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

[Mindful]

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 and the arab muslims are there illegally. 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. I 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, 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.

So basically you feel that the Palestinians don't have the right to self determination - that they should go to Jordan?

They do have the right to self determination but not at the cost of the Jews rights to self determination. They were given Jordan but wanted all the land so illegally migrated there to increase the numbers.

Now how about answering the points raised instead of deflecting and derailing as you always do when faced with the reality

So the Palestinians who owned orange groves in Jaffa were given Jordan? How does that work?

Links?

Orange groves and other agricultural areas were owned by absentee landlords, and any Palestinian Arabs living there were tenant farmers.

 

[Challenger]

Israel completely ceased to exist thousands of years ago.

If it ever existed in the first place. Remove the Bible from the equation and there is very little if any evidence for a "Kingdom of Israel", even less so that it was ever "Jewish" outside of possibly a ruling elite.

Archeology does support many of the main historical narratives, I have little doubt that there was a kingdom.

I want to use it to ensure that people like Challenger can't erase, deny or reject the historical, spiritual and ancestral ties that the Jewish people have to the territory. You know, like he JUST did by saying that the Jewish people are not a "real" people and therefore have NO RIGHTS to the reconstitution of the Jewish nation.

I'm erasing nothing, I'm highlighting the fact that Zionist "historians" invented a "Jewish people" from assorted groups tenuously linked together by a religion. You are arguing in effect that Mormons or Moonies, or Scientologists, are an "ethnic group". If that's the case, move over, the British are coming; according to this crowd, we have more right to Palestine than " the Jewish people" do. British Israelism - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Are you saying a Jewish people did not exist prior to Zionist historians? In this area science does provide genetic evidence of close relationships among the Jewish people. A huge difference from members of proselytizing religions.

Judaism is a religion and of course there were adherants and practicioners of the religion before Zionism emerged, that has never been in doubt, but that's a religious group, not an ethenic one. Judea/Palestine in antiquity was a cosmopolitan area containing several ethicities speaking different languages and having their own customs and religions. Also Judaism was a proselytising religion for centuries until supplanted by Christianity and was not above carrying out forced conversions, especially during the Hashmonean period. As for "genetic evidence", the jury is still out on that one, so I'll forego comment.

I've never heard it was a proselytising religion - do you have a source for these?

This is widely known in academic circles and there are several scholarly sources available, sadly not on the web unless you are a member of JSTOR or similar organisations. Look for works by Louis H. Feldman (Jew and Gentile in the Ancient World) and Theodor Mommsen, who asserted in Rome's History vol 6, "...ancient Judaism was not exclusive at all: ir was rather, as keen to propagate itself as Chistianity and later Islam would be." (page 193)

...and just so I don't get inundated with moronic accusations of "Islamo-nazism (whatever that is) and using "hate sites"...

How was the biblical “stranger” transfigured into the “proselyte”?

In the Bible, the Hebrew term ger refers to a “resident alien,” but ger later took on the meaning of “a proselyte” (from the Greek proselytos ). The talmudic sages (third century C.E.) stressed the equality of the native-born and the proselyte, citing Exodus 12:49, “One law shall be to him that is home born and to the ger, the sojourner among you,” as well as the teaching (from Mechilta Piska 15) that the proselyte was equal to the native-born Jew with respect to “all the commandments of the Torah.” Once the stranger has, by choice, become a member of the family, he/she is entitled to all its privileges (and burdens).

The rabbis also observed that the precept to love, protect, and not oppress the ger or stranger appears 36 times in the Torah, more often than any other biblical precept. The 12th-century philosopher and talmudist Moses Maimonides thus said: “Our parents are to be honored and obeyed; our prophets are to be heeded; but the proselyte we are bidden to love with a full force of our heart’s affection” (Mishneh Torah, Book I).

This suggests that Jews must have been actively proselytizing at the time.

Yes. According to the Jewish historian Salo Baron, in great part because of proselytizing, the number of Jews grew from 150,000 in 586 B.C.E. to eight million in the first century C.E.—at which time they constituted 10% of the Roman Empire! Jews were working very hard then to convert pagans; the Gospel of Matthew reports that Jewish proselytizers traveled over sea and land to make a single proselyte (23:15).

Why, then, did Jews stop proselytizing gentiles?

The cessation was imposed by Roman edicts, not rabbinic rulings. In the fourth century C.E., after the empire adopted Christianity as the state religion, Roman emperors made conversion to Judaism a criminal offense, punishable by death of both the proselytizing Jews and the convert. The code of the Roman Emperor Theodosius declared: Any person who “betakes himself to the nefarious sect of Judaism shall sustain with them the deserved punishment of death...” (Theodosius Code 116.8.1, August 13, 339). The Holy Roman Empire hoped to dismantle the Jewish mission to be “a light to the nations” and thus drive a universal faith into a parochial tribalism.

Reform Judaism Magazine - Choosing Judaism: Judaism's Proselytizing Tradition

 

[Phoenall]

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 and the arab muslims are there illegally. 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. I 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, 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.

So basically you feel that the Palestinians don't have the right to self determination - that they should go to Jordan?

They do have the right to self determination but not at the cost of the Jews rights to self determination. They were given Jordan but wanted all the land so illegally migrated there to increase the numbers.

Now how about answering the points raised instead of deflecting and derailing as you always do when faced with the reality

So the Palestinians who owned orange groves in Jaffa were given Jordan? How does that work?

Links?

Orange groves and other agricultural areas were owned by absentee landlords, and any Palestinian Arabs living there were tenant farmers.

Jews who owned lands in Jordan were evicted and sent packing across the river to fend for themselves, and their property given to migrants from palestine. Tinny asks how that worked, it was simple the LoN set aside a sum of money to pay compensation to any person that migrated to their section of palestine, because most arab muslims were penniless nomads they recieved nothing

 

[Challenger]

The native people of the place, whatever they may have been called in the past or are called now, have a greater claim to that place than European colonists driven by a religiously inspired pseudo-nationalist, impulse, oh, you're welcome.

What is your genealogical ancestry? Are you going to give up your stake in America to its natives and return to the Old Country?......or does that idea only apply to Jews?

Well, I've got blue eyes and fair hair and my family has always lived in the Midlands so I suppose there's a bit of Viking and Ango-saxon in me, I don't have to return to the "old country" I'm there already. It must really be true what they say about Americans and geography

 

[Challenger]

It absolutely should not be destroyed.

...but reformed into an inclusive fully democratic state of all it's people, regardless of their religious affilliations.

 

[rylah]

Israel completely ceased to exist thousands of years ago.

If it ever existed in the first place. Remove the Bible from the equation and there is very little if any evidence for a "Kingdom of Israel", even less so that it was ever "Jewish" outside of possibly a ruling elite.

Archeology does support many of the main historical narratives, I have little doubt that there was a kingdom.

I want to use it to ensure that people like Challenger can't erase, deny or reject the historical, spiritual and ancestral ties that the Jewish people have to the territory. You know, like he JUST did by saying that the Jewish people are not a "real" people and therefore have NO RIGHTS to the reconstitution of the Jewish nation.

I'm erasing nothing, I'm highlighting the fact that Zionist "historians" invented a "Jewish people" from assorted groups tenuously linked together by a religion. You are arguing in effect that Mormons or Moonies, or Scientologists, are an "ethnic group". If that's the case, move over, the British are coming; according to this crowd, we have more right to Palestine than " the Jewish people" do. British Israelism - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Are you saying a Jewish people did not exist prior to Zionist historians? In this area science does provide genetic evidence of close relationships among the Jewish people. A huge difference from members of proselytizing religions.

Judaism is a religion and of course there were adherants and practicioners of the religion before Zionism emerged, that has never been in doubt, but that's a religious group, not an ethenic one. Judea/Palestine in antiquity was a cosmopolitan area containing several ethicities speaking different languages and having their own customs and religions. Also Judaism was a proselytising religion for centuries until supplanted by Christianity and was not above carrying out forced conversions, especially during the Hashmonean period. As for "genetic evidence", the jury is still out on that one, so I'll forego comment.

I've never heard it was a proselytising religion - do you have a source for these?

This is widely known in academic circles and there are several scholarly sources available, sadly not on the web unless you are a member of JSTOR or similar organisations. Look for works by Louis H. Feldman (Jew and Gentile in the Ancient World) and Theodor Mommsen, who asserted in Rome's History vol 6, "...ancient Judaism was not exclusive at all: ir was rather, as keen to propagate itself as Chistianity and later Islam would be." (page 193)

...and just so I don't get inundated with moronic accusations of "Islamo-nazism (whatever that is) and using "hate sites"...

How was the biblical “stranger” transfigured into the “proselyte”?

In the Bible, the Hebrew term ger refers to a “resident alien,” but ger later took on the meaning of “a proselyte” (from the Greek proselytos ). The talmudic sages (third century C.E.) stressed the equality of the native-born and the proselyte, citing Exodus 12:49, “One law shall be to him that is home born and to the ger, the sojourner among you,” as well as the teaching (from Mechilta Piska 15) that the proselyte was equal to the native-born Jew with respect to “all the commandments of the Torah.” Once the stranger has, by choice, become a member of the family, he/she is entitled to all its privileges (and burdens).

The rabbis also observed that the precept to love, protect, and not oppress the ger or stranger appears 36 times in the Torah, more often than any other biblical precept. The 12th-century philosopher and talmudist Moses Maimonides thus said: “Our parents are to be honored and obeyed; our prophets are to be heeded; but the proselyte we are bidden to love with a full force of our heart’s affection” (Mishneh Torah, Book I).

This suggests that Jews must have been actively proselytizing at the time.

Yes. According to the Jewish historian Salo Baron, in great part because of proselytizing, the number of Jews grew from 150,000 in 586 B.C.E. to eight million in the first century C.E.—at which time they constituted 10% of the Roman Empire! Jews were working very hard then to convert pagans; the Gospel of Matthew reports that Jewish proselytizers traveled over sea and land to make a single proselyte (23:15).

Why, then, did Jews stop proselytizing gentiles?

The cessation was imposed by Roman edicts, not rabbinic rulings. In the fourth century C.E., after the empire adopted Christianity as the state religion, Roman emperors made conversion to Judaism a criminal offense, punishable by death of both the proselytizing Jews and the convert. The code of the Roman Emperor Theodosius declared: Any person who “betakes himself to the nefarious sect of Judaism shall sustain with them the deserved punishment of death...” (Theodosius Code 116.8.1, August 13, 339). The Holy Roman Empire hoped to dismantle the Jewish mission to be “a light to the nations” and thus drive a universal faith into a parochial tribalism.

Reform Judaism Magazine - Choosing Judaism: Judaism's Proselytizing Tradition

Reform Judaism has a clear Frankist agenda of sabotage and little in common with the Traditional Judaism, practiced for centuries, what Moses Maimonides practiced as well.

The most basic thing they conveniently "forgot" to mention-
there're 2 kinds of totally different 'ger':

1. "Ger toshav": a person who lives with the Jews and accepts the 7 Noahide laws, this is NOT conversion but an "etiquette".

2. 'Ger zedek': a persons who becomes fully Jewish after being rejected a couple of times, taking upon himself to keep all the 613 commandments.

Who would be so crazy, living in Rome to take all this responsibility when unnecessary, when your culture brings so much pleasure to life?


The fact that you know so little about our culture just proves further that Judaism isn't about spreading or converting others. As the fact that you think that Judaism is a religion, only shows you haven't a clue, the only way for you can think of Judaism is in Christian terms...

To talk about Judaism, read Maimonides not some garbage in a newspaper.

 

[Divine Wind]

Well, I've got blue eyes and fair hair and my family has always lived in the Midlands so I suppose there's a bit of Viking and Ango-saxon in me, I don't have to return to the "old country" I'm there already. It must really be true what they say about Americans and geography

Translation: I"m of Nordic and European descent, but I have no intention of ever giving up my property in the Americas. **** the Goddamn ******* Indians!

Thanks, got it. So your attack on "European colonists" only applies if they are Jews. Interesting. Two-faced, hypocritical and completely bigoted, but still it's an interesting perspective you have.

 

[Challenger]

Well, I've got blue eyes and fair hair and my family has always lived in the Midlands so I suppose there's a bit of Viking and Ango-saxon in me, I don't have to return to the "old country" I'm there already. It must really be true what they say about Americans and geography

Translation: I"m of Nordic and European descent, but I have no intention of ever giving up my property in the Americas. **** the Goddamn ******* Indians!

Thanks, got it. So your attack on "European colonists" only applies if they are Jews. Interesting. Two-faced, hypocritical and completely bigoted, but still it's an interesting perspective you have.

Not only Geography, but basic comprehension, it seems.

If you want to take this to another more suitable forum, I'll happily discuss the brutal suppression, disposession and genocide of the native Americans by European Colonists. Perhaps that's why you support the Zionist colonists so much, two peas in a pod. Oh, FWIW, if it were up to me, I'd give America back to it's native population in an instant, but that's a topic for another forum and another time.

 

[Challenger]

Reform Judaism has a clear Frankist agenda of sabotage and little in common with the Traditional Judaism, practiced for centuries, what Moses Maimonides practiced as well.

YES!! Result! As expected, some Zionut ignored the question I was answering and instead went off on an irrelevant rant against Reform Judaism.

 

[Divine Wind]

Not only Geography, but basic comprehension, it seems...

Given your choice of maps and posts, we can agree on your talents...or lack thereof.

FWIW, if it were up to me, I'd give America back to it's native population in an instant, but that's a topic for another forum and another time.

Easy to say but, of course, you don't plan on giving anything you own back to the natives nor do you plan on moving back to Northern Europe, amirite? So why do you continue to insist native-born Israelis are "European Colonists"? Is it because you are a ******* liar? A hypocrite? Or, as we just discussed above, you are geography and basic comprehension challenged?

Latest Population Statistics for Israel | Jewish Virtual Library
The Jewish population makes up 6,377,000 (74.8%); 1,771,000 (20.8%) are Arabs; and, those identified as "others" (non-Arab Christians, Baha'i, etc) make up 4.4% of the population (374,000 people). When the state was established, there were only 806,000 residents and the total population reached its first and second millions in 1949 and 1958 respectively. Judging by current population trend data, experts predict that the population of Israel will reach 10 million by 2025 or sooner.....

......In 2014, 75% of the total Jewish population were "Sabras" - born in Israel - compared with just a 35% native-born population at Israel's independence in 1948. 38.6% of the Jewish population are Israeli-born to at least one parent who was also Israeli-born.

 

[rylah]

Reform Judaism has a clear Frankist agenda of sabotage and little in common with the Traditional Judaism, practiced for centuries, what Moses Maimonides practiced as well.

YES!! Result! As expected, some Zionut ignored the question I was answering and instead went off on an irrelevant rant against Reform Judaism.

Your sources, upon which you based your answers, are biased bs.
As usual.

How convenient to ignore the facts in my post when they're directly attacking your answer.

 

[Phoenall]

It absolutely should not be destroyed.

...but reformed into an inclusive fully democratic state of all it's people, regardless of their religious affilliations.

So you can party everytime a Jew is murdered by the state, because they are 4th class slaves of the muslim overlords

 

[Phoenall]

Reform Judaism has a clear Frankist agenda of sabotage and little in common with the Traditional Judaism, practiced for centuries, what Moses Maimonides practiced as well.

YES!! Result! As expected, some Zionut ignored the question I was answering and instead went off on an irrelevant rant against Reform Judaism.

Once again rat boy lets down his guard and shows he is an out and out rabid Jew hater, resorting to the new profanity that is already worn out. Should we call him a neo marxist moron for believing all that the Unions and Corbyn tell him about the Jews ?

 

[Phoenall]

Not only Geography, but basic comprehension, it seems...

Given your choice of maps and posts, we can agree on your talents...or lack thereof.

FWIW, if it were up to me, I'd give America back to it's native population in an instant, but that's a topic for another forum and another time.

Easy to say but, of course, you don't plan on giving anything you own back to the natives nor do you plan on moving back to Northern Europe, amirite? So why do you continue to insist native-born Israelis are "European Colonists"? Is it because you are a ******* liar? A hypocrite? Or, as we just discussed above, you are geography and basic comprehension challenged?

Latest Population Statistics for Israel | Jewish Virtual Library
The Jewish population makes up 6,377,000 (74.8%); 1,771,000 (20.8%) are Arabs; and, those identified as "others" (non-Arab Christians, Baha'i, etc) make up 4.4% of the population (374,000 people). When the state was established, there were only 806,000 residents and the total population reached its first and second millions in 1949 and 1958 respectively. Judging by current population trend data, experts predict that the population of Israel will reach 10 million by 2025 or sooner.....

......In 2014, 75% of the total Jewish population were "Sabras" - born in Israel - compared with just a 35% native-born population at Israel's independence in 1948. 38.6% of the Jewish population are Israeli-born to at least one parent who was also Israeli-born.

It is simple why he says the Jews are European colonists, without that to support his racism he would be facing another long term in prison under English law. If he asked his Lawyer if his words on here were racist he would get a shock and be a little less abrasive in his future posts, and also stop making up words as he does not look clever when another moron uses them

 

[P F Tinmore]

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.

 

[Shusha]

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?

 

[P F Tinmore]

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

 

[Shusha]

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

I'll take a look at your link. But three initial comments:

1. This is an opinion of law, rather than quoting the law which you are using to support your argument.

2. This depends on accepting the concept that Israel is the successor State in ALL of the territory.

3. This depends on no other factors coming into play.

 

[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.)

 

[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