The Balfour Declaration

[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.

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

 

[P F Tinmore]

The State of Israel was internationally recognized decades before the State of Palestine was declared in 1988.

The state of Palestine was widely recognized, including by the US, all during the period that it was administered by the Mandate. The League of Nations Covenant stated that the Mandate was to administer the territory in the best interest of the inhabitants implying the right to self determination.

 

[Sixties Fan]

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.

You keep giving the wrong facts about history.

The ones to be first attacked, in 1920, were the Jews.
The ones who continued to be attacked by the Arabs, were the Jews.
Not only attacked, but expelled from their homes as in 1920 and 1929, long before 1948.

The ONLY ONES to prevent the Arab Palestinians from their right to self determination from 1920 on, and specifically since 1937 on when the first partition was offered was the Arab League, led by that wonderful Nazi Muslim .....Al Husseini and all other Arabs he managed to convince to think as he did.

SO....the only ones to keep the Arab Palestinians from any possible rights they already had, to keep their homes and have a decent life, be it under Israel or any Palestinian State were the Arab Leaders in the League.....The Jordanians, Egyptians, Syrians, Lebanese, etc who voted to deny the Jews THEIR RIGHTS to any part of their ancient homeland.

Correct

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

Which is what the Arabs have been doing since 1920.

More than time for them to stop spilling their own Arab people's blood over something they do not have the right to have.

ISRAEL

 

[Sixties Fan]

The State of Israel was internationally recognized decades before the State of Palestine was declared in 1988.

The state of Palestine was widely recognized, including by the US, all during the period that it was administered by the Mandate. The League of Nations Covenant stated that the Mandate was to administer the territory in the best interest of the inhabitants implying the right to self determination.

For the Jewish People, with the Arabs living under Jewish sovereignty.

See my previous post for the rest of it.

 

[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.

You keep giving the wrong facts about history.

The ones to be first attacked, in 1920, were the Jews.
The ones who continued to be attacked by the Arabs, were the Jews.
Not only attacked, but expelled from their homes as in 1920 and 1929, long before 1948.

The ONLY ONES to prevent the Arab Palestinians from their right to self determination from 1920 on, and specifically since 1937 on when the first partition was offered was the Arab League, led by that wonderful Nazi Muslim .....Al Husseini and all other Arabs he managed to convince to think as he did.

SO....the only ones to keep the Arab Palestinians from any possible rights they already had, to keep their homes and have a decent life, be it under Israel or any Palestinian State were the Arab Leaders in the League.....The Jordanians, Egyptians, Syrians, Lebanese, etc who voted to deny the Jews THEIR RIGHTS to any part of their ancient homeland.

Correct

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

Which is what the Arabs have been doing since 1920.

More than time for them to stop spilling their own Arab people's blood over something they do not have the right to have.

ISRAEL

You keep giving the wrong facts about history.

The ones to be first attacked, in 1920, were the Jews.

Not true. The Palestinians were being attacked before 1920.

 

[P F Tinmore]

The State of Israel was internationally recognized decades before the State of Palestine was declared in 1988.

The state of Palestine was widely recognized, including by the US, all during the period that it was administered by the Mandate. The League of Nations Covenant stated that the Mandate was to administer the territory in the best interest of the inhabitants implying the right to self determination.

For the Jewish People, with the Arabs living under Jewish sovereignty.

See my previous post for the rest of it.

The inhabitants have sovereignty. Foreigners do not.

Look it up.

 

[Mindful]

I did.


State in Palestine
August 10, 2016 | Eli E. Hertz
Source: There Has Never Been a Sovereign Arab State in Palestine

The artificiality of a Palestinian identity is reflected in the attitudes and actions of neighboring Arab nations who never established a Palestinian state themselves.

The rhetoric by Arab leaders on behalf of the Palestinians rings hollow. Arabs in neighboring states, who control 99.9 percent of the Middle East land, have never recognized a Palestinian entity. They have always considered Palestine and its inhabitants part of the great “Arab nation,” historically and politically as an integral part of Greater Syria – Suriyya al-Kubra – a designation that extended to both sides of the Jordan River. In the 1950s, Jordan simply annexed the West Bank since the population there was viewed as the brethren of the Jordanians.

The Arabs never established a Palestinian state when the UN in 1947 recommended to partition Palestine, and to establish “an Arab and a Jewish state” (not a Palestinian state, it should be noted). Nor did the Arabs recognize or establish a Palestinian state during the two decades prior to the Six-Day War when the West Bank was under Jordanian control and the Gaza Strip was under Egyptian control; nor did the Palestinian Arabs clamor for autonomy or independence during those years under Jordanian and Egyptian rule.

And as for Jerusalem: Only twice in the city’s history has it served as a national capital. First as the capital of the two Jewish Commonwealths during the First and Second Temple periods, as described in the Bible, reinforced by archaeological evidence and numerous ancient documents. And again, in modern times as the capital of the State of Israel. It has never served as an Arab capital for the simple reason that there has never been a Palestinian Arab state.

 

[Sixties Fan]

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.

You keep giving the wrong facts about history.

The ones to be first attacked, in 1920, were the Jews.
The ones who continued to be attacked by the Arabs, were the Jews.
Not only attacked, but expelled from their homes as in 1920 and 1929, long before 1948.

The ONLY ONES to prevent the Arab Palestinians from their right to self determination from 1920 on, and specifically since 1937 on when the first partition was offered was the Arab League, led by that wonderful Nazi Muslim .....Al Husseini and all other Arabs he managed to convince to think as he did.

SO....the only ones to keep the Arab Palestinians from any possible rights they already had, to keep their homes and have a decent life, be it under Israel or any Palestinian State were the Arab Leaders in the League.....The Jordanians, Egyptians, Syrians, Lebanese, etc who voted to deny the Jews THEIR RIGHTS to any part of their ancient homeland.

Correct

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

Which is what the Arabs have been doing since 1920.

More than time for them to stop spilling their own Arab people's blood over something they do not have the right to have.

ISRAEL

You keep giving the wrong facts about history.

The ones to be first attacked, in 1920, were the Jews.

Not true. The Palestinians were being attacked before 1920.

Oh, I cannot wait to see the news about it.

Let us have those links.

The ONLY Palestinians ever attacked during any century on that land before 1920 were the Indigenous Jewish People of Palestine. THOSE Palestinians were the only ones to face attacks after attacks, pogroms after pogroms from your saintly Palestinian Arabs.

 

[rylah]

The State of Israel was internationally recognized decades before the State of Palestine was declared in 1988.

The state of Palestine was widely recognized, including by the US, all during the period that it was administered by the Mandate. The League of Nations Covenant stated that the Mandate was to administer the territory in the best interest of the inhabitants implying the right to self determination.

Yet the US ratified their recognition of the Jewish sovereignty over Palestine into binding international law:

In the 1924 Anglo American Convention the U.S. agreed to support Great Britain as a Mandatory so long as the Mandatory abided by the San Remo Resolution. The sole purpose of the Resolution regarding Palestine was:

1. Drawing the borders of Palestine
   
2. Reconstituting Palestine as a National Homeland for the Jewish People worldwide
   
3. Recognizing the Jewish People's historical connection to the land

There was not even one word in the Mandate or the Anglo American convention about creating an Arab state in Palestine.

 

[Sixties Fan]

The State of Israel was internationally recognized decades before the State of Palestine was declared in 1988.

The state of Palestine was widely recognized, including by the US, all during the period that it was administered by the Mandate. The League of Nations Covenant stated that the Mandate was to administer the territory in the best interest of the inhabitants implying the right to self determination.

For the Jewish People, with the Arabs living under Jewish sovereignty.

See my previous post for the rest of it.

The inhabitants have sovereignty. Foreigners do not.

Look it up.

The indigenous Inhabitants, The Jewish People, have all the rights to their ancient homeland.

The invading Arabs, who even chose a nationality where they bring up that they are INVADERS, are the foreigners from that land you do not like people to remember.

Arabia Peninsula.

And that is not Ancient Canaan, and never has been a part of Ancient Canaan.

 

[P F Tinmore]

I did.


State in Palestine
August 10, 2016 | Eli E. Hertz
Source: There Has Never Been a Sovereign Arab State in Palestine

The artificiality of a Palestinian identity is reflected in the attitudes and actions of neighboring Arab nations who never established a Palestinian state themselves.

The rhetoric by Arab leaders on behalf of the Palestinians rings hollow. Arabs in neighboring states, who control 99.9 percent of the Middle East land, have never recognized a Palestinian entity. They have always considered Palestine and its inhabitants part of the great “Arab nation,” historically and politically as an integral part of Greater Syria – Suriyya al-Kubra – a designation that extended to both sides of the Jordan River. In the 1950s, Jordan simply annexed the West Bank since the population there was viewed as the brethren of the Jordanians.

The Arabs never established a Palestinian state when the UN in 1947 recommended to partition Palestine, and to establish “an Arab and a Jewish state” (not a Palestinian state, it should be noted). Nor did the Arabs recognize or establish a Palestinian state during the two decades prior to the Six-Day War when the West Bank was under Jordanian control and the Gaza Strip was under Egyptian control; nor did the Palestinian Arabs clamor for autonomy or independence during those years under Jordanian and Egyptian rule.

And as for Jerusalem: Only twice in the city’s history has it served as a national capital. First as the capital of the two Jewish Commonwealths during the First and Second Temple periods, as described in the Bible, reinforced by archaeological evidence and numerous ancient documents. And again, in modern times as the capital of the State of Israel. It has never served as an Arab capital for the simple reason that there has never been a Palestinian Arab state.

So you post an Israeli propaganda site.

Decisions of international and national tribunals​

​

The U.S. State Department Digest of International Law says that the terms of the Treaty of Lausanne provided for the application of the principles of state succession to the "A" Mandates. The Treaty of Versailles (1920) provisionally recognized the former Ottoman communities as independent nations. It also required Germany to recognize the disposition of the former Ottoman territories and to recognize the new states laid down within their boundaries. The Treaty of Lausanne required the newly created states that acquired the territory to pay annuities on the Ottoman public debt, and to assume responsibility for the administration of concessions that had been granted by the Ottomans. A dispute regarding the status of the territories was settled by an Arbitrator appointed by the Council of the League of Nations. It was decided that Palestine and Transjordan were newly created states according to the terms of the applicable post-war treaties. In its Judgment No. 5, The Mavrommatis Palestine Concessions, the Permanent Court of International Justice also decided that Palestine was responsible as the successor state for concessions granted by Ottoman authorities. The Courts of Palestine and Great Britain decided that title to the properties shown on the Ottoman Civil list had been ceded to the government of Palestine as an allied successor state.[25]

State of Palestine: Difference between revisions - Wikipedia​

 

[rylah]

I did.


State in Palestine
August 10, 2016 | Eli E. Hertz
Source: There Has Never Been a Sovereign Arab State in Palestine

The artificiality of a Palestinian identity is reflected in the attitudes and actions of neighboring Arab nations who never established a Palestinian state themselves.

The rhetoric by Arab leaders on behalf of the Palestinians rings hollow. Arabs in neighboring states, who control 99.9 percent of the Middle East land, have never recognized a Palestinian entity. They have always considered Palestine and its inhabitants part of the great “Arab nation,” historically and politically as an integral part of Greater Syria – Suriyya al-Kubra – a designation that extended to both sides of the Jordan River. In the 1950s, Jordan simply annexed the West Bank since the population there was viewed as the brethren of the Jordanians.

The Arabs never established a Palestinian state when the UN in 1947 recommended to partition Palestine, and to establish “an Arab and a Jewish state” (not a Palestinian state, it should be noted). Nor did the Arabs recognize or establish a Palestinian state during the two decades prior to the Six-Day War when the West Bank was under Jordanian control and the Gaza Strip was under Egyptian control; nor did the Palestinian Arabs clamor for autonomy or independence during those years under Jordanian and Egyptian rule.

And as for Jerusalem: Only twice in the city’s history has it served as a national capital. First as the capital of the two Jewish Commonwealths during the First and Second Temple periods, as described in the Bible, reinforced by archaeological evidence and numerous ancient documents. And again, in modern times as the capital of the State of Israel. It has never served as an Arab capital for the simple reason that there has never been a Palestinian Arab state.

So you post an Israeli propaganda site.

Decisions of international and national tribunals

The U.S. State Department Digest of International Law says that the terms of the Treaty of Lausanne provided for the application of the principles of state succession to the "A" Mandates. The Treaty of Versailles (1920) provisionally recognized the former Ottoman communities as independent nations. It also required Germany to recognize the disposition of the former Ottoman territories and to recognize the new states laid down within their boundaries. The Treaty of Lausanne required the newly created states that acquired the territory to pay annuities on the Ottoman public debt, and to assume responsibility for the administration of concessions that had been granted by the Ottomans. A dispute regarding the status of the territories was settled by an Arbitrator appointed by the Council of the League of Nations. It was decided that Palestine and Transjordan were newly created states according to the terms of the applicable post-war treaties. In its Judgment No. 5, The Mavrommatis Palestine Concessions, the Permanent Court of International Justice also decided that Palestine was responsible as the successor state for concessions granted by Ottoman authorities. The Courts of Palestine and Great Britain decided that title to the properties shown on the Ottoman Civil list had been ceded to the government of Palestine as an allied successor state.[25]

State of Palestine: Difference between revisions - Wikipedia​

Your source is revision discussion on wikipedia?

 

[Mindful]

I did.


State in Palestine
August 10, 2016 | Eli E. Hertz
Source: There Has Never Been a Sovereign Arab State in Palestine

The artificiality of a Palestinian identity is reflected in the attitudes and actions of neighboring Arab nations who never established a Palestinian state themselves.

The rhetoric by Arab leaders on behalf of the Palestinians rings hollow. Arabs in neighboring states, who control 99.9 percent of the Middle East land, have never recognized a Palestinian entity. They have always considered Palestine and its inhabitants part of the great “Arab nation,” historically and politically as an integral part of Greater Syria – Suriyya al-Kubra – a designation that extended to both sides of the Jordan River. In the 1950s, Jordan simply annexed the West Bank since the population there was viewed as the brethren of the Jordanians.

The Arabs never established a Palestinian state when the UN in 1947 recommended to partition Palestine, and to establish “an Arab and a Jewish state” (not a Palestinian state, it should be noted). Nor did the Arabs recognize or establish a Palestinian state during the two decades prior to the Six-Day War when the West Bank was under Jordanian control and the Gaza Strip was under Egyptian control; nor did the Palestinian Arabs clamor for autonomy or independence during those years under Jordanian and Egyptian rule.

And as for Jerusalem: Only twice in the city’s history has it served as a national capital. First as the capital of the two Jewish Commonwealths during the First and Second Temple periods, as described in the Bible, reinforced by archaeological evidence and numerous ancient documents. And again, in modern times as the capital of the State of Israel. It has never served as an Arab capital for the simple reason that there has never been a Palestinian Arab state.

So you post an Israeli propaganda site.

Decisions of international and national tribunals

The U.S. State Department Digest of International Law says that the terms of the Treaty of Lausanne provided for the application of the principles of state succession to the "A" Mandates. The Treaty of Versailles (1920) provisionally recognized the former Ottoman communities as independent nations. It also required Germany to recognize the disposition of the former Ottoman territories and to recognize the new states laid down within their boundaries. The Treaty of Lausanne required the newly created states that acquired the territory to pay annuities on the Ottoman public debt, and to assume responsibility for the administration of concessions that had been granted by the Ottomans. A dispute regarding the status of the territories was settled by an Arbitrator appointed by the Council of the League of Nations. It was decided that Palestine and Transjordan were newly created states according to the terms of the applicable post-war treaties. In its Judgment No. 5, The Mavrommatis Palestine Concessions, the Permanent Court of International Justice also decided that Palestine was responsible as the successor state for concessions granted by Ottoman authorities. The Courts of Palestine and Great Britain decided that title to the properties shown on the Ottoman Civil list had been ceded to the government of Palestine as an allied successor state.[25]

State of Palestine: Difference between revisions - Wikipedia​

Took you long enough.

Your desperation is showing.

 

[rylah]

Both the Anglo-American Convention (1924) and The Lodge-Fish Resolution (1922) confirm the irrevocable historic right of the Jewish nation to Palestine - under the constitution making it into US law.

Any attempt to negate the Jewish people's right to Palestine - Eretz Israel, and to deny them access and control in the area designated for the Jewish people by the League of Nations is an actionable infringement of both international law and the Supremacy Clause (Article VI, paragraph 2 of the United States Constitution), which dictates that Treaties "shall be the supreme Law of the Land".

 

[P F Tinmore]

I did.


State in Palestine
August 10, 2016 | Eli E. Hertz
Source: There Has Never Been a Sovereign Arab State in Palestine

The artificiality of a Palestinian identity is reflected in the attitudes and actions of neighboring Arab nations who never established a Palestinian state themselves.

The rhetoric by Arab leaders on behalf of the Palestinians rings hollow. Arabs in neighboring states, who control 99.9 percent of the Middle East land, have never recognized a Palestinian entity. They have always considered Palestine and its inhabitants part of the great “Arab nation,” historically and politically as an integral part of Greater Syria – Suriyya al-Kubra – a designation that extended to both sides of the Jordan River. In the 1950s, Jordan simply annexed the West Bank since the population there was viewed as the brethren of the Jordanians.

The Arabs never established a Palestinian state when the UN in 1947 recommended to partition Palestine, and to establish “an Arab and a Jewish state” (not a Palestinian state, it should be noted). Nor did the Arabs recognize or establish a Palestinian state during the two decades prior to the Six-Day War when the West Bank was under Jordanian control and the Gaza Strip was under Egyptian control; nor did the Palestinian Arabs clamor for autonomy or independence during those years under Jordanian and Egyptian rule.

And as for Jerusalem: Only twice in the city’s history has it served as a national capital. First as the capital of the two Jewish Commonwealths during the First and Second Temple periods, as described in the Bible, reinforced by archaeological evidence and numerous ancient documents. And again, in modern times as the capital of the State of Israel. It has never served as an Arab capital for the simple reason that there has never been a Palestinian Arab state.

So you post an Israeli propaganda site.

Decisions of international and national tribunals

The U.S. State Department Digest of International Law says that the terms of the Treaty of Lausanne provided for the application of the principles of state succession to the "A" Mandates. The Treaty of Versailles (1920) provisionally recognized the former Ottoman communities as independent nations. It also required Germany to recognize the disposition of the former Ottoman territories and to recognize the new states laid down within their boundaries. The Treaty of Lausanne required the newly created states that acquired the territory to pay annuities on the Ottoman public debt, and to assume responsibility for the administration of concessions that had been granted by the Ottomans. A dispute regarding the status of the territories was settled by an Arbitrator appointed by the Council of the League of Nations. It was decided that Palestine and Transjordan were newly created states according to the terms of the applicable post-war treaties. In its Judgment No. 5, The Mavrommatis Palestine Concessions, the Permanent Court of International Justice also decided that Palestine was responsible as the successor state for concessions granted by Ottoman authorities. The Courts of Palestine and Great Britain decided that title to the properties shown on the Ottoman Civil list had been ceded to the government of Palestine as an allied successor state.[25]

State of Palestine: Difference between revisions - Wikipedia​

Your source is revision discussion on wikipedia?

History did not change. The newer version focuses more on current events.

 

[Sixties Fan]

I did.


State in Palestine
August 10, 2016 | Eli E. Hertz
Source: There Has Never Been a Sovereign Arab State in Palestine

The artificiality of a Palestinian identity is reflected in the attitudes and actions of neighboring Arab nations who never established a Palestinian state themselves.

The rhetoric by Arab leaders on behalf of the Palestinians rings hollow. Arabs in neighboring states, who control 99.9 percent of the Middle East land, have never recognized a Palestinian entity. They have always considered Palestine and its inhabitants part of the great “Arab nation,” historically and politically as an integral part of Greater Syria – Suriyya al-Kubra – a designation that extended to both sides of the Jordan River. In the 1950s, Jordan simply annexed the West Bank since the population there was viewed as the brethren of the Jordanians.

The Arabs never established a Palestinian state when the UN in 1947 recommended to partition Palestine, and to establish “an Arab and a Jewish state” (not a Palestinian state, it should be noted). Nor did the Arabs recognize or establish a Palestinian state during the two decades prior to the Six-Day War when the West Bank was under Jordanian control and the Gaza Strip was under Egyptian control; nor did the Palestinian Arabs clamor for autonomy or independence during those years under Jordanian and Egyptian rule.

And as for Jerusalem: Only twice in the city’s history has it served as a national capital. First as the capital of the two Jewish Commonwealths during the First and Second Temple periods, as described in the Bible, reinforced by archaeological evidence and numerous ancient documents. And again, in modern times as the capital of the State of Israel. It has never served as an Arab capital for the simple reason that there has never been a Palestinian Arab state.

So you post an Israeli propaganda site.

Decisions of international and national tribunals

The U.S. State Department Digest of International Law says that the terms of the Treaty of Lausanne provided for the application of the principles of state succession to the "A" Mandates. The Treaty of Versailles (1920) provisionally recognized the former Ottoman communities as independent nations. It also required Germany to recognize the disposition of the former Ottoman territories and to recognize the new states laid down within their boundaries. The Treaty of Lausanne required the newly created states that acquired the territory to pay annuities on the Ottoman public debt, and to assume responsibility for the administration of concessions that had been granted by the Ottomans. A dispute regarding the status of the territories was settled by an Arbitrator appointed by the Council of the League of Nations. It was decided that Palestine and Transjordan were newly created states according to the terms of the applicable post-war treaties. In its Judgment No. 5, The Mavrommatis Palestine Concessions, the Permanent Court of International Justice also decided that Palestine was responsible as the successor state for concessions granted by Ottoman authorities. The Courts of Palestine and Great Britain decided that title to the properties shown on the Ottoman Civil list had been ceded to the government of Palestine as an allied successor state.[25]

State of Palestine: Difference between revisions - Wikipedia​

Your source is revision discussion on wikipedia?

History did not change. The newer version focuses more on current events.

Revision means.....changing the history....

The question is...

Who is doing that revision.....and why....

and why is ALL of the history of the Jewish people being revised?

 

[rylah]

I did.


State in Palestine
August 10, 2016 | Eli E. Hertz
Source: There Has Never Been a Sovereign Arab State in Palestine

The artificiality of a Palestinian identity is reflected in the attitudes and actions of neighboring Arab nations who never established a Palestinian state themselves.

The rhetoric by Arab leaders on behalf of the Palestinians rings hollow. Arabs in neighboring states, who control 99.9 percent of the Middle East land, have never recognized a Palestinian entity. They have always considered Palestine and its inhabitants part of the great “Arab nation,” historically and politically as an integral part of Greater Syria – Suriyya al-Kubra – a designation that extended to both sides of the Jordan River. In the 1950s, Jordan simply annexed the West Bank since the population there was viewed as the brethren of the Jordanians.

The Arabs never established a Palestinian state when the UN in 1947 recommended to partition Palestine, and to establish “an Arab and a Jewish state” (not a Palestinian state, it should be noted). Nor did the Arabs recognize or establish a Palestinian state during the two decades prior to the Six-Day War when the West Bank was under Jordanian control and the Gaza Strip was under Egyptian control; nor did the Palestinian Arabs clamor for autonomy or independence during those years under Jordanian and Egyptian rule.

And as for Jerusalem: Only twice in the city’s history has it served as a national capital. First as the capital of the two Jewish Commonwealths during the First and Second Temple periods, as described in the Bible, reinforced by archaeological evidence and numerous ancient documents. And again, in modern times as the capital of the State of Israel. It has never served as an Arab capital for the simple reason that there has never been a Palestinian Arab state.

So you post an Israeli propaganda site.

Decisions of international and national tribunals

The U.S. State Department Digest of International Law says that the terms of the Treaty of Lausanne provided for the application of the principles of state succession to the "A" Mandates. The Treaty of Versailles (1920) provisionally recognized the former Ottoman communities as independent nations. It also required Germany to recognize the disposition of the former Ottoman territories and to recognize the new states laid down within their boundaries. The Treaty of Lausanne required the newly created states that acquired the territory to pay annuities on the Ottoman public debt, and to assume responsibility for the administration of concessions that had been granted by the Ottomans. A dispute regarding the status of the territories was settled by an Arbitrator appointed by the Council of the League of Nations. It was decided that Palestine and Transjordan were newly created states according to the terms of the applicable post-war treaties. In its Judgment No. 5, The Mavrommatis Palestine Concessions, the Permanent Court of International Justice also decided that Palestine was responsible as the successor state for concessions granted by Ottoman authorities. The Courts of Palestine and Great Britain decided that title to the properties shown on the Ottoman Civil list had been ceded to the government of Palestine as an allied successor state.[25]

State of Palestine: Difference between revisions - Wikipedia​

Your source is revision discussion on wikipedia?

History did not change. The newer version focuses more on current events.

Irrelevant to discussion.
Balfour Declaration was specifically incorporated into international law.

 

[Shusha]

The State of Israel was internationally recognized decades before the State of Palestine was declared in 1988.

The state of Palestine was widely recognized, including by the US, all during the period that it was administered by the Mandate. The League of Nations Covenant stated that the Mandate was to administer the territory in the best interest of the inhabitants implying the right to self determination.

All during the period that it was administered by the Mandate, the right of self-determination of the Jewish people was recognized.

Arguing against that in light of the actual documents is just foolish.

 

[P F Tinmore]

I did.


State in Palestine
August 10, 2016 | Eli E. Hertz
Source: There Has Never Been a Sovereign Arab State in Palestine

The artificiality of a Palestinian identity is reflected in the attitudes and actions of neighboring Arab nations who never established a Palestinian state themselves.

The rhetoric by Arab leaders on behalf of the Palestinians rings hollow. Arabs in neighboring states, who control 99.9 percent of the Middle East land, have never recognized a Palestinian entity. They have always considered Palestine and its inhabitants part of the great “Arab nation,” historically and politically as an integral part of Greater Syria – Suriyya al-Kubra – a designation that extended to both sides of the Jordan River. In the 1950s, Jordan simply annexed the West Bank since the population there was viewed as the brethren of the Jordanians.

The Arabs never established a Palestinian state when the UN in 1947 recommended to partition Palestine, and to establish “an Arab and a Jewish state” (not a Palestinian state, it should be noted). Nor did the Arabs recognize or establish a Palestinian state during the two decades prior to the Six-Day War when the West Bank was under Jordanian control and the Gaza Strip was under Egyptian control; nor did the Palestinian Arabs clamor for autonomy or independence during those years under Jordanian and Egyptian rule.

And as for Jerusalem: Only twice in the city’s history has it served as a national capital. First as the capital of the two Jewish Commonwealths during the First and Second Temple periods, as described in the Bible, reinforced by archaeological evidence and numerous ancient documents. And again, in modern times as the capital of the State of Israel. It has never served as an Arab capital for the simple reason that there has never been a Palestinian Arab state.

So you post an Israeli propaganda site.

Decisions of international and national tribunals

The U.S. State Department Digest of International Law says that the terms of the Treaty of Lausanne provided for the application of the principles of state succession to the "A" Mandates. The Treaty of Versailles (1920) provisionally recognized the former Ottoman communities as independent nations. It also required Germany to recognize the disposition of the former Ottoman territories and to recognize the new states laid down within their boundaries. The Treaty of Lausanne required the newly created states that acquired the territory to pay annuities on the Ottoman public debt, and to assume responsibility for the administration of concessions that had been granted by the Ottomans. A dispute regarding the status of the territories was settled by an Arbitrator appointed by the Council of the League of Nations. It was decided that Palestine and Transjordan were newly created states according to the terms of the applicable post-war treaties. In its Judgment No. 5, The Mavrommatis Palestine Concessions, the Permanent Court of International Justice also decided that Palestine was responsible as the successor state for concessions granted by Ottoman authorities. The Courts of Palestine and Great Britain decided that title to the properties shown on the Ottoman Civil list had been ceded to the government of Palestine as an allied successor state.[25]

State of Palestine: Difference between revisions - Wikipedia​

Your source is revision discussion on wikipedia?

History did not change. The newer version focuses more on current events.

Revision means.....changing the history....

The question is...

Who is doing that revision.....and why....

and why is ALL of the history of the Jewish people being revised?

Israel, Jews, Zionists Seminar Takeover of Wikipedia Online Information to Implement Disinformation

 

[rylah]

I did.


State in Palestine
August 10, 2016 | Eli E. Hertz
Source: There Has Never Been a Sovereign Arab State in Palestine

The artificiality of a Palestinian identity is reflected in the attitudes and actions of neighboring Arab nations who never established a Palestinian state themselves.

The rhetoric by Arab leaders on behalf of the Palestinians rings hollow. Arabs in neighboring states, who control 99.9 percent of the Middle East land, have never recognized a Palestinian entity. They have always considered Palestine and its inhabitants part of the great “Arab nation,” historically and politically as an integral part of Greater Syria – Suriyya al-Kubra – a designation that extended to both sides of the Jordan River. In the 1950s, Jordan simply annexed the West Bank since the population there was viewed as the brethren of the Jordanians.

The Arabs never established a Palestinian state when the UN in 1947 recommended to partition Palestine, and to establish “an Arab and a Jewish state” (not a Palestinian state, it should be noted). Nor did the Arabs recognize or establish a Palestinian state during the two decades prior to the Six-Day War when the West Bank was under Jordanian control and the Gaza Strip was under Egyptian control; nor did the Palestinian Arabs clamor for autonomy or independence during those years under Jordanian and Egyptian rule.

And as for Jerusalem: Only twice in the city’s history has it served as a national capital. First as the capital of the two Jewish Commonwealths during the First and Second Temple periods, as described in the Bible, reinforced by archaeological evidence and numerous ancient documents. And again, in modern times as the capital of the State of Israel. It has never served as an Arab capital for the simple reason that there has never been a Palestinian Arab state.

So you post an Israeli propaganda site.

Decisions of international and national tribunals

The U.S. State Department Digest of International Law says that the terms of the Treaty of Lausanne provided for the application of the principles of state succession to the "A" Mandates. The Treaty of Versailles (1920) provisionally recognized the former Ottoman communities as independent nations. It also required Germany to recognize the disposition of the former Ottoman territories and to recognize the new states laid down within their boundaries. The Treaty of Lausanne required the newly created states that acquired the territory to pay annuities on the Ottoman public debt, and to assume responsibility for the administration of concessions that had been granted by the Ottomans. A dispute regarding the status of the territories was settled by an Arbitrator appointed by the Council of the League of Nations. It was decided that Palestine and Transjordan were newly created states according to the terms of the applicable post-war treaties. In its Judgment No. 5, The Mavrommatis Palestine Concessions, the Permanent Court of International Justice also decided that Palestine was responsible as the successor state for concessions granted by Ottoman authorities. The Courts of Palestine and Great Britain decided that title to the properties shown on the Ottoman Civil list had been ceded to the government of Palestine as an allied successor state.[25]

State of Palestine: Difference between revisions - Wikipedia​

Your source is revision discussion on wikipedia?

History did not change. The newer version focuses more on current events.

Revision means.....changing the history....

The question is...

Who is doing that revision.....and why....

and why is ALL of the history of the Jewish people being revised?

Israel, Jews, Zionists Seminar Takeover of Wikipedia Online Information to Implement Disinformation

Says the guy who insists a wiki revision makes his case.