Finally, Israel and Palestine is a US election issue.

[Hollie]

P F Tinmore, et al,

Well, this is a trick question. Every time you ask it, it starts off the same way. NO ONE denied any of the basic rights to the Arab Palestinians. Remembering, of course, that the actual Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR) is not law. It was adopted in December 1948, but several attempts to bring it into law as a Convention in the same way as the companion International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (CESCR) and the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (CCPR) were
Adopted and opened for signature, ratification and accession.

Having said that, clearly the Arab Palestinians have exercised their right of self-determination several times since the release from the Enemy Occupied Territory Administration. Even today, the UN does not consider the Non-Self-Governing and Trust Territory.

Palestine is a territory defined by international borders. The Palestinians are the normal residents and citizens of the land.

You have never been able to explain, other than some foreign criminals wanting to steal their land, how the Palestinians became exempt from universal rights.

(COMMENT)

At the current time, there is no Palestinian territories that has valid international defined borders. While there were the Demarcations associated with the former Mandate that terminated in 1948, those are historical and not internationally defined. But since they were surveyed, Lebanon and Syria still use them relative to the Armistice Lines, which are not borders.

The remainder of the international boundaries for Israel, are defined by treaties. The UN and the International community in general, consider the reaffirmation of the right of the Palestinian people to self-determination and to independence in their "State of Palestine" (alla 1988) on the Palestinian territory occupied since 1967; when the General Assembly Votes Overwhelmingly to Accord Palestine ‘Non-Member Observer State’ Status in United Nations.

The Arab Palestinians can be considered "normal residents and citizens of the land," as you've stated. But that does not change the intent of the Ottoman Sovereign in 1888 (in the previous posting). And next year, the Balfour Declaration of November 2, 1917, will be a century old.

Finally, it should be remembered that the right of self-determination can be exercised in the negative direction as well as the positive direct. The Arab Palestinians exercised their right of self-determination several times:

• Prior to November 1923, three successive proposals were put forward by the mandatory Government with a view to the closer association of the Arab community with the Administration of Palestine. Towards all these proposals the Arabs adopted the same attitude, namely, refusal to co-operate in measures which they considered did not satisfy their aspirations.

• Of course the Arab Community declined to participate in the Partition Plan; including the establishment of an additional Arab State.

• The Palestinians voted in the Jordanian Parliament to the ascend to the Annexation.

• The Palestinians adopted both the 1993 and 1995 Oslo Accords.

* The Palestinians chose to recognize the State of Israel, but no the Jewish State as outlined in the Partition Plan.
​

This is just a thumbnail look at the issues, in a set of broad brush strokes.

Most Respectfully,
R

3. Reaffirms the inalienable right of the Namibian people, the
Palestinian people and all peoples under foreign and colonial domination to self-determination, national independence, territorial integrity, national unity and sovereignty without outside interference;

A/RES/37/43. Importance of the universal realization of the right of peoples to self-determination and of the speedy granting of independence to colonial countries and peoples for the effective guarantee and observance of human rights​

How can the Palestinians have the inalienable right to territorial integrity if they have no territory? Hmmm?

And who has stopped them from negotiating the extent of that territory with their neighbours in Jordan, Egypt, Syria and Israel ? Claiming land that is already claimed is not allowed under the UN charter or international laws.

There is nothing to negotiate. Palestine has no border disputes with any of its neighbors?

There are a number of dead Egyptian soldiers who would disagree.

You also need to define this mythical 'Pal'istan you rattle on about. There is the islamic terrorist enclave of Gaza'istan which is competing for Islamic terrorist Street cred and for shares of the islamic terrorist welfare fraud maintenance program with the islamic terrorist enclave of Fatah'istan. Where is this mythical 'Pal'istan?

 

[Phoenall]

P F Tinmore, et al,

Well, this is a trick question. Every time you ask it, it starts off the same way. NO ONE denied any of the basic rights to the Arab Palestinians. Remembering, of course, that the actual Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR) is not law. It was adopted in December 1948, but several attempts to bring it into law as a Convention in the same way as the companion International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (CESCR) and the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (CCPR) were
Adopted and opened for signature, ratification and accession.

Having said that, clearly the Arab Palestinians have exercised their right of self-determination several times since the release from the Enemy Occupied Territory Administration. Even today, the UN does not consider the Non-Self-Governing and Trust Territory.

Palestine is a territory defined by international borders. The Palestinians are the normal residents and citizens of the land.

You have never been able to explain, other than some foreign criminals wanting to steal their land, how the Palestinians became exempt from universal rights.

(COMMENT)

At the current time, there is no Palestinian territories that has valid international defined borders. While there were the Demarcations associated with the former Mandate that terminated in 1948, those are historical and not internationally defined. But since they were surveyed, Lebanon and Syria still use them relative to the Armistice Lines, which are not borders.

The remainder of the international boundaries for Israel, are defined by treaties. The UN and the International community in general, consider the reaffirmation of the right of the Palestinian people to self-determination and to independence in their "State of Palestine" (alla 1988) on the Palestinian territory occupied since 1967; when the General Assembly Votes Overwhelmingly to Accord Palestine ‘Non-Member Observer State’ Status in United Nations.

The Arab Palestinians can be considered "normal residents and citizens of the land," as you've stated. But that does not change the intent of the Ottoman Sovereign in 1888 (in the previous posting). And next year, the Balfour Declaration of November 2, 1917, will be a century old.

Finally, it should be remembered that the right of self-determination can be exercised in the negative direction as well as the positive direct. The Arab Palestinians exercised their right of self-determination several times:

• Prior to November 1923, three successive proposals were put forward by the mandatory Government with a view to the closer association of the Arab community with the Administration of Palestine. Towards all these proposals the Arabs adopted the same attitude, namely, refusal to co-operate in measures which they considered did not satisfy their aspirations.

• Of course the Arab Community declined to participate in the Partition Plan; including the establishment of an additional Arab State.

• The Palestinians voted in the Jordanian Parliament to the ascend to the Annexation.

• The Palestinians adopted both the 1993 and 1995 Oslo Accords.

* The Palestinians chose to recognize the State of Israel, but no the Jewish State as outlined in the Partition Plan.
​

This is just a thumbnail look at the issues, in a set of broad brush strokes.

Most Respectfully,
R

3. Reaffirms the inalienable right of the Namibian people, the
Palestinian people and all peoples under foreign and colonial domination to self-determination, national independence, territorial integrity, national unity and sovereignty without outside interference;

A/RES/37/43. Importance of the universal realization of the right of peoples to self-determination and of the speedy granting of independence to colonial countries and peoples for the effective guarantee and observance of human rights​

How can the Palestinians have the inalienable right to territorial integrity if they have no territory? Hmmm?

And who has stopped them from negotiating the extent of that territory with their neighbours in Jordan, Egypt, Syria and Israel ? Claiming land that is already claimed is not allowed under the UN charter or international laws.

There is nothing to negotiate. Palestine has no border disputes with any of its neighbors?

WRONG AGAIN as it has disputes with Egypt, Jordan, Syria and Israel, which is why it is surrounded by a fence. They admitted themselves they need to negotiate mutual borders and have reneged on the promise ever since.


AS YOU YOURSELF SAY HOW CAN PALESTINE HAVE BORDERS WHEN IT HAS NO TERRITORY

 

[Phoenall]

P F Tinmore, et al,

Well, this is a trick question. Every time you ask it, it starts off the same way. NO ONE denied any of the basic rights to the Arab Palestinians. Remembering, of course, that the actual Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR) is not law. It was adopted in December 1948, but several attempts to bring it into law as a Convention in the same way as the companion International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (CESCR) and the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (CCPR) were
Adopted and opened for signature, ratification and accession.

Having said that, clearly the Arab Palestinians have exercised their right of self-determination several times since the release from the Enemy Occupied Territory Administration. Even today, the UN does not consider the Non-Self-Governing and Trust Territory.

(COMMENT)

At the current time, there is no Palestinian territories that has valid international defined borders. While there were the Demarcations associated with the former Mandate that terminated in 1948, those are historical and not internationally defined. But since they were surveyed, Lebanon and Syria still use them relative to the Armistice Lines, which are not borders.

The remainder of the international boundaries for Israel, are defined by treaties. The UN and the International community in general, consider the reaffirmation of the right of the Palestinian people to self-determination and to independence in their "State of Palestine" (alla 1988) on the Palestinian territory occupied since 1967; when the General Assembly Votes Overwhelmingly to Accord Palestine ‘Non-Member Observer State’ Status in United Nations.

The Arab Palestinians can be considered "normal residents and citizens of the land," as you've stated. But that does not change the intent of the Ottoman Sovereign in 1888 (in the previous posting). And next year, the Balfour Declaration of November 2, 1917, will be a century old.

Finally, it should be remembered that the right of self-determination can be exercised in the negative direction as well as the positive direct. The Arab Palestinians exercised their right of self-determination several times:

• Prior to November 1923, three successive proposals were put forward by the mandatory Government with a view to the closer association of the Arab community with the Administration of Palestine. Towards all these proposals the Arabs adopted the same attitude, namely, refusal to co-operate in measures which they considered did not satisfy their aspirations.

• Of course the Arab Community declined to participate in the Partition Plan; including the establishment of an additional Arab State.

• The Palestinians voted in the Jordanian Parliament to the ascend to the Annexation.

• The Palestinians adopted both the 1993 and 1995 Oslo Accords.

* The Palestinians chose to recognize the State of Israel, but no the Jewish State as outlined in the Partition Plan.
​

This is just a thumbnail look at the issues, in a set of broad brush strokes.

Most Respectfully,
R

• Prior to November 1923, three successive proposals were put forward by the mandatory Government with a view to the closer association of the Arab community with the Administration of Palestine. Towards all these proposals the Arabs adopted the same attitude, namely, refusal to co-operate in measures which they considered did not satisfy their aspirations.​

Indeed, the Palestinians did not want to legitimize the colonial project.

P F Tinmore, et al,

Well, this is a trick question. Every time you ask it, it starts off the same way. NO ONE denied any of the basic rights to the Arab Palestinians. Remembering, of course, that the actual Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR) is not law. It was adopted in December 1948, but several attempts to bring it into law as a Convention in the same way as the companion International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (CESCR) and the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (CCPR) were
Adopted and opened for signature, ratification and accession.

Having said that, clearly the Arab Palestinians have exercised their right of self-determination several times since the release from the Enemy Occupied Territory Administration. Even today, the UN does not consider the Non-Self-Governing and Trust Territory.

(COMMENT)

At the current time, there is no Palestinian territories that has valid international defined borders. While there were the Demarcations associated with the former Mandate that terminated in 1948, those are historical and not internationally defined. But since they were surveyed, Lebanon and Syria still use them relative to the Armistice Lines, which are not borders.

The remainder of the international boundaries for Israel, are defined by treaties. The UN and the International community in general, consider the reaffirmation of the right of the Palestinian people to self-determination and to independence in their "State of Palestine" (alla 1988) on the Palestinian territory occupied since 1967; when the General Assembly Votes Overwhelmingly to Accord Palestine ‘Non-Member Observer State’ Status in United Nations.

The Arab Palestinians can be considered "normal residents and citizens of the land," as you've stated. But that does not change the intent of the Ottoman Sovereign in 1888 (in the previous posting). And next year, the Balfour Declaration of November 2, 1917, will be a century old.

Finally, it should be remembered that the right of self-determination can be exercised in the negative direction as well as the positive direct. The Arab Palestinians exercised their right of self-determination several times:

• Prior to November 1923, three successive proposals were put forward by the mandatory Government with a view to the closer association of the Arab community with the Administration of Palestine. Towards all these proposals the Arabs adopted the same attitude, namely, refusal to co-operate in measures which they considered did not satisfy their aspirations.

• Of course the Arab Community declined to participate in the Partition Plan; including the establishment of an additional Arab State.

• The Palestinians voted in the Jordanian Parliament to the ascend to the Annexation.

• The Palestinians adopted both the 1993 and 1995 Oslo Accords.

* The Palestinians chose to recognize the State of Israel, but no the Jewish State as outlined in the Partition Plan.
​

This is just a thumbnail look at the issues, in a set of broad brush strokes.

Most Respectfully,
R

• Prior to November 1923, three successive proposals were put forward by the mandatory Government with a view to the closer association of the Arab community with the Administration of Palestine. Towards all these proposals the Arabs adopted the same attitude, namely, refusal to co-operate in measures which they considered did not satisfy their aspirations.​

Indeed, the Palestinians did not want to legitimize the colonial project.

Indeed, there were no 'Pal'istanians.

The automatic, ipso facto, change from Ottoman to Palestinian nationality was dealt with in Article 1, paragraph 1, of the Citizenship Order, which declared:

“Turkish subjects habitually resident in the territory of Palestine upon the 1st day of August, 1925, shall become Palestinian citizens.”​

Genesis of Citizenship in Palestine and Israel

And once again you link to the lies of an islamonazi propagandist that has been censured for altering the wording of treaties and UN resolutions to suit his agenda.
This cut and paste forgets to add the fact that they became citizens of mandatory Palestine as no nation of Palestine was in existence. There is no evidence of any Palestine nation until 1988.

Link?

To what exactly, common knowledge of your LIES

 

[P F Tinmore]

P F Tinmore, et al,

Well, this is a trick question. Every time you ask it, it starts off the same way. NO ONE denied any of the basic rights to the Arab Palestinians. Remembering, of course, that the actual Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR) is not law. It was adopted in December 1948, but several attempts to bring it into law as a Convention in the same way as the companion International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (CESCR) and the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (CCPR) were
Adopted and opened for signature, ratification and accession.

Having said that, clearly the Arab Palestinians have exercised their right of self-determination several times since the release from the Enemy Occupied Territory Administration. Even today, the UN does not consider the Non-Self-Governing and Trust Territory.

Palestine is a territory defined by international borders. The Palestinians are the normal residents and citizens of the land.

You have never been able to explain, other than some foreign criminals wanting to steal their land, how the Palestinians became exempt from universal rights.

(COMMENT)

At the current time, there is no Palestinian territories that has valid international defined borders. While there were the Demarcations associated with the former Mandate that terminated in 1948, those are historical and not internationally defined. But since they were surveyed, Lebanon and Syria still use them relative to the Armistice Lines, which are not borders.

The remainder of the international boundaries for Israel, are defined by treaties. The UN and the International community in general, consider the reaffirmation of the right of the Palestinian people to self-determination and to independence in their "State of Palestine" (alla 1988) on the Palestinian territory occupied since 1967; when the General Assembly Votes Overwhelmingly to Accord Palestine ‘Non-Member Observer State’ Status in United Nations.

The Arab Palestinians can be considered "normal residents and citizens of the land," as you've stated. But that does not change the intent of the Ottoman Sovereign in 1888 (in the previous posting). And next year, the Balfour Declaration of November 2, 1917, will be a century old.

Finally, it should be remembered that the right of self-determination can be exercised in the negative direction as well as the positive direct. The Arab Palestinians exercised their right of self-determination several times:

• Prior to November 1923, three successive proposals were put forward by the mandatory Government with a view to the closer association of the Arab community with the Administration of Palestine. Towards all these proposals the Arabs adopted the same attitude, namely, refusal to co-operate in measures which they considered did not satisfy their aspirations.

• Of course the Arab Community declined to participate in the Partition Plan; including the establishment of an additional Arab State.

• The Palestinians voted in the Jordanian Parliament to the ascend to the Annexation.

• The Palestinians adopted both the 1993 and 1995 Oslo Accords.

* The Palestinians chose to recognize the State of Israel, but no the Jewish State as outlined in the Partition Plan.
​

This is just a thumbnail look at the issues, in a set of broad brush strokes.

Most Respectfully,
R

3. Reaffirms the inalienable right of the Namibian people, the
Palestinian people and all peoples under foreign and colonial domination to self-determination, national independence, territorial integrity, national unity and sovereignty without outside interference;

A/RES/37/43. Importance of the universal realization of the right of peoples to self-determination and of the speedy granting of independence to colonial countries and peoples for the effective guarantee and observance of human rights​

How can the Palestinians have the inalienable right to territorial integrity if they have no territory? Hmmm?

And who has stopped them from negotiating the extent of that territory with their neighbours in Jordan, Egypt, Syria and Israel ? Claiming land that is already claimed is not allowed under the UN charter or international laws.

There is nothing to negotiate. Palestine has no border disputes with any of its neighbors?

WRONG AGAIN as it has disputes with Egypt, Jordan, Syria and Israel, which is why it is surrounded by a fence. They admitted themselves they need to negotiate mutual borders and have reneged on the promise ever since.


AS YOU YOURSELF SAY HOW CAN PALESTINE HAVE BORDERS WHEN IT HAS NO TERRITORY

Links?

 

[RoccoR]

P F Tinmore, et al,

You resort to this "asking for the evidence of absence" on a regular basis. And then you (later) follow-up with the statement "you still haven't answered the question." In this case, YOU assert that a pre-1988 Palestine (State of) existed because there is no evidence to the contrary (Proof By Lack of Evidence).

Sympathy alone (for the virtual victims called Arab Palestinians) is generally not evidence for believing any proposition that a reference to a region of Palestine after the 18th Century Napoleonic Wars is making reference to an independent state or sovereign nation by the Arabs resident to that region.

There is nothing to negotiate. Palestine has no border disputes with any of its neighbors?

(COMMENT)

When the Allied Powers expressed, in the 1920 San Remo Conference, using the phrase relative to the administration of the --- "territory of Palestine" --- "within such boundaries as may be fixed by them" --- they implied that up to that time, there was no formal territorial limits. They implied it was for the Allied Powers to establish the entity to be known as Palestine.

Today, the State of Palestine is described differently, depending on which faction of Arab Palestinians you are listening to.

• The PLO-Negotiations Affairs Department says: "The 1967 border is the internationally-recognized border between Israel and the oPt."
• The latest Resolution on the Status of Palestine in the UN say: "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;"
​

But neither of these truly hold the same strength as a Treaty of Peace between the two Governments. Remember, there was never a "Treaty" signed between Israel and Palestine on any border; unless you count of the 1993/1995 Oslo Accords. And the Oslo Accords are what establish Areas "A", "B", and "C."

And once again you link to the lies of an islamonazi propagandist that has been censured for altering the wording of treaties and UN resolutions to suit his agenda.
This cut and paste forgets to add the fact that they became citizens of mandatory Palestine as no nation of Palestine was in existence. There is no evidence of any Palestine nation until 1988.

Link?

(COMMENT)

Yes, it is true, no one thought to write in 1920, that Palestine was not a state, or the al-Bekaa was not a state, or the Sinai, or even that the Levant was not a state. Having said that --- it does not mean that this absence of a declarative statement is evidence of any kind that suggests (in this case) any are independent of sovereign states.

It should also be noted that, if there was an independent and sovereign nation called Palestine, THEN the need for a Citizenship Order or Nationality Law would be quite irrelevant.

The demand for a "LINK" that something does not exist is just a very fallacious ploy.

Most Respectfully,
R

 

[Phoenall]

P F Tinmore, et al,

Well, this is a trick question. Every time you ask it, it starts off the same way. NO ONE denied any of the basic rights to the Arab Palestinians. Remembering, of course, that the actual Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR) is not law. It was adopted in December 1948, but several attempts to bring it into law as a Convention in the same way as the companion International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (CESCR) and the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (CCPR) were
Adopted and opened for signature, ratification and accession.

Having said that, clearly the Arab Palestinians have exercised their right of self-determination several times since the release from the Enemy Occupied Territory Administration. Even today, the UN does not consider the Non-Self-Governing and Trust Territory.

(COMMENT)

At the current time, there is no Palestinian territories that has valid international defined borders. While there were the Demarcations associated with the former Mandate that terminated in 1948, those are historical and not internationally defined. But since they were surveyed, Lebanon and Syria still use them relative to the Armistice Lines, which are not borders.

The remainder of the international boundaries for Israel, are defined by treaties. The UN and the International community in general, consider the reaffirmation of the right of the Palestinian people to self-determination and to independence in their "State of Palestine" (alla 1988) on the Palestinian territory occupied since 1967; when the General Assembly Votes Overwhelmingly to Accord Palestine ‘Non-Member Observer State’ Status in United Nations.

The Arab Palestinians can be considered "normal residents and citizens of the land," as you've stated. But that does not change the intent of the Ottoman Sovereign in 1888 (in the previous posting). And next year, the Balfour Declaration of November 2, 1917, will be a century old.

Finally, it should be remembered that the right of self-determination can be exercised in the negative direction as well as the positive direct. The Arab Palestinians exercised their right of self-determination several times:

• Prior to November 1923, three successive proposals were put forward by the mandatory Government with a view to the closer association of the Arab community with the Administration of Palestine. Towards all these proposals the Arabs adopted the same attitude, namely, refusal to co-operate in measures which they considered did not satisfy their aspirations.

• Of course the Arab Community declined to participate in the Partition Plan; including the establishment of an additional Arab State.

• The Palestinians voted in the Jordanian Parliament to the ascend to the Annexation.

• The Palestinians adopted both the 1993 and 1995 Oslo Accords.

* The Palestinians chose to recognize the State of Israel, but no the Jewish State as outlined in the Partition Plan.
​

This is just a thumbnail look at the issues, in a set of broad brush strokes.

Most Respectfully,
R

3. Reaffirms the inalienable right of the Namibian people, the
Palestinian people and all peoples under foreign and colonial domination to self-determination, national independence, territorial integrity, national unity and sovereignty without outside interference;

A/RES/37/43. Importance of the universal realization of the right of peoples to self-determination and of the speedy granting of independence to colonial countries and peoples for the effective guarantee and observance of human rights​

How can the Palestinians have the inalienable right to territorial integrity if they have no territory? Hmmm?

And who has stopped them from negotiating the extent of that territory with their neighbours in Jordan, Egypt, Syria and Israel ? Claiming land that is already claimed is not allowed under the UN charter or international laws.

There is nothing to negotiate. Palestine has no border disputes with any of its neighbors?

WRONG AGAIN as it has disputes with Egypt, Jordan, Syria and Israel, which is why it is surrounded by a fence. They admitted themselves they need to negotiate mutual borders and have reneged on the promise ever since.


AS YOU YOURSELF SAY HOW CAN PALESTINE HAVE BORDERS WHEN IT HAS NO TERRITORY

Links?

Your own words good enough for you

How can the Palestinians have the inalienable right to territorial integrity if they have no territory? Hmmm?

 

[P F Tinmore]

P F Tinmore, et al,

You resort to this "asking for the evidence of absence" on a regular basis. And then you (later) follow-up with the statement "you still haven't answered the question." In this case, YOU assert that a pre-1988 Palestine (State of) existed because there is no evidence to the contrary (Proof By Lack of Evidence).

Sympathy alone (for the virtual victims called Arab Palestinians) is generally not evidence for believing any proposition that a reference to a region of Palestine after the 18th Century Napoleonic Wars is making reference to an independent state or sovereign nation by the Arabs resident to that region.

There is nothing to negotiate. Palestine has no border disputes with any of its neighbors?

(COMMENT)

When the Allied Powers expressed, in the 1920 San Remo Conference, using the phrase relative to the administration of the --- "territory of Palestine" --- "within such boundaries as may be fixed by them" --- they implied that up to that time, there was no formal territorial limits. They implied it was for the Allied Powers to establish the entity to be known as Palestine.

Today, the State of Palestine is described differently, depending on which faction of Arab Palestinians you are listening to.

• The PLO-Negotiations Affairs Department says: "The 1967 border is the internationally-recognized border between Israel and the oPt."
• The latest Resolution on the Status of Palestine in the UN say: "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;"
​

But neither of these truly hold the same strength as a Treaty of Peace between the two Governments. Remember, there was never a "Treaty" signed between Israel and Palestine on any border; unless you count of the 1993/1995 Oslo Accords. And the Oslo Accords are what establish Areas "A", "B", and "C."

And once again you link to the lies of an islamonazi propagandist that has been censured for altering the wording of treaties and UN resolutions to suit his agenda.
This cut and paste forgets to add the fact that they became citizens of mandatory Palestine as no nation of Palestine was in existence. There is no evidence of any Palestine nation until 1988.

Link?

(COMMENT)

Yes, it is true, no one thought to write in 1920, that Palestine was not a state, or the al-Bekaa was not a state, or the Sinai, or even that the Levant was not a state. Having said that --- it does not mean that this absence of a declarative statement is evidence of any kind that suggests (in this case) any are independent of sovereign states.

It should also be noted that, if there was an independent and sovereign nation called Palestine, THEN the need for a Citizenship Order or Nationality Law would be quite irrelevant.

The demand for a "LINK" that something does not exist is just a very fallacious ploy.

Most Respectfully,
R

To the contrary, I have posted much evidence showing that Palestine is a state. Many people come back to me and say that it is not, but nobody has posted anything to back up that opinion other than just more opinion.

 

[RoccoR]

P F Tinmore, et al,

You've presented absolutely nothing that you've not corrupted the meaning. Nothing...

To the contrary, I have posted much evidence showing that Palestine is a state. Many people come back to me and say that it is not, but nobody has posted anything to back up that opinion other than just more opinion.

(COMMENT)

Even the Mandatory (which stood as the successor Government) of territory to which the Mandate Applied, Palestine, defined it as a "Legal Entity." The Mandatory further stated that it was NOT a "sovereign state." Yes in a jointly released worldwide UN Memorandum, the Mandatory specifically said that it was NOT a "Sovereign State."

UN Palestine Commission​

27 February 1948​

UNITED NATIONS
Department of Public Information
Press and Publications Bureau
Lake Success, New York
​

Press Release PAL/138
27 February 1948
​

UK MEMORANDUM NAMES COMMISSION
AS SUCCESSOR GOVERNMENT
​

The Government of the United Kingdom, in a memorandum on the "Legal Meaning of the Termination of the Mandate", has advised the United Nations Palestine Commission that so fas the Mandatory Power is concerned the United Nations Commission will be the Government of Palestine after 15 May 1948.

The memorandum, transmitted to the Commission by the British Delegation to the United Nations, sets forth the position of the Mandatory Power with respect to the question of the successor government in Palestine after the termination of the British mandate. Pertinent excerpts from the memorandum are as follows:

"Palestine is today a legal entity but it is not a sovereign state. Palestine is a territory administered under mandate by His Majesty (in respect of the United Kingdom), who is entirely responsible both for its internal administration and for its foreign affairs.

"After the 15th May, 1948, Palestine will continue to be a legal entity but it will still not be a sovereign state because it will not be immediately self-governing. The authority responsible for its administration will, however, have changed.

"Where the sovereignty of Palestine lies at the present time is a disputed and perhaps academic legal question about which writers have expressed a number of different conclusions. Where the sovereignty of Palestine will lie after the 15th May, 1948, is perhaps also a question on which different views will be held, but so far as His Majesty's Government are aware, it is a question which it is unnecessary to answer in connection with any practical issues.

"After the 15th May, 1948, the United Nations Commission will be the Government of Palestine. It does not seem very material whether it is considered to be the de facto or the de jure Government. In any case, its title to be the Government of Palestine will rest on the resolution of the General Assembly."His Majesty's Government will recognize the United Nations Commission as the authority with which to make an agreement regarding the transfer of the assets of the Government of Palestine."
​

The Palestine Commission has adopted the following statement of policy with respect to the continuity of employment of present employees of the Mandatory administration in Palestine, and has requested the Mandatory Power to publish the statement or circulate it to all employees of the present Government in Palestine:

"The United Nations Palestine Commission, being under the terms of the resolution of the General Assembly responsible for the administration of Palestine immediately following the termination of the Mandate, hereby calls upon all present employees of the Palestine administration to continue their service with the successor authority in Palestine when the British Mandate is terminated. It is the policy of the United Nations Palestine commission as the successor authority to maintain services on the same terms and with the same rights for employees as those enjoyed under the Mandatory Government. The Commission requests all present employees of the Palestine Administration to inform at the earliest possible date, the Mandatory Government for communication to the Commission, whether they would be willing to remain in the service of the successor administration of Palestine on such terms."
​

The next meeting of the Commission will be on Monday, March 1, at 3 P.M.

​

When the Mandatory stated "Palestine is today a legal entity but it is not a sovereign state." It was stating that as a fact from the time of the Occupied Enemy Territory Administration (OETA) in 1918 through to the termination of the Mandate in 1948, there was not sovereign state. After the 1948-1949 War of Independence, the Egyptian and Jordanian Occupations began.

​

Most Respectfully,
R

 

[P F Tinmore]

P F Tinmore, et al,

You've presented absolutely nothing that you've not corrupted the meaning. Nothing...

To the contrary, I have posted much evidence showing that Palestine is a state. Many people come back to me and say that it is not, but nobody has posted anything to back up that opinion other than just more opinion.

(COMMENT)

Even the Mandatory (which stood as the successor Government) of territory to which the Mandate Applied, Palestine, defined it as a "Legal Entity." The Mandatory further stated that it was NOT a "sovereign state." Yes in a jointly released worldwide UN Memorandum, the Mandatory specifically said that it was NOT a "Sovereign State."

UN Palestine Commission​

27 February 1948​

UNITED NATIONS
Department of Public Information
Press and Publications Bureau
Lake Success, New York
​

Press Release PAL/138
27 February 1948
​

UK MEMORANDUM NAMES COMMISSION
AS SUCCESSOR GOVERNMENT
​

The Government of the United Kingdom, in a memorandum on the "Legal Meaning of the Termination of the Mandate", has advised the United Nations Palestine Commission that so fas the Mandatory Power is concerned the United Nations Commission will be the Government of Palestine after 15 May 1948.

The memorandum, transmitted to the Commission by the British Delegation to the United Nations, sets forth the position of the Mandatory Power with respect to the question of the successor government in Palestine after the termination of the British mandate. Pertinent excerpts from the memorandum are as follows:

"Palestine is today a legal entity but it is not a sovereign state. Palestine is a territory administered under mandate by His Majesty (in respect of the United Kingdom), who is entirely responsible both for its internal administration and for its foreign affairs.

"After the 15th May, 1948, Palestine will continue to be a legal entity but it will still not be a sovereign state because it will not be immediately self-governing. The authority responsible for its administration will, however, have changed.

"Where the sovereignty of Palestine lies at the present time is a disputed and perhaps academic legal question about which writers have expressed a number of different conclusions. Where the sovereignty of Palestine will lie after the 15th May, 1948, is perhaps also a question on which different views will be held, but so far as His Majesty's Government are aware, it is a question which it is unnecessary to answer in connection with any practical issues.

"After the 15th May, 1948, the United Nations Commission will be the Government of Palestine. It does not seem very material whether it is considered to be the de facto or the de jure Government. In any case, its title to be the Government of Palestine will rest on the resolution of the General Assembly."His Majesty's Government will recognize the United Nations Commission as the authority with which to make an agreement regarding the transfer of the assets of the Government of Palestine."
​

The Palestine Commission has adopted the following statement of policy with respect to the continuity of employment of present employees of the Mandatory administration in Palestine, and has requested the Mandatory Power to publish the statement or circulate it to all employees of the present Government in Palestine:

"The United Nations Palestine Commission, being under the terms of the resolution of the General Assembly responsible for the administration of Palestine immediately following the termination of the Mandate, hereby calls upon all present employees of the Palestine administration to continue their service with the successor authority in Palestine when the British Mandate is terminated. It is the policy of the United Nations Palestine commission as the successor authority to maintain services on the same terms and with the same rights for employees as those enjoyed under the Mandatory Government. The Commission requests all present employees of the Palestine Administration to inform at the earliest possible date, the Mandatory Government for communication to the Commission, whether they would be willing to remain in the service of the successor administration of Palestine on such terms."
​

The next meeting of the Commission will be on Monday, March 1, at 3 P.M.

​

When the Mandatory stated "Palestine is today a legal entity but it is not a sovereign state." It was stating that as a fact from the time of the Occupied Enemy Territory Administration (OETA) in 1918 through to the termination of the Mandate in 1948, there was not sovereign state. After the 1948-1949 War of Independence, the Egyptian and Jordanian Occupations began.

​

Most Respectfully,
R

What part of all that refutes my post?

 

[Hollie]

P F Tinmore, et al,

You've presented absolutely nothing that you've not corrupted the meaning. Nothing...

To the contrary, I have posted much evidence showing that Palestine is a state. Many people come back to me and say that it is not, but nobody has posted anything to back up that opinion other than just more opinion.

(COMMENT)

Even the Mandatory (which stood as the successor Government) of territory to which the Mandate Applied, Palestine, defined it as a "Legal Entity." The Mandatory further stated that it was NOT a "sovereign state." Yes in a jointly released worldwide UN Memorandum, the Mandatory specifically said that it was NOT a "Sovereign State."

UN Palestine Commission​

27 February 1948​

UNITED NATIONS
Department of Public Information
Press and Publications Bureau
Lake Success, New York
​

Press Release PAL/138
27 February 1948
​

UK MEMORANDUM NAMES COMMISSION
AS SUCCESSOR GOVERNMENT
​

The Government of the United Kingdom, in a memorandum on the "Legal Meaning of the Termination of the Mandate", has advised the United Nations Palestine Commission that so fas the Mandatory Power is concerned the United Nations Commission will be the Government of Palestine after 15 May 1948.

The memorandum, transmitted to the Commission by the British Delegation to the United Nations, sets forth the position of the Mandatory Power with respect to the question of the successor government in Palestine after the termination of the British mandate. Pertinent excerpts from the memorandum are as follows:

"Palestine is today a legal entity but it is not a sovereign state. Palestine is a territory administered under mandate by His Majesty (in respect of the United Kingdom), who is entirely responsible both for its internal administration and for its foreign affairs.

"After the 15th May, 1948, Palestine will continue to be a legal entity but it will still not be a sovereign state because it will not be immediately self-governing. The authority responsible for its administration will, however, have changed.

"Where the sovereignty of Palestine lies at the present time is a disputed and perhaps academic legal question about which writers have expressed a number of different conclusions. Where the sovereignty of Palestine will lie after the 15th May, 1948, is perhaps also a question on which different views will be held, but so far as His Majesty's Government are aware, it is a question which it is unnecessary to answer in connection with any practical issues.

"After the 15th May, 1948, the United Nations Commission will be the Government of Palestine. It does not seem very material whether it is considered to be the de facto or the de jure Government. In any case, its title to be the Government of Palestine will rest on the resolution of the General Assembly."His Majesty's Government will recognize the United Nations Commission as the authority with which to make an agreement regarding the transfer of the assets of the Government of Palestine."
​

The Palestine Commission has adopted the following statement of policy with respect to the continuity of employment of present employees of the Mandatory administration in Palestine, and has requested the Mandatory Power to publish the statement or circulate it to all employees of the present Government in Palestine:

"The United Nations Palestine Commission, being under the terms of the resolution of the General Assembly responsible for the administration of Palestine immediately following the termination of the Mandate, hereby calls upon all present employees of the Palestine administration to continue their service with the successor authority in Palestine when the British Mandate is terminated. It is the policy of the United Nations Palestine commission as the successor authority to maintain services on the same terms and with the same rights for employees as those enjoyed under the Mandatory Government. The Commission requests all present employees of the Palestine Administration to inform at the earliest possible date, the Mandatory Government for communication to the Commission, whether they would be willing to remain in the service of the successor administration of Palestine on such terms."
​

The next meeting of the Commission will be on Monday, March 1, at 3 P.M.

​

When the Mandatory stated "Palestine is today a legal entity but it is not a sovereign state." It was stating that as a fact from the time of the Occupied Enemy Territory Administration (OETA) in 1918 through to the termination of the Mandate in 1948, there was not sovereign state. After the 1948-1949 War of Independence, the Egyptian and Jordanian Occupations began.

​

Most Respectfully,
R

What part of all that refutes my post?

The part that refutes your post.

Honestly Tinmore, your all too frequent slogan:

What part of all that refutes my post?™

serves only as a time wasting embarrassment.

 

[RoccoR]

P F Tinmore, et al,

Unless you have changed your position, you have held the position that the Arab Higher Committee held in 1948; you hold a position similar to that held by the PLO and later HAMAS, in that:

• Palestine from the river to the sea, and from north to south, is a land of the Palestinian people and its homeland and its legitimate right, we may not a waiver an inch or any part thereof, no matter what the reasons and circumstances and pressures.
​

What part of all that refutes my post?

(COMMENT)

You word this question so ambiguously that it is hard to tell what the parameters of your question is.

All of it defeats your your argument, concerning the establishment of the State of Palestine pre-1988.

I challenge you to specify a specific date, prior to 1988, in which their was a State of Palestine.

Most Respectfully,
R

 

[Roudy]

Of course there were Palestinians, that's who the people of Palestine were. Would there be a passport that the Mandatory issued that stated that the citizenship of a person was Palestinian citizen if there were no Palestinians you silly little ignoramus.

Does this guy ever stop lying? He intentionally shows you the inside of the passport so as to not to show that it's actually a BRITISH PASSPORT. Ha ha ha. OMG.

 

[P F Tinmore]

P F Tinmore, et al,

Unless you have changed your position, you have held the position that the Arab Higher Committee held in 1948; you hold a position similar to that held by the PLO and later HAMAS, in that:

• Palestine from the river to the sea, and from north to south, is a land of the Palestinian people and its homeland and its legitimate right, we may not a waiver an inch or any part thereof, no matter what the reasons and circumstances and pressures.
​

What part of all that refutes my post?

(COMMENT)

You word this question so ambiguously that it is hard to tell what the parameters of your question is.

All of it defeats your your argument, concerning the establishment of the State of Palestine pre-1988.

I challenge you to specify a specific date, prior to 1988, in which their was a State of Palestine.

Most Respectfully,
R

• Palestine from the river to the sea, and from north to south, is a land of the Palestinian people and its homeland and its legitimate right, we may not a waiver an inch or any part thereof, no matter what the reasons and circumstances and pressures.
​

I have asked many times for you to prove that false. You have ducked the question every time.

 

[RoccoR]

P F Tinmore, et al,

I have never ducked that question! You just don't like the answer. It is a fallacious question.

• Palestine from the river to the sea, and from north to south, is a land of the Palestinian people and its homeland and its legitimate right, we may not a waiver an inch or any part thereof, no matter what the reasons and circumstances and pressures.​

​

I have asked many times for you to prove that false. You have ducked the question every time.

(COMMENT)

• Since the time of the territorial seizure eight centuries ago, there was no political subdivision with a local government and governing body called Palestine.

• The boundaries to which the Allied Powers established as the territory under the Mandate Applied was called, for a short title, Palestine as defined by the Order in Council; with the Mandatory assigned as the Government of Palestine.

• Absent the Mandate, there was no Government of Palestine when the Ottoman Empire renounced all rights and title whatsoever over or respecting the territories situated outside the frontiers of Turkey to the Allied Powers.
​

Between the Mudros Armistice (1918) and the establishment of the State of Israel (1948), 'the territory from the River to the Sea" was a legal entity under the supervision of the Mandatory selected by the Allied Powers.

The Treaty of Lausanne (Article 16) places the rights and title of the territory into the hands of the Allied Powers.

(QUESTION)

When did the rights and title pass from the Allied Powers to the Palestinians?

Most Respectfully,
R

 

[Andylusion]

P F Tinmore, et al,

Well, this is a trick question. Every time you ask it, it starts off the same way. NO ONE denied any of the basic rights to the Arab Palestinians. Remembering, of course, that the actual Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR) is not law. It was adopted in December 1948, but several attempts to bring it into law as a Convention in the same way as the companion International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (CESCR) and the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (CCPR) were
Adopted and opened for signature, ratification and accession.

Having said that, clearly the Arab Palestinians have exercised their right of self-determination several times since the release from the Enemy Occupied Territory Administration. Even today, the UN does not consider the Non-Self-Governing and Trust Territory.

(COMMENT)

At the current time, there is no Palestinian territories that has valid international defined borders. While there were the Demarcations associated with the former Mandate that terminated in 1948, those are historical and not internationally defined. But since they were surveyed, Lebanon and Syria still use them relative to the Armistice Lines, which are not borders.

The remainder of the international boundaries for Israel, are defined by treaties. The UN and the International community in general, consider the reaffirmation of the right of the Palestinian people to self-determination and to independence in their "State of Palestine" (alla 1988) on the Palestinian territory occupied since 1967; when the General Assembly Votes Overwhelmingly to Accord Palestine ‘Non-Member Observer State’ Status in United Nations.

The Arab Palestinians can be considered "normal residents and citizens of the land," as you've stated. But that does not change the intent of the Ottoman Sovereign in 1888 (in the previous posting). And next year, the Balfour Declaration of November 2, 1917, will be a century old.

Finally, it should be remembered that the right of self-determination can be exercised in the negative direction as well as the positive direct. The Arab Palestinians exercised their right of self-determination several times:

• Prior to November 1923, three successive proposals were put forward by the mandatory Government with a view to the closer association of the Arab community with the Administration of Palestine. Towards all these proposals the Arabs adopted the same attitude, namely, refusal to co-operate in measures which they considered did not satisfy their aspirations.

• Of course the Arab Community declined to participate in the Partition Plan; including the establishment of an additional Arab State.

• The Palestinians voted in the Jordanian Parliament to the ascend to the Annexation.

• The Palestinians adopted both the 1993 and 1995 Oslo Accords.

* The Palestinians chose to recognize the State of Israel, but no the Jewish State as outlined in the Partition Plan.
​

This is just a thumbnail look at the issues, in a set of broad brush strokes.

Most Respectfully,
R

3. Reaffirms the inalienable right of the Namibian people, the
Palestinian people and all peoples under foreign and colonial domination to self-determination, national independence, territorial integrity, national unity and sovereignty without outside interference;

A/RES/37/43. Importance of the universal realization of the right of peoples to self-determination and of the speedy granting of independence to colonial countries and peoples for the effective guarantee and observance of human rights​

How can the Palestinians have the inalienable right to territorial integrity if they have no territory? Hmmm?

And who has stopped them from negotiating the extent of that territory with their neighbours in Jordan, Egypt, Syria and Israel ? Claiming land that is already claimed is not allowed under the UN charter or international laws.

There is nothing to negotiate. Palestine has no border disputes with any of its neighbors?

WRONG AGAIN as it has disputes with Egypt, Jordan, Syria and Israel, which is why it is surrounded by a fence. They admitted themselves they need to negotiate mutual borders and have reneged on the promise ever since.


AS YOU YOURSELF SAY HOW CAN PALESTINE HAVE BORDERS WHEN IT HAS NO TERRITORY

Links?

I personally don't care what others think on the issue, so while I'm sure I could find links supporting my views... I don't want or need them. Nor do I intend to even attempt to convince you, or anyone else.

There is no nation or people of "palestine". The area that was called "Palestine" by the Romans, is the entire area of Israel. There are no, and never were any people called "Palestinians".

Palestine is not a nation. Israel is a nation. Gaza, and the west bank, belong as part of the ancient land of Israel, and should belong to Israel today. And they will. Israel will at some point become a complete and whole nation.

Everything that has transpired, was predicted in the Bible, and thus far, as come true exactly as expected.

It will continue to come true, until the complete regathering of the Jewish people to Israel, which will complete the entire land that belongs to Israel.

The fake "palestinians" should leave. They will either leave by choice, or they leave by force, or they will die fighting the Jews. Those are the only choices they have. They will leave by choice, or by force... or die. The choice is theirs, the results will be the same no matter what they do.

 

[P F Tinmore]

P F Tinmore, et al,

I have never ducked that question! You just don't like the answer. It is a fallacious question.

• Palestine from the river to the sea, and from north to south, is a land of the Palestinian people and its homeland and its legitimate right, we may not a waiver an inch or any part thereof, no matter what the reasons and circumstances and pressures.​

​

I have asked many times for you to prove that false. You have ducked the question every time.

(COMMENT)

• Since the time of the territorial seizure eight centuries ago, there was no political subdivision with a local government and governing body called Palestine.

• The boundaries to which the Allied Powers established as the territory under the Mandate Applied was called, for a short title, Palestine as defined by the Order in Council; with the Mandatory assigned as the Government of Palestine.

• Absent the Mandate, there was no Government of Palestine when the Ottoman Empire renounced all rights and title whatsoever over or respecting the territories situated outside the frontiers of Turkey to the Allied Powers.
​

Between the Mudros Armistice (1918) and the establishment of the State of Israel (1948), 'the territory from the River to the Sea" was a legal entity under the supervision of the Mandatory selected by the Allied Powers.

The Treaty of Lausanne (Article 16) places the rights and title of the territory into the hands of the Allied Powers.

(QUESTION)

When did the rights and title pass from the Allied Powers to the Palestinians?

Most Respectfully,
R

False question. When did the allied powers annex or otherwise claim that territory? Palestine was held in trust on the behalf of the inhabitant i.e. the Palestinians.

 

[montelatici]

Of course there were Palestinians, that's who the people of Palestine were. Would there be a passport that the Mandatory issued that stated that the citizenship of a person was Palestinian citizen if there were no Palestinians you silly little ignoramus.

Does this guy ever stop lying? He intentionally shows you the inside of the passport so as to not to show that it's actually a BRITISH PASSPORT. Ha ha ha. OMG.

And it states Palestinian Citizen. hahahahaha

 

[montelatici]

3. Reaffirms the inalienable right of the Namibian people, the
Palestinian people and all peoples under foreign and colonial domination to self-determination, national independence, territorial integrity, national unity and sovereignty without outside interference;

A/RES/37/43. Importance of the universal realization of the right of peoples to self-determination and of the speedy granting of independence to colonial countries and peoples for the effective guarantee and observance of human rights​

How can the Palestinians have the inalienable right to territorial integrity if they have no territory? Hmmm?

And who has stopped them from negotiating the extent of that territory with their neighbours in Jordan, Egypt, Syria and Israel ? Claiming land that is already claimed is not allowed under the UN charter or international laws.

There is nothing to negotiate. Palestine has no border disputes with any of its neighbors?

WRONG AGAIN as it has disputes with Egypt, Jordan, Syria and Israel, which is why it is surrounded by a fence. They admitted themselves they need to negotiate mutual borders and have reneged on the promise ever since.


AS YOU YOURSELF SAY HOW CAN PALESTINE HAVE BORDERS WHEN IT HAS NO TERRITORY

Links?

I personally don't care what others think on the issue, so while I'm sure I could find links supporting my views... I don't want or need them. Nor do I intend to even attempt to convince you, or anyone else.

There is no nation or people of "palestine". The area that was called "Palestine" by the Romans, is the entire area of Israel. There are no, and never were any people called "Palestinians".

Palestine is not a nation. Israel is a nation. Gaza, and the west bank, belong as part of the ancient land of Israel, and should belong to Israel today. And they will. Israel will at some point become a complete and whole nation.

Everything that has transpired, was predicted in the Bible, and thus far, as come true exactly as expected.

It will continue to come true, until the complete regathering of the Jewish people to Israel, which will complete the entire land that belongs to Israel.

The fake "palestinians" should leave. They will either leave by choice, or they leave by force, or they will die fighting the Jews. Those are the only choices they have. They will leave by choice, or by force... or die. The choice is theirs, the results will be the same no matter what they do.

What will happen to all these "Jewish people" after they kill all the Christian and Muslim Palestinians and they all gather together in Israel?

Will they become Christian and acknowledge Jesus Christ as God and Savior? But after killing all the Palestinian Christians won't Jesus be a bit upset?

 

[Hollie]

And who has stopped them from negotiating the extent of that territory with their neighbours in Jordan, Egypt, Syria and Israel ? Claiming land that is already claimed is not allowed under the UN charter or international laws.

There is nothing to negotiate. Palestine has no border disputes with any of its neighbors?

WRONG AGAIN as it has disputes with Egypt, Jordan, Syria and Israel, which is why it is surrounded by a fence. They admitted themselves they need to negotiate mutual borders and have reneged on the promise ever since.


AS YOU YOURSELF SAY HOW CAN PALESTINE HAVE BORDERS WHEN IT HAS NO TERRITORY

Links?

I personally don't care what others think on the issue, so while I'm sure I could find links supporting my views... I don't want or need them. Nor do I intend to even attempt to convince you, or anyone else.

There is no nation or people of "palestine". The area that was called "Palestine" by the Romans, is the entire area of Israel. There are no, and never were any people called "Palestinians".

Palestine is not a nation. Israel is a nation. Gaza, and the west bank, belong as part of the ancient land of Israel, and should belong to Israel today. And they will. Israel will at some point become a complete and whole nation.

Everything that has transpired, was predicted in the Bible, and thus far, as come true exactly as expected.

It will continue to come true, until the complete regathering of the Jewish people to Israel, which will complete the entire land that belongs to Israel.

The fake "palestinians" should leave. They will either leave by choice, or they leave by force, or they will die fighting the Jews. Those are the only choices they have. They will leave by choice, or by force... or die. The choice is theirs, the results will be the same no matter what they do.

What will happen to all these "Jewish people" after they kill all the Christian and Muslim Palestinians and they all gather together in Israel?

Will they become Christian and acknowledge Jesus Christ as God and Savior? But after killing all the Palestinian Christians won't Jesus be a bit upset?

Getting a little frothy, there. There's no reason to believe the "Jewish people" have any desire to kill the Arabs-Moslems occupying the disputed territories. How do think the jeebus would react to an Islamist posing as a xtian?

 

[montelatici]

I despise most forms of Islam, how can I be an Islamist? I also despise Jews that insult my religion. You think you are being cute writing "xtian".