I will not Bow!

[Phoenall]

The Palestinians became a distinct nation of people upon the break up of the Ottoman Empire.

No. The people assumed a distinction that was given by Mandate and the Allied Powers.

The Palestinians were citizens of Palestine by law.

Yes, the law as created and written by the Allied Powers.

The Treaty of Peace between the allied powers and Turkey officially ending World War I was signed in Lausanne, Switzerland, on 24 July 1923.121 Setting out the legal status of the territories detached from Turkey, the Treaty had the effect of law in Palestine, as it was extended to this country by an ordinance,122 on 6 August 1924.

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

Drawing up the framework of nationality, Article 30 of the Treaty of Lausanne stated:

“Turkish subjects habitually resident in territory which in accordance with the provisions of the present Treaty is detached from Turkey will become ipso facto, in the conditions laid down by the local law, nationals of the State to which such territory is transferred.”​

Article 30 is of a great significance. It constituted a declaration of existing international law and the standard practice of states. This was despite the absence of a definite international law rule of state succession under which the nationals of predecessor state could ipso facto acquire the nationality of the successor.129 “As a rule, however, States have conferred their nationality on the former nationals of the predecessor State.”130 In practice, almost all peace treaties concluded between the Allies and other states at the end of World War I embodied nationality provisions similar to those of the Treaty of Lausanne. The inhabitants of Palestine, as the successors of this territory, henceforth acquired Palestinian nationality even if there was no treaty with Turkey.131

The automatic, ipso facto, change from Ottoman to Palestinian nationality was dealt with in Article 1, paragraph 1, of the Citizenship Order, which declared:

“Turkish subjects habitually resident in the territory of Palestine upon the 1st day of August, 1925, shall become Palestinian citizens.”​

Genesis of Citizenship in Palestine and Israel

Why have you skipped over this part of your link, don't you want the full truth to be seen ?

4
Although the nationality of Palestine’s inhabitants remained in transition before 1925, this eight-year period between 1917 and 1925 determined the future of the country’s native inhabitants and migrants. While the 1922 Palestine Mandate and the Treaty of Lausanne recognized a distinct nationality for Palestine, nationality of this country lacked clear domestic regulation. This paper wishes to explore this ambiguous or ‘anomalous’ situation,4 to borrow a term from Lassa Oppenheim.

Or this which shows that there was no Nationality Law for Palestine

Trans-Jordan eventually enacted its Nationality Law on 1 May 1928.16 Article1 of this Law conferred Trans-Jordanian nationality on all Ottoman subjects (citizens) residing in the territory of Trans-Jordan retroactively as of 6 August 1924 – the date on which the Treaty of Lausanne came into force. Trans-Jordanian nationality formed a distinct nationality from that of Palestine, not only in law but also in practice, throughout the mandate.17 Trans-Jordanians, for example, were required to obtain official permission to be admitted into Palestine, albeit with certain favorable facilities compared with other foreigners (such as exemption from possessing passports to enter, and work in, Palestine

Then this that says the Palestinians were still ottoman nationals


In addition to being Ottoman citizens on the basis of the international law of state succession, Palestine’s inhabitants continued at the same time to be Ottomans in accordance with the 1869 Ottoman Nationality Law. The ongoing validity of the 1869 Law was part of the general application of Ottoman laws in Palestine. Thus, apart from military laws executed by military courts, “all civil matters according to the Ottoman law” were dealt by civil courts. Article 1 of the Palestinian Citizenship Order of 1925 considered the habitual residents in Palestine Ottoman citizens .


Although the inhabitants of Palestine remained Ottoman citizens according to international law, in practice they started to be gradually regarded as Palestinians.

 

[RoccoR]

P F Tinmore, et al,

I think our friend "Phoenall," using a slight different line of approach, nails the intent and practical effect of the law and treaty.

Although the inhabitants of Palestine remained Ottoman citizens according to international law, in practice they started to be gradually regarded as Palestinians.

(COMMENT)

The Treaty of Lausanne did not have so far reaching an impact as you are attempting to assume it had. The operative guidance on the issue, for the "Palestinians," was the Palestinian Citizenship Order in Council of 1925 and NOT the Treaty of Lausanne.

3.Q. What measures have been taken to bring the country under such political, administrative and economic conditions as will safeguard the civil and religious rights of all the inhabitants of Palestine, irrespective of race and religion? What are the effects of these measures?

A. The Palestinian Citizenship Order in Council which was made in August, 1925, provides for the acquisition of Palestinian citizenship by persons habitually resident in the country who were Ottoman subjects, and persons who were foreign subjects and take up permanent residence.​

SOURCE: Annual Report by Mandatory 31 December 1925

This was discussed in Posting #72 in the Thread named "UN chief admits bias against Israel."

Most Respectfully,
R

 

[P F Tinmore]

P F Tinmore, et al,

I think our friend "Phoenall," using a slight different line of approach, nails the intent and practical effect of the law and treaty.

Although the inhabitants of Palestine remained Ottoman citizens according to international law, in practice they started to be gradually regarded as Palestinians.

(COMMENT)

The Treaty of Lausanne did not have so far reaching an impact as you are attempting to assume it had. The operative guidance on the issue, for the "Palestinians," was the Palestinian Citizenship Order in Council of 1925 and NOT the Treaty of Lausanne.

3.Q. What measures have been taken to bring the country under such political, administrative and economic conditions as will safeguard the civil and religious rights of all the inhabitants of Palestine, irrespective of race and religion? What are the effects of these measures?

A. The Palestinian Citizenship Order in Council which was made in August, 1925, provides for the acquisition of Palestinian citizenship by persons habitually resident in the country who were Ottoman subjects, and persons who were foreign subjects and take up permanent residence.​

SOURCE: Annual Report by Mandatory 31 December 1925

This was discussed in Posting #72 in the Thread named "UN chief admits bias against Israel."

Most Respectfully,
R

OK, but how does any of that changer or refute the facts that I posted?

 

[RoccoR]

P F Tinmore, et al,

The broad bush strokes of you citations are, essentially drawing an improper and invalid set of inferences which you attempt to use as evidence of something that did not happen.

OK, but how does any of that changer or refute the facts that I posted?

(COMMENT)

You attempt to imply that "Palestine" was set free by the Treaty of Lausanne, and that a new nation was established with a nationality and citizenship known as "Palestinians." Nothing can be further from the truth.

The Treaty of Lausanne can well after the fact and merely codified some principles that were already well establish and in effect at the time.

"Palestine" does not mean the "State of" or the "Nation of" anything. When you read that word, you might as well mentally line it out and replace it with the phrase "The Territory under the Mandate of Palestine."

When you read the phrase "Palestinian Citizenship," you might as well mentally line that out and replace it with the phrase "Citizens of the Territory under the Mandate of Palestine."

The Treaty of Lausanne did not confer any special status on the Palestinian (the inhabitance and indigenous population to the Territory under the Mandate of Palestine.") In the case of citizenship and nationality, it merely set for the record that which was already in place by the Orders in Council of 1922 and 1925, as implemented by the Mandate. The Treaty set no borders relative to the Mandate and made no special state. It did not do anything you suggest in terms of national sovereignty. In terms of the Mandate, it had no appreciable effect or impact to what was already enacted. The Treaty wasn't even mentioned in the 1925 year-end report by the Mandatory. It was not the Genesis of Citizenship in Palestine and Israel.

Most Respectfully,
R

 

[Kondor3]

Really weak mojo on the part of the Palestinians and their sympathizers... trying to define a 'Magic Moment' when somebody authoritatively sprinkled Magic Sovereignty Fairy Dust over them to create a nation. Bahhhh... humbug. Then again, it's all they have. Must be tough, tryin' to sit at the Big Boys poker table with a pair of deuces.

 

[P F Tinmore]

P F Tinmore, et al,

The broad bush strokes of you citations are, essentially drawing an improper and invalid set of inferences which you attempt to use as evidence of something that did not happen.

OK, but how does any of that changer or refute the facts that I posted?

(COMMENT)

You attempt to imply that "Palestine" was set free by the Treaty of Lausanne, and that a new nation was established with a nationality and citizenship known as "Palestinians." Nothing can be further from the truth.

The Treaty of Lausanne can well after the fact and merely codified some principles that were already well establish and in effect at the time.

"Palestine" does not mean the "State of" or the "Nation of" anything. When you read that word, you might as well mentally line it out and replace it with the phrase "The Territory under the Mandate of Palestine."

When you read the phrase "Palestinian Citizenship," you might as well mentally line that out and replace it with the phrase "Citizens of the Territory under the Mandate of Palestine."

The Treaty of Lausanne did not confer any special status on the Palestinian (the inhabitance and indigenous population to the Territory under the Mandate of Palestine.") In the case of citizenship and nationality, it merely set for the record that which was already in place by the Orders in Council of 1922 and 1925, as implemented by the Mandate. The Treaty set no borders relative to the Mandate and made no special state. It did not do anything you suggest in terms of national sovereignty. In terms of the Mandate, it had no appreciable effect or impact to what was already enacted. The Treaty wasn't even mentioned in the 1925 year-end report by the Mandatory. It was not the Genesis of Citizenship in Palestine and Israel.

Most Respectfully,
R

The mandate was not an entity or place. It was an administration that was temporarily assigned to Palestine.

It had no land, no borders, and no citizens.

All of that was Palestinian.

 

[Phoenall]

P F Tinmore, et al,

I think our friend "Phoenall," using a slight different line of approach, nails the intent and practical effect of the law and treaty.

Although the inhabitants of Palestine remained Ottoman citizens according to international law, in practice they started to be gradually regarded as Palestinians.

(COMMENT)

The Treaty of Lausanne did not have so far reaching an impact as you are attempting to assume it had. The operative guidance on the issue, for the "Palestinians," was the Palestinian Citizenship Order in Council of 1925 and NOT the Treaty of Lausanne.

3.Q. What measures have been taken to bring the country under such political, administrative and economic conditions as will safeguard the civil and religious rights of all the inhabitants of Palestine, irrespective of race and religion? What are the effects of these measures?

A. The Palestinian Citizenship Order in Council which was made in August, 1925, provides for the acquisition of Palestinian citizenship by persons habitually resident in the country who were Ottoman subjects, and persons who were foreign subjects and take up permanent residence.​

SOURCE: Annual Report by Mandatory 31 December 1925

This was discussed in Posting #72 in the Thread named "UN chief admits bias against Israel."

Most Respectfully,
R

OK, but how does any of that changer or refute the facts that I posted?

Because it shows that your Islamic source for the Palestinian nationality is flawed in the extreme, and your refusal to add all the pertinent facts shows that you are aware of this. So why run with a flawed imperfect truncated fantasy when you know that it will be destroyed by truth and reality.
Your facts are not facts just one persons POV on the situation, who happens to be very biased due to his Islamic heritage. The facts are what is actually written down by those who agreed the various treaties and rules regarding the land and people. It also seems that you forget that France was also a mandated power of Palestine, and partitioned their portion into arab states that declared independence and enacted nationality laws.

So why didn't your friends the Palestinians not enact Nationality laws ?

 

[P F Tinmore]

P F Tinmore, et al,

I think our friend "Phoenall," using a slight different line of approach, nails the intent and practical effect of the law and treaty.


(COMMENT)

The Treaty of Lausanne did not have so far reaching an impact as you are attempting to assume it had. The operative guidance on the issue, for the "Palestinians," was the Palestinian Citizenship Order in Council of 1925 and NOT the Treaty of Lausanne.



This was discussed in Posting #72 in the Thread named "UN chief admits bias against Israel."

Most Respectfully,
R

OK, but how does any of that changer or refute the facts that I posted?

Because it shows that your Islamic source for the Palestinian nationality is flawed in the extreme, and your refusal to add all the pertinent facts shows that you are aware of this. So why run with a flawed imperfect truncated fantasy when you know that it will be destroyed by truth and reality.
Your facts are not facts just one persons POV on the situation, who happens to be very biased due to his Islamic heritage. The facts are what is actually written down by those who agreed the various treaties and rules regarding the land and people. It also seems that you forget that France was also a mandated power of Palestine, and partitioned their portion into arab states that declared independence and enacted nationality laws.

So why didn't your friends the Palestinians not enact Nationality laws ?

Illegal foreign military occupation.

 

[Kondor3]

Chasing sugar-plum visions of a Unified People Who Never Were, and a Sovereign Nation That Never Was...

Somebody call Ghostbusters...

'Cause that's what you're chasin'... ghosts...

 

[Phoenall]

P F Tinmore, et al,

The broad bush strokes of you citations are, essentially drawing an improper and invalid set of inferences which you attempt to use as evidence of something that did not happen.

OK, but how does any of that changer or refute the facts that I posted?

(COMMENT)

You attempt to imply that "Palestine" was set free by the Treaty of Lausanne, and that a new nation was established with a nationality and citizenship known as "Palestinians." Nothing can be further from the truth.

The Treaty of Lausanne can well after the fact and merely codified some principles that were already well establish and in effect at the time.

"Palestine" does not mean the "State of" or the "Nation of" anything. When you read that word, you might as well mentally line it out and replace it with the phrase "The Territory under the Mandate of Palestine."

When you read the phrase "Palestinian Citizenship," you might as well mentally line that out and replace it with the phrase "Citizens of the Territory under the Mandate of Palestine."

The Treaty of Lausanne did not confer any special status on the Palestinian (the inhabitance and indigenous population to the Territory under the Mandate of Palestine.") In the case of citizenship and nationality, it merely set for the record that which was already in place by the Orders in Council of 1922 and 1925, as implemented by the Mandate. The Treaty set no borders relative to the Mandate and made no special state. It did not do anything you suggest in terms of national sovereignty. In terms of the Mandate, it had no appreciable effect or impact to what was already enacted. The Treaty wasn't even mentioned in the 1925 year-end report by the Mandatory. It was not the Genesis of Citizenship in Palestine and Israel.

Most Respectfully,
R

The mandate was not an entity or place. It was an administration that was temporarily assigned to Palestine.

It had no land, no borders, and no citizens.

All of that was Palestinian.

No it was just part of the original Palestine that existed under ottoman rule, that was partitioned by the mandated powers into separate arab states and one Jewish one. Before the partition of Palestine into Syria, Iraq and trans Jordan it had no land, no borders, no citizens and no identity. After the mandate the remainder still had no land, no borders, no citizens and no identity according to International law.
AND THAT IS THE DECIDING FACTOR, NOT SOME BIASED MUSLIM REWRITTING THE FACTS

 

[P F Tinmore]

Chasing sugar-plum visions of a Unified People Who Never Were, and a Sovereign Nation That Never Was...

Somebody call Ghostbusters...

'Cause that's what you're chasin'... ghosts...

So says Israeli propaganda bullshit.

Got links?

 

[P F Tinmore]

P F Tinmore, et al,

The broad bush strokes of you citations are, essentially drawing an improper and invalid set of inferences which you attempt to use as evidence of something that did not happen.


(COMMENT)

You attempt to imply that "Palestine" was set free by the Treaty of Lausanne, and that a new nation was established with a nationality and citizenship known as "Palestinians." Nothing can be further from the truth.

The Treaty of Lausanne can well after the fact and merely codified some principles that were already well establish and in effect at the time.

"Palestine" does not mean the "State of" or the "Nation of" anything. When you read that word, you might as well mentally line it out and replace it with the phrase "The Territory under the Mandate of Palestine."

When you read the phrase "Palestinian Citizenship," you might as well mentally line that out and replace it with the phrase "Citizens of the Territory under the Mandate of Palestine."

The Treaty of Lausanne did not confer any special status on the Palestinian (the inhabitance and indigenous population to the Territory under the Mandate of Palestine.") In the case of citizenship and nationality, it merely set for the record that which was already in place by the Orders in Council of 1922 and 1925, as implemented by the Mandate. The Treaty set no borders relative to the Mandate and made no special state. It did not do anything you suggest in terms of national sovereignty. In terms of the Mandate, it had no appreciable effect or impact to what was already enacted. The Treaty wasn't even mentioned in the 1925 year-end report by the Mandatory. It was not the Genesis of Citizenship in Palestine and Israel.

Most Respectfully,
R

The mandate was not an entity or place. It was an administration that was temporarily assigned to Palestine.

It had no land, no borders, and no citizens.

All of that was Palestinian.

No it was just part of the original Palestine that existed under ottoman rule, that was partitioned by the mandated powers into separate arab states and one Jewish one. Before the partition of Palestine into Syria, Iraq and trans Jordan it had no land, no borders, no citizens and no identity. After the mandate the remainder still had no land, no borders, no citizens and no identity according to International law.
AND THAT IS THE DECIDING FACTOR, NOT SOME BIASED MUSLIM REWRITTING THE FACTS

Got a link mentioning "Jewish State?"

 

[Phoenall]

OK, but how does any of that changer or refute the facts that I posted?

Because it shows that your Islamic source for the Palestinian nationality is flawed in the extreme, and your refusal to add all the pertinent facts shows that you are aware of this. So why run with a flawed imperfect truncated fantasy when you know that it will be destroyed by truth and reality.
Your facts are not facts just one persons POV on the situation, who happens to be very biased due to his Islamic heritage. The facts are what is actually written down by those who agreed the various treaties and rules regarding the land and people. It also seems that you forget that France was also a mandated power of Palestine, and partitioned their portion into arab states that declared independence and enacted nationality laws.

So why didn't your friends the Palestinians not enact Nationality laws ?

Illegal foreign military occupation.

They invited them in, and then tried to claim all the land as arab, so why didn't they also enact a Nationality Law at the same time. Israel managed to do it while over run by an ILLEGAL FORIEGN MILITARY OCCUPATION and fighting for their very existence.

A copout answer because you know deep down that you are losing the battle

 

[Phoenall]

Chasing sugar-plum visions of a Unified People Who Never Were, and a Sovereign Nation That Never Was...

Somebody call Ghostbusters...

'Cause that's what you're chasin'... ghosts...

So says Israeli propaganda bullshit.

Got links?

Yes the same ones that you used and hacked about to get them to support your POV, only this time in their entirety

 

[Phoenall]

The mandate was not an entity or place. It was an administration that was temporarily assigned to Palestine.

It had no land, no borders, and no citizens.

All of that was Palestinian.

No it was just part of the original Palestine that existed under ottoman rule, that was partitioned by the mandated powers into separate arab states and one Jewish one. Before the partition of Palestine into Syria, Iraq and trans Jordan it had no land, no borders, no citizens and no identity. After the mandate the remainder still had no land, no borders, no citizens and no identity according to International law.
AND THAT IS THE DECIDING FACTOR, NOT SOME BIASED MUSLIM REWRITTING THE FACTS

Got a link mentioning "Jewish State?"

Got loads starting with the Macmahon letters and ending with the UN acceptance of a Jewish state in 1948, a state that had enacted Nationality Laws by the way while under HOSTILE FORIEGN MILITARY INVASION

 

[Kondor3]

Chasing sugar-plum visions of a Unified People Who Never Were, and a Sovereign Nation That Never Was...

Somebody call Ghostbusters...

'Cause that's what you're chasin'... ghosts...

So says Israeli propaganda bullshit.

Got links?

I am not Israeli.

I am not spewing propaganda.

My post was not bullshit.

I served-up valid personal opinion.

Substantiated by the fact that no Palestinian Nation was recognized formally by the outside world as of the moment of the termination of the British Mandate.

Unlike Israel, whose recognition by major powers began on that very day; culminating in their formal recognition by the United Nations in 1949.

As to links... links to what?... personal opinion? You can already see that expression.

And, if by some chance, you can demonstrate that Palestine was recognized diplomatically and on a broad international basis as of the moment of the termination of the British Mandate, DO feel free to serve that up here...

Like I said... you're sittin' at the Big Boys poker table, holding a pair of deuces... and nobody's buyin' the bluff... you've been called... must be a *****.

 

[P F Tinmore]

Because it shows that your Islamic source for the Palestinian nationality is flawed in the extreme, and your refusal to add all the pertinent facts shows that you are aware of this. So why run with a flawed imperfect truncated fantasy when you know that it will be destroyed by truth and reality.
Your facts are not facts just one persons POV on the situation, who happens to be very biased due to his Islamic heritage. The facts are what is actually written down by those who agreed the various treaties and rules regarding the land and people. It also seems that you forget that France was also a mandated power of Palestine, and partitioned their portion into arab states that declared independence and enacted nationality laws.

So why didn't your friends the Palestinians not enact Nationality laws ?

Illegal foreign military occupation.

They invited them in, and then tried to claim all the land as arab, so why didn't they also enact a Nationality Law at the same time. Israel managed to do it while over run by an ILLEGAL FORIEGN MILITARY OCCUPATION and fighting for their very existence.

A copout answer because you know deep down that you are losing the battle

Not really.

The Palestinians hold the legal and moral high ground. The world is starting to see that.

 

[P F Tinmore]

Chasing sugar-plum visions of a Unified People Who Never Were, and a Sovereign Nation That Never Was...

Somebody call Ghostbusters...

'Cause that's what you're chasin'... ghosts...

So says Israeli propaganda bullshit.

Got links?

I am not Israeli.

I am not spewing propaganda.

My post was not bullshit.

I served-up valid personal opinion.

Substantiated by the fact that no Palestinian Nation was recognized formally by the outside world as of the moment of the termination of the British Mandate.

Unlike Israel, whose recognition by major powers began on that very day; culminating in their formal recognition by the United Nations in 1949.

As to links... links to what?... personal opinion? You can already see that expression.

And, if by some chance, you can demonstrate that Palestine was recognized diplomatically and on a broad international basis as of the moment of the termination of the British Mandate, DO feel free to serve that up here...

Like I said... you're sittin' at the Big Boys poker table, holding a pair of deuces... and nobody's buyin' the bluff... you've been called... must be a *****.

I served-up valid personal opinion.

That is a relief. I thought you were passing that crap off as fact.

 

[P F Tinmore]

P F Tinmore, et al,

I think our friend "Phoenall," using a slight different line of approach, nails the intent and practical effect of the law and treaty.


(COMMENT)

The Treaty of Lausanne did not have so far reaching an impact as you are attempting to assume it had. The operative guidance on the issue, for the "Palestinians," was the Palestinian Citizenship Order in Council of 1925 and NOT the Treaty of Lausanne.



This was discussed in Posting #72 in the Thread named "UN chief admits bias against Israel."

Most Respectfully,
R

OK, but how does any of that change or refute the facts that I posted?

Because it shows that your Islamic source for the Palestinian nationality is flawed in the extreme, and your refusal to add all the pertinent facts shows that you are aware of this. So why run with a flawed imperfect truncated fantasy when you know that it will be destroyed by truth and reality.
Your facts are not facts just one persons POV on the situation, who happens to be very biased due to his Islamic heritage. The facts are what is actually written down by those who agreed the various treaties and rules regarding the land and people. It also seems that you forget that France was also a mandated power of Palestine, and partitioned their portion into arab states that declared independence and enacted nationality laws.

So why didn't your friends the Palestinians not enact Nationality laws ?

OK, but how does any of that change or refute the facts that I posted?

 

[Kondor3]

So says Israeli propaganda bullshit.

Got links?

I am not Israeli.

I am not spewing propaganda.

My post was not bullshit.

I served-up valid personal opinion.

Substantiated by the fact that no Palestinian Nation was recognized formally by the outside world as of the moment of the termination of the British Mandate.

Unlike Israel, whose recognition by major powers began on that very day; culminating in their formal recognition by the United Nations in 1949.

As to links... links to what?... personal opinion? You can already see that expression.

And, if by some chance, you can demonstrate that Palestine was recognized diplomatically and on a broad international basis as of the moment of the termination of the British Mandate, DO feel free to serve that up here...

Like I said... you're sittin' at the Big Boys poker table, holding a pair of deuces... and nobody's buyin' the bluff... you've been called... must be a *****.

I served-up valid personal opinion.

That is a relief. I thought you were passing that crap off as fact.

You are the one trying to retroactively conjure up a pretended nationality out of thin air and I'm the one posting crap? Her a funny guy, Tinny. Especially fer a guy only holding a pair of deuces at the Big Boy table.

Sent from my HP 7 using USMessageBoard.com mobile app