The Palestinian National Identity as it is: no lies, propaganda and hidden agendas allowed

[RoccoR]

P F Tinmore, et al,

This is a common practice of the Arab Palestinian. They claim "nothing is ever their fault" and they are always the victim.

OK, that is the job of the UNCCP who has dropped the ball on its responsibilities.

Just like the UNPC dropped the ball in 1948.

That is why there is BDS. Nobody else is doing anything.

(COMMENT)

Whether we are talking about The British Mandatory Government of Palestine (GOP), The United Nations Conciliation Commission for Palestine (UNCCP) --- or --- The United Nations Palestine Commission (UNPC), you will find that the Arab Palestinians (or the Arab Higher Committee or Arab League) declined, rejected or otherwise obstructed nearly every opportunity for advancement and development.

Yes, as you have often said, the Arab Palestinian has the "right" to reject opportunities as they will. BUT in so exercising that right to reject --- the Arab Palestinian cannot then turn-around and claim that no other organ or activity has has been delinquent in forging any type of settlement.

In the Spring 1920, in which the Allied Powers at the established the general outline and foundation for the Mandate for Palestine; which incorporated the Balfour Declaration and Article 22 - Covenant of the League of Nation. Britain (as the appointed Mandatory) was charged with reconstituting the "national home for the Jewish people" [Jewish National Home (JNH)] in Palestine.

In the Springs of 1920, and again in 1921, the Arabs instigated anti-Jewish riots; lead by Islamic radical clerics and religious leaders.
​

With reluctance, the Jewish leadership agreed to conform to the policy set forth in the 1922 Churchill White Paper, relative to the establishment of the JNH. However, the Arabs began to forge a policy of rejection to any form of coexistence with Jewish Immigrants.

Following the 1922 Churchill White Paper, three attempts were made to establish direct Arab representation in the government formed under the Mandate. The Arab population of Palestine could be brought into cooperation with the government through “the establishment of an Arab Agency in Palestine, a counterpart to and analogous to the Jewish Agency. The Arab Agency would have the right to be consulted on all matters relating to immigration, on which it was recognized that “the views of the Arab community were entitled to special consideration”. The Arab leaders (once again) declined. The Arab Palestinians intentionally refused to discuss the Article 6 requirements to facilitate Jewish immigration.

By 1929 Arab Palestine mobs again attacked Jews throughout the territory under the Mandate; reacting to inflammatory rhetoric instigated by the Supreme Moslem Council.

At the same time, the traveling radical muslim teacher Izz ad-Din al-Qassam began to form covert guerrilla cells of 8 to 10 men, independent and unknown by other cells. These cells were anti-Semitic and anti-British Jihadists which came to be known as the Palestinian Black Hand.

The idea of the One-State (Shared Government) dates back to a time before the formulation of the Shaw Commission Report. British Administration Authorities organized a "Round Table" Forum (alla King Arthur) in December 1930 --- which the rejected and boycotted the forum.
​

Following an extended turbulent period -- The Peel Commission (May 1936) opened a new inquiry into the roots of renewed Arab violence. The Commission's objective was to make such recommendations as necessary to bring about Arab/Jewish coexistence.

The Grand Mufti, representing the Arab Palestinian, under deposition, made three unconditional and non-negotiable demands:

• Complete abandonment of the Balfour Declaration and the NO establishment of a JNH;
• HALT all Jewish immigration and land purchases;
• Termination of the Mandate;
​

In the Arab National Congress September 1937, rejected the Peel Commission's recommendations.
​

The Arab League formed an economic boycott (December 1945) of the Jewish goods and services from the territory. in Mandate Palestine. A secondary boycott against foreign firms that traded with Israel.

In January 1948, the UN Palestine Commission requested the participation of the Arab Palestinian Community in the Steps Preparatory for Independence. Rejected.
​

There is no question that every party involved in the Question of Palestine made mistakes. But the most obstinate and uncooperative (by far) where the Arabs. As the UN Palestine Commission (UNPC) noted during the Civil War (early 1948):

"Powerful Arab interests, both inside and outside Palestine, are defying the resolution of the General Assembly and are engaged in a deliberate effort to alter by force the settlement envisaged therein."
​

The Arabs have absolutely no room to talk. When has the Arab Palestinian ever made an effort to establish peace?

Most Respectfully,
R​

 

[montelatici]

P F Tinmore, et al,

This is a common practice of the Arab Palestinian. They claim "nothing is ever their fault" and they are always the victim.

OK, that is the job of the UNCCP who has dropped the ball on its responsibilities.

Just like the UNPC dropped the ball in 1948.

That is why there is BDS. Nobody else is doing anything.

(COMMENT)

Whether we are talking about The British Mandatory Government of Palestine (GOP), The United Nations Conciliation Commission for Palestine (UNCCP) --- or --- The United Nations Palestine Commission (UNPC), you will find that the Arab Palestinians (or the Arab Higher Committee or Arab League) declined, rejected or otherwise obstructed nearly every opportunity for advancement and development.

Yes, as you have often said, the Arab Palestinian has the "right" to reject opportunities as they will. BUT in so exercising that right to reject --- the Arab Palestinian cannot then turn-around and claim that no other organ or activity has has been delinquent in forging any type of settlement.

In the Spring 1920, in which the Allied Powers at the established the general outline and foundation for the Mandate for Palestine; which incorporated the Balfour Declaration and Article 22 - Covenant of the League of Nation. Britain (as the appointed Mandatory) was charged with reconstituting the "national home for the Jewish people" [Jewish National Home (JNH)] in Palestine.

In the Springs of 1920, and again in 1921, the Arabs instigated anti-Jewish riots; lead by Islamic radical clerics and religious leaders.
​

With reluctance, the Jewish leadership agreed to conform to the policy set forth in the 1922 Churchill White Paper, relative to the establishment of the JNH. However, the Arabs began to forge a policy of rejection to any form of coexistence with Jewish Immigrants.

Following the 1922 Churchill White Paper, three attempts were made to establish direct Arab representation in the government formed under the Mandate. The Arab population of Palestine could be brought into cooperation with the government through “the establishment of an Arab Agency in Palestine, a counterpart to and analogous to the Jewish Agency. The Arab Agency would have the right to be consulted on all matters relating to immigration, on which it was recognized that “the views of the Arab community were entitled to special consideration”. The Arab leaders (once again) declined. The Arab Palestinians intentionally refused to discuss the Article 6 requirements to facilitate Jewish immigration.

By 1929 Arab Palestine mobs again attacked Jews throughout the territory under the Mandate; reacting to inflammatory rhetoric instigated by the Supreme Moslem Council.

At the same time, the traveling radical muslim teacher Izz ad-Din al-Qassam began to form covert guerrilla cells of 8 to 10 men, independent and unknown by other cells. These cells were anti-Semitic and anti-British Jihadists which came to be known as the Palestinian Black Hand.

The idea of the One-State (Shared Government) dates back to a time before the formulation of the Shaw Commission Report. British Administration Authorities organized a "Round Table" Forum (alla King Arthur) in December 1930 --- which the rejected and boycotted the forum.
​

Following an extended turbulent period -- The Peel Commission (May 1936) opened a new inquiry into the roots of renewed Arab violence. The Commission's objective was to make such recommendations as necessary to bring about Arab/Jewish coexistence.

The Grand Mufti, representing the Arab Palestinian, under deposition, made three unconditional and non-negotiable demands:

• Complete abandonment of the Balfour Declaration and the NO establishment of a JNH;
• HALT all Jewish immigration and land purchases;
• Termination of the Mandate;
​

In the Arab National Congress September 1937, rejected the Peel Commission's recommendations.​

The Arab League formed an economic boycott (December 1945) of the Jewish goods and services from the territory. in Mandate Palestine. A secondary boycott against foreign firms that traded with Israel.

In January 1948, the UN Palestine Commission requested the participation of the Arab Palestinian Community in the Steps Preparatory for Independence. Rejected.
​

There is no question that every party involved in the Question of Palestine made mistakes. But the most obstinate and uncooperative (by far) where the Arabs. As the UN Palestine Commission (UNPC) noted during the Civil War (early 1948):

"Powerful Arab interests, both inside and outside Palestine, are defying the resolution of the General Assembly and are engaged in a deliberate effort to alter by force the settlement envisaged therein."
​

The Arabs have absolutely no room to talk. When has the Arab Palestinian ever made an effort to establish peace?

Most Respectfully,
R​

The Jews were the most obstinate and uncooperative. They expected a third of the Muslim and Christians to accept being ruled by Jews, never to exercise their right to self-determination.

 

[P F Tinmore]

Yes, as you have often said, the Arab Palestinian has the "right" to reject opportunities as they will.

Do you mean like the "opportunity" to buy into the colonial project?

 

[Shusha]

The Jews ... expected a third of the Muslim and Christians to accept being ruled by Jews, never to exercise their right to self-determination.

Oh NO! Not ruled by Jews! The HORROR! I just can't. CAN'T, I tell you! I will not. I won't. I'd rather DIE than be ruled by the Joooos!

But Jews ruled by Arab Muslims? Well, no problem. Of course, Jews should be ruled by Muslims. I'm pretty sure Allah told us so. And Jews got on GREAT with Muslims. Way better than those awful Christians. The Jews don't need no stinkin' self-determination. That's only for, you know, REAL people.

 

[Phoenall]

P F Tinmore, et al,

This is a common practice of the Arab Palestinian. They claim "nothing is ever their fault" and they are always the victim.

OK, that is the job of the UNCCP who has dropped the ball on its responsibilities.

Just like the UNPC dropped the ball in 1948.

That is why there is BDS. Nobody else is doing anything.

(COMMENT)

Whether we are talking about The British Mandatory Government of Palestine (GOP), The United Nations Conciliation Commission for Palestine (UNCCP) --- or --- The United Nations Palestine Commission (UNPC), you will find that the Arab Palestinians (or the Arab Higher Committee or Arab League) declined, rejected or otherwise obstructed nearly every opportunity for advancement and development.

Yes, as you have often said, the Arab Palestinian has the "right" to reject opportunities as they will. BUT in so exercising that right to reject --- the Arab Palestinian cannot then turn-around and claim that no other organ or activity has has been delinquent in forging any type of settlement.

In the Spring 1920, in which the Allied Powers at the established the general outline and foundation for the Mandate for Palestine; which incorporated the Balfour Declaration and Article 22 - Covenant of the League of Nation. Britain (as the appointed Mandatory) was charged with reconstituting the "national home for the Jewish people" [Jewish National Home (JNH)] in Palestine.

In the Springs of 1920, and again in 1921, the Arabs instigated anti-Jewish riots; lead by Islamic radical clerics and religious leaders.
​

With reluctance, the Jewish leadership agreed to conform to the policy set forth in the 1922 Churchill White Paper, relative to the establishment of the JNH. However, the Arabs began to forge a policy of rejection to any form of coexistence with Jewish Immigrants.

Following the 1922 Churchill White Paper, three attempts were made to establish direct Arab representation in the government formed under the Mandate. The Arab population of Palestine could be brought into cooperation with the government through “the establishment of an Arab Agency in Palestine, a counterpart to and analogous to the Jewish Agency. The Arab Agency would have the right to be consulted on all matters relating to immigration, on which it was recognized that “the views of the Arab community were entitled to special consideration”. The Arab leaders (once again) declined. The Arab Palestinians intentionally refused to discuss the Article 6 requirements to facilitate Jewish immigration.

By 1929 Arab Palestine mobs again attacked Jews throughout the territory under the Mandate; reacting to inflammatory rhetoric instigated by the Supreme Moslem Council.

At the same time, the traveling radical muslim teacher Izz ad-Din al-Qassam began to form covert guerrilla cells of 8 to 10 men, independent and unknown by other cells. These cells were anti-Semitic and anti-British Jihadists which came to be known as the Palestinian Black Hand.

The idea of the One-State (Shared Government) dates back to a time before the formulation of the Shaw Commission Report. British Administration Authorities organized a "Round Table" Forum (alla King Arthur) in December 1930 --- which the rejected and boycotted the forum.
​

Following an extended turbulent period -- The Peel Commission (May 1936) opened a new inquiry into the roots of renewed Arab violence. The Commission's objective was to make such recommendations as necessary to bring about Arab/Jewish coexistence.

The Grand Mufti, representing the Arab Palestinian, under deposition, made three unconditional and non-negotiable demands:

• Complete abandonment of the Balfour Declaration and the NO establishment of a JNH;
• HALT all Jewish immigration and land purchases;
• Termination of the Mandate;
​

In the Arab National Congress September 1937, rejected the Peel Commission's recommendations.​

The Arab League formed an economic boycott (December 1945) of the Jewish goods and services from the territory. in Mandate Palestine. A secondary boycott against foreign firms that traded with Israel.

In January 1948, the UN Palestine Commission requested the participation of the Arab Palestinian Community in the Steps Preparatory for Independence. Rejected.
​

There is no question that every party involved in the Question of Palestine made mistakes. But the most obstinate and uncooperative (by far) where the Arabs. As the UN Palestine Commission (UNPC) noted during the Civil War (early 1948):

"Powerful Arab interests, both inside and outside Palestine, are defying the resolution of the General Assembly and are engaged in a deliberate effort to alter by force the settlement envisaged therein."
​

The Arabs have absolutely no room to talk. When has the Arab Palestinian ever made an effort to establish peace?

Most Respectfully,
R​

The Jews were the most obstinate and uncooperative. They expected a third of the Muslim and Christians to accept being ruled by Jews, never to exercise their right to self-determination.

LIAR they said no such thing, and you cant produce any evidence to show they did. From 635 C.E. the muslims have denied the rights of everyone else in the world to exist in peace and to have free determination. The Jews offered the locals full citizenship and full rights which the arab muslims refused and turned violent to steal the land

 

[Phoenall]

Yes, as you have often said, the Arab Palestinian has the "right" to reject opportunities as they will.

Do you mean like the "opportunity" to buy into the colonial project?

Didnt they start the colonial projects in 635 C.E. when they invaded Mecca and Medina and took them from the Jewish owners. You seem to forget your history all the time and just dwell on what the Jews have done since returning home

 

[Challenger]

This is a common practice of the Arab Palestinian. They claim "nothing is ever their fault" and they are always the victim.

Actually, that's been a Jewish mantra over the centuries.

 

[montelatici]

The Jews ... expected a third of the Muslim and Christians to accept being ruled by Jews, never to exercise their right to self-determination.

Oh NO! Not ruled by Jews! The HORROR! I just can't. CAN'T, I tell you! I will not. I won't. I'd rather DIE than be ruled by the Joooos!

But Jews ruled by Arab Muslims? Well, no problem. Of course, Jews should be ruled by Muslims. I'm pretty sure Allah told us so. And Jews got on GREAT with Muslims. Way better than those awful Christians. The Jews don't need no stinkin' self-determination. That's only for, you know, REAL people.

Firstly, a large portion of the Palestinians were Christians who with the Muslims envisioned a secular Palestinian state.

The people the British selected to rule over the native Muslim and Christian inhabitants of Palestine were native inhabitants of Europe. Plans were made to transfer them to Palestine to rule over the native people of Palestine. You don't seem to understand that the native people knew and understood what the British intended to do to them. They rightfully and justly resisted the best they could. Do you think they were wrong to resist enslavement by and rule of people newly transferred from another continent?

 

[RoccoR]

P F Tinmore, et al,

It is not just any one single arrangement or recommendation that the Arab Palestinian has "rejected" --- but every single one of the opportunities to help bring self-governing institutions of a peaceful nature and a safe and stable Jewish National Home to the territory to which the Allied Powers had all titles and rights (ie had not be under Arab Sovereignty for centuries).

Yes, as you have often said, the Arab Palestinian has the "right" to reject opportunities as they will.

Do you mean like the "opportunity" to buy into the colonial project?

(COMMENT)

You have yet to identify the "colonial power" for that allegation.

Most Respectfully,
R

 

[P F Tinmore]

P F Tinmore, et al,

It is not just any one single arrangement or recommendation that the Arab Palestinian has "rejected" --- but every single one of the opportunities to help bring self-governing institutions of a peaceful nature and a safe and stable Jewish National Home to the territory to which the Allied Powers had all titles and rights (ie had not be under Arab Sovereignty for centuries).

Yes, as you have often said, the Arab Palestinian has the "right" to reject opportunities as they will.

Do you mean like the "opportunity" to buy into the colonial project?

(COMMENT)

You have yet to identify the "colonial power" for that allegation.

Most Respectfully,
R

It was a British/Zionist joint venture.

 

[montelatici]

P F Tinmore, et al,

It is not just any one single arrangement or recommendation that the Arab Palestinian has "rejected" --- but every single one of the opportunities to help bring self-governing institutions of a peaceful nature and a safe and stable Jewish National Home to the territory to which the Allied Powers had all titles and rights (ie had not be under Arab Sovereignty for centuries).

Yes, as you have often said, the Arab Palestinian has the "right" to reject opportunities as they will.

Do you mean like the "opportunity" to buy into the colonial project?

(COMMENT)

You have yet to identify the "colonial power" for that allegation.

Most Respectfully,
R

Oh dear, the native Muslims and Christians resisted the plan envisioned by the British to have European Zionists transferred to Palestine for the purpose of ruling over native Muslims and Christians as a minority. How rejectionist of the Palestinians. You are a clown Rocco.

 

[Phoenall]

This is a common practice of the Arab Palestinian. They claim "nothing is ever their fault" and they are always the victim.

Actually, that's been a Jewish mantra over the centuries.

LINK


To duck the request shows you are a LIAR and a NAZI

 

[Phoenall]

The Jews ... expected a third of the Muslim and Christians to accept being ruled by Jews, never to exercise their right to self-determination.

Oh NO! Not ruled by Jews! The HORROR! I just can't. CAN'T, I tell you! I will not. I won't. I'd rather DIE than be ruled by the Joooos!

But Jews ruled by Arab Muslims? Well, no problem. Of course, Jews should be ruled by Muslims. I'm pretty sure Allah told us so. And Jews got on GREAT with Muslims. Way better than those awful Christians. The Jews don't need no stinkin' self-determination. That's only for, you know, REAL people.

Firstly, a large portion of the Palestinians were Christians who with the Muslims envisioned a secular Palestinian state.

The people the British selected to rule over the native Muslim and Christian inhabitants of Palestine were native inhabitants of Europe. Plans were made to transfer them to Palestine to rule over the native people of Palestine. You don't seem to understand that the native people knew and understood what the British intended to do to them. They rightfully and justly resisted the best they could. Do you think they were wrong to resist enslavement by and rule of people newly transferred from another continent?

Making it all up again freddy because you know the truth is going against your POV

 

[Phoenall]

P F Tinmore, et al,

It is not just any one single arrangement or recommendation that the Arab Palestinian has "rejected" --- but every single one of the opportunities to help bring self-governing institutions of a peaceful nature and a safe and stable Jewish National Home to the territory to which the Allied Powers had all titles and rights (ie had not be under Arab Sovereignty for centuries).

Yes, as you have often said, the Arab Palestinian has the "right" to reject opportunities as they will.

Do you mean like the "opportunity" to buy into the colonial project?

(COMMENT)

You have yet to identify the "colonial power" for that allegation.

Most Respectfully,
R

It was a British/Zionist joint venture.

That you refuse to provide links for because you know they dont say what you claim

 

[P F Tinmore]

P F Tinmore, et al,

It is not just any one single arrangement or recommendation that the Arab Palestinian has "rejected" --- but every single one of the opportunities to help bring self-governing institutions of a peaceful nature and a safe and stable Jewish National Home to the territory to which the Allied Powers had all titles and rights (ie had not be under Arab Sovereignty for centuries).

Yes, as you have often said, the Arab Palestinian has the "right" to reject opportunities as they will.

Do you mean like the "opportunity" to buy into the colonial project?

(COMMENT)

You have yet to identify the "colonial power" for that allegation.

Most Respectfully,
R

It was a British/Zionist joint venture.

That you refuse to provide links for because you know they dont say what you claim

Zionists extracted 1917 Balfour Declaration from British as price for bringing U.S. into WWI

 

[Phoenall]

P F Tinmore, et al,

It is not just any one single arrangement or recommendation that the Arab Palestinian has "rejected" --- but every single one of the opportunities to help bring self-governing institutions of a peaceful nature and a safe and stable Jewish National Home to the territory to which the Allied Powers had all titles and rights (ie had not be under Arab Sovereignty for centuries).

Yes, as you have often said, the Arab Palestinian has the "right" to reject opportunities as they will.

Do you mean like the "opportunity" to buy into the colonial project?

(COMMENT)

You have yet to identify the "colonial power" for that allegation.

Most Respectfully,
R

It was a British/Zionist joint venture.

That you refuse to provide links for because you know they dont say what you claim

Zionists extracted 1917 Balfour Declaration from British as price for bringing U.S. into WWI

A conspiracy theorist is the best you have, so much for unbiased sources

 

[Shusha]

Do you think they were wrong to resist enslavement by and rule of people newly transferred from another continent?

Enslavement?! Seriously?

 

[Shusha]

Do you think they were wrong to resist enslavement by and rule of people newly transferred from another continent?

Yes. I do think they were (and are) wrong. I think the emotional drama of your statement demonstrates the ideology with which the Arab Muslims view the situation. The problem is not presented as Palestinian self-determination. The underlying problem is the belief that the Joooooos will enslave us! The HORROR!

 

[theliq]

I'd like to start this thread by making clear what the palestinian national identity IS NOT:

It's not the result of international legal documents, the Treaty of Lausanne, the Palestinian Citizenship Order etc, etc...

Anyone who has ever followed RoccoR and Tinmore's endless debates over the legal maze that marked the partition of Palestine is familiar with the exagerated importance they attribute to formal legal concepts of citizenship and nationality established by the Mandate.

The international legal framework that led to the creation of Israel has its importance in the overall debate but the creation of the palestinian national identity is not one of them.

The creation of national identities derived from colonialism like the american, south african and palestinian national identities is a long-term historical-political, sociological-psychological process that spans over the period of years, decades and even centuries and are not the result of signed documents conferring citizenships, nationalities and other unimportant legal formalities but of the gradual acceptance of the new identity by the inhabitants of the land.

Let's use the IP conflict itself to illustrate how national identities are infinitelly more important than legal concepts like citizenship:

The turning point in which the idea of Palestine as the national homeland of their inhabitants finally supplanted the idea of Southern Syria, the idea of uniting Palestine with Syria was when french troops invaded Damacus and toppled the Kingdom of Syria, in 1920.

From that moment on, the arab elites in Palestine realized they were on their own in their struggle to save their homeland from Zionism, abandonned Pan-syrianism and started to spread the idea of Palestine as their national homeland.

In the few months after July, 12 the palestinian national identity, at long last, won the battle against the syrian identity and, in the next years and decades, began to slowly spread and being internalized from the arab elites in Palestine to the common man on the streets of Jerusalem, Haifa and throughout the countryside.

Why was Jordan's decision to confer Jordanian CITIZENSHIP to palestinian refugees and WB residents a miserable failure that ended in open war, in Black September?

Because in 1954 the basic foundation of the palestinian NATIONAL IDENTITY was already formed, those individuals already thought about themselves as a distinct group within the arab nation just like americans think about themselves as a separate people within the Anglosphere and at that stage no conferring of jordanian citizenship could change this psychological reality anymore.

In their minds, the struggle for the land lost to Israel separated them from Syrians, Egyptians and Jordanians.

Before 1920, before the triumph and gradual consolidation of the palestinian NATIONAL IDENTITY this act might have made a difference (highly, extremely unlikely, I'm really just trying to make my point clear).

But by 1954, Abdullah might just as well have conferred them american, chinese or russian CITIZENSHIP... they would all be equally disregarded by the people as a worthless piece of paper that did not reflect who they were:

THE GROUP OF ARABS WHO EXPERIENCED A UNIQUE HISTORIC PLIGHT, JEWISH COLONIZATION AND DISPOSSESSION.

The abysmal failure of Jordan's attempt to "Jordanize" the palestinian people that culminated in Black September is a testament to the fact that NATIONAL IDENTITIES are infinitely more important than legal concepts like CITIZENSHIP.

But try and convince RoccoR and Tinmore of this reality and see what you get.

Rocco and Tinmore reduce the whole universe to international legislation. In their minds there's no room for sociological, psychological concepts...

The entire cosmos is reduced to treaties, covenants, agreements, mandates, etc, etc...

Their obssession with Law leads them to believe that the palestinian national identity, the american national identity cannot possibly be the result of long-term historical, sociological processes... they can only be the result of treaties, citizenship acts, etc, etc...

I'm gonna analyze some of their posts and you're gonna understand what I mean.

The problem with your summation Jose is,..Palestinians have always lived in the ara we know as Palestine...They are quite distinct as a people,quite unlike other Arabic people throughout the Middle East,BE THEY CUSTOMS,MENTALITY ETC,...Thet are not and never have been Syrian,Jordanian or Egyptian,...They are clearly not Jewish (who are made up from a polyglot of different peoples)

 

[P F Tinmore]

P F Tinmore, et al,

It is not just any one single arrangement or recommendation that the Arab Palestinian has "rejected" --- but every single one of the opportunities to help bring self-governing institutions of a peaceful nature and a safe and stable Jewish National Home to the territory to which the Allied Powers had all titles and rights (ie had not be under Arab Sovereignty for centuries).

Do you mean like the "opportunity" to buy into the colonial project?

(COMMENT)

You have yet to identify the "colonial power" for that allegation.

Most Respectfully,
R

It was a British/Zionist joint venture.

That you refuse to provide links for because you know they dont say what you claim

Zionists extracted 1917 Balfour Declaration from British as price for bringing U.S. into WWI

A conspiracy theorist is the best you have, so much for unbiased sources

Promises and Betrayals - Middle East - History Channel Documentary