"Free Palestine

[TheOldSchool]

They are Arabs.
Israel is a small country.
Let any if the neighboring Arab nations take in the Palestinians

How? Israel won't allow them to leave.

nice lie.

but okie dokie.

You sure about that?

 

[Coyote]

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.

Of course, those Arabs who are descendants of those who did not take up active hostilities in 1947 have a right to keep living in Israel. I have never made the claim they don't.

It's those who are descendants of the murderous thugs who are inspired by genocidal antisemitism who don't.

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.

again with this nonsense?

they left.

they lost.

let me know when i get my great grandparents' properly in belarus then we'll talk.

til then, stop asking for things for terrorists that no group of people has ever gotten.

Let me know when you attempt to pursue it.

I had no idea that all Palestinians are terrorists.

 

[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.

There were arabs that had deeds and went through the courts to get the land back, or compensated for land that could not be returned.
Most did not own land, or might have been offered a chance to register land but chose not to. Arabs worked the land for both other arabs and jews but working does not mean owning. Being allowed to live on land they tended for others does not mean it is their home or that they cannot be removed. Declaring land they sold as null and void is not going to mean the land should be returned to them.
Arabs stayed and helped develop Israel. Not everyone is out to take from or destroy Israel.

With Likud or ZU there will be no "right of return", no withdrawal of the high ground, no giving up the Jordan valley and no surrender of security for Israel. If Netanyahu is tapped again, there will be no palestinian state. If Herzog is tapped, there could be negotiation for a state but only on zone A and B in the WB.
If Abbas folds up the PLO and hands back the WB, those involved in attacks against Israelis, supported terrorists in any way, and even those who would not accept Israeli citizenship in a jewish state might have to leave. Those who want peace as Israelis could stay.
No one wants G, even the palestinians there.
Either way the mount will likely be opened to all faiths. Anyone that tries to attack a non-muslim would be refused entry to the mount and even Israel, if not jailed.
Israel wants security which will bring prosperity. No one is going to dance the steps the palestinians want. A few seat by the arab party is not going to do much to satisfy the "demands" of the palestinians. MKs should be first and foremost Israelis.

 

[toastman]

What was its capital then, who was its leader, what was its monetary unit and who owned the land under International law at the time ?

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

Oh, they formed state? When ?

Well, that is a 1937 League of Nation document and Palestine was already a state.

The official start date was 1924.

Are you saying Palestine became a sovereign state in 1937?

 

[Dogmaphobe]

again with this nonsense?

they left.

they lost.

let me know when i get my great grandparents' properly in belarus then we'll talk.

til then, stop asking for things for terrorists that no group of people has ever gotten.

I'm trying to decide if I should claim my birthright to somebody else's land in Ireland, or Scotland, myself.

I hadn't realized until I met Coyote what an advantage it was to be Scots-Irish.

 

[P F Tinmore]

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

Oh, they formed state? When ?

Well, that is a 1937 League of Nation document and Palestine was already a state.

The official start date was 1924.

Are you saying Palestine became a sovereign state in 1937?

No.

 

[theliq]

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.

Of course, those Arabs who are descendants of those who did not take up active hostilities in 1947 have a right to keep living in Israel. I have never made the claim they don't.

It's those who are descendants of the murderous thugs who are inspired by genocidal antisemitism who don't.

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.

again with this nonsense?

they left.

they lost.

let me know when i get my great grandparents' properly in belarus then we'll talk.

til then, stop asking for things for terrorists that no group of people has ever gotten.

They left did they,Bullshit they were driven out of their homes and villages by Zionist Terrorists,non of these Palestinians took up active hostilities they were caught in the cross-fire and the Jews attempted to eliminate them.....Gillian you talk so much Shit.

 

[theliq]

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?

Wrong again Shitmouth........you knowledge of history is so poor that your comments have been consigned to the Garbage Can of History,much like Jillian's have............Stop being Cretins for Cretins sake

 

[theliq]

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?

Moronic Comment

 

[theliq]

one neuron short of a synapse. wishful thinking is not going to make it happen without iPSCs or BAM

aris2chat , how about this latest event?

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Natanyahu, on the eve of parliamentary elections, pledged in an interview published Monday that he would not support a separate Palestinian state if re-elected.

http://www.foxnews.com/world/2015/03/16/netanyahu-urges-supporters-to-close-this-gap-ahead-israeli-election/

Who, in their right mind, would agree to another nation establishing its borders within the confines of their own nation? AND allow that nation to claim the same capital?

Exactly right, the Palestinians certainly didn't agree to another "nation," (the European Zionist colonial project, aka Israel) establishing it's borders within the confines of their own nation, Palestine. Nice to see you are finally getting the point.

What was its capital then, who was its leader, what was its monetary unit and who owned the land under International law at the time ?

"Nation: A large body of people united by common descent, history, culture, or language, inhabiting a particular state or territory." nation - definition of nation in English from the Oxford dictionary

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.

Nation= "A large body of people united by common descent, history, culture, or language, inhabiting a particular state or territory."

Nation State= "A form of political organization in which a group of people who share the same history, traditions, or language live in a particular area under one government.

Country= "A nation with its own government, occupying a particular territory."

Thanks Challenger......Explains the Palestinians to a Tee.........steve

 

[theliq]

They are Palestinians, it was their country before the Zionist colonists arrived, why should they leave?

I keep hoping some neurons will finally start occupying all that unused tissue that lies between your two ears.

As has been pointed out to you innumerable times, there has never been a country called Palestine run by "Palestinians". You are uneducable and so keep repeating this stupid nonsense.

Yet they lived there. Why should they be forced to leave?

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.

Lets try this for a hypothetical......
Refugees settle (squat) in places they have no right to. They might stay their for decades, but they have no legal claim or right to that land. When are asked to move and the owners want the land back, should they have a right to demand it as their state? If they go to some place and work the land for the owners, they have no right to demand they have infinite right through time to make it their land.
If the PA fails or gives the land back to Israel, those in camps that have no legal deed to the land they are on can be removed. The UN camps were set up for convenience to help the refugees. The UN does not own the land nor to the refugees. Even if a state of some type is created in the WB, the camps are not legal determinant dwellings built to modern standards.
Camps around Beirut have grown on what was once park land. Palestinians have occupied apartment buildings, chalets and private homes but they have no permanent claim of ownership or right to stay there forever. The property belong to Lebanese.
Jews bought land but after the fact arabs want to declare the sales null and void. Money was exchanged, documents signed and taxes paid. Sellers remorse is just too bad. The land is no longer their's.
Towns have sprouted out of necessity but through most of gaza and the WB there is no legal proof of ownership. Even land that many palestinians might have registered, they did take the opportunity because they did not want to serve in the military or pay taxes. They don't own the land.
Demanding rights of public land is also problematic. Israel can rent state land but the renters do not own the land and no right to remain there indefinably can be claimed.
Things are no so black and white.
............as for nations? there was no palestinian state or government before the mandate and the arabs rejected the formation of a palestinian state. Where is their right?

You are of course talking about Jewish Gypo Settlers mainly from the USA,in this post.....because you would be correct.

 

[Phoenall]

Who, in their right mind, would agree to another nation establishing its borders within the confines of their own nation? AND allow that nation to claim the same capital?

Exactly right, the Palestinians certainly didn't agree to another "nation," (the European Zionist colonial project, aka Israel) establishing it's borders within the confines of their own nation, Palestine. Nice to see you are finally getting the point.

What was its capital then, who was its leader, what was its monetary unit and who owned the land under International law at the time ?

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.

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.

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 .

 

[Phoenall]

They are Palestinians, it was their country before the Zionist colonists arrived, why should they leave?

I keep hoping some neurons will finally start occupying all that unused tissue that lies between your two ears.

As has been pointed out to you innumerable times, there has never been a country called Palestine run by "Palestinians". You are uneducable and so keep repeating this stupid nonsense.

Yet they lived there. Why should they be forced to leave?

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.

 

[Phoenall]

Who, in their right mind, would agree to another nation establishing its borders within the confines of their own nation? AND allow that nation to claim the same capital?

Exactly right, the Palestinians certainly didn't agree to another "nation," (the European Zionist colonial project, aka Israel) establishing it's borders within the confines of their own nation, Palestine. Nice to see you are finally getting the point.

What was its capital then, who was its leader, what was its monetary unit and who owned the land under International law at the time ?

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.

 

[Phoenall]

aris2chat , how about this latest event?

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Natanyahu, on the eve of parliamentary elections, pledged in an interview published Monday that he would not support a separate Palestinian state if re-elected.

http://www.foxnews.com/world/2015/03/16/netanyahu-urges-supporters-to-close-this-gap-ahead-israeli-election/

Who, in their right mind, would agree to another nation establishing its borders within the confines of their own nation? AND allow that nation to claim the same capital?

Exactly right, the Palestinians certainly didn't agree to another "nation," (the European Zionist colonial project, aka Israel) establishing it's borders within the confines of their own nation, Palestine. Nice to see you are finally getting the point.

What was its capital then, who was its leader, what was its monetary unit and who owned the land under International law at the time ?

"Nation: A large body of people united by common descent, history, culture, or language, inhabiting a particular state or territory." nation - definition of nation in English from the Oxford dictionary

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.

Nation= "A large body of people united by common descent, history, culture, or language, inhabiting a particular state or territory."

Nation State= "A form of political organization in which a group of people who share the same history, traditions, or language live in a particular area under one government.

Country= "A nation with its own government, occupying a particular territory."

Thanks Challenger......Explains the Palestinians to a Tee.........steve

YES the Jewish Palestinians as the Ottoman records show that the arab muslim Palestinians did not exist in any numbers until the late 1880's when they migrated illegally on the promise of work.

 

[Phoenall]

I keep hoping some neurons will finally start occupying all that unused tissue that lies between your two ears.

As has been pointed out to you innumerable times, there has never been a country called Palestine run by "Palestinians". You are uneducable and so keep repeating this stupid nonsense.

Yet they lived there. Why should they be forced to leave?

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.

Lets try this for a hypothetical......
Refugees settle (squat) in places they have no right to. They might stay their for decades, but they have no legal claim or right to that land. When are asked to move and the owners want the land back, should they have a right to demand it as their state? If they go to some place and work the land for the owners, they have no right to demand they have infinite right through time to make it their land.
If the PA fails or gives the land back to Israel, those in camps that have no legal deed to the land they are on can be removed. The UN camps were set up for convenience to help the refugees. The UN does not own the land nor to the refugees. Even if a state of some type is created in the WB, the camps are not legal determinant dwellings built to modern standards.
Camps around Beirut have grown on what was once park land. Palestinians have occupied apartment buildings, chalets and private homes but they have no permanent claim of ownership or right to stay there forever. The property belong to Lebanese.
Jews bought land but after the fact arabs want to declare the sales null and void. Money was exchanged, documents signed and taxes paid. Sellers remorse is just too bad. The land is no longer their's.
Towns have sprouted out of necessity but through most of gaza and the WB there is no legal proof of ownership. Even land that many palestinians might have registered, they did take the opportunity because they did not want to serve in the military or pay taxes. They don't own the land.
Demanding rights of public land is also problematic. Israel can rent state land but the renters do not own the land and no right to remain there indefinably can be claimed.
Things are no so black and white.
............as for nations? there was no palestinian state or government before the mandate and the arabs rejected the formation of a palestinian state. Where is their right?

You are of course talking about Jewish Gypo Settlers mainly from the USA,in this post.....because you would be correct.

Wrong as the last two legal owners of the land invited the Jews to migrate LEGALLY to Palestine and settle the land. You are not very well educated on the history of Palestine are you, must be all the brainwashing done in your formative years. So it is the illegal arab muslim migrants that invaded Palestine that are the Gypo squatters mainly from Iran, Syria, Iraq and Egypt.

 

[Phoenall]

Exactly right, the Palestinians certainly didn't agree to another "nation," (the European Zionist colonial project, aka Israel) establishing it's borders within the confines of their own nation, Palestine. Nice to see you are finally getting the point.

What was its capital then, who was its leader, what was its monetary unit and who owned the land under International law at the time ?

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

Oh, they formed state? When ?

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

 

[Phoenall]

one neuron short of a synapse. wishful thinking is not going to make it happen without iPSCs or BAM

aris2chat , how about this latest event?

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Natanyahu, on the eve of parliamentary elections, pledged in an interview published Monday that he would not support a separate Palestinian state if re-elected.

http://www.foxnews.com/world/2015/03/16/netanyahu-urges-supporters-to-close-this-gap-ahead-israeli-election/

Who, in their right mind, would agree to another nation establishing its borders within the confines of their own nation? AND allow that nation to claim the same capital?

Exactly right, the Palestinians certainly didn't agree to another "nation," (the European Zionist colonial project, aka Israel) establishing it's borders within the confines of their own nation, Palestine. Nice to see you are finally getting the point.

What was its capital then, who was its leader, what was its monetary unit and who owned the land under International law at the time ?

"Nation: A large body of people united by common descent, history, culture, or language, inhabiting a particular state or territory." nation - definition of nation in English from the Oxford dictionary

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.

Nation= "A large body of people united by common descent, history, culture, or language, inhabiting a particular state or territory."

Nation State= "A form of political organization in which a group of people who share the same history, traditions, or language live in a particular area under one government.

Country= "A nation with its own government, occupying a particular territory."

Defines the Jews perfectly, but not the arab muslims who are recent arrivals on the scene.

But read your definition and you see the word STATE used to define the nation. So when did the state of arab muslim Palestine come into existence ? And what was their government as that is also added as a must have to be a nation or state.

 

[Phoenall]

What was its capital then, who was its leader, what was its monetary unit and who owned the land under International law at the time ?

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

Oh, they formed state? When ?

Well, that is a 1937 League of Nation document and Palestine was already a state.

The official start date was 1924.

Produce it and show who was the palestinian representative that signed to accept the existence of a Palestinian state. What were its mutually agreed borders with its neighbours, and who signed for their neighbours.

You are confusing the MANDATE FOR PALESTINE with a state when it clearly was never a state.

 

[Phoenall]

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.

Of course, those Arabs who are descendants of those who did not take up active hostilities in 1947 have a right to keep living in Israel. I have never made the claim they don't.

It's those who are descendants of the murderous thugs who are inspired by genocidal antisemitism who don't.

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.

And when they do commit a crime what then, can they be evicted as enemies of the state and their dual Israeli nationality removed ?