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

[Phoenall]

And just like people like Phoenall claim the Palestinians have no historical or ancestral ties to the area. How he says Palestinians were invented in 1960 something and how they aren't a real people.

I don't think that what Phoenall is saying is the same thing as what Challenger is saying. Let's ask.

Phoenall: Do you believe that the Palestinian people do not have inherent rights to a national self-determination? What would be your criteria for determining who is or who is not eligible for a national self-determination?

I have never once heard Phoenal, Kondor, MJB and several others express support for the Palestinian people for natinal self determination beyond shipping them to Jordan.

Let's also ask the same of Challenger: Do you believe that the Jewish people do not have inherent rights to a national self-determination? What would be your criteria for determining who is or who is not eligible for a national self-determination?

Because that is what the LoN decided was right in 1923, and if that had been enforced fully back then we would not have the situation we face today. I have never once heard any member of team palestine declare that the whole of the land to the west of the Jordan was granted to the Jews as their national home

There was no land transfers to the Jews.

and the arab muslims are there illegally.

I don't know about your arab muslim propaganda shtick. The Palestinians were Muslims, Christians, and Jews. They became Palestinian citizens according to international law and the Treaty of Lausanne.

That the UN overstepped their authority by carving up this land and giving the best of it to the arab muslims along with all the Jewish holy places.

The UN has no authority over land or borders.

have never seen the members of team palestine admit that Israel is acting in accordance with international laws when they respond to arab muslim violence, terrorism and acts of war.
I do see many saying that the Israelis are apartheid because they wont allow the non citizen arab muslims the vote,

According to the international law of state succession, all Palestinian citizens who lived in the territory that became Israel shall become Israeli citizens. This would include the refugees in Gaza, the West Bank, and beyond. They all have the right to vote in Israel.

and have a two tier legal system in place as demanded by the Geneva conventions. I see team palestine saying the Israelis are guilty of war crimes when the children and civilians forced to act as human shields by hamas are killed.

 

[Phoenall]

And just like people like Phoenall claim the Palestinians have no historical or ancestral ties to the area. How he says Palestinians were invented in 1960 something and how they aren't a real people.

I don't think that what Phoenall is saying is the same thing as what Challenger is saying. Let's ask.

Phoenall: Do you believe that the Palestinian people do not have inherent rights to a national self-determination? What would be your criteria for determining who is or who is not eligible for a national self-determination?

I have never once heard Phoenal, Kondor, MJB and several others express support for the Palestinian people for natinal self determination beyond shipping them to Jordan.

Let's also ask the same of Challenger: Do you believe that the Jewish people do not have inherent rights to a national self-determination? What would be your criteria for determining who is or who is not eligible for a national self-determination?

Because that is what the LoN decided was right in 1923, and if that had been enforced fully back then we would not have the situation we face today. I have never once heard any member of team palestine declare that the whole of the land to the west of the Jordan was granted to the Jews as their national home

There was no land transfers to the Jews.

and the arab muslims are there illegally.

I don't know about your arab muslim propaganda shtick. The Palestinians were Muslims, Christians, and Jews. They became Palestinian citizens according to international law and the Treaty of Lausanne.

That the UN overstepped their authority by carving up this land and giving the best of it to the arab muslims along with all the Jewish holy places.

The UN has no authority over land or borders.

have never seen the members of team palestine admit that Israel is acting in accordance with international laws when they respond to arab muslim violence, terrorism and acts of war.
I do see many saying that the Israelis are apartheid because they wont allow the non citizen arab muslims the vote,

According to the international law of state succession, all Palestinian citizens who lived in the territory that became Israel shall become Israeli citizens. This would include the refugees in Gaza, the West Bank, and beyond. They all have the right to vote in Israel.

and have a two tier legal system in place as demanded by the Geneva conventions. I see team palestine saying the Israelis are guilty of war crimes when the children and civilians forced to act as human shields by hamas are killed.

You keep repeating this mantra yet refuse to provide any evidence to support your claim. The Mandate of Palestine clearly and distinctly says that there was, and you ignore the fact at your peril.

Only those that were there in 1923 and the Jews that were invited after that date, This makes 90% of the arab muslims illegal immigrants


Correct and still they carved up the land granted to the Jews by the Sovereign owners to give to illegal immigrants in return for saudi oil.

Because they are not citizens of Israel but of palestine the illegal nation. By your criteria the USA is also apartheid because it does not allow arab muslims the vote. Do you understand yet that you are just making a bigger fool of yourself by repeating the lies on the hate sites.

Not according to the international law of 1923 that you accept when it worls for the arab muslims. When did this alleged law of yours come into existence then. Does it also mean they can murder the Jews to take control of the land, or is that not allowed in your alleged law.

 

[Phoenall]

According to the international law of state succession, all Palestinian citizens who lived in the territory that became Israel shall become Israeli citizens...

Defend. What international laws are you using here?

One's he has just made up or found on the hate sites of course

 

[Phoenall]

According to the international law of state succession, all Palestinian citizens who lived in the territory that became Israel shall become Israeli citizens...

Defend. What international laws are you using here?

In the second part of Article 18, the Harvard Research on Nationality provided: “When a part of the territory of a state... becomes the territory of a new state, the nationals of the first state who continue their habitual residence in such territory lose the nationality of that state and become nationals of the successor state, in the absence of treaty provisions to the contrary...”.

It is interesting to note that seventy years later, the International Law Commission (ILC) adopted a similar provision: “Persons concerned having their habitual residence in the territory affected by the succession of States are presumed to acquire the nationality of the successor State on the date of such succession.

Moreover, Israel law cannot alter, as Kattan himself observed, a rule of international law, particularly the law of state succession, which obliges the successor state (Israel) to confer ipso facto its nationality on citizens of the predecessor state (Palestine)

https://doc.rero.ch/record/9065/files/these.pdf

Should have guessed it was this islamonazi propagandist who alters treaties, laws and resolutions to suit his own ends just so he can attack the Jews. The BLOOD LIBELS are running thick and fast today.



So what is the INTERNATIONAL LAW that you are quoting as your link does not show one ? Harvard research is not INTERNATIONAL LAW it is just one persons views

 

[Phoenall]

P F Tinmore

Please clarify. According to your argument the successor State to Turkey was what? And at what date? Have there been any changes in sovereignty since? If so, to which States and on which dates and through which laws or treaties?

(I'm still weeding through your 348 page link. Its interesting, though apparently irrelevant to the conversation so far.)

It is his usual link to a muslim that alters laws, treaties and resolutions to meet his Jew hatred. He has been told thousands of times that it is not a valid source and still he insists on using it. He has 3 outlets for the same persons report and uses them as if they are seperate sources.

 

[Phoenall]

P F Tinmore

Please clarify. According to your argument the successor State to Turkey was what? And at what date? Have there been any changes in sovereignty since? If so, to which States and on which dates and through which laws or treaties?

(I'm still weeding through your 348 page link. Its interesting, though apparently irrelevant to the conversation so far.)

1. From Ottoman subjects into Palestinian citizens

Turkish subjects habitually resident in the territory of Palestine upon the 1st day of August, 1925, shall become Palestinian citizens.​

This is what Article 1, Clause (1) , of the 1925 Palestinian Citizenship Order declared with regard to those persons who formed, according to domestic law, the first ‘Palestinians’. As already concluded in Chapter III above, the ‘Palestinian people’ had been defined according to international law on 6 August 1924, the date at which the Treaty of Lausanne was enforced. Hence, the just quoted clause was a mere declaration of pre-existing international law.

This clause refers to the automatic, or ipso facto, acquisition of Palestinian citizenship by those persons resident in Palestine who had replaced their former Turkish, or Ottoman, nationality. Although the term ‘ipso facto’ is not literally employed, it should be easily understood as the clause is a direct application of Article 30 of the Treaty of Lausanne, 1923, which stated that “Turkish subjects habitually resident in territory which... is detached from Turkey will become ipso facto... nationals...”. Thus, Turkish individuals who were covered by this clause became Palestinians by the operation of law without further action.

https://doc.rero.ch/record/9065/files/these.pdf

And not the 3 million that arrived after this date as illegal immigrants. Then the LoN in conjuction with the Jordanians enacted an international law that made it illegal for Jews to live in trans Jordan and for arab muslims to live in the Jewish national home. Why do you only accept the first part and not the second ?


You do realise that is only applied until the land was declared a state and independent of the Mandate dont you, the part your islamonazi propagandist friend always ignores




The order in full



THE KING'S MOST EXCELLENT MAJESTY NOW THEREFORE, HIS MAJESTY

By virtue and in exercise of the powers in his behalf by the Foreign Jurisdiction Act of 1890, or otherwise, in His Majesty vested , is pleased by and with the advice of His Privy Council to order , and it is ordered as follows:-

PART 1.

1.

(1) Turkish subjects habitually resident in the territory of Palestine upon the 1st day of August 1924 shall become Palestine citizens.

(2) Any person over eighteen years of age who by virtue of this Article becomes a Palestinian citizen may [...]

(3) Any person over eighteen years of age who by virtue of clause (1) of this Article becomes a Palestinian citizen and differs in race from the majority of the population of Palestine may in the like manner and subject to the same conditions opt for the nationality of one of the States in which the majority of the population is of the same race as the person exercising the right to opt subject to the consent of that State and he shall thereupon cease to be a Palestinian citizen.

Article 21: Definitions

For the purpose of this Order:

1. The expression “Palestine” includes the territories to which the mandate for Palestine applies, except such parts of the territories comprised in Palestine to the east of Jordan and the Dead Sea as were defined by Order of the High Commissioner dated the first of September 1922.

2. The expression “Palestinian citizen” means a person who is by birth or becomes by naturalisation of otherwise a Palestinian citizen.

SCHEDULE OATH OF ALLeGIANCE

I, A.B., Swear by Almighty God that I will be Faithful and Loyal to the Government of Palestine".





This means all those arab muslims that took Jordanian and Egyptian citizenship are no longer palestinians , reducing their numbers by at least 3 million.

 

[P F Tinmore]

P F Tinmore

Please clarify. According to your argument the successor State to Turkey was what? And at what date? Have there been any changes in sovereignty since? If so, to which States and on which dates and through which laws or treaties?

(I'm still weeding through your 348 page link. Its interesting, though apparently irrelevant to the conversation so far.)

1. From Ottoman subjects into Palestinian citizens

Turkish subjects habitually resident in the territory of Palestine upon the 1st day of August, 1925, shall become Palestinian citizens.​

This is what Article 1, Clause (1) , of the 1925 Palestinian Citizenship Order declared with regard to those persons who formed, according to domestic law, the first ‘Palestinians’. As already concluded in Chapter III above, the ‘Palestinian people’ had been defined according to international law on 6 August 1924, the date at which the Treaty of Lausanne was enforced. Hence, the just quoted clause was a mere declaration of pre-existing international law.

This clause refers to the automatic, or ipso facto, acquisition of Palestinian citizenship by those persons resident in Palestine who had replaced their former Turkish, or Ottoman, nationality. Although the term ‘ipso facto’ is not literally employed, it should be easily understood as the clause is a direct application of Article 30 of the Treaty of Lausanne, 1923, which stated that “Turkish subjects habitually resident in territory which... is detached from Turkey will become ipso facto... nationals...”. Thus, Turkish individuals who were covered by this clause became Palestinians by the operation of law without further action.

https://doc.rero.ch/record/9065/files/these.pdf

And not the 3 million that arrived after this date as illegal immigrants. Then the LoN in conjuction with the Jordanians enacted an international law that made it illegal for Jews to live in trans Jordan and for arab muslims to live in the Jewish national home. Why do you only accept the first part and not the second ?


You do realise that is only applied until the land was declared a state and independent of the Mandate dont you, the part your islamonazi propagandist friend always ignores




The order in full



THE KING'S MOST EXCELLENT MAJESTY NOW THEREFORE, HIS MAJESTY

By virtue and in exercise of the powers in his behalf by the Foreign Jurisdiction Act of 1890, or otherwise, in His Majesty vested , is pleased by and with the advice of His Privy Council to order , and it is ordered as follows:-

PART 1.

1.

(1) Turkish subjects habitually resident in the territory of Palestine upon the 1st day of August 1924 shall become Palestine citizens.

(2) Any person over eighteen years of age who by virtue of this Article becomes a Palestinian citizen may [...]

(3) Any person over eighteen years of age who by virtue of clause (1) of this Article becomes a Palestinian citizen and differs in race from the majority of the population of Palestine may in the like manner and subject to the same conditions opt for the nationality of one of the States in which the majority of the population is of the same race as the person exercising the right to opt subject to the consent of that State and he shall thereupon cease to be a Palestinian citizen.

Article 21: Definitions

For the purpose of this Order:

1. The expression “Palestine” includes the territories to which the mandate for Palestine applies, except such parts of the territories comprised in Palestine to the east of Jordan and the Dead Sea as were defined by Order of the High Commissioner dated the first of September 1922.

2. The expression “Palestinian citizen” means a person who is by birth or becomes by naturalisation of otherwise a Palestinian citizen.

SCHEDULE OATH OF ALLeGIANCE

I, A.B., Swear by Almighty God that I will be Faithful and Loyal to the Government of Palestine".





This means all those arab muslims that took Jordanian and Egyptian citizenship are no longer palestinians , reducing their numbers by at least 3 million.

In 1922 Britain occupied Turkish territory. In 1924 Britain was the Mandate of Palestine.

Occupations and Mandates have two different rules.

 

[Phoenall]

P F Tinmore

Please clarify. According to your argument the successor State to Turkey was what? And at what date? Have there been any changes in sovereignty since? If so, to which States and on which dates and through which laws or treaties?

(I'm still weeding through your 348 page link. Its interesting, though apparently irrelevant to the conversation so far.)

1. From Ottoman subjects into Palestinian citizens

Turkish subjects habitually resident in the territory of Palestine upon the 1st day of August, 1925, shall become Palestinian citizens.​

This is what Article 1, Clause (1) , of the 1925 Palestinian Citizenship Order declared with regard to those persons who formed, according to domestic law, the first ‘Palestinians’. As already concluded in Chapter III above, the ‘Palestinian people’ had been defined according to international law on 6 August 1924, the date at which the Treaty of Lausanne was enforced. Hence, the just quoted clause was a mere declaration of pre-existing international law.

This clause refers to the automatic, or ipso facto, acquisition of Palestinian citizenship by those persons resident in Palestine who had replaced their former Turkish, or Ottoman, nationality. Although the term ‘ipso facto’ is not literally employed, it should be easily understood as the clause is a direct application of Article 30 of the Treaty of Lausanne, 1923, which stated that “Turkish subjects habitually resident in territory which... is detached from Turkey will become ipso facto... nationals...”. Thus, Turkish individuals who were covered by this clause became Palestinians by the operation of law without further action.

https://doc.rero.ch/record/9065/files/these.pdf

And not the 3 million that arrived after this date as illegal immigrants. Then the LoN in conjuction with the Jordanians enacted an international law that made it illegal for Jews to live in trans Jordan and for arab muslims to live in the Jewish national home. Why do you only accept the first part and not the second ?


You do realise that is only applied until the land was declared a state and independent of the Mandate dont you, the part your islamonazi propagandist friend always ignores




The order in full



THE KING'S MOST EXCELLENT MAJESTY NOW THEREFORE, HIS MAJESTY

By virtue and in exercise of the powers in his behalf by the Foreign Jurisdiction Act of 1890, or otherwise, in His Majesty vested , is pleased by and with the advice of His Privy Council to order , and it is ordered as follows:-

PART 1.

1.

(1) Turkish subjects habitually resident in the territory of Palestine upon the 1st day of August 1924 shall become Palestine citizens.

(2) Any person over eighteen years of age who by virtue of this Article becomes a Palestinian citizen may [...]

(3) Any person over eighteen years of age who by virtue of clause (1) of this Article becomes a Palestinian citizen and differs in race from the majority of the population of Palestine may in the like manner and subject to the same conditions opt for the nationality of one of the States in which the majority of the population is of the same race as the person exercising the right to opt subject to the consent of that State and he shall thereupon cease to be a Palestinian citizen.

Article 21: Definitions

For the purpose of this Order:

1. The expression “Palestine” includes the territories to which the mandate for Palestine applies, except such parts of the territories comprised in Palestine to the east of Jordan and the Dead Sea as were defined by Order of the High Commissioner dated the first of September 1922.

2. The expression “Palestinian citizen” means a person who is by birth or becomes by naturalisation of otherwise a Palestinian citizen.

SCHEDULE OATH OF ALLeGIANCE

I, A.B., Swear by Almighty God that I will be Faithful and Loyal to the Government of Palestine".





This means all those arab muslims that took Jordanian and Egyptian citizenship are no longer palestinians , reducing their numbers by at least 3 million.

In 1922 Britain occupied Turkish territory. In 1924 Britain was the Mandate of Palestine.

Occupations and Mandates have two different rules.

Wrong you are confusing your self again Britain occupied conquered lands as the international law of that time allowed, it became the MANDATORY ELECTED POWER to administer the LoN Mandate of Palestine under very strict rules.

Once again you try and use recent laws retrospectively, will you impose a cut of date before or after the land you live on was stolen ?

 

[Shusha]

P F Tinmore

Please clarify. According to your argument the successor State to Turkey was what? And at what date? Have there been any changes in sovereignty since? If so, to which States and on which dates and through which laws or treaties?

(I'm still weeding through your 348 page link. Its interesting, though apparently irrelevant to the conversation so far.)

1. From Ottoman subjects into Palestinian citizens

Turkish subjects habitually resident in the territory of Palestine upon the 1st day of August, 1925, shall become Palestinian citizens.​

This is what Article 1, Clause (1) , of the 1925 Palestinian Citizenship Order declared with regard to those persons who formed, according to domestic law, the first ‘Palestinians’. As already concluded in Chapter III above, the ‘Palestinian people’ had been defined according to international law on 6 August 1924, the date at which the Treaty of Lausanne was enforced. Hence, the just quoted clause was a mere declaration of pre-existing international law.

This clause refers to the automatic, or ipso facto, acquisition of Palestinian citizenship by those persons resident in Palestine who had replaced their former Turkish, or Ottoman, nationality. Although the term ‘ipso facto’ is not literally employed, it should be easily understood as the clause is a direct application of Article 30 of the Treaty of Lausanne, 1923, which stated that “Turkish subjects habitually resident in territory which... is detached from Turkey will become ipso facto... nationals...”. Thus, Turkish individuals who were covered by this clause became Palestinians by the operation of law without further action.

https://doc.rero.ch/record/9065/files/these.pdf

So help me out here. Where are you going with all this?

Ottoman subjects became citizens of a sovereign State of Palestine in 1925. Then Palestine subjects became citizens of Israel in 1948? Or should have become citizens of Israel in 1948?

 

[Shusha]

P F Tinmore

Okay. I get you now. You are saying that since Israel is sovereign over the whole territory (as it was never divided) -- all of the former citizens of "Palestine" are, or should be Israeli citizens. And the reasoning behind this argument is that they would have been rendered Stateless and a new sovereign is obligated to grant citizenship to all its citizens.

So more questions:

You think Jordanian citizenship is irrelevant, because Jordan had no legal claim over territory west of the river, yes?

What happened in 1988 when Palestine declared independence? How did that affect citizenship?

 

[P F Tinmore]

P F Tinmore

Okay. I get you now. You are saying that since Israel is sovereign over the whole territory (as it was never divided) -- all of the former citizens of "Palestine" are, or should be Israeli citizens. And the reasoning behind this argument is that they would have been rendered Stateless and a new sovereign is obligated to grant citizenship to all its citizens.

That only applies to the Palestinians who lived in the territory that became Israel.

So more questions:

You think Jordanian citizenship is irrelevant, because Jordan had no legal claim over territory west of the river, yes?

Jordan never had legal sovereignty over the West Bank. It is illegal to annex occupied territory. The world considered the West Bank occupied territory.

What happened in 1988 when Palestine declared independence? How did that affect citizenship?

1988 is way late in the game. you can't unscramble that egg from there. You have to go back to the roots.

 

[Shusha]

P F Tinmore

Ah. So you are just trying to put an Israeli citizenship spin on the RoR. Gotcha.

 

[Shusha]

But you can most certainly unscramble that egg from here. Palestinians become citizens of Palestine. Easy peasy.

 

[Shusha]

P F Tinmore

You think the residents of Gaza should become Israeli citizens under Israeli sovereignty? Doesn't that come into conflict with their right to self-determination?

 

[P F Tinmore]

P F Tinmore

Ah. So you are just trying to put an Israeli citizenship spin on the RoR. Gotcha.

I am just pointing out what the law says.

 

[Phoenall]

P F Tinmore

Okay. I get you now. You are saying that since Israel is sovereign over the whole territory (as it was never divided) -- all of the former citizens of "Palestine" are, or should be Israeli citizens. And the reasoning behind this argument is that they would have been rendered Stateless and a new sovereign is obligated to grant citizenship to all its citizens.

That only applies to the Palestinians who lived in the territory that became Israel.

So more questions:

You think Jordanian citizenship is irrelevant, because Jordan had no legal claim over territory west of the river, yes?

Jordan never had legal sovereignty over the West Bank. It is illegal to annex occupied territory. The world considered the West Bank occupied territory.

What happened in 1988 when Palestine declared independence? How did that affect citizenship?

1988 is way late in the game. you can't unscramble that egg from there. You have to go back to the roots.

Before a certain date, any that came after or were born later dont have a claim do they according to your cut and paste


When did it become illegal, what date and give a link to show this. A pity that the UN made no moves to take the corpus separatum away from the Jordanians. And the arab muslims residing there accepted Jordans rule and became full citizens, until they were made stateless which is illegal

Is it, then explain why this is the first time a nation of palestine existed legally. albeit on stolen lands

 

[Phoenall]

P F Tinmore

Ah. So you are just trying to put an Israeli citizenship spin on the RoR. Gotcha.

He is also trying to say that international law that gave rights to the Jordanians did not give rights to the Israelis because that would destroy his whole argument. The mandate of Palestine evolved over the years and was altered to suit the demands of the arab muslims, apart from the granting of 22% to the Jews.

 

[Phoenall]

P F Tinmore

Ah. So you are just trying to put an Israeli citizenship spin on the RoR. Gotcha.

I am just pointing out what the law says.

What law as this law does not exist. What you are doing is trying to do is alter the terms to suit your islamonazi stance so that Israel will disappear and the Jews will be wiped out

 

[Mindful]

P F Tinmore

Ah. So you are just trying to put an Israeli citizenship spin on the RoR. Gotcha.

I am just pointing out what the law says.

I




What law as this law does not exist. What you are doing is trying to do is alter the terms to suit your islamonazi stance so that Israel will disappear and the Jews will be wiped out

Can you figure out why this is even up for discussion?

 

[Shusha]

P F Tinmore

Ah. So you are just trying to put an Israeli citizenship spin on the RoR. Gotcha.

I am just pointing out what the law says.

In point of fact, you are not. You provided a link to an opinion of the law, and neither you nor that opinion provided the actual law(s) you are using to support your argument.