Palestinians Massing At The Israeli Border

[Shusha]

P F Tinmore

You claim that immigrating Jews obtained Palestinian citizenship. This was true from 1924 onwards. The Jewish people living in the territory of Palestine in 1948, then, according to your own argument, were Palestinian citizens. When the five Arab armies attacked -- they were attacking the citizens of Palestine (but only the Jewish ones). The Arab citizens of Palestine also attacked the citizens of Palestine (but only the Jewish ones).

That makes the war of 1948 a civil war between citizens of Palestine as well as an international war between sovereigns, according to your own argument.

 

[P F Tinmore]

P F Tinmore

You claim that immigrating Jews obtained Palestinian citizenship. This was true from 1924 onwards. The Jewish people living in the territory of Palestine in 1948, then, according to your own argument, were Palestinian citizens. When the five Arab armies attacked -- they were attacking the citizens of Palestine (but only the Jewish ones). The Arab citizens of Palestine also attacked the citizens of Palestine (but only the Jewish ones).

That makes the war of 1948 a civil war between citizens of Palestine as well as an international war between sovereigns, according to your own argument.

That depends on how you define immigrant.

 

[RoccoR]

RE: Palestinians Massing At The Israeli Border
⁜→ P F Tinmore, Shusha, et al,

Here we go again, with the use of ambiguously defined terminology.

Immigrants or non-immigrants makes no difference. International humanitarian law (IHL) distinguishes two types of armed conflicts, namely:

◈ international Armed Conflicts (IAC), opposing two or more States, and

◈ Non-International Armed Conflicts (NIAC), between governmental forces and non-governmental armed groups, or between such groups only.
​

IHL treaty law also establishes a distinction between NAICs in the meaning of common Article 3 of the Geneva Conventions of 1949 (In the case of armed conflict not of an international character) and IACs falling within the definition provided in Article 1 of Additional Protocol II (shall apply to all armed conflicts which are not covered by Article 1).

The term "Civil War" is a layman's description for a classic condition. It is immune to "Type I Tinmore" manipulation.

P F TinmoreThat makes the war of 1948 a civil war between citizens of Palestine as well as an international war between sovereigns, according to your own argument.

That depends on how you define immigrant.

(COMMENT)

On 15 May 1948, the dilemma in categorizing the Jewish People was settled. They were neither Palestinian or Immigrant. They were Israeli citizens. The became Israeli Citizens under Article I UN Charter and on the recommendation by the UN through A/RES/ 181 (II), declared Independence through the right of self-determination.

On the act of aggression by the Arab League, the conflict was between one nation (Israel) against many nations (Arab League). That would, in today's terminology be an IAC (opposing two or more States). In 1948 terminology, it was just a plain old "war" (nations in conflict).

Most Respectfully,
R

 

[P F Tinmore]

RE: Palestinians Massing At The Israeli Border
⁜→ P F Tinmore, Shusha, et al,

Here we go again, with the use of ambiguously defined terminology.

Immigrants or non-immigrants makes no difference. International humanitarian law (IHL) distinguishes two types of armed conflicts, namely:

◈ international Armed Conflicts (IAC), opposing two or more States, and

◈ Non-International Armed Conflicts (NIAC), between governmental forces and non-governmental armed groups, or between such groups only.
​

IHL treaty law also establishes a distinction between NAICs in the meaning of common Article 3 of the Geneva Conventions of 1949 (In the case of armed conflict not of an international character) and IACs falling within the definition provided in Article 1 of Additional Protocol II (shall apply to all armed conflicts which are not covered by Article 1).

The term "Civil War" is a layman's description for a classic condition. It is immune to "Type I Tinmore" manipulation.

P F TinmoreThat makes the war of 1948 a civil war between citizens of Palestine as well as an international war between sovereigns, according to your own argument.

That depends on how you define immigrant.

(COMMENT)

On 15 May 1948, the dilemma in categorizing the Jewish People was settled. They were neither Palestinian or Immigrant. They were Israeli citizens. The became Israeli Citizens under Article I UN Charter and on the recommendation by the UN through A/RES/ 181 (II), declared Independence through the right of self-determination.

On the act of aggression by the Arab League, the conflict was between one nation (Israel) against many nations (Arab League). That would, in today's terminology be an IAC (opposing two or more States). In 1948 terminology, it was just a plain old "war" (nations in conflict).

Most Respectfully,
R

Israel was proclaimed by the foreign Jewish Agency that was created in Zurich by the foreign World Zionist Organization. Israel's "permanent population" was recently imported foreign settlers who did not immigrate into the Palestinian society.

The whole enterprise was funded by foreign money.

Israel was a foreign invasion of Palestine.

 

[RoccoR]

RE: Palestinians Massing At The Israeli Border
⁜→ P F Tinmore, et al,

It was the intention of the Allied Powers to implement the Balfour Declaration and to establish a Jewish National Home in Palestine.

The whole enterprise was funded by foreign money.
Israel was a foreign invasion of Palestine.

(COMMENT)

How the venture is funded was a complex matter. The British Foreign Office provided the lions share of the budget, administered by the High Commissioner. However Zionist funding did help. See the Economic Affairs section (simply as an example).

❖ 12/31/1927 Mandate 1927 Mandate for Palestine - Report of the Mandatory to the League of Nations •
​

The general mistake you make is in the understanding that the Zionist Organization (alla Munich at that time) had to approve and sponsor the Jewish Agency in Palestine.

Jewish Agency, in full Jewish Agency Of Israel, Hebrew Ha-sokhnut Ha-yehudit El-eretz Yisraʾel, international body representing the World Zionist Organization, created in 1929 by Chaim Weizmann, with headquarters in Jerusalem. Its purpose is to assist and encourage Jews worldwide to help develop and settle Israel.

Zionists needed financial backing for their project of creating a Jewish national home in Palestine. The Jewish Agency became an external arm of the Zionists, seeking to elicit aid from non-Zionist Jews, overseeing the settlement of Jewish immigrants in Palestine, and helping set up a Jewish economy.

Your implication that "foreign money" somehow taints the Jewish National Home the organization was largely inaccurate. After all, the Arab Palestinians cannot maintain their (Ramallah and Gaza) governmental functions and operations without huge foreign donations.

Most Respectfully,
R

 

[P F Tinmore]

It was the intention of the Allied Powers to implement the Balfour Declaration and to establish a Jewish National Home in Palestine.

Cool euphemism for foreign settler colonialism.

 

[P F Tinmore]

After all, the Arab Palestinians cannot maintain their (Ramallah and Gaza) governmental functions and operations without huge foreign donations.

The Palestinians did not need aid until the Zionists stole, bombed, and bulldozed all their stuff.

 

[RoccoR]

RE: Palestinians Massing At The Israeli Border
⁜→ P F Tinmore, et al,

The Arab Palestinians, unable to successfully engage on a political level, have several mantras → with one of the more often used excuses is "colonialism." They just cannot grasp the intention of the Allied Powers and the need for a National Home for the Jewish People.

It was the intention of the Allied Powers to implement the Balfour Declaration and to establish a Jewish National Home in Palestine.

Cool euphemism for foreign settler colonialism.

(COMMENT)

The consistent whining by the Hostile Arab Palestinians (HoAP) for every minute since the San Remo Convention, constant bickering with the Jewish Community, their inability to work cooperatively with the High Commissioner on the establishing self-governing institutions → was one long series of mistakes placing the a greater and greater distance between the successes of the Jewish Community and the failures of the Arab Community. It set the conditions for a cascade political failure from which, after a century, they could not recover. The HoAP have consistently had to cry on the shoulder of other Arab nation because they could not stand on their own or make any significant progress towards the development of their nation.

That is just how I see it, as do so many others.

Right now, the supporting Arab League nations, most of which are also behind Israel in terms of their Human Development, are on the road towards being the long-term care donors for the Palestinians.

Most Respectfully,
R

 

[P F Tinmore]

RE: Palestinians Massing At The Israeli Border
⁜→ P F Tinmore, et al,

The Arab Palestinians, unable to successfully engage on a political level, have several mantras → with one of the more often used excuses is "colonialism." They just cannot grasp the intention of the Allied Powers and the need for a National Home for the Jewish People.

It was the intention of the Allied Powers to implement the Balfour Declaration and to establish a Jewish National Home in Palestine.

Cool euphemism for foreign settler colonialism.

(COMMENT)

The consistent whining by the Hostile Arab Palestinians (HoAP) for every minute since the San Remo Convention, constant bickering with the Jewish Community, their inability to work cooperatively with the High Commissioner on the establishing self-governing institutions → was one long series of mistakes placing the a greater and greater distance between the successes of the Jewish Community and the failures of the Arab Community. It set the conditions for a cascade political failure from which, after a century, they could not recover. The HoAP have consistently had to cry on the shoulder of other Arab nation because they could not stand on their own or make any significant progress towards the development of their nation.

That is just how I see it, as do so many others.

Right now, the supporting Arab League nations, most of which are also behind Israel in terms of their Human Development, are on the road towards being the long-term care donors for the Palestinians.

Most Respectfully,
R

constant bickering with the Jewish Community, their inability to work cooperatively with the High Commissioner on the establishing self-governing institutions

There was not going to be any self governance in a settler colonial setting. The plan was (and still is) to move the Palestinians out and the settlers in.

 

[Sixties Fan]

Gaza border protest cancelled due to high temperatures, Ramadan fast

 

[Sixties Fan]

The Palestinian Arab media today are missing something that was in every Friday for over a year: reports on the weekly Gaza "Great Return March."

There are no protests today.

If they were popular protests, then people would come anyway, wouldn't they?

All this proves is that Hamas is behind the protests. They provide the logistics, the transportation, probably the tires to burn. They position who approaches the fence and who stays behind.

A terror group is behind every aspect of the "popular, peaceful" protests.

(full article online)

No protests in Gaza today. I guess the people decided on their own not to show up. ~ Elder Of Ziyon - Israel News

 

[Shusha]

P F Tinmore

You claim that immigrating Jews obtained Palestinian citizenship. This was true from 1924 onwards. The Jewish people living in the territory of Palestine in 1948, then, according to your own argument, were Palestinian citizens. When the five Arab armies attacked -- they were attacking the citizens of Palestine (but only the Jewish ones). The Arab citizens of Palestine also attacked the citizens of Palestine (but only the Jewish ones).

That makes the war of 1948 a civil war between citizens of Palestine as well as an international war between sovereigns, according to your own argument.

That depends on how you define immigrant.

I define it the usual way. The accepted way.

You have a new definition of immigrant twisted for your purposes of denying rights to the Jewish people? A people which, btw, you just agreed have legal right to settle the land.

 

[Shusha]

It was the intention of the Allied Powers to implement the Balfour Declaration and to establish a Jewish National Home in Palestine.

Cool euphemism for foreign settler colonialism.

Once again you completely ignore the point of a Jewish National Home created based on the existing right of the Jewish people to return to their homeland.

You are a hypocrite if you support a return for the Arabs and all their descendants and don’t support the same for the Jewish people.

The rights are collective rights.

 

[RoccoR]

RE: Palestinians Massing At The Israeli Border
⁜→ P F Tinmore, et al,

We are talking about a time period just over a century-long; if you start the clock with the Balfour Declaration. And in that 100 year period, there were all kinds of exchange in views → as to the various perspectives.

BUT, in the framework of the Mandate that was agreed upon by the Allied Powers, the Jewish Agency (a World Zionist Executive) was formally recognized as a "public body." And it was through the interpretation of this language that the Jewish Agency derived international legitimacy and diplomatic representation before the League of Nations. And it was precisely the lack of embrionic‐state and progress towards self-governing institutions, that the Palestinians become at a disadvantage in the ability to effectively influence public opinion anywhere in the world. This was compounded, in 1923, by the fact that the Arab Higher Committee (AHC) rejected, for a third time, the proposed creation of an Arab Agency to bring the AHC up to the same functional level similar → to the Zionist Executive (the Jewish Agency). Of course, by rejecting the offer made by the first High Commissioner of Palestine (Herbert Samuel), the AHC irreparably crippled the Palestinian interest.

constant bickering with the Jewish Community, their inability to work cooperatively with the High Commissioner on the establishing self-governing institutions

There was not going to be any self-governance in a settler colonial setting. The plan was (and still is) to move the Palestinians out and the settlers in.

(COMMENT)

Your interpretation is entirely wrong, as wrong as the decisions that continued to compound self-inflicted political wounds that retarded the establishment of quasi-self-governing institutions to balance the equations with the Jewish Agency.

The idea that displacement of Arab Palestinians is a condition set upon themselves. The Hostile Arab Palestinians (HoAP) made it imperative for the Israelis to institute rear area security measures in order to protect themselves from an internal security problems well behind the FEBA.

The more the HoAP crippled themselves, the more they tried to blame their weaknesses and failures on the Israelis. With them, the Arab Palestinians always blame someone else.

Most Respectfully,
R

 

[P F Tinmore]

RE: Palestinians Massing At The Israeli Border
⁜→ P F Tinmore, et al,

We are talking about a time period just over a century-long; if you start the clock with the Balfour Declaration. And in that 100 year period, there were all kinds of exchange in views → as to the various perspectives.

BUT, in the framework of the Mandate that was agreed upon by the Allied Powers, the Jewish Agency (a World Zionist Executive) was formally recognized as a "public body." And it was through the interpretation of this language that the Jewish Agency derived international legitimacy and diplomatic representation before the League of Nations. And it was precisely the lack of embrionic‐state and progress towards self-governing institutions, that the Palestinians become at a disadvantage in the ability to effectively influence public opinion anywhere in the world. This was compounded, in 1923, by the fact that the Arab Higher Committee (AHC) rejected, for a third time, the proposed creation of an Arab Agency to bring the AHC up to the same functional level similar → to the Zionist Executive (the Jewish Agency). Of course, by rejecting the offer made by the first High Commissioner of Palestine (Herbert Samuel), the AHC irreparably crippled the Palestinian interest.

constant bickering with the Jewish Community, their inability to work cooperatively with the High Commissioner on the establishing self-governing institutions

There was not going to be any self-governance in a settler colonial setting. The plan was (and still is) to move the Palestinians out and the settlers in.

(COMMENT)

Your interpretation is entirely wrong, as wrong as the decisions that continued to compound self-inflicted political wounds that retarded the establishment of quasi-self-governing institutions to balance the equations with the Jewish Agency.

The idea that displacement of Arab Palestinians is a condition set upon themselves. The Hostile Arab Palestinians (HoAP) made it imperative for the Israelis to institute rear area security measures in order to protect themselves from an internal security problems well behind the FEBA.

The more the HoAP crippled themselves, the more they tried to blame their weaknesses and failures on the Israelis. With them, the Arab Palestinians always blame someone else.

Most Respectfully,
R

The drive of political zionism to establish a settler State in Palestine was met by violent resistance from the Palestinians, and this situation simmered until it boiled over in 1936.
-------------
The King-Crane Commission had reported that Jewish colonists were planning a radical transformation of Palestine:

• 
  "The fact came out repeatedly in the Commission's conference with Jewish representatives, that the Zionists looked forward to a practically complete dispossession of the present non-Jewish inhabitants of Palestine, by various forms of purchase". 67/

Similarly, a number of Jewish organizations such as the Colonisation Department of the Zionist Organization, financed by the Keren ha-Yesod, were actively engaged in acquisition of land both for individual immigrant families as well as for the Yishuv or Jewish settlements. Several of these organizations had been operating since the nineteenth century, notably the Palestine Jewish Colonisation Association (PICA)*.
---------
"(e) The Agency shall promote agricultural colonization based on Jewish labour ... it shall be deemed to be a matter of principle that Jewish labour shall be employed ..."
---------------
The report noted in the strongest terms the effect on indigenous Palestinians of Zionist policies.

• 
  "The effect of the Zionist colonization policy on the Arab. Actually the result of the purchase of land in Palestine by the Jewish National Fund has been that land has been extraterritorialized. It ceases to be land from which the Arab can gain any advantage either now or at any time in the future. Not only can he never hope to lease or to cultivate it, but, by the stringent provisions of the lease of the Jewish National Fund, he is deprived for ever from employment on that land.

The Origins and Evolution of the Palestine Problem Part I: 1917-1947 - Study (30 June 1978)

And you keep saying that it is not a settler colonial project. One that continues today.


The protests reject that policy.

 

[RoccoR]

RE: Palestinians Massing At The Israeli Border
⁜→ P F Tinmore, et al,

FIRST: I should point out that I did not use the terminology "colonialism" - or - "colonization." I know from previous encounters that you have trouble with these words.

I think that I have spoken to this issue before. Let me try one more time.




There is absolutely NOTHING wrong with the Allied Powers opening up Article 16 territories for immigration and "colonization" assuming that just compensation is made to property owners. Which you admit is being done in your example. It is the action of appropriating a place or domain for one's own use. Or, as you say below, "various forms of purchase." Once I purchase land from you (free and clear), thereafter it is mine, not yours.

That is a much different thing from domination policy of foreign expansionism or → "colonialism."

Second: While you may try to convey the idea that there is something inherently evil about "colonization" that is accomplished "by various forms of purchase" (King-Crane Commission (KCC) Report) → there is not evil. It should be noted that the KCC will turn 100 years old this year, implying that the views expressed and the conduct of the survey itself need to be reflected in any interpretation. That would include the idea that the San Remo Convention implied a "radical transformation" in Palestine with the creation of a Jewish National Home. The radical transformation was intended to express a positive change in the future.

The King-Crane Commission had reported that Jewish colonists were planning a radical transformation of Palestine:

• 
  "The fact came out repeatedly in the Commission's conference with Jewish representatives, that the Zionists looked forward to a practically complete dispossession of the present non-Jewish inhabitants of Palestine, by various forms of purchase". 67/

---------
"(e) The Agency shall promote agricultural colonization based on Jewish labor... it shall be deemed to be a matter of principle that Jewish labor shall be employed ..."
---------------
The report noted in the strongest terms the effect on indigenous Palestinians of Zionist policies.

• 
  "The effect of the Zionist colonization policy on the Arab. Actually the result of the purchase of land in Palestine by the Jewish National Fund has been that land has been extraterritorialized. It ceases to be land from which the Arab can gain any advantage either now or at any time in the future. Not only can he never hope to lease or to cultivate it, but, by the stringent provisions of the lease of the Jewish National Fund, he is deprived for ever from employment on that land.

The Origins and Evolution of the Palestine Problem Part I: 1917-1947 - Study (30 June 1978)

And you keep saying that it is not a settler colonial project. One that continues today.


The protests reject that policy.

(COMMENT)

At the outset, I would like to remind everyone that the entire series (4 Volumes) of the Origins and Evolution of the Palestine Problem was Prepared for, and under the guidance of the Committee on the Exercise of the Inalienable Rights for the Palestinian People (CEIRPP) is part and parcel an entity of the UN Division for Palestinian Rights (DPR). The CEIRPP/DPR is the official drum beater for the Palestinian People and commemorating the adoption by the Assembly, on 29 November 1947, of A/RES/181 (II), which provided for the partition of Palestine into two States. (See: UN LINK) The CEIRPP/DPR mission is to achievement the cooperation (regionally and globally) in the establishment of a Two-State solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.

Not that I know anything,
Most Respectfully,
R

 

[Hollie]

RE: Palestinians Massing At The Israeli Border
⁜→ P F Tinmore, et al,

We are talking about a time period just over a century-long; if you start the clock with the Balfour Declaration. And in that 100 year period, there were all kinds of exchange in views → as to the various perspectives.

BUT, in the framework of the Mandate that was agreed upon by the Allied Powers, the Jewish Agency (a World Zionist Executive) was formally recognized as a "public body." And it was through the interpretation of this language that the Jewish Agency derived international legitimacy and diplomatic representation before the League of Nations. And it was precisely the lack of embrionic‐state and progress towards self-governing institutions, that the Palestinians become at a disadvantage in the ability to effectively influence public opinion anywhere in the world. This was compounded, in 1923, by the fact that the Arab Higher Committee (AHC) rejected, for a third time, the proposed creation of an Arab Agency to bring the AHC up to the same functional level similar → to the Zionist Executive (the Jewish Agency). Of course, by rejecting the offer made by the first High Commissioner of Palestine (Herbert Samuel), the AHC irreparably crippled the Palestinian interest.

constant bickering with the Jewish Community, their inability to work cooperatively with the High Commissioner on the establishing self-governing institutions

There was not going to be any self-governance in a settler colonial setting. The plan was (and still is) to move the Palestinians out and the settlers in.

(COMMENT)

Your interpretation is entirely wrong, as wrong as the decisions that continued to compound self-inflicted political wounds that retarded the establishment of quasi-self-governing institutions to balance the equations with the Jewish Agency.

The idea that displacement of Arab Palestinians is a condition set upon themselves. The Hostile Arab Palestinians (HoAP) made it imperative for the Israelis to institute rear area security measures in order to protect themselves from an internal security problems well behind the FEBA.

The more the HoAP crippled themselves, the more they tried to blame their weaknesses and failures on the Israelis. With them, the Arab Palestinians always blame someone else.

Most Respectfully,
R

The drive of political zionism to establish a settler State in Palestine was met by violent resistance from the Palestinians, and this situation simmered until it boiled over in 1936.
-------------
The King-Crane Commission had reported that Jewish colonists were planning a radical transformation of Palestine:

• 
  "The fact came out repeatedly in the Commission's conference with Jewish representatives, that the Zionists looked forward to a practically complete dispossession of the present non-Jewish inhabitants of Palestine, by various forms of purchase". 67/

Similarly, a number of Jewish organizations such as the Colonisation Department of the Zionist Organization, financed by the Keren ha-Yesod, were actively engaged in acquisition of land both for individual immigrant families as well as for the Yishuv or Jewish settlements. Several of these organizations had been operating since the nineteenth century, notably the Palestine Jewish Colonisation Association (PICA)*.
---------
"(e) The Agency shall promote agricultural colonization based on Jewish labour ... it shall be deemed to be a matter of principle that Jewish labour shall be employed ..."
---------------
The report noted in the strongest terms the effect on indigenous Palestinians of Zionist policies.

• 
  "The effect of the Zionist colonization policy on the Arab. Actually the result of the purchase of land in Palestine by the Jewish National Fund has been that land has been extraterritorialized. It ceases to be land from which the Arab can gain any advantage either now or at any time in the future. Not only can he never hope to lease or to cultivate it, but, by the stringent provisions of the lease of the Jewish National Fund, he is deprived for ever from employment on that land.

The Origins and Evolution of the Palestine Problem Part I: 1917-1947 - Study (30 June 1978)

And you keep saying that it is not a settler colonial project. One that continues today.


The protests reject that policy.

That long cut and paste demonstrates the rage that grips you at the existence of Israel and your insensate Jew hatreds.

You demonstrate a real pathology.

 

[USAF 2023]

RE: Palestinians Massing At The Israeli Border
⁜→ P F Tinmore, et al,

We are talking about a time period just over a century-long; if you start the clock with the Balfour Declaration. And in that 100 year period, there were all kinds of exchange in views → as to the various perspectives.

BUT, in the framework of the Mandate that was agreed upon by the Allied Powers, the Jewish Agency (a World Zionist Executive) was formally recognized as a "public body." And it was through the interpretation of this language that the Jewish Agency derived international legitimacy and diplomatic representation before the League of Nations. And it was precisely the lack of embrionic‐state and progress towards self-governing institutions, that the Palestinians become at a disadvantage in the ability to effectively influence public opinion anywhere in the world. This was compounded, in 1923, by the fact that the Arab Higher Committee (AHC) rejected, for a third time, the proposed creation of an Arab Agency to bring the AHC up to the same functional level similar → to the Zionist Executive (the Jewish Agency). Of course, by rejecting the offer made by the first High Commissioner of Palestine (Herbert Samuel), the AHC irreparably crippled the Palestinian interest.

constant bickering with the Jewish Community, their inability to work cooperatively with the High Commissioner on the establishing self-governing institutions

There was not going to be any self-governance in a settler colonial setting. The plan was (and still is) to move the Palestinians out and the settlers in.

(COMMENT)

Your interpretation is entirely wrong, as wrong as the decisions that continued to compound self-inflicted political wounds that retarded the establishment of quasi-self-governing institutions to balance the equations with the Jewish Agency.

The idea that displacement of Arab Palestinians is a condition set upon themselves. The Hostile Arab Palestinians (HoAP) made it imperative for the Israelis to institute rear area security measures in order to protect themselves from an internal security problems well behind the FEBA.

The more the HoAP crippled themselves, the more they tried to blame their weaknesses and failures on the Israelis. With them, the Arab Palestinians always blame someone else.

Most Respectfully,
R

The drive of political zionism to establish a settler State in Palestine was met by violent resistance from the Palestinians, and this situation simmered until it boiled over in 1936.
-------------
The King-Crane Commission had reported that Jewish colonists were planning a radical transformation of Palestine:

• 
  "The fact came out repeatedly in the Commission's conference with Jewish representatives, that the Zionists looked forward to a practically complete dispossession of the present non-Jewish inhabitants of Palestine, by various forms of purchase". 67/

Similarly, a number of Jewish organizations such as the Colonisation Department of the Zionist Organization, financed by the Keren ha-Yesod, were actively engaged in acquisition of land both for individual immigrant families as well as for the Yishuv or Jewish settlements. Several of these organizations had been operating since the nineteenth century, notably the Palestine Jewish Colonisation Association (PICA)*.
---------
"(e) The Agency shall promote agricultural colonization based on Jewish labour ... it shall be deemed to be a matter of principle that Jewish labour shall be employed ..."
---------------
The report noted in the strongest terms the effect on indigenous Palestinians of Zionist policies.

• 
  "The effect of the Zionist colonization policy on the Arab. Actually the result of the purchase of land in Palestine by the Jewish National Fund has been that land has been extraterritorialized. It ceases to be land from which the Arab can gain any advantage either now or at any time in the future. Not only can he never hope to lease or to cultivate it, but, by the stringent provisions of the lease of the Jewish National Fund, he is deprived for ever from employment on that land.

The Origins and Evolution of the Palestine Problem Part I: 1917-1947 - Study (30 June 1978)

And you keep saying that it is not a settler colonial project. One that continues today.


The protests reject that policy.

That long cut and paste demonstrates the rage that grips you at the existence of Israel and your insensate Jew hatreds.

You demonstrate a real pathology.

With each You Tube posting he gets more desperate. I am starting to miss the one where the Hasidic Jews wish for Israels destruction. I enjoy it

 

[P F Tinmore]

RE: Palestinians Massing At The Israeli Border
⁜→ P F Tinmore, et al,

FIRST: I should point out that I did not use the terminology "colonialism" - or - "colonization." I know from previous encounters that you have trouble with these words.

I think that I have spoken to this issue before. Let me try one more time.

View attachment 261326


There is absolutely NOTHING wrong with the Allied Powers opening up Article 16 territories for immigration and "colonization" assuming that just compensation is made to property owners. Which you admit is being done in your example. It is the action of appropriating a place or domain for one's own use. Or, as you say below, "various forms of purchase." Once I purchase land from you (free and clear), thereafter it is mine, not yours.

That is a much different thing from domination policy of foreign expansionism or → "colonialism."

Second: While you may try to convey the idea that there is something inherently evil about "colonization" that is accomplished "by various forms of purchase" (King-Crane Commission (KCC) Report) → there is not evil. It should be noted that the KCC will turn 100 years old this year, implying that the views expressed and the conduct of the survey itself need to be reflected in any interpretation. That would include the idea that the San Remo Convention implied a "radical transformation" in Palestine with the creation of a Jewish National Home. The radical transformation was intended to express a positive change in the future.

The King-Crane Commission had reported that Jewish colonists were planning a radical transformation of Palestine:

• 
  "The fact came out repeatedly in the Commission's conference with Jewish representatives, that the Zionists looked forward to a practically complete dispossession of the present non-Jewish inhabitants of Palestine, by various forms of purchase". 67/

---------
"(e) The Agency shall promote agricultural colonization based on Jewish labor... it shall be deemed to be a matter of principle that Jewish labor shall be employed ..."
---------------
The report noted in the strongest terms the effect on indigenous Palestinians of Zionist policies.

• 
  "The effect of the Zionist colonization policy on the Arab. Actually the result of the purchase of land in Palestine by the Jewish National Fund has been that land has been extraterritorialized. It ceases to be land from which the Arab can gain any advantage either now or at any time in the future. Not only can he never hope to lease or to cultivate it, but, by the stringent provisions of the lease of the Jewish National Fund, he is deprived for ever from employment on that land.

The Origins and Evolution of the Palestine Problem Part I: 1917-1947 - Study (30 June 1978)

And you keep saying that it is not a settler colonial project. One that continues today.


The protests reject that policy.

(COMMENT)

At the outset, I would like to remind everyone that the entire series (4 Volumes) of the Origins and Evolution of the Palestine Problem was Prepared for, and under the guidance of the Committee on the Exercise of the Inalienable Rights for the Palestinian People (CEIRPP) is part and parcel an entity of the UN Division for Palestinian Rights (DPR). The CEIRPP/DPR is the official drum beater for the Palestinian People and commemorating the adoption by the Assembly, on 29 November 1947, of A/RES/181 (II), which provided for the partition of Palestine into two States. (See: UN LINK) The CEIRPP/DPR mission is to achievement the cooperation (regionally and globally) in the establishment of a Two-State solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.

Not that I know anything,
Most Respectfully,
R

Uhhh, OK.

 

[Mindful]

RE: Palestinians Massing At The Israeli Border
⁜→ P F Tinmore, et al,

We are talking about a time period just over a century-long; if you start the clock with the Balfour Declaration. And in that 100 year period, there were all kinds of exchange in views → as to the various perspectives.

BUT, in the framework of the Mandate that was agreed upon by the Allied Powers, the Jewish Agency (a World Zionist Executive) was formally recognized as a "public body." And it was through the interpretation of this language that the Jewish Agency derived international legitimacy and diplomatic representation before the League of Nations. And it was precisely the lack of embrionic‐state and progress towards self-governing institutions, that the Palestinians become at a disadvantage in the ability to effectively influence public opinion anywhere in the world. This was compounded, in 1923, by the fact that the Arab Higher Committee (AHC) rejected, for a third time, the proposed creation of an Arab Agency to bring the AHC up to the same functional level similar → to the Zionist Executive (the Jewish Agency). Of course, by rejecting the offer made by the first High Commissioner of Palestine (Herbert Samuel), the AHC irreparably crippled the Palestinian interest.

constant bickering with the Jewish Community, their inability to work cooperatively with the High Commissioner on the establishing self-governing institutions

There was not going to be any self-governance in a settler colonial setting. The plan was (and still is) to move the Palestinians out and the settlers in.

(COMMENT)

Your interpretation is entirely wrong, as wrong as the decisions that continued to compound self-inflicted political wounds that retarded the establishment of quasi-self-governing institutions to balance the equations with the Jewish Agency.

The idea that displacement of Arab Palestinians is a condition set upon themselves. The Hostile Arab Palestinians (HoAP) made it imperative for the Israelis to institute rear area security measures in order to protect themselves from an internal security problems well behind the FEBA.

The more the HoAP crippled themselves, the more they tried to blame their weaknesses and failures on the Israelis. With them, the Arab Palestinians always blame someone else.

Most Respectfully,
R

The drive of political zionism to establish a settler State in Palestine was met by violent resistance from the Palestinians, and this situation simmered until it boiled over in 1936.
-------------
The King-Crane Commission had reported that Jewish colonists were planning a radical transformation of Palestine:

• 
  "The fact came out repeatedly in the Commission's conference with Jewish representatives, that the Zionists looked forward to a practically complete dispossession of the present non-Jewish inhabitants of Palestine, by various forms of purchase". 67/

Similarly, a number of Jewish organizations such as the Colonisation Department of the Zionist Organization, financed by the Keren ha-Yesod, were actively engaged in acquisition of land both for individual immigrant families as well as for the Yishuv or Jewish settlements. Several of these organizations had been operating since the nineteenth century, notably the Palestine Jewish Colonisation Association (PICA)*.
---------
"(e) The Agency shall promote agricultural colonization based on Jewish labour ... it shall be deemed to be a matter of principle that Jewish labour shall be employed ..."
---------------
The report noted in the strongest terms the effect on indigenous Palestinians of Zionist policies.

• 
  "The effect of the Zionist colonization policy on the Arab. Actually the result of the purchase of land in Palestine by the Jewish National Fund has been that land has been extraterritorialized. It ceases to be land from which the Arab can gain any advantage either now or at any time in the future. Not only can he never hope to lease or to cultivate it, but, by the stringent provisions of the lease of the Jewish National Fund, he is deprived for ever from employment on that land.

The Origins and Evolution of the Palestine Problem Part I: 1917-1947 - Study (30 June 1978)

And you keep saying that it is not a settler colonial project. One that continues today.


The protests reject that policy.

That long cut and paste demonstrates the rage that grips you at the existence of Israel and your insensate Jew hatreds.

You demonstrate a real pathology.

If he could just be honest, and say he has a 'thing' for Jews.