Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
P F Tinmore, et al,
I think you misread the tense. This statement was made in connection with the post-Agreement phase. Relative to the comment made by MJB12741: "The worst punishment Israel could inflict on the Palestinians would be self government,with self determination without having Israel to suck off of to support them any longer."
This is all about what happens after (if ever) the Israelis and the Palestinians agree and begin a withdrawal from the West Bank.UNRWA said:The United States government has announced a new contribution of nearly US$ 68 million to the United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees in the Near East (UNRWA), including more than US$ 3.8 million for the construction of a multipurpose school building in Zohour to replace the current rented facilities and more than $1.3 million for the extension of Jordan Field operations support office (OSO). The majority of the nearly $68 million contribution will go to the Agency's Programme Budget to support more than 170 UNRWA schools in Jordan; as well as its health clinics and social services programmes, which help Palestine refugees’ efforts to stay healthy and secure.
SOURCE: UNRWA US Announces Additional $68M Contribution to Support Palestine Refugee
(COMMENT)Not true. The money the US gives to the "Palestinians" is to protect Israel.Where as, the US donor contribution to the Palestinians would probably go down; because they have virtually no expected return on any US investment.
First, the return on US Dollar Investment given to the Palestinians is not now, nor expected to be in the future, about the protection of Israel; not even the US Security Assistance funding for PA Security Forces. It is about setting the conditions to meet Article 43 HR (law and order) prior to an agreed upon withdrawal from the West Bank.
The effectiveness of U.S. assistance to the Palestinians in furthering U.S. policy objectives might be defined by answers to the following questions:
( Quote From U.S. Foreign Aid to the Palestinians CRS RS22967 18 MAR 16)
How does it affect U.S. influence with Palestinians in working toward regional policy objectives?
How does it address short-term (i.e., humanitarian) needs?
How does it address longer-term development, governance, and reform efforts?
Again, you misunderstand the various purposes for the various kinds of funding, and how the change in conditions changes the direction and focus of funding.
If the Palestinians were to come forth with acceptable conditions that actually (not theoretically) lead to a withdrawal, the US will in all probability, cut a substantial portion of funding to the PA (or successor government); simply because the US would not want that funding to be used in hostile activities against Israel. Likewise, the US would increase funding to Israel's defensive capabilities to offset the potential for staging Arab Forces (Hostile Arab Palestinians) within 9 miles of Netanya, 10 miles from Beersheba, and 11 miles from Tel Aviv.
Currently, the US is getting virtually no return on its investment from the US Dollars and equipment provided to the PA, relative to Israeli Security. In fact, one only needs to read this Discussion Group and watch as violent events occur and the low and order declines relative to the safety and security of Israeli Citizens. Incident levels are increasing --- not decreasing.
Most Respectfully,
RCurrently, the US is getting virtually no return on its investment from the US Dollars and equipment provided to the PA, relative to Israeli Security.
You don't give military aid to a place that has no generally agreed upon govt. And is split between rival factions that want to kill each other. . Are you nutz? That shouldn't even BE on the table until the proper leadership and authorities are in place.
(COMMENT)No they didn't. Read Article 30 of the Treaty of Lausanne.
(COMMENT)This all boils down to your refusal to provide any link that states that the arab muslims were granted any part of Jewish palestine after 1917.False question.
What treaty mentions "Arab Muslims?"P F Tinmore, et al,
Sometimes you just kill me.
(COMMENT)This all boils down to your refusal to provide any link that states that the arab muslims were granted any part of Jewish palestine after 1917.False question.
A question can be neither be "true" or "false." It is either a question, or it is not. An answer can be "true" or "false."
Questions can present a false dilemma --- or it can ask a question where only imaginary answers are available. A question can be limited in it possible answers where reality is not --- meaning the answer cannot be strictly "binary:" Yes or No --- Black or White --- Good or Evil --- right or wrong --- etc.
The "Question of Palestine" has been around from more than a half century. It does not lend itself to limits of binary thinking so often representative of the Hostile Arab Palestinian thinking. (Conflict or No Conflict --- as opposed to --- Hostilities or Peace)
We have known since the time of Sir Isaac Newton that humans operate in a three-dimensional universe + time. But most living creatures have no concept of what a dimension is (X, Y, Z riding on T). Often we are expected to answer Palestinian questions with a two-dimensional (verbal or written) model when there are at least two other dimension. Any two dimensional answer can only be part of an answer to a multi-dimensional question.
Most Respectfully,
R
P F Tinmore, et al,
I think you misread the tense. This statement was made in connection with the post-Agreement phase. Relative to the comment made by MJB12741: "The worst punishment Israel could inflict on the Palestinians would be self government,with self determination without having Israel to suck off of to support them any longer."
This is all about what happens after (if ever) the Israelis and the Palestinians agree and begin a withdrawal from the West Bank.UNRWA said:The United States government has announced a new contribution of nearly US$ 68 million to the United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees in the Near East (UNRWA), including more than US$ 3.8 million for the construction of a multipurpose school building in Zohour to replace the current rented facilities and more than $1.3 million for the extension of Jordan Field operations support office (OSO). The majority of the nearly $68 million contribution will go to the Agency's Programme Budget to support more than 170 UNRWA schools in Jordan; as well as its health clinics and social services programmes, which help Palestine refugees’ efforts to stay healthy and secure.
SOURCE: UNRWA US Announces Additional $68M Contribution to Support Palestine Refugee
(COMMENT)Not true. The money the US gives to the "Palestinians" is to protect Israel.Where as, the US donor contribution to the Palestinians would probably go down; because they have virtually no expected return on any US investment.
First, the return on US Dollar Investment given to the Palestinians is not now, nor expected to be in the future, about the protection of Israel; not even the US Security Assistance funding for PA Security Forces. It is about setting the conditions to meet Article 43 HR (law and order) prior to an agreed upon withdrawal from the West Bank.
The effectiveness of U.S. assistance to the Palestinians in furthering U.S. policy objectives might be defined by answers to the following questions:
( Quote From U.S. Foreign Aid to the Palestinians CRS RS22967 18 MAR 16)
How does it affect U.S. influence with Palestinians in working toward regional policy objectives?
How does it address short-term (i.e., humanitarian) needs?
How does it address longer-term development, governance, and reform efforts?
Again, you misunderstand the various purposes for the various kinds of funding, and how the change in conditions changes the direction and focus of funding.
If the Palestinians were to come forth with acceptable conditions that actually (not theoretically) lead to a withdrawal, the US will in all probability, cut a substantial portion of funding to the PA (or successor government); simply because the US would not want that funding to be used in hostile activities against Israel. Likewise, the US would increase funding to Israel's defensive capabilities to offset the potential for staging Arab Forces (Hostile Arab Palestinians) within 9 miles of Netanya, 10 miles from Beersheba, and 11 miles from Tel Aviv.
Currently, the US is getting virtually no return on its investment from the US Dollars and equipment provided to the PA, relative to Israeli Security. In fact, one only needs to read this Discussion Group and watch as violent events occur and the low and order declines relative to the safety and security of Israeli Citizens. Incident levels are increasing --- not decreasing.
Most Respectfully,
RCurrently, the US is getting virtually no return on its investment from the US Dollars and equipment provided to the PA, relative to Israeli Security.
You don't give military aid to a place that has no generally agreed upon govt. And is split between rival factions that want to kill each other. . Are you nutz? That shouldn't even BE on the table until the proper leadership and authorities are in place.
The security forces in the illegal "PA" in the West Bank is armed, paid, and trained by the US to take out Hamas and other resistance factions. The so called unity government wants to put those forces in Gaza. Of course Hamas is opposed to that. Hamas ran those US supported forces out of Gaza in 2007.
(COMMENT)What treaty mentions "Arab Muslims?"
What treaty mention a "Jewish Palestine?"
That is the contradiction. Accordingly Israel could not acquire any land without an agreement with the Palestinians. Not just the land outside of the partition plan that did not happen.
Israel did not acquire land. At no time has Israel acquired any territory. Step by step.
The Ottoman Empire was dissolved.
The Ottoman Empire (now Turkey) ceded all claims to territory, of which, "Palestine" was part.
The territory was ceded to the control of the Allied Powers for the purpose of self-determination and self-government of various groups as they became capable of said government.
One of those groups was the Jewish People and the territory ceded for their self-determination and self-government was what was left of "Palestine" after Jordan's people were given its own self-determination.
The Jewish People, having completed the necessary steps, having established a government, DECLARED its independence (from the Mandate of the Allied Powers) just as Jordan and Syria and Iraq declared their independence. It is the declaration of independence and the recognition of independence which brings a State into being. Done and done. Israel is a State on all of the territory.
Jordan and Egypt sign peace treaties with Israel delineating the borders between their respective nations and Israel.
Much later, 1988, Palestine declared its own independence (from Israel). Israel essentially accepted this in principle. A negotiated peace treaty between Israel and the government of Palestine permitted Palestine temporary government over Gaza and Area A and temporary limited government over Area B. Israel maintains complete control over Area C (they maintain control -- they already had it both legally and effectively). ALL final dispositions were left to negotiation and treaty.
So, P F Tinmore , where do you think I have this wrong and why?The territory was ceded to the control of the Allied Powers for the purpose of self-determination and self-government of various groups as they became capable of said government.
No they didn't. Read Article 30 of the Treaty of Lausanne.
What part of all this addresses my post?P F Tinmore, et al,
No, I labeled each point and answered each.
(COMMENT)Rocco, you are still ducking my post.
Nothing happens instantaneously. When the Arab League decided to break the UN Charter and cross their frontiers (fully expecting to suppress the Jewish State), the entire process changed at that point. Even the Successor Government changed hands.
So, Arab League was unable to achieve any significant military objective in the 1948-49 Conflict, that they would compensate for the political and diplomatic failures as a result of excessive demands. And that leads us right up to today. The pattern in the lack of military accomplishment (not once, not twice, not even on the third attempt with a sneak attack) and the continuation of perpetual threats for perpetual conflict by Jihadist, Terrorist, Fedayeen Activity, Rebels and organized Resistance Impostors, brings us to the point where the fantasy land of the State of Palestine only exists by the grace of donor nations.
As the League of Nations Covenant said, "until such time as they are able to stand alone." Now I have heard nearly every excuse about why the Hostile Arab Palestinians have been unable to achieve the "stand alone" goal. And the excuses nearly always point to the Israelis (the Israelis did this and the Israelis did that). It should be noted that between 1949 (The Armistices) and 1967 (The Six-Day War) Israel was peaceful and building a nation. During that time, the Hostile Arab Palestinians, accomplished nothing that would add significantly to national development.
AND NO! I did not duck anything in your post. You are just trying to find some political bone to pick just to make it appear that the Palestinians are Lilly White and the Israelis are Light Green and Loam.
Most Respectfully,
R
Borders can be changed, but a state can only acquire territory from a neighbor by legal annexation, that is, by agreement, and with a referendum of the population. Obtaining territory by war violates fundamental principles of the UN Charter. Nevertheless, this is what Israel did.So, how did Israel claim Resolution 181 borders when the UN had no authority to partition Palestine? Resolution 181 was a recommendation that was not implemented.
That is the contradiction. Accordingly Israel could not acquire any land without an agreement with the Palestinians. Not just the land outside of the partition plan that did not happen.
This all boils down to your refusal to provide any link that states that the arab muslims were granted any part of Jewish palestine after 1917. You are going on one persons POV and his lies and manipulations to show that palestine the nation was invented by the LoN in their treaties of Sevres and Lausanne. The reality is that neither treaty mentions palestine by name, or grants the arab muslims full control of all of palestine. Why would Israel need the palestinians go ahead when the palestinians did not own any of the landThis all boils down to your refusal to provide any link that states that the arab muslims were granted any part of Jewish palestine after 1917.
False question.
What treaty mentions "Arab Muslims?"P F Tinmore, et al,
Sometimes you just kill me.
(COMMENT)This all boils down to your refusal to provide any link that states that the arab muslims were granted any part of Jewish palestine after 1917.False question.
A question can be neither be "true" or "false." It is either a question, or it is not. An answer can be "true" or "false."
Questions can present a false dilemma --- or it can ask a question where only imaginary answers are available. A question can be limited in it possible answers where reality is not --- meaning the answer cannot be strictly "binary:" Yes or No --- Black or White --- Good or Evil --- right or wrong --- etc.
The "Question of Palestine" has been around from more than a half century. It does not lend itself to limits of binary thinking so often representative of the Hostile Arab Palestinian thinking. (Conflict or No Conflict --- as opposed to --- Hostilities or Peace)
We have known since the time of Sir Isaac Newton that humans operate in a three-dimensional universe + time. But most living creatures have no concept of what a dimension is (X, Y, Z riding on T). Often we are expected to answer Palestinian questions with a two-dimensional (verbal or written) model when there are at least two other dimension. Any two dimensional answer can only be part of an answer to a multi-dimensional question.
Most Respectfully,
R
What treaty mention a "Jewish Palestine?"
Indeed, the Muslims/Christians were about 93% of the population at the turn of the century. With their mass immigration their numbers zoomed up to 65% by 1947.That is the contradiction. Accordingly Israel could not acquire any land without an agreement with the Palestinians. Not just the land outside of the partition plan that did not happen.
Israel did not acquire land. At no time has Israel acquired any territory. Step by step.
The Ottoman Empire was dissolved.
The Ottoman Empire (now Turkey) ceded all claims to territory, of which, "Palestine" was part.
The territory was ceded to the control of the Allied Powers for the purpose of self-determination and self-government of various groups as they became capable of said government.
One of those groups was the Jewish People and the territory ceded for their self-determination and self-government was what was left of "Palestine" after Jordan's people were given its own self-determination.
The Jewish People, having completed the necessary steps, having established a government, DECLARED its independence (from the Mandate of the Allied Powers) just as Jordan and Syria and Iraq declared their independence. It is the declaration of independence and the recognition of independence which brings a State into being. Done and done. Israel is a State on all of the territory.
Jordan and Egypt sign peace treaties with Israel delineating the borders between their respective nations and Israel.
Much later, 1988, Palestine declared its own independence (from Israel). Israel essentially accepted this in principle. A negotiated peace treaty between Israel and the government of Palestine permitted Palestine temporary government over Gaza and Area A and temporary limited government over Area B. Israel maintains complete control over Area C (they maintain control -- they already had it both legally and effectively). ALL final dispositions were left to negotiation and treaty.
So, P F Tinmore , where do you think I have this wrong and why?The territory was ceded to the control of the Allied Powers for the purpose of self-determination and self-government of various groups as they became capable of said government.
No they didn't. Read Article 30 of the Treaty of Lausanne.
Where does it say what you claim in article 30 then
SECTION II .
NATIONALITY.
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.
This means that the arab muslims that arrived after JULY 24, 1923 are not covered by this treaty. You cant make a treaty apply to an aspect it was never meant to cover, and as we all know the arab muslim illegally migrated to palestine to swell their numbers
No treaty, to my knowledge, used those racist terms.What treaty mentions "Arab Muslims?"P F Tinmore, et al,
Sometimes you just kill me.
(COMMENT)This all boils down to your refusal to provide any link that states that the arab muslims were granted any part of Jewish palestine after 1917.False question.
A question can be neither be "true" or "false." It is either a question, or it is not. An answer can be "true" or "false."
Questions can present a false dilemma --- or it can ask a question where only imaginary answers are available. A question can be limited in it possible answers where reality is not --- meaning the answer cannot be strictly "binary:" Yes or No --- Black or White --- Good or Evil --- right or wrong --- etc.
The "Question of Palestine" has been around from more than a half century. It does not lend itself to limits of binary thinking so often representative of the Hostile Arab Palestinian thinking. (Conflict or No Conflict --- as opposed to --- Hostilities or Peace)
We have known since the time of Sir Isaac Newton that humans operate in a three-dimensional universe + time. But most living creatures have no concept of what a dimension is (X, Y, Z riding on T). Often we are expected to answer Palestinian questions with a two-dimensional (verbal or written) model when there are at least two other dimension. Any two dimensional answer can only be part of an answer to a multi-dimensional question.
Most Respectfully,
R
What treaty mention a "Jewish Palestine?"
None mention arab muslims because they refused to be part of the solution.
The mandate mentions the splitting of palestine into trans Jordan and the Jewish national home. I believe that this was also called Jewish palestine
(COMMENT)No treaty, to my knowledge, used those racist terms.
Terms used only by racists. Nothing of the sort was mentioned in treaties.P F Tinmore, et al,
I think you have it wrong here.
(COMMENT)No treaty, to my knowledge, used those racist terms.
"Arab Muslims?" ---- is analogous to saying "American Christians."
"Jewish Palestine?" ---- is analogous to saying "Christian America."
The words Jewish and Muslim are both religions. Arab and Jewish are acceptable terms for the two religious factions. Similarly, Arab is a description of a specific cultural member.
Most Respectfully,
R
Indeed, the Muslims/Christians were about 93% of the population at the turn of the century. With their mass immigration their numbers zoomed up to 65% by 1947.That is the contradiction. Accordingly Israel could not acquire any land without an agreement with the Palestinians. Not just the land outside of the partition plan that did not happen.
Israel did not acquire land. At no time has Israel acquired any territory. Step by step.
The Ottoman Empire was dissolved.
The Ottoman Empire (now Turkey) ceded all claims to territory, of which, "Palestine" was part.
The territory was ceded to the control of the Allied Powers for the purpose of self-determination and self-government of various groups as they became capable of said government.
One of those groups was the Jewish People and the territory ceded for their self-determination and self-government was what was left of "Palestine" after Jordan's people were given its own self-determination.
The Jewish People, having completed the necessary steps, having established a government, DECLARED its independence (from the Mandate of the Allied Powers) just as Jordan and Syria and Iraq declared their independence. It is the declaration of independence and the recognition of independence which brings a State into being. Done and done. Israel is a State on all of the territory.
Jordan and Egypt sign peace treaties with Israel delineating the borders between their respective nations and Israel.
Much later, 1988, Palestine declared its own independence (from Israel). Israel essentially accepted this in principle. A negotiated peace treaty between Israel and the government of Palestine permitted Palestine temporary government over Gaza and Area A and temporary limited government over Area B. Israel maintains complete control over Area C (they maintain control -- they already had it both legally and effectively). ALL final dispositions were left to negotiation and treaty.
So, P F Tinmore , where do you think I have this wrong and why?The territory was ceded to the control of the Allied Powers for the purpose of self-determination and self-government of various groups as they became capable of said government.
No they didn't. Read Article 30 of the Treaty of Lausanne.
Where does it say what you claim in article 30 then
SECTION II .
NATIONALITY.
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.
This means that the arab muslims that arrived after JULY 24, 1923 are not covered by this treaty. You cant make a treaty apply to an aspect it was never meant to cover, and as we all know the arab muslim illegally migrated to palestine to swell their numbers
Terms used only by racists. Nothing of the sort was mentioned in treaties.P F Tinmore, et al,
I think you have it wrong here.
(COMMENT)No treaty, to my knowledge, used those racist terms.
"Arab Muslims?" ---- is analogous to saying "American Christians."
"Jewish Palestine?" ---- is analogous to saying "Christian America."
The words Jewish and Muslim are both religions. Arab and Jewish are acceptable terms for the two religious factions. Similarly, Arab is a description of a specific cultural member.
Most Respectfully,
R
When all residents were mentioned that included Muslims, Christians, and Jews.
That was not Palestine. That was just Jerusalem.Indeed, the Muslims/Christians were about 93% of the population at the turn of the century. With their mass immigration their numbers zoomed up to 65% by 1947.That is the contradiction. Accordingly Israel could not acquire any land without an agreement with the Palestinians. Not just the land outside of the partition plan that did not happen.
Israel did not acquire land. At no time has Israel acquired any territory. Step by step.
The Ottoman Empire was dissolved.
The Ottoman Empire (now Turkey) ceded all claims to territory, of which, "Palestine" was part.
The territory was ceded to the control of the Allied Powers for the purpose of self-determination and self-government of various groups as they became capable of said government.
One of those groups was the Jewish People and the territory ceded for their self-determination and self-government was what was left of "Palestine" after Jordan's people were given its own self-determination.
The Jewish People, having completed the necessary steps, having established a government, DECLARED its independence (from the Mandate of the Allied Powers) just as Jordan and Syria and Iraq declared their independence. It is the declaration of independence and the recognition of independence which brings a State into being. Done and done. Israel is a State on all of the territory.
Jordan and Egypt sign peace treaties with Israel delineating the borders between their respective nations and Israel.
Much later, 1988, Palestine declared its own independence (from Israel). Israel essentially accepted this in principle. A negotiated peace treaty between Israel and the government of Palestine permitted Palestine temporary government over Gaza and Area A and temporary limited government over Area B. Israel maintains complete control over Area C (they maintain control -- they already had it both legally and effectively). ALL final dispositions were left to negotiation and treaty.
So, P F Tinmore , where do you think I have this wrong and why?The territory was ceded to the control of the Allied Powers for the purpose of self-determination and self-government of various groups as they became capable of said government.
No they didn't. Read Article 30 of the Treaty of Lausanne.
Where does it say what you claim in article 30 then
SECTION II .
NATIONALITY.
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.
This means that the arab muslims that arrived after JULY 24, 1923 are not covered by this treaty. You cant make a treaty apply to an aspect it was never meant to cover, and as we all know the arab muslim illegally migrated to palestine to swell their numbers
Were they, then why does the Ottoman census show the Jews to be the majority. Do explain why you mix data from separate era's to arrive at a figure that meets with your POV . Did you forget that in 1931 the first official census or head count included trans Jordan. The census or head count in 1947 did not include Jordan so is out by at least 30%.
Just to upset you here is a link that shows the demographics and proves you wrong
.AOLWebSuite .AOLAttachedImage {max-width:275px; max-height:275px;} .AOLWebSuite .AOLPicturesFullSizeLink { height: 1px; width: 1px; overflow: hidden; } .AOLWebSuite a {color:blue; text-decoration: underline; cursor: pointer} .AOLWebSuite a.hsSig {cursor: default} .AOLWebSuiteM1 {margin: 10px 20px;} .AOLWebSuiteM2 {margin: 5px;} .AOLWebSuiteM3 {margin: 10px;} .dmItemSelected {padding: 2px !important;text-decoration: none !important;color:#fff !important;background-color: #656565 !important;border-radius: 2px;}
CATHOLIC ENCYCLOPEDIA: Jerusalem (After 1291)
CATHOLIC ENCYCLOPEDIA Jerusalem After 1291
"...Present condition of the City: (1907 edition)
Jerusalem (El Quds) is the capital of a sanjak and the seat of a mutasarrif directly dependent on the Sublime Porte. In the administration of the sanjak the mutasarrif is assisted by a council called majlis ida ra; the city has a municipal government (majlis baladiye) presided over by a mayor. The total population is estimated at 66,000. The Turkish census of 1905, which counts only Ottoman subjects, gives these figures:
Jews, 45,000; Moslems, 8,000; Orthodox Christians, 6000; Latins, 2500; Armenians, 950; Protestants, 800; Melkites, 250; Copts, 150; Abyssinians, 100; Jacobites, 100; Catholic Syrians, 50. During the Nineteenth century large suburbs to the north and east have grown up, chiefly for the use of the Jewish colony. These suburbs contain nearly Half the present population...""
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Growth of Jerusalem 1838-Present
....... Jews Muslims Christians Total
1838 6,000 5,000 3,000 14,000
1844 7,120 5,760 3,390 16,270 ..... ..The First Official Ottoman Census
1876 12,000 7,560 5,470 25,030 .... .....Second """"""""""
1905 40,000 8,000 10,900 58,900 ....... Third/last, detailed in CathEncyc above
1948 99,320 36,680 31,300 167,300
1990 353,200 124,200 14,000 491,400
1992 385,000 150,000 15,000 550,000
http://www.testimony-magazine.org/jerusalem/bring.htm
They can't just because they don't have a country to rule!
Maybe Israelis and Palestinians should split in two Palestine then they could have two indipendent countries (a jewish one for Israelis and a muslim one for Palestinians)
Indeed, the Zionists inserted much racism. The Palestinians did not divide people. They just wanted to include everyone.Terms used only by racists. Nothing of the sort was mentioned in treaties.P F Tinmore, et al,
I think you have it wrong here.
(COMMENT)No treaty, to my knowledge, used those racist terms.
"Arab Muslims?" ---- is analogous to saying "American Christians."
"Jewish Palestine?" ---- is analogous to saying "Christian America."
The words Jewish and Muslim are both religions. Arab and Jewish are acceptable terms for the two religious factions. Similarly, Arab is a description of a specific cultural member.
Most Respectfully,
R
When all residents were mentioned that included Muslims, Christians, and Jews.
You need to read the LoN minutes of their annual meetings in regards to the various mandates
No treaty, to my knowledge, used those racist terms.What treaty mentions "Arab Muslims?"P F Tinmore, et al,
Sometimes you just kill me.
(COMMENT)This all boils down to your refusal to provide any link that states that the arab muslims were granted any part of Jewish palestine after 1917.False question.
A question can be neither be "true" or "false." It is either a question, or it is not. An answer can be "true" or "false."
Questions can present a false dilemma --- or it can ask a question where only imaginary answers are available. A question can be limited in it possible answers where reality is not --- meaning the answer cannot be strictly "binary:" Yes or No --- Black or White --- Good or Evil --- right or wrong --- etc.
The "Question of Palestine" has been around from more than a half century. It does not lend itself to limits of binary thinking so often representative of the Hostile Arab Palestinian thinking. (Conflict or No Conflict --- as opposed to --- Hostilities or Peace)
We have known since the time of Sir Isaac Newton that humans operate in a three-dimensional universe + time. But most living creatures have no concept of what a dimension is (X, Y, Z riding on T). Often we are expected to answer Palestinian questions with a two-dimensional (verbal or written) model when there are at least two other dimension. Any two dimensional answer can only be part of an answer to a multi-dimensional question.
Most Respectfully,
R
What treaty mention a "Jewish Palestine?"
None mention arab muslims because they refused to be part of the solution.
The mandate mentions the splitting of palestine into trans Jordan and the Jewish national home. I believe that this was also called Jewish palestine
