Explain. Give ~time on video where this occurs.
Many times. What is he saying from 6:00 to 7:50 What is the significance?
Quit being so obtuse. He states that the independent State for the Jewish homeland could have come into being at any time from 1920. Where is the self-contradiction and where is the contradiction with Kontorovich?
What ARE you trying to argue here? The territory HAD borders. Borders are normally transferred from one political entity to another with a change of sovereignty. Do you dispute that?
That is not what he was talking about.
As always, you are not discussing, you are just messing around.
He clearly states that the Jews would have had a State from 1920 to 1948, any time after 1920, had it not been for the British back stabbing the Jews with Article #6 by cutting down the Jewish right to immigrate into their own homeland.
Is there a problem with that? What is it?
What did you understand from 6 to 7:50 minutes into the video that you are bringing it up? Or let us say it, what is it that you did misunderstand about it?
It is you who misunderstood what he said. He said that a condition had to be met. That condition was a Jewish majority. If Palestine was given to the Jews, why would this be important? If the Palestinians had no sovereignty in the land that should not make a difference. But it did.
After the Treaty of Lausenne, The Palestinians became the sovereigns and citizens of Palestine. If a representative government was established with the Jews in the minority there would not be a Jewish state. Britain had the Mandate for 30 years and never established a representative government for that reason. The plan was, through mass immigration, to pack Palestine with Jews and when they became the majority then a government could be established. This never happened. The plan failed and Britain left Palestine without establishing a government.
The Arabs had NO sovereignty on the land. Ask the Ottomans.
It was the Jewish Homeland, and it was for the Jews to return to their land and become the majority in it again.
But the Arabs kept attacking and the British kept capitulating to the Arab demands and Jews only became a majority in some of the areas and not all of it by 1948.
TranJordan became Jew free in 1925.
Jewish cities became Jew free in 1929 thanks to the Arabs rioting and attacking Jews, and then the British expelling them from those areas.
Hebron.
The Arabs (Al Husseini ) understood very well that once the Jews immigrated into the Mandate and they became the majority, the Muslims would become subjects to the Jews. And that was unacceptable to him and Islam.
The UN disagrees with you.
The Jews showed the UN that they had built an infrastructure and a government and they were ready to become independent of the Mandate, like the other three Mandates.
Arabs and Jews became the "Palestinians" under the British Mandate for Palestine. The name was chosen by the British because of the Romans having changed the name from Judea to Syria Palestina. The Arabs were not around, then.
The Arabs were offered a partition during the 1936-39 war. They rejected it because they wanted sovereignty of it all, a future Pan Arab Caliphate.
The Jews accepted the partition in 1937. And again when the UN offered the partition and the Jews showed that they were ready for it in November of 1947.
The UN acceptance of the future Jewish State is what got the Arabs started again with attacks on Jews until May 14, 1948 when Israel declared Independence.
Next day, all the Arab Muslim countries invaded in order to destroy the new State which had been approved by the UN.
It was not up to the British to establish a government in the Mandate for Palestine.
Which government did they establish for the Mandate of Iraq?
Or the French for the Mandates of Lebanon and Syria?
It was always up to the people living in those Mandates to create an infrastructure and a government which would work and therefore be able to function as a State.
Keep dreaming.