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

[P F Tinmore]

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


(COMMENT)
.
I do not believe anyone argued against that point.

What was stated in my own words was derived from:


The "International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights" (CCPR) is an agreement that enjoins the signatories to respect the Rights of the Israelis to exercise their CCPR and to form their own self-governing institutions to include the Jewish State. The Israelis today are inhabitants of the territory over which they have established "sovereignty." They have:

◈ ) a permanent population; ​

◈ ) a defined territory; ​

◈ ) government; and ​

◈) capacity to enter into relations with the other states.​

No matter what the argument raised, there is nothing that the Arab Palestinian can put forth that can take their nation away. N O T H I N G !

And the Arab Palestinians have, for over 100 years, attempting to obstruct the reconstituting the national home for the Jewish people within the territory formerly under the mandate.

It is done.
.

Most Respectfully,
R

P F Tinmore said:


Rights belong to the inhabitants not to any state or government.

Look it up.

(COMMENT)
.

I do not believe anyone argued against that point.

You do all the time. You say that the Palestinians have no rights because they don't have a "state."

 

[P F Tinmore]

The anti-Israel crowd is going nuts over this tweet:



There have been hundreds of angry responses and quote tweets, most over-the-top but few actually addressing the issue.


No, the IHRA Working Definition of Antisemitism cannot in any way make it illegal to say the word "nakba."

Is the word "nakba" itself antisemitic?

Originally, "nakba" in the context of Palestine was coined by Syrian historian Constantin Zureiq to describe Israel's defeat of combined Arab armies. “The defeat of the Arabs in Palestine is not a small downfall – naksa … It is a catastrophe – nakba – in every sense of the word....Seven Arab countries declare war on Zionism in Palestine….Seven countries go to war to abolish the partition and to defeat Zionism, and quickly leave the battle after losing much of the land of Palestine – even the part that was given to the Arabs in the Partition Plan.”

Nothing about Palestinian Arabs or refugees. The word described the shame of Arab armies losing a war to the Jews after bragging about their inevitable great victory. Zureiq intended to have the Arab world take responsibility for it mistakes.

Certainly, the original meaning of "nakba" could not be considered antisemitic. It was a word of shame and of resolve, but not of hate. It is not tied to Israel or Jews at all.

Over time, though, the term changed. The PLO originally stayed away from using the word, as it wanted to give the impression of victory through revolution and not emphasizing shameful loss. Most Palestinians didn't latch onto that term for decades.

As time went on, though, and the world started to give brownie points to the oppressed, the PLO decided that this was a role it could enthusiastically take. The meaning of the word changed from "the shameful defeat of the Arab world in 1948" to "the disaster that happened to Palestinians in 1948 as a result of Israel becoming a state."

Yasir Arafat only declared "Nakba Day" in 1998 - specifically as a response to Israel's 50th anniversary, and specifically choosing the date to coincide with the anniversary of Israel's independence. Thousands of Palestinians fled their homes as early as December 1947, and some (although a minority) were indeed expelled during the war. Other dates could have been considered for Nakba Day, such as the anniversary of the Deir Yassin events. But Arafat chose to commemorate the date that Israel became a state, tying the Nakba to Israel's very existence.

In Arabic, "nakba" is often defined as the birth of Israel without mentioning anything else..

That is indeed antisemitic.

(full article online)

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

Israel's "defined borders" are the 1949 armistice lines. The armistice lines were specifically not to be political or territorial boundaries. I find it hilarious to watch you contradict your own cut and paste arguments. How is it that Israel’s “defined borders” are the 1949 armistice lines...

www.usmessageboard.com

The Nakba and the 1948 war were two separate events.

 

[Hollie]

(COMMENT)
.


You do all the time. You say that the Palestinians have no rights because they don't have a "state."

You have difficulty paying attention.

 

[Sixties Fan]

I just found this description of Jerusalem written in 1909 that described an incident earlier that year.

The author was Frederic J. Haskin, who was a prominent journalist and author, well known for a newspaper feature where people would ask him questions and he and his staff would find the answers.

I find it hard to believe this story is true, but if it is, it is remarkable. (Notice the antisemitism alongside the sympathy for Jews.)

From the Salt Lake Herald-Republican, December 26, 1909:

Was there a day of religious freedom in Jerusalem in 1909?

Blogging about Israel and the Arab world since, oh, forever.

elderofziyon.blogspot.com

 

[Sixties Fan]

The Mandate for Palestine had to conform to what was intended in the San Remo Resolution. This meant that, as the Mandatory over Palestine, Britain was legally obligated with implementing the terms of the Balfour Declaration. The primary purpose of the Mandate for Palestine was to grant political rights to the Jews in Palestine so that reconstitution of their national homeland would be possible.

Although the League of Nations was superseded by the United Nations following WWII, Article 80 of the UN Charter stipulated that the UN would not alter existing states, peoples or mandates. This meant that the UN preserved and recognized the legal right for the establishment of a Jewish state from the Jordan River to the Mediterranean Sea, which was the boundary of the Mandate for Palestine.

Additionally, this boundary delineated Israel’s borders; under the customary international law doctrine of uti possidetis juris, newly forming countries acquire their pre-independence administrative borders.

In 1947, Britain resigned as the “mandatory” and gave control over to the United Nations. The UNGA passed Resolution 181 in November of that year, recommending the partition of the land into separate Jewish and Arab states, with Jerusalem and the areas surrounding it placed under international control.

However, Resolution 181 did not declare statehood, as all UN General Assembly resolutions are non-binding recommendations that carry no force of law. Instead, Resolution 181, as former Israeli ambassador to the UN Dore Gold stated, “provided international legitimacy for the Jewish claim to statehood.” Gold stated that what establishes countries is declarations of independence as opposed to actions in the UN. Israel would declare its independence on May 14, 1948.

As of today, the Mandate for Palestine also provides legal rights for any claims Israel has to the disputed West Bank. Eugene Rostow, former US under secretary of state and Yale Law School dean, commented that the West Bank is an “unallocated part of the British Mandate.”

(full article online)

Did Resolution 181 create the State of Israel? - opinion

Israel’s true legal foundation can be traced to the Balfour Declaration and the international documents that it was incorporated into and that are still in effect today with respect to the West Bank.

www.jpost.com

 

[P F Tinmore]

This meant that the UN preserved and recognized the legal right for the establishment of a Jewish state from the Jordan River to the Mediterranean Sea, which was the boundary of the Mandate for Palestine.

Where does it say that?

Quote with Link?

BTW, Resolution 181 was never implemented. It did not create or authorize anything.

The mandate was not a place. It was an administration. It has no boundary.

 

[rylah]

Where does it say that?

Quote with Link?

BTW, Resolution 181 was never implemented. It did not create or authorize anything.

The mandate was not a place. It was an administration. It has no boundary.

In the sentence, right before the one you quoted, Article 80 UN charter:

United Nations Charter (full text) | United Nations

www.un.org

Indeed, the mandate was not a place, rather a legal instrument attached to a place.
And since 181 was not implemented, no Arab state was authorized between the
river and the sea, with the sovereignty remaining vested with the Jewish nation.

In other words, this right, to re-constitute the Jewish nation - goes ad infinitum.

 

[P F Tinmore]

In the sentence, right before the one you quoted, Article 80 UN charter:

United Nations Charter (full text) | United Nations

www.un.org

Indeed, the mandate was not a place, rather a legal instrument attached to a place.
And since 181 was not implemented, no Arab state was authorized between the
river and the sea, with the sovereignty remaining vested with the Jewish nation.

In other words, this right, to re-constitute the Jewish nation - goes ad infinitum.

The Mandate was assigned to Palestine. It worked inside Palestine's international borders.

They did not need to create an Arab state. Palestine was already there.

Where did the Jewish nation get sovereignty over the territory? Link?

 

[rylah]

The Mandate was assigned to Palestine. It worked inside Palestine's international borders.

They did not need to create an Arab state. Palestine was already there.

Where did the Jewish nation get sovereignty over the territory? Link?

The first sentence is correct,
the second is where your narrative falls.

Both the mandate and Palestine's international borders,
were assigned to the Jewish national re-constitution.

Refer to the links above.

 

[P F Tinmore]

The first sentence is correct,
the second is where your narrative falls.

Both the mandate and Palestine's international borders,
were assigned to the Jewish national re-constitution.

Refer to the links above.

Both the mandate and Palestine's international borders,
were assigned to the Jewish national re-constitution.

Link?

 

[rylah]

Lin

The mandates for Mesopotamia, Syria and Palestine were assigned by the Supreme Court of the League of Nations at its San Remo meeting in April 1920. Negotiations between Great Britain and the United States with regard to the Palestine mandate were successfully concluded in May 1922, and approved by the Council of the League of Nations in July 1922. The mandates for Palestine and Syria came into force simultaneously on September 29, 1922. In this document, the League of Nations recognized the "historical connection of the Jewish people with Palestine" and the "grounds for reconstituting their national home in that country."

The High Contracting Parties agree that Syria and Mesopotamia shall, in accordance with the fourth paragraph of Article 22, Part I (Covenant of the League of Nations)...The High Contracting Parties agree to entrust, by application of the provisions of Article 22...within such boundaries, as may be determined by the Principal Allied Powers.

https://www.mfa.gov.il/mfa/foreignpolicy/peace/guide/pages/the%20mandate%20for%20palestine.aspx

United Nations Maintenance Page

unispal.un.org

Q. Palestine's borders were defined for Jewish re-constitution.
Do you see any reference in law to Arab sovereignty?

 

[P F Tinmore]

Q. Palestine's borders were defined for Jewish re-constitution.

Where does it say that?

Link?

 

[P F Tinmore]

The mandates for Mesopotamia, Syria and Palestine were assigned by the Supreme Court of the League of Nations at its San Remo meeting in April 1920. Negotiations between Great Britain and the United States with regard to the Palestine mandate were successfully concluded in May 1922, and approved by the Council of the League of Nations in July 1922. The mandates for Palestine and Syria came into force simultaneously on September 29, 1922. In this document, the League of Nations recognized the "historical connection of the Jewish people with Palestine" and the "grounds for reconstituting their national home in that country."

The High Contracting Parties agree that Syria and Mesopotamia shall, in accordance with the fourth paragraph of Article 22, Part I (Covenant of the League of Nations)...The High Contracting Parties agree to entrust, by application of the provisions of Article 22...within such boundaries, as may be determined by the Principal Allied Powers.

https://www.mfa.gov.il/mfa/foreignpolicy/peace/guide/pages/the%20mandate%20for%20palestine.aspx

United Nations Maintenance Page

unispal.un.org

Q. Palestine's borders were defined for Jewish re-constitution.
Do you see any reference in law to Arab sovereignty?

Article 5.

The Mandatory shall be responsible for seeing that no Palestine territory shall be ceded or leased to, or in any way placed under the control of, the Government of any foreign Power.

If it isn't Palestinian, it is foreign.

Article 7.

The Administration of Palestine shall be responsible for enacting a nationality law. There shall be included in this law provisions framed so as to facilitate the acquisition of Palestinian citizenship by Jews who take up their permanent residence in Palestine.

There was not to be any country but Palestine. The "Jewish National Home" was Jewish citizenship in Palestine.

 

[Sixties Fan]

If it isn't Palestinian, it is foreign.



There was not to be any country but Palestine. The "Jewish National Home" was Jewish citizenship in Palestine.

Palestine meant Israel. The Jewish Homeland.

You do know that. Always has known that.

Denying it will not turn the Jewish Homeland into an Arab State which never existed and was not going to exist via the Mandate.

 

[P F Tinmore]

Palestine meant Israel. The Jewish Homeland.

You do know that. Always has known that.

Denying it will not turn the Jewish Homeland into an Arab State which never existed and was not going to exist via the Mandate.

Palestine meant Israel. The Jewish Homeland.

Link?

 

[Sixties Fan]

Link?

Go read and re read what you have been taught about by too many of us but refuse to understand because you cannot accept.

You insist in being an endless joke.

 

[P F Tinmore]

Go read and re read what you have been taught about by too many of us but refuse to understand because you cannot accept.

You insist in being an endless joke.

I can't make it say what it doesn't say no matter how many times I read it.

 

[Sixties Fan]

I can't make it say what it doesn't say no matter how many times I read it.

It is there. Your non legal mind cannot see it.

Comprehensive English reading classes.

That will help in reading normal English texts, and any other like Shakespeare, the Law and many other things a normal mind does not understand.

International law, or any kind of law, is not for everyone.

Most do, like you, do not only not understand it, but do not wish to understand it.

 

[P F Tinmore]

It is there. Your non legal mind cannot see it.

Comprehensive English reading classes.

That will help in reading normal English texts, and any other like Shakespeare, the Law and many other things a normal mind does not understand.

International law, or any kind of law, is not for everyone.

Most do, like you, do not only not understand it, but do not wish to understand it.

Quote the passage. That might help.

 

[Sixties Fan]

Quote the passage. That might help.

Nothing will help your deep, deep Christian learned hatred of Jews.

Stay hateful of Jews.