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

[P F Tinmore]

P F Tinmore, et al,

Now you are just playing with the vocabulary.

But Israeli forces were created and controlled by foreigners. The government of Israel was established by foreigners in complete disregard of the inhabitants.​

(COMMENT)

The Israeli Forces were not under foreign control.
The ALA and HWA were under Jordanian control.
Only the members of the ALA and HWA were Palestinian Citizens under the Palestine Order in Council and the Citizenship Order of 1925. None of the Arab League Armies crossing the line of departure into the territory formerly under the Mandate held Palestinian Citizenship; fighting under a different flag and country command.

Whether you want to call it foreign or external interference, the fact is, it was a clear violation of Chapter I, Article 2(4) of the UN Charter.

Most Respectfully,
R​

Whether you want to call it foreign or external interference, the fact is, it was a clear violation of Chapter I, Article 2(4) of the UN Charter.​

How so?

The Israeli Forces were not under foreign control.​

The entire colonial project was that of the foreign WZO.

 

[RoccoR]

P F Tinmore, et al,

Oh wow! I say again: Oh wOw!

The entire colonial project was that of the foreign WZO.

(COMMENT)

The World Zionist Organization (WZO) was neither a foreign government or government arm. It was a consensus building foundation and a logistics organizer.

It had absolutely nothing to do with the Politics behind the decisions necessary to build a nation.

Once the WZO gave recognition to the Jewish Agency, it took a backseat to the Jewish Agency. However, during the conflicts between 1946 and 1949, even the Jewish Agency took a back seat to the Provisional Government.

You bandy that "colonial project" terminology around like it is some kind of smoking gun. It is not. Even the Allied Powers at the San Remo Convention was a need for consensus and organization.

The WZO had absolutely nothing to do with task organization during the Civil War and Israeli War of Independence. It had virtually nothing to do with Jewish Security matters from 1918 to 1948.

Most Respectfully,
R

 

[P F Tinmore]

P F Tinmore, et al,

Oh wow! I say again: Oh wOw!

The entire colonial project was that of the foreign WZO.

(COMMENT)

The World Zionist Organization (WZO) was neither a foreign government or government arm. It was a consensus building foundation and a logistics organizer.

It had absolutely nothing to do with the Politics behind the decisions necessary to build a nation.

Once the WZO gave recognition to the Jewish Agency, it took a backseat to the Jewish Agency. However, during the conflicts between 1946 and 1949, even the Jewish Agency took a back seat to the Provisional Government.

You bandy that "colonial project" terminology around like it is some kind of smoking gun. It is not. Even the Allied Powers at the San Remo Convention was a need for consensus and organization.

The WZO had absolutely nothing to do with task organization during the Civil War and Israeli War of Independence. It had virtually nothing to do with Jewish Security matters from 1918 to 1948.

Most Respectfully,
R

Similarly, a number of Jewish organizations such as the Colonisation Department of the Zionist Organization, financed by the Keren ha-Yesod, were actively engaged in acquisition of land both for individual immigrant families as well as for the Yishuv or Jewish settlements. Several of these organizations had been operating since the nineteenth century, notably the Palestine Jewish Colonisation Association (PICA)

https://unispal.un.org/DPA/DPR/unispal.nsf/0/AEAC80E740C782E4852561150071FDB0​

BTW, the foreign Jewish Agency was created in Zurich by the foreign WZO.

 

[RoccoR]

P F Tinmore, et al,

Don't be ridiculous. Colonization is just another work for a coordinated immigration program. It fits hand in glove to the encouraged immigration that was Mandated.

Similarly, a number of Jewish organizations such as the Colonisation Department of the Zionist Organization, financed by the Keren ha-Yesod, were actively engaged in acquisition of land both for individual immigrant families as well as for the Yishuv or Jewish settlements. Several of these organizations had been operating since the nineteenth century, notably the Palestine Jewish Colonisation Association (PICA)
https://unispal.un.org/DPA/DPR/unispal.nsf/0/AEAC80E740C782E4852561150071FDB0​

BTW, the foreign Jewish Agency was created in Zurich by the foreign WZO.

(COMMENT)

The Jewish Agency international body representing the World Zionist Organization, created in 1929 by Chaim Weizmann, with headquarters in Jerusalem. Its purpose is to assist and encourage Jews worldwide to help develop and settle Israel. However is needs were invisioned by the Allied Power as early as 1920, in San Remo, when the concept was incorporated into the agreement. The Allied Powers, being conservative, stipulated that the "Zionist Organization" must first accredit the Jewish Agency. The year the WZO, lacking a permanent Headquarters, was meeting in Zurich that year (1929). But the concept was though of a decade before.

[FONT=Asap, sans-serif]If you want to attach some sinister motive to either proper planning and organization for the encourage immigration to Palestine --- go right ahead.

But don't dish-out the misinformation that the WZO or the JA had anything to do with some armed invasion strategy by foreign military forces. Or suggest by innuendo that Haganah was some sort of foreign controlled paramilitary. It is simply not true.

And if you are going to suggest that the WZO or JA was some sort of covert colonization program, established by some Nation's Colonial Foreign Office, for the purpose of exploitation and expansionist of the territory for a political power -- then don't make us guess. Connect the dots for us.

What I see is the Allied Powers did -- was attempt to establish a safe haven for the Jewish people. Setting up a place where they can protect themselves form the majority population that were most likely to attempt the annihilation of the Jewish Culture; under the color of law that they manipulate. [/FONT]

Most respectfully,
R

 

[P F Tinmore]

P F Tinmore, et al,

Don't be ridiculous. Colonization is just another work for a coordinated immigration program. It fits hand in glove to the encouraged immigration that was Mandated.

Similarly, a number of Jewish organizations such as the Colonisation Department of the Zionist Organization, financed by the Keren ha-Yesod, were actively engaged in acquisition of land both for individual immigrant families as well as for the Yishuv or Jewish settlements. Several of these organizations had been operating since the nineteenth century, notably the Palestine Jewish Colonisation Association (PICA)
The Origins and Evolution of the Palestine Problem - CEIRPP, DPR study, part I: 1917-1947 (30 June 1978)​

BTW, the foreign Jewish Agency was created in Zurich by the foreign WZO.

(COMMENT)

The Jewish Agency international body representing the World Zionist Organization, created in 1929 by Chaim Weizmann, with headquarters in Jerusalem. Its purpose is to assist and encourage Jews worldwide to help develop and settle Israel. However is needs were invisioned by the Allied Power as early as 1920, in San Remo, when the concept was incorporated into the agreement. The Allied Powers, being conservative, stipulated that the "Zionist Organization" must first accredit the Jewish Agency. The year the WZO, lacking a permanent Headquarters, was meeting in Zurich that year (1929). But the concept was though of a decade before.

[FONT=Asap, sans-serif]If you want to attach some sinister motive to either proper planning and organization for the encourage immigration to Palestine --- go right ahead.

But don't dish-out the misinformation that the WZO or the JA had anything to do with some armed invasion strategy by foreign military forces. Or suggest by innuendo that Haganah was some sort of foreign controlled paramilitary. It is simply not true.

And if you are going to suggest that the WZO or JA was some sort of covert colonization program, established by some Nation's Colonial Foreign Office, for the purpose of exploitation and expansionist of the territory for a political power -- then don't make us guess. Connect the dots for us.

What I see is the Allied Powers did -- was attempt to establish a safe haven for the Jewish people. Setting up a place where they can protect themselves form the majority population that were most likely to attempt the annihilation of the Jewish Culture; under the color of law that they manipulate. [/FONT]

Most respectfully,

R

And if you are going to suggest that the WZO or JA was some sort of covert colonization program, established by some Nation's Colonial Foreign Office, for the purpose of exploitation and expansionist of the territory for a political power -- then don't make us guess. Connect the dots for us.​

The King-Crane Commission had reported that Jewish colonists were planning a radical transformation of Palestine:

• 
  "The fact came out repeatedly in the Commission's conference with Jewish representatives, that the Zionists looked forward to a practically complete dispossession of the present non-Jewish inhabitants of Palestine, by various forms of purchase".

https://unispal.un.org/DPA/DPR/unispal.nsf/0/AEAC80E740C782E4852561150071FDB0

There was nothing covert about it. They spoke openly about their colonial project.

 

[montelatici]

P F Tinmore, et al,

Don't be ridiculous. Colonization is just another work for a coordinated immigration program. It fits hand in glove to the encouraged immigration that was Mandated.

Similarly, a number of Jewish organizations such as the Colonisation Department of the Zionist Organization, financed by the Keren ha-Yesod, were actively engaged in acquisition of land both for individual immigrant families as well as for the Yishuv or Jewish settlements. Several of these organizations had been operating since the nineteenth century, notably the Palestine Jewish Colonisation Association (PICA)
https://unispal.un.org/DPA/DPR/unispal.nsf/0/AEAC80E740C782E4852561150071FDB0​

BTW, the foreign Jewish Agency was created in Zurich by the foreign WZO.

(COMMENT)

The Jewish Agency international body representing the World Zionist Organization, created in 1929 by Chaim Weizmann, with headquarters in Jerusalem. Its purpose is to assist and encourage Jews worldwide to help develop and settle Israel. However is needs were invisioned by the Allied Power as early as 1920, in San Remo, when the concept was incorporated into the agreement. The Allied Powers, being conservative, stipulated that the "Zionist Organization" must first accredit the Jewish Agency. The year the WZO, lacking a permanent Headquarters, was meeting in Zurich that year (1929). But the concept was though of a decade before.

[FONT=Asap, sans-serif]If you want to attach some sinister motive to either proper planning and organization for the encourage immigration to Palestine --- go right ahead.

But don't dish-out the misinformation that the WZO or the JA had anything to do with some armed invasion strategy by foreign military forces. Or suggest by innuendo that Haganah was some sort of foreign controlled paramilitary. It is simply not true.

And if you are going to suggest that the WZO or JA was some sort of covert colonization program, established by some Nation's Colonial Foreign Office, for the purpose of exploitation and expansionist of the territory for a political power -- then don't make us guess. Connect the dots for us.

What I see is the Allied Powers did -- was attempt to establish a safe haven for the Jewish people. Setting up a place where they can protect themselves form the majority population that were most likely to attempt the annihilation of the Jewish Culture; under the color of law that they manipulate. [/FONT]

Most respectfully,
R

It wasn't a covert colonization program. It was an overt Zionist colonization program.

 

[RoccoR]

montelatici, P F Tinmore, et al,

You two are trying to make it sound like the Jewish were planning something sinister; something illegal! This is the wolf cry...

There was nothing covert about it. They spoke openly about their colonial project.

It wasn't a covert colonization program. It was an overt Zionist colonization program.

(COMMENT)

The Jewish People you are talking about, are not and were not, involved in anything improper or illegal; or unsanctioned.

It was all done at the encouragement of the Council of the League of Nations and the Allied Powers.

Most Respectfully,
R

 

[P F Tinmore]

montelatici, P F Tinmore, et al,

You two are trying to make it sound like the Jewish were planning something sinister; something illegal! This is the wolf cry...

There was nothing covert about it. They spoke openly about their colonial project.

It wasn't a covert colonization program. It was an overt Zionist colonization program.

(COMMENT)

The Jewish People you are talking about, are not and were not, involved in anything improper or illegal; or unsanctioned.

It was all done at the encouragement of the Council of the League of Nations and the Allied Powers.

Most Respectfully,
R

Hogwash, it was a premeditated plan to take over Palestine. That was their intent. They openly said that they were colonizing Palestine. That is what they did.

You keep posting this:

You cannot go to war for the purpose of conquering a territory or nation. This is a variation of Article 2(4) if the Charter.

All Members shall refrain in their international relations from the threat or use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of any state, or in any other manner inconsistent with the Purposes of the United Nations.​

But you do not believe that applies to lesser people.

 

[RoccoR]

P F Tinmore, et al,

Is this where I'm suppose to laugh?

montelatici, P F Tinmore, et al,

You two are trying to make it sound like the Jewish were planning something sinister; something illegal! This is the wolf cry...

There was nothing covert about it. They spoke openly about their colonial project.

It wasn't a covert colonization program. It was an overt Zionist colonization program.

(COMMENT)

The Jewish People you are talking about, are not and were not, involved in anything improper or illegal; or unsanctioned.

It was all done at the encouragement of the Council of the League of Nations and the Allied Powers.

Most Respectfully,
R

Hogwash, it was a premeditated plan to take over Palestine. That was their intent. They openly said that they were colonizing Palestine. That is what they did.

You keep posting this:

You cannot go to war for the purpose of conquering a territory or nation. This is a variation of Article 2(4) if the Charter.

All Members shall refrain in their international relations from the threat or use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of any state, or in any other manner inconsistent with the Purposes of the United Nations.​

But you do not believe that applies to lesser people.

(COMMENT)

Throughout history, all kinds of people invested in the future value of concepts and ideals. Before the end of the 19th Century, all manner of influential people believed that their would be a place for the Jewish People somewhere in the region; even back then. So, yes... who cares what your call it? If you want to call it the Jewish Colony, go ahead. At the end of the day, and the 19th Century, it was thought of as a Jewish National Home.

The People of the United States and new immigrants were moving west in the direction of California. Many in huge wagon trains, building railroads, and caravans. You can call them, if you like, colonist. But its not going to sound right. Because it is an intention to create something bigger then the sum of its parts; just has the Jewish National Home was something bigger then anything the Arabs had ever put together for 3000 years, and is still more enormous in terms of human development than anything the Arab have put together since the Radicalized Islamics started running free.

Just as some people who saw the potential for in California, there were people who saw potential for the Middle East. And there were still others that saw the potential in the Middle East and put teams together to begin building a nation.

Premeditation! --- Again an attempt to use semantics in language to twist the positive intent of planned immigration efforts. That word (premeditation) more often used in law enforcement, is merely an attempt to apply criminal language to a human developmental process that was framed by the Allied Powers, adopted by the Council to the League of Nations, and put in effect by the Jewish Immigrants.

Most Respectfully,
R

 

[P F Tinmore]

P F Tinmore, et al,

Is this where I'm suppose to laugh?

montelatici, P F Tinmore, et al,

You two are trying to make it sound like the Jewish were planning something sinister; something illegal! This is the wolf cry...

There was nothing covert about it. They spoke openly about their colonial project.

It wasn't a covert colonization program. It was an overt Zionist colonization program.

(COMMENT)

The Jewish People you are talking about, are not and were not, involved in anything improper or illegal; or unsanctioned.

It was all done at the encouragement of the Council of the League of Nations and the Allied Powers.

Most Respectfully,
R

Hogwash, it was a premeditated plan to take over Palestine. That was their intent. They openly said that they were colonizing Palestine. That is what they did.

You keep posting this:

You cannot go to war for the purpose of conquering a territory or nation. This is a variation of Article 2(4) if the Charter.

All Members shall refrain in their international relations from the threat or use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of any state, or in any other manner inconsistent with the Purposes of the United Nations.​

But you do not believe that applies to lesser people.

(COMMENT)

Throughout history, all kinds of people invested in the future value of concepts and ideals. Before the end of the 19th Century, all manner of influential people believed that their would be a place for the Jewish People somewhere in the region; even back then. So, yes... who cares what your call it? If you want to call it the Jewish Colony, go ahead. At the end of the day, and the 19th Century, it was thought of as a Jewish National Home.

The People of the United States and new immigrants were moving west in the direction of California. Many in huge wagon trains, building railroads, and caravans. You can call them, if you like, colonist. But its not going to sound right. Because it is an intention to create something bigger then the sum of its parts; just has the Jewish National Home was something bigger then anything the Arabs had ever put together for 3000 years, and is still more enormous in terms of human development than anything the Arab have put together since the Radicalized Islamics started running free.

Just as some people who saw the potential for in California, there were people who saw potential for the Middle East. And there were still others that saw the potential in the Middle East and put teams together to begin building a nation.

Premeditation! --- Again an attempt to use semantics in language to twist the positive intent of planned immigration efforts. That word (premeditation) more often used in law enforcement, is merely an attempt to apply criminal language to a human developmental process that was framed by the Allied Powers, adopted by the Council to the League of Nations, and put in effect by the Jewish Immigrants.

Most Respectfully,
R

So it is OK to kick the lesser people out of their land?

That is so fucking racist.

 

[RoccoR]

P F Tinmore, et al,

I don't believe I've made any claim against people of other races, or given cause to assume that I believe that a particular race is superior to another.

So it is OK to kick the lesser people out of their land?

That is so fucking racist.

(COMMENT)

Remember, these are not lesser people because they have no sovereign history. They do have a history of a sovereign power over them. And they have always need someone to watch over them. They have a very poor record of human development; and have never really demonstrated that they could stand on their own. The Arab Palestinians have yet to have a peace transition in government since 1988 and the Declaration of Independence. They have not made much progress in managing the 2400 sq mi they clain to have. And they cannot even maintain a civilized manner for the governance over Jerusalem.

Most Respectfully,
R

 

[jillian]

This thread was created in order to attempt to fix the significant derailment of another thread without having to delete posts.

The topic of this thread is one that comes up with regularity in IP, and is also a frequent derailer of active threads so it will now have a thread of it's own which will be pinned as a "stickie".

I apologize ahead of time for the bumpy discontinuous beginnig of this, but I think it will smooth out as discussion goes on.

The topic is: The history involving the creation of Israel, the British Mandate, and the applicable actions of the UN in that history.

why don't you do a thread about how iraq was created? or jordan? or the united arab emirates?

Because threads in those forums don't get consistently derailed like threads in IP do. You can start with any topic and it's almost a guarantee that within a few pages the the thread is derailed into the history of the mandate, who has a right to be there, who is an invader/squatter, who is indiginous yada yada yada. This seems like one solution, that avoids having to just delete posts and gives a consistent place to discuss this.

no. my point is if you ask those questions abut israel, you need to ask the same questions about the countries i mentioned since they were "formed" the same way.

Agree...and if people want to they can - I don't care We are just tired of the constant derailing of threads in IP.

but they DON'T want to... and you foster the anti-Semite spew.

 

[Coyote]

This thread was created in order to attempt to fix the significant derailment of another thread without having to delete posts.

The topic of this thread is one that comes up with regularity in IP, and is also a frequent derailer of active threads so it will now have a thread of it's own which will be pinned as a "stickie".

I apologize ahead of time for the bumpy discontinuous beginnig of this, but I think it will smooth out as discussion goes on.

The topic is: The history involving the creation of Israel, the British Mandate, and the applicable actions of the UN in that history.

why don't you do a thread about how iraq was created? or jordan? or the united arab emirates?

Because threads in those forums don't get consistently derailed like threads in IP do. You can start with any topic and it's almost a guarantee that within a few pages the the thread is derailed into the history of the mandate, who has a right to be there, who is an invader/squatter, who is indiginous yada yada yada. This seems like one solution, that avoids having to just delete posts and gives a consistent place to discuss this.

no. my point is if you ask those questions abut israel, you need to ask the same questions about the countries i mentioned since they were "formed" the same way.

Agree...and if people want to they can - I don't care We are just tired of the constant derailing of threads in IP.

but they DON'T want to... and you foster the anti-Semite spew.

No one wants to Jillian, including your side. And even "anti-semite spew" as you put it, is free speech. If you don't like it, put the speaker on ignore.

 

[Phoenall]

You can't expel 4.4 million people simply because you want to take their land.

Your premise is incorrect.

You are assuming it is "their land".

The area west of the Jordan has never been adjudicated as anyones land beyond the British mandate period. In which case it reverts to sovereign control. The Jordanians abandoned the area and IMHO illegally stripped its inhabitants of Jordanian citizenship. Israel controls the area which places it under the auspices of the Israeli courts by virtue of the Geneva conventions.

Under those conventions any combatants, including those who assist combatants or are suspected of assisting or participating in acts agains the state, forfeit their protected persons status. In which case Israel can detain them as prisoners of war.

Prisoners of war must be repatriated to their countries of origin. In which case Syria, Jordan, Lebanon, Iraq or Egypt are the responsible parties.

I think you are assuming the Arabs remaining within Israeli controlled areas are all civilians. The hard reality is anyone committing acts against the state in war time are combatants and forfeit their protected persons status.

They originated where they are. There is no country of "origin" to "repatriot" them to. That's just another name for ethnic cleansing.

Its an issue of legalities. What is the last legal status of nationality of the Arabs living in the mandated area west of the Jordan. The mandate for palestine did contain a citizenship order, however, obviously that that was a requirement of the mandate and was irrespective of the subsequent divisions of the mandated area. Either way the order expired and the two sister nations Jordan and Israel now have sovereign control of who they are willing to become citizens ?

Maybe Rocco will chime in on that one.

From what I can see they were illegally stripped of their Jordanian citizenship and therefor, Jordan bears the greatest responsibility.

It doesn't really matter Israel is only legally responsible for turning them over to a neutral third party and the Geneva conventions names the IRC as the default third party.

I don't see anything in the Geneva conventions that prohibits repatriation of prisoners of war. Nor do I see any ethnic restrictions within Israel's ability to declare who is a hostile combatant. So your cries of ethnic cleansing don't appear to have any merit give the criteria set forth within the Geneva conventions.

In the end not one inch of land should be awarded to any hostiles who under international law can be declared prisoners of war and repatriated to their countries of origin. Since their is no country of palestine, they palestine cannot be considered a country of origin and one of the waring signatories of the original declaration of war against Israel becomes responsible

The mandate and the LoN enacted an International law that granted the Jews the land that is now know as the west bank, gaza and Golan heights. The UN illegally partitioned this land into a possible arab muslim state, once they realised they amended the UN charter to once again grant the Jews the above land. The pro Palestinians/anti Jews always balk when these INTERNATIONAL LAWS are pointed out and deflect away from the reality because they know they have no answers.

What international "law"? My understanding is there was no force of law there. Maybe we should take this up in the Mandate thread?

This international law




The Avalon Project : The Palestine Mandate


The Council of the League of Nations:
Whereas the Principal Allied Powers have agreed, for the purpose of giving effect to the provisions of Article 22 of the Covenant of the League of Nations, to entrust to a Mandatory selected by the said Powers the administration of the territory of Palestine, which formerly belonged to the Turkish Empire, within such boundaries as may be fixed by them; and

Whereas the Principal Allied Powers have also agreed that 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; and

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; and

Whereas the Principal Allied Powers have selected His Britannic Majesty as the Mandatory for Palestine; and

Whereas the mandate in respect of Palestine has been formulated in the following terms and submitted to the Council of the League for approval; and

Whereas His Britannic Majesty has accepted the mandate in respect of Palestine and undertaken to exercise it on behalf of the League of Nations in conformity with the following provisions; and

Whereas by the afore-mentioned Article 22 (paragraph 8), it is provided that the degree of authority, control or administration to be exercised by the Mandatory, not having been previously agreed upon by the Members of the League, shall be explicitly defined by the Council of the League Of Nations;

 

[Phoenall]

Coyote, Phoenall, et al, (Just a POINT of Clarification!)

Don't get twisted up here. This is a mistake a lot of people make.

The mandate and the LoN enacted an International law that granted the Jews the land that is now know as the west bank, gaza and Golan heights. The UN illegally partitioned this land into a possible arab muslim state, once they realised they amended the UN charter to once again grant the Jews the above land. The pro Palestinians/anti Jews always balk when these INTERNATIONAL LAWS are pointed out and deflect away from the reality because they know they have no answers.

What international "law"? My understanding is there was no force of law there. Maybe we should take this up in the Mandate thread?

(COMMENT)

There was no amendment of the Charter to allow anything of the sort.

The UN did not illegally partition anything. The UN made an offer to for the Arabs and the Jews based on the logic and recommendations put forth by the UN Special Commission on Palestine (UNSCOP).

The Mandate is a "Directive" from the "League of Nations" to the "Assigned Mandatory" as determined by the "Allied Powers" --- with the "Allied Powers" having decided the context of the Mandate. You will notice that the Preamble to the Mandate for Palestine says (over and over again) the phrase: "Whereas the Principle Allied Powers have agreed," --- and not the Council of the League of Nations. Now look at this last bit of language:

"Whereas by the aforementioned Article 22 (paragraph 8), it is provided that the degree of authority, control or administration to be exercised by the Mandatory, not having been previously agreed upon by the Members of the League, shall be explicitly defined by the Council of the League of Nations;

Confirming the said mandate, defines its terms as follows:
​

The Allied Powers set-up the Mandate and had it approved by the Council. The Mandatory exercises the authority on behalf of the "Council."

The Mandate slipped into the UN Trusteeship Program in April 1946 (in accordance with Article 28 of the Mandate and Article 77 of the Charter). But the terms stayed the same. If the Administrator (the successor government to the UK) wants to do something outside that Mandate as was NOT previously agreed to by the League Membership (Trustee Programs as the successor), Then it shall be explicitly defined by the Council of the League of Nations (the UN General Assembly as the successor body).

• References:

• Paragraphs 7 and 8 of the Mandate Preamble.
• Articles 28 of the Mandate
• Chapter XII of the UN Charter

In November 1947, the UN General Assembly (as the successor body to the Council) voted on and approved the "partition plan" in the form of Resolution 181(II). All in accordance with the agreed upon procedures involving the Allied Powers, and the Council as passed on to the Mandatory. The UN General Assembly adoption of the 1947 Resolution fulfills the requirement within the Mandate (agreed upon by the parties) to "explicitly defined" by the body if it was not previously agreed to.

Most Respectfully,
R

This says otherwise




General Assembly Resolutions 4th Session

 

[Phoenall]

Coyote, et al,

I'm confused.

(COMMENT)

So where did you get that from?

I don't think I said that at all.

Most Respectfully,
R

No...you're right. It's what I'm getting from Boston. Apologies

No

Its what you are getting from yourself. What I said had nothing to do with civilians

No, I get if from what you have said in multiple threads which is to expel them all to Jordan.

You can't both take the stand that "they've lived there for ages" and ignore that the PREVIOUS owner and admin of that land was Jordan. Merely living on the land doesn't give you civil rights, legal process or citizenship of any nation.. That's a MUTUAL decision..

At one time the administrator was Britain - would that have that make them British? Would they have been expelled to their British "homeland" then?

It may be a mutual decision but in a modern world it is also a humanitarian decision and simply flicking your hand and talking about mass expulsions is not a mutual decision.

The OP plan is NOT to expel them to Jordan -- but keep them on the same land they've living on for over 50 years. WITH the eventual transition of that land to an autonomous Palestine. Jordan's payout would be to become their gateway to growth and commerce.. Essentially bootstrapping BOTH the economies of Jordan AND "palestine".

Agree - I got side tracked. Just not sure how beneficial that would be to Jordan and whether Jordan could manage security.

With the help of Arab partners, Israel MIGHT consider moving some of their settlements as they did in Gaza. But WITHOUT partners to help the Palestinians build a govt/nation --- they would be IDIOTS to fall for that trip again..

Agree - but, settlements are a part of the problem as to why there has been no resolution.

NO as this was made clear in the mandate documents. Which is where many people fall foul of the arab interpretations. Britain was a caretaker government put in place to look after the day to day running of Jewish Palestine and arab Palestine until they were able to stand on their own feet. They were also there to act as a security force in case of any insurrection or civil disturbance. They inhabitants were granted citizenship of Palestine under the control and protection of Britain, this did not make it a nation or the inhabitants British.

The problems arise when you look at the inhabitants actual citizenship before the 1948 declaration of independence, and where they considered themselves to be citizens of. Many declared to be Syrian which means that they should be deported to Syria if they are sentenced for any criminal act. The law is simple and clear on this matter, which is why so many illegal immigrants destroy their papers as soon as they arrive at their destination. No proof of citizenship and they cant be deported.



The settlements were part of an agreement that the Palestinians now want to renege on because they did not foresee them spreading as they have done. The only way to do this would be to have them declared illegal and have the UN enforce this decision, that will never happen while the Oslo accords are still in existence.

 

[P F Tinmore]

P F Tinmore, et al,

I don't believe I've made any claim against people of other races, or given cause to assume that I believe that a particular race is superior to another.

So it is OK to kick the lesser people out of their land?

That is so fucking racist.

(COMMENT)

Remember, these are not lesser people because they have no sovereign history. They do have a history of a sovereign power over them. And they have always need someone to watch over them. They have a very poor record of human development; and have never really demonstrated that they could stand on their own. The Arab Palestinians have yet to have a peace transition in government since 1988 and the Declaration of Independence. They have not made much progress in managing the 2400 sq mi they clain to have. And they cannot even maintain a civilized manner for the governance over Jerusalem.

Most Respectfully,
R

They have a very poor record of human development; and have never really demonstrated that they could stand on their own.​

Another racist remark.

How can they develop when their means of production, both agricultural and industrial, have been stolen, bombed, bulldozed, and blockaded. Their cultural and educational institution are severely restricted in Gaza and the West Bank.

Could you elaborate please?

 

[Coyote]

Coyote, et al,

I'm confused.

So you would expel 4.4 million civilians from the Occupied Territories?

(COMMENT)

So where did you get that from?

I don't think I said that at all.

Most Respectfully,
R

No...you're right. It's what I'm getting from Boston. Apologies

No

Its what you are getting from yourself. What I said had nothing to do with civilians

No, I get if from what you have said in multiple threads which is to expel them all to Jordan.

Which is where they were supposed to go under the International laws of 1923. There was even provision in these laws for a forced move to arab Palestine it they did not want to live in Jewish Palestine peacefully and as full citizens. Even the UN stated that they could only stay/return if they gave an understanding that they would be prepared to act in a civilised manner and live peacefully with the Jews. Remind me again who it is that says they will never live in peace with the Jews, and why these laws have not been implemented in full ?

What international laws?

 

[RoccoR]

P F Tinmore, et al,

It is a matter of Record because, that is what it is --- a matter of record.

• Global 2015 Human Development Report - English

It is what it is. An objective view of reality without tampering.

Points to keep in mind as you read, they are Palestinian view as expressed over time:

Palestine is the homeland of the Arab Palestinian people; it is an indivisible part of the Arab homeland, and the Palestinian people are an integral part of the Arab nation.

Palestine, with the boundaries it had during the British Mandate, is an indivisible territorial unit.

There is no solution to the Palestinian problem except by Jihad. Armed struggle is the only way to liberate Palestine. Thus it is the overall strategy, not merely a tactical phase.

Initiatives, and so-called peaceful solutions and international conferences, are in contradiction to the principles of the Islamic Resistance Movement.
No peace with Israel, no recognition of Israel, and no negotiations with Israel.
​

Another racist remark.

How can they develop when their means of production, both agricultural and industrial, have been stolen, bombed, bulldozed, and blockaded. Their cultural and educational institution are severely restricted in Gaza and the West Bank.

Could you elaborate please?

(COMMENT)

First, there is a subliminal message transmitted in this question. It presupposes that the relationship between the Hostile Arab Palestinian (HoAP) and the Israeli Defense Force (IDF) if the facts on the ground had been different, that the relationship might have been cordial if the territory had not been occupied by the IDF in 1967. And of course, there is absolutely no reason to consider this as whimsical possibility.

Second, the imbedded supposition is a latent idea that, had the IDF not taken control of the West Bank and Gaza Strip from Jordanian authority and Egyptian authorities (respectively) in 1967 that somehow the occupied Palestinian territory (oPt) would have emerged differently from the fate of all the other Arab nations states in the Immediate vicinity. And again, there is no reason to believe that the HoAP would have developed economically, commercially, scientifically or even socially to an advance position any more than any of the adjacent Arab States.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------​

The reason they call it a "Belligerent Occupation" with respect to the oPt is because the Arab Palestinians opened hostilities with the State of Israel in 1948 with the interventionist assistance of the combined Arab League Force; and never attempted to establish a peaceful arrangement through the Principles of International Law concerning Friendly Relations and Co-operation among States. There was no closer on the mater with respect to the HoAP --- even by the Arab League. In 1948 the Arab Palestinians vowed that they would never recognize the validity of the UN General Assembly Resolution 181(II) and that of the Partition proposed and adopted. The HoAP made a "solemn declaration before the United Nations, before God and history, that they will never submit or yield to any power going to Palestine to enforce partition. The only way to establish partition is first to wipe them out — man, woman and child."

Before you can even consider the possibility of a more theoretical alternative, one has to make a leap beyond the Palestinian fascination with conflict, martyrdom, and the generational inheritance of murder and mayhem, --- you have to conceive of there being a very different kind of Palestinian. You have to be able to imagine --- conceive of a Palestinian that does not spend their time undermining a prosperous nation --- but a Palestinian that reaches to make the best of what they have in a peaceful manner. The morph from the terrorist and jihadist demon that that is the Palestinian to the plans, designs, and oversees the construction of a new nation; the architect of a new way.

We would then have to see the Palestinian turn the possibility into a reality; one that has been recast and rebuild that which we call the Arab Palestinian, into a alternative national identity. No one can do it for them. The must want to do it. Today, they cast the next generation to hate that which is Jewish. Just as they ruined the last generation to to act the way that they do; believing that they have some special right to something they never worked for and never had. The whole culture needs cleansed.

The idea that the Palestinians could have matched Israel, left unrestrained, it fantasy. The would have been luck to achieve the status of a chaotic neighbor like Syrian. Given the best of all conditions, there is no reason they could have achieved a Human Development Level for the best of the entire Arab League.

Most Respectfully,
R

 

[P F Tinmore]

P F Tinmore, et al,

It is a matter of Record because, that is what it is --- a matter of record.

• Global 2015 Human Development Report - English

It is what it is. An objective view of reality without tampering.

Points to keep in mind as you read, they are Palestinian view as expressed over time:

Palestine is the homeland of the Arab Palestinian people; it is an indivisible part of the Arab homeland, and the Palestinian people are an integral part of the Arab nation.

Palestine, with the boundaries it had during the British Mandate, is an indivisible territorial unit.

There is no solution to the Palestinian problem except by Jihad. Armed struggle is the only way to liberate Palestine. Thus it is the overall strategy, not merely a tactical phase.

Initiatives, and so-called peaceful solutions and international conferences, are in contradiction to the principles of the Islamic Resistance Movement.
No peace with Israel, no recognition of Israel, and no negotiations with Israel.
​

Another racist remark.

How can they develop when their means of production, both agricultural and industrial, have been stolen, bombed, bulldozed, and blockaded. Their cultural and educational institution are severely restricted in Gaza and the West Bank.

Could you elaborate please?

(COMMENT)

First, there is a subliminal message transmitted in this question. It presupposes that the relationship between the Hostile Arab Palestinian (HoAP) and the Israeli Defense Force (IDF) if the facts on the ground had been different, that the relationship might have been cordial if the territory had not been occupied by the IDF in 1967. And of course, there is absolutely no reason to consider this as whimsical possibility.

Second, the imbedded supposition is a latent idea that, had the IDF not taken control of the West Bank and Gaza Strip from Jordanian authority and Egyptian authorities (respectively) in 1967 that somehow the occupied Palestinian territory (oPt) would have emerged differently from the fate of all the other Arab nations states in the Immediate vicinity. And again, there is no reason to believe that the HoAP would have developed economically, commercially, scientifically or even socially to an advance position any more than any of the adjacent Arab States.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------​

The reason they call it a "Belligerent Occupation" with respect to the oPt is because the Arab Palestinians opened hostilities with the State of Israel in 1948 with the interventionist assistance of the combined Arab League Force; and never attempted to establish a peaceful arrangement through the Principles of International Law concerning Friendly Relations and Co-operation among States. There was no closer on the mater with respect to the HoAP --- even by the Arab League. In 1948 the Arab Palestinians vowed that they would never recognize the validity of the UN General Assembly Resolution 181(II) and that of the Partition proposed and adopted. The HoAP made a "solemn declaration before the United Nations, before God and history, that they will never submit or yield to any power going to Palestine to enforce partition. The only way to establish partition is first to wipe them out — man, woman and child."

Before you can even consider the possibility of a more theoretical alternative, one has to make a leap beyond the Palestinian fascination with conflict, martyrdom, and the generational inheritance of murder and mayhem, --- you have to conceive of there being a very different kind of Palestinian. You have to be able to imagine --- conceive of a Palestinian that does not spend their time undermining a prosperous nation --- but a Palestinian that reaches to make the best of what they have in a peaceful manner. The morph from the terrorist and jihadist demon that that is the Palestinian to the plans, designs, and oversees the construction of a new nation; the architect of a new way.

We would then have to see the Palestinian turn the possibility into a reality; one that has been recast and rebuild that which we call the Arab Palestinian, into a alternative national identity. No one can do it for them. The must want to do it. Today, they cast the next generation to hate that which is Jewish. Just as they ruined the last generation to to act the way that they do; believing that they have some special right to something they never worked for and never had. The whole culture needs cleansed.

The idea that the Palestinians could have matched Israel, left unrestrained, it fantasy. The would have been luck to achieve the status of a chaotic neighbor like Syrian. Given the best of all conditions, there is no reason they could have achieved a Human Development Level for the best of the entire Arab League.

Most Respectfully,
R

It is racist to speculate on the Palestinian's incompetence.