Who Are The Palestinians? Part 2

[P F Tinmore]

Who Are The Palestinians? Part 2
※→ P F Tinmore, et al,

Let's see if I both in one shot; and not an evasive "yes."

The Hostile Arab Palestinians (HoAP) attempt to camouflage and conceal the injustice and moral deviance of their continued struggle outside the boundaries to the Principles of International Law concerning Friendly Relations and Co-operation among States; as well as the Disputed resolution process.

Such as?

The HoAP also believe that they have the right to take by force that territory (in fact any territory) they have determined is theirs.

Only that inside their international borders.

(COMMENT)

The current voice that claims to speak for the Arab Palestinians is:

Logo is link → SoP/PLO-NAD

• Historic Palestine (pre-1948) encompasses all of Israel, the Gaza Strip, the West Bank and Jerusalem. In 1922, historic Palestine was placed under a British Mandate by the League of Nations.
• In 1947, the United Nations General Assembly recommended the partitioning of Palestine, against the wishes of the majority of our inhabitants. The Partition Plan allocated 55 percent of Palestine to a Jewish state. At the time, the Jewish population living in Palestine represented only one third of the total population and owned less than seven percent of the land.

(COMMENT)

In every piece of good propaganda, there are splinters of truth framed in a misdirection.

√ Carefully worded, it the first bullet says the pre-1948 territory was "encompasses all of Israel, the Gaza Strip, the West Bank and Jerusalem" (TRUE as far as it goes.) But then next it says "In 1922, historic Palestine was placed under a British Mandate by the League of Nations." (Close enough to the TRUTH) But is misleading to think that the Mandate consisted only of "Israel, the Gaza Strip, the West Bank and Jerusalem." This little misdirection becomes important when the discussion shits to percentages. But in point of fact Trans-Jordan was included into the Mandate.

His Britannic Majesty is the Mandatory for Transjordan to which the terms of the mandate for Palestine, with the exception of the provisions dealing with the establishment of a national home for the Jewish people, are applicable. (SOURCE: REPORT BY HIS BRITANNIC MAJESTY'S GOVERNMENT ON THE ADMINISTRATION UNDER MANDATE OF PALESTINE 1924)

• During the June 1967 war, Israel militarily occupied the remaining 22 percent of historic Palestine, comprising the West Bank, including East Jerusalem, No Man’s Land, and the Gaza Strip. Only two weeks after the war’s end, Israel unilaterally annexed East Jerusalem, applying Israeli law to the Palestinian half of the city. Within one month, Israel began building illegal settlements in the occupied State of Palestine, in direct violation of international law. The international community immediately rejected Israel’s illegal annexation of the occupied Palestinian territory and continues to do so today. Up to 2014, Israel has illegally transferred more than 600,000 settlers into the occupied State of Palestine. More than 200,000 settler of those are residing illegally in East Jerusalem.

(COMMENT)

Let's get the percentages understood here.

• Before the 1948 Independence of Israel:

≈ 77% Of the Mandate was allocated to be an Arab autonomous government of Trans-Jordan
≈ 23% The remainder of the territory yet to be allocated.​

• After the 1948 War of Independence for Israel:

≈ 12.6% of the original Mandate Territory was apportioned and claimed independent by Israel.
≈ 10.4% of the original Mandate Territory remained unallocate/unapportioned. This unallocate portion of the original Mandate included the West Bank, the Gaza Strip, and East Jerusalem.​

• Since 2002, Israel has been constructing its Wall in the occupied State of Palestine, grabbing more Palestinian land in an attempt to unilaterally set its borders. Israel has de-facto annexed land that falls between the 1967 border and the Wall by severely restricting Palestinian access to these areas while at the same time facilitating Israeli access to them. In October 2003, Israel declared as “closed zones” all of the land that falls between the 1967 border and the Wall in the northern West Bank, requiring that Palestinian obtain hard-to-come-by Israeli permits to continue to live on, or otherwise access, their land in these areas.

(COMMENT)

√ "Wall in the occupied State of Palestine, grabbing more Palestinian land in an attempt to unilaterally set its borders."

⇒ The construct of the Security Barrier that would run near the “Green Line” between Israel and the West Bank was an attempt to prevent Hostile Arab Palestinians (HoAP) from infiltrating Israel and conducting terrorist operations intentionally directed against Israeli citizens.
⇒ Any sovereign state (including Israel) has - not simply the right to protect itself, but a duty to protect its citizens from harm.
⇒ Any sovereign state (including Israel) has a right to control its borders. It is not a matter of allowing (or not allowing) Arab Palestinians access to traverse the border (in either direction). It is a matter of controlling the border to minimize the threat posed by HoAP.
⇒ The "Green Line" was not a 1967 Border between Israel and the State of Palestine. It was an Armistice Line between the forces of Israel and Jordan. While many people make reference to the former Armistice Line as a 1967 Border, that Armistice Line became meaningless in 1967 when Jordanian Forces were routed back across the Jordan River. The Armistice Line, pursuant to Article XII(2) of the General Armistice Agreement, dissolved when: "a peaceful settlement between the Parties is achieved" which occurred with the Treaty of Peace Between The Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan And The State of Israel October 26, 1994. The treaty established the "International Boundary" between Jordan and Israel in Article 3 (and Annex I).
⇒ The West Bank and Jerusalem were abandoned into the hands of Israel (terra nullius) in August 1988, after Jordan cut all ties with the West Bank.
​

(IF -THEN STATEMENT)
√ Now the PLO-NAD contends: "The 1967 border, which is defined as the 1949 Armistice Line along with all legal modification thereto up to June 4th 1967, is the internationally-recognized border between Israel and the occupied State of Palestine."

⇒ IF that is true, THEN there is no border since the Armistice Agreement says n Article XII:

2. This Agreement, having been negotiated and concluded in pursuance of the resolution of the Security Council of 16 November 1948 calling for the establishment of an armistice in order to eliminate the threat to the peace in Palestine and to facilitate the transition from the present truce to permanent peace in Palestine, shall remain in force until a peaceful settlement between the Parties is achieved except as provided in paragraph 3 of this article.
​

√ Now the PLO-NAD contends: "A basic principle of international law is that no state may acquire territory by force. Israel has no valid claim to any part of the territory it occupied in 1967."
⇒ I know that many of you heard this, over and over again. That is not what the basic prohibition says:

Emphasizing: the inadmissibility of the acquisition of territory by war and the need to work for a just and lasting peace in which every State in the area can live in security,

• UN Charter (1945) Article 2: Paragraph 3: “All Members shall settle their international disputes by peaceful means in such a manner that peace and security, and justice are not endangered.”
• UN Charter (1945) Article 2: Paragraph 4: “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.”
• Declaration on Principles of International Law concerning Friendly Relations and Co-operation among States in accordance with the Charter of the United Nations (1970) Principle 1: “Every State has the duty to refrain in its 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. Such a threat or use of force constitutes a violation of international law and the Charter of the United Nations and shall never be employed as a means of settling international issues.“

Israel did not acquire any territory by force from the Arab Palestinian. Israel took effective control over the territory from the Jordanians. In 1988, Israel maintained control after Jordan abandoned the West Bank.

Most Respectfully,
R

"A basic principle of international law is that no state may acquire territory by force.

That is how Israel acquired all of its territory in 1948.

 

[Sixties Fan]

Channel 20 also reported that representatives of the Jewish community in Hevron's Tel Rumeida neighborhood, the number of attacks by Arabs against Jews is increasing. The main person responsible for the incitement to violence is Fatah member Tayssir Abu Sneinah, the newly-elected mayor of Hevron.

Abu Sneinah is a convicted terrorist who murdered 6 people in a 1980 terror attack. and was handed a life sentence. He was freed in the prisoner swaps of the 1980s.

(full article online)

'They threw a rock at your head'

 

[rylah]

• attacks upon a person's life which may cause death;
• attacks upon the physical integrity of a person;
• kidnapping or hostage taking and murder;
• causing extensive destruction to a Government or public facility, a transport system, an infrastructure facility;
• seizure of aircraft, ships or other means of public or goods transport;
• manufacture, possession, acquisition, transport, supply or use of weapons and explosives;
• participating in the activities, including by supplying information or material resources, or by funding its activities in any way, with knowledge of the fact that such participation will contribute to the criminal activities of the group.

Yes, some still trivialize the actions of these groups, saying that the Israelis have done much worse.

This defines Israel in spades. Then Israel plays a deck of terrorist cards on every piddly little thing the Palestinians do.

And, you have to remember that Israel's settler colonial project was the initial aggression in this conflict. None of this would have happened without that.

False, it's a lie You keep parroting.

Arab aggression, pogroms and ethnic cleansing against Palestinian Jews occurred long before any Zionist ever settles in the land.

Q. How can there be any serious and sincere debate, when such things are totally ignored by the pro-Arab side?

 

[P F Tinmore]

• attacks upon a person's life which may cause death;
• attacks upon the physical integrity of a person;
• kidnapping or hostage taking and murder;
• causing extensive destruction to a Government or public facility, a transport system, an infrastructure facility;
• seizure of aircraft, ships or other means of public or goods transport;
• manufacture, possession, acquisition, transport, supply or use of weapons and explosives;
• participating in the activities, including by supplying information or material resources, or by funding its activities in any way, with knowledge of the fact that such participation will contribute to the criminal activities of the group.

Yes, some still trivialize the actions of these groups, saying that the Israelis have done much worse.

This defines Israel in spades. Then Israel plays a deck of terrorist cards on every piddly little thing the Palestinians do.

And, you have to remember that Israel's settler colonial project was the initial aggression in this conflict. None of this would have happened without that.

False, it's a lie You keep parroting.

Arab aggression, pogroms and ethnic cleansing against Palestinian Jews occurred long before any Zionist ever settles in the land.

Q. How can there be any serious and sincere debate, when such things are totally ignored by the pro-Arab side?

There were a few incidents posted, many years apart with no context given.

 

[rylah]

Raneem Nabulsi

Palestinians who are "natives":

Bushnak (Arabic: بشناق‎‎, meaning "Bosnian" or "Bosniak", also transliterated Bushnaq, Boshnak and Bouchnak) is a surname common among Palestinians who are of Bosnian origin.[1][2][3] Those sharing this surname are the descendants of Bosnian Muslims apprehensive of living under Christian rule after the Austro-Hungarian occupation of Bosnia and Herzegovina in 1878, who emigrated to Palestine within the Ottoman empire.

Some Bosnian movement to Palestine occurred when Bosnian Muslim soldiers were brought to Palestine in the late 1800s to provide reinforcements for the Ottoman army.[1][3]

More substantial movement occurred after 1878, when the Austro-Hungarian empire, ruled by the House of Habsburg, occupied Bosnia. Bosnian Muslim emigration continued through this period, escalating after the Austro-Hungarian's 1908 annexation of Bosnia.....

Bushnak - Wikipedia

 

[Sixties Fan]

• attacks upon a person's life which may cause death;
• attacks upon the physical integrity of a person;
• kidnapping or hostage taking and murder;
• causing extensive destruction to a Government or public facility, a transport system, an infrastructure facility;
• seizure of aircraft, ships or other means of public or goods transport;
• manufacture, possession, acquisition, transport, supply or use of weapons and explosives;
• participating in the activities, including by supplying information or material resources, or by funding its activities in any way, with knowledge of the fact that such participation will contribute to the criminal activities of the group.

Yes, some still trivialize the actions of these groups, saying that the Israelis have done much worse.

This defines Israel in spades. Then Israel plays a deck of terrorist cards on every piddly little thing the Palestinians do.

And, you have to remember that Israel's settler colonial project was the initial aggression in this conflict. None of this would have happened without that.

False, it's a lie You keep parroting.

Arab aggression, pogroms and ethnic cleansing against Palestinian Jews occurred long before any Zionist ever settles in the land.

Q. How can there be any serious and sincere debate, when such things are totally ignored by the pro-Arab side?

Here is a perfect article explaining the haters of Jews' mindset:

Rising to the Bait (Divest This!) ~ Elder Of Ziyon - Israel News

 

[rylah]

• attacks upon a person's life which may cause death;
• attacks upon the physical integrity of a person;
• kidnapping or hostage taking and murder;
• causing extensive destruction to a Government or public facility, a transport system, an infrastructure facility;
• seizure of aircraft, ships or other means of public or goods transport;
• manufacture, possession, acquisition, transport, supply or use of weapons and explosives;
• participating in the activities, including by supplying information or material resources, or by funding its activities in any way, with knowledge of the fact that such participation will contribute to the criminal activities of the group.

Yes, some still trivialize the actions of these groups, saying that the Israelis have done much worse.

This defines Israel in spades. Then Israel plays a deck of terrorist cards on every piddly little thing the Palestinians do.

And, you have to remember that Israel's settler colonial project was the initial aggression in this conflict. None of this would have happened without that.

False, it's a lie You keep parroting.

Arab aggression, pogroms and ethnic cleansing against Palestinian Jews occurred long before any Zionist ever settles in the land.

Q. How can there be any serious and sincere debate, when such things are totally ignored by the pro-Arab side?

There were a few incidents posted, many years apart with no context given.

There were given at least 6-7 Arab pogroms against Jews in Syria-Palestine prior to Zionism.
There were only some thousands of Jew to massacre...

They spared some Jews at a time, to enjoy some later.
These are Palestinian Arabs.

Q. Which of the Arab pogroms do You want to discuss 1st?
Safed, Tiberias, Jerusalem, Hebron, Damascus?

 

[Sixties Fan]

(full article online)

Netanyahu compared to Hitler by PA TV hosts - PMW Bulletins

 

[rylah]

• attacks upon a person's life which may cause death;
• attacks upon the physical integrity of a person;
• kidnapping or hostage taking and murder;
• causing extensive destruction to a Government or public facility, a transport system, an infrastructure facility;
• seizure of aircraft, ships or other means of public or goods transport;
• manufacture, possession, acquisition, transport, supply or use of weapons and explosives;
• participating in the activities, including by supplying information or material resources, or by funding its activities in any way, with knowledge of the fact that such participation will contribute to the criminal activities of the group.

Yes, some still trivialize the actions of these groups, saying that the Israelis have done much worse.

This defines Israel in spades. Then Israel plays a deck of terrorist cards on every piddly little thing the Palestinians do.

And, you have to remember that Israel's settler colonial project was the initial aggression in this conflict. None of this would have happened without that.

False, it's a lie You keep parroting.

Arab aggression, pogroms and ethnic cleansing against Palestinian Jews occurred long before any Zionist ever settles in the land.

Q. How can there be any serious and sincere debate, when such things are totally ignored by the pro-Arab side?

There were a few incidents posted, many years apart with no context given.

If You want context , look at what happened in close districts when the new Ottoman reforms imposed equality between Muslims, Jews and Christians, in taxation and status.
Look exclusively at the Arab response towards Jews and Christians.

 

[Sixties Fan]

• attacks upon a person's life which may cause death;
• attacks upon the physical integrity of a person;
• kidnapping or hostage taking and murder;
• causing extensive destruction to a Government or public facility, a transport system, an infrastructure facility;
• seizure of aircraft, ships or other means of public or goods transport;
• manufacture, possession, acquisition, transport, supply or use of weapons and explosives;
• participating in the activities, including by supplying information or material resources, or by funding its activities in any way, with knowledge of the fact that such participation will contribute to the criminal activities of the group.

Yes, some still trivialize the actions of these groups, saying that the Israelis have done much worse.

This defines Israel in spades. Then Israel plays a deck of terrorist cards on every piddly little thing the Palestinians do.

And, you have to remember that Israel's settler colonial project was the initial aggression in this conflict. None of this would have happened without that.

False, it's a lie You keep parroting.

Arab aggression, pogroms and ethnic cleansing against Palestinian Jews occurred long before any Zionist ever settles in the land.

Q. How can there be any serious and sincere debate, when such things are totally ignored by the pro-Arab side?

There were a few incidents posted, many years apart with no context given.

Professor Tinmore.
PHD and Masters in - Denializm

 

[Sixties Fan]

[ Muslims supporting Muslims against Jewish Sovereignty ]

Deputy Hamas Chief: Iran to continue support for 'resistance'

 

[Sixties Fan]

The following are some of the main points of the document. This analysis is based on Hamas' own English translation:

• Hamas’ affiliation with the Muslim Brotherhood has been omitted, but the document is still Islamic religious in nature. It mentions Allah several times and although there is no reference in the document to “the Land of Palestine” as an Islamic Waqf (i.e., an inalienable religious endowment in Islamic law), as in the Hamas’ charter, the new document opens by stating that “Palestine is a land whose status has been elevated by Islam…” It goes on to say that Hamas’ “frame of reference is Islam, which determines its principles, objectives and means,” and that “Palestine is an Arab Islamic land… a blessed sacred land…” The document further dedicates two whole paragraphs in praise of Islam, stating among other things that “Hamas believes that the message of Islam upholds the values of truth, justice, freedom and dignity…”

• Hamas still does not recognize Israel’s right to exist and describes “Palestine” as reaching “from the Jordan River to the Mediterranean Sea,” while “the establishment of ‘Israel’ is entirely illegal.” The document emphasizes that "there is no compromise on any part of Palestine under any conditions,” and that “no part of the land of Palestine shall be compromised or conceded.”

• The document mentions a Palestinian state on the 1967 borders only as “a national, agreed-upon, and joint formula” and emphasizes that “Hamas rejects any alternative to the full and complete liberation of Palestine.”

(full article online)

Hamas Document of Principles and General Policies (2017) - Official Palestinian charters | PMW

 

[Sixties Fan]

[ Oh, look. The Palestinian Arabs do recognize that they are a part of the ARAB NATION and their struggle is not just against Israel and Jews. Colonialism and Imperialism = Europe. But it should also mean the Colonial and Empirial advances of the Muslim Empire. They have had such a good one for 1400 years. No end in sight. Who will end that colonialism on the Muslim side? ]

The Movement's Essential Principles
Article (1) Palestine is part of the Arab World, and the Palestinian people are part of the Arab Nation, and their struggle is part of its struggle.
Article (2) The Palestinian people have an independent identity. They are the sole authority that decides their own destiny, and they have complete sovereignty on all their lands.
Article (3) The Palestinian Revolution plays a leading role in liberating Palestine.
Article (4) The Palestinian struggle is part and parcel of the world-wide struggle against Zionism, colonialism and international imperialism.
Article (5) Liberating Palestine is a national obligation which necessities the materialistic and human support of the Arab Nation.
Article (6) UN projects, accords and resolutions, or those of any individual which undermine the Palestinian people's right in their homeland are illegal and rejected.
---------
-------------
Article (12) Complete liberation of Palestine, and eradication of Zionist economic, political, military and cultural existence.
Article (13) Establishing an independent democratic state with complete sovereignty on all Palestinian lands, and Jerusalem is its capital city, and protecting the citizens' legal and equal rights without any racial or religious discrimination.
Article (14) Setting up a progressive society that warrants people's rights and their public freedom.
Article (15) Active participation in achieving the Arab Nation's goals in liberation and building an independent, progressive and united Arab society.
Article (16) Backing up all oppressed people in their struggle for liberation and self-determination in order to build a just, international peace.
Method
Article (17) Armed public revolution is the inevitable method to liberating Palestine.
Article (18) Entire dependence on the Palestinian people which is the pedestal forefront and on the Arab Nation as a partner in the fight, and realising actual interaction between the Arab Nation and the Palestinian people by involving the Arab people in the fight through a united Arab front.
Article (19) Armed struggle is a strategy and not a tactic, and the Palestinian Arab People's armed revolution is a decisive factor in the liberation fight and in uprooting the Zionist existence, and this struggle will not cease unless the Zionist state is demolished and Palestine is completely liberated.

(full article online)

Fatah Charter - Official Palestinian charters | PMW

 

[RoccoR]

RE: Who Are The Palestinians? Part 2
※→ P F Tinmore, et al,

I would like to clarify some points

"A basic principle of international law is that no state may acquire territory by force.

√ Now the PLO-NAD contends: "A basic principle of international law is that no state may acquire territory by force. Israel has no valid claim to any part of the territory it occupied in 1967." ※→ SoP/PLO-NAD was the source

That is how Israel acquired all of its territory in 1948.

What I said:

• UN Charter (1945) Article 2: Paragraph 3: “All Members shall settle their international disputes by peaceful means in such a manner that peace and security, and justice are not endangered.”
• UN Charter (1945) Article 2: Paragraph 4: “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.”
• Declaration on Principles of International Law concerning Friendly Relations and Co-operation among States in accordance with the Charter of the United Nations (1970) Principle 1: “Every State has the duty to refrain in its 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. Such a threat or use of force constitutes a violation of international law and the Charter of the United Nations and shall never be employed as a means of settling international issues.“

(COMMENT)
You will notice that it does not prohibit the occupation of defensive positions acquire under Article 51. You are quoting, as do a number of people, an "emphasis line" from UNSC Resolution 242: "inadmissibility of the acquisition of territory by war." Again, that is an emphasis line, not law; not even the historical practice of the ways things have been done.

Israel did not acquire any territory by force from the Arab Palestinian. Israel took effective control over the territory from the Jordanians. In 1988, Israel maintained control after Jordan abandoned the West Bank.

The West Bank is Palestinian territory that was occupied by Jordan from 1949 to 1967.

Now, how Jordan end up occupying Palestinian land when they were not at war has always been a mystery to me.

(COMMENT)

At the time of the Armistice (1949), Jordan - the Arab Power over the region, encompassed that area we call the West Bank. It was s stipulated in the Armistice.

Jordan only occupied the territory for a very short time. The Jordanian Parliament, Arabs all, equal numbers of as far as Palestinian representation was concerned, --- unanimously voted to Annex the West Bank. It does not matter what the Arab League say, or what the UN says; recognition by other countries is not required, and a lack of recognition did NOT trump Self-Determination. The Arab Palestinians do what they want to do. After April 1950, the West Bank was Sovereign Jordanian Territory. AND, the Arab Palestinians cannot come back a half century latter and call a "do over" just because they don't like the outcome and cannot take responsibility for the consequences of their actions.

Anyway, that is how, in 1967, the IDF --- while in pursuit of Jordanian Forces took effective control of the West Bank --- which was Sovereign Jordanian territory. It was not Palestinian territory; any more than the Crimea is Ukrainian territory. It is the way things are done, and have been done for hundreds of years.

Most Respectfully,
R

 

[P F Tinmore]

RE: Who Are The Palestinians? Part 2
※→ P F Tinmore, et al,

I would like to clarify some points

"A basic principle of international law is that no state may acquire territory by force.

√ Now the PLO-NAD contends: "A basic principle of international law is that no state may acquire territory by force. Israel has no valid claim to any part of the territory it occupied in 1967." ※→ SoP/PLO-NAD was the source

That is how Israel acquired all of its territory in 1948.

What I said:

• UN Charter (1945) Article 2: Paragraph 3: “All Members shall settle their international disputes by peaceful means in such a manner that peace and security, and justice are not endangered.”
• UN Charter (1945) Article 2: Paragraph 4: “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.”
• Declaration on Principles of International Law concerning Friendly Relations and Co-operation among States in accordance with the Charter of the United Nations (1970) Principle 1: “Every State has the duty to refrain in its 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. Such a threat or use of force constitutes a violation of international law and the Charter of the United Nations and shall never be employed as a means of settling international issues.“

(COMMENT)
You will notice that it does not prohibit the occupation of defensive positions acquire under Article 51. You are quoting, as do a number of people, an "emphasis line" from UNSC Resolution 242: "inadmissibility of the acquisition of territory by war." Again, that is an emphasis line, not law; not even the historical practice of the ways things have been done.

Israel did not acquire any territory by force from the Arab Palestinian. Israel took effective control over the territory from the Jordanians. In 1988, Israel maintained control after Jordan abandoned the West Bank.

The West Bank is Palestinian territory that was occupied by Jordan from 1949 to 1967.

Now, how Jordan end up occupying Palestinian land when they were not at war has always been a mystery to me.

(COMMENT)

At the time of the Armistice (1949), Jordan - the Arab Power over the region, encompassed that area we call the West Bank. It was s stipulated in the Armistice.

Jordan only occupied the territory for a very short time. The Jordanian Parliament, Arabs all, equal numbers of as far as Palestinian representation was concerned, --- unanimously voted to Annex the West Bank. It does not matter what the Arab League say, or what the UN says; recognition by other countries is not required, and a lack of recognition did NOT trump Self-Determination. The Arab Palestinians do what they want to do. After April 1950, the West Bank was Sovereign Jordanian Territory. AND, the Arab Palestinians cannot come back a half century latter and call a "do over" just because they don't like the outcome and cannot take responsibility for the consequences of their actions.

Anyway, that is how, in 1967, the IDF --- while in pursuit of Jordanian Forces took effective control of the West Bank --- which was Sovereign Jordanian territory. It was not Palestinian territory; any more than the Crimea is Ukrainian territory. It is the way things are done, and have been done for hundreds of years.

Most Respectfully,
R

I don't agree with your assessment. Apparently the rest of the world did not agree at that time either. Were the Palestinians asked if they wanted to cede any land to Jordan?

 

[Sixties Fan]

RE: Who Are The Palestinians? Part 2
※→ P F Tinmore, et al,

I would like to clarify some points

"A basic principle of international law is that no state may acquire territory by force.

√ Now the PLO-NAD contends: "A basic principle of international law is that no state may acquire territory by force. Israel has no valid claim to any part of the territory it occupied in 1967." ※→ SoP/PLO-NAD was the source

That is how Israel acquired all of its territory in 1948.

What I said:

• UN Charter (1945) Article 2: Paragraph 3: “All Members shall settle their international disputes by peaceful means in such a manner that peace and security, and justice are not endangered.”
• UN Charter (1945) Article 2: Paragraph 4: “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.”
• Declaration on Principles of International Law concerning Friendly Relations and Co-operation among States in accordance with the Charter of the United Nations (1970) Principle 1: “Every State has the duty to refrain in its 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. Such a threat or use of force constitutes a violation of international law and the Charter of the United Nations and shall never be employed as a means of settling international issues.“

(COMMENT)
You will notice that it does not prohibit the occupation of defensive positions acquire under Article 51. You are quoting, as do a number of people, an "emphasis line" from UNSC Resolution 242: "inadmissibility of the acquisition of territory by war." Again, that is an emphasis line, not law; not even the historical practice of the ways things have been done.

Israel did not acquire any territory by force from the Arab Palestinian. Israel took effective control over the territory from the Jordanians. In 1988, Israel maintained control after Jordan abandoned the West Bank.

The West Bank is Palestinian territory that was occupied by Jordan from 1949 to 1967.

Now, how Jordan end up occupying Palestinian land when they were not at war has always been a mystery to me.

(COMMENT)

At the time of the Armistice (1949), Jordan - the Arab Power over the region, encompassed that area we call the West Bank. It was s stipulated in the Armistice.

Jordan only occupied the territory for a very short time. The Jordanian Parliament, Arabs all, equal numbers of as far as Palestinian representation was concerned, --- unanimously voted to Annex the West Bank. It does not matter what the Arab League say, or what the UN says; recognition by other countries is not required, and a lack of recognition did NOT trump Self-Determination. The Arab Palestinians do what they want to do. After April 1950, the West Bank was Sovereign Jordanian Territory. AND, the Arab Palestinians cannot come back a half century latter and call a "do over" just because they don't like the outcome and cannot take responsibility for the consequences of their actions.

Anyway, that is how, in 1967, the IDF --- while in pursuit of Jordanian Forces took effective control of the West Bank --- which was Sovereign Jordanian territory. It was not Palestinian territory; any more than the Crimea is Ukrainian territory. It is the way things are done, and have been done for hundreds of years.

Most Respectfully,
R

I don't agree with your assessment. Apparently the rest of the world did not agree at that time either. Were the Palestinians asked if they wanted to cede any land to Jordan?

Have you found any document or article about the Arab Palestinians going against the decision in 1922 to give TransJordan to the Hashemites (not Jordan until 1950) ?

Have you found any document or article by the Palestinian Arabs going against the Hashemites deciding to annex Judea, Samaria and the Jewish Quarter of Jerusalem to what was now Jordan?

What part of the world think between 1920 and 1948, that the Land of Israel was Palestinian Land?
Which countries, and what were their reasons for thinking that way?

 

[Sixties Fan]

• Iran's goal in this move? For Hamas to maintain and enhance its preparation for war against Israel.
  
  
• Iran's message to Hamas: If you want us to continue providing you with financial and military aid, you must continue to hold on to your weapons and reject demands to disarm.
  
  
• Iran wants Hamas to retain its security control over the Gaza Strip so that the Iranians can hold onto another power base in the Middle East, as it does with Hezbollah in Lebanon.
  
  (full article online)
  
  The Iran-Hamas Plan to Destroy Israel

 

[P F Tinmore]

RE: Who Are The Palestinians? Part 2
※→ P F Tinmore, et al,

I would like to clarify some points

"A basic principle of international law is that no state may acquire territory by force.

√ Now the PLO-NAD contends: "A basic principle of international law is that no state may acquire territory by force. Israel has no valid claim to any part of the territory it occupied in 1967." ※→ SoP/PLO-NAD was the source

That is how Israel acquired all of its territory in 1948.

What I said:

• UN Charter (1945) Article 2: Paragraph 3: “All Members shall settle their international disputes by peaceful means in such a manner that peace and security, and justice are not endangered.”
• UN Charter (1945) Article 2: Paragraph 4: “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.”
• Declaration on Principles of International Law concerning Friendly Relations and Co-operation among States in accordance with the Charter of the United Nations (1970) Principle 1: “Every State has the duty to refrain in its 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. Such a threat or use of force constitutes a violation of international law and the Charter of the United Nations and shall never be employed as a means of settling international issues.“

(COMMENT)
You will notice that it does not prohibit the occupation of defensive positions acquire under Article 51. You are quoting, as do a number of people, an "emphasis line" from UNSC Resolution 242: "inadmissibility of the acquisition of territory by war." Again, that is an emphasis line, not law; not even the historical practice of the ways things have been done.

Israel did not acquire any territory by force from the Arab Palestinian. Israel took effective control over the territory from the Jordanians. In 1988, Israel maintained control after Jordan abandoned the West Bank.

The West Bank is Palestinian territory that was occupied by Jordan from 1949 to 1967.

Now, how Jordan end up occupying Palestinian land when they were not at war has always been a mystery to me.

(COMMENT)

At the time of the Armistice (1949), Jordan - the Arab Power over the region, encompassed that area we call the West Bank. It was s stipulated in the Armistice.

Jordan only occupied the territory for a very short time. The Jordanian Parliament, Arabs all, equal numbers of as far as Palestinian representation was concerned, --- unanimously voted to Annex the West Bank. It does not matter what the Arab League say, or what the UN says; recognition by other countries is not required, and a lack of recognition did NOT trump Self-Determination. The Arab Palestinians do what they want to do. After April 1950, the West Bank was Sovereign Jordanian Territory. AND, the Arab Palestinians cannot come back a half century latter and call a "do over" just because they don't like the outcome and cannot take responsibility for the consequences of their actions.

Anyway, that is how, in 1967, the IDF --- while in pursuit of Jordanian Forces took effective control of the West Bank --- which was Sovereign Jordanian territory. It was not Palestinian territory; any more than the Crimea is Ukrainian territory. It is the way things are done, and have been done for hundreds of years.

Most Respectfully,
R

I don't agree with your assessment. Apparently the rest of the world did not agree at that time either. Were the Palestinians asked if they wanted to cede any land to Jordan?

Have you found any document or article about the Arab Palestinians going against the decision in 1922 to give TransJordan to the Hashemites (not Jordan until 1950) ?

Have you found any document or article by the Palestinian Arabs going against the Hashemites deciding to annex Judea, Samaria and the Jewish Quarter of Jerusalem to what was now Jordan?

What part of the world think between 1920 and 1948, that the Land of Israel was Palestinian Land?
Which countries, and what were their reasons for thinking that way?

Only Britain and Pakistan recognized Jordan's annexation.

 

[P F Tinmore]

 

[Shusha]

I don't agree with your assessment. Apparently the rest of the world did not agree at that time either. Were the Palestinians asked if they wanted to cede any land to Jordan?

The Arabs in Palestine were never sovereign over any territory to cede. You could argue (and you do) that they wanted sovereignty. You could argue (and you do) that they had some sort of right to sovereignty. But arguing that they HAD actual sovereignty is simply incorrect.

The Arab Palestinians never had a government which had any sovereign control over any part of the territory (until Oslo).