Who Are The Palestinians? Part 2

[rylah]

The historic documents argue with this. What You say is wrong.
I've attached a real scientific study, READ IT.

I read your links and they are just critique's of what someone else wrote. Show me the archeological evidence that the diaspora occurred.

There's a bunch of ancient writings saying it happened, but no archeological evidence proving it happened.

Pony up that and I'll admit I'm wrong.

Review of: S. Sand, The Invention of the Jewish People (Hebrew and English) | Avshalom Laniado - Academia.edu

The Invention of the Jewish People | Reviews in History

The link showed the misrepresentations, flaws in reasoning and method of research-the experiment failed to show the same results.

Scientists actually get p/raised when critique their own work and show it to be wrong. They don't get emotional and use Hitler to derail the argument. Like Sholomo did.

Now for he archaeological evidence of
diaspora:

Ancient Jewish art and archaeology in the Diaspora

Ancient tablets disclose Jewish exiles’ life in Babylonia - Archaeology

 

[P F Tinmore]

Who are the Palestinians?

Ghada Karmi

 

[rylah]

That's exactly what they are doing- 'PALESTINIANS' all the time reinventing their roots.
But the name they chose states it clear- INVADERS.

That's why no one showed the distinct Palestinian culture-
they're Arabs, late invaders of Jewish homeland.

How could they possibly be invaders, when they constituted 90% of the population, before the Zionist migration?

That's only recent history. Muslims/Ishmaelites reached majority only in the end of the 12th century CE. Israel was first documented archaeologically in the 12th century BC (Merneptah Stele)
. It's 2400 years difference at least. And Jews kept their presence there, came to settle or be buried. It's a thing with the Jews- they won't stop coming back to the land they face and praise in their prayers for centuries.

 

[rylah]

So until now the Palestinians chose to be:
1. Arabs 2. Jews 3. Syrians 3. Phoenicians 4. Plishtim-Greeks 5.Jebusites 6. Cnaanites
7. Bedouines

But no distinct culture as a people...somebody is trying to play all he cards at once, while rewriting the Jewish history. How convenient, however their flag shows they're Arabs FOR NOW- therefore invaders (as their name directly suggests).

At least they didn't have to reinvent themselves.

That's exactly what they are doing- 'PALESTINIANS' all the time reinventing their roots.
But the name they chose states it clear- INVADERS.

That's why no one showed the distinct Palestinian culture-
they're Arabs, late invaders of Jewish homeland.

OK, I get it. The cavemen were the indigenous people. Everyone who came later are invaders.

Quiet infantile, that's why Jews should leave?

Do You suggest border-less society, so that if Arabs don't get it Jews won't too?

 

[Hollie]

Who are the Pal'istanians?

Hamas's New Army of Children


While thousands of Palestinian families who lost their houses during the war continue to live in public shelters throughout the Gaza Strip, Hamas recently established 18 camps for military training.

The Hamas military training camps, under the motto "Vanguards of Liberation," have attracted some 17,000 Palestinian males aged 15-21. The young recruits were trained how to use various types of weapons, including pistols, rifles and mortars. They were also "educated" about the need to eliminate Israel and "restore Palestinian rights."





In the Arab/Islamic world, fear, oppression and xenophobia are an intrinsic part of the body politic when it comes to Islamic fear societies.

This is yet another glaring example of the near-impossible difficulties Islamist nations face in being extricated from the Theocratic/Authoritarian Dark Ages that is a yolk around the neck of the typical Middle Eastern/totalitarian Islamist fear society.

 

[Hollie]

Who are the Pal'istanians?

 

[rylah]

What's their distinct Palestinian culture they've been keeping?

 

[Phoenall]

They didn't they were given the land by the last owners, being Jordan and Egypt.

What are you talking about?

The people that live on the land are the owners of the land, not the governments or corrupt politicians.
If you displace the native population, you commit a crime.

So you admit that the arab muslims are criminals as they displaced the native Jewish population of gaza and the west bank in 1949.
But read the international treaties that saw Jordan and Egypt give up all claims to gaza and the west bank

 

[Phoenall]

P F Tinmore, et al,

Well --- not exactly.

Well, yes I did.

Where, exactly, is that territory and how did Israel acquire it?

Keep dancing, Rocco.

You did no answer the questions.

(COMMENT)

It is on the other side of the border barrier. It runs along the red lines in this map.

View attachment 50195

As stipulated in the Treaties.

Most Respectfully,
R

Those are armistice lines. They were specifically not to be political or territorial boundaries.

As the rules say it Israel controls the area then it is Israeli soil, and seeing as they held in from 1967 to 1988 then the Palestinians have lost all but the land on their side of the red line

(COMMENT)

An Armistice Line, by the Armistice Agreement is not a permanent border. But the Armistice Agreement with Jordan and Egypt is no more; having been replaced by Treaties. The Arab Palestinians have no standing what-so-ever relative to the Armistice Agreements. When the treaties were signed, the Armistice Lines effectively went away.

For the Israeli-Egyptian Armistice Agreement, Article XII says: "shall remain in force until a peaceful settlement between the Parties is achieved." (This superseded the SECRET temporary Peace Agreement between Egypt and Israel of September 1975.)

For the Israeli-Jordanian Armistice Agreement, Article XII says: "shall remain in force until a peaceful settlement between the Parties is achieved,"
​

The Armistice Lines have long since become just a matter of historical reference. Nothing prevents Israel from using, adjusting, revising or amending the inactive Armistice Lines for borders they control.

We went over this in May of last year.

Most Respectfully,
R

An Armistice Line, by the Armistice Agreement is not a permanent border. But the Armistice Agreement with Jordan and Egypt is no more; having been replaced by Treaties.​

So that if the Palestinians attack "Israel" they are not crossing any borders.

That's good to know.

WRONG as Israel has imposed borders prior to the existence of the Palestinian state and they are legal until such a time as the Palestinians keep their promise to negotiate mutual borders.

 

[Phoenall]

P F Tinmore, et al,

And there it one of them. One of several key issues with the Palestinians.

Where, exactly, is that territory and how did Israel acquire it?

(EXHIBIT)

View attachment 50186
EXEMPLAR: The Israeli Security Barrier
"The Israeli government says the purpose of the security barrier is to prevent
terrorists from entering Israeli cities, a problem which has plagued Israel since the start of the Al-Aqsa Intifada.
Its secondary purpose is to prevent illegal infiltrations of Palestinians, mainly illegal immigrants and car thieves.
Political commentators have suggested a wide variety of other explanations.
Only small parts of the fence are made of concrete wall - 8 miles around Qalqiliya and around
Jerusalem - where shooting attacks toward Israelis have occured."
​

(COMMENT)

Often confused, is the difference between "recognition" of a state and the "border" of a state. Recognition is a political action that declares a state of being:

• The State of Israel exists
• The State of Palestine exists

The limit of that existence is called the border or International Boundary.

There is a formal legal process by which the Israelis and Palestinians MUST eventually traverse wherein the two sovereign nations establish in writing the location of their common boundary. This is called the "Delimitations Process." Most often it is the outcome of a negotiation. Examples are:

Article II (and associated Annexes), Treaty of Peace between the Arab Republic of Egypt and the State of Israel, 26 March 1979: The permanent boundary between Egypt and Israel is the recognized international boundary between Egypt and the former mandated territory of Palestine.

Article 3 (and associated Annexes), Treaty of Peace between the Government of the State of Israel and the Government of the Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan, 26 October 1994: The international boundary between Israel and Jordan is delimited with reference to the boundary definition under the Mandate as is shown in Annex I(a), on the mapping materials attached thereto and co-ordinates specified therein. (Joint Boundary Commission involved)
​

There are TWO very interest things in common with these two treaties relative to the recognition of international boundaries:

First, is that they both use the boundary of the territory to which the former Mandate for Palestine applied.

Second, they both make note that the agreement was undertaken without prejudice to the issue of the status either the Gaza Strip (in the case of the treaty with Egypt) or the West Bank (in the case of the treaty with Jordan). It was pretty clear that neither Egypt or Jordan wanted the Treaty seen as an admission that could be used against the Arab Palestinians in future with any determinative legal effect. They wanted to protect the development of self-government in these two areas from any adverse consequence. In deed, in 1988, the PLO declared independence.
​

But the greatest and most definitive evidence of a sovereign state border (all paper aside) is the effective control over territorial space (or a defined territory) is usually a prerequisite. Article I of the 1933 Montevideo Convention on Rights and Duties of States identifies a "defined territory." There is no more a definitive example of a border (effective control) then the exemplar (supra).

ARTICLE 3

The political existence of the state is independent of recognition by the other states. Even before recognition the state has the right to defend its integrity and independence, to provide for its conservation and prosperity, and consequently to organize itself as it sees fit, to legislate upon its interests, administer its services, and to define the jurisdiction and competence of its courts.

The exercise of these rights has no other limitation than the exercise of the rights of other states according to international law.
​

The State of Israel does not actually need recognition from the Hostile Arab Palestinians. Within the territory defined, it defends the boundary and exercises effective control within that boundary.

Most Respectfully,
R

The political existence of the state is independent of recognition by the other states. Even before recognition the state has the right to defend its integrity and independence,...​

Indeed.

A/C.1/330 of 14 October 1948

And even though recognition is not necessary Palestine was recognized by 5 other states and was admitted to the Arab League as a member state in 1974.

And the arab league government of gaza were told they could not declare on another persons land making the above link null and void as evidence of a Palestinian state prior to 1988. So it did not have the rights that Israel had, and have lost repeatedly every war they have started

And the arab league government of gaza were told they could not declare on another persons land...​

I assume you have a link to that.

The UN charter, the mandate of Palestine and UN res 181

 

[Phoenall]

P F Tinmore, et al,

Well, yes I did.

Where, exactly, is that territory and how did Israel acquire it?

Keep dancing, Rocco.

You did no answer the questions.

(COMMENT)

It is on the other side of the border barrier. It runs along the red lines in this map.

View attachment 50195

As stipulated in the Treaties.

Most Respectfully,
R

Those are armistice lines. They were specifically not to be political or territorial boundaries.

As the rules say it Israel controls the area then it is Israeli soil, and seeing as they held in from 1967 to 1988 then the Palestinians have lost all but the land on their side of the red line

As the rules say it Israel controls the area then it is Israeli soil,...​

Of course you can post the link that says that.[/QUOTE]




UN charter, mandate of Palestine and UN res 181. The land became free when the Palestinians refused to take up 181 as it had no sovereign owners. There was no acquisition of land through force as the land had no sovereign owner and so was free for all. To the victor goes the spoils, which is why Israel/Jews lost land in 1949 as well

 

[Phoenall]

P F Tinmore, et al,

Oh yes, the APG again.

The political existence of the state is independent of recognition by the other states. Even before recognition the state has the right to defend its integrity and independence,...​

Indeed.

A/C.1/330 of 14 October 1948

And even though recognition is not necessary Palestine was recognized by 5 other states and was admitted to the Arab League as a member state in 1974.

(COMMENT)

What territory did the APG have control when it declared Independence?

Come-on really. I could put together a group of former enemy officers and send the UN a telegram declaring independence over the United States. That doesn't mean a thing. You must have some sort of credibility and control over the territory. APG, puppet to the Egyptians, and dissolved by them in 1959, had nothing of the sort.

V/R
R

What territory did the APG have control when it declared Independence?​

What control of territory did the PLO have in 1988?

NONE as it was ensconced in Egypt after being displaced by the fighting.

None as they had no feet on the ground and had not fully declared independence, and still haven't which is why the land is still disputed.

 

[Phoenall]

P F Tinmore, et al,

Again, this is your interpretation, not reality.

So that if the Palestinians attack "Israel" they are not crossing any borders.

That's good to know.

(COMMENT)

The State of Israel has established sovereignty over their national territory. If the "Palestinians attack Israel," the Palestinians are demonstrating the use of force against the territorial integrity and political independence of Israel. [Article 2(4)]

Relative to the issue of borders, the Palestinians do not have a unified political position. The Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO) (sole representative of the Palestinian People) Negotiation Affairs Department (NAD), openly acknowledges that the "June 4, 1967 border, also known as Green Line, is the internationally recognized border between the occupied Palestinian territory (oPt) (i.e. West Bank, including East Jerusalem, and Gaza Strip) and the State of Israel."

The June 4, 1967 border, also known as green line, is the internationally recognized border between the occupied Palestinian territory (i.e. West Bank, including East Jerusalem, and Gaza Strip) and the State of Israel. The occupied Palestinian territory (oPt) represents an area equivalent to 22 percent of historic Palestine.

2. Key Facts PLO-NAD

• The 1967 border is the internationally-recognized border between Israel and the oPt.

• 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.

• The international community does not recognize Israeli sovereignty over any part of the oPt, including East Jerusalem.
​

The PLO recognition of the 1967 Border (pre-establishment of the Palestinian State), varies from the position that the Islamic Resistance Movement (HAMAS); which is all the territory previously subject to the British Mandate. This cannot be negotiated or argued until the Palestinians themselves come to agreement amongst themselves as to what their position is.

If one reference the "UNTERM Database," one the annotation that: "A principle enunciated for the first time in Security Council resolution 242 (1967) of 22 November 1967 in reference to the Palestinian people, and subsequently reiterated, in the same context, in several United Nations documents of other organs."

Seen in phrase:

• the inadmissibility of the acquisition of territory by war
• the inadmissibility of the acquisition of territory by force

​

This comes after the 1967 Six-day War. But it also is important to note that no "Palestinian Territory" was occupied in 1967. The territory was sovereign Jordanian Territory (West Bank) and the Egyptian Military Governorship (Gaza Strip).

UN Security Council Resolution 242 cannot retroactively apply the "Emphasis." The conflict between the actions of Israel and Article 2(4) of the Charter, was resolved by Treaties; as outlined in previous Posting.

What territory did the APG have control when it declared Independence?

What control of territory did the PLO have in 1988?

(COMMENT)

Recognition of the 1988 State of Palestine was a sympathy vote. It was unopposed by Israel. The PLO had no effective territorial control anywhere. It is for this reason that the State of Palestine has only achieved "Observer Status."

Most Respectfully,
R

Recognition of the 1988 State of Palestine was a sympathy vote.​

Then why does everyone keep bringing this up when it is meaningless?

The Palestinians had more standing in 1948. They were not officially occupied until 1949.

By other arab muslims as they had never owned the land since 1099.

 

[Phoenall]

P F Tinmore, et al,

Again, this is your interpretation, not reality.

So that if the Palestinians attack "Israel" they are not crossing any borders.

That's good to know.

(COMMENT)

The State of Israel has established sovereignty over their national territory. If the "Palestinians attack Israel," the Palestinians are demonstrating the use of force against the territorial integrity and political independence of Israel. [Article 2(4)]

Relative to the issue of borders, the Palestinians do not have a unified political position. The Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO) (sole representative of the Palestinian People) Negotiation Affairs Department (NAD), openly acknowledges that the "June 4, 1967 border, also known as Green Line, is the internationally recognized border between the occupied Palestinian territory (oPt) (i.e. West Bank, including East Jerusalem, and Gaza Strip) and the State of Israel."

The June 4, 1967 border, also known as green line, is the internationally recognized border between the occupied Palestinian territory (i.e. West Bank, including East Jerusalem, and Gaza Strip) and the State of Israel. The occupied Palestinian territory (oPt) represents an area equivalent to 22 percent of historic Palestine.

2. Key Facts PLO-NAD

• The 1967 border is the internationally-recognized border between Israel and the oPt.

• 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.

• The international community does not recognize Israeli sovereignty over any part of the oPt, including East Jerusalem.
​

The PLO recognition of the 1967 Border (pre-establishment of the Palestinian State), varies from the position that the Islamic Resistance Movement (HAMAS); which is all the territory previously subject to the British Mandate. This cannot be negotiated or argued until the Palestinians themselves come to agreement amongst themselves as to what their position is.

If one reference the "UNTERM Database," one the annotation that: "A principle enunciated for the first time in Security Council resolution 242 (1967) of 22 November 1967 in reference to the Palestinian people, and subsequently reiterated, in the same context, in several United Nations documents of other organs."

Seen in phrase:

• the inadmissibility of the acquisition of territory by war
• the inadmissibility of the acquisition of territory by force

​

This comes after the 1967 Six-day War. But it also is important to note that no "Palestinian Territory" was occupied in 1967. The territory was sovereign Jordanian Territory (West Bank) and the Egyptian Military Governorship (Gaza Strip).

UN Security Council Resolution 242 cannot retroactively apply the "Emphasis." The conflict between the actions of Israel and Article 2(4) of the Charter, was resolved by Treaties; as outlined in previous Posting.

What territory did the APG have control when it declared Independence?

What control of territory did the PLO have in 1988?

(COMMENT)

Recognition of the 1988 State of Palestine was a sympathy vote. It was unopposed by Israel. The PLO had no effective territorial control anywhere. It is for this reason that the State of Palestine has only achieved "Observer Status."

Most Respectfully,
R

The State of Israel has established sovereignty over their national territory. If the "Palestinians attack Israel," the Palestinians are demonstrating the use of force against the territorial integrity and political independence of Israel. [Article 2(4)]​

You always crack me up with that one.

You constantly bring it up.

Then you always duck the issue of Israel's territory.

Do you want the mandate of Palestine's delineation of the land destined as the Jewish NATIONal home again, as that shows you are wrong every time

 

[P F Tinmore]

P F Tinmore, et al,

Well --- not exactly.

Well, yes I did.

Keep dancing, Rocco.

You did no answer the questions.

(COMMENT)

It is on the other side of the border barrier. It runs along the red lines in this map.

View attachment 50195

As stipulated in the Treaties.

Most Respectfully,
R

Those are armistice lines. They were specifically not to be political or territorial boundaries.

As the rules say it Israel controls the area then it is Israeli soil, and seeing as they held in from 1967 to 1988 then the Palestinians have lost all but the land on their side of the red line

(COMMENT)

An Armistice Line, by the Armistice Agreement is not a permanent border. But the Armistice Agreement with Jordan and Egypt is no more; having been replaced by Treaties. The Arab Palestinians have no standing what-so-ever relative to the Armistice Agreements. When the treaties were signed, the Armistice Lines effectively went away.

For the Israeli-Egyptian Armistice Agreement, Article XII says: "shall remain in force until a peaceful settlement between the Parties is achieved." (This superseded the SECRET temporary Peace Agreement between Egypt and Israel of September 1975.)

For the Israeli-Jordanian Armistice Agreement, Article XII says: "shall remain in force until a peaceful settlement between the Parties is achieved,"
​

The Armistice Lines have long since become just a matter of historical reference. Nothing prevents Israel from using, adjusting, revising or amending the inactive Armistice Lines for borders they control.

We went over this in May of last year.

Most Respectfully,
R

An Armistice Line, by the Armistice Agreement is not a permanent border. But the Armistice Agreement with Jordan and Egypt is no more; having been replaced by Treaties.​

So that if the Palestinians attack "Israel" they are not crossing any borders.

That's good to know.

WRONG as Israel has imposed borders prior to the existence of the Palestinian state and they are legal until such a time as the Palestinians keep their promise to negotiate mutual borders.

Borders are not imposed. They are arrived to be treaty.

The Palestinians do not need to change their borders.

 

[Rehmani]

...Israel as a country a gift to jewish because of Jewish support against Germany in WII and that support followed by divide the region in many countries so Israel can be place there and also armed and army support to Israel against Arab nation.

The Jews wanted their old spiritual and ancestral homeland back, so we (The West) gave it to them.

The sparse population of Arab descendants of earlier Arab conquerors and land-thieves weren't doing anything worthwhile with the place, anyway.

And, given that the Euros had bled themselves dry and could not longer hold onto their Imperial Possessions in the region...

Setting-up a West-friendly Client State like Israel served to (1) keep the silly-ass Arabs in line and (2) establish a trip-wire for any serious trouble coming down the pipe.

And, truth be told, nobody expected the Jewish State to last very long, anyway.

But the Jews had other ideas.

And, after lying-down and taking it, like lambs to the slaughter, in the death-camps of Europe in the 1940s, and after taking Christian and Muslim shit for 2,000 years...

The Jews finally found their balls again, and carved-out a country for themselves again, holding it against all comers, against very long odds in the early going...

The land is theirs now...

There's really no point in the Arabs hanging-around any longer...

The Arabs have lost... it's all over... and has been, for quite some time now... all naive, idiotic protestations to the contrary, notwithstanding...

They're down to a handful of disconnected slivers of land, crowded-together and standing on each other's shoulders, stacked ten high, on a postage-stamp -sized dirt-ball...

It's time for the silly Arab-Muslims remaining there to pack up and leave...

67 years of sitting-around refugee camps and refugee-towns is quite long enough...

Sooner or later, they have to get it through their thick skulls, that they've lost, and that there is no point in clinging to their delusional aspirations...

Time to grow-up, acknowledge reality, pack-up, and leave... creating new and safe and happy and prosperous futures for themselves and their families, elsewhere.

Sound like you are story maker but you can not change the facts and figure but you can make the story as you like and as you did and time will prove you wrong and do you accept the facts then, better do it now and make the world peace full.

 

[P F Tinmore]

P F Tinmore, et al,

And there it one of them. One of several key issues with the Palestinians.

(EXHIBIT)

View attachment 50186
EXEMPLAR: The Israeli Security Barrier
"The Israeli government says the purpose of the security barrier is to prevent
terrorists from entering Israeli cities, a problem which has plagued Israel since the start of the Al-Aqsa Intifada.
Its secondary purpose is to prevent illegal infiltrations of Palestinians, mainly illegal immigrants and car thieves.
Political commentators have suggested a wide variety of other explanations.
Only small parts of the fence are made of concrete wall - 8 miles around Qalqiliya and around
Jerusalem - where shooting attacks toward Israelis have occured."
​

(COMMENT)

Often confused, is the difference between "recognition" of a state and the "border" of a state. Recognition is a political action that declares a state of being:

• The State of Israel exists
• The State of Palestine exists

The limit of that existence is called the border or International Boundary.

There is a formal legal process by which the Israelis and Palestinians MUST eventually traverse wherein the two sovereign nations establish in writing the location of their common boundary. This is called the "Delimitations Process." Most often it is the outcome of a negotiation. Examples are:

Article II (and associated Annexes), Treaty of Peace between the Arab Republic of Egypt and the State of Israel, 26 March 1979: The permanent boundary between Egypt and Israel is the recognized international boundary between Egypt and the former mandated territory of Palestine.

Article 3 (and associated Annexes), Treaty of Peace between the Government of the State of Israel and the Government of the Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan, 26 October 1994: The international boundary between Israel and Jordan is delimited with reference to the boundary definition under the Mandate as is shown in Annex I(a), on the mapping materials attached thereto and co-ordinates specified therein. (Joint Boundary Commission involved)
​

There are TWO very interest things in common with these two treaties relative to the recognition of international boundaries:

First, is that they both use the boundary of the territory to which the former Mandate for Palestine applied.

Second, they both make note that the agreement was undertaken without prejudice to the issue of the status either the Gaza Strip (in the case of the treaty with Egypt) or the West Bank (in the case of the treaty with Jordan). It was pretty clear that neither Egypt or Jordan wanted the Treaty seen as an admission that could be used against the Arab Palestinians in future with any determinative legal effect. They wanted to protect the development of self-government in these two areas from any adverse consequence. In deed, in 1988, the PLO declared independence.
​

But the greatest and most definitive evidence of a sovereign state border (all paper aside) is the effective control over territorial space (or a defined territory) is usually a prerequisite. Article I of the 1933 Montevideo Convention on Rights and Duties of States identifies a "defined territory." There is no more a definitive example of a border (effective control) then the exemplar (supra).

ARTICLE 3

The political existence of the state is independent of recognition by the other states. Even before recognition the state has the right to defend its integrity and independence, to provide for its conservation and prosperity, and consequently to organize itself as it sees fit, to legislate upon its interests, administer its services, and to define the jurisdiction and competence of its courts.

The exercise of these rights has no other limitation than the exercise of the rights of other states according to international law.
​

The State of Israel does not actually need recognition from the Hostile Arab Palestinians. Within the territory defined, it defends the boundary and exercises effective control within that boundary.

Most Respectfully,
R

The political existence of the state is independent of recognition by the other states. Even before recognition the state has the right to defend its integrity and independence,...​

Indeed.

A/C.1/330 of 14 October 1948

And even though recognition is not necessary Palestine was recognized by 5 other states and was admitted to the Arab League as a member state in 1974.

And the arab league government of gaza were told they could not declare on another persons land making the above link null and void as evidence of a Palestinian state prior to 1988. So it did not have the rights that Israel had, and have lost repeatedly every war they have started

And the arab league government of gaza were told they could not declare on another persons land...​

I assume you have a link to that.

The UN charter, the mandate of Palestine and UN res 181

I have read those.

You are full of crap.

 

[rylah]

P F Tinmore, et al,

Well --- not exactly.

Those are armistice lines. They were specifically not to be political or territorial boundaries.

As the rules say it Israel controls the area then it is Israeli soil, and seeing as they held in from 1967 to 1988 then the Palestinians have lost all but the land on their side of the red line

(COMMENT)

An Armistice Line, by the Armistice Agreement is not a permanent border. But the Armistice Agreement with Jordan and Egypt is no more; having been replaced by Treaties. The Arab Palestinians have no standing what-so-ever relative to the Armistice Agreements. When the treaties were signed, the Armistice Lines effectively went away.

For the Israeli-Egyptian Armistice Agreement, Article XII says: "shall remain in force until a peaceful settlement between the Parties is achieved." (This superseded the SECRET temporary Peace Agreement between Egypt and Israel of September 1975.)

For the Israeli-Jordanian Armistice Agreement, Article XII says: "shall remain in force until a peaceful settlement between the Parties is achieved,"
​

The Armistice Lines have long since become just a matter of historical reference. Nothing prevents Israel from using, adjusting, revising or amending the inactive Armistice Lines for borders they control.

We went over this in May of last year.

Most Respectfully,
R

An Armistice Line, by the Armistice Agreement is not a permanent border. But the Armistice Agreement with Jordan and Egypt is no more; having been replaced by Treaties.​

So that if the Palestinians attack "Israel" they are not crossing any borders.

That's good to know.

WRONG as Israel has imposed borders prior to the existence of the Palestinian state and they are legal until such a time as the Palestinians keep their promise to negotiate mutual borders.

Borders are not imposed. They are arrived to be treaty.

The Palestinians do not need to change their borders.

Yeah I get it, Palestinians are people without distinct culture,
they are those for whom the justification lays in narrow pathways of modern laws and word games.

 

[P F Tinmore]

P F Tinmore, et al,

Well, yes I did.

Where, exactly, is that territory and how did Israel acquire it?

Keep dancing, Rocco.

You did no answer the questions.

(COMMENT)

It is on the other side of the border barrier. It runs along the red lines in this map.

View attachment 50195

As stipulated in the Treaties.

Most Respectfully,
R

Those are armistice lines. They were specifically not to be political or territorial boundaries.

As the rules say it Israel controls the area then it is Israeli soil, and seeing as they held in from 1967 to 1988 then the Palestinians have lost all but the land on their side of the red line

As the rules say it Israel controls the area then it is Israeli soil,...​

Of course you can post the link that says that.

UN charter, mandate of Palestine and UN res 181. The land became free when the Palestinians refused to take up 181 as it had no sovereign owners. There was no acquisition of land through force as the land had no sovereign owner and so was free for all. To the victor goes the spoils, which is why Israel/Jews lost land in 1949 as well[/QUOTE]

UN charter, mandate of Palestine and UN res 181. The land became free when the Palestinians refused to take up 181 as it had no sovereign owners.​

Of course you have a link that says that.

I didn't think so.

 

[Phoenall]

P F Tinmore, et al,

Well --- not exactly.

Those are armistice lines. They were specifically not to be political or territorial boundaries.

As the rules say it Israel controls the area then it is Israeli soil, and seeing as they held in from 1967 to 1988 then the Palestinians have lost all but the land on their side of the red line

(COMMENT)

An Armistice Line, by the Armistice Agreement is not a permanent border. But the Armistice Agreement with Jordan and Egypt is no more; having been replaced by Treaties. The Arab Palestinians have no standing what-so-ever relative to the Armistice Agreements. When the treaties were signed, the Armistice Lines effectively went away.

For the Israeli-Egyptian Armistice Agreement, Article XII says: "shall remain in force until a peaceful settlement between the Parties is achieved." (This superseded the SECRET temporary Peace Agreement between Egypt and Israel of September 1975.)

For the Israeli-Jordanian Armistice Agreement, Article XII says: "shall remain in force until a peaceful settlement between the Parties is achieved,"
​

The Armistice Lines have long since become just a matter of historical reference. Nothing prevents Israel from using, adjusting, revising or amending the inactive Armistice Lines for borders they control.

We went over this in May of last year.

Most Respectfully,
R

An Armistice Line, by the Armistice Agreement is not a permanent border. But the Armistice Agreement with Jordan and Egypt is no more; having been replaced by Treaties.​

So that if the Palestinians attack "Israel" they are not crossing any borders.

That's good to know.

WRONG as Israel has imposed borders prior to the existence of the Palestinian state and they are legal until such a time as the Palestinians keep their promise to negotiate mutual borders.

Borders are not imposed. They are arrived to be treaty.

The Palestinians do not need to change their borders.

They do as they don't have any other than the ones agreed by treaty and imposed by Israel. And what treaty gives Palestine any borders ?