Indigenous Palestinians Were JEWS

[P F Tinmore]

theliq, et al,

The reliance on the concept of "indigenous" (rights or population) is a slippery slope.

MJB12741,

The definition of "Indigenous People(s)" is tricky to say the least. The definition is often self serving.

Objectively, there are two very key issues that must be addressed before a determination can be made on the assignment of the "Indigenous People" label.

• How far back in time are you accepting evidence of a culture with historical ties to the territory?
• How long does it take for a culture to be in place before it can be considered "Indigenous?"
​

Who’s Indigenous?

(COMMENT)

There is NO Universally accepted definition for "Indigenous People." Why? (Rhetorical) Simply because it raises difficult questions that cannot be settled accurately by law.

The Ohio Scenario

If the Canadians mount a successful amphibious assault from Ontario and captures the State of Ohio, who are considered the "indigenous population?"
OR, is it still the Iroquois, Miami, and Shawnee Tribes that inhabited the Ohio Valley (territory west of the Appalachian Mountains) in the time of the French and Indian Wars?
OR, was it the first American Settlers that moving west and encroaching on the indian inhabitants?
​

It is tied up in the nebulas phrase "historical ties to a particular territory;" or as the Allied Powers said at San Remo: "the historical connexion of the Jewish people with Palestine." In 1920, when the Allied Powers were making decisions on the apportionment of former Ottoman Empire territory, they saw the history of the territory of Palestine as very transient and evolving. The territory of Palestine was a sliver of land that was controlled by numerous different Empires, Countries, and Cultural Authorities [Paleo-Canaanites, Amorites, Ancient Egyptians, Israelites, Moabites, Ammonites, Tjeker, Philistines, Assyrians, Babylonians, Persians, Ancient Greeks, Romans, Byzantines, (Umayads, Abbasids, Seljuqs, Fatimids), French Crusaders, (Ayyubids, Mameluks, Ottoman Turks), and soon the British]. (List from Wikipedia --- History of Palestine) This is what the Allied Powers saw in the way of History. This is part of the thought process that ultimately lead them to the decisions they made.

Yes, we also consider cultural and historical distinction, ethnic groups associated, and a share sense of identity. But in the end, you have to ask yourself, how long do you look back in time to determine "indigenous?"

Most Respectfully,
R

well I can tell you for nothing Rocco,Jews were definately sic NOT THE INDIGENOUS PEOPLES OF THIS LAND.......NOT BY A LONG HAUL..steve and you know it

(COMMENT)

The Anglo-Saxons of England were the members of Germanic-speaking groups who migrated (≈ AD 400 to AD 600) to the southern half of the island from continental Europe, and their cultural. Then, in about ≈ 1066, Duke William of Normandy invaded England (from France), ending ≈ 500 years of Saxon rule (Battle of Hastings.). Today, who is the indigenous population? Its a rhetorical question because it doesn't matter.

What this does indicate is that at some point, just as the Anglo-Saxons became the "indigenous population" over the post Roman era inhabitants, --- so it was that the Normans assimilated the survivors and they mix became indigenous. How long does it take to become the "indigenous population?"

Most Respectfully,
R

One thing I would like to point out. Hundreds of years ago military conquest was not illegal. It is now. So, recent colonial projects cannot be considered indigenous.

 

[Hollie]

theliq, et al,

The reliance on the concept of "indigenous" (rights or population) is a slippery slope.

MJB12741,

The definition of "Indigenous People(s)" is tricky to say the least. The definition is often self serving.

Objectively, there are two very key issues that must be addressed before a determination can be made on the assignment of the "Indigenous People" label.

• How far back in time are you accepting evidence of a culture with historical ties to the territory?
• How long does it take for a culture to be in place before it can be considered "Indigenous?"
​

Who’s Indigenous?

(COMMENT)

There is NO Universally accepted definition for "Indigenous People." Why? (Rhetorical) Simply because it raises difficult questions that cannot be settled accurately by law.

The Ohio Scenario

If the Canadians mount a successful amphibious assault from Ontario and captures the State of Ohio, who are considered the "indigenous population?"
OR, is it still the Iroquois, Miami, and Shawnee Tribes that inhabited the Ohio Valley (territory west of the Appalachian Mountains) in the time of the French and Indian Wars?
OR, was it the first American Settlers that moving west and encroaching on the indian inhabitants?
​

It is tied up in the nebulas phrase "historical ties to a particular territory;" or as the Allied Powers said at San Remo: "the historical connexion of the Jewish people with Palestine." In 1920, when the Allied Powers were making decisions on the apportionment of former Ottoman Empire territory, they saw the history of the territory of Palestine as very transient and evolving. The territory of Palestine was a sliver of land that was controlled by numerous different Empires, Countries, and Cultural Authorities [Paleo-Canaanites, Amorites, Ancient Egyptians, Israelites, Moabites, Ammonites, Tjeker, Philistines, Assyrians, Babylonians, Persians, Ancient Greeks, Romans, Byzantines, (Umayads, Abbasids, Seljuqs, Fatimids), French Crusaders, (Ayyubids, Mameluks, Ottoman Turks), and soon the British]. (List from Wikipedia --- History of Palestine) This is what the Allied Powers saw in the way of History. This is part of the thought process that ultimately lead them to the decisions they made.

Yes, we also consider cultural and historical distinction, ethnic groups associated, and a share sense of identity. But in the end, you have to ask yourself, how long do you look back in time to determine "indigenous?"

Most Respectfully,
R

well I can tell you for nothing Rocco,Jews were definately sic NOT THE INDIGENOUS PEOPLES OF THIS LAND.......NOT BY A LONG HAUL..steve and you know it

(COMMENT)

The Anglo-Saxons of England were the members of Germanic-speaking groups who migrated (≈ AD 400 to AD 600) to the southern half of the island from continental Europe, and their cultural. Then, in about ≈ 1066, Duke William of Normandy invaded England (from France), ending ≈ 500 years of Saxon rule (Battle of Hastings.). Today, who is the indigenous population? Its a rhetorical question because it doesn't matter.

What this does indicate is that at some point, just as the Anglo-Saxons became the "indigenous population" over the post Roman era inhabitants, --- so it was that the Normans assimilated the survivors and they mix became indigenous. How long does it take to become the "indigenous population?"

Most Respectfully,
R

One thing I would like to point out. Hundreds of years ago military conquest was not illegal. It is now. So, recent colonial projects cannot be considered indigenous.

You must have missed the email. There was an extension granted that grandfathered more recent military conquest.

Ironically, the grandfathering was endorsed by Islamist nations.

 

[RoccoR]

P F Tinmore, et al,

While you base conjecture that the use of conquest has changed, it has very little to do with the decision. After all, in the surrender of the Ottoman Empire territories was not illegal in the post World War I era.

theliq, et al,

The reliance on the concept of "indigenous" (rights or population) is a slippery slope.

MJB12741,

The definition of "Indigenous People(s)" is tricky to say the least. The definition is often self serving.

Objectively, there are two very key issues that must be addressed before a determination can be made on the assignment of the "Indigenous People" label.

• How far back in time are you accepting evidence of a culture with historical ties to the territory?
• How long does it take for a culture to be in place before it can be considered "Indigenous?"
​

Who’s Indigenous?

(COMMENT)

There is NO Universally accepted definition for "Indigenous People." Why? (Rhetorical) Simply because it raises difficult questions that cannot be settled accurately by law.

The Ohio Scenario

If the Canadians mount a successful amphibious assault from Ontario and captures the State of Ohio, who are considered the "indigenous population?"
OR, is it still the Iroquois, Miami, and Shawnee Tribes that inhabited the Ohio Valley (territory west of the Appalachian Mountains) in the time of the French and Indian Wars?
OR, was it the first American Settlers that moving west and encroaching on the indian inhabitants?
​

It is tied up in the nebulas phrase "historical ties to a particular territory;" or as the Allied Powers said at San Remo: "the historical connexion of the Jewish people with Palestine." In 1920, when the Allied Powers were making decisions on the apportionment of former Ottoman Empire territory, they saw the history of the territory of Palestine as very transient and evolving. The territory of Palestine was a sliver of land that was controlled by numerous different Empires, Countries, and Cultural Authorities [Paleo-Canaanites, Amorites, Ancient Egyptians, Israelites, Moabites, Ammonites, Tjeker, Philistines, Assyrians, Babylonians, Persians, Ancient Greeks, Romans, Byzantines, (Umayads, Abbasids, Seljuqs, Fatimids), French Crusaders, (Ayyubids, Mameluks, Ottoman Turks), and soon the British]. (List from Wikipedia --- History of Palestine) This is what the Allied Powers saw in the way of History. This is part of the thought process that ultimately lead them to the decisions they made.

Yes, we also consider cultural and historical distinction, ethnic groups associated, and a share sense of identity. But in the end, you have to ask yourself, how long do you look back in time to determine "indigenous?"

Most Respectfully,
R

well I can tell you for nothing Rocco,Jews were definately sic NOT THE INDIGENOUS PEOPLES OF THIS LAND.......NOT BY A LONG HAUL..steve and you know it

(COMMENT)

The Anglo-Saxons of England were the members of Germanic-speaking groups who migrated (≈ AD 400 to AD 600) to the southern half of the island from continental Europe, and their cultural. Then, in about ≈ 1066, Duke William of Normandy invaded England (from France), ending ≈ 500 years of Saxon rule (Battle of Hastings.). Today, who is the indigenous population? Its a rhetorical question because it doesn't matter.

What this does indicate is that at some point, just as the Anglo-Saxons became the "indigenous population" over the post Roman era inhabitants, --- so it was that the Normans assimilated the survivors and they mix became indigenous. How long does it take to become the "indigenous population?"

Most Respectfully,
R

One thing I would like to point out. Hundreds of years ago military conquest was not illegal. It is now. So, recent colonial projects cannot be considered indigenous.

(COMMENT)

Colonial Projects and Cultural Assimilation are entirely different from that of making a determination as to who is indigenous. The fact of the matter is that the Ottoman Empire:

Unconditionally surrendered to the Allied Powers.

• Article 16, Armistice of Mudros
• Article 132, Treaty of Sevres
• Article 16, Treaty of Laussanne

The Allied Powers had the Authority to initiate the implementation of the Jewish National Home.
The Allied Powers decided to initiate immigration procedures.
​

Most Respectfully,
R

 

[P F Tinmore]

P F Tinmore, et al,

While you base conjecture that the use of conquest has changed, it has very little to do with the decision. After all, in the surrender of the Ottoman Empire territories was not illegal in the post World War I era.

theliq, et al,

The reliance on the concept of "indigenous" (rights or population) is a slippery slope.

MJB12741,

The definition of "Indigenous People(s)" is tricky to say the least. The definition is often self serving.

Objectively, there are two very key issues that must be addressed before a determination can be made on the assignment of the "Indigenous People" label.

• How far back in time are you accepting evidence of a culture with historical ties to the territory?
• How long does it take for a culture to be in place before it can be considered "Indigenous?"
​

Who’s Indigenous?

(COMMENT)

There is NO Universally accepted definition for "Indigenous People." Why? (Rhetorical) Simply because it raises difficult questions that cannot be settled accurately by law.

The Ohio Scenario

If the Canadians mount a successful amphibious assault from Ontario and captures the State of Ohio, who are considered the "indigenous population?"
OR, is it still the Iroquois, Miami, and Shawnee Tribes that inhabited the Ohio Valley (territory west of the Appalachian Mountains) in the time of the French and Indian Wars?
OR, was it the first American Settlers that moving west and encroaching on the indian inhabitants?
​

It is tied up in the nebulas phrase "historical ties to a particular territory;" or as the Allied Powers said at San Remo: "the historical connexion of the Jewish people with Palestine." In 1920, when the Allied Powers were making decisions on the apportionment of former Ottoman Empire territory, they saw the history of the territory of Palestine as very transient and evolving. The territory of Palestine was a sliver of land that was controlled by numerous different Empires, Countries, and Cultural Authorities [Paleo-Canaanites, Amorites, Ancient Egyptians, Israelites, Moabites, Ammonites, Tjeker, Philistines, Assyrians, Babylonians, Persians, Ancient Greeks, Romans, Byzantines, (Umayads, Abbasids, Seljuqs, Fatimids), French Crusaders, (Ayyubids, Mameluks, Ottoman Turks), and soon the British]. (List from Wikipedia --- History of Palestine) This is what the Allied Powers saw in the way of History. This is part of the thought process that ultimately lead them to the decisions they made.

Yes, we also consider cultural and historical distinction, ethnic groups associated, and a share sense of identity. But in the end, you have to ask yourself, how long do you look back in time to determine "indigenous?"

Most Respectfully,
R

well I can tell you for nothing Rocco,Jews were definately sic NOT THE INDIGENOUS PEOPLES OF THIS LAND.......NOT BY A LONG HAUL..steve and you know it

(COMMENT)

The Anglo-Saxons of England were the members of Germanic-speaking groups who migrated (≈ AD 400 to AD 600) to the southern half of the island from continental Europe, and their cultural. Then, in about ≈ 1066, Duke William of Normandy invaded England (from France), ending ≈ 500 years of Saxon rule (Battle of Hastings.). Today, who is the indigenous population? Its a rhetorical question because it doesn't matter.

What this does indicate is that at some point, just as the Anglo-Saxons became the "indigenous population" over the post Roman era inhabitants, --- so it was that the Normans assimilated the survivors and they mix became indigenous. How long does it take to become the "indigenous population?"

Most Respectfully,
R

One thing I would like to point out. Hundreds of years ago military conquest was not illegal. It is now. So, recent colonial projects cannot be considered indigenous.

(COMMENT)

Colonial Projects and Cultural Assimilation are entirely different from that of making a determination as to who is indigenous. The fact of the matter is that the Ottoman Empire:

Unconditionally surrendered to the Allied Powers.

• Article 16, Armistice of Mudros
• Article 132, Treaty of Sevres
• Article 16, Treaty of Laussanne

The Allied Powers had the Authority to initiate the implementation of the Jewish National Home.
The Allied Powers decided to initiate immigration procedures.
​

Most Respectfully,
R

OK, but neither the LoN nor the Mandates acquired any land. They held the land in trust for the inhabitants of the respective newly created states.

 

[Rehmani]

Rehmani, Phoenall, MJB12741, et al,

I really don't think that this argument about who is an "indigenous population" to the territory is going anywhere.

Why has Israel allowed all the Muslim Palestinian land theiving squatters to remain in Israel?
Israel Palestine: Who’s Indigenous?

If jews are indigenous then why they look more Russian,American, Iranian but not Palestinian or Arab.

Because arab and Palestinian never lived in Israel, they are illegal immigrants from the south and north. Thje jews look like Jews and their DNA matches that of the Jews who never left the Holy Land

Rubbish!

(COMMENT)

You can read and research all the various studies concerning the sample , analysis and testing of Mitochondrial DNA (MtDNA) of the Jewish People and still not have a definitive biological answer to what is basically a political question.

The attempt of these various DNA studies is to lend some scientific molecular genetic research credibility to the genetic ancestry of contemporary Jewish populations and whether there is some reasonable evidence demonstrated that their is a relationship to the ancient Israelites of the Middle East that lived two or three millennium ago. I'm not even sure that this is relevant; let alone a question that can be answered.

The establishment of the Jewish National Home in the Middle East was a decision based on the observation that the Jewish People needed a "safe haven" if the culture was remain viable and survive. And it was determined that basically, it was more important and beneficial to protect and safeguard the Jewish Culture from further attrition at the hands of present and future anti-Semitic regimes, to prevent the continuation of the cultural devastation as demonstrated by the historical indifference of most Europeans --- and --- the open collaboration of political regimes to target and murder of Jews to achieve some political end.

Even if there was a clear understanding as to what is meant by the "indigenous population" --- and --- when a migrating population or an immigrating population has assimilated enough to be identified with the indigenous population; would it really matter if the objective to to save a culture in distress?

Most Respectfully,
R

I really don't think that this argument about who is an "indigenous population" to the territory is going anywhere.​

All of the people, Muslims, Christians, and Jews, who normally lived in Palestine when it was created after WWI became citizens of Palestine. That is the standard procedure. All of those new countries did the same thing.

There is nothing to dispute.

I agreed but jew have different opinion and they are not coming for peace and keep forcing to innocent palestinian in camps but how long it should end soon.

 

[Rehmani]

Rehmani, Phoenall, MJB12741, et al,

I really don't think that this argument about who is an "indigenous population" to the territory is going anywhere.

If jews are indigenous then why they look more Russian,American, Iranian but not Palestinian or Arab.

Because arab and Palestinian never lived in Israel, they are illegal immigrants from the south and north. Thje jews look like Jews and their DNA matches that of the Jews who never left the Holy Land

Rubbish!

(COMMENT)

You can read and research all the various studies concerning the sample , analysis and testing of Mitochondrial DNA (MtDNA) of the Jewish People and still not have a definitive biological answer to what is basically a political question.

The attempt of these various DNA studies is to lend some scientific molecular genetic research credibility to the genetic ancestry of contemporary Jewish populations and whether there is some reasonable evidence demonstrated that their is a relationship to the ancient Israelites of the Middle East that lived two or three millennium ago. I'm not even sure that this is relevant; let alone a question that can be answered.

The establishment of the Jewish National Home in the Middle East was a decision based on the observation that the Jewish People needed a "safe haven" if the culture was remain viable and survive. And it was determined that basically, it was more important and beneficial to protect and safeguard the Jewish Culture from further attrition at the hands of present and future anti-Semitic regimes, to prevent the continuation of the cultural devastation as demonstrated by the historical indifference of most Europeans --- and --- the open collaboration of political regimes to target and murder of Jews to achieve some political end.

Even if there was a clear understanding as to what is meant by the "indigenous population" --- and --- when a migrating population or an immigrating population has assimilated enough to be identified with the indigenous population; would it really matter if the objective to to save a culture in distress?

Most Respectfully,
R

I really don't think that this argument about who is an "indigenous population" to the territory is going anywhere.​

All of the people, Muslims, Christians, and Jews, who normally lived in Palestine when it was created after WWI became citizens of Palestine. That is the standard procedure. All of those new countries did the same thing.

There is nothing to dispute.

Actually, you're befuddled, as usual.

Palestine was the description of an undefined, noncontiguous land area. That's why it's comical to read of islamists referring to "Pal'istanians". That label for an invented people with an invented national identify was the creation of the now, thankfully dead, Arafat.

OR in my word Israel is gift to jews from coalition in wwii, because jew help them against Germany and this undefined territory was part of Ottoman Empire which was letter on divided in small countries so they can placed Israel in there followed by armed and army support.

 

[Rehmani]

Rehmani, Phoenall, MJB12741, et al,

I really don't think that this argument about who is an "indigenous population" to the territory is going anywhere.

If jews are indigenous then why they look more Russian,American, Iranian but not Palestinian or Arab.

Because arab and Palestinian never lived in Israel, they are illegal immigrants from the south and north. Thje jews look like Jews and their DNA matches that of the Jews who never left the Holy Land

Rubbish!

(COMMENT)

You can read and research all the various studies concerning the sample , analysis and testing of Mitochondrial DNA (MtDNA) of the Jewish People and still not have a definitive biological answer to what is basically a political question.

The attempt of these various DNA studies is to lend some scientific molecular genetic research credibility to the genetic ancestry of contemporary Jewish populations and whether there is some reasonable evidence demonstrated that their is a relationship to the ancient Israelites of the Middle East that lived two or three millennium ago. I'm not even sure that this is relevant; let alone a question that can be answered.

The establishment of the Jewish National Home in the Middle East was a decision based on the observation that the Jewish People needed a "safe haven" if the culture was remain viable and survive. And it was determined that basically, it was more important and beneficial to protect and safeguard the Jewish Culture from further attrition at the hands of present and future anti-Semitic regimes, to prevent the continuation of the cultural devastation as demonstrated by the historical indifference of most Europeans --- and --- the open collaboration of political regimes to target and murder of Jews to achieve some political end.

Even if there was a clear understanding as to what is meant by the "indigenous population" --- and --- when a migrating population or an immigrating population has assimilated enough to be identified with the indigenous population; would it really matter if the objective to to save a culture in distress?

Most Respectfully,
R

I really don't think that this argument about who is an "indigenous population" to the territory is going anywhere.​

All of the people, Muslims, Christians, and Jews, who normally lived in Palestine when it was created after WWI became citizens of Palestine. That is the standard procedure. All of those new countries did the same thing.

There is nothing to dispute.

Actually, you're befuddled, as usual.

Palestine was the description of an undefined, noncontiguous land area. That's why it's comical to read of islamists referring to "Pal'istanians". That label for an invented people with an invented national identify was the creation of the now, thankfully dead, Arafat.

OR in my word Israel is gift to jews from coalition in wwii, because jew help them against Germany and this undefined territory was part of Ottoman Empire which was letter on divided in small countries so they can placed Israel in there followed by armed and army support.

 

[montelatici]

P F Tinmore, et al,

While you base conjecture that the use of conquest has changed, it has very little to do with the decision. After all, in the surrender of the Ottoman Empire territories was not illegal in the post World War I era.

theliq, et al,

The reliance on the concept of "indigenous" (rights or population) is a slippery slope.

MJB12741,

The definition of "Indigenous People(s)" is tricky to say the least. The definition is often self serving.

Objectively, there are two very key issues that must be addressed before a determination can be made on the assignment of the "Indigenous People" label.

• How far back in time are you accepting evidence of a culture with historical ties to the territory?
• How long does it take for a culture to be in place before it can be considered "Indigenous?"
​

Who’s Indigenous?

(COMMENT)

There is NO Universally accepted definition for "Indigenous People." Why? (Rhetorical) Simply because it raises difficult questions that cannot be settled accurately by law.

The Ohio Scenario

If the Canadians mount a successful amphibious assault from Ontario and captures the State of Ohio, who are considered the "indigenous population?"
OR, is it still the Iroquois, Miami, and Shawnee Tribes that inhabited the Ohio Valley (territory west of the Appalachian Mountains) in the time of the French and Indian Wars?
OR, was it the first American Settlers that moving west and encroaching on the indian inhabitants?
​

It is tied up in the nebulas phrase "historical ties to a particular territory;" or as the Allied Powers said at San Remo: "the historical connexion of the Jewish people with Palestine." In 1920, when the Allied Powers were making decisions on the apportionment of former Ottoman Empire territory, they saw the history of the territory of Palestine as very transient and evolving. The territory of Palestine was a sliver of land that was controlled by numerous different Empires, Countries, and Cultural Authorities [Paleo-Canaanites, Amorites, Ancient Egyptians, Israelites, Moabites, Ammonites, Tjeker, Philistines, Assyrians, Babylonians, Persians, Ancient Greeks, Romans, Byzantines, (Umayads, Abbasids, Seljuqs, Fatimids), French Crusaders, (Ayyubids, Mameluks, Ottoman Turks), and soon the British]. (List from Wikipedia --- History of Palestine) This is what the Allied Powers saw in the way of History. This is part of the thought process that ultimately lead them to the decisions they made.

Yes, we also consider cultural and historical distinction, ethnic groups associated, and a share sense of identity. But in the end, you have to ask yourself, how long do you look back in time to determine "indigenous?"

Most Respectfully,
R

well I can tell you for nothing Rocco,Jews were definately sic NOT THE INDIGENOUS PEOPLES OF THIS LAND.......NOT BY A LONG HAUL..steve and you know it

(COMMENT)

The Anglo-Saxons of England were the members of Germanic-speaking groups who migrated (≈ AD 400 to AD 600) to the southern half of the island from continental Europe, and their cultural. Then, in about ≈ 1066, Duke William of Normandy invaded England (from France), ending ≈ 500 years of Saxon rule (Battle of Hastings.). Today, who is the indigenous population? Its a rhetorical question because it doesn't matter.

What this does indicate is that at some point, just as the Anglo-Saxons became the "indigenous population" over the post Roman era inhabitants, --- so it was that the Normans assimilated the survivors and they mix became indigenous. How long does it take to become the "indigenous population?"

Most Respectfully,
R

One thing I would like to point out. Hundreds of years ago military conquest was not illegal. It is now. So, recent colonial projects cannot be considered indigenous.

(COMMENT)

Colonial Projects and Cultural Assimilation are entirely different from that of making a determination as to who is indigenous. The fact of the matter is that the Ottoman Empire:

Unconditionally surrendered to the Allied Powers.

• Article 16, Armistice of Mudros
• Article 132, Treaty of Sevres
• Article 16, Treaty of Laussanne

The Allied Powers had the Authority to initiate the implementation of the Jewish National Home.
The Allied Powers decided to initiate immigration procedures.
​

Most Respectfully,
R

No, the Allied Powers had no right to implement the Jewish National Home as it contravened articles 20 and 22 of the Covenant of the League of Nations, i.e. the Balfour Declaration was null and void when the Britain signed the Covenant.

"ARTICLE 20.

The Members of the League severally agree that this Covenant is accepted as abrogating all obligations or understandings inter se which are inconsistent with the terms thereof, and solemnly undertake that they will not hereafter enter into any engagements inconsistent with the terms thereof.
In case any Member of the League shall, before becoming a Member of the League, have undertaken any obligations inconsistent with the terms of this Covenant, it shall be the duty of such Member to take immediate steps to procure its release from such obligations.


ARTICLE 22.

To those colonies and territories which as a consequence of the late war have ceased to be under the sovereignty of the States which formerly governed them and which are inhabited by peoples not yet able to stand by themselves under the strenuous conditions of the modern world, there should be applied the principle that the well-being and development of such peoples form a sacred trust of civilisation and that securities for the performance of this trust should be embodied in this Covenant.
The best method of giving practical effect to this principle is that the tutelage of such peoples should be entrusted to advanced nations who by reason of their resources, their experience or their geographical position can best undertake this responsibility, and who are willing to accept it, and that this tutelage should be exercised by them as Mandatories on behalf of the League.....communities formerly belonging to the Turkish Empire (which included the Christian and Muslim Palestinians, ed.)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. - See more at: League of Nations covenant - Peace Treaty of Versailles, Peace Conference text/Non-UN document (28 April 1919)

 

[Phoenall]

Why has Israel allowed all the Muslim Palestinian land theiving squatters to remain in Israel?

Israel Palestine: Who’s Indigenous?

They were muslims and christian and chose ti stay in stead if running. They might have been people that actually owned land for generations. Some returned because they had family living in Israel, they become Israelis.
There were a number of way to go to Israel.
that ended with Olso

>>1948 until 2001, Israel allowed about 184,000 Palestinians to settle in Israel.<<

>>In November 2012, Palestinian Authority President Mahmud Abbas repeated his stance that the claim of return was not to his original hometown, but to a Palestinian state that would be established<<

Idiot,

Why because she posts the truth about your beloved islamonazi terrorists

 

[Rehmani]

Rehmani, Phoenall, MJB12741, et al,

I really don't think that this argument about who is an "indigenous population" to the territory is going anywhere.

If jews are indigenous then why they look more Russian,American, Iranian but not Palestinian or Arab.

Because arab and Palestinian never lived in Israel, they are illegal immigrants from the south and north. Thje jews look like Jews and their DNA matches that of the Jews who never left the Holy Land

Rubbish!

(COMMENT)

You can read and research all the various studies concerning the sample , analysis and testing of Mitochondrial DNA (MtDNA) of the Jewish People and still not have a definitive biological answer to what is basically a political question.

The attempt of these various DNA studies is to lend some scientific molecular genetic research credibility to the genetic ancestry of contemporary Jewish populations and whether there is some reasonable evidence demonstrated that their is a relationship to the ancient Israelites of the Middle East that lived two or three millennium ago. I'm not even sure that this is relevant; let alone a question that can be answered.

The establishment of the Jewish National Home in the Middle East was a decision based on the observation that the Jewish People needed a "safe haven" if the culture was remain viable and survive. And it was determined that basically, it was more important and beneficial to protect and safeguard the Jewish Culture from further attrition at the hands of present and future anti-Semitic regimes, to prevent the continuation of the cultural devastation as demonstrated by the historical indifference of most Europeans --- and --- the open collaboration of political regimes to target and murder of Jews to achieve some political end.

Even if there was a clear understanding as to what is meant by the "indigenous population" --- and --- when a migrating population or an immigrating population has assimilated enough to be identified with the indigenous population; would it really matter if the objective to to save a culture in distress?

Most Respectfully,
R

I really don't think that this argument about who is an "indigenous population" to the territory is going anywhere.​

All of the people, Muslims, Christians, and Jews, who normally lived in Palestine when it was created after WWI became citizens of Palestine. That is the standard procedure. All of those new countries did the same thing.

There is nothing to dispute.

Actually, you're befuddled, as usual.

Palestine was the description of an undefined, noncontiguous land area. That's why it's comical to read of islamists referring to "Pal'istanians". That label for an invented people with an invented national identify was the creation of the now, thankfully dead, Arafat.

OR in my word Israel is gift to jews from coalition in wwii, because jew help them against Germany and this undefined territory was part of Ottoman Empire which was letter on divided in small countries so they can placed Israel in there followed by armed and army support.

 

[Rehmani]

Rehmani, Phoenall, MJB12741, et al,

I really don't think that this argument about who is an "indigenous population" to the territory is going anywhere.

Because arab and Palestinian never lived in Israel, they are illegal immigrants from the south and north. Thje jews look like Jews and their DNA matches that of the Jews who never left the Holy Land

Rubbish!

(COMMENT)

You can read and research all the various studies concerning the sample , analysis and testing of Mitochondrial DNA (MtDNA) of the Jewish People and still not have a definitive biological answer to what is basically a political question.

The attempt of these various DNA studies is to lend some scientific molecular genetic research credibility to the genetic ancestry of contemporary Jewish populations and whether there is some reasonable evidence demonstrated that their is a relationship to the ancient Israelites of the Middle East that lived two or three millennium ago. I'm not even sure that this is relevant; let alone a question that can be answered.

The establishment of the Jewish National Home in the Middle East was a decision based on the observation that the Jewish People needed a "safe haven" if the culture was remain viable and survive. And it was determined that basically, it was more important and beneficial to protect and safeguard the Jewish Culture from further attrition at the hands of present and future anti-Semitic regimes, to prevent the continuation of the cultural devastation as demonstrated by the historical indifference of most Europeans --- and --- the open collaboration of political regimes to target and murder of Jews to achieve some political end.

Even if there was a clear understanding as to what is meant by the "indigenous population" --- and --- when a migrating population or an immigrating population has assimilated enough to be identified with the indigenous population; would it really matter if the objective to to save a culture in distress?

Most Respectfully,
R

I really don't think that this argument about who is an "indigenous population" to the territory is going anywhere.​

All of the people, Muslims, Christians, and Jews, who normally lived in Palestine when it was created after WWI became citizens of Palestine. That is the standard procedure. All of those new countries did the same thing.

There is nothing to dispute.

Actually, you're befuddled, as usual.

Palestine was the description of an undefined, noncontiguous land area. That's why it's comical to read of islamists referring to "Pal'istanians". That label for an invented people with an invented national identify was the creation of the now, thankfully dead, Arafat.

The Treaty of Lausanne came into force on August 6, 1924. It stated that the Ottoman nationals who were "habitually residents" of what became Palestine "will become ipso facto" nationals of that state.

The Palestine Citizenship Order was enacted by Britain on 24 July 1925.[4] It began by granting Palestinian citizenship to "Turkish subjects habitually resident in the territory of Palestine upon the 1st day of August, 1925"

History of Palestinian nationality - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia​

Just like I said.

But who tell to jews that Israel is part of Palestine so follow the order and establish the peace.

 

[Rehmani]

Rehmani, Phoenall, MJB12741, et al,

I really don't think that this argument about who is an "indigenous population" to the territory is going anywhere.

If jews are indigenous then why they look more Russian,American, Iranian but not Palestinian or Arab.

Because arab and Palestinian never lived in Israel, they are illegal immigrants from the south and north. Thje jews look like Jews and their DNA matches that of the Jews who never left the Holy Land

Rubbish!

(COMMENT)

You can read and research all the various studies concerning the sample , analysis and testing of Mitochondrial DNA (MtDNA) of the Jewish People and still not have a definitive biological answer to what is basically a political question.

The attempt of these various DNA studies is to lend some scientific molecular genetic research credibility to the genetic ancestry of contemporary Jewish populations and whether there is some reasonable evidence demonstrated that their is a relationship to the ancient Israelites of the Middle East that lived two or three millennium ago. I'm not even sure that this is relevant; let alone a question that can be answered.

The establishment of the Jewish National Home in the Middle East was a decision based on the observation that the Jewish People needed a "safe haven" if the culture was remain viable and survive. And it was determined that basically, it was more important and beneficial to protect and safeguard the Jewish Culture from further attrition at the hands of present and future anti-Semitic regimes, to prevent the continuation of the cultural devastation as demonstrated by the historical indifference of most Europeans --- and --- the open collaboration of political regimes to target and murder of Jews to achieve some political end.

Even if there was a clear understanding as to what is meant by the "indigenous population" --- and --- when a migrating population or an immigrating population has assimilated enough to be identified with the indigenous population; would it really matter if the objective to to save a culture in distress?

Most Respectfully,
R

I really don't think that this argument about who is an "indigenous population" to the territory is going anywhere.​

All of the people, Muslims, Christians, and Jews, who normally lived in Palestine when it was created after WWI became citizens of Palestine. That is the standard procedure. All of those new countries did the same thing.

There is nothing to dispute.

Apart from what do we do with all those who migrated illegally to Palestine after 1923, which would be 80% of the current aqrab muslim population.

You are more jew than a jew, may be if I will try to convince to some jew would be better.

 

[Likkmee]

Lets get Biblical, Biblical...that song sucked. Israel IsNtReal. It's a people. Where were they to go ?
Here.
“And I am come down to deliver them out of the hand of the Egyptians, and to bring them up out of that land unto a good land and a large, unto a land flowing with milk and honey; unto the place of the Canaanites, and the Hittites, and the Amorites, and the Perizzites, and the Hivites, and the Jebusites.”

Ya see. Those Bolsheveks are real estate thieves !

 

[Rehmani]

Rehmani, Phoenall, MJB12741, et al,

I really don't think that this argument about who is an "indigenous population" to the territory is going anywhere.

Rubbish!

(COMMENT)

You can read and research all the various studies concerning the sample , analysis and testing of Mitochondrial DNA (MtDNA) of the Jewish People and still not have a definitive biological answer to what is basically a political question.

The attempt of these various DNA studies is to lend some scientific molecular genetic research credibility to the genetic ancestry of contemporary Jewish populations and whether there is some reasonable evidence demonstrated that their is a relationship to the ancient Israelites of the Middle East that lived two or three millennium ago. I'm not even sure that this is relevant; let alone a question that can be answered.

The establishment of the Jewish National Home in the Middle East was a decision based on the observation that the Jewish People needed a "safe haven" if the culture was remain viable and survive. And it was determined that basically, it was more important and beneficial to protect and safeguard the Jewish Culture from further attrition at the hands of present and future anti-Semitic regimes, to prevent the continuation of the cultural devastation as demonstrated by the historical indifference of most Europeans --- and --- the open collaboration of political regimes to target and murder of Jews to achieve some political end.

Even if there was a clear understanding as to what is meant by the "indigenous population" --- and --- when a migrating population or an immigrating population has assimilated enough to be identified with the indigenous population; would it really matter if the objective to to save a culture in distress?

Most Respectfully,
R

I really don't think that this argument about who is an "indigenous population" to the territory is going anywhere.​

All of the people, Muslims, Christians, and Jews, who normally lived in Palestine when it was created after WWI became citizens of Palestine. That is the standard procedure. All of those new countries did the same thing.

There is nothing to dispute.

Actually, you're befuddled, as usual.

Palestine was the description of an undefined, noncontiguous land area. That's why it's comical to read of islamists referring to "Pal'istanians". That label for an invented people with an invented national identify was the creation of the now, thankfully dead, Arafat.

The Treaty of Lausanne came into force on August 6, 1924. It stated that the Ottoman nationals who were "habitually residents" of what became Palestine "will become ipso facto" nationals of that state.

The Palestine Citizenship Order was enacted by Britain on 24 July 1925.[4] It began by granting Palestinian citizenship to "Turkish subjects habitually resident in the territory of Palestine upon the 1st day of August, 1925"

History of Palestinian nationality - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia​

Just like I said.

No it doesn't try reading it again

Rehmani, Phoenall, MJB12741, et al,

I really don't think that this argument about who is an "indigenous population" to the territory is going anywhere.

Rubbish!

(COMMENT)

You can read and research all the various studies concerning the sample , analysis and testing of Mitochondrial DNA (MtDNA) of the Jewish People and still not have a definitive biological answer to what is basically a political question.

The attempt of these various DNA studies is to lend some scientific molecular genetic research credibility to the genetic ancestry of contemporary Jewish populations and whether there is some reasonable evidence demonstrated that their is a relationship to the ancient Israelites of the Middle East that lived two or three millennium ago. I'm not even sure that this is relevant; let alone a question that can be answered.

The establishment of the Jewish National Home in the Middle East was a decision based on the observation that the Jewish People needed a "safe haven" if the culture was remain viable and survive. And it was determined that basically, it was more important and beneficial to protect and safeguard the Jewish Culture from further attrition at the hands of present and future anti-Semitic regimes, to prevent the continuation of the cultural devastation as demonstrated by the historical indifference of most Europeans --- and --- the open collaboration of political regimes to target and murder of Jews to achieve some political end.

Even if there was a clear understanding as to what is meant by the "indigenous population" --- and --- when a migrating population or an immigrating population has assimilated enough to be identified with the indigenous population; would it really matter if the objective to to save a culture in distress?

Most Respectfully,
R

I really don't think that this argument about who is an "indigenous population" to the territory is going anywhere.​

All of the people, Muslims, Christians, and Jews, who normally lived in Palestine when it was created after WWI became citizens of Palestine. That is the standard procedure. All of those new countries did the same thing.

There is nothing to dispute.

Actually, you're befuddled, as usual.

Palestine was the description of an undefined, noncontiguous land area. That's why it's comical to read of islamists referring to "Pal'istanians". That label for an invented people with an invented national identify was the creation of the now, thankfully dead, Arafat.

The Treaty of Lausanne came into force on August 6, 1924. It stated that the Ottoman nationals who were "habitually residents" of what became Palestine "will become ipso facto" nationals of that state.

The Palestine Citizenship Order was enacted by Britain on 24 July 1925.[4] It began by granting Palestinian citizenship to "Turkish subjects habitually resident in the territory of Palestine upon the 1st day of August, 1925"

History of Palestinian nationality - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia​

Just like I said.

What state would that be then

state if of Palestine dumb.

 

[montelatici]

Lets get Biblical, Biblical...that song sucked. Israel IsNtReal. It's a people. Where were they to go ?
Here.
“And I am come down to deliver them out of the hand of the Egyptians, and to bring them up out of that land unto a good land and a large, unto a land flowing with milk and honey; unto the place of the Canaanites, and the Hittites, and the Amorites, and the Perizzites, and the Hivites, and the Jebusites.”

Ya see. Those Bolsheveks are real estate thieves !

Tell Ruffles (Roudy) he'll go ballistic.

 

[Phoenall]

MJB12741, et al,

The statement is not exactly accurate.

Oh now I get it. So people can just move onto some land & thus they are citizens.

(COMMENT)

The Palestine that the Order in Council is referring to is: The Palestine as determined by the Allied Powers and to which the territories to which the Mandate for Palestine applied. This was NOT some new legal entity created by a WWI event, it was definitely NOT a sovereign state.

To say that "Turkish subjects habitually resident in the territory of Palestine" is to say: Turkish subjects habitually resident in the territories to which the Mandate for Palestine applied. It just allowed for the Mandate Power to issue Passports for Palestinians.

Most Respectfully,
R

AND THE AREA WAS CALLED PALESTINE for the majority of the population who had been there for centuries or tens of centuries to be exact........they were NOT THE JEWS, THEY WERE THE PALESTINIANS..FACT...THERE WERE NEVER MORE OTTOMANS LIVING THERE AT ANYTIME<THAN THE PALESTINIANS......the Jews were hardly mentioned as their numbers were so minute.With Respect Rocco.....Steve

LINK FROM AND UNBIASED NON PARTISAN SOURCE

 

[Phoenall]

MJB12741,

The definition of "Indigenous People(s)" is tricky to say the least. The definition is often self serving.

Objectively, there are two very key issues that must be addressed before a determination can be made on the assignment of the "Indigenous People" label.

• How far back in time are you accepting evidence of a culture with historical ties to the territory?
• How long does it take for a culture to be in place before it can be considered "Indigenous?"
​

Who’s Indigenous?

(COMMENT)

There is NO Universally accepted definition for "Indigenous People." Why? (Rhetorical) Simply because it raises difficult questions that cannot be settled accurately by law.

The Ohio Scenario

If the Canadians mount a successful amphibious assault from Ontario and captures the State of Ohio, who are considered the "indigenous population?"
OR, is it still the Iroquois, Miami, and Shawnee Tribes that inhabited the Ohio Valley (territory west of the Appalachian Mountains) in the time of the French and Indian Wars?
OR, was it the first American Settlers that moving west and encroaching on the indian inhabitants?
​

It is tied up in the nebulas phrase "historical ties to a particular territory;" or as the Allied Powers said at San Remo: "the historical connexion of the Jewish people with Palestine." In 1920, when the Allied Powers were making decisions on the apportionment of former Ottoman Empire territory, they saw the history of the territory of Palestine as very transient and evolving. The territory of Palestine was a sliver of land that was controlled by numerous different Empires, Countries, and Cultural Authorities [Paleo-Canaanites, Amorites, Ancient Egyptians, Israelites, Moabites, Ammonites, Tjeker, Philistines, Assyrians, Babylonians, Persians, Ancient Greeks, Romans, Byzantines, (Umayads, Abbasids, Seljuqs, Fatimids), French Crusaders, (Ayyubids, Mameluks, Ottoman Turks), and soon the British]. (List from Wikipedia --- History of Palestine) This is what the Allied Powers saw in the way of History. This is part of the thought process that ultimately lead them to the decisions they made.

Yes, we also consider cultural and historical distinction, ethnic groups associated, and a share sense of identity. But in the end, you have to ask yourself, how long do you look back in time to determine "indigenous?"

Most Respectfully,
R

well I can tell you for nothing Rocco,Jews were definately sic NOT THE INDIGENOUS PEOPLES OF THIS LAND.......NOT BY A LONG HAUL..steve and you know it

THE ARAB MUSLIMS CANT BE AS THEY COME FROM THE SOUTH, THEIR NAMES GIVES IT AWAY ARABS FROM THE ARABIAN PENINSULAR

 

[Phoenall]

Why has Israel allowed all the Muslim Palestinian land theiving squatters to remain in Israel?

Israel Palestine: Who’s Indigenous?

If jews are indigenous then why they look more Russian,American, Iranian but not Palestinian or Arab.

Because arab and Palestinian never lived in Israel, they are illegal immigrants from the south and north. Thje jews look like Jews and their DNA matches that of the Jews who never left the Holy Land

Rubbish!

Prove me wrong and you will be the first to do so, but no islamonazi propaganda sources

You speak yourself that you are wrong.

PROVE IT OR SHUT UP SPREADING LIES

 

[Phoenall]

You mean like the Jews from Europe and went to Palestine?

I believe I already supplied the one thousand years of documentation that shows Jews went from Judea to Rome back to Israel.
You're really into ignoring material you can find on Wikipedia, Amazon or a Judaic bookstore.

Though completely false, even if it were true, I doubt that the people of Normandy who left Scandinavia a thousand or so years ago, would be welcome to set up a state for themselves in Norway at the expense of the Norwegians, you idiot.

You are ignoring the facts and accepting propaganda, which is what Hasbara editors have published in Wiki.

Now the facts:

"Surprise: Ashkenazi Jews Are Genetically European"

"Though the finding may seem intuitive, it contradicts the notion that European Jews mostly descend from people who left Israel and the Middle East around 2,000 years ago."

Surprise: Ashkenazi Jews Are Genetically European

So you are now saying that 10 million Jews are all related to each other and only have 4 great great great great great great grandmothers between them.

 

[Phoenall]

Rehmani, Phoenall, MJB12741, et al,

I really don't think that this argument about who is an "indigenous population" to the territory is going anywhere.

Because arab and Palestinian never lived in Israel, they are illegal immigrants from the south and north. Thje jews look like Jews and their DNA matches that of the Jews who never left the Holy Land

Rubbish!

(COMMENT)

You can read and research all the various studies concerning the sample , analysis and testing of Mitochondrial DNA (MtDNA) of the Jewish People and still not have a definitive biological answer to what is basically a political question.

The attempt of these various DNA studies is to lend some scientific molecular genetic research credibility to the genetic ancestry of contemporary Jewish populations and whether there is some reasonable evidence demonstrated that their is a relationship to the ancient Israelites of the Middle East that lived two or three millennium ago. I'm not even sure that this is relevant; let alone a question that can be answered.

The establishment of the Jewish National Home in the Middle East was a decision based on the observation that the Jewish People needed a "safe haven" if the culture was remain viable and survive. And it was determined that basically, it was more important and beneficial to protect and safeguard the Jewish Culture from further attrition at the hands of present and future anti-Semitic regimes, to prevent the continuation of the cultural devastation as demonstrated by the historical indifference of most Europeans --- and --- the open collaboration of political regimes to target and murder of Jews to achieve some political end.

Even if there was a clear understanding as to what is meant by the "indigenous population" --- and --- when a migrating population or an immigrating population has assimilated enough to be identified with the indigenous population; would it really matter if the objective to to save a culture in distress?

Most Respectfully,
R

I really don't think that this argument about who is an "indigenous population" to the territory is going anywhere.​

All of the people, Muslims, Christians, and Jews, who normally lived in Palestine when it was created after WWI became citizens of Palestine. That is the standard procedure. All of those new countries did the same thing.

There is nothing to dispute.

Actually, you're befuddled, as usual.

Palestine was the description of an undefined, noncontiguous land area. That's why it's comical to read of islamists referring to "Pal'istanians". That label for an invented people with an invented national identify was the creation of the now, thankfully dead, Arafat.

OR in my word Israel is gift to jews from coalition in wwii, because jew help them against Germany and this undefined territory was part of Ottoman Empire which was letter on divided in small countries so they can placed Israel in there followed by armed and army support.

30 years out as they were granted the land in 1923 by the then sovereign owners