ottoman Empire, Yugoslavia, Czechoslovakia, Sudan, etc, etc, etc. Its only the Arab Palestinians who insist on special treatment. Why is that, do you think?

So,when did the Zionists change from colonialism to self determination?

 

[P F Tinmore]

So, foreigners with guns can prevent the people's right to declare independence.

Where is that legal?

Link?

Every word of that is wrong.

First, the Jewish people are not foreigners in their own homeland.

Second, it wasn't (and isn't) guns which gave the Jewish people the right to self-determination in their own homeland -- it is the inherent right of all peoples to self-determination and sovereignty. The guns only became necessary when hostile Arabs decided to prevent the Jewish people from exercising their inherent, inviolable right to self-determination, as confirmed and written in international law by the international community from 1920 onward. In fact, you are (again) inverting the truth. It is the Arabs who are STILL (!) attempting to use guns and violence to reverse and erase the actual, declared and recognized independence of Israel. With absolutely zero effect, except to entrench the Jewish peoples need for safety and security.

Third, no one is preventing the Arab Palestinians from declaring independence. In fact, they HAVE declared independence, in 1988. Their declaration is complete. And look! no one prevented it. In fact, Hamas can declare independence in Gaza today, tomorrow or next week. They meet the necessary criteria of: government, people, territory and treating with other states.

And to answer your question about legality: the accepted legal standard in the world where different, distinct ethnic/cultural groups within a territory are each vying for self-determination and sovereignty is to partition the territory. In other words, the accepted legal standard is that self-determination trumps territorial integrity. Witness former Ottoman Empire, Yugoslavia, Czechoslovakia, Sudan, etc, etc, etc. Its only the Arab Palestinians who insist on special treatment. Why is that, do you think?

Second, it wasn't (and isn't) guns which gave the Jewish people the right to self-determination in their own homeland -- it is the inherent right of all peoples to self-determination and sovereignty.

Yes they did. They moved in under the gun of the British military.

Nobody has the "right" to violate the rights of others. The Zionists moved in from Europe, under the gun, and violated the rights of the Palestinians. That is an act of aggression.

 

[Sixties Fan]

So, foreigners with guns can prevent the people's right to declare independence.

Where is that legal?

Link?

Every word of that is wrong.

First, the Jewish people are not foreigners in their own homeland.

Second, it wasn't (and isn't) guns which gave the Jewish people the right to self-determination in their own homeland -- it is the inherent right of all peoples to self-determination and sovereignty. The guns only became necessary when hostile Arabs decided to prevent the Jewish people from exercising their inherent, inviolable right to self-determination, as confirmed and written in international law by the international community from 1920 onward. In fact, you are (again) inverting the truth. It is the Arabs who are STILL (!) attempting to use guns and violence to reverse and erase the actual, declared and recognized independence of Israel. With absolutely zero effect, except to entrench the Jewish peoples need for safety and security.

Third, no one is preventing the Arab Palestinians from declaring independence. In fact, they HAVE declared independence, in 1988. Their declaration is complete. And look! no one prevented it. In fact, Hamas can declare independence in Gaza today, tomorrow or next week. They meet the necessary criteria of: government, people, territory and treating with other states.

And to answer your question about legality: the accepted legal standard in the world where different, distinct ethnic/cultural groups within a territory are each vying for self-determination and sovereignty is to partition the territory. In other words, the accepted legal standard is that self-determination trumps territorial integrity. Witness former Ottoman Empire, Yugoslavia, Czechoslovakia, Sudan, etc, etc, etc. Its only the Arab Palestinians who insist on special treatment. Why is that, do you think?

So,when did the Zionists change from colonialism to self determination?

Please save yourself from your very dumb questions.
You do know the answer, and that it was never colonialism on the part of the Jews, it was reconstituting their Nation on their ancestral home.

Stop demonizing and delegitimizing the indigenous people of Ancient Canaan, Israel.

 

[Sixties Fan]

So, foreigners with guns can prevent the people's right to declare independence.

Where is that legal?

Link?

Every word of that is wrong.

First, the Jewish people are not foreigners in their own homeland.

Second, it wasn't (and isn't) guns which gave the Jewish people the right to self-determination in their own homeland -- it is the inherent right of all peoples to self-determination and sovereignty. The guns only became necessary when hostile Arabs decided to prevent the Jewish people from exercising their inherent, inviolable right to self-determination, as confirmed and written in international law by the international community from 1920 onward. In fact, you are (again) inverting the truth. It is the Arabs who are STILL (!) attempting to use guns and violence to reverse and erase the actual, declared and recognized independence of Israel. With absolutely zero effect, except to entrench the Jewish peoples need for safety and security.

Third, no one is preventing the Arab Palestinians from declaring independence. In fact, they HAVE declared independence, in 1988. Their declaration is complete. And look! no one prevented it. In fact, Hamas can declare independence in Gaza today, tomorrow or next week. They meet the necessary criteria of: government, people, territory and treating with other states.

And to answer your question about legality: the accepted legal standard in the world where different, distinct ethnic/cultural groups within a territory are each vying for self-determination and sovereignty is to partition the territory. In other words, the accepted legal standard is that self-determination trumps territorial integrity. Witness former Ottoman Empire, Yugoslavia, Czechoslovakia, Sudan, etc, etc, etc. Its only the Arab Palestinians who insist on special treatment. Why is that, do you think?

Second, it wasn't (and isn't) guns which gave the Jewish people the right to self-determination in their own homeland -- it is the inherent right of all peoples to self-determination and sovereignty.

Yes they did. They moved in under the gun of the British military.

Nobody has the "right" to violate the rights of others. The Zionists moved in from Europe, under the gun, and violated the rights of the Palestinians. That is an act of aggression.

You are a joke.

Jews bought land, and that very same land, in Gaza and TransJordan was taken from them by force from 1920 to 1948.

And that also includes all the land they bought in Judea and Samaria.


Go have some fun, instead of playing the advocate for thieves and murderers.

 

[AzogtheDefiler]

There was never such a country as Palestine

 

[P F Tinmore]

So, foreigners with guns can prevent the people's right to declare independence.

Where is that legal?

Link?

Every word of that is wrong.

First, the Jewish people are not foreigners in their own homeland.

Second, it wasn't (and isn't) guns which gave the Jewish people the right to self-determination in their own homeland -- it is the inherent right of all peoples to self-determination and sovereignty. The guns only became necessary when hostile Arabs decided to prevent the Jewish people from exercising their inherent, inviolable right to self-determination, as confirmed and written in international law by the international community from 1920 onward. In fact, you are (again) inverting the truth. It is the Arabs who are STILL (!) attempting to use guns and violence to reverse and erase the actual, declared and recognized independence of Israel. With absolutely zero effect, except to entrench the Jewish peoples need for safety and security.

Third, no one is preventing the Arab Palestinians from declaring independence. In fact, they HAVE declared independence, in 1988. Their declaration is complete. And look! no one prevented it. In fact, Hamas can declare independence in Gaza today, tomorrow or next week. They meet the necessary criteria of: government, people, territory and treating with other states.

And to answer your question about legality: the accepted legal standard in the world where different, distinct ethnic/cultural groups within a territory are each vying for self-determination and sovereignty is to partition the territory. In other words, the accepted legal standard is that self-determination trumps territorial integrity. Witness former Ottoman Empire, Yugoslavia, Czechoslovakia, Sudan, etc, etc, etc. Its only the Arab Palestinians who insist on special treatment. Why is that, do you think?

So,when did the Zionists change from colonialism to self determination?

Please save yourself from your very dumb questions.
You do know the answer, and that it was never colonialism on the part of the Jews, it was reconstituting their Nation on their ancestral home.

Stop demonizing and delegitimizing the indigenous people of Ancient Canaan, Israel.

You need to read up. And stay off of that Israeli propaganda bullshit.

Both the British and the Zionists called their project colonialism all through the Mandate period.

 

[P F Tinmore]

There was never such a country as Palestine

Link?

 

[AzogtheDefiler]

There was never such a country as Palestine

Link?

Who was the President of Palestine in 1946? LOL don’t need a link for something that doesn’t exist

 

[P F Tinmore]

There was never such a country as Palestine

Link?

Who was the President of Palestine in 1946? LOL don’t need a link for something that doesn’t exist

Why did you say it if you can't prove it?

 

[AzogtheDefiler]

There was never such a country as Palestine

Link?

Who was the President of Palestine in 1946? LOL don’t need a link for something that doesn’t exist

Why did you say it if you can't prove it?

I did prove it. Unless it was a country without a President? LOL

 

[AzogtheDefiler]

There was never such a country as Palestine

Link?

Who was the President of Palestine in 1946? LOL don’t need a link for something that doesn’t exist

Why did you say it if you can't prove it?

The Patriots won the last SB. I don’t need a link to prove it. Palestine never existed as a country. I dont Need a link to prove it. Try to follow along.

 

[Rehmani]

There was never such a country as Palestine

Link?

Who was the President of Palestine in 1946? LOL don’t need a link for something that doesn’t exist

Where was Israel for 4000 years?

 

[AzogtheDefiler]

There was never such a country as Palestine

Link?

Who was the President of Palestine in 1946? LOL don’t need a link for something that doesn’t exist

Where was Israel for 4000 years?

Who cares about 4K yrs lol.

 

[Rehmani]

There was never such a country as Palestine

Link?

Who was the President of Palestine in 1946? LOL don’t need a link for something that doesn’t exist

Why did you say it if you can't prove it?

The Patriots won the last SB. I don’t need a link to prove it. Palestine never existed as a country. I dont Need a link to prove it. Try to follow along.

Was Israel exist?
Israel never ever exist in 4000 years of history. Means you don't have prove.

 

[Rehmani]

There was never such a country as Palestine

Link?

Who was the President of Palestine in 1946? LOL don’t need a link for something that doesn’t exist

Where was Israel for 4000 years?

Who cares about 4K yrs lol.

Lol like you don't.