Hamas breaks ceasefire as rockets explode near Be'er Sheva

[haissem123]

when i was a little kid having snow ball fights. I would always throw a snow ball straight up and when the stupid enemies watched it, I'd have my brother hit them in the face with his. that's what's happening here and all over. you people are gullible.

 

[Hossfly]

when i was a little kid having snow ball fights. I would always throw a snow ball straight up and when the stupid enemies watched it, I'd have my brother hit them in the face with his. that's what's happening here and all over. you people are gullible.

Everyone here knows the hudna is in effect. Wake me when the next rockets are airborne so I can alert @Lipush and @Daniyel

 

[P F Tinmore]

Rocco, you need to read this more closely.

"In a first group -- "A" Mandates1/ (Syria and Lebanon, Palestine and Transjordan, and Iraq) -- the nation is provisionally recognised as independent, but receives the advice and assistance of a Mandatory in its administration until such time as it is able to stand alone." (LoN/1945.VI.A.1 30 April 1945)

It confirms what I said.

 

[RoccoR]

P F Tinmore, et al,

Yes, let's read this a little more closely.

You need to read this more closely.

"In a first group -- "A" Mandates1/ (Syria and Lebanon, Palestine and Transjordan, and Iraq) -- the nation is provisionally recognised as independent, but receives the advice and assistance of a Mandatory in its administration until such time as it is able to stand alone." (LoN/1945.VI.A.1 30 April 1945)

It confirms what I said.

(OBSERVATION)

provisional

providing or serving for the time being only; existing only until permanently or properly replaced;
temporary: a provisional government.​

provisionally
Provisionally is defined as temporarily or until approved.

• An example of something done provisionally is a license issued pending no incidents in the next year.
• An example of something done provisionally is a stamp that can be used for only a short amount of time.

(COMMENT)

Even today, the more contemporary notion of a State of Palestine is relatively provisional. It is not a state that has been able to stand alone.

While the other provisional recognitions were finally granted, Palestine's never was. The Arab Higher Committee rejected the path to statehood, and adopted Jihad and Armed Conflict as the alternative.

That provisional recognition faded away a long time ago. Many changes have occurred since then. However, since then, the UN made two decisions:

• A/RES/43/177 15 December 1988 Acknowledges the proclamation of the State of Palestine
• A/RES/67/19 4 December 2012 Palestine non-member observer State status in the United Nations

Most Respectfully,
R

 

[P F Tinmore]

P F Tinmore, et al,

Yes, let's read this a little more closely.

You need to read this more closely.

"In a first group -- "A" Mandates1/ (Syria and Lebanon, Palestine and Transjordan, and Iraq) -- the nation is provisionally recognised as independent, but receives the advice and assistance of a Mandatory in its administration until such time as it is able to stand alone." (LoN/1945.VI.A.1 30 April 1945)

It confirms what I said.

(OBSERVATION)

provisional
providing or serving for the time being only; existing only until permanently or properly replaced;
temporary: a provisional government.​

provisionally
Provisionally is defined as temporarily or until approved.

• An example of something done provisionally is a license issued pending no incidents in the next year.
• An example of something done provisionally is a stamp that can be used for only a short amount of time.

Palestine was a nation like the others. It was defined by international borders. It had a native population who were citizens of Palestine.

The part that was provisional was its recognition as independent. That provision was event sensitive. It was until such time as it is able to stand alone. The LoN Covenant assigned mandates to provide the assistance to accomplish that goal.

Of course that did not happen because Britain did not follow the provisions of the covenant.

(COMMENT)

Even today, the more contemporary notion of a State of Palestine is relatively provisional. It is not a state that has been able to stand alone.

While the other provisional recognitions were finally granted, Palestine's never was. The Arab Higher Committee rejected the path to statehood, and adopted Jihad and Armed Conflict as the alternative.

That provisional recognition faded away a long time ago. Many changes have occurred since then. However, since then, the UN made two decisions:

• A/RES/43/177 15 December 1988 Acknowledges the proclamation of the State of Palestine
• A/RES/67/19 4 December 2012 Palestine non-member observer State status in the United Nations

Most Respectfully,
R

 

[RoccoR]

P F Tinmore, et al,

Well, not exactly.

The scope and nature of the growing conflict between the Arab Palestinians and Jewish Immigrants, coupled with the inability of the Arab Palestinians to assemble effective self governing institutions, demonstrated that the Arab component was not quite ready for independence.

Palestine was a nation like the others.

(COMMENT)

​

While all Group "A" Mandates share common construction, there was very special criteria and characteristic in the Palestine Mandate. Contained within the Mandate was Balfour and San Remo Policy --- stating the intention to encourage the establishment of a national home for the Jewish people in Palestine.

It should be noted that while Palestine was initially described as a nation provisionally recognized as independent, by the time of the end of the Mandate, it was described as a "legal entity;" and not a nation --- deterioration over time. To be sure, there are a number of reasons for this. Certainly the limited --- but --- continuously growing insurgency between the Arabs and Jews --- the development and expansion of armed groups on both sides; retarding the growth of the people as a nation.

Most Respectfully,
R

 

[Hossfly]

P F Tinmore, et al,

Well, not exactly.

The scope and nature of the growing conflict between the Arab Palestinians and Jewish Immigrants, coupled with the inability of the Arab Palestinians to assemble effective self governing institutions, demonstrated that the Arab component was not quite ready for independence.

Palestine was a nation like the others.

(COMMENT)

​

While all Group "A" Mandates share common construction, there was very special criteria and characteristic in the Palestine Mandate. Contained within the Mandate was Balfour and San Remo Policy --- stating the intention to encourage the establishment of a national home for the Jewish people in Palestine.

It should be noted that while Palestine was initially described as a nation provisionally recognized as independent, by the time of the end of the Mandate, it was described as a "legal entity;" and not a nation --- deterioration over time. To be sure, there are a number of reasons for this. Certainly the limited --- but --- continuously growing insurgency between the Arabs and Jews --- the development and expansion of armed groups on both sides; retarding the growth of the people as a nation.

Most Respectfully,
R

@RoccoR , I thought you had Tinmore straightened out but he seems to be energized by your revelations. Give him a knockout punch.

 

[P F Tinmore]

P F Tinmore, et al,

Well, not exactly.

The scope and nature of the growing conflict between the Arab Palestinians and Jewish Immigrants, coupled with the inability of the Arab Palestinians to assemble effective self governing institutions, demonstrated that the Arab component was not quite ready for independence.

Of course your so called "not quite ready for independence" was due to Britain having its boot on their neck all through the mandate period. This was a violation of the LoN covenant and the inalienable rights of the Palestinians.

You imply that it was due to a lack of abilities on the Palestinians part.

Palestine was a nation like the others.

(COMMENT)

​

While all Group "A" Mandates share common construction, there was very special criteria and characteristic in the Palestine Mandate. Contained within the Mandate was Balfour and San Remo Policy --- stating the intention to encourage the establishment of a national home for the Jewish people in Palestine.

It should be noted that while Palestine was initially described as a nation provisionally recognized as independent, by the time of the end of the Mandate, it was described as a "legal entity;" and not a nation --- deterioration over time. To be sure, there are a number of reasons for this. Certainly the limited --- but --- continuously growing insurgency between the Arabs and Jews --- the development and expansion of armed groups on both sides; retarding the growth of the people as a nation.

Most Respectfully,
R

 

[RoccoR]

P F Tinmore, et al,

There were never any "international borders" made by or on behalf of the Arab Palestinian. You will never find such a document or recognition other than A/RES/43/177 15 December 1988 that Affirms their sovereignty over their territory occupied since 1967; and those demarkations are Armistice Line protected by A/RES/25/2625 Declaration on Principles of International Law concerning Friendly Relations and Co-operation among States; for which the Arab Palestinian was never a party to the agreements.

• (Note: The Oslo Accords are considered a set of binding agreements and these might be an exception.)

Palestine was a nation like the others. It was defined by international borders. It had a native population who were citizens of Palestine.

(COMMENT)

Including the boundaries of the territory formerly under the Mandate of Palestine, the Arab Palestinians did not establish any borders, boundaries, or armistice lines. All such demarkations were made by either the Allied Powers, Israel, or the adjacent Arab nations, in mutual agreements. But no such demarkation lines were ever made by the indigenous population (Arab Palestinians). All such demarkations were made by and for other parties for their purposes.

The part that was provisional was its recognition as independent. That provision was event sensitive. It was until such time as it is able to stand alone. The LoN Covenant assigned mandates to provide the assistance to accomplish that goal.

Of course that did not happen because Britain did not follow the provisions of the covenant.

(COMMENT)

The League of Nations Covenant [Article 22(4)] says:

"Certain communities formerly belonging to the Turkish Empire have reached a stage of development where their existence as independent nations can be provisionally recognized subject to the rendering of administrative advice and assistance by a Mandatory until such time as they are able to stand alone. The wishes of these communities must be a principal consideration in the selection of the Mandatory."​

The LoN Covenant does not specify "Palestine" as a provisionally recognized anything. In fact, "Palestine" is not mentioned once in the entire Covenant, let alone in Article 22. It does not specify that "Palestine" was one of the "certain communities." That is an assumption not in evidence. Clearly, the turmoil in the territory contributed to the obstruction towards national aspirations and prevented the advancement of independence though self-determination.

The allegation that "Britain did not follow the provisions of the covenant" is merely that; an unsubstantiated allegation. It doesn't take into consideration that the Arab Palestinian did not cooperate in the education process ("administrative advice and assistance" --- "the tutelage of such peoples") by the Mandatory.

Most Respectfully,
R

 

[aris2chat]

>>The Middle East is not a sports arena, and the War Environment is not a game. You do not have an umpire that can call for an instant replay, stop motion, or reset the clock. There are no do-overs --- or --- the ability to replay the down.<<

and yet for some "jihadists" they play like the aztec ball game where the losing side is executed on an alter.

 

[P F Tinmore]

P F Tinmore, et al,

There were never any "international borders" made by or on behalf of the Arab Palestinian. You will never find such a document or recognition other than A/RES/43/177 15 December 1988 that Affirms their sovereignty over their territory occupied since 1967; and those demarkations are Armistice Line protected by A/RES/25/2625 Declaration on Principles of International Law concerning Friendly Relations and Co-operation among States; for which the Arab Palestinian was never a party to the agreements.

• (Note: The Oslo Accords are considered a set of binding agreements and these might be an exception.)

Palestine was a nation like the others. It was defined by international borders. It had a native population who were citizens of Palestine.

(COMMENT)

Including the boundaries of the territory formerly under the Mandate of Palestine, the Arab Palestinians did not establish any borders, boundaries, or armistice lines. All such demarkations were made by either the Allied Powers, Israel, or the adjacent Arab nations, in mutual agreements. But no such demarkation lines were ever made by the indigenous population (Arab Palestinians). All such demarkations were made by and for other parties for their purposes.

The part that was provisional was its recognition as independent. That provision was event sensitive. It was until such time as it is able to stand alone. The LoN Covenant assigned mandates to provide the assistance to accomplish that goal.

Of course that did not happen because Britain did not follow the provisions of the covenant.

(COMMENT)

The League of Nations Covenant [Article 22(4)] says:

"Certain communities formerly belonging to the Turkish Empire have reached a stage of development where their existence as independent nations can be provisionally recognized subject to the rendering of administrative advice and assistance by a Mandatory until such time as they are able to stand alone. The wishes of these communities must be a principal consideration in the selection of the Mandatory."​

The LoN Covenant does not specify "Palestine" as a provisionally recognized anything. In fact, "Palestine" is not mentioned once in the entire Covenant, let alone in Article 22. It does not specify that "Palestine" was one of the "certain communities." That is an assumption not in evidence. Clearly, the turmoil in the territory contributed to the obstruction towards national aspirations and prevented the advancement of independence though self-determination.

The allegation that "Britain did not follow the provisions of the covenant" is merely that; an unsubstantiated allegation. It doesn't take into consideration that the Arab Palestinian did not cooperate in the education process ("administrative advice and assistance" --- "the tutelage of such peoples") by the Mandatory.

Most Respectfully,
R

There were never any "international borders" made by or on behalf of the Arab Palestinian.

Rocco, you start with something that is not true then you base your conclusion on that false premise.

 

[docmauser1]

Palestine was a nation like the others. It was defined by international borders. It had a native population who were citizens of Palestine.

So, who was that shakh, sheikh, sultan, emir, pasha, president, prime-minister of that nation, defined by international borders in support of the claim?

 

[RoccoR]

@Tinmore, et al,

Teach me!

There were never any "international borders" made by or on behalf of the Arab Palestinian.

Rocco, you start with something that is not true then you base your conclusion on that false premise.

(QUESTION)

Just where are the Arab Palestinians a party to any Treaty, Agreement, Armistice, etc, that specify "international boundaries" on behalf of the Arab Palestinian.

(COMMENT)

With the exception of the Oslo Accords, I don't see anything the Arab-Palestinians have signed as a party to the agreement.

Can you show me?

Most Respectfully,
R

 

[P F Tinmore]

@Tinmore, et al,

Teach me!

There were never any "international borders" made by or on behalf of the Arab Palestinian.

Rocco, you start with something that is not true then you base your conclusion on that false premise.

(QUESTION)

Just where are the Arab Palestinians a party to any Treaty, Agreement, Armistice, etc, that specify "international boundaries" on behalf of the Arab Palestinian.

None of the countries that were detached from Turkey determined their own borders. Their international borders were defined by the allied powers.

There are no treaties or agreements between those countries because their borders are undisputed. There has never been a borders dispute between Palestine and any of its neighbors.

Why do you keep bringing up all this irrelevance?

(COMMENT)

With the exception of the Oslo Accords, I don't see anything the Arab-Palestinians have signed as a party to the agreement.

Can you show me?

Most Respectfully,
R

 

[Hossfly]

@Tinmore, et al,

Teach me!

There were never any "international borders" made by or on behalf of the Arab Palestinian.

Rocco, you start with something that is not true then you base your conclusion on that false premise.

(QUESTION)

Just where are the Arab Palestinians a party to any Treaty, Agreement, Armistice, etc, that specify "international boundaries" on behalf of the Arab Palestinian.

None of the countries that were detached from Turkey determined their own borders. Their international borders were defined by the allied powers.

There are no treaties or agreements between those countries because their borders are undisputed. There has never been a borders dispute between Palestine and any of its neighbors.

Why do you keep bringing up all this irrelevance?

(COMMENT)

With the exception of the Oslo Accords, I don't see anything the Arab-Palestinians have signed as a party to the agreement.

Can you show me?

Most Respectfully,
R

Does it matter in the grand scheme of things, old bean?

 

[P F Tinmore]

@Tinmore, et al,

Teach me!

There were never any "international borders" made by or on behalf of the Arab Palestinian.

Rocco, you start with something that is not true then you base your conclusion on that false premise.

(QUESTION)

Just where are the Arab Palestinians a party to any Treaty, Agreement, Armistice, etc, that specify "international boundaries" on behalf of the Arab Palestinian.

None of the countries that were detached from Turkey determined their own borders. Their international borders were defined by the allied powers.

There are no treaties or agreements between those countries because their borders are undisputed. There has never been a borders dispute between Palestine and any of its neighbors.

Why do you keep bringing up all this irrelevance?

(COMMENT)

With the exception of the Oslo Accords, I don't see anything the Arab-Palestinians have signed as a party to the agreement.

Can you show me?

Most Respectfully,
R

Does it matter in the grand scheme of things, old bean?

It is the issue in this conflict.

 

[RoccoR]

@Tinmore, et al,

Not irrelevant.

Teach me!

There were never any "international borders" made by or on behalf of the Arab Palestinian.

Rocco, you start with something that is not true then you base your conclusion on that false premise.

(QUESTION)

Just where are the Arab Palestinians a party to any Treaty, Agreement, Armistice, etc, that specify "international boundaries" on behalf of the Arab Palestinian.

None of the countries that were detached from Turkey determined their own borders. Their international borders were defined by the allied powers.

There are no treaties or agreements between those countries because their borders are undisputed. There has never been a borders dispute between Palestine and any of its neighbors.

Why do you keep bringing up all this irrelevance?

(COMMENT)

With the exception of the Oslo Accords, I don't see anything the Arab-Palestinians have signed as a party to the agreement.

Can you show me?

Most Respectfully,
R

(COMMENT)

All the detached Middle East territories were given independence by the Allied Powers:

• Franco-Syrian Treaty of Independence - 1936
  • The Franco-Syrian Treaty of Independence was a treaty negotiated between France and Syria to provide for Syrian independence from French authority, which had been imposed under a League of Nations Mandate.
• Franco-Lebanese Treaty of Independence - 1945
  • In 1945, Lebanon became a member of the Arab League (March 22) and a member in the United Nations (UN San Francisco Conference of 1945). On December 31, 1946, French troops withdrew completely from Lebanon, with the signing of the Franco-Lebanese Treaty.
• Anglo-Transjordanian Treaty 1946
  • Ending the British mandate and gaining full independence for Transjordan.

All the neighboring states have a treaty that celebrates and documents their full independence; that is all except the claim the Arab Palestinian makes. All that stipulates the borders of the remainder of the territory is the Mandate for Palestine as determined by the Allied Power for the purposes of it legal administration on behalf of the League of Nations.

I'm still asking you, to show me the similar arrangements made that covers your claim.

Most Respectfully,
R

 

[P F Tinmore]

@Tinmore, et al,

Not irrelevant.

Teach me!

There were never any "international borders" made by or on behalf of the Arab Palestinian.

Rocco, you start with something that is not true then you base your conclusion on that false premise.

(QUESTION)

Just where are the Arab Palestinians a party to any Treaty, Agreement, Armistice, etc, that specify "international boundaries" on behalf of the Arab Palestinian.

None of the countries that were detached from Turkey determined their own borders. Their international borders were defined by the allied powers.

There are no treaties or agreements between those countries because their borders are undisputed. There has never been a borders dispute between Palestine and any of its neighbors.

Why do you keep bringing up all this irrelevance?

(COMMENT)

With the exception of the Oslo Accords, I don't see anything the Arab-Palestinians have signed as a party to the agreement.

Can you show me?

Most Respectfully,
R

(COMMENT)

All the detached Middle East territories were given independence by the Allied Powers:

• Franco-Syrian Treaty of Independence - 1936
  • The Franco-Syrian Treaty of Independence was a treaty negotiated between France and Syria to provide for Syrian independence from French authority, which had been imposed under a League of Nations Mandate.
• Franco-Lebanese Treaty of Independence - 1945
  • In 1945, Lebanon became a member of the Arab League (March 22) and a member in the United Nations (UN San Francisco Conference of 1945). On December 31, 1946, French troops withdrew completely from Lebanon, with the signing of the Franco-Lebanese Treaty.
• Anglo-Transjordanian Treaty 1946
  • Ending the British mandate and gaining full independence for Transjordan.

All the neighboring states have a treaty that celebrates and documents their full independence; that is all except the claim the Arab Palestinian makes. All that stipulates the borders of the remainder of the territory is the Mandate for Palestine as determined by the Allied Power for the purposes of it legal administration on behalf of the League of Nations.

I'm still asking you, to show me the similar arrangements made that covers your claim.

Most Respectfully,
R

Palestine became independent of the mandate when the mandate left.

 

[RoccoR]

@P F Tinmore, et al,

This is 100% wrong.

Palestine became independent of the mandate when the mandate left.

(COMMENT)

The United Nations (UN) became an intergovernmental organization established on 24 October 1945. Under Article 77 of the Charter, territories now held under mandate were transferred to the UN Trusteeship System. On the termination of the Mandate held by the UK, the successor government became the UN Palestine Commission. The territory formerly under Mandate did not magically become independent.

You will never find anything that says that.

Most Respectfully,
R

 

[P F Tinmore]

@P F Tinmore, et al,

This is 100% wrong.

Palestine became independent of the mandate when the mandate left.

(COMMENT)

The United Nations (UN) became an intergovernmental organization established on 24 October 1945. Under Article 77 of the Charter, territories now held under mandate were transferred to the UN Trusteeship System. On the termination of the Mandate held by the UK, the successor government became the UN Palestine Commission. The territory formerly under Mandate did not magically become independent.

You will never find anything that says that.

Most Respectfully,
R

And just when did this so called UN Palestine Commission go to Palestine to secure the territory and protect the citizens under its trust?