Who Are The Palestinians?

[Kondor3]

Pfffft, facts according to Israel.

No, facts according to history.

Zionist history, perhaps.

It's ok challenger, I don't expect you to accept the truth. I've seen your posts many times where you are simply unable to handle the truth. It's a known fact that pro Palestinians are allergic to it, so don't worry, you're not alone

There are many "truths", all with their own preconceptions and biases, interpretations, feelings and fantasies. Accepting one "truth" blinds you to the possibilities in all the others and is intellectually lazy. I strive to obtain "The Truth" from amongst the web of lies and deceptions that are out there pretending to be "The Truth".

If you are comfortable with your version of the "truth", that's fine, but your mind is closed as a consequence. As the saying goes, "Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice, shame on me." I and millions of others have found that Zionist Historiography and Hasbara has lied, again and again and again, so pardon my continuing skepticism about the stream of Hasbara I'm bombarded with from the Pro-Israelis here. So I'm glad I'm not alone, but thanks for your concern.

Well, you must be blind. Israel has had nuclear weapons for years. If they wanted to, they could wipe the Palestinians off the map. They have the power to do so, but they have not. They have tolerated a LOT from their "neighbors" over many, many, many years. Obviously you are quite ignorant.

No, not ignorant, just partisan.

 

[ChrisL]

montelatici, et al,

Remembering --- that the UK Colonial Office (UKCO) to the Palestine Arab Delegation (PAD) is not an official; statement of policy. Again, remember as stated in Correspondence #2, Paragraph #2, Mr Churchill and the UKCO was "not in a position to negotiate officially with [the PAD] or with any other body which claims to represent the whole or, part of the people of Palestine, since no official machinery for representation has as yet been constituted." The Arab Palestinian Leadership having rejected (more then once) the opportunity to establish an official conduit.

Also remember that the very same people that wrote the Covenant for the League of Nations, also wrote the Mandate. There is nothing at all in Article 22 of the Covenant, that would suggest that Article 22 was in anyway dedicated exclusively to the opportunities of Arab Palestinians --- or --- predicated upon the claim that the granting an advantage to the Arab Palestinians. The same authors of the 1919 Covenant, were also the principles at the 1920 San Remo Convention in which the framework for the Mandate of Palestine was agreed upon; and where the concept was hammered-out in regards to the establishment of the Jewish National Home (JNH).

As clearly stated, any obligation antecedent to the entry of a state as a member of the League of Nations that conflicted with the covenant of the LoN, was to abrogated by the entrant (UK) prior to joining the LoN.

(b) The object aimed at by Article 22 of the Covenant of the League of Nations is "the well-being and development of the people" of the land. Alien Jews not in Palestine do not come within the scope of this aim, neither is their association with Palestine more close than that of Christians and Moslems all over the world. Consequently the Jewish National Home policy is contrary to the spirit of the Covenant.

(c) Article XX of the Covenant reads: "The Members of this League severally agree that this Covenant is accepted as abrogating all obligations or understandings inter se which are inconsistent with the terms thereof, and solemnly undertake that they will not hereafter enter into any engagements inconsistent with the terms thereof.

"In case any Member of the League shall, before becoming a Member of the League, have undertaken any obligations inconsistent with the terms of this Covenant, it shall be the duty of such Member to take immediate steps to procure its release from such obligations."

- See more at: UK correspondence with Palestine Arab Delegation and Zionist Organization British policy in Palestine Churchill White Paper - UK documentation Cmd. 1700 Non-UN document excerpts 1 July 1922

(COMMENT)

The Covenant grants no special or unique application to the indigenous population of the territory under mandate. In fact, Article 22, could be thought of as applying in general to any of the orphaned territories left in the wake of the post-War conditions.

Relative to Article 22/1 of the Covenant:

To those colonies and territories which as a consequence of the late war have ceased to be under the sovereignty of the States which formerly governed them and which are inhabited by peoples not yet able to stand by themselves under the strenuous conditions of the modern world, there should be applied the principle that the well-being and development of such peoples form a sacred trust of civilisation and that securities for the performance of this trust should be embodied in this Covenant.

In fact, of the Middle East Protectorates and Mandates, the following Arab countries were determined to stand-alone, with their independence and sovereignty.

• Lebanon: Independence: 22 November 1943 (from League of Nations mandate under French administration)
• Syria: Independence: 17 April 1946 (from League of Nations mandate under French administration)
• Jordan: Independence: 25 May 1946 (from League of Nations mandate under British administration)
• Iraq: Independence: 3 October 1932 (from League of Nations mandate under British administration)
• Israel: Independence: 14 May 1948 (from League of Nations mandate under British administration)
• Kuwait: Independence: 19 June 1961 (from UK)
• Egypt: Independence: 28 February 1922 (from UK)

Relative to Article 22/4 of the Covenant:

Certain communities formerly belonging to the Turkish Empire have reached a stage of development where their existence as 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. The wishes of these communities must be a principal consideration in the selection of the Mandatory.

Nothing in this clause specifically applies to the Palestinian territory under Mandate. It has a general application but on pinpoint specific application. While in general one could say that the League of Nations gave Britain the Mandate to administer Palestine, which required her to implement the Balfour Declaration, and undertake a “sacred trust of civilisation” to advance the welfare of the all people and guide them to independence. And here again, --- while the Jewish citizens under the Mandate of Palestine chose to follow the "Step Preparatory to Independence" as approved by the General Assembly; the Arab Palestinians turned this opportunity down at least three times.​

Relative to Article 22/8 of the Covenant:

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.

One of the major objectives of the Mandate, as passed-down from the San Remo Convention, by the Principal Allied Powers to the Mandatory --- was the responsibility for putting into effect the declaration originally made on November 2nd, 1917, in favor of the establishment in Palestine of a national home for the Jewish people.
​

I have heard, many times, that the Palestinians were not given the proper well-being care and development they had due to them. That they were denied the right to self-determination, and that they were not dealt with fairly. The is a form of negativism in which the under developed culture does not have the ability to stand on its own --- and who tends to be negative. Of course, most cultures have periods or moments of whining, complaining, and displaying “the glass-is-half-empty” attitude now and again, but the continuation --- day after day, year after year, decade after decade --- of dwelling on the worst outcome of any given situation --- droning on and on about the unfairness of the world, then there is something more wrong with the culture than meets the eye.

Most Respectfully,
R

It wouldn't matter if it were the British Virgin Islands. If the British had a deal/treaty/agreement with the Gurkhas to populate the BVIs with thousands Gurkhas and their extended families in order to create a Gurkha National home there, at the expense of the locals, they should, by the terms of the LoN Covenant, have extricated themselves out of that agreement.

There hasn't been any such campaign, validated by an International Organization, against any people that was planned and executed to replace an indigenous people living a continent away from Europe, with a "favored" European people. I don't think that anyone looking at it as a neutral could ever imagine that such a process, with all the opaque and sinister tactics combined with betrayal, used against the Christians and Muslims would be acceptable to any fair and neutral observer.

And like a good little islamonazi stooge you deny the indigenous Jews of Palestine their rights to free determination and a homeland. So how about we make all muslims stateless and destined to wander the world for the next 2,000 years as unwanted pariahs ?

Not true.

Even the PLO Charter specifically recognizes indigenous Jews as legitimate citizens of Palestine.

YOU are one of the most dishonest posters here and one of the most disgusting. Jews are not respected as "citizens." They are considered dhimmis. Anyone who is not Muslim, is a second class citizen.

 

[ChrisL]

No, facts according to history.

Zionist history, perhaps.

It's ok challenger, I don't expect you to accept the truth. I've seen your posts many times where you are simply unable to handle the truth. It's a known fact that pro Palestinians are allergic to it, so don't worry, you're not alone

There are many "truths", all with their own preconceptions and biases, interpretations, feelings and fantasies. Accepting one "truth" blinds you to the possibilities in all the others and is intellectually lazy. I strive to obtain "The Truth" from amongst the web of lies and deceptions that are out there pretending to be "The Truth".

If you are comfortable with your version of the "truth", that's fine, but your mind is closed as a consequence. As the saying goes, "Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice, shame on me." I and millions of others have found that Zionist Historiography and Hasbara has lied, again and again and again, so pardon my continuing skepticism about the stream of Hasbara I'm bombarded with from the Pro-Israelis here. So I'm glad I'm not alone, but thanks for your concern.

Well, you must be blind. Israel has had nuclear weapons for years. If they wanted to, they could wipe the Palestinians off the map. They have the power to do so, but they have not. They have tolerated a LOT from their "neighbors" over many, many, many years. Obviously you are quite ignorant.

No, not ignorant, just partisan.

Or just liars.

 

[P F Tinmore]

montelatici, et al,

Remembering --- that the UK Colonial Office (UKCO) to the Palestine Arab Delegation (PAD) is not an official; statement of policy. Again, remember as stated in Correspondence #2, Paragraph #2, Mr Churchill and the UKCO was "not in a position to negotiate officially with [the PAD] or with any other body which claims to represent the whole or, part of the people of Palestine, since no official machinery for representation has as yet been constituted." The Arab Palestinian Leadership having rejected (more then once) the opportunity to establish an official conduit.

Also remember that the very same people that wrote the Covenant for the League of Nations, also wrote the Mandate. There is nothing at all in Article 22 of the Covenant, that would suggest that Article 22 was in anyway dedicated exclusively to the opportunities of Arab Palestinians --- or --- predicated upon the claim that the granting an advantage to the Arab Palestinians. The same authors of the 1919 Covenant, were also the principles at the 1920 San Remo Convention in which the framework for the Mandate of Palestine was agreed upon; and where the concept was hammered-out in regards to the establishment of the Jewish National Home (JNH).

As clearly stated, any obligation antecedent to the entry of a state as a member of the League of Nations that conflicted with the covenant of the LoN, was to abrogated by the entrant (UK) prior to joining the LoN.

(b) The object aimed at by Article 22 of the Covenant of the League of Nations is "the well-being and development of the people" of the land. Alien Jews not in Palestine do not come within the scope of this aim, neither is their association with Palestine more close than that of Christians and Moslems all over the world. Consequently the Jewish National Home policy is contrary to the spirit of the Covenant.

(c) Article XX of the Covenant reads: "The Members of this League severally agree that this Covenant is accepted as abrogating all obligations or understandings inter se which are inconsistent with the terms thereof, and solemnly undertake that they will not hereafter enter into any engagements inconsistent with the terms thereof.

"In case any Member of the League shall, before becoming a Member of the League, have undertaken any obligations inconsistent with the terms of this Covenant, it shall be the duty of such Member to take immediate steps to procure its release from such obligations."

- See more at: UK correspondence with Palestine Arab Delegation and Zionist Organization British policy in Palestine Churchill White Paper - UK documentation Cmd. 1700 Non-UN document excerpts 1 July 1922

(COMMENT)

The Covenant grants no special or unique application to the indigenous population of the territory under mandate. In fact, Article 22, could be thought of as applying in general to any of the orphaned territories left in the wake of the post-War conditions.

Relative to Article 22/1 of the Covenant:

To those colonies and territories which as a consequence of the late war have ceased to be under the sovereignty of the States which formerly governed them and which are inhabited by peoples not yet able to stand by themselves under the strenuous conditions of the modern world, there should be applied the principle that the well-being and development of such peoples form a sacred trust of civilisation and that securities for the performance of this trust should be embodied in this Covenant.

In fact, of the Middle East Protectorates and Mandates, the following Arab countries were determined to stand-alone, with their independence and sovereignty.

• Lebanon: Independence: 22 November 1943 (from League of Nations mandate under French administration)
• Syria: Independence: 17 April 1946 (from League of Nations mandate under French administration)
• Jordan: Independence: 25 May 1946 (from League of Nations mandate under British administration)
• Iraq: Independence: 3 October 1932 (from League of Nations mandate under British administration)
• Israel: Independence: 14 May 1948 (from League of Nations mandate under British administration)
• Kuwait: Independence: 19 June 1961 (from UK)
• Egypt: Independence: 28 February 1922 (from UK)

Relative to Article 22/4 of the Covenant:

Certain communities formerly belonging to the Turkish Empire have reached a stage of development where their existence as 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. The wishes of these communities must be a principal consideration in the selection of the Mandatory.

Nothing in this clause specifically applies to the Palestinian territory under Mandate. It has a general application but on pinpoint specific application. While in general one could say that the League of Nations gave Britain the Mandate to administer Palestine, which required her to implement the Balfour Declaration, and undertake a “sacred trust of civilisation” to advance the welfare of the all people and guide them to independence. And here again, --- while the Jewish citizens under the Mandate of Palestine chose to follow the "Step Preparatory to Independence" as approved by the General Assembly; the Arab Palestinians turned this opportunity down at least three times.​

Relative to Article 22/8 of the Covenant:

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.

One of the major objectives of the Mandate, as passed-down from the San Remo Convention, by the Principal Allied Powers to the Mandatory --- was the responsibility for putting into effect the declaration originally made on November 2nd, 1917, in favor of the establishment in Palestine of a national home for the Jewish people.
​

I have heard, many times, that the Palestinians were not given the proper well-being care and development they had due to them. That they were denied the right to self-determination, and that they were not dealt with fairly. The is a form of negativism in which the under developed culture does not have the ability to stand on its own --- and who tends to be negative. Of course, most cultures have periods or moments of whining, complaining, and displaying “the glass-is-half-empty” attitude now and again, but the continuation --- day after day, year after year, decade after decade --- of dwelling on the worst outcome of any given situation --- droning on and on about the unfairness of the world, then there is something more wrong with the culture than meets the eye.

Most Respectfully,
R

It wouldn't matter if it were the British Virgin Islands. If the British had a deal/treaty/agreement with the Gurkhas to populate the BVIs with thousands Gurkhas and their extended families in order to create a Gurkha National home there, at the expense of the locals, they should, by the terms of the LoN Covenant, have extricated themselves out of that agreement.

There hasn't been any such campaign, validated by an International Organization, against any people that was planned and executed to replace an indigenous people living a continent away from Europe, with a "favored" European people. I don't think that anyone looking at it as a neutral could ever imagine that such a process, with all the opaque and sinister tactics combined with betrayal, used against the Christians and Muslims would be acceptable to any fair and neutral observer.

And like a good little islamonazi stooge you deny the indigenous Jews of Palestine their rights to free determination and a homeland. So how about we make all muslims stateless and destined to wander the world for the next 2,000 years as unwanted pariahs ?

Not true.

Even the PLO Charter specifically recognizes indigenous Jews as legitimate citizens of Palestine.

YOU are one of the most dishonest posters here and one of the most disgusting. Jews are not respected as "citizens." They are considered dhimmis. Anyone who is not Muslim, is a second class citizen.

 

[montelatici]

Pfffft, facts according to Israel.

No, facts according to history.

Zionist history, perhaps.

It's ok challenger, I don't expect you to accept the truth. I've seen your posts many times where you are simply unable to handle the truth. It's a known fact that pro Palestinians are allergic to it, so don't worry, you're not alone

There are many "truths", all with their own preconceptions and biases, interpretations, feelings and fantasies. Accepting one "truth" blinds you to the possibilities in all the others and is intellectually lazy. I strive to obtain "The Truth" from amongst the web of lies and deceptions that are out there pretending to be "The Truth".

If you are comfortable with your version of the "truth", that's fine, but your mind is closed as a consequence. As the saying goes, "Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice, shame on me." I and millions of others have found that Zionist Historiography and Hasbara has lied, again and again and again, so pardon my continuing skepticism about the stream of Hasbara I'm bombarded with from the Pro-Israelis here. So I'm glad I'm not alone, but thanks for your concern.

Here is one truth that no one can deny with any documentation to back up a denial. Among the indigenous Palestinians were Jews. And not a single Muslim Palestinian among them. And the overwhelming majority of Muslim Palestinians are squatters on Israel's land for generations with no deeds or titles whatsoever to the land they stole.

Facts are a ***** especially when source documentation is provided. The people living in Palestine before the European invasion/settlement, were for the most part the same indigenous people that were there since people started living there. That they converted from Judaism, the Roman religions or Christianity to Islam, does not make them any less indigenous you moron. Your ridiculous assertion regarding Muslim Palestinians is like claiming the Christian Germans aren't indigenous to Germany because there were no Christians in Germany before the time of Christ.

No, the overwhelming majority of squatters in Palestine are Jews. There were only a handful of indigenous Jews in Palestine before the Europeans began their settlement/invasion:

"There are now in the whole of Palestine hardly 700,000 people, a population much less than that of the province of Gallilee alone in the time of Christ.* (*See Sir George Adam Smith "Historical Geography of the Holy Land", Chap. 20.) Of these 235,000 live in the larger towns, 465,000 in the smaller towns and villages. Four-fifths of the whole population are Moslems. A small proportion of these are Bedouin Arabs; the remainder, although they speak Arabic and are termed Arabs, are largely of mixed race. Some 77,000 of the population are Christians, in large majority belonging to the Orthodox Church, and speaking Arabic. The minority are members of the Latin or of the Uniate Greek Catholic Church, or--a small number--are Protestants.

The Jewish element of the population numbers 76,000. Almost all have entered Palestine during the last 40 years. Prior to 1850 there were in the country only a handful of Jews. In the following 30 years a few hundreds came to Palestine. Most of them were animated by religious motives; they came to pray and to die in the Holy Land, and to be buried in its soil. - See more at: http://unispal.un.org/UNISPAL.NSF/0/349B02280A930813052565E90048ED1C#sthash.YJukwiXn.dpuf

 

[docmauser1]

...

Yes-yes-yes, and palistanians were all saudi sheiks to own 99% of the mandate palestine.

 

[Challenger]

No, facts according to history.

Zionist history, perhaps.

It's ok challenger, I don't expect you to accept the truth. I've seen your posts many times where you are simply unable to handle the truth. It's a known fact that pro Palestinians are allergic to it, so don't worry, you're not alone

There are many "truths", all with their own preconceptions and biases, interpretations, feelings and fantasies. Accepting one "truth" blinds you to the possibilities in all the others and is intellectually lazy. I strive to obtain "The Truth" from amongst the web of lies and deceptions that are out there pretending to be "The Truth".

If you are comfortable with your version of the "truth", that's fine, but your mind is closed as a consequence. As the saying goes, "Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice, shame on me." I and millions of others have found that Zionist Historiography and Hasbara has lied, again and again and again, so pardon my continuing skepticism about the stream of Hasbara I'm bombarded with from the Pro-Israelis here. So I'm glad I'm not alone, but thanks for your concern.

Here is one truth that no one can deny with any documentation to back up a denial. Among the indigenous Palestinians were Jews. And not a single Muslim Palestinian among them. And the overwhelming majority of Muslim Palestinians are squatters on Israel's land for generations with no deeds or titles whatsoever to the land they stole.

Facts are a ***** especially when source documentation is provided. The people living in Palestine before the European invasion/settlement, were for the most part the same indigenous people that were there since people started living there. That they converted from Judaism, the Roman religions or Christianity to Islam, does not make them any less indigenous you moron. Your ridiculous assertion regarding Muslim Palestinians is like claiming the Christian Germans aren't indigenous to Germany because there were no Christians in Germany before the time of Christ.

No, the overwhelming majority of squatters in Palestine are Jews. There were only a handful of indigenous Jews in Palestine before the Europeans began their settlement/invasion:

"There are now in the whole of Palestine hardly 700,000 people, a population much less than that of the province of Gallilee alone in the time of Christ.* (*See Sir George Adam Smith "Historical Geography of the Holy Land", Chap. 20.) Of these 235,000 live in the larger towns, 465,000 in the smaller towns and villages. Four-fifths of the whole population are Moslems. A small proportion of these are Bedouin Arabs; the remainder, although they speak Arabic and are termed Arabs, are largely of mixed race. Some 77,000 of the population are Christians, in large majority belonging to the Orthodox Church, and speaking Arabic. The minority are members of the Latin or of the Uniate Greek Catholic Church, or--a small number--are Protestants.

The Jewish element of the population numbers 76,000. Almost all have entered Palestine during the last 40 years. Prior to 1850 there were in the country only a handful of Jews. In the following 30 years a few hundreds came to Palestine. Most of them were animated by religious motives; they came to pray and to die in the Holy Land, and to be buried in its soil. - See more at: Mandate for Palestine - Interim report of the Mandatory to the League of Nations Balfour Declaration text 30 July 1921

Thanks for saving me the bother of looking it up.

 

[Challenger]

Pfffft, facts according to Israel.

No, facts according to history.

Zionist history, perhaps.

It's ok challenger, I don't expect you to accept the truth. I've seen your posts many times where you are simply unable to handle the truth. It's a known fact that pro Palestinians are allergic to it, so don't worry, you're not alone

There are many "truths", all with their own preconceptions and biases, interpretations, feelings and fantasies. Accepting one "truth" blinds you to the possibilities in all the others and is intellectually lazy. I strive to obtain "The Truth" from amongst the web of lies and deceptions that are out there pretending to be "The Truth".

If you are comfortable with your version of the "truth", that's fine, but your mind is closed as a consequence. As the saying goes, "Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice, shame on me." I and millions of others have found that Zionist Historiography and Hasbara has lied, again and again and again, so pardon my continuing skepticism about the stream of Hasbara I'm bombarded with from the Pro-Israelis here. So I'm glad I'm not alone, but thanks for your concern.

Well, you must be blind. Israel has had nuclear weapons for years. If they wanted to, they could wipe the Palestinians off the map. They have the power to do so, but they have not. They have tolerated a LOT from their "neighbors" over many, many, many years. Obviously you are quite ignorant.

Well you must be really stupid. Nuclear War 101: Bang! the bombs goe off...lots of wanton death and destruction, vapourisation, etc.etc. Nice mushroom clouds of radioactive debris and dust tens of thousands of feet into the air, OK? still with me?

What goes up, must come down, it's called "fallout" and radioactive fallout at that. On its way down it is carried over long distances, many miles.

So....Israel nukes the West Bank and Gaza, job done....except for all that nasty radioactive fallout which is as likely to be carried East and North as it is to be carried South and West, thus leaving huge swathes of Israel uninhabitable and lots of Israelis "glowing in the dark" or growing two heads.

Power is one thing, but even the most rabid Zionist isn't that stupid. No wait, I hear you cry....get a weather forcast and nuke them when the winds are blowing away from Israel.....OK good idea but for those pesky facts that have a tendency to get in the way of the best Zionist wet dreams,

"Israel is located at the exact point where these four weather systems converge. This is why the country is subject to contradictory weather patterns (rainy or dry) as well as highly unpredictable shifts in the direction of prevailing winds. These unusual climatic conditions make it very difficult to predict weather conditions." What are Israel s prevailing winds

....bummer.

 

[Challenger]

No, facts according to history.

Zionist history, perhaps.

It's ok challenger, I don't expect you to accept the truth. I've seen your posts many times where you are simply unable to handle the truth. It's a known fact that pro Palestinians are allergic to it, so don't worry, you're not alone

There are many "truths", all with their own preconceptions and biases, interpretations, feelings and fantasies. Accepting one "truth" blinds you to the possibilities in all the others and is intellectually lazy. I strive to obtain "The Truth" from amongst the web of lies and deceptions that are out there pretending to be "The Truth".

If you are comfortable with your version of the "truth", that's fine, but your mind is closed as a consequence. As the saying goes, "Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice, shame on me." I and millions of others have found that Zionist Historiography and Hasbara has lied, again and again and again, so pardon my continuing skepticism about the stream of Hasbara I'm bombarded with from the Pro-Israelis here. So I'm glad I'm not alone, but thanks for your concern.

Well, you must be blind. Israel has had nuclear weapons for years. If they wanted to, they could wipe the Palestinians off the map. They have the power to do so, but they have not. They have tolerated a LOT from their "neighbors" over many, many, many years. Obviously you are quite ignorant.

No, not ignorant, just partisan.

Why, thank you for those kind words. sir.

 

[ChrisL]

montelatici, et al,

Remembering --- that the UK Colonial Office (UKCO) to the Palestine Arab Delegation (PAD) is not an official; statement of policy. Again, remember as stated in Correspondence #2, Paragraph #2, Mr Churchill and the UKCO was "not in a position to negotiate officially with [the PAD] or with any other body which claims to represent the whole or, part of the people of Palestine, since no official machinery for representation has as yet been constituted." The Arab Palestinian Leadership having rejected (more then once) the opportunity to establish an official conduit.

Also remember that the very same people that wrote the Covenant for the League of Nations, also wrote the Mandate. There is nothing at all in Article 22 of the Covenant, that would suggest that Article 22 was in anyway dedicated exclusively to the opportunities of Arab Palestinians --- or --- predicated upon the claim that the granting an advantage to the Arab Palestinians. The same authors of the 1919 Covenant, were also the principles at the 1920 San Remo Convention in which the framework for the Mandate of Palestine was agreed upon; and where the concept was hammered-out in regards to the establishment of the Jewish National Home (JNH).

(COMMENT)

The Covenant grants no special or unique application to the indigenous population of the territory under mandate. In fact, Article 22, could be thought of as applying in general to any of the orphaned territories left in the wake of the post-War conditions.

Relative to Article 22/1 of the Covenant:

To those colonies and territories which as a consequence of the late war have ceased to be under the sovereignty of the States which formerly governed them and which are inhabited by peoples not yet able to stand by themselves under the strenuous conditions of the modern world, there should be applied the principle that the well-being and development of such peoples form a sacred trust of civilisation and that securities for the performance of this trust should be embodied in this Covenant.

In fact, of the Middle East Protectorates and Mandates, the following Arab countries were determined to stand-alone, with their independence and sovereignty.

• Lebanon: Independence: 22 November 1943 (from League of Nations mandate under French administration)
• Syria: Independence: 17 April 1946 (from League of Nations mandate under French administration)
• Jordan: Independence: 25 May 1946 (from League of Nations mandate under British administration)
• Iraq: Independence: 3 October 1932 (from League of Nations mandate under British administration)
• Israel: Independence: 14 May 1948 (from League of Nations mandate under British administration)
• Kuwait: Independence: 19 June 1961 (from UK)
• Egypt: Independence: 28 February 1922 (from UK)

Relative to Article 22/4 of the Covenant:

Certain communities formerly belonging to the Turkish Empire have reached a stage of development where their existence as 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. The wishes of these communities must be a principal consideration in the selection of the Mandatory.

Nothing in this clause specifically applies to the Palestinian territory under Mandate. It has a general application but on pinpoint specific application. While in general one could say that the League of Nations gave Britain the Mandate to administer Palestine, which required her to implement the Balfour Declaration, and undertake a “sacred trust of civilisation” to advance the welfare of the all people and guide them to independence. And here again, --- while the Jewish citizens under the Mandate of Palestine chose to follow the "Step Preparatory to Independence" as approved by the General Assembly; the Arab Palestinians turned this opportunity down at least three times.​

Relative to Article 22/8 of the Covenant:

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.

One of the major objectives of the Mandate, as passed-down from the San Remo Convention, by the Principal Allied Powers to the Mandatory --- was the responsibility for putting into effect the declaration originally made on November 2nd, 1917, in favor of the establishment in Palestine of a national home for the Jewish people.
​

I have heard, many times, that the Palestinians were not given the proper well-being care and development they had due to them. That they were denied the right to self-determination, and that they were not dealt with fairly. The is a form of negativism in which the under developed culture does not have the ability to stand on its own --- and who tends to be negative. Of course, most cultures have periods or moments of whining, complaining, and displaying “the glass-is-half-empty” attitude now and again, but the continuation --- day after day, year after year, decade after decade --- of dwelling on the worst outcome of any given situation --- droning on and on about the unfairness of the world, then there is something more wrong with the culture than meets the eye.

Most Respectfully,
R

It wouldn't matter if it were the British Virgin Islands. If the British had a deal/treaty/agreement with the Gurkhas to populate the BVIs with thousands Gurkhas and their extended families in order to create a Gurkha National home there, at the expense of the locals, they should, by the terms of the LoN Covenant, have extricated themselves out of that agreement.

There hasn't been any such campaign, validated by an International Organization, against any people that was planned and executed to replace an indigenous people living a continent away from Europe, with a "favored" European people. I don't think that anyone looking at it as a neutral could ever imagine that such a process, with all the opaque and sinister tactics combined with betrayal, used against the Christians and Muslims would be acceptable to any fair and neutral observer.

And like a good little islamonazi stooge you deny the indigenous Jews of Palestine their rights to free determination and a homeland. So how about we make all muslims stateless and destined to wander the world for the next 2,000 years as unwanted pariahs ?

Not true.

Even the PLO Charter specifically recognizes indigenous Jews as legitimate citizens of Palestine.

YOU are one of the most dishonest posters here and one of the most disgusting. Jews are not respected as "citizens." They are considered dhimmis. Anyone who is not Muslim, is a second class citizen.

So . . . here you are pretending to know about Muslims and their belief systems, but you don't know what a dhimmi is? Figures.

http://www.discoverthenetworks.org/viewSubCategory.asp?id=761

From its beginnings in the seventh century, Islam was spread by means of its practitioners' violent conquest of non-Muslim lands. For more than a millennium (from 638 to 1683), these conquests expanded Islam's empire over vast territories in Africa, Europe, and Asia. During that period, the conquered "infidels" (non-Muslims) -- who each possessed their own unique religion, culture, and language -- constituted a significant majority of the population of the newly Islamized lands.

As early as the eighth century, a formal set of rules was created to govern the relationships between the conquering Muslims and the defeated infidels. The framework of these regulations is known as "dhimmitude," a term connoting the lowly legal and social status of Jews and Christians who are subjected to Islamic rule. Dhimmi was the name applied by the Arab-Muslim conquerors to the indigenous non-Muslim populations that surrendered by a treaty (dhimma) to Muslim domination.

A non-Muslim community that is forced to accept dhimmitude is condemned to live in a system that will protect it from violent jihad on only one condition: if it is completely subservient to a Muslim master. In return for that subservience, the community is granted limited rights, although dhimmis could be capriciously subjected to such depredations as mass slavery, abductions, and deportations.

According to Dr. Mitchell G. Bard, director of the Jewish Virtual Library:

“Dhimmis were excluded from public office and armed service, and were forbidden to bear arms. They were not allowed to ride horses or camels, to build synagogues or churches taller than mosques, to construct houses higher than those of Muslims, or to drink wine in public. They were not allowed to pray or mourn in loud voices as that might offend the Muslims. The dhimmi had to show public deference toward Muslims, always yielding them the center of the road. The dhimmi was not allowed to give evidence in court against a Muslim, and his oath was unacceptable in an Islamic court. To defend himself the dhimmi would have to purchase Muslim witnesses at great expense. This left the dhimmi with little legal recourse when harmed by a Muslim. Dhimmis were also forced to wear distinctive clothing. In the ninth century, for example, Baghdad's Caliph al-Mutawakkil designated a yellow badge for Jews, setting a precedent that would be followed centuries later.”

Dhimmitude was abolished from the Islamic world during the 19th and 20th centuries under European military pressure, or by direct European colonization. But it has recently made a resurgence -- along with jihad itself -- as a consequence of the Islamic wars in Sudan, the Philippines, Indonesia, Algeria, and Israel. Moreover, non-Muslim minorities suffer severe discrimination in Iran, Saudi Arabia, Egypt, Pakistan, and countries that apply or recognize the shari’a law. Ultimately, dhimmitude is an outgrowth of the fact that Muslims consider themselves to be in a perpetual state of war with their non-Muslim neighbors.

 

[ChrisL]

No, facts according to history.

Zionist history, perhaps.

It's ok challenger, I don't expect you to accept the truth. I've seen your posts many times where you are simply unable to handle the truth. It's a known fact that pro Palestinians are allergic to it, so don't worry, you're not alone

There are many "truths", all with their own preconceptions and biases, interpretations, feelings and fantasies. Accepting one "truth" blinds you to the possibilities in all the others and is intellectually lazy. I strive to obtain "The Truth" from amongst the web of lies and deceptions that are out there pretending to be "The Truth".

If you are comfortable with your version of the "truth", that's fine, but your mind is closed as a consequence. As the saying goes, "Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice, shame on me." I and millions of others have found that Zionist Historiography and Hasbara has lied, again and again and again, so pardon my continuing skepticism about the stream of Hasbara I'm bombarded with from the Pro-Israelis here. So I'm glad I'm not alone, but thanks for your concern.

Well, you must be blind. Israel has had nuclear weapons for years. If they wanted to, they could wipe the Palestinians off the map. They have the power to do so, but they have not. They have tolerated a LOT from their "neighbors" over many, many, many years. Obviously you are quite ignorant.

Well you must be really stupid. Nuclear War 101: Bang! the bombs goe off...lots of wanton death and destruction, vapourisation, etc.etc. Nice mushroom clouds of radioactive debris and dust tens of thousands of feet into the air, OK? still with me?

What goes up, must come down, it's called "fallout" and radioactive fallout at that. On its way down it is carried over long distances, many miles.

So....Israel nukes the West Bank and Gaza, job done....except for all that nasty radioactive fallout which is as likely to be carried East and North as it is to be carried South and West, thus leaving huge swathes of Israel uninhabitable and lots of Israelis "glowing in the dark" or growing two heads.

Power is one thing, but even the most rabid Zionist isn't that stupid. No wait, I hear you cry....get a weather forcast and nuke them when the winds are blowing away from Israel.....OK good idea but for those pesky facts that have a tendency to get in the way of the best Zionist wet dreams,

"Israel is located at the exact point where these four weather systems converge. This is why the country is subject to contradictory weather patterns (rainy or dry) as well as highly unpredictable shifts in the direction of prevailing winds. These unusual climatic conditions make it very difficult to predict weather conditions." What are Israel s prevailing winds

....bummer.

Ah, that wasn't the point at all. The point is, Israel could wipe out Palestine with or without nuclear weapons. If they are as "evil" as you seem to think they are, they could capture, kill or enslave all of the Palestinians, but they have not.

 

[Phoenall]

montelatici, et al,

Remembering --- that the UK Colonial Office (UKCO) to the Palestine Arab Delegation (PAD) is not an official; statement of policy. Again, remember as stated in Correspondence #2, Paragraph #2, Mr Churchill and the UKCO was "not in a position to negotiate officially with [the PAD] or with any other body which claims to represent the whole or, part of the people of Palestine, since no official machinery for representation has as yet been constituted." The Arab Palestinian Leadership having rejected (more then once) the opportunity to establish an official conduit.

Also remember that the very same people that wrote the Covenant for the League of Nations, also wrote the Mandate. There is nothing at all in Article 22 of the Covenant, that would suggest that Article 22 was in anyway dedicated exclusively to the opportunities of Arab Palestinians --- or --- predicated upon the claim that the granting an advantage to the Arab Palestinians. The same authors of the 1919 Covenant, were also the principles at the 1920 San Remo Convention in which the framework for the Mandate of Palestine was agreed upon; and where the concept was hammered-out in regards to the establishment of the Jewish National Home (JNH).

As clearly stated, any obligation antecedent to the entry of a state as a member of the League of Nations that conflicted with the covenant of the LoN, was to abrogated by the entrant (UK) prior to joining the LoN.

(b) The object aimed at by Article 22 of the Covenant of the League of Nations is "the well-being and development of the people" of the land. Alien Jews not in Palestine do not come within the scope of this aim, neither is their association with Palestine more close than that of Christians and Moslems all over the world. Consequently the Jewish National Home policy is contrary to the spirit of the Covenant.

(c) Article XX of the Covenant reads: "The Members of this League severally agree that this Covenant is accepted as abrogating all obligations or understandings inter se which are inconsistent with the terms thereof, and solemnly undertake that they will not hereafter enter into any engagements inconsistent with the terms thereof.

"In case any Member of the League shall, before becoming a Member of the League, have undertaken any obligations inconsistent with the terms of this Covenant, it shall be the duty of such Member to take immediate steps to procure its release from such obligations."

- See more at: UK correspondence with Palestine Arab Delegation and Zionist Organization British policy in Palestine Churchill White Paper - UK documentation Cmd. 1700 Non-UN document excerpts 1 July 1922

(COMMENT)

The Covenant grants no special or unique application to the indigenous population of the territory under mandate. In fact, Article 22, could be thought of as applying in general to any of the orphaned territories left in the wake of the post-War conditions.

Relative to Article 22/1 of the Covenant:

To those colonies and territories which as a consequence of the late war have ceased to be under the sovereignty of the States which formerly governed them and which are inhabited by peoples not yet able to stand by themselves under the strenuous conditions of the modern world, there should be applied the principle that the well-being and development of such peoples form a sacred trust of civilisation and that securities for the performance of this trust should be embodied in this Covenant.

In fact, of the Middle East Protectorates and Mandates, the following Arab countries were determined to stand-alone, with their independence and sovereignty.

• Lebanon: Independence: 22 November 1943 (from League of Nations mandate under French administration)
• Syria: Independence: 17 April 1946 (from League of Nations mandate under French administration)
• Jordan: Independence: 25 May 1946 (from League of Nations mandate under British administration)
• Iraq: Independence: 3 October 1932 (from League of Nations mandate under British administration)
• Israel: Independence: 14 May 1948 (from League of Nations mandate under British administration)
• Kuwait: Independence: 19 June 1961 (from UK)
• Egypt: Independence: 28 February 1922 (from UK)

Relative to Article 22/4 of the Covenant:

Certain communities formerly belonging to the Turkish Empire have reached a stage of development where their existence as 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. The wishes of these communities must be a principal consideration in the selection of the Mandatory.

Nothing in this clause specifically applies to the Palestinian territory under Mandate. It has a general application but on pinpoint specific application. While in general one could say that the League of Nations gave Britain the Mandate to administer Palestine, which required her to implement the Balfour Declaration, and undertake a “sacred trust of civilisation” to advance the welfare of the all people and guide them to independence. And here again, --- while the Jewish citizens under the Mandate of Palestine chose to follow the "Step Preparatory to Independence" as approved by the General Assembly; the Arab Palestinians turned this opportunity down at least three times.​

Relative to Article 22/8 of the Covenant:

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.

One of the major objectives of the Mandate, as passed-down from the San Remo Convention, by the Principal Allied Powers to the Mandatory --- was the responsibility for putting into effect the declaration originally made on November 2nd, 1917, in favor of the establishment in Palestine of a national home for the Jewish people.
​

I have heard, many times, that the Palestinians were not given the proper well-being care and development they had due to them. That they were denied the right to self-determination, and that they were not dealt with fairly. The is a form of negativism in which the under developed culture does not have the ability to stand on its own --- and who tends to be negative. Of course, most cultures have periods or moments of whining, complaining, and displaying “the glass-is-half-empty” attitude now and again, but the continuation --- day after day, year after year, decade after decade --- of dwelling on the worst outcome of any given situation --- droning on and on about the unfairness of the world, then there is something more wrong with the culture than meets the eye.

Most Respectfully,
R

It wouldn't matter if it were the British Virgin Islands. If the British had a deal/treaty/agreement with the Gurkhas to populate the BVIs with thousands Gurkhas and their extended families in order to create a Gurkha National home there, at the expense of the locals, they should, by the terms of the LoN Covenant, have extricated themselves out of that agreement.

There hasn't been any such campaign, validated by an International Organization, against any people that was planned and executed to replace an indigenous people living a continent away from Europe, with a "favored" European people. I don't think that anyone looking at it as a neutral could ever imagine that such a process, with all the opaque and sinister tactics combined with betrayal, used against the Christians and Muslims would be acceptable to any fair and neutral observer.

And like a good little islamonazi stooge you deny the indigenous Jews of Palestine their rights to free determination and a homeland. So how about we make all muslims stateless and destined to wander the world for the next 2,000 years as unwanted pariahs ?

Not true.

Even the PLO Charter specifically recognizes indigenous Jews as legitimate citizens of Palestine.

What are the criteria again for these indigenous Jews, something along these lines

Only Jews who lived in Palestine prior to the Zionist migration of 1850 will be classed as Palestinian citizens. So do you know any Jews over 165 years old. The charter goes on to say that their children and grand children are not covered and will not be seen as Palestinian citizens unless they lived in Palestine prior to the Zionist migration of 1850.

 

[Phoenall]

No, facts according to history.

Zionist history, perhaps.

It's ok challenger, I don't expect you to accept the truth. I've seen your posts many times where you are simply unable to handle the truth. It's a known fact that pro Palestinians are allergic to it, so don't worry, you're not alone

There are many "truths", all with their own preconceptions and biases, interpretations, feelings and fantasies. Accepting one "truth" blinds you to the possibilities in all the others and is intellectually lazy. I strive to obtain "The Truth" from amongst the web of lies and deceptions that are out there pretending to be "The Truth".

If you are comfortable with your version of the "truth", that's fine, but your mind is closed as a consequence. As the saying goes, "Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice, shame on me." I and millions of others have found that Zionist Historiography and Hasbara has lied, again and again and again, so pardon my continuing skepticism about the stream of Hasbara I'm bombarded with from the Pro-Israelis here. So I'm glad I'm not alone, but thanks for your concern.

And by your use of the terms Zionist and hasbara you prove beyond reasonable doubt that your mind is closed to the truth. All you want to see is your warped version of reality and the arab muslims "truths" being peddled. You don't want to see Islamic sources saying that arab muslims were very thin on the ground in Palestine prior to the Ottoman's inviting Jews to migrate and settle. You don't want to see the original acceptance by arab muslims to the Jews taking Palestine as their homeland as back then it was worthless desert. You don't want to see the evidence of mass illegal immigration by arab muslims. You don't want to see the atrocities committed by arab muslims in Palestine against all non muslims. because to admit that these are truth and reality would mean your brainwashing was wrong.

Israelis and Jewish people use the terms Zionist and Hasbara all the time; the word "Hasbara" is an Israeli word for goodness sake! I use the words for the purpose of clarity; being precise in defining what I'm talking about. I prefer to use the phrase "Jewish person" over the word "Jew" as I consider the word both derogatory and racist. I'm more than happy to look at any source but I'm allowed to be skeptical about any source's veracity and objectivity, as well as it's accuracy.

What source of yours says, "...that arab muslims were very thin on the ground in Palestine prior to the Ottoman's inviting Jews to migrate and settle"? I'll look at it.

What source of yours talks about, "acceptance by arab muslims to the Jews taking Palestine as their homeland as back then it was worthless desert."? I'll look at it as well.

What source of yours provides, "evidence of mass illegal immigration by arab muslims" ? I'll look at it.

What source of yours catalogues, "the atrocities committed by arab muslims in Palestine against all non muslims."? I'll look at that too, without fear and with an open mind.

No you use the terms in the same way the Germans spewed out **** and juden, or the way the arab muslims used Palestinian when referring to the Jews.
You have still to give your personal definition of Zionist because you know it will show you as a RACIST POS


Try the ottomans reports of Palestine prior to 1870 when they failed to get arab muslims to colonise the land and turn it into valuable arable farms. 3 times they tried and each time the arab muslims up sticks and left, the same arab muslims that later came back and tried to claim they had lived in Palestine for 3,000 years.

The Mcmahon letters

The reports by Winston Churchill when he was foreign secretary

The 1929 massacre of Jews in Hebron, the ethnic cleansing of Christians from gaza and the west bank since 2005 and the civil wars or 1930 and 1945

 

[Phoenall]

montelatici, et al,

Remembering --- that the UK Colonial Office (UKCO) to the Palestine Arab Delegation (PAD) is not an official; statement of policy. Again, remember as stated in Correspondence #2, Paragraph #2, Mr Churchill and the UKCO was "not in a position to negotiate officially with [the PAD] or with any other body which claims to represent the whole or, part of the people of Palestine, since no official machinery for representation has as yet been constituted." The Arab Palestinian Leadership having rejected (more then once) the opportunity to establish an official conduit.

Also remember that the very same people that wrote the Covenant for the League of Nations, also wrote the Mandate. There is nothing at all in Article 22 of the Covenant, that would suggest that Article 22 was in anyway dedicated exclusively to the opportunities of Arab Palestinians --- or --- predicated upon the claim that the granting an advantage to the Arab Palestinians. The same authors of the 1919 Covenant, were also the principles at the 1920 San Remo Convention in which the framework for the Mandate of Palestine was agreed upon; and where the concept was hammered-out in regards to the establishment of the Jewish National Home (JNH).

(COMMENT)

The Covenant grants no special or unique application to the indigenous population of the territory under mandate. In fact, Article 22, could be thought of as applying in general to any of the orphaned territories left in the wake of the post-War conditions.

Relative to Article 22/1 of the Covenant:

To those colonies and territories which as a consequence of the late war have ceased to be under the sovereignty of the States which formerly governed them and which are inhabited by peoples not yet able to stand by themselves under the strenuous conditions of the modern world, there should be applied the principle that the well-being and development of such peoples form a sacred trust of civilisation and that securities for the performance of this trust should be embodied in this Covenant.

In fact, of the Middle East Protectorates and Mandates, the following Arab countries were determined to stand-alone, with their independence and sovereignty.

• Lebanon: Independence: 22 November 1943 (from League of Nations mandate under French administration)
• Syria: Independence: 17 April 1946 (from League of Nations mandate under French administration)
• Jordan: Independence: 25 May 1946 (from League of Nations mandate under British administration)
• Iraq: Independence: 3 October 1932 (from League of Nations mandate under British administration)
• Israel: Independence: 14 May 1948 (from League of Nations mandate under British administration)
• Kuwait: Independence: 19 June 1961 (from UK)
• Egypt: Independence: 28 February 1922 (from UK)

Relative to Article 22/4 of the Covenant:

Certain communities formerly belonging to the Turkish Empire have reached a stage of development where their existence as 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. The wishes of these communities must be a principal consideration in the selection of the Mandatory.

Nothing in this clause specifically applies to the Palestinian territory under Mandate. It has a general application but on pinpoint specific application. While in general one could say that the League of Nations gave Britain the Mandate to administer Palestine, which required her to implement the Balfour Declaration, and undertake a “sacred trust of civilisation” to advance the welfare of the all people and guide them to independence. And here again, --- while the Jewish citizens under the Mandate of Palestine chose to follow the "Step Preparatory to Independence" as approved by the General Assembly; the Arab Palestinians turned this opportunity down at least three times.​

Relative to Article 22/8 of the Covenant:

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.

One of the major objectives of the Mandate, as passed-down from the San Remo Convention, by the Principal Allied Powers to the Mandatory --- was the responsibility for putting into effect the declaration originally made on November 2nd, 1917, in favor of the establishment in Palestine of a national home for the Jewish people.
​

I have heard, many times, that the Palestinians were not given the proper well-being care and development they had due to them. That they were denied the right to self-determination, and that they were not dealt with fairly. The is a form of negativism in which the under developed culture does not have the ability to stand on its own --- and who tends to be negative. Of course, most cultures have periods or moments of whining, complaining, and displaying “the glass-is-half-empty” attitude now and again, but the continuation --- day after day, year after year, decade after decade --- of dwelling on the worst outcome of any given situation --- droning on and on about the unfairness of the world, then there is something more wrong with the culture than meets the eye.

Most Respectfully,
R

It wouldn't matter if it were the British Virgin Islands. If the British had a deal/treaty/agreement with the Gurkhas to populate the BVIs with thousands Gurkhas and their extended families in order to create a Gurkha National home there, at the expense of the locals, they should, by the terms of the LoN Covenant, have extricated themselves out of that agreement.

There hasn't been any such campaign, validated by an International Organization, against any people that was planned and executed to replace an indigenous people living a continent away from Europe, with a "favored" European people. I don't think that anyone looking at it as a neutral could ever imagine that such a process, with all the opaque and sinister tactics combined with betrayal, used against the Christians and Muslims would be acceptable to any fair and neutral observer.

And like a good little islamonazi stooge you deny the indigenous Jews of Palestine their rights to free determination and a homeland. So how about we make all muslims stateless and destined to wander the world for the next 2,000 years as unwanted pariahs ?

Not true.

Even the PLO Charter specifically recognizes indigenous Jews as legitimate citizens of Palestine.

YOU are one of the most dishonest posters here and one of the most disgusting. Jews are not respected as "citizens." They are considered dhimmis. Anyone who is not Muslim, is a second class citizen.

Try reading the Koran that states that non muslims are dogs, apes and pigs

 

[RoccoR]

P F Tinmore, et al,

There was never a case in which the Arab Palestinian attempted to use their right of self-determination, in an internationally accepted way, and was denied.

Still does not change the fact that the Zionist colonial project was imposed on the Palestinians at the point of a gun denying them of their inalienable rights.

(COMMENT)

When, in the 1920s, the Palestinian Arab Delegation rejected (by right of self-determination) the opportunity to establish a legitimate Arab institution (not once, not twice, but three times) to represent the Arab Palestinian People to express their concerns on what is in their best interest, the Arab Palestinian was not denied.

When, in 1948, the UN inviting the Arab Higher Committee to appoint a representative “to be available to the Palestine Commission for such authoritative information and other assistance as the commission may require,” and rejected representation (by right of self-determination), the Arab Palestinian was not denied.

When, in 1950, the Arab Palestinian join the Jordanian Parliament and voted (by right of self-determination) to be annexed into the Hashemite Kingdom, the Arab Palestinian was not denied.

When, in 1970, Arab Palestinian extremist elements (took a public stance in favor of the Fedayeen), who ambushed the King Hussein’s motorcade twice --- and --- perpetrated a series of spectacular hijackings; and attempted to take by force control of the Hashemite Kingdom, Arab Palestinian was not denied. While they lost to King Hussein, who ordered the army into action and suppress the Palestinian guerrillas in Amman, there was no external interference to deny the Arab Palestinians (through the right of self-determination) their opportunity make the coup d'état attempt.

When, in 1988, the Arab Palestinian gathered and declared Independence (Pursuant to the resolutions of the Arab Summit Conferences and on the basis of the international legitimacy embodied in the resolutions of the United Nations since 1947, and Through the exercise by the Palestinian Arab people of its right to self-determination, political independence and sovereignty over its territory) the Arab Palestinian was not denied.​

The Arab Palestinian was never denied their right.

Most Respectfully,
R

 

[Phoenall]

No, facts according to history.

Zionist history, perhaps.

It's ok challenger, I don't expect you to accept the truth. I've seen your posts many times where you are simply unable to handle the truth. It's a known fact that pro Palestinians are allergic to it, so don't worry, you're not alone

There are many "truths", all with their own preconceptions and biases, interpretations, feelings and fantasies. Accepting one "truth" blinds you to the possibilities in all the others and is intellectually lazy. I strive to obtain "The Truth" from amongst the web of lies and deceptions that are out there pretending to be "The Truth".

If you are comfortable with your version of the "truth", that's fine, but your mind is closed as a consequence. As the saying goes, "Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice, shame on me." I and millions of others have found that Zionist Historiography and Hasbara has lied, again and again and again, so pardon my continuing skepticism about the stream of Hasbara I'm bombarded with from the Pro-Israelis here. So I'm glad I'm not alone, but thanks for your concern.

Here is one truth that no one can deny with any documentation to back up a denial. Among the indigenous Palestinians were Jews. And not a single Muslim Palestinian among them. And the overwhelming majority of Muslim Palestinians are squatters on Israel's land for generations with no deeds or titles whatsoever to the land they stole.

Facts are a ***** especially when source documentation is provided. The people living in Palestine before the European invasion/settlement, were for the most part the same indigenous people that were there since people started living there. That they converted from Judaism, the Roman religions or Christianity to Islam, does not make them any less indigenous you moron. Your ridiculous assertion regarding Muslim Palestinians is like claiming the Christian Germans aren't indigenous to Germany because there were no Christians in Germany before the time of Christ.

No, the overwhelming majority of squatters in Palestine are Jews. There were only a handful of indigenous Jews in Palestine before the Europeans began their settlement/invasion:

"There are now in the whole of Palestine hardly 700,000 people, a population much less than that of the province of Gallilee alone in the time of Christ.* (*See Sir George Adam Smith "Historical Geography of the Holy Land", Chap. 20.) Of these 235,000 live in the larger towns, 465,000 in the smaller towns and villages. Four-fifths of the whole population are Moslems. A small proportion of these are Bedouin Arabs; the remainder, although they speak Arabic and are termed Arabs, are largely of mixed race. Some 77,000 of the population are Christians, in large majority belonging to the Orthodox Church, and speaking Arabic. The minority are members of the Latin or of the Uniate Greek Catholic Church, or--a small number--are Protestants.

The Jewish element of the population numbers 76,000. Almost all have entered Palestine during the last 40 years. Prior to 1850 there were in the country only a handful of Jews. In the following 30 years a few hundreds came to Palestine. Most of them were animated by religious motives; they came to pray and to die in the Holy Land, and to be buried in its soil. - See more at: Mandate for Palestine - Interim report of the Mandatory to the League of Nations Balfour Declaration text 30 July 1921

What about this source document then Abdul that says differently



CATHOLIC ENCYCLOPEDIA: Jerusalem (After 1291)
CATHOLIC ENCYCLOPEDIA Jerusalem After 1291

"...Present condition of the City: (1907 edition)

Jerusalem (El Quds) is the capital of a sanjak and the seat of a mutasarrif directly dependent on the Sublime Porte. In the administration of the sanjak the mutasarrif is assisted by a council called majlis ida ra; the city has a municipal government (majlis baladiye) presided over by a mayor. The total population is estimated at 66,000. The Turkish census of 1905, which counts only Ottoman subjects, gives these figures:
Jews, 45,000; Moslems, 8,000; Orthodox Christians, 6000; Latins, 2500; Armenians, 950; Protestants, 800; Melkites, 250; Copts, 150; Abyssinians, 100; Jacobites, 100; Catholic Syrians, 50. During the Nineteenth century large suburbs to the north and east have grown up, chiefly for the use of the Jewish colony. These suburbs contain nearly Half the present population...""

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Growth of Jerusalem 1838-Present

....... Jews Muslims Christians Total
1838 6,000 5,000 3,000 14,000
1844 7,120 5,760 3,390 16,270 ..... ..The First Official Ottoman Census
1876 12,000 7,560 5,470 25,030 .... .....Second """"""""""
1905 40,000 8,000 10,900 58,900 ....... Third/last, detailed in CathEncyc above
1948 99,320 36,680 31,300 167,300
1990 353,200 124,200 14,000 491,400
1992 385,000 150,000 15,000 550,000

http://www.testimony-magazine.org/jerusalem/bring.htm





Just so you know and understand only ottoman citizens were counted, so any arab muslims over the 8,000 number must have been illegal immigrants.

So 45,000 Jews and 8,000 muslims, 5 times more Jews in Jerusalem than muslims and you still say that the Jews were non existent ?

 

[Phoenall]

Zionist history, perhaps.

It's ok challenger, I don't expect you to accept the truth. I've seen your posts many times where you are simply unable to handle the truth. It's a known fact that pro Palestinians are allergic to it, so don't worry, you're not alone

There are many "truths", all with their own preconceptions and biases, interpretations, feelings and fantasies. Accepting one "truth" blinds you to the possibilities in all the others and is intellectually lazy. I strive to obtain "The Truth" from amongst the web of lies and deceptions that are out there pretending to be "The Truth".

If you are comfortable with your version of the "truth", that's fine, but your mind is closed as a consequence. As the saying goes, "Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice, shame on me." I and millions of others have found that Zionist Historiography and Hasbara has lied, again and again and again, so pardon my continuing skepticism about the stream of Hasbara I'm bombarded with from the Pro-Israelis here. So I'm glad I'm not alone, but thanks for your concern.

Here is one truth that no one can deny with any documentation to back up a denial. Among the indigenous Palestinians were Jews. And not a single Muslim Palestinian among them. And the overwhelming majority of Muslim Palestinians are squatters on Israel's land for generations with no deeds or titles whatsoever to the land they stole.

Facts are a ***** especially when source documentation is provided. The people living in Palestine before the European invasion/settlement, were for the most part the same indigenous people that were there since people started living there. That they converted from Judaism, the Roman religions or Christianity to Islam, does not make them any less indigenous you moron. Your ridiculous assertion regarding Muslim Palestinians is like claiming the Christian Germans aren't indigenous to Germany because there were no Christians in Germany before the time of Christ.

No, the overwhelming majority of squatters in Palestine are Jews. There were only a handful of indigenous Jews in Palestine before the Europeans began their settlement/invasion:

"There are now in the whole of Palestine hardly 700,000 people, a population much less than that of the province of Gallilee alone in the time of Christ.* (*See Sir George Adam Smith "Historical Geography of the Holy Land", Chap. 20.) Of these 235,000 live in the larger towns, 465,000 in the smaller towns and villages. Four-fifths of the whole population are Moslems. A small proportion of these are Bedouin Arabs; the remainder, although they speak Arabic and are termed Arabs, are largely of mixed race. Some 77,000 of the population are Christians, in large majority belonging to the Orthodox Church, and speaking Arabic. The minority are members of the Latin or of the Uniate Greek Catholic Church, or--a small number--are Protestants.

The Jewish element of the population numbers 76,000. Almost all have entered Palestine during the last 40 years. Prior to 1850 there were in the country only a handful of Jews. In the following 30 years a few hundreds came to Palestine. Most of them were animated by religious motives; they came to pray and to die in the Holy Land, and to be buried in its soil. - See more at: Mandate for Palestine - Interim report of the Mandatory to the League of Nations Balfour Declaration text 30 July 1921

Thanks for saving me the bother of looking it up.

And I will save you the bother of looking for the real numbers by posting this.


Shows that all throughout recent history the muslims were the minority in Jerusalem



CATHOLIC ENCYCLOPEDIA: Jerusalem (After 1291)
CATHOLIC ENCYCLOPEDIA Jerusalem After 1291

"...Present condition of the City: (1907 edition)

Jerusalem (El Quds) is the capital of a sanjak and the seat of a mutasarrif directly dependent on the Sublime Porte. In the administration of the sanjak the mutasarrif is assisted by a council called majlis ida ra; the city has a municipal government (majlis baladiye) presided over by a mayor. The total population is estimated at 66,000. The Turkish census of 1905, which counts only Ottoman subjects, gives these figures:
Jews, 45,000; Moslems, 8,000; Orthodox Christians, 6000; Latins, 2500; Armenians, 950; Protestants, 800; Melkites, 250; Copts, 150; Abyssinians, 100; Jacobites, 100; Catholic Syrians, 50. During the Nineteenth century large suburbs to the north and east have grown up, chiefly for the use of the Jewish colony. These suburbs contain nearly Half the present population...""

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Growth of Jerusalem 1838-Present

....... Jews Muslims Christians Total
1838 6,000 5,000 3,000 14,000
1844 7,120 5,760 3,390 16,270 ..... ..The First Official Ottoman Census
1876 12,000 7,560 5,470 25,030 .... .....Second """"""""""
1905 40,000 8,000 10,900 58,900 ....... Third/last, detailed in CathEncyc above
1948 99,320 36,680 31,300 167,300
1990 353,200 124,200 14,000 491,400
1992 385,000 150,000 15,000 550,000

http://www.testimony-magazine.org/jerusalem/bring.htm

 

[P F Tinmore]

P F Tinmore, et al,

There was never a case in which the Arab Palestinian attempted to use their right of self-determination, in an internationally accepted way, and was denied.

Still does not change the fact that the Zionist colonial project was imposed on the Palestinians at the point of a gun denying them of their inalienable rights.

(COMMENT)

When, in the 1920s, the Palestinian Arab Delegation rejected (by right of self-determination) the opportunity to establish a legitimate Arab institution (not once, not twice, but three times) to represent the Arab Palestinian People to express their concerns on what is in their best interest, the Arab Palestinian was not denied.

When, in 1948, the UN inviting the Arab Higher Committee to appoint a representative “to be available to the Palestine Commission for such authoritative information and other assistance as the commission may require,” and rejected representation (by right of self-determination), the Arab Palestinian was not denied.

When, in 1950, the Arab Palestinian join the Jordanian Parliament and voted (by right of self-determination) to be annexed into the Hashemite Kingdom, the Arab Palestinian was not denied.

When, in 1970, Arab Palestinian extremist elements (took a public stance in favor of the Fedayeen), who ambushed the King Hussein’s motorcade twice --- and --- perpetrated a series of spectacular hijackings; and attempted to take by force control of the Hashemite Kingdom, Arab Palestinian was not denied. While they lost to King Hussein, who ordered the army into action and suppress the Palestinian guerrillas in Amman, there was no external interference to deny the Arab Palestinians (through the right of self-determination) their opportunity make the coup d'état attempt.

When, in 1988, the Arab Palestinian gathered and declared Independence (Pursuant to the resolutions of the Arab Summit Conferences and on the basis of the international legitimacy embodied in the resolutions of the United Nations since 1947, and Through the exercise by the Palestinian Arab people of its right to self-determination, political independence and sovereignty over its territory) the Arab Palestinian was not denied.​

The Arab Palestinian was never denied their right.

Most Respectfully,
R

When, in the 1920s, the Palestinian Arab Delegation rejected (by right of self-determination) the opportunity to establish a legitimate Arab institution (not once, not twice, but three times) to represent the Arab Palestinian People to express their concerns on what is in their best interest, the Arab Palestinian was not denied.​

Wrong again.

They rejected the creation of an arm of the colonial project with their name on it.

 

[P F Tinmore]

There was never a case in which the Arab Palestinian attempted to use their right of self-determination, in an internationally accepted way, and was denied.

What about their 1948 declaration of independence?

 

[Phoenall]

No, facts according to history.

Zionist history, perhaps.

It's ok challenger, I don't expect you to accept the truth. I've seen your posts many times where you are simply unable to handle the truth. It's a known fact that pro Palestinians are allergic to it, so don't worry, you're not alone

There are many "truths", all with their own preconceptions and biases, interpretations, feelings and fantasies. Accepting one "truth" blinds you to the possibilities in all the others and is intellectually lazy. I strive to obtain "The Truth" from amongst the web of lies and deceptions that are out there pretending to be "The Truth".

If you are comfortable with your version of the "truth", that's fine, but your mind is closed as a consequence. As the saying goes, "Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice, shame on me." I and millions of others have found that Zionist Historiography and Hasbara has lied, again and again and again, so pardon my continuing skepticism about the stream of Hasbara I'm bombarded with from the Pro-Israelis here. So I'm glad I'm not alone, but thanks for your concern.

Well, you must be blind. Israel has had nuclear weapons for years. If they wanted to, they could wipe the Palestinians off the map. They have the power to do so, but they have not. They have tolerated a LOT from their "neighbors" over many, many, many years. Obviously you are quite ignorant.

Well you must be really stupid. Nuclear War 101: Bang! the bombs goe off...lots of wanton death and destruction, vapourisation, etc.etc. Nice mushroom clouds of radioactive debris and dust tens of thousands of feet into the air, OK? still with me?

What goes up, must come down, it's called "fallout" and radioactive fallout at that. On its way down it is carried over long distances, many miles.

So....Israel nukes the West Bank and Gaza, job done....except for all that nasty radioactive fallout which is as likely to be carried East and North as it is to be carried South and West, thus leaving huge swathes of Israel uninhabitable and lots of Israelis "glowing in the dark" or growing two heads.

Power is one thing, but even the most rabid Zionist isn't that stupid. No wait, I hear you cry....get a weather forcast and nuke them when the winds are blowing away from Israel.....OK good idea but for those pesky facts that have a tendency to get in the way of the best Zionist wet dreams,

"Israel is located at the exact point where these four weather systems converge. This is why the country is subject to contradictory weather patterns (rainy or dry) as well as highly unpredictable shifts in the direction of prevailing winds. These unusual climatic conditions make it very difficult to predict weather conditions." What are Israel s prevailing winds

....bummer.

You forget that the prevailing weather affects Syria, Iraq, Jordan, Saudi and Egypt just as much as it would Israel. And Iran has made it clear that they are prepared to sacrifice 1 million muslims to kill 1 Jew as they know the same as you do. But as we have seen in the past nuclear explosions alter the worlds weather patterns and they become unpredictable so the fallout could go anywhere.