Boycott Israel

[Shusha]

BTW, you are grasping at straws.

BTW revisited. I am a neutral observer to this conflict. I am not Jewish or Israeli. I am not Muslim or Palestinian. I am just a mid-western WASP who developed an interest about 15 years ago.

I am grasping at straws? You are disregarding entire legal documents because they don't say what you want them to say and completely misreading other legal documents to suit your fantasy.

And "neutral", my ass.

 

[P F Tinmore]

BTW, you are grasping at straws.

BTW revisited. I am a neutral observer to this conflict. I am not Jewish or Israeli. I am not Muslim or Palestinian. I am just a mid-western WASP who developed an interest about 15 years ago.

I am grasping at straws? You are disregarding entire legal documents because they don't say what you want them to say and completely misreading other legal documents to suit your fantasy.

And "neutral", my ass.

You won't quote passages because the documents don't say what you want.

 

[RoccoR]

RE: Boycott Israel
※→ P F Tinmore,, et al,

That is correct. Your observation is absolutely correct. And all the regional cultures of the former Ottoman Empire were treated (to the best of the Mandate Authorities abilities) nearly the same.

Palestine was not a party to the Treaty. In fact, the word Palestine does not appear in the treaty.

Neither was Lebanon, Syria, Jordan, or Iraq.

Why do you keep pimping this Israeli talking point?

(COMMENT)

None of these countries were a party to the Treaty. And four out of five came about in very similar fashion:

• Egypt: 28 February 1922 released from Administration as a UK Protectorate;
... 18 June 1953 released from occupation after the 1952 Revolution
• Iraq: 3 October 1932 released from Administration under the British Mandate
• Lebanon: 22 November 1943 released from Administration under the French Mandate
• Syria: 17 April 1946 released from Administration under the French Mandate
• Jordan: 25 May 1946 released from Administration under the British Mandate
• Israel: 14 May 1948 released from Administration under the British Mandate

The Arab Palestinians were constant and continuous complainers and totally uncooperative. They were the reason for the delay in establishing independence. With the exception of Egypt becoming a Kingdom in 1922, and Iraq becoming a Kingdom in 1932, the four regional Mandates. The entire set of Mandates ,in this particular region, were carve-outs of:

Six Major Sanjaks:

• Zor (Autonomous)
• Aleppo
• Hama
• Damascus
• Hawran
• Ma'an​

The Central Vilayet of Beirut consisting of:

• Sanjaks of Jerusalem (Autonomous)
• Sanjaks of Nablas
• Sanjaks of Beirut
• Sanjaks of Mount Lebanon (Autonomous)
• Sanjaks of Triipoli​

What made the Mandate of Palestine different to this day is the hostile behaviors of the Arab Palestinians themselves.

(ON THE MATTER OF PIMPING TALKING POINTS)

Yes, I have may faults; but, this is not one of them. I know that I should invites more discussion and argument (talking points); but I don't feel that the manner of selecting what I respond to as all that small or insignificant (pimping).

• I try to deliver my responses in succinct statements designed to support one side of an issue; and to frame a response that is firmed-up by salient comments from readily available sources.
• I try to make my response free standing (like one domino in a string of domino's) that created persuasive retorts that lead the reader to the conclusion on there own (not talking down to them).​

If I appreciate a "talking point" (Arab - Israeli - American - Russian - etc) and respond, that means I have seen something of interest (negative or positive).

Most Respectfully,
R

 

[P F Tinmore]

What made the Mandate of Palestine different to this day is the hostile behaviors of the Arab Palestinians themselves.

No, It was Zionist settler colonialism.

 

[P F Tinmore]

None of these countries were a party to the Treaty. And four out of five came about in very similar fashion:

• Egypt: 28 February 1922 released from Administration as a UK Protectorate;
... 18 June 1953 released from occupation after the 1952 Revolution
• Iraq: 3 October 1932 released from Administration under the British Mandate
• Lebanon: 22 November 1943 released from Administration under the French Mandate
• Syria: 17 April 1946 released from Administration under the French Mandate
• Jordan: 25 May 1946 released from Administration under the British Mandate
• Israel: 14 May 1948 released from Administration under the British Mandate

Palestine still under 100 years of military occupation.

 

[RoccoR]

RE: Boycott Israel
※→ P F Tinmore,, et al,

Yes, and don't expect that to change.

None of these countries were a party to the Treaty. And four out of five came about in very similar fashion:

• Egypt: 28 February 1922 released from Administration as a UK Protectorate;
... 18 June 1953 released from occupation after the 1952 Revolution
• Iraq: 3 October 1932 released from Administration under the British Mandate
• Lebanon: 22 November 1943 released from Administration under the French Mandate
• Syria: 17 April 1946 released from Administration under the French Mandate
• Jordan: 25 May 1946 released from Administration under the British Mandate
• Israel: 14 May 1948 released from Administration under the British Mandate

Palestine still under 100 years of military occupation.

(COMMENT)

As long as the Arab-Palestinian presents itself as a population of ready made Jihadist, Virulent Fedayeen, Hostile Insurgent, Radicalized Islamist, and Asymmetric Fighters, the longer they won't care.

While many nations in the world may sign the various non-binding or unenforceable resolutions, they don't want to deal with another potential threat.

As long as the Arab-Palestinians pervert the course of peace, and they actively pursue ways to stall and cloud the good faith talks on how resolve disputes by peaceful means, the longer they wait. Even if it takes another 100 years. It is getting to the point that the logic of either side will matter. It will soon be just a feud.

Most Respectfully,
R

 

[Shusha]

What made the Mandate of Palestine different to this day is the hostile behaviors of the Arab Palestinians themselves.

No, It was Zionist settler colonialism.

No it was the hostility toward the idea of a Jewish State in the Jewish ancestral homeland. A hostility which is reflected even in the language you use while fallaciously claiming "neutrality".

 

[P F Tinmore]

As long as the Arab-Palestinian presents itself as a population of ready made Jihadist, Virulent Fedayeen, Hostile Insurgent, Radicalized Islamist, and Asymmetric Fighters, the longer they won't care.

Do you mean like defending themselves?

They were not like that before the Zionist settler colonial project.

 

[Indeependent]

As long as the Arab-Palestinian presents itself as a population of ready made Jihadist, Virulent Fedayeen, Hostile Insurgent, Radicalized Islamist, and Asymmetric Fighters, the longer they won't care.

Do you mean like defending themselves?

They were not like that before the Zionist settler colonial project.

Defending themselves against a force 1/100th smaller than them?
How lame.

 

[P F Tinmore]

The Palestine Support Network Australia-PSNA, on behalf of its member groups is pleased to announce that the Royal Flying Doctors (RFDS), South East Section, has advised us that it has not entered into any commercial or contractual agreement with Elbit Systems Australia.

http://www.psna.net.au/wordpress/wp...-statement-re-RFDS-and-Elbit_Sept-25-2017.pdf

 

[Shusha]

You won't quote passages because the documents don't say what you want.

I've stopped quoting passages because I have quoted them dozens of times over the years and you consistently fail to respond to them. But here we go again:

Turkey cedes territory with the Treaty of Lausanne:

ARTICLE 16.
Turkey hereby renounces all rights and title whatsoever over or respecting the territories situated outside the frontiers laid down in the present Treaty and the islands other than those over which her sovereignty is recognised by the said Treaty, the future of these territories and islands being settled or to be settled by the parties concerned.

ARTICLE 30.
Turkish subjects habitually resident in territory which in accordance with the provisions of the present Treaty is detached from Turkey will become ipsofacto, in the conditions laid down by the local law, nationals of the State to which such territory is transferred.
(emphasis mine).

The parties concerned determine the settlement in the Mandate for Palestine:

(PREAMBLE)
Whereas the Principal Allied Powers have also agreed that the Mandatory should be responsible for putting into effect the declaration originally made on November 2nd, 1917, by the Government of His Britannic Majesty, and adopted by the said Powers, in favor of the establishment in Palestine of a national home for the Jewish people, it being clearly understood that nothing should be done which might 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; and

Whereas recognition has thereby been given to the historical connection of the Jewish people with Palestine and to the grounds for reconstituting their national home in that country; and

Whereas the Principal Allied Powers have selected His Britannic Majesty as the Mandatory for Palestine; and

ART. 2.
The Mandatory shall be responsible for placing the country under such political, administrative and economic conditions as will secure the establishment of the Jewish national home, as laid down in the preamble, and the development of self-governing institutions, and also for safeguarding the civil and religious rights of all the inhabitants of Palestine, irrespective of race and religion.

ART. 4.
An appropriate Jewish agency shall be recognised as a public body for the purpose of advising and co-operating with the Administration of Palestine in such economic, social and other matters as may affect the establishment of the Jewish national home and the interests of the Jewish population in Palestine, and, subject always to the control of the Administration to assist and take part in the development of the country.

The Zionist organization, so long as its organization and constitution are in the opinion of the Mandatory appropriate, shall be recognised as such agency. It shall take steps in consultation with His Britannic Majesty's Government to secure the co-operation of all Jews who are willing to assist in the establishment of the Jewish national home.

ART. 7.
The Administration of Palestine shall be responsible for enacting a nationality law. There shall be included in this law provisions framed so as to facilitate the acquisition of Palestinian citizenship by Jews who take up their permanent residence in Palestine.

ART. 11.
The Administration of Palestine shall take all necessary measures to safeguard the interests of the community in connection with the development of the country, and, subject to any international obligations accepted by the Mandatory, shall have full power to provide for public ownership or control of any of the natural resources of the country or of the public works, services and utilities established or to be established therein. It shall introduce a land system appropriate to the needs of the country, having regard, among other things, to the desirability of promoting the close settlement and intensive cultivation of the land.

The Administration may arrange with the Jewish agency mentioned in Article 4 to construct or operate, upon fair and equitable terms, any public works, services and utilities, and to develop any of the natural resources of the country, in so far as these matters are not directly undertaken by the Administration. Any such arrangements shall provide that no profits distributed by such agency, directly or indirectly, shall exceed a reasonable rate of interest on the capital, and any further profits shall be utilised by it for the benefit of the country in a manner approved by the Administration.
(emphasis mine)

The Palestine Citizenship Order of 1925 was the fulfillment of Article 7 of the Palestine Mandate. Notice that one of the things the naturalization law was required to do was to "facilitate the acquisition of Palestinian citizenship by Jews":

The Palestinian Citizenship Order, under the administration of Britain, accomplished a number of things:

1. It created a Palestinian nationality -- as distinct from a Turkish, Jordanian, Syrian, Lebanese, etc.
2. It transferred the citizenship of Turkish nationals residing in Palestine to Palestinian nationality.
3. It facilitated the acquisition of Palestinian nationality for Jewish immigrants/returnees.


What ALL this did NOT do was:
1. create a State of Palestine
2. prohibit a State for the Jewish people (in fact, the treaties require it)
3. end British administration or control over the territory


If you are trying to argue, as is customary in international law, that the treaties transferred nationality from Turkish to Palestinian and should have transferred from Palestinian to Israeli with the declaration of Israel's independence -- I agree with you. That is normally what happens. It didn't happen. Why? Arab hostility.

But if you are trying to argue that any of this somehow prevents or prohibits a Jewish State from existing, or that it created a State of Palestine for the Arab people -- you are just wrong.

 

[Shusha]

As long as the Arab-Palestinian presents itself as a population of ready made Jihadist, Virulent Fedayeen, Hostile Insurgent, Radicalized Islamist, and Asymmetric Fighters, the longer they won't care.

Do you mean like defending themselves?

There is nothing to defend themselves FROM!

The fact that the Jewish people, like all people, have an inherent, inviolable right to self-determination on ancestral homelands is not an ATTACK on other people.

 

[abi]

The fact that the Jewish people, like all people, have an inherent, inviolable right to self-determination on ancestral homelands is not an ATTACK on other people.

What about their attacks on other people? Why try to confuse that with "self-determination?"

 

[Sixties Fan]

The fact that the Jewish people, like all people, have an inherent, inviolable right to self-determination on ancestral homelands is not an ATTACK on other people.

What about their attacks on other people? Why try to confuse that with "self-determination?"

Why are you usually posting only vague posts which say absolutely nothing?

You have something specific to say, say it. Do not be vague.
And you do owe me answers to two other posts in two of your threads which you do not seem to want to answer.

Pro Israel posters must be banned, apparently, from what you wrote in your newest thread.

So, may I ask you what your knowledge of the history of the area is and what is your knowledge of Jews and Arabs to want to somewhat ban the Pro Israel side from posting on the forums?

 

[abi]

I owe you? Read what you wrote. I owe you nothing and I do not respond to troll posts; whether they are creating a straw man to argue with or posting from a narrative as it is definitively known is irrelevant to me and to rational discussion.

I suppose you believe that boycotting or criticizing Israel is antisemitic and shows support for terrorists, fair?

 

[Shusha]

The fact that the Jewish people, like all people, have an inherent, inviolable right to self-determination on ancestral homelands is not an ATTACK on other people.

What about their attacks on other people? Why try to confuse that with "self-determination?"

Because self-determination for all people is -- SHOULD BE -- the starting place. If you begin with the idea that BOTH the Jewish people and the Arab Palestinian people have inherent, inviolable rights to self-determination in that territory then you will see that the presence of NEITHER people is an attack on the other.

And once THAT is out of the way, its a simple conflict which a simple solution.

 

[P F Tinmore]

If you are trying to argue, as is customary in international law, that the treaties transferred nationality from Turkish to Palestinian and should have transferred from Palestinian to Israeli with the declaration of Israel's independence -- I agree with you. That is normally what happens. It didn't happen. Why? Arab hostility.

The transfer of nationality from Turkish to Palestinian was by treaty following international law. Where is the treaty transferring it to Israel?

 

[Shusha]

If you are trying to argue, as is customary in international law, that the treaties transferred nationality from Turkish to Palestinian and should have transferred from Palestinian to Israeli with the declaration of Israel's independence -- I agree with you. That is normally what happens. It didn't happen. Why? Arab hostility.

The transfer of nationality from Turkish to Palestinian was by treaty following international law. Where is the treaty transferring it to Israel?

When Israel declared independance and created her own nationality laws, just as Jordan, Syria, Lebanon, etc did, according to the demands for a Jewish State in the Mandate for Palestine.

 

[P F Tinmore]

If you are trying to argue, as is customary in international law, that the treaties transferred nationality from Turkish to Palestinian and should have transferred from Palestinian to Israeli with the declaration of Israel's independence -- I agree with you. That is normally what happens. It didn't happen. Why? Arab hostility.

The transfer of nationality from Turkish to Palestinian was by treaty following international law. Where is the treaty transferring it to Israel?

When Israel declared independance and created her own nationality laws, just as Jordan, Syria, Lebanon, etc did, according to the demands for a Jewish State in the Mandate for Palestine.

The Mandate for Palestine was not a place. And besides, they left Palestine without a treaty with Israel.

 

[Shusha]

If you are trying to argue, as is customary in international law, that the treaties transferred nationality from Turkish to Palestinian and should have transferred from Palestinian to Israeli with the declaration of Israel's independence -- I agree with you. That is normally what happens. It didn't happen. Why? Arab hostility.

The transfer of nationality from Turkish to Palestinian was by treaty following international law. Where is the treaty transferring it to Israel?

When Israel declared independance and created her own nationality laws, just as Jordan, Syria, Lebanon, etc did, according to the demands for a Jewish State in the Mandate for Palestine.

The Mandate for Palestine was not a place. And besides, they left Palestine without a treaty with Israel.

The Mandate for Palestine is a legal document. It provides for a State for the Jewish peoples. In accordance with that legal document, Israel declared independence and created her own nationality laws. You are playing silly word games.