5 Common Myths about "The Settlements".

[ForeverYoung436]

I have two questions, maybe somebody can answer, about Samaria and Judea.


How did the Palestinians acquire those territories, and when did that happen?

In 1924 the Palestinians became the legal citizens of Palestine. This was according the rule of state succession (international law) and reiterated by the Treaty of Lausanne. This was followed up by the Palestinian Citizenship Order of 1925.

Treaty of Lausanne...about as enforceable as the Magna Carta.
Beware of Wash, Rinse, Repeat Tinmore.

Even if it were enforced, the treaty doesn't mention Palestine anyway.

It's true. For years Tinmore has repeated the same rigamarole about that treaty over and over again. Then one day someone actually posted the Treaty (I think it was Phoenall), and I was shocked when I read it over and Palestine wasn't even in it at all.

Stupid post.

Also not mentioned: Syria, Lebanon, Iraq, and Jordan.

Do you have a point here someplace?

Look who's calling who stupid. The guy who doesn't think Palestinians are Arab.

 

[rylah]

I used to be “anti-settlement” until I visited one by accident. Since then, I’ve learned a lot about how the settlement issue is misunderstood and often twisted.


Myth 1: They’re on stolen Palestinian land
Most of the land that the Jewish communities in Judea and Samaria were built on was Jewish-owned. In 1948, thousands of Jews who lived over the Green Line on land they had bought were forcibly removed from their homes when the Land became an Arab state – Jordan. Between 1948 and 1967, the Jordanians were desperate to fill that land with Arabs so that if the Jews got it back, they wouldn’t be able to live there because of all the land that was literally “given away” to Arabs. However, the “settlements” that are legal under Israeli law were not built on such land, even though it was literally handed out by Jordan to prevent future Jewish settlement. Amona is an example of a town that was evacuated by the Israeli government when it was determined that the land belonged to an Arab (who was an absentee land owner who didn’t care about it until leftist NGOs told him he should). It was an “illegal settlement” because part of it was on Arab-owned land. The current legal settlements under Israeli law are all built on Jewish-owned land, or within Area C as designated by Oslo.

5 Common Myths About “The Settlements”

Israeli-Jewish settlements are in occupied Palestine and therefore illegal under international law.

Many of those Jews You single out (as opposed to Palestinian and EU illegal settlements)...have been living there before the Zionist immigration started.

What You call "illegal" and "law" are basically subjects of Your opinion.

I't the continuation of the al-Husseini agenda- who officially demanded land bought by Jews returned to Arabs for the sole reason of them being Jews. The same reason one can demand a Juderein Palestine while demanding Israel to give Palestinians in Gaza and Rammallah the same rights as Israeli Arab and Jewish citizens have.

I thought you would know I was referring to the Israeli-Jewish settlements established on the best land of the West Bank, including East Jerusalem since 1967.

"best lands" - any facts yet?

When You decide to address ANY of my points, rather than push some slogans- I'd gladly read those

After the 1967 War, Jordan became responsible for the West Bank and Egypt for Gaza.
In 1993, Israeli Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin and Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO) Negotiator Mahmoud Abbas signed a Declaration of Principles on Interim Self-Government Arrangements (Oslo Accord). Israel accepted the PLO as the representative of the Palestinians, and the PLO renounced terrorism and recognized Israel’s right to exist in peace.

The Israeli-Jordanian peace treaty of 1994 was signed. The Cairo Agreement of 1994 finalized Israel’s withdrawal from most of Gaza and Jericho and then came the Taba (Oslo II) Agreement in 1995. The latter agreement divided the West Bank into separate areas under Israeli control, Palestinian control, and Israeli military responsibility with Palestinian civil administration, respectively.

Area A (Palestinian Control) 18%
Area B (Palestine civil administration/Israeli military responsibility) 22%
Area C (Israeli military control) 60%

You took exception to my claim that the settlers were taking the best land. By best I am, of course, referring to agriculture water, and minerals. The settlements are all in Area C or land which has been annexed by Israel. This current arrangement makes it impossible for the Palestinians in the West Bank, including East Jerusalem to develop an economy. The majority of the West Bank's agricultural land is in Area C as well as the water and mineral resources. Palestinians are severely restricted from accessing these resources The settlements continue to grow in Area C, giving the settlers the best land.

"Every time a settlement is built, Palestinians say, a little more is taken away from a future Palestinian state. The possibility of peace seems to grow less and less likely, and Palestinians accuse Israel of confiscating lands and taking away resources from the areas that Palestinians want for their statehood."
Israeli settlements controversy explained, and why it matters

No where in Your answer was an explanation about "best lands" You claim being stolen from Palestinians.

-How is that different from Haj Amin al-Husseini's motive behind the demand to evict Jews from lands they lawfully bought or owned even before the 1st Zionist immigration?

"The control of land remains the crucial issue in the Arab-Israel conflict. Kenneth Stein investigates in detail and without polemics how and why Jews acquired land from Arabs in Palestine during the British Mandate, and he reaches conclusions that are challenging and surprising.

Stein contends that Zionists were able to purchase the core of a national territory in Palestine during this period for three reasons: they had the single-mindedness of purpose, as well as the capital, to buy the land; the Arabs, economically impoverished, politically fragmented, and socially atomized, were willing to sell the land; and the British were largely ineffective in regulating land sales and protecting Arab tenants.

Neither Arab opposition to land sales nor British attempts to regulate them actually limited land acquisition. There were always more Arab offers to sell land than there were Zionist funds. In fact, many sales were made by Arab politicians who publicly opposed Zionism and even led agitation against land acquisition by Jews. Zionists furthered their own ambitions by skillfully using their understanding of the bureaucracy to write laws and to influence key administrative appointments. Further, they knew how to take advantage of social and economic cleavages within Arab society..."

 

[rylah]

I used to be “anti-settlement” until I visited one by accident. Since then, I’ve learned a lot about how the settlement issue is misunderstood and often twisted.


Myth 1: They’re on stolen Palestinian land
Most of the land that the Jewish communities in Judea and Samaria were built on was Jewish-owned. In 1948, thousands of Jews who lived over the Green Line on land they had bought were forcibly removed from their homes when the Land became an Arab state – Jordan. Between 1948 and 1967, the Jordanians were desperate to fill that land with Arabs so that if the Jews got it back, they wouldn’t be able to live there because of all the land that was literally “given away” to Arabs. However, the “settlements” that are legal under Israeli law were not built on such land, even though it was literally handed out by Jordan to prevent future Jewish settlement. Amona is an example of a town that was evacuated by the Israeli government when it was determined that the land belonged to an Arab (who was an absentee land owner who didn’t care about it until leftist NGOs told him he should). It was an “illegal settlement” because part of it was on Arab-owned land. The current legal settlements under Israeli law are all built on Jewish-owned land, or within Area C as designated by Oslo.

5 Common Myths About “The Settlements”

Israeli-Jewish settlements are in occupied Palestine and therefore illegal under international law.

Many of those Jews You single out (as opposed to Palestinian and EU illegal settlements)...have been living there before the Zionist immigration started.

What You call "illegal" and "law" are basically subjects of Your opinion.

I't the continuation of the al-Husseini agenda- who officially demanded land bought by Jews returned to Arabs for the sole reason of them being Jews. The same reason one can demand a Juderein Palestine while demanding Israel to give Palestinians in Gaza and Rammallah the same rights as Israeli Arab and Jewish citizens have.

I thought you would know I was referring to the Israeli-Jewish settlements established on the best land of the West Bank, including East Jerusalem since 1967.

"best lands" - any facts yet?

When You decide to address ANY of my points, rather than push some slogans- I'd gladly read those

After the 1967 War, Jordan became responsible for the West Bank and Egypt for Gaza.
In 1993, Israeli Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin and Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO) Negotiator Mahmoud Abbas signed a Declaration of Principles on Interim Self-Government Arrangements (Oslo Accord). Israel accepted the PLO as the representative of the Palestinians, and the PLO renounced terrorism and recognized Israel’s right to exist in peace.

The Israeli-Jordanian peace treaty of 1994 was signed. The Cairo Agreement of 1994 finalized Israel’s withdrawal from most of Gaza and Jericho and then came the Taba (Oslo II) Agreement in 1995. The latter agreement divided the West Bank into separate areas under Israeli control, Palestinian control, and Israeli military responsibility with Palestinian civil administration, respectively.

Area A (Palestinian Control) 18%
Area B (Palestine civil administration/Israeli military responsibility) 22%
Area C (Israeli military control) 60%

You took exception to my claim that the settlers were taking the best land. By best I am, of course, referring to agriculture water, and minerals. The settlements are all in Area C or land which has been annexed by Israel. This current arrangement makes it impossible for the Palestinians in the West Bank, including East Jerusalem to develop an economy. The majority of the West Bank's agricultural land is in Area C as well as the water and mineral resources. Palestinians are severely restricted from accessing these resources The settlements continue to grow in Area C, giving the settlers the best land.

"Every time a settlement is built, Palestinians say, a little more is taken away from a future Palestinian state. The possibility of peace seems to grow less and less likely, and Palestinians accuse Israel of confiscating lands and taking away resources from the areas that Palestinians want for their statehood."
Israeli settlements controversy explained, and why it matters

Here's from the mufti's interview with sir Hammond of the PEEL commission:

MUFTI: But I can say that the Jews, many thousands, are actually living in Iraq and Syria under Arab rule and have the same rights and the same position as the other inhabitants of the countries.

SIR L. HAMMOND: Would you give me the figures again for the land. I want to know how much land was held by the Jews before the Occupation.

MUFTI: First of all I would like to say that one of the members of our Committee will deal later with the land question, but nevertheless I will give you the figures. At the time of the Occupation the Jews held about 100,000 dunams.

SIR L. HAMMOND: What year?

MUFTI: At the date of the British Occupation.

SIR L. HAMMOND: And now they hold how much?

MUFTI: About 1,500,000 dunams: 1,200,000 dunams already registered in the name of the Jewish holders, but there are 300,000 dunams which are the subject of written agreements, and which have not yet been registered in the Land Registry. That does not, of course, include the land which was assigned, about 100,000 dunams.

SIR L. HAMMOND: What 100,000 dunams was assigned. Is that not included in, the 1,200,000 dunams? The point is this. He says that in 1920 at the time of the Occupation, the Jews only held 100,000 dunams, is that so? I asked the figures from the Land Registry, how much land the Jews owned at the time of the Occupation. Would he be surprised to hear that the figure is not 100,000 but 650,000 dunams?

MUFTI: It may be that the difference was due to the fact that many lands were bought by contract which were not registered.

SIR L. HAMMOND: There is a lot of difference between 100,000 and 650,000.

MUFTI: In one case they sold about 400,000 dunams in one lot.

SIR L. HAMMOND: Who? An Arab?

MUFTI: Sarsuk. An Arab of Beirut.

SIR L. HAMMOND: His Eminence gave us a picture of the Arabs being evicted from their land and villages being wiped out. What I want to know is, did the Government of Palestine, the Administration, acquire the land and then hand it over to the Jews?

MUFTI: In most cases the lands were acquired.

SIR L. HAMMOND: I mean forcibly acquired-compulsory acquisition as land would be acquired for public purposes?

MUFTI: No, it wasn't.

SIR L. HAMMOND: Not taken by compulsory acquisition?

MUFTI: No.

SIR L. HAMMOND: But these lands amounting to some 700,000 dunams were actually sold?

MUFTI: Yes, they were sold, but the country was placed in such conditions as would facilitate such purchases.

SIR I HAMMOND: I don't quite understand what you mean by that. They were sold Who sold them?

MUFTI: Land owners.

SIR I HAMMOND: Arabs?

MUFTI: In most cases they were Arabs.

SIR L. HAMMOND: Was any compulsion put on them to sell? If so, by whom?

It was sold willingly by Arabs. He admits this, but...

MUFTI: As in other countries, there are people who by force of circumstances, economic forces, sell their land.

SIR L. HAMMOND: Is that all he said?

MUFTI: They were not prevented from selling the land, and mostly the country was in such economic condition as facilitated the sale. If the Government had the interest of these poor people at heart they should have prevented sales and these people would not have been evicted from their land. A large part of these lands belong to absentee landlords who sold the land over the heads of their tenants, who were forcibly evicted. The majority of these landlords were absentees who sold their land over the heads of their tenants. Not Palestinians but Lebanese.

SIR L. HAMMOND: Is His Eminence in a position to give the Commission a list of the people, the Arabs who have sold lands, apart from those absentee landlords?

MUFTI: I am sure the Department of Lands can supply such a list.

SIR L. HAMMOND: I didn't ask him to tell me where I could get the information from. I asked was he in a position to give it to me.

MUFTI: It is possible for me to supply such a list.

SIR L. HAMMOND: I ask him now this: does he think that as compared with the standard of life under the Turkish rule the position of the fellahin in the villages has improved or deteriorated?

MUFTI: Generally speaking I think their situation has got worse.

SIR L. HAMMOND: Is taxation heavier or lighter?

MUFTI: Taxation was much heavier then, but now there are additional burdens.

SIR L. HAMMOND: I am asking him if it is now, the present day, as we are sitting together here, is it a fact that the fellahin has a much lighter tax than he had under the Turkish rule? Or is he taxed more heavily?

MUFTI: The present taxation is lighter, but the Arabs nevertheless have now other taxation, for instance, customs. On this very point a member of the Arab Committee will deal.

LORD PEEL: On the burden of taxation?

MUFTI: Yes.

LORD PEEL: And the condition of the fellahin as regards, for example, education. Are there more schools or fewer schools now?

MUFTI: They may have more schools, comparatively, but at the same time there has been an increase in their numbers.

 

[Mindful]

I see two of my favourite (not) and "knowledgeable" posters have shown up.

It was just a matter of time.

 

[RoccoR]

P F Tinmore, et al,

That does not answer the question...

I have two questions, maybe somebody can answer, about Samaria and Judea.

How did the Palestinians acquire those territories, and when did that happen?

In 1924 the Palestinians became the legal citizens of Palestine. This was according the rule of state succession (international law) and reiterated by the Treaty of Lausanne. This was followed up by the Palestinian Citizenship Order of 1925.

(COMMENT)

"Citizenship" and the twin questions of "Private Ownership" and "Governmental Sovereignty" are completely different issues altogether.

Most Respectfully,
R

 

[montelatici]

Land ownership facts, not propaganda:

 

[elektra]

The League of Nations, similar to the UN, was established after WWI to promote peace. It was replaced by the UN in1945.

In the context of the subject we are speaking of?

Article 22 of the League of Nations Covenant applies to the new states separated from the Turkish Empire after WWI. Article 20 is also applicable.

Avalon Project - The Covenant of the League of Nations

League of Nations Trumped the Hague. And, the USA was not a member of the League so it is irrelevant. Not to mention it does not exist today, so again irrelevant.

Seems the jewish settlements can not be contested by international law or by organizations that no longer exist.

 

[elektra]

Land, much if which was legally sold to the jews by the arabs for huge profits.

 

[montelatici]

Land ownership facts not propaganda:

Survey of Palestine Vol. 2 page 566

Berman Jewish Policy Archive Stanford University

A Survey of Palestine Volume 2 | Berman Jewish Policy Archive @ Stanford University

 

[montelatici]

Land ownership facts not propaganda:

UNITED
NATIONS
A

• 
  General Assembly

A/364
3 September 1947
OFFICIAL RECORDS OF THE SECOND SESSION OF
THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY


SUPPLEMENT No. 11



UNITED NATIONS
SPECIAL COMMITTEE
ON PALESTINE



REPORT TO THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY

VOLUME 1





Lake Success
New York
1947




164. The Arab population, despite the strenuous efforts of Jews to acquire land in Palestine, at present remains in possession of approximately 85 per cent of the land. The provisions of the land transfer regulations of 1940, which gave effect to the 1939 White Paper policy, have severely restricted the Jewish efforts to acquire new land.

https://unispal.un.org/DPA/DPR/unispal.nsf/0/07175DE9FA2DE563852568D3006E10F3

 

[montelatici]

"Israel’s Settlements Have No Legal Validity,................. Constitute Flagrant Violation of International Law"

UNSC Resolution 2334

 

[Mindful]

Myth 5: These settlers are singlehandedly sabotaging hope for a Palestinian state
Now that is the biggest load of rubbish I’ve ever heard about the communities in Judea and Samaria. These people fear that the Israeli government will refuse to negotiate with the Palestinians because they don’t want to evacuate 300,000 people from their homes. This statement has proven to be untrue. Most of the two state deals proposed by Israel have included the communities in Judea and Samaria, which would be evicted as Gaza was in 2005. Residents of Judea and Samaria know they are taking this risk. However I don’t understand why the world thinks it’s okay for Palestine to have no Jews but not ok for Israel to have no Arabs – talk about a double standard! A future Palestinian state would have several million Palestinian Arabs. Those 300,000 Jews, most of which would probably leave for Israel anyway, are merely a drop in the ocean. What’s wrong with having a Jewish minority in an Arab State if we can have an Arab minority in a Jewish state? I think coexistence in a Palestinian state is possible as it currently exists with Israeli “settlers” who shop alongside their Palestinian counterparts at the same Rami Levy.

 

[P F Tinmore]

P F Tinmore, et al,

That does not answer the question...

I have two questions, maybe somebody can answer, about Samaria and Judea.

How did the Palestinians acquire those territories, and when did that happen?

In 1924 the Palestinians became the legal citizens of Palestine. This was according the rule of state succession (international law) and reiterated by the Treaty of Lausanne. This was followed up by the Palestinian Citizenship Order of 1925.

(COMMENT)

"Citizenship" and the twin questions of "Private Ownership" and "Governmental Sovereignty" are completely different issues altogether.

Most Respectfully,
R

Where are you trying to go with this?

 

[MJB12741]

Had the Arab countries not united to annihilate Israel there would have been no disputed land to build settlements on.

 

[P F Tinmore]

The League of Nations, similar to the UN, was established after WWI to promote peace. It was replaced by the UN in1945.

In the context of the subject we are speaking of?

Article 22 of the League of Nations Covenant applies to the new states separated from the Turkish Empire after WWI. Article 20 is also applicable.

Avalon Project - The Covenant of the League of Nations

League of Nations Trumped the Hague. And, the USA was not a member of the League so it is irrelevant. Not to mention it does not exist today, so again irrelevant.

Seems the jewish settlements can not be contested by international law or by organizations that no longer exist.

The law exists separate from any organization like the LoN or the UN. These organizations merely adopted existing international law.

 

[ForeverYoung436]

Land ownership facts not propaganda:

UNITED
NATIONS
A

• 
  General Assembly

A/364
3 September 1947
OFFICIAL RECORDS OF THE SECOND SESSION OF
THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY


SUPPLEMENT No. 11



UNITED NATIONS
SPECIAL COMMITTEE
ON PALESTINE



REPORT TO THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY

VOLUME 1





Lake Success
New York
1947




164. The Arab population, despite the strenuous efforts of Jews to acquire land in Palestine, at present remains in possession of approximately 85 per cent of the land. The provisions of the land transfer regulations of 1940, which gave effect to the 1939 White Paper policy, have severely restricted the Jewish efforts to acquire new land.

https://unispal.un.org/DPA/DPR/unispal.nsf/0/07175DE9FA2DE563852568D3006E10F3

This official document speaks of the Arab population. Recently, Tinmore claimed that the Palestinians aren't Arab.

 

[Mindful]

P F Tinmore, et al,

That does not answer the question...

I have two questions, maybe somebody can answer, about Samaria and Judea.

How did the Palestinians acquire those territories, and when did that happen?

In 1924 the Palestinians became the legal citizens of Palestine. This was according the rule of state succession (international law) and reiterated by the Treaty of Lausanne. This was followed up by the Palestinian Citizenship Order of 1925.

(COMMENT)

"Citizenship" and the twin questions of "Private Ownership" and "Governmental Sovereignty" are completely different issues altogether.

Most Respectfully,
R

Where are you trying to go with this?

Not La La land, where you live, that's for sure.

 

[Eloy]

Israeli-Jewish settlements are in occupied Palestine and therefore illegal under international law.

Many of those Jews You single out (as opposed to Palestinian and EU illegal settlements)...have been living there before the Zionist immigration started.

What You call "illegal" and "law" are basically subjects of Your opinion.

I't the continuation of the al-Husseini agenda- who officially demanded land bought by Jews returned to Arabs for the sole reason of them being Jews. The same reason one can demand a Juderein Palestine while demanding Israel to give Palestinians in Gaza and Rammallah the same rights as Israeli Arab and Jewish citizens have.

I thought you would know I was referring to the Israeli-Jewish settlements established on the best land of the West Bank, including East Jerusalem since 1967.

"best lands" - any facts yet?

When You decide to address ANY of my points, rather than push some slogans- I'd gladly read those

After the 1967 War, Jordan became responsible for the West Bank and Egypt for Gaza.
In 1993, Israeli Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin and Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO) Negotiator Mahmoud Abbas signed a Declaration of Principles on Interim Self-Government Arrangements (Oslo Accord). Israel accepted the PLO as the representative of the Palestinians, and the PLO renounced terrorism and recognized Israel’s right to exist in peace.

The Israeli-Jordanian peace treaty of 1994 was signed. The Cairo Agreement of 1994 finalized Israel’s withdrawal from most of Gaza and Jericho and then came the Taba (Oslo II) Agreement in 1995. The latter agreement divided the West Bank into separate areas under Israeli control, Palestinian control, and Israeli military responsibility with Palestinian civil administration, respectively.

Area A (Palestinian Control) 18%
Area B (Palestine civil administration/Israeli military responsibility) 22%
Area C (Israeli military control) 60%

You took exception to my claim that the settlers were taking the best land. By best I am, of course, referring to agriculture water, and minerals. The settlements are all in Area C or land which has been annexed by Israel. This current arrangement makes it impossible for the Palestinians in the West Bank, including East Jerusalem to develop an economy. The majority of the West Bank's agricultural land is in Area C as well as the water and mineral resources. Palestinians are severely restricted from accessing these resources The settlements continue to grow in Area C, giving the settlers the best land.

"Every time a settlement is built, Palestinians say, a little more is taken away from a future Palestinian state. The possibility of peace seems to grow less and less likely, and Palestinians accuse Israel of confiscating lands and taking away resources from the areas that Palestinians want for their statehood."
Israeli settlements controversy explained, and why it matters

No where in Your answer was an explanation about "best lands" You claim being stolen from Palestinians.

-How is that different from Haj Amin al-Husseini's motive behind the demand to evict Jews from lands they lawfully bought or owned even before the 1st Zionist immigration?

"The control of land remains the crucial issue in the Arab-Israel conflict. Kenneth Stein investigates in detail and without polemics how and why Jews acquired land from Arabs in Palestine during the British Mandate, and he reaches conclusions that are challenging and surprising.

Stein contends that Zionists were able to purchase the core of a national territory in Palestine during this period for three reasons: they had the single-mindedness of purpose, as well as the capital, to buy the land; the Arabs, economically impoverished, politically fragmented, and socially atomized, were willing to sell the land; and the British were largely ineffective in regulating land sales and protecting Arab tenants.

Neither Arab opposition to land sales nor British attempts to regulate them actually limited land acquisition. There were always more Arab offers to sell land than there were Zionist funds. In fact, many sales were made by Arab politicians who publicly opposed Zionism and even led agitation against land acquisition by Jews. Zionists furthered their own ambitions by skillfully using their understanding of the bureaucracy to write laws and to influence key administrative appointments. Further, they knew how to take advantage of social and economic cleavages within Arab society..."

Yes there is an explanation and proof that the settlers in Area C (80% of the West Bank) with the best agricultural land, water and mineral resources. Perhaps you missed that.
But you know something? You are not a dope but I have to admit that I am quite tired of providing all sorts of documentary evidence for what I post only to have you dismiss it all.
I will let you have the last word.
Bye bye.

 

[montelatici]

Had the Arab countries not united to annihilate Israel there would have been no disputed land to build settlements on.

• The Arab League intervened to stop the Jewish slaughter of non-Jews and to prevent the Jews from expelling non-Jews from Palestine. The Arab League only entered the part of Palestine assigned to the non-Jews and the international sector, after the Jews had already conquered numerous Arab villages and cities in the Arab sector. Jaffa, for example, had been under Jewish siege for over a month and surrendered to the Jews before the State of Israel was declared (May 13) and before the Arab League intervened. The fighting took place in the non-Jew or international sectors into which the Jews had entered and were expelling or killing the non-Jews. The fact that the Jews were the aggressors was confirmed in recently declassified British intelligence reports:

British officials predicted war – and Arab defeat – in Palestine in 1948
Declassified UK reports document build-up of conflict, Jewish public's endorsement of their leaders' pro-terrorist stance and declare armies of Arab states were Palestinians' 'only hope'

"After an increase in violent attacks by the militant Zionists of the Stern group and Irgun, British officials reported later in 1946: "Arab leaders appear to be still disposed to defer active opposition so long as a chance of a political decision acceptable to Arab interests exists...... "the Arabs have suffered a series of overwhelming defeats............... It is now obvious that the only hope of regaining their position lies in the regular armies of the Arab states."

British officials predicted war – and Arab defeat – in Palestine in 1948

 

[P F Tinmore]

Land ownership facts not propaganda:

UNITED
NATIONS
A

• 
  General Assembly

A/364
3 September 1947
OFFICIAL RECORDS OF THE SECOND SESSION OF
THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY


SUPPLEMENT No. 11



UNITED NATIONS
SPECIAL COMMITTEE
ON PALESTINE



REPORT TO THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY

VOLUME 1





Lake Success
New York
1947




164. The Arab population, despite the strenuous efforts of Jews to acquire land in Palestine, at present remains in possession of approximately 85 per cent of the land. The provisions of the land transfer regulations of 1940, which gave effect to the 1939 White Paper policy, have severely restricted the Jewish efforts to acquire new land.

A/364 of 3 September 1947

This official document speaks of the Arab population. Recently, Tinmore claimed that the Palestinians aren't Arab.

I did not.