"Free Palestine

[P F Tinmore]

P F Tinmore, et al,

Again, you are trying to project the image of the Arab Palestinian as the virtual victim.

P F Tinmore, et al,

I don't think this is accurate at all.

Arabs attacked the fledgling state in 1947.

Now, 70 years later, its as if by magic that these Arabs are being cast as a people that did not actually exist at the time.​

Propaganda does not have to make sense for some people to believe it.

(COMMENT)

The territorial Arab of 1947 were Citizens of Palestine (the territories to which the Mandate for Palestine applies, hereinafter described as Palestine) as defined by the Palestine Order in Council; that is, for the purposes of this discussion --- the Arabs being discussed were Citizens of "the territories to which the Mandate for Palestine applies," either as:

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

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

They were citizens to the legal entity (defined by the Order in Council) but not a sovereign state and not self-governing or with autonomous governing functionality. The Arab Palestinians, having declined to form the precursor institutions on more than three occasions, by declining to cooperation in developing precursors to self-governing institution, discarded the right to consulted on all matters relating to immigration, Arab civil and religious rights, on which it was recognized that “the views of the Arab community were entitled to special consideration.” Even in 1947, the Arab Palestinian the Arab Higher Committee refused to cooperate to be an advisor to the identified successor government; not being denied a voice --- but instead again declining to be an active voice.

The nature of the Arab Palestinian is much different than you are attempting to portray them. That is the difference --- the propaganda is the attmept to cast them as the perpetual victim --- when the reality is they short themselves in the foot.

Just my thought... (Don't decline to participate --- and them complain you didn't get what you wanted.)

Most Respectfully,
R

The Palestinians did not want to get involved in any of the colonial schemes.

(COMMENT)

There were no colonial schemes in the sense you are suggesting. The Mandatory, through the tasking of the Allied Powers, was to provide advice, administration (executive and legislative), and assistance until such time as the Arab could stand alone (an Article 22 prerequisite). The Arab Palestinian was uncooperative and certainly did not follow the steps preparatory to independence. Thus they were left behind by their own choice (self-determination).

And you should know that people in non self governing territories have the same rights as those livings in independent states.

(COMMENT)

• (SUB TEXT QUESTION) Who gave the people of non-self governing territories this "right" beyond the self-determination of the Charter?
  • That would not be by chance the non-binding 1960'ish A/RES/15/1514(XV) would it --- (not in play at the time Israel declared independence pursuant to the directions it received from the UN)?

Having the "right" is much different than a people that know how to exercise that right and stand alone as a nation. It is a much different thing for a people not to know how to establish independence and so not use the right --- then it is --- for a people to be denied the right. The Arab Palestinians knew how to object, protest, create lethal conditions and perform terrorist operations. But they did not demonstrate until 1988 that they had the slightest idea how to create a country and stand alone. Even today, the 1988 State of Palestine is not demonstrating that it can engage in the activities of a functional government. It cannot collect its own taxes, it cannot maintain peace and security or perform law enforcement functions on its own. It cannot engage in good faith and productive peace negotiations to settle disputes. It can only engage in Jihad.

The Palestinians never rejected a state. They rejected colonialism.

(COMMENT)

Again, you are trying to massage the actions of the Arab Palestinian to make it appear much more noble than what they are. Not only did the Arab Palestinians reject the "Arab State" (the Partition Plan) --- but they did it --- not because it was some colonial scheme, but because the Arab Palestinian wanted all --- (repeat) ALL --- the remaining territory to which the Mandate applied. It had nothing to do with colonialism.

The selfish Arab Palestinian, represented by the Arab Higher Committee (AHC) Delegation indicated that the Arab "rejection" was ground on:

(a) The Arabs of Palestine will never recognize the validity of the extorted partition recommendations or the authority of the United Nations to make them.
(b) The Arabs of Palestine consider that any attempt by the Jews or any power group of powers to establish a Jewish state in Arab territory is an act of aggression which will be resisted in self-defense.
(c) It is very unwise and fruitless to ask any commission to proceed to Palestine because not a single Arab will cooperate with the said Commission.
(d) The United Nations or its Commission should not be misled to believe that its efforts in the partition plan will meet with any success. It will be far better for the eclipsed prestige of this organization not to start on this adventure.
(e) The United Nations prestige will be better served by abandoning, not enforcing such an injustice.
(f) The determination of every Arab in Palestine is to oppose in every way the partition of that country.
(g) The Arabs of Palestine made a solemn declaration before the United Nations, before God and history, that they will never submit or yield to any power going to Palestine to enforce partition. ​

And this stance is repeated several times --- over the last half century. It is the Arab Palestinian position that the Allied Powers (under the League of Nations or the United Nations) did not have the authority to make disposition on the territories surrendered to it by the Ottoman Empire. And the Arab Palestinian, through the AHC and the Arab League states, work tirelessly to undermine the establishment of the Jewish Nation Home; a safe haven that could preserve and protect the Jewish People and their culture. It is substantially the same position the Arab Palestinian hold today:

1. 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.
2. Palestine - all of Palestine - is a land of Islamic and Arab affiliation, a blessed sacred land, that has a major portion in the heart of every Arab and Muslim
3. No recognition of the legitimacy of the occupation whatever; this is a principled position, political and moral, and therefore do not recognize the legitimacy of the Israeli occupation of Palestine, and recognition of "Israel" and the legitimacy of its presence on any part of Palestine no matter how long; and it will not be long, God willing.
4. Liberation of Palestine is a national duty; it is the responsibility of the Palestinian people and the Arab and Islamic nation, it is also a humanitarian responsibility in accordance with the requirements of truth and justice.
5. Jihad and the armed resistance is the right and real method for the liberation of Palestine, and the restoration of all the rights, together with, of course, all forms of political and diplomatic struggle including in the media, public and legal [spheres]; with the need to mobilize all the energies of the nation in the battle.​

The Arab-Palestinian is so out of touch with the Declaration on Principles of International Law concerning Friendly Relations and Co-operation among States (Article 1 of UN Charter), that it is totally incapable of entering into a good faith effort to settle disputes by negotiation, enquiry, mediation, conciliation, arbitration, judicial settlement, resort to regional agencies or arrangements, or other peaceful means of their own choice.

There solution is Jihad.

Most Respectfully,
R

3. No recognition of the legitimacy of the occupation whatever; this is a principled position, political and moral, and therefore do not recognize the legitimacy of the Israeli occupation of Palestine, and recognition of "Israel" and the legitimacy of its presence on any part of Palestine no matter how long; and it will not be long, God willing.​

How is that different from anyone else?

Because this means the existence of Israel in Palestine that was not arab muslim owned or controlled from 1099. The lands legal owners gave the title of the land to the Jews, after giving the arab muslims the other 99.9% of the land.

Quote the passage with link.

 

[Phoenall]

As to that last question, the answer is obvious. Jews represent everything she is not, as they are educated, accomplished, successful and innovative. It's much like the remedial kids picking on the brainiac in that envy has been sublimated and turned into hatred.

I think the obvious answer is hidden in your own bitterness and hate. You can not see beyond the end of your nose or acknowledge that a situation is far more complex than a simple black and white, good vs. evil scenario. The real world seldom works that way and if you think you are some sort of "super hero" trumpeting the rights of "good" over "evil" then you are sadly misguided.

The Jews have a homeland, and they deserve to keep it.
The Palestinians are stateless and under occupation - they deserve a homeland. This has been going on long enough.

Should Israel be allowed to keep it's all of it's conquered territories and deny either a homeland or citizenship or independence to the people that originally lived there - alongside the Jews - before there was Israel? If you say yes, then frankly - what about Russia and the Ukraine? Should Russia be allowed to continue gobbling up the Ukraine? You, and others, seem to think that rights belong to only those you deem "good" or "worthy" or share your particular values.

COWFLOP the arab muslims have a homeland, in fact they have many homelands as the mood takes them. They also have a state invented in 1988 that they have failed to do anything with, relying on hand outs and aid instead of hard work and initiative. They rely on retaliation to terrorism from Israel to garner sympathy amongst the west's looney left and Nazi Jew haters to support their ideal of a Jew free world.

Now just where is this conquered land of Israel's then, as they have stated that they will give the land back once the arab muslims agree a peace deal and mutual borders. They never lived alongside the Jews they abused and terrorised them in line with their religious commands.
Are the violent, psychopathic bloodthirsty arab muslims good when they mass murder millions at a time ?

The Palestinians, Christian and Muslim, have their homeland controlled and occupied by European colonists and/or their offspring.

BULLSHIT they control their own land as proven by the many links to hamas leaders stating this fact.

How can it be a fact? Palestinians control no borders, no air space no territorial sea, and the Israelis collect their taxes. Plus the IDF controls everything within the West Bank and East Jerusalem.

Because the arab muslims agreed to those measures in Oslo, you know the treaty fatah tried to use last year, Since when has the west bank been on the coast, and since when has it had mutually agreed borders with Israel, Egypt and Jordan. You did know that Egypt and Jordan control over half of palestines borders didn't you, and that they are also controlling their air space and territorial seas. So easy to show you are an islamonazi stooge when you blame Israel for all of the arab muslims misfortunes, when two other nations are also fighting a war with hamas and fatah.

 

[Phoenall]

P F Tinmore, et al,

Again, you are trying to project the image of the Arab Palestinian as the virtual victim.

P F Tinmore, et al,

I don't think this is accurate at all.

(COMMENT)

The territorial Arab of 1947 were Citizens of Palestine (the territories to which the Mandate for Palestine applies, hereinafter described as Palestine) as defined by the Palestine Order in Council; that is, for the purposes of this discussion --- the Arabs being discussed were Citizens of "the territories to which the Mandate for Palestine applies," either as:

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

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

They were citizens to the legal entity (defined by the Order in Council) but not a sovereign state and not self-governing or with autonomous governing functionality. The Arab Palestinians, having declined to form the precursor institutions on more than three occasions, by declining to cooperation in developing precursors to self-governing institution, discarded the right to consulted on all matters relating to immigration, Arab civil and religious rights, on which it was recognized that “the views of the Arab community were entitled to special consideration.” Even in 1947, the Arab Palestinian the Arab Higher Committee refused to cooperate to be an advisor to the identified successor government; not being denied a voice --- but instead again declining to be an active voice.

The nature of the Arab Palestinian is much different than you are attempting to portray them. That is the difference --- the propaganda is the attmept to cast them as the perpetual victim --- when the reality is they short themselves in the foot.

Just my thought... (Don't decline to participate --- and them complain you didn't get what you wanted.)

Most Respectfully,
R

The Palestinians did not want to get involved in any of the colonial schemes.

(COMMENT)

There were no colonial schemes in the sense you are suggesting. The Mandatory, through the tasking of the Allied Powers, was to provide advice, administration (executive and legislative), and assistance until such time as the Arab could stand alone (an Article 22 prerequisite). The Arab Palestinian was uncooperative and certainly did not follow the steps preparatory to independence. Thus they were left behind by their own choice (self-determination).

And you should know that people in non self governing territories have the same rights as those livings in independent states.

(COMMENT)

• (SUB TEXT QUESTION) Who gave the people of non-self governing territories this "right" beyond the self-determination of the Charter?
  • That would not be by chance the non-binding 1960'ish A/RES/15/1514(XV) would it --- (not in play at the time Israel declared independence pursuant to the directions it received from the UN)?

Having the "right" is much different than a people that know how to exercise that right and stand alone as a nation. It is a much different thing for a people not to know how to establish independence and so not use the right --- then it is --- for a people to be denied the right. The Arab Palestinians knew how to object, protest, create lethal conditions and perform terrorist operations. But they did not demonstrate until 1988 that they had the slightest idea how to create a country and stand alone. Even today, the 1988 State of Palestine is not demonstrating that it can engage in the activities of a functional government. It cannot collect its own taxes, it cannot maintain peace and security or perform law enforcement functions on its own. It cannot engage in good faith and productive peace negotiations to settle disputes. It can only engage in Jihad.

The Palestinians never rejected a state. They rejected colonialism.

(COMMENT)

Again, you are trying to massage the actions of the Arab Palestinian to make it appear much more noble than what they are. Not only did the Arab Palestinians reject the "Arab State" (the Partition Plan) --- but they did it --- not because it was some colonial scheme, but because the Arab Palestinian wanted all --- (repeat) ALL --- the remaining territory to which the Mandate applied. It had nothing to do with colonialism.

The selfish Arab Palestinian, represented by the Arab Higher Committee (AHC) Delegation indicated that the Arab "rejection" was ground on:

(a) The Arabs of Palestine will never recognize the validity of the extorted partition recommendations or the authority of the United Nations to make them.
(b) The Arabs of Palestine consider that any attempt by the Jews or any power group of powers to establish a Jewish state in Arab territory is an act of aggression which will be resisted in self-defense.
(c) It is very unwise and fruitless to ask any commission to proceed to Palestine because not a single Arab will cooperate with the said Commission.
(d) The United Nations or its Commission should not be misled to believe that its efforts in the partition plan will meet with any success. It will be far better for the eclipsed prestige of this organization not to start on this adventure.
(e) The United Nations prestige will be better served by abandoning, not enforcing such an injustice.
(f) The determination of every Arab in Palestine is to oppose in every way the partition of that country.
(g) The Arabs of Palestine made a solemn declaration before the United Nations, before God and history, that they will never submit or yield to any power going to Palestine to enforce partition. ​

And this stance is repeated several times --- over the last half century. It is the Arab Palestinian position that the Allied Powers (under the League of Nations or the United Nations) did not have the authority to make disposition on the territories surrendered to it by the Ottoman Empire. And the Arab Palestinian, through the AHC and the Arab League states, work tirelessly to undermine the establishment of the Jewish Nation Home; a safe haven that could preserve and protect the Jewish People and their culture. It is substantially the same position the Arab Palestinian hold today:

1. 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.
2. Palestine - all of Palestine - is a land of Islamic and Arab affiliation, a blessed sacred land, that has a major portion in the heart of every Arab and Muslim
3. No recognition of the legitimacy of the occupation whatever; this is a principled position, political and moral, and therefore do not recognize the legitimacy of the Israeli occupation of Palestine, and recognition of "Israel" and the legitimacy of its presence on any part of Palestine no matter how long; and it will not be long, God willing.
4. Liberation of Palestine is a national duty; it is the responsibility of the Palestinian people and the Arab and Islamic nation, it is also a humanitarian responsibility in accordance with the requirements of truth and justice.
5. Jihad and the armed resistance is the right and real method for the liberation of Palestine, and the restoration of all the rights, together with, of course, all forms of political and diplomatic struggle including in the media, public and legal [spheres]; with the need to mobilize all the energies of the nation in the battle.​

The Arab-Palestinian is so out of touch with the Declaration on Principles of International Law concerning Friendly Relations and Co-operation among States (Article 1 of UN Charter), that it is totally incapable of entering into a good faith effort to settle disputes by negotiation, enquiry, mediation, conciliation, arbitration, judicial settlement, resort to regional agencies or arrangements, or other peaceful means of their own choice.

There solution is Jihad.

Most Respectfully,
R

The Arab-Palestinian is so out of touch with the Declaration on Principles of International Law concerning Friendly Relations and Co-operation among States (Article 1 of UN Charter), that it is totally incapable of entering into a good faith effort to settle disputes by negotiation, enquiry, mediation, conciliation, arbitration, judicial settlement, resort to regional agencies or arrangements, or other peaceful means of their own choice.​

How so?

How many ILLEGAL WEAPONS do they fire at Israeli citizens inside the borders of Israel contrary to the Declaration on Principles of International law concerning friendly relations and co-operation among states. An International law they signed to abide by and breached within seconds of making the agreement.

None.

How about a link to prove this then, as the UN see the rockets as illegal weapons

 

[Phoenall]

P F Tinmore, et al,

Again, you are trying to project the image of the Arab Palestinian as the virtual victim.

P F Tinmore, et al,

I don't think this is accurate at all.

(COMMENT)

The territorial Arab of 1947 were Citizens of Palestine (the territories to which the Mandate for Palestine applies, hereinafter described as Palestine) as defined by the Palestine Order in Council; that is, for the purposes of this discussion --- the Arabs being discussed were Citizens of "the territories to which the Mandate for Palestine applies," either as:

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

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

They were citizens to the legal entity (defined by the Order in Council) but not a sovereign state and not self-governing or with autonomous governing functionality. The Arab Palestinians, having declined to form the precursor institutions on more than three occasions, by declining to cooperation in developing precursors to self-governing institution, discarded the right to consulted on all matters relating to immigration, Arab civil and religious rights, on which it was recognized that “the views of the Arab community were entitled to special consideration.” Even in 1947, the Arab Palestinian the Arab Higher Committee refused to cooperate to be an advisor to the identified successor government; not being denied a voice --- but instead again declining to be an active voice.

The nature of the Arab Palestinian is much different than you are attempting to portray them. That is the difference --- the propaganda is the attmept to cast them as the perpetual victim --- when the reality is they short themselves in the foot.

Just my thought... (Don't decline to participate --- and them complain you didn't get what you wanted.)

Most Respectfully,
R

The Palestinians did not want to get involved in any of the colonial schemes.

(COMMENT)

There were no colonial schemes in the sense you are suggesting. The Mandatory, through the tasking of the Allied Powers, was to provide advice, administration (executive and legislative), and assistance until such time as the Arab could stand alone (an Article 22 prerequisite). The Arab Palestinian was uncooperative and certainly did not follow the steps preparatory to independence. Thus they were left behind by their own choice (self-determination).

And you should know that people in non self governing territories have the same rights as those livings in independent states.

(COMMENT)

• (SUB TEXT QUESTION) Who gave the people of non-self governing territories this "right" beyond the self-determination of the Charter?
  • That would not be by chance the non-binding 1960'ish A/RES/15/1514(XV) would it --- (not in play at the time Israel declared independence pursuant to the directions it received from the UN)?

Having the "right" is much different than a people that know how to exercise that right and stand alone as a nation. It is a much different thing for a people not to know how to establish independence and so not use the right --- then it is --- for a people to be denied the right. The Arab Palestinians knew how to object, protest, create lethal conditions and perform terrorist operations. But they did not demonstrate until 1988 that they had the slightest idea how to create a country and stand alone. Even today, the 1988 State of Palestine is not demonstrating that it can engage in the activities of a functional government. It cannot collect its own taxes, it cannot maintain peace and security or perform law enforcement functions on its own. It cannot engage in good faith and productive peace negotiations to settle disputes. It can only engage in Jihad.

The Palestinians never rejected a state. They rejected colonialism.

(COMMENT)

Again, you are trying to massage the actions of the Arab Palestinian to make it appear much more noble than what they are. Not only did the Arab Palestinians reject the "Arab State" (the Partition Plan) --- but they did it --- not because it was some colonial scheme, but because the Arab Palestinian wanted all --- (repeat) ALL --- the remaining territory to which the Mandate applied. It had nothing to do with colonialism.

The selfish Arab Palestinian, represented by the Arab Higher Committee (AHC) Delegation indicated that the Arab "rejection" was ground on:

(a) The Arabs of Palestine will never recognize the validity of the extorted partition recommendations or the authority of the United Nations to make them.
(b) The Arabs of Palestine consider that any attempt by the Jews or any power group of powers to establish a Jewish state in Arab territory is an act of aggression which will be resisted in self-defense.
(c) It is very unwise and fruitless to ask any commission to proceed to Palestine because not a single Arab will cooperate with the said Commission.
(d) The United Nations or its Commission should not be misled to believe that its efforts in the partition plan will meet with any success. It will be far better for the eclipsed prestige of this organization not to start on this adventure.
(e) The United Nations prestige will be better served by abandoning, not enforcing such an injustice.
(f) The determination of every Arab in Palestine is to oppose in every way the partition of that country.
(g) The Arabs of Palestine made a solemn declaration before the United Nations, before God and history, that they will never submit or yield to any power going to Palestine to enforce partition. ​

And this stance is repeated several times --- over the last half century. It is the Arab Palestinian position that the Allied Powers (under the League of Nations or the United Nations) did not have the authority to make disposition on the territories surrendered to it by the Ottoman Empire. And the Arab Palestinian, through the AHC and the Arab League states, work tirelessly to undermine the establishment of the Jewish Nation Home; a safe haven that could preserve and protect the Jewish People and their culture. It is substantially the same position the Arab Palestinian hold today:

1. 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.
2. Palestine - all of Palestine - is a land of Islamic and Arab affiliation, a blessed sacred land, that has a major portion in the heart of every Arab and Muslim
3. No recognition of the legitimacy of the occupation whatever; this is a principled position, political and moral, and therefore do not recognize the legitimacy of the Israeli occupation of Palestine, and recognition of "Israel" and the legitimacy of its presence on any part of Palestine no matter how long; and it will not be long, God willing.
4. Liberation of Palestine is a national duty; it is the responsibility of the Palestinian people and the Arab and Islamic nation, it is also a humanitarian responsibility in accordance with the requirements of truth and justice.
5. Jihad and the armed resistance is the right and real method for the liberation of Palestine, and the restoration of all the rights, together with, of course, all forms of political and diplomatic struggle including in the media, public and legal [spheres]; with the need to mobilize all the energies of the nation in the battle.​

The Arab-Palestinian is so out of touch with the Declaration on Principles of International Law concerning Friendly Relations and Co-operation among States (Article 1 of UN Charter), that it is totally incapable of entering into a good faith effort to settle disputes by negotiation, enquiry, mediation, conciliation, arbitration, judicial settlement, resort to regional agencies or arrangements, or other peaceful means of their own choice.

There solution is Jihad.

Most Respectfully,
R

3. No recognition of the legitimacy of the occupation whatever; this is a principled position, political and moral, and therefore do not recognize the legitimacy of the Israeli occupation of Palestine, and recognition of "Israel" and the legitimacy of its presence on any part of Palestine no matter how long; and it will not be long, God willing.​

How is that different from anyone else?

Because this means the existence of Israel in Palestine that was not arab muslim owned or controlled from 1099. The lands legal owners gave the title of the land to the Jews, after giving the arab muslims the other 99.9% of the land.

Quote the passage with link.

Look back to the link provided every week to the same stupid question. It has not changed the LoN Mandate for Palestine still says that the land was to be given to the Jews as the RESURRECTED NATIONAL HOME FOR THE JEWS.

 

[montelatici]

It really doesn't matter if a group of Europeans may have decided to give land on another continent to other Europeans. The Berlin West Africa Conference in 1884-1885 gave the Congo to King Leopold of Belgium, big deal.

In any case, the LoN Mandate stated that " the establishment in Palestine of a national home for the Jewish people, it being clearly understood that nothing should be done which might prejudice the civil and religious rights of existing non-Jewish communities in Palestine....."

Since the rights and political status non-Jewish communities in Palestine were prejudiced (most non-Jews were ethnically cleansed), and the National Home was established as a state and not as a home within Palestine, the LoN Mandate is irrelevant to the current dispute.

 

[Phoenall]

It really doesn't matter if a group of Europeans may have decided to give land on another continent to other Europeans. The Berlin West Africa Conference in 1884-1885 gave the Congo to King Leopold of Belgium, big deal.

In any case, the LoN Mandate stated that " the establishment in Palestine of a national home for the Jewish people, it being clearly understood that nothing should be done which might prejudice the civil and religious rights of existing non-Jewish communities in Palestine....."

Since the rights and political status non-Jewish communities in Palestine were prejudiced (most non-Jews were ethnically cleansed), and the National Home was established as a state and not as a home within Palestine, the LoN Mandate is irrelevant to the current dispute.

You do not know what you are talking about, you just spout parrot fashion what your imam tells you. The LoN Mandate for Palestine is explicit in what it says, and your missing out crucial parts does not alter the facts. The LoN being the legal land owners gave the land to the Jews for their RESURECTED NATIONAL HOME OF THE JEWS. The term in itself names it as a state or NATION. It also spells out that those non Jews living in the area an stay as full citizens or move to any of the other states or nations created under the Mandate. Not one of the Non Jews was prejudiced under the international laws of the time which did not mention politics or rights other than those already mentioned in the Mandate. Once again you try and cloud the issue by bringing in 2015 rights to a 1948 dispute that they do not cover. Unless of course you want to go back to the time of the Roman invasion and grant the land to the last extant group from that period. You can forget the arab muslims as they were invented in 627 C.E., and the Christians were not invented until the 4C C.E. when Rome collapsed. This leaves the Jews that have been proven to have DNA matches with ancient Jews and modern Jews from around the world.


And why did you miss the part of regarding the Jews rights that have been systematically denied by every islamonazi nation since 1948 ?

 

[P F Tinmore]

P F Tinmore, et al,

Again, you are trying to project the image of the Arab Palestinian as the virtual victim.

The Palestinians did not want to get involved in any of the colonial schemes.

(COMMENT)

There were no colonial schemes in the sense you are suggesting. The Mandatory, through the tasking of the Allied Powers, was to provide advice, administration (executive and legislative), and assistance until such time as the Arab could stand alone (an Article 22 prerequisite). The Arab Palestinian was uncooperative and certainly did not follow the steps preparatory to independence. Thus they were left behind by their own choice (self-determination).

And you should know that people in non self governing territories have the same rights as those livings in independent states.

(COMMENT)

• (SUB TEXT QUESTION) Who gave the people of non-self governing territories this "right" beyond the self-determination of the Charter?
  • That would not be by chance the non-binding 1960'ish A/RES/15/1514(XV) would it --- (not in play at the time Israel declared independence pursuant to the directions it received from the UN)?

Having the "right" is much different than a people that know how to exercise that right and stand alone as a nation. It is a much different thing for a people not to know how to establish independence and so not use the right --- then it is --- for a people to be denied the right. The Arab Palestinians knew how to object, protest, create lethal conditions and perform terrorist operations. But they did not demonstrate until 1988 that they had the slightest idea how to create a country and stand alone. Even today, the 1988 State of Palestine is not demonstrating that it can engage in the activities of a functional government. It cannot collect its own taxes, it cannot maintain peace and security or perform law enforcement functions on its own. It cannot engage in good faith and productive peace negotiations to settle disputes. It can only engage in Jihad.

The Palestinians never rejected a state. They rejected colonialism.

(COMMENT)

Again, you are trying to massage the actions of the Arab Palestinian to make it appear much more noble than what they are. Not only did the Arab Palestinians reject the "Arab State" (the Partition Plan) --- but they did it --- not because it was some colonial scheme, but because the Arab Palestinian wanted all --- (repeat) ALL --- the remaining territory to which the Mandate applied. It had nothing to do with colonialism.

The selfish Arab Palestinian, represented by the Arab Higher Committee (AHC) Delegation indicated that the Arab "rejection" was ground on:

(a) The Arabs of Palestine will never recognize the validity of the extorted partition recommendations or the authority of the United Nations to make them.
(b) The Arabs of Palestine consider that any attempt by the Jews or any power group of powers to establish a Jewish state in Arab territory is an act of aggression which will be resisted in self-defense.
(c) It is very unwise and fruitless to ask any commission to proceed to Palestine because not a single Arab will cooperate with the said Commission.
(d) The United Nations or its Commission should not be misled to believe that its efforts in the partition plan will meet with any success. It will be far better for the eclipsed prestige of this organization not to start on this adventure.
(e) The United Nations prestige will be better served by abandoning, not enforcing such an injustice.
(f) The determination of every Arab in Palestine is to oppose in every way the partition of that country.
(g) The Arabs of Palestine made a solemn declaration before the United Nations, before God and history, that they will never submit or yield to any power going to Palestine to enforce partition. ​

And this stance is repeated several times --- over the last half century. It is the Arab Palestinian position that the Allied Powers (under the League of Nations or the United Nations) did not have the authority to make disposition on the territories surrendered to it by the Ottoman Empire. And the Arab Palestinian, through the AHC and the Arab League states, work tirelessly to undermine the establishment of the Jewish Nation Home; a safe haven that could preserve and protect the Jewish People and their culture. It is substantially the same position the Arab Palestinian hold today:

1. 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.
2. Palestine - all of Palestine - is a land of Islamic and Arab affiliation, a blessed sacred land, that has a major portion in the heart of every Arab and Muslim
3. No recognition of the legitimacy of the occupation whatever; this is a principled position, political and moral, and therefore do not recognize the legitimacy of the Israeli occupation of Palestine, and recognition of "Israel" and the legitimacy of its presence on any part of Palestine no matter how long; and it will not be long, God willing.
4. Liberation of Palestine is a national duty; it is the responsibility of the Palestinian people and the Arab and Islamic nation, it is also a humanitarian responsibility in accordance with the requirements of truth and justice.
5. Jihad and the armed resistance is the right and real method for the liberation of Palestine, and the restoration of all the rights, together with, of course, all forms of political and diplomatic struggle including in the media, public and legal [spheres]; with the need to mobilize all the energies of the nation in the battle.​

The Arab-Palestinian is so out of touch with the Declaration on Principles of International Law concerning Friendly Relations and Co-operation among States (Article 1 of UN Charter), that it is totally incapable of entering into a good faith effort to settle disputes by negotiation, enquiry, mediation, conciliation, arbitration, judicial settlement, resort to regional agencies or arrangements, or other peaceful means of their own choice.

There solution is Jihad.

Most Respectfully,
R

3. No recognition of the legitimacy of the occupation whatever; this is a principled position, political and moral, and therefore do not recognize the legitimacy of the Israeli occupation of Palestine, and recognition of "Israel" and the legitimacy of its presence on any part of Palestine no matter how long; and it will not be long, God willing.​

How is that different from anyone else?

Because this means the existence of Israel in Palestine that was not arab muslim owned or controlled from 1099. The lands legal owners gave the title of the land to the Jews, after giving the arab muslims the other 99.9% of the land.

Quote the passage with link.

Look back to the link provided every week to the same stupid question. It has not changed the LoN Mandate for Palestine still says that the land was to be given to the Jews as the RESURRECTED NATIONAL HOME FOR THE JEWS.

OK, but nobody has posted the passage with a link.

 

[RoccoR]

P F Tinmore, et al,

Your insistence that Israel (1948 State of) is somehow inside some territory boundary sovereign to the Palestinians is an example of just how far out of touch with reality the Hostile Arab Palestinians (HoAP) are; and how dangerous they have become to regional peace.

References:

• 11/29/1947
  
  103.1 (b) Palestine - Plan of Partition with Economic Union under A/RES/181 - Map
• 11/29/1947
  
  Map No. 3067 Rev.1 United Nations partition plan of 1947 - Map
• 11/29/1947
  
  A/RES/181(II) Palestine plan of partition with economic union - General Assembly Resolution 181

How many ILLEGAL WEAPONS do they fire at Israeli citizens inside the borders of Israel contrary to the Declaration on Principles of International law concerning friendly relations and co-operation among states. An International law they signed to abide by and breached within seconds of making the agreement.

None.

(COMMENT)

There is no history or documentation anywhere that substantiates the premise that at anytime during the period of the Ottoman Empire taking control of the Levant (from 1517) --- and the summary Declaration of Independence in 1988 (more than four centuries), did the Arab Palestinian have autonomy and control over the territory defined by the Allied Powers as Palestine --- the territory to which the Mandate applied. From a time before the end of the Mandate and the implementation of the Jewish State portion of the Partition Plan (1948), the HoAP have expressed the idea that Palestine belonged to the Palestinians; and have presented the idea a number of different ways.

As regards the Arab Higher Committee, the following telegraphic response was received by the Secretary-General on 19 January (1948):

“ARAB HIGHER COMMITTEE IS DETERMINED PERSIST IN REJECTION PARTITION AND IN REFUSAL RECOGNIZE UNO RESOLUTION THIS RESPECT AND ANYTHING DERIVING THEREFROM. FOR THESE REASONS IT IS UNABLE ACCEPT INVITATION” (1948)

Article 19: The partition of Palestine in 1947, and the establishment of the state of Israel are entirely illegal, regardless of the passage of time, because they were contrary to the will of the Palestinian people and its natural right in their homeland, and were inconsistent with the principles embodied in the Charter of the United Nations, particularly the right to self-determination. (1968)

Article 20: The Balfour Declaration, the Palestine Mandate, and everything that has been based on them, are deemed null and void. Claims of historical or religious ties of Jews with Palestine are incompatible with the facts of history and the conception of what constitutes statehood. Judaism, being a religion, is not an independent nationality. Nor do Jews constitute a single nation with an identity of their own; they are citizens of the states to which they belong. (1968)
​

In May 1948 and the same it true today, the Arab Higher Committee (AHC) stated substantially as follows:

"Arabs claim to have authority over all the area of Palestine as being the political representative of the overwhelming majority of the population. They regard Palestine a one unit. All forces that oppose majority wherever they may be are regarded as unlawful." (1948)

1. 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. (2013)

2. Palestine - all of Palestine - is a land of Islamic and Arab affiliation, a blessed sacred land, that has a major portion in the heart of every Arab and Muslim (2013)

3. No recognition of the legitimacy of the occupation whatever; this is a principled position, political and moral, and therefore do not recognize the legitimacy of the Israeli occupation of Palestine, and recognition of "Israel" and the legitimacy of its presence on any part of Palestine no matter how long; and it will not be long, God willing. (2013)

4. Liberation of Palestine is a national duty; it is the responsibility of the Palestinian people and the Arab and Islamic nation, it is also a humanitarian responsibility in accordance with the requirements of truth and justice. (2013)​

The HoAP rebelled against the British Mandate and its policies of Jewish people with Palestine and to the grounds for reconstituting their national home in that country on what they considered their land; AND facilitating Jewish immigration by encouraging all those willing to assist in the establishment of the Jewish national home. The United Nations on the 29th November 1947 agreed upon a 'Partition Plan of Palestine' A/RES/181(II), which would divide Palestine into two independent States; one for the Jews and another for the Palestinians, while keeping Jerusalem under international administration, by declaring it a 'Corpus Separatum'. Even this is argued by the HoAP --- on the matter of implementation --- under the condition to which it went forward.

PAL/169 17 May 1948 ---
"During today's brief meeting, Dr. Eduardo Morgan (Panama) said that this resolution of the Assembly merely "relieves responsibility. The Commission has not been dissolved. In fact the resolution of last November 29 has been implemented."

Dr. Paul Diez de Medina (Bolivia) said that the Assembly last Friday did only two things. First, he said, "it appointed a mediator between the parties and that in itself is reaffirmation of partition." The second part of the reference to the Commission expressed appreciation for the work performed, and that, he said, was also reaffirmation for partition."

• NOTE: The UNPC was the Successor Government to the Mandatory (UK) --- and the "United Nations Mediator" in Palestine, relieved the "United Nations Palestine Commission." --- separate from: A/554 14 May 1948

• • The view was also expressed that the two resolutions passed by the General Assembly on 14 May reaffirmed partition. The resolution calling for the appointment of a Mediator implied two parties, and two parties implied partition. Likewise, the other resolution, expressing appreciation of the General Assembly for the work performed by the Commission in pursuance of the mandate given to it last November, also could be interpreted as reaffirming partition. A/AC.21/SR.76 21 May 1948

It is often argued that when the Mandate Terminated, that somehow left the HoAP as the successors and entitled to claim sovereignty. While the reaffirmed Partition Plan (which the Palestinian claimed "never happened") offered the HoAP (who opened the civil war in 1947) the participation, the HoAP declined; until the notion was revived in 1988.

Moving forward to the outcomes of the 6-Day War issues, you will note that the Palestinians seem to always reflect upon UN Security Council Resolution 242 (1967) --- emphasizes “the inadmissibility of the acquisition of territory by war” and calls for the “withdrawal of Israel armed forces from territories occupied in the recent conflict.” And I say: Hmmmm.

President Johnson's speech of 19 June '67 --- announced the ideas which became Resolution 242 after four more months of heated debate in the Security Council, the General Assembly, and then the Security Council again. President Johnson's statement had several key points:

(1) It rejected proposals that Israel withdraw its forces to the Armistice Lines as they stood on 4 June. "This is not a prescription for peace," the President said, quoting Ambassador Arthur Goldberg, "but for a renewal of hostilities."
(2) There needed to be peace between the parties, real peace, before there could be any troop withdrawal.
(3) The agreements of peace needed to be negotiated by the parties.
(4) All the states in the region had the same right to have their territorial integrity and political independence respected; threats to end the life of any nation had become a burden to the peace.
(5) There needed to be justice for the refugees.
(6) Maritime rights through the international waterways of the area needed to be respected.
(7) The special interest of the three great religions represented in jerusalem needed also to be assured.​

It is important to understand the language of diplomacy, and the intent of the authors. Here is a comment from Professor Eugene Rostow, who was the Under Secretary of State for Political Affairs (1966-1969), Professor Rostow was Chairman of the Interdepartmental Control Group charged with preparing, proposing, and carrying out US policy for the Middle East crisis of that period.

Recommended Citation: Professor Rostow, Eugene V., "The Drafting of Security Council Resolution 242: The Role of the Non-Regional Actors" (1993).
Faculty Yale Law School ---- Scholarship Series. Paper 1978.
The Drafting of Security Council Resolution 242 The Role of the Non-R by Eugene V. Rostow

Two of these issues proved to be especially critical in the diplomacy of obtaining the passage of the Resolution in 1967, and in the subsequent struggle to implement it: first, the issue of coupling Israeli withdrawals and agreements on a state of peace; and second, the question of how much withdrawal, i.e., whether Israel is required by Resolution 242 to withdraw to the Armistice Demarcation Lines of 1949. Since Resolution 242 calls on Israel to withdraw only from "territories occupied" in the course of the Six Day War, that is, not from all the territories or from the territories it occupied in the course of the War, and since most of the boundaries in question are no more than armistice lines specifically designated as not being political boundaries, it is hard to believe that professional diplomats seriously claim in 1993 that Security Council Resolution 242 requires that Israel must return to the 1967 armistice lines. This Arab position is particularly bizarre applied to the West Bank and the Gaza Strip, where the jewish people have an incontestably valid claim under the original mandate and Article 80 of the UN Charter to make close settlements on the land.

Five and one half months of vehement public and private diplomacy in 1967 made it perfectly clear what the missing definite article in Resolution 242 means. Ingeniously
drafted resolutions calling for withdrawal from all the territories were defeated in the Security Council and the General Assembly, one after another. Speaker after speaker made it explicit that Israel was not to be forced back to the fragile and vulnerable Armistice Demarcation Lines, but should retire once peace was made to what Resolution 242 called "secure and recognized" boundaries, agreed on by the parties. In negotiating such agreements, the parties should take into account, among other factors, security considerations, assured access to the international waterways of the region, a just settlement of the refugee problem, and, of course, their respective legal claims. In 1967, J. Lawrence Hargrove, the Director of the American Society of International Law, was Senior Adviser on International Law to the United States Mission to the United Nations. In testimony before a subcommittee of the House Committee on Foreign Affairs in 1971, he said:

"The language "from territories" was regarded at the time of the adoption of the resolution as of high consequence because the proposal put forward by those espousing the Egyptian cause was withdrawal from "the territories." In the somewhat minute debate which frequently characterizes the period before the adoption of a United Nations resolution, the article "the" was regarded of considerable significance because its inclusion would seem to imply withdrawal from all territories which Israel had not occupied prior to the June war, but was at the present time occupying.

Consequently, the omission of "the" was intended on our part, as I understood it at the time, and was understood on all sides, to leave open the possibility of modifications in the lines which were occupied as of June 4, 1967, in the final settlement."​

Another Palestinian myth that needs to be set aside is the issue on the question: Who was the aggressor in the 1967 War??? This becomes important because of the dogmatic concept by which that determination is made. It is usually made on the basis of The first use of armed force. In conventional terms (customary law) --- prima facie evidence of an act of aggression is in the "first shot fired." Although the Security Council may, in conformity with the Charter, conclude that a determination that an act of aggression has been committed would not be justified in the light of other relevant circumstances, including the fact that the acts concerned or their consequences are not of sufficient gravity. --- When the Egyptian troops manned the guns controlling the Straits and announced that the waterway was closed to Israeli shipping, the first shot in the Six Day War was effectively fired. Thus the Arabs were the aggressors.

All together, the HoAP have very little footing for a real cause of action against Israel.

On what basis is the "Free Palestine" mantra professed that is not the same as that of the convicted criminal?

Most Respectfully,
R

 

[montelatici]

" Thus the Arabs were the aggressors."

Not according to the U.S. Government, the CIA specifically:

"Helms was awakened at 3:00 in the morning on 5 June by a call from the CIA Operations Center. The Foreign Broadcast Information Service had picked up reports that Israel had launched its attack. (OCI soon concluded that the Israelis— contrary to their claims—had fired first.) "

CIA Analysis of the 1967 Arab-Israeli War Central Intelligence Agency

 

[Phoenall]

P F Tinmore, et al,

Again, you are trying to project the image of the Arab Palestinian as the virtual victim.

(COMMENT)

There were no colonial schemes in the sense you are suggesting. The Mandatory, through the tasking of the Allied Powers, was to provide advice, administration (executive and legislative), and assistance until such time as the Arab could stand alone (an Article 22 prerequisite). The Arab Palestinian was uncooperative and certainly did not follow the steps preparatory to independence. Thus they were left behind by their own choice (self-determination).

(COMMENT)

• (SUB TEXT QUESTION) Who gave the people of non-self governing territories this "right" beyond the self-determination of the Charter?
  • That would not be by chance the non-binding 1960'ish A/RES/15/1514(XV) would it --- (not in play at the time Israel declared independence pursuant to the directions it received from the UN)?

Having the "right" is much different than a people that know how to exercise that right and stand alone as a nation. It is a much different thing for a people not to know how to establish independence and so not use the right --- then it is --- for a people to be denied the right. The Arab Palestinians knew how to object, protest, create lethal conditions and perform terrorist operations. But they did not demonstrate until 1988 that they had the slightest idea how to create a country and stand alone. Even today, the 1988 State of Palestine is not demonstrating that it can engage in the activities of a functional government. It cannot collect its own taxes, it cannot maintain peace and security or perform law enforcement functions on its own. It cannot engage in good faith and productive peace negotiations to settle disputes. It can only engage in Jihad.

(COMMENT)

Again, you are trying to massage the actions of the Arab Palestinian to make it appear much more noble than what they are. Not only did the Arab Palestinians reject the "Arab State" (the Partition Plan) --- but they did it --- not because it was some colonial scheme, but because the Arab Palestinian wanted all --- (repeat) ALL --- the remaining territory to which the Mandate applied. It had nothing to do with colonialism.

The selfish Arab Palestinian, represented by the Arab Higher Committee (AHC) Delegation indicated that the Arab "rejection" was ground on:

(a) The Arabs of Palestine will never recognize the validity of the extorted partition recommendations or the authority of the United Nations to make them.
(b) The Arabs of Palestine consider that any attempt by the Jews or any power group of powers to establish a Jewish state in Arab territory is an act of aggression which will be resisted in self-defense.
(c) It is very unwise and fruitless to ask any commission to proceed to Palestine because not a single Arab will cooperate with the said Commission.
(d) The United Nations or its Commission should not be misled to believe that its efforts in the partition plan will meet with any success. It will be far better for the eclipsed prestige of this organization not to start on this adventure.
(e) The United Nations prestige will be better served by abandoning, not enforcing such an injustice.
(f) The determination of every Arab in Palestine is to oppose in every way the partition of that country.
(g) The Arabs of Palestine made a solemn declaration before the United Nations, before God and history, that they will never submit or yield to any power going to Palestine to enforce partition. ​

And this stance is repeated several times --- over the last half century. It is the Arab Palestinian position that the Allied Powers (under the League of Nations or the United Nations) did not have the authority to make disposition on the territories surrendered to it by the Ottoman Empire. And the Arab Palestinian, through the AHC and the Arab League states, work tirelessly to undermine the establishment of the Jewish Nation Home; a safe haven that could preserve and protect the Jewish People and their culture. It is substantially the same position the Arab Palestinian hold today:

1. 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.
2. Palestine - all of Palestine - is a land of Islamic and Arab affiliation, a blessed sacred land, that has a major portion in the heart of every Arab and Muslim
3. No recognition of the legitimacy of the occupation whatever; this is a principled position, political and moral, and therefore do not recognize the legitimacy of the Israeli occupation of Palestine, and recognition of "Israel" and the legitimacy of its presence on any part of Palestine no matter how long; and it will not be long, God willing.
4. Liberation of Palestine is a national duty; it is the responsibility of the Palestinian people and the Arab and Islamic nation, it is also a humanitarian responsibility in accordance with the requirements of truth and justice.
5. Jihad and the armed resistance is the right and real method for the liberation of Palestine, and the restoration of all the rights, together with, of course, all forms of political and diplomatic struggle including in the media, public and legal [spheres]; with the need to mobilize all the energies of the nation in the battle.​

The Arab-Palestinian is so out of touch with the Declaration on Principles of International Law concerning Friendly Relations and Co-operation among States (Article 1 of UN Charter), that it is totally incapable of entering into a good faith effort to settle disputes by negotiation, enquiry, mediation, conciliation, arbitration, judicial settlement, resort to regional agencies or arrangements, or other peaceful means of their own choice.

There solution is Jihad.

Most Respectfully,
R

3. No recognition of the legitimacy of the occupation whatever; this is a principled position, political and moral, and therefore do not recognize the legitimacy of the Israeli occupation of Palestine, and recognition of "Israel" and the legitimacy of its presence on any part of Palestine no matter how long; and it will not be long, God willing.​

How is that different from anyone else?

Because this means the existence of Israel in Palestine that was not arab muslim owned or controlled from 1099. The lands legal owners gave the title of the land to the Jews, after giving the arab muslims the other 99.9% of the land.

Quote the passage with link.

Look back to the link provided every week to the same stupid question. It has not changed the LoN Mandate for Palestine still says that the land was to be given to the Jews as the RESURRECTED NATIONAL HOME FOR THE JEWS.

OK, but nobody has posted the passage with a link.

I posted it for you 3 days ago and it is the Mandate for Palestine


The Avalon Project The Palestine Mandate

Whereas the Principal Allied Powers have also agreed that the Mandatory should be responsible for putting into effect the declaration originally made on November 2nd, 1917, by the Government of His Britannic Majesty, and adopted by the said Powers, in favor of the establishment in Palestine of a national home for the Jewish people, it being clearly understood that nothing should be done which might prejudice the civil and religious rights of existing non-Jewish communities in Palestine, or the rights and political status enjoyed by Jews in any other country; and

Whereas recognition has thereby been given to the historical connection of the Jewish people with Palestine and to the grounds for reconstituting their national home in that country;

ART. 4.
An appropriate Jewish agency shall be recognised as a public body for the purpose of advising and co-operating with the Administration of Palestine in such economic, social and other matters as may affect the establishment of the Jewish national home and the interests of the Jewish population in Palestine, and, subject always to the control of the Administration to assist and take part in the development of the country.

The Zionist organization, so long as its organization and constitution are in the opinion of the Mandatory appropriate, shall be recognised as such agency. It shall take steps in consultation with His Britannic Majesty's Government to secure the co-operation of all Jews who are willing to assist in the establishment of the Jewish national home.


ART. 6.
The Administration of Palestine, while ensuring that the rights and position of other sections of the population are not prejudiced, shall facilitate Jewish immigration under suitable conditions and shall encourage, in co-operation with the Jewish agency referred to in Article 4, close settlement by Jews on the land, including State lands and waste lands not required for public purposes

 

[montelatici]

It really doesn't matter if a group of Europeans may have decided to give land on another continent to other Europeans. The Berlin West Africa Conference in 1884-1885 gave the Congo to King Leopold of Belgium, big deal.

In any case, the LoN Mandate stated that " the establishment in Palestine of a national home for the Jewish people, it being clearly understood that nothing should be done which might prejudice the civil and religious rights of existing non-Jewish communities in Palestine....."

Since the rights and political status non-Jewish communities in Palestine were prejudiced (most non-Jews were ethnically cleansed), and the National Home was established as a state and not as a home within Palestine, the LoN Mandate is irrelevant to the current dispute.

You do not know what you are talking about, you just spout parrot fashion what your imam tells you. The LoN Mandate for Palestine is explicit in what it says, and your missing out crucial parts does not alter the facts. The LoN being the legal land owners gave the land to the Jews for their RESURECTED NATIONAL HOME OF THE JEWS. The term in itself names it as a state or NATION. It also spells out that those non Jews living in the area an stay as full citizens or move to any of the other states or nations created under the Mandate. Not one of the Non Jews was prejudiced under the international laws of the time which did not mention politics or rights other than those already mentioned in the Mandate. Once again you try and cloud the issue by bringing in 2015 rights to a 1948 dispute that they do not cover. Unless of course you want to go back to the time of the Roman invasion and grant the land to the last extant group from that period. You can forget the arab muslims as they were invented in 627 C.E., and the Christians were not invented until the 4C C.E. when Rome collapsed. This leaves the Jews that have been proven to have DNA matches with ancient Jews and modern Jews from around the world.


And why did you miss the part of regarding the Jews rights that have been systematically denied by every islamonazi nation since 1948 ?

Where does the word "resurected", even spelled correctly, you ignoramus, ever appear in the Mandate? Come on bozo, find the word in the Mandate text. The Jews came from Europe as colonists/settlers/invaders (as it turned out). That's the one fact that no one can deny. You can't get it through your thick skull that the people in Palestine in the mid 19th century, before the Europeans began their colonization, were the same people that were always in Palestine. Most had been Christian before they converted to Islam. Before becoming Christians most followed the Roman state religion (which was the wise thing to do), before that they could have been of any pre-Christian faith Jewish included. But as in most areas of the world they remained mostly the same people. The general ethnic make up of the Irish population did not change drastically when they were Christianized nor after the English/Scottish colonization/setllement.

 

[Kondor3]

Perhaps the time has come for Israel to complete their Reconquista.

Just bite the bullet, clean-out Gaza first, then the West Bank, and dump the evicted population across the borders into Jordan and Lebanon.

If the Israelis put on their war-face, and don't hold back, and settle for nothing less than complete and total surrender and submission, they could do it within a matter of weeks, before anybody could even begin to muster the force to stop them.

Not that anybody would, anyway.

The EU sure-as-hell isn't going to war against Israel, to help the Palestinians.

The US sure-as-hell isn't going to war against Israel, to help the Palestinians.

Neither Russia nor the Chinese are going to war against Israel, to help the Palestinians.

Hell, most of their Arab-Muslim co-religionist neighbors arenot going to go to war against Israel, to help the Palestinians.

There is no Arab cavalry coming over the hill this time, to bail-out their foolish, nasty asses.

And, if Israel throws in sufficient wergeld and compensation to help those displaced folks get re-started, elsewhere, and provides humanitarian and logistical assistance on their way out the door, once they're properly subdued and left with no choice but to comply, well, that will go a long way towards softening any non-Muslim angst over the whole thing.

A couple of years of sanctions - which various nations of the world will be only too happy to undermine - a couple of further years of lighterweight sanctions which will taper-off and fizzle into nothingness - a couple of further years of outcast or bad-boy status where the Israelis aren't invited to the annual UN Father-Daugher Dance, and it's over.

Two or three generations after that, nobody will even remember the scattered, loosely-knit so-called Palestinian 'nation' - it will become another Biafra in Man's collective memory.

Nature de-selected the Palestinians some time ago... as a so-called 'People', they're amongst the Walking Dead already - they just haven't stopped twitching yet.

Maybe it's time to get this over with, and cut through all this bullshit.

 

[montelatici]

Fantasy and Science Fiction fan.

 

[P F Tinmore]

3. No recognition of the legitimacy of the occupation whatever; this is a principled position, political and moral, and therefore do not recognize the legitimacy of the Israeli occupation of Palestine, and recognition of "Israel" and the legitimacy of its presence on any part of Palestine no matter how long; and it will not be long, God willing.​

How is that different from anyone else?

Because this means the existence of Israel in Palestine that was not arab muslim owned or controlled from 1099. The lands legal owners gave the title of the land to the Jews, after giving the arab muslims the other 99.9% of the land.

Quote the passage with link.

Look back to the link provided every week to the same stupid question. It has not changed the LoN Mandate for Palestine still says that the land was to be given to the Jews as the RESURRECTED NATIONAL HOME FOR THE JEWS.

OK, but nobody has posted the passage with a link.

I posted it for you 3 days ago and it is the Mandate for Palestine


The Avalon Project The Palestine Mandate

Whereas the Principal Allied Powers have also agreed that the Mandatory should be responsible for putting into effect the declaration originally made on November 2nd, 1917, by the Government of His Britannic Majesty, and adopted by the said Powers, in favor of the establishment in Palestine of a national home for the Jewish people, it being clearly understood that nothing should be done which might prejudice the civil and religious rights of existing non-Jewish communities in Palestine, or the rights and political status enjoyed by Jews in any other country; and

Whereas recognition has thereby been given to the historical connection of the Jewish people with Palestine and to the grounds for reconstituting their national home in that country;

ART. 4.
An appropriate Jewish agency shall be recognised as a public body for the purpose of advising and co-operating with the Administration of Palestine in such economic, social and other matters as may affect the establishment of the Jewish national home and the interests of the Jewish population in Palestine, and, subject always to the control of the Administration to assist and take part in the development of the country.

The Zionist organization, so long as its organization and constitution are in the opinion of the Mandatory appropriate, shall be recognised as such agency. It shall take steps in consultation with His Britannic Majesty's Government to secure the co-operation of all Jews who are willing to assist in the establishment of the Jewish national home.


ART. 6.
The Administration of Palestine, while ensuring that the rights and position of other sections of the population are not prejudiced, shall facilitate Jewish immigration under suitable conditions and shall encourage, in co-operation with the Jewish agency referred to in Article 4, close settlement by Jews on the land, including State lands and waste lands not required for public purposes

And that meant that the Jews could live in Palestine, with the Palestinians, as Palestinian citizens.

 

[Hossfly]

Because this means the existence of Israel in Palestine that was not arab muslim owned or controlled from 1099. The lands legal owners gave the title of the land to the Jews, after giving the arab muslims the other 99.9% of the land.

Quote the passage with link.

Look back to the link provided every week to the same stupid question. It has not changed the LoN Mandate for Palestine still says that the land was to be given to the Jews as the RESURRECTED NATIONAL HOME FOR THE JEWS.

OK, but nobody has posted the passage with a link.

I posted it for you 3 days ago and it is the Mandate for Palestine


The Avalon Project The Palestine Mandate

Whereas the Principal Allied Powers have also agreed that the Mandatory should be responsible for putting into effect the declaration originally made on November 2nd, 1917, by the Government of His Britannic Majesty, and adopted by the said Powers, in favor of the establishment in Palestine of a national home for the Jewish people, it being clearly understood that nothing should be done which might prejudice the civil and religious rights of existing non-Jewish communities in Palestine, or the rights and political status enjoyed by Jews in any other country; and

Whereas recognition has thereby been given to the historical connection of the Jewish people with Palestine and to the grounds for reconstituting their national home in that country;

ART. 4.
An appropriate Jewish agency shall be recognised as a public body for the purpose of advising and co-operating with the Administration of Palestine in such economic, social and other matters as may affect the establishment of the Jewish national home and the interests of the Jewish population in Palestine, and, subject always to the control of the Administration to assist and take part in the development of the country.

The Zionist organization, so long as its organization and constitution are in the opinion of the Mandatory appropriate, shall be recognised as such agency. It shall take steps in consultation with His Britannic Majesty's Government to secure the co-operation of all Jews who are willing to assist in the establishment of the Jewish national home.


ART. 6.
The Administration of Palestine, while ensuring that the rights and position of other sections of the population are not prejudiced, shall facilitate Jewish immigration under suitable conditions and shall encourage, in co-operation with the Jewish agency referred to in Article 4, close settlement by Jews on the land, including State lands and waste lands not required for public purposes

And that meant that the Jews could live in Palestine, with the Palestinians, as Palestinian citizens.

They probably wouldn't want to after the Palestinian factions want to cannabalize one another.



First Publish: 3/21/2015, 10:58 PM

Mahmoud Al-Zahar
Reuters
Hamas has pledged a takeover of Judea-Samaria Saturday, after one of its leaders declared "the liberation of all Palestine" - including the Palestinian Authority (PA) - a strategic area of utmost importance in implementing long-term objectives of the terror group.

Speaking from an event to mark the release of terrorist Ismail al-Zahar from Israeli prison after a 12-year sentence, Hamas leader Mahmoud al-Zahar stated that there are "a thousand courses of action" to break the Israeli travel and import restrictions on Gaza, and he vowed to force Israel to release more terrorists, similar to the way prisoners were released as part of the Shalit deal.(i.e. through abductions - ed.).

Zahar, who has watched the relations between Gaza and other Arab states slowly improve, also imparted blame on the security cooperation between Israel and the PA for Palestinian Arab failings.


Hamas Pledges Liberation of PA From Traitors - Middle East - News - Arutz Sheva

 

[Coyote]

So what? Palestine has been a geo-political entity since at least Herodotus, and it's inhabitants were Palestinians, regardless of what they called themselves or what others may called them. Kurds have never had a State or Kingdom, but no-one denies they are a "nation".

So when did the Syrians and Egyptians start calling themselves palestinians ?

When did the Syrians start calling themselves Syrian?
When did the Egyptians start calling themselves Egyptian?

Did the Souix have a border? A capital? A currency? A GDP?

They had the most important thing -- a sense of identity as a people.

"Palestinians" were simply made up as a propaganda tool against Jews and had no such identity until encouraged by the Egyptian Named Arafat to start calling themselves such.

The Palestinians formed an identity as a group of people who lived in that area - every group of people start out that way.

Well before the arab muslims started calling themselves Palestinians. At least 100 years before


And amongst that group were Jews who were given the chance to form a homeland and agreed. It seems that you are siding with the islamonazi stooges and Jew hating white supremacists in denying the Jews their human rights and wanting them to be stateless wandering bums so you can treat them like something you have stepped in.

Where did you come up with that? Where have I ever denied Jews their human rights or indicated I want them to be "stateless wandering bums"? Where?

I support Israel's right to exist. What I don't support is creating another wrong in order fix the old wrongs.

You have a habit of accusing anyone who even suggests that the Palestinians might have a just cause as being Jew hating white supremacists, or islamonazi's - because you can't see beyond black and white. If they don't agree, then they MUST be...blah blah blah.

Why is this, what have the Jews ever done to you to deserve such treatment ?

Where have I ever said they deserve such treatment?

Why do you lie?

I don't but you do when you deny your anti Semitism and Jew hatred. You constantly want to see Israel reduced to fighting for its existence by forcing them to give up their defence and move to non existent 1967 borders.

Good lord. Well, this should be easy to prove then right?

Please provide links to my "anti-semitism and Jew hatred". This should be easy for you. Shall I wait?

 

[Phoenall]

It really doesn't matter if a group of Europeans may have decided to give land on another continent to other Europeans. The Berlin West Africa Conference in 1884-1885 gave the Congo to King Leopold of Belgium, big deal.

In any case, the LoN Mandate stated that " the establishment in Palestine of a national home for the Jewish people, it being clearly understood that nothing should be done which might prejudice the civil and religious rights of existing non-Jewish communities in Palestine....."

Since the rights and political status non-Jewish communities in Palestine were prejudiced (most non-Jews were ethnically cleansed), and the National Home was established as a state and not as a home within Palestine, the LoN Mandate is irrelevant to the current dispute.

You do not know what you are talking about, you just spout parrot fashion what your imam tells you. The LoN Mandate for Palestine is explicit in what it says, and your missing out crucial parts does not alter the facts. The LoN being the legal land owners gave the land to the Jews for their RESURECTED NATIONAL HOME OF THE JEWS. The term in itself names it as a state or NATION. It also spells out that those non Jews living in the area an stay as full citizens or move to any of the other states or nations created under the Mandate. Not one of the Non Jews was prejudiced under the international laws of the time which did not mention politics or rights other than those already mentioned in the Mandate. Once again you try and cloud the issue by bringing in 2015 rights to a 1948 dispute that they do not cover. Unless of course you want to go back to the time of the Roman invasion and grant the land to the last extant group from that period. You can forget the arab muslims as they were invented in 627 C.E., and the Christians were not invented until the 4C C.E. when Rome collapsed. This leaves the Jews that have been proven to have DNA matches with ancient Jews and modern Jews from around the world.


And why did you miss the part of regarding the Jews rights that have been systematically denied by every islamonazi nation since 1948 ?

Where does the word "resurected", even spelled correctly, you ignoramus, ever appear in the Mandate? Come on bozo, find the word in the Mandate text. The Jews came from Europe as colonists/settlers/invaders (as it turned out). That's the one fact that no one can deny. You can't get it through your thick skull that the people in Palestine in the mid 19th century, before the Europeans began their colonization, were the same people that were always in Palestine. Most had been Christian before they converted to Islam. Before becoming Christians most followed the Roman state religion (which was the wise thing to do), before that they could have been of any pre-Christian faith Jewish included. But as in most areas of the world they remained mostly the same people. The general ethnic make up of the Irish population did not change drastically when they were Christianized nor after the English/Scottish colonization/setllement.

In the original treaty of course

The phrase "national home" was intentionally used instead of "state" because of opposition to the Zionist program within the British Cabinet. The initial draft of the declaration referred to the principle "that Palestine should be reconstituted as the National Home of the Jewish people."[

 

[Phoenall]

Fantasy and Science Fiction fan.

Better than being an outright LIAR and islamonazi propagandist. At least we know how to read and write.

 

[Phoenall]

Because this means the existence of Israel in Palestine that was not arab muslim owned or controlled from 1099. The lands legal owners gave the title of the land to the Jews, after giving the arab muslims the other 99.9% of the land.

Quote the passage with link.

Look back to the link provided every week to the same stupid question. It has not changed the LoN Mandate for Palestine still says that the land was to be given to the Jews as the RESURRECTED NATIONAL HOME FOR THE JEWS.

OK, but nobody has posted the passage with a link.

I posted it for you 3 days ago and it is the Mandate for Palestine


The Avalon Project The Palestine Mandate

Whereas the Principal Allied Powers have also agreed that the Mandatory should be responsible for putting into effect the declaration originally made on November 2nd, 1917, by the Government of His Britannic Majesty, and adopted by the said Powers, in favor of the establishment in Palestine of a national home for the Jewish people, it being clearly understood that nothing should be done which might prejudice the civil and religious rights of existing non-Jewish communities in Palestine, or the rights and political status enjoyed by Jews in any other country; and

Whereas recognition has thereby been given to the historical connection of the Jewish people with Palestine and to the grounds for reconstituting their national home in that country;

ART. 4.
An appropriate Jewish agency shall be recognised as a public body for the purpose of advising and co-operating with the Administration of Palestine in such economic, social and other matters as may affect the establishment of the Jewish national home and the interests of the Jewish population in Palestine, and, subject always to the control of the Administration to assist and take part in the development of the country.

The Zionist organization, so long as its organization and constitution are in the opinion of the Mandatory appropriate, shall be recognised as such agency. It shall take steps in consultation with His Britannic Majesty's Government to secure the co-operation of all Jews who are willing to assist in the establishment of the Jewish national home.


ART. 6.
The Administration of Palestine, while ensuring that the rights and position of other sections of the population are not prejudiced, shall facilitate Jewish immigration under suitable conditions and shall encourage, in co-operation with the Jewish agency referred to in Article 4, close settlement by Jews on the land, including State lands and waste lands not required for public purposes

And that meant that the Jews could live in Palestine, with the Palestinians, as Palestinian citizens.

All legal and above board as well, unlike the arab muslim illegal immigrants that just came and set up shop.

How about this aspect of International law that sets out the real borders of Israel under International treaty

Delineating the final geographical area of Palestine designated for the Jewish National Home on September 16, 1922, as described by the Mandatory


PALESTINE



INTRODUCTORY.


POSITION, ETC.


Palestine lies on the western edge of the continent of Asia between Latitude 30º N. and 33º N., Longitude 34º 30’ E. and 35º 30’ E.

On the North it is bounded by the French Mandated Territories of Syria and Lebanon, on the East by Syria and Trans-Jordan, on the South-west by the Egyptian province of Sinai, on the South-east by the Gulf of Aqaba and on the West by the Mediterranean. The frontier with Syria was laid down by the Anglo-French Convention of the 23rd December, 1920, and its delimitation was ratified in 1923. Briefly stated, the boundaries are as follows: -

North. – From Ras en Naqura on the Mediterranean eastwards to a point west of Qadas, thence in a northerly direction to Metulla, thence east to a point west of Banias.

East. – From Banias in a southerly direction east of Lake Hula to Jisr Banat Ya’pub, thence along a line east of the Jordan and the Lake of Tiberias and on to El Hamme station on the Samakh-Deraa railway line, thence along the centre of the river Yarmuq to its confluence with the Jordan, thence along the centres of the Jordan, the Dead Sea and the Wadi Araba to a point on the Gulf of Aqaba two miles west of the town of Aqaba, thence along the shore of the Gulf of Aqaba to Ras Jaba.

South. – From Ras Jaba in a generally north-westerly direction to the junction of the Neki-Aqaba and Gaza-Aqaba Roads, thence to a point west-north-west of Ain Maghara and thence to a point on the Mediterranean coast north-west of Rafa.

West. – The Mediterranean Sea.


Now an you produce the same for the fantasy nation of Palestine ?

Every stone turned points to the Jews legal right to live in Palestine and the arab muslims being the invaders.

 

[Phoenall]

It really doesn't matter if a group of Europeans may have decided to give land on another continent to other Europeans. The Berlin West Africa Conference in 1884-1885 gave the Congo to King Leopold of Belgium, big deal.

In any case, the LoN Mandate stated that " the establishment in Palestine of a national home for the Jewish people, it being clearly understood that nothing should be done which might prejudice the civil and religious rights of existing non-Jewish communities in Palestine....."

Since the rights and political status non-Jewish communities in Palestine were prejudiced (most non-Jews were ethnically cleansed), and the National Home was established as a state and not as a home within Palestine, the LoN Mandate is irrelevant to the current dispute.

You do not know what you are talking about, you just spout parrot fashion what your imam tells you. The LoN Mandate for Palestine is explicit in what it says, and your missing out crucial parts does not alter the facts. The LoN being the legal land owners gave the land to the Jews for their RESURECTED NATIONAL HOME OF THE JEWS. The term in itself names it as a state or NATION. It also spells out that those non Jews living in the area an stay as full citizens or move to any of the other states or nations created under the Mandate. Not one of the Non Jews was prejudiced under the international laws of the time which did not mention politics or rights other than those already mentioned in the Mandate. Once again you try and cloud the issue by bringing in 2015 rights to a 1948 dispute that they do not cover. Unless of course you want to go back to the time of the Roman invasion and grant the land to the last extant group from that period. You can forget the arab muslims as they were invented in 627 C.E., and the Christians were not invented until the 4C C.E. when Rome collapsed. This leaves the Jews that have been proven to have DNA matches with ancient Jews and modern Jews from around the world.


And why did you miss the part of regarding the Jews rights that have been systematically denied by every islamonazi nation since 1948 ?

Where does the word "resurected", even spelled correctly, you ignoramus, ever appear in the Mandate? Come on bozo, find the word in the Mandate text. The Jews came from Europe as colonists/settlers/invaders (as it turned out). That's the one fact that no one can deny. You can't get it through your thick skull that the people in Palestine in the mid 19th century, before the Europeans began their colonization, were the same people that were always in Palestine. Most had been Christian before they converted to Islam. Before becoming Christians most followed the Roman state religion (which was the wise thing to do), before that they could have been of any pre-Christian faith Jewish included. But as in most areas of the world they remained mostly the same people. The general ethnic make up of the Irish population did not change drastically when they were Christianized nor after the English/Scottish colonization/setllement.

This exert from International law should shut you up for a short time as it shows the Jews were granted the land as far back as 1922 before the major illegal immigration of the arab muslims

Delineating the final geographical area of Palestine designated for the Jewish National Home on September 16, 1922, as described by the Mandatory


PALESTINE



INTRODUCTORY.


POSITION, ETC.


Palestine lies on the western edge of the continent of Asia between Latitude 30º N. and 33º N., Longitude 34º 30’ E. and 35º 30’ E.

On the North it is bounded by the French Mandated Territories of Syria and Lebanon, on the East by Syria and Trans-Jordan, on the South-west by the Egyptian province of Sinai, on the South-east by the Gulf of Aqaba and on the West by the Mediterranean. The frontier with Syria was laid down by the Anglo-French Convention of the 23rd December, 1920, and its delimitation was ratified in 1923. Briefly stated, the boundaries are as follows: -

North. – From Ras en Naqura on the Mediterranean eastwards to a point west of Qadas, thence in a northerly direction to Metulla, thence east to a point west of Banias.

East. – From Banias in a southerly direction east of Lake Hula to Jisr Banat Ya’pub, thence along a line east of the Jordan and the Lake of Tiberias and on to El Hamme station on the Samakh-Deraa railway line, thence along the centre of the river Yarmuq to its confluence with the Jordan, thence along the centres of the Jordan, the Dead Sea and the Wadi Araba to a point on the Gulf of Aqaba two miles west of the town of Aqaba, thence along the shore of the Gulf of Aqaba to Ras Jaba.

South. – From Ras Jaba in a generally north-westerly direction to the junction of the Neki-Aqaba and Gaza-Aqaba Roads, thence to a point west-north-west of Ain Maghara and thence to a point on the Mediterranean coast north-west of Rafa.

West. – The Mediterranean Sea.