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

[P F Tinmore]

Again, what do you not understand with respect to the following statement:

"Turkish subjects habitually resident in the territory of Palestine upon the 1st day of August, 1925, shall become Palestinian citizens.”

They ceased to be citizens of Turkey and became citizens of the Mandate for Palestine.

With regard to nationality of the inhabitants of mandated territories, in general, the Council of the League of Nations adopted the following resolution on 23 April 1923:

“(1) The status of the native inhabitants of a Mandated territory is distinct from that of the nationals of the Mandatory Power....
(2) The native inhabitants of a Mandated territory are not invested with the nationality of the Mandatory Power by means of the protection extended to them…”92​

So the formerly Turkish citizens were definitely not British. Not sure why you would bring this up.

Because you said:

They ceased to be citizens of Turkey and became citizens of the Mandate for Palestine.
​

That is not true.

The Mandate was not a place. It was not a country. It had no land or borders. It had no citizens.

It was a temporarily assigned administration to assist the people until they could stand alone i.e. create an independent state.

 

[RoccoR]

P F Tinmore, Shusha, et al,

Shusha, you are running into something that our friend P F Tinmore uses quite effectively to derail a true thought which he does not want to be the focus.

If you use the word "Mandate," as was often used in the 1920, as the short title for the territorial government (official order or commission to form the Administration) he will speer you with this response.

Similarly, if you use the term "Palestine" to mean the territory to which the Mandate (authority) was applied; he will use this as quasi-evidence of recognition of a independent state or a territory to which the Arab-Palestinian has special rights.

Basically, what you said was technically wrong -- but completely understood as to your meaning.

So the formerly Turkish citizens were definitely not British. Not sure why you would bring this up.

Because you said:

"They ceased to be citizens of Turkey and became citizens of the Mandate for Palestine."
​

That is not true.

The Mandate was not a place. It was not a country. It had no land or borders. It had no citizens.

It was a temporarily assigned administration to assist the people until they could stand alone i.e. create an independent state.

Most Respectfully,
R

 

[montelatici]

Palestine was a Class A Mandate, as such it received provisional statehood with the signing of the Covenant of the United Nations. The Mandate was merely a tool to transform provisional statehood to full statehood for the inhabitants of the former Axis and specifically former Turkish territories with respect to Palestine.

 

[Shusha]

They ceased to be citizens of Turkey and became citizens of the Mandate for Palestine.

​

That is not true. The Mandate was not a place. It was not a country. It had no land or borders. It had no citizens.

Oh please. Rocco is correct, my meaning was perfectly plain. Sure, technically, I should have said "...became citizens living in the geographical area known as Palestine (not to be misinterpreted as or confused with the potential future State which is also named Palestine but has an entirely different meaning) under the temporarily assigned administration by the British government known as the Mandate for Palestine which held territory in trust for the Jewish people until they could stand alone and create an independent state," but that does seem a bit cumbersome, don't you think? Especially since my meaning was perfectly clear.

It was a temporarily assigned administration to assist the people until they could stand alone i.e. create an independent state.

You missed a very important word there, Tinmore: Jewish. "It was a temporarily assigned administration to assist the JEWISH people until they could stand alone i.e. create an independent state."

And your argument that the Mandate was not a place, had no land and no borders and no citizens is a silly word salad tossed to negate the rights of the Jewish people.

 

[P F Tinmore]

They ceased to be citizens of Turkey and became citizens of the Mandate for Palestine.

​

That is not true. The Mandate was not a place. It was not a country. It had no land or borders. It had no citizens.

Oh please. Rocco is correct, my meaning was perfectly plain. Sure, technically, I should have said "...became citizens living in the geographical area known as Palestine (not to be misinterpreted as or confused with the potential future State which is also named Palestine but has an entirely different meaning) under the temporarily assigned administration by the British government known as the Mandate for Palestine which held territory in trust for the Jewish people until they could stand alone and create an independent state," but that does seem a bit cumbersome, don't you think? Especially since my meaning was perfectly clear.

It was a temporarily assigned administration to assist the people until they could stand alone i.e. create an independent state.

You missed a very important word there, Tinmore: Jewish. "It was a temporarily assigned administration to assist the JEWISH people until they could stand alone i.e. create an independent state."

And your argument that the Mandate was not a place, had no land and no borders and no citizens is a silly word salad tossed to negate the rights of the Jewish people.

the Mandate for Palestine which held territory in trust for the Jewish people​

It seems strange then that only about 5% of the original citizens were Jews.

 

[Shusha]

It seems strange then that only about 5% of the original citizens were Jews.

The "original" citizens, going back 4000 years (and further if you include all the tribal wars) were ALL Jews.

 

[P F Tinmore]

It seems strange then that only about 5% of the original citizens were Jews.

The "original" citizens, going back 4000 years (and further if you include all the tribal wars) were ALL Jews.

Most of the people granted Palestinian citizenship in 1925 were Muslims and Christians. There were no citizens before that.

 

[montelatici]

It seems strange then that only about 5% of the original citizens were Jews.

The "original" citizens, going back 4000 years (and further if you include all the tribal wars) were ALL Jews.

That's crazy. Even the Jewish bible claims the Jews weren't the "original" citizens. The land had Canaanites, Philistines and others living there before the Jews arrived. Plus claiming a bunch of Europeans were somehow citizens of Palestine over the native people living there is ridiculous.

 

[Challenger]

It seems strange then that only about 5% of the original citizens were Jews.

The "original" citizens, going back 4000 years (and further if you include all the tribal wars) were ALL Jews.

No. There were certainly "Judeans", but they formed a minority in an otherwise diverse and cosmopolitan ethnic mix of peoples. "Judaism" was one of many religions practiced by the "elite" population of the region from time to time, but except for short periods of dominance, the locals worshipped local deities. It wasn't until 200 years after the Arab conquest that the locals had converted to Islam, which became the almost universal religion in the area until the 13th century when Judaism enjoyed a revival after Moshe Ben Nahman set up a synagogue in Jerusalem.

 

[P F Tinmore]

montelatici, et al,

In 1925, who was the "Government of Palestine"?

You have a habit of ignoring fact, written in plain English. Even when the original source document is presented. The question is, why bother responding to a pathological bullshitter?

View attachment 57533

(COMMENT)

Well it cannot be the Arab Palestinians. They declined to participate in programs and processes leading to self-government.

The Government of Palestine was the Mandatory Power headed by the High Commissioner.

"The Palestine Order in Council, 1922."

• "The High Commissioner" shall include every person for the time being administering the Government of Palestine.

1.Q. What measures have been taken to place the country under such political, administrative and economic conditions as will secure the establishment of the national home of the Jewish people? What are the effects of these measures?

REPORT
BY HIS BRITANNIC MAJESTY'S GOVERNMENT
TO THE COUNCIL OF THE LEAGUE OF NATIONS
ON THE ADMINISTRATION OF
PALESTINE AND TRANSJORDAN
FOR THE YEAR
1925

SECTION III.
QUESTIONNAIRE OF PERMANENT MANDATES COMMISSION,
WITH BRIEF REPLIES.
I.--JEWISH NATIONAL HOME.​

A. The direction and objects of the policy of the Government of Palestine in law, administration and finance are unchanged. The visible results of the policy have been tranquillity, increased Jewish immigration, progress of Jewish agricultural settlement. The expansion of industry has been encouraged by the grant of exemption of certain raw materials from import duty (see [pages ] of this Report).

The regulations under the Immigration Ordinance, 1925, set up a statutory procedure for the introduction of Jewish immigrant labour into Palestine. The Palestinian Citizenship Order in Council, 1925, facilitates the acquisition of Palestinian nationality by persons settling in the country, including those who opted for Palestinian citizenship under the Palestine Legislative Council Election Order in Council, 1922. There was a remarkable development of Jewish Co-operative Societies, constituted principally for building, agricultural and mutual credit purposes. Twenty-six Jewish companies were formed.
​

III.--JEWISH AGENCY.​

1.Q. When and in what manner has the Jewish Agency been officially recognized?

A. There is nothing to add to the reply in the Report for 1923.
​

2.Q. Has this Agency given any advice to the Administration in the past year? If so, in what form and in what connection?

A. The Palestine Committee of the Agency (Palestine Zionist Executive) and the Head Office of the Zionist Organization have been given special opportunity of expressing their views on the draft Passport and Immigration Ordinances and Regulations as well as on questions affecting the organization of the Jewish Community which are still engaging the attention of the Government of Palestine.
​

Most Respectfully,
R

And what is the relevance to all that? Britain fucked up so bad that they left accomplishing nothing. All of that is moot.

 

[P F Tinmore]

They ceased to be citizens of Turkey and became citizens of the Mandate for Palestine.

​

That is not true. The Mandate was not a place. It was not a country. It had no land or borders. It had no citizens.

Oh please. Rocco is correct, my meaning was perfectly plain. Sure, technically, I should have said "...became citizens living in the geographical area known as Palestine (not to be misinterpreted as or confused with the potential future State which is also named Palestine but has an entirely different meaning) under the temporarily assigned administration by the British government known as the Mandate for Palestine which held territory in trust for the Jewish people until they could stand alone and create an independent state," but that does seem a bit cumbersome, don't you think? Especially since my meaning was perfectly clear.

It was a temporarily assigned administration to assist the people until they could stand alone i.e. create an independent state.

You missed a very important word there, Tinmore: Jewish. "It was a temporarily assigned administration to assist the JEWISH people until they could stand alone i.e. create an independent state."

And your argument that the Mandate was not a place, had no land and no borders and no citizens is a silly word salad tossed to negate the rights of the Jewish people.

Link?

 

[Billo_Really]

The ethnicity of land owners does not confer sovereignty over territory.

But land ownership does. You cannot come into my neighborhood, go up and knock on my door and tell me that's your house now, because God told you so. Or because your great great great great grandfather used to live there.

Are all the "settlements" Israeli territory because the residents are Jewish?

The settlements are illegal. Period. And the white trash psycho settlers that live there, will eventually have to leave. They're not even settlers, they are more like Israeli insurgents.

The Mandate gave a portion of the Mandate territory to the Jewish people in recognition of their historical national homeland, just as the Mandate gave other portions to other peoples.

And they should of only got 30% of the land, since they were only 30% of the population.

Why so many people seem to have a problem with the Jewish people having a homeland is beyond me.

It's because of what Zionists did when they got here...

"...the settlers must under no circumstances arouse the wrath of the natives ... 'Yet what do our brethren do in Palestine? Just the very opposite! Serfs they were in the lands of the Diaspora and suddenly they find themselves in unrestricted freedom and this change has awakened in them an inclination to despotism. They treat the Arabs with hostility and cruelty, deprive them of their rights, offend them without cause and even boast of these deeds; and nobody among us opposes this despicable and dangerous inclination..."
- Ahad Ha'am​

That's why.

 

[Billo_Really]

Where did I claim that? No one is being removed from territory...

Tell that to the over 700,000 Arabs who were driven out of their homes by Jewish terrorist groups like Irgun.

 

[abu afak]

I covered alot of this whole concept/String 5 Years ago, including Brillo-Greasy's MIsunderstandings/Misrepresentations.
slightly modified for updated maps, relevence, etc.

Myth #1..... Israel is "Stolen Land" | US Message Board - Political Discussion Forum

77% of British Mandate 'Palestine' was lopped and made Jordan, no Jews allowed.
(Contradicting British and League of Nations promises)

Jordan is 70% 'Palestinian'.
Leaving the other 23% divided roughly 13-10 for the Jews.

Meaning the Arabs aka Palestinians got 87% of Mandate Palestine.
(the Pink AND Red Areas)

And ½ of the Jews 13% was the Negev Desert. (lower ½ the light Blue Area above)
So Jews really got about 6% of the usable land of the Original Mandate.
AND unlike in The surrounding states... Arabs still live in/make up 20% of Current Israel's population within that land.
So 1/3 of the People: Jews, got 27% of the Usable land: the thought-useless wasteland Negev thrown in for size viability.

2/3 of what became Israel was State Land (miri, belonging to the emir), passing from the Ottomans, to the British, to the Jews; owned by NO Arab.
This Includes the Half alone of Israel that was/Is the Negev Desert.
-

-

Yes, the lower half of that little that red spot/Israel- is the Negev Desert, State Land under the Ottomans, owned by No Arab. (and about 15-20% more that was also state land). And 20% of the population of the upper half of the Red Dot- is Arab.
abu afak/mbig
-​

 

[P F Tinmore]

Response to Shusha's post:

So, let's go ahead and go back to the '1967' borders and end the 'occupation' | Page 26 | US Message Board - Political Discussion Forum

Nice video except there was no mention of the Nakba. He did mention that people who have never been to the holy land and have no ancestors from there should "return" to Israel simply because they share a religion. As stated in my video, Judaism is a religion not a nationality. The right to a nationality under international law does not apply to religious groups. It only applies to people who are tied to the land by habitual residence, or what the Montevideo Conference calls a permanent population. Of course this does apply to Jews who have lived there for centuries. They were recognized as Palestinians and received Palestinian citizenship just like everyone else who normally lived there.

Of course the Nakba that Netenyahu didn't mention was the web of ethnic cleansing, killing, theft, and lies that represent the creation and continued existence of Israel.

 

[Shusha]

Response to Shusha's post:

He did mention that people who have never been to the holy land and have no ancestors from there should "return" to Israel simply because they share a religion. As stated in my video, Judaism is a religion not a nationality. The right to a nationality under international law does not apply to religious groups. It only applies to people who are tied to the land by habitual residence, or what the Montevideo Conference calls a permanent population.

You seem to have missed the whole point of the video. The Jewish people, the people of Israel, ARE a nationality. The Jewish people, the people of Israel, are tied to the land. The Jewish people, the people of Israel, were the permanent population. It is our homeland, our history, our birthright. (It may be other people's land, and history and birthright.) But it is also OURS.

The whole point of your video is to claim an intergenerational, lasting, commitment to return to the homeland from which a group was forceably removed -- to claim an absolute universal right to return to your homeland through the generations even if you, personally, have never been to that homeland. The Mandate for Palestine is rooted in this concept -- the right to re-constitute your nation in the place of your origin.

It is immoral to claim a right for one people while simultaneously denying it to another. It doesn't matter what excuse you give or how you argue it or how you frame it. The concept of an intergenerational, lasting, commitment to return to your place of origin and homeland is the same whether you are speaking of Palestinians or Jews or any other people who have experienced a "Nakba". Excluding any group from having that concept apply to them is immoral and wrong.

 

[abu afak]

... As stated in my video, Judaism is a religion not a nationality. The right to a nationality under international law does not apply to religious groups. It only applies to people who are tied to the land by habitual residence, or what the Montevideo Conference calls a permanent population. Of course this does apply to Jews who have lived there for centuries....

Except, as you well know, Jews are Not 'just a religion'.
How Dishonest of you after all these years/discussions.
Jews are an Ethnoreligious group, People and a NATION.

Jews - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The Jews.., also known as the Jewish People, are an ethnoreligious group[11] originating from the Israelites, or Hebrews, of the Ancient Near East.[12][13]
Jewish ethnicity, Nationhood and religion are strongly interrelated, as Judaism is the traditional faith of the Jewish Nation,[14][15][16] while its observance varies from strict observance to complete nonobservance.

The Jews trace their ethnogenesis to the part of the Levant known as the Land of Israel.[17] The discovery of the Merneptah Stele confirms the existence of the people of Israel in Canaan as far back as the 13th century BCE...
[.....]
​

Ker-SPLAT! Tinhead.
-

 

[P F Tinmore]

Response to Shusha's post:

He did mention that people who have never been to the holy land and have no ancestors from there should "return" to Israel simply because they share a religion. As stated in my video, Judaism is a religion not a nationality. The right to a nationality under international law does not apply to religious groups. It only applies to people who are tied to the land by habitual residence, or what the Montevideo Conference calls a permanent population.

You seem to have missed the whole point of the video. The Jewish people, the people of Israel, ARE a nationality. The Jewish people, the people of Israel, are tied to the land. The Jewish people, the people of Israel, were the permanent population. It is our homeland, our history, our birthright. (It may be other people's land, and history and birthright.) But it is also OURS.

The whole point of your video is to claim an intergenerational, lasting, commitment to return to the homeland from which a group was forceably removed -- to claim an absolute universal right to return to your homeland through the generations even if you, personally, have never been to that homeland. The Mandate for Palestine is rooted in this concept -- the right to re-constitute your nation in the place of your origin.

It is immoral to claim a right for one people while simultaneously denying it to another. It doesn't matter what excuse you give or how you argue it or how you frame it. The concept of an intergenerational, lasting, commitment to return to your place of origin and homeland is the same whether you are speaking of Palestinians or Jews or any other people who have experienced a "Nakba". Excluding any group from having that concept apply to them is immoral and wrong.

It is immoral to claim a right for one people while simultaneously denying it to another.​

And illegal too. But that is what is happening to the Palestinians now.

The only remedy for that injustice is the right of return and a one state solution.

 

[montelatici]

I covered alot of this whole concept/String 5 Years ago, including Brillo-Greasy's MIsunderstandings/Misrepresentations.
slightly modified for updated maps, relevence, etc.

Myth #1..... Israel is "Stolen Land" | US Message Board - Political Discussion Forum

77% of British Mandate 'Palestine' was lopped and made Jordan, no Jews allowed.
(Contradicting British and League of Nations promises)

Jordan is 70% 'Palestinian'.
Leaving the other 23% divided roughly 13-10 for the Jews.

Meaning the Arabs aka Palestinians got 87% of Mandate Palestine.
(the Pink AND Red Areas)

And ½ of the Jews 13% was the Negev Desert. (lower ½ the light Blue Area above)
So Jews really got about 6% of the usable land of the Original Mandate.
AND unlike in The surrounding states... Arabs still live in/make up 20% of Current Israel's population within that land.
So 1/3 of the People: Jews, got 27% of the Usable land: the thought-useless wasteland Negev thrown in for size viability.

2/3 of what became Israel was State Land (miri, belonging to the emir), passing from the Ottomans, to the British, to the Jews; owned by NO Arab.
This Includes the Half alone of Israel that was/Is the Negev Desert.
-

-

Yes, the lower half of that little that red spot/Israel- is the Negev Desert, State Land under the Ottomans, owned by No Arab. (and about 15-20% more that was also state land). And 20% of the population of the upper half of the Red Dot- is Arab.
abu afak/mbig
-​

Trans-Jordan was added to the Mandate for Palestine but was a completely different territory from the outset and destined to repay the Hashemites and their followers (Bedouins not Palestinians), who had supported the British against the Turks in the Hejaz (where Mecca is located) during WW1 after they lost the Hejaz to King Saud.

Your post is just a bunch of Zionist propaganda with no basis in fact. Even the note to the Mandate describes Trans Jordan as a separate territory whose border is the eastern boundary of PALESTINE, a separate territory. Clearly, if Trans Jordan's border was the eastern border of Palestine, it could not possibly have been considered Palestine.

 

[abu afak]

Trans-Jordan was added to the Mandate for Palestine but was a completely different territory from the outset and destined to repay the Hashemites and their followers (Bedouins not Palestinians), who had supported the British against the Turks in the Hejaz (where Mecca is located) during WW1 after they lost the Hejaz to King Saud.

Your post is just a bunch of Zionist propaganda with no basis in fact. Even the note to the Mandate describes Trans Jordan as a separate territory whose border is the eastern boundary of PALESTINE, a separate territory. Clearly, if Trans Jordan's border was the eastern border of Palestine, it could not possibly have been considered Palestine.

"Zionst Propaganda"?
TAKE YOUR PICK AKHMED!

mandate for palestine - Google Search

I just used the First of Many/MOST.
-