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

[theliq]

P F Tinmore, et al,

Again we're back to this.

It was Palestine.

The Palestinians had the right to say no. They did and there was no more partition.

(OBSERVATION)

Point # 1: Any dispute relating to the application or the interpretation of this declaration shall be referred, at the request of either party, to the International Court of Justice, unless the parties agree to another mode of settlement.

• The Palestinians did not participate with the process; formally rejecting the process in January 1948. The Arab Palestinians never asked for dispute resolution at the ICJ. [SOURCE: Part C - General Provisions, Chapter 4, Resolution 181(II)]
​

Point #2: When the independence of either the Arab or the Jewish State as envisaged in this plan has become effective and the declaration and undertaking, as envisaged in this plan, have been signed by either of them, sympathetic consideration should be given to its application for admission to membership in the United Nations in accordance with Article 4 of the Charter of the United Nations. (SOURCE: Part I Section F)

Point #3: During today's brief meeting, Dr. Eduardo Morgan (Panama) said that this resolution of the Assembly merely "relieves responsibility. The Commission has not been dissolved. In fact the resolution of last November 29 has been implemented." (SOURCE: UN Department of Public Information Press and Publications Bureau PAL/169 17 May 1948.)

Point #4: The Arab Palestinians used a very similar process.

• Pursuant to the resolutions of the Arab Summit Conferences and on the basis of the international legitimacy embodied in the resolutions of the United Nations since 1947, and
Through the exercise by the Palestinian Arab people of its right to self-determination, political independence and sovereignty over its territory:
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: Palestine Declaration of Independence A/43/827 S/20278 18 November 1988)​

Point #5: For the Palestinian side, and since the strategic decision to forge a peace on the basis of coexistence, resolution 181 (II) has become acceptable. The resolution provides the legal basis for the existence of both the Jewish and the Arab States in Mandated Palestine. According to the resolution, Jerusalem should become a corpus separatum, which the Palestinian side is willing to take into consideration and to reconcile with the Palestinian position that East Jerusalem is part of the Palestinian territory and the capital of the Palestinian State. The Palestinian side adheres to international legitimacy and respects General Assembly resolution 181 (II), as well as Security Council resolution 242 (1967), the implementation of which is the aim of the current Middle East peace process.

Point #6: The PLO-Negotiation Affair, stated: Almost immediately after the Partition Plan vote, organized Jewish militias began military campaigns to seize control over even more of historic Palestine’s territory than the UN partition plan had proposed. On May 14, 1948, after months of military expansion, Zionist forces declared the establishment of the State of Israel. The next day, neighboring Arab armies attacked Israel in reaction to the eruption . However, Israeli forces defeated Arab forces and by the end of the war in 1949, Israel controlled 78 percent of historic Palestine.

(COMMENT)

YES. The Arab Palestinians had the Right to decline the offer. But their declination does not prohibit a Jewish acceptance.

The Arab Palestinians DO NOT have the right to decline the offer extended by the UN -- using that as an excuse to prevent the Jewish Representative from accepting.

You will note that "either" party could accept. Nowhere in the offer does the UN say that "both" must accept. This is again an argument which the Arab Palestinian attempts to use to discredit the the Israeli Declaration of Independence.

Most Respectfully,
R

However, Israeli forces defeated Arab forces and by the end of the war in 1949, Israel controlled 78 percent of historic Palestine.​

Common misperception. Those five Arab armies did not lose the 1948 war.

You're right, Tinmore! It was the World Series they lost.

I missed the connection on that comment Hoss......WTFAYTA...steve

Code, Steve.

Hoss,I note that you often use pics of Mrs Clinton...do you have Sexual Fantasys (sic)about her or what...Just musing Steve

 

[Hossfly]

P F Tinmore, et al,

Again we're back to this.

(OBSERVATION)

Point # 1: Any dispute relating to the application or the interpretation of this declaration shall be referred, at the request of either party, to the International Court of Justice, unless the parties agree to another mode of settlement.

• The Palestinians did not participate with the process; formally rejecting the process in January 1948. The Arab Palestinians never asked for dispute resolution at the ICJ. [SOURCE: Part C - General Provisions, Chapter 4, Resolution 181(II)]
​

Point #2: When the independence of either the Arab or the Jewish State as envisaged in this plan has become effective and the declaration and undertaking, as envisaged in this plan, have been signed by either of them, sympathetic consideration should be given to its application for admission to membership in the United Nations in accordance with Article 4 of the Charter of the United Nations. (SOURCE: Part I Section F)

Point #3: During today's brief meeting, Dr. Eduardo Morgan (Panama) said that this resolution of the Assembly merely "relieves responsibility. The Commission has not been dissolved. In fact the resolution of last November 29 has been implemented." (SOURCE: UN Department of Public Information Press and Publications Bureau PAL/169 17 May 1948.)

Point #4: The Arab Palestinians used a very similar process.

• Pursuant to the resolutions of the Arab Summit Conferences and on the basis of the international legitimacy embodied in the resolutions of the United Nations since 1947, and
Through the exercise by the Palestinian Arab people of its right to self-determination, political independence and sovereignty over its territory:
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: Palestine Declaration of Independence A/43/827 S/20278 18 November 1988)​

Point #5: For the Palestinian side, and since the strategic decision to forge a peace on the basis of coexistence, resolution 181 (II) has become acceptable. The resolution provides the legal basis for the existence of both the Jewish and the Arab States in Mandated Palestine. According to the resolution, Jerusalem should become a corpus separatum, which the Palestinian side is willing to take into consideration and to reconcile with the Palestinian position that East Jerusalem is part of the Palestinian territory and the capital of the Palestinian State. The Palestinian side adheres to international legitimacy and respects General Assembly resolution 181 (II), as well as Security Council resolution 242 (1967), the implementation of which is the aim of the current Middle East peace process.

Point #6: The PLO-Negotiation Affair, stated: Almost immediately after the Partition Plan vote, organized Jewish militias began military campaigns to seize control over even more of historic Palestine’s territory than the UN partition plan had proposed. On May 14, 1948, after months of military expansion, Zionist forces declared the establishment of the State of Israel. The next day, neighboring Arab armies attacked Israel in reaction to the eruption . However, Israeli forces defeated Arab forces and by the end of the war in 1949, Israel controlled 78 percent of historic Palestine.

(COMMENT)

YES. The Arab Palestinians had the Right to decline the offer. But their declination does not prohibit a Jewish acceptance.

The Arab Palestinians DO NOT have the right to decline the offer extended by the UN -- using that as an excuse to prevent the Jewish Representative from accepting.

You will note that "either" party could accept. Nowhere in the offer does the UN say that "both" must accept. This is again an argument which the Arab Palestinian attempts to use to discredit the the Israeli Declaration of Independence.

Most Respectfully,
R

However, Israeli forces defeated Arab forces and by the end of the war in 1949, Israel controlled 78 percent of historic Palestine.​

Common misperception. Those five Arab armies did not lose the 1948 war.

You're right, Tinmore! It was the World Series they lost.

I missed the connection on that comment Hoss......WTFAYTA...steve

Code, Steve.

Hoss,I note that you often use pics of Mrs Clinton...do you have Sexual Fantasys (sic)about her or what...Just musing Steve

I don't have fantasies about Bull Dykes. Just typical hatred of anything Clinton.
But we're getting away from the OP.

 

[montelatici]

However, Israeli forces defeated Arab forces and by the end of the war in 1949, Israel controlled 78 percent of historic Palestine.​

Common misperception. Those five Arab armies did not lose the 1948 war.

You're right, Tinmore! It was the World Series they lost.

I missed the connection on that comment Hoss......WTFAYTA...steve

Code, Steve.

Hoss,I note that you often use pics of Mrs Clinton...do you have Sexual Fantasys (sic)about her or what...Just musing Steve

I don't have fantasies about Bull Dykes. Just typical hatred of anything Clinton.
But we're getting away from the OP.

Wow, another homophobe.

 

[Hossfly]

You're right, Tinmore! It was the World Series they lost.

I missed the connection on that comment Hoss......WTFAYTA...steve

Code, Steve.

Hoss,I note that you often use pics of Mrs Clinton...do you have Sexual Fantasys (sic)about her or what...Just musing Steve

I don't have fantasies about Bull Dykes. Just typical hatred of anything Clinton.
But we're getting away from the OP.

Wow, another homophobe.

You win a seegar, Chuckles!

 

[P F Tinmore]

Challenger, et al,

Two points I would like to make.

I supplied the link to the document Communique twice, so that it was easily referenced. And the quote was exact. In every Special Theater operations, especially in the Middle East, there is a bit of truth.

I did not misrepresent anything. HM made a very good plan and craftily wired cable. I take great exception, given that I gave all references and explained the plan in detail.

I'm surprised that you would make such an accusation. Is that all you can do.

Preparatory Steps to Independence,

What exactly are these specifically and where can I find them within U.N. documents?

(ANSWER)

The "Steps Preparatory to Independence" are to be found in easily Resolution 181 (II). Future government of Palestine, Part I - Section B; 29 November 1948.

In the official media release by the UN and UNPC, Press Release PAL/169 17 May 1948, said in part:

During today's brief meeting, Dr. Eduardo Morgan (Panama) said that this resolution of the Assembly merely "relieves responsibility. The Commission has not been dissolved. In fact the resolution of last November 29 has been implemented."
​

Most Respectfully,
R

Rocco, neither of your links mention Israel.

Recommends
to the United Kingdom, as the mandatory Power for Palestine, and to all other Members of the United Nations the adoption and implementation, with regard to the future government of Palestine, of the Plan of Partition with Economic Union set out below;

Requests that

(a) The Security Council take the necessary measures as provided for in the plan for its implementation;

A/RES/181(II) of 29 November 1947​

Where did the UN get the authority to divide a country and set up governments against the wishes of the people?

Link?

What measures did the Security Council take to implement the plan?

Link?

When was Palestine ever a country?

Link?

Palestine became a "successor state" upon the signing of the Treaty of Lausanne.

The Treaty of Lausanne was a peace treaty signed in Lausanne, Switzerland, on 24 July 1923. Treaty of Lausanne - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia​

Because the Mandate was assigned to Palestine, Palestine had to already exist. Britain had to wait for this to happen before it could come into effect.

The draft of the Mandate for Palestine was formally confirmed by the Council of the League of Nations on 24 July 1922, supplemented via the 16 September 1922 Trans-Jordan memorandum[2][3] and then came into effect on 29 September 1923[2] British Mandate for Palestine (legal instrument) - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia​

When people say that the Mandate was Palestine, that is incorrect. Palestine existed for two months before the Mandate could take effect as a temporarily assigned administration.

 

[theliq]

However, Israeli forces defeated Arab forces and by the end of the war in 1949, Israel controlled 78 percent of historic Palestine.​

Common misperception. Those five Arab armies did not lose the 1948 war.

You're right, Tinmore! It was the World Series they lost.

I missed the connection on that comment Hoss......WTFAYTA...steve

Code, Steve.

Hoss,I note that you often use pics of Mrs Clinton...do you have Sexual Fantasys (sic)about her or what...Just musing Steve

I don't have fantasies about Bull Dykes. Just typical hatred of anything Clinton.
But we're getting away from the OP.

I dunno Hoss,she isn't a Dyke at all,I see your reaction as denial of the secret feelings you have for her,so you wake in the middle of night in a sexual sweat,who cares,just admit the lady turns you on,no shame in that....a song for you friend.I hope it helps...steve.......always caring

 

[RoccoR]

P F Tinmore,

Yah, this is very strange approach.

[

Palestine became a "successor state" upon the signing of the Treaty of Lausanne.

The Treaty of Lausanne was a peace treaty signed in Lausanne, Switzerland, on 24 July 1923. Treaty of Lausanne - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia​

Because the Mandate was assigned to Palestine, Palestine had to already exist. Britain had to wait for this to happen before it could come into effect.

The draft of the Mandate for Palestine was formally confirmed by the Council of the League of Nations on 24 July 1922, supplemented via the 16 September 1922 Trans-Jordan memorandum[2][3] and then came into effect on 29 September 1923[2] British Mandate for Palestine (legal instrument) - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia​

When people say that the Mandate was Palestine, that is incorrect. Palestine existed for two months before the Mandate could take effect as a temporarily assigned administration.

(COMMENT)

It is virtually impossible for Palestine to exist as a defined area before the Mandate. First, Palestine was not a state; either before or after the Treaty. The territory to which the Mandate Applied was an artificial legal entity established for the convenience of the Allied Powers for administration. Prior to the creation of the Mandate, no such Place called Palestine actually existed as a state under the previous sovereignties going back a 1000 years. It was just a regional name; and the boundaries were to be defined by the Allied Powers.

The successor government was the established British Mandatory, not the undefined Palestine. A report to the Council of the League of Nations on the administration of Palestine and Trans-Jordan for the year 1938, tgives the geographic area that defines Palestine to a specific geographical area.

Actually, the Mandate, in the form of the San Remo Convention, existed in 1920. Just because the Mandate was not signed, does not mean it did not have an impact. Reports to the League Council was being made even before the Mandate was formalized. You can this be --- because the magic of the mandate was a creation of the 1919 League which had as its member, the Allied Powers.

••• If the League of Nations and the Allied Powers had actually wanted Palestine, within such boundaries as may be fixed by the Allied Powers, to be a state or nation --- they had all the authority and tools at their disposal. The Territories were surrendered to the Allied Powers (Armistice of Mudros 1918). The Allied Powers created the League of Nations (1919); the Allied Powers were the participants of the San Remo Conventions (1920). The Covenant of the League of Nation was not a limitation or restrictive document to them. Nor were any of the Treaties signed by defeated Enemy Axis Powers.

Most Respectfully,
R

 

[P F Tinmore]

P F Tinmore,

Yah, this is very strange approach.

[

Palestine became a "successor state" upon the signing of the Treaty of Lausanne.

The Treaty of Lausanne was a peace treaty signed in Lausanne, Switzerland, on 24 July 1923. Treaty of Lausanne - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia​

Because the Mandate was assigned to Palestine, Palestine had to already exist. Britain had to wait for this to happen before it could come into effect.

The draft of the Mandate for Palestine was formally confirmed by the Council of the League of Nations on 24 July 1922, supplemented via the 16 September 1922 Trans-Jordan memorandum[2][3] and then came into effect on 29 September 1923[2] British Mandate for Palestine (legal instrument) - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia​

When people say that the Mandate was Palestine, that is incorrect. Palestine existed for two months before the Mandate could take effect as a temporarily assigned administration.

(COMMENT)

It is virtually impossible for Palestine to exist as a defined area before the Mandate. First, Palestine was not a state; either before or after the Treaty. The territory to which the Mandate Applied was an artificial legal entity established for the convenience of the Allied Powers for administration. Prior to the creation of the Mandate, no such Place called Palestine actually existed as a state under the previous sovereignties going back a 1000 years. It was just a regional name; and the boundaries were to be defined by the Allied Powers.

The successor government was the established British Mandatory, not the undefined Palestine. A report to the Council of the League of Nations on the administration of Palestine and Trans-Jordan for the year 1938, tgives the geographic area that defines Palestine to a specific geographical area.

Actually, the Mandate, in the form of the San Remo Convention, existed in 1920. Just because the Mandate was not signed, does not mean it did not have an impact. Reports to the League Council was being made even before the Mandate was formalized. You can this be --- because the magic of the mandate was a creation of the 1919 League which had as its member, the Allied Powers.

••• If the League of Nations and the Allied Powers had actually wanted Palestine, within such boundaries as may be fixed by the Allied Powers, to be a state or nation --- they had all the authority and tools at their disposal. The Territories were surrendered to the Allied Powers (Armistice of Mudros 1918). The Allied Powers created the League of Nations (1919); the Allied Powers were the participants of the San Remo Conventions (1920). The Covenant of the League of Nation was not a limitation or restrictive document to them. Nor were any of the Treaties signed by defeated Enemy Axis Powers.

Most Respectfully,
R

After two decades of Mandatory rule and colonization from abroad, the inherent rights of the Palestinians finally had been acknowledged.

The Origins and Evolution of the Palestine Problem - CEIRPP, DPR study, part I: 1917-1947 (30 June 1978)

 

[montelatici]

P F Tinmore,

Yah, this is very strange approach.

[

Palestine became a "successor state" upon the signing of the Treaty of Lausanne.

The Treaty of Lausanne was a peace treaty signed in Lausanne, Switzerland, on 24 July 1923. Treaty of Lausanne - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia​

Because the Mandate was assigned to Palestine, Palestine had to already exist. Britain had to wait for this to happen before it could come into effect.

The draft of the Mandate for Palestine was formally confirmed by the Council of the League of Nations on 24 July 1922, supplemented via the 16 September 1922 Trans-Jordan memorandum[2][3] and then came into effect on 29 September 1923[2] British Mandate for Palestine (legal instrument) - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia​

When people say that the Mandate was Palestine, that is incorrect. Palestine existed for two months before the Mandate could take effect as a temporarily assigned administration.

(COMMENT)

It is virtually impossible for Palestine to exist as a defined area before the Mandate. First, Palestine was not a state; either before or after the Treaty. The territory to which the Mandate Applied was an artificial legal entity established for the convenience of the Allied Powers for administration. Prior to the creation of the Mandate, no such Place called Palestine actually existed as a state under the previous sovereignties going back a 1000 years. It was just a regional name; and the boundaries were to be defined by the Allied Powers.

The successor government was the established British Mandatory, not the undefined Palestine. A report to the Council of the League of Nations on the administration of Palestine and Trans-Jordan for the year 1938, tgives the geographic area that defines Palestine to a specific geographical area.

Actually, the Mandate, in the form of the San Remo Convention, existed in 1920. Just because the Mandate was not signed, does not mean it did not have an impact. Reports to the League Council was being made even before the Mandate was formalized. You can this be --- because the magic of the mandate was a creation of the 1919 League which had as its member, the Allied Powers.

••• If the League of Nations and the Allied Powers had actually wanted Palestine, within such boundaries as may be fixed by the Allied Powers, to be a state or nation --- they had all the authority and tools at their disposal. The Territories were surrendered to the Allied Powers (Armistice of Mudros 1918). The Allied Powers created the League of Nations (1919); the Allied Powers were the participants of the San Remo Conventions (1920). The Covenant of the League of Nation was not a limitation or restrictive document to them. Nor were any of the Treaties signed by defeated Enemy Axis Powers.

Most Respectfully,
R

Rocco is confused. The "Franco-British Convention on Certain Points Connected with the Mandates for Syria, and the Lebanon, Palestine and Mesopotania" was signed in 1920 more than 2 years before the Mandate for Palestine was signed.

"FRANCO-BRITISH BOUNDARY AGREEMENT (1920)

The Franco-British Boundary Agreement of 1920, properly called the Franco-British Convention on Certain Points Connected with the Mandates for Syria and the Lebanon, Palestine and Mesopotamia, was an agreement signed between theBritish and French governments in Paris, on 23 December 1920. The agreement contained statements of principle regarding the position and nature of the boundary between the Mandates of Palestine and Mesopotamia, attributed to Great Britain, and the Mandate of Syria and the Lebanon, attributed to France."

Franco-British Boundary Agreement (1920) | Project Gutenberg Self-Publishing - eBooks | Read eBooks online

 

[P F Tinmore]

P F Tinmore,

Yah, this is very strange approach.

[

Palestine became a "successor state" upon the signing of the Treaty of Lausanne.

The Treaty of Lausanne was a peace treaty signed in Lausanne, Switzerland, on 24 July 1923. Treaty of Lausanne - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia​

Because the Mandate was assigned to Palestine, Palestine had to already exist. Britain had to wait for this to happen before it could come into effect.

The draft of the Mandate for Palestine was formally confirmed by the Council of the League of Nations on 24 July 1922, supplemented via the 16 September 1922 Trans-Jordan memorandum[2][3] and then came into effect on 29 September 1923[2] British Mandate for Palestine (legal instrument) - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia​

When people say that the Mandate was Palestine, that is incorrect. Palestine existed for two months before the Mandate could take effect as a temporarily assigned administration.

(COMMENT)

It is virtually impossible for Palestine to exist as a defined area before the Mandate. First, Palestine was not a state; either before or after the Treaty. The territory to which the Mandate Applied was an artificial legal entity established for the convenience of the Allied Powers for administration. Prior to the creation of the Mandate, no such Place called Palestine actually existed as a state under the previous sovereignties going back a 1000 years. It was just a regional name; and the boundaries were to be defined by the Allied Powers.

The successor government was the established British Mandatory, not the undefined Palestine. A report to the Council of the League of Nations on the administration of Palestine and Trans-Jordan for the year 1938, tgives the geographic area that defines Palestine to a specific geographical area.

Actually, the Mandate, in the form of the San Remo Convention, existed in 1920. Just because the Mandate was not signed, does not mean it did not have an impact. Reports to the League Council was being made even before the Mandate was formalized. You can this be --- because the magic of the mandate was a creation of the 1919 League which had as its member, the Allied Powers.

••• If the League of Nations and the Allied Powers had actually wanted Palestine, within such boundaries as may be fixed by the Allied Powers, to be a state or nation --- they had all the authority and tools at their disposal. The Territories were surrendered to the Allied Powers (Armistice of Mudros 1918). The Allied Powers created the League of Nations (1919); the Allied Powers were the participants of the San Remo Conventions (1920). The Covenant of the League of Nation was not a limitation or restrictive document to them. Nor were any of the Treaties signed by defeated Enemy Axis Powers.

Most Respectfully,
R

It is virtually impossible for Palestine to exist as a defined area before the Mandate.​

Link?

My sources say different.

 

[Hossfly]

You're right, Tinmore! It was the World Series they lost.

I missed the connection on that comment Hoss......WTFAYTA...steve

Code, Steve.

Hoss,I note that you often use pics of Mrs Clinton...do you have Sexual Fantasys (sic)about her or what...Just musing Steve

I don't have fantasies about Bull Dykes. Just typical hatred of anything Clinton.
But we're getting away from the OP.

I dunno Hoss,she isn't a Dyke at all,I see your reaction as denial of the secret feelings you have for her,so you wake in the middle of night in a sexual sweat,who cares,just admit the lady turns you on,no shame in that....a song for you friend.I hope it helps...steve.......always caring

Not a Playboy Playmate

 

[montelatici]

I missed the connection on that comment Hoss......WTFAYTA...steve

Code, Steve.

Hoss,I note that you often use pics of Mrs Clinton...do you have Sexual Fantasys (sic)about her or what...Just musing Steve

I don't have fantasies about Bull Dykes. Just typical hatred of anything Clinton.
But we're getting away from the OP.

I dunno Hoss,she isn't a Dyke at all,I see your reaction as denial of the secret feelings you have for her,so you wake in the middle of night in a sexual sweat,who cares,just admit the lady turns you on,no shame in that....a song for you friend.I hope it helps...steve.......always caring

Not a Playboy Playmate


View attachment 59263

Add misogynist to homophobe.

 

[Hossfly]

Code, Steve.

Hoss,I note that you often use pics of Mrs Clinton...do you have Sexual Fantasys (sic)about her or what...Just musing Steve

I don't have fantasies about Bull Dykes. Just typical hatred of anything Clinton.
But we're getting away from the OP.

I dunno Hoss,she isn't a Dyke at all,I see your reaction as denial of the secret feelings you have for her,so you wake in the middle of night in a sexual sweat,who cares,just admit the lady turns you on,no shame in that....a song for you friend.I hope it helps...steve.......always caring

Not a Playboy Playmate


View attachment 59263

Add misogynist to homophobe.

You forgot cynic

 

[theliq]

P F Tinmore,

Yah, this is very strange approach.

[

Palestine became a "successor state" upon the signing of the Treaty of Lausanne.

The Treaty of Lausanne was a peace treaty signed in Lausanne, Switzerland, on 24 July 1923. Treaty of Lausanne - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia​

Because the Mandate was assigned to Palestine, Palestine had to already exist. Britain had to wait for this to happen before it could come into effect.

The draft of the Mandate for Palestine was formally confirmed by the Council of the League of Nations on 24 July 1922, supplemented via the 16 September 1922 Trans-Jordan memorandum[2][3] and then came into effect on 29 September 1923[2] British Mandate for Palestine (legal instrument) - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia​

When people say that the Mandate was Palestine, that is incorrect. Palestine existed for two months before the Mandate could take effect as a temporarily assigned administration.

(COMMENT)

It is virtually impossible for Palestine to exist as a defined area before the Mandate. First, Palestine was not a state; either before or after the Treaty. The territory to which the Mandate Applied was an artificial legal entity established for the convenience of the Allied Powers for administration. Prior to the creation of the Mandate, no such Place called Palestine actually existed as a state under the previous sovereignties going back a 1000 years. It was just a regional name; and the boundaries were to be defined by the Allied Powers.

The successor government was the established British Mandatory, not the undefined Palestine. A report to the Council of the League of Nations on the administration of Palestine and Trans-Jordan for the year 1938, tgives the geographic area that defines Palestine to a specific geographical area.

Actually, the Mandate, in the form of the San Remo Convention, existed in 1920. Just because the Mandate was not signed, does not mean it did not have an impact. Reports to the League Council was being made even before the Mandate was formalized. You can this be --- because the magic of the mandate was a creation of the 1919 League which had as its member, the Allied Powers.

••• If the League of Nations and the Allied Powers had actually wanted Palestine, within such boundaries as may be fixed by the Allied Powers, to be a state or nation --- they had all the authority and tools at their disposal. The Territories were surrendered to the Allied Powers (Armistice of Mudros 1918). The Allied Powers created the League of Nations (1919); the Allied Powers were the participants of the San Remo Conventions (1920). The Covenant of the League of Nation was not a limitation or restrictive document to them. Nor were any of the Treaties signed by defeated Enemy Axis Powers.

Most Respectfully,
R

With respect Rocco,this could all be solved by giving Land back at least to 1968 or preferably 1948 borders ..steve

 

[Hossfly]

P F Tinmore,

Yah, this is very strange approach.

[

Palestine became a "successor state" upon the signing of the Treaty of Lausanne.

The Treaty of Lausanne was a peace treaty signed in Lausanne, Switzerland, on 24 July 1923. Treaty of Lausanne - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia​

Because the Mandate was assigned to Palestine, Palestine had to already exist. Britain had to wait for this to happen before it could come into effect.

The draft of the Mandate for Palestine was formally confirmed by the Council of the League of Nations on 24 July 1922, supplemented via the 16 September 1922 Trans-Jordan memorandum[2][3] and then came into effect on 29 September 1923[2] British Mandate for Palestine (legal instrument) - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia​

When people say that the Mandate was Palestine, that is incorrect. Palestine existed for two months before the Mandate could take effect as a temporarily assigned administration.

(COMMENT)

It is virtually impossible for Palestine to exist as a defined area before the Mandate. First, Palestine was not a state; either before or after the Treaty. The territory to which the Mandate Applied was an artificial legal entity established for the convenience of the Allied Powers for administration. Prior to the creation of the Mandate, no such Place called Palestine actually existed as a state under the previous sovereignties going back a 1000 years. It was just a regional name; and the boundaries were to be defined by the Allied Powers.

The successor government was the established British Mandatory, not the undefined Palestine. A report to the Council of the League of Nations on the administration of Palestine and Trans-Jordan for the year 1938, tgives the geographic area that defines Palestine to a specific geographical area.

Actually, the Mandate, in the form of the San Remo Convention, existed in 1920. Just because the Mandate was not signed, does not mean it did not have an impact. Reports to the League Council was being made even before the Mandate was formalized. You can this be --- because the magic of the mandate was a creation of the 1919 League which had as its member, the Allied Powers.

••• If the League of Nations and the Allied Powers had actually wanted Palestine, within such boundaries as may be fixed by the Allied Powers, to be a state or nation --- they had all the authority and tools at their disposal. The Territories were surrendered to the Allied Powers (Armistice of Mudros 1918). The Allied Powers created the League of Nations (1919); the Allied Powers were the participants of the San Remo Conventions (1920). The Covenant of the League of Nation was not a limitation or restrictive document to them. Nor were any of the Treaties signed by defeated Enemy Axis Powers.

Most Respectfully,
R

With respect Rocco,this could all be solved by giving Land back at least to 1968 or preferably 1948 borders ..steve

 

[theliq]

I missed the connection on that comment Hoss......WTFAYTA...steve

Code, Steve.

Hoss,I note that you often use pics of Mrs Clinton...do you have Sexual Fantasys (sic)about her or what...Just musing Steve

I don't have fantasies about Bull Dykes. Just typical hatred of anything Clinton.
But we're getting away from the OP.

I dunno Hoss,she isn't a Dyke at all,I see your reaction as denial of the secret feelings you have for her,so you wake in the middle of night in a sexual sweat,who cares,just admit the lady turns you on,no shame in that....a song for you friend.I hope it helps...steve.......always caring

Not a Playboy Playmate


View attachment 59263

She could have been in the early days Hoss.......to the rest of the posters,my apologies for digressing off topic....steve

 

[Hossfly]

Code, Steve.

Hoss,I note that you often use pics of Mrs Clinton...do you have Sexual Fantasys (sic)about her or what...Just musing Steve

I don't have fantasies about Bull Dykes. Just typical hatred of anything Clinton.
But we're getting away from the OP.

I dunno Hoss,she isn't a Dyke at all,I see your reaction as denial of the secret feelings you have for her,so you wake in the middle of night in a sexual sweat,who cares,just admit the lady turns you on,no shame in that....a song for you friend.I hope it helps...steve.......always caring

Not a Playboy Playmate


View attachment 59263

She could have been in the early days Hoss.......to the rest of the posters,my apologies for digressing off topic....steve

You're right, Steve. Sadly, the only thing she attracts now is crab lice.

 

[P F Tinmore]

And yes, legally, the Mandate did not have the authority to take land away from one group of people and give it to another group.

The Mandate did no such thing. The Mandate did not take land away from anyone. What the Mandate did was assign self-determination under national sovereignty of specific territories to those groups who lived in those territories.

The Mandate gave sovereignty over a portion of the land to the Syrians and formed the State of Syria. Jewish people lived in Syria. Did the Mandate "take land away" from the Jewish people in order to create Syria?

The Mandate gave sovereignty over a portion of the land to the Lebanese and formed the State of Lebanon. Jewish people lived in Lebanon. Did the Mandate "take land away" from the Jewish people in order to create Lebanon?

The Mandate gave sovereignty over a portion of the land to the Jordanian people and formed the State of Jordan. Jewish people lived in Jordan. Did the Mandate "take land away" from the Jewish people in order to create Jordan?

Just so, the Mandate gave sovereignty over a portion of the land to the Jewish people and formed the State of Israel, by right of the Jewish people's historical connection to the land. Arab Muslims lived in Israel.

Denial of the Jewish people to ALSO have rights to a national homeland, while giving those rights to others, is hypocritical.

You have a really fucked up way of looking at things.

The Mandate gave sovereignty over a portion of the land to the Syrians and formed the State of Syria. Jewish people lived in Syria. Did the Mandate "take land away" from the Jewish people in order to create Syria?​

First off, the Mandate could not "give" sovereignty to anyone. Sovereignty is the inherent, inalienable right of the inhabitants. Nobody has the authority to change that.

The Mandates had no authority to take or give land. The land belonged to the sovereigns (the inhabitants) without distinction of race, religion, etc..

 

[Shusha]

Sure. I'll give you that "gave" was not the technically correct term. But you aren't addressing my point, which is -- the Jewish people are also inhabitants (and therefore the sovereigns) of the entire area of the Mandate. So why shouldn't the Jewish people have sovereignty, not only in Palestine, but over part of Jordan and Syria and Lebanon and for that matter Egypt and Morocco and Algeria, Tunisia, Yemen...?

 

[RoccoR]

montelatici, et al,

Don't be such a wise-ass. I'm not confused at all. You just didn't get it.

Actually, the Mandate, in the form of the San Remo Convention, existed in 1920. Just because the Mandate was not signed, does not mean it did not have an impact. Reports to the League Council was being made even before the Mandate was formalized. You can this be --- because the magic of the mandate was a creation of the 1919 League which had as its member, the Allied Powers.

Rocco is confused. The "Franco-British Convention on Certain Points Connected with the Mandates for Syria, and the Lebanon, Palestine and Mesopotania" was signed in 1920 more than 2 years before the Mandate for Palestine was signed.

(COMMENT)

The "IDEAs" and the basic content of the Mandate was agreed upon by the Allied Powers in 1920 at the San Remo Convention.

True, the Mandate itself was introduced for adoption in 1922, but the idea to replace the Enemy Occupied Territory Administration (EOTA) with a civil administration was the topic of many discussions between 1918 and 1920, with the fundamental product, verbiage, and limitations were hammered-out and adopted by the Allied Powers at San Remo. And the Allied Powers were operating under the tenants of the Mandate years before the Mandate was actually set to paper before the Council.

EXCERPTS
04/25/1920 Syria, Mesopotamia, Palestine mandates - San Remo conference (UK, France, Italy, Japan) - Resolution (Non-UN document)​

The High Contracting Parties agree that Syria and Mesopotamia shall, in accordance with the fourth paragraph of Article 22, Part I (Covenant of the League of Nations), be provisionally recognized as independent States, subject to the rendering of administrative advice and assistance by a mandatory until such time as they are able to stand alone. The boundaries of the said States will be determined, and the selection of the Mandatories made, by the Principal Allied Powers.

The High Contracting Parties agree to entrust, by application of the provisions of Article 22, the administration of Palestine, within such boundaries as may be determined by the Principal Allied Powers, to a Mandatory, to be selected by the said Powers. The Mandatory will be responsible for putting into effect the declaration • • originally made on November 8, 1917, by the British Government, and adopted by the other Allied Powers, in favour of the establishment in Palestine of a national home for the Jewish people, it being clearly understood that nothing shall be done which may 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.

The terms of the mandates in respect of the above territories will be formulated by the Principal Allied Powers and submitted to the Council of the League of Nations for approval.

Turkey hereby undertakes, in accordance with the provisions of Article [132 of the Treaty of Sevres] to accept any decisions which may be taken in this connection.

____________________________________________________________________________​

THE SAN REMO CONVENTION 1920​

The San Remo Conference decided on April 24, 1920 to assign the Mandate [for Palestine] under the League of Nations to Britain. The terms of the Mandate were also discussed with the United States which was not a member of the League. An agreed text was confirmed by the Council of the League of Nations on July 24, 1922, and it came into operation in September 1923.[/center]​

The point was, that the Allied Powers already had decided what was going to happen and how they wanted to frame it. They did not actually need the League of Nations or it Covenant at all. Nor did they actually need a written mandate. They were just the manifestation of the Will of the Allied Powers.

In fact, given the hindsight --- the Allied Powers would have been better-off if the had dispensed with the entire League of Nations (LoN)(no covenant at all) concept and the issuance of a LoN Mandate; and just did it. The Hostile Arab Palestinians have been welding their interpretation of Article 22 as if it were a broadsword and an absolute, carved in stone, commandment. When in fact, it was conceived by the Allied Powers, as a forum for the Allied Powers, and dispensed by the Allied Powers when it became unacceptable.

The League of Nations, 1920 ​

EXCERPT: Department of State - Office of the Historian

The League of Nations was an international organization, headquartered in Geneva, Switzerland, created after the First World War to provide a forum for resolving international disputes. Though first proposed by President Woodrow Wilson as part of his Fourteen Points plan for an equitable peace in Europe, the United States never became a member.​

​

The Covenant of the League of Nations was not an inherent or imposed Law by a higher power. It was a by-product of the War generated by the "BIG THREE" (Woodrow Wilson of the United States, Georges Clemenceau of France, and David Lloyd George of the United Kingdom).

Most Respectfully,
R