Wrong.
The Churchill Whitepaper of 1922, was the official British government release.
It is not only legal, but the law.
{...
The
Churchill White Paper of 3 June 1922 (sometimes referred to as "British Policy in Palestine") was drafted at the request of
Winston Churchill, then Secretary of State for the Colonies, partly in response to the 1921
Jaffa Riots. The official name of the document was
Palestine: Correspondence with the Palestine Arab Delegation and the Zionist Organisation. The
white paper was made up of nine documents and "Churchill's memorandum" was an enclosure to document number 5.
[1] While maintaining Britain's commitment to the
Balfour Declaration and its promise of a Jewish national home in Palestine, the paper emphasized that the establishment of a national home would not impose a Jewish nationality on the Arab inhabitants of Palestine. To reduce tensions between the Arabs and Jews in Palestine the paper called for a limitation of Jewish immigration to the economic capacity of the country to absorb new arrivals. This limitation was considered a great setback to many in the Zionist movement, though it acknowledged that the Jews should be able to increase their numbers through immigration rather than sufferance.
...
On 23 October 1918 following the
Sinai and Palestine Campaign of
World War I, the
Occupied Enemy Territory Administration was established over Levantine provinces of the former
Ottoman Empire. Earlier, on 1 October 1918, General Allenby had been authorized to permit the hoisting of the Arab flag at Damascus.
[2] An Arab government was announced on 5 October 1918 and gained
de facto independence after the withdrawal of the British forces on 26 November 1919.
...
As one author put it, quoting a 6 June 1920 report to the Foreign Office, "..what struck me most of all was that nobody seemed to know what the Zionist policy of His Majesty’s Government meant."
[24] Churchill quoted Samuel in the first full parliamentary debate of 14 June 1921 on Palestine
[25] and wherein he defended the policy and the mandates arguing that it had all been agreed prior, it was important for Britain to keep its word and that provided immigration were properly regulated then that would benefit the economy.
[26]
It was Herbert Samuel who insisted, on returning to London in May, on a "definitive" interpretation of the Declaration. Although supporting the principle, the policy restricted the interpretation of a "national home," geographically excluding the territory east of the Jordan River; politically, by defining it in terms of "development of the existing community"; and numerically, limiting future immigration to "the economic capacity of the country".
[27]
The "British Policy in Palestine" (enclosure in document #5 of the white paper) was accepted by the Zionist Organization (document #7 of the white paper) and rejected by the Palestinians (document #6 of the white paper)
[28] Shortly thereafter, the House of Lords rejected a Palestine Mandate that incorporated the Balfour Declaration by 60 votes to 25.
[29][30] The vote was subsequently overruled by a vote of 292 to 35 in the House of Commons.
[29]Churchill White Paper - Wikipedia
The white paper, formalized as a Palestine Order in Council in August,[33] reaffirmed the British commitment to a national home, promised that Palestine would not become a Jewish State and that Arabs would not be subordinated to Jews. Fieldhouse further says that the white paper "interpreted and subtly modified the harshness of the mandate." It pointed out that the Balfour Declaration did "not contemplate that Palestine as a whole should be converted into a Jewish national home, but that such a home should be founded in Palestine" and affirming the right to Jewish immigration but subject to the concept of "economic absorptive capacity".[34]
...}
en.wikipedia.org
What I said was mentioned everywhere.
Which is that the British were sympathetic to the creation of a national Jewish homeland inside of an Arab Palestine.
