Israel's Legal Right To Exist

[RoccoR]

Hollie, et al,

You will never be able to convince our friend P F Tinmore that it is a fraudulent claim the Arab Palestinian make to a pre-1988 sovereignty.

The Israeli counter-claim should be that the Hostile Arab Palestinians withdraw to territory in which Arab Palestinian have had explicit title and rights granted to them by a previous sovereign; OR such territory in which the Arab Palestinian has demonstrated sovereign powers in the last century.

Absent evidence to the title and rights to a specific territory, or the demonstrated extension of sovereign authority and power over such a territory, the claim made by our friend P F Tinmore and Hostile Arab Palestinians everywhere is an hollow and baseless delusion. Such claims have the same potential for validity as a homeless person has to a luxury apartment built over land where he once had his cardboard box.

Most Respectfully,
R

 

[MJB12741]

Hollie, et al,

You will never be able to convince our friend P F Tinmore that it is a fraudulent claim the Arab Palestinian make to a pre-1988 sovereignty.

The Israeli counter-claim should be that the Hostile Arab Palestinians withdraw to territory in which Arab Palestinian have had explicit title and rights granted to them by a previous sovereign; OR such territory in which the Arab Palestinian has demonstrated sovereign powers in the last century.

Absent evidence to the title and rights to a specific territory, or the demonstrated extension of sovereign authority and power over such a territory, the claim made by our friend P F Tinmore and Hostile Arab Palestinians everywhere is an hollow and baseless delusion. Such claims have the same potential for validity as a homeless person has to a luxury apartment built over land where he once had his cardboard box.

Most Respectfully,
R

Yep! As soon as Israel turned this near wasteland into a thriving metropolis, here came hoards of Palestinians to claim "it's their land."

 

[P F Tinmore]

Hollie, et al,

You will never be able to convince our friend P F Tinmore that it is a fraudulent claim the Arab Palestinian make to a pre-1988 sovereignty.

The Israeli counter-claim should be that the Hostile Arab Palestinians withdraw to territory in which Arab Palestinian have had explicit title and rights granted to them by a previous sovereign; OR such territory in which the Arab Palestinian has demonstrated sovereign powers in the last century.

Absent evidence to the title and rights to a specific territory, or the demonstrated extension of sovereign authority and power over such a territory, the claim made by our friend P F Tinmore and Hostile Arab Palestinians everywhere is an hollow and baseless delusion. Such claims have the same potential for validity as a homeless person has to a luxury apartment built over land where he once had his cardboard box.

Most Respectfully,
R

You have a weird view of history.

The Treaty of Lausanne gave citizenship to the Palestinians, and nobody else, in Palestine.

The British wanted to create a Jewish national home in Palestine. The Palestinians rejected it, and after 30 years of occupation, Britain left failing to accomplish their goal.

The UN proposed partitioning Palestine. The Palestinians rejected the plan so the UN did not implement it.

The UN states that the Palestinians, in Palestine, have the right to self determination without external interference. The right to independence and sovereignty.

Even today the Palestinians, and their supporters around the world, reject Israel's so called right to exist and are demanding Palestinian rights. Israel, and its supporters, have dumped hundreds of millions of dollars and other mass resources to counter this claim.

The Palestinians have fought an uphill battle against Israel and its super power supporters to defend their country. Lesser people would have lost long ago.

 

[ForeverYoung436]

Hollie, et al,

You will never be able to convince our friend P F Tinmore that it is a fraudulent claim the Arab Palestinian make to a pre-1988 sovereignty.

The Israeli counter-claim should be that the Hostile Arab Palestinians withdraw to territory in which Arab Palestinian have had explicit title and rights granted to them by a previous sovereign; OR such territory in which the Arab Palestinian has demonstrated sovereign powers in the last century.

Absent evidence to the title and rights to a specific territory, or the demonstrated extension of sovereign authority and power over such a territory, the claim made by our friend P F Tinmore and Hostile Arab Palestinians everywhere is an hollow and baseless delusion. Such claims have the same potential for validity as a homeless person has to a luxury apartment built over land where he once had his cardboard box.

Most Respectfully,
R

You have a weird view of history.

The Treaty of Lausanne gave citizenship to the Palestinians, and nobody else, in Palestine.

The British wanted to create a Jewish national home in Palestine. The Palestinians rejected it, and after 30 years of occupation, Britain left failing to accomplish their goal.

The UN proposed partitioning Palestine. The Palestinians rejected the plan so the UN did not implement it.

The UN states that the Palestinians, in Palestine, have the right to self determination without external interference. The right to independence and sovereignty.

Even today the Palestinians, and their supporters around the world, reject Israel's so called right to exist and are demanding Palestinian rights. Israel, and its supporters, have dumped hundreds of millions of dollars and other mass resources to counter this claim.

The Palestinians have fought an uphill battle against Israel and its super power supporters to defend their country. Lesser people would have lost long ago.

To quote Tom Petty:

"Why do you want to lay there, revel in your abandon?
Baby, it don't really matter to me
Everybody's had to fight to be free
You don't have to live like a refugee!"

 

[Hollie]

Hollie, et al,

You will never be able to convince our friend P F Tinmore that it is a fraudulent claim the Arab Palestinian make to a pre-1988 sovereignty.

The Israeli counter-claim should be that the Hostile Arab Palestinians withdraw to territory in which Arab Palestinian have had explicit title and rights granted to them by a previous sovereign; OR such territory in which the Arab Palestinian has demonstrated sovereign powers in the last century.

Absent evidence to the title and rights to a specific territory, or the demonstrated extension of sovereign authority and power over such a territory, the claim made by our friend P F Tinmore and Hostile Arab Palestinians everywhere is an hollow and baseless delusion. Such claims have the same potential for validity as a homeless person has to a luxury apartment built over land where he once had his cardboard box.

Most Respectfully,
R

You have a weird view of history.

The Treaty of Lausanne gave citizenship to the Palestinians, and nobody else, in Palestine.

The British wanted to create a Jewish national home in Palestine. The Palestinians rejected it, and after 30 years of occupation, Britain left failing to accomplish their goal.

The UN proposed partitioning Palestine. The Palestinians rejected the plan so the UN did not implement it.

The UN states that the Palestinians, in Palestine, have the right to self determination without external interference. The right to independence and sovereignty.

Even today the Palestinians, and their supporters around the world, reject Israel's so called right to exist and are demanding Palestinian rights. Israel, and its supporters, have dumped hundreds of millions of dollars and other mass resources to counter this claim.

The Palestinians have fought an uphill battle against Israel and its super power supporters to defend their country. Lesser people would have lost long ago.

I'm disappointed you have simply cut and pasted the same material you have cut and pasted many times across multiple threads in spite of your cutting and pasting having been addressed many times.

 

[Phoenall]

Hollie, et al,

You will never be able to convince our friend P F Tinmore that it is a fraudulent claim the Arab Palestinian make to a pre-1988 sovereignty.

The Israeli counter-claim should be that the Hostile Arab Palestinians withdraw to territory in which Arab Palestinian have had explicit title and rights granted to them by a previous sovereign; OR such territory in which the Arab Palestinian has demonstrated sovereign powers in the last century.

Absent evidence to the title and rights to a specific territory, or the demonstrated extension of sovereign authority and power over such a territory, the claim made by our friend P F Tinmore and Hostile Arab Palestinians everywhere is an hollow and baseless delusion. Such claims have the same potential for validity as a homeless person has to a luxury apartment built over land where he once had his cardboard box.

Most Respectfully,
R

You have a weird view of history.

The Treaty of Lausanne gave citizenship to the Palestinians, and nobody else, in Palestine.

The British wanted to create a Jewish national home in Palestine. The Palestinians rejected it, and after 30 years of occupation, Britain left failing to accomplish their goal.

The UN proposed partitioning Palestine. The Palestinians rejected the plan so the UN did not implement it.

The UN states that the Palestinians, in Palestine, have the right to self determination without external interference. The right to independence and sovereignty.

Even today the Palestinians, and their supporters around the world, reject Israel's so called right to exist and are demanding Palestinian rights. Israel, and its supporters, have dumped hundreds of millions of dollars and other mass resources to counter this claim.

The Palestinians have fought an uphill battle against Israel and its super power supporters to defend their country. Lesser people would have lost long ago.

Wrong as it never mentions the palestinian people deliberstely for this reason

Wrong the LoN implemented the creation of the Jewish national home on 22% of palestine, leaving 78% as the arab muslim national home

Wrong The UN proposed to partition the 22% of palestine clearly designated as the Jewish national home and the arab muslims wanted it all as theirs. So the Jews implemented 181 by declaring independence on less than 20% of the designated lands. The arab muslims had no say in the matter after the Jews had beaten the crap out of them.

Correct, so now they need to designate what is acceptable as their palestine, going with existing international laws it is Jordan and they dont want illegal immigrants fouling their lands. This is what the whole problem boils down to where is arab muslim palestine ?

In doing so they are in breach of international laws, Geneva conventions, UN charter, IHL and state laws. First you need to delineate exactly what rights the arab muslims do have, and then enforce them on the arab muslims. See how they like having to obey laws that give them their rights .


And when did it pass into their ownership under international treaty or international law. Provide the link that clearly says that the arab muslims living in palestine will have this land granted
to them as their national home ?

I have produced this treaty and you ignore it because it leaves out Israel, gaza, west bank and Jerusalem

 

[Hollie]

Hollie, et al,

You will never be able to convince our friend P F Tinmore that it is a fraudulent claim the Arab Palestinian make to a pre-1988 sovereignty.

The Israeli counter-claim should be that the Hostile Arab Palestinians withdraw to territory in which Arab Palestinian have had explicit title and rights granted to them by a previous sovereign; OR such territory in which the Arab Palestinian has demonstrated sovereign powers in the last century.

Absent evidence to the title and rights to a specific territory, or the demonstrated extension of sovereign authority and power over such a territory, the claim made by our friend P F Tinmore and Hostile Arab Palestinians everywhere is an hollow and baseless delusion. Such claims have the same potential for validity as a homeless person has to a luxury apartment built over land where he once had his cardboard box.

Most Respectfully,
R

You have a weird view of history.

The Treaty of Lausanne gave citizenship to the Palestinians, and nobody else, in Palestine.

The British wanted to create a Jewish national home in Palestine. The Palestinians rejected it, and after 30 years of occupation, Britain left failing to accomplish their goal.

The UN proposed partitioning Palestine. The Palestinians rejected the plan so the UN did not implement it.

The UN states that the Palestinians, in Palestine, have the right to self determination without external interference. The right to independence and sovereignty.

Even today the Palestinians, and their supporters around the world, reject Israel's so called right to exist and are demanding Palestinian rights. Israel, and its supporters, have dumped hundreds of millions of dollars and other mass resources to counter this claim.

The Palestinians have fought an uphill battle against Israel and its super power supporters to defend their country. Lesser people would have lost long ago.

"Even today the Palestinians, and their supporters around the world, reject Israel's so called right to exist..."

Oh, well, that clears things up. We wouldn't want to offend the tender sensibilities of Islamic terrorists and their supporters, especially around the world.

Hasn't the UN yet defined "hurting Moslems feelings"™ as racist™ and islamophobic™ or at the very least, multiculturally insensitive™?

 

[RoccoR]

P F Tinmore, et al,

I think there is a little bit of a delusion here.

The Treaty of Lausanne gave citizenship to the Palestinians, and nobody else, in Palestine.

(COMMENT)

• Article 16 grants rights and title to the Allied Powers.
• Nowhere, in the entire Treaty, are the Palestinians mentioned by name...
• The Treaty dealt with "nationalities," again not specifically mentioning the Palestinians.
• The Treaty set the authorization to for Mandatories to develop citizenship procedures.
• The citizenship of all those within the boundary defined by the Mandatory, was established under the criteria of the "Palestine Citizenship Order."

The British wanted to create a Jewish national home in Palestine. The Palestinians rejected it, and after 30 years of occupation, Britain left failing to accomplish their goal.

The UN proposed partitioning Palestine. The Palestinians rejected the plan so the UN did not implement it.

(COMMENT)

Success or failure are merely outcome of "an attempt to accomplish." It has nothing to do with the evaluating an "intent to achieve" as either right or wrong.

The many rejections of the Arab Palestinians to participate in the in the "Article 22(2): and the "practical effect to this principle is that the tutelage" DOES NOT preclude by estoppel the separate and distinct intention of the Allied Powers to establish a Jewish National Home.

The UN states that the Palestinians, in Palestine, have the right to self determination without external interference. The right to independence and sovereignty.

(COMMENT)

The basic application pertaining to the "right to self determination without external interference" is found in Chapter I or the UN Charter. It applied to everyone, and is not exclusive to the Arab Palestinian. This included the Jewish People who, after participation in the Article 22(2) Tutalage in the assistance in the administration of the Government of Palestine (which the Arab Palestinian rejected), Declared Independence.

Even today the Palestinians, and their supporters around the world, reject Israel's so called right to exist and are demanding Palestinian rights. Israel, and its supporters, have dumped hundreds of millions of dollars and other mass resources to counter this claim.

(COMMENT)

Rejecting the "so called right to exist" DOES NOT change the reality that the Jewish State of Israel does exist.

• The political existence of the state is independent of recognition by the other states.
• Recognition is unconditional and irrevocable.
• The PLO (sole representative of the Palestinian People) recognizes the right of the State of Israel to exist in peace and security. (1993)
​

It exists and it is over. Just because you don't like it, does not mean your observation has a legal implication.

The Palestinians have fought an uphill battle against Israel and its super power supporters to defend their country. Lesser people would have lost long ago.

(COMMENT)

Well, this is twisting a bit. Until 1988, there was no country under the Sovereignty of the Arab Palestinian.

The Arab Palestinian sets their own course in destiny, and define themselves by word and deed.

• They define themselves as participating in Jihad and Armed Struggle.
• The HoAP, representing the Arab Palestinian in their Jihadism, Deadly Fedayeen Action, Hostile Insurgency Operations, Radicalized Islamic Behaviors, and Asymmetric Violence, have participated in massacres, aircraft hijackings, piracy, suicide attacks, bombing, kidnapping and murder (just to name a few). And the general population of Arab Palestinians overwhelming support the bloodthirsty culture of the various HoAP; providing financial and material support.
​

It was never their country to defend. You keep saying that, but the Arab Palestinians did not exercise their sovereignty over any territory pre-1988 Declaration of Independence by the sole and legitimate representative of the Palestinian People.

Most Respectfully,
R

 

[Shusha]

The Treaty of Lausanne gave citizenship to the Palestinians, and nobody else, in Palestine.

The act of ensuring a transfer of citizenship from the ceding State to the Mandate did not create a State. Nor did it create a legal condition whereby the two peoples of the Mandate could not EACH have self-determination and separate.

The British wanted to create a Jewish national home in Palestine. The Palestinians rejected it, and after 30 years of occupation, Britain left failing to accomplish their goal.

The LoN not only 'wanted' to create a Jewish National Home in Palestine, they entrenched in law the RIGHTS of the Jewish people to a National Home in Palestine. You can 'reject' international law all you want, but that won't change the fact of it.

The UN states that the Palestinians, in Palestine, have the right to self determination without external interference. The right to independence and sovereignty.

The UN does not state that it is ONLY the Arab Muslim Palestinians which have the right to self-determination in Palestine. The UN has always taken the position that both peoples have those rights.

... the Palestinians, and their supporters around the world, reject Israel's so called right to exist ...

As stated above, the right of the Jewish people to a National Homeland is entrenched in law. To reject it is to reject law. And, as Rocco also pointed out, Israel exists. Fighting its existence is an exercise in futility.

But it does confirm what I frequently claim is the source of the conflict and has always been the source of the conflict. Its about preventing the Jewish people from having self-determination.

Your end game, then, is to have the State of Israel cease to exist.

 

[P F Tinmore]

• The Treaty set the authorization to for Mandatories to develop citizenship procedures.

All of the Mandated territories, except Palestine, developed their citizenship through their local representatives. Palestine's was written by a foreign power against their will.

That is a violation of the Palestinian's right to self determination without external interference.

 

[P F Tinmore]

It was never their country to defend. You keep saying that, but the Arab Palestinians did not exercise their sovereignty over any territory pre-1988 Declaration of Independence by the sole and legitimate representative of the Palestinian People.

You are back to Israeli talking points again.

That preventing the Palestinians from exercise their sovereignty at the point of a gun is a violation of their rights.

 

[P F Tinmore]

I have produced this treaty and you ignore it because it leaves out Israel, gaza, west bank and Jerusalem

The rules of occupation state that an occupying power does not acquire sovereignty.

 

[P F Tinmore]

The act of ensuring a transfer of citizenship from the ceding State to the Mandate did not create a State.

Nobody became the citizens of the Mandate.

 

[P F Tinmore]

The UN does not state that it is ONLY the Arab Muslim Palestinians which have the right to self-determination in Palestine.

Link?

 

[P F Tinmore]

Nor did it create a legal condition whereby the two peoples of the Mandate could not EACH have self-determination and separate.

The Treaty of Lausanne did not mention two people.

 

[Shusha]

The act of ensuring a transfer of citizenship from the ceding State to the Mandate did not create a State.

Nobody became the citizens of the Mandate.

Not my point. My point is that it did not create a State.

 

[Hollie]

It was never their country to defend. You keep saying that, but the Arab Palestinians did not exercise their sovereignty over any territory pre-1988 Declaration of Independence by the sole and legitimate representative of the Palestinian People.

You are back to Israeli talking points again.

That preventing the Palestinians from exercise their sovereignty at the point of a gun is a violation of their rights.

I'm afraid the above is the same cut and paste nonsense you have dumped into other threads. It's a pointless and unsupported claim.

Really dear, stop beating this horse. It has joined Archeohippus as a Montanan fossil.

 

[Shusha]

The UN does not state that it is ONLY the Arab Muslim Palestinians which have the right to self-determination in Palestine.

Link?

Are you seriously claiming that the UN has made a statement that ONLY the Arab Muslim Palestinians have a right to self-determination in the territory of the Palestinian Mandate?!

Please provide a link to that.

 

[Shusha]

Nor did it create a legal condition whereby the two peoples of the Mandate could not EACH have self-determination and separate.

The Treaty of Lausanne did not mention two people.

Exactly. Then it could not have created a legal condition which restricted rights of one of the two peoples.

 

[ForeverYoung436]

Nor did it create a legal condition whereby the two peoples of the Mandate could not EACH have self-determination and separate.

The Treaty of Lausanne did not mention two people.

Neither does it even mention Palestine at all.