Who Are The Palestinians?

Status
Not open for further replies.
P F Tinmore, et al,

This is nonsense.

Not true, again. International law, the Treaty of Lausanne, and the mandate gave Palestine to the Palestinians.
(COMMENT)

During the 1920's, there was no international law applicable to the situation.

The Treaty of Lausanne (1924) makes no mention of either Palestine or Palestinians. Nothing in the Treaty of Lausanne changes anything concerning the outline of the Middle East situation or the stipulations made under the Treaty of Sevres.

However six years earlier, the signing abroad the Battleship HMS Agamemnon, the Armistice of Mudros brought to an end the participation of the Ottoman Empire in World War I --- effectively—if not legally—marking the dissolution of the empire. Under the terms of the armistice, the Ottomans surrendered their remaining garrisons in Hejaz, Yemen, Syria, Mesopotamia, Tripolitania, and Cyrenaica to the Allied Powers. The Treaty of Sevres (1920) made the surrender of the territory and relinquished sovereignty to the Allied Powers.​

SECTION XIII --- Treaty of Sevres said:
GENERAL PROVISIONS.
ARTICLE 132
.

Outside her frontiers as fixed by the present Treaty Turkey hereby renounces in favour of the Principal Allied Powers all rights and title which she could claim on any ground over or concerning any territories outside Europe which are not otherwise disposed of by the present Treaty.

Turkey undertakes to recognise and conform to the measures which may be taken now or in the future by the Principal Allied Powers, in agreement where necessary with third Powers, in order to carry the above stipulation into effect.

The Article 22(8) Covenant, sets the degree of authority, control, or administration to be exercised by the Mandatory shall, if not previously agreed upon by the Members of the League, be explicitly defined in each case by the Council. The Mandate for Palestine was created by the Allied Powers for the Mandate and subject to the Council of the League of Nations (The consent of the Council of the League of Nations is required for any modification of the terms of this mandate.). The Mandate does not pass-on sovereignty as a directive to any other entity.
  • Whereas the Principal Allied Powers have also agreed that the Mandatory should be responsible for putting into effect the declaration originally made on November 2nd, 1917, by the Government of His Britannic Majesty, and adopted by the said Powers, in favour of the establishment in Palestine of a national home for the Jewish people.
Most Respectfully,
R
The Treaty of Sevres was never ratified. Why did you quote it?

The LoN Covenant and its mandate system are very much misunderstood. I think this is by design. The focus of the mandate system was to bring the people to independence. It was the people who were considered the sovereigns. The right to Palestinian independence and sovereignty is even stated in subsequent UN resolutions.

...independent nations can be provisionally recognized subject to the rendering of administrative advice and assistance by a Mandatory until such time as they are able to stand alone.

See more at: League of Nations covenant - Peace Treaty of Versailles Peace Conference text Non-UN document 28 April 1919

The Mandate for Palestine was not Palestine. It was a temporarily assigned administration that held Palestine in trust. It had no land or borders. When the Mandate left Palestine, Palestine was still there.

Britain left Palestine without creating an independent state or a Jewish homeland. Its mandate was a complete flop.
 
Colonization is not just a one time event. It is an ongoing condition. If that condition existed in 1960, the resolution applies. If the condition exists in 2015, the resolution applies.




It existed in 635 C.E. as well when the arab muslims started their colonisation, so it must apply to them even more. So tell them to get out of Israel, Judea and Samaria to make room for the original inhabitants.

But it is only your belief that the Jews colonised their own land stolen by the arab muslims, who then lost it for good in 1099. The truth is the legal owners gave the land to the Jews for their National home and the squatters did not like that.
The truth is the legal owners gave the land to the Jews...

Not true, again. International law, the Treaty of Lausanne, and the mandate gave Palestine to the Palestinians.






LINKS ?
In international law, when a state is dissolved and new states are established, “the population follows the change of sovereignty in matters of nationality.”5 As a rule, therefore, citizens of the former state should automatically acquire the nationality of the successor state in which they had already been residing.

Nationality constitutes a legal bond that connects individuals with a specific territory, making them citizens of that territory.

Genesis of Citizenship in Palestine and Israel
--------------------------------
SECTION II .
NATIONALITY.
ARTICLE 30.

Turkish subjects habitually resident in territory which in accordance with the provisions of the present Treaty is detached from Turkey will become ipsofacto, in the conditions laid down by the local law, nationals of the State to which such territory is transferred.

Treaty of Lausanne - World War I Document Archive
------------------------------
3.Q. What measures have been taken to bring the country under such political, administrative and economic conditions as will safeguard the civil and religious rights of all the inhabitants of Palestine, irrespective of race and religion? What are the effects of these measures?

A. The Palestinian Citizenship Order in Council which was made in August, 1925, provides for the acquisition of Palestinian citizenship by persons habitually resident in the country who were Ottoman subjects, and persons who were foreign subjects and take up permanent residence.

Mandate for Palestine - Report of the Mandatory to the League of Nations 31 December 1925
----------------------------------
The first Palestine Citizenship Order was enacted by Britain on 24 July 1925; it was the first official enactment that outlined the legal definition of a Palestinian. Its first article defined a Palestinian as a "Turkish subject habitually resident in the territory of Palestine." It defined the territorial criteria for citizenship, and appeared to be nondiscriminatory legislation, which provided granting of citizenship to an applicant, irrespective of their race, religion or language.

History of Palestinian nationality - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia





What year did that become International law, and a link proving it.

What you are quoting is not International law and the state that took control was Britain, plus no state was actually dissolved as none existed there prior to 1948.


So no actual links to support your claims as the treaty of Lausanne does not mention Palestine once on purpose, because it was never a nation in its own right. The Mandate for Palestine ( as opposed to the British Mandate ) clearly states

The Avalon Project The Palestine Mandate


ARTICLE 1.
The Mandatory shall have full powers of legislation and of administration, save as they may be limited by the terms of this mandate.

ART. 2.
The Mandatory shall be responsible for placing the country under such political, administrative and economic conditions as will secure the establishment of the Jewish national home, as laid down in the preamble, and the development of self-governing institutions, and also for safeguarding the civil and religious rights of all the inhabitants of Palestine, irrespective of race and religion.

ART. 3.
The Mandatory shall, so far as circumstances permit, encourage local autonomy.

ART. 4.
An appropriate Jewish agency shall be recognised as a public body for the purpose of advising and co-operating with the Administration of Palestine in such economic, social and other matters as may affect the establishment of the Jewish national home and the interests of the Jewish population in Palestine, and, subject always to the control of the Administration to assist and take part in the development of the country.

The Zionist organization, so long as its organization and constitution are in the opinion of the Mandatory appropriate, shall be recognised as such agency. It shall take steps in consultation with His Britannic Majesty's Government to secure the co-operation of all Jews who are willing to assist in the establishment of the Jewish national home.

ART. 5.
The Mandatory shall be responsible for seeing that no Palestine territory shall be ceded or leased to, or in any way placed under the control of the Government of any foreign Power.

ART. 6.
The Administration of Palestine, while ensuring that the rights and position of other sections of the population are not prejudiced, shall facilitate Jewish immigration under suitable conditions and shall encourage, in co-operation with the Jewish agency referred to in Article 4, close settlement by Jews on the land, including State lands and waste lands not required for public purposes.

ART. 7.
The Administration of Palestine shall be responsible for enacting a nationality law. There shall be included in this law provisions framed so as to facilitate the acquisition of Palestinian citizenship by Jews who take up their permanent residence in Palestine.



Not once does it mention the nation of Palestine or the arab muslims, but it does mention the fact that in INTERNATIONAL LAW the Jews would receive the 22% of Palestine remaining as their NATIONAL HOME and that any Jew that migrated to Palestine would be automatically granted protected Palestinian citizenship under the British mandate.

This is how you produce evidence of your claims, not some site that upholds your own POV.
And the Mandate left Palestine without accomplishing it goals.
 
P F Tinmore, et al,

This is not very accurate.

The Treaty of Sevres was never ratified. Why did you quote it?
(COMMENT)

Because for four years, the tenants cited in the Treaty of Sevres (1920) were the guide used. Between the Treaty of Sevres (1920) and the Treaty of Lausanne (1924) the Palestine Order in Council and the Mandate for Palestine were created on the basis of the San Remo Convention which came first. At the time the decisions were made on the issues surrounding the territory subject to the mandate the only signed Treaty was the 1920 version at Sevres. The Treaty of Lausanne was not even contemplated yet. (Incidentally, the Arab Higher Committee during this same period, refused to establish an Arab Agency. The Arab leaders declined that this offer on the ground that it would not satisfy the aspirations of the Arab people.)

The LoN Covenant and its mandate system are very much misunderstood. I think this is by design. The focus of the mandate system was to bring the people to independence. It was the people who were considered the sovereigns. The right to Palestinian independence and sovereignty is even stated in subsequent UN resolutions.

...independent nations can be provisionally recognized subject to the rendering of administrative advice and assistance by a Mandatory until such time as they are able to stand alone.

See more at: League of Nations covenant - Peace Treaty of Versailles Peace Conference text Non-UN document 28 April 1919
(COMMENT)

The provisional recognition cited in the Article 22(4) of the Covenant was both vague and non-specific. It could have applied to any one of a number of communities (territories) that were once under the Ottoman/Turkish Empire (Lebanon, Syria, Mesopotamia, Trans-Jordan, Iraq). In 1919, it was not necessarily pertaining to Palestine which had not yet been determined by the Principal Allied Powers; as stipulated in Part III, Section VII (SYRIA, MESOPOTAMIA, PALESTINE) of the Treaty of Sevres spoke directly to the territory of Palestine.

The Mandate for Palestine was not Palestine. It was a temporarily assigned administration that held Palestine in trust. It had no land or borders. When the Mandate left Palestine, Palestine was still there.
(COMMENT)

Palestine was not subject to a distinct territory until the Allied Powers determine the boundaries. And that distinctive territory was subject to the Palestine Order in Council and the Mandate for Palestine. When the Mandate was terminated, the territory was remanded to the International Trusteeship System (Article 77a, UN Charter), with a new successor government appointed.

Britain left Palestine without creating an independent state or a Jewish homeland. Its mandate was a complete flop.
(COMMENT)

The Mandatory believed that His Majesty’s government did not have the power or authority, under the terms of the Mandate, to award the country either to the Arabs or to the Jews, or even to partition it between them. The Mandatory and His Majesty’s government then ask the United Nations to consider the circumstances and the situation, and to recommend a settlement of the problem. The Mandatory and His Majesty’s government did not intend to recommend any particular solution.

The Arab Community (the Arab Higher Committee) refused to cooperate at all with the UK (as the Mandatory) or the Palestine Commission (the successor government) having refused to establish a Arab Agency (counterpart to the Jewish Agency) or to participate in the development of a solution. On the termination of the Mandate, and in coordination with the UN Palestine Commission, the State of Israel was declared.

If the allegation has any merit, it is the fault of the Arab Community and Leadership; which presented the Mandatory with an irreconcilable differences aimed at both the Allied Powers and the UN.

Most Respectfully,
R
 
P F Tinmore, et al,

Once again, this is being misapplied.

In international law, when a state is dissolved and new states are established, “the population follows the change of sovereignty in matters of nationality.”5 As a rule, therefore, citizens of the former state should automatically acquire the nationality of the successor state in which they had already been residing.

Nationality constitutes a legal bond that connects individuals with a specific territory, making them citizens of that territory.

Genesis of Citizenship in Palestine and Israel
--------------------------------
SECTION II .
NATIONALITY.
ARTICLE 30.

Turkish subjects habitually resident in territory which in accordance with the provisions of the present Treaty is detached from Turkey will become ipsofacto, in the conditions laid down by the local law, nationals of the State to which such territory is transferred.

Treaty of Lausanne - World War I Document Archive
------------------------------
3.Q. What measures have been taken to bring the country under such political, administrative and economic conditions as will safeguard the civil and religious rights of all the inhabitants of Palestine, irrespective of race and religion? What are the effects of these measures?

A. The Palestinian Citizenship Order in Council which was made in August, 1925, provides for the acquisition of Palestinian citizenship by persons habitually resident in the country who were Ottoman subjects, and persons who were foreign subjects and take up permanent residence.

Mandate for Palestine - Report of the Mandatory to the League of Nations 31 December 1925
----------------------------------
The first Palestine Citizenship Order was enacted by Britain on 24 July 1925; it was the first official enactment that outlined the legal definition of a Palestinian. Its first article defined a Palestinian as a "Turkish subject habitually resident in the territory of Palestine." It defined the territorial criteria for citizenship, and appeared to be nondiscriminatory legislation, which provided granting of citizenship to an applicant, irrespective of their race, religion or language.

History of Palestinian nationality - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia
(COMMENT)

The 1925 Palestine Citizenship Order establishes the directive for the application.

The Treaty of Lausanne (Section II, Article 30) has no being on the control of sovereignty. To suggest that this somehow transfers sovereignty of the territory under the Mandate to the Arab Palestinian is pure nonsense.

Most Respectfully,
R
P F Tinmore, et al,

This is not very accurate.

The Treaty of Sevres was never ratified. Why did you quote it?
(COMMENT)

Because for four years, the tenants cited in the Treaty of Sevres (1920) were the guide used. Between the Treaty of Sevres (1920) and the Treaty of Lausanne (1924) the Palestine Order in Council and the Mandate for Palestine were created on the basis of the San Remo Convention which came first. At the time the decisions were made on the issues surrounding the territory subject to the mandate the only signed Treaty was the 1920 version at Sevres. The Treaty of Lausanne was not even contemplated yet. (Incidentally, the Arab Higher Committee during this same period, refused to establish an Arab Agency. The Arab leaders declined that this offer on the ground that it would not satisfy the aspirations of the Arab people.)

The LoN Covenant and its mandate system are very much misunderstood. I think this is by design. The focus of the mandate system was to bring the people to independence. It was the people who were considered the sovereigns. The right to Palestinian independence and sovereignty is even stated in subsequent UN resolutions.

...independent nations can be provisionally recognized subject to the rendering of administrative advice and assistance by a Mandatory until such time as they are able to stand alone.

See more at: League of Nations covenant - Peace Treaty of Versailles Peace Conference text Non-UN document 28 April 1919
(COMMENT)

The provisional recognition cited in the Article 22(4) of the Covenant was both vague and non-specific. It could have applied to any one of a number of communities (territories) that were once under the Ottoman/Turkish Empire (Lebanon, Syria, Mesopotamia, Trans-Jordan, Iraq). In 1919, it was not necessarily pertaining to Palestine which had not yet been determined by the Principal Allied Powers; as stipulated in Part III, Section VII (SYRIA, MESOPOTAMIA, PALESTINE) of the Treaty of Sevres spoke directly to the territory of Palestine.

The Mandate for Palestine was not Palestine. It was a temporarily assigned administration that held Palestine in trust. It had no land or borders. When the Mandate left Palestine, Palestine was still there.
(COMMENT)

Palestine was not subject to a distinct territory until the Allied Powers determine the boundaries. And that distinctive territory was subject to the Palestine Order in Council and the Mandate for Palestine. When the Mandate was terminated, the territory was remanded to the International Trusteeship System (Article 77a, UN Charter), with a new successor government appointed.

Britain left Palestine without creating an independent state or a Jewish homeland. Its mandate was a complete flop.
(COMMENT)

The Mandatory believed that His Majesty’s government did not have the power or authority, under the terms of the Mandate, to award the country either to the Arabs or to the Jews, or even to partition it between them. The Mandatory and His Majesty’s government then ask the United Nations to consider the circumstances and the situation, and to recommend a settlement of the problem. The Mandatory and His Majesty’s government did not intend to recommend any particular solution.

The Arab Community (the Arab Higher Committee) refused to cooperate at all with the UK (as the Mandatory) or the Palestine Commission (the successor government) having refused to establish a Arab Agency (counterpart to the Jewish Agency) or to participate in the development of a solution. On the termination of the Mandate, and in coordination with the UN Palestine Commission, the State of Israel was declared.

If the allegation has any merit, it is the fault of the Arab Community and Leadership; which presented the Mandatory with an irreconcilable differences aimed at both the Allied Powers and the UN.

Most Respectfully,
R

Oh stop it. It's like saying that the Native Americans lost their land because they could not sign their signatures on treaties. You are a ridiculous person.
 
RoccoR said:
I don't think that the Declaration on the Granting of Independence to Colonial Countries and Peoples (General Assembly resolution 1514 (XV) of 14 December 1960) is directly applicable to Israel and the general Palestine situation. I believe that the self-determination exercised (1948) by the Jewish People pursuant to the directions of the UN set the conditions. I also think that the conditions were altered in 1988 by the Palestinian exercise of self-determination.

A 1960 Resolution cannot be retroactively applied to a 1948 action.

Colonization is not just a one time event. It is an ongoing condition. If that condition existed in 1960, the resolution applies. If the condition exists in 2015, the resolution applies.




It existed in 635 C.E. as well when the arab muslims started their colonisation, so it must apply to them even more. So tell them to get out of Israel, Judea and Samaria to make room for the original inhabitants.

But it is only your belief that the Jews colonised their own land stolen by the arab muslims, who then lost it for good in 1099. The truth is the legal owners gave the land to the Jews for their National home and the squatters did not like that.
The truth is the legal owners gave the land to the Jews...

Not true, again. International law, the Treaty of Lausanne, and the mandate gave Palestine to the Palestinians.

Completely false. I have already showed you links that prove that Palestine had nothing to do with the Treaty of Lausanne.
 
P F Tinmore, et al,

This is not very accurate.

The Treaty of Sevres was never ratified. Why did you quote it?
(COMMENT)

Because for four years, the tenants cited in the Treaty of Sevres (1920) were the guide used. Between the Treaty of Sevres (1920) and the Treaty of Lausanne (1924) the Palestine Order in Council and the Mandate for Palestine were created on the basis of the San Remo Convention which came first. At the time the decisions were made on the issues surrounding the territory subject to the mandate the only signed Treaty was the 1920 version at Sevres. The Treaty of Lausanne was not even contemplated yet. (Incidentally, the Arab Higher Committee during this same period, refused to establish an Arab Agency. The Arab leaders declined that this offer on the ground that it would not satisfy the aspirations of the Arab people.)

Here again, the Treaty of Sevres was never ratified. The exceptions for Palestine in The Treaty of Sevres were not in the Treaty of Lausanne that was ratified.

The Arab Agency was part of the colonial scheme. The Arabs wanted no part of colonialism.
The LoN Covenant and its mandate system are very much misunderstood. I think this is by design. The focus of the mandate system was to bring the people to independence. It was the people who were considered the sovereigns. The right to Palestinian independence and sovereignty is even stated in subsequent UN resolutions.

...independent nations can be provisionally recognized subject to the rendering of administrative advice and assistance by a Mandatory until such time as they are able to stand alone.

See more at: League of Nations covenant - Peace Treaty of Versailles Peace Conference text Non-UN document 28 April 1919

(COMMENT)

The provisional recognition cited in the Article 22(4) of the Covenant was both vague and non-specific. It could have applied to any one of a number of communities (territories) that were once under the Ottoman/Turkish Empire (Lebanon, Syria, Mesopotamia, Trans-Jordan, Iraq). In 1919, it was not necessarily pertaining to Palestine which had not yet been determined by the Principal Allied Powers; as stipulated in Part III, Section VII (SYRIA, MESOPOTAMIA, PALESTINE) of the Treaty of Sevres spoke directly to the territory of Palestine.
Again, The treaty of Sevres was never ratified. It is meaningless.
The Mandate for Palestine was not Palestine. It was a temporarily assigned administration that held Palestine in trust. It had no land or borders. When the Mandate left Palestine, Palestine was still there.
(COMMENT)

Palestine was not subject to a distinct territory until the Allied Powers determine the boundaries. And that distinctive territory was subject to the Palestine Order in Council and the Mandate for Palestine.
Palestine's international boundaries were defined by 1922.

What is your point?
When the Mandate was terminated, the territory was remanded to the International Trusteeship System (Article 77a, UN Charter), with a new successor government appointed.
You have posted where this was said but you have posted nothing to show that it actually happened.
Britain left Palestine without creating an independent state or a Jewish homeland. Its mandate was a complete flop.
(COMMENT)

The Mandatory believed that His Majesty’s government did not have the power or authority, under the terms of the Mandate, to award the country either to the Arabs or to the Jews, or even to partition it between them. The Mandatory and His Majesty’s government then ask the United Nations to consider the circumstances and the situation, and to recommend a settlement of the problem. The Mandatory and His Majesty’s government did not intend to recommend any particular solution.
Indeed, the mandate had no authority over land or borders.
The Arab Community (the Arab Higher Committee) refused to cooperate at all with the UK (as the Mandatory) or the Palestine Commission (the successor government) having refused to establish a Arab Agency (counterpart to the Jewish Agency) or to participate in the development of a solution. On the termination of the Mandate, and in coordination with the UN Palestine Commission, the State of Israel was declared.

If the allegation has any merit, it is the fault of the Arab Community and Leadership; which presented the Mandatory with an irreconcilable differences aimed at both the Allied Powers and the UN.

Most Respectfully,
R
The irreconcilable differences were imposed by the British. The Arabs wanted nothing to do with them.
 
P F Tinmore, et al,

This is not very accurate.

The Treaty of Sevres was never ratified. Why did you quote it?
(COMMENT)

Because for four years, the tenants cited in the Treaty of Sevres (1920) were the guide used. Between the Treaty of Sevres (1920) and the Treaty of Lausanne (1924) the Palestine Order in Council and the Mandate for Palestine were created on the basis of the San Remo Convention which came first. At the time the decisions were made on the issues surrounding the territory subject to the mandate the only signed Treaty was the 1920 version at Sevres. The Treaty of Lausanne was not even contemplated yet. (Incidentally, the Arab Higher Committee during this same period, refused to establish an Arab Agency. The Arab leaders declined that this offer on the ground that it would not satisfy the aspirations of the Arab people.)
Here again, the Treaty of Sevres was never ratified. The exceptions for Palestine in The Treaty of Sevres were not in the Treaty of Lausanne that was ratified.

The Arab Agency was part of the colonial scheme. The Arabs wanted no part of colonialism.
The LoN Covenant and its mandate system are very much misunderstood. I think this is by design. The focus of the mandate system was to bring the people to independence. It was the people who were considered the sovereigns. The right to Palestinian independence and sovereignty is even stated in subsequent UN resolutions.

...independent nations can be provisionally recognized subject to the rendering of administrative advice and assistance by a Mandatory until such time as they are able to stand alone.

See more at: League of Nations covenant - Peace Treaty of Versailles Peace Conference text Non-UN document 28 April 1919

(COMMENT)

The provisional recognition cited in the Article 22(4) of the Covenant was both vague and non-specific. It could have applied to any one of a number of communities (territories) that were once under the Ottoman/Turkish Empire (Lebanon, Syria, Mesopotamia, Trans-Jordan, Iraq). In 1919, it was not necessarily pertaining to Palestine which had not yet been determined by the Principal Allied Powers; as stipulated in Part III, Section VII (SYRIA, MESOPOTAMIA, PALESTINE) of the Treaty of Sevres spoke directly to the territory of Palestine.
Again, The treaty of Sevres was never ratified. It is meaningless.
The Mandate for Palestine was not Palestine. It was a temporarily assigned administration that held Palestine in trust. It had no land or borders. When the Mandate left Palestine, Palestine was still there.
(COMMENT)

Palestine was not subject to a distinct territory until the Allied Powers determine the boundaries. And that distinctive territory was subject to the Palestine Order in Council and the Mandate for Palestine.
Palestine's international boundaries were defined by 1922.

What is your point?
When the Mandate was terminated, the territory was remanded to the International Trusteeship System (Article 77a, UN Charter), with a new successor government appointed.
You have posted where this was said but you have posted nothing to show that it actually happened.
Britain left Palestine without creating an independent state or a Jewish homeland. Its mandate was a complete flop.
(COMMENT)

The Mandatory believed that His Majesty’s government did not have the power or authority, under the terms of the Mandate, to award the country either to the Arabs or to the Jews, or even to partition it between them. The Mandatory and His Majesty’s government then ask the United Nations to consider the circumstances and the situation, and to recommend a settlement of the problem. The Mandatory and His Majesty’s government did not intend to recommend any particular solution.
Indeed, the mandate had no authority over land or borders.
The Arab Community (the Arab Higher Committee) refused to cooperate at all with the UK (as the Mandatory) or the Palestine Commission (the successor government) having refused to establish a Arab Agency (counterpart to the Jewish Agency) or to participate in the development of a solution. On the termination of the Mandate, and in coordination with the UN Palestine Commission, the State of Israel was declared.

If the allegation has any merit, it is the fault of the Arab Community and Leadership; which presented the Mandatory with an irreconcilable differences aimed at both the Allied Powers and the UN.

Most Respectfully,
R
The irreconcilable differences were imposed by the British. The Arabs wanted nothing to do with them.
Please show me how where Palestine's borders were defined in 1922..
 
P F Tinmore, et al,

This is not very accurate.

The Treaty of Sevres was never ratified. Why did you quote it?
(COMMENT)

Because for four years, the tenants cited in the Treaty of Sevres (1920) were the guide used. Between the Treaty of Sevres (1920) and the Treaty of Lausanne (1924) the Palestine Order in Council and the Mandate for Palestine were created on the basis of the San Remo Convention which came first. At the time the decisions were made on the issues surrounding the territory subject to the mandate the only signed Treaty was the 1920 version at Sevres. The Treaty of Lausanne was not even contemplated yet. (Incidentally, the Arab Higher Committee during this same period, refused to establish an Arab Agency. The Arab leaders declined that this offer on the ground that it would not satisfy the aspirations of the Arab people.)
Here again, the Treaty of Sevres was never ratified. The exceptions for Palestine in The Treaty of Sevres were not in the Treaty of Lausanne that was ratified.

The Arab Agency was part of the colonial scheme. The Arabs wanted no part of colonialism.
The LoN Covenant and its mandate system are very much misunderstood. I think this is by design. The focus of the mandate system was to bring the people to independence. It was the people who were considered the sovereigns. The right to Palestinian independence and sovereignty is even stated in subsequent UN resolutions.

...independent nations can be provisionally recognized subject to the rendering of administrative advice and assistance by a Mandatory until such time as they are able to stand alone.

See more at: League of Nations covenant - Peace Treaty of Versailles Peace Conference text Non-UN document 28 April 1919

(COMMENT)

The provisional recognition cited in the Article 22(4) of the Covenant was both vague and non-specific. It could have applied to any one of a number of communities (territories) that were once under the Ottoman/Turkish Empire (Lebanon, Syria, Mesopotamia, Trans-Jordan, Iraq). In 1919, it was not necessarily pertaining to Palestine which had not yet been determined by the Principal Allied Powers; as stipulated in Part III, Section VII (SYRIA, MESOPOTAMIA, PALESTINE) of the Treaty of Sevres spoke directly to the territory of Palestine.
Again, The treaty of Sevres was never ratified. It is meaningless.
The Mandate for Palestine was not Palestine. It was a temporarily assigned administration that held Palestine in trust. It had no land or borders. When the Mandate left Palestine, Palestine was still there.
(COMMENT)

Palestine was not subject to a distinct territory until the Allied Powers determine the boundaries. And that distinctive territory was subject to the Palestine Order in Council and the Mandate for Palestine.
Palestine's international boundaries were defined by 1922.

What is your point?
When the Mandate was terminated, the territory was remanded to the International Trusteeship System (Article 77a, UN Charter), with a new successor government appointed.
You have posted where this was said but you have posted nothing to show that it actually happened.
Britain left Palestine without creating an independent state or a Jewish homeland. Its mandate was a complete flop.
(COMMENT)

The Mandatory believed that His Majesty’s government did not have the power or authority, under the terms of the Mandate, to award the country either to the Arabs or to the Jews, or even to partition it between them. The Mandatory and His Majesty’s government then ask the United Nations to consider the circumstances and the situation, and to recommend a settlement of the problem. The Mandatory and His Majesty’s government did not intend to recommend any particular solution.
Indeed, the mandate had no authority over land or borders.
The Arab Community (the Arab Higher Committee) refused to cooperate at all with the UK (as the Mandatory) or the Palestine Commission (the successor government) having refused to establish a Arab Agency (counterpart to the Jewish Agency) or to participate in the development of a solution. On the termination of the Mandate, and in coordination with the UN Palestine Commission, the State of Israel was declared.

If the allegation has any merit, it is the fault of the Arab Community and Leadership; which presented the Mandatory with an irreconcilable differences aimed at both the Allied Powers and the UN.

Most Respectfully,
R
The irreconcilable differences were imposed by the British. The Arabs wanted nothing to do with them.
Please show me how where Palestine's borders were defined in 1922..
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.

Genesis of Citizenship in Palestine and Israel
 
P F Tinmore, et al,

This is not very accurate.

The Treaty of Sevres was never ratified. Why did you quote it?
(COMMENT)

Because for four years, the tenants cited in the Treaty of Sevres (1920) were the guide used. Between the Treaty of Sevres (1920) and the Treaty of Lausanne (1924) the Palestine Order in Council and the Mandate for Palestine were created on the basis of the San Remo Convention which came first. At the time the decisions were made on the issues surrounding the territory subject to the mandate the only signed Treaty was the 1920 version at Sevres. The Treaty of Lausanne was not even contemplated yet. (Incidentally, the Arab Higher Committee during this same period, refused to establish an Arab Agency. The Arab leaders declined that this offer on the ground that it would not satisfy the aspirations of the Arab people.)
Here again, the Treaty of Sevres was never ratified. The exceptions for Palestine in The Treaty of Sevres were not in the Treaty of Lausanne that was ratified.

The Arab Agency was part of the colonial scheme. The Arabs wanted no part of colonialism.
The LoN Covenant and its mandate system are very much misunderstood. I think this is by design. The focus of the mandate system was to bring the people to independence. It was the people who were considered the sovereigns. The right to Palestinian independence and sovereignty is even stated in subsequent UN resolutions.

...independent nations can be provisionally recognized subject to the rendering of administrative advice and assistance by a Mandatory until such time as they are able to stand alone.

See more at: League of Nations covenant - Peace Treaty of Versailles Peace Conference text Non-UN document 28 April 1919

(COMMENT)

The provisional recognition cited in the Article 22(4) of the Covenant was both vague and non-specific. It could have applied to any one of a number of communities (territories) that were once under the Ottoman/Turkish Empire (Lebanon, Syria, Mesopotamia, Trans-Jordan, Iraq). In 1919, it was not necessarily pertaining to Palestine which had not yet been determined by the Principal Allied Powers; as stipulated in Part III, Section VII (SYRIA, MESOPOTAMIA, PALESTINE) of the Treaty of Sevres spoke directly to the territory of Palestine.
Again, The treaty of Sevres was never ratified. It is meaningless.
The Mandate for Palestine was not Palestine. It was a temporarily assigned administration that held Palestine in trust. It had no land or borders. When the Mandate left Palestine, Palestine was still there.
(COMMENT)

Palestine was not subject to a distinct territory until the Allied Powers determine the boundaries. And that distinctive territory was subject to the Palestine Order in Council and the Mandate for Palestine.
Palestine's international boundaries were defined by 1922.

What is your point?
When the Mandate was terminated, the territory was remanded to the International Trusteeship System (Article 77a, UN Charter), with a new successor government appointed.
You have posted where this was said but you have posted nothing to show that it actually happened.
Britain left Palestine without creating an independent state or a Jewish homeland. Its mandate was a complete flop.
(COMMENT)

The Mandatory believed that His Majesty’s government did not have the power or authority, under the terms of the Mandate, to award the country either to the Arabs or to the Jews, or even to partition it between them. The Mandatory and His Majesty’s government then ask the United Nations to consider the circumstances and the situation, and to recommend a settlement of the problem. The Mandatory and His Majesty’s government did not intend to recommend any particular solution.
Indeed, the mandate had no authority over land or borders.
The Arab Community (the Arab Higher Committee) refused to cooperate at all with the UK (as the Mandatory) or the Palestine Commission (the successor government) having refused to establish a Arab Agency (counterpart to the Jewish Agency) or to participate in the development of a solution. On the termination of the Mandate, and in coordination with the UN Palestine Commission, the State of Israel was declared.

If the allegation has any merit, it is the fault of the Arab Community and Leadership; which presented the Mandatory with an irreconcilable differences aimed at both the Allied Powers and the UN.

Most Respectfully,
R
The irreconcilable differences were imposed by the British. The Arabs wanted nothing to do with them.
Please show me how where Palestine's borders were defined in 1922..
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.

Genesis of Citizenship in Palestine and Israel

No mention of internation boundaries.

Also, you said borderS
 
P F Tinmore, et al,

This is not very accurate.

The Treaty of Sevres was never ratified. Why did you quote it?
(COMMENT)

Because for four years, the tenants cited in the Treaty of Sevres (1920) were the guide used. Between the Treaty of Sevres (1920) and the Treaty of Lausanne (1924) the Palestine Order in Council and the Mandate for Palestine were created on the basis of the San Remo Convention which came first. At the time the decisions were made on the issues surrounding the territory subject to the mandate the only signed Treaty was the 1920 version at Sevres. The Treaty of Lausanne was not even contemplated yet. (Incidentally, the Arab Higher Committee during this same period, refused to establish an Arab Agency. The Arab leaders declined that this offer on the ground that it would not satisfy the aspirations of the Arab people.)
Here again, the Treaty of Sevres was never ratified. The exceptions for Palestine in The Treaty of Sevres were not in the Treaty of Lausanne that was ratified.

The Arab Agency was part of the colonial scheme. The Arabs wanted no part of colonialism.
The LoN Covenant and its mandate system are very much misunderstood. I think this is by design. The focus of the mandate system was to bring the people to independence. It was the people who were considered the sovereigns. The right to Palestinian independence and sovereignty is even stated in subsequent UN resolutions.

...independent nations can be provisionally recognized subject to the rendering of administrative advice and assistance by a Mandatory until such time as they are able to stand alone.

See more at: League of Nations covenant - Peace Treaty of Versailles Peace Conference text Non-UN document 28 April 1919

(COMMENT)

The provisional recognition cited in the Article 22(4) of the Covenant was both vague and non-specific. It could have applied to any one of a number of communities (territories) that were once under the Ottoman/Turkish Empire (Lebanon, Syria, Mesopotamia, Trans-Jordan, Iraq). In 1919, it was not necessarily pertaining to Palestine which had not yet been determined by the Principal Allied Powers; as stipulated in Part III, Section VII (SYRIA, MESOPOTAMIA, PALESTINE) of the Treaty of Sevres spoke directly to the territory of Palestine.
Again, The treaty of Sevres was never ratified. It is meaningless.
The Mandate for Palestine was not Palestine. It was a temporarily assigned administration that held Palestine in trust. It had no land or borders. When the Mandate left Palestine, Palestine was still there.
(COMMENT)

Palestine was not subject to a distinct territory until the Allied Powers determine the boundaries. And that distinctive territory was subject to the Palestine Order in Council and the Mandate for Palestine.
Palestine's international boundaries were defined by 1922.

What is your point?
When the Mandate was terminated, the territory was remanded to the International Trusteeship System (Article 77a, UN Charter), with a new successor government appointed.
You have posted where this was said but you have posted nothing to show that it actually happened.
Britain left Palestine without creating an independent state or a Jewish homeland. Its mandate was a complete flop.
(COMMENT)

The Mandatory believed that His Majesty’s government did not have the power or authority, under the terms of the Mandate, to award the country either to the Arabs or to the Jews, or even to partition it between them. The Mandatory and His Majesty’s government then ask the United Nations to consider the circumstances and the situation, and to recommend a settlement of the problem. The Mandatory and His Majesty’s government did not intend to recommend any particular solution.
Indeed, the mandate had no authority over land or borders.
The Arab Community (the Arab Higher Committee) refused to cooperate at all with the UK (as the Mandatory) or the Palestine Commission (the successor government) having refused to establish a Arab Agency (counterpart to the Jewish Agency) or to participate in the development of a solution. On the termination of the Mandate, and in coordination with the UN Palestine Commission, the State of Israel was declared.

If the allegation has any merit, it is the fault of the Arab Community and Leadership; which presented the Mandatory with an irreconcilable differences aimed at both the Allied Powers and the UN.

Most Respectfully,
R
The irreconcilable differences were imposed by the British. The Arabs wanted nothing to do with them.
Please show me how where Palestine's borders were defined in 1922..

Instead of thinking of "palestine" as having a drawn line for a border, think more in terms of the Levant, a valley, plains, highlands, desert, etc. When does one end and another begin? It was a region, not a title of a place defined by a coast, river or fence.
It is a bit like saying near east or middle east. We know what we are talking about without having a think black line on a map
 
P F Tinmore, et al,

This is nonsense.

Not true, again. International law, the Treaty of Lausanne, and the mandate gave Palestine to the Palestinians.
(COMMENT)

During the 1920's, there was no international law applicable to the situation.

The Treaty of Lausanne (1924) makes no mention of either Palestine or Palestinians. Nothing in the Treaty of Lausanne changes anything concerning the outline of the Middle East situation or the stipulations made under the Treaty of Sevres.

However six years earlier, the signing abroad the Battleship HMS Agamemnon, the Armistice of Mudros brought to an end the participation of the Ottoman Empire in World War I --- effectively—if not legally—marking the dissolution of the empire. Under the terms of the armistice, the Ottomans surrendered their remaining garrisons in Hejaz, Yemen, Syria, Mesopotamia, Tripolitania, and Cyrenaica to the Allied Powers. The Treaty of Sevres (1920) made the surrender of the territory and relinquished sovereignty to the Allied Powers.​

SECTION XIII --- Treaty of Sevres said:
GENERAL PROVISIONS.
ARTICLE 132
.

Outside her frontiers as fixed by the present Treaty Turkey hereby renounces in favour of the Principal Allied Powers all rights and title which she could claim on any ground over or concerning any territories outside Europe which are not otherwise disposed of by the present Treaty.

Turkey undertakes to recognise and conform to the measures which may be taken now or in the future by the Principal Allied Powers, in agreement where necessary with third Powers, in order to carry the above stipulation into effect.

The Article 22(8) Covenant, sets the degree of authority, control, or administration to be exercised by the Mandatory shall, if not previously agreed upon by the Members of the League, be explicitly defined in each case by the Council. The Mandate for Palestine was created by the Allied Powers for the Mandate and subject to the Council of the League of Nations (The consent of the Council of the League of Nations is required for any modification of the terms of this mandate.). The Mandate does not pass-on sovereignty as a directive to any other entity.
  • Whereas the Principal Allied Powers have also agreed that the Mandatory should be responsible for putting into effect the declaration originally made on November 2nd, 1917, by the Government of His Britannic Majesty, and adopted by the said Powers, in favour of the establishment in Palestine of a national home for the Jewish people.
Most Respectfully,
R
The Treaty of Sevres was never ratified. Why did you quote it?

The LoN Covenant and its mandate system are very much misunderstood. I think this is by design. The focus of the mandate system was to bring the people to independence. It was the people who were considered the sovereigns. The right to Palestinian independence and sovereignty is even stated in subsequent UN resolutions.

...independent nations can be provisionally recognized subject to the rendering of administrative advice and assistance by a Mandatory until such time as they are able to stand alone.

See more at: League of Nations covenant - Peace Treaty of Versailles Peace Conference text Non-UN document 28 April 1919

The Mandate for Palestine was not Palestine. It was a temporarily assigned administration that held Palestine in trust. It had no land or borders. When the Mandate left Palestine, Palestine was still there.

Britain left Palestine without creating an independent state or a Jewish homeland. Its mandate was a complete flop.





Because it was the basis of the treaty of Lausanne and was accepted as part of that treaty making it very relevant

The Mandate spelt out the rules and in the case of the 22% OF PALESTINE LEFT it clearly states it was for the RESURECTED NATIONAL OF THE JEWS.

Stop putting 2015 laws in place for things that happened 100 years ago. the facts remain that at no time were the arab muslims offered any part of the 22% of Palestine having already received the other 78%. You mix up two mandates in your attempt at demonising the Jews. The mandate for Palestine was the legal document drawn up by the LoN that set in stone the facts, the British mandate was the rules by which the British had to work. The mandate for Palestine set out the borders of the British mandate and told the world what was to happen in respect of the Jewish national home. Yes the British mandate was a flop because they appeased the arab muslims all the time and ran roughshod over the Jews when they should have been helping the Jews to set up their land. Britain did everything it could to destroy the Jews and the dream so yes their mandate was a flop, by the LoN Mandate for Palestine did succeed and the Jews did get their homeland and have had to fight every second of every day to keep it safe.
 
It existed in 635 C.E. as well when the arab muslims started their colonisation, so it must apply to them even more. So tell them to get out of Israel, Judea and Samaria to make room for the original inhabitants.

But it is only your belief that the Jews colonised their own land stolen by the arab muslims, who then lost it for good in 1099. The truth is the legal owners gave the land to the Jews for their National home and the squatters did not like that.
The truth is the legal owners gave the land to the Jews...

Not true, again. International law, the Treaty of Lausanne, and the mandate gave Palestine to the Palestinians.






LINKS ?
In international law, when a state is dissolved and new states are established, “the population follows the change of sovereignty in matters of nationality.”5 As a rule, therefore, citizens of the former state should automatically acquire the nationality of the successor state in which they had already been residing.

Nationality constitutes a legal bond that connects individuals with a specific territory, making them citizens of that territory.

Genesis of Citizenship in Palestine and Israel
--------------------------------
SECTION II .
NATIONALITY.
ARTICLE 30.

Turkish subjects habitually resident in territory which in accordance with the provisions of the present Treaty is detached from Turkey will become ipsofacto, in the conditions laid down by the local law, nationals of the State to which such territory is transferred.

Treaty of Lausanne - World War I Document Archive
------------------------------
3.Q. What measures have been taken to bring the country under such political, administrative and economic conditions as will safeguard the civil and religious rights of all the inhabitants of Palestine, irrespective of race and religion? What are the effects of these measures?

A. The Palestinian Citizenship Order in Council which was made in August, 1925, provides for the acquisition of Palestinian citizenship by persons habitually resident in the country who were Ottoman subjects, and persons who were foreign subjects and take up permanent residence.

Mandate for Palestine - Report of the Mandatory to the League of Nations 31 December 1925
----------------------------------
The first Palestine Citizenship Order was enacted by Britain on 24 July 1925; it was the first official enactment that outlined the legal definition of a Palestinian. Its first article defined a Palestinian as a "Turkish subject habitually resident in the territory of Palestine." It defined the territorial criteria for citizenship, and appeared to be nondiscriminatory legislation, which provided granting of citizenship to an applicant, irrespective of their race, religion or language.

History of Palestinian nationality - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia





What year did that become International law, and a link proving it.

What you are quoting is not International law and the state that took control was Britain, plus no state was actually dissolved as none existed there prior to 1948.


So no actual links to support your claims as the treaty of Lausanne does not mention Palestine once on purpose, because it was never a nation in its own right. The Mandate for Palestine ( as opposed to the British Mandate ) clearly states

The Avalon Project The Palestine Mandate


ARTICLE 1.
The Mandatory shall have full powers of legislation and of administration, save as they may be limited by the terms of this mandate.

ART. 2.
The Mandatory shall be responsible for placing the country under such political, administrative and economic conditions as will secure the establishment of the Jewish national home, as laid down in the preamble, and the development of self-governing institutions, and also for safeguarding the civil and religious rights of all the inhabitants of Palestine, irrespective of race and religion.

ART. 3.
The Mandatory shall, so far as circumstances permit, encourage local autonomy.

ART. 4.
An appropriate Jewish agency shall be recognised as a public body for the purpose of advising and co-operating with the Administration of Palestine in such economic, social and other matters as may affect the establishment of the Jewish national home and the interests of the Jewish population in Palestine, and, subject always to the control of the Administration to assist and take part in the development of the country.

The Zionist organization, so long as its organization and constitution are in the opinion of the Mandatory appropriate, shall be recognised as such agency. It shall take steps in consultation with His Britannic Majesty's Government to secure the co-operation of all Jews who are willing to assist in the establishment of the Jewish national home.

ART. 5.
The Mandatory shall be responsible for seeing that no Palestine territory shall be ceded or leased to, or in any way placed under the control of the Government of any foreign Power.

ART. 6.
The Administration of Palestine, while ensuring that the rights and position of other sections of the population are not prejudiced, shall facilitate Jewish immigration under suitable conditions and shall encourage, in co-operation with the Jewish agency referred to in Article 4, close settlement by Jews on the land, including State lands and waste lands not required for public purposes.

ART. 7.
The Administration of Palestine shall be responsible for enacting a nationality law. There shall be included in this law provisions framed so as to facilitate the acquisition of Palestinian citizenship by Jews who take up their permanent residence in Palestine.



Not once does it mention the nation of Palestine or the arab muslims, but it does mention the fact that in INTERNATIONAL LAW the Jews would receive the 22% of Palestine remaining as their NATIONAL HOME and that any Jew that migrated to Palestine would be automatically granted protected Palestinian citizenship under the British mandate.

This is how you produce evidence of your claims, not some site that upholds your own POV.
And the Mandate left Palestine without accomplishing it goals.




The mandate was in place until 1949 when it signed of on the final nation, the UN did not have the authority to partition Palestine but did so because they were and are NAZI ANTI SEMITIC JEW HATERS.

You confuse the British with the Mandate when they are totally different aspects of reality. The Mandate was a legal concept put in place by the LoN between 1919 and 1923, the British administered the mandate and gave it up when they found they could no longer appease the arab muslims. The mandate was still in place even though the failed administrators had thrown in the towel.
 
P F Tinmore, et al,

This is not very accurate.

The Treaty of Sevres was never ratified. Why did you quote it?
(COMMENT)

Because for four years, the tenants cited in the Treaty of Sevres (1920) were the guide used. Between the Treaty of Sevres (1920) and the Treaty of Lausanne (1924) the Palestine Order in Council and the Mandate for Palestine were created on the basis of the San Remo Convention which came first. At the time the decisions were made on the issues surrounding the territory subject to the mandate the only signed Treaty was the 1920 version at Sevres. The Treaty of Lausanne was not even contemplated yet. (Incidentally, the Arab Higher Committee during this same period, refused to establish an Arab Agency. The Arab leaders declined that this offer on the ground that it would not satisfy the aspirations of the Arab people.)
Here again, the Treaty of Sevres was never ratified. The exceptions for Palestine in The Treaty of Sevres were not in the Treaty of Lausanne that was ratified.

The Arab Agency was part of the colonial scheme. The Arabs wanted no part of colonialism.
The LoN Covenant and its mandate system are very much misunderstood. I think this is by design. The focus of the mandate system was to bring the people to independence. It was the people who were considered the sovereigns. The right to Palestinian independence and sovereignty is even stated in subsequent UN resolutions.

...independent nations can be provisionally recognized subject to the rendering of administrative advice and assistance by a Mandatory until such time as they are able to stand alone.

See more at: League of Nations covenant - Peace Treaty of Versailles Peace Conference text Non-UN document 28 April 1919

(COMMENT)

The provisional recognition cited in the Article 22(4) of the Covenant was both vague and non-specific. It could have applied to any one of a number of communities (territories) that were once under the Ottoman/Turkish Empire (Lebanon, Syria, Mesopotamia, Trans-Jordan, Iraq). In 1919, it was not necessarily pertaining to Palestine which had not yet been determined by the Principal Allied Powers; as stipulated in Part III, Section VII (SYRIA, MESOPOTAMIA, PALESTINE) of the Treaty of Sevres spoke directly to the territory of Palestine.
Again, The treaty of Sevres was never ratified. It is meaningless.
The Mandate for Palestine was not Palestine. It was a temporarily assigned administration that held Palestine in trust. It had no land or borders. When the Mandate left Palestine, Palestine was still there.
(COMMENT)

Palestine was not subject to a distinct territory until the Allied Powers determine the boundaries. And that distinctive territory was subject to the Palestine Order in Council and the Mandate for Palestine.
Palestine's international boundaries were defined by 1922.

What is your point?
When the Mandate was terminated, the territory was remanded to the International Trusteeship System (Article 77a, UN Charter), with a new successor government appointed.
You have posted where this was said but you have posted nothing to show that it actually happened.
Britain left Palestine without creating an independent state or a Jewish homeland. Its mandate was a complete flop.
(COMMENT)

The Mandatory believed that His Majesty’s government did not have the power or authority, under the terms of the Mandate, to award the country either to the Arabs or to the Jews, or even to partition it between them. The Mandatory and His Majesty’s government then ask the United Nations to consider the circumstances and the situation, and to recommend a settlement of the problem. The Mandatory and His Majesty’s government did not intend to recommend any particular solution.
Indeed, the mandate had no authority over land or borders.
The Arab Community (the Arab Higher Committee) refused to cooperate at all with the UK (as the Mandatory) or the Palestine Commission (the successor government) having refused to establish a Arab Agency (counterpart to the Jewish Agency) or to participate in the development of a solution. On the termination of the Mandate, and in coordination with the UN Palestine Commission, the State of Israel was declared.

If the allegation has any merit, it is the fault of the Arab Community and Leadership; which presented the Mandatory with an irreconcilable differences aimed at both the Allied Powers and the UN.

Most Respectfully,
R
The irreconcilable differences were imposed by the British. The Arabs wanted nothing to do with them.
Please show me how where Palestine's borders were defined in 1922..
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.

Genesis of Citizenship in Palestine and Israel





But trans Jordan was never removed from the auspices of the Mandate for Palestine was it, that is until 1949 when it was finally signed of as a fully fledged independent nation.
 
P F Tinmore, et al,

Let's see if I can clean this up for you; so you don't have to interpret anything.

The Treaty of Sevres was never ratified. Why did you quote it?

Again, The treaty of Sevres was never ratified. It is meaningless.

Palestine's international boundaries were defined by 1922.
(COMMENT)

  • Clarifying the Treaty of Sevres (1920)
The importance of the Treaty of Sevres (1920) --- and before the Treaty of Lausanne (1924) --- rests in an obscure and little known agreement [04/25/1920 Syria, Mesopotamia, Palestine mandates - San Remo conference - Resolution (Non-UN document)]
ecblank.gif
which stated in part that: "The terms of the mandates in respect of the above territories (Syria, Mesopotamia, Palestine) will be formulated by the Principal Allied Powers and submitted to the Council of the League of Nations for approval. Turkey hereby undertakes, in accordance with the provisions of Article [132 of the Treaty of Sevres] to accept any decisions which may be taken in this connection."

The Treaty itself did not have to be ratified in connection with the Mandates pertaining to Syria, Mesopotamia, Palestine; because those aspects where agreed to in the 1920 agreement. And that is why the Treaty of Lausanne is silent on the issue of Palestine. The Ottoman/Turkish Empire had already agreed to accept the decision of the Allied Powers in those territories --- four years earlier. While it is true that the Treaty of Sevres was not ratified, it was signed and it was subordinated to the San Remo Convention --- as you can see.​

  • Clarifying the Boundaries of Palestine
EXTENSION OF CONTROL TO CERTAIN AREAS SOUTH OF BEERSHEBA. DELIMITATION OF THE
FRONTIER BETWEEN SYRIA ON THE ONE HAND AND PALESTINE AND TRANS-JORDAN ON THE OTHER.

Report to the Permanent Mandate Commission

"With regard to the two villages in the north of Palestine, Mr. Moody explained that the frontier between Syria, on the one hand, and Palestine and Trans-Jordan, on the other, was defined in the Franco-British Convention of 1920, but had not been delimited until 1931."​

End of Year Report December 1932

Palestine lies on the western edge of the continent of Asia between latitude 30° N. and 33° N., Longitude 34° 30 E. and 35° 30' E.

On the south it is bounded by Egyptian and Saudi Arabian territory, on the east by Trans-Jordan, on the north by the French Mandated Territories of Syria and the Lebanon, and on the west by the Mediterranean.

The boundaries are described as follows:--
  • South.--From a point west of Rafa on the Mediterranean to a point two miles west of Aqaba in the Gulf of Aqaba.
  • East.--From a point two miles west of Aqaba in the Gulf of Aqaba up the centre of the Wadi Araba, the Dead Sea, and the River Jordan, to the junction of the latter with the River Yarmuk, thence up the centre of the River Yarmuk to the Syrian frontier.
  • North.--The northern boundary was laid down by the Anglo-French Convention of the 23rd December, 1920, and its delimitation was ratified in 1923. Stated briefly, the boundary runs from Ras el Naqura on the Mediterranean eastwards to Metulla and across the upper Jordan valley to Banias, thence to Jisr Banat Yaqub, thence along the Jordan to the Lake of Tiberias on to El Hamme station on the Samakh-Deraa railway line.
  • West.--The Mediterranean Sea.
The relationship of Trans-Jordan and the Mandate for Palestine --- REPORT BY HIS BRITANNIC MAJESTY'S GOVERNMENT ON THE ADMINISTRATION UNDER MANDATE OF PALESTINE.

2. 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. The declaration of His Majesty's Government with regard to its Mandatory obligations in Transjordan, made to the Council of League of Nations in September, 1922, (Cmd. 1785) was in the following terms:--

"In the application of the Mandate to Transjordan, the action which in Palestine is taken by the Administration of the latter country, will be taken by the Administration of Transjordan under the general supervision of the Mandatory.

"His Majesty's Government accept full responsibility as Mandatory for Transjordan, and undertake that such provision as may be made for the administration of that country in accordance with Article 25 of the Mandate shall be in no way inconsistent with those provisions of the Mandate which are not by this resolution declared inapplicable."​

X.--TRANS-JORDANIA. Interim Report of Civil Administration July 1921

Included in the area of the Palestine Mandate is the territory of Trans-Jordania. It is bounded on the north by the frontier of Syria, placed under the mandate of France; on the south by the kingdom of the Hejaz; and on the west by the line of the Jordan and the Dead Sea; while on the east it stretches into the desert and ends--the boundary is not yet defined--where Mesopotamia begins.​

Most Respectfully,
R
 
P F Tinmore, et al,

Let's see if I can clean this up for you; so you don't have to interpret anything.

The Treaty of Sevres was never ratified. Why did you quote it?

Again, The treaty of Sevres was never ratified. It is meaningless.

Palestine's international boundaries were defined by 1922.
(COMMENT)

  • Clarifying the Treaty of Sevres (1920)
The importance of the Treaty of Sevres (1920) --- and before the Treaty of Lausanne (1924) --- rests in an obscure and little known agreement [04/25/1920 Syria, Mesopotamia, Palestine mandates - San Remo conference - Resolution (Non-UN document)]
ecblank.gif
which stated in part that: "The terms of the mandates in respect of the above territories (Syria, Mesopotamia, Palestine) will be formulated by the Principal Allied Powers and submitted to the Council of the League of Nations for approval. Turkey hereby undertakes, in accordance with the provisions of Article [132 of the Treaty of Sevres] to accept any decisions which may be taken in this connection."

The Treaty itself did not have to be ratified in connection with the Mandates pertaining to Syria, Mesopotamia, Palestine; because those aspects where agreed to in the 1920 agreement. And that is why the Treaty of Lausanne is silent on the issue of Palestine. The Ottoman/Turkish Empire had already agreed to accept the decision of the Allied Powers in those territories --- four years earlier. While it is true that the Treaty of Sevres was not ratified, it was signed and it was subordinated to the San Remo Convention --- as you can see.​

  • Clarifying the Boundaries of Palestine
EXTENSION OF CONTROL TO CERTAIN AREAS SOUTH OF BEERSHEBA. DELIMITATION OF THE
FRONTIER BETWEEN SYRIA ON THE ONE HAND AND PALESTINE AND TRANS-JORDAN ON THE OTHER.

Report to the Permanent Mandate Commission

"With regard to the two villages in the north of Palestine, Mr. Moody explained that the frontier between Syria, on the one hand, and Palestine and Trans-Jordan, on the other, was defined in the Franco-British Convention of 1920, but had not been delimited until 1931."​

End of Year Report December 1932

Palestine lies on the western edge of the continent of Asia between latitude 30° N. and 33° N., Longitude 34° 30 E. and 35° 30' E.

On the south it is bounded by Egyptian and Saudi Arabian territory, on the east by Trans-Jordan, on the north by the French Mandated Territories of Syria and the Lebanon, and on the west by the Mediterranean.

The boundaries are described as follows:--
  • South.--From a point west of Rafa on the Mediterranean to a point two miles west of Aqaba in the Gulf of Aqaba.
  • East.--From a point two miles west of Aqaba in the Gulf of Aqaba up the centre of the Wadi Araba, the Dead Sea, and the River Jordan, to the junction of the latter with the River Yarmuk, thence up the centre of the River Yarmuk to the Syrian frontier.
  • North.--The northern boundary was laid down by the Anglo-French Convention of the 23rd December, 1920, and its delimitation was ratified in 1923. Stated briefly, the boundary runs from Ras el Naqura on the Mediterranean eastwards to Metulla and across the upper Jordan valley to Banias, thence to Jisr Banat Yaqub, thence along the Jordan to the Lake of Tiberias on to El Hamme station on the Samakh-Deraa railway line.
  • West.--The Mediterranean Sea.
The relationship of Trans-Jordan and the Mandate for Palestine --- REPORT BY HIS BRITANNIC MAJESTY'S GOVERNMENT ON THE ADMINISTRATION UNDER MANDATE OF PALESTINE.

2. 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. The declaration of His Majesty's Government with regard to its Mandatory obligations in Transjordan, made to the Council of League of Nations in September, 1922, (Cmd. 1785) was in the following terms:--

"In the application of the Mandate to Transjordan, the action which in Palestine is taken by the Administration of the latter country, will be taken by the Administration of Transjordan under the general supervision of the Mandatory.

"His Majesty's Government accept full responsibility as Mandatory for Transjordan, and undertake that such provision as may be made for the administration of that country in accordance with Article 25 of the Mandate shall be in no way inconsistent with those provisions of the Mandate which are not by this resolution declared inapplicable."​

X.--TRANS-JORDANIA. Interim Report of Civil Administration July 1921

Included in the area of the Palestine Mandate is the territory of Trans-Jordania. It is bounded on the north by the frontier of Syria, placed under the mandate of France; on the south by the kingdom of the Hejaz; and on the west by the line of the Jordan and the Dead Sea; while on the east it stretches into the desert and ends--the boundary is not yet defined--where Mesopotamia begins.​

Most Respectfully,
R

It's funny how he never addresses the excellent points in your posts. He just keeps on with believing Islam is somehow "good." Good Lord.
 
P F Tinmore, et al,

Let's see if I can clean this up for you; so you don't have to interpret anything.

The Treaty of Sevres was never ratified. Why did you quote it?

Again, The treaty of Sevres was never ratified. It is meaningless.

Palestine's international boundaries were defined by 1922.
(COMMENT)

  • Clarifying the Treaty of Sevres (1920)
The importance of the Treaty of Sevres (1920) --- and before the Treaty of Lausanne (1924) --- rests in an obscure and little known agreement [04/25/1920 Syria, Mesopotamia, Palestine mandates - San Remo conference - Resolution (Non-UN document)]
ecblank.gif
which stated in part that: "The terms of the mandates in respect of the above territories (Syria, Mesopotamia, Palestine) will be formulated by the Principal Allied Powers and submitted to the Council of the League of Nations for approval. Turkey hereby undertakes, in accordance with the provisions of Article [132 of the Treaty of Sevres] to accept any decisions which may be taken in this connection."

The Treaty itself did not have to be ratified in connection with the Mandates pertaining to Syria, Mesopotamia, Palestine; because those aspects where agreed to in the 1920 agreement. And that is why the Treaty of Lausanne is silent on the issue of Palestine. The Ottoman/Turkish Empire had already agreed to accept the decision of the Allied Powers in those territories --- four years earlier. While it is true that the Treaty of Sevres was not ratified, it was signed and it was subordinated to the San Remo Convention --- as you can see.​

  • Clarifying the Boundaries of Palestine
EXTENSION OF CONTROL TO CERTAIN AREAS SOUTH OF BEERSHEBA. DELIMITATION OF THE
FRONTIER BETWEEN SYRIA ON THE ONE HAND AND PALESTINE AND TRANS-JORDAN ON THE OTHER.

Report to the Permanent Mandate Commission

"With regard to the two villages in the north of Palestine, Mr. Moody explained that the frontier between Syria, on the one hand, and Palestine and Trans-Jordan, on the other, was defined in the Franco-British Convention of 1920, but had not been delimited until 1931."​

End of Year Report December 1932

Palestine lies on the western edge of the continent of Asia between latitude 30° N. and 33° N., Longitude 34° 30 E. and 35° 30' E.

On the south it is bounded by Egyptian and Saudi Arabian territory, on the east by Trans-Jordan, on the north by the French Mandated Territories of Syria and the Lebanon, and on the west by the Mediterranean.

The boundaries are described as follows:--
  • South.--From a point west of Rafa on the Mediterranean to a point two miles west of Aqaba in the Gulf of Aqaba.
  • East.--From a point two miles west of Aqaba in the Gulf of Aqaba up the centre of the Wadi Araba, the Dead Sea, and the River Jordan, to the junction of the latter with the River Yarmuk, thence up the centre of the River Yarmuk to the Syrian frontier.
  • North.--The northern boundary was laid down by the Anglo-French Convention of the 23rd December, 1920, and its delimitation was ratified in 1923. Stated briefly, the boundary runs from Ras el Naqura on the Mediterranean eastwards to Metulla and across the upper Jordan valley to Banias, thence to Jisr Banat Yaqub, thence along the Jordan to the Lake of Tiberias on to El Hamme station on the Samakh-Deraa railway line.
  • West.--The Mediterranean Sea.
The relationship of Trans-Jordan and the Mandate for Palestine --- REPORT BY HIS BRITANNIC MAJESTY'S GOVERNMENT ON THE ADMINISTRATION UNDER MANDATE OF PALESTINE.

2. 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. The declaration of His Majesty's Government with regard to its Mandatory obligations in Transjordan, made to the Council of League of Nations in September, 1922, (Cmd. 1785) was in the following terms:--

"In the application of the Mandate to Transjordan, the action which in Palestine is taken by the Administration of the latter country, will be taken by the Administration of Transjordan under the general supervision of the Mandatory.

"His Majesty's Government accept full responsibility as Mandatory for Transjordan, and undertake that such provision as may be made for the administration of that country in accordance with Article 25 of the Mandate shall be in no way inconsistent with those provisions of the Mandate which are not by this resolution declared inapplicable."​

X.--TRANS-JORDANIA. Interim Report of Civil Administration July 1921

Included in the area of the Palestine Mandate is the territory of Trans-Jordania. It is bounded on the north by the frontier of Syria, placed under the mandate of France; on the south by the kingdom of the Hejaz; and on the west by the line of the Jordan and the Dead Sea; while on the east it stretches into the desert and ends--the boundary is not yet defined--where Mesopotamia begins.​

Most Respectfully,
R

Problem is if we confuse him with documented facts, we may lose him on this board. Do we want to miss all the laughs he gives us?
 
15th post
P F Tinmore, et al,

Let's see if I can clean this up for you; so you don't have to interpret anything.

The Treaty of Sevres was never ratified. Why did you quote it?

Again, The treaty of Sevres was never ratified. It is meaningless.

Palestine's international boundaries were defined by 1922.
(COMMENT)

  • Clarifying the Treaty of Sevres (1920)
The importance of the Treaty of Sevres (1920) --- and before the Treaty of Lausanne (1924) --- rests in an obscure and little known agreement [04/25/1920 Syria, Mesopotamia, Palestine mandates - San Remo conference - Resolution (Non-UN document)]
ecblank.gif
which stated in part that: "The terms of the mandates in respect of the above territories (Syria, Mesopotamia, Palestine) will be formulated by the Principal Allied Powers and submitted to the Council of the League of Nations for approval. Turkey hereby undertakes, in accordance with the provisions of Article [132 of the Treaty of Sevres] to accept any decisions which may be taken in this connection."

The Treaty itself did not have to be ratified in connection with the Mandates pertaining to Syria, Mesopotamia, Palestine; because those aspects where agreed to in the 1920 agreement. And that is why the Treaty of Lausanne is silent on the issue of Palestine. The Ottoman/Turkish Empire had already agreed to accept the decision of the Allied Powers in those territories --- four years earlier. While it is true that the Treaty of Sevres was not ratified, it was signed and it was subordinated to the San Remo Convention --- as you can see.​

  • Clarifying the Boundaries of Palestine
EXTENSION OF CONTROL TO CERTAIN AREAS SOUTH OF BEERSHEBA. DELIMITATION OF THE
FRONTIER BETWEEN SYRIA ON THE ONE HAND AND PALESTINE AND TRANS-JORDAN ON THE OTHER.

Report to the Permanent Mandate Commission

"With regard to the two villages in the north of Palestine, Mr. Moody explained that the frontier between Syria, on the one hand, and Palestine and Trans-Jordan, on the other, was defined in the Franco-British Convention of 1920, but had not been delimited until 1931."​

End of Year Report December 1932

Palestine lies on the western edge of the continent of Asia between latitude 30° N. and 33° N., Longitude 34° 30 E. and 35° 30' E.

On the south it is bounded by Egyptian and Saudi Arabian territory, on the east by Trans-Jordan, on the north by the French Mandated Territories of Syria and the Lebanon, and on the west by the Mediterranean.

The boundaries are described as follows:--
  • South.--From a point west of Rafa on the Mediterranean to a point two miles west of Aqaba in the Gulf of Aqaba.
  • East.--From a point two miles west of Aqaba in the Gulf of Aqaba up the centre of the Wadi Araba, the Dead Sea, and the River Jordan, to the junction of the latter with the River Yarmuk, thence up the centre of the River Yarmuk to the Syrian frontier.
  • North.--The northern boundary was laid down by the Anglo-French Convention of the 23rd December, 1920, and its delimitation was ratified in 1923. Stated briefly, the boundary runs from Ras el Naqura on the Mediterranean eastwards to Metulla and across the upper Jordan valley to Banias, thence to Jisr Banat Yaqub, thence along the Jordan to the Lake of Tiberias on to El Hamme station on the Samakh-Deraa railway line.
  • West.--The Mediterranean Sea.
The relationship of Trans-Jordan and the Mandate for Palestine --- REPORT BY HIS BRITANNIC MAJESTY'S GOVERNMENT ON THE ADMINISTRATION UNDER MANDATE OF PALESTINE.

2. 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. The declaration of His Majesty's Government with regard to its Mandatory obligations in Transjordan, made to the Council of League of Nations in September, 1922, (Cmd. 1785) was in the following terms:--

"In the application of the Mandate to Transjordan, the action which in Palestine is taken by the Administration of the latter country, will be taken by the Administration of Transjordan under the general supervision of the Mandatory.

"His Majesty's Government accept full responsibility as Mandatory for Transjordan, and undertake that such provision as may be made for the administration of that country in accordance with Article 25 of the Mandate shall be in no way inconsistent with those provisions of the Mandate which are not by this resolution declared inapplicable."​

X.--TRANS-JORDANIA. Interim Report of Civil Administration July 1921

Included in the area of the Palestine Mandate is the territory of Trans-Jordania. It is bounded on the north by the frontier of Syria, placed under the mandate of France; on the south by the kingdom of the Hejaz; and on the west by the line of the Jordan and the Dead Sea; while on the east it stretches into the desert and ends--the boundary is not yet defined--where Mesopotamia begins.​

Most Respectfully,
R

Problem is if we confuse him with documented facts, we may lose him on this board. Do we want to miss all the laughs he gives us?

You provide us with the best laughs, ignoring source documentation while not realizing that Rocco is making the Palestinian's point.
 
montelatici, et al,

Interesting!

You provide us with the best laughs, ignoring source documentation while not realizing that Rocco is making the Palestinian's point.
(QUESTION)

Just what point do you think I'm making?

What is the "Palestinian's point?"

Most Respectfully,
R
 
The point is that Europeans organized the colonization of Palestine by Europeans at the expense of the people living in Palestine. All your recent posts regarding the subject confirm that fact.
 
montelatici, et al,

Yes, I've heard this claim many times.

The point is that Europeans organized the colonization of Palestine by Europeans at the expense of the people living in Palestine. All your recent posts regarding the subject confirm that fact.
(QUESTIONS)

Who maintained the government control of the territory? (HINT: It was not the Arab Palestinian.)
What territory (expense) was taken from the Arab Palestinian? (HINT: None, the territory transferred from the Ottoman/Turk Empire to the Allied Powers.)
Who's territory was colonized? (HINT: Sovereign territory which transferred from the Ottoman/Turk Empire to the Allied Powers.)
Who was the colonial power?
(HINT: There was not one. None of the Allied Powers engaged in Colonialism for their own benefit; in which indigenous populations are directly ruled or displaced as a original intent of the Allied Powers. Displacement was a direct result of the indigenous population (twice the size of the Jewish Settlers) posing a direct threat to regional peace.)

(COMMENT)

The Arab Palestinian has been a disruptive influence and a force opposed to the maintenance of international and regional --- peace and security. The Arab Palestinian was not in the practice of demonstrating tolerance and live together in peace with one another as good neighbors. The Arab Palestinian did not demonstrate the fulfillment in good faith of the obligation and duty to refrain in their relations from the threat or use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of any State. The Arab Palestinian at no time, performed their duty to refrain from the threat or use of force to violate the existing international boundaries of another State or as a means of solving international disputes, including territorial disputes and problems concerning frontiers of States.

Most Respectfully,
R





 
Status
Not open for further replies.

New Topics

Back
Top Bottom