I will not Bow!

[Phoenall]

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!

Now lets see the figures from 1850 to 1920 and them from 1930 to 1948.

Or are you the one who is full of shit..................

 

[Phoenall]

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?


Bullshit they want to wipe out every Jew in the M.E and destroy Israel. It is entrenched in every single charter the HoAP have


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?

They withdrew completely and gave up all control other than that accorded to all Nations under International law. The did not send any planes over gaza, they did not fire any weapons into gaza and they did not assassinate anyone in gaza. So why did the HoAP increase the rate of fire and severity of attacks on Israeli civilians, mostly children ?


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!

What Israeli aggression as it is the HoAP that are the aggressors, the Israelis just respond to the constant rocket attacks. Take the ceasefire that hamas broke when they allowed rockets to be fired into Israel in the vicinity of the Funeral. Was Israel supposed to just sit back and do nothing to safeguard the foreign dignitaries attending the Funeral. It's you that is full of shit, islamonazi shit at that
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.

Get it right I attack idiotic Americans like you who don't know what time it is. Who elect a neo Marxist to lead their country and fawn all over him when he bows to a muslim.

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.

The LIES are self evident as you LIE for the muslims all the time, the profanities are there because you don't have the intelligence to come up with a reasoned argument. So all in all a complete idiot that has been brainwashed by a neo Marxist

 

[P F Tinmore]

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

It did not need to be mentioned. That is an irrelevant statement.

It was undefined for a time but that changed. That is an irrelevant statement.

Your response did not address my post.

 

[Phoenall]

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

It did not need to be mentioned. That is an irrelevant statement.

It was undefined for a time but that changed. That is an irrelevant statement.

Your response did not address my post.

So if it isn't mentioned then why do you use it as evidence of the International borders of Palestine.

They are still undefined as the present government refuses to accept the borders negotiated by Israel with Egypt and Jordan.

It did , but because it blows your argument apart you don't want to recognise it.

 

[P F Tinmore]

P F Tinmore, et al,

I hate to tell you this.


(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

It did not need to be mentioned. That is an irrelevant statement.

It was undefined for a time but that changed. That is an irrelevant statement.

Your response did not address my post.

So if it isn't mentioned then why do you use it as evidence of the International borders of Palestine.

They are still undefined as the present government refuses to accept the borders negotiated by Israel with Egypt and Jordan.

It did , but because it blows your argument apart you don't want to recognise it.

The borders, nationality, and citizenship of Palestine were all set up while it was still under the Ottoman Empire. It was all de facto until the legal end of the Empire at the signing of the Treaty of Lausanne then they became de jure.

 

[RoccoR]

Phoenall, et al,

No, not at all.

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

(COMMENT)

BUT, early on in the Administration of the Mandate, it became obvious that the two cultures were not compatible; an unexpected discovery not envisioned by the Allied Powers. The Mandatory termed it, later on, as an "unreconcilable difference."

At the turn into the 20th Century, there were very few senior officials and diplomats that understood the Arab, the connection to Islam, and the cultural elements that resisted social diversity within the region. Had that been widely understood, it might have made a difference in the approach.

Most Respectfully,
R

 

[RoccoR]

P F Tinmore, et al,

This is another one of those things that I don't see any evidence.

The borders, nationality, and citizenship of Palestine were all set up while it was still under the Ottoman Empire. It was all de facto until the legal end of the Empire at the signing of the Treaty of Lausanne then they became de jure.

(COMMENT)

How do you derive this. Clearly, in 1920, Palestine was undefined in the Treaty of Sevres. There was no precursor government established by the Ottoman or Turkish governments. There was no mention of Palestine in the Treaty of Lausanne, or the autonomy of self-governance of any of the Mandate Territories in the Middle East.

If anyone is grasping at straws, it is not me.

Most Respectfully,
R

 

[P F Tinmore]

Phoenall, et al,

No, not at all.

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

(COMMENT)

BUT, early on in the Administration of the Mandate, it became obvious that the two cultures were not compatible; an unexpected discovery not envisioned by the Allied Powers. The Mandatory termed it, later on, as an "unreconcilable difference."

At the turn into the 20th Century, there were very few senior officials and diplomats that understood the Arab, the connection to Islam, and the cultural elements that resisted social diversity within the region. Had that been widely understood, it might have made a difference in the approach.

Most Respectfully,
R

They did not see that their stupid plan was going to be a hundred year long disaster?

What planet were they on?

 

[toastman]

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

You have explained this to Tinmore, and backed up your statements with links. Yet he still asks the same crap over and over. Why do you bother, he is just playing with your head

 

[toastman]

P F Tinmore, et al,

So, where is Israel's land?

Most Respectfully,
R

Where are the documents showing Israel acquiring any land?

How many times does it have to be explained to you that acquiring land has nothing to do with this. He explained it VERY CLEARLY that the Mandate allowed Israel to declare independence in the territory allotted to her in the partition plan.
You know he's right, but you're just playing games right now.

Where did YOU read that Israel had to acquire land for it to declare independence ??? Link???

 

[P F Tinmore]

P F Tinmore, et al,

This is another one of those things that I don't see any evidence.

The borders, nationality, and citizenship of Palestine were all set up while it was still under the Ottoman Empire. It was all de facto until the legal end of the Empire at the signing of the Treaty of Lausanne then they became de jure.

(COMMENT)

How do you derive this. Clearly, in 1920, Palestine was undefined in the Treaty of Sevres. There was no precursor government established by the Ottoman or Turkish governments. There was no mention of Palestine in the Treaty of Lausanne, or the autonomy of self-governance of any of the Mandate Territories in the Middle East.

If anyone is grasping at straws, it is not me.

Most Respectfully,
R

Of course you don't see any evidence. You won't find it in Israeli propaganda.

The status of Palestine and the nationality of its inhabitants were finally settled by the Treaty of Lausanne from the perspective of public international law. In a report submitted to the League of Nations, the British government pointed out: “The ratification of the Treaty of Lausanne in Aug., 1924, finally regularised the international status of Palestine.”123 And, thereafter, “Palestine could, at last, obtain a separate nationality.”124

Genesis of Citizenship in Palestine and Israel

 

[toastman]

Tinmore, your lies and fabrication of history might pass with some people, but Rocco knows his stuff.

Why can't you admit you're wrong?? Your constant denial and inability to accept FACTS is immature and childish.

 

[P F Tinmore]

P F Tinmore, et al,

Most Respectfully,
R

Where are the documents showing Israel acquiring any land?

How many times does it have to be explained to you that acquiring land has nothing to do with this. He explained it VERY CLEARLY that the Mandate allowed Israel to declare independence in the territory allotted to her in the partition plan.
You know he's right, but you're just playing games right now.

Where did YOU read that Israel had to acquire land for it to declare independence ??? Link???

The partition plan flopped. It didn't happen.

 

[toastman]

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

It did not need to be mentioned. That is an irrelevant statement.

It was undefined for a time but that changed. That is an irrelevant statement.

Your response did not address my post.

This was your post:

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.

This was Roccos response:

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.

And you say he DIDN'T address your post??
Who are you trying to fool ?

 

[P F Tinmore]

P F Tinmore, et al,

Most Respectfully,
R

Where are the documents showing Israel acquiring any land?

How many times does it have to be explained to you that acquiring land has nothing to do with this. He explained it VERY CLEARLY that the Mandate allowed Israel to declare independence in the territory allotted to her in the partition plan.
You know he's right, but you're just playing games right now.

Where did YOU read that Israel had to acquire land for it to declare independence ??? Link???

ARTICLE 1

The state as a person of international law should possess the following qualifications: a ) a permanent population; b ) a defined territory; c ) government; and d) capacity to enter into relations with the other states.

The Avalon Project : Convention on Rights and Duties of States (inter-American); December 26, 1933

 

[toastman]

Where are the documents showing Israel acquiring any land?

How many times does it have to be explained to you that acquiring land has nothing to do with this. He explained it VERY CLEARLY that the Mandate allowed Israel to declare independence in the territory allotted to her in the partition plan.
You know he's right, but you're just playing games right now.

Where did YOU read that Israel had to acquire land for it to declare independence ??? Link???

ARTICLE 1

The state as a person of international law should possess the following qualifications: a ) a permanent population; b ) a defined territory; c ) government; and d) capacity to enter into relations with the other states.

The Avalon Project : Convention on Rights and Duties of States (inter-American); December 26, 1933

And once again, you post something that has NOTHING TO DO with my question.

Try again

 

[P F Tinmore]

How many times does it have to be explained to you that acquiring land has nothing to do with this. He explained it VERY CLEARLY that the Mandate allowed Israel to declare independence in the territory allotted to her in the partition plan.
You know he's right, but you're just playing games right now.

Where did YOU read that Israel had to acquire land for it to declare independence ??? Link???

ARTICLE 1

The state as a person of international law should possess the following qualifications: a ) a permanent population; b ) a defined territory; c ) government; and d) capacity to enter into relations with the other states.

The Avalon Project : Convention on Rights and Duties of States (inter-American); December 26, 1933

And once again, you post something that has NOTHING TO DO with my question.

Try again

Where is Israel's defined territory?

 

[RoccoR]

P F Tinmore, et al,

Again, this is an understanding over time.

Phoenall,

No, not at all.

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

(COMMENT)

BUT, early on in the Administration of the Mandate, it became obvious that the two cultures were not compatible; an unexpected discovery not envisioned by the Allied Powers. The Mandatory termed it, later on, as an "unreconcilable difference."

At the turn into the 20th Century, there were very few senior officials and diplomats that understood the Arab, the connection to Islam, and the cultural elements that resisted social diversity within the region. Had that been widely understood, it might have made a difference in the approach.

Most Respectfully,
R

They did not see that their stupid plan was going to be a hundred year long disaster?

What planet were they on?

(COMMENT)

The Partition Plan was not even a consideration in the 1920's when the Mandate came into effect. It was just the Balfour Declaration aims that were on the table.

There was a general consensus that, given time, the two cultures, each with nationalistic aspirations, would be civilized enough to overcome their differences. The development of the Palestinian Black Hand (an Arab Killing Machine with Islamic fundamentalism behind it) partly countered by the Haganah [local defense watch at Kibbutz level govern by policy of havlagah (restraint)] and later shed the splinter groups of Irgun and Lehi (each more offensive oriented than it predecessor), flared-up at a staggering rate.

However, it was the post-War (II) Palestine that really demonstrated the the extent to which the level of violence was to expand. And after what the Jewish Community had just gone through in Europe, when Isa Nakhleh (Arab Higher Committee) threatened a second Holocaust in 1948 ("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.") the defenses of the Jewish People exploded in a flash of lightening. There was no coming back; the Jewish saw this as a decisive moment in the survival of their culture; live or die at the hands of the Arab.

Each side believed they had a perfect justification for the conflict. In another Century, maybe we'll know.

Today, the Arab Palestinian claims they are the victim of Apartheid, Genocide, Occupation and State terrorism. But remember the threat the sequence of events.

• WWII and Holocaust ends 1945: 6 Million Jews perish.
• Palestine 1948: Then the AHC makes the Solemn oath: "first to wipe them out — man, woman and child."

If for no other cause, --- what would you expect the outcome to be?

Did the Hostile Arab Palestinian exercise sound judgment and implement actions toward a peaceful solution?

Most Respectfully,
R

 

[toastman]

ARTICLE 1

The state as a person of international law should possess the following qualifications: a ) a permanent population; b ) a defined territory; c ) government; and d) capacity to enter into relations with the other states.

The Avalon Project : Convention on Rights and Duties of States (inter-American); December 26, 1933

And once again, you post something that has NOTHING TO DO with my question.

Try again

Where is Israel's defined territory?

Rocco answered that question with the map he posted. Notice the INTERNATIONAL BOUNDARIES
How can a country sign a treaty that gives it international borders with another country, and NOT have defined territory

BTW, d) is very interesting:
capacity to enter into relations with the other states.
Kind of like 'Palestine'. Thanks for proving my point that Palestine was not a country in 1948

 

[RoccoR]

P F Tinmore, et al,

How can this be true?

Of course you don't see any evidence. You won't find it in Israeli propaganda.

The status of Palestine and the nationality of its inhabitants were finally settled by the Treaty of Lausanne from the perspective of public international law. In a report submitted to the League of Nations, the British government pointed out: “The ratification of the Treaty of Lausanne in Aug., 1924, finally regularised the international status of Palestine.”123 And, thereafter, “Palestine could, at last, obtain a separate nationality.”124

Genesis of Citizenship in Palestine and Israel

(COMMENT)

Well, you'll just have to show me in the Treaty where Palestine is "regularized;" and what that means.

Like I said, Palestine is not even mentioned in the Treaty.

Most Respectfully,
R