Who Are The Palestinians?

[Phoenall]

Where does it say that these are two separate mandates?

In the links of course, try reading them


The British Mandate for Palestine, or simply the Mandate for Palestine, was a legal commission for the administration of the territory that had formerly constituted the Ottoman Empire sanjaks of Nablus, Acre, the Southern portion of the Beirut Vilayet, and the Mutasarrifate of Jerusalem, prior to the Armistice of Mudros.



The Council of the League of Nations:
Whereas the Principal Allied Powers have agreed, for the purpose of giving effect to the provisions of Article 22 of the Covenant of the League of Nations, to entrust to a Mandatory selected by the said Powers the administration of the territory of Palestine, which formerly belonged to the Turkish Empire, within such boundaries as may be fixed by them; and

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Allied Powers have also agreed that the Mandatory should be responsible for putting into effect the declaration originally made on November 2nd, 1917, by the Government of His Britannic Majesty, and adopted by the said Powers, in favor of the establishment in Palestine of a national home for the Jewish people, it being clearly understood that nothing should be done which might prejudice the civil and religious rights of existing non-Jewish communities in Palestine, or the rights and political status enjoyed by Jews in any other country; and

Whereas recognition has thereby been given to the historical connection of the Jewish people with Palestine and to the grounds for reconstituting their national home in that country; and

Whereas the Principal Allied Powers have selected His Britannic Majesty as the Mandatory for Palestine; and

Whereas the mandate in respect of Palestine has been formulated in the following terms and submitted to the Council of the League for approval; and

Whereas His Britannic Majesty has accepted the mandate in respect of Palestine and undertaken to exercise it on behalf of the League of Nations in conformity with the following provisions; and

Whereas by the afore-mentioned Article 22 (paragraph 8), it is provided that the degree of authority, control or administration to be exercised by the Mandatory, not having been previously agreed upon by the Members of the League, shall be explicitly defined by the Council of the League Of Nations;

confirming the said Mandate, defines its terms as follows:

Where does it say that 22% of Palestine is to be given to the European Jews? Where does it say that any land is to be given to the European Jews? Establishing a 'National Home" could mean a cultural center, it certainly does not mean a sovereign state. Plus wiki reproductions are subject to Hasbara manipulation. They are not reliable. Find the source document from an academic or governmental archive and then we can discuss.

Indeed, the national home was interpreted by the Mandate to mean:

Jews could immigrate to Palestine.
Jews would get Palestinian citizenship.
Jews would be a part of Palestine and share a government.

A Jewish state was specifically not in the plan.

Nor was an arab muslim state anywhere in any of the mandates then as they said the same thing about those states. The term national home means home of the nation for the Jews.

By default it would be a state for those who normally lived there. Whether they were Arabs or Muslims or not was irrelevant.

The historic abusive treatment of the Jews by arab muslims meant that a multi-ethnic multifaith approach would never work. So the LoN experts decided on an unequal split giving the land in question to both the muslim and the Jews via a partition. This led to 78% becoming arab muslim under the name of trans Jordan ( no national name at the time and still the same today ) and 22% becoming the National home of the Jews ( now called Israel ). That was the only plausible answer to the problems surrounding the area at the time, and the LoN should have enforced their decision with military force and shown the violent aggressive arab muslims that they stood to loose more than then expected when they kicked off. Simply by arresting the leaders of arab muslim nations engaging in attacks on the Jews and evicting them from office would have the effect of diminishing the leaders power struggles.

 

[montelatici]

There is no historic abusive treatment of Jews by arab Muslims. You are conflating the historic abusive treatment of Jews by Christians with centuries of peaceful coexistence of Muslims and Jews.

 

[montelatici]

In the links of course, try reading them


The British Mandate for Palestine, or simply the Mandate for Palestine, was a legal commission for the administration of the territory that had formerly constituted the Ottoman Empire sanjaks of Nablus, Acre, the Southern portion of the Beirut Vilayet, and the Mutasarrifate of Jerusalem, prior to the Armistice of Mudros.



The Council of the League of Nations:
Whereas the Principal Allied Powers have agreed, for the purpose of giving effect to the provisions of Article 22 of the Covenant of the League of Nations, to entrust to a Mandatory selected by the said Powers the administration of the territory of Palestine, which formerly belonged to the Turkish Empire, within such boundaries as may be fixed by them; and

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 favor of the establishment in Palestine of a national home for the Jewish people, it being clearly understood that nothing should be done which might prejudice the civil and religious rights of existing non-Jewish communities in Palestine, or the rights and political status enjoyed by Jews in any other country; and

Whereas recognition has thereby been given to the historical connection of the Jewish people with Palestine and to the grounds for reconstituting their national home in that country; and

Whereas the Principal Allied Powers have selected His Britannic Majesty as the Mandatory for Palestine; and

Whereas the mandate in respect of Palestine has been formulated in the following terms and submitted to the Council of the League for approval; and

Whereas His Britannic Majesty has accepted the mandate in respect of Palestine and undertaken to exercise it on behalf of the League of Nations in conformity with the following provisions; and

Whereas by the afore-mentioned Article 22 (paragraph 8), it is provided that the degree of authority, control or administration to be exercised by the Mandatory, not having been previously agreed upon by the Members of the League, shall be explicitly defined by the Council of the League Of Nations;

confirming the said Mandate, defines its terms as follows:

Where does it say that 22% of Palestine is to be given to the European Jews? Where does it say that any land is to be given to the European Jews? Establishing a 'National Home" could mean a cultural center, it certainly does not mean a sovereign state. Plus wiki reproductions are subject to Hasbara manipulation. They are not reliable. Find the source document from an academic or governmental archive and then we can discuss.

Indeed, the national home was interpreted by the Mandate to mean:

Jews could immigrate to Palestine.
Jews would get Palestinian citizenship.
Jews would be a part of Palestine and share a government.

A Jewish state was specifically not in the plan.

Nor was an arab muslim state anywhere in any of the mandates then as they said the same thing about those states. The term national home means home of the nation for the Jews.

By default it would be a state for those who normally lived there. Whether they were Arabs or Muslims or not was irrelevant.

The historic abusive treatment of the Jews by arab muslims meant that a multi-ethnic multifaith approach would never work. So the LoN experts decided on an unequal split giving the land in question to both the muslim and the Jews via a partition. This led to 78% becoming arab muslim under the name of trans Jordan ( no national name at the time and still the same today ) and 22% becoming the National home of the Jews ( now called Israel ). That was the only plausible answer to the problems surrounding the area at the time, and the LoN should have enforced their decision with military force and shown the violent aggressive arab muslims that they stood to loose more than then expected when they kicked off. Simply by arresting the leaders of arab muslim nations engaging in attacks on the Jews and evicting them from office would have the effect of diminishing the leaders power struggles.

The UN had no right to cede land to the European colonists. The UN subcommittee's legal analysis said as much. The final determination that the land should have legally been turned over to the People of Palestine is excerpted below. The complete legal analysis is contained in the complete report (linked below) which is pretty much hidden from the general public (you have to know what you are looking for in the archives) as it shows conclusively that the UN acted illegally and solely for political motives when they sold out the people of Palestine to European colonists. The British knew this and abstained from the vote on partition, by the way.

The last sentence in the excerpt below demonstrates conclusively that everything you believe and post about the issue is untrue, nonsensical and regurgitation of of Ziionist propaganda.

Here is the link to the complete report.

http://unispal.un.org/pdfs/AAC1432.pdf

 

[M14 Shooter]

The UN had no right to cede land to the European colonists.

Today, this is irrelevant.
The states of Israel, Jordan Lebanon and Syria all exist.
That's not going to change, unless someone invades one or more of them, dismantles the state(s) in question, and annexes the territory.
.

 

[montelatici]

The UN had no right to cede land to the European colonists.

Today, this is irrelevant.
The states of Israel, Jordan Lebanon and Syria all exist.
That's not going to change, unless someone invades one or more of them, dismantles the state(s) in question, and annexes the territory.
.

Of course the illegality and the lack of authority of the UN to establish a European colony against the wishes of the people of Palestine, as stated in the legal opinion is relevant. It is the basis on which the Palestinians can go to an international of even national tribunal and, for example, demand reparations from the UN. Or, demand a legal decision on the right of return which an international tribunal would probably agree with. Not that Israel could be compelled to comply, but Israel's non-compliance could result in international sanctions which could in turn induce Israel to negotiate, for example.

 

[M14 Shooter]

The UN had no right to cede land to the European colonists.

Today, this is irrelevant.
The states of Israel, Jordan Lebanon and Syria all exist.
That's not going to change, unless someone invades one or more of them, dismantles the state(s) in question, and annexes the territory.
.

Of course the illegality and the lack of authority of the UN to establish a European colony against the wishes of the people of Palestine, as stated in the legal opinion is relevant.

Nope. Not relevant. Nothing the UN or anyone else can or will do, short of invasion, will dissolve these states.
And so, you can lay blame all you want, but it wont change a thing.

 

[MJB12741]

The West Bank Palestinians used to be Jordanians, but Jordan renounced its claim to the West Bank and abandoned them.
Now, the land belongs to Israel; the future of the people there will be determined by their willingness to not act like savages.

Well said. How relieved Jordan was to sacrifice the West Bank to dump their Palestinians on Israel to deal with. Let the Palis & their supporters bitch all they want. Fact still remains that as a country Israel IS & Palestine IS NOT. And if the Palis continue to act like savages with governing bodies like the PA & Hamas there never will be any Palestinian State in the country of Israel.

 

[aris2chat]

The UN had no right to cede land to the European colonists.

Today, this is irrelevant.
The states of Israel, Jordan Lebanon and Syria all exist.
That's not going to change, unless someone invades one or more of them, dismantles the state(s) in question, and annexes the territory.
.

That is what is happening in syria....what groups are trying to make happen. Some want to change government, there was invasion from neighboring countries and other are trying to carve it up and form their own countries.
Jordan and Lebanon are try to keep that from happening in their own territory. Lebanon went through decades of invaders dictating, stealing, abusing and trying to annex all or part of the the country. They are still struggling against outside interference of government.

 

[montelatici]

Well, the UN can certainly pay reparations to the people of Palestine, what do you mean there is nothing the UN can do? An international court can make life difficult for Israel, if the Palestinians were to prove their case to a tribunal. In any case, the demographics are such that eventually the area will revert to the non-Jews. It's just a matter of time.

 

[MJB12741]

Well, the UN can certainly pay reparations to the people of Palestine, what do you mean there is nothing the UN can do? An international court can make life difficult for Israel, if the Palestinians were to prove their case to a tribunal. In any case, the demographics are such that eventually the area will revert to the non-Jews. It's just a matter of time.

You are so funny Monte. For over 4000 years Israel's enemies have been preaching Israel is doomed. And 4000 years from now Israel's enemies will be preaching Israel is doomed.

 

[M14 Shooter]

Well, the UN can certainly pay reparations to the people of Palestine, what do you mean there is nothing the UN can do?

Paying "reparations" to the Palestinians? That's the limit to the UN's power here?
The UN does not have the power to force Israel to change its borders and/or cede any land to a Palestinian state.

 

[montelatici]

Israel was "doomed", the Romans saw to that. A colonial project, facilitated by Britain, may have been completed, but colonial projects of the late 19th and 20th century have not lasted over 100 years.

 

[montelatici]

Well, the UN can certainly pay reparations to the people of Palestine, what do you mean there is nothing the UN can do?

Paying "reparations" to the Palestinians? That's the limit to the UN's power here?
The UN does not have the power to force Israel to change its borders and/or cede any land to a Palestinian state.

I don't think that the UN can do much more than pay reparations at the moment. If Israel loses the support of the U.S. for some reason, then the U.N. could do what it did against Apartheid South Africa, sanctions etc., which forced the European South Africans to the table. But at the moment reparations are about it.

 

[MJB12741]

Israel was "doomed", the Romans saw to that. A colonial project, facilitated by Britain, may have been completed, but colonial projects of the late 19th and 20th century have not lasted over 100 years.

Oh Monte. I think I love you for all the laughs you give us while those you support are killing us infidels all over the world.

FACT: Empires rose, empires fell & --- ISRAEL STILL REMAINS.

 

[MJB12741]

Israel was "doomed", the Romans saw to that. A colonial project, facilitated by Britain, may have been completed, but colonial projects of the late 19th and 20th century have not lasted over 100 years.

Oh Monte. I think I love you for all the laughs you give us while those you support are killing us infidels all over the world.

FACT: Empires rose, empires fell & --- ISRAEL STILL REMAINS.

Ain't life a bitch for Israel's enemies?

 

[M14 Shooter]

Well, the UN can certainly pay reparations to the people of Palestine, what do you mean there is nothing the UN can do?

Paying "reparations" to the Palestinians? That's the limit to the UN's power here?
The UN does not have the power to force Israel to change its borders and/or cede any land to a Palestinian state.

I don't think that the UN can do much more than pay reparations at the moment. If Israel loses the support of the U.S. for some reason, then the U.N. could do what it did against Apartheid South Africa, sanctions etc., which forced the European South Africans to the table. But at the moment reparations are about it.

And so, back to my original point:
Whatever the UN said about the region way back when really doesn't matter today.

 

[Phoenall]

There is no historic abusive treatment of Jews by arab Muslims. You are conflating the historic abusive treatment of Jews by Christians with centuries of peaceful coexistence of Muslims and Jews.

Nope as the evidence shows the muslims abused both Jews and Christians over he last 1400 years. They even have a god get out clause in their holy book that commands them to do so. And as you know being a muslim yourself you can not deny the teachings and commands of the Koran That is the best evidence there is the Koran and hadiths that spell out just how much islam has abused those that it sees as weak.

 

[montelatici]

Is this hubris really justified?

Israel was "doomed", the Romans saw to that. A colonial project, facilitated by Britain, may have been completed, but colonial projects of the late 19th and 20th century have not lasted over 100 years.

Oh Monte. I think I love you for all the laughs you give us while those you support are killing us infidels all over the world.

FACT: Empires rose, empires fell & --- ISRAEL STILL REMAINS.

I am supporting the right of the Palestinian Christians and Muslims to self-determination.

What empire has actually actual fallen without its base element surviving? Is Israel an "empire" today? The British, exist, the Greeks exist, the French exist, the Italians exist, the Spanish exist, the Portuguese exist.

 

[montelatici]

Well, the UN can certainly pay reparations to the people of Palestine, what do you mean there is nothing the UN can do?

Paying "reparations" to the Palestinians? That's the limit to the UN's power here?
The UN does not have the power to force Israel to change its borders and/or cede any land to a Palestinian state.

I don't think that the UN can do much more than pay reparations at the moment. If Israel loses the support of the U.S. for some reason, then the U.N. could do what it did against Apartheid South Africa, sanctions etc., which forced the European South Africans to the table. But at the moment reparations are about it.

And so, back to my original point:
Whatever the UN said about the region way back when really doesn't matter today.

Again, of course it matters for the reasons I amply described. Without the basic illegality, what would the Palestinians hang any demand for rights on?

 

[Phoenall]

Where does it say that 22% of Palestine is to be given to the European Jews? Where does it say that any land is to be given to the European Jews? Establishing a 'National Home" could mean a cultural center, it certainly does not mean a sovereign state. Plus wiki reproductions are subject to Hasbara manipulation. They are not reliable. Find the source document from an academic or governmental archive and then we can discuss.

Indeed, the national home was interpreted by the Mandate to mean:

Jews could immigrate to Palestine.
Jews would get Palestinian citizenship.
Jews would be a part of Palestine and share a government.

A Jewish state was specifically not in the plan.

Nor was an arab muslim state anywhere in any of the mandates then as they said the same thing about those states. The term national home means home of the nation for the Jews.

By default it would be a state for those who normally lived there. Whether they were Arabs or Muslims or not was irrelevant.

The historic abusive treatment of the Jews by arab muslims meant that a multi-ethnic multifaith approach would never work. So the LoN experts decided on an unequal split giving the land in question to both the muslim and the Jews via a partition. This led to 78% becoming arab muslim under the name of trans Jordan ( no national name at the time and still the same today ) and 22% becoming the National home of the Jews ( now called Israel ). That was the only plausible answer to the problems surrounding the area at the time, and the LoN should have enforced their decision with military force and shown the violent aggressive arab muslims that they stood to loose more than then expected when they kicked off. Simply by arresting the leaders of arab muslim nations engaging in attacks on the Jews and evicting them from office would have the effect of diminishing the leaders power struggles.

The UN had no right to cede land to the European colonists. The UN subcommittee's legal analysis said as much. The final determination that the land should have legally been turned over to the People of Palestine is excerpted below. The complete legal analysis is contained in the complete report (linked below) which is pretty much hidden from the general public (you have to know what you are looking for in the archives) as it shows conclusively that the UN acted illegally and solely for political motives when they sold out the people of Palestine to European colonists. The British knew this and abstained from the vote on partition, by the way.

The last sentence in the excerpt below demonstrates conclusively that everything you believe and post about the issue is untrue, nonsensical and regurgitation of of Ziionist propaganda.

Here is the link to the complete report.

http://unispal.un.org/pdfs/AAC1432.pdf








View attachment 39858

So he International law put into place in 1923 that set up Jordan, Syria, Iraq and Lebanon should be scrapped and all the inhabitants of those countries expelled. Because that is what you are saying by this post.
Yes the UN did not have the authority to alter INTERNATIONAL LAW and should have spelt this out to the arab muslims, with the threat they would face military action up to and including low yield nukes to stop any violence over the allocation of land. The arab muslims already had their 78% of Palestine to play in and that is where they should have been herded in 1947. The British should have been penalised for their anti Semitism and cowardice by having their embassies closed down for a full year and only being allowed to export needed goods.