I will not Bow!

[P F Tinmore]

P F Tinmore, et al,

Again with the misunderstanding of the process.

P F Tinmore, et al,

Did I say that? I think not.


(COMMENT)

The UNPC Implemented the November 1947 Resolution and declared independence with there full cooperation, at the completion of the Steps Preparatory to Independence.

No Force required. Cooperation and coordination.

Most Respectfully,
R

The UNPC was to define the borders between the two states. When did that happen?

When did the UNPC transfer land to Israel?

(COMMENT)

It is not a real-estate transaction for property ownership. It is an establishment of sovereignty. The borders were accepted as in Part II, Section B, Boundaries - as outlined in Annex A to Resolution 181 (II) of the General Assembly, dated 29 November 1947.

The establishment of a Sovereign State is not about land ownership (a civil liberty). You can go back through the records, you will not find any of the Arab States with a deed to the property for their respective states.

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."

SOURCE: PAL/169 17 May 1948

Most Respectfully,
R

I think you are confused. First you say that Palestine belongs to the British. Then the British gives Palestine to the UNPC.

Then Palestine is Israel. Where is this transfer to Israel. Surely something like that should be a documented agreement including defined borders of land transferred.

Show me something.

 

[RoccoR]

P F Tinmore, et al,

You are so very confused!

I think you are confused. First you say that Palestine belongs to the British. Then the British gives Palestine to the UNPC.

(COMMENT)

I never said Palestine belongs to the British. I said the UK exercised governing authority over the Mandate of Palestine.

Then Palestine is Israel. Where is this transfer to Israel. Surely something like that should be a documented agreement including defined borders of land transferred.

Show me something.

(COMMENT)

Again, it is not a real-estate deal. There is no transfer of property, not for Lebanon, Syria, Jordan, Iraq, Egypt, and certainly not for Israel.

The Mandate Authority (in this case the UNPC) allowed Israel to Declare Independence upon the terms and conditions established in the implementation process, General Assembly Resolution 181(II). The boundaries were established in PART II - Boundaries, Section B, as annotated in Annex A to Resolution 181 (II) of the General Assembly, dated 29 November 1947.

Israel Declares Independence on Mid-night 14-15 May '48; the UN Palestine Commission authenticates implementation and adjourns; Israeli Foreign Minister Makes Application for Admission in Paris, 29 November 1948, the UN Security Council received and considered the application of Israel for membership - Recommends approval 4 March 1949; General Assembly Admission of Israel to membership in the United Nations, 11 May 1949.

Done!

The process is not required to please the Arab Palestinian. It is a process that was almost universally used throughout the region.

Most Respectfully,
R

 

[P F Tinmore]

P F Tinmore, et al,

You are so very confused!

I think you are confused. First you say that Palestine belongs to the British. Then the British gives Palestine to the UNPC.

(COMMENT)

I never said Palestine belongs to the British. I said the UK exercised governing authority over the Mandate of Palestine.

Then Palestine is Israel. Where is this transfer to Israel. Surely something like that should be a documented agreement including defined borders of land transferred.

Show me something.

(COMMENT)

Again, it is not a real-estate deal. There is no transfer of property, not for Lebanon, Syria, Jordan, Iraq, Egypt, and certainly not for Israel.

The Mandate Authority (in this case the UNPC) allowed Israel to Declare Independence upon the terms and conditions established in the implementation process, General Assembly Resolution 181(II). The boundaries were established in PART II - Boundaries, Section B, as annotated in Annex A to Resolution 181 (II) of the General Assembly, dated 29 November 1947.

Israel Declares Independence on Mid-night 14-15 May '48; the UN Palestine Commission authenticates implementation and adjourns; Israeli Foreign Minister Makes Application for Admission in Paris, 29 November 1948, the UN Security Council received and considered the application of Israel for membership - Recommends approval 4 March 1949; General Assembly Admission of Israel to membership in the United Nations, 11 May 1949.

Done!

Most Respectfully,
R

OK, Israel has political recognition but where is it? There are no documents showing Israel acquiring any land.

The 1949 UN armistice agreements mention Palestine many times. Israel is not mentioned. Palestine's international borders are mentioned. No borders are mentioned for Israel.

 

[RoccoR]

P F Tinmore, et al,

This is nonsense!

OK, Israel has political recognition but where is it? There are no documents showing Israel acquiring any land.

The 1949 UN armistice agreements mention Palestine many times. Israel is not mentioned. Palestine's international borders are mentioned. No borders are mentioned for Israel.

(COMMENT)

Every one of the Armistice Agreements is a two-party agreement; Israel and one of the Adjacent Arab States. Nowhere in any of the agreements is a state called Palestine a party to the agreement. It is a regional name.

On one side of the line is one party, and on the other side of the line there is Israel. Palestine is just the name of the turf the line is drawn on, until 1988.

Most Respectfully,
R

 

[P F Tinmore]

P F Tinmore, et al,

This is nonsense!

OK, Israel has political recognition but where is it? There are no documents showing Israel acquiring any land.

The 1949 UN armistice agreements mention Palestine many times. Israel is not mentioned. Palestine's international borders are mentioned. No borders are mentioned for Israel.

(COMMENT)

Every one of the Armistice Agreements is a two-party agreement; Israel and one of the Adjacent Arab States. Nowhere in any of the agreements is a state called Palestine a party to the agreement. It is a regional name.

On one side of the line is one party, and on the other side of the line there is Israel. Palestine is just the name of the turf the line is drawn on, until 1988.

Most Respectfully,
R

Not really. You are grasping at straws. The armistice lines are drawn on top of Palestine's international borders except with Jordan and Egypt where they deviated for their occupations.

The main fact is that Israel has never acquired any land. That would make Israel a foreign, military occupation of Palestine.

 

[RoccoR]

P F Tinmore, et al,

This is Jihadist and Fedayeen speak.

This is nonsense!

OK, Israel has political recognition but where is it? There are no documents showing Israel acquiring any land.

The 1949 UN armistice agreements mention Palestine many times. Israel is not mentioned. Palestine's international borders are mentioned. No borders are mentioned for Israel.

(COMMENT)

Every one of the Armistice Agreements is a two-party agreement; Israel and one of the Adjacent Arab States. Nowhere in any of the agreements is a state called Palestine a party to the agreement. It is a regional name.

On one side of the line is one party, and on the other side of the line there is Israel. Palestine is just the name of the turf the line is drawn on, until 1988.

Most Respectfully,
R

Not really. You are grasping at straws. The armistice lines are drawn on top of Palestine's international borders except with Jordan and Egypt where they deviated for their occupations.

The main fact is that Israel has never acquired any land. That would make Israel a foreign, military occupation of Palestine.

(COMMENT)

With the exception of the military occupation under the Oslo Accords in the West Bank, you are wrong. But that is another argument about the HoAP and their core beliefs and their origins.

Most Respectfully,
R

 

[P F Tinmore]

P F Tinmore, et al,

This is Jihadist and Fedayeen speak.

This is nonsense!


(COMMENT)

Every one of the Armistice Agreements is a two-party agreement; Israel and one of the Adjacent Arab States. Nowhere in any of the agreements is a state called Palestine a party to the agreement. It is a regional name.

On one side of the line is one party, and on the other side of the line there is Israel. Palestine is just the name of the turf the line is drawn on, until 1988.

Most Respectfully,
R

Not really. You are grasping at straws. The armistice lines are drawn on top of Palestine's international borders except with Jordan and Egypt where they deviated for their occupations.

The main fact is that Israel has never acquired any land. That would make Israel a foreign, military occupation of Palestine.

(COMMENT)

With the exception of the military occupation under the Oslo Accords in the West Bank, you are wrong. But that is another argument about the HoAP and their core beliefs and their origins.

Most Respectfully,
R

So, where is Israel's land?

 

[RoccoR]

P F Tinmore, et al,

So, where is Israel's land?

Most Respectfully,
R

 

[P F Tinmore]

P F Tinmore, et al,

So, where is Israel's land?

Most Respectfully,
R

Where are the documents showing Israel acquiring any land?

 

[RoccoR]

P F Tinmore, et al,

Where are such documents of any Arab country?

Where are the documents showing Israel acquiring any land?

(COMMENT)

Where are the documents for the acquisitions you claim Palestine has.

Most Respectfully,
R

 

[P F Tinmore]

P F Tinmore, et al,

Where are such documents of any Arab country?

Where are the documents showing Israel acquiring any land?

(COMMENT)

Where are the documents for the acquisitions you claim Palestine has.

Most Respectfully,
R

Several post war agreements set Palestine's international borders that finalized by the Treaty of Lausanne when all of the newly created states were release from Ottoman rule.

 

[Phoenall]

I appreciate that the moral dilemma baffles you...The answer is simple...No one in Any Human Culture would agree to their dispossession for no Just reason...

The only answer is acceptance, and unlike what you posted, the Arabs have agreed to Israel's existence, acceptance and trade...All Israel has to do is sign a peace and end the occupation to the 67 borders.

Still fantasising about the non existing '67 borders, they are the '67 ceasefire lines look at UN res 242

Indeed the '67 borders are the 1949 armistice lines that were specifically not to be borders. These lines ran along the West Bank and the Gaza Strip.

They also ran along the international borders between Palestine and Lebanon, Palestine and Syria, and Palestine and Egypt. None of those armistice lines were ever borders.

Nor has Palestine had international borders, if it did then they would take in part of the Sinai, all of Jordan and parts of Syria and Lebanon. Because that was the extent of the British mandate for Palestine at the beginning. It did not contain just the tiny part that is now under dispute. Just a paltry 20% of Palestine is what the argument is over a tiny little part that you think is the whole of Palestine and has had international borders since it was part of the Ottoman empire. The only international borders extant are those of Egypt, Jordan, Syria and Lebanon, Palestine was broken up and given away to mostly arab rulers during the British mandate. Don't see you complaining about those land grabs by Saudi princes and Iranian clerics

 

[Phoenall]

pbel, et al,

This is exactly the example I was eluding to.

Answer this one question...Why did the Palestinians have to give up their indigenous Homelands to establish a Jewish one? After all the Jews lived in peace prior to European Zionists propose a Jewish State?

I understand the reasoning of a safe haven like America, where minority rights are codified, but what did the Palestinians do to deserve their loss for European atrocities?

For me it is a true Moral dilemma, perhaps you can answer it?

(COMMENT)

• "(B)ut what did the Palestinians do to deserve their loss for European atrocities?"

The Palestinians did "nothing" to deserve this. And that is just it. There is no way to address your question in the higher order of logic that the Arab Palestinian will accept. They hear and understand, but cannot accept because it is not in their culture.

"All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing." (Edmund Burke)​

The Allied Powers never expected the Arab Palestinians to ever understand and appreciate the entire aspiration in the dilemma. It was all about "them" (the Arab) and what they get out of it. And no one can actually answer that question to the satisfaction of the Arab-Palestinian.

No matter which set of datum I use, form whatever source, the outcome is alway the same. In 1947, the population ratio was about 2:1 in favor of the Arab and the land ownership was overwhelmingly in favor of the Arab. The concern was beyond the understanding and compassion of the Arab-Palestinian. They wanted what they saw as theirs and they were going to kill for it. "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. The only way to establish partition is first to wipe them out — man, woman and child." (Tyranny of the Majority).

AGAIN, I cannot answer your question. Any answer I could give would be well beyond that which can be assimilated by the Arab-Palestinian as a part of the species that preserves itself.

Most Respectfully,
R

The Palestinians did "nothing" to deserve this.

Indeed, The Palestinians were at home minding their own business when foreigners came and ran them out of their homes at the point of a gun.

And you don't believe they have the right to self determination without external interference.

You don't believe they have the right to sovereignty.

You don't believe they have the right to territorial integrity.

You don't believe they have the right to defend themselves.

Sorry, Rocco, I can't support your position.

The arab muslims were tooling up ready for a fight and started to MASS MURDER Jews as far back as 1929.

They have the same rights as Israel, but the HoAP want to have more rights and more land and more MASS MURDERS.

They have the same rights as Israel, but the HoAP want more rights and more land and more JEWISH SLAVES

They have the same right as Israel, but the HoAP want more rights to MASS MURDER, RAPE and PILLAGE without getting shot at.

Those are the facts and can be seen in their many charters and proclamations issued by the HoAP in regards to Israel and MASS MURDER.

 

[RoccoR]

P F Tinmore, et al,

I hate to tell you this.

Several post war agreements set Palestine's international borders that finalized by the Treaty of Lausanne when all of the newly created states were release from Ottoman rule.

(COMMENT)

In none of the five parts to the Treaty of Lausanne is Palestine even mentioned once, let alone set its borders.

SOURCES:

#1 TREATY OF PEACE WITH TURKEY SIGNED AT LAUSANNE JULY 24, 1923

#2 TREATY OF PEACE WITH TURKEY SIGNED AT LAUSANNE JULY 24, 1923

#3 TREATY OF PEACE WITH TURKEY SIGNED AT LAUSANNE JULY 24, 1923​

Palestine was an undefined and unincorporated administrative region.

Most Respectfully,
R

 

[Phoenall]

pbel, et al,

Remembering of course, there was no "dispossession" of land, merely a change in sovereignty.

I appreciate that the moral dilemma baffles you...The answer is simple...No one in Any Human Culture would agree to their dispossession for no Just reason...

The only answer is acceptance, and unlike what you posted, the Arabs have agreed to Israel's existence, acceptance and trade...All Israel has to do is sign a peace and end the occupation to the 67 borders.

(COMMENT)

The issue of "dispossession" of land has not really been discussed (very much - for what it is), although it is often confused with the unintended outcome of the Arab manipulation of aggression and military engagement.

Most Respectfully,
R

Merely a change of sovereignty by an invading European backed power. Invaders creating a forced sovereignty by terrorism (Irgun) creating mass hysteria on civilians to make them flee...

Nice cup of English Tea...

And what about before the Irgun then when arab hostiles rioted and MASS MURDERED many Jews, and not a European in sight. When they ethnically cleansed Hebron of all of its Jews and stole the land and property owned by the Jews. The same arab hostiles that later started running Jews of their land and property in the lead up to the 1948 declaration of independence, assisted by foreign arab insurgents.

 

[Phoenall]

pbel, et al,

Just a minor "timeline" reminder.

Merely a change of sovereignty by an invading European backed power. Invaders creating a forced sovereignty by terrorism (Irgun) creating mass hysteria on civilians to make them flee...

Nice cup of English Tea...

(COMMENT)

The Palestinian Black Hand was founded in 1930 and led until his death in 1935 by Syrian-born Sheikh Izz ad-Din al-Qassam; hero and Martyr of HAMAS.

The Irgun was a Jewish paramilitary group that operated in Mandate Palestine between 1931 and 1948.

The Hostile Arab Palestinian started terrorist and paramilitary operations before the Jewish communities formed a response.
Most Respectfully,
R

If invaders had not come to create a State from their lands, there would not have been any terrorism...

Rocco, you sound as though the creation of Israel by Colonial Western Powers was a given and justified fiat.

And you sound as if the MASS MURDER and OPPRESION of the Jews by the arabs was a given and justifiable fiat

 

[Phoenall]

P F Tinmore, et al,

I believe that much of this is exaggerated, in favor of the Hostile Arab Palestinian.

Indeed, The Palestinians were at home minding their own business when foreigners came and ran them out of their homes at the point of a gun.

And you don't believe they have the right to self determination without external interference.

(COMMENT)

The infiltration of External Arab Forces into the Region by the Arab League, many months before the war, had a consequence.

The external interference was on the part of the Arab League. There were no external forces infiltrating into the region or rushing to support the Jewish defense of the Homeland after the 15 May Declaration of Independence.


(COMMENT)

The right to sovereignty and the right of self-determination are two different things; hence two different word description. There was a Recommendation on the table for a Jewish State and an Arab State. The Hostile Arab Palestinian (HoAP), rather than move forward and become involved in the Implementation Process, exercised their right of self-determination by rejecting the plan for a sovereign Arab State.


(COMMENT)

I did not say that. In fact I argue for it. Territory integrity came into play when the Jewish Agency declared independence in MAY '48, and the the phony Arab Higher Committee tried to declare independence over the same territory four months later in September '48.


(COMMENT)

The Hostile Arab Palestinians are not defending themselves. They are, by their own admission, conducting aggressive operations against Israel to overturn the establishment of the Jewish State which the UN authorized, help establish, and implemented under resolution. The HoAP segment of the Palestinians, don't recognize the UN Resolution of 1947, or anything derived from it. They don't recognize the State of Israel, or their legitimacy. The Jihadist and Fedayeen have sworn to participate and conduct hostile operations to liberate all of the former mandate. This is not self defense but political-military offensive operations by paramilitary and terrorist forces.

This is not self defense. The current occupation is a quarantine and containment effort to protect the people of the State of Israel from the demonstrated threat of genocide by the HoAP, through conventional warfare, criminal activity, terrorist operations and suicide attacks. The HoAP are currently allowing terrorist training to be conducted in the open, in camps that are inside the 1988 State of Palestine.

Sorry, Rocco, I can't support your position.

(COMMENT)

Like I said, there was no reasonable expectation that you would.

Most Respectfully,
R

Holy deflection, Batman!

How about making a serious attempt at addressing my post.

HE HAS EVERY TIME it is just that you refuse to accept the truth in regards to JEWISH/ISREALI rights

 

[Phoenall]

Merely a change of sovereignty by an invading European backed power. Invaders creating a forced sovereignty by terrorism (Irgun) creating mass hysteria on civilians to make them flee...

Nice cup of English Tea...

You need to read up some more on the event before Israel declared independence . Read up on the Arab revolt and the many attacks perpetrated by Arabs on Jews. I say this because you act as if The Arabs never commited massacres during this timeline

There were atrocities on both sides, by the invaders and defenders. Not surprising.

Would those invaders also include the many hundred of thousands arab insurgents that flocked to the area between 1919 and 1948

 

[Billo_Really]

Would those invaders also include the many hundred of thousands arab insurgents that flocked to the area between 1919 and 1948

According to immigration records at the time...





You are full of shit!

 

[Billo_Really]

Thankfully, that's not your decision to make.

Nor is it anyone elses but the Israelis and the muslims, and until the muslims wind their necks in they will lose

First off, this has nothing to do with muslims. This is a political and judicial issue, not a religious one. Second, eventually, if Israel doesn't decide, that "decision", will be made for them. And third, WTF does "wind their necks" mean?

It has everything to do with islam and the muslims when they are invoking their religion when they MASS MURDER. Who will make that decision and go against the fundamental right of the Israeli's to decide their own path. How would you feel if the UN decided to force the muslims into accepting something they don't want. Simply put it means stop being so aggressive and belligerent and getting in peoples faces.

That's not the issue. The issue is, "Who gave Israel the right to decide the Palestinian's path?"

Or turning it round who gave the HoAP muslims the right to decide the Jews path

But they are not trying to do that, so why do you keep pushing this strawman argument?



What has Israel done to allow the Pals to live peacefully?

Take the withdrawal from Gaza in August 2005, what did the HoaAP do to prove they could be peaceful after that.

Israel did not withdraw from Gaza! You actually expect people to be peaceful, when you are constantly shooting at them, while they fish and farm; while you deliberately murder their children; while you shoot out the lamps at the top of their light poles, after they made street improvements; while you violate their air space on a weekly basis; and after you cut out the dead, un-born baby, from the belly of a Palestinian mother you just killed and left the body in the street for all to see? You expect peace after all that? You're lucky I'm not there. If you did that to me, I would **** your country up!

Israel withdrew from gaza completely in August 2005, and even the HoAP agree that is the case. The HoAP increased the rate of attack without any provocation and taunted the Israeli's. All that you spout is just Islamic blood libels with no corroborative evidence available. But then you never let a lie get in the way of your NAZI JEW HATRED AND ANTI SEMITIC LIES do you

You cannot "completely withdraw", yet control over 80% of what goes into (and out of) the area. It's either one or the other. How old are you? You've got the logic of a 15 year old.

In August 2005 Israel completely withdrew from gaza and did not impose any restrictions or blockades until 2008, So were was the control of what went in or out other than that accorded to all nations under International law. How old are you and what grade did you stop your schooling, You sound like a 9 year old

They might of withdrawn physically from the area, but they never withdrew control over the area, nor did they stop conducting air raids and targeted assassinations?



Because that's what Israel wants.

Not Israel that is putting obstacles in the way is it, not Israel demanding pre conditions before even thinking about starting the peace talks. NOT ISREAL MAKING THE CLAIM THAT THEY WILL MASS MURDER ALL THE MUSLIMS .

You don't consider over 500 roadblocks and checkpoints in the West Bank, "obstacles"? You don't consider the illegal and immoral blockade of Gaza, an "obstacle"? You don't consider a 47 year occupation of land that isn't yours, an "obstacle"?

No as they are security measures to stop terrorist attacks on innocent Israeli civilians, but you don't see that do you all you see is JOOOOOOS. The blockade is there to stop gun running and has saved the lives if thousands of innocent people. The HoAP would rather spend $1 million on building a tunnel so they could murder one Israeli child than spend $1 on providing a meal for a starving child in gaza. No occupation at all if you look at the facts, the land was given back to its rightful owners and refused, Israel was told to do what they wanted as Egypt and Jordan no longer wanted the bother of HoAP terrorism.

You're FOS! The roadblocks are in the West Bank, not between the West Bank and Israel. The blockade is there to punish Gazan's because Israel didn't like who they voted for in a democratic election. Like it's any of Israel's ******* business who the Pals vote for. And the tunnels are built to bring in the goods necessary to support a population of that size. BTW, those are the goods Israel is preventing with their blockade.

Yes goods like grad rockets, Kalashnikovs, grenades, H.E, Nitrates and other weapons to be used to target Israel children. But then you NAZI JEW HATING SHIT don't believe that the JOOOOS should be allowed to defend themselves from attack do you. Is it any of your business who the UK vote for, and if they want to withdraw from the EU, because your tame neo Marxist chimp thinks it is.

Maybe they're weapons to be used to defend themselves from Israeli aggression. Did you ever think of that? As far as your UK comment, I don't see WTF that has to do with this conversation? No only do you make up shit, it's stupid shit to boot!



Well the pro terrorist on this board seem to think the boycott of Israeli goods is a threat that cant be ignored

You consider choosing not to buy your products (made from OPT sweat shops), "terrorism"? You consider people trying to symbolically enforce the law, "terrorists"?

Would you rather buy your goods from a Chinese neo Marxist sweat shop, or a Pakistani muslim sweat shop. Then complain when they don't last a month. For the record what Israeli goods are made in a sweat shop, now this should be entertaining as you scour the internet for muslim blood libels
Personally, I'd rather buy American.

Then stop attacking the Jews because you are a NAZI JEW HATER because they keep 30% of American defence workers in employment. And going on the quality of the US goods I have then you are easily pleased with trash quality. Who wants a car that wallows like a pregnant whale and handles like a piece of overcooked spaghetti

You tell me to "stop attacking the Jews", then you turn right around and attack Americans! What a ******* hypocrite, you are.

You can always tell when a pro terrorist is losing they resort to abusive profanity and outright lies.

Unfortunately, you haven't proven either, so don't change the subject!

Do I need to highlight all your LIES and PROFANITIES above, in the UK we say that this is a lack of education and is how low life's and crack whores talk.

The "LIES" you need to prove, the profanity is there for emphasis and has nothing to do with what I know, or don't know.