Do Palestinians Have the Right to Defend Themselves?

[RoccoR]

P F Tinmore, et al,

Now your just trying to pretend you have a reading comprehension problem.

P F Tinmore, et al,

You are just quibbling now.

Nice song and dance but you did not answer the question.

(COMMENT)

When the Mandate ended, and Israel Declared Independence, it was up to Israel to defend itself (which it successfully did). The Arab Palestinians immediately lost all their territory to the advancing Arab Aggressor Armies (shame on them).

Most Respectfully,
R

Still ducking the question?

(COMMENT)

State your question plainly!

v/r
R

 

[P F Tinmore]

P F Tinmore, et al,

You are inaccurate again.

The British Mandate left without setting up a state. The UNPC never showed up to set up a state.

Israel's declaration was unilateral. The UN had nothing to do with it.

(COMMENT)

The UNPC had already arrange for the Israeli Declaration of Independence. Israel directly coordinated with the UNPC on 14 May. It was not unilateral. It was in accordance with the instructions in A/RES/181 (II).

You will not find a single UN document, after 15 May 1948, that says anything different. In fact you see the opposite. By 1949, the Security Council is recommending approval and the General Assembly is adopting a membership measure.

Most Respectfully,
R

It was a violation of its own charter to partition Palestine without the Palestinian's approval.

 

[P F Tinmore]

P F Tinmore, et al,

Now your just trying to pretend you have a reading comprehension problem.

P F Tinmore, et al,

You are just quibbling now.

Nice song and dance but you did not answer the question.

(COMMENT)

When the Mandate ended, and Israel Declared Independence, it was up to Israel to defend itself (which it successfully did). The Arab Palestinians immediately lost all their territory to the advancing Arab Aggressor Armies (shame on them).

Most Respectfully,
R

Still ducking the question?

(COMMENT)

State your question plainly!

v/r
R

Since there was no partition, where did Israel acquire the land it sits on?

 

[RoccoR]

foggedinn, et al,

I've cited Article 68, Forth Geneva Convention at least a half dozen times.

The question that started this thread is easy.
It depends entirely on the circumstances.
We have been given the Law and we should use it.
Amazing how a simple question can start a political debate just by using the word "palistinian".

(COMMENT)

They still don't understand how to read it.

Under IHL if the Palestinians take action that is solely intended to harm the Occupying Power (Israel), then they can be prosecuted. The theory behind it is the: Declaration on Principles of International Law concerning Friendly Relations and Co-operation among States ---

1. The principle that States shall refrain in their international relations from the threat or use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of any State, or in any other manner inconsistent with the purposes of the United Nations,
2. Every State has the duty to refrain from any forcible action which deprives peoples referred to in the elaboration of the principle of equal rights and self-determination of their right to self-determination and freedom and independence.
3. States shall accordingly seek early and just settlement of their international disputes by negotiation, inquiry, mediation, conciliation, arbitration, judicial settlement, resort to regional agencies or arrangements or other peaceful means of their choice. In seeking such a settlement the parties shall agree upon such peaceful means as may be appropriate to the circumstances and nature of the dispute.
4. All States shall pursue in good faith negotiations for the early conclusion of a universal treaty on general and complete disarmament under effective international control and strive to adopt appropriate measures to reduce international tensions and strengthen confidence among States.

There it is.

Most Respectfully,
R

 

[P F Tinmore]

foggedinn, et al,

I've cited Article 68, Forth Geneva Convention at least a half dozen times.

The question that started this thread is easy.
It depends entirely on the circumstances.
We have been given the Law and we should use it.
Amazing how a simple question can start a political debate just by using the word "palistinian".

(COMMENT)

They still don't understand how to read it.

Under IHL if the Palestinians take action that is solely intended to harm the Occupying Power (Israel), then they can be prosecuted. The theory behind it is the: Declaration on Principles of International Law concerning Friendly Relations and Co-operation among States ---

1. The principle that States shall refrain in their international relations from the threat or use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of any State, or in any other manner inconsistent with the purposes of the United Nations,
2. Every State has the duty to refrain from any forcible action which deprives peoples referred to in the elaboration of the principle of equal rights and self-determination of their right to self-determination and freedom and independence.
3. States shall accordingly seek early and just settlement of their international disputes by negotiation, inquiry, mediation, conciliation, arbitration, judicial settlement, resort to regional agencies or arrangements or other peaceful means of their choice. In seeking such a settlement the parties shall agree upon such peaceful means as may be appropriate to the circumstances and nature of the dispute.
4. All States shall pursue in good faith negotiations for the early conclusion of a universal treaty on general and complete disarmament under effective international control and strive to adopt appropriate measures to reduce international tensions and strengthen confidence among States.

There it is.

Most Respectfully,
R

...from the threat or use of force against the territorial integrity or...​

You always crack me up with that one.

What international border of Israel have the Palestinians violated?

 

[toastman]

P F Tinmore, et al,

You are just quibbling now.

P F Tinmore, et al,

Nonsense.

P F Tinmore, et al,

The only reason that it appears that there was "no partition" was because the Aggressor Arab Armies that invaded Israel on the same day independence was declared; trying to subvert the intent of the General Assembly and take territory by force.

(COMMENT)

The hostile military intervention failed to some degree. Jordan captured and annexed the West Bank. Egypt captured the Gaza Strip and placed it under it control. And Lebanon and Syria failed.

In the end, it cost the Palestinians.

Most Respectfully,
R

Whatever reason, there was no partition.

The UN could not partition Palestine without the Palestinian's approval without violating its own charter.

(COMMENT)

You will not find that in the Charter. Nothing in the Charter prevents the UN General Assembly from providing advise and guidance on the proper execution of Self-determination. You are merely attempting to read more into it then there is.

The Palestinians had absolutely NO authority to press a complaint.

Most Respectfully,
R

If there was no partition then where did Israel get the land to park its fat ass on?

(COMMENT)

The right of self-determination as guided by the UN General Assembly and it agencies.

Whether you want to pretend that the Resolution was not adopted or not, is just burying your head in the sand.

But the fact of the matter is, Israel followed the recommendations and guidance and ultimately established a state. The Arabs consistently argue, did everything to obstruct progress, used force and violence, and eventually invasion to suppress the establishment of Israel. They lost.

It was created. And the Arab that attempted to take by force what they could not achieve through hard work, has whined ever since. They even tried to rewrite history.

Most Respectfully,

Nice song and dance but you did not answer the question.

Wow...Just stop already Tinmore. Why don't you come back here when you are ready to accept the truth

 

[RoccoR]

P F Tinmore, et al,

Who said their was no Partition? That is just a fictitious defense by the Palestinians.

Since there was no partition, where did Israel acquire the land it sits on?

(COMMENT)

The UN made a very public announcements and published documents.

• The UNPC said the Resolution was implemented.
• The Palestinians used the Resolution saying it was in part on the basis of the international legitimacy embodied in the resolutions of the United Nations since 1947 they declared independence.
• The Palestinian side adheres to international legitimacy and respects General Assembly resolution 181 (II).
• Recalling its resolution 181 (II) of 29 November 1947, Decides to accord to Palestine non-member observer State status in the United Nations.

For a Partition that never existed, it was used in 1948, 1988, 1999, and 2012. (Which is not all inclusive.)

But the Jewish Agency could have just exercised self-determination under Article I - Clause 2 of the UN Charter which states: To develop friendly relations among nations based on respect for the principle of equal rights and self-determination of peoples, and to take other appropriate measures to strengthen universal peace;

Most Respectfully,
R

 

[P F Tinmore]

P F Tinmore, et al,

You are just quibbling now.

P F Tinmore, et al,

Nonsense.

Whatever reason, there was no partition.

The UN could not partition Palestine without the Palestinian's approval without violating its own charter.

(COMMENT)

You will not find that in the Charter. Nothing in the Charter prevents the UN General Assembly from providing advise and guidance on the proper execution of Self-determination. You are merely attempting to read more into it then there is.

The Palestinians had absolutely NO authority to press a complaint.

Most Respectfully,
R

If there was no partition then where did Israel get the land to park its fat ass on?

(COMMENT)

The right of self-determination as guided by the UN General Assembly and it agencies.

Whether you want to pretend that the Resolution was not adopted or not, is just burying your head in the sand.

But the fact of the matter is, Israel followed the recommendations and guidance and ultimately established a state. The Arabs consistently argue, did everything to obstruct progress, used force and violence, and eventually invasion to suppress the establishment of Israel. They lost.

It was created. And the Arab that attempted to take by force what they could not achieve through hard work, has whined ever since. They even tried to rewrite history.

Most Respectfully,

Nice song and dance but you did not answer the question.

Wow...Just stop already Tinmore. Why don't you come back here when you are ready to accept the truth

Oh really?

What was my question?

What was his answer?

 

[toastman]

P F Tinmore, et al,

Now your just trying to pretend you have a reading comprehension problem.

P F Tinmore, et al,

You are just quibbling now.

(COMMENT)

When the Mandate ended, and Israel Declared Independence, it was up to Israel to defend itself (which it successfully did). The Arab Palestinians immediately lost all their territory to the advancing Arab Aggressor Armies (shame on them).

Most Respectfully,
R

Still ducking the question?

(COMMENT)

State your question plainly!

v/r
R

Since there was no partition, where did Israel acquire the land it sits on?

There WAS partition ! Are you retarded or something ??? Oh my God it's like you read something and then forget it 2 seconds later !

 

[P F Tinmore]

P F Tinmore, et al,

Who said their was no Partition? That is just a fictitious defense by the Palestinians.

Since there was no partition, where did Israel acquire the land it sits on?

(COMMENT)

The UN made a very public announcements and published documents.

• The UNPC said the Resolution was implemented.
• The Palestinians used the Resolution saying it was in part on the basis of the international legitimacy embodied in the resolutions of the United Nations since 1947 they declared independence.
• The Palestinian side adheres to international legitimacy and respects General Assembly resolution 181 (II).
• Recalling its resolution 181 (II) of 29 November 1947, Decides to accord to Palestine non-member observer State status in the United Nations.

For a Partition that never existed, it was used in 1948, 1988, 1999, and 2012. (Which is not all inclusive.)

But the Jewish Agency could have just exercised self-determination under Article I - Clause 2 of the UN Charter which states: To develop friendly relations among nations based on respect for the principle of equal rights and self-determination of peoples, and to take other appropriate measures to strengthen universal peace;

Most Respectfully,
R

So then, Israel and Palestine exist on the proposed borders and there is an international city of Jerusalem?

 

[RoccoR]

P F Tinmore, et al,

If Israel doesn't have international borders and demarcations to rely upon, then the State of Palestine doesn't exist either.

foggedinn, et al,

I've cited Article 68, Forth Geneva Convention at least a half dozen times.

The question that started this thread is easy.
It depends entirely on the circumstances.
We have been given the Law and we should use it.
Amazing how a simple question can start a political debate just by using the word "palistinian".

(COMMENT)

They still don't understand how to read it.

Under IHL if the Palestinians take action that is solely intended to harm the Occupying Power (Israel), then they can be prosecuted. The theory behind it is the: Declaration on Principles of International Law concerning Friendly Relations and Co-operation among States ---

1. The principle that States shall refrain in their international relations from the threat or use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of any State, or in any other manner inconsistent with the purposes of the United Nations,
2. Every State has the duty to refrain from any forcible action which deprives peoples referred to in the elaboration of the principle of equal rights and self-determination of their right to self-determination and freedom and independence.
3. States shall accordingly seek early and just settlement of their international disputes by negotiation, inquiry, mediation, conciliation, arbitration, judicial settlement, resort to regional agencies or arrangements or other peaceful means of their choice. In seeking such a settlement the parties shall agree upon such peaceful means as may be appropriate to the circumstances and nature of the dispute.
4. All States shall pursue in good faith negotiations for the early conclusion of a universal treaty on general and complete disarmament under effective international control and strive to adopt appropriate measures to reduce international tensions and strengthen confidence among States.

There it is.

Most Respectfully,
R

...from the threat or use of force against the territorial integrity or...​

You always crack me up with that one.

What international border of Israel have the Palestinians violated?

(COMMENT)

But in fact, the State of Israel has protect demarcation lines with Lebanon and Syria by Armistice Agreements. And relative to the West Bank and Gaza Strip, Israel has two peace treaties with Egypt and Jordan:

Article 3 - International Boundary Peace Treaty between the State of Israel and the Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan

1. The international boundary between Israel and Jordan is delimited with reference to the boundary definition under the Mandate as is shown in Annex I(a), on the mapping materials attached thereto and co-ordinates specified therein.
2. The boundary, as set out in Annex I (a), is the permanent, secure and recognised international boundary between Israel and Jordan, without prejudice to the status of any territories that came under Israeli military government control in 1967.

Article II

• 
  Treaty of Peace between the Arab Republic of Egypt and the State of Israel

The permanent boundary between Egypt and Israel is the recognized international boundary between Egypt and the former mandated territory of Palestine, as shown on the map at Annex II, without prejudice to the issue of the status of the Gaza Strip. The Parties recognize this boundary as inviolable. Each will respect the territorial integrity of the other, including their territorial waters and airspace.

There it is. The question is, as an example --- where are the Borders of the West Bank if the border between Israel and Jordan run down the River Jordan and the Dead Sea?

The demarcation lines for the State of Palestine are defined (currently) by the UN in this way:

"Reaffirms the right of the Palestinian people to self-determination and to independence in their State of Palestine on the Palestinian territory occupied since 1967;"​

I think that answers the question.

Most Respectfully,
R

 

[RoccoR]

P F Tinmore, et al,

No --- not at all.

P F Tinmore, et al,

Who said their was no Partition? That is just a fictitious defense by the Palestinians.

Since there was no partition, where did Israel acquire the land it sits on?

(COMMENT)

The UN made a very public announcements and published documents.

• The UNPC said the Resolution was implemented.
• The Palestinians used the Resolution saying it was in part on the basis of the international legitimacy embodied in the resolutions of the United Nations since 1947 they declared independence.
• The Palestinian side adheres to international legitimacy and respects General Assembly resolution 181 (II).
• Recalling its resolution 181 (II) of 29 November 1947, Decides to accord to Palestine non-member observer State status in the United Nations.

For a Partition that never existed, it was used in 1948, 1988, 1999, and 2012. (Which is not all inclusive.)

But the Jewish Agency could have just exercised self-determination under Article I - Clause 2 of the UN Charter which states: To develop friendly relations among nations based on respect for the principle of equal rights and self-determination of peoples, and to take other appropriate measures to strengthen universal peace;

Most Respectfully,
R

So then, Israel and Palestine exist on the proposed borders and there is an international city of Jerusalem?

(COMMENT)

Because the Aggressor Arab Nations attempted to acquire territory through the use of force, a war was started by the Arab Nations. This was the 1948-49 War of Independence. The War, for the purposed of Israel 'v' Egypt and Israel 'v' Jordan have ended, and by treaty international borders established. The War is still unresolved between Israel 'v' Lebanon and Israel 'v' Syria, dormant under their respective Armistice Arrangements. The original Partition as stipulated in Annex A to resolution 181 (II) of the General Assembly, dated 29 November 1947, was overtaken by the event of the Arab initiated conflict; thus changed.

There is no arrangement, again, with the Arab Palestinians, because technically, they rejected the Partition arrangement and therefore was not a sovereign party to the conflict. The were not a party to either Armistice Arrangements or Peace Treaties, as they were not competent under the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties.

Most Respectfully,
R

 

[P F Tinmore]

P F Tinmore, et al,

No --- not at all.

P F Tinmore, et al,

Who said their was no Partition? That is just a fictitious defense by the Palestinians.

Since there was no partition, where did Israel acquire the land it sits on?

(COMMENT)

The UN made a very public announcements and published documents.

• The UNPC said the Resolution was implemented.
• The Palestinians used the Resolution saying it was in part on the basis of the international legitimacy embodied in the resolutions of the United Nations since 1947 they declared independence.
• The Palestinian side adheres to international legitimacy and respects General Assembly resolution 181 (II).
• Recalling its resolution 181 (II) of 29 November 1947, Decides to accord to Palestine non-member observer State status in the United Nations.

For a Partition that never existed, it was used in 1948, 1988, 1999, and 2012. (Which is not all inclusive.)

But the Jewish Agency could have just exercised self-determination under Article I - Clause 2 of the UN Charter which states: To develop friendly relations among nations based on respect for the principle of equal rights and self-determination of peoples, and to take other appropriate measures to strengthen universal peace;

Most Respectfully,
R

So then, Israel and Palestine exist on the proposed borders and there is an international city of Jerusalem?

(COMMENT)

Because the Aggressor Arab Nations attempted to acquire territory through the use of force, a war was started by the Arab Nations. This was the 1948-49 War of Independence. The War, for the purposed of Israel 'v' Egypt and Israel 'v' Jordan have ended, and by treaty international borders established. The War is still unresolved between Israel 'v' Lebanon and Israel 'v' Syria, dormant under their respective Armistice Arrangements. The original Partition as stipulated in Annex A to resolution 181 (II) of the General Assembly, dated 29 November 1947, was overtaken by the event of the Arab initiated conflict; thus changed.

There is no arrangement, again, with the Arab Palestinians, because technically, they rejected the Partition arrangement and therefore was not a sovereign party to the conflict. The were not a party to either Armistice Arrangements or Peace Treaties, as they were not competent under the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties.

Most Respectfully,
R

So what did a war with Lebanon, Syria, Jordan, and Egypt have to do with Palestinian land?

BTW, the 1948 war was called by Security Council resolution. Nobody lost that war.

 

[RoccoR]

P F Tinmore, et al

They don't declare a victory in order for the Arav Palestinian to save face.

P F Tinmore, et al,

No --- not at all.

P F Tinmore, et al,

Who said their was no Partition? That is just a fictitious defense by the Palestinians.

Since there was no partition, where did Israel acquire the land it sits on?

(COMMENT)

The UN made a very public announcements and published documents.

• The UNPC said the Resolution was implemented.
• The Palestinians used the Resolution saying it was in part on the basis of the international legitimacy embodied in the resolutions of the United Nations since 1947 they declared independence.
• The Palestinian side adheres to international legitimacy and respects General Assembly resolution 181 (II).
• Recalling its resolution 181 (II) of 29 November 1947, Decides to accord to Palestine non-member observer State status in the United Nations.

For a Partition that never existed, it was used in 1948, 1988, 1999, and 2012. (Which is not all inclusive.)

But the Jewish Agency could have just exercised self-determination under Article I - Clause 2 of the UN Charter which states: To develop friendly relations among nations based on respect for the principle of equal rights and self-determination of peoples, and to take other appropriate measures to strengthen universal peace;

Most Respectfully,
R

So then, Israel and Palestine exist on the proposed borders and there is an international city of Jerusalem?

(COMMENT)

Because the Aggressor Arab Nations attempted to acquire territory through the use of force, a war was started by the Arab Nations. This was the 1948-49 War of Independence. The War, for the purposed of Israel 'v' Egypt and Israel 'v' Jordan have ended, and by treaty international borders established. The War is still unresolved between Israel 'v' Lebanon and Israel 'v' Syria, dormant under their respective Armistice Arrangements. The original Partition as stipulated in Annex A to resolution 181 (II) of the General Assembly, dated 29 November 1947, was overtaken by the event of the Arab initiated conflict; thus changed.

There is no arrangement, again, with the Arab Palestinians, because technically, they rejected the Partition arrangement and therefore was not a sovereign party to the conflict. The were not a party to either Armistice Arrangements or Peace Treaties, as they were not competent under the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties.

Most Respectfully,
R

So what did a war with Lebanon, Syria, Jordan, and Egypt have to do with Palestinian land?

BTW, the 1948 war was called by Security Council resolution. Nobody lost that war.

(COMMENT)

The war and subsequent international boundaries establish the territory.

In the case of Jordan, the boundary runs down the Jordan River and through the Dead Sea. Jordan on the East side and Israel on the West side. (Where is the Palestinain West Bank?)

Most Respectfully,
R

 

[Phoenall]

Nope it very clearly states that the nationality law was to give the inhabitants the citizenship of the mandatory power. It never at any time gave the basis for a nation or a nationality based on a nation

Link?

The Avalon Project The Palestine Mandate
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.
The administration, or mandatory power, not the nation of palestine

Where does that say what you said?

(COMMENT)

Everything, having to do with the governance of the territory, was defined relative to the application of the Mandate (The "MANDATE" means the Mandate for Palestine which was confirmed, and the terms of which were defined by the Council of the League of Nations on the 24th day of July, 1922) . Other than that defined by the Allied Powers, there was no other meaning given to "Palestine."

√ The Palestine Legislative Council Election Order, 1922.

For the purposes of this Order and pending the introduction of an Order in Council regulating Palestinian citizenship, the following persons shall be deemed to be Palestinian citizens:--

(a)Turkish subjects habitually resident in the territory of Palestine at the date of commencement of this Order.

(b)All persons of other than Turkish nationality habitually resident in the territory of Palestine at the said date, who shall within two calendar months of the said date make application for Palestinian citizenship in such form and before such officer as may be prescribed by the High Commissioner.
​

√ The Palestine Order in Council, 1922

The limits of this Order are the territories to which the Mandate for Palestine applies, hereinafter described as Palestine.

WHEREAS the Principal Allied Powers have agreed, for the purpose of giving effect to the provisions of Article 22 of the Covenant of the League of Nations, to entrust to a Mandatory selected by the said Powers the administration of the territory of Palestine, which formerly belonged to the Turkish Empire, within such boundaries as may be fixed by them;

11.--(1) The High Commissioner may, with the approval of a Secretary of State, by Proclamation divide Palestine into administrative divisions or districts in such manner and with such subdivisions as may be convenient for purposes of administration describing the boundaries thereof and assigning names thereto.​

Any attempt to suggest that the "Administration of Palestine" or the "Government of Palestine" was any entity other than Britain (or that defined by the Allied Powers), is misinformation. Any attempt to suggest that "Palestine" or "Palestinian Citizenship" inferred or implies any special meaning of sovereignty or territorial integrity (other than explicitly cited by the Council), is misinformation. Any attempt to suggest that the use of the short-title "Palestine" attaches any significants other that the meaning --- "the territories to which the Mandate for Palestine applies" --- is misinformation.

Most Respectfully,
R

Mandate for Palestine.

Not

Mandate is Palestine.

Just as in the Laws for England as opposed to the Laws for Scotland. Seems that you have a comprehension problem when it comes to 1920's legalise, just as the arab muslims had the same comprehension problems when it came to the meaning of UN res 242.

The MANDATE for PALESTINE set in stone the general rules and conditions of the limits of the mandatory power and also the limits of their actual physical extent of the land. This means that the LoN land ownership/sovereignty through the Mandate for Palestine was in any way granting Palestine nation status. But it did give the LoN the right under International Law to ignore the arab muslims complaints and threats and apportion part of Palestine as the Jewish National Home.

 

[Phoenall]

Again Mandate of Palestine land as there was never a nation of Palestine until 1988.

And we are still waiting for you to post the link that says otherwise. Who made the borders, what person acting on behalf of Palestine signed the papers and where are the treaties

Palestine, as the mandate clearly showed, was a subject under international law. While she could not conclude international conventions, the mandatory Power, until further notice, concluded them on her behalf, in virtue of Article 19 of the mandate. The mandate, in Article 7, obliged the Mandatory to enact a nationality law, which again showed that the Palestinians formed a nation, and that Palestine was a State, though provisionally under guardianship. It was, moreover, unnecessary to labour the point; there was no doubt whatever that Palestine was a separate political entity.

Mandate for Palestine - League of Nations 32nd session - Minutes of the Permanent Mandates Commission 18 August 1937

Nope it very clearly states that the nationality law was to give the inhabitants the citizenship of the mandatory power. It never at any time gave the basis for a nation or a nationality based on a nation

Link?

The Avalon Project The Palestine Mandate


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.


The administration, or mandatory power, not the nation of palestine

How is it that you are always wrong. A broken clock is more accurate than you are.

REPORT
BY HIS BRITANNIC MAJESTY'S GOVERNMENT
TO THE COUNCIL OF THE LEAGUE OF NATIONS
ON THE ADMINISTRATION OF
PALESTINE AND TRANSJORDAN
FOR THE YEAR
1925
​

3.Q. What measures have been taken to bring the country under such political, administrative and economic conditions as will safeguard the civil and religious rights of all the inhabitants of Palestine, irrespective of race and religion? What are the effects of these measures?

A. The Palestinian Citizenship Order in Council which was made in August, 1925, provides for the acquisition of Palestinian citizenship by persons habitually resident in the country who were Ottoman subjects, and persons who were foreign subjects and take up permanent residence.

Mandate for Palestine - Report of the Mandatory to the League of Nations 31 December 1925

So what it does not alter contemporary International law that had already given the arab muslims their share of Palestine called trans Jordan. Now where does it say nation of Palestine, and who signed for the various groups to allow for the setting up of this nation ?


So what about this from your link

A. The direction and objects of the policy of the Government of Palestine in law, administration and finance are unchanged. The visible results of the policy have been tranquillity, increased Jewish immigration, progress of Jewish agricultural settlement. The expansion of industry has been encouraged by the grant of exemption of certain raw materials from import duty (see [pages ] of this Report).

The regulations under the Immigration Ordinance, 1925, set up a statutory procedure for the introduction of Jewish immigrant labour into Palestine. The Palestinian Citizenship Order in Council, 1925, facilitates the acquisition of Palestinian nationality by persons settling in the country, including those who opted for Palestinian citizenship under the Palestine Legislative Council Election Order in Council, 1922. There was a remarkable development of Jewish Co-operative Societies, constituted principally for building, agricultural and mutual credit purposes. Twenty-six Jewish companies were formed.

 

[P F Tinmore]

P F Tinmore, et al

They don't declare a victory in order for the Arav Palestinian to save face.

P F Tinmore, et al,

No --- not at all.

P F Tinmore, et al,

Who said their was no Partition? That is just a fictitious defense by the Palestinians.

Since there was no partition, where did Israel acquire the land it sits on?

(COMMENT)

The UN made a very public announcements and published documents.

• The UNPC said the Resolution was implemented.
• The Palestinians used the Resolution saying it was in part on the basis of the international legitimacy embodied in the resolutions of the United Nations since 1947 they declared independence.
• The Palestinian side adheres to international legitimacy and respects General Assembly resolution 181 (II).
• Recalling its resolution 181 (II) of 29 November 1947, Decides to accord to Palestine non-member observer State status in the United Nations.

For a Partition that never existed, it was used in 1948, 1988, 1999, and 2012. (Which is not all inclusive.)

But the Jewish Agency could have just exercised self-determination under Article I - Clause 2 of the UN Charter which states: To develop friendly relations among nations based on respect for the principle of equal rights and self-determination of peoples, and to take other appropriate measures to strengthen universal peace;

Most Respectfully,
R

So then, Israel and Palestine exist on the proposed borders and there is an international city of Jerusalem?

(COMMENT)

Because the Aggressor Arab Nations attempted to acquire territory through the use of force, a war was started by the Arab Nations. This was the 1948-49 War of Independence. The War, for the purposed of Israel 'v' Egypt and Israel 'v' Jordan have ended, and by treaty international borders established. The War is still unresolved between Israel 'v' Lebanon and Israel 'v' Syria, dormant under their respective Armistice Arrangements. The original Partition as stipulated in Annex A to resolution 181 (II) of the General Assembly, dated 29 November 1947, was overtaken by the event of the Arab initiated conflict; thus changed.

There is no arrangement, again, with the Arab Palestinians, because technically, they rejected the Partition arrangement and therefore was not a sovereign party to the conflict. The were not a party to either Armistice Arrangements or Peace Treaties, as they were not competent under the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties.

Most Respectfully,
R

So what did a war with Lebanon, Syria, Jordan, and Egypt have to do with Palestinian land?

BTW, the 1948 war was called by Security Council resolution. Nobody lost that war.

(COMMENT)

The war and subsequent international boundaries establish the territory.

In the case of Jordan, the boundary runs down the Jordan River and through the Dead Sea. Jordan on the East side and Israel on the West side. (Where is the Palestinain West Bank?)

Most Respectfully,
R

Your ducking the question.

 

[Phoenall]

P F Tinmore, et al,

No --- not at all.

P F Tinmore, et al,

Who said their was no Partition? That is just a fictitious defense by the Palestinians.

Since there was no partition, where did Israel acquire the land it sits on?

(COMMENT)

The UN made a very public announcements and published documents.

• The UNPC said the Resolution was implemented.
• The Palestinians used the Resolution saying it was in part on the basis of the international legitimacy embodied in the resolutions of the United Nations since 1947 they declared independence.
• The Palestinian side adheres to international legitimacy and respects General Assembly resolution 181 (II).
• Recalling its resolution 181 (II) of 29 November 1947, Decides to accord to Palestine non-member observer State status in the United Nations.

For a Partition that never existed, it was used in 1948, 1988, 1999, and 2012. (Which is not all inclusive.)

But the Jewish Agency could have just exercised self-determination under Article I - Clause 2 of the UN Charter which states: To develop friendly relations among nations based on respect for the principle of equal rights and self-determination of peoples, and to take other appropriate measures to strengthen universal peace;

Most Respectfully,
R

So then, Israel and Palestine exist on the proposed borders and there is an international city of Jerusalem?

(COMMENT)

Because the Aggressor Arab Nations attempted to acquire territory through the use of force, a war was started by the Arab Nations. This was the 1948-49 War of Independence. The War, for the purposed of Israel 'v' Egypt and Israel 'v' Jordan have ended, and by treaty international borders established. The War is still unresolved between Israel 'v' Lebanon and Israel 'v' Syria, dormant under their respective Armistice Arrangements. The original Partition as stipulated in Annex A to resolution 181 (II) of the General Assembly, dated 29 November 1947, was overtaken by the event of the Arab initiated conflict; thus changed.

There is no arrangement, again, with the Arab Palestinians, because technically, they rejected the Partition arrangement and therefore was not a sovereign party to the conflict. The were not a party to either Armistice Arrangements or Peace Treaties, as they were not competent under the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties.

Most Respectfully,
R

So what did a war with Lebanon, Syria, Jordan, and Egypt have to do with Palestinian land?

BTW, the 1948 war was called by Security Council resolution. Nobody lost that war.

Because they wanted to invade and steal the land that they saw as Palestine.

Depends on how you call it, as UN resolutions are not legally binding, which means the war is still in existence. Apart from Jordan and Egypt who have signed peace treaties with Israel. No one won the war, but Israel was won every battle so far.

 

[Phoenall]

P F Tinmore, et al

They don't declare a victory in order for the Arav Palestinian to save face.

P F Tinmore, et al,

No --- not at all.

P F Tinmore, et al,

Who said their was no Partition? That is just a fictitious defense by the Palestinians.

(COMMENT)

The UN made a very public announcements and published documents.

• The UNPC said the Resolution was implemented.
• The Palestinians used the Resolution saying it was in part on the basis of the international legitimacy embodied in the resolutions of the United Nations since 1947 they declared independence.
• The Palestinian side adheres to international legitimacy and respects General Assembly resolution 181 (II).
• Recalling its resolution 181 (II) of 29 November 1947, Decides to accord to Palestine non-member observer State status in the United Nations.

For a Partition that never existed, it was used in 1948, 1988, 1999, and 2012. (Which is not all inclusive.)

But the Jewish Agency could have just exercised self-determination under Article I - Clause 2 of the UN Charter which states: To develop friendly relations among nations based on respect for the principle of equal rights and self-determination of peoples, and to take other appropriate measures to strengthen universal peace;

Most Respectfully,
R

So then, Israel and Palestine exist on the proposed borders and there is an international city of Jerusalem?

(COMMENT)

Because the Aggressor Arab Nations attempted to acquire territory through the use of force, a war was started by the Arab Nations. This was the 1948-49 War of Independence. The War, for the purposed of Israel 'v' Egypt and Israel 'v' Jordan have ended, and by treaty international borders established. The War is still unresolved between Israel 'v' Lebanon and Israel 'v' Syria, dormant under their respective Armistice Arrangements. The original Partition as stipulated in Annex A to resolution 181 (II) of the General Assembly, dated 29 November 1947, was overtaken by the event of the Arab initiated conflict; thus changed.

There is no arrangement, again, with the Arab Palestinians, because technically, they rejected the Partition arrangement and therefore was not a sovereign party to the conflict. The were not a party to either Armistice Arrangements or Peace Treaties, as they were not competent under the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties.

Most Respectfully,
R

So what did a war with Lebanon, Syria, Jordan, and Egypt have to do with Palestinian land?

BTW, the 1948 war was called by Security Council resolution. Nobody lost that war.

(COMMENT)

The war and subsequent international boundaries establish the territory.

In the case of Jordan, the boundary runs down the Jordan River and through the Dead Sea. Jordan on the East side and Israel on the West side. (Where is the Palestinain West Bank?)

Most Respectfully,
R

Your ducking the question.

No he has answered your loaded question and put the correct perspective on it. There was no nation of Palestine until 1988 so the land was Mandate for Palestine land because the arab muslims did not take up the offer when they could have.

 

[Phoenall]

Just curious as to under whose authority was the Kingdom of Hejaz operating with respect to the Palestinians. Was he speaking for the Palestinian Muslims or the Palestinian Christians, who made up 93% of the population of Palestine? I don't recall that the Palestine Arab Congress ever agreed for this self appointed Bedouin King to negotiate on the Palestinian's behalf, in fact, the Palestinians were far more likely to give Syria that right, given the British refusal to recognize the representative body of 93% of the population.

BULLSHIT