Sweet_Caroline
Gold Member
- Jun 15, 2013
- 4,174
- 824
- 155
"It should be common knowledge that under the Mandate, all of Palestine was reserved exclusively for the establishment of the Jewish National Home and future independent Jewish State"
Rubbish. I might add that the preamble specifically negates that silly assertion when it recognizes the existence of the non-Jewish communities and prohibits any action that "might" prejudice the rights of these communities. The word "might" is clear in that even if there is just a small probability that an action might prejudice the civil rights of the non-Jewish communities, it could not be taken. And, putting non-Jews in a state where the Jews would be 55% of the population, as the UN partition did, certainly might have prejudiced the civil and religious rights of the non-Jews, which we know it did. So the Partition contravened the Mandate on a few levels.
"the establishment in Palestine of a national home for the Jewish people, it being clearly understood that nothing should be done which might prejudice the civil and religious rights of existing non-Jewish communities in Palestine,"
The Avalon Project : The Palestine Mandate
And nothing did.
Of course the partition "might" have prejudiced the civil rights of the non-Jewish communities that remained in the Jewish part of the partition. And it certainly did. You are aware of the fact that most of the non-Jewish community was displaced. Can't prejudice civil rights any more than that.
Most non-Jewish communities were displaced? Your assertions get more ridiculous as time goes on. Watch Eurovision - take a break.