I've seen your response. No proof there. Now you are just deflecting.
Explanation of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict
- Thread starter xdangerousxdavex
- Start date
Here you go again
The Council of the League of Nations:
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; and
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Allied Powers have also agreed that the Mandatory should be responsible for putting into effect the declaration originally made on November 2nd, 1917, by the Government of His Britannic Majesty, and adopted by the said Powers, in favor of the establishment in Palestine of a national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
Whereas the mandate in respect of Palestine has been formulated in the following terms and submitted to the Council of the League for approval; and
Whereas His Britannic Majesty has accepted the mandate in respect of Palestine and undertaken to exercise it on behalf of the League of Nations in conformity with the following provisions; and
Whereas by the afore-mentioned Article 22 (paragraph 8), it is provided that the degree of authority, control or administration to be exercised by the Mandatory, not having been previously agreed upon by the Members of the League, shall be explicitly defined by the Council of the League Of Nations;
toastman, P F Tinmore, et al,
That is confusing to a number of people, because they do not put the various reports and resolutions in the proper sequence.
(COMMENT)
FIRST: Up front, the question is: Was it implemented? The SHORT ANSWER is: YES!
The implementation was disclosed in a Public Announcement: Press Release PAL/169 17 May 1948 (The date is important!) The announcement says in part:
During today's brief meeting, Dr. Eduardo Morgan (Panama) said that this resolution of the Assembly merely "relieves responsibility. The Commission has not been dissolved. In fact the resolution of last November 29 has been implemented."
The UN page that simulates Resolution 181 (II) make two incorrect statements in the header of the page:
The UNPC did say, in A/532 10 April 1948, that in part was:
- The UN Palestine Commission reported
that it was unable to implement res.
- 181 due to the deteriorating security situation and was abolished on 14 May 1948:
"Armed Arab bands from neighboring Arab States have infiltrated into the territory of Palestine and together with local Arab forces are defeating the purposes of the resolution by acts of violence. The Jews, on the other hand, are determined to ensure the establishment of the Jewish State, as envisaged by the resolution. The resulting conditions of insecurity in Palestine have made it impossible for the Commission to implement the Assembly’s resolution without the assistance of adequate armed forces."
The was complemented with the observation that:
"Arab opposition to the Plan of the Assembly has taken the form of organized efforts by strong Arab elements, both inside and outside of Palestine, to prevent its implementation and to thwart its objectives by threats and acts of violence, including repeated armed incursions into Palestinian territory.
However, that was not the last UNPC Report. The UNPC carried-on as best it could. A month later, with the evolving condition for war, the PAL/169 Statement was released to the media on implementation.
The second erroneous annotation in the header, suggesting that Resolution 181(II) was "abolished" is totally wrong. What A/RES/186 (S-2) 14 May 1948 says in part is:
"Relieves the Palestine Commission from the further exercise of responsibilities under resolution 181 (II) of 29 November 1947."
That is the last sentence of the Resolution and the only sentence in which either the UNPC or Resolution 181(II) are mentioned. The 186(S-2) Resolution does not abolish anything. In fact that word is not even used in the resolution.
The errors in the header are probable do to misinterpretations and inexperience.
Most Respectfully,
R
The UN Palestine Commission reported
Then why did that clown say that it was implemented? And why do you believe him when it is obviously not true?
Read the rest and don't just take the small part that supports your POV
You are the one that needs to keep up as 181 did not give any borders and stated that the arabs and Jews needed to agree them
Humanity
Gold Member
- Jul 17, 2014
- 5,089
- 361
- 130
The link isn't Mine it's posted recently on this board....
Why SHOULD I post a link AGAIN that is available to EVERYONE on this board for those few LAZY assholes who simply choose to bleat on about NOTHING!?
P F Tinmore
Diamond Member
- Dec 6, 2009
- 83,449
- 4,684
- 1,815
I know all that but you do not know what it means.
P F Tinmore
Diamond Member
- Dec 6, 2009
- 83,449
- 4,684
- 1,815
Where does it say that they needed to agree?
rylah
Gold Member
- Jun 10, 2015
- 23,411
- 4,954
- 290
Let's see...to be seen as an intellectual person....to be truthful...to make a good use of tie dealing with fact rather than opinions.
So let's sum it up again:
10 sec to show a fact vs numerous replies rejecting that opportunity in favor of name calling.
Kindergarten stuff.
Billo_Really
Litre of the Band
I don't have to have been there or know anyone personally involved to know that you cannot move into a neighborhood and automatically have more rights than the people already living there.
This issue has nothing to do with philosophy or religion. This issue is about international law and Israel's grouse violations of it.
rylah
Gold Member
- Jun 10, 2015
- 23,411
- 4,954
- 290
rights....as I showed earlier Arabs in Israel are a privileged community with more social and financial benefits
than the average jew.
But that still doesn't change the fact that You get in the middle of a centuries old war/argument
trying to measure it using Your native standards and telling what is "right' for them.
Imagine Syrians going to Russia telling them what to do in Kazan or how to relocate their capital
to S Petersburg...or even how to deal with Ukraine's nazis.
Your difficult to realize th importance of religion and culture in this region show how
disconnected You are from the realities there.
YOU ARE A MERELY PASSING BY PUSHING YOUR NOSE INTO MATTERS
THAT HAVE LITTLE CONNECTION TO YOU EXCEPT FOR OIL PRICES- AND YOU'RE
USED JUST FOR THAT. A DELUDED "WHITE MAN" WHO DWELLS IN SELF-IMPORTANCE
Last edited:
Yes it gives the 22% of Palestine left after the LoN partitioned it into an arab and Jewish as the Jewish national home. It also spells out that the arab muslims are covered by the mandates and would be dealt with accordingly. No borders were mentioned other than those of the mandate and the proposed national home of the Jews.
A RES 181 II of 29 November 1947
d) The Trusteeship Council be informed of the responsibilities envisaged for it in this plan;
Calls upon the inhabitants of Palestine to take such steps as may be necessary on their part to put this plan into effect;
Appeals to all Governments and all peoples to refrain from taking action which might hamper or delay the carrying out of these recommendations
3. Independent Arab and Jewish States and the Special International Regime for the City of Jerusalem, set forth in part III of this plan, shall come into existence in Palestine two months after the evacuation of the armed forces of the mandatory Power has been completed but in any case not later than 1 October 1948. The boundaries of the Arab State, the Jewish State, and the City of Jerusalem shall be as described in parts II and III below
3. On its arrival in Palestine the Commission shall proceed to carry out measures for the establishment of the frontiers of the Arab and Jewish States and the City of Jerusalem in accordance with the general lines of the recommendations of the General Assembly on the partition of Palestine. Nevertheless, the boundaries as described in part II of this plan are to be modified in such a way that village areas as a rule will not be divided by state boundaries unless pressing reasons make that necessary.
No such international law in existence up to the declaration of independence of Israel. And what International laws has Israel been found guilty of by the ICC/ICJ as that is the only benchmark to go by
RoccoR
Gold Member
Phoenall, toastman, Tinmore, et al,
We go through this periodically.
The boundaries are described as follows:-- INTRODUCTORY Position
(COMMENT)
The "administration of Palestine, within such boundaries as may be determined by the Principal Allied Powers, was based on the Sykes-Picot Treaty and the Franco-British Boundary Agreement of 1920 (AKA: Paulet–Newcombe Agreement named after the two Military Officers that lead the Survey Team). The boundary between the Mandates of Palestine and Mesopotamia were authored by LTC Newcombe British Surveyor in agreement with the French. The Mandate of Syria and the Lebanon, were authored by LTC Paulet, French Surveyor in agreement with the British. These Survey results were finally established and agreed upon on 7 March 1923; shortly before the British and French took-up Mandatory responsibilities on 29 September 1923.
There was no political subdivision called Palestine prior to the establishment of the territory under which the Mandate for Palestine was applied. What "P F Tinmore" is using and referring to are the boundaries established in the Paulet–Newcombe Agreement of 1923 for the Mandate was named after. It is also why the All Palestine Government (as an example) used the phrase: ""PALESTINE IN ITS ENTIRETY AND WITHIN ITS BOUNDARIES AS ESTABLISHED BEFORE THE TERMINATION OF THE BRITISH MANDATE."" It is because the Arab Palestinian had no other means to identify the territory other than in relationship to --- and by the name the Allied Powers assigned the Mandate.
Most Respectfully,
R
We go through this periodically.
(REFERENCE)
The boundaries are described as follows:-- INTRODUCTORY Position
Palestine lies on the western edge of the continent of Asia between Latitude 30º N. and 33º N., Longitude 34º 30’ E. and 35º 30’ E.
On the North it is bounded by the French Mandated Territories of Syria and Lebanon, on the East by Syria and Trans-Jordan, on the South-west by the Egyptian province of Sinai, on the South-east by the Gulf of Aqaba and on the West by the Mediterranean. The frontier with Syria was laid down by the Anglo-French Convention of the 23rd December, 1920, and its delimitation was ratified in 1923. Briefly stated, the boundaries are as follows:
North.—From Ras en Naqura on the Mediterranean eastwards to a point west of Qadas, thence in a northerly direction to Metulla, thence east to a point west of Banias.
East.—From Banias in a southerly direction east of Lake Hula to Jisr Banat Ya’pub, thence along a line east of the Jordan and the Lake of Tiberias and on to El Hamme station on the Samakh-Deraa railway line, thence along the centre of the river Yarmuq to its confluence with the Jordan, thence along the centres of the Jordan, the Dead Sea and the Wadi Araba to a point on the Gulf of Aqaba two miles west of the town of Aqaba, thence along the shore of the Gulf of Aqaba to Ras Jaba.
South.—From Ras Jaba in a generally north-westerly direction to the junction of the Neki-Aqaba and Gaza-Aqaba Roads, thence to a point west-north-west of Ain Maghara and thence to a point on the Mediterranean coast north-west of Rafa.
West.—The Mediterranean Sea.
On the North it is bounded by the French Mandated Territories of Syria and Lebanon, on the East by Syria and Trans-Jordan, on the South-west by the Egyptian province of Sinai, on the South-east by the Gulf of Aqaba and on the West by the Mediterranean. The frontier with Syria was laid down by the Anglo-French Convention of the 23rd December, 1920, and its delimitation was ratified in 1923. Briefly stated, the boundaries are as follows:
North.—From Ras en Naqura on the Mediterranean eastwards to a point west of Qadas, thence in a northerly direction to Metulla, thence east to a point west of Banias.
East.—From Banias in a southerly direction east of Lake Hula to Jisr Banat Ya’pub, thence along a line east of the Jordan and the Lake of Tiberias and on to El Hamme station on the Samakh-Deraa railway line, thence along the centre of the river Yarmuq to its confluence with the Jordan, thence along the centres of the Jordan, the Dead Sea and the Wadi Araba to a point on the Gulf of Aqaba two miles west of the town of Aqaba, thence along the shore of the Gulf of Aqaba to Ras Jaba.
South.—From Ras Jaba in a generally north-westerly direction to the junction of the Neki-Aqaba and Gaza-Aqaba Roads, thence to a point west-north-west of Ain Maghara and thence to a point on the Mediterranean coast north-west of Rafa.
West.—The Mediterranean Sea.
(COMMENT)
The "administration of Palestine, within such boundaries as may be determined by the Principal Allied Powers, was based on the Sykes-Picot Treaty and the Franco-British Boundary Agreement of 1920 (AKA: Paulet–Newcombe Agreement named after the two Military Officers that lead the Survey Team). The boundary between the Mandates of Palestine and Mesopotamia were authored by LTC Newcombe British Surveyor in agreement with the French. The Mandate of Syria and the Lebanon, were authored by LTC Paulet, French Surveyor in agreement with the British. These Survey results were finally established and agreed upon on 7 March 1923; shortly before the British and French took-up Mandatory responsibilities on 29 September 1923.
There was no political subdivision called Palestine prior to the establishment of the territory under which the Mandate for Palestine was applied. What "P F Tinmore" is using and referring to are the boundaries established in the Paulet–Newcombe Agreement of 1923 for the Mandate was named after. It is also why the All Palestine Government (as an example) used the phrase: ""PALESTINE IN ITS ENTIRETY AND WITHIN ITS BOUNDARIES AS ESTABLISHED BEFORE THE TERMINATION OF THE BRITISH MANDATE."" It is because the Arab Palestinian had no other means to identify the territory other than in relationship to --- and by the name the Allied Powers assigned the Mandate.
Most Respectfully,
R
P F Tinmore
Diamond Member
- Dec 6, 2009
- 83,449
- 4,684
- 1,815
There are some facts that we need to remember.
The Mandates never annexed or otherwise gained possession of the mandated territories. They had no land or borders of their own.
The Mandates were temporally assigned to hold defined territories in trust on behalf of the people.
"The people" were defined by international law and reiterated by the Treaty of Lausanne. In the defined territory of Palestine that would be the Palestinians. "The People" have the inherent, inalienable right to self determination, independence and sovereignty, and territorial integrity.
The mandates had procedures, goals, and end times specified in the LoN Covenant.
The Treaty of Lausanne had NOTHING to do with 'Palestine' or the 'Palestinian' people. How many more times are you going to spew that lie ?
RoccoR
Gold Member
P F Tinmore, et al,
You are confused.
The territorial boundaries applicable to the four major Mandates in the region were documented by international agreements as stipulated in Post #436 supra. The Anglo-French Convention of the 23rd December, 1920 is still the pillar document that encompasses the boundaries as revisited in the Special Report of 1932.
The purpose, goals and limitation of each mandate is spelled-out in each of the respective mandates.
In addition to the regular boilerplate for Class "A" Mandates and Charters, the Mandate for Palestine was different in that:
Nowhere in the five Parts to the Treaty of Lausanne is the "Right of Self-Determination" mentioned. Nowhere in the five Parts to the Treaty of Lausanne is Palestine mentioned. Nowhere in the five Parts to the Treaty of Lausanne are inherent or inalienable rights discussed at all.
It was very obvious that the Arab Palestinian did not want to participate in the governance process, or a deliberative dialog and decision making process which listens all voices and diverse perspectives (Arab and Jewish) to enact meaningful change. Nor did they want to be involved with Article 22 administrative advice and assistance by a Mandatory until such time as they are able to stand alone.
The 1945 UN Charter [Article I (2)] stipulates that a purpose of the UN Organization is 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; but does not define self-determination as a inherent and unalienable right. The Universal Declaration of Human Rights (A/RES/3/217 A), 10 December 1948, adopted by the UN General Assembly, outlines the common standard of achievement for all peoples and all nations, to the end that every individual and every organ of society. The right to self determination, independence and sovereignty, and territorial integrity are part of the Declaration on Principles of International Law concerning Friendly Relations and Co-operation among States [A/RES/25/2625 (XXV)] of 1970. These rights are enunciated well after the creation of Mandates and the era which ended the Mandates; in fact it comes after the 1967 War.
In terms of the duration of a mandate, Article 22 said: "Mandatory until such time as they are able to stand alone." While the mandate has terminated (in a sense) the 1988 State of Palestine has yet to demonstrate that it can "stand alone." Palestine is a parasitic country that survives on donor nation contributions. It has yet to change governments in a peaceful manner in accordance with their basic law.
Most Respectfully,
R
You are confused.
(COMMENT)
The territorial boundaries applicable to the four major Mandates in the region were documented by international agreements as stipulated in Post #436 supra. The Anglo-French Convention of the 23rd December, 1920 is still the pillar document that encompasses the boundaries as revisited in the Special Report of 1932.
(COMMENT)
The purpose, goals and limitation of each mandate is spelled-out in each of the respective mandates.
"The various Mandates or "charters" adopted by the Council comprise a collection of provisions defining the manner in which the principles laid down by the Covenant are to be applied. Under the terms of the latter, the degree of authority or control to be exercised by the Mandatory varies according to the character of the territory."
SOURCE: PART II. THE PRINCIPLES OF THE MANDATORY REGIME --- Section 2 Mandates and Charters --- Series of League of Nations Publications VI.A. MANDATES 1945. VI.A. 1
SOURCE: PART II. THE PRINCIPLES OF THE MANDATORY REGIME --- Section 2 Mandates and Charters --- Series of League of Nations Publications VI.A. MANDATES 1945. VI.A. 1
In addition to the regular boilerplate for Class "A" Mandates and Charters, the Mandate for Palestine was different in that:
"The Palestine Mandate is of a very special character. While it follows the main lines laid down by the Covenant for "A" Mandates, it also contains a number of provisions designed to apply the policy defined by the "Balfour Declaration" of November 2nd, 1917. By this declaration, the British Government had announced its intention to encourage 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. The Mandate reproduces the Balfour Declaration almost in full in its preamble and states that "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".
SOURCE: PART II. THE PRINCIPLES OF THE MANDATORY REGIME --- Section 2 Mandates and Charters --- Series of League of Nations Publications VI.A. MANDATES 1945. VI.A. 1
SOURCE: PART II. THE PRINCIPLES OF THE MANDATORY REGIME --- Section 2 Mandates and Charters --- Series of League of Nations Publications VI.A. MANDATES 1945. VI.A. 1
(COMMENT)
Nowhere in the five Parts to the Treaty of Lausanne is the "Right of Self-Determination" mentioned. Nowhere in the five Parts to the Treaty of Lausanne is Palestine mentioned. Nowhere in the five Parts to the Treaty of Lausanne are inherent or inalienable rights discussed at all.
- Preamble
- Part I: Articles 1 - 45
- Part II: Articles 46 - 63
- Part III: Articles 64 - 100
- Part IV: Articles 101 - 118
- Part V: Articles 119 - 143
22. Later in 1923, a third attempt was made to establish an institution through which the Arab population of Palestine could be brought into cooperation with the government. The mandatory Power now proposed “the establishment of an Arab Agency in Palestine which will occupy a position exactly analogous to that accorded to the Jewish Agency”. The Arab Agency would have the right to be consulted on all matters relating to immigration, on which it was recognised that “the views of the Arab community were entitled to special consideration”. The Arab leaders declined that this offer on the ground that it would not satisfy the aspirations of the Arab people. They added that, never having recognised the status of the Jewish Agency, they had no desire for the establishment of an Arab Agency on the same basis.
SOURCE: Political History of Palestine under British Administration
SOURCE: Political History of Palestine under British Administration
It was very obvious that the Arab Palestinian did not want to participate in the governance process, or a deliberative dialog and decision making process which listens all voices and diverse perspectives (Arab and Jewish) to enact meaningful change. Nor did they want to be involved with Article 22 administrative advice and assistance by a Mandatory until such time as they are able to stand alone.
The 1945 UN Charter [Article I (2)] stipulates that a purpose of the UN Organization is 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; but does not define self-determination as a inherent and unalienable right. The Universal Declaration of Human Rights (A/RES/3/217 A), 10 December 1948, adopted by the UN General Assembly, outlines the common standard of achievement for all peoples and all nations, to the end that every individual and every organ of society. The right to self determination, independence and sovereignty, and territorial integrity are part of the Declaration on Principles of International Law concerning Friendly Relations and Co-operation among States [A/RES/25/2625 (XXV)] of 1970. These rights are enunciated well after the creation of Mandates and the era which ended the Mandates; in fact it comes after the 1967 War.
In terms of the duration of a mandate, Article 22 said: "Mandatory until such time as they are able to stand alone." While the mandate has terminated (in a sense) the 1988 State of Palestine has yet to demonstrate that it can "stand alone." Palestine is a parasitic country that survives on donor nation contributions. It has yet to change governments in a peaceful manner in accordance with their basic law.
Most Respectfully,
R
P F Tinmore
Diamond Member
- Dec 6, 2009
- 83,449
- 4,684
- 1,815
It is generally accepted that all peoples have the same inherent, inalienable rights.
Where do you get the impression that the Palestinians are exempt?
Similar threads
New Topics
-
President Trump. Putting political nails in the Republican party coffin.
- Started by 52ndStreet
- Replies: 1
-
-
Democrats are Actually Angry that our State Department will Vett Student VISA Applicants?- Started by Seymour Flops
- Replies: 3
-
-
Kash Patel is using polygraph test to find FBI leakers — NYT is (definitely) not pleased.- Started by DonGlock26
- Replies: 18
