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

[Shusha]

RE: The NEWER Official Discussion Thread for the creation of Israel, the UN and the British Mandate
⁜→ Rehmani, et al,

We've talked about this many times.

Why was Palestine's 1948 declaration of independence illegitimate?

(COMMENT)

• Israel's claim for Independence came first, in May 1948. The Arab Palestinians declined (making a HARD rejection) with threats.

• THe All Palestine Government (APG) came in September and tried to claim the same territory already declared Independent by the Israelis. See Posting #205 (Excerpt):

(COMMENT)

I'm not sure what this is asking. I'm not sure what it says. BUT, by Convention, a STATE mush has:

a ) a permanent population;

◈ It is not quite known what portion of what populations, associated with what territories were supoorting the APG.​

b ) a defined territory;

◈ The APG cannot declare Independence over any territory it did not have sovergn control of → nor the territory over which another independent entity (the State of Israel) held sovereign control.​

c ) government; and

◈ While there was an intrim cabinet established by the APG, there was no functional government activities. The Arab Palestinians, on a number of occassions, rejected the opportunities in the building of self-governing institutions. That included a number of rejections by the Arab Higher Committee which was Chaired by Hajj Amin al-Husseini, former chairman of the Arab Higher Committee and NAZI collaborator with the enemy.

◈ The APG Government was not a functioning government able to immediately state the process of Government. They declined to participate in the establishment of self-governing Institutions.
​

d) capacity to enter into relations with the other states.

◈ The APG did not ever demonstrate the capacity to concluded between States in written form and governed by international law.​

There is more to being a Government than just saying you are a government. And, the Arab League, on behalf of the Arab Palestinians, helped to prove the territorial limits of Israeli sovereignty. Certainly, the APG could not prove they had sovereign governmental control over even the small patch of Gaza.

Most Respectfully,
R

Yep. And why Palestine is still not accepted fully as a State. Haven't met the criteria.

 

[P F Tinmore]

RE: The NEWER Official Discussion Thread for the creation of Israel, the UN and the British Mandate
⁜→ P F Tinmore, et al,

Actually you are correct. There was no "State of Palestine!" Thus they were not a party to the 1948, the 1967, or the 1973 Conflicts. Some other Arab League Members fought on behalf of the Arab Palestinians.

Where does it say that Palestine lost a war?

(COMMENT)

Politically and diplomatically, each of the conflicts left the Arab Palestinian worse-off then they were before the conflict.

When participant say that the Arab Palestinians "lost the war," what they mean is that the Arab League proxy on the Arab Palestinians behalf, in the post-conflict experienced a decisive military failure; I say again: the Arab League combatants "experienced a decisive military failure."

The consequences of those (Arab League) failures had the cumulative negative effect on the limitations to establish Arab Palestinians sovereignty. Not only that! → but as a consequence of those failures, the Arab Palestinians failed to have any positive impact on the Armistice Agreements or the follow-on Peace Treaties (Egypt and Jordan) (Letter of Understanding from Lebanon) that followed. Nor have the Arab Palestinians able to make any significant political-military advancements. They are continually setting the condition to actually loose control of ever-increasing parcels of territory.

Most Respectfully,
R

Pfffft, Israeli talking points. The fighting ended when the UN Security Council called for an armistice. Nobody won or lost that war. Consequently nobody won or lost any land. In 1949 the UN carved Palestine into three areas of occupation.

 

[Hollie]

RE: The NEWER Official Discussion Thread for the creation of Israel, the UN and the British Mandate
⁜→ P F Tinmore, et al,

Actually you are correct. There was no "State of Palestine!" Thus they were not a party to the 1948, the 1967, or the 1973 Conflicts. Some other Arab League Members fought on behalf of the Arab Palestinians.

Where does it say that Palestine lost a war?

(COMMENT)

Politically and diplomatically, each of the conflicts left the Arab Palestinian worse-off then they were before the conflict.

When participant say that the Arab Palestinians "lost the war," what they mean is that the Arab League proxy on the Arab Palestinians behalf, in the post-conflict experienced a decisive military failure; I say again: the Arab League combatants "experienced a decisive military failure."

The consequences of those (Arab League) failures had the cumulative negative effect on the limitations to establish Arab Palestinians sovereignty. Not only that! → but as a consequence of those failures, the Arab Palestinians failed to have any positive impact on the Armistice Agreements or the follow-on Peace Treaties (Egypt and Jordan) (Letter of Understanding from Lebanon) that followed. Nor have the Arab Palestinians able to make any significant political-military advancements. They are continually setting the condition to actually loose control of ever-increasing parcels of territory.

Most Respectfully,
R

Pfffft, Israeli talking points. The fighting ended when the UN Security Council called for an armistice. Nobody won or lost that war. Consequently nobody won or lost any land. In 1949 the UN carved Palestine into three areas of occupation.

Indeed, nothing but an Islamic schoolboy’s understanding of history.

 

[rylah]

RE: The NEWER Official Discussion Thread for the creation of Israel, the UN and the British Mandate
⁜→ rylah, P F Tinmore, Sixties Fan,
et al,

I'm sure that I mentioned this before, but there are wholly legitimate reasons for the Israelis to retain certain key terrain given (in the 1967 Time Frame then aggravated in 1973) the aggressive nature of the Arab League at that time, and no encouraging results from diplomatic efforts.

Indeed.

Indeed what?
That association treated the settlement of Jews in several countries at the same time.
Lands were bought in the US, Canada, S. America, Syria-Palestine, and Turkey for families fleeing from pogroms to legally build their homes.

Can You point to the country of which sovereignty did Jews infringe upon when purchasing and settling those lands, and in the name of which other sovereign country?

(COMMENT)

Whether the terrain was privately purchased or publicly acquired is really not the issue. The issue has to do with the necessity to militarily preserved for protection. To prevent, ever again, that terrain from being exploited by Hostile Syrian Forces (elements of the Arab League). This is not just an excuse, it was noted by the US Joint Chiefs back in 1967.

View attachment 252486
​

Relative to (specifically) the Golan Heights area, it was further noted that:

b. Syrian Territory Contiguous to Israel. Israel is particularly sensitive to the prevalence of terrorist raids and border incidents in this area. The presently occupied territory, the high ground running generally north-south on a line with Qnaitra about 15 miles inside the Syrian border, would give Israel control of the terrain which Syria has used effectively in harassing the border area.

Conventional Military Logic of the late 20th Century doesn't seem to apply in the Middle East. The US thought that Egypt and Syria would not attack. But they each made the fatal maneuvers that triggered the war in 1967 and then launched the coordinated surprise attack in 1973.

Yeah, so someone bought some land. It was purchased long before the ground became a strategic consideration. It was not the purpose of the purchase to facilitate annexation. That annexation was to close-off the high-ground from the Syrians.

Most Respectfully,
R

Indeed the Conventional Military Logic of late 20 Century doesn't apply in the ME, and especially when Israel was involved. All those big victories happened in spite of our numbers, mistakes and dysfunction on the command level, thanks to circumstance and mistakes, or sudden retreats of the enemy at crucial moments. As Ben- Gurion said: "In Israel to be a realist, one has to believe in miracles".

The second point is regarding the land purchase. When discussing such terms as annexation we have to separate 2 things:

• it was specifically bought for local Jews to build their homes legally. This was specifically mentioned in the Kushan, it was Mulk land, meaning the ownership was full. The purpose was specifically to take care of the refugees and local Jews who were left homeless under the burden of triple Ottoman tax and the numerous pogroms and persecutions by the local population. Eventually those Kushans (Ottoman ownership license) were transferred to the Jewish nation through the INF, and as far as I know including the Kushans of the Golan Heights, that were later registered under the Jewish nation by the owners who fled or were expelled and became Israeli citizens. As a main political representative of the Jewish refugees from Arab countries, the govt of the Jewish nation is obliged to put forth this issue (estimated $250bil), and specifically in the context of each negotiation brought to the table.
• The Jewish nation was vested with sovereignty under international law in all territory that was alloted to Palestine, before parts of the territory were illegally ceded to the Mandate of Trans-Jordan and Mandate of Syria. Jewish presence, settlement and holding are all protected by international agreements that precede British and French mandates, neither, as far as I understand did they follow the procedures of the LoN constitution changing those borders. In this aspect too, Israeli government must take a more concrete position regarding the Golan Heights and other territories that lawfully belong to the Jewish nation.

This is an interesting map I've found on the "Palestinian Academic Society for The Study of International Affairs" website:

PASSIA - MAPS - Palestine - PALESTINE UNDER THE BRITISH MANDATE

 

[RoccoR]

RE: The NEWER Official Discussion Thread for the creation of Israel, the UN and the British Mandate
⁜→ P F Tinmore, et al,

Sometimes I get so confused.

◈ The Arab Palestinians are charging the border, but they did not lose anything. What's that about?

◈ The Hostile Arab Palestinians keep showing this (inaccurate) chart. Yet they did not lose anything. What's that about?

​

Pfffft, Israeli talking points. The fighting ended when the UN Security Council called for an armistice. Nobody won or lost that war. Consequently, nobody won or lost any land. In 1949 the UN carved Palestine into three areas of occupation.

(COMMENT)

◈ The "cessation of hostilities" and the "end of a conflict" are entirely two different things.

◈ Relative to the 1949 Armistice Arrangements, two Armistice Agreements have been supercededd by Peace Treaties (Egyptian and Jordanian issues).

◈ Relative to the 1949 Armistice, the year 2000 Agreement Letter essentially overtakes the Armistice. The letter is found at A/54/914 S/2000/564 12 June 2000 from the Permanent Representative of Lebanon to the United Nations addressed to the Secretary-General and the arrangement is still one of peace.

◈ The Armistice with Syria was overtaken by the Annexation of the Golan Heights.​

Back in 1949, a lot of things were true or different from today. However, the four arrangements were independent of each other and none of them were carve-outs; although I understand what you mean. None of the Agrrementstoday are active in the sense they were before each was negated by a follow-on agreement. They are great historical documents, but each has been legally replaced.

The demarcations of the Armistice Lines have no validity today.

Pfffft, Israeli talking points. The fighting ended when the UN Security Council called for an armistice. Nobody won or lost that war. Consequently nobody won or lost any land. In 1949 the UN carved Palestine into three areas of occupation.

(COMMENT)

◈ I would be ever so greatfulif you could send me the link to the imfamous "Talk Point Memo" (TPM) you have mentioned so often as some sort of response to facts I mention.

◈ IF "Nobody won or lost that war," then what is the current dispute about?​

My understanding is that the Hostile Arab Palestinians (HoAP) have nine major areas of concern.

• Borders
• Jerusalem
• Refugees
• Political Prisoners
• Water
• Security
• Economy
• State to State
• Claims Resolution

"The Palestinian position seeks to end Israeli occupation, exercise the Palestinian people’s inalienable right to self-determination and establish an independent, viable and sovereign state on the 1967 borders."

There are so many things at issue (that have not been lost), with my limited capacity, I can only tackle one at a time. If you have a specific in which you want to hold a discussion as to whether or not the HoAP has a sound and valid complaint, then, by all means, let's tackle them one at a time.

Most Respectfully,
R

 

[Rehmani]

Why was Palestine's 1948 declaration of independence illegitimate?

Because they had no effective government, no control of territory, and no population willing to accept them.

Because their Home Land / Holy land invaded illegally. Because invader created Israel illegally with help of lethal force/super power.

 

[Rehmani]

RE: The NEWER Official Discussion Thread for the creation of Israel, the UN and the British Mandate
⁜→ Rehmani, et al,

Oh come on, let's be both realistic and clear.

✦ I dont Know where “holly land” is?

✦ I would Like to know what land they “stole”?

✦ Who was the President of “Palestine” in 1946?​

​

(ANSWERS)

✦ I don't Know where “holly land” is?

The Holy Land (Terra Sancta) is not a defined term, but "words of description." is anywhere that the Messiah was claimed to have roamed.

✦ I would Like to know what land they “stole”?

This is a different emotional level question that is dependent on who you ask (like the thermotropic liquid crystals in Mood Rings). The PLO ("the sole legitimate representative of the Palestinian people in any Palestinian territory that is liberated" I say again → any Palestinian territory that is liberated") Negotiation Affairs Department (the authoritative voice of the people) answer this question with: "The delineation and demarcation of agreed-upon borders are central to reaching an end of conflict on the basis of the two-state solution."

Our national movement once laid claim to its rights over all of historic Palestine, an area that includes modern-day Israel. Since 1988, however, in the interest of achieving peace and ending the conflict, we limited our national aspirations to statehood to 22 percent of historic Palestine, seeking a state of our own in the West Bank and Gaza Strip, with East Jerusalem as its capital (that is, all of the territory occupied by Israel in 1967). Despite this, Israel continues to create “facts on the ground,” building the Wall, expanding settlements, confiscating and grabbing Palestinian Land, demolishing of Palestinian homes, in violation of international law.

It should be noted that the PLO-NAD recognizes: "Historic Palestine (pre-1948) encompasses all of Israel, the Gaza Strip, the West Bank and Jerusalem. In 1922, historic Palestine was placed under a British Mandate by the League of Nations."

✦ Who was the President of “Palestine” in 1946?

The anti-government coalition of the Arab Palestinians attempted, under the protection of the Egyptian Military Governorship, assembled a makeshift organization called the All Palestine Government (APG).

The Prime Minister was Ahmed Hilmi Pasha; a former General Officer in the Enemy Army of the Ottoman Empire.

The President was Hajj Amin al-Husseini, former chairman of the Arab Higher Committee and a significant collaborator with NAZI Leaders, including the Chancellor of Germany - The Fuhrer.​

How dumb someone can be.
Holy Land a territory which is invaded by Israel illegally.

(COMMENT)

The vast majority of the Jewish population in the first half of the 20th Century were Article 4 Immigrants"

"The Zionist Organisation, so long as its organisation and constitution are in the opinion of the Mandatory appropriate, shall be recognised as such agency. It shall take steps in consultation with His Britannic Majesty's Government to secure the co-operation of all Jews who are willing to assist in the establishment of the Jewish national home."​

The Jewish Agency → recognised as a public body for the purpose of advising and co-operating with the Administration of Palestine → assisting the Administration in the successful Jewish immigration under Article 6 procedures → encouraging settlement by Jews on the land.

This was agreed upon by the Principal Allied Powers on the assumption of territorial rights and title.

And when legitimacy is concern then president of Palestine or president of Israel become irrelevant.
I will say even this debate is useless.
That is how jew and their supporter are they trying to make right from wrong through a organize paid propaganda.

(COMMENT)

I'm not sure what this is asking. I'm not sure what it says. BUT, by Convention, a STATE mush has:

a ) a permanent population;

◈ It is not quite known what portion of what populations, associated with what territories were supoorting the APG.​

b ) a defined territory;

◈ The APG cannot declare Independence over any territory it did not have sovergn control of → nor the territory over which another independent entity (the State of Israel) held sovereign control.​

c ) government; and

◈ While there was an intrim cabinet established by the APG, there was no functional government activities. The Arab Palestinians, on a number of occassions, rejected the opportunities in the building of self-governing institutions. That included a number of rejections by the Arab Higher Committee which was Chaired by Hajj Amin al-Husseini, former chairman of the Arab Higher Committee and NAZI collaborator with the enemy.
​

d) capacity to enter into relations with the other states.

◈ The APG did not ever demonstrate the capacity to concluded between States in written form and governed by international law.
​

Most Respectfully,
R

Why was Palestine's 1948 declaration of independence illegitimate?

Because they lost the war.

Because their country invaded with the help of super power. Otherwise Israeli can not win at all means israel should not be there if super power did not support.
It was a gift by the coalition power to jews in return to help in wwI and II. Because Coalition thought at the time that jew paid heavy price to won war against Germany like sacrificed 6 ml jews.
Which was wrong or false claim by the jew. Now these powers realized that jew lied to them because no mas grave found about jew yet as compare to other countries mass graved already founded.

 

[flacaltenn]

All of that discussion that was just mostly removed needs some explanation.. It's TRUE -- biblical Jews did not live in Israel.... Don't jump my bones yet....

























They lived in CANAAN... The ancestral home for all THREE of the world's major religions... Because Abraham, Isaac and Ishmael all derive from there. Isaac and Ishmael both prophets. Abraham the roots of Islam, Christianity and Judaism... For those of you who can't PLACE this strange country of Canaan (like the Pakistani formerly in this thread) --- here's a map..

Can't be argued by Jews, Muslims or Christians.. It's ALL in the same book...

Glad to be done with that "technicality....

 

[P F Tinmore]

RE: The NEWER Official Discussion Thread for the creation of Israel, the UN and the British Mandate
⁜→ P F Tinmore, et al,

Sometimes I get so confused.

◈ The Arab Palestinians are charging the border, but they did not lose anything. What's that about?

◈ The Hostile Arab Palestinians keep showing this (inaccurate) chart. Yet they did not lose anything. What's that about?

​

Pfffft, Israeli talking points. The fighting ended when the UN Security Council called for an armistice. Nobody won or lost that war. Consequently, nobody won or lost any land. In 1949 the UN carved Palestine into three areas of occupation.

(COMMENT)

◈ The "cessation of hostilities" and the "end of a conflict" are entirely two different things.

◈ Relative to the 1949 Armistice Arrangements, two Armistice Agreements have been supercededd by Peace Treaties (Egyptian and Jordanian issues).

◈ Relative to the 1949 Armistice, the year 2000 Agreement Letter essentially overtakes the Armistice. The letter is found at A/54/914 S/2000/564 12 June 2000 from the Permanent Representative of Lebanon to the United Nations addressed to the Secretary-General and the arrangement is still one of peace.

◈ The Armistice with Syria was overtaken by the Annexation of the Golan Heights.​

Back in 1949, a lot of things were true or different from today. However, the four arrangements were independent of each other and none of them were carve-outs; although I understand what you mean. None of the Agrrementstoday are active in the sense they were before each was negated by a follow-on agreement. They are great historical documents, but each has been legally replaced.

The demarcations of the Armistice Lines have no validity today.

Pfffft, Israeli talking points. The fighting ended when the UN Security Council called for an armistice. Nobody won or lost that war. Consequently nobody won or lost any land. In 1949 the UN carved Palestine into three areas of occupation.

(COMMENT)

◈ I would be ever so greatfulif you could send me the link to the imfamous "Talk Point Memo" (TPM) you have mentioned so often as some sort of response to facts I mention.

◈ IF "Nobody won or lost that war," then what is the current dispute about?​

My understanding is that the Hostile Arab Palestinians (HoAP) have nine major areas of concern.

• Borders
• Jerusalem
• Refugees
• Political Prisoners
• Water
• Security
• Economy
• State to State
• Claims Resolution

"The Palestinian position seeks to end Israeli occupation, exercise the Palestinian people’s inalienable right to self-determination and establish an independent, viable and sovereign state on the 1967 borders."

There are so many things at issue (that have not been lost), with my limited capacity, I can only tackle one at a time. If you have a specific in which you want to hold a discussion as to whether or not the HoAP has a sound and valid complaint, then, by all means, let's tackle them one at a time.

Most Respectfully,
R

◈ IF "Nobody won or lost that war," then what is the current dispute about?

Good question.What is disputed and whose dispute is it?

 

[Hollie]

RE: The NEWER Official Discussion Thread for the creation of Israel, the UN and the British Mandate
⁜→ P F Tinmore, et al,

Sometimes I get so confused.

◈ The Arab Palestinians are charging the border, but they did not lose anything. What's that about?

◈ The Hostile Arab Palestinians keep showing this (inaccurate) chart. Yet they did not lose anything. What's that about?

​

Pfffft, Israeli talking points. The fighting ended when the UN Security Council called for an armistice. Nobody won or lost that war. Consequently, nobody won or lost any land. In 1949 the UN carved Palestine into three areas of occupation.

(COMMENT)

◈ The "cessation of hostilities" and the "end of a conflict" are entirely two different things.

◈ Relative to the 1949 Armistice Arrangements, two Armistice Agreements have been supercededd by Peace Treaties (Egyptian and Jordanian issues).

◈ Relative to the 1949 Armistice, the year 2000 Agreement Letter essentially overtakes the Armistice. The letter is found at A/54/914 S/2000/564 12 June 2000 from the Permanent Representative of Lebanon to the United Nations addressed to the Secretary-General and the arrangement is still one of peace.

◈ The Armistice with Syria was overtaken by the Annexation of the Golan Heights.​

Back in 1949, a lot of things were true or different from today. However, the four arrangements were independent of each other and none of them were carve-outs; although I understand what you mean. None of the Agrrementstoday are active in the sense they were before each was negated by a follow-on agreement. They are great historical documents, but each has been legally replaced.

The demarcations of the Armistice Lines have no validity today.

Pfffft, Israeli talking points. The fighting ended when the UN Security Council called for an armistice. Nobody won or lost that war. Consequently nobody won or lost any land. In 1949 the UN carved Palestine into three areas of occupation.

(COMMENT)

◈ I would be ever so greatfulif you could send me the link to the imfamous "Talk Point Memo" (TPM) you have mentioned so often as some sort of response to facts I mention.

◈ IF "Nobody won or lost that war," then what is the current dispute about?​

My understanding is that the Hostile Arab Palestinians (HoAP) have nine major areas of concern.

• Borders
• Jerusalem
• Refugees
• Political Prisoners
• Water
• Security
• Economy
• State to State
• Claims Resolution

"The Palestinian position seeks to end Israeli occupation, exercise the Palestinian people’s inalienable right to self-determination and establish an independent, viable and sovereign state on the 1967 borders."

There are so many things at issue (that have not been lost), with my limited capacity, I can only tackle one at a time. If you have a specific in which you want to hold a discussion as to whether or not the HoAP has a sound and valid complaint, then, by all means, let's tackle them one at a time.

Most Respectfully,
R

◈ IF "Nobody won or lost that war," then what is the current dispute about?

Good question.What is disputed and whose dispute is it?

Indeed, after all this time, you still don’t understand the most basic premise of an Islamist waqf?

 

[P F Tinmore]

RE: The NEWER Official Discussion Thread for the creation of Israel, the UN and the British Mandate
⁜→ P F Tinmore, et al,

Sometimes I get so confused.

◈ The Arab Palestinians are charging the border, but they did not lose anything. What's that about?

◈ The Hostile Arab Palestinians keep showing this (inaccurate) chart. Yet they did not lose anything. What's that about?

​

Pfffft, Israeli talking points. The fighting ended when the UN Security Council called for an armistice. Nobody won or lost that war. Consequently, nobody won or lost any land. In 1949 the UN carved Palestine into three areas of occupation.

(COMMENT)

◈ The "cessation of hostilities" and the "end of a conflict" are entirely two different things.

◈ Relative to the 1949 Armistice Arrangements, two Armistice Agreements have been supercededd by Peace Treaties (Egyptian and Jordanian issues).

◈ Relative to the 1949 Armistice, the year 2000 Agreement Letter essentially overtakes the Armistice. The letter is found at A/54/914 S/2000/564 12 June 2000 from the Permanent Representative of Lebanon to the United Nations addressed to the Secretary-General and the arrangement is still one of peace.

◈ The Armistice with Syria was overtaken by the Annexation of the Golan Heights.​

Back in 1949, a lot of things were true or different from today. However, the four arrangements were independent of each other and none of them were carve-outs; although I understand what you mean. None of the Agrrementstoday are active in the sense they were before each was negated by a follow-on agreement. They are great historical documents, but each has been legally replaced.

The demarcations of the Armistice Lines have no validity today.

Pfffft, Israeli talking points. The fighting ended when the UN Security Council called for an armistice. Nobody won or lost that war. Consequently nobody won or lost any land. In 1949 the UN carved Palestine into three areas of occupation.

(COMMENT)

◈ I would be ever so greatfulif you could send me the link to the imfamous "Talk Point Memo" (TPM) you have mentioned so often as some sort of response to facts I mention.

◈ IF "Nobody won or lost that war," then what is the current dispute about?​

My understanding is that the Hostile Arab Palestinians (HoAP) have nine major areas of concern.

• Borders
• Jerusalem
• Refugees
• Political Prisoners
• Water
• Security
• Economy
• State to State
• Claims Resolution

"The Palestinian position seeks to end Israeli occupation, exercise the Palestinian people’s inalienable right to self-determination and establish an independent, viable and sovereign state on the 1967 borders."

There are so many things at issue (that have not been lost), with my limited capacity, I can only tackle one at a time. If you have a specific in which you want to hold a discussion as to whether or not the HoAP has a sound and valid complaint, then, by all means, let's tackle them one at a time.

Most Respectfully,
R

◈ IF "Nobody won or lost that war," then what is the current dispute about?

Good question.What is disputed and whose dispute is it?

Indeed, after all this time, you still don’t understand the most basic premise of an Islamist waqf?

An endowment made by a Muslim to a religious, educational, or charitable cause.

waqf | Definition of waqf in English by Oxford Dictionaries

 

[Hollie]

RE: The NEWER Official Discussion Thread for the creation of Israel, the UN and the British Mandate
⁜→ P F Tinmore, et al,

Sometimes I get so confused.

◈ The Arab Palestinians are charging the border, but they did not lose anything. What's that about?

◈ The Hostile Arab Palestinians keep showing this (inaccurate) chart. Yet they did not lose anything. What's that about?

​

Pfffft, Israeli talking points. The fighting ended when the UN Security Council called for an armistice. Nobody won or lost that war. Consequently, nobody won or lost any land. In 1949 the UN carved Palestine into three areas of occupation.

(COMMENT)

◈ The "cessation of hostilities" and the "end of a conflict" are entirely two different things.

◈ Relative to the 1949 Armistice Arrangements, two Armistice Agreements have been supercededd by Peace Treaties (Egyptian and Jordanian issues).

◈ Relative to the 1949 Armistice, the year 2000 Agreement Letter essentially overtakes the Armistice. The letter is found at A/54/914 S/2000/564 12 June 2000 from the Permanent Representative of Lebanon to the United Nations addressed to the Secretary-General and the arrangement is still one of peace.

◈ The Armistice with Syria was overtaken by the Annexation of the Golan Heights.​

Back in 1949, a lot of things were true or different from today. However, the four arrangements were independent of each other and none of them were carve-outs; although I understand what you mean. None of the Agrrementstoday are active in the sense they were before each was negated by a follow-on agreement. They are great historical documents, but each has been legally replaced.

The demarcations of the Armistice Lines have no validity today.

Pfffft, Israeli talking points. The fighting ended when the UN Security Council called for an armistice. Nobody won or lost that war. Consequently nobody won or lost any land. In 1949 the UN carved Palestine into three areas of occupation.

(COMMENT)

◈ I would be ever so greatfulif you could send me the link to the imfamous "Talk Point Memo" (TPM) you have mentioned so often as some sort of response to facts I mention.

◈ IF "Nobody won or lost that war," then what is the current dispute about?​

My understanding is that the Hostile Arab Palestinians (HoAP) have nine major areas of concern.

• Borders
• Jerusalem
• Refugees
• Political Prisoners
• Water
• Security
• Economy
• State to State
• Claims Resolution

"The Palestinian position seeks to end Israeli occupation, exercise the Palestinian people’s inalienable right to self-determination and establish an independent, viable and sovereign state on the 1967 borders."

There are so many things at issue (that have not been lost), with my limited capacity, I can only tackle one at a time. If you have a specific in which you want to hold a discussion as to whether or not the HoAP has a sound and valid complaint, then, by all means, let's tackle them one at a time.

Most Respectfully,
R

◈ IF "Nobody won or lost that war," then what is the current dispute about?

Good question.What is disputed and whose dispute is it?

Indeed, after all this time, you still don’t understand the most basic premise of an Islamist waqf?

An endowment made by a Muslim to a religious, educational, or charitable cause.

waqf | Definition of waqf in English by Oxford Dictionaries

The Islamist settler colonial project defines it as such:

The Islamic Resistance Movement believes that the land of Palestine is an Islamic Waqf consecrated for future Moslem generations until Judgement Day.

That's from the Hamas charter.

The lands conquered by the Islamist settler colonial project do not become eternally Islamist, despite what Muhammud promised you.

 

[Sixties Fan]

THE WHITE HOUSE
WASHINGTON

"Out of the world War came a matter of great spiritual significance — the establishment of a Homeland for the Jewish people, recognized as such by the public law of the world. In the realization of this aim the United States played a leading role. I know how close it was to the wish of President Wilson. The formal terms of its expression during the War, the so-called Balfour Declaration, had his personal approval, and he did much to have it written into the peace treaty. The subsequent unanimous endorsement or the Balfour Declaration by both Houses of the United States Congress gave further proof of the deep interest or the American people in the purposes of the Declaration and in the fulfilment the moral obligation which it involved.

Jewish achievement in Palestine since the Balfour Declaration vindicates the high hope which lay behind the sponsorship of the Homeland. The Jewish development in Palestine since the Balfour Declaration is not only a tribute to the creative powers of the Jewish people, but by bringing great advancement into the sacred Land has promoted the well-being of all the inhabitants thereof.

I shall personally watch with deep sympathy the progress of Palestine."
---------------
Franklin D. RooseveltIt looks like most of this letter was actually written in 1932, with the last paragraph perhaps added for the exhibition.

In this letter, FDR confirms that the building of a Jewish homeland in Palestine was enshrined in international law. This means building through the entire area of the British Mandate.

Has the status of the land changed since then?

The areas illegally seized by Jordan in 1948, now known as the "West Bank," did not change their status since Jordan's annexation was not recognized by the international community. In 1967, when Israel gained those lands back, nothing changed from the San Remo conference and other nations' recognition of all of British Mandate Palestine as being the area where the Jewish homeland should be built - which of course includes towns and villages.

The first change to the status of those territories came during the Oslo process when Israel apparently gave Area A to the PLO. The areas where Jews have moved to live are still fully within the areas covered by San Remo and international law since the early 1920s.

(full article online)

FDR's letter to the Palestine Pavilion at the World's Fair and the legality of Jewish settlements ~ Elder Of Ziyon - Israel News

 

[Sixties Fan]

 

[Sixties Fan]

 

[Sixties Fan]

[ " A Land without A people" not a land without people, as so many interpret those words. A People, as in Germany there are the Germans, in Italy there are the Italians, etc. In the Land of Israel, that People would be the Jews ]

 

[P F Tinmore]

◈ The Hostile Arab Palestinians keep showing this (inaccurate) chart. Yet they did not lose anything. What's that about?

​

As far as I can tell from documents, that is a map of Palestine and the green is occupied territory.

 

[P F Tinmore]

◈ The Armistice with Syria was overtaken by the Annexation of the Golan Heights.

It is illegal to annex occupied territory. The world still recognizes the Golan as Syrian territory. As they should.

 

[rylah]

◈ The Armistice with Syria was overtaken by the Annexation of the Golan Heights.

It is illegal to annex occupied territory. The world still recognizes the Golan as Syrian territory. As they should.

"The World" also literally elected a Nazi officer as the UN secretary-general.

If 2 billion Muslims all jump together in coordination shouting "Israel does not exist" for 70 years, it only means that if their collective intelligence was transformed into electricity - would barely suffice to toast a piece of bread...

And yet, international law is not a popularity contest.

 

[RoccoR]

RE: The NEWER Official Discussion Thread for the creation of Israel, the UN and the British Mandate
⁜→ P F Tinmore, et al,

Yes, let's go back to my target to this response. Maybe it will jog your memory. You said:

Pfffft, Israeli talking points. The fighting ended when the UN Security Council called for an armistice. Nobody won or lost that war. Consequently nobody won or lost any land. In 1949 the UN carved Palestine into three areas of occupation.

You can clearly see that the Map you posted then, and you post here again is Titled of bold print: "LOSS OF LAND"

◈ The Hostile Arab Palestinians keep showing this (inaccurate) chart. Yet they did not lose anything. What's that about?

​

As far as I can tell from documents, that is a map of Palestine and the green is occupied territory.

(COMMENT)

The caption under Phase Map #2 claims that the yellow portion belonged to:

​

In point of fact, the territory was under Ottoman/Turkish Sovereignty until the Rights and Title were renounced and placed into the hands of the Allied Powers. It was NOT a case that "90% of the land belongs to Palestinians."

​

None of the 4 Armistice Agreements reallocated any territory to any party. Nor did the agreements established a permanent boundary. The Agreements approximate the Forward Edge of the Battle Area (FEBA) used and agreed upon as the Armistice Lines. The Armistice Line would remain a demarcation until a Treaty of Peace were negotiated. (See: Posting #2054 • Palestine Massing...)

❖ The Jordan-Israel Peace Treaty was signed on October 26, 1994 →
◈ Article 3 - International Boundary

❖ The Treaty of Peace between the Arab Republic of Egypt and the State of Israel, 26 March 1979
◈ Article II The permanent boundary between Egypt and Israel
​

That portion of the "Green Line" (demarcation line set out in the 1949 Armistice Agreements) separating Israeli Force from Arab Forces (Egypt and Jordan) was dissolved by the Treaties.

In my opinion, the 5th and 6th Phase Maps are an oversimplification of the current situation and that period beginning 1956-1967. It is also obvious that the last Phase Map suggests that all of Area "C" was Annexed, as opposed to the Arab Palestinian Agreement which created the Palestinian Authority.

Anyone that actually studies Map (which you posted) will realize that this is a Disinformation effort on the part of Arab Palestinians to seek sympathy for their political position.

Most Respectfully,
R