The Balfour Declaration

[P F Tinmore]

RE: The Balfour Declaration
※→ Humanity, Shusha, et al,

Well, I can see how you might say that, if you were applying modern "civil rights" criteria in strict compliance. However, history shows us that what is discussed as rights in time of peace, is the first casualty in time of war and conflict. In fact, today, war and conflict have been replaced by newer terminology.

• International Armed Conflict (IAC)
• Non-International Armed Conflict (NIAC)​

“In Palestine as of Right and Not on Sufferance ...”
“When it is asked what is meant by the development of the Jewish National Home in Palestine, it may be answered that it is not the imposition of a Jewish nationality upon the inhabitants of Palestine as a whole, but the further development of the existing Jewish community, with the assistance of Jews in other parts of the world, in order that it may become a centre in which the Jewish people as a whole may take, on grounds of religion and race, an interest and a pride. But in order that this community should have the best prospect of free development and provide a full opportunity for the Jewish people to display its capacities, it is essential that it should know that it is in Palestine as of right and not on sufferance.”

Winston Churchill
British Secretary of State for the Colonies
June 1922​

Many are of the opinion that the creation of the State of Israel (as the Jewish National Home), which displaced the Palestinian regional majority, was the primary trigger in the conflict which ignited between the Arab Palestinian - and the State of Israel. But is that actually true?

I would probably suggest that one of the "rights" was to be able to remain in their homes and not be evicted!

(COMMENT)

THE FIRST QUESTION: While this statement sounds reasonable, where does it say that? What assurance do the Arab Palestinians (non-Jewish) have on the matter of "civil rights." Remember, under the Rule of the Sultan, the rights were what the Sultan granted.

Not even in modern times are all Customary and International Humanitarian Law is the same in both the IAC and the NIAC. For instance, Common Article 3 applies to "armed conflicts not of an international character (NIAC) occurring in the territory of one of the High Contracting Parties."

Interesting enough, all of the peacetime applicable provisions, of the Gevena Convention, apply to all cases of declared war → or → of any other armed conflict which may arise between two or more of the High Contracting Parties, even if the state of war is not recognized by one of them. This is very applicable to the current Arab Palestinian engagements with the State of Israel. You will sometime hear a pro-Arab Palestinian Advocate suggest that the Arab Palestinians have no peace treaty because they have not been at war with anyone.

But in any case, the civil rights of the Arab Palestinians during the period 1917 through 1922 were not codified. It is hard to say what rights were envisioned, or even if the concept of rights existed for Arab Palestinians.

Most Respectfully,
R

Well...

Recognizing​

that the Palestinian people is entitled to self-determination in accordance with the Charter of the United Nations,

Expressing its grave concern that the Palestinian people has been prevented from enjoying its inalienable rights, in particular its right to self-determination,

Guided by the purposes and principles of the Charter,

Recalling its relevant resolutions which affirm the right of the Palestinian people to self-determination,

1. Reaffirms the inalienable rights of the Palestinian people in Palestine, including:

(a) The right to self-determination without external interference;

(b) The right to national independence and sovereignty;

UN General Assembly Resolution 3236 and UN General Assembly Resolution 3237​

At what time and under what circumstances did the Palestinians obtain these rights?

 

[Sixties Fan]

RE: The Balfour Declaration
※→ Humanity, Shusha, et al,

Well, I can see how you might say that, if you were applying modern "civil rights" criteria in strict compliance. However, history shows us that what is discussed as rights in time of peace, is the first casualty in time of war and conflict. In fact, today, war and conflict have been replaced by newer terminology.

• International Armed Conflict (IAC)
• Non-International Armed Conflict (NIAC)​

“In Palestine as of Right and Not on Sufferance ...”
“When it is asked what is meant by the development of the Jewish National Home in Palestine, it may be answered that it is not the imposition of a Jewish nationality upon the inhabitants of Palestine as a whole, but the further development of the existing Jewish community, with the assistance of Jews in other parts of the world, in order that it may become a centre in which the Jewish people as a whole may take, on grounds of religion and race, an interest and a pride. But in order that this community should have the best prospect of free development and provide a full opportunity for the Jewish people to display its capacities, it is essential that it should know that it is in Palestine as of right and not on sufferance.”

Winston Churchill
British Secretary of State for the Colonies
June 1922​

Many are of the opinion that the creation of the State of Israel (as the Jewish National Home), which displaced the Palestinian regional majority, was the primary trigger in the conflict which ignited between the Arab Palestinian - and the State of Israel. But is that actually true?

I would probably suggest that one of the "rights" was to be able to remain in their homes and not be evicted!

(COMMENT)

THE FIRST QUESTION: While this statement sounds reasonable, where does it say that? What assurance do the Arab Palestinians (non-Jewish) have on the matter of "civil rights." Remember, under the Rule of the Sultan, the rights were what the Sultan granted.

Not even in modern times are all Customary and International Humanitarian Law is the same in both the IAC and the NIAC. For instance, Common Article 3 applies to "armed conflicts not of an international character (NIAC) occurring in the territory of one of the High Contracting Parties."

Interesting enough, all of the peacetime applicable provisions, of the Gevena Convention, apply to all cases of declared war → or → of any other armed conflict which may arise between two or more of the High Contracting Parties, even if the state of war is not recognized by one of them. This is very applicable to the current Arab Palestinian engagements with the State of Israel. You will sometime hear a pro-Arab Palestinian Advocate suggest that the Arab Palestinians have no peace treaty because they have not been at war with anyone.

But in any case, the civil rights of the Arab Palestinians during the period 1917 through 1922 were not codified. It is hard to say what rights were envisioned, or even if the concept of rights existed for Arab Palestinians.

Most Respectfully,
R

Well...

Recognizing
that the Palestinian people is entitled to self-determination in accordance with the Charter of the United Nations,

Expressing its grave concern that the Palestinian people has been prevented from enjoying its inalienable rights, in particular its right to self-determination,

Guided by the purposes and principles of the Charter,

Recalling its relevant resolutions which affirm the right of the Palestinian people to self-determination,

1. Reaffirms the inalienable rights of the Palestinian people in Palestine, including:

(a) The right to self-determination without external interference;

(b) The right to national independence and sovereignty;

UN General Assembly Resolution 3236 and UN General Assembly Resolution 3237​

At what time and under what circumstances did the Palestinians obtain these rights?

It is the umpteenth time you put up that worthless link to that worthless nonsense in 1974, not in 1920, by Yasser Arafat, which are nothing but Arab DEMANDS, and have nothing to do with the Balfour Declaration OR the Mandate for Palestine.

Keep lying and inserting what never was the Declaration or the Mandate wherever you can. It is fun to watch you lose again and again.

 

[P F Tinmore]

RE: The Balfour Declaration
※→ Humanity, Shusha, et al,

Well, I can see how you might say that, if you were applying modern "civil rights" criteria in strict compliance. However, history shows us that what is discussed as rights in time of peace, is the first casualty in time of war and conflict. In fact, today, war and conflict have been replaced by newer terminology.

• International Armed Conflict (IAC)
• Non-International Armed Conflict (NIAC)​

“In Palestine as of Right and Not on Sufferance ...”
“When it is asked what is meant by the development of the Jewish National Home in Palestine, it may be answered that it is not the imposition of a Jewish nationality upon the inhabitants of Palestine as a whole, but the further development of the existing Jewish community, with the assistance of Jews in other parts of the world, in order that it may become a centre in which the Jewish people as a whole may take, on grounds of religion and race, an interest and a pride. But in order that this community should have the best prospect of free development and provide a full opportunity for the Jewish people to display its capacities, it is essential that it should know that it is in Palestine as of right and not on sufferance.”

Winston Churchill
British Secretary of State for the Colonies
June 1922​

Many are of the opinion that the creation of the State of Israel (as the Jewish National Home), which displaced the Palestinian regional majority, was the primary trigger in the conflict which ignited between the Arab Palestinian - and the State of Israel. But is that actually true?

I would probably suggest that one of the "rights" was to be able to remain in their homes and not be evicted!

(COMMENT)

THE FIRST QUESTION: While this statement sounds reasonable, where does it say that? What assurance do the Arab Palestinians (non-Jewish) have on the matter of "civil rights." Remember, under the Rule of the Sultan, the rights were what the Sultan granted.

Not even in modern times are all Customary and International Humanitarian Law is the same in both the IAC and the NIAC. For instance, Common Article 3 applies to "armed conflicts not of an international character (NIAC) occurring in the territory of one of the High Contracting Parties."

Interesting enough, all of the peacetime applicable provisions, of the Gevena Convention, apply to all cases of declared war → or → of any other armed conflict which may arise between two or more of the High Contracting Parties, even if the state of war is not recognized by one of them. This is very applicable to the current Arab Palestinian engagements with the State of Israel. You will sometime hear a pro-Arab Palestinian Advocate suggest that the Arab Palestinians have no peace treaty because they have not been at war with anyone.

But in any case, the civil rights of the Arab Palestinians during the period 1917 through 1922 were not codified. It is hard to say what rights were envisioned, or even if the concept of rights existed for Arab Palestinians.

Most Respectfully,
R

Well...

Recognizing
that the Palestinian people is entitled to self-determination in accordance with the Charter of the United Nations,

Expressing its grave concern that the Palestinian people has been prevented from enjoying its inalienable rights, in particular its right to self-determination,

Guided by the purposes and principles of the Charter,

Recalling its relevant resolutions which affirm the right of the Palestinian people to self-determination,

1. Reaffirms the inalienable rights of the Palestinian people in Palestine, including:

(a) The right to self-determination without external interference;

(b) The right to national independence and sovereignty;

UN General Assembly Resolution 3236 and UN General Assembly Resolution 3237​

At what time and under what circumstances did the Palestinians obtain these rights?

It is the umpteenth time you put up that worthless link to that worthless nonsense in 1974, not in 1920, by Yasser Arafat, which are nothing but Arab DEMANDS, and have nothing to do with the Balfour Declaration OR the Mandate for Palestine.

Keep lying and inserting what never was the Declaration or the Mandate wherever you can. It is fun to watch you lose again and again.

Only Zionists try to replace actual documented proof with Israeli bullshit.

 

[Sixties Fan]

RE: The Balfour Declaration
※→ Humanity, Shusha, et al,

Well, I can see how you might say that, if you were applying modern "civil rights" criteria in strict compliance. However, history shows us that what is discussed as rights in time of peace, is the first casualty in time of war and conflict. In fact, today, war and conflict have been replaced by newer terminology.

• International Armed Conflict (IAC)
• Non-International Armed Conflict (NIAC)​

“In Palestine as of Right and Not on Sufferance ...”
“When it is asked what is meant by the development of the Jewish National Home in Palestine, it may be answered that it is not the imposition of a Jewish nationality upon the inhabitants of Palestine as a whole, but the further development of the existing Jewish community, with the assistance of Jews in other parts of the world, in order that it may become a centre in which the Jewish people as a whole may take, on grounds of religion and race, an interest and a pride. But in order that this community should have the best prospect of free development and provide a full opportunity for the Jewish people to display its capacities, it is essential that it should know that it is in Palestine as of right and not on sufferance.”

Winston Churchill
British Secretary of State for the Colonies
June 1922​

Many are of the opinion that the creation of the State of Israel (as the Jewish National Home), which displaced the Palestinian regional majority, was the primary trigger in the conflict which ignited between the Arab Palestinian - and the State of Israel. But is that actually true?

I would probably suggest that one of the "rights" was to be able to remain in their homes and not be evicted!

(COMMENT)

THE FIRST QUESTION: While this statement sounds reasonable, where does it say that? What assurance do the Arab Palestinians (non-Jewish) have on the matter of "civil rights." Remember, under the Rule of the Sultan, the rights were what the Sultan granted.

Not even in modern times are all Customary and International Humanitarian Law is the same in both the IAC and the NIAC. For instance, Common Article 3 applies to "armed conflicts not of an international character (NIAC) occurring in the territory of one of the High Contracting Parties."

Interesting enough, all of the peacetime applicable provisions, of the Gevena Convention, apply to all cases of declared war → or → of any other armed conflict which may arise between two or more of the High Contracting Parties, even if the state of war is not recognized by one of them. This is very applicable to the current Arab Palestinian engagements with the State of Israel. You will sometime hear a pro-Arab Palestinian Advocate suggest that the Arab Palestinians have no peace treaty because they have not been at war with anyone.

But in any case, the civil rights of the Arab Palestinians during the period 1917 through 1922 were not codified. It is hard to say what rights were envisioned, or even if the concept of rights existed for Arab Palestinians.

Most Respectfully,
R

Well...

Recognizing
that the Palestinian people is entitled to self-determination in accordance with the Charter of the United Nations,

Expressing its grave concern that the Palestinian people has been prevented from enjoying its inalienable rights, in particular its right to self-determination,

Guided by the purposes and principles of the Charter,

Recalling its relevant resolutions which affirm the right of the Palestinian people to self-determination,

1. Reaffirms the inalienable rights of the Palestinian people in Palestine, including:

(a) The right to self-determination without external interference;

(b) The right to national independence and sovereignty;

UN General Assembly Resolution 3236 and UN General Assembly Resolution 3237​

At what time and under what circumstances did the Palestinians obtain these rights?

It is the umpteenth time you put up that worthless link to that worthless nonsense in 1974, not in 1920, by Yasser Arafat, which are nothing but Arab DEMANDS, and have nothing to do with the Balfour Declaration OR the Mandate for Palestine.

Keep lying and inserting what never was the Declaration or the Mandate wherever you can. It is fun to watch you lose again and again.

Only Zionists try to replace actual documented proof with Israeli bullshit.

You ! are the BS that never ends.

That is a 1974 document manufactured by Arafat with the help of all Israel/Jew haters in that organization.

It is absolutely worthless in the real world.

It does not change the fact that the Arabs refused their own State since 1937 and will continue to refuse to create one as long as Israel is on the map of the world.

 

[rylah]

RE: The Balfour Declaration
※→ Humanity, Shusha, et al,

Well, I can see how you might say that, if you were applying modern "civil rights" criteria in strict compliance. However, history shows us that what is discussed as rights in time of peace, is the first casualty in time of war and conflict. In fact, today, war and conflict have been replaced by newer terminology.

• International Armed Conflict (IAC)
• Non-International Armed Conflict (NIAC)​

“In Palestine as of Right and Not on Sufferance ...”
“When it is asked what is meant by the development of the Jewish National Home in Palestine, it may be answered that it is not the imposition of a Jewish nationality upon the inhabitants of Palestine as a whole, but the further development of the existing Jewish community, with the assistance of Jews in other parts of the world, in order that it may become a centre in which the Jewish people as a whole may take, on grounds of religion and race, an interest and a pride. But in order that this community should have the best prospect of free development and provide a full opportunity for the Jewish people to display its capacities, it is essential that it should know that it is in Palestine as of right and not on sufferance.”

Winston Churchill
British Secretary of State for the Colonies
June 1922​

Many are of the opinion that the creation of the State of Israel (as the Jewish National Home), which displaced the Palestinian regional majority, was the primary trigger in the conflict which ignited between the Arab Palestinian - and the State of Israel. But is that actually true?

I would probably suggest that one of the "rights" was to be able to remain in their homes and not be evicted!

(COMMENT)

THE FIRST QUESTION: While this statement sounds reasonable, where does it say that? What assurance do the Arab Palestinians (non-Jewish) have on the matter of "civil rights." Remember, under the Rule of the Sultan, the rights were what the Sultan granted.

Not even in modern times are all Customary and International Humanitarian Law is the same in both the IAC and the NIAC. For instance, Common Article 3 applies to "armed conflicts not of an international character (NIAC) occurring in the territory of one of the High Contracting Parties."

Interesting enough, all of the peacetime applicable provisions, of the Gevena Convention, apply to all cases of declared war → or → of any other armed conflict which may arise between two or more of the High Contracting Parties, even if the state of war is not recognized by one of them. This is very applicable to the current Arab Palestinian engagements with the State of Israel. You will sometime hear a pro-Arab Palestinian Advocate suggest that the Arab Palestinians have no peace treaty because they have not been at war with anyone.

But in any case, the civil rights of the Arab Palestinians during the period 1917 through 1922 were not codified. It is hard to say what rights were envisioned, or even if the concept of rights existed for Arab Palestinians.

Most Respectfully,
R

Well...

Recognizing
that the Palestinian people is entitled to self-determination in accordance with the Charter of the United Nations,

Expressing its grave concern that the Palestinian people has been prevented from enjoying its inalienable rights, in particular its right to self-determination,

Guided by the purposes and principles of the Charter,

Recalling its relevant resolutions which affirm the right of the Palestinian people to self-determination,

1. Reaffirms the inalienable rights of the Palestinian people in Palestine, including:

(a) The right to self-determination without external interference;

(b) The right to national independence and sovereignty;

UN General Assembly Resolution 3236 and UN General Assembly Resolution 3237​

At what time and under what circumstances did the Palestinians obtain these rights?

It is the umpteenth time you put up that worthless link to that worthless nonsense in 1974, not in 1920, by Yasser Arafat, which are nothing but Arab DEMANDS, and have nothing to do with the Balfour Declaration OR the Mandate for Palestine.

Keep lying and inserting what never was the Declaration or the Mandate wherever you can. It is fun to watch you lose again and again.

Only Zionists try to replace actual documented proof with Israeli bullshit.

How does a non-binding resolution from 1974 changes the obligations of the international law regarding Balfour declaration?

 

[danielpalos]

Reality: No Jews living Arab controlled territories. Plenty of Arabs living in Israel.

It was the Jewish people who were failed by the results from the Balfour Declaration. Not the Arabs.

A State of Judea should have been created for the Jews.

 

[danielpalos]

Reality: No Jews living Arab controlled territories. Plenty of Arabs living in Israel.

It was the Jewish people who were failed by the results from the Balfour Declaration. Not the Arabs.

A Jewish homeland was achieved... And you call that a failure?

An Israeli homeland was achieved. There is no State of Judea for Judeans.

 

[P F Tinmore]

RE: The Balfour Declaration
※→ Humanity, Shusha, et al,

Well, I can see how you might say that, if you were applying modern "civil rights" criteria in strict compliance. However, history shows us that what is discussed as rights in time of peace, is the first casualty in time of war and conflict. In fact, today, war and conflict have been replaced by newer terminology.

• International Armed Conflict (IAC)
• Non-International Armed Conflict (NIAC)​

“In Palestine as of Right and Not on Sufferance ...”
“When it is asked what is meant by the development of the Jewish National Home in Palestine, it may be answered that it is not the imposition of a Jewish nationality upon the inhabitants of Palestine as a whole, but the further development of the existing Jewish community, with the assistance of Jews in other parts of the world, in order that it may become a centre in which the Jewish people as a whole may take, on grounds of religion and race, an interest and a pride. But in order that this community should have the best prospect of free development and provide a full opportunity for the Jewish people to display its capacities, it is essential that it should know that it is in Palestine as of right and not on sufferance.”

Winston Churchill
British Secretary of State for the Colonies
June 1922​

Many are of the opinion that the creation of the State of Israel (as the Jewish National Home), which displaced the Palestinian regional majority, was the primary trigger in the conflict which ignited between the Arab Palestinian - and the State of Israel. But is that actually true?

I would probably suggest that one of the "rights" was to be able to remain in their homes and not be evicted!

(COMMENT)

THE FIRST QUESTION: While this statement sounds reasonable, where does it say that? What assurance do the Arab Palestinians (non-Jewish) have on the matter of "civil rights." Remember, under the Rule of the Sultan, the rights were what the Sultan granted.

Not even in modern times are all Customary and International Humanitarian Law is the same in both the IAC and the NIAC. For instance, Common Article 3 applies to "armed conflicts not of an international character (NIAC) occurring in the territory of one of the High Contracting Parties."

Interesting enough, all of the peacetime applicable provisions, of the Gevena Convention, apply to all cases of declared war → or → of any other armed conflict which may arise between two or more of the High Contracting Parties, even if the state of war is not recognized by one of them. This is very applicable to the current Arab Palestinian engagements with the State of Israel. You will sometime hear a pro-Arab Palestinian Advocate suggest that the Arab Palestinians have no peace treaty because they have not been at war with anyone.

But in any case, the civil rights of the Arab Palestinians during the period 1917 through 1922 were not codified. It is hard to say what rights were envisioned, or even if the concept of rights existed for Arab Palestinians.

Most Respectfully,
R

Well...

Recognizing
that the Palestinian people is entitled to self-determination in accordance with the Charter of the United Nations,

Expressing its grave concern that the Palestinian people has been prevented from enjoying its inalienable rights, in particular its right to self-determination,

Guided by the purposes and principles of the Charter,

Recalling its relevant resolutions which affirm the right of the Palestinian people to self-determination,

1. Reaffirms the inalienable rights of the Palestinian people in Palestine, including:

(a) The right to self-determination without external interference;

(b) The right to national independence and sovereignty;

UN General Assembly Resolution 3236 and UN General Assembly Resolution 3237​

At what time and under what circumstances did the Palestinians obtain these rights?

It is the umpteenth time you put up that worthless link to that worthless nonsense in 1974, not in 1920, by Yasser Arafat, which are nothing but Arab DEMANDS, and have nothing to do with the Balfour Declaration OR the Mandate for Palestine.

Keep lying and inserting what never was the Declaration or the Mandate wherever you can. It is fun to watch you lose again and again.

Only Zionists try to replace actual documented proof with Israeli bullshit.

How does a non-binding resolution from 1974 changes the obligations of the international law regarding Balfour declaration?

You don't understand UN resolutions.

 

[Mindful]

RE: The Balfour Declaration
※→ Humanity, Shusha, et al,

Well, I can see how you might say that, if you were applying modern "civil rights" criteria in strict compliance. However, history shows us that what is discussed as rights in time of peace, is the first casualty in time of war and conflict. In fact, today, war and conflict have been replaced by newer terminology.

• International Armed Conflict (IAC)
• Non-International Armed Conflict (NIAC)​

“In Palestine as of Right and Not on Sufferance ...”
“When it is asked what is meant by the development of the Jewish National Home in Palestine, it may be answered that it is not the imposition of a Jewish nationality upon the inhabitants of Palestine as a whole, but the further development of the existing Jewish community, with the assistance of Jews in other parts of the world, in order that it may become a centre in which the Jewish people as a whole may take, on grounds of religion and race, an interest and a pride. But in order that this community should have the best prospect of free development and provide a full opportunity for the Jewish people to display its capacities, it is essential that it should know that it is in Palestine as of right and not on sufferance.”

Winston Churchill
British Secretary of State for the Colonies
June 1922​

Many are of the opinion that the creation of the State of Israel (as the Jewish National Home), which displaced the Palestinian regional majority, was the primary trigger in the conflict which ignited between the Arab Palestinian - and the State of Israel. But is that actually true?

(COMMENT)

THE FIRST QUESTION: While this statement sounds reasonable, where does it say that? What assurance do the Arab Palestinians (non-Jewish) have on the matter of "civil rights." Remember, under the Rule of the Sultan, the rights were what the Sultan granted.

Not even in modern times are all Customary and International Humanitarian Law is the same in both the IAC and the NIAC. For instance, Common Article 3 applies to "armed conflicts not of an international character (NIAC) occurring in the territory of one of the High Contracting Parties."

Interesting enough, all of the peacetime applicable provisions, of the Gevena Convention, apply to all cases of declared war → or → of any other armed conflict which may arise between two or more of the High Contracting Parties, even if the state of war is not recognized by one of them. This is very applicable to the current Arab Palestinian engagements with the State of Israel. You will sometime hear a pro-Arab Palestinian Advocate suggest that the Arab Palestinians have no peace treaty because they have not been at war with anyone.

But in any case, the civil rights of the Arab Palestinians during the period 1917 through 1922 were not codified. It is hard to say what rights were envisioned, or even if the concept of rights existed for Arab Palestinians.

Most Respectfully,
R

Well...

Recognizing
that the Palestinian people is entitled to self-determination in accordance with the Charter of the United Nations,

Expressing its grave concern that the Palestinian people has been prevented from enjoying its inalienable rights, in particular its right to self-determination,

Guided by the purposes and principles of the Charter,

Recalling its relevant resolutions which affirm the right of the Palestinian people to self-determination,

1. Reaffirms the inalienable rights of the Palestinian people in Palestine, including:

(a) The right to self-determination without external interference;

(b) The right to national independence and sovereignty;

UN General Assembly Resolution 3236 and UN General Assembly Resolution 3237​

At what time and under what circumstances did the Palestinians obtain these rights?

It is the umpteenth time you put up that worthless link to that worthless nonsense in 1974, not in 1920, by Yasser Arafat, which are nothing but Arab DEMANDS, and have nothing to do with the Balfour Declaration OR the Mandate for Palestine.

Keep lying and inserting what never was the Declaration or the Mandate wherever you can. It is fun to watch you lose again and again.

Only Zionists try to replace actual documented proof with Israeli bullshit.

How does a non-binding resolution from 1974 changes the obligations of the international law regarding Balfour declaration?

You don't understand UN resolutions.

lmao.

You must be one of them.

 

[Shusha]

As usual, Team Palestine discussing "rights" in a vacuum without acknowledging the reality of the situation, including the war which occurred between Israel and hostile locals and five invading armies.

The war that Israel started you mean? Is it that one you are talking about?

Israel started the war? How so? By what actions did Israel start the war?

 

[rylah]

RE: The Balfour Declaration
※→ Humanity, Shusha, et al,

Well, I can see how you might say that, if you were applying modern "civil rights" criteria in strict compliance. However, history shows us that what is discussed as rights in time of peace, is the first casualty in time of war and conflict. In fact, today, war and conflict have been replaced by newer terminology.

• International Armed Conflict (IAC)
• Non-International Armed Conflict (NIAC)​

“In Palestine as of Right and Not on Sufferance ...”
“When it is asked what is meant by the development of the Jewish National Home in Palestine, it may be answered that it is not the imposition of a Jewish nationality upon the inhabitants of Palestine as a whole, but the further development of the existing Jewish community, with the assistance of Jews in other parts of the world, in order that it may become a centre in which the Jewish people as a whole may take, on grounds of religion and race, an interest and a pride. But in order that this community should have the best prospect of free development and provide a full opportunity for the Jewish people to display its capacities, it is essential that it should know that it is in Palestine as of right and not on sufferance.”

Winston Churchill
British Secretary of State for the Colonies
June 1922​

Many are of the opinion that the creation of the State of Israel (as the Jewish National Home), which displaced the Palestinian regional majority, was the primary trigger in the conflict which ignited between the Arab Palestinian - and the State of Israel. But is that actually true?

(COMMENT)

THE FIRST QUESTION: While this statement sounds reasonable, where does it say that? What assurance do the Arab Palestinians (non-Jewish) have on the matter of "civil rights." Remember, under the Rule of the Sultan, the rights were what the Sultan granted.

Not even in modern times are all Customary and International Humanitarian Law is the same in both the IAC and the NIAC. For instance, Common Article 3 applies to "armed conflicts not of an international character (NIAC) occurring in the territory of one of the High Contracting Parties."

Interesting enough, all of the peacetime applicable provisions, of the Gevena Convention, apply to all cases of declared war → or → of any other armed conflict which may arise between two or more of the High Contracting Parties, even if the state of war is not recognized by one of them. This is very applicable to the current Arab Palestinian engagements with the State of Israel. You will sometime hear a pro-Arab Palestinian Advocate suggest that the Arab Palestinians have no peace treaty because they have not been at war with anyone.

But in any case, the civil rights of the Arab Palestinians during the period 1917 through 1922 were not codified. It is hard to say what rights were envisioned, or even if the concept of rights existed for Arab Palestinians.

Most Respectfully,
R

Well...

Recognizing
that the Palestinian people is entitled to self-determination in accordance with the Charter of the United Nations,

Expressing its grave concern that the Palestinian people has been prevented from enjoying its inalienable rights, in particular its right to self-determination,

Guided by the purposes and principles of the Charter,

Recalling its relevant resolutions which affirm the right of the Palestinian people to self-determination,

1. Reaffirms the inalienable rights of the Palestinian people in Palestine, including:

(a) The right to self-determination without external interference;

(b) The right to national independence and sovereignty;

UN General Assembly Resolution 3236 and UN General Assembly Resolution 3237​

At what time and under what circumstances did the Palestinians obtain these rights?

It is the umpteenth time you put up that worthless link to that worthless nonsense in 1974, not in 1920, by Yasser Arafat, which are nothing but Arab DEMANDS, and have nothing to do with the Balfour Declaration OR the Mandate for Palestine.

Keep lying and inserting what never was the Declaration or the Mandate wherever you can. It is fun to watch you lose again and again.

Only Zionists try to replace actual documented proof with Israeli bullshit.

How does a non-binding resolution from 1974 changes the obligations of the international law regarding Balfour declaration?

You don't understand UN resolutions.

What is the point in quoting a non-binding UN resolutions?
The Balfour Declaration on the other hand became binding by an act of international law, as well as eventually the law of US.

 

[Mindful]

As usual, Team Palestine discussing "rights" in a vacuum without acknowledging the reality of the situation, including the war which occurred between Israel and hostile locals and five invading armies.

The war that Israel started you mean? Is it that one you are talking about?

Israel started the war? How so? By what actions did Israel start the war?

You do realise you are posting to a dolt?

 

[Shusha]

As usual, Team Palestine discussing "rights" in a vacuum without acknowledging the reality of the situation, including the war which occurred between Israel and hostile locals and five invading armies.

The war that Israel started you mean? Is it that one you are talking about?

Israel started the war? How so? By what actions did Israel start the war?

You do realise you are posting to a dolt?

He's going to dodge the question.

 

[RoccoR]

RE: The Balfour Declaration
※→ Humanity, Shusha, et al,

Well...

Recognizing
that the Palestinian people is entitled to self-determination in accordance with the Charter of the United Nations,

Expressing its grave concern that the Palestinian people has been prevented from enjoying its inalienable rights, in particular its right to self-determination,

Guided by the purposes and principles of the Charter,

Recalling its relevant resolutions which affirm the right of the Palestinian people to self-determination,

1. Reaffirms the inalienable rights of the Palestinian people in Palestine, including:

(a) The right to self-determination without external interference;

(b) The right to national independence and sovereignty;

UN General Assembly Resolution 3236 and UN General Assembly Resolution 3237​

At what time and under what circumstances did the Palestinians obtain these rights?

(COMMENT)

Yes, I agree → all that was said → but it does not mean that the Israelis, or anyone else, needs to make way for the Palestinians. The rights that they talk about here also apply equally to the Israelis.

BTW: Neither of the Resolutions cited has any special meaning in law. UN A/RES/3236 and A/RES/3237 were was published in November 1974. That would be well after all three major Arab Palestinian conflicts (1948/1967/1973).

The State of Israel was internationally recognized decades before the State of Palestine was declared in 1988. So it only stands to reason that any territory that the Israels had control over before the November 1988 PLO proclamation is Israeli; unless they abandon it.

Most Respectfully,
R

 

[P F Tinmore]

Yes, I agree → all that was said → but it does not mean that the Israelis, or anyone else, needs to make way for the Palestinians. The rights that they talk about here also apply equally to the Israelis.

Then post the UN resolution for the Israelis.

 

[rylah]

Yes, I agree → all that was said → but it does not mean that the Israelis, or anyone else, needs to make way for the Palestinians. The rights that they talk about here also apply equally to the Israelis.

Then post the UN resolution for the Israelis.

Because it magically turns those US resolutions into binding international law?

 

[rylah]

Q.How much UN resolutions does it take to rewrite the US law?

 

[P F Tinmore]

BTW: Neither of the Resolutions cited has any special meaning in law. UN A/RES/3236 and A/RES/3237 were was published in November 1974. That would be well after all three major Arab Palestinian conflicts (1948/1967/1973).

Yes but the resolution referenced the UN Charter that predated Israel's declaration. It also said:

Expressing its grave concern​

that the Palestinian people has been prevented from enjoying its inalienable rights, in particular its right to self-determination,​

Preventing a peoples rights (by aggression, external interference, etc.) is a violation of the law.

 

[Mindful]

BTW: Neither of the Resolutions cited has any special meaning in law. UN A/RES/3236 and A/RES/3237 were was published in November 1974. That would be well after all three major Arab Palestinian conflicts (1948/1967/1973).

Yes but the resolution referenced the UN Charter that predated Israel's declaration. It also said:

Expressing its grave concern
that the Palestinian people has been prevented from enjoying its inalienable rights, in particular its right to self-determination,​

Preventing a peoples rights (by aggression, external interference, etc.) is a violation of the law.

Given that the Jews were Palestinian people before the State of Israel.

 

[P F Tinmore]

BTW: Neither of the Resolutions cited has any special meaning in law. UN A/RES/3236 and A/RES/3237 were was published in November 1974. That would be well after all three major Arab Palestinian conflicts (1948/1967/1973).

Yes but the resolution referenced the UN Charter that predated Israel's declaration. It also said:

Expressing its grave concern
that the Palestinian people has been prevented from enjoying its inalienable rights, in particular its right to self-determination,​

Preventing a peoples rights (by aggression, external interference, etc.) is a violation of the law.

Given that the Jews were Palestinian people before the State of Israel.

Indeed, a few percent of Palestinians were Jews and they had the same rights as all of the other Palestinians.