P F Tinmore
Diamond Member
- Dec 6, 2009
- 83,301
- 4,681
- 1,815
There can't be a Mandate for Palestine without Palestine.
The Balfour Declaration
- Thread starter Shusha
- Start date
P F Tinmore
Diamond Member
- Dec 6, 2009
- 83,301
- 4,681
- 1,815
The Balfour Declaration scratched the Palestinian's national and political rights. Britain ran with those violations of the Palestine's rights from day one.
Shusha
Gold Member
- Dec 14, 2015
- 15,035
- 3,063
- 290
- Thread starter
- #584
Patently, demonstrably not true.
United States of America. Canada. Australia. Any number of South American State.
But even if you want to call it true -- then there can be no return of foreigners to upset the current inhabitants of Israel. The inhabitants have sovereignty.
Shusha
Gold Member
- Dec 14, 2015
- 15,035
- 3,063
- 290
- Thread starter
- #585
Well, no. Arabs right to self-determination in Palestine were acknowledged with the separation of Palestine into an Arab State and a Jewish State (Israel and Jordan). Arab rights to self-determination were again acknowledged with the UN Partition Plan. Arab rights to self-determination were again acknowledged with numerous UN resolutions. Arab rights to self-determination were again acknowledged with the withdrawal from Gaza. And Arab rights were again acknowledged with the Oslo Accords. And with the Olmert plan and other peace negotiations. Even the ceasefire agreement between Hamas and Israel is an acknowledgement of Arab rights to self-determination.
Arab rights to self-determination are acknowledged all over the damn place.
Mindful
Diamond Member
- Banned
- #587
Periodically Gaza takes centerstage on the world news. The circumstances change but the conflict remains the same – Israel vs Gaza, Gazans vs Israelis, terrorists vs the State of Israel. Depending on the media source, the story seems different but more often than not, the main message seems to be: Israel = bad / aggressive and possibly even criminal.
Watching this unfold from a distance can be very confusing. What is happening on the ground? How can I know what is true? If the Jewish State is actually bad as so many of these reports imply, what does that say about me?
Many questions rise to the surface. Left unanswered, they open the door to damaging misperceptions – the most damaging of which is the undermining of pride in Jewish identity and connection to the only Jewish State, Israel. This is why we have put together teaching resources that address the issue of Israel and Gaza in a non-political way.
Our goal is not to promote, justify or explain any political stance or party but rather to focus on the human experience surrounding this issue. Human rights are not political. Neither is morality or decency. This is about understanding what is happening, in context and having the tools and critical thinking skills to make fact-based conclusions.
Disengagement from Gaza and North Samaria (2005)
DISENGAGEMENT FROM GAZA AND NORTH SAMARIA (2005)
Israel's plan of unilateral disengagement from the Gaza Strip and North Samaria put forward by Prime Minister Ariel Sharon was carried out on 15 August 2005. The purpose of the plan was to improve Israel's security and international status in the absence of peace negotiations. With the implementation of the plan, IDF installations and forces were removed and over 9000 Israeli citizens living in 25 settlements were evicted. By 22 September 2005, Israel's withdrawal from the entire Gaza Strip to the 1967 Green Line, and the eviction of the four settlements in Samaria, was completed.
GUSH KATIF
Jews have lived in Gaza since Biblical times. Famed residents include medieval rabbis such as Rabbi Yisrael Najara and the renowned Rabbi Avraham Azoulai. A historic Jewish community existed in Gaza City prior to its expulsion for safety reasons by the British during the infamous 1929 riots by the city's Arabs. Land for the village of Kfar Darom was purchased in the 1930s and settled in 1946. It was evacuated following an Egyptian siege in the 1948 Arab-Israeli War.
Gush Katif began in 1968 as Jewish was viewed vital to Israel's security in the area, which had been captured the previous year in the 1967 Six-Day War. In 1970, Kfar Darom was reestablished as the first of many Israeli agricultural villages in the area. Throughout the 1980s new communities were established, especially with the influx of former residents of the Sinai.
The sum of exports from the greenhouses of Gush Katif, which were owned by 200 farmers, came to $200,000,000 per year and made up 15% of the agricultural exports of the State of Israel. The combined assets in Gush Katif were estimated at $23 billion.
Of Israel’s total exports abroad, Gush Katif exported:
· 95% of bug-free lettuce and greens
· 70% of organic vegetables
· 60% of cherry tomatoes
· 60% of geraniums to Europe
The Jewish residents of Gush Katif became subject to frequent terror attacks during the First Intifada (1987–1990). During the al-Aqsa Intifada (2000), Gush Katif settlements were the target of thousands of violent attacks by Palestinian militants. More than 6000 mortar bombs and Qassam rockets were launched into Gush Katif, miraculously causing only few fatalities though tremendous property and psychological damage.
Disengagement and the people of Gush Katif
Read more, much more......
Israel & Gaza
Watching this unfold from a distance can be very confusing. What is happening on the ground? How can I know what is true? If the Jewish State is actually bad as so many of these reports imply, what does that say about me?
Many questions rise to the surface. Left unanswered, they open the door to damaging misperceptions – the most damaging of which is the undermining of pride in Jewish identity and connection to the only Jewish State, Israel. This is why we have put together teaching resources that address the issue of Israel and Gaza in a non-political way.
Our goal is not to promote, justify or explain any political stance or party but rather to focus on the human experience surrounding this issue. Human rights are not political. Neither is morality or decency. This is about understanding what is happening, in context and having the tools and critical thinking skills to make fact-based conclusions.
Disengagement from Gaza and North Samaria (2005)
DISENGAGEMENT FROM GAZA AND NORTH SAMARIA (2005)
Israel's plan of unilateral disengagement from the Gaza Strip and North Samaria put forward by Prime Minister Ariel Sharon was carried out on 15 August 2005. The purpose of the plan was to improve Israel's security and international status in the absence of peace negotiations. With the implementation of the plan, IDF installations and forces were removed and over 9000 Israeli citizens living in 25 settlements were evicted. By 22 September 2005, Israel's withdrawal from the entire Gaza Strip to the 1967 Green Line, and the eviction of the four settlements in Samaria, was completed.
GUSH KATIF
Jews have lived in Gaza since Biblical times. Famed residents include medieval rabbis such as Rabbi Yisrael Najara and the renowned Rabbi Avraham Azoulai. A historic Jewish community existed in Gaza City prior to its expulsion for safety reasons by the British during the infamous 1929 riots by the city's Arabs. Land for the village of Kfar Darom was purchased in the 1930s and settled in 1946. It was evacuated following an Egyptian siege in the 1948 Arab-Israeli War.
Gush Katif began in 1968 as Jewish was viewed vital to Israel's security in the area, which had been captured the previous year in the 1967 Six-Day War. In 1970, Kfar Darom was reestablished as the first of many Israeli agricultural villages in the area. Throughout the 1980s new communities were established, especially with the influx of former residents of the Sinai.
The sum of exports from the greenhouses of Gush Katif, which were owned by 200 farmers, came to $200,000,000 per year and made up 15% of the agricultural exports of the State of Israel. The combined assets in Gush Katif were estimated at $23 billion.
Of Israel’s total exports abroad, Gush Katif exported:
· 95% of bug-free lettuce and greens
· 70% of organic vegetables
· 60% of cherry tomatoes
· 60% of geraniums to Europe
The Jewish residents of Gush Katif became subject to frequent terror attacks during the First Intifada (1987–1990). During the al-Aqsa Intifada (2000), Gush Katif settlements were the target of thousands of violent attacks by Palestinian militants. More than 6000 mortar bombs and Qassam rockets were launched into Gush Katif, miraculously causing only few fatalities though tremendous property and psychological damage.
Disengagement and the people of Gush Katif
Read more, much more......
Israel & Gaza
P F Tinmore
Diamond Member
- Dec 6, 2009
- 83,301
- 4,681
- 1,815
Refugees are not foreigners.
P F Tinmore
Diamond Member
- Dec 6, 2009
- 83,301
- 4,681
- 1,815
Not so. Any foreign plan to divide Palestine is a violation of their rights.
- Banned
- #591
False premise.
- Banned
- #592
False. You just don’t understand history.
P F Tinmore
Diamond Member
- Dec 6, 2009
- 83,301
- 4,681
- 1,815
Refugees are citizens, not foreigners.
rylah
Gold Member
- Jun 10, 2015
- 23,397
- 4,953
- 290
Once a refugee receives citizenship he's been re-settled.
This is the standard practice.
There were many refugees during those times, including millions of Jews from Europe and about a million Jews from the Middle East. All have been resettled in Israel and other countries where they have citizenship.
Humanity
Gold Member
- Jul 17, 2014
- 5,089
- 361
- 130
I'm still awaiting your responses to questions from months ago when you went on 'vacation'... Funny that!
RoccoR
Gold Member
RE: The Balfour Declaration
※→ P F Tinmore, et al,
I think that your need to find some high ground, on which to base the claim that the Arab Palestinian (residents of the former Enemy-occupied territory of the Ottoman Empire/Turkish Republic) were treated unfairly different, from the people that have lost wars and territory to superior powers throughout the history of the region, that you assign rights to the vanquished that no previous defeated people had before them.
The fact that the defeated Arab Palestinians of the Ottoman Empire lived in the region in larger numbers than the Jewish People does not mean that the Arab Palestinians held some special benefit over and above that of the Jews. It only means that the Arab Palestinian represented a greater threat to peace and security in the post-Conflict Phase.
The victors of a conflict usually set the civil and political protocols on the defeated population.
The Arab Palestinians do not have the means to re-write post-Conflict protocols in their favor or re-interpret new protocols simply because it suits them.
("come in after the fact,")
There is no question at all that the intent of the Allied Powers, with the rights and title in hand under Article 16 (Treaty of Lausanne), was to establish in Palestine of a national home for the Jewish people. It is also the case that the Arab Palestinians declined to participate in the build self-governing institutions simply because they could not get their own way and dictate the outcome. Further, it is no question that the Jewish People adopted and followed the "Steps Preparatory to Independence" as recommended by the United Nations; AND finaly, the Jewish People exercised their right of self-determination and declared independence several decades before the Palestine Liberation Organization.
No portion of the territory outlined by the PLO was not already under the control of the Israelis in 1988. No international law sets the requirement that the Israelis, having previously established territorial control, must relinquish that control to a non-existent government.
Most Respectfully,
R
※→ P F Tinmore, et al,
I think that your need to find some high ground, on which to base the claim that the Arab Palestinian (residents of the former Enemy-occupied territory of the Ottoman Empire/Turkish Republic) were treated unfairly different, from the people that have lost wars and territory to superior powers throughout the history of the region, that you assign rights to the vanquished that no previous defeated people had before them.
(COMMENT)
The fact that the defeated Arab Palestinians of the Ottoman Empire lived in the region in larger numbers than the Jewish People does not mean that the Arab Palestinians held some special benefit over and above that of the Jews. It only means that the Arab Palestinian represented a greater threat to peace and security in the post-Conflict Phase.
The victors of a conflict usually set the civil and political protocols on the defeated population.
The Arab Palestinians do not have the means to re-write post-Conflict protocols in their favor or re-interpret new protocols simply because it suits them.
("come in after the fact,")
There is no question at all that the intent of the Allied Powers, with the rights and title in hand under Article 16 (Treaty of Lausanne), was to establish in Palestine of a national home for the Jewish people. It is also the case that the Arab Palestinians declined to participate in the build self-governing institutions simply because they could not get their own way and dictate the outcome. Further, it is no question that the Jewish People adopted and followed the "Steps Preparatory to Independence" as recommended by the United Nations; AND finaly, the Jewish People exercised their right of self-determination and declared independence several decades before the Palestine Liberation Organization.
No portion of the territory outlined by the PLO was not already under the control of the Israelis in 1988. No international law sets the requirement that the Israelis, having previously established territorial control, must relinquish that control to a non-existent government.
Most Respectfully,
R
RoccoR
Gold Member
RE: The Balfour Declaration
※→ P F Tinmore, et al,
Again, NONSENSE!
What authority do you refer to - that outlined "Palestinian's national and political rights" prior to November 1917?
Most Respectfully,
R
※→ P F Tinmore, et al,
Again, NONSENSE!
(COMMENT)
What authority do you refer to - that outlined "Palestinian's national and political rights" prior to November 1917?
Most Respectfully,
R
P F Tinmore
Diamond Member
- Dec 6, 2009
- 83,301
- 4,681
- 1,815
Stupid post. Palestine (like Lebanon, Syria, Iraq, and Transjordan,) was not a state in 1917.
RoccoR
Gold Member
RE: The Balfour Declaration
※→ P F Tinmore, et al,
I think you need to re-read your statement...
→ You said: The Balfour Declaration scratched the Palestinian's national and political rights.
Most Respectfully,
R
※→ P F Tinmore, et al,
I think you need to re-read your statement...
(COMMENT)
→ You said: The Balfour Declaration scratched the Palestinian's national and political rights.
※ I asked: "What authority do you refer to - that outlined "Palestinian's national and political rights" prior to November 1917?"
Of course, I know that Palestine was not a state in 1917, and thus had no "Palestinian's national and political rights." I just asked the question because your statement makes it seem that the Balfour Declaration of scratched (canceled or struck-out) some pre-existing Palestinian "national and political rights."
Most Respectfully,
R
Similar threads
New Topics
-
Can We Trust Courts to Stop Trump's Lawlessness?- Started by C_Clayton_Jones
- Replies: 11
-
-
Karmelo Anthony Charged With First-Degree Murder and Will Be Tried as Adult — But Won’t Face Death Penalty
- Started by StatesRightsForever
- Replies: 18
-
-
FBI Recruiting Weekend: Patriot Front Fed Group Resurfaces in Kansas City, MO- Started by DonGlock26
- Replies: 3
