Finally, Israel and Palestine is a US election issue.

[RoccoR]

P F Tinmore, et al,

Nonsense --- mine was not a fallacious question.

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.

(COMMENT)

Lausanne Treaty was signed on 24 July 1923 by the Allied Powers with Turkey; each having agreed to the terms and conditions.

There was no requirement for the Allied Powers to take any action relative to the acceptance of the territory by treaty. Acceptance it all that is required.

Not "i.e." (that is) the Palestinians; nowhere was that an exclusive condition; not in the Covenant and not in the Mandate. facilitate the acquisition of Palestinian citizenship by Jews who take up their permanent residence in Palestine.
​

Regarding the development of self-governing institutions --- The Mandate also provides for the recognition of a public body --- The Jewish Agency --- which is to advise and co-operate with the Mandatory in the administration of Palestine (economic, social and other matters) as may affect the establishment of the Jewish National Home and the interests of the Jewish population in Palestine, administration and immigration to establish citizenship as an "inhabitant'.. The Jewish Agency containing provisions framed so as to facilitate the acquisition of Palestinian citizenship by Jews who take up their permanent residence in Palestine.

Now this is important. The Arab Palestinians did not want to participate at the same level as the Jewish immigrants in terms of providing advise and co-operate with the Mandatory in the administration of Palestine. The Arab Palestinians declined three times during the period 1922 and 1923. The created a dilemma in the development of self-governing institutions more favorable to Arab Palestinian concerns.

However, none of this is even relevant any more. The Arab Palestinians declined to participate in the development of self-governing institutions, they declined in the participation in the Step Preparatory to Independence, and declined to engage in fruitful negotiations. The Arab Palestinians cannot roll back the clock. The outcomes are what they are. No matter how difficult for them to accept, they will not be given the State of Israel in which to complete their Jihad.

Most Respectfully,
R

 

[P F Tinmore]

P F Tinmore, et al,

Nonsense --- mine was not a fallacious question.

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.

(COMMENT)

Lausanne Treaty was signed on 24 July 1923 by the Allied Powers with Turkey; each having agreed to the terms and conditions.

There was no requirement for the Allied Powers to take any action relative to the acceptance of the territory by treaty. Acceptance it all that is required.

Not "i.e." (that is) the Palestinians; nowhere was that an exclusive condition; not in the Covenant and not in the Mandate. facilitate the acquisition of Palestinian citizenship by Jews who take up their permanent residence in Palestine.
​

Regarding the development of self-governing institutions --- The Mandate also provides for the recognition of a public body --- The Jewish Agency --- which is to advise and co-operate with the Mandatory in the administration of Palestine (economic, social and other matters) as may affect the establishment of the Jewish National Home and the interests of the Jewish population in Palestine, administration and immigration to establish citizenship as an "inhabitant'.. The Jewish Agency containing provisions framed so as to facilitate the acquisition of Palestinian citizenship by Jews who take up their permanent residence in Palestine.

Now this is important. The Arab Palestinians did not want to participate at the same level as the Jewish immigrants in terms of providing advise and co-operate with the Mandatory in the administration of Palestine. The Arab Palestinians declined three times during the period 1922 and 1923. The created a dilemma in the development of self-governing institutions more favorable to Arab Palestinian concerns.

However, none of this is even relevant any more. The Arab Palestinians declined to participate in the development of self-governing institutions, they declined in the participation in the Step Preparatory to Independence, and declined to engage in fruitful negotiations. The Arab Palestinians cannot roll back the clock. The outcomes are what they are. No matter how difficult for them to accept, they will not be given the State of Israel in which to complete their Jihad.

Most Respectfully,
R

Holy smokescreen, Batman!

What does all that have to do with my post?

There was no requirement for the Allied Powers to take any action relative to the acceptance of the territory by treaty. Acceptance it all that is required.​

Yes there was.
-------------------------
Drawing up the framework of nationality, Article 30 of the Treaty of Lausanne stated:

“Turkish subjects habitually resident in territory which in accordance with the provisions of the present Treaty is detached from Turkey will become ipso facto, in the conditions laid down by the local law, nationals of the State to which such territory is transferred.”​

-------------------------
And being the citizens of Palestine it was their prerogative to determine immigration.

 

[P F Tinmore]

P F Tinmore, et al,

Nonsense --- mine was not a fallacious question.

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.

(COMMENT)

Lausanne Treaty was signed on 24 July 1923 by the Allied Powers with Turkey; each having agreed to the terms and conditions.

There was no requirement for the Allied Powers to take any action relative to the acceptance of the territory by treaty. Acceptance it all that is required.

Not "i.e." (that is) the Palestinians; nowhere was that an exclusive condition; not in the Covenant and not in the Mandate. facilitate the acquisition of Palestinian citizenship by Jews who take up their permanent residence in Palestine.
​

Regarding the development of self-governing institutions --- The Mandate also provides for the recognition of a public body --- The Jewish Agency --- which is to advise and co-operate with the Mandatory in the administration of Palestine (economic, social and other matters) as may affect the establishment of the Jewish National Home and the interests of the Jewish population in Palestine, administration and immigration to establish citizenship as an "inhabitant'.. The Jewish Agency containing provisions framed so as to facilitate the acquisition of Palestinian citizenship by Jews who take up their permanent residence in Palestine.

Now this is important. The Arab Palestinians did not want to participate at the same level as the Jewish immigrants in terms of providing advise and co-operate with the Mandatory in the administration of Palestine. The Arab Palestinians declined three times during the period 1922 and 1923. The created a dilemma in the development of self-governing institutions more favorable to Arab Palestinian concerns.

However, none of this is even relevant any more. The Arab Palestinians declined to participate in the development of self-governing institutions, they declined in the participation in the Step Preparatory to Independence, and declined to engage in fruitful negotiations. The Arab Palestinians cannot roll back the clock. The outcomes are what they are. No matter how difficult for them to accept, they will not be given the State of Israel in which to complete their Jihad.

Most Respectfully,
R

However, none of this is even relevant any more. The Arab Palestinians declined to participate in the development of self-governing institutions, blah, blah, blah.​

Are you still peddling this horseshit? You know that the Palestinians did not want to legitimize the colonial project.

 

[Andylusion]

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?

I did not say that. There are Christians that are Israeli citizens. There are Arabs, and Muslims, that are Israeli citizens.

I do not believe that the Jewish people will irradiate all non-jews. They could..... I don't think so.

What I was talking about, was explicitly about the people in Gaza and West Bank, that are fighting the IDF. They must leave, or die fighting. Or be forced out.

First off.... anyone that calls themselves Christian, should be supporting the Jewish people. If a Palestinian is fighting the IDF, is calling themselves Christian, then either they are ignorant, or they are liars.

The Christ, in the name Christian.... was a Jew. To fight Jews, and proclaim to be following a Jew, is contradictory. Moreover, a Christian, should by definition, be reading the Bible.... which include Isaiah, Jeremiah, Ezekiel, Hosea, Zechariah, Revelations. If you read those, you will find that Israel would be destroyed, and claimed by the Gentiles, that the Jews would be scattered to the ends of the Earth, that nation of Israel would be reborn, the people gathered from all nations, and return to Israel, that Israel would end up wealthy, and be stronger, and would destroy their enemies, and that the Jewish Temple would be rebuilt.

Now if you see those prophesies coming true, and you are a "Christian" and you are fighting the Jews... when you read that the Jews will destroy their enemies..... That makes you either really dumb, really ignorant... are a really big liar.

If the Jews asked me to leave, I would ask for an audience in court, but if all failed, I would leave. I most certainly wouldn't start shooting, when I knew the Bible said clearly the Jews will regather, and kill their enemies.... and especially we I can see on TV those prophecies coming true.

 

[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.

And it states Palestinian Citizen. hahahahaha

So the Pslestinians were British subjects to Her Majesty. Ho Ho Ho. Merry Ramadan.

 

[Roudy]

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".

You despise Jews? Gee who woulda thunk that?!

On the other hand you're a-ok with playing a Christian who has no problem with Muslims slaughtering Christians, and defiling and destroying everything having to do with Christianty. So let's really stop this pro-Christian charade. It isn't working, and nobody's falling for it.

 

[Roudy]

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?

I did not say that. There are Christians that are Israeli citizens. There are Arabs, and Muslims, that are Israeli citizens.

I do not believe that the Jewish people will irradiate all non-jews. They could..... I don't think so.

What I was talking about, was explicitly about the people in Gaza and West Bank, that are fighting the IDF. They must leave, or die fighting. Or be forced out.

First off.... anyone that calls themselves Christian, should be supporting the Jewish people. If a Palestinian is fighting the IDF, is calling themselves Christian, then either they are ignorant, or they are liars.

The Christ, in the name Christian.... was a Jew. To fight Jews, and proclaim to be following a Jew, is contradictory. Moreover, a Christian, should by definition, be reading the Bible.... which include Isaiah, Jeremiah, Ezekiel, Hosea, Zechariah, Revelations. If you read those, you will find that Israel would be destroyed, and claimed by the Gentiles, that the Jews would be scattered to the ends of the Earth, that nation of Israel would be reborn, the people gathered from all nations, and return to Israel, that Israel would end up wealthy, and be stronger, and would destroy their enemies, and that the Jewish Temple would be rebuilt.

Now if you see those prophesies coming true, and you are a "Christian" and you are fighting the Jews... when you read that the Jews will destroy their enemies..... That makes you either really dumb, really ignorant... are a really big liar.

If the Jews asked me to leave, I would ask for an audience in court, but if all failed, I would leave. I most certainly wouldn't start shooting, when I knew the Bible said clearly the Jews will regather, and kill their enemies.... and especially we I can see on TV those prophecies coming true.

Well said.

 

[Roudy]

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?

As usual you have it ass backwards. Christians and Muslims have been doing the "killing" in the Jewish holy land. Christians stopped, hundreds of years ago, Muslims can't.

 

[Phoenall]

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.

You have posted no such thing as all you have is the LIES of one person who altered treaties to suit his own ends. The litmus test of a nations existence is to name its ruler, its capital city and to produce evidence of it currency. You have failed to do any of these, and at best produced mandate of Palestine currency issued by the British. Who created the nation of Palestine, on what date was it created and by what authority was it created

 

[Phoenall]

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?

THIS which is very clear


"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.

 

[Phoenall]

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.

It says it on the laft hand page as well when it says

By His Majesties high commissioner for palestine

 

[Phoenall]

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.

From what river to what sea.
From the north of what and where
From the south of what and where

Israel has already declared and had annotated their National Home before the arab league tried to illegally claim over them. And the arab muslims never had sovereignty of the land from the day the Ottomans invaded to the present day

 

[Phoenall]

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.

At the treaty of Sevres when the Ottomans signed it over. Are you that stupid that you cant read the simplest of treaties, or understand what they mean.

If your claim is that the LoN did not own the land then it is still Ottoman. This means that all the arab muslims that have made themselves rulers have done so illegally and not one of the nations can be a member of the UN.

See how your idiotic remarks and stupidity get you in deep water and show how close to being certifiable you are

 

[Phoenall]

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

WRONG as it states Palestinian Citizen under article of the Palestinian Citizenship Orders 1925. Which is not the same as Palestinian citizen, you need to refer to the orders for the explanation

 

[Phoenall]

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?

The way the Palestinians are going there wont be any Christians left, 90% have been eradicated already from Palestine and the Jews cant be blamed for their deaths or expulsions

 

[Phoenall]

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".

No more cute than you when you write Zionist

But why do you defend the muslims so much if you are not an islamist

 

[Phoenall]

P F Tinmore, et al,

Nonsense --- mine was not a fallacious question.

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.

(COMMENT)

Lausanne Treaty was signed on 24 July 1923 by the Allied Powers with Turkey; each having agreed to the terms and conditions.

There was no requirement for the Allied Powers to take any action relative to the acceptance of the territory by treaty. Acceptance it all that is required.

Not "i.e." (that is) the Palestinians; nowhere was that an exclusive condition; not in the Covenant and not in the Mandate. facilitate the acquisition of Palestinian citizenship by Jews who take up their permanent residence in Palestine.
​

Regarding the development of self-governing institutions --- The Mandate also provides for the recognition of a public body --- The Jewish Agency --- which is to advise and co-operate with the Mandatory in the administration of Palestine (economic, social and other matters) as may affect the establishment of the Jewish National Home and the interests of the Jewish population in Palestine, administration and immigration to establish citizenship as an "inhabitant'.. The Jewish Agency containing provisions framed so as to facilitate the acquisition of Palestinian citizenship by Jews who take up their permanent residence in Palestine.

Now this is important. The Arab Palestinians did not want to participate at the same level as the Jewish immigrants in terms of providing advise and co-operate with the Mandatory in the administration of Palestine. The Arab Palestinians declined three times during the period 1922 and 1923. The created a dilemma in the development of self-governing institutions more favorable to Arab Palestinian concerns.

However, none of this is even relevant any more. The Arab Palestinians declined to participate in the development of self-governing institutions, they declined in the participation in the Step Preparatory to Independence, and declined to engage in fruitful negotiations. The Arab Palestinians cannot roll back the clock. The outcomes are what they are. No matter how difficult for them to accept, they will not be given the State of Israel in which to complete their Jihad.

Most Respectfully,
R

Holy smokescreen, Batman!

What does all that have to do with my post?

There was no requirement for the Allied Powers to take any action relative to the acceptance of the territory by treaty. Acceptance it all that is required.​

Yes there was.
-------------------------
Drawing up the framework of nationality, Article 30 of the Treaty of Lausanne stated:

“Turkish subjects habitually resident in territory which in accordance with the provisions of the present Treaty is detached from Turkey will become ipso facto, in the conditions laid down by the local law, nationals of the State to which such territory is transferred.”​

-------------------------
And being the citizens of Palestine it was their prerogative to determine immigration.

WRONG as no nation of Palestine existed. What did exist was the mandate of Palestine governed by the British and acting as the nation for legal means. That is the state the land was transferred to. This was further split into two separate identities with the arab muslim part gaining a nationality first, being trans Jordan.

They became citizens of the British mandate of Palestine until such time as they showed free determination and the ability to stand on their own feet. Have the arab muslims done either yet ?

 

[Phoenall]

P F Tinmore, et al,

Nonsense --- mine was not a fallacious question.

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.

(COMMENT)

Lausanne Treaty was signed on 24 July 1923 by the Allied Powers with Turkey; each having agreed to the terms and conditions.

There was no requirement for the Allied Powers to take any action relative to the acceptance of the territory by treaty. Acceptance it all that is required.

Not "i.e." (that is) the Palestinians; nowhere was that an exclusive condition; not in the Covenant and not in the Mandate. facilitate the acquisition of Palestinian citizenship by Jews who take up their permanent residence in Palestine.
​

Regarding the development of self-governing institutions --- The Mandate also provides for the recognition of a public body --- The Jewish Agency --- which is to advise and co-operate with the Mandatory in the administration of Palestine (economic, social and other matters) as may affect the establishment of the Jewish National Home and the interests of the Jewish population in Palestine, administration and immigration to establish citizenship as an "inhabitant'.. The Jewish Agency containing provisions framed so as to facilitate the acquisition of Palestinian citizenship by Jews who take up their permanent residence in Palestine.

Now this is important. The Arab Palestinians did not want to participate at the same level as the Jewish immigrants in terms of providing advise and co-operate with the Mandatory in the administration of Palestine. The Arab Palestinians declined three times during the period 1922 and 1923. The created a dilemma in the development of self-governing institutions more favorable to Arab Palestinian concerns.

However, none of this is even relevant any more. The Arab Palestinians declined to participate in the development of self-governing institutions, they declined in the participation in the Step Preparatory to Independence, and declined to engage in fruitful negotiations. The Arab Palestinians cannot roll back the clock. The outcomes are what they are. No matter how difficult for them to accept, they will not be given the State of Israel in which to complete their Jihad.

Most Respectfully,
R

However, none of this is even relevant any more. The Arab Palestinians declined to participate in the development of self-governing institutions, blah, blah, blah.​

Are you still peddling this horseshit? You know that the Palestinians did not want to legitimize the colonial project.

And so lost any chance of having a say in the running of the country. The LoN could have just as easily stated that the arab muslims need to evacuate the land as they are not citizens of the New regime and must move to Syria. Under international laws of the time this was valid.

 

[RoccoR]

P F Tinmore, et al,

You missed the intention again. And you've stepped around the discussion. Article 30 does not apply to the Mandate for Lebanon or the Mandate for Palestine; as they were both segments of multiple Sanjuks (NOT STATES) of the former Ottoman Empire.

What does all that have to do with my post?

There was no requirement for the Allied Powers to take any action relative to the acceptance of the territory by treaty. Acceptance it all that is required.

Yes there was.
-------------------------
Drawing up the framework of nationality, Article 30 of the Treaty of Lausanne stated:

“Turkish subjects habitually resident in territory which in accordance with the provisions of the present Treaty is detached from Turkey will become ipso facto, in the conditions laid down by the local law, nationals of the State to which such territory is transferred.”​

-------------------------
And being the citizens of Palestine it was their prerogative to determine immigration.

(COMMENT)

Actually NOT!

The Treaty of Lausanne had to cover a multitude of territorial issues over a vast number of territories. Article 30, like all the Articles of the Treaty, was not exclusively applicable to all.

Well before the Treaty of Lausanne (years), the Allied Powers had determined and made it known their intention to create special conditions for the territory (yet to be determined) of Palestine. Well before the treaty, the Allied Powers had determined the need for and the placement of a Jewish National Home; as well as the need for special consideration to unique immigration and citizenship requirements to bring the immigrants up in the same status as the inhabitants. Just as the Treaty was (generally) written to meet the entire landscape beyonds the boundaries of Turkey, the Mandate for Palestine contained the unique aspects and instructions to fulfill the intentions of the Allied Powers.

In 1916 Britain and France signed the Sykes-Picot Agreement, which divided the Arab region into Zones of Influence (ZoI). Lebanon and Syria were assigned to France, Jordan and Iraq to Britain and Palestine was to be internationalized. THAT DID NOT HAPPEN. In 1922 The Council of the League of Nations issued a Mandate for Palestine. The Mandate was in favor of the establishment for the Jewish people a homeland in Palestine.
​

Article 30 applied specifically to "States" (including Vassal or Tributary) detached from Turkey (The Balkan States, Egypt, Greece, Bulgaria, Romania, Macedonia, Hungary, as examples) (Ottoman Partitions The Kingdoms of Nejd and Hejaz was formed, which in 1932 became the kingdom of Saudi Arabia, examples of States NOT covered by the Treaty of Lausanne). But in the Middle East, the Ottoman Territorial Administrations was broken down slightly difference into Sanjuks (Districts) and Vilayets (Provinces). But NOT States or self governing regions [Vassal (tribal) or Tributary (self-governing paying tribute)].... In the Middle East, the two Vilayets that include, what we consider today as Palestine, were the Vilayet of Beirut (including the Sanjuks of Latakia, Tripoli, Lebanon, Beirut, Acre, Balqa, Jerusalem), and the Vilayet of Syria (including the Sanjuks of Hama, Damascus, Hauran, and Maan). As I've mentioned many times before, the Region of Palestine was neither a State (Independent, Vassal or Tributary) or a Political Subdivision (Sanjuk or Vilayet). THUS, Article 30 is not applicable to the issue under discussion.

The Ottoman Empire/Turkish Republic renounces title and right to the Region we call Palestine, which was then was transferred to the Mandatory for administration and disposition under Article 16 (the future of these territories and islands being settled or to be settled by the parties concerned). Neither The Treaty of Lausanne or the Mandate for Palestine granted or promised the inhabitants any particular future or any future authority, or any specific territory (within such boundaries as may be determined by the Principal Allied Powers). While that may have been an intention for most of the detached territories, the intention for Palestine was outlined in the Mandate.

Most Respectfully,
R

 

[P F Tinmore]

P F Tinmore, et al,

You missed the intention again. And you've stepped around the discussion. Article 30 does not apply to the Mandate for Lebanon or the Mandate for Palestine; as they were both segments of multiple Sanjuks (NOT STATES) of the former Ottoman Empire.

What does all that have to do with my post?

There was no requirement for the Allied Powers to take any action relative to the acceptance of the territory by treaty. Acceptance it all that is required.

Yes there was.
-------------------------
Drawing up the framework of nationality, Article 30 of the Treaty of Lausanne stated:

“Turkish subjects habitually resident in territory which in accordance with the provisions of the present Treaty is detached from Turkey will become ipso facto, in the conditions laid down by the local law, nationals of the State to which such territory is transferred.”​

-------------------------
And being the citizens of Palestine it was their prerogative to determine immigration.

(COMMENT)

Actually NOT!

The Treaty of Lausanne had to cover a multitude of territorial issues over a vast number of territories. Article 30, like all the Articles of the Treaty, was not exclusively applicable to all.

Well before the Treaty of Lausanne (years), the Allied Powers had determined and made it known their intention to create special conditions for the territory (yet to be determined) of Palestine. Well before the treaty, the Allied Powers had determined the need for and the placement of a Jewish National Home; as well as the need for special consideration to unique immigration and citizenship requirements to bring the immigrants up in the same status as the inhabitants. Just as the Treaty was (generally) written to meet the entire landscape beyonds the boundaries of Turkey, the Mandate for Palestine contained the unique aspects and instructions to fulfill the intentions of the Allied Powers.

In 1916 Britain and France signed the Sykes-Picot Agreement, which divided the Arab region into Zones of Influence (ZoI). Lebanon and Syria were assigned to France, Jordan and Iraq to Britain and Palestine was to be internationalized. THAT DID NOT HAPPEN. In 1922 The Council of the League of Nations issued a Mandate for Palestine. The Mandate was in favor of the establishment for the Jewish people a homeland in Palestine.
​

Article 30 applied specifically to "States" (including Vassal or Tributary) detached from Turkey (The Balkan States, Egypt, Greece, Bulgaria, Romania, Macedonia, Hungary, as examples) (Ottoman Partitions The Kingdoms of Nejd and Hejaz was formed, which in 1932 became the kingdom of Saudi Arabia, examples of States NOT covered by the Treaty of Lausanne). But in the Middle East, the Ottoman Territorial Administrations was broken down slightly difference into Sanjuks (Districts) and Vilayets (Provinces). But NOT States or self governing regions [Vassal (tribal) or Tributary (self-governing paying tribute)].... In the Middle East, the two Vilayets that include, what we consider today as Palestine, were the Vilayet of Beirut (including the Sanjuks of Latakia, Tripoli, Lebanon, Beirut, Acre, Balqa, Jerusalem), and the Vilayet of Syria (including the Sanjuks of Hama, Damascus, Hauran, and Maan). As I've mentioned many times before, the Region of Palestine was neither a State (Independent, Vassal or Tributary) or a Political Subdivision (Sanjuk or Vilayet). THUS, Article 30 is not applicable to the issue under discussion.

The Ottoman Empire/Turkish Republic renounces title and right to the Region we call Palestine, which was then was transferred to the Mandatory for administration and disposition under Article 16 (the future of these territories and islands being settled or to be settled by the parties concerned). Neither The Treaty of Lausanne or the Mandate for Palestine granted or promised the inhabitants any particular future or any future authority, or any specific territory (within such boundaries as may be determined by the Principal Allied Powers). While that may have been an intention for most of the detached territories, the intention for Palestine was outlined in the Mandate.

Most Respectfully,
R

The Treaty of Lausanne had to cover a multitude of territorial issues over a vast number of territories. Article 30, like all the Articles of the Treaty, was not exclusively applicable to all.​

Where does it say that?