What's new
US Message Board 🦅 Political Discussion Forum

Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

The NEWER Official Discussion Thread for the creation of Israel, the UN and the British Mandate

Sixties Fan

Diamond Member
Joined
Mar 6, 2017
Messages
35,859
Reaction score
5,836
Points
1,240
pasted-image-0.png


The American Jewish Joint Distribution Committee (a.k.a. “The Joint”) was founded in 1914, initially to save the Jews of Palestine from starvation. Since then, it’s been involved in rescue, relief and renewal of Jews around the world. The Joint assisted 190,000 Jews to leave Germany in the 1930s, helped care for 420,000 Holocaust survivors after the war, and assisted 167,000 Jews reach Israel from Muslim countries. Having operated in 85 countries—including Russia, Ethiopia and the former Yugoslavia—its non-sectarian work provides a unified Jewish response to global disasters. The Joint remains active wherever Jews are in distress: currently, it’s providing critical help in Ukraine, both to those inside the country and new refugees. This label publicized a food drive for Holocaust survivors.



 

Sixties Fan

Diamond Member
Joined
Mar 6, 2017
Messages
35,859
Reaction score
5,836
Points
1,240
IMG_6476.jpg


The Partition Resolution passed by the United Nations on Nov. 29, 1947, called for the creation of a Jewish State and the end of the British Mandate. The British then started to wind down their administrative duties including ending postal services in April 1948. But, to ensure the public would still be able to send and receive mail, the provisional Jewish government in Palestine improvised and authorized the use of pre-existing Jewish National Fund stamps (overprinted with the word “Doar” or post) as valid postage stamps. These are two JNF stamps—one depicting the partition map of the independent Jewish state and the other the Negev water pipeline—which were used to send mail and postmarked by Minhelet Ha’am (People’s Administration). Israel issued its own stamps right after independence.


 

Sixties Fan

Diamond Member
Joined
Mar 6, 2017
Messages
35,859
Reaction score
5,836
Points
1,240
eilat.jpeg


The city of Eilat was nothing but a police station in a place called Um Rash-Rash when it was captured by the Israeli army in the last operation of the War of Independence on March 10, 1949. This important victory without a battle extended Israel to the Gulf of Aqaba and gave it a shipping route through the Red Sea. A makeshift flag—made out of a bedsheet with two stripes made of ink and a Star of David from a first-aid kit—was hoisted to signify the victory. This postcard shows Eilat shortly after its lagoon opened in 1967. Anyone who’s visited the luxury hotels and tourist attractions in the past half-century knows how much the city has changed.



 

Sixties Fan

Diamond Member
Joined
Mar 6, 2017
Messages
35,859
Reaction score
5,836
Points
1,240
 

P F Tinmore

Diamond Member
Joined
Dec 6, 2009
Messages
69,771
Reaction score
3,514
Points
1,815
pasted-image-0-1.png


The Balfour Declaration was the Nov. 2, 1917, statement of the British Government that it views “with favour the establishment in Palestine of a national home for the Jewish people.” Lord Arthur Balfour, the author of those words, toured Palestine in 1925 at the invitation of Zionist leader Chaim Weizmann. He attended the ceremonial opening of the Hebrew University in Jerusalem, and was welcomed throughout his tour with great honour and ceremony by the Jewish population—including at Tel Aviv’s Gymnasium Hebrew school, which is depicted in this postcard. But the Arab population greeted Balfour with strikes and protests; after Palestine, he traveled to Damascus where he was greeted by a hostile crowd of 6,000. A riot ensued. Fearing for his safety, Balfour ended his trip to Syria early, and returned home. (Watch original footage of this visit on YouTube.)


Britain had no sovereignty in Palestine.
 

P F Tinmore

Diamond Member
Joined
Dec 6, 2009
Messages
69,771
Reaction score
3,514
Points
1,815

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]


Are you going to believe actual documents or Israeli bullshit?
 

P F Tinmore

Diamond Member
Joined
Dec 6, 2009
Messages
69,771
Reaction score
3,514
Points
1,815
IMG_8214.jpg


Keren Hayesod (Palestine Foundation Fund) was established in 1920 in London, England, to finance the Zionist movement’s work to bring about the return of the Jewish people to the Land of Israel. Leading figures from Chaim Weizmann to Ze’ev Jabotinsky were involved in its fundraising efforts. Keren Hayesod helped raise the seed money to establish the Hebrew University and the Israel Philharmonic Orchestra. It also helped develop the Haifa Bay suburbs to settle German Jewish refugees in the 1930s, and established dozens of communities to house the waves of immigrants after Israel’s creation. It continues to serve as a link between the people of Israel and Jewish communities around the world. This plaque recognizes a contribution made 100 years ago.




return of the Jewish people to the Land of Israel.
"Return" to a place where they have no ancestors.
:laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :cuckoo::cuckoo::cuckoo:
 

P F Tinmore

Diamond Member
Joined
Dec 6, 2009
Messages
69,771
Reaction score
3,514
Points
1,815
pasted-image-0.png


The American Jewish Joint Distribution Committee (a.k.a. “The Joint”) was founded in 1914, initially to save the Jews of Palestine from starvation. Since then, it’s been involved in rescue, relief and renewal of Jews around the world. The Joint assisted 190,000 Jews to leave Germany in the 1930s, helped care for 420,000 Holocaust survivors after the war, and assisted 167,000 Jews reach Israel from Muslim countries. Having operated in 85 countries—including Russia, Ethiopia and the former Yugoslavia—its non-sectarian work provides a unified Jewish response to global disasters. The Joint remains active wherever Jews are in distress: currently, it’s providing critical help in Ukraine, both to those inside the country and new refugees. This label publicized a food drive for Holocaust survivors.



Israel always has its hand out.
 

Toddsterpatriot

Diamond Member
Joined
May 3, 2011
Messages
85,928
Reaction score
26,598
Points
2,250
Location
Chicago

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]


Are you going to believe actual documents or Israeli bullshit?

provisionally recognized the former Ottoman communities as independent nations.

I believe Israel is an independent nation.

Palestine was responsible as the successor state

Yes. But now the name is Israel.
 

Sixties Fan

Diamond Member
Joined
Mar 6, 2017
Messages
35,859
Reaction score
5,836
Points
1,240
In the eyes of the Palestinian Authority, one historical act is attributed with all future Palestinian suffering. That act is the Balfour Declaration, issued today, Nov. 2, in 1917. The declaration was the first contemporary, internationally recognized expression of the right of the Jewish people to establish a national homeland in the geographical area known as “Palestine”.

“His Majesty's Government view with favour the establishment in Palestine of a national home for the Jewish people, and will use their best endeavors to facilitate the achievement of this object, it being clearly understood that nothing shall be done which may prejudice the civil and religious rights of existing non-Jewish communities in Palestine or the rights and political status enjoyed by Jews in any other country.” [emphasis added]
As exposed by Palestinian Media Watch, the PA Ministry of Information called the Balfour declaration: “The greatest crime in the history of mankind,” and the official PA daily called it “The crime of the century.”

PA Chairman Mahmoud Abbas’ Advisor on Religious Affairs and Islamic Relations, Mahmoud Al-Habbash, who also serves as the PA’s Supreme Shari’ah Judge recently claimed that the Balfour declaration violated international law:

Mahmoud-Al-Habbash-2.JPG
Mahmoud-Al-Habbash-3.0-Balfour.JPG
Mahmoud-Al-Habbash-4-Balfour.JPG


“Israel’s very existence contradicts international law. On what right do you bring people who have no connection to this land and plant them here and tell them: This is your national home? Who gave Britain a right to give a national home? Was Palestine the land of [former British Foreign Secretary Arthur] Balfour’s father?”
[Facebook page of the Fatah Commission of Information and Culture, Oct. 10, 2022]
So how then, can one answer the PA’s claim?

While the Balfour Declaration was an important statement of policy on the part of the UK government, it certainly did not have the ability to bring about the creation of the Jewish state without wide international consensus.

Historically, the declaration was issued as part of a new regional order that was born out of World War I and the demise of the Ottoman Empire, which, inter alia, had controlled most of the Middle East for centuries. As part of the new order, new borders were drawn and countries were, for the first time, carved out.

Ottoman-Empire-extent.webp


In the Ottoman Empire, “Palestine” as the separate national country and identity, as the PA claims, never existed. Rather, the region was merely just another region of the empire with no specific definition.

The British agreement to reorganize the Middle East, did not occur within the vacuum but rather as part of international, and even Arab, consensus.

The Arab consensus was expressed in the 1919 between the Hashemite Faisal I bin Al-Hussein, on behalf of the Arabs and Zionist leader Chaim Weizmann, commonly referred to as the Faisal–Weizmann Agreement.

The Arab agreement then laid the foundations for both the Paris Peace Conference and the conference held in in San Remo, Italy, in April 1920. At the San Remo Conference, the international community then adopted the Balfour Declaration and made the preliminary designation that Britain, as a holder of the “Mandate” would implement the decision to create a national homeland for the Jewish people in Palestine:

“The Mandatory will be responsible for putting into effect the declaration originally made on the [2nd] November, 1917, by the British Government and adopted by the other Allied Powers, in favour of the establishment in Palestine of a national home for the Jewish people”.
The decisions taken in San Remo were then galvanized into international law on July 24, 1922, when the League of Nations – the UN predecessor – adopted the “Mandate for Palestine”.

The preamble to the Mandate reaffirmed the Balfour Declaration and once again confirmed the historical connection of the Jewish people to the Land of Israel by stating:

"Whereas the Principal Allied Powers have also agreedthat the Mandatory should be responsible for putting into effect the declaration originally made on November 2nd, 1917, by the Government of His Britannic Majesty, and adopted by the said Powers, in favor of the establishment in Palestine of a national home for the Jewish people, it being clearly understood that nothing should be done which might prejudice the civil and religious rights of existing non-Jewish communities in Palestine, or the rights and political status enjoyed by Jews in any other country;
Whereas recognition has thereby been given to the historical connection of the Jewish people with Palestine and to the grounds for reconstituting their national home in that country."
It is fundamental to understand, the when the Balfour Declaration was issued, there was no Arab “Palestinian” identity. As historian Abd Al-Ghani Salameh explained:

Balfour-Promise-2.JPG
Balfour-3.JPG
Balfour-4.JPG


"Before the Balfour Promise (i.e., Declaration) when the Ottoman rule ended (1517 - 1917), Palestine's political borders as we know them today did not exist, and there was nothing called a Palestinian people with a political identity as we know today, since Palestine's lines of administrative division stretched from east to west and included Jordan and southern Lebanon, and like all peoples of the region were liberated from the Turkish rule and immediately moved to colonial rule, without forming a Palestinian people's political identity."
[Official Palestinian Authority TV, Nov 1, 2017]
In other words, in making its claim, the PA focuses on just one event, taken out of the wider context, and which presents a reality that lacks a factual basis.

Israel’s legitimacy in international law, questioned by the PA and Al-Habbash, does not stem from the Balfour Declaration. Rather it is based on decisions made by the international community during and in the aftermath of WWI. The decisions taken at that time by the international community, are the basis for the existence of all the different countries in the Middle East.

Unfortunately, the PA does not allow real historical facts to cloud its judgment. Indeed, the PA attacks on and obsession with the Balfour Declaration, as exposed here, here, here, here, and here, among others, by PMW, is probably the closest thing the PA has to a “national sport”.



 

P F Tinmore

Diamond Member
Joined
Dec 6, 2009
Messages
69,771
Reaction score
3,514
Points
1,815
In the eyes of the Palestinian Authority, one historical act is attributed with all future Palestinian suffering. That act is the Balfour Declaration, issued today, Nov. 2, in 1917. The declaration was the first contemporary, internationally recognized expression of the right of the Jewish people to establish a national homeland in the geographical area known as “Palestine”.


As exposed by Palestinian Media Watch, the PA Ministry of Information called the Balfour declaration: “The greatest crime in the history of mankind,” and the official PA daily called it “The crime of the century.”

PA Chairman Mahmoud Abbas’ Advisor on Religious Affairs and Islamic Relations, Mahmoud Al-Habbash, who also serves as the PA’s Supreme Shari’ah Judge recently claimed that the Balfour declaration violated international law:

Mahmoud-Al-Habbash-2.JPG
Mahmoud-Al-Habbash-3.0-Balfour.JPG
Mahmoud-Al-Habbash-4-Balfour.JPG



So how then, can one answer the PA’s claim?

While the Balfour Declaration was an important statement of policy on the part of the UK government, it certainly did not have the ability to bring about the creation of the Jewish state without wide international consensus.

Historically, the declaration was issued as part of a new regional order that was born out of World War I and the demise of the Ottoman Empire, which, inter alia, had controlled most of the Middle East for centuries. As part of the new order, new borders were drawn and countries were, for the first time, carved out.

Ottoman-Empire-extent.webp


In the Ottoman Empire, “Palestine” as the separate national country and identity, as the PA claims, never existed. Rather, the region was merely just another region of the empire with no specific definition.

The British agreement to reorganize the Middle East, did not occur within the vacuum but rather as part of international, and even Arab, consensus.

The Arab consensus was expressed in the 1919 between the Hashemite Faisal I bin Al-Hussein, on behalf of the Arabs and Zionist leader Chaim Weizmann, commonly referred to as the Faisal–Weizmann Agreement.

The Arab agreement then laid the foundations for both the Paris Peace Conference and the conference held in in San Remo, Italy, in April 1920. At the San Remo Conference, the international community then adopted the Balfour Declaration and made the preliminary designation that Britain, as a holder of the “Mandate” would implement the decision to create a national homeland for the Jewish people in Palestine:


The decisions taken in San Remo were then galvanized into international law on July 24, 1922, when the League of Nations – the UN predecessor – adopted the “Mandate for Palestine”.

The preamble to the Mandate reaffirmed the Balfour Declaration and once again confirmed the historical connection of the Jewish people to the Land of Israel by stating:


It is fundamental to understand, the when the Balfour Declaration was issued, there was no Arab “Palestinian” identity. As historian Abd Al-Ghani Salameh explained:

Balfour-Promise-2.JPG
Balfour-3.JPG
Balfour-4.JPG



In other words, in making its claim, the PA focuses on just one event, taken out of the wider context, and which presents a reality that lacks a factual basis.

Israel’s legitimacy in international law, questioned by the PA and Al-Habbash, does not stem from the Balfour Declaration. Rather it is based on decisions made by the international community during and in the aftermath of WWI. The decisions taken at that time by the international community, are the basis for the existence of all the different countries in the Middle East.

Unfortunately, the PA does not allow real historical facts to cloud its judgment. Indeed, the PA attacks on and obsession with the Balfour Declaration, as exposed here, here, here, here, and here, among others, by PMW, is probably the closest thing the PA has to a “national sport”.



Neither Balfour, San Remo, the Mandate, nor Resolution 181 had anything to do with the creation of Israel.
 

Toddsterpatriot

Diamond Member
Joined
May 3, 2011
Messages
85,928
Reaction score
26,598
Points
2,250
Location
Chicago
Neither Balfour, San Remo, the Mandate, nor Resolution 181 had anything to do with the creation of Israel.

I think it was the Jewish people putting their boots in Arab ass that created Isreal.
 

Sixties Fan

Diamond Member
Joined
Mar 6, 2017
Messages
35,859
Reaction score
5,836
Points
1,240

Sixties Fan

Diamond Member
Joined
Mar 6, 2017
Messages
35,859
Reaction score
5,836
Points
1,240
I came across this snippet in an article in the Palestine Post, May 20, 1947:




"Was it advisable to say in front of an international body that we hate the Jews because they are Jews?" asked thc Jaffa daily Ash-Shaab yesterday in its leading article.

It is no secret that the Arabs were completely unprepared in their evidence before various inquiry Commissions , and also before the UN meeting, the paper stated. "We must select very carefully the people who are to defend us."

In short, Arab antisemitism was a given - the article admits that Arabs hate Jews because they are Jews - but allowing that hate to be shown in front of international bodies is not smart, because the other dhimmis aren't as tolerant of antisemitism as the Arabs are.

So the emphasis must be on how Arabs are welcoming to Jews and treat them well, and it is only Zionism that they have a problem with.

Indeed, two months later the Arab delegates to the UNSCOP meeting insisted that there was no discrimination against Jews in Arab countries, and even that the Mufti of Jerusalem was not a Nazi supporter.


 

Sixties Fan

Diamond Member
Joined
Mar 6, 2017
Messages
35,859
Reaction score
5,836
Points
1,240
The Palestinian objection to the 1917 Balfour Declaration is one of the most explicit expressions of the Palestinian rejection of Israel’s right to exist. This year, as in previous years, the Palestinian Authority and its leaders marked the historical event with a barrage of statements condemning the declaration, that ranged from outright rejection to elaborate conspiracy theories.

The common theme of all the statements, as Palestinian Media Watch has conclusively demonstrated, is the denial of the internationally and historically recognized connection of the Jewish people to the Land of Israel and the rejection of the legitimacy of the State of Israel, in any borders.

Leading the barrage was the PA Ministry of Information which claimed that the declaration was “the crime of the era” which “exceeded the crimes of colonialism”, and called on the Britain to “be ashamed of their sin”.

“The [PA] Ministry of Information said that the black Balfour Promise in its 105th year is the crime of the era, ... this unjust promise is a dangerous precedent in the history of international relations... that ... exceeded the crimes of colonialism...
The Ministry of Information reemphasized that Britain and all its diplomats should be ashamed of their sin, their historical injustice, and their denial of all the laws and conventions...” – which obligates them to recognize the State of Palestine and stop blindly siding with injustice, occupation, and colonialism.”
[Official PA daily Al-Hayat Al-Jadida, Nov. 2, 2022]
PA Prime Minister Muhammad Shtayyeh also condemned the declaration, claiming that “Britain gave that which it did not have ownership over to one who has no right”. Shtayyeh added his demand that Britain correct its historical mistake by recognizing the “State of Palestine:

“[At the weekly PA governmental meeting, PA] Prime Minister Muhammad Shtayyeh said... that the anniversary of the ominous Balfour Declaration will take place in two days, Wednesday [Nov. 2, 2022], ‘and through it Britain gave that which it did not have ownership over to one who has no right. We are still paying the price of this ominous declaration’s consequences in political, material, humanitarian, geographical, and other terms, and Britain must correct its historical mistake and recognize the sovereign and contiguous State of Palestine whose capital is Jerusalem, and the [Palestinian] refugees’ right of return.’”
[Official PA daily Al-Hayat Al-Jadida, Nov. 1, 2022]
The PA Presidential Guard posted a similar message on its Facebook page:

mail


Posted text: “The 105th anniversary of the ominous Balfour Promise (i.e., Declaration)
On Nov. 2, 1917, the ominous Balfour Promise was issued, by virtue of which Britain gave the Jews the right to establish a national home in Palestine, based on the false statement ‘A land without a people for a people without a land.’ ...
This is a black day in the history of the Palestinian people and even in the history of all humanity, and a blow to justice and the international institutions.”
The image shows Arab refugees at the top and bottom, and on the left is a picture of former British Foreign Secretary Arthur Balfour next to the Balfour Declaration, with a large red “X” crossing them both out.
Text on image: “The Balfour Promise
We will not forget the ominous promise
The 105th anniversary of the ominous Balfour Promise
The day of the Palestinians emigrating from their cities and villages”
[PA Presidential Guard, Facebook page, Nov. 2, 2022]
Fatah, the movement headed by PA Chairman Mahmoud Abbas, also made the same claims:

mail


Posted text: “105 years since the ominous Balfour Promise (i.e., Declaration)
A promise of one who has no ownership to one who has no right
Today, Wednesday, Nov. 2, [2022,] is the 105th anniversary of the issuing of the ominous Balfour Promise, by virtue of which Britain gave the Jews the right to establish a national home in Palestine.
Our elderly are dying, and our young people will not forget.
#Balfour_105”
The image shows former British Foreign Secretary Arthur Balfour on the right, and on the left is the logo of Fatah-run Awdah TV.
Text on image: “Lest we forget our Palestine
British Foreign Secretary Arthur James Balfour
The Balfour Promise –
A promise of one who has no ownership to one who has no right
The Balfour Promise is the common nickname for a letter that Arthur James Balfour sent on Nov. 2, 1917, to Lord Lionel Walter Rothschild, in which he noted the British government’s support for establishing a national home for the Jews in our Palestine.”
[Fatah Commission of Information and Culture, Facebook page, Nov. 2, 2022]


(full article online)


 

Sixties Fan

Diamond Member
Joined
Mar 6, 2017
Messages
35,859
Reaction score
5,836
Points
1,240

A Lost Novel Describes Arriving at the “Palestinian Ellis Island” in Pre-State Israel​



Before setting off from New York City to the Land of Israel in 1926, the Yiddish novelist and essayist Miriam Karpilove dashed off a letter to the secretary of the I.L. Peretz Writers’ Union. Therein, she complained of the many things she had to do in preparation for leaving golus [diasporic exile], adding “I am my own [lady messiah] and, as you know, I have no white horse and, as you also know, the subway is on strike to boot.” Her visit to Mandate Palestine would last for two years, and form the basis of an unfinished novel, parts of which will soon be published. Jessica Kirzane excerpts her translation of the opening chapter, which depicts the characters’ arrival at the “Palestinian Ellis Island.”
We had to show a group of British government officers all of our documents so they could see that our coming here to Eretz Yisrael was kosher and we’d followed all the legal requirements they set out for us. These government officials sat at a long table in the middle of a large room. We had to stand. Stand and wait in line until someone looked over our papers and gave them to another official, who gave them to a third official, and so forth.
More than anything, they noticed the stamp on our papers with the word “settler.” They were surprised that American citizens with money had come to settle in Palestine: is it so bad in America, or so good in Eretz Yisrael, that the Jews would want to settle here? Especially during the present crisis? One of the officials asked my brother why he wanted to settle in Palestine, isn’t it good to be an American citizen?
“Oh, very good!” Jacob said. “But I think Palestine has more for us.”
“Remarkable, . . . ” he shrugged his shoulders and asked me what compelled me to settle in Palestine. I looked him straight in his squinty eyes and replied, “historical connections, you know . . .”.

Read more at Jewish Review of Books



 

💲 Amazon Deals 💲

Forum List

Top