Israel's Legal Right To Exist

[Phoenall]

They became legal citizens of the Mandate of Palestine,

This is a common piece of Israeli propaganda. The Mandate was not Palestine. It was a temporarily assigned administration. It had no citizens. It had no land. It had no borders.

You are confusing the mandate with the mandatory again. It was only the British function that was a temporary assigned administration, the actual mandate had defined borders so the member states of the LoN could see where there authority ended

 

[Phoenall]

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


If they had meant that the independent nations were capable of standing alone and being a State, they would have said so. What they actually said was that some nations, Arab "Palestine" notably being included STILL a hundred years later, are not capable of becoming a State.

Certainly neither the language of the Covenant did not CREATE States. whether capable or not.

That concept is beyond his capability to understand, he still believes that the arab muslims have been a nation since the beginning of time

 

[Phoenall]

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


If they had meant that the independent nations were capable of standing alone and being a State, they would have said so. What they actually said was that some nations, Arab "Palestine" notably being included STILL a hundred years later, are not capable of becoming a State.

Certainly neither the language of the Covenant did not CREATE States. whether capable or not.

Indeed, they did not create states. The Mandates were assigned to existing states to bring them up to speed and become independent.

That is what the administrative advice and assistance was supposed to do. In Palestine's case the opposite was true. Any move by the Palestinians toward independence was taken down by Britain.

WRONG try reading the mandates again and see that they did create states, There was no Jordan before the mandate of palestine, no Iraq or Iran either. Not even a Syria even though the land already existed. As for palestine the arab muslims ignored the Mandate and refused to be guided by the principles, meaning they lost everything by not claiming the little bits. By refusing the administrative advice and assistance they also refused the rights implicit with the administrative advice and assistance

 

[Phoenall]

They became legal citizens of the Mandate of Palestine,

This is a common piece of Israeli propaganda. The Mandate was not Palestine. It was a temporarily assigned administration. It had no citizens. It had no land. It had no borders.

If this is true the citizens of Palestine became citizens of nothing. If the Palestine had no citizens, no land and no borders -- it had nothing. You have shredded your own argument to pieces.

Where did you get that? That is not what I said.

From your own words repeated above, if the mandate was not palestine then no palestine can ever exist

 

[Phoenall]

Indeed, they did not create states. The Mandates were assigned to existing states to bring them up to speed and become independent.

That is what the administrative advice and assistance was supposed to do. In Palestine's case the opposite was true. Any move by the Palestinians toward independence was taken down by Britain.

Oh you are freaking kidding me. So Syria, Iraq, Lebanon, Jordan and "Palestine" were existing States. With existing borders. Prior to the dissolution of the Ottoman Empire. You are mad. And, of course, the Jewish people, of all the people in the region, were explicitly excluded from being a State.

They were but they had to wait for the Treaty of Lausanne to release them from Turkish sovereignty so that it can take place.

And according to you the Turks handed their sovereignty to the arab muslims in 1917, even though the only palestinians at that time were the Jews

 

[Phoenall]

the Jewish people, of all the people in the region, were explicitly excluded from being a State.

The people were defined by where they lived. Religion was not a factor.

And once again you deny the Jews their rights to free determination and a national home

 

[P F Tinmore]

They became legal citizens of the Mandate of Palestine,

This is a common piece of Israeli propaganda. The Mandate was not Palestine. It was a temporarily assigned administration. It had no citizens. It had no land. It had no borders.

If this is true the citizens of Palestine became citizens of nothing. If the Palestine had no citizens, no land and no borders -- it had nothing. You have shredded your own argument to pieces.

Where did you get that? That is not what I said.

From your own words repeated above, if the mandate was not palestine then no palestine can ever exist

Unsubstantiated Israeli talking point.

 

[MJB12741]

The same blabber I have heard a gazillion times but nobody has ever provided any proof.

Yes indeed. "THERE NEVER WAS A NATION OF PALESTINE."

Articles: There Was Never a Country Called Palestine

This land was given to the Jewish people, as stated in the Bible, by the Creator, and will remain the homeland of the Jewish people in perpetuity.​

You didn't post one of those, did you?

Do you deny that the overwhelming majority of Palestinians are squatters on the land with no titles or deeds whatsoever to the stolen land?

They are the legal citizens of Palestine as per international law and the Treaty of Lausanne.

Uh huh. So where does the treaty of Lausanne make any mention regarding Palestinians?

Hello! PF where are you?

 

[Phoenall]

They became legal citizens of the Mandate of Palestine,

This is a common piece of Israeli propaganda. The Mandate was not Palestine. It was a temporarily assigned administration. It had no citizens. It had no land. It had no borders.

If this is true the citizens of Palestine became citizens of nothing. If the Palestine had no citizens, no land and no borders -- it had nothing. You have shredded your own argument to pieces.

Where did you get that? That is not what I said.

From your own words repeated above, if the mandate was not palestine then no palestine can ever exist

Unsubstantiated Israeli talking point.

So you are saying your own posts are now unsubstantiated Israeli talking points

 

[MJB12741]

The same blabber I have heard a gazillion times but nobody has ever provided any proof.

Yes indeed. "THERE NEVER WAS A NATION OF PALESTINE."

Articles: There Was Never a Country Called Palestine

This land was given to the Jewish people, as stated in the Bible, by the Creator, and will remain the homeland of the Jewish people in perpetuity.​

You didn't post one of those, did you?

Do you deny that the overwhelming majority of Palestinians are squatters on the land with no titles or deeds whatsoever to the stolen land?

They are the legal citizens of Palestine as per international law and the Treaty of Lausanne.

Uh huh. So where does the treaty of Lausanne make any mention regarding Palestinians?

 

[MJB12741]

Yes indeed. "THERE NEVER WAS A NATION OF PALESTINE."

Articles: There Was Never a Country Called Palestine

This land was given to the Jewish people, as stated in the Bible, by the Creator, and will remain the homeland of the Jewish people in perpetuity.​

You didn't post one of those, did you?

Do you deny that the overwhelming majority of Palestinians are squatters on the land with no titles or deeds whatsoever to the stolen land?

They are the legal citizens of Palestine as per international law and the Treaty of Lausanne.

Uh huh. So where does the treaty of Lausanne make any mention regarding Palestinians?

Still waiting to learn what theTreaty of Lausanne says regarding Palestinians.

 

[P F Tinmore]

This land was given to the Jewish people, as stated in the Bible, by the Creator, and will remain the homeland of the Jewish people in perpetuity.​

You didn't post one of those, did you?

Do you deny that the overwhelming majority of Palestinians are squatters on the land with no titles or deeds whatsoever to the stolen land?

They are the legal citizens of Palestine as per international law and the Treaty of Lausanne.

Uh huh. So where does the treaty of Lausanne make any mention regarding Palestinians?

Still waiting to learn what theTreaty of Lausanne says regarding Palestinians.

It was a blanket statement covering all of the new states without mentioning any of them by name.

 

[RoccoR]

P F Tinmore, et al,

Please don't mislead the discussion members. Article 30 deals with "nationality." That pertains exclusively to "nationality" and is found in Section II of the Treaty with that name.

It was a blanket statement covering all of the new states without mentioning any of them by name.

(COMMENT)

Section I, Territorial Clauses --- contains the disposition of the Title and Rights to the territory that did not stay with the Turkish Republic.

Most Respectfully,
R

 

[P F Tinmore]

P F Tinmore, et al,

Please don't mislead the discussion members. Article 30 deals with "nationality." That pertains exclusively to "nationality" and is found in Section II of the Treaty with that name.

It was a blanket statement covering all of the new states without mentioning any of them by name.

(COMMENT)

Section I, Territorial Clauses --- contains the disposition of the Title and Rights to the territory that did not stay with the Turkish Republic.

Most Respectfully,
R

Indeed, and that went to the LoN who held it in trust for the inhabitants through the Mandate system.

 

[RoccoR]

P F Tinmore, et al,

The Arab Palestinians were not members of the LoN. The Covenant promises the Arab Palestinian nothing. They were not a party to the Covenant.

Indeed, and that went to the LoN who held it in trust for the inhabitants through the Mandate system.

(COMMENT)

The Covenant, the Palestine Order in Council, the Mandate, and even the Treaty of Lausanne were all written by the very same victorious Allied Powers. These documents were written for and between the parties to the agreements. They were not written for the Arab Palestinians to interpret and use. The LoN Covenant when the Arab Palestinians were still under the Enemy Occupied Territory Administration. The Arab Palestinians were represented by the Central Powers; not the Allied Powers. The Ottoman Empire/Turkish Republic, one of the Enemy Empires of the Central Powers, renounced the Title and Rights to the territory in question. So, in a way, the representative of the Sovereign Power that represented the Arab Palestinians, placed the Title and Rights in the hands of the Allied Powers.

Most Respectfully,
R

 

[montelatici]

P F Tinmore, et al,

The Arab Palestinians were not members of the LoN. The Covenant promises the Arab Palestinian nothing. They were not a party to the Covenant.

Indeed, and that went to the LoN who held it in trust for the inhabitants through the Mandate system.

(COMMENT)

The Covenant, the Palestine Order in Council, the Mandate, and even the Treaty of Lausanne were all written by the very same victorious Allied Powers. These documents were written for and between the parties to the agreements. They were not written for the Arab Palestinians to interpret and use. The LoN Covenant when the Arab Palestinians were still under the Enemy Occupied Territory Administration. The Arab Palestinians were represented by the Central Powers; not the Allied Powers. The Ottoman Empire/Turkish Republic, one of the Enemy Empires of the Central Powers, renounced the Title and Rights to the territory in question. So, in a way, the representative of the Sovereign Power that represented the Arab Palestinians, placed the Title and Rights in the hands of the Allied Powers.

Most Respectfully,
R

The Muslims and Christians of Palestine were the "inhabitants" referred to in Article of the Covenant of the League of Nations. None of your smoke and mirrors changes that.

"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...."

Quit making things up Rocco, we have got your number.

 

[P F Tinmore]

The Arab Palestinians were not members of the LoN.

So? Neither were any of the other new states.

Do you have a point?

 

[RoccoR]

P F Tinmore, et al,

The point is very simple. The Covenant, like any contract, is between the parties to the agreement. Not a third party.

The Arab Palestinians were not members of the LoN.

So? Neither were any of the other new states.

Do you have a point?

(COMMENT)

The Covenant is the foundation for the agreement between the various Mandatory Powers and the remainder of the Allied Powers. It was the overarching framework on the most general of agreements as to how the Mandatories with achieve their obligations to the other Allied Powers relative to the Mandates. Any obligation in the Mandate is an obligation to the other Allied Powers; and not the former inhabitants of the Enemy Occupied Territory.

In 1919, when the Allied Powers assembled the Covenant, the Arabs of Palestine were under the Enemy Occupied Territory Administration. In 1920, when the Allied Powers crafted the framework for the Mandate for Palestine (San Remo), there were no promises made by the Allied Powers to the Inhabitants under Enemy Occupation. The Allied Powers decided how the Mandate system will relate to the Mandatories.

Suppose that I and Hollie make an agreement between ourselves, for me to feed you. You, not a party to the agreement, have not say as to what I feed you, how much I feed you, or the quality of the food I give you. In fact, at any point along the timeline, Hollie and I can --- between us --- decide to do something different. You have not say in the matter. The agreement (the LoN Covenant) is the legal and binding agreement between the two of us, and not you. You have no right to enforce anything relative to the agreement. You have not standing in the agreement.

Most Respectfully,
R

 

[montelatici]

The Covenant was an agreement between several parties that negotiated what was to become of the inhabitants of the former Turkish territories, among other issues. Your bullshit Rocco, would mean that one of the signers of the Charter of the United Nations could decide that they would disregard an article within the Charter. That is not the case. You are just blowing smoke, as usual.

 

[Phoenall]

Do you deny that the overwhelming majority of Palestinians are squatters on the land with no titles or deeds whatsoever to the stolen land?

They are the legal citizens of Palestine as per international law and the Treaty of Lausanne.

Uh huh. So where does the treaty of Lausanne make any mention regarding Palestinians?

Still waiting to learn what theTreaty of Lausanne says regarding Palestinians.

It was a blanket statement covering all of the new states without mentioning any of them by name.

Nope wrong again, it was a treaty that disclosed the LoN upcoming use for the former Ottoman empire, and the palestinians played no part in it