UN Rejects Palestinian Statehood Resolution

Again with the land transfer? That is a Tinmore pre requisite. Where does it say that land needs to be transferred in order to be able to declare independence on it ?
ARTICLE 1

The state as a person of international law should possess the following qualifications: a ) a permanent population; b ) a defined territory; c ) government; and d) capacity to enter into relations with the other states.

The Avalon Project Convention on Rights and Duties of States inter-American December 26 1933

For Israel to be a state, it must have some place for it to be. Israel has no territory. It sits inside Palestine. That is an occupation.

You completely failed at answering my question. YOU are the one that claims Israel has no territory because no land was transferred to it. I asked you where it says that land transfer is a pre requisite for declaring independence.

For Israel to be a state? Is that what you just said ?? :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :cuckoo: :cuckoo:

Israel IS a sovereign state. Who are you to claim otherwise?

I feel stupid just talking about this with you. You have no clue what you're talking about.

BTW, Palestine in INSIDE Israel, not the other way around. Palestine has no borders, Israel does.
Incorrect.

Palestine has borders. Israel does not.

Other way around. Remember, I have valid links showing the treaties between Israel and Egypt and Jordan clearly identifying the international boundaries between Israel and the 2 states, maps from valid links that clearly identify the boundaries. You have nothing except a partition map that shows PROPOSED borders.

So, Palestine has no borders , Israel does.
Interesting premise.

If Germany and Spain sign a treaty saying that they have a mutual border in the middle of France, what does that mean?

Nice deflection, again. You cannot argue with things like this. No matter how hard you try, facts are facts. Israel has internationally recognized borders and 'Palestine' doesn't.

Just because Israel doesn't meet the Tinmore requirements, it doesn't change anything in real life.
 
ARTICLE 1

The state as a person of international law should possess the following qualifications: a ) a permanent population; b ) a defined territory; c ) government; and d) capacity to enter into relations with the other states.

The Avalon Project Convention on Rights and Duties of States inter-American December 26 1933

For Israel to be a state, it must have some place for it to be. Israel has no territory. It sits inside Palestine. That is an occupation.

You completely failed at answering my question. YOU are the one that claims Israel has no territory because no land was transferred to it. I asked you where it says that land transfer is a pre requisite for declaring independence.

For Israel to be a state? Is that what you just said ?? :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :cuckoo: :cuckoo:

Israel IS a sovereign state. Who are you to claim otherwise?

I feel stupid just talking about this with you. You have no clue what you're talking about.

BTW, Palestine in INSIDE Israel, not the other way around. Palestine has no borders, Israel does.
Incorrect.

Palestine has borders. Israel does not.

Other way around. Remember, I have valid links showing the treaties between Israel and Egypt and Jordan clearly identifying the international boundaries between Israel and the 2 states, maps from valid links that clearly identify the boundaries. You have nothing except a partition map that shows PROPOSED borders.

So, Palestine has no borders , Israel does.
Interesting premise.

If Germany and Spain sign a treaty saying that they have a mutual border in the middle of France, what does that mean?

Nice deflection, again. You cannot argue with things like this. No matter how hard you try, facts are facts. Israel has internationally recognized borders and 'Palestine' doesn't.

Just because Israel doesn't meet the Tinmore requirements, it doesn't change anything in real life.
It is not an irrelevant comparison. Israel claims borders on Palestinian land. Just signing a treaty does not make that Israeli land.

The UN says that land is Palestine. Israel must sign a treaty with Palestine to acquire that land.
 
PA did not have a unity government to speak for the palestinian people. The PA was unable and unwilling to reach a negotiated compromise with Israel towards peace. The US did not have to veto, there was not enough support for the draft. it should not have been brought before the UN. It was a calculation by Abbas that failed.
The ICC has 60 days to accept or eject the request of the PA but if they try to but a case against Israel it could back fire and leave the PA and hamas vulnerable for war crimes.
Israel is not a signatory to the ICC and decisions have no weight in Israel. At most it might present a problem for the International travel of certain Israeli officials. The PA could be left without support from Israel or other states and collapse. In an attempt to bring down Israel it could be the down fall of the PA and hamas.
The hope for a state for the palestinians could be brought to an end by the PA and Abbas. Even hamas tried to dissuade the PA from bringing the issue before the UN.
 
...For Israel to be a state, it must have some place for it to be. Israel has no territory. It sits inside Palestine. That is an occupation.

giphy.gif
 
Nice deflection.
Zionism is a European ideology of Jewish nation-alism whose main goal was to colonize Palestine inorder to establish a Jewish state.

Colonialism and Imperialism Zionism EWIC 6 9-15 Smadar Lavie - Academia.edu
--------------------
Zionism as a colonial project was explained by Vladimir Ze’ev Jabotinsky, one of its chief architects, in 1923: “We can talk as much as we want about our good intentions but they understand as well as we what is not good for them. They look upon Palestine with the same instinctive love and true fervor that any Aztec looked upon his Mexico or any Sioux looked upon his prairie...Thus we conclude that we cannot promise anything to the Arabs of the land of Israel or the Arab countries. Their voluntary agreement is out of the question. Zionist colonization even the most restricted, must either be terminated or carried out in defiance of the will of the native population. Thus colonization, can therefore continue and develop only under the protection of a force independent of the local population-an iron wall which the native population cannot break through."

http://www.onepalestine.org/resources/flyers/MythHistory.pdf

The physical occupation of Palestine was carried out by Britain, by force, until 1948 when the occupation was taken over by Israel, by force.

Not even close to being remotely true. Britain never declared independence. Israel did. So there was no occupation passed on. That's the dumbest thing I ever heard.

Show me a current map that shows an occupation beyond the West Bank
So?

Israel declared independence inside Palestine and has never legally acquired the land it sits on.

Ruling territory, by force, that is not yours is occupation.




LoN treaties that state the land is for the Jews, they are International Law
OK, show me where that land was transferred to Israel.



I haver done by means of maps from 1920, 1921 and 1922. These clearly shown that the land was for the RESURECTED NATIONAL HOME OF THE JEWS and no other purpose once the Jews were able to declare independence and show free determination. This they did in 1948 so the land became theirs automatically.

If yiu cant understand how 1920's international law works then you should not be trying to change it.
 
Zionism is a European ideology of Jewish nation-alism whose main goal was to colonize Palestine inorder to establish a Jewish state.

Colonialism and Imperialism Zionism EWIC 6 9-15 Smadar Lavie - Academia.edu
--------------------
Zionism as a colonial project was explained by Vladimir Ze’ev Jabotinsky, one of its chief architects, in 1923: “We can talk as much as we want about our good intentions but they understand as well as we what is not good for them. They look upon Palestine with the same instinctive love and true fervor that any Aztec looked upon his Mexico or any Sioux looked upon his prairie...Thus we conclude that we cannot promise anything to the Arabs of the land of Israel or the Arab countries. Their voluntary agreement is out of the question. Zionist colonization even the most restricted, must either be terminated or carried out in defiance of the will of the native population. Thus colonization, can therefore continue and develop only under the protection of a force independent of the local population-an iron wall which the native population cannot break through."

http://www.onepalestine.org/resources/flyers/MythHistory.pdf

The physical occupation of Palestine was carried out by Britain, by force, until 1948 when the occupation was taken over by Israel, by force.

Not even close to being remotely true. Britain never declared independence. Israel did. So there was no occupation passed on. That's the dumbest thing I ever heard.

Show me a current map that shows an occupation beyond the West Bank
So?

Israel declared independence inside Palestine and has never legally acquired the land it sits on.

Ruling territory, by force, that is not yours is occupation.




LoN treaties that state the land is for the Jews, they are International Law
OK, show me where that land was transferred to Israel.

Again with the land transfer? That is a Tinmore pre requisite. Where does it say that land needs to be transferred in order to be able to declare independence on it ?



Where was the land transfer to Jordan, Syria, Iraq and Saudi ?
 
You completely failed at answering my question. YOU are the one that claims Israel has no territory because no land was transferred to it. I asked you where it says that land transfer is a pre requisite for declaring independence.

For Israel to be a state? Is that what you just said ?? :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :cuckoo: :cuckoo:

Israel IS a sovereign state. Who are you to claim otherwise?

I feel stupid just talking about this with you. You have no clue what you're talking about.

BTW, Palestine in INSIDE Israel, not the other way around. Palestine has no borders, Israel does.
Incorrect.

Palestine has borders. Israel does not.

Other way around. Remember, I have valid links showing the treaties between Israel and Egypt and Jordan clearly identifying the international boundaries between Israel and the 2 states, maps from valid links that clearly identify the boundaries. You have nothing except a partition map that shows PROPOSED borders.

So, Palestine has no borders , Israel does.
Interesting premise.

If Germany and Spain sign a treaty saying that they have a mutual border in the middle of France, what does that mean?

Nice deflection, again. You cannot argue with things like this. No matter how hard you try, facts are facts. Israel has internationally recognized borders and 'Palestine' doesn't.

Just because Israel doesn't meet the Tinmore requirements, it doesn't change anything in real life.
It is not an irrelevant comparison. Israel claims borders on Palestinian land. Just signing a treaty does not make that Israeli land.

The UN says that land is Palestine. Israel must sign a treaty with Palestine to acquire that land.

Again, Israel is not the one that claims those borders. They are internationally recognized borders. Israel did not write the treaty.

"The UN says that land is Palestine" Huh? Where did you get that from ? Link ?? The U.N says that Palestine is the West Bank and Gaza.

"Israel must sign a treaty with Palestine to acquire that land"

Again with this lie. I keep asking you for proof that there must be a land transaction in order for Israel to have that land.

Of course it's Israel's land. It's called Israel, is it not ?

You have nothing but lies, fabrications and Tinmore pre requisites. You cannot make up your own rules to suit your agenda.
 
2
Nice deflection.
Zionism is a European ideology of Jewish nation-alism whose main goal was to colonize Palestine inorder to establish a Jewish state.

Colonialism and Imperialism Zionism EWIC 6 9-15 Smadar Lavie - Academia.edu
--------------------
Zionism as a colonial project was explained by Vladimir Ze’ev Jabotinsky, one of its chief architects, in 1923: “We can talk as much as we want about our good intentions but they understand as well as we what is not good for them. They look upon Palestine with the same instinctive love and true fervor that any Aztec looked upon his Mexico or any Sioux looked upon his prairie...Thus we conclude that we cannot promise anything to the Arabs of the land of Israel or the Arab countries. Their voluntary agreement is out of the question. Zionist colonization even the most restricted, must either be terminated or carried out in defiance of the will of the native population. Thus colonization, can therefore continue and develop only under the protection of a force independent of the local population-an iron wall which the native population cannot break through."

http://www.onepalestine.org/resources/flyers/MythHistory.pdf

The physical occupation of Palestine was carried out by Britain, by force, until 1948 when the occupation was taken over by Israel, by force.

Not even close to being remotely true. Britain never declared independence. Israel did. So there was no occupation passed on. That's the dumbest thing I ever heard.

Show me a current map that shows an occupation beyond the West Bank
So?

Israel declared independence inside Palestine and has never legally acquired the land it sits on.

Ruling territory, by force, that is not yours is occupation.

No it didn't. Israel declared independence on land allotted to it by the partition plan, the SAME WAY the Palestinians declared independence. There was no PAlestinian country, state or anything to occupy. It happened after the mandate ended. Palestine was nothing but a black hole then. acquiring land has nothing to do with declaring independence.
You're trying to argue something that is not up for debate. Sorry Tinmore, but Israel is a sovereign state and even the Palestinian government recognizes it. In order for it to be occupied, it had to have belongs to someone. It didn't. You are just making things up as you go along.
You're wrong, yet again.
No it didn't. Israel declared independence on land allotted to it by the partition plan,...​

Resolution 181 was a plan to give a Jewish state half of Palestine. Resolution 181 was rejected and never implemented. That territory that was allotted for the Jewish state was never transferred.

There was no PAlestinian country, state or anything to occupy. It happened after the mandate ended.​

The mandate was not Palestine. It had no land or borders. It was temporarily assigned to Palestine and it held Palestine in trust. Palestine was still there after it abandoned the trust.




But never in the 2,000 years of being called palestine was it a de facto nation.
Res 181 was in breach of International law and that was why it was never implemented
International law transferred the land once Israel declared independence automatically, which is why the UN added the Israel clause to its mandate.
Palestine was a place on the map it was not a country or nation and the name was used for convenience by the LoN to define the MANDATE FOR PALESTINE, not the country of palestine.
 
I should also add that after the Treaty of Lausanne, the isssue of 'Palestine' was not dealt with, like the other countries that were under Turkish occupation were. Palestine was nothing but a vacuum after the mandate ended. Nothing but an entity of Arab squatters
Can you prove your point?



Where is the nation of palestine, what are its borders under international treaty, who signed those traeties for and on behalf of palestine and when did this happen.

There your proof hisorical fact and international law.
 
Not even close to being remotely true. Britain never declared independence. Israel did. So there was no occupation passed on. That's the dumbest thing I ever heard.

Show me a current map that shows an occupation beyond the West Bank
So?

Israel declared independence inside Palestine and has never legally acquired the land it sits on.

Ruling territory, by force, that is not yours is occupation.




LoN treaties that state the land is for the Jews, they are International Law
OK, show me where that land was transferred to Israel.

Again with the land transfer? That is a Tinmore pre requisite. Where does it say that land needs to be transferred in order to be able to declare independence on it ?
ARTICLE 1

The state as a person of international law should possess the following qualifications: a ) a permanent population; b ) a defined territory; c ) government; and d) capacity to enter into relations with the other states.

The Avalon Project Convention on Rights and Duties of States inter-American December 26 1933

For Israel to be a state, it must have some place for it to be. Israel has no territory. It sits inside Palestine. That is an occupation.



palestine is just the same and has no defined territory. Israel was granted the land under International Law, to be transferred automatically when the declared independence.
 
LoN treaties that state the land is for the Jews, they are International Law
OK, show me where that land was transferred to Israel.

Again with the land transfer? That is a Tinmore pre requisite. Where does it say that land needs to be transferred in order to be able to declare independence on it ?
ARTICLE 1

The state as a person of international law should possess the following qualifications: a ) a permanent population; b ) a defined territory; c ) government; and d) capacity to enter into relations with the other states.

The Avalon Project Convention on Rights and Duties of States inter-American December 26 1933

For Israel to be a state, it must have some place for it to be. Israel has no territory. It sits inside Palestine. That is an occupation.

You completely failed at answering my question. YOU are the one that claims Israel has no territory because no land was transferred to it. I asked you where it says that land transfer is a pre requisite for declaring independence.

For Israel to be a state? Is that what you just said ?? :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :cuckoo: :cuckoo:

Israel IS a sovereign state. Who are you to claim otherwise?

I feel stupid just talking about this with you. You have no clue what you're talking about.

BTW, Palestine in INSIDE Israel, not the other way around. Palestine has no borders, Israel does.
Incorrect.

Palestine has borders. Israel does not.




The MANDATE FOR PALESTINE had borders, the nation of palestine has yet to define theirs.
 
Again with the land transfer? That is a Tinmore pre requisite. Where does it say that land needs to be transferred in order to be able to declare independence on it ?
ARTICLE 1

The state as a person of international law should possess the following qualifications: a ) a permanent population; b ) a defined territory; c ) government; and d) capacity to enter into relations with the other states.

The Avalon Project Convention on Rights and Duties of States inter-American December 26 1933

For Israel to be a state, it must have some place for it to be. Israel has no territory. It sits inside Palestine. That is an occupation.

You completely failed at answering my question. YOU are the one that claims Israel has no territory because no land was transferred to it. I asked you where it says that land transfer is a pre requisite for declaring independence.

For Israel to be a state? Is that what you just said ?? :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :cuckoo: :cuckoo:

Israel IS a sovereign state. Who are you to claim otherwise?

I feel stupid just talking about this with you. You have no clue what you're talking about.

BTW, Palestine in INSIDE Israel, not the other way around. Palestine has no borders, Israel does.
Incorrect.

Palestine has borders. Israel does not.

Other way around. Remember, I have valid links showing the treaties between Israel and Egypt and Jordan clearly identifying the international boundaries between Israel and the 2 states, maps from valid links that clearly identify the boundaries. You have nothing except a partition map that shows PROPOSED borders.

So, Palestine has no borders , Israel does.
Interesting premise.

If Germany and Spain sign a treaty saying that they have a mutual border in the middle of France, what does that mean?




That they have been to war and both have claimed half of France for themselves. It would never stand up in court
 
You completely failed at answering my question. YOU are the one that claims Israel has no territory because no land was transferred to it. I asked you where it says that land transfer is a pre requisite for declaring independence.

For Israel to be a state? Is that what you just said ?? :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :cuckoo: :cuckoo:

Israel IS a sovereign state. Who are you to claim otherwise?

I feel stupid just talking about this with you. You have no clue what you're talking about.

BTW, Palestine in INSIDE Israel, not the other way around. Palestine has no borders, Israel does.
Incorrect.

Palestine has borders. Israel does not.

Other way around. Remember, I have valid links showing the treaties between Israel and Egypt and Jordan clearly identifying the international boundaries between Israel and the 2 states, maps from valid links that clearly identify the boundaries. You have nothing except a partition map that shows PROPOSED borders.

So, Palestine has no borders , Israel does.
Interesting premise.

If Germany and Spain sign a treaty saying that they have a mutual border in the middle of France, what does that mean?

Nice deflection, again. You cannot argue with things like this. No matter how hard you try, facts are facts. Israel has internationally recognized borders and 'Palestine' doesn't.

Just because Israel doesn't meet the Tinmore requirements, it doesn't change anything in real life.
It is not an irrelevant comparison. Israel claims borders on Palestinian land. Just signing a treaty does not make that Israeli land.

The UN says that land is Palestine. Israel must sign a treaty with Palestine to acquire that land.




Then where are the treaties signed by a palestinian representative detailing these alleged border of the nation of palestine. There are borders for the MANDATE FOR PALESTINE that was never a nation and the treaty that set these borders also stated " hereinafter to be shortened to palestine"

Produce the resolution that states that Israel is palestinian land ?
 
Not even close to being remotely true. Britain never declared independence. Israel did. So there was no occupation passed on. That's the dumbest thing I ever heard.

Show me a current map that shows an occupation beyond the West Bank
So?

Israel declared independence inside Palestine and has never legally acquired the land it sits on.

Ruling territory, by force, that is not yours is occupation.




LoN treaties that state the land is for the Jews, they are International Law
OK, show me where that land was transferred to Israel.

Again with the land transfer? That is a Tinmore pre requisite. Where does it say that land needs to be transferred in order to be able to declare independence on it ?



Where was the land transfer to Jordan, Syria, Iraq and Saudi ?
Jordan, Syria, Iraq, and Palestine already had territory defined by post-war treaties. (Saudi Arabia is another story for another day.)

Israel did not.
 
I should also add that after the Treaty of Lausanne, the isssue of 'Palestine' was not dealt with, like the other countries that were under Turkish occupation were. Palestine was nothing but a vacuum after the mandate ended. Nothing but an entity of Arab squatters
Can you prove your point?



Where is the nation of palestine, what are its borders under international treaty, who signed those traeties for and on behalf of palestine and when did this happen.

There your proof hisorical fact and international law.
Nationality constitutes a legal bond that connects individuals with a specific territory, making them citizens of that territory. It is therefore imperative to examine the boundaries of Palestine in order to define the piece of land on which Palestinian nationality was established. Determining borders will also help us identify the new nationalities of the inhabitants in the neighboring countries who were Ottoman citizens as well. Such a determination will thus identify, by exclusion, those who held Palestinian nationality.

The eastern border of Palestine with Trans-Jordan was of particular significance.8 The Palestine Mandate originally incorporated the territory of Trans-Jordan within the scope of ‘Palestine.’ Article 25 of the Mandate accorded Britain the power, “with consent of the Council of the League of Nations, to postpone or withhold application of such provisions of this mandate as… may consider inapplicable to the existing local conditions.” Subsequently, on 16 September 1922, the Council of the League of Nations passed a resolution by which it approved a proposal submitted by Britain to exclude Trans-Jordan from the scope of Palestine’s territory.9 Ultimately, the border between Palestine and Trans-Jordan was fixed as suggested by Britain.10

With regard to the northern border of Palestine, Britain and France (the occupying powers at the time, and later the mandatory powers over Syria and Lebanon respectively) signed an agreement which settled key aspects relating to the Palestinian-Syrian-Lebanese border (Paris, 23 December 1920).20 The British High Commissioner of Palestine and the French High Commissioner of Syria and Lebanon reached, at Jerusalem on 16 December 1923, a complementary agreement on border issues.21 On 2 February 1926, the agreement was replaced by the Bon Voisinage Agreement to Regulate Certain Administrative Matters in Connection with the Frontier between Palestine and Syria [including Lebanon].22

The southwestern border of Palestine with Egypt dates back to the late 19th century. Originally, this border was drawn up on a de facto basis, as the Ottoman Empire recognized Egypt’s autonomy.27 Formally, however, two border agreements between the Ottoman Empire and Egypt were reached in 1906.

The separation of Egypt from Turkey (Palestine, in this instance), as of 5 November 1914, was ultimately recognized by the 1923 Treaty of Lausanne.

Drawing up the framework of nationality, Article 30 of the Treaty of Lausanne stated:
“Turkish subjects habitually resident in territory which in accordance with the provisions of the present Treaty is detached from Turkey will become ipso facto, in the conditions laid down by the local law, nationals of the State to which such territory is transferred.”​

The automatic, ipso facto, change from Ottoman to Palestinian nationality was dealt with in Article 1, paragraph 1, of the Citizenship Order, which declared:
“Turkish subjects habitually resident in the territory of Palestine upon the 1st day of August, 1925, shall become Palestinian citizens.”​

Genesis of Citizenship in Palestine and Israel
 
So?

Israel declared independence inside Palestine and has never legally acquired the land it sits on.

Ruling territory, by force, that is not yours is occupation.




LoN treaties that state the land is for the Jews, they are International Law
OK, show me where that land was transferred to Israel.

Again with the land transfer? That is a Tinmore pre requisite. Where does it say that land needs to be transferred in order to be able to declare independence on it ?



Where was the land transfer to Jordan, Syria, Iraq and Saudi ?
Jordan, Syria, Iraq, and Palestine already had territory defined by post-war treaties. (Saudi Arabia is another story for another day.)

Israel did not.




They did not exist as nations until the various MANDATES helped them become nations. As for Jordan that was brand new until the LoN gave them 78% of palestine. Those post war treaties were exactly the same ones that enshrined the land of Israel in International law, so to deny Israel means you are denying Syria, Iraq, Jordan and Saudi
 
15th post
I should also add that after the Treaty of Lausanne, the isssue of 'Palestine' was not dealt with, like the other countries that were under Turkish occupation were. Palestine was nothing but a vacuum after the mandate ended. Nothing but an entity of Arab squatters
Can you prove your point?



Where is the nation of palestine, what are its borders under international treaty, who signed those traeties for and on behalf of palestine and when did this happen.

There your proof hisorical fact and international law.
Nationality constitutes a legal bond that connects individuals with a specific territory, making them citizens of that territory. It is therefore imperative to examine the boundaries of Palestine in order to define the piece of land on which Palestinian nationality was established. Determining borders will also help us identify the new nationalities of the inhabitants in the neighboring countries who were Ottoman citizens as well. Such a determination will thus identify, by exclusion, those who held Palestinian nationality.

The eastern border of Palestine with Trans-Jordan was of particular significance.8 The Palestine Mandate originally incorporated the territory of Trans-Jordan within the scope of ‘Palestine.’ Article 25 of the Mandate accorded Britain the power, “with consent of the Council of the League of Nations, to postpone or withhold application of such provisions of this mandate as… may consider inapplicable to the existing local conditions.” Subsequently, on 16 September 1922, the Council of the League of Nations passed a resolution by which it approved a proposal submitted by Britain to exclude Trans-Jordan from the scope of Palestine’s territory.9 Ultimately, the border between Palestine and Trans-Jordan was fixed as suggested by Britain.10

With regard to the northern border of Palestine, Britain and France (the occupying powers at the time, and later the mandatory powers over Syria and Lebanon respectively) signed an agreement which settled key aspects relating to the Palestinian-Syrian-Lebanese border (Paris, 23 December 1920).20 The British High Commissioner of Palestine and the French High Commissioner of Syria and Lebanon reached, at Jerusalem on 16 December 1923, a complementary agreement on border issues.21 On 2 February 1926, the agreement was replaced by the Bon Voisinage Agreement to Regulate Certain Administrative Matters in Connection with the Frontier between Palestine and Syria [including Lebanon].22

The southwestern border of Palestine with Egypt dates back to the late 19th century. Originally, this border was drawn up on a de facto basis, as the Ottoman Empire recognized Egypt’s autonomy.27 Formally, however, two border agreements between the Ottoman Empire and Egypt were reached in 1906.

The separation of Egypt from Turkey (Palestine, in this instance), as of 5 November 1914, was ultimately recognized by the 1923 Treaty of Lausanne.

Drawing up the framework of nationality, Article 30 of the Treaty of Lausanne stated:
“Turkish subjects habitually resident in territory which in accordance with the provisions of the present Treaty is detached from Turkey will become ipso facto, in the conditions laid down by the local law, nationals of the State to which such territory is transferred.”​

The automatic, ipso facto, change from Ottoman to Palestinian nationality was dealt with in Article 1, paragraph 1, of the Citizenship Order, which declared:
“Turkish subjects habitually resident in the territory of Palestine upon the 1st day of August, 1925, shall become Palestinian citizens.”​

Genesis of Citizenship in Palestine and Israel




MANDATE FOR PALESTINE which was abbrieveated to palestine to save time, there was no nation of palestine until 1988.
 
...MANDATE FOR PALESTINE which was abbrieveated to palestine to save time, there was no nation of palestine until 1988.
Hell, there's not nation of Palestine NOW, never mind 1988, or (cue the laugh-track) 1948...

Just a rag-tag collection of non-contiguous parcels of land roughly the size of a postage stamp...

Lorded-over by a rag-tag collection of Muslim-Arab militant congenital idiots whose ancestors ran like rabbits in 1948, who use their own children as suicide bombers and proximity-shields for their pissant military assets, and who couldn't fight their way out of a wet paper bag...

In Webster's, under "joke", it says: "See Palestine" and "See Palestinians".
 
So?

Israel declared independence inside Palestine and has never legally acquired the land it sits on.

Ruling territory, by force, that is not yours is occupation.




LoN treaties that state the land is for the Jews, they are International Law
OK, show me where that land was transferred to Israel.

Again with the land transfer? That is a Tinmore pre requisite. Where does it say that land needs to be transferred in order to be able to declare independence on it ?



Where was the land transfer to Jordan, Syria, Iraq and Saudi ?
Jordan, Syria, Iraq, and Palestine already had territory defined by post-war treaties. (Saudi Arabia is another story for another day.)

Israel did not.

What treaty defines Palestine territrory?
 
It is useless debating with Tinmore. He has a pretzel he uses, and that is how he steers his debate.
 
Back
Top Bottom