RoccoR
Gold Member
RE: Who Are The Palestinians? Part 2
SUBTOPIC: Clarifying Misconceptions
※→ P F Tinmore, et al,
BLUF: The Treaty of Lausanne is a good historical document, and a good legal reference; as long as you interpret it correctly.
.
We don't need a separate discussion. This misinterpretation (and in some cases - misinformation) of critical historical documents go directly into the heart of the question: Who Are The Palestinians?
But the Treaty of Lausanne is NOT the central theme it once was a century ago. You may not realize it, but most of the members of the UN are NOT signatories Treaty of Lausanne. And in the immediate regional sector under discussion, none of the Arab League members were signatories to the Treaty when they jumped their borders and entered the fray now called the "Arab-Israeli Conflict."
The 1925 Citizenship Order, once again, applied only to the territory under the British Mandate. It was created by HM Government for British Mandate. Part I of that Order sets the criteria. Read it carefully.
BUT, since the creation of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (CCPR), the perceived inequities and limitations of that British 1925 Order have been largely corrected.
.
.
Your understanding of Section II Nationality • Article 30 • Treaty of Lausanne is off-center. Article 30 essentially says that no matter what the government is called, the habitual residents' pickup that nationality.
This is largely overtaken by Article 12 • CCPR:
Article 12
Article 12(3) puts a big dent in who may have the CCPR to enter.
Excerpt:
You can bet that the various photos and videos accumulated from all those demonstrations → will have the photo-recognition software working overtime to justify exercising this exemption. And believe me when I say, the Israeli Security Services have the technology to capture all those al-Jazeera video clips and the Youtube sources materials (not to mention all those) propaganda press shots of all those Peaceful Arab-Palestinians that tried to overrun the border security barriers or those that sent incendiary devices towards Israeli Civilian Targets.
We will see who can present an effective and compelling presentation.
Most Respectfully,
R
SUBTOPIC: Clarifying Misconceptions
※→ P F Tinmore, et al,
BLUF: The Treaty of Lausanne is a good historical document, and a good legal reference; as long as you interpret it correctly.
(COMMENT)If you disagree with any of these issues, pull it out for discussion.
.
We don't need a separate discussion. This misinterpretation (and in some cases - misinformation) of critical historical documents go directly into the heart of the question: Who Are The Palestinians?
But the Treaty of Lausanne is NOT the central theme it once was a century ago. You may not realize it, but most of the members of the UN are NOT signatories Treaty of Lausanne. And in the immediate regional sector under discussion, none of the Arab League members were signatories to the Treaty when they jumped their borders and entered the fray now called the "Arab-Israeli Conflict."
The 1925 Citizenship Order, once again, applied only to the territory under the British Mandate. It was created by HM Government for British Mandate. Part I of that Order sets the criteria. Read it carefully.
BUT, since the creation of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (CCPR), the perceived inequities and limitations of that British 1925 Order have been largely corrected.
.
(COMMENT)The territory was transferred to Palestine and the inhabitants whold be nationals of their new state. (Article 30 of the Treaty of Lausanne.) This was followed up by the Palestine Citizenship Order of 1925 that gave Palestinian citizenship to the former Ottoman subjects living on that land.
.
Your understanding of Section II Nationality • Article 30 • Treaty of Lausanne is off-center. Article 30 essentially says that no matter what the government is called, the habitual residents' pickup that nationality.
This is largely overtaken by Article 12 • CCPR:
Article 12
1. Everyone lawfully within the territory of a State shall, within that territory, have the right to liberty of movement and freedom to choose his residence.
2. Everyone shall be free to leave any country, including his own.
3. The above-mentioned rights shall not be subject to any restrictions except those which are provided by law, are necessary to protect national security, public order (ordre public), public health or morals or the rights and freedoms of others, and are consistent with the other rights recognized in the present Covenant.
4. No one shall be arbitrarily deprived of the right to enter his own country.
Article 12(3) puts a big dent in who may have the CCPR to enter.
Excerpt:
"shall not be subject to any restrictions except those which are provided by law, are necessary to protect national security, public order (ordre public), public health or morals or the rights and freedoms of others,"
You can bet that the various photos and videos accumulated from all those demonstrations → will have the photo-recognition software working overtime to justify exercising this exemption. And believe me when I say, the Israeli Security Services have the technology to capture all those al-Jazeera video clips and the Youtube sources materials (not to mention all those) propaganda press shots of all those Peaceful Arab-Palestinians that tried to overrun the border security barriers or those that sent incendiary devices towards Israeli Civilian Targets.
We will see who can present an effective and compelling presentation.
Most Respectfully,
R
Last edited: