Who Are The Palestinians?

[P F Tinmore]

What was different that one declaration would be valid and the other not?

It's common sense. If a country declared independence twice, then it's obvious that the first one didn't work out since thet needed to do it again.

In the case of the Palestinians, they tried to declare independence on land that Israel had declared independence a few weeks (or months earlier).
Obviously if that declaration was valid,they would not have done it again in 1988

That is a common Fallacy.

Post a 1948 map of Israel showing what Israeli territory was claimed by the Palestinian's 1948 declaration.

You're playing this stupid game again Tinmore

Israel declared independence on the land allotted to it in the partition plan.

The Palestinians tried to declare independence on that land (and more) AFTER Israel did so. Why you have a hard time accepting this fact is beyond me.

No I am not. I just want you to prove your point.

I await your response.

Do you mean llke we are still waiting for you to prove your points raised over the last few years.

I have backed up my claims with documents.

How about you?

 

[Phoenall]

You are completely deflecting again. Did you read the link I posted? The Palestinians used 181 to declare independence in 1988. There was no valid declaration of independence in 1948. You can't declare independence twice and have both of them be valid. I've done searches online for Palestinian declaration of independence and nothing about 1948 come up.

What was different that one declaration would be valid and the other not?

It's common sense. If a country declared independence twice, then it's obvious that the first one didn't work out since thet needed to do it again.

In the case of the Palestinians, they tried to declare independence on land that Israel had declared independence a few weeks (or months earlier).
Obviously if that declaration was valid,they would not have done it again in 1988

That is a common Fallacy.

Post a 1948 map of Israel showing what Israeli territory was claimed by the Palestinian's 1948 declaration.

Cant you do this to bolster your claim, or wil this show that Palestine tried to declare on land already accepted as Israel

You are ducking the question.

What land did the Palestinians claim that already belonged to Israel?

All of lesser Palestine that included the land destined for the RESURECTED NATIONAL HOME OF THE JEWS by the UN. That is why the arab coup failed as the UN saw the extent of the land grab and declared it invalid

 

[toastman]

It's common sense. If a country declared independence twice, then it's obvious that the first one didn't work out since thet needed to do it again.

In the case of the Palestinians, they tried to declare independence on land that Israel had declared independence a few weeks (or months earlier).
Obviously if that declaration was valid,they would not have done it again in 1988

That is a common Fallacy.

Post a 1948 map of Israel showing what Israeli territory was claimed by the Palestinian's 1948 declaration.

You're playing this stupid game again Tinmore

Israel declared independence on the land allotted to it in the partition plan.

The Palestinians tried to declare independence on that land (and more) AFTER Israel did so. Why you have a hard time accepting this fact is beyond me.

No I am not. I just want you to prove your point.

I await your response.

Do you mean llke we are still waiting for you to prove your points raised over the last few years.

I have backed up my claims with documents.

How about you?

No you haven't . You always claim that the Palestinians needed to have transfered Israel land in order for Israel to declare independence.
But that's a made up Tinmore pre requisite

 

[Phoenall]

It's common sense. If a country declared independence twice, then it's obvious that the first one didn't work out since thet needed to do it again.

In the case of the Palestinians, they tried to declare independence on land that Israel had declared independence a few weeks (or months earlier).
Obviously if that declaration was valid,they would not have done it again in 1988

That is a common Fallacy.

Post a 1948 map of Israel showing what Israeli territory was claimed by the Palestinian's 1948 declaration.

You're playing this stupid game again Tinmore

Israel declared independence on the land allotted to it in the partition plan.

The Palestinians tried to declare independence on that land (and more) AFTER Israel did so. Why you have a hard time accepting this fact is beyond me.

No I am not. I just want you to prove your point.

I await your response.

Do you mean llke we are still waiting for you to prove your points raised over the last few years.

I have backed up my claims with documents.

How about you?

Invalid reports that when checked show the author had rewritten the source to suit his POV, or did not apply to the subject matter. I provide links to non partisan sources that show the truth

 

[MJB12741]

P F Tinmore, et al,

Yes, yes, this again.

Israel never had any intention of abiding by Resolution 181. It merely threw it in there to pretend to have lagitimacy.

What is your recommendation, Tinmore?

Good question and since Resolution 181 was never implemented it was a dubious move for Israel to hang its hat on that resolution for legitimacy.

(COMMENT)

• • Recalling its resolutions of 29 November 1947 3/ and 11 December 1948 4/ and taking note of the declarations and explanations made by the representative of the Government of Israel 5/ before the ad hoc Political Committee in respect of the implementation of the said resolutions, [See: Resolution 273 (III). Admission of Israel to membership in the United Nations, 11 May 1949]
  • The Commission has not been dissolved. In fact the resolution of last November 29 has been implemented." [PAL/169 17 May 1948]

Often evidentiary UN remarks are challenged by the pro-Palestinian. They believe that if they say it enough, the UN will reverse its position.

And because the of the legitimacy and importance of the Resolution, it is cited quite frequently, by the Palestinians and the UN.

Palestinians:

• Declaration of Independence, 1988
• Letter dated 25 March 1999 from the Permanent Observer of Palestine

The UN:

• A/RES/43/177 15 December 1988 43/177. Question of Palestine
• A/67/L.28 26 November 2012 Question of Palestine
• A/RES/67/19 4 December 2012 67/19. Status of Palestine in the United Nations

Most Respectfully,
R

You keep posting the same thing, but:

When did those proposed borders become international borders?

Where is that international city of Jerusalem?

Where are the full civil and political rights guaranteed to the non Jewish citizens?

Speaking of citizens, this part of Resolution 181 also didn't happen.

...Palestinian citizens residing in Palestine...shall, upon the recognition of independence, become citizens of the State in which they are resident and enjoy full civil and political rights.​

This reflects international law.

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

Palestinians who resided in the territory that became Israel became Israeli citizens. This includes the refugees who normally lived in that territory. Obviously Israel wants to duck that part.

So tell us, who made the Palestinians have to be refugees in Israel?

 

[RoccoR]

P F Tinmore, et al,

You keep making these little mistakes.

• First, your mistake to make a distinction between a Regional Protocol and a Law.
• Second, you did not read my entire rebuttal as to reasonable applicability.

The "Declaration on the Consequences of State Succession for Nationality of Natural Persons" as adopted by the European Commission for Democracy through Law at its 28th Plenary Meeting, Venice, 13-14 September 1996, is NOT international law applicable to the Middle East (Israeli-Palestinian Conflict).

Not true. The law on the succession of states ha been around since the LoN.

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

Genesis of Citizenship in Palestine and Israel

You are just looking for excuses.

Try again.

(COMMENT)

The actual international laws on the subject are:

• Vienna Convention on Succession of States in respect of State Property, Archives and Debts 1983
• Vienna Convention on Succession of States in respect of Treaties 1978

These International Laws have not been around since the League of Nations. In fact, as every federal agent knows, that has foreign investigative experience, that the International Law Commission (ILC) considers these two international conventions on the law of state succession as having been adopted; BUT NOT conventions that have been entered into force (each requires but fifteen ratifications or accessions for entry into force).

There are four (4) broad categories the ILC examines with respect to State succession:

1) Treaties: the Vienna Convention on Succession of States in Respect of Treaties: Vienna I

2) State property, State debt and State archives: Vienna II

3) Membership to international Organizations

4) State succession and its impact on the nationality of natural and legal persons: the Rapporteur also failed to find any prospects for codification and recommended an ILC report or a United Nations General Assembly draft declaration setting minimum standards for the automatic acquisition of nationality. These minimum standards would serve as guidelines for State legislation concerned with State succession. But any "new" law would not necessarily be retroactive to any past or ongoing dispute. In fact, any claim made by the Palestinians concerning their nationality would have to be an exception to the "Non-Retroactive Principle" in law.​

The ILC made note that, "[a] close examination of State practice afforded no convincing evidence of any general doctrine by reference to which the various problems of succession in respect of treaties could find their appropriate solution." [See: The Problem of State Succession and the Identity of States under International Law and the Yearbook ILC (1974 - II, part i), at 168, para. 51. See also Castrén, ‘Obligations of States Arising from the Dismemberment of Another State’, 13 ZaöRV (1951) 753.] Each case must be examined on their own merit. That would include the Palestinian issue, if there were a question. But as you missed in the rebuttal, there is NO question relative to nationality. With the establishment of the Palestinian State in 1988, the Arab Palestinians are all citizens of the latest iteration of "self-determination" --- The State of Palestine.

Most Respectfully,
R

 

[RoccoR]

P F Tinmore, et al,

This is so bogus.

I have backed up my claims with documents.

How about you?

(COMMENT)

You have not presented any convincing argument or evidence that the Jewish Declaration of Independence and their exercise of the right of "self-determination" was in any way invalid at the time.

Most Respectfully,
R

 

[MJB12741]

P F Tinmore, et al,

You keep making these little mistakes.

• First, your mistake to make a distinction between a Regional Protocol and a Law.
• Second, you did not read my entire rebuttal as to reasonable applicability.

The "Declaration on the Consequences of State Succession for Nationality of Natural Persons" as adopted by the European Commission for Democracy through Law at its 28th Plenary Meeting, Venice, 13-14 September 1996, is NOT international law applicable to the Middle East (Israeli-Palestinian Conflict).

Not true. The law on the succession of states ha been around since the LoN.

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

Genesis of Citizenship in Palestine and Israel

You are just looking for excuses.

Try again.

(COMMENT)

The actual international laws on the subject are:

• Vienna Convention on Succession of States in respect of State Property, Archives and Debts 1983
• Vienna Convention on Succession of States in respect of Treaties 1978

These International Laws have not been around since the League of Nations. In fact, as every federal agent knows, that has foreign investigative experience, that the International Law Commission (ILC) considers these two international conventions on the law of state succession as having been adopted; BUT NOT conventions that have been entered into force (each requires but fifteen ratifications or accessions for entry into force).

There are four (4) broad categories the ILC examines with respect to State succession:

1) Treaties: the Vienna Convention on Succession of States in Respect of Treaties: Vienna I

2) State property, State debt and State archives: Vienna II

3) Membership to international Organizations

4) State succession and its impact on the nationality of natural and legal persons: the Rapporteur also failed to find any prospects for codification and recommended an ILC report or a United Nations General Assembly draft declaration setting minimum standards for the automatic acquisition of nationality. These minimum standards would serve as guidelines for State legislation concerned with State succession. But any "new" law would not necessarily be retroactive to any past or ongoing dispute. In fact, any claim made by the Palestinians concerning their nationality would have to be an exception to the "Non-Retroactive Principle" in law.​

The ILC made note that, "[a] close examination of State practice afforded no convincing evidence of any general doctrine by reference to which the various problems of succession in respect of treaties could find their appropriate solution." [See: The Problem of State Succession and the Identity of States under International Law and the Yearbook ILC (1974 - II, part i), at 168, para. 51. See also Castrén, ‘Obligations of States Arising from the Dismemberment of Another State’, 13 ZaöRV (1951) 753.] Each case must be examined on their own merit. That would include the Palestinian issue, if there were a question. But as you missed in the rebuttal, there is NO question relative to nationality. With the establishment of the Palestinian State in 1988, the Arab Palestinians are all citizens of the latest iteration of "self-determination" --- The State of Palestine.

Most Respectfully,
R

What you present are documented facts. As we have all witnessed, that is not acceptable to Tinmore's Palestinian mentality.

 

[P F Tinmore]

P F Tinmore, et al,

This is so bogus.

I have backed up my claims with documents.

How about you?

(COMMENT)

You have not presented any convincing argument or evidence that the Jewish Declaration of Independence and their exercise of the right of "self-determination" was in any way invalid at the time.

Most Respectfully,
R

I have. It is just that you have refused to see it.

3. Reaffirms the inalienable right of the peoples of Namibia and Zimbabwe, of the Palestinian people and of all peoples under alien and colonial domination to self-determination, national independence, territorial integrity, and national unity and sovereignty without external interference;

A RES 33 24 of 29 November 1978​

 

[Kondor3]

P F Tinmore, et al,

This is so bogus.

I have backed up my claims with documents.

How about you?

(COMMENT)

You have not presented any convincing argument or evidence that the Jewish Declaration of Independence and their exercise of the right of "self-determination" was in any way invalid at the time.

Most Respectfully,
R

I have. It is just that you have refused to see it.

3. Reaffirms the inalienable right of the peoples of Namibia and Zimbabwe, of the Palestinian people and of all peoples under alien and colonial domination to self-determination, national independence, territorial integrity, and national unity and sovereignty without external interference;

A RES 33 24 of 29 November 1978​

Just what is it that you think you have here, Tinny? Some kind of smoking gun or compelling directive?

 

[RoccoR]

P F Tinmore, et asl,

Again, this is a timeline issue.

P F Tinmore, et al,

This is so bogus.

I have backed up my claims with documents.

How about you?

(COMMENT)

You have not presented any convincing argument or evidence that the Jewish Declaration of Independence and their exercise of the right of "self-determination" was in any way invalid at the time.

Most Respectfully,
R

I have. It is just that you have refused to see it.

3. Reaffirms the inalienable right of the peoples of Namibia and Zimbabwe, of the Palestinian people and of all peoples under alien and colonial domination to self-determination, national independence, territorial integrity, and national unity and sovereignty without external interference;

A RES 33 24 of 29 November 1978​

(COMMENT)

Watch closely. (Now you see it ---- Now you don't!)

Jordanian Parliamentary Action 11 April 1950, Unification of the Two Banks, West Bank Annexation, "actualization of "self-determination"
---- Three decades later. ----
A RES 33 24 of 29 November 1978 UN reaffirmation of "self-determination"
---- A decade later. ----
A/43/827 S/20278 18 November 1988 Palestinian Independence --- actualization of "self-determination"​

The applicability of the "Importance of the universal realization of the right of peoples to self-determination" (A RES 33 24 of 29 November 1978) ended for the Palestinian:

• Gaza: 1988
• West Bank 1950

Today, the 1988 Declaration applies to all Palestinians located in the West Bank and Gaza Strip.

Most Respectfully,
R

 

[aris2chat]

P F Tinmore, et al,

This is so bogus.

I have backed up my claims with documents.

How about you?

(COMMENT)

You have not presented any convincing argument or evidence that the Jewish Declaration of Independence and their exercise of the right of "self-determination" was in any way invalid at the time.

Most Respectfully,
R

I have. It is just that you have refused to see it.

3. Reaffirms the inalienable right of the peoples of Namibia and Zimbabwe, of the Palestinian people and of all peoples under alien and colonial domination to self-determination, national independence, territorial integrity, and national unity and sovereignty without external interference;

A RES 33 24 of 29 November 1978​

Just what is it that you think you have here, Tinny? Some kind of smoking gun or compelling directive?

Palestinians have to sit down at the negotiation table to determine the territory that will part of their state. There was no state yet for the palestinians, arabs rejected that offer.

 

[P F Tinmore]

P F Tinmore, et asl,

Again, this is a timeline issue.

P F Tinmore, et al,

This is so bogus.

I have backed up my claims with documents.

How about you?

(COMMENT)

You have not presented any convincing argument or evidence that the Jewish Declaration of Independence and their exercise of the right of "self-determination" was in any way invalid at the time.

Most Respectfully,
R

I have. It is just that you have refused to see it.

3. Reaffirms the inalienable right of the peoples of Namibia and Zimbabwe, of the Palestinian people and of all peoples under alien and colonial domination to self-determination, national independence, territorial integrity, and national unity and sovereignty without external interference;

A RES 33 24 of 29 November 1978​

(COMMENT)

Watch closely. (Now you see it ---- Now you don't!)

Jordanian Parliamentary Action 11 April 1950, Unification of the Two Banks, West Bank Annexation, "actualization of "self-determination"
---- Three decades later. ----
A RES 33 24 of 29 November 1978 UN reaffirmation of "self-determination"
---- A decade later. ----
A/43/827 S/20278 18 November 1988 Palestinian Independence --- actualization of "self-determination"​

The applicability of the "Importance of the universal realization of the right of peoples to self-determination" (A RES 33 24 of 29 November 1978) ended for the Palestinian:

• Gaza: 1988
• West Bank 1950

Today, the 1988 Declaration applies to all Palestinians located in the West Bank and Gaza Strip.

Most Respectfully,
R

You are starting late in your timeline.

 

[RoccoR]

P F Tinmore, et al,

No such thing.

P F Tinmore, et asl,

Again, this is a timeline issue.

P F Tinmore, et al,

This is so bogus.

I have backed up my claims with documents.

How about you?

(COMMENT)

You have not presented any convincing argument or evidence that the Jewish Declaration of Independence and their exercise of the right of "self-determination" was in any way invalid at the time.

Most Respectfully,
R

I have. It is just that you have refused to see it.

3. Reaffirms the inalienable right of the peoples of Namibia and Zimbabwe, of the Palestinian people and of all peoples under alien and colonial domination to self-determination, national independence, territorial integrity, and national unity and sovereignty without external interference;

A RES 33 24 of 29 November 1978​

(COMMENT)

Watch closely. (Now you see it ---- Now you don't!)

Jordanian Parliamentary Action 11 April 1950, Unification of the Two Banks, West Bank Annexation, "actualization of "self-determination"
---- Three decades later. ----
A RES 33 24 of 29 November 1978 UN reaffirmation of "self-determination"
---- A decade later. ----
A/43/827 S/20278 18 November 1988 Palestinian Independence --- actualization of "self-determination"​

The applicability of the "Importance of the universal realization of the right of peoples to self-determination" (A RES 33 24 of 29 November 1978) ended for the Palestinian:

• Gaza: 1988
• West Bank 1950

Today, the 1988 Declaration applies to all Palestinians located in the West Bank and Gaza Strip.

Most Respectfully,
R

You are starting late in your timeline.

(COMMENT)

The timeline covers a period between 1950 and today; anywhere in between.

Pick your time. Let me know.

Most Respectfully,
R

 

[P F Tinmore]

P F Tinmore, et al,

No such thing.

P F Tinmore, et asl,

Again, this is a timeline issue.

P F Tinmore, et al,

This is so bogus.

I have backed up my claims with documents.

How about you?

(COMMENT)

You have not presented any convincing argument or evidence that the Jewish Declaration of Independence and their exercise of the right of "self-determination" was in any way invalid at the time.

Most Respectfully,
R

I have. It is just that you have refused to see it.

3. Reaffirms the inalienable right of the peoples of Namibia and Zimbabwe, of the Palestinian people and of all peoples under alien and colonial domination to self-determination, national independence, territorial integrity, and national unity and sovereignty without external interference;

A RES 33 24 of 29 November 1978​

(COMMENT)

Watch closely. (Now you see it ---- Now you don't!)

Jordanian Parliamentary Action 11 April 1950, Unification of the Two Banks, West Bank Annexation, "actualization of "self-determination"
---- Three decades later. ----
A RES 33 24 of 29 November 1978 UN reaffirmation of "self-determination"
---- A decade later. ----
A/43/827 S/20278 18 November 1988 Palestinian Independence --- actualization of "self-determination"​

The applicability of the "Importance of the universal realization of the right of peoples to self-determination" (A RES 33 24 of 29 November 1978) ended for the Palestinian:

• Gaza: 1988
• West Bank 1950

Today, the 1988 Declaration applies to all Palestinians located in the West Bank and Gaza Strip.

Most Respectfully,
R

You are starting late in your timeline.

(COMMENT)

The timeline covers a period between 1950 and today; anywhere in between.

Pick your time. Let me know.

Most Respectfully,
R

Like I say, you are starting late.

 

[Hossfly]

P F Tinmore, et al,

No such thing.

P F Tinmore, et asl,

Again, this is a timeline issue.

P F Tinmore, et al,

This is so bogus.

(COMMENT)

You have not presented any convincing argument or evidence that the Jewish Declaration of Independence and their exercise of the right of "self-determination" was in any way invalid at the time.

Most Respectfully,
R

I have. It is just that you have refused to see it.

3. Reaffirms the inalienable right of the peoples of Namibia and Zimbabwe, of the Palestinian people and of all peoples under alien and colonial domination to self-determination, national independence, territorial integrity, and national unity and sovereignty without external interference;

A RES 33 24 of 29 November 1978​

(COMMENT)

Watch closely. (Now you see it ---- Now you don't!)

Jordanian Parliamentary Action 11 April 1950, Unification of the Two Banks, West Bank Annexation, "actualization of "self-determination"
---- Three decades later. ----
A RES 33 24 of 29 November 1978 UN reaffirmation of "self-determination"
---- A decade later. ----
A/43/827 S/20278 18 November 1988 Palestinian Independence --- actualization of "self-determination"​

The applicability of the "Importance of the universal realization of the right of peoples to self-determination" (A RES 33 24 of 29 November 1978) ended for the Palestinian:

• Gaza: 1988
• West Bank 1950

Today, the 1988 Declaration applies to all Palestinians located in the West Bank and Gaza Strip.

Most Respectfully,
R

You are starting late in your timeline.

(COMMENT)

The timeline covers a period between 1950 and today; anywhere in between.

Pick your time. Let me know.

Most Respectfully,
R

Like I say, you are starting late.

Tinmore, Rocco is already there. You're the one who is a day late and a dollar short. Get yer act together.

 

[Hossfly]

The OP is "Who Are The Palestinians?" Hear them in their own words as they let the truth slip out.

 

[Coyote]

The Palestinians are people. Human beings. Men and women and children.

Who would have thought it would be this difficult a question to answer?

 

[Hossfly]

The Palestinians are people. Human beings. Men and women and children.

Who would have thought it would be this difficult a question to answer?

According to a Hamas figure in my video, half are Egyptian, half are Saudi. All human beings but not Palestinian.

 

[Coyote]

Hoss, many are as indiginous to Palestine as the Jews.

Beyond that - does it matter?

They are people and it's all to easy to marginalize them with these sort of arguments.

The question to ask is why is it so important to some how make them less worthy of inclusion by asking these sorts of questions?