"Free Palestine

[P F Tinmore]

Palestine, as the mandate clearly showed, was a subject under international law. While she could not conclude international conventions, the mandatory Power, until further notice, concluded them on her behalf, in virtue of Article 19 of the mandate. The mandate, in Article 7, obliged the Mandatory to enact a nationality law, which again showed that the Palestinians formed a nation, and that Palestine was a State, though provisionally under guardianship. It was, moreover, unnecessary to labour the point; there was no doubt whatever that Palestine was a separate political entity. - See more at: Mandate for Palestine - League of Nations 32nd session - Minutes of the Permanent Mandates Commission 18 August 1937

Once again you fail to see the truth in as much as Palestine was not a nation until 1988, and the Nationality Law was to provide consular cover for any Mandate for Palestine inhabitant to travel outside of the mandate. If Palestine was a nation why are its passports from that era all BRITISH and not issued by the Palestinian government on the order of its government ?

Still waiting for the Internationally agreed treaty signed by the representatives of Palestine that gave the Palestinians a nation. Just like the ones that gave the Syrians, Iraqi's, Jordanians and Israeli's their nations.

What international treaty gave Israelis their nation?

Quote the passages.

None, Tinmore. It was given to the Israelites by the Creator. Period.

Oh no, not the great realtor in the sky thing again.

Oh yes! I'm a believer, heathen.

The Lord uses the good ones and the bad ones use the Lord. ~ Michael Stanley

 

[P F Tinmore]

.

As soon as you use the term nation to describe the arab muslims claims you are showing your lack of understanding. Which is why the questions are always asked and never replied to properly. If Palestine was a nation before 1988 then it must have had a capital city, a currency, a leader or leaders, a GDP, and a set of laws. It must also have had a treaty signed by the LoN giving it the land undewr the terms of the Mandate for Palestine. Like Syria has, Iraq has, Jordan has and Israel has.
But seeing as it was just an undefined area in the M.E. that had no leaders or capital then it could not have been a nation. It is no different to the Gobi desert, the Sahara, the Pampas or the Steppes which are also not nations but just places on the map.

It's not undefined. It's a region. Palestine - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia

... a geographic region in Western Asia between the Mediterranean Sea and the Jordan River. It is sometimes considered to include adjoining territories. The name was used by Ancient Greek writers, and was later used for the Roman province Syria Palaestina, the Byzantine Palaestina Prima and the Umayyad and Abbasid province of Jund Filastin.

Like Basque, Mongolia, Siberia, etc. You're insisting that in order to "exist" and by extention, its people to exist it must have defined borders, a capital, a currency, etc. That's bullshit. A canard designed to delegitimize their existence and rights.

Did the Souix have a border? A capital? A currency? A GDP? How about the Cheyenne? How many other people will suddenly cease to exist as a people?

Then define its borders of 100 C.E. to what they are today and see if it is defined or not. As your cut and paste shows it is undefined, as in its boundaries alter as and when the people decide. You are putting that as the definition of the Palestine nation, but the Palestine area is on a par with the Badlands of Nevada, the Antarctic ice pack and the Russian Steppes all know areas but without any clear boundaries.

No. I've never said "nation" - I've said it's a geographically defined region and it's had defined borders, depending on the era and which powers controlled the region.

Like I said - this is nothing more than a transparent attempt to delegitimize the rights of the people who inhabit the region.

Your last statement shows that you are blind to reality as the Souix, Chetenne and many other first nation tribes did have borders, being nomadic their capital was were they met, they had a currency of shells, beads and trade goods and their GDP was related to their food supplies and wealth.

Want to try again with the palestinain nation that never existed until 1988, and the Mandate for Palestine that gave 22% of the area of Palestine borders .

Show me the defined borders of the Souix, their capital, and their currency.

Then define those borders as they were in say 625 C.E., then in 1850 C.E. and finally in 1919 C.E.



Here you go for defined borders of first nation people a map of the area

And then the Souix lands, also called Lakotah

Their currency was trade goods, wampum and barter. They had no defined capital other than the camp of their chief of chiefs.

Now how about you do the same for arab muslim Palestine the nation prior to 1988 ?

Those were territories in which they roamed or lived - not distinct borders and they were gradually pushed westward by the Ojibwe.

Google "Palestine" and "maps" and you will see many maps of a distinctly marked borders.

Encyclopedia of the Great Plains SIOUX

They had trade and barter, but all human groups had some form of that.

Wampum was used by the Eastern Woodland tribes, not the Souix.

So...are the Souix not a "real people" since they had no firm borders, no currency and no capital?

Peoples around the world have different methods to define ownership that differed from European practices.

Just because they did not match the European definition does not mean they did not own land.

 

[aris2chat]

It doesn't matter who they are "descendents of". As long as they haven't committed a crime - then just like anyone else they have a right to live where their families have lived for generations.

No they don't.

Descendants of murderous squatters have to right to that which belongs to others. They declared war. They lost. By what right do squatters who initiated a war have the right to that which they never owned in the first place?

They aren't squatters.

LINK showing that they own the land, either through international treaty or land deeds. A clue the Ottoman census put the numbers of arab muslims in Palestine to be very low, with the Christians outnumbering them in many places. The Jews owned most of Jerusalem, Hebron and other towns and cities.

Till the end of WWII most of the "local" arabs were serfs and most of those who "owned" land were foreign officials who had been given land by the Ottomans. The area was very poor and under/un-developed and little if any taxes were generated. Were were all these people who could afford to own land?
A tax province or sanjuk is not a state and the people within are not a nation. Sanjuks were little more than counties and what became the mandate were made up of at least half a dozen of these. Where was "palestine"? Even under the Romans there were three palæstina (name given by the romans) and mostly in what is now the gaza, sinai and jordan, not jerusalem or most of the roman towns in the fertile area.
The region was populated by people from throughout the mediterranean and middle east. To say there was a native people beside the jews is a misunderstanding. Yes, there are remnants of crusaders, armenians, persians, greeks, italians, french, english, etc. that has live there for hundreds of years but they were not a single people that were arab or palestinian. There were dozens of people and tribles like an amish quilt that existed as muslims or kafir in the area.
So where was this palestine? It was a region like saying the levant or fertile crescent.
So were was the state of palestine and who were the palestinian people, especially those who owned land?
Slaves, serfs, workers, share croppers, seasonal laborers, renters did not own the land or homes they occupied. Apart from some store owners in the urban areas, few locals owned land, even if their family have worked the land for generations.
Most did not want to serve in the military so the Ottoman gave land to those that served the government as officers, those from outside of those sanjuks. There was a tradition, before the Ottomans opened the area to jewish immigration, of land owned by jews/synagogues remained in those hands. It was passed down, sold to other jews or given to the synagogues to be rented or sold to other jews coming to the area. It never left jewish hands. Till the early 19th C jews could not buy non-jewish land, it could only be given by the empire or rented to them. Even being able to pray at the wall is a relatively modern privilage of the Ottomans, through there have been a few times off and on when it was permitted. The other land owners were the churches and wakf. The churches owned land they farmed to support themselves and the maintenance of the churches they were responsible for. The rest was for the most part state land.
The idea of a palestine or palestinian people is a modern creation, not historically based.
The muslims were arab, syrian, (later) jordanian, egyptian but not palestinian. They were known by tribe or were serfs in large part.

So where is the origin of this nation for the palestinians? Where are the lines for borders? Where is this history and government?
Why are they more deserving of a state than the kurds, yazidi, armeneans, zoroastrians or dozens of other "people" with their own language, traditions, religions, culture, history, etc.?

 

[P F Tinmore]

It doesn't matter who they are "descendents of". As long as they haven't committed a crime - then just like anyone else they have a right to live where their families have lived for generations.

No they don't.

Descendants of murderous squatters have to right to that which belongs to others. They declared war. They lost. By what right do squatters who initiated a war have the right to that which they never owned in the first place?

They aren't squatters.

LINK showing that they own the land, either through international treaty or land deeds. A clue the Ottoman census put the numbers of arab muslims in Palestine to be very low, with the Christians outnumbering them in many places. The Jews owned most of Jerusalem, Hebron and other towns and cities.

Till the end of WWII most of the "local" arabs were serfs and most of those who "owned" land were foreign officials who had been given land by the Ottomans. The area was very poor and under/un-developed and little if any taxes were generated. Were were all these people who could afford to own land?
A tax province or sanjuk is not a state and the people within are not a nation. Sanjuks were little more than counties and what became the mandate were made up of at least half a dozen of these. Where was "palestine"? Even under the Romans there were three palæstina (name given by the romans) and mostly in what is now the gaza, sinai and jordan, not jerusalem or most of the roman towns in the fertile area.
The region was populated by people from throughout the mediterranean and middle east. To say there was a native people beside the jews is a misunderstanding. Yes, there are remnants of crusaders, armenians, persians, greeks, italians, french, english, etc. that has live there for hundreds of years but they were not a single people that were arab or palestinian. There were dozens of people and tribles like an amish quilt that existed as muslims or kafir in the area.
So where was this palestine? It was a region like saying the levant or fertile crescent.
So were was the state of palestine and who were the palestinian people, especially those who owned land?
Slaves, serfs, workers, share croppers, seasonal laborers, renters did not own the land or homes they occupied. Apart from some store owners in the urban areas, few locals owned land, even if their family have worked the land for generations.
Most did not want to serve in the military so the Ottoman gave land to those that served the government as officers, those from outside of those sanjuks. There was a tradition, before the Ottomans opened the area to jewish immigration, of land owned by jews/synagogues remained in those hands. It was passed down, sold to other jews or given to the synagogues to be rented or sold to other jews coming to the area. It never left jewish hands. Till the early 19th C jews could not buy non-jewish land, it could only be given by the empire or rented to them. Even being able to pray at the wall is a relatively modern privilage of the Ottomans, through there have been a few times off and on when it was permitted. The other land owners were the churches and wakf. The churches owned land they farmed to support themselves and the maintenance of the churches they were responsible for. The rest was for the most part state land.
The idea of a palestine or palestinian people is a modern creation, not historically based.
The muslims were arab, syrian, (later) jordanian, egyptian but not palestinian. They were known by tribe or were serfs in large part.

So where is the origin of this nation for the palestinians? Where are the lines for borders? Where is this history and government?
Why are they more deserving of a state than the kurds, yazidi, armeneans, zoroastrians or dozens of other "people" with their own language, traditions, religions, culture, history, etc.?

I have always believed that Kurdistan, Tibet, Porto Rico, Palestine, etc. should be independent states.

 

[montelatici]

If all of your bullshit were true (and it is not, it is just Zionist propaganda), does that justify evicting the Christians and Muslims of Palestine and replacing them with settlers from Europe?

The land records were sufficiently clear to allow the Anglo-American survey commission to determine that Arabs (Christian and Muslim) owned over 85% of the land in 1943 while Jews owned less than 5%.

A Survey of Palestine Volume 2 Berman Jewish Policy Archive NYU Wagner

 

[Challenger]

That's such a stupid canard.

The region known as Palestine has existed under that name for some time. It does not have to have the above to "exist" as a region with inhabitants.

As soon as you use the term nation to describe the arab muslims claims you are showing your lack of understanding. Which is why the questions are always asked and never replied to properly. If Palestine was a nation before 1988 then it must have had a capital city, a currency, a leader or leaders, a GDP, and a set of laws. It must also have had a treaty signed by the LoN giving it the land undewr the terms of the Mandate for Palestine. Like Syria has, Iraq has, Jordan has and Israel has.
But seeing as it was just an undefined area in the M.E. that had no leaders or capital then it could not have been a nation. It is no different to the Gobi desert, the Sahara, the Pampas or the Steppes which are also not nations but just places on the map.

Palestine, as the mandate clearly showed, was a subject under international law. While she could not conclude international conventions, the mandatory Power, until further notice, concluded them on her behalf, in virtue of Article 19 of the mandate. The mandate, in Article 7, obliged the Mandatory to enact a nationality law, which again showed that the Palestinians formed a nation, and that Palestine was a State, though provisionally under guardianship. It was, moreover, unnecessary to labour the point; there was no doubt whatever that Palestine was a separate political entity. - See more at: Mandate for Palestine - League of Nations 32nd session - Minutes of the Permanent Mandates Commission 18 August 1937

Once again you fail to see the truth in as much as Palestine was not a nation until 1988, and the Nationality Law was to provide consular cover for any Mandate for Palestine inhabitant to travel outside of the mandate. If Palestine was a nation why are its passports from that era all BRITISH and not issued by the Palestinian government on the order of its government ?

Still waiting for the Internationally agreed treaty signed by the representatives of Palestine that gave the Palestinians a nation. Just like the ones that gave the Syrians, Iraqi's, Jordanians and Israeli's their nations.

What international treaty gave Israelis their nation?

Quote the passages.

None, Tinmore. It was given to the Israelites by the Creator. Period.

Which "Creator", assuming such a thing even exists? All you have is a fairy story written by a bunch of religious fanatics who were exiled for misbehaving and subsequently made up a "religion" based on Sumerian/Assyrian/Babylonian fairy stories. In any event claims of "ancient title" have always been rejected by competent legal bodies like the ICJ.

 

[Challenger]

As soon as you use the term nation to describe the arab muslims claims you are showing your lack of understanding. Which is why the questions are always asked and never replied to properly. If Palestine was a nation before 1988 then it must have had a capital city, a currency, a leader or leaders, a GDP, and a set of laws. It must also have had a treaty signed by the LoN giving it the land undewr the terms of the Mandate for Palestine. Like Syria has, Iraq has, Jordan has and Israel has.
But seeing as it was just an undefined area in the M.E. that had no leaders or capital then it could not have been a nation. It is no different to the Gobi desert, the Sahara, the Pampas or the Steppes which are also not nations but just places on the map.

Palestine, as the mandate clearly showed, was a subject under international law. While she could not conclude international conventions, the mandatory Power, until further notice, concluded them on her behalf, in virtue of Article 19 of the mandate. The mandate, in Article 7, obliged the Mandatory to enact a nationality law, which again showed that the Palestinians formed a nation, and that Palestine was a State, though provisionally under guardianship. It was, moreover, unnecessary to labour the point; there was no doubt whatever that Palestine was a separate political entity. - See more at: Mandate for Palestine - League of Nations 32nd session - Minutes of the Permanent Mandates Commission 18 August 1937

Oh, they formed state? When ?

He ant answer because there is no evidence of there ever being a Palestinian state until 1988

Well....maybe. Daher el-Omar ruled most of Palestine as an independant Emirate from 1730 to 1775. Daher was a native Palestinian. That should count.

Interesting...I did not know that

Me neither, until I found out about it researching something else.

 

[Coyote]

It doesn't matter who they are "descendents of". As long as they haven't committed a crime - then just like anyone else they have a right to live where their families have lived for generations.

No they don't.

Descendants of murderous squatters have to right to that which belongs to others. They declared war. They lost. By what right do squatters who initiated a war have the right to that which they never owned in the first place?

They aren't squatters.

LINK showing that they own the land, either through international treaty or land deeds. A clue the Ottoman census put the numbers of arab muslims in Palestine to be very low, with the Christians outnumbering them in many places. The Jews owned most of Jerusalem, Hebron and other towns and cities.

Till the end of WWII most of the "local" arabs were serfs and most of those who "owned" land were foreign officials who had been given land by the Ottomans. The area was very poor and under/un-developed and little if any taxes were generated. Were were all these people who could afford to own land?
A tax province or sanjuk is not a state and the people within are not a nation. Sanjuks were little more than counties and what became the mandate were made up of at least half a dozen of these. Where was "palestine"? Even under the Romans there were three palæstina (name given by the romans) and mostly in what is now the gaza, sinai and jordan, not jerusalem or most of the roman towns in the fertile area.
The region was populated by people from throughout the mediterranean and middle east. To say there was a native people beside the jews is a misunderstanding. Yes, there are remnants of crusaders, armenians, persians, greeks, italians, french, english, etc. that has live there for hundreds of years but they were not a single people that were arab or palestinian. There were dozens of people and tribles like an amish quilt that existed as muslims or kafir in the area.
So where was this palestine? It was a region like saying the levant or fertile crescent.
So were was the state of palestine and who were the palestinian people, especially those who owned land?
Slaves, serfs, workers, share croppers, seasonal laborers, renters did not own the land or homes they occupied. Apart from some store owners in the urban areas, few locals owned land, even if their family have worked the land for generations.
Most did not want to serve in the military so the Ottoman gave land to those that served the government as officers, those from outside of those sanjuks. There was a tradition, before the Ottomans opened the area to jewish immigration, of land owned by jews/synagogues remained in those hands. It was passed down, sold to other jews or given to the synagogues to be rented or sold to other jews coming to the area. It never left jewish hands. Till the early 19th C jews could not buy non-jewish land, it could only be given by the empire or rented to them. Even being able to pray at the wall is a relatively modern privilage of the Ottomans, through there have been a few times off and on when it was permitted. The other land owners were the churches and wakf. The churches owned land they farmed to support themselves and the maintenance of the churches they were responsible for. The rest was for the most part state land.
The idea of a palestine or palestinian people is a modern creation, not historically based.
The muslims were arab, syrian, (later) jordanian, egyptian but not palestinian. They were known by tribe or were serfs in large part.

So where is the origin of this nation for the palestinians? Where are the lines for borders? Where is this history and government?

First, I never claimed there was a nation. There is a people. As I pointed out to Phoenall if national borders, government, currency etc were required for a people to be a people then a whole lot of groups would lose their identity.

Why are they more deserving of a state than the kurds, yazidi, armeneans, zoroastrians or dozens of other "people" with their own language, traditions, religions, culture, history, etc.?

Are Jews any more deserving of a state then those aforementioned people? The answer is no, yet they have one, they have self determination, freedom, security and rights.

At this point, the Palestinians are stateless, citizenless, subject to military law and a system that administers "justice" one way for them and one way for their Jewish counterparts.

You can argue for self determination for those other groups if you want and if that is what they want. Make a case for it. No one else has.

 

[Phoenall]

Are you saying Palestine became a sovereign state in 1937?

No.

Then what are you saying as that is what is implied in your post................

No it wasn't.

Well it was never formed in 1924, as that pertains to the Mandate for Palestine that was truncated to Palestine under official request. So what are you actually trying to say ?

The Mandate was a temporarily appointed administration to Palestine. It had a specific goal and end date. Palestine remained after the Mandate left.

Then what was the end date as I cant find any reference in the Mandate itself, Or are you getting confused again by the two mandates in force. The MANDATE FOR PALESTINE that is still in effect, or the British Mandate that ended on may 14 1948 when the British called it a day. By the way the second became the UN mandate for Palestine at the same time and again is still in existence

 

[Phoenall]

The Arabs who had not yet invented their identity as "Palestinians" were invited to stay and take part in the new state of Israel. They chose warfare and murder, instead. Why should those dedicated to murder based upon ethnicity be allowed to return once they have made such a choice?

It wasn't as black and white as you make it out to be. Those who live their now have a right to keep living there.

Actually it was as black and white as that, defined by the UN resolution that stated that the arab muslims that were preparted to live in peace with the Jews should be allowed to return to their homes. They never said all arab muslims as they knew the majority would not accept the rules, so they were barred from returning.

that were preparted to live in peace with the Jews​

Where does it say that?

UN res 194


Article 11 of the resolution reads:

(The General Assembly) Resolves that the refugees wishing to return to their homes and live at peace with their neighbours should be permitted to do so at the earliest practicable date, and that compensation should be paid for the property of those choosing not to return and for loss of or damage to property which, under principles of international law or in equity, should be made good by the Governments or authorities responsible.

Exactly!

That does not match what you posted.

You lied.

Wrong again as the term neighbours in this case means the Jews. Want to try again tinny, or are you feeling the pain yet ?

 

[Phoenall]

As soon as you use the term nation to describe the arab muslims claims you are showing your lack of understanding. Which is why the questions are always asked and never replied to properly. If Palestine was a nation before 1988 then it must have had a capital city, a currency, a leader or leaders, a GDP, and a set of laws. It must also have had a treaty signed by the LoN giving it the land undewr the terms of the Mandate for Palestine. Like Syria has, Iraq has, Jordan has and Israel has.
But seeing as it was just an undefined area in the M.E. that had no leaders or capital then it could not have been a nation. It is no different to the Gobi desert, the Sahara, the Pampas or the Steppes which are also not nations but just places on the map.

Palestine, as the mandate clearly showed, was a subject under international law. While she could not conclude international conventions, the mandatory Power, until further notice, concluded them on her behalf, in virtue of Article 19 of the mandate. The mandate, in Article 7, obliged the Mandatory to enact a nationality law, which again showed that the Palestinians formed a nation, and that Palestine was a State, though provisionally under guardianship. It was, moreover, unnecessary to labour the point; there was no doubt whatever that Palestine was a separate political entity. - See more at: Mandate for Palestine - League of Nations 32nd session - Minutes of the Permanent Mandates Commission 18 August 1937

Once again you fail to see the truth in as much as Palestine was not a nation until 1988, and the Nationality Law was to provide consular cover for any Mandate for Palestine inhabitant to travel outside of the mandate. If Palestine was a nation why are its passports from that era all BRITISH and not issued by the Palestinian government on the order of its government ?

Still waiting for the Internationally agreed treaty signed by the representatives of Palestine that gave the Palestinians a nation. Just like the ones that gave the Syrians, Iraqi's, Jordanians and Israeli's their nations.

What international treaty gave Israelis their nation?

Quote the passages.

None, Tinmore. It was given to the Israelites by the Creator. Period.

Oh no, not the great realtor in the sky thing again.

Didn't he give the world to the muslims according to the false prophet ?

 

[Phoenall]

nice lie.

but okie dokie.

You sure about that?

YEP I am as the arab muslims an leave at any time they want, but they cant return. Once they have gone they stay gone for ever. The only people stopping the arab muslims from leaving is hamas who controls who leaves gaza

I don't think you are right about that. Hamas has no control over the borders.

Palestinian freedom of movement - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia

He is completely wrong. The people in Gaza are basically trapped. I'm not even sure they can import or export goods.

That is the main problem. Israel will not allow them to export anything. No produce, no manufactured goods, nothing.

That means that they are not allowed to make any money. That is why most of them are on the dole.

And wrong once again tinny as they don't produce anything to export, and if they did they expect the Jews to organise and pay for the shipping costs out of gaza to its destination

 

[Phoenall]

Palestine, as the mandate clearly showed, was a subject under international law. While she could not conclude international conventions, the mandatory Power, until further notice, concluded them on her behalf, in virtue of Article 19 of the mandate. The mandate, in Article 7, obliged the Mandatory to enact a nationality law, which again showed that the Palestinians formed a nation, and that Palestine was a State, though provisionally under guardianship. It was, moreover, unnecessary to labour the point; there was no doubt whatever that Palestine was a separate political entity. - See more at: Mandate for Palestine - League of Nations 32nd session - Minutes of the Permanent Mandates Commission 18 August 1937

Oh, they formed state? When ?

He ant answer because there is no evidence of there ever being a Palestinian state until 1988

Well....maybe. Daher el-Omar ruled most of Palestine as an independant Emirate from 1730 to 1775. Daher was a native Palestinian. That should count.

Interesting...I did not know that

Me neither, until I found out about it researching something else.

So he ruled the NORTERN PART OF PALESTINE not all of it. And this does not mean that Palestine was a nation does it ?

Another fail

 

[Phoenall]

It doesn't matter who they are "descendents of". As long as they haven't committed a crime - then just like anyone else they have a right to live where their families have lived for generations.

No they don't.

Descendants of murderous squatters have to right to that which belongs to others. They declared war. They lost. By what right do squatters who initiated a war have the right to that which they never owned in the first place?

They aren't squatters.

LINK showing that they own the land, either through international treaty or land deeds. A clue the Ottoman census put the numbers of arab muslims in Palestine to be very low, with the Christians outnumbering them in many places. The Jews owned most of Jerusalem, Hebron and other towns and cities.

Till the end of WWII most of the "local" arabs were serfs and most of those who "owned" land were foreign officials who had been given land by the Ottomans. The area was very poor and under/un-developed and little if any taxes were generated. Were were all these people who could afford to own land?
A tax province or sanjuk is not a state and the people within are not a nation. Sanjuks were little more than counties and what became the mandate were made up of at least half a dozen of these. Where was "palestine"? Even under the Romans there were three palæstina (name given by the romans) and mostly in what is now the gaza, sinai and jordan, not jerusalem or most of the roman towns in the fertile area.
The region was populated by people from throughout the mediterranean and middle east. To say there was a native people beside the jews is a misunderstanding. Yes, there are remnants of crusaders, armenians, persians, greeks, italians, french, english, etc. that has live there for hundreds of years but they were not a single people that were arab or palestinian. There were dozens of people and tribles like an amish quilt that existed as muslims or kafir in the area.
So where was this palestine? It was a region like saying the levant or fertile crescent.
So were was the state of palestine and who were the palestinian people, especially those who owned land?
Slaves, serfs, workers, share croppers, seasonal laborers, renters did not own the land or homes they occupied. Apart from some store owners in the urban areas, few locals owned land, even if their family have worked the land for generations.
Most did not want to serve in the military so the Ottoman gave land to those that served the government as officers, those from outside of those sanjuks. There was a tradition, before the Ottomans opened the area to jewish immigration, of land owned by jews/synagogues remained in those hands. It was passed down, sold to other jews or given to the synagogues to be rented or sold to other jews coming to the area. It never left jewish hands. Till the early 19th C jews could not buy non-jewish land, it could only be given by the empire or rented to them. Even being able to pray at the wall is a relatively modern privilage of the Ottomans, through there have been a few times off and on when it was permitted. The other land owners were the churches and wakf. The churches owned land they farmed to support themselves and the maintenance of the churches they were responsible for. The rest was for the most part state land.
The idea of a palestine or palestinian people is a modern creation, not historically based.
The muslims were arab, syrian, (later) jordanian, egyptian but not palestinian. They were known by tribe or were serfs in large part.

So where is the origin of this nation for the palestinians? Where are the lines for borders? Where is this history and government?

First, I never claimed there was a nation. There is a people. As I pointed out to Phoenall if national borders, government, currency etc were required for a people to be a people then a whole lot of groups would lose their identity.

Why are they more deserving of a state than the kurds, yazidi, armeneans, zoroastrians or dozens of other "people" with their own language, traditions, religions, culture, history, etc.?

Are Jews any more deserving of a state then those aforementioned people? The answer is no, yet they have one, they have self determination, freedom, security and rights.

At this point, the Palestinians are stateless, citizenless, subject to military law and a system that administers "justice" one way for them and one way for their Jewish counterparts.

You can argue for self determination for those other groups if you want and if that is what they want. Make a case for it. No one else has.

They already have self determination as it is not something that can be handed out. Do you have the self determination to post on this board daily, do the Palestinians have the self determination to engage in terrorism, violence, propaganda and a whole range of other activities. They are stateless because they wont take that other small step of self determination because they would be in debt to the rest of the world. They are not citizenless as they have over 6 million citizens around the world. They are subject to military law because they believe violence and terrorism is the right and only way to carry out the final solution. The system works that way because that is how it is written in the Geneva conventions, which the Israelis follow. As an example the customary punishment under Jordanian law for murder ( the laws that apply in the west bank under the Geneva conventions) is different to the punishment under Israeli law. So the Israelis apply the law of the land. If you cant understand the Geneva conventions then I advise you to refrain from posting on topics you are not educated enough to understand.

 

[aris2chat]

How? Israel won't allow them to leave.

nice lie.

but okie dokie.

You sure about that?

YEP I am as the arab muslims an leave at any time they want, but they cant return. Once they have gone they stay gone for ever. The only people stopping the arab muslims from leaving is hamas who controls who leaves gaza

I don't think you are right about that. Hamas has no control over the borders.

Palestinian freedom of movement - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia

He is completely wrong. The people in Gaza are basically trapped. I'm not even sure they can import or export goods.

As long as they are not restricted items, of course they can. How do you thing the stores stayed supplied? Flowers, fruit, vegetable are among the items they export to europe and asia. Sale of goods to Israel is relatively new, through Israeli goods can be found throughout gaza stores.
Egypt has had their border closed most of last year, only opening it for palestinians that were in egypt to return to gaza.

 

[TheOldSchool]

nice lie.

but okie dokie.

You sure about that?

YEP I am as the arab muslims an leave at any time they want, but they cant return. Once they have gone they stay gone for ever. The only people stopping the arab muslims from leaving is hamas who controls who leaves gaza

I don't think you are right about that. Hamas has no control over the borders.

Palestinian freedom of movement - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia

He is completely wrong. The people in Gaza are basically trapped. I'm not even sure they can import or export goods.

As long as they are not restricted items, of course they can. How do you thing the stores stayed supplied? Flowers, fruit, vegetable are among the items they export to europe and asia. Sale of goods to Israel is relatively new, through Israeli goods can be found throughout gaza stores.
Egypt has had their border closed most of last year, only opening it for palestinians that were in egypt to return to gaza.

How generous of Israel to allow them such luxury.

 

[aris2chat]

You sure about that?

YEP I am as the arab muslims an leave at any time they want, but they cant return. Once they have gone they stay gone for ever. The only people stopping the arab muslims from leaving is hamas who controls who leaves gaza

I don't think you are right about that. Hamas has no control over the borders.

Palestinian freedom of movement - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia

He is completely wrong. The people in Gaza are basically trapped. I'm not even sure they can import or export goods.

As long as they are not restricted items, of course they can. How do you thing the stores stayed supplied? Flowers, fruit, vegetable are among the items they export to europe and asia. Sale of goods to Israel is relatively new, through Israeli goods can be found throughout gaza stores.
Egypt has had their border closed most of last year, only opening it for palestinians that were in egypt to return to gaza.

How generous of Israel to allow them such luxury.

Everything that goes into gaza is held and distributed by hamas. Food and medicines have expired before hamas allows them to be sold. Building supplies and fuel have hamas getting them first. Hamas charge premium prices for being allowed to receive good, but they don't want to pay for fuel from the PA or for much of the supplies, nor do they want to pay taxes to the PA. Most of what goes into gaza is via donations or paid for from NGOs.
Israel and egypt provide 2/3 of the electricity to gaza. The gaza power plant is controlled by hamas who restrict power to just a few hours a day.
It is their shell game. They control gaza.

 

[TheOldSchool]

YEP I am as the arab muslims an leave at any time they want, but they cant return. Once they have gone they stay gone for ever. The only people stopping the arab muslims from leaving is hamas who controls who leaves gaza

I don't think you are right about that. Hamas has no control over the borders.

Palestinian freedom of movement - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia

He is completely wrong. The people in Gaza are basically trapped. I'm not even sure they can import or export goods.

As long as they are not restricted items, of course they can. How do you thing the stores stayed supplied? Flowers, fruit, vegetable are among the items they export to europe and asia. Sale of goods to Israel is relatively new, through Israeli goods can be found throughout gaza stores.
Egypt has had their border closed most of last year, only opening it for palestinians that were in egypt to return to gaza.

How generous of Israel to allow them such luxury.

Everything that goes into gaza is held and distributed by hamas. Food and medicines have expired before hamas allows them to be sold. Building supplies and fuel have hamas getting them first. Hamas charge premium prices for being allowed to receive good, but they don't want to pay for fuel from the PA or for much of the supplies, nor do they want to pay taxes to the PA. Most of what goes into gaza is via donations or paid for from NGOs.
Israel and egypt provide 2/3 of the electricity to gaza. The gaza power plant is controlled by hamas who restrict power to just a few hours a day.
It is their shell game. They control gaza.

Gaza was a mess long before Hamas came into power. And Israel built the wall to keep residents out long before Hamas was in power as well. Members of the Hamas govrenment were born and raised in Gaza right? Shouldn't they love Israel for all the marvelous things Israel did for them when they were growing up?

 

[aris2chat]

I don't think you are right about that. Hamas has no control over the borders.

Palestinian freedom of movement - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia

He is completely wrong. The people in Gaza are basically trapped. I'm not even sure they can import or export goods.

As long as they are not restricted items, of course they can. How do you thing the stores stayed supplied? Flowers, fruit, vegetable are among the items they export to europe and asia. Sale of goods to Israel is relatively new, through Israeli goods can be found throughout gaza stores.
Egypt has had their border closed most of last year, only opening it for palestinians that were in egypt to return to gaza.

How generous of Israel to allow them such luxury.

Everything that goes into gaza is held and distributed by hamas. Food and medicines have expired before hamas allows them to be sold. Building supplies and fuel have hamas getting them first. Hamas charge premium prices for being allowed to receive good, but they don't want to pay for fuel from the PA or for much of the supplies, nor do they want to pay taxes to the PA. Most of what goes into gaza is via donations or paid for from NGOs.
Israel and egypt provide 2/3 of the electricity to gaza. The gaza power plant is controlled by hamas who restrict power to just a few hours a day.
It is their shell game. They control gaza.

Gaza was a mess long before Hamas came into power. And Israel built the wall to keep residents out long before Hamas was in power as well. Members of the Hamas govrenment were born and raised in Gaza right? Shouldn't they love Israel for all the marvelous things Israel did for them when they were growing up?

The wall is in the WB not gaza. Gaza is just a fence.

Palestinians in gaza were given work at Israeli pay on the farms and Israeli businesses in gaza before the withdrawal.
They were treated a "hell" of a lot better than they were when egypt controlled gaza.
Gazans were allowed into Israel for work, medical treatment, education and to visit the mount. The might have needed ID cards and passes to come and go but that should be expected since so many were calling for and carrying out acts of terrorism.
The power, sewage and other services were established by the Israelis. There was building, growth and development under Israel. An air port was built, a deep water harbor was in the works. Hotels and tourism were growing thanks to Israel.
All that ended with hamas, and Israel withdrawal from gaza.

So how marvelous is hamas? What have they done but bring war and destruction to gaza?

 

[TheOldSchool]

He is completely wrong. The people in Gaza are basically trapped. I'm not even sure they can import or export goods.

As long as they are not restricted items, of course they can. How do you thing the stores stayed supplied? Flowers, fruit, vegetable are among the items they export to europe and asia. Sale of goods to Israel is relatively new, through Israeli goods can be found throughout gaza stores.
Egypt has had their border closed most of last year, only opening it for palestinians that were in egypt to return to gaza.

How generous of Israel to allow them such luxury.

Everything that goes into gaza is held and distributed by hamas. Food and medicines have expired before hamas allows them to be sold. Building supplies and fuel have hamas getting them first. Hamas charge premium prices for being allowed to receive good, but they don't want to pay for fuel from the PA or for much of the supplies, nor do they want to pay taxes to the PA. Most of what goes into gaza is via donations or paid for from NGOs.
Israel and egypt provide 2/3 of the electricity to gaza. The gaza power plant is controlled by hamas who restrict power to just a few hours a day.
It is their shell game. They control gaza.

Gaza was a mess long before Hamas came into power. And Israel built the wall to keep residents out long before Hamas was in power as well. Members of the Hamas govrenment were born and raised in Gaza right? Shouldn't they love Israel for all the marvelous things Israel did for them when they were growing up?

The wall is in the WB not gaza. Gaza is just a fence.

Palestinians in gaza were given work at Israeli pay on the farms and Israeli businesses in gaza before the withdrawal.
They were treated a "hell" of a lot better than they were when egypt controlled gaza.
Gazans were allowed into Israel for work, medical treatment, education and to visit the mount. The might have needed ID cards and passes to come and go but that should be expected since so many were calling for and carrying out acts of terrorism.
The power, sewage and other services were established by the Israelis. There was building, growth and development under Israel. An air port was built, a deep water harbor was in the works. Hotels and tourism were growing thanks to Israel.
All that ended with hamas, and Israel withdrawal from gaza.

So how marvelous is hamas? What have they done but bring war and destruction to gaza?

It's not a wall just a fence...

Well whatever. As an American I just hope Israel doesn't drag us into a religious war. If Israel wants to pretend Palestinians hate them for no reason, well, I hope they know they made the beds that they're sleeping in.

No 2 state solution anymore right? The most prominent Israeli warned that the evil arabs were voting and had to be stopped right? What a joke.