# "Free Palestine



## hortysir (Mar 13, 2015)

End the Occupation"

That was a bumper sticker I saw today.

So there are several Arab states in the region and only one Jewish state, but Israel is "occupying" Palestine?


----------



## Challenger (Mar 13, 2015)

Correct.


----------



## Muslim75 (Mar 13, 2015)

Jerusalem and Palestine are very coveted by the three monotheistic religions. As the Christians have more political power, they rule over that land.

From my Muslim perspective, I say that Islam will never be denied Jerusalem and Palestine. Ever since Israel was created, Islam has never been denied Jerusalem and Palestine.


----------



## Phoenall (Mar 13, 2015)

Challenger said:


> Correct.






And your documented evidence of this is what ?


----------



## Challenger (Mar 13, 2015)

Phoenall said:


> Challenger said:
> 
> 
> > Correct.
> ...



OK, go to your browser and type in "Amazon.co.uk" click on "books" then in the search field type in "Arab Irseli Conflict", you'll get 11,287 books on the subject. Off you go. Come back to me when you've read them all.


----------



## Daniyel (Mar 13, 2015)

Hmm the usual clowns can always deflect, but lets observe the facts the way they are - the Jews decided to allow Muslims in, the Muslims decided to not allow Jews in, anyone care to disprove?


----------



## P F Tinmore (Mar 13, 2015)

Daniyel said:


> Hmm the usual clowns can always deflect, but lets observe the facts the way they are - the Jews decided to allow Muslims in, the Muslims decided to not allow Jews in, anyone care to disprove?


Is this what you are lying about?

Abbas pledges There will be no Israelis in Palestine The Times of Israel


----------



## P F Tinmore (Mar 13, 2015)

P F Tinmore said:


> Daniyel said:
> 
> 
> > Hmm the usual clowns can always deflect, but lets observe the facts the way they are - the Jews decided to allow Muslims in, the Muslims decided to not allow Jews in, anyone care to disprove?
> ...


Former Labor leader Shelly Yacimovich claimed on Tuesday morning  that she had discussed the possibility of Jewish settlers who did not wish to leave their West Bank communities, staying in a Palestinian state as citizens. Yacimovich stated on Israel Radio that Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas had accepted the proposal in a meeting between herself and Abbas in May, 2013.

Yacimovich Abbas agreed to Jewish settlers in a future Palestinian state - Diplomacy Politics - Jerusalem Post


----------



## hortysir (Mar 13, 2015)

They are Arabs.
Israel is a small country.
Let any if the neighboring Arab nations take in the Palestinians


----------



## Daniyel (Mar 13, 2015)

P F Tinmore said:


> Daniyel said:
> 
> 
> > Hmm the usual clowns can always deflect, but lets observe the facts the way they are - the Jews decided to allow Muslims in, the Muslims decided to not allow Jews in, anyone care to disprove?
> ...


Jews* you skipped that part, and despite the fact you - head of Team Palestine clowns - just deflected it all again I still see no Muslim place where Jews are allowed, try again.


----------



## Daniyel (Mar 13, 2015)

hortysir said:


> They are Arabs.
> Israel is a small country.
> Let any if the neighboring Arab nations take in the Palestinians


They don't want them.


----------



## TheOldSchool (Mar 13, 2015)

hortysir said:


> They are Arabs.
> Israel is a small country.
> Let any if the neighboring Arab nations take in the Palestinians


How?  Israel won't allow them to leave.


----------



## hortysir (Mar 13, 2015)

TheOldSchool said:


> hortysir said:
> 
> 
> > They are Arabs.
> ...


Bullshit.
Let em start packing, and I bet every penny-pinching Jew in the region would pitch in on uhaul trucks


----------



## Daniyel (Mar 13, 2015)

TheOldSchool said:


> hortysir said:
> 
> 
> > They are Arabs.
> ...


We're dying to "let them leave".


----------



## P F Tinmore (Mar 13, 2015)

Challenger said:


> Phoenall said:
> 
> 
> > Challenger said:
> ...


Long but shorter than reading all of those books.


----------



## Phoenall (Mar 13, 2015)

Challenger said:


> Phoenall said:
> 
> 
> > Challenger said:
> ...






 So you have bought all 11,287 books and read them front to back and every one agrees with your claims  that Israel is occupying Palestine ?

 So if I find one that doesn't it means that you are wrong ...................


----------



## Phoenall (Mar 13, 2015)

P F Tinmore said:


> Daniyel said:
> 
> 
> > Hmm the usual clowns can always deflect, but lets observe the facts the way they are - the Jews decided to allow Muslims in, the Muslims decided to not allow Jews in, anyone care to disprove?
> ...





 Nope try the Palestinian charter that states no Jews will be allowed to live in Palestine unless they were born before Zionists were invited to migrate to Palestine. Do you know of any Jews born before 1850 ?


----------



## Phoenall (Mar 13, 2015)

P F Tinmore said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> > Daniyel said:
> ...





 And since then he has publicly stated that no Jews will be allowed to live in Palestine


----------



## Phoenall (Mar 13, 2015)

P F Tinmore said:


> Challenger said:
> 
> 
> > Phoenall said:
> ...




 One mans views and not worth bothering with


----------



## montelatici (Mar 13, 2015)

hortysir said:


> End the Occupation"
> 
> That was a bumper sticker I saw today.
> 
> So there are several Arab states in the region and only one Jewish state, but Israel is "occupying" Palestine?



There were quite a few black ruled states in the region when South Africa was the only white ruled state.


----------



## High_Gravity (Mar 13, 2015)

Palestine can eat my balls.


----------



## toastman (Mar 13, 2015)

Palestinians are the biggest cry babies in the world.

They are probably the only people that attack a country and then whine when theh are hit back ten times harder.
Soon, the world will stop caring about these freeloaders.


----------



## aris2chat (Mar 13, 2015)

Gaza is exporting it's agricultural goods to Israel and Israel and Qatar are speeding up the rebuilding or gaza, while the arab states are pledging billions to fight terrorism.
Everyone is trying to help the palestinians, except the terrorists.


----------



## Lipush (Mar 14, 2015)

hortysir said:


> End the Occupation"
> 
> That was a bumper sticker I saw today.
> 
> So there are several Arab states in the region and only one Jewish state, but Israel is "occupying" Palestine?



That's the Palestinian muslim logic. Every non-Muslim state is "occupied" by "Kuffar" and should be liberated.

True story.


----------



## Challenger (Mar 14, 2015)

hortysir said:


> They are Arabs.
> Israel is a small country.
> Let any if the neighboring Arab nations take in the Palestinians



They are Palestinians, it was their country before the Zionist colonists arrived, why should they leave?


----------



## Challenger (Mar 14, 2015)

Daniyel said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> > Daniyel said:
> ...



Maybe if you let all the refugees return to their homes, the Muslim world would be more inclined to let  Jewish people settle wherever they wanted; they did before the Zionists tried to ethnically cleanse Palestine.


----------



## docmauser1 (Mar 14, 2015)

Challenger said:


> Correct.


Ah! Palistanian 0ccupation©!


----------



## docmauser1 (Mar 14, 2015)

Challenger said:


> OK, go to your browser and type in "Amazon.co.uk" click on "books" then in the search field type in "Arab Irseli Conflict", you'll get 11,287 books on the subject. Off you go. Come back to me when you've read them all.


Did our honorable challenger read all that occupation© garbage?!


----------



## Phoenall (Mar 14, 2015)

montelatici said:


> hortysir said:
> 
> 
> > End the Occupation"
> ...





 OFF TOPIC AGAIN


----------



## Phoenall (Mar 14, 2015)

Challenger said:


> hortysir said:
> 
> 
> > They are Arabs.
> ...





 They are arab muslims that said they were Syrians and it was Ottoman country before the Zionists were invited by the ottomans to settle and work the land. So why shouldn't the free loading arab muslim squatters move when they are even more recent arrivals than the Zionists. Just read the accounts of the Ottomans


----------



## Phoenall (Mar 14, 2015)

Challenger said:


> Daniyel said:
> 
> 
> > P F Tinmore said:
> ...





 As soon as they produce Ottoman or British mandate land title they can return, if they don't have any and they cant get copies from the land registry then they cant prove ownership.
 They massacred the Jews every chance they got  as the recent links I supplied showed. Not one pro pali moron posted a reply to them either.


----------



## Challenger (Mar 14, 2015)

Phoenall said:


> Challenger said:
> 
> 
> > Daniyel said:
> ...



So now Phoney speaks for the government of Israel?  How many Israelis can produce Ottoman or British mandate land titles?


----------



## Phoenall (Mar 14, 2015)

Challenger said:


> Phoenall said:
> 
> 
> > Challenger said:
> ...






 They don't need to as they are in Israel and not arab muslim land. But many can produce land title to property in Jerusalem, west bank, Jordan, Iraq, Iran, Lebanon, gaza and Egypt. But because right of return is only a concept and not a law they cant claim the land.
 So how about this for a suggestion, the arab muslims in the west bank and gaza take up all the stolen Jewish land in the surrounding nations on a two for one basis. So or every 1 acre of land in Palestine they will get two acres of stolen Jewish land and the slate will be wiped clean. Sound fair to you ?


----------



## P F Tinmore (Mar 14, 2015)

Phoenall said:


> Challenger said:
> 
> 
> > Phoenall said:
> ...


I think the Jews should demand their right of return like the Palestinians are doing.


----------



## Challenger (Mar 14, 2015)

Phoenall said:


> Challenger said:
> 
> 
> > Phoenall said:
> ...



The right to return to your home at the end of hostilities is actually enshrined in customary international law. That's why the Zionists keep the conflict going. 

I don't know of any law stopping any Jewish citizen of a Muslim country from returning to their country of birth, even Spain has abolished the laws preventing Jews from returning to their homes.


----------



## aris2chat (Mar 14, 2015)

Challenger said:


> Phoenall said:
> 
> 
> > Challenger said:
> ...



Artificial non binding "laws" less than a hundred years old.  That is not how nations and civilizations throughout history have developed or survived.
A handful of people decide how the world should be run without consulting the billions that live on the planet.
..........and then they rant about self determination.  Do you have any idea how many dictatorships and theocracies there are?  How many wars are ongoing?  How many people are living in oppression?  How many are dependent on aid organizations?  How many don't or can't vote?  How many nations are failing?  How much of the world lives below their own poverty levels?  How many are forced into slavery?


----------



## Phoenall (Mar 14, 2015)

P F Tinmore said:


> Phoenall said:
> 
> 
> > Challenger said:
> ...





 An illegal premise as there is no actual right of return, and I don't care about the UN resolution because all that is in reality is a recommendation. The UN themselves stated that there is no legal right of return


----------



## Phoenall (Mar 14, 2015)

Challenger said:


> Phoenall said:
> 
> 
> > Challenger said:
> ...






 Which International law is that then as I cant find it anywhere. What I do find is this

Right of return - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia

 By contrast the *right of return* has not passed into customary international law, although it remains an important aspirational human right. Instead, international law gives each country the right to decide for itself to whom it will give citizenship



I can name plenty of nations that ban Jews from entering the country starting with Saudi Arabia, Syria, Lebanon, Jordan etc.


----------



## aris2chat (Mar 14, 2015)

Phoenall said:


> Challenger said:
> 
> 
> > Phoenall said:
> ...



but saudi royals, by private plane, have brought in Israeli doctors on a number of occasions for their family's treatment.  Those with Israeli passports are "officially" not permitted into the countries.


----------



## SAYIT (Mar 14, 2015)

Challenger said:


> The right to return to your home at the end of hostilities is actually enshrined in customary international law. That's why the Zionists keep the conflict going...



The right of return - as stated in the _*non-binding*_ UN Gen Ass 194 - is for "refugees wishing to return to their homes and live at peace with their neighbours." Do you know any Palestinians who fit that criteria? Any at all?


----------



## Phoenall (Mar 14, 2015)

aris2chat said:


> Phoenall said:
> 
> 
> > Challenger said:
> ...






 Double standards of course, it is an insult to their own medical professionals bringing in banned people to treat the sick. Don't the Jewish members of the U.S. military have to hide their religion when visiting Saudi ?


----------



## aris2chat (Mar 14, 2015)

Phoenall said:


> aris2chat said:
> 
> 
> > Phoenall said:
> ...



No books, no symbols off base.  No discussion of their religion........


----------



## theliq (Mar 14, 2015)

Phoenall said:


> Challenger said:
> 
> 
> > Correct.
> ...


OVER 100,000 DEAD PALESTINIANS,MOSTLY CIVILIANS.......MOSTLY WOMEN,CHILDREN AND BABIES........ALL DOCUMENTED,EVEN FOR A DOPE LIKE YOU.....THAT WAS A VERY SILLY QUESTION


----------



## theliq (Mar 14, 2015)

hortysir said:


> They are Arabs.
> Israel is a small country.
> Let any if the neighboring Arab nations take in the Palestinians


MORON..you know not the minute,nor the hour


----------



## jillian (Mar 14, 2015)

hortysir said:


> End the Occupation"
> 
> That was a bumper sticker I saw today.
> 
> So there are several Arab states in the region and only one Jewish state, but Israel is "occupying" Palestine?



the territories aren't "occupied".


----------



## theliq (Mar 14, 2015)

jillian said:


> hortysir said:
> 
> 
> > End the Occupation"
> ...


I SEE YOU HAVE RAISED YOU UGLY HEAD AGAIN.........WITH MORE INANE BULLSHIT


----------



## Phoenall (Mar 14, 2015)

theliq said:


> Phoenall said:
> 
> 
> > Challenger said:
> ...






 And were is the link from a non partisan source to back up your islamonazi claims ?


----------



## hortysir (Mar 14, 2015)

theliq said:


> hortysir said:
> 
> 
> > They are Arabs.
> ...


Enlighten me, asshole.
Are there more Jewish states than Arab states?
Seems to me Arabs have a wider variety of choices to live than to be "occupied"


----------



## P F Tinmore (Mar 14, 2015)

hortysir said:


> theliq said:
> 
> 
> > hortysir said:
> ...


So it is OK to occupy Pennsylvania because there are 49 other states?


----------



## hortysir (Mar 14, 2015)

P F Tinmore said:


> hortysir said:
> 
> 
> > theliq said:
> ...


So there was a country called Palestine that the Jews just showed up, moved in and took over?


----------



## hortysir (Mar 14, 2015)

Who was their president, or what form of government did they have? What was their currency? Their trade partners? Tax rate? Population? Flag? Their borders?
How about their gdp or rate of debt vs deficit spending?


----------



## P F Tinmore (Mar 14, 2015)

hortysir said:


> Who was their president, or what form of government did they have? What was their currency? Their trade partners? Tax rate? Population? Flag? Their borders?
> How about their gdp or rate of debt vs deficit spending?


You should link to the Israeli propaganda site that you lifted that post from.


----------



## toastman (Mar 14, 2015)

P F Tinmore said:


> hortysir said:
> 
> 
> > Who was their president, or what form of government did they have? What was their currency? Their trade partners? Tax rate? Population? Flag? Their borders?
> ...


Way to answer the questions.

That seems to be your response all the time; accusing someone of propaganda when you have no valid response, even when you yourself are an expert Palestinian propagandist.
Double standard much?


----------



## hortysir (Mar 14, 2015)

P F Tinmore said:


> hortysir said:
> 
> 
> > Who was their president, or what form of government did they have? What was their currency? Their trade partners? Tax rate? Population? Flag? Their borders?
> ...


It's legitimate questions. 
Too bad Palestine isn't a legitimate nation.


----------



## Phoenall (Mar 15, 2015)

P F Tinmore said:


> hortysir said:
> 
> 
> > theliq said:
> ...






 Isnt that what happened originally before the states were formed, the migrants occupied the land and then made it their own through barter and trade.

Now when did the Palestinian arab muslims declare independence and sign on the dotted line again


----------



## Phoenall (Mar 15, 2015)

P F Tinmore said:


> hortysir said:
> 
> 
> > Who was their president, or what form of government did they have? What was their currency? Their trade partners? Tax rate? Population? Flag? Their borders?
> ...






In other words you know you ant answer the question because there never was a Palestinian state until 1988, and then in name only


----------



## P F Tinmore (Mar 15, 2015)

Phoenall said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> > hortysir said:
> ...


A dispute regarding the status of the territories was settled by an Arbitrator appointed by the Council of the League of Nations. It was decided that *Palestine and Transjordan were newly created states * according to the terms of the applicable post-war treaties. In its Judgment No. 5, The Mavrommatis Palestine Concessions, the Permanent Court of International Justice also decided that *Palestine was responsible as the successor state* for concessions granted by Ottoman authorities. The Courts of Palestine and Great Britain decided that title to the properties shown on the Ottoman Civil list had been ceded to the government of* Palestine as an allied successor state.*[16]

State of Palestine - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia
------------------------------
The mandate, in Article 7, obliged the Mandatory to enact a nationality law, which again showed that the *Palestinians formed a nation, and that Palestine was a State*, though provisionally under guardianship. It was, moreover, unnecessary to labour the point; there was no doubt whatever that *Palestine was a separate political entity.* - See more at: Mandate for Palestine - League of Nations 32nd session - Minutes of the Permanent Mandates Commission 18 August 1937 
--------------------------
28 September 1948

 I HAVE THE HONOR TO INFORM YOUR EXCELLENCY THAT IN VIRTUE OF THE NATURAL RIGHT OF THE PEOPLE OF PALESTINE FOR SELF-DETERMINATION WHICH PRINCIPLE IS SUPPORTED BY THE CHARTERS OF THE LEAGUE OF NATIONS, THE UNITED NATIONS AND OTHERS AND IN VIEW OF THE TERMINATION OF THE BRITISH MANDATE OVER PALESTINE WHICH HAD PREVENTED THE ARABS FROM EXERCISING THEIR INDEPENDENCE, THE ARABS OF PALESTINE WHO ARE THE OWNERS OF THE COUNTRY AND ITS INDIGENOUS INHABITANTS AND WHO CONSTITUTE THE GREAT MAJORITY OF ITS LEGAL POPULATION HAVE SOLEMNLY RESOLVED TO DECLARE PALESTINE IN ITS ENTIRETY AND WITHIN ITS BOUNDARIES AS ESTABLISHED BEFORE THE TERMINATION OF THE BRITISH MANDATE AN INDEPENDENT STATE AND CONSTITUTED A GOVERNMENT UNDER THE NAME OF THE ALL-PALESTINE GOVERNMENT DERIVING ITS AUTHORITY FROM A REPRESENTATIVE COUNCIL BASED ON DEMOCRATIC PRINCIPLES AND AIMING TO SAFEGUARD THE RIGHTS OF MINORITIES AND FOREIGNERS PROTECT THE HOLY PLACES AND GUARANTEE FREEDOM OF WORSHIP TO ALL COMMUNITIES

A C.1 330 of 14 October 1948
--------------------------
The political existence of the state is independent of recognition by the other states. Even before recognition the state has the right to defend its integrity and independence,...

The Avalon Project Convention on Rights and Duties of States inter-American December 26 1933


----------



## hortysir (Mar 15, 2015)

""Most of the areas claimed by the State of Palestine have been occupied by Israel since 1967""

Israel became a country in 1948
Palestine claimed itself to be a country in 1988.
But Israel is "occupying" their land?


----------



## Challenger (Mar 15, 2015)

Phoenall said:


> Challenger said:
> 
> 
> > Phoenall said:
> ...



"Jews" or Israelis?


----------



## Challenger (Mar 15, 2015)

hortysir said:


> But Israel is "occupying" their land?...



Correct.


----------



## Challenger (Mar 15, 2015)

hortysir said:


> "Most of the areas claimed by the State of Palestine have been occupied by Israel since 1967"....



QED


----------



## hortysir (Mar 15, 2015)

Challenger said:


> hortysir said:
> 
> 
> > But Israel is "occupying" their land?...
> ...


So you move in and carve out a section of land, "declare" yourself a nation, then call the land owner an occupier.


----------



## P F Tinmore (Mar 15, 2015)

hortysir said:


> Challenger said:
> 
> 
> > hortysir said:
> ...


Yep, that is what Israel did.


----------



## P F Tinmore (Mar 15, 2015)

hortysir said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> > hortysir said:
> ...


I have seen that same list from several posters.


----------



## Phoenall (Mar 15, 2015)

P F Tinmore said:


> Phoenall said:
> 
> 
> > P F Tinmore said:
> ...






 The first link does not contain the passage you claim making you a liar.

 The second link has been explained to you in detail and you refuse to accept that it was British Palestine and that there was never a nation of Palestine prior to 1988. If the arab muslims accept this why ant you.

 The third link was a paper exercise by foreign powers to stir up trouble thus negating the claim.

 Palestine had no leader, no capital, no monetary unit and no government until 1988 unless you an peoduce evidence to the contrary


----------



## Phoenall (Mar 15, 2015)

Challenger said:


> Phoenall said:
> 
> 
> > Challenger said:
> ...






To these nations it does not matter, they prefer the term Zionist that they refuse to define making it a racist term. So why are you RACIST towards the Jews ?


----------



## Phoenall (Mar 15, 2015)

Challenger said:


> hortysir said:
> 
> 
> > But Israel is "occupying" their land?...
> ...






 So when did they legally acquire this land and from whom did they acquire it. Should be easy as the land had two legal owners in the 600 years ending in 1948.


----------



## Phoenall (Mar 15, 2015)

P F Tinmore said:


> hortysir said:
> 
> 
> > Challenger said:
> ...






 When did Israel do this then, and where is the evidence of the declaration ?


----------



## Phoenall (Mar 15, 2015)

P F Tinmore said:


> hortysir said:
> 
> 
> > P F Tinmore said:
> ...






 And yiu still have not been able to give an answer to the question, is this because there is no evidence of Palestine being a nation prior to 1988 ?


----------



## P F Tinmore (Mar 15, 2015)

Phoenall said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> > Phoenall said:
> ...


The first link does not contain the passage you claim making you a liar.​
Yes it does. All you do is shovel shit.


----------



## Phoenall (Mar 15, 2015)

P F Tinmore said:


> Phoenall said:
> 
> 
> > P F Tinmore said:
> ...






 Nope went through it and could not find that passage, so how about you do a screen grab and show were it is ?


----------



## Phoenall (Mar 15, 2015)

did anyone else see the Bumper sticker in question, the one I say did saw did say  FREE PALESTINE and underneath it said "with 3 packs of ali's halal kebabs"


----------



## P F Tinmore (Mar 15, 2015)

Phoenall said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> > Phoenall said:
> ...



State of Palestine - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia


----------



## Phoenall (Mar 15, 2015)

P F Tinmore said:


> Phoenall said:
> 
> 
> > P F Tinmore said:
> ...







 Opening sentence of your link is

 The *State of Palestine*http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/State_of_Palestine#endnote_naming_ (Arabic: دولة فلسطين‎ Dawlat Filasṭīn) is a de jure sovereign state in the Middle East.[14][15] Its independence was declared on *15 November 1988* by the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO) in Algiers as a government-in-exile


So when did the state of Palestine come into existence again ?_


----------



## hortysir (Mar 15, 2015)

P F Tinmore said:


> hortysir said:
> 
> 
> > P F Tinmore said:
> ...


As have I.

And I have yet to see a convincing answer


----------



## hortysir (Mar 15, 2015)

P F Tinmore said:


> hortysir said:
> 
> 
> > Challenger said:
> ...


How can that be when Israel was a country 40 years before Palestine labeled themselves one?


----------



## P F Tinmore (Mar 15, 2015)

Phoenall said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> > Phoenall said:
> ...


No it isn't. Try again.

State of Palestine - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia


----------



## Phoenall (Mar 15, 2015)

P F Tinmore said:


> Phoenall said:
> 
> 
> > P F Tinmore said:
> ...







 Which clearly states in the first sentence

 The *State of Palestine*http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/State_of_Palestine#endnote_naming_ (Arabic: دولة فلسطين‎ Dawlat Filasṭīn) is a de jure sovereign state in the Middle East.[14][15] Its independence was declared on *15 November 1988* by the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO) in Algiers as a government-in-exile._


----------



## P F Tinmore (Mar 15, 2015)

hortysir said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> > hortysir said:
> ...



A state must have defined territory.

What territory did Israel define and legally acquire that it sits on.

The Palestinians claimed territory that is inside their international borders.


----------



## Phoenall (Mar 15, 2015)

P F Tinmore said:


> hortysir said:
> 
> 
> > P F Tinmore said:
> ...





The territory inside the borders of the Mandate for Palestine as there are no borders for the state of Palestine until they are negotiated.

 So which treaty gave the state of Palestine International borders against the wishes of the neighbouring nations ?


----------



## P F Tinmore (Mar 15, 2015)

Phoenall said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> > Phoenall said:
> ...


I get this:

*Decisions of international and national tribunals*
The U.S. State Department _Digest of International Law_ says that the terms of the Treaty of Lausanne provided for the application of the principles of state succession to the "A" Mandates. The Treaty of Versailles (1920) provisionally recognized the former Ottoman communities as independent nations. It also required Germany to recognize the disposition of the former Ottoman territories and to recognize the new states laid down within their boundaries.

State of Palestine - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia


----------



## P F Tinmore (Mar 15, 2015)

Phoenall said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> > hortysir said:
> ...


The Mandate had no land. You can't have borders without land. Borders define an area of land.


----------



## Phoenall (Mar 16, 2015)

P F Tinmore said:


> Phoenall said:
> 
> 
> > P F Tinmore said:
> ...










 That is well down the page and is not the first thing you read, unless you have an islamonazi computer that removes the truth and just produces what you want to see..  Here is the befgining again


*State of Palestine*
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Jump to: navigation, search
This article is about the state proclaimed in 1988 that later became an observer of the United Nations. For the administration established under the Oslo Accords, see Palestinian National Authority. For the state proclaimed in 1948, see All-Palestine Government.



*State of Palestinehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/State_of_Palestine#endnote_naming
دولة فلسطين
Dawlat Filasṭīn*_


 


Flag Coat of arms
*Anthem: *"فدائي"
"Fida'i"[1][2]
"My Redemption"





http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/f/f9/National_Anthem_of_Palestine.ogg





*Proclaimed capital*
*Administrative center*

Jerusalem (East)[ii][3][4]
Ramallah
*Largest city* Jerusalem (claimed)Gaza City (de facto)a
*Official languages* Arabic
*Government* De jure parliamentary republic operating de facto as a semi-presidential republic[5]
 -  President Mahmoud Abbasb
 -  Prime Minister Rami Hamdallah
 -  Speaker of Parliament Salim Zanoun
*Legislature* National Council
*Formation*
 -  Declaration of Independence 15 November 1988 
 -  UNGA observer state resolution 29 November 2012 
 -  Transformed from PA 3 January 2013 
 -  Sovereignty dispute with Israel Ongoingc[iii][6][7] 
*Area*
 -  Total 6,220 km2

 - West Bank: 5,860 km2
- Dead Sea: 220 km2[8]
 - Gaza Strip: 360 km2[9]

2,400 sq mi
*Population*
 -  2014 estimate 4,550,368[10] (123rd)
 -  Density 731/km2 1,895/sq mi
*GDP* (PPP) 2008a estimate
 -  Total $11.95 billiona (–)
 -  Per capita $2,900a (–)
*Gini* (2009) 35.5[11]
medium
*HDI* (2013) 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




 0.686[12]
medium *·* 107th
*Currency*

Egyptian pound (EGP)
Israeli new sheqel (ILS)
Jordanian dinar (JOD)[13]
(see also Palestinian currency)

*Time zone* (UTC+2)
 -  Summer (DST)  (UTC+3)
*Date format* dd/mm/yyyy
*Drives on the* right
*Calling code* +970
*ISO 3166 code* PS
*Internet TLD* .ps
a. Population and economy statistics and rankings are based data of the PCBS.
b. Also the leader of the state's government.[iv]
c. The territories claimed are under Israeli occupation.
The *State of Palestine*http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/State_of_Palestine#endnote_naming (Arabic: دولة فلسطين‎ Dawlat Filasṭīn) is a de jure sovereign state in the Middle East.[14][15] Its independence was declared on 15 November 1988 by the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO) in Algiers as a government-in-exile. The State of Palestine claims the West Bank and Gaza Strip,[16] and has designated Jerusalem as its capital,[ii][3][4] with partial control of those areas assumed in 1994 as the Palestinian Authority. Most of the areas claimed by the State of Palestine have been occupied by Israel since 1967 in the aftermath of the Six-Day War.[7] The State of Palestine applied for United Nations (UN) membership in 2011[16] but in 2012 was granted a non-member observer state status.[14][15]





And you LIE again as you have omitted words that don't sit with your POV Here is the section in ful

Decisions of international and national tribunals

The U.S. State Department Digest of International Law says that the terms of the Treaty of Lausanne provided for the application of the principles of state succession to the "A" Mandates. The Treaty of Versailles (1920) provisionally recognized the former Ottoman communities as independent nations. It also required Germany to recognize the disposition of the former Ottoman territories and to recognize the new states laid down within their boundaries. The Treaty of Lausanne required the newly created states that acquired the territory to pay annuities on the Ottoman public debt, and to assume responsibility for the administration of concessions that had been granted by the Ottomans. A dispute regarding the status of the territories was settled by an Arbitrator appointed by the Council of the League of Nations. It was decided that Palestine and Transjordan were newly created states according to the terms of the applicable post-war treaties. In its Judgment No. 5, The Mavrommatis Palestine Concessions, the Permanent Court of International Justice also decided that Palestine was responsible as the successor state for concessions granted by Ottoman authorities. The Courts of Palestine and Great Britain decided that title to the properties shown on the Ottoman Civil list had been ceded to the government of Palestine as an allied successor state.[43]_


----------



## Phoenall (Mar 16, 2015)

P F Tinmore said:


> Phoenall said:
> 
> 
> > P F Tinmore said:
> ...







 The Mandate set the borders as you have been shown before they did not set the borders of the nation of Palestine
 The Mandate had all the Ottoman land under International law of the time


----------



## P F Tinmore (Mar 16, 2015)

Phoenall said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> > Phoenall said:
> ...


Mandates were temporary assignments with a stated goal and end date.


----------



## Phoenall (Mar 16, 2015)

P F Tinmore said:


> Phoenall said:
> 
> 
> > P F Tinmore said:
> ...






 So what was the end date of the Mandate for Palestine then  ?

 What was the Mandate for Palestine's stated goals ? ( a hint it is in the Mandate )


----------



## P F Tinmore (Mar 16, 2015)

Phoenall said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> > Phoenall said:
> ...


Until the people can stand alone.

Mission accomplished. End of Mandate.


----------



## Phoenall (Mar 16, 2015)

P F Tinmore said:


> Phoenall said:
> 
> 
> > P F Tinmore said:
> ...







So the mandate for Palestine is still in effect as the arab muslims have yet to prove they can stand alone. The whole world doubts that they ever will as they are ultimately reliant on charity and handouts to exist

 But you missed the main essence of the Mandate for Palestine's  stated goals

 The resurrection of the national home of the Jews in Palestine.


----------



## P F Tinmore (Mar 16, 2015)

Phoenall said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> > Phoenall said:
> ...


And they flopped at that too. Britain's Mandate was more than just a failure, it was a colossal disaster.


----------



## Phoenall (Mar 16, 2015)

P F Tinmore said:


> Phoenall said:
> 
> 
> > P F Tinmore said:
> ...






 Because the arab muslims would not accept their leaders agreements, not to late for the UN to send in the troops to dismantle hamas and fatah. Then ascertain were each arab muslim Palestinian came from and send them back


----------



## P F Tinmore (Mar 16, 2015)

Phoenall said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> > Phoenall said:
> ...


----------



## Dogmaphobe (Mar 16, 2015)

hortysir said:


> End the Occupation"
> 
> That was a bumper sticker I saw today.
> 
> So there are several Arab states in the region and only one Jewish state, but Israel is "occupying" Palestine?




 The bumper sticker you saw just as easily could have been "Marriage = one man, one woman" or some such if the imbecile sporting it had been exposed to right wing fundamentalism during their formative years instead of left wing fundamentalism.

 It's really all about people with extremely low levels of intelligence posturing in such a way that they are recognized by others similarly afflicted.


----------



## Dogmaphobe (Mar 16, 2015)

Challenger said:


> They are Palestinians, it was their country before the Zionist colonists arrived, why should they leave?




 I keep hoping some neurons will finally start occupying all that unused tissue that lies between your two ears. 

  As has been pointed out to you innumerable times, there has never been a country called Palestine run by "Palestinians".  You are uneducable and so keep repeating this stupid nonsense.


----------



## hortysir (Mar 16, 2015)

Dogmaphobe said:


> hortysir said:
> 
> 
> > End the Occupation"
> ...


This dude even had a license plate frame that was emblazoned with the word "Palestine" across the bottom.
He had some sort of flag hanging from the rear view mirror. Windows were tinted too dark to make it out. Also couldn't tell if he was Arabic.
It was a nice Lexus though


----------



## aris2chat (Mar 16, 2015)

Dogmaphobe said:


> Challenger said:
> 
> 
> > They are Palestinians, it was their country before the Zionist colonists arrived, why should they leave?
> ...



one neuron short of a synapse.  wishful thinking is not going to make it happen without iPSCs or BAM


----------



## Phoenall (Mar 16, 2015)

P F Tinmore said:


> Phoenall said:
> 
> 
> > P F Tinmore said:
> ...





 Confused by simple logic I see.


----------



## Hossfly (Mar 16, 2015)

aris2chat said:


> Dogmaphobe said:
> 
> 
> > Challenger said:
> ...


aris2chat , how about this latest event?

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Natanyahu, on the eve of parliamentary elections, pledged in an interview published Monday that he would not support a separate Palestinian state if re-elected. 

http://www.foxnews.com/world/2015/03/16/netanyahu-urges-supporters-to-close-this-gap-ahead-israeli-election/


----------



## aris2chat (Mar 16, 2015)

Hossfly said:


> aris2chat said:
> 
> 
> > Dogmaphobe said:
> ...


 
With or without Natanyahu, the land in the WB will not be surrendered.
Israel will not cede the high ground and their security.  Israel tried for years to work things out.  No more, they have had enough.
PA has already begun turning the security in the WB back to Israel.  As for G.....everyone wants to wash their hand of that mess, even 90% of the palestinians there.


----------



## hortysir (Mar 16, 2015)

Hossfly said:


> aris2chat said:
> 
> 
> > Dogmaphobe said:
> ...


Who, in their right mind, would agree to another nation establishing its borders within the confines of their own nation? AND allow that nation to claim the same capital?


----------



## Challenger (Mar 17, 2015)

hortysir said:


> Hossfly said:
> 
> 
> > aris2chat said:
> ...



Exactly right, the Palestinians certainly didn't agree to another "nation," (the European Zionist colonial project, aka Israel) establishing it's borders within the confines of their own nation, Palestine. Nice to see you are finally getting the point.


----------



## Phoenall (Mar 17, 2015)

Challenger said:


> hortysir said:
> 
> 
> > Hossfly said:
> ...







 What was its capital then, who was its leader, what was its monetary unit and who owned the land under International law at the time ?


----------



## docmauser1 (Mar 17, 2015)

Challenger said:


> Exactly right, the Palestinians certainly didn't agree to another "nation," ...


And since palistanians aren't a nation themselves they may go pound sand, of course.


----------



## Coyote (Mar 17, 2015)

Dogmaphobe said:


> Challenger said:
> 
> 
> > They are Palestinians, it was their country before the Zionist colonists arrived, why should they leave?
> ...



Yet they lived there.  Why should they be forced to leave?


----------



## Coyote (Mar 17, 2015)

Phoenall said:


> Challenger said:
> 
> 
> > hortysir said:
> ...



That's such a stupid canard.

The region known as Palestine has existed under that name for some time.  It does not have to have the above to "exist" as a region with inhabitants.


----------



## Phoenall (Mar 17, 2015)

Coyote said:


> Dogmaphobe said:
> 
> 
> > Challenger said:
> ...





 Because the Palestinians that had carried that name for 1900 years were not being forced to leave, but the violent fifth columnists that arrived in the past 75 years were being deported as illegal immigrants and enemies of the state. If you look the arab muslims that looked on the land as theirs took up the offers and are now full citizens of the state. Would you like a psychopathic terrorist living next door to you, one hell bent on killing you and your family because they believe that your property is theirs


----------



## Phoenall (Mar 17, 2015)

Coyote said:


> Phoenall said:
> 
> 
> > Challenger said:
> ...






 As soon as you use the term nation to describe the arab muslims claims you are showing your lack of understanding. Which is why the questions are always asked and never replied to properly. If Palestine was a nation before 1988 then it must have had a capital city, a currency, a leader or leaders, a GDP, and a set of laws. It must also have had a treaty signed by the LoN giving it the land undewr the terms of the Mandate for Palestine. Like Syria has, Iraq has, Jordan has and Israel has.
 But seeing as it was just an undefined area in the M.E. that had no leaders or capital then it could not have been a nation. It is no different to the Gobi desert, the Sahara, the Pampas or the Steppes which are also not nations but just places on the map.


----------



## Coyote (Mar 17, 2015)

Phoenall said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> > Phoenall said:
> ...




It's not undefined.  It's a region.  Palestine - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia

_... a geographic region in Western Asia between the Mediterranean Sea and the Jordan River. It is sometimes considered to include adjoining territories. The name was used by Ancient Greek writers, and was later used for the Roman province Syria Palaestina, the Byzantine Palaestina Prima and the Umayyad and Abbasid province of Jund Filastin. _

Like Basque, Mongolia, Siberia, etc.  You're insisting that in order to "exist"  and by extention, its people to exist it must have defined borders, a capital, a currency, etc.  That's bullshit.  A canard designed to delegitimize their existence and rights.

Did the Souix have a border? A capital?  A currency? A GDP?  How about the Cheyenne?  How many other people will suddenly cease to exist as a people?


----------



## Dogmaphobe (Mar 17, 2015)

Coyote said:


> Dogmaphobe said:
> 
> 
> > Challenger said:
> ...


The Arabs who had not yet invented their identity as "Palestinians" were invited to stay and take part in the new state of Israel.  They chose warfare and murder, instead.      Why should those dedicated to murder based upon ethnicity be allowed to return once they have made such a choice?


----------



## Coyote (Mar 17, 2015)

Dogmaphobe said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> > Dogmaphobe said:
> ...



It wasn't as black and white as you make it out to be.  Those who live their now have a right to keep living there.


----------



## P F Tinmore (Mar 17, 2015)

Phoenall said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> > Phoenall said:
> ...


Palestine, as the mandate clearly showed, was a subject under international law. While she could not conclude international conventions, the mandatory Power, until further notice, concluded them _on her behalf,_ in virtue of Article 19 of the mandate. The mandate, in Article 7, obliged the Mandatory to enact a nationality law, which again showed that* the Palestinians formed a nation, and that Palestine was a State,* though provisionally under guardianship. It was, moreover, unnecessary to labour the point; there was no doubt whatever that *Palestine was a separate political entity.* - See more at: Mandate for Palestine - League of Nations 32nd session - Minutes of the Permanent Mandates Commission 18 August 1937


----------



## toastman (Mar 17, 2015)

P F Tinmore said:


> Phoenall said:
> 
> 
> > Coyote said:
> ...


Oh, they formed  state? When ?


----------



## Challenger (Mar 17, 2015)

Phoenall said:


> Challenger said:
> 
> 
> > hortysir said:
> ...



"Nation: A large body of people united by common descent, history, culture, or language, inhabiting a particular state or territory." nation - definition of nation in English from the Oxford dictionary


			
				Phoenall said:
			
		

> As soon as you use the term nation to describe the arab muslims claims you are showing your lack of understanding. Which is why the questions are always asked and never replied to properly. If Palestine was a nation before 1988 then it must have had a capital city, a currency, a leader or leaders, a GDP, and a set of laws. It must also have had a treaty signed by the LoN giving it the land undewr the terms of the Mandate for Palestine. Like Syria has, Iraq has, Jordan has and Israel has.
> But seeing as it was just an undefined area in the M.E. that had no leaders or capital then it could not have been a nation. It is no different to the Gobi desert, the Sahara, the Pampas or the Steppes which are also not nations but just places on the map.



*Nation=* "A large body of people united by common descent, history, culture, or language, inhabiting a particular state or territory."

*Nation State=* "A form of political organization in which a group of people who share the same history, traditions, or language live in a particular area under one government.

*Country=* "A nation with its own government, occupying a particular territory."


----------



## P F Tinmore (Mar 17, 2015)

toastman said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> > Phoenall said:
> ...


Well, that is a 1937 League of Nation document and Palestine was already a state.

The official start date was 1924.


----------



## aris2chat (Mar 17, 2015)

Coyote said:


> Dogmaphobe said:
> 
> 
> > Coyote said:
> ...



Lets try this for a hypothetical......
Refugees settle (squat) in places they have no right to.  They might stay their for decades, but they have no legal claim or right to that land.  When are asked to move and the owners want the land back, should they have a right to demand it as their state?  If they go to some place and work the land for the owners, they have no right to demand they have infinite right through time to make it their land.
If the PA fails or gives the land back to Israel, those in camps that have no legal deed to the land they are on can be removed. The UN camps were set up for convenience to help the refugees.  The UN does not own the land nor to the refugees.  Even if a state of some type is created in the WB, the camps are not legal determinant dwellings built to modern standards. 
Camps around Beirut have grown on what was once park land.  Palestinians have occupied apartment buildings, chalets and private homes but they have no permanent claim of ownership or right to stay there forever.  The property belong to Lebanese.
Jews bought land but after the fact arabs want to declare the sales null and void.  Money was exchanged, documents signed and taxes paid.  Sellers remorse is just too bad.  The land is no longer their's.
Towns have sprouted out of necessity but through most of gaza and the WB there is no legal proof of ownership.  Even land that many palestinians might have registered, they did take the opportunity because they did not want to serve in the military or pay taxes.  They don't own the land.
Demanding rights of public land is also problematic.  Israel can rent state land but the renters do not own the land and no right to remain there indefinably can be claimed. 
Things are no so black and white.
............as for nations?  there was no palestinian state or government before the mandate and the arabs rejected the formation of a palestinian state. Where is their right?


----------



## Dogmaphobe (Mar 17, 2015)

Coyote said:


> It wasn't as black and white as you make it out to be.  Those who live their now have a right to keep living there.




Of course, those Arabs who are descendants of those who did not take up active hostilities in 1947 have a right to keep living in Israel.  I have never made the claim they don't.

It's those who are descendants of the murderous thugs who are inspired by genocidal antisemitism who don't.


----------



## Coyote (Mar 17, 2015)

Dogmaphobe said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> > It wasn't as black and white as you make it out to be.  Those who live their now have a right to keep living there.
> ...



It doesn't matter who they are "descendents of".  As long as they haven't committed a crime - then just like anyone else they have a right to live where their families have lived for generations.


----------



## Dogmaphobe (Mar 17, 2015)

Coyote said:


> It doesn't matter who they are "descendents of".  As long as they haven't committed a crime - then just like anyone else they have a right to live where their families have lived for generations.




 No they don't.

Descendants of murderous squatters have to right to that which belongs to others.  They declared war. They lost.  By what right do squatters who initiated a war have the right to that which they never owned in the first place?


----------



## jillian (Mar 17, 2015)

TheOldSchool said:


> hortysir said:
> 
> 
> > They are Arabs.
> ...



nice lie.

but okie dokie.


----------



## Coyote (Mar 17, 2015)

Dogmaphobe said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> > It doesn't matter who they are "descendents of".  As long as they haven't committed a crime - then just like anyone else they have a right to live where their families have lived for generations.
> ...



They aren't squatters.


----------



## jillian (Mar 17, 2015)

Coyote said:


> Dogmaphobe said:
> 
> 
> > Coyote said:
> ...



again with this nonsense? 

they left.

they lost.

let me know when i get my great grandparents' properly in belarus then we'll talk.

til then, stop asking for things for terrorists that no group of people has ever gotten.


----------



## TheOldSchool (Mar 17, 2015)

jillian said:


> TheOldSchool said:
> 
> 
> > hortysir said:
> ...


You sure about that?


----------



## Coyote (Mar 17, 2015)

jillian said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> > Dogmaphobe said:
> ...



Let me know when you attempt to pursue it.

I  had no idea that all Palestinians are terrorists.


----------



## aris2chat (Mar 17, 2015)

Coyote said:


> Dogmaphobe said:
> 
> 
> > Coyote said:
> ...



There were arabs that had deeds and went through the courts to get the land back, or compensated for land that could not be returned.
Most did not own land, or might have been offered a chance to register land but chose not to.  Arabs worked the land for both other arabs and jews but working does not mean owning.  Being allowed to live on land they tended for others does not mean it is their home or that they cannot be removed.  Declaring land they sold as null and void is not going to mean the land should be returned to them.
Arabs stayed and helped develop Israel.  Not everyone is out to take from or destroy Israel.

With Likud or ZU there will be no "right of return", no withdrawal of the high ground, no giving up the Jordan valley and no surrender of security for Israel.  If Netanyahu is tapped again, there will be no palestinian state.  If Herzog is tapped, there could be negotiation for a state but only on zone A and B in the WB.
If Abbas folds up the PLO and hands back the WB, those involved in attacks against Israelis, supported terrorists in any way, and even those who would not accept Israeli citizenship in a jewish state might have to leave.  Those who want peace as Israelis could stay.
No one wants G, even the palestinians there.
Either way the mount will likely be opened to all faiths. Anyone that tries to attack a non-muslim would be refused entry to the mount and even Israel, if not jailed.
Israel wants security which will bring prosperity.  No one is going to dance the steps the palestinians want.  A few seat by the arab party is not going to do much to satisfy the "demands" of the palestinians.  MKs should be first and foremost Israelis.


----------



## toastman (Mar 17, 2015)

P F Tinmore said:


> toastman said:
> 
> 
> > P F Tinmore said:
> ...


Are you saying Palestine became a sovereign state in 1937?


----------



## Dogmaphobe (Mar 17, 2015)

jillian said:


> again with this nonsense?
> 
> they left.
> 
> ...




I'm trying to decide if I should claim my birthright to somebody else's land in Ireland, or Scotland, myself.

I hadn't realized until I met Coyote what an advantage it was to be Scots-Irish.


----------



## P F Tinmore (Mar 17, 2015)

toastman said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> > toastman said:
> ...


No.


----------



## theliq (Mar 18, 2015)

jillian said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> > Dogmaphobe said:
> ...


They left did they,Bullshit they were driven out of their homes and villages by Zionist Terrorists,non of these Palestinians took up active hostilities they were caught in the cross-fire and the Jews attempted to eliminate them.....Gillian you talk so much Shit.


----------



## theliq (Mar 18, 2015)

Dogmaphobe said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> > It doesn't matter who they are "descendents of".  As long as they haven't committed a crime - then just like anyone else they have a right to live where their families have lived for generations.
> ...


Wrong again Shitmouth........you knowledge of history is so poor that your comments have been consigned to the Garbage Can of History,much like Jillian's have............Stop being Cretins for Cretins sake


----------



## theliq (Mar 18, 2015)

Dogmaphobe said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> > It doesn't matter who they are "descendents of".  As long as they haven't committed a crime - then just like anyone else they have a right to live where their families have lived for generations.
> ...


Moronic Comment


----------



## theliq (Mar 18, 2015)

Challenger said:


> Phoenall said:
> 
> 
> > Challenger said:
> ...


Thanks Challenger......Explains the Palestinians to a Tee.........steve


----------



## theliq (Mar 18, 2015)

aris2chat said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> > Dogmaphobe said:
> ...


You are of course talking about Jewish Gypo Settlers mainly from the USA,in this post.....because you would be correct.


----------



## Phoenall (Mar 18, 2015)

Coyote said:


> Phoenall said:
> 
> 
> > Coyote said:
> ...






 Then define its borders of 100 C.E. to what they are today and see if it is defined or not.    As your cut and paste shows it is undefined, as in its boundaries alter as and when the people decide. You are putting that as the definition of the Palestine nation, but the Palestine area is on a par with the Badlands of Nevada, the Antarctic ice pack and the Russian Steppes all know areas but without any clear boundaries.

 Your last statement shows that you are blind to reality as the Souix, Chetenne and many other first nation tribes did have borders, being nomadic their capital was were they met, they had a currency of shells, beads and trade goods and their GDP was related to their food supplies and wealth.

 Want to try again with the palestinain nation that never existed until 1988, and the Mandate for Palestine that gave 22% of the area of Palestine borders .


----------



## Phoenall (Mar 18, 2015)

Coyote said:


> Dogmaphobe said:
> 
> 
> > Coyote said:
> ...






 Actually it was as black and white as that, defined by the UN resolution that stated that the arab muslims that were preparted to live in peace with the Jews should be allowed to return to their homes. They never said all arab muslims as they knew the majority would not accept the rules, so they were barred from returning.


----------



## Phoenall (Mar 18, 2015)

P F Tinmore said:


> Phoenall said:
> 
> 
> > Coyote said:
> ...






 Once again you fail to see the truth in as much as Palestine was not a nation until 1988, and the Nationality Law was to provide consular cover for any Mandate for Palestine inhabitant to travel outside of the mandate. If Palestine was a nation why are its passports from that era all BRITISH and not issued by the Palestinian government on the order of its government ?

Still waiting for the Internationally agreed treaty signed by the representatives of Palestine that gave the Palestinians a nation. Just like the ones that gave the Syrians, Iraqi's, Jordanians and Israeli's their nations.


----------



## Phoenall (Mar 18, 2015)

theliq said:


> Challenger said:
> 
> 
> > Phoenall said:
> ...






 YES the Jewish Palestinians as the Ottoman records show that the arab muslim Palestinians did not exist in any numbers until the late 1880's when they migrated illegally on the promise of work.


----------



## Phoenall (Mar 18, 2015)

theliq said:


> aris2chat said:
> 
> 
> > Coyote said:
> ...






 Wrong as the last two legal owners of the land invited the Jews to migrate LEGALLY to Palestine and settle the land. You are not very well educated on the history of Palestine are you, must be all the brainwashing done in your formative years. So it is the illegal arab muslim migrants that invaded Palestine that are the Gypo squatters mainly from Iran, Syria, Iraq and Egypt.


----------



## Phoenall (Mar 18, 2015)

toastman said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> > Phoenall said:
> ...






 He ant answer because there is no evidence of there ever being a Palestinian state until 1988


----------



## Phoenall (Mar 18, 2015)

Challenger said:


> Phoenall said:
> 
> 
> > Challenger said:
> ...






 Defines the Jews perfectly, but not the arab muslims who are recent arrivals on the scene.

 But read your definition and you see the word STATE used to define the nation. So when did the state of arab muslim Palestine come into existence ?   And what was their government as that is also added as a must have to be a nation or state.


----------



## Phoenall (Mar 18, 2015)

P F Tinmore said:


> toastman said:
> 
> 
> > P F Tinmore said:
> ...






 Produce it and show who was the palestinian representative that signed to accept the existence of a Palestinian state. What were its mutually agreed borders with its neighbours, and who signed for their neighbours.

 You are confusing the MANDATE FOR PALESTINE with a state when it clearly was never a state.


----------



## Phoenall (Mar 18, 2015)

Coyote said:


> Dogmaphobe said:
> 
> 
> > Coyote said:
> ...





 And when they do commit a crime what then, can they be evicted as enemies of the state and their dual Israeli nationality removed ?


----------



## Phoenall (Mar 18, 2015)

Coyote said:


> Dogmaphobe said:
> 
> 
> > Coyote said:
> ...





 LINK showing that they own the land, either through international treaty or land deeds.  A clue the Ottoman census put the numbers of arab muslims in Palestine to be very low, with the Christians outnumbering them in many places. The Jews owned most of Jerusalem, Hebron and other towns and cities.


----------



## Phoenall (Mar 18, 2015)

TheOldSchool said:


> jillian said:
> 
> 
> > TheOldSchool said:
> ...






 YEP I am as the arab muslims an leave at any time they want, but they cant return. Once they have gone they stay gone for ever. The only people stopping the arab muslims from leaving is hamas who controls who leaves gaza


----------



## Phoenall (Mar 18, 2015)

Coyote said:


> jillian said:
> 
> 
> > Coyote said:
> ...






 Have they risen up and demanded fair and free elections, moved away from the rocket launchers built on their homes. Do they surround hamas leaders houses in gaza inviting the Israelis to bomb them. If they don't and angage in any terrorist/militia activity then they must be terrorists.


----------



## Phoenall (Mar 18, 2015)

P F Tinmore said:


> toastman said:
> 
> 
> > P F Tinmore said:
> ...






 Then what are you saying as that is what is implied in your post................


----------



## Phoenall (Mar 18, 2015)

theliq said:


> jillian said:
> 
> 
> > Coyote said:
> ...






 Not according to the arab muslims they didn't. And if the Jews tried to eliminate them then the bodies would be piled high all over Palestine.


----------



## Phoenall (Mar 18, 2015)

theliq said:


> Dogmaphobe said:
> 
> 
> > Coyote said:
> ...






 Read the history of the M.E. from other than islamonazi sources and you will see that the war actually stated as far back as 1924


----------



## Phoenall (Mar 18, 2015)

theliq said:


> Dogmaphobe said:
> 
> 
> > Coyote said:
> ...





 So is it a MORONIC COMMENT when you make it about the Jews ?


----------



## Challenger (Mar 18, 2015)

Phoenall said:


> theliq said:
> 
> 
> > Challenger said:
> ...



Unsubstantiated Opinion. Prove it.


----------



## Challenger (Mar 18, 2015)

Phoenall said:


> theliq said:
> 
> 
> > aris2chat said:
> ...



The Ottomans invited Jewish people from Spain to settle in the Empire, most settled in the European portion and in Anatolia; very few settled in the Arab areas of the Empire. History of the Jews in the Ottoman Empire - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia  The British facilitated immigration based on Balfour, and most Jewish immigrants settled in the coastal cities. Fourth Aliyah - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia Fifth Aliyah - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia


----------



## Phoenall (Mar 18, 2015)

Challenger said:


> Phoenall said:
> 
> 
> > theliq said:
> ...





 Like this do you mean



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


----------



## Challenger (Mar 18, 2015)

Phoenall said:


> Challenger said:
> 
> 
> > Phoenall said:
> ...



The changing demographic of Jerusalem does not reflect the wider situation in Palestine which you well know. Try providing Ottoman records for the whole of Palestine and you will find there was never a jewish majority in Palestine throughout the Ottoman period, and for that matter the British period.  

"According to Alexander Scholch, the population of Palestine in 1850 was about 350,000 inhabitants, 30% of whom lived in 13 towns; roughly 85% were Muslims, 11% were Christians and 4% Jews.[116]

According to Ottoman statistics studied by Justin McCarthy, the population of Palestine in the early 19th century was 350,000, in 1860 it was 411,000 and in 1900 about 600,000 of whom 94% were Arabs.[117] In 1914 Palestine had a population of 657,000 Muslim Arabs, 81,000 Christian Arabs, and 59,000 Jews.[118] McCarthy estimates the non-Jewish population of Palestine at 452,789 in 1882; 737,389 in 1914; 725,507 in 1922; 880,746 in 1931; and 1,339,763 in 1946.[119]

In 1920, the League of Nations' _Interim Report on the Civil Administration of Palestine_ described the 700,000 people living in Palestine as follows:[120]

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. After the persecutions in Russia forty years ago, the movement of the Jews to Palestine assumed larger proportions." Palestine - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia


----------



## Challenger (Mar 18, 2015)

Phoenall said:


> toastman said:
> 
> 
> > P F Tinmore said:
> ...



Well....maybe. Daher el-Omar ruled most of Palestine as an independant Emirate from 1730 to 1775. Daher was a native Palestinian. That should count.


----------



## P F Tinmore (Mar 18, 2015)

Phoenall said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> > toastman said:
> ...


No it wasn't.


----------



## Coyote (Mar 18, 2015)

aris2chat said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> > Dogmaphobe said:
> ...



I'm talking about people who have been there for generations who's land gets confiscated because they were driven off and not allowed to return, or because "settlers" squat there and take it over.  When Israel "needs" land for "security" reasons - is it Jewish land that is taken or Palestinian land that is taken?  When illegal settlements are created - how many Jewish ones are demolished and how many Palestinian ones are demolished?

You imply they are squatters.  That is no better than those who term immigrant Jews "invaders".



> If the PA fails or gives the land back to Israel, those in camps that have no legal deed to the land they are on can be removed. The UN camps were set up for convenience to help the refugees.  The UN does not own the land nor to the refugees.  Even if a state of some type is created in the WB, the camps are not legal determinant dwellings built to modern standards.



Ok...so now we get into a serious ethical dilemma here.  Many of those in refugee camps fled their property in the war and, contrary to the winner's narrative, there was evidence to support the claim that i*t wasn't just the Arabs telling them to flee*.  Israel forces emptied villages and forced people out.  That property became Jewish property with no compensation to those who fled.  There was a pretense at "inviting them back" but Israel placed substantial legal obstacles in the way of that return precisely to restrict those who could return.  Same with so-called family unification efforts which were in actuality very restricted but heavily publicized.
 They can neither return to their original property, nor receive just compensation.   



> Camps around Beirut have grown on what was once park land.  Palestinians have occupied apartment buildings, chalets and private homes but they have no permanent claim of ownership or right to stay there forever.  The property belong to Lebanese.



Are you talking about all the refugee camps...or West Bank....?  I think there are multiple issues here.

One is - the Palestinians living in the West Bank.
Two is - the Palestinians living in Gaza
Three is - the Palestinians in refugee camps outside those areas.

I think the problems and solutions are seperate for each of the groups.



> Jews bought land but after the fact arabs want to declare the sales null and void.  Money was exchanged, documents signed and taxes paid.  Sellers remorse is just too bad.  The land is no longer their's.



Jews bought SOME of the land.  The constant refrain of "they bought it" is not entirely honest.



> Towns have sprouted out of necessity but through most of gaza and the WB there is no legal proof of ownership.  Even land that many palestinians might have registered, they did take the opportunity because they did not want to serve in the military or pay taxes.  They don't own the land.
> Demanding rights of public land is also problematic.  Israel can rent state land but the renters do not own the land and no right to remain there indefinably can be claimed.
> Things are no so black and white.
> ............as for nations?  there was no palestinian state or government before the mandate and the arabs rejected the formation of a palestinian state. Where is their right?



I agree they aren't so black and white - but that goes for both sides.  Where is their right?  It's the fundamental right of any people to have freedom, self determination, dignity and citizenship.

The recent election was interesting.  For one thing, I took the time to look up the some many parties involved to see what they stood for and did.  Some were very focused on domestic issues but a number had statements on the Palestinian issue.  From what I can see the sentiment seems strongly towards NO two-state solution and annexation of the West Bank.  I wonder how that would work and whether it mean for Israel as a Democratic State.  It would create two classes of citizens: those with citizenship and those with permenant residency.


----------



## Coyote (Mar 18, 2015)

Phoenall said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> > Phoenall said:
> ...



No.  I've never said "nation" - I've said it's a geographically defined region and it's had defined borders, depending on the era and which powers controlled the region.

Like I said - this is nothing more than a transparent attempt to delegitimize the rights of the people who inhabit the region.




> Your last statement shows that you are blind to reality as the Souix, Chetenne and many other first nation tribes did have borders, being nomadic their capital was were they met, they had a currency of shells, beads and trade goods and their GDP was related to their food supplies and wealth.
> 
> Want to try again with the palestinain nation that never existed until 1988, and the Mandate for Palestine that gave 22% of the area of Palestine borders .



Show me the defined borders of the Souix, their capital, and their currency.


----------



## Coyote (Mar 18, 2015)

Phoenall said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> > Dogmaphobe said:
> ...



Does that happen when Jews commit a crime?


----------



## Coyote (Mar 18, 2015)

Phoenall said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> > Dogmaphobe said:
> ...



You have to be specific - you are talking about millions of people, cases "ownership" going back prior to good records.  Some owned, some resided for centuries and may as well have owned.  You've heard of squatters rights laws?  Can you guarantee that every Jew there "owned" the land they reside on?  How much was confiscated when Palestinian residents were driven out?   If you are going to call people squatters, then you need to be democratic about that slur.


----------



## Coyote (Mar 18, 2015)

Phoenall said:


> TheOldSchool said:
> 
> 
> > jillian said:
> ...



I don't think you are right about that.  Hamas has no control over the borders.

Palestinian freedom of movement - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia


----------



## Coyote (Mar 18, 2015)

Challenger said:


> Phoenall said:
> 
> 
> > toastman said:
> ...



Interesting...I did not know that


----------



## Phoenall (Mar 18, 2015)

Challenger said:


> Phoenall said:
> 
> 
> > Challenger said:
> ...







 They problem is the arab muslims and their stooges point to Jerusalem as the evidence of arab muslim occupancy in Palestine, so if this is proven to be wrong what chance is there that the rest of Palestine would not be the same. The records once produced by monte showed that the Jews owned 8% of palestines land, the Christians 1% and arab muslim less than 0.8%. That in itself tells anyone with intelligence that the arab muslims did not see the land as theirs


 The Ottoman census of 1831 tells the story if you bother to look at it. Or wade your way through this

The Arab Settlement of Late Ottoman and Mandatory Palestine New Village Formation and Settlement Fixation 1871-1948 Seth Frantzman - Academia.edu


----------



## Phoenall (Mar 18, 2015)

Challenger said:


> Phoenall said:
> 
> 
> > toastman said:
> ...







 Did he call himself a Palestinian and did he say he ruled the nation of Palestine ?


----------



## Phoenall (Mar 18, 2015)

P F Tinmore said:


> Phoenall said:
> 
> 
> > P F Tinmore said:
> ...





 Well it was never formed in 1924, as that pertains to the Mandate for Palestine that was truncated to Palestine under official request. So what are you actually trying to say ?


----------



## Phoenall (Mar 18, 2015)

Coyote said:


> Phoenall said:
> 
> 
> > Coyote said:
> ...






 Then define those borders as they were in say 625 C.E., then in 1850 C.E. and finally in 1919 C.E.



Here you go for defined borders of first nation people a map of the area








And then the Souix lands, also called Lakotah







Their currency was trade goods, wampum and barter. They had no defined capital other than the camp of their chief of chiefs.

 Now how about you do the same for arab muslim Palestine the nation prior to 1988 ?


----------



## Phoenall (Mar 18, 2015)

Coyote said:


> Phoenall said:
> 
> 
> > Coyote said:
> ...






 They are not foreign nationals with an agenda, but they can be deported if they hold dual nationality. That is what it all boils down to.


----------



## TheOldSchool (Mar 18, 2015)

Coyote said:


> Phoenall said:
> 
> 
> > TheOldSchool said:
> ...


He is completely wrong.  The people in Gaza are basically trapped.  I'm not even sure they can import or export goods.


----------



## Coyote (Mar 18, 2015)

TheOldSchool said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> > Phoenall said:
> ...



That's what I thought.  If they were able to leave why are they paying huge amounts of money to Egyptian smugglers to attempt the hugely dangerous journy try to escape in leaky boats - or ending up deliberately sunk and drowned.

Palestinian migrants fleeing Gaza Strip drown in Mediterranean Sea Al Jazeera America
Traffickers laughed as they capsized boat to drown refugees - Israel News Ynetnews


----------



## Phoenall (Mar 18, 2015)

Coyote said:


> Phoenall said:
> 
> 
> > TheOldSchool said:
> ...






 Not the same thing at all that is to do with Internal movement not migration. And in gaza it is hamas that controls the migration in and out of gaza.

Hamas closes border crossing with Israel News Middle East THE DAILY STAR


----------



## Phoenall (Mar 18, 2015)

TheOldSchool said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> > Phoenall said:
> ...






 Yet tens of thousands of tons of imports are entering gaza every day, just not materials that could be used for military purposes. The arab muslims have nothing to export seeing as they have destroyed everything inside gaza.


----------



## P F Tinmore (Mar 18, 2015)

Phoenall said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> > Phoenall said:
> ...


What international treaty gave Israelis their nation?

Quote the passages.


----------



## Coyote (Mar 18, 2015)

.


Phoenall said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> > Phoenall said:
> ...



Those were territories in which they roamed or lived - not distinct borders and they were gradually pushed westward by the Ojibwe.

Google "Palestine" and "maps" and you will see many maps of a distinctly marked borders.

Encyclopedia of the Great Plains SIOUX

They had trade and barter, but all human groups had some form of that.

Wampum was used by the Eastern Woodland tribes, not the Souix.

So...are the Souix not a "real people" since they had no firm borders, no currency and no capital?


----------



## P F Tinmore (Mar 18, 2015)

Phoenall said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> > Dogmaphobe said:
> ...


that were preparted to live in peace with the Jews​
Where does it say that?


----------



## Phoenall (Mar 18, 2015)

Coyote said:


> TheOldSchool said:
> 
> 
> > Coyote said:
> ...







 Did you bother to read your links and see where the first says...... Sources told Maan that the Palestinians who drowned on Saturday fled Gaza into Egypt through underground tunnels, after which they boarded the ship bound for Italy..... so not from gaza but from elsewhere in the area.

Second link./........ Fresh witness testimony confirmed around 500 people drowned after their boat sank off Malta on Wednesday, including up to 100 children who had been making the treacherous journey from Egypt to Italy,........

 Guess you just cant wait to blame Israel for something outside of their control, and forget that hamas control the tunnels into Egypt and exact a very high price for anything/anyone moving in or out of gaza.
 It is hamas that controls the crossing and they say who goes out of gaza.


----------



## Phoenall (Mar 18, 2015)

Coyote said:


> .
> 
> 
> Phoenall said:
> ...







 They were borders within which they had control of the land, they used trade and barter as currency. And in western nations the same barter an be taxed as a commodity. It is only recently that we have had currency as a concept so keep trying the Souix had borders, currency and a movable capital under the existing tenets of the day, you are trying to impose 2015 thinking on a 1600's nomadic people. Just as team Palestine try and impose 2015 laws to the 1920's, 1930's and 1940's and they wont work.


----------



## Phoenall (Mar 18, 2015)

P F Tinmore said:


> Phoenall said:
> 
> 
> > Coyote said:
> ...






 UN res 194


Article 11 of the resolution reads:

(The General Assembly) *Resolves that the refugees wishing to return to their homes and live at peace with their neighbours should be permitted to do so at the earliest practicable date,* and that compensation should be paid for the property of those choosing not to return and for loss of or damage to property which, under principles of international law or in equity, should be made good by the Governments or authorities responsible.


----------



## Hossfly (Mar 18, 2015)

P F Tinmore said:


> Phoenall said:
> 
> 
> > P F Tinmore said:
> ...


None, Tinmore. It was given to the Israelites by the Creator. Period.


----------



## P F Tinmore (Mar 18, 2015)

Phoenall said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> > Phoenall said:
> ...


The Mandate was a temporarily appointed administration to Palestine. It had a specific goal and end date. Palestine remained after the Mandate left.


----------



## P F Tinmore (Mar 18, 2015)

Phoenall said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> > Phoenall said:
> ...


*Exactly!*

That does not match what you posted.

*You lied.*


----------



## P F Tinmore (Mar 18, 2015)

Hossfly said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> > Phoenall said:
> ...


Oh no, not the great realtor in the sky thing again.


----------



## Hossfly (Mar 18, 2015)

P F Tinmore said:


> Hossfly said:
> 
> 
> > P F Tinmore said:
> ...


Oh yes! I'm a believer, heathen.


----------



## P F Tinmore (Mar 18, 2015)

TheOldSchool said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> > Phoenall said:
> ...


That is the main problem. Israel will not allow them to export anything. No produce, no manufactured goods, nothing.

That means that they are not allowed to make any money. That is why most of them are on the dole.


----------



## P F Tinmore (Mar 18, 2015)

Hossfly said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> > Hossfly said:
> ...


The Lord uses the good ones and the bad ones use the Lord. ~ Michael Stanley


----------



## P F Tinmore (Mar 18, 2015)

Coyote said:


> .
> 
> 
> Phoenall said:
> ...


Peoples around the world have different methods to define ownership that differed from European practices.

Just because they did not match the European definition does not mean they did not own land.


----------



## aris2chat (Mar 18, 2015)

Phoenall said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> > Dogmaphobe said:
> ...



Till the end of WWII most of the "local" arabs were serfs and most of those who "owned" land were foreign officials who had been given land by the Ottomans.  The area was very poor and under/un-developed and little if any taxes were generated.  Were were all these people who could afford to own land?
A tax province or sanjuk is not a state and the people within are not a nation.  Sanjuks were little more than counties and what became the mandate were made up of at least half a dozen of these.  Where was "palestine"?  Even under the Romans there were three palæstina (name given by the romans) and mostly in what is now the gaza, sinai and jordan, not jerusalem or most of the roman towns in the fertile area.
The region was populated by people from throughout the mediterranean and middle east.  To say there was a native people beside the jews is a misunderstanding.  Yes, there are remnants of crusaders, armenians, persians, greeks, italians, french, english, etc. that has live there for hundreds of years but they were not a single people that were arab or palestinian.  There were dozens of people and tribles like an amish quilt that existed as muslims or kafir in the area.
So where was this palestine?  It was a region like saying the levant or fertile crescent.
So were was the state of palestine and who were the palestinian people, especially those who owned land?
Slaves, serfs, workers, share croppers, seasonal laborers, renters did not own the land or homes they occupied.  Apart from some store owners in the urban areas, few locals owned land, even if their family have worked the land for generations.
Most did not want to serve in the military so the Ottoman gave land to those that served the government as officers, those from outside of those sanjuks.  There was a tradition, before the Ottomans opened the area to jewish immigration, of land owned by jews/synagogues remained in those hands.  It was passed down, sold to other jews or given to the synagogues to be rented or sold to other jews coming to the area. It never left jewish hands.  Till the early 19th C jews could not buy non-jewish land, it could only be given by the empire or rented to them.  Even being able to pray at the wall is a relatively modern privilage of the Ottomans, through there have been a few times off and on when it was permitted.  The other land owners were the churches and wakf.  The churches owned land they farmed to support themselves and the maintenance of the churches they were responsible for.  The rest was for the most part state land.
The idea of a palestine or palestinian people is a modern creation, not historically based.
The muslims were arab, syrian, (later) jordanian, egyptian but not palestinian.  They were known by tribe or were serfs in large part.

So where is the origin of this nation for the palestinians?  Where are the lines for borders?  Where is this history and government?
Why are they more deserving of a state than the kurds, yazidi, armeneans, zoroastrians or dozens of other "people" with their own language, traditions, religions, culture, history, etc.?


----------



## P F Tinmore (Mar 18, 2015)

aris2chat said:


> Phoenall said:
> 
> 
> > Coyote said:
> ...


I have always believed that Kurdistan, Tibet, Porto Rico, Palestine, etc. should be independent states.


----------



## montelatici (Mar 18, 2015)

If all of your bullshit were true (and it is not, it is just Zionist propaganda), does that justify evicting the Christians and Muslims of Palestine and replacing them with settlers from Europe?  

The land records were sufficiently clear to allow the Anglo-American survey commission to determine that Arabs (Christian and Muslim) owned over 85% of the land in 1943 while Jews owned less than 5%.



 

A Survey of Palestine Volume 2 Berman Jewish Policy Archive NYU Wagner


----------



## Challenger (Mar 18, 2015)

Hossfly said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> > Phoenall said:
> ...



Which "Creator", assuming such a thing even exists? All you have is a fairy story written by a bunch of religious fanatics who were exiled for misbehaving and subsequently made up a "religion" based on Sumerian/Assyrian/Babylonian fairy stories. In any event claims of "ancient title" have always been rejected by competent legal bodies like the ICJ.


----------



## Challenger (Mar 18, 2015)

Coyote said:


> Challenger said:
> 
> 
> > Phoenall said:
> ...



Me neither, until I found out about it researching something else.


----------



## Coyote (Mar 18, 2015)

aris2chat said:


> Phoenall said:
> 
> 
> > Coyote said:
> ...



First, I never claimed there was a nation.  There is a people.  As I pointed out to Phoenall if national borders, government, currency etc were required for a people to be a people then a whole lot of groups would lose their identity.



> Why are they more deserving of a state than the kurds, yazidi, armeneans, zoroastrians or dozens of other "people" with their own language, traditions, religions, culture, history, etc.?



Are Jews any more deserving of a state then those aforementioned people?  The answer is no, yet they have one, they have self determination, freedom, security and rights.

At this point, the Palestinians are stateless, citizenless, subject to military law and a system that administers "justice" one way for them and one way for their Jewish counterparts.

You can argue for self determination for those other groups if you want and if that is what they want.  Make a case for it.  No one else has.


----------



## Phoenall (Mar 18, 2015)

P F Tinmore said:


> Phoenall said:
> 
> 
> > P F Tinmore said:
> ...






 Then what was the end date as I cant find any reference in the Mandate itself, Or are you getting confused again by the two mandates in force. The MANDATE FOR PALESTINE that is still in effect, or the British Mandate that ended on may 14 1948 when the British called it a day. By the way the second became the UN mandate for Palestine at the same time and again is still in existence


----------



## Phoenall (Mar 18, 2015)

P F Tinmore said:


> Phoenall said:
> 
> 
> > P F Tinmore said:
> ...






 Wrong again as the term neighbours in this case means the Jews. Want to try again tinny, or are you feeling the pain yet ?


----------



## Phoenall (Mar 18, 2015)

P F Tinmore said:


> Hossfly said:
> 
> 
> > P F Tinmore said:
> ...






 Didn't he give the world to the muslims according to the false prophet ?


----------



## Phoenall (Mar 18, 2015)

P F Tinmore said:


> TheOldSchool said:
> 
> 
> > Coyote said:
> ...






 And wrong once again tinny as they don't produce anything to export, and if they did they expect the Jews to organise and pay for the shipping costs out of gaza to its destination


----------



## Phoenall (Mar 18, 2015)

Challenger said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> > Challenger said:
> ...





 So he ruled the NORTERN PART OF PALESTINE not all of it. And this does not mean that Palestine was a nation does it ?

 Another fail


----------



## Phoenall (Mar 18, 2015)

Coyote said:


> aris2chat said:
> 
> 
> > Phoenall said:
> ...






 They already have self determination as it is not something that can be handed out. Do you have the self determination to post on this board daily, do the Palestinians have the self determination to engage in terrorism, violence, propaganda and a whole range of other activities. They are stateless because they wont take that other small step of self determination because they would be in debt to the rest of the world. They are not citizenless as they have over 6 million citizens around the world. They are subject to military law because they believe violence and terrorism is the right and only way to carry out the final solution. The system works that way because that is how it is written in the Geneva conventions, which the Israelis follow. As an example the customary punishment under Jordanian law for murder ( the laws that apply in the west bank under the Geneva conventions) is different to the punishment under Israeli law. So the Israelis apply the law of the land. If you cant understand the Geneva conventions then I advise you to refrain from posting on topics you are not educated enough to understand.


----------



## aris2chat (Mar 18, 2015)

TheOldSchool said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> > Phoenall said:
> ...



As long as they are not restricted items, of course they can.  How do you thing the stores stayed supplied? Flowers, fruit, vegetable are among the items they export to europe and asia.  Sale of goods to Israel is relatively new, through Israeli goods can be found throughout gaza stores.
Egypt has had their border closed most of last year, only opening it for palestinians that were in egypt to return to gaza.


----------



## TheOldSchool (Mar 18, 2015)

aris2chat said:


> TheOldSchool said:
> 
> 
> > Coyote said:
> ...


How generous of Israel to allow them such luxury.


----------



## aris2chat (Mar 18, 2015)

TheOldSchool said:


> aris2chat said:
> 
> 
> > TheOldSchool said:
> ...



Everything that goes into gaza is held and distributed by hamas.  Food and medicines have expired before hamas allows them to be sold.  Building supplies and fuel have hamas getting them first.  Hamas charge premium prices for being allowed to receive good, but they don't want to pay for fuel from the PA or for much of the supplies, nor do they want to pay taxes to the PA.  Most of what goes into gaza is via donations or paid for from NGOs.
Israel and egypt provide 2/3 of the electricity to gaza.  The gaza power plant is controlled by hamas who restrict power to just a few hours a day.
It is their shell game.  They control gaza.


----------



## TheOldSchool (Mar 18, 2015)

aris2chat said:


> TheOldSchool said:
> 
> 
> > aris2chat said:
> ...


Gaza was a mess long before Hamas came into power.  And Israel built the wall to keep residents out long before Hamas was in power as well.  Members of the Hamas govrenment were born and raised in Gaza right?  Shouldn't they love Israel for all the marvelous things Israel did for them when they were growing up?


----------



## aris2chat (Mar 18, 2015)

TheOldSchool said:


> aris2chat said:
> 
> 
> > TheOldSchool said:
> ...



The wall is in the WB not gaza.  Gaza is just a fence.

Palestinians in gaza were given work at Israeli pay on the farms and Israeli businesses in gaza before the withdrawal.
They were treated a "hell" of a lot better than they were when egypt controlled gaza.
Gazans were allowed into Israel for work, medical treatment, education and to visit the mount.  The might have needed ID cards and passes to come and go but that should be expected since so many were calling for and carrying out acts of terrorism.
The power, sewage and other services were established by the Israelis.  There was building, growth and development under Israel.  An air port was built, a deep water harbor was in the works.  Hotels and tourism were growing thanks to Israel.
All that ended with hamas, and Israel withdrawal from gaza.

So how marvelous is hamas?  What have they done but bring war and destruction to gaza?


----------



## TheOldSchool (Mar 18, 2015)

aris2chat said:


> TheOldSchool said:
> 
> 
> > aris2chat said:
> ...


It's not a wall just a fence...

Well whatever.  As an American I just hope Israel doesn't drag us into a religious war.  If Israel wants to pretend Palestinians hate them for no reason, well, I hope they know they made the beds that they're sleeping in.

No 2 state solution anymore right?  The most prominent Israeli warned that the evil arabs were voting and had to be stopped right?  What a joke.


----------



## P F Tinmore (Mar 18, 2015)

Phoenall said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> > Phoenall said:
> ...


No, I am not the one who faked the quote.


----------



## aris2chat (Mar 18, 2015)

TheOldSchool said:


> aris2chat said:
> 
> 
> > TheOldSchool said:
> ...



Arabs have hated them for 1500 yrs.  It is not Israel, that is just a political excuse.  Most palestinians would accept a negotiated settlement for peace.  Hamas will not.  Most would recognize Israel as a jewish state.  Hamas will not.
Hamas will not even come to some peace with the PA and allow free elections or set an election day.  They say they will allow a vote but not the right to campaign in gaza if not hamas.  The want to control election within gaza.   Hamas killed or kicked the PLO/PA out of gaza.
The more deprived the palestinians feel the more anger which empowers hamas.  They are in control of the desperation in gaza.  They are the cause.
WB prospers while hamas crushes gaza.
People should stop equating the conditions between Israelis and palestinians as Israel's responsibility.  They are not Israel and it is not up to Israel to give them the rights of Israelis.  They don't serve Israel or pay Israeli taxes.  Israel does not have refugee camps.  The camps were set up in the WB and G by arabs not Israelis.
Till Oslo there was a trickle of palestinians that applied for entry and citizenship in Israel, about two thousand a year, despite PLO and arab attempts to prevent this.  Palestinians were allowed to use Israeli courts to reclaim land if there was some proof, or to be compensated when the land could not be returned.
Most arab state won't even allow palestinians to get jobs or live outside of the camps unless they have some special skill that would be of benefit.


----------



## Coyote (Mar 18, 2015)

Phoenall said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> > aris2chat said:
> ...



They do not have self-determination.

Definition: the process by which a country determines its own statehood and forms its own allegiances and government.


----------



## TheOldSchool (Mar 18, 2015)

aris2chat said:


> TheOldSchool said:
> 
> 
> > aris2chat said:
> ...


Continue that line of thinking and nothing will change.  Which is fine if you're okay with that.  But I'd recommend at least electing someone whose foreign policy won't isolate Israel from the rest of the world.  As it's isolated right now.

Though, unfortunately, that may involve doing something to better the lives of people in both Gaza and the West Bank.

Btw if everything is so terrible in Gaza but so great in the West Bank; why does the West Bank have the giant wall you mentioned earlier but Gaza merely has a giant fence?


----------



## aris2chat (Mar 18, 2015)

Coyote said:


> Phoenall said:
> 
> 
> > Coyote said:
> ...



Few groups/people have that right in the region.  Why only the palestinians should have that right.  They were never a people before the mandate.  Historical they did not exist.

They were just arabs and a state was created, Jordan.


----------



## TheOldSchool (Mar 18, 2015)

Coyote said:


> Phoenall said:
> 
> 
> > Coyote said:
> ...


It's a funny thing how in the long run people always choose freedom.

The middle east may be in the clutches of ultra conservative muslims, but they will eventually choose freedom too.


----------



## Coyote (Mar 18, 2015)

aris2chat said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> > Phoenall said:
> ...



"they were just arabs"...doesn't that just say it all?


----------



## aris2chat (Mar 18, 2015)

TheOldSchool said:


> aris2chat said:
> 
> 
> > TheOldSchool said:
> ...



Change the hamas thinking.  The refusal to accept Israel as a state and the call for the death of all jews.  Change the hate coming out of the mosques and schools.

For more than 60 yrs Israel has tried and all it got was more violence in return.

Right now the palestinians do not seem to be ready for a state unless it means the annihilation of Israelis.  Israelis will not play the sacrificial lamb to the palestinian god of violence.  They will not allow another genocide of jews.


----------



## P F Tinmore (Mar 18, 2015)

Phoenall said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> > TheOldSchool said:
> ...


Before Israel imposed a blockade on Hamas-run Gaza three years ago, Gaza exported more than $300 million worth of products each year, from garments to furniture to agricultural products to ice cream.

How Israel s easing of Gaza blockade has hurt Gaza business - CSMonitor.com


----------



## TheOldSchool (Mar 18, 2015)

aris2chat said:


> TheOldSchool said:
> 
> 
> > aris2chat said:
> ...


How can Israeli's call for Hamas to recognize Israel when Israel JUST reelected a man who swore to never recognize Palestine?  How can you change the hate in Mosques and Schools when all of the people are treated as if they were hated by Israel?  Restricted movement, blocked off by walls, not allowed to leave, under constant threat of air raids, restricted imports and exports, etc....

Israel has NOT tried!  The violence is WILDLY lopsided in the favor of Israel!  Look at the casualties from all the conflicts.  It's not even close!  For 60 years Israel has been in the position of power in negotiations, backed by the most powerful nations in the world, and they have never been willing to concede anything of real value.

There are 3 ways this plays out.  1. The status quo remains and rockets fly into Israel as Israel further isolates itself from the rest of the world.  2.  Israel lays to waste all Palestinian land and never has to worry about Palestinians again.  And completely isolates itself from the rest of the world.  3.  Israel comes to the table in an honest attempt at peace (so Bibi will have to be gone).

Of course there's the 4th option that 1 and 2 will likely lead to which is an all out war in the middle east that Israel may or may not survive.  Which of those options seems the best to you?


----------



## Challenger (Mar 18, 2015)

Phoenall said:


> Challenger said:
> 
> 
> > Coyote said:
> ...



You said there was no evidence of a Palestinian state until 1988, look you said it here:  


			
				Phoenall said:
			
		

> ....there is *no evidence* of there ever being a Palestinian state until 1988


I provided you with some evidence for a Palestinian state before 1988, seems you are moving the goalposts again.


----------



## Hossfly (Mar 18, 2015)

Challenger said:


> Hossfly said:
> 
> 
> > P F Tinmore said:
> ...


So sue me.


----------



## Challenger (Mar 18, 2015)

Phoenall said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> > aris2chat said:
> ...


----------



## RoccoR (Mar 18, 2015)

Coyote,  et al,

OK --- I can work with this.



Coyote said:


> They do not have self-determination.
> 
> Definition: the process by which a country determines its own statehood and forms its own allegiances and government.


*(QUESTIONS)*

In what way were the Palestinians denied:

Statehood.
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 Palestine National Council hereby declares, in the Name of God and on behalf of the Palestinian Arab people, the establishment of the State of Palestine in the land of Palestine with its capital at Jerusalem.

Form it own Allegiance
*Video: Hamas Pledges Allegiance to Muslim Brotherhood*
This video is a reminder of the irony that the Muslim Brotherhood is often considered “moderate” while its Palestinian branch, Hamas, is considered a terrorist group. The video shows that the two are inseparable
The video shows Hamas Prime Minister Ismail Haniyeh on stage towards the end (1:12 minutes into the video), apparently taking the pledge with his hand raised.
The two countries (Saudi Arabia and Egypt) are said to be worried that under British law the Brotherhood cannot be proscribed as a terrorist group despite being the centre of a web of extremist groups. Had the report been published without the mechanisms in place to ban the Muslim Brotherhood, both Saudi and Egypt may have felt pressurised to end their own crackdowns on the group.

The Brotherhood operates through a number of front organisations in the UK, most of which are based in two buildings in West London. According to the website Stand For Peace these include the Muslim Association of Britain and Interpal, which has been accused by the US government of being the “fundraising coordinator of HAMAS”.

The State of Palestine currently enjoys bilateral recognition from 135 other States. Many States extended recognition to the State of Palestine following the Declaration of Independence by the Palestine National Council on 15 November 1988 in Algeris, Algeria.  Other States recognized the State of Palestine in the recent period following extensive bilateral and multilateral diplomatic efforts.  Below you will find a list of those States which have extended recognition to the State of Palestine and their corresponding date of recognition.

Form its own government
The current Government was sworn in by the President of the State of Palestine, Mr. Mahmoud Abbas, on 2 June 2014.


*(COMMENT)*

The Arab Palestinians want, on the one hand --- to play the part of the martyr and argue that Israel has somehow denied them these rights or opportunities; when in fact, the Arab Palestinian has attempted to use self-determination on multiple occasions.

Most Respectfully,
R


----------



## aris2chat (Mar 18, 2015)

Coyote said:


> aris2chat said:
> 
> 
> > Coyote said:
> ...



The identity of a palestine or palestinians did not exist.
Most of the arab speaking world that did not identify with a particular tribe or group were just arabs.  That was the only unifying thing they had.
It was hundreds of little people or arab.  It is just the way things were. Nationalism and statehood are modern concepts.  Islam was supposed to unify them till it became a dozen or so separate groups, and each considered the others heretics.  
You seem to want to change the facts to suit your own perceptions of what a people or nation should be today.
You need to understand what it was in the 18th, 19th and 20th century, not what you want it to have been.


----------



## Challenger (Mar 19, 2015)

Hossfly said:


> Challenger said:
> 
> 
> > Hossfly said:
> ...



Would that get the Palestinians their freedom? If so, send me your details and I'll get my lawyers on to it right away.


----------



## Challenger (Mar 19, 2015)

RoccoR said:


> In what way were the Palestinians denied:



Belligerent occupation by the Zionist regime prevents them exercising the full unfettered sovereignty, of an independant state. Definition: a state or a governing body having the full right and power to govern itself without any interference from outside sources or bodies.


----------



## Challenger (Mar 19, 2015)

aris2chat said:


> The identity of a palestine or palestinians did not exist.



Yes it did. Although by and large subsumed in the Pan-Arabism prevalent at the time, an Arab from Arabia could distinguish between an Arab from Mesopotamia from Syria, from Palestine. Much like in the U.K. we can distinguish between a Cornishman, a Geordie, a Cockney, etc. A Cornishman, a Geordie and a Cockney are all Englishmen, but they have their own fierce pride in their regional history and identity.


----------



## joesakic (Mar 19, 2015)

I do not know why there is a focus on whether the people indigenous to the land were called Palestinians or not. I am from Canada and we displaced many aboriginals in this land. Whether or not the were from the Metis tribe, Iroquois etc. or whether they are called Indians or aboriginals does not matter.  It seems like unlike Zionists, I feel very badly on how we treated the people indigenous to this land. I encourage aboriginals in Canada to have tax empetions, fist rights on government jobs, mining agreements regarding natural resources because WE TOOK IT ALL FROM THEM.  For Zionists to deny they displaced people wether the are Arab, Palestinian, or whatever they want to be called is ignorant.  
Please note THERE IS A HUGE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN ZIONISM AND JUDAISM.  Jews lived in a much more peaceful time in the Middle East prior to Zionism.
ZIONISTS please listen to your brothers of the Neturei Karta and the True Torah Jews. They have the true insight into peace for the region.


----------



## Challenger (Mar 19, 2015)

joesakic said:


> I do not know why there is a focus on whether the people indigenous to the land were called Palestinians or not. I am from Canada and we displaced many aboriginals in this land. Whether or not the were from the Metis tribe, Iroquois etc. or whether they are called Indians or aboriginals does not matter.  It seems like unlike Zionists, I feel very badly on how we treated the people indigenous to this land. I encourage aboriginals in Canada to have tax empetions, fist rights on government jobs, mining agreements regarding natural resources because WE TOOK IT ALL FROM THEM.  For Zionists to deny they displaced people wether the are Arab, Palestinian, or whatever they want to be called is ignorant.
> Please note THERE IS A HUGE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN ZIONISM AND JUDAISM.  Jews lived in a much more peaceful time in the Middle East prior to Zionism.
> ZIONISTS please listen to your brothers of the Neturei Karta and the True Torah Jews. They have the true insight into peace for the region.



Nice first post, but you need to be aware there is a firestorm of hatred and invective heading your way from the Zionists and their fellow travellers on this forum. I hope you have thick skin...


----------



## P F Tinmore (Mar 19, 2015)

aris2chat said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> > aris2chat said:
> ...


The identity of a palestine or palestinians did not exist.​
Indeed, they just dropped out of the sky in 1964 like a gift from G-d.


----------



## aris2chat (Mar 19, 2015)

Challenger said:


> aris2chat said:
> 
> 
> > The identity of a palestine or palestinians did not exist.
> ...



But they are still British.  You do not have separate countries or "self determination" for each of those groups.  Arabs had tribal labeling but they were arabs.  Of the many tribes, they did not form separate nations.


----------



## Coyote (Mar 19, 2015)

RoccoR said:


> Coyote,  et al,
> 
> OK --- I can work with this.
> 
> ...



Ok...I used the dictionary definition so I deserved that.

However....
Hamas does not represent all the Palestinians - they are a political group not a nation or state.

Are they subject to Israeli oversight?
Can the Palestinians form alliences and treaties with other states?
Do they operate under their own justice system or subject to military justice from an occupying power?
Can they enter and exit their "state"?
Can they engage in free trade in and out?

There's a lot more to self determination than a dictionary definition.


----------



## Challenger (Mar 19, 2015)

aris2chat said:


> Challenger said:
> 
> 
> > aris2chat said:
> ...



I deliberately chose English regions, but "British" will do at a pinch to demonstrate the regional variations within one country. Historically we did have sperate kingdoms for many English regions and many do want regional autonomy, (a recent genetic survey has found that a Geordie is genetically different from a Cornishman, but thats a topic for another forum) not just te scots or the Welsh. 

My point was that the same or something similar applies to Palestinians, Syrians, etc. While they were all Ottoman subjects, a Syrian could tell a Palestinian from a Bedouin by their appearance, cultural traits and dialect. Yet all of them were considered a homogenous group: "Arabs", by the Western colonial powers who drew arbitrary lines in the sand and created a country of "Syria", "Palestine", "Jordan", etc.


----------



## Phoenall (Mar 19, 2015)

TheOldSchool said:


> aris2chat said:
> 
> 
> > TheOldSchool said:
> ...






 So what are your views on the fence that separates America from Mexico, or the fence that separates America from Canada. They are just the same as the fences between gaza and Israel, built to stop Palestinians from murdering Israeli children.   Now why do you think the Israelis hate the Palestinians just that little bit ?


----------



## aris2chat (Mar 19, 2015)

Challenger said:


> aris2chat said:
> 
> 
> > Challenger said:
> ...



even Scotland voted against separation.

Palestinians were never a state or kingdom.  It is simply a roman name given to three part of the gaza sinai.  It was never an autonomous rule nor a people.
How is it similar?  They were tribes, arabs, various other races but not palestinian by race, language, religion, culture or anything else.  It is simply a foreign designation of name for the area, not an arab name.  Till the mandate they never called themselves palestinians or call the land palestine. Even as a sanjak within the syria vilayet it was called jerusalem, beirut, damascus, zor, mount lebanon, safad, nablus.  Not since the 16th century had there even been a gaza within syria.

Till the mandate they would never have called themselves palestinian or claimed to have been part of any place called palestine.  It was not in their language.


----------



## Phoenall (Mar 20, 2015)

P F Tinmore said:


> Phoenall said:
> 
> 
> > P F Tinmore said:
> ...






 I cope it verbatim and gave the link so how is the quote faked.

 As I said a MASSIVE FAIL   that you are trying to get out of.


----------



## Phoenall (Mar 20, 2015)

P F Tinmore said:


> Phoenall said:
> 
> 
> > P F Tinmore said:
> ...






 I copied it verbatim and gave the link so how is the quote faked.

 As I said a MASSIVE FAIL   that you are trying to get out of.


----------



## Phoenall (Mar 20, 2015)

Coyote said:


> Phoenall said:
> 
> 
> > Coyote said:
> ...






 That is up to their elected officials to sort out, not Israel, or for the people themselves to take control of he situation. The fact that they have held two elections in the past shows they have free determination no matter what you say. They just need to demand another election from their leaders. But look at the allegiances formed by the P.A.and then say they dont have free deterination


----------



## Phoenall (Mar 20, 2015)

TheOldSchool said:


> aris2chat said:
> 
> 
> > TheOldSchool said:
> ...






For the same reason that yean has a fence and Saudi has a wall, to separate the two groups  and to keep the people safe. Before the wall went up the arab muslims were systematically murdering Jewish children in Israel, after the wall went up the attacks stopped saving the lives of untold thousands of Israel children.   Or would you prefer it if Israeli children were blown to pieces by arab muslim terrorists


----------



## Phoenall (Mar 20, 2015)

Challenger said:


> Phoenall said:
> 
> 
> > Challenger said:
> ...





NO you didn't you provided the name of a person that ruled over a province in the north of Palestine, you did not prove the existence of a nation or state by that name.


----------



## Phoenall (Mar 20, 2015)

Challenger said:


> Phoenall said:
> 
> 
> > Coyote said:
> ...







 Beaten by logic and fats again so resort to immature actions


----------



## Phoenall (Mar 20, 2015)

Challenger said:


> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> > In what way were the Palestinians denied:
> ...







 Define Zionist in your own words


----------



## Phoenall (Mar 20, 2015)

joesakic said:


> I do not know why there is a focus on whether the people indigenous to the land were called Palestinians or not. I am from Canada and we displaced many aboriginals in this land. Whether or not the were from the Metis tribe, Iroquois etc. or whether they are called Indians or aboriginals does not matter.  It seems like unlike Zionists, I feel very badly on how we treated the people indigenous to this land. I encourage aboriginals in Canada to have tax empetions, fist rights on government jobs, mining agreements regarding natural resources because WE TOOK IT ALL FROM THEM.  For Zionists to deny they displaced people wether the are Arab, Palestinian, or whatever they want to be called is ignorant.
> Please note THERE IS A HUGE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN ZIONISM AND JUDAISM.  Jews lived in a much more peaceful time in the Middle East prior to Zionism.
> ZIONISTS please listen to your brothers of the Neturei Karta and the True Torah Jews. They have the true insight into peace for the region.





 Define Zionism in your own words


----------



## Phoenall (Mar 20, 2015)

P F Tinmore said:


> aris2chat said:
> 
> 
> > Coyote said:
> ...






 No they were invented by the Russians


----------



## Phoenall (Mar 20, 2015)

Coyote said:


> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> > Coyote,  et al,
> ...






 Does Obama represent all Americans ?

 Yes because they chose violence and terrorism over peace.
 Yes as they have done with Iran, Syria and others
 Both and expect this to change in the near future when they withdraw their justice system
 To a certain extent
 Yes for the majority of their nation, it is only gaza that is under blockade and cant move all goods freely.

 So they have free determination to the point they determine their own lives and how they will engage in violence and terrorism.


----------



## docmauser1 (Mar 20, 2015)

Coyote said:


> Dogmaphobe said:
> 
> 
> > As has been pointed out to you innumerable times, there has never been a country called Palestine run by "Palestinians".  You are uneducable and so keep repeating this stupid nonsense.
> ...


Because they don't let others live, of course.


----------



## Daniyel (Mar 20, 2015)

Phoenall said:


> joesakic said:
> 
> 
> > I do not know why there is a focus on whether the people indigenous to the land were called Palestinians or not. I am from Canada and we displaced many aboriginals in this land. Whether or not the were from the Metis tribe, Iroquois etc. or whether they are called Indians or aboriginals does not matter.  It seems like unlike Zionists, I feel very badly on how we treated the people indigenous to this land. I encourage aboriginals in Canada to have tax empetions, fist rights on government jobs, mining agreements regarding natural resources because WE TOOK IT ALL FROM THEM.  For Zionists to deny they displaced people wether the are Arab, Palestinian, or whatever they want to be called is ignorant.
> ...


They never understand that Judaism is about Israel and the strive for living in the holy land to fulfill the covenant with God almighty, the Modern Zionism is about living in this land and unify the Jewish to a place for shelter.


----------



## docmauser1 (Mar 20, 2015)

Coyote said:


> Phoenall said:
> 
> 
> > What was its capital then, who was its leader, what was its monetary unit and who owned the land under International law at the time ?
> ...


To a palistanian, an arab/moslem, a loser, or a university student, of course.


Coyote said:


> The region known as Palestine has existed under that name for some time.


Had existed like some loose palestine, indeed. And, oh, the mandate palestine included Jordan!


Coyote said:


> It does not have to have the above to "exist" as a region with inhabitants.


Oh. Mesopotamia, of course! With "mesopotamians" objecting to "the right of return" of other "mesopotamians".


----------



## docmauser1 (Mar 20, 2015)

Coyote said:


> Did the Souix have a border? A capital?  A currency? A GDP?  How about the Cheyenne?  How many other people will suddenly cease to exist as a people?


Oh! And palistanians had a currency, a capital and a GDP! How 'bout the cheyenne, bth?


----------



## docmauser1 (Mar 20, 2015)

P F Tinmore said:


> ... the Palestinians formed a nation, and that Palestine was a State, ...


If our honorable beaten P F Tinmore says so, of course.


----------



## docmauser1 (Mar 20, 2015)

Coyote said:


> Dogmaphobe said:
> 
> 
> > No they don't. Descendants of murderous squatters have to right to that which belongs to others.  They declared war. They lost.  By what right do squatters who initiated a war have the right to that which they never owned in the first place?
> ...


But of course, they are.


----------



## docmauser1 (Mar 20, 2015)

Coyote said:


> I  had no idea that all Palestinians are terrorists.


Nah. Not all of them, indeed. It's just all of them support terrorism and wait till it "succeeds" to rush in and take a jewish home over, of course.


----------



## Challenger (Mar 20, 2015)

Phoenall said:


> Challenger said:
> 
> 
> > Phoenall said:
> ...


----------



## Challenger (Mar 20, 2015)

Phoenall said:


> Challenger said:
> 
> 
> > Phoenall said:
> ...



OMG! Beaten by FATS! Ugh! What a vivid imagination you do have.


----------



## Challenger (Mar 20, 2015)

Phoenall said:


> Challenger said:
> 
> 
> > RoccoR said:
> ...



Already done, not my fault you are to lazy or stupid to find it.


----------



## Challenger (Mar 20, 2015)

Phoenall said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> > aris2chat said:
> ...



...or maybe little green men from Mars?


----------



## Challenger (Mar 20, 2015)

aris2chat said:


> Challenger said:
> 
> 
> > aris2chat said:
> ...



So what? Palestine has been a geo-political entity since at least Herodotus, and it's inhabitants were Palestinians, regardless of what they called themselves or what others may called them. Kurds have never had a State or Kingdom, but no-one denies they are a "nation".


----------



## Challenger (Mar 20, 2015)

Daniyel said:


> Phoenall said:
> 
> 
> > joesakic said:
> ...



Always thought Judaism was about the quest for personal redemption. If it was about living in the "Holy Land" why wasn't there a mass wave of immigration in the centuries following the collapse of the Christian Eastern Roman Empire? The subsequent Muslim rulers never enacted any law preventing Jewish immigration until the late 19th, early 20th centuries CE, after the invention of Zionism and because of protests by the local population.


----------



## TheOldSchool (Mar 20, 2015)

Phoenall said:


> TheOldSchool said:
> 
> 
> > aris2chat said:
> ...


I wonder what the body count of dead children is for Israeli's versus Palestinians.


----------



## aris2chat (Mar 20, 2015)

Challenger said:


> aris2chat said:
> 
> 
> > Challenger said:
> ...



Palaistinê, a greek term, to describe where the Philistines lived, people of Plešt.  They likely called them selves caphtor.  They would not have used a "foreign" name for identifying who they were.
That would be like american natives calling themselves indian.  That was a term used by others not one they would have known or used.


----------



## Phoenall (Mar 20, 2015)

Challenger said:


> Phoenall said:
> 
> 
> > Challenger said:
> ...






 That is something you do all the time whenever you are shown to be posting half truths and outright lies.


----------



## Phoenall (Mar 20, 2015)

Challenger said:


> Phoenall said:
> 
> 
> > Challenger said:
> ...






 Should have read facts, sticky keyboard


----------



## Phoenall (Mar 20, 2015)

Challenger said:


> Phoenall said:
> 
> 
> > Challenger said:
> ...





Followed the link you provided and ended up at a post by another person. Have not seen any other links so I will keep asking. Just as you do when I post a fact you don't like and ask for a link, have you noticed I use links from another source so you cant claim there is no back up links ?


----------



## Phoenall (Mar 20, 2015)

Challenger said:


> Phoenall said:
> 
> 
> > P F Tinmore said:
> ...






 Nope by the Russians who told Arafat to legitimise his campaign by giving the terrorists a name linked to the land. They suggested Palestine, and Arafat being unable to say Palestine called it filastin


----------



## Phoenall (Mar 20, 2015)

Challenger said:


> aris2chat said:
> 
> 
> > Challenger said:
> ...






 So when did the Syrians and Egyptians start calling themselves palestinians ?


----------



## Phoenall (Mar 20, 2015)

Challenger said:


> Daniyel said:
> 
> 
> > Phoenall said:
> ...






 LIAR asSaudi Arabia has always had laws against the Jews living there. The ottomans only allowed Jewish migration from the middle of the 1800's.


----------



## Phoenall (Mar 20, 2015)

TheOldSchool said:


> Phoenall said:
> 
> 
> > TheOldSchool said:
> ...





Depends on how far back in time you want to go, after all team Palestine claim that the arab muslims have owned the land for over 2,000 years. ( they were only invented 1388 years ago ) But better to ask how many were killed in cold blood by terrorists carrying out the commands of their gods ?


----------



## Coyote (Mar 20, 2015)

docmauser1 said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> > Dogmaphobe said:
> ...



Really now....there seem to be a whole lot of "others" alive.


----------



## Challenger (Mar 20, 2015)

aris2chat said:


> Challenger said:
> 
> 
> > aris2chat said:
> ...



So what? Palestine in one language or another has been called Palestine for at least a thousand years, be it a place where Philistines lived, or a Roman province, or a part of a wider Caliphate, or Ottoman subjects.  It's just a label; the people who lived there throughout countless generations with their own language and customs, are still a "nation" like the Kurds.  In the 19th and 20th centuries they decided to call themselves "Palestinians", much like the European foreigner colonists who decided to call themselves "Israelis", based purely on a semi-mythical Kingdom of Israel that may, or may not, have existed, but was written up in a so called "holy book" by a bunch of monotheist fanatics exiled in Babylonia.


----------



## Coyote (Mar 20, 2015)

docmauser1 said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> > Phoenall said:
> ...




Perhaps you can fill us in as to what monetary unit the Souix had, what was it's capital, and who owned the land under international law at the time or are they a fake people too?  



Coyote said:


> The region known as Palestine has existed under that name for some time.


Had existed like some loose palestine, indeed. And, oh, the mandate palestine included Jordan![/quote]

Drivel.




Coyote said:


> It does not have to have the above to "exist" as a region with inhabitants.


Oh. Mesopotamia, of course! With "mesopotamians" objecting to "the right of return" of other "mesopotamians".[/QUOTE]

More drivel.


----------



## Coyote (Mar 20, 2015)

docmauser1 said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> > Did the Souix have a border? A capital?  A currency? A GDP?  How about the Cheyenne?  How many other people will suddenly cease to exist as a people?
> ...



Did the Souix have a border? A capital?  A currency? A GDP?


----------



## Challenger (Mar 20, 2015)

Phoenall said:


> Challenger said:
> 
> 
> > Daniyel said:
> ...



Oh please. You can be such a tool at times. Saudi Arabia didn't exist until 1932 and you've already forgotten the fact that you yourself pointed out that the Ottomans invited Jewish Spaniards to settle in the 15th century.


----------



## Coyote (Mar 20, 2015)

docmauser1 said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> > I  had no idea that all Palestinians are terrorists.
> ...



I'm sure you can support that statement with facts or....are we in for more drivel?


----------



## Challenger (Mar 20, 2015)

Phoenall said:


> Challenger said:
> 
> 
> > Phoenall said:
> ...



Not happened yet, but feel free to dream on.


----------



## Phoenall (Mar 20, 2015)

Coyote said:


> docmauser1 said:
> 
> 
> > Coyote said:
> ...






 Not really when you consider the numbers there were before the Islamic invasion, everywhere they invade they ethnically cleanse and decimate the indigenous


----------



## Phoenall (Mar 20, 2015)

Challenger said:


> aris2chat said:
> 
> 
> > Challenger said:
> ...







 But it was never a nation or state was it, it was just a place in the M.E. that no one wanted to claim.


----------



## Dogmaphobe (Mar 20, 2015)

Coyote said:


> Did the Souix have a border? A capital?  A currency? A GDP?




They had the most important thing -- a sense of identity as a people.

"Palestinians" were simply made up as a propaganda tool against Jews and had no such identity until encouraged by the Egyptian Named Arafat to start calling themselves such.


----------



## Coyote (Mar 20, 2015)

Phoenall said:


> Challenger said:
> 
> 
> > aris2chat said:
> ...



When did the Syrians start calling themselves Syrian?
When did the Egyptians start calling themselves Egyptian?


Dogmaphobe said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> > Did the Souix have a border? A capital?  A currency? A GDP?
> ...



The Palestinians formed an identity as a group of people who lived in that area - every group of people start out that way.


----------



## Coyote (Mar 20, 2015)

Phoenall said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> > docmauser1 said:
> ...



That doesn't jive with history.


----------



## aris2chat (Mar 20, 2015)

Coyote said:


> Phoenall said:
> 
> 
> > Challenger said:
> ...



The name of sura come from the hittites, turks.  Greeks changed used to the term syria for the northern assyria, Iraq.  Romans used syria for the levant area.  The people identified by their city-state, not as syrians.  Even under the mandate they were classified by the major cities such as damascus and aleppo.

Nationalist terms came with the end of the empire.


----------



## aris2chat (Mar 20, 2015)

Coyote said:


> Phoenall said:
> 
> 
> > Coyote said:
> ...


 
Western history or muslim history?  You are imposing the belief that all history is western history.  What was actually written by the arab world did not use the same terms or ideas.


----------



## Dogmaphobe (Mar 20, 2015)

Coyote said:


> The Palestinians formed an identity as a group of people who lived in that area - every group of people start out that way.




Just a few decades ago, and only AFTER the advent of Zionism.

 Legitimate groups are not only much older than that, but their sense of Identity resulted from natural processes rather than one intentionally manipulated for a very specific political purpose.


----------



## Coyote (Mar 20, 2015)

Dogmaphobe said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> > The Palestinians formed an identity as a group of people who lived in that area - every group of people start out that way.
> ...



When does a people become a people?  10 years? 50 years? A century?  A thousand years?

They lived there.

They are a community.

They are a people now.

But some people are desperate to take that away.  Make them less than.  Is it really so important to do so?


----------



## Dogmaphobe (Mar 20, 2015)

Coyote said:


> When does a people become a people?  10 years? 50 years? A century?  A thousand years?
> 
> They lived there.
> 
> ...



  It is important to know how you have been manipulated in most cynical fashion in order to arrive at the opinions you hold.

 That is assuming you are an actual useful idiot living in West Virginia as you claim instead of being one of the manipulating Arabs doing this intentionally as you actually appear, mind you.


----------



## Coyote (Mar 20, 2015)

Dogmaphobe said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> > When does a people become a people?  10 years? 50 years? A century?  A thousand years?
> ...



It doesn't take any nefarious manipulating to recognize people as people - individuals.  Nor does it take any manipulating to ask a simple straightforward question - when does a people become a people?

Is it an arbritrary timeline...like...only after a century....?
Is it a political definition...like...only if they are of the politically correct ethnicity?


----------



## Coyote (Mar 20, 2015)

aris2chat said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> > Phoenall said:
> ...



No.  I'm not.  Your imposing your assumptions on me.


----------



## Coyote (Mar 20, 2015)

aris2chat said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> > Phoenall said:
> ...



When does a people become a "people" worthy of being recognized as such?  Is it arbritrary depending on whether you approve of the group or not?


----------



## joesakic (Mar 21, 2015)

Phoenall said:


> joesakic said:
> 
> 
> > I do not know why there is a focus on whether the people indigenous to the land were called Palestinians or not. I am from Canada and we displaced many aboriginals in this land. Whether or not the were from the Metis tribe, Iroquois etc. or whether they are called Indians or aboriginals does not matter.  It seems like unlike Zionists, I feel very badly on how we treated the people indigenous to this land. I encourage aboriginals in Canada to have tax empetions, fist rights on government jobs, mining agreements regarding natural resources because WE TOOK IT ALL FROM THEM.  For Zionists to deny they displaced people wether the are Arab, Palestinian, or whatever they want to be called is ignorant.
> ...


Zionism is a belief started in late 1800's that Jews have a right to the land of Israel even if it encompasses apartheid measures.  Define apartheid.


----------



## joesakic (Mar 21, 2015)

references for Zionism vs Judaism

True Torah Jews
Neturei Karta - Orthodox Jews United Against Zionism


----------



## Dogmaphobe (Mar 21, 2015)

Coyote said:


> When does a people become a "people" worthy of being recognized as such?  Is it arbritrary depending on whether you approve of the group or not?




Before the events referenced in such a way as to try to justify various points of view, not after, and because the group identity arose naturally rather than through a product of cynical manipulation and deceit. Now, YOU certainly approve of a group that has elevated mass murder to a position of highest honor, which treats women as nothing but brood mares to produce as many potential killers as possible, and which invests it's resources into an enormous propaganda apparatus geared towards fooling useful idiots into supporting all this, but it isn't a matter of approval, but of reality. The reality of the situation is that "Palestinians" did not exist as a people at the time inevitably referenced by deceitful, cult-like followers such as yourself who have made the promotion of their agenda into their very Raison D' Etre. 

 Arabs attacked the fledgling state in 1947. Arabs vacated the property upon which they squatted in 1947.  Hostilities ensued after Arabs attacked Jews that resulted in hostile Arabs leaving.

 Now, 70 years later, its as if by magic that these Arabs are being cast as a people that did not actually exist at the time.


----------



## P F Tinmore (Mar 21, 2015)

Dogmaphobe said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> > When does a people become a "people" worthy of being recognized as such?  Is it arbritrary depending on whether you approve of the group or not?
> ...


Arabs attacked the fledgling state in 1947.

Now, 70 years later, its as if by magic that these Arabs are being *cast as a people that did not actually exist at the time.*​

Propaganda does not have to make sense for some people to believe it.


----------



## RoccoR (Mar 21, 2015)

P F Tinmore,  et al,

I don't think this is accurate at all.



P F Tinmore said:


> Arabs attacked the fledgling state in 1947.
> 
> Now, 70 years later, its as if by magic that these Arabs are being *cast as a people that did not actually exist at the time.*​
> Propaganda does not have to make sense for some people to believe it.


*(COMMENT)*

The territorial Arab of 1947 were Citizens of Palestine _(the territories to which the Mandate for Palestine applies, hereinafter described as Palestine) _as defined by the Palestine Order in Council; that is, for the purposes of this discussion --- the Arabs being discussed were Citizens of "_the territories to which the Mandate for Palestine applies," _either as:






 (a)Turkish subjects habitually resident in the territory of Palestine at the date of commencement of this Order.





 (b)All persons of other than Turkish nationality habitually resident in the territory of Palestine at the said date, who shall within two calendar months of the said date make application for Palestinian citizenship in such form and before such officer as may be prescribed by the High Commissioner.​They were citizens to the legal entity _(defined by the Order in Council)_ but not a sovereign state and not self-governing or with autonomous governing functionality.  The Arab Palestinians, having declined to form the precursor institutions on more than three occasions, by declining to cooperation in developing precursors to self-governing institution, discarded the right to consulted on all matters relating to immigration, Arab civil and religious rights, on which it was recognized that “the views of the Arab community were entitled to special consideration.”   Even in 1947, the Arab Palestinian the Arab Higher Committee refused to cooperate to be an advisor to the identified successor government; not being denied a voice --- but instead again declining to be an active voice. 

The nature of the Arab Palestinian is much different than you are attempting to portray them.  That is the difference --- the propaganda is the attmept to cast them as the perpetual victim --- when the reality is they short themselves in the foot.

Just my thought...  _(Don't decline to participate --- and them complain you didn't get what you wanted.)_

Most Respectfully,
R


----------



## P F Tinmore (Mar 21, 2015)

RoccoR said:


> P F Tinmore,  et al,
> 
> I don't think this is accurate at all.
> 
> ...


The Palestinians did not want to get involved in any of the colonial schemes.

And you should know that people in non self governing territories have the same rights as those livings in independent states.

The Palestinians never rejected a state. They rejected colonialism.


----------



## Phoenall (Mar 21, 2015)

Coyote said:


> Phoenall said:
> 
> 
> > Challenger said:
> ...






Well before the arab muslims started calling themselves Palestinians. At least 100 years before


 And amongst that group were Jews who were given the chance to form a homeland and agreed. It seems that you are siding with the islamonazi stooges and Jew hating white supremacists in denying the Jews their human rights and wanting them to be stateless wandering bums so you can treat them like something you have stepped in.

 Why is this, what have the Jews ever done to you to deserve such treatment ?


----------



## Phoenall (Mar 21, 2015)

Coyote said:


> Phoenall said:
> 
> 
> > Coyote said:
> ...






 Who's history are we talking about here, as the history of islam is steeped in mass murders, genocides and ethnic cleansing.   Just look at the Cathedral of Bones in Spain built using the skeletons of the many hundreds of thousands murdered by muslims, then say that history is wrong


----------



## Phoenall (Mar 21, 2015)

P F Tinmore said:


> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> > P F Tinmore,  et al,
> ...






NO they rejected the rights of the Jews to show free determination and ability to govern themselves. But they waited until they had their cut of the land first before resorting to violence and terrorism to kill the Jews.   As is usual you are refusing to allow the Jews the same rights as the arab muslims because of your anti-Semitism and Jew hatred.


 And for the record the arab muslims in Palestine have been self governing since 1988, when they first acquired free determination. They then refused to take the next step on the roud to full autonomy showing that they are not yet ready for a state of their own.


----------



## P F Tinmore (Mar 21, 2015)

Phoenall said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> > Phoenall said:
> ...


Well before the arab muslims started calling themselves Palestinians. At least 100 years before​
Ahhh, a rose by any other name...


----------



## P F Tinmore (Mar 21, 2015)

Phoenall said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> > RoccoR said:
> ...


Pfffft, what a load of crap.


----------



## RoccoR (Mar 21, 2015)

P F Tinmore,  et al,

Again, you are trying to project the image of the Arab Palestinian as the virtual victim.



P F Tinmore said:


> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> > P F Tinmore,  et al,
> ...


*(COMMENT)*

There were no colonial schemes in the sense you are suggesting.  The Mandatory, through the tasking of the Allied Powers, was to provide advice, administration (executive and legislative), and assistance until such time as the Arab could stand alone (an Article 22 prerequisite).  The Arab Palestinian was uncooperative and certainly did not follow the steps preparatory to independence.  Thus they were left behind by their own choice (self-determination).



P F Tinmore said:


> And you should know that people in non self governing territories have the same rights as those livings in independent states.


*(COMMENT)*

*(SUB TEXT QUESTION)  *Who gave the people of non-self governing territories this "right" beyond the self-determination of the Charter?
_That would not be by chance the non-binding 1960'ish A/RES/15/1514(XV) would it --- (not in play at the time Israel declared independence pursuant to the directions it received from the UN)?_

Having the "right" is much different than a people that know how  to exercise that right and stand alone as a nation.  It is a much different thing for a people not to know how to establish independence and so not use the right --- then it is --- for a people to be denied the right.  The Arab Palestinians knew how to object, protest, create lethal conditions and perform terrorist operations.  But they did not demonstrate until 1988 that they had the slightest idea how to create a country and stand alone.  Even today, the 1988 State of Palestine is not demonstrating that it can engage in the activities of a functional government.   It cannot collect its own taxes, it cannot maintain peace and security or perform law enforcement functions on its own.  It cannot engage in good faith and productive peace negotiations to settle disputes.  It can only engage in Jihad.



P F Tinmore said:


> The Palestinians never rejected a state. They rejected colonialism.


*(COMMENT)*

Again, you are trying to massage the actions of the Arab Palestinian to make it appear much more noble than what they are.  Not only did the Arab Palestinians reject the "Arab State" (the Partition Plan) --- but they did it --- not because it was some colonial scheme, but because the Arab Palestinian wanted all --- (repeat) ALL --- the remaining territory to which the Mandate applied.  It had nothing to do with colonialism.

The selfish Arab Palestinian, represented by the Arab Higher Committee (AHC) Delegation indicated that the Arab "rejection" was ground on:

(a) The Arabs of Palestine will never recognize the validity of the extorted partition recommendations or the authority of the United Nations to make them.
(b) The Arabs of Palestine consider that any attempt by the Jews or any power group of powers to establish a Jewish state in Arab territory is an act of aggression which will be resisted in self-defense.
(c) It is very unwise and fruitless to ask any commission to proceed to Palestine because not a single Arab will cooperate with the said Commission.
(d) The United Nations or its Commission should not be misled to believe that its efforts in the partition plan will meet with any success. It will be far better for the eclipsed prestige of this organization not to start on this adventure.
(e) The United Nations prestige will be better served by abandoning, not enforcing such an injustice.
(f) The determination of every Arab in Palestine is to oppose in every way the partition of that country.
(g) The Arabs of Palestine made a solemn declaration before the United Nations, before God and history, that they will never submit or yield to any power going to Palestine to enforce partition. ​
And this stance is repeated several times --- over the last half century.  It is the Arab Palestinian position that the Allied Powers _(under the League of Nations or the United Nations)_ did not have the authority to make disposition on the territories surrendered to it by the Ottoman Empire.  And the Arab Palestinian, through the AHC and the Arab League states, work tirelessly to undermine the establishment of the Jewish Nation Home; a safe haven that could preserve and protect the Jewish People and their culture.  It is substantially the same position the Arab Palestinian hold today:

1. Palestine from the river to the sea, and from north to south, is a land of the Palestinian people and its homeland and its legitimate right, we may not a waiver an inch or any part thereof, no matter what the reasons and circumstances and pressures. 
2. Palestine - all of Palestine - is a land of Islamic and Arab affiliation, a blessed sacred land, that has a major portion in the heart of every Arab and Muslim
3. No recognition of the legitimacy of the occupation whatever; this is a principled position, political and moral, and therefore do not recognize the legitimacy of the Israeli occupation of Palestine, and recognition of "Israel" and the legitimacy of its presence on any part of Palestine no matter how long; and it will not be long, God willing.
4. Liberation of Palestine is a national duty; it is the responsibility of the Palestinian people and the Arab and Islamic nation, it is also a humanitarian responsibility in accordance with the requirements of truth and justice. 
5. Jihad and the armed resistance is the right and real method for the liberation of Palestine, and the restoration of all the rights, together with, of course, all forms of political and diplomatic struggle including in the media, public and legal [spheres]; with the need to mobilize all the energies of the nation in the battle.​
The Arab-Palestinian is so out of touch with the Declaration on Principles of International Law concerning Friendly Relations and Co-operation among States (Article 1 of UN Charter), that it is totally incapable of entering into a good faith effort to settle disputes by negotiation, enquiry, mediation, conciliation, arbitration, judicial settlement, resort to regional agencies or arrangements, or other peaceful means of their own choice.

There solution is Jihad.

Most Respectfully,
R


----------



## Phoenall (Mar 21, 2015)

P F Tinmore said:


> Phoenall said:
> 
> 
> > P F Tinmore said:
> ...





 Have you read the various charters of the arab muslims that all deny the Jews and Christians any free determination, human rights and the ability to set out their own lives.   You think the arab muslim Palestinians are treated badly, well under them the Jews would be dead by now, the Christians driven out and the temple mount reduced to rubble along with the two carbuncles


----------



## P F Tinmore (Mar 21, 2015)

RoccoR said:


> P F Tinmore,  et al,
> 
> Again, you are trying to project the image of the Arab Palestinian as the virtual victim.
> 
> ...


The Arab-Palestinian is so out of touch with the Declaration on Principles of International Law concerning Friendly Relations and Co-operation among States (Article 1 of UN Charter), that it is totally incapable of entering into a good faith effort to settle disputes by negotiation, enquiry, mediation, conciliation, arbitration, judicial settlement, resort to regional agencies or arrangements, or other peaceful means of their own choice.​
How so?


----------



## Coyote (Mar 21, 2015)

Dogmaphobe said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> > When does a people become a "people" worthy of being recognized as such?  Is it arbritrary depending on whether you approve of the group or not?
> ...



Every group begins somewhere and this group existed and lived there regardless of what you chose to call them then or now.  They are real people.



> Now, YOU certainly approve of a group that has elevated mass murder to a position of highest honor, which treats women as nothing but brood mares to produce as many potential killers as possible, and which invests it's resources into an enormous propaganda apparatus geared towards fooling useful idiots into supporting all this, but it isn't a matter of approval, but of reality.



Your talking about actions and broad brushing an entire group.  You can disagree with particular behavior and fight to make changes (as many Muslim groups are doing in an attempt to reform Islam) - without denying an entire people their rights.



> The reality of the situation is that "Palestinians" did not exist as a people at the time inevitably referenced by deceitful, cult-like followers such as yourself who have made the promotion of their agenda into their very Raison D' Etre.



The reality of the situation is that yes, they did - they were a group of people that consisted of Jews, Christians, Muslims, Druze, Beduoins and other minorities that lived in the region called Palestine.  That's fact.  Whether they were called that or not is irrelevent.  Everyone becomes a "people" at one time.  There was no such thing as Israeli's prior to Israel.  They are a people now.  Are you going to deny them their identity?



> Arabs attacked the fledgling state in 1947. Arabs vacated the property upon which they squatted in 1947.  Hostilities ensued after Arabs attacked Jews that resulted in hostile Arabs leaving.
> 
> Now, 70 years later, its as if by magic that these Arabs are being cast as a people that did not actually exist at the time.



The magic is in the semantics of people trying to deny other people their basic rights, rights those critics enjoy themselves.


----------



## P F Tinmore (Mar 21, 2015)

RoccoR said:


> P F Tinmore,  et al,
> 
> Again, you are trying to project the image of the Arab Palestinian as the virtual victim.
> 
> ...


3. No recognition of the legitimacy of the occupation whatever; this is a principled position, political and moral, and therefore do not recognize the legitimacy of the Israeli occupation of Palestine, and recognition of "Israel" and the legitimacy of its presence on any part of Palestine no matter how long; and it will not be long, God willing.​
How is that different from anyone else?


----------



## Dogmaphobe (Mar 21, 2015)

Phoenall said:


> Well before the arab muslims started calling themselves Palestinians. At least 100 years before
> 
> 
> And amongst that group were Jews who were given the chance to form a homeland and agreed. It seems that you are siding with the islamonazi stooges and Jew hating white supremacists in denying the Jews their human rights and wanting them to be stateless wandering bums so you can treat them like something you have stepped in.
> ...



As to that last question, the answer is obvious. Jews represent everything she is not, as they are educated, accomplished, successful and innovative.  It's much like the remedial kids picking on the brainiac in that envy has been sublimated and turned into hatred.


----------



## Coyote (Mar 21, 2015)

Phoenall said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> > Phoenall said:
> ...



Where did you come up with that?  Where have I ever denied Jews their human rights or indicated I want them to be "stateless wandering bums"?  Where?

I support Israel's right to exist.  What I don't support is creating another wrong in order fix the old wrongs.

You have a habit of accusing anyone who even suggests that the Palestinians might have a just cause as being Jew hating white supremacists, or islamonazi's - because you can't see beyond black and white.  If they don't agree, then they MUST be...blah blah blah.



> Why is this, what have the Jews ever done to you to deserve such treatment ?



Where have I ever said they deserve such treatment?  

Why do you lie?


----------



## Coyote (Mar 21, 2015)

Dogmaphobe said:


> Phoenall said:
> 
> 
> > Well before the arab muslims started calling themselves Palestinians. At least 100 years before
> ...



I think the obvious answer is hidden in your own bitterness and hate.  You can not see beyond the end of your nose or acknowledge that a situation is far more complex than a simple black and white, good vs. evil scenario.  The real world seldom works that way and if you think you are some sort of "super hero" trumpeting the rights of "good" over "evil" then you are sadly misguided.

The Jews have a homeland, and they deserve to keep it.
The Palestinians are stateless and under occupation - they deserve a homeland.  This has been going on long enough.

Should Israel be allowed to keep it's all of it's conquered territories and deny either a homeland or citizenship or independence to the people that originally lived there - alongside the Jews - before there was Israel?  If you say yes, then frankly - what about Russia and the Ukraine?  Should Russia be allowed to continue gobbling up the Ukraine?   You, and others, seem to think that rights belong to only those you deem "good" or "worthy" or share your particular values.


----------



## Coyote (Mar 21, 2015)

RoccoR said:


> P F Tinmore,  et al,
> 
> I don't think this is accurate at all.
> 
> ...



Seems to me there is a lot of pro-Israeli propaganda going around as well with constant refrains of David vs Goliath victimhood and if one disagrees with that narrative, one is labeled an anti-semite.


----------



## montelatici (Mar 21, 2015)

Dogmaphobe said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> > When does a people become a "people" worthy of being recognized as such?  Is it arbritrary depending on whether you approve of the group or not?
> ...



The Palestinian people existed before the Mandate and there is documented proof that the Palestinian people considered themselves thus officially in correspondence to with the Mandatory (Britain) at the outset of the Mandate.  You are full of crap:

"*PALESTINE.*​*CORRESPONDENCE 
WITH THE
PALESTINE ARAB DELEGATION
AND THE 
ZIONIST ORGANISATION.​*​*Presented to Parliament by Command of His Majesty.
JUNE, 1922.
LONDON:
​If the British Government would revise their present policy in Palestine, end the Zionist con-dominium, put a stop to all alien immigration and grant the People of Palestine — who by Right and Experience are the best judges of what is good and bad to their country — Executive and Legislative powers, the terms of a constitution could be discussed in a different atmosphere. If to-day the People of Palestine assented to any constitution which fell short of giving them full control of their own affairs they would be in the position of agreeing to an instrument of Government which might, and probably would, be used to smother their national life under a flood of alien immigration......."

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 *

Arabs from neighboring countries intervened to attempt to prevent the ethnic cleansing and murder of the Christians and Muslims in Palestine, by the Jews.


----------



## montelatici (Mar 21, 2015)

Why should any people accept a colonial sc


RoccoR said:


> P F Tinmore,  et al,
> 
> Again, you are trying to project the image of the Arab Palestinian as the virtual victim.
> 
> ...



Why should any people accept a colonial scheme designed to settle people from another continent on land they had been living on for thousands of years?


----------



## Coyote (Mar 21, 2015)

montelatici said:


> Why should any people accept a colonial sc
> 
> 
> RoccoR said:
> ...



Because that happened long ago and they have to move on and deal with the reality on the ground.


----------



## Dogmaphobe (Mar 21, 2015)

Coyote said:


> I think the obvious answer is hidden in your own bitterness and hate.  You can not see beyond the end of your nose or acknowledge that a situation is far more complex than a simple black and white, good vs. evil scenario.  The real world seldom works that way and if you think you are some sort of "super hero" trumpeting the rights of "good" over "evil" then you are sadly misguided.
> 
> The Jews have a homeland, and they deserve to keep it.
> The Palestinians are stateless and under occupation - they deserve a homeland.  This has been going on long enough.
> ...




Now, why on earth would I harbor any bitterness or hatred, Coyote? I own my own business, I have some good employees, I am successful and content. I have no reason to be bitter. I am pretty damn content, and that is why I don't need to scapegoat Jews like you do.

 Goodness -- it's not like I wash people's dogs for a living or something and so I run around pissed about it.


----------



## Coyote (Mar 21, 2015)

Dogmaphobe said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> > I think the obvious answer is hidden in your own bitterness and hate.  You can not see beyond the end of your nose or acknowledge that a situation is far more complex than a simple black and white, good vs. evil scenario.  The real world seldom works that way and if you think you are some sort of "super hero" trumpeting the rights of "good" over "evil" then you are sadly misguided.
> ...



  I'm quite content and have yet to scapegoat Jews for anything.  If you feel I do,* please provide a link* (oops...except you never can).

I enjoy my job, work with a variety of people that include Christians, Athiests, Jews, Muslims, Hindus and many who's religion I have no knowledge of because, who cares?  We are people.  I train dogs (as a volunteer) and am involved in Australian Shepherd rescue as well.  It's a good life and a good feeling when I take in a dog, clean him up, help fix his issues and find him a home as someone's cherished companion.  Life is good and I don't have to be a CEO of some company to enjoy it and appreciate my blessings.

You seem to have a driven need - since the onset of your participation here, to put down other people.  I'm no psychologist, so I won't even guess as to why.

The Jews have a homeland in Israel.
Now, it's time to address the Palestinians and give them some justice.


----------



## P F Tinmore (Mar 21, 2015)

Coyote said:


> montelatici said:
> 
> 
> > Why should any people accept a colonial sc
> ...


And we would accept that here if it happened to us?

The Palestinians do not accept it happening to them.


----------



## Coyote (Mar 21, 2015)

P F Tinmore said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> > montelatici said:
> ...




At some point, you have to if you are going to have a future.  Israel is not going anywhere.  The Palestinians aren't going anywhere.  The "Right of Return" for everyone is highly unlikely.  Just as the Jews that fled or were evicted from Arab land during that time are unlikely to either.    So what do you do?  What is a just solution for everyone? 

Each side has to compromise on some things.  But no one wants to.


----------



## P F Tinmore (Mar 21, 2015)

Coyote said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> > Coyote said:
> ...


Only the Palestinians are required to compromise. Israel gives up nothing.


----------



## Coyote (Mar 21, 2015)

P F Tinmore said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> > P F Tinmore said:
> ...



I disagree.  They both need to compromise.  I've said that multiple times.


----------



## toastman (Mar 21, 2015)

P F Tinmore said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> > P F Tinmore said:
> ...


Although the Palestinians have not surrendered, they have still lost every war in which they fought against Israel. They have openly tried to destroy Israel since 1948, and in the process they got themselves in a deep hole which they keep digging deeper.


----------



## P F Tinmore (Mar 21, 2015)

Coyote said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> > Coyote said:
> ...


Only the Palestinians are required to compromise. Israel gives up nothing.


Coyote said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> > Coyote said:
> ...


What is Israel compromising?


----------



## P F Tinmore (Mar 21, 2015)

toastman said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> > Coyote said:
> ...


The Palestinians have never surrendered and the war continues.

Isn't it premature for Israel to declare victory?


----------



## Phoenall (Mar 22, 2015)

P F Tinmore said:


> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> > P F Tinmore,  et al,
> ...






 How many ILLEGAL WEAPONS do they fire at Israeli citizens inside the borders of Israel contrary to the Declaration on Principles of International law concerning friendly relations and co-operation among states.  An International law they signed to abide by and breached within seconds of making the agreement.


----------



## Phoenall (Mar 22, 2015)

Coyote said:


> Dogmaphobe said:
> 
> 
> > Coyote said:
> ...








 Is that why you endeavour to refuse the Jews their rights to safety and peace by supporting the terrorist attacks by the arab muslim Palestinians.


----------



## Phoenall (Mar 22, 2015)

P F Tinmore said:


> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> > P F Tinmore,  et al,
> ...








 Because this means the existence of Israel in Palestine that was not arab muslim owned or controlled from 1099. The lands legal owners gave the title of the land to the Jews, after giving the arab muslims the other 99.9% of the land.


----------



## Phoenall (Mar 22, 2015)

Coyote said:


> Phoenall said:
> 
> 
> > Coyote said:
> ...







 I don't but you do when you deny your anti Semitism and Jew hatred. You constantly want to see Israel reduced to fighting for its existence by forcing them to give up their defence and move to non existent 1967 borders.


----------



## Phoenall (Mar 22, 2015)

Coyote said:


> Dogmaphobe said:
> 
> 
> > Phoenall said:
> ...







 COWFLOP   the arab muslims have a homeland, in fact they have many homelands as the mood takes them. They also have a state invented in 1988 that they have failed to do anything with, relying on hand outs and aid instead of hard work and initiative. They rely on retaliation to terrorism from Israel to garner sympathy amongst the west's looney left and Nazi Jew haters to support their ideal of a Jew free world.

 Now just where is this conquered land of Israel's then, as they have stated that they will give the land back once the arab muslims agree a peace deal and mutual borders.   They never lived alongside the Jews they abused and terrorised them in line with their religious commands.
 Are the violent, psychopathic bloodthirsty arab muslims good when they mass murder millions at a time ?


----------



## montelatici (Mar 22, 2015)

Phoenall said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> > Dogmaphobe said:
> ...



The Palestinians, Christian and Muslim, have their homeland controlled and occupied by European colonists and/or their offspring.


----------



## Phoenall (Mar 22, 2015)

montelatici said:


> Phoenall said:
> 
> 
> > Coyote said:
> ...






 BULLSHIT   they control their own land as proven by the many links to hamas leaders stating this fact.


----------



## montelatici (Mar 22, 2015)

Phoenall said:


> montelatici said:
> 
> 
> > Phoenall said:
> ...




How can it be a fact?  Palestinians control no borders, no air space no territorial sea, and the Israelis collect their taxes.  Plus the IDF controls everything within the West Bank and East Jerusalem.


----------



## Dogmaphobe (Mar 22, 2015)

Phoenall said:


> Is that why you endeavour to refuse the Jews their rights to safety and peace by supporting the terrorist attacks by the arab muslim Palestinians.




In one recent thread, she posted dozens and dozens of defenses of a fat Islamist toad who called for the genocide of Jews, and then turned around and started demanding people attack some selected Jews, instead. 

   Of course, what's a little genocide, eh?   Heaven forbid that anybody defending the extermination of Jews would be called an antisemite in THIS forum.


----------



## P F Tinmore (Mar 22, 2015)

Phoenall said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> > RoccoR said:
> ...


None.


----------



## P F Tinmore (Mar 22, 2015)

Phoenall said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> > RoccoR said:
> ...


Quote the passage with link.


----------



## Phoenall (Mar 22, 2015)

montelatici said:


> Phoenall said:
> 
> 
> > montelatici said:
> ...






 Because the arab muslims agreed to those measures in Oslo, you know the treaty fatah tried to use last year, Since when has the west bank been on the coast, and since when has it had mutually agreed borders with Israel, Egypt and Jordan. You did know that Egypt and Jordan control over half of palestines borders didn't you, and that they are also controlling their air space and territorial seas. So easy to show you are an islamonazi stooge when you blame Israel for all of the arab muslims misfortunes, when two other nations are also fighting a war with hamas and fatah.


----------



## Phoenall (Mar 22, 2015)

P F Tinmore said:


> Phoenall said:
> 
> 
> > P F Tinmore said:
> ...







 How about a link to prove this then, as the UN see the rockets as illegal weapons


----------



## Phoenall (Mar 22, 2015)

P F Tinmore said:


> Phoenall said:
> 
> 
> > P F Tinmore said:
> ...






 Look back to the link provided every week to the same stupid question. It has not changed the LoN Mandate for Palestine still says that the land was to be given to the Jews as the RESURRECTED NATIONAL HOME FOR THE JEWS.


----------



## montelatici (Mar 22, 2015)

It really doesn't matter if a group of Europeans may have decided to give land on another continent to other Europeans.  The Berlin West Africa Conference in 1884-1885 gave the Congo to King Leopold of Belgium, big deal.  

In any case, the LoN Mandate stated that " 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....."*

Since the rights and political status non-Jewish communities in Palestine were prejudiced (most non-Jews were ethnically cleansed), and the National Home was established as a state and not as a home within Palestine, the LoN Mandate is irrelevant to the current dispute.


----------



## Phoenall (Mar 22, 2015)

montelatici said:


> It really doesn't matter if a group of Europeans may have decided to give land on another continent to other Europeans.  The Berlin West Africa Conference in 1884-1885 gave the Congo to King Leopold of Belgium, big deal.
> 
> In any case, the LoN Mandate stated that " 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....."*
> 
> Since the rights and political status non-Jewish communities in Palestine were prejudiced (most non-Jews were ethnically cleansed), and the National Home was established as a state and not as a home within Palestine, the LoN Mandate is irrelevant to the current dispute.






 You do not know what you are talking about, you just spout parrot fashion what your imam tells you.   The LoN Mandate for Palestine is explicit in what it says, and your missing out crucial parts does not alter the facts. The LoN being the legal land owners gave the land to the Jews for their RESURECTED NATIONAL HOME OF THE JEWS. The term in itself names it as a state or NATION. It also spells out that those non Jews living in the area an stay as full citizens or move to any of the other states or nations created under the Mandate. Not one of the Non Jews was prejudiced under the international laws of the time which did not mention politics or rights other than those already mentioned in the Mandate. Once again you try and cloud the issue by bringing in 2015 rights to a 1948 dispute that they do not cover. Unless of course you want to go back to the time of the Roman invasion and grant the land to the last extant group from that period. You can forget the arab muslims as they were invented in 627 C.E., and the Christians were not invented until the 4C C.E. when Rome collapsed. This leaves the Jews that have been proven to have DNA matches with ancient Jews and modern Jews from around the world.


 And why did you miss the part of regarding the Jews rights that have been systematically denied by every islamonazi nation since 1948 ?


----------



## P F Tinmore (Mar 22, 2015)

Phoenall said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> > Phoenall said:
> ...


OK, but nobody has posted the passage with a link.


----------



## RoccoR (Mar 22, 2015)

P F Tinmore, et al,

Your insistence that Israel (1948 State of) is somehow inside some territory boundary sovereign to the Palestinians is an example of just how far out of touch with reality the Hostile Arab Palestinians (HoAP) are; and how dangerous they have become to regional peace.

References:

11/29/1947 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




 103.1 (b) Palestine - Plan of Partition with Economic Union under A/RES/181 - Map 
	

11/29/1947 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




 Map No. 3067 Rev.1 United Nations partition plan of 1947 - Map
11/29/1947 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




 A/RES/181(II) Palestine plan of partition with economic union - General Assembly Resolution 181



P F Tinmore said:


> Phoenall said:
> 
> 
> > How many ILLEGAL WEAPONS do they fire at Israeli citizens inside the borders of Israel contrary to the Declaration on Principles of International law concerning friendly relations and co-operation among states.  An International law they signed to abide by and breached within seconds of making the agreement.
> ...


*(COMMENT)*

There is no history or documentation anywhere that substantiates the premise that at anytime during the period of the Ottoman Empire taking control of the Levant _(from 1517)_ --- and the summary Declaration of Independence in 1988 _(more than four centuries)_, did the Arab Palestinian have autonomy and control over the territory defined by the Allied Powers as Palestine --- the territory to which the Mandate applied.  From a time before the end of the Mandate and the implementation of the Jewish State portion of the Partition Plan (1948), the HoAP have expressed the idea that Palestine belonged to the Palestinians; and have presented the idea a number of different ways.

As regards the Arab Higher Committee, the following telegraphic response was received by the Secretary-General on 19 January (1948):

_“ARAB HIGHER COMMITTEE IS DETERMINED PERSIST IN REJECTION PARTITION AND IN REFUSAL RECOGNIZE UNO RESOLUTION THIS RESPECT AND ANYTHING DERIVING THEREFROM. FOR THESE REASONS IT IS UNABLE ACCEPT INVITATION” (1948)_

_Article 19: The partition of Palestine in 1947, and the establishment of the state of Israel are entirely illegal, regardless of the passage of time, because they were contrary to the will of the Palestinian people and its natural right in their homeland, and were inconsistent with the principles embodied in the Charter of the United Nations, particularly the right to self-determination. (1968)_

_Article 20: The Balfour Declaration, the Palestine Mandate, and everything that has been based on them, are deemed null and void. Claims of historical or religious ties of Jews with Palestine are incompatible with the facts of history and the conception of what constitutes statehood. Judaism, being a religion, is not an independent nationality. Nor do Jews constitute a single nation with an identity of their own; they are citizens of the states to which they belong. (1968)_
​In May 1948 and the same it true today, the Arab Higher Committee (AHC) stated substantially as follows:

_"Arabs claim to have authority over all the area of Palestine as being the political representative of the overwhelming majority of the population. They regard Palestine a one unit. All forces that oppose majority wherever they may be are regarded as unlawful." (1948)_

_1. Palestine from the river to the sea, and from north to south, is a land of the Palestinian people and its homeland and its legitimate right, we may not a waiver an inch or any part thereof, no matter what the reasons and circumstances and pressures. (2013)_

_2. Palestine - all of Palestine - is a land of Islamic and Arab affiliation, a blessed sacred land, that has a major portion in the heart of every Arab and Muslim (2013)_

_3. No recognition of the legitimacy of the occupation whatever; this is a principled position, political and moral, and therefore do not recognize the legitimacy of the Israeli occupation of Palestine, and recognition of "Israel" and the legitimacy of its presence on any part of Palestine no matter how long; and it will not be long, God willing. (2013)_

_4. Liberation of Palestine is a national duty; it is the responsibility of the Palestinian people and the Arab and Islamic nation, it is also a humanitarian responsibility in accordance with the requirements of truth and justice. (2013)_​
The HoAP rebelled against the British Mandate and its policies of Jewish people with Palestine and to the grounds for reconstituting their national home in that country on what they considered their land; AND facilitating Jewish immigration by encouraging all those willing to assist in the establishment of the Jewish national home.   The United Nations on the *29th November 1947 *agreed upon a _'Partition Plan of Palestine'_ A/RES/181(II), which would divide Palestine into two independent States; one for the Jews and another for the Palestinians, while keeping Jerusalem under international administration, by declaring it a _'Corpus Separatum'_.  Even this is argued by the HoAP --- on the matter of implementation --- under the condition to which it went forward.

PAL/169  17 May 1948 ---
"During today's brief meeting, Dr. Eduardo Morgan (Panama) said that this resolution of the Assembly merely "relieves responsibility. The Commission has not been dissolved. In fact the resolution of last November 29 *has been implemented*."

Dr. Paul Diez de Medina (Bolivia) said that the Assembly last Friday did only two things. First, he said, "it appointed a mediator between the parties and that in itself is reaffirmation of partition." The second part of the reference to the Commission expressed appreciation for the work performed, and that, he said, *was also reaffirmation for partition*."

*NOTE:*  The UNPC was the Successor Government to the Mandatory (UK) --- and the "United Nations Mediator" in Palestine, relieved the "United Nations Palestine Commission." --- separate from:   A/554  14 May 1948


The view was also expressed that the two resolutions passed by the General Assembly on 14 May reaffirmed partition. The resolution calling for the appointment of a Mediator implied two parties, and two parties implied partition. Likewise, the other resolution, expressing appreciation of the General Assembly for the work performed by the Commission in pursuance of the mandate given to it last November, also could be interpreted as reaffirming partition.  A/AC.21/SR.76  21 May 1948

It is often argued that when the Mandate Terminated, that somehow left the HoAP as the successors and entitled to claim sovereignty.   While the reaffirmed Partition Plan _(which the Palestinian claimed "never happened")_ offered the HoAP _(who opened the civil war in 1947)_ the participation, the HoAP declined; until the notion was revived in 1988.

Moving forward to the outcomes of the 6-Day War issues, you will note that the Palestinians seem to always reflect upon UN Security Council Resolution 242 (1967) --- emphasizes “the inadmissibility of the acquisition of territory by war” and calls for the “withdrawal of Israel armed forces from territories occupied in the recent conflict.”  And I say:  Hmmmm. 

President Johnson's speech of 19 June '67 --- announced the ideas which became Resolution 242 after four more months of heated debate in the Security Council, the General Assembly, and then the Security Council again. President Johnson's statement had several key points:

(1) It rejected proposals that Israel withdraw its forces to the Armistice Lines as they stood on 4 June. "This is not a prescription for peace," the President said, quoting Ambassador Arthur Goldberg, "but for a renewal of hostilities."
(2) There needed to be peace between the parties, real peace, before there could be any troop withdrawal.
(3) The agreements of peace needed to be negotiated by the parties.
(4) All the states in the region had the same right to have their territorial integrity and political independence respected; threats to end the life of any nation had become a burden to the peace.
(5) There needed to be justice for the refugees.
(6) Maritime rights through the international waterways of the area needed to be respected.
(7) The special interest of the three great religions represented in jerusalem needed also to be assured.​
It is important to understand the language of diplomacy, and the intent of the authors.  Here is a comment from Professor Eugene Rostow, who was the Under Secretary of State for Political Affairs (1966-1969), Professor Rostow was Chairman of the Interdepartmental Control Group charged with preparing, proposing, and carrying out US policy for the Middle East crisis of that period.

*Recommended Citation: * Professor Rostow, Eugene V., "The Drafting of Security Council Resolution 242: The Role of the Non-Regional Actors" (1993).
Faculty Yale Law School ---- Scholarship Series. Paper 1978.
 The Drafting of Security Council Resolution 242 The Role of the Non-R by Eugene V. Rostow

Two of these issues proved to be especially critical in the diplomacy of obtaining the passage of the Resolution in 1967, and in the subsequent struggle to implement it: first, the issue of coupling Israeli withdrawals and agreements on a state of peace; and second, the question of how much withdrawal, i.e., whether Israel is required by Resolution 242 to withdraw to the Armistice Demarcation Lines of 1949. Since Resolution 242 calls on Israel to withdraw only from "territories occupied" in the course of the Six Day War, that is, not from all the territories or from the territories it occupied in the course of the War, and since most of the boundaries in question are no more than armistice lines specifically designated as not being political boundaries, it is hard to believe that professional diplomats seriously claim in 1993 that Security Council Resolution 242 requires that Israel must return to the 1967 armistice lines. This Arab position is particularly bizarre applied to the West Bank and the Gaza Strip, where the jewish people have an incontestably valid claim under the original mandate and Article 80 of the UN Charter to make close settlements on the land.

Five and one half months of vehement public and private diplomacy in 1967 made it perfectly clear what the missing definite article in Resolution 242 means. Ingeniously
drafted resolutions calling for withdrawal from all the territories were defeated in the Security Council and the General Assembly, one after another. Speaker after speaker made it explicit that Israel was not to be forced back to the fragile and vulnerable Armistice Demarcation Lines, but should retire once peace was made to what Resolution 242 called "secure and recognized" boundaries, agreed on by the parties.  In negotiating such agreements, the parties should take into account, among other factors, security considerations, assured access to the international waterways of the region, a just settlement of the refugee problem, and, of course, their respective legal claims. In 1967, J. Lawrence Hargrove, the Director of the American Society of International Law, was Senior Adviser on International Law to the United States Mission to the United Nations. In testimony before a subcommittee of the House Committee on Foreign Affairs in 1971, he said:

"The language "from territories" was regarded at the time of the adoption of the resolution as of high consequence because the proposal put forward by those espousing the Egyptian cause was withdrawal from "the territories." In the somewhat minute debate which frequently characterizes the period before the adoption of a United Nations resolution, the article "the" was regarded of considerable significance because its inclusion would seem to imply withdrawal from all territories which Israel had not occupied prior to the June war, but was at the present time occupying.

Consequently, the omission of "the" was intended on our part, as I understood it at the time, and was understood on all sides, to leave open the possibility of modifications in the lines which were occupied as of June 4, 1967, in the final settlement."​
Another Palestinian myth that needs to be set aside is the issue on the question:  *Who was the aggressor in the 1967 War*???  This becomes important because of the dogmatic concept by which that determination is made.  It is usually made on the basis of The first use of armed force.  In conventional terms (customary law) --- _prima facie _evidence of an act of aggression is in the "first shot fired."  Although the Security Council may, in conformity with the Charter, conclude that a determination that an act of aggression has been committed would not be justified in the light of other relevant circumstances, including the fact that the acts concerned or their consequences are not of sufficient gravity.  ---   When the Egyptian troops manned the guns controlling the Straits and announced that the waterway was closed to Israeli shipping, the first shot in the Six Day War was *effectively fired*.  Thus the Arabs were the aggressors. 

All together, the HoAP have very little footing for a real cause of action against Israel.  

On what basis is the "Free Palestine" mantra professed that is not the same as that of the convicted criminal?

Most Respectfully,
R


----------



## montelatici (Mar 22, 2015)

" Thus the Arabs were the aggressors."

Not according to the U.S. Government, the CIA specifically:

"Helms was awakened at 3:00 in the morning on 5 June by a call from the CIA Operations Center. The Foreign Broadcast Information Service had picked up reports that Israel had launched its attack.* (OCI soon concluded that the Israelis— contrary to their claims—had fired first.) *"

CIA Analysis of the 1967 Arab-Israeli War Central Intelligence Agency


----------



## Phoenall (Mar 22, 2015)

P F Tinmore said:


> Phoenall said:
> 
> 
> > P F Tinmore said:
> ...






 I posted it for you 3 days ago and it is the Mandate for Palestine


The Avalon Project The Palestine Mandate

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*;

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

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


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


----------



## montelatici (Mar 22, 2015)

Phoenall said:


> montelatici said:
> 
> 
> > It really doesn't matter if a group of Europeans may have decided to give land on another continent to other Europeans.  The Berlin West Africa Conference in 1884-1885 gave the Congo to King Leopold of Belgium, big deal.
> ...



Where does the word "resurected", even spelled correctly, you ignoramus, ever appear in the Mandate?  Come on bozo, find the word in the Mandate text.  The Jews came from Europe as colonists/settlers/invaders (as it turned out).  That's the one fact that no one can deny.  You can't get it through your thick skull that the people in Palestine in the mid 19th century, before the Europeans began their colonization, were the same people that were always in Palestine.  Most had been Christian before they converted to Islam.  Before becoming Christians most followed the Roman state religion (which was the wise thing to do), before that they could have been of any pre-Christian faith Jewish included.  But as in most areas of the world they remained mostly the same people.  The general ethnic make up of the Irish population did not change drastically when they were Christianized nor after the English/Scottish colonization/setllement.


----------



## Kondor3 (Mar 22, 2015)

Perhaps the time has come for Israel to complete their Reconquista.

Just bite the bullet, clean-out Gaza first, then the West Bank, and dump the evicted population across the borders into Jordan and Lebanon.

If the Israelis put on their war-face, and don't hold back, and settle for nothing less than complete and total surrender and submission, they could do it within a matter of weeks, before anybody could even begin to muster the force to stop them.

Not that anybody would, anyway.

The EU sure-as-hell isn't going to war against Israel, to help the Palestinians.

The US sure-as-hell isn't going to war against Israel, to help the Palestinians.

Neither Russia nor the Chinese are going to war against Israel, to help the Palestinians.

Hell, most of their Arab-Muslim co-religionist neighbors arenot going to go to war against Israel, to help the Palestinians.

There is no Arab cavalry coming over the hill this time, to bail-out their foolish, nasty asses.

And, if Israel throws in sufficient wergeld and compensation to help those displaced folks get re-started, elsewhere, and provides humanitarian and logistical assistance on their way out the door, once they're properly subdued and left with no choice but to comply, well, that will go a long way towards softening any non-Muslim angst over the whole thing.

A couple of years of sanctions - which various nations of the world will be only too happy to undermine - a couple of further years of lighterweight sanctions which will taper-off and fizzle into nothingness - a couple of further years of outcast or bad-boy status where the Israelis aren't invited to the annual UN Father-Daugher Dance, and it's over.

Two or three generations after that, nobody will even remember the scattered, loosely-knit so-called Palestinian 'nation' - it will become another Biafra in Man's collective memory.

Nature de-selected the Palestinians some time ago... as a so-called 'People', they're amongst the Walking Dead already - they just haven't stopped twitching yet.

Maybe it's time to get this over with, and cut through all this bullshit.


----------



## montelatici (Mar 22, 2015)

Fantasy and Science Fiction fan.


----------



## P F Tinmore (Mar 22, 2015)

Phoenall said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> > Phoenall said:
> ...


And that meant that the Jews could live in Palestine, with the Palestinians, as Palestinian citizens.


----------



## Hossfly (Mar 22, 2015)

P F Tinmore said:


> Phoenall said:
> 
> 
> > P F Tinmore said:
> ...


They probably wouldn't want to after the Palestinian factions want to cannabalize one another.



First Publish: 3/21/2015, 10:58 PM





Mahmoud Al-Zahar
Reuters
Hamas has pledged a takeover of Judea-Samaria Saturday, after one of its leaders declared "the liberation of all Palestine" - including the Palestinian Authority (PA) - a strategic area of utmost importance in implementing long-term objectives of the terror group. 

Speaking from an event to mark the release of terrorist Ismail al-Zahar from Israeli prison after a 12-year sentence, Hamas leader Mahmoud al-Zahar stated that there are "a thousand courses of action" to break the Israeli travel and import restrictions on Gaza, and he vowed to force Israel to release more terrorists, similar to the way prisoners were released as part of the Shalit deal.(i.e. through abductions - ed.).

Zahar, who has watched the relations between Gaza and other Arab states slowly improve, also imparted blame on the security cooperation between Israel and the PA for Palestinian Arab failings.


Hamas Pledges Liberation of PA From Traitors - Middle East - News - Arutz Sheva


----------



## Coyote (Mar 22, 2015)

Phoenall said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> > Phoenall said:
> ...



Good lord.  Well, this should be easy to prove then right?

Please provide links to my "anti-semitism and Jew hatred".  This should be easy for you.  Shall I wait?


----------



## Phoenall (Mar 23, 2015)

montelatici said:


> Phoenall said:
> 
> 
> > montelatici said:
> ...






 In the original treaty of course

 The phrase "national home" was intentionally used instead of "state" because of opposition to the Zionist program within the British Cabinet. The initial draft of the declaration referred to the principle _"that Palestine should be reconstituted as the National Home of the Jewish people."_[


----------



## Phoenall (Mar 23, 2015)

montelatici said:


> Fantasy and Science Fiction fan.







 Better than being an outright LIAR and islamonazi propagandist. At least we know how to read and write.


----------



## Phoenall (Mar 23, 2015)

P F Tinmore said:


> Phoenall said:
> 
> 
> > P F Tinmore said:
> ...






 All legal and above board as well, unlike the arab muslim illegal immigrants that just came and set up shop.

 How about this aspect of International law that sets out the real borders of Israel under International treaty

* Delineating the final geographical area of Palestine designated for the Jewish National Home on September 16, 1922, as described by the Mandatory*


PALESTINE



INTRODUCTORY.


POSITION, ETC.


Palestine lies on the western edge of the continent of Asia between Latitude 30º N. and 33º N., Longitude 34º 30’ E. and 35º 30’ E.

On the North it is bounded by the French Mandated Territories of Syria and Lebanon, on the East by Syria and Trans-Jordan, on the South-west by the Egyptian province of Sinai, on the South-east by the Gulf of Aqaba and on the West by the Mediterranean. The frontier with Syria was laid down by the Anglo-French Convention of the 23rd December, 1920, and its delimitation was ratified in 1923. Briefly stated, the boundaries are as follows: -

_ North_. – From Ras en Naqura on the Mediterranean eastwards to a point west of Qadas, thence in a northerly direction to Metulla, thence east to a point west of Banias.

_ East_. – From Banias in a southerly direction east of Lake Hula to Jisr Banat Ya’pub, thence along a line east of the Jordan and the Lake of Tiberias and on to El Hamme station on the Samakh-Deraa railway line, thence along the centre of the river Yarmuq to its confluence with the Jordan, thence along the centres of the Jordan, the Dead Sea and the Wadi Araba to a point on the Gulf of Aqaba two miles west of the town of Aqaba, thence along the shore of the Gulf of Aqaba to Ras Jaba.

_ South_. – From Ras Jaba in a generally north-westerly direction to the junction of the Neki-Aqaba and Gaza-Aqaba Roads, thence to a point west-north-west of Ain Maghara and thence to a point on the Mediterranean coast north-west of Rafa.

_ West_. – The Mediterranean Sea.


 Now an you produce the same for the fantasy nation of Palestine ?

 Every stone turned points to the Jews legal right to live in Palestine and the arab muslims being the invaders.


----------



## Phoenall (Mar 23, 2015)

montelatici said:


> Phoenall said:
> 
> 
> > montelatici said:
> ...






 This exert from International law should shut you up for a short time as it shows the Jews were granted the land as far back as 1922 before the major illegal immigration of the arab muslims

*Delineating the final geographical area of Palestine designated for the Jewish National Home on September 16, 1922, as described by the Mandatory*


PALESTINE



INTRODUCTORY.


POSITION, ETC.


Palestine lies on the western edge of the continent of Asia between Latitude 30º N. and 33º N., Longitude 34º 30’ E. and 35º 30’ E.

On the North it is bounded by the French Mandated Territories of Syria and Lebanon, on the East by Syria and Trans-Jordan, on the South-west by the Egyptian province of Sinai, on the South-east by the Gulf of Aqaba and on the West by the Mediterranean. The frontier with Syria was laid down by the Anglo-French Convention of the 23rd December, 1920, and its delimitation was ratified in 1923. Briefly stated, the boundaries are as follows: -

_ North_. – From Ras en Naqura on the Mediterranean eastwards to a point west of Qadas, thence in a northerly direction to Metulla, thence east to a point west of Banias.

_ East_. – From Banias in a southerly direction east of Lake Hula to Jisr Banat Ya’pub, thence along a line east of the Jordan and the Lake of Tiberias and on to El Hamme station on the Samakh-Deraa railway line, thence along the centre of the river Yarmuq to its confluence with the Jordan, thence along the centres of the Jordan, the Dead Sea and the Wadi Araba to a point on the Gulf of Aqaba two miles west of the town of Aqaba, thence along the shore of the Gulf of Aqaba to Ras Jaba.

_ South_. – From Ras Jaba in a generally north-westerly direction to the junction of the Neki-Aqaba and Gaza-Aqaba Roads, thence to a point west-north-west of Ain Maghara and thence to a point on the Mediterranean coast north-west of Rafa.

_ West_. – The Mediterranean Sea.


----------



## Phoenall (Mar 23, 2015)

Coyote said:


> Phoenall said:
> 
> 
> > Coyote said:
> ...







 Look at your own posts in regards to the Jews and Israel. If I posted the same things about the arab muslims I would be banned from the board


----------



## montelatici (Mar 23, 2015)

Now for the facts, after Phoeny's usual bullshit.  In clarifying what was meant in the Mandate (and Balfour Declaration) the British Government issued a clarifying White Paper in 1922 which declared, in part:
*
"Unauthorized statements have been made to the effect that the purpose in view is to create a wholly Jewish Palestine.* Phrases have been used such as that Palestine is to become "as Jewish as England is English." His Majesty's Government regard any such expectation as impracticable and have no such aim in view. Nor have they at any time contemplated, as appears to be feared by the Arab delegation, the disappearance or the subordination of the Arabic population, language, or culture in Palestine. *They would draw attention to the fact that the terms of the Declaration referred to do not contemplate that Palestine as a whole should be converted into a Jewish National Home,but that such a Home should be**  founded `in Palestine**...."

The Avalon Project British White Paper of June 1922*


----------



## Challenger (Mar 23, 2015)

Phoenall said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> > docmauser1 said:
> ...



Nah, you mean Zionist Israelis, thats what  Zionists do.


----------



## Challenger (Mar 23, 2015)

Phoenall said:


> Challenger said:
> 
> 
> > aris2chat said:
> ...



EVERYBODY wanted to claim it, that's why everyone is STILL fighting over it. Palestine has been fought over for thousands of yours, go read a history book (preferably not by Joan Peters or Alan Derschowitz though, they're just BS Hasbararats), a good academic history book; they do exist.


----------



## Challenger (Mar 23, 2015)

aris2chat said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> > Phoenall said:
> ...



The concept of the modern nation state first appeared in the Peace of Westphalia in 1648 CE and the political ideology of Nationalism first appeared in Great Britain in the early 18th century, but burgeoned in Europe in the post Napoleonic era. There were no real nations as we now know them before then. As you've said people identified first by their familly/tribal group, then by their town or city-state, them by their region or monarch.


----------



## Challenger (Mar 23, 2015)

Dogmaphobe said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> > When does a people become a "people" worthy of being recognized as such?  Is it arbritrary depending on whether you approve of the group or not?
> ...


----------



## Challenger (Mar 23, 2015)

RoccoR said:


> ... The Arab Palestinians, having declined to form the precursor institutions on more than three occasions, by declining to cooperation in developing precursors to self-governing institution, discarded the right to consulted on all matters relating to immigration, Arab civil and religious rights, on which it was recognized that “the views of the Arab community were entitled to special consideration.”   Even in 1947, the Arab Palestinian the Arab Higher Committee refused to cooperate to be an advisor to the identified successor government; not being denied a voice --- but instead again declining to be an active voice.
> 
> The nature of the Arab Palestinian is much different than you are attempting to portray them.  That is the difference --- the propaganda is the attmept to cast them as the perpetual victim --- when the reality is they short themselves in the foot.
> 
> ...



Firstly Arab Palestinians did form part of the government of Palestine until it became obvious to them that the British were intent on enabling the Zionist Jewish immigrants to disposess them of their country. They refused to be willing participants in their own destruction. They attempted their own "war of independance" in 1936 which was brutally surpressed by the british aided by Zionist militias and death squads. By 1945 the top Palestinian civil and political leadership was either dead, in prison or in exile, so couldn't meaninfully "participate" in anything.


----------



## Challenger (Mar 23, 2015)

Phoenall said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> > Phoenall said:
> ...



What "Cathederal of bones" in Spain?


----------



## Phoenall (Mar 23, 2015)

montelatici said:


> Now for the facts, after Phoeny's usual bullshit.  In clarifying what was meant in the Mandate (and Balfour Declaration) the British Government issued a clarifying White Paper in 1922 which declared, in part:
> *
> "Unauthorized statements have been made to the effect that the purpose in view is to create a wholly Jewish Palestine.* Phrases have been used such as that Palestine is to become "as Jewish as England is English." His Majesty's Government regard any such expectation as impracticable and have no such aim in view. Nor have they at any time contemplated, as appears to be feared by the Arab delegation, the disappearance or the subordination of the Arabic population, language, or culture in Palestine. *They would draw attention to the fact that the terms of the Declaration referred to do not contemplate that Palestine as a whole should be converted into a Jewish National Home,but that such a Home should be**  founded `in Palestine**...."
> 
> The Avalon Project British White Paper of June 1922*







 Another islamonazi idiot that does not realise that a White Paper is not a binding document, all it is in reality is a preamble for a debate or consultation on the subject submitted by one person. It never got past the white paper stage and was subsequently shelved .

 Want to try again Haniya only this time using actual legal documents and not some  unalterable policy commitment.


 See here

White paper - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia


The term "white paper" originated with the British government, and many point to the Churchill White Paper of 1922 as the earliest well-known example under this name.[_citation needed_] In British government it is usually the less extensive version of the so-called "blue book", both terms being derived from the colour of the document's cover.[2]

White Papers are a "... tool of participatory democracy ... not [an] unalterable policy commitment".[4] "White Papers have tried to perform the dual role of presenting firm government policies while at the same time inviting opinions upon them


----------



## Phoenall (Mar 23, 2015)

Challenger said:


> Phoenall said:
> 
> 
> > Coyote said:
> ...






 How about a LINK from a non partisan source then, say the last census of Israel or "Palestine" ?


Strange isn't it that the arab muslims in gaza and the west bank are increasing at a rate of 19% ( highest rate in the world ) while the Christians have decreased by 90% due to ethnic cleansing by arab muslims.


----------



## Phoenall (Mar 23, 2015)

Challenger said:


> Phoenall said:
> 
> 
> > Challenger said:
> ...






 Only when the LoN decided to give it to the Jews for their NATIONAL HOME. It was not fought over as no one bothered with it as a place to raise families, it was just the sight of the battles for control of small parts like Jerusalem.  I have read many works by well renowned academics who state that the holy land was mud brick hovels around watering holes and miles of uninhabited desert. They also saw that the few arab muslims there were nomadic tribesmen who wandered around following the food for their animals.


----------



## Phoenall (Mar 23, 2015)

Challenger said:


> aris2chat said:
> 
> 
> > Coyote said:
> ...






Apart from the great empires of years ago when whole areas of land saw themselves as belonging to a particular group, like the Greeks, Trojans, Romans and Israelites. When the empires of old were "killed" off the people still clung to their old system as shown by the Roman empire. Even today we still form family groups and tribes based around cities and towns, just look at the following for football teams. They descend into tribal wars sometimes


Challenger said:


> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> > ... The Arab Palestinians, having declined to form the precursor institutions on more than three occasions, by declining to cooperation in developing precursors to self-governing institution, discarded the right to consulted on all matters relating to immigration, Arab civil and religious rights, on which it was recognized that “the views of the Arab community were entitled to special consideration.”   Even in 1947, the Arab Palestinian the Arab Higher Committee refused to cooperate to be an advisor to the identified successor government; not being denied a voice --- but instead again declining to be an active voice.
> ...








 LINK ? ? ? ?


 And don't forget to include the massacres of the Jews from 1850 onwards ?


----------



## Phoenall (Mar 23, 2015)

Challenger said:


> Phoenall said:
> 
> 
> > Coyote said:
> ...






 The one adorned with the skeletons of the massacred Christians and Jews at the hands of the muslims


----------



## Coyote (Mar 23, 2015)

Challenger said:


> Phoenall said:
> 
> 
> > Coyote said:
> ...



Never heard of it before but it piqued my curiousity....here's what I found:

Capela de Ossos Bone Chapel Atlas Obscura

9 of the Strangest Bone Churches of Europe BootsnAll

I think he's referring to this, but of course ommitting a bit of history:
The Skull Cathedral of Otranto Where the Bones of 800 Martyrs Adorn the Walls
_
The Ottoman Wars were motivated by territory gains and eradicating the Christian faith while spreading the Muslim one. Sound familiar? Just 200 hundred years earlier, the Christian Crusades (1095-1291) had led to an invasion of Northern Africa, with the crusaders’ goal to claim territory and eradicate the Muslim faith while spreading the Christian one. And the saga continues…_​


----------



## P F Tinmore (Mar 23, 2015)

Phoenall said:


> montelatici said:
> 
> 
> > Phoenall said:
> ...


OK, you have defined Palestine's borders.

Now show where that land was given exclusively to the Jews.


----------



## Coyote (Mar 23, 2015)

Phoenall said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> > Phoenall said:
> ...



Then it should be easy to provide examples of my posts to support your claim...come on Phoenal, I'm counting on you here


----------



## aris2chat (Mar 23, 2015)

Challenger said:


> Phoenall said:
> 
> 
> > Coyote said:
> ...



9 of the Strangest Bone Churches of Europe BootsnAll


----------



## Coyote (Mar 23, 2015)

aris2chat said:


> Challenger said:
> 
> 
> > Phoenall said:
> ...



I have to admit...I find the concept downright creepy....


----------



## Coyote (Mar 23, 2015)

Phoenall said:


> Challenger said:
> 
> 
> > Phoenall said:
> ...



According to what I read, there were no Jews involved in the death toll - they were 800 Catholics who refused to convert.

What you don't seem to realize is conversion to the faith du jour was a requirement of invading forces in that era - don't convert, then die.


----------



## Dogmaphobe (Mar 23, 2015)

Coyote said:


> According to what I read, there were no Jews involved in the death toll - they were 800 Catholics who refused to convert.
> 
> What you don't seem to realize is conversion to the faith du jour was a requirement of invading forces in that era - don't convert, then die.



Ah -- so THAT'S why you are nothing but a mouthpiece for Jihad.  It's because their convert or die attitudes have been so well established all these years and so you are A OK with it. . 

Thanks for clearing that one up.


----------



## aris2chat (Mar 23, 2015)

Coyote said:


> aris2chat said:
> 
> 
> > Challenger said:
> ...



Halloween ride through the cathedral of bones?  The city of bones?  The cave of death?

or just a way of honoring their ancestors, like visiting a grave yard.


----------



## RoccoR (Mar 23, 2015)

Challenger,  et al,

Yes --- I'm not sure we are talking about the same thing.

The Arabs of Palestine not once participated in the active governance process of Palestine or helped to establish self-governing institutions - NOT ONCE (From 1922 to 1947).



Challenger said:


> Firstly Arab Palestinians did form part of the government of Palestine until it became obvious to them that the British were intent on enabling the Zionist Jewish immigrants to disposess them of their country. They refused to be willing participants in their own destruction. They attempted their own "war of independance" in 1936 which was brutally surpressed by the british aided by Zionist militias and death squads. By 1945 the top Palestinian civil and political leadership was either dead, in prison or in exile, so couldn't meaninfully "participate" in anything.


*(OBSERVATION)*



			
				The Political History of the British Administration of Palestine said:
			
		

> 22. Later in 1923, a third attempt was made to establish an institution through which the Arab population of Palestine could be brought into cooperation with the government. The mandatory Power now proposed “the establishment of an Arab Agency in Palestine which will occupy a position exactly analogous to that accorded to the Jewish Agency”. The Arab Agency would have the right to be consulted on all matters relating to immigration, on which it was recognised that “the views of the Arab community were entitled to special consideration”. The Arab leaders declined that this offer on the ground that it would not satisfy the aspirations of the Arab people. They added that, never having recognised the status of the Jewish Agency, they had no desire for the establishment of an Arab Agency on the same basis.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



*(COMMENT)*

The "Jewish Agency," realizing that Article 6 of the Mandate only got their foot in the door, leaped at every opportunity that availed itself in the establishment of self-governing institutions in Palestine.  On the hand --- the Arabs of Palestine, which opposed the Mandate and did not recognize the Mandate and its authority, rejected every opportunity to have an equal voice and express both ideas and concerns in the council --- and the administration --- equivalent to that of the Jewish Agency.

For the Jewish Agency, this positive effort paid-off in November (1930), when the mandatory Government invited members of the Jewish Agency to confer with them on the Sir John Hope-Simson’s estimates and subsequent controversy --- which appeared to be a reversal of policy in regards to the establishment of the Jewish National Home. The outcome of the conversations was a letter addressed by the Prime Minister to Dr Weizmann on the 13 February 1931.

Again, from the perspective of the Mandatory, acts of terrorism committed by Jews ceased altogether with the outbreak of war, and the armed Arab bands melted away before the end of the year. The Jewish Agency called on the Jewish community to offer its full assistance to the mandatory Power, and similar appeals were made in the Arabic press. In the course of the war the Jews provided 27,000 recruits for the British services with a Jewish Brigade formed.  As Farouk Qaddoumi _(AKA: Abu al-Lutf, is Secretary-general of Fatah's central committee and PLO's political department) _said in an interview (December 2013) when he removed any doubt over Arab support for Nazi Germany:  "We supported the NAZI's in WWII." 

The Arabs of Palestine did nothing to further their support toward self-government in the territory to which the Mandate applied.

Most Respectfully,
R


----------



## Coyote (Mar 23, 2015)

Dogmaphobe said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> > According to what I read, there were no Jews involved in the death toll - they were 800 Catholics who refused to convert.
> ...



Who said I was ok with it?

Work on your reading skills.


----------



## P F Tinmore (Mar 23, 2015)

RoccoR said:


> Challenger,  et al,
> 
> Yes --- I'm not sure we are talking about the same thing.
> 
> ...


The Arabs of Palestine not once participated in the active governance process of Palestine or helped to establish self-governing institutions - NOT ONCE (From 1922 to 1947).​
Indeed, they did not want to legitimize the colonial project by taking any part in it.


----------



## RoccoR (Mar 23, 2015)

P F Tinmore, et al,

You are trying to pull a fast one.



P F Tinmore said:


> OK, you have defined Palestine's borders.
> 
> Now show where that land was given exclusively to the Jews.


*(COMMENT)*

None of the Nations created from the various Mandates, can meet that requirement.  WHY (you ask)?  Because self-determination is based on the action of the free population that exercises it.  It is a much different thing than when the original territory was surrendered by the Ottoman Empire in 1920; or when the US gave the Philippines their independence; or when Alaska was purchased from Russia.

Just as the current State of Palestine has no formal international boundaries at all (no one inch) --- Israel has two sets of international boundaries (with Jordan and Egypt) and two demarcation lines pending peace negotiations (with Syria and Lebanon).

The question might be asked, what does the State of Palestine have?

Most Respectfully,
R


----------



## P F Tinmore (Mar 23, 2015)

RoccoR said:


> P F Tinmore, et al,
> 
> You are trying to pull a fast one.
> 
> ...


Nice deflection.

Now show where that land was given exclusively to the Jews.


----------



## RoccoR (Mar 23, 2015)

P F Tinmore,  et al,

OH, give me a break.  You can't ask for something that doesn't exist and then claim deflection.  It is a fallacy _(fallacious argument)_. 



P F Tinmore said:


> Nice deflection.
> 
> Now show where that land was given exclusively to the Jews.


*(COMMENT)*

It was not "given" ---

You are asking for something that is not part of self-determination process.

The territory described under the Partition Plan was declared independent under the right of self determination.  And that was altered by the invasion of the Arab States.  Thus by 1949, the territory controlled by Israel was determine sovereign through the war of independence against act of aggression in the Arab World.

BTW:  No where does it say that the territory is exclusively Arab. 

Most Respectfully,
R


----------



## P F Tinmore (Mar 23, 2015)

RoccoR said:


> P F Tinmore,  et al,
> 
> OH, give me a break.  You can't ask for something that doesn't exist and then claim deflection.  It is a fallacy _(fallacious argument)_.
> 
> ...


Indeed, Palestine belonged to the Palestinians who were Muslims, Christians, and Jews.

Not the same Jews who came down from Europe to take over the country.


----------



## P F Tinmore (Mar 23, 2015)

RoccoR said:


> P F Tinmore,  et al,
> 
> OH, give me a break.  You can't ask for something that doesn't exist and then claim deflection.  It is a fallacy _(fallacious argument)_.
> 
> ...


OH, give me a break. You can't ask for something that doesn't exist and then claim deflection. It is a fallacy _(fallacious argument)_.​
No it isn't. It is repeatedly said that the land was given to the Jews.

Who owned that land?

Where is the treaty ceding it to the Jews?


----------



## RoccoR (Mar 23, 2015)

P F Tinmore,  et al,

Again you are mixing "Apples" and "Oranges."



P F Tinmore said:


> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> > P F Tinmore,  et al,
> ...


*(COMMENT)*

Ownership is a real estate concepts.  

When you are talking about sovereignty --- ownership plays no part.

The treaties that establish the Israel-Egyptian border (Article II) and the Israel-Jordanian border (Article III) are a matter of record and covers 75% to 80% of the perimeter.  

The Armistice Agreements between Israel-Lebanon and Israel-Syria are still in place because the war is not concluded.  The are covered by Declaration on Principles of International Law concerning Friendly Relations and Co-operation among States [A/RES/25/2625 (XXV)].


Every State has the duty to refrain from the threat or use of force to violate the existing international boundaries of another State or as a means of solving international disputes, including territorial disputes and problems concerning frontiers of States.

Every State likewise has the duty to refrain from the threat or use of force to violate international lines of demarcation, such as armistice lines, established by or pursuant to an international agreement to which it is a party or which it is otherwise bound to respect. Nothing in the foregoing shall be construed as prejudicing the positions of the parties concerned with regard to the status and effects of such lines under their special regimes or as affecting their temporary character.

The question as to who owns the land is irrelevant in the determination of sovereignty.

There is no entity that has either a treaty or armistice with the Arab Palestinian.

Most Respectfully,
R


----------



## P F Tinmore (Mar 23, 2015)

RoccoR said:


> P F Tinmore,  et al,
> 
> Again you are mixing "Apples" and "Oranges."
> 
> ...


Ownership is a real estate concepts.​
So the French do not own France?

That's good to know. Who does?


----------



## RoccoR (Mar 23, 2015)

P F Tinmore,  et al,

Boy --- you do like to twist the words around.



P F Tinmore said:


> Ownership is a real estate concepts.​
> So the French do not own France?
> 
> That's good to know. Who does?


*(COMMENT)*

Well -- I did not say that.  I said it was irrelevant to the issue of Sovereignty.  

The French People do not own all the property in the French Republic.  For instance Embassies are owned by other countries and are sovereign unto other countries.  The Hilton Hotel _(2 Palce de la Defense)_ is partially owned by the French Businessman and is in sovereign French territory.  The The European Space Agency _(ESA ; French: Agence spatiale européenne, ASE)_ is a special intergovernmental activity, with multiple EU members with a vested interest; but still in  French sovereignty.  And of course the French interest in the ESA/ASE is own collectively by the French people as is most government property and real estate.  _(The French Republic nor the French People need not "own" the land for the land to be sovereign to France.)  _The US and Canada have treaties with Indian Tribes in which sovereignty is of special interest.

French sovereign territory is defined by the various treaties it has with the adjacent countries.    

Most Respectfully,
R


----------



## aris2chat (Mar 23, 2015)

RoccoR said:


> P F Tinmore,  et al,
> 
> Boy --- you do like to twist the words around.
> 
> ...



verbal macrame


----------



## P F Tinmore (Mar 23, 2015)

RoccoR said:


> P F Tinmore,  et al,
> 
> Boy --- you do like to twist the words around.
> 
> ...


So much smoke to dodge an issue.

French sovereign territory is defined by the various treaties it has with the adjacent countries.​
And the French collectively "own" that. Nobody else.


----------



## Phoenall (Mar 23, 2015)

Coyote said:


> Challenger said:
> 
> 
> > Phoenall said:
> ...






 And it keeps on happening with the muslims trying to take over the world in the name of islam. Do you want a BBC video posting of a muslim telling this to a British politician, or will you deny it because it is on you tube


----------



## Phoenall (Mar 23, 2015)

P F Tinmore said:


> Phoenall said:
> 
> 
> > montelatici said:
> ...






 Read the header as that says just that

* Delineating the final geographical area of Palestine designated for the Jewish National Home on September 16, 1922, as described by the Mandatory

 No mention of any arab muslim nation of Palestine anywhere in the Mandate for Palestine*


----------



## Phoenall (Mar 23, 2015)

Coyote said:


> Phoenall said:
> 
> 
> > Coyote said:
> ...






 Done just yesterday by another poster, don't have the time or inclination to trawl for your posts


----------



## Phoenall (Mar 23, 2015)

Coyote said:


> Phoenall said:
> 
> 
> > Challenger said:
> ...






 And is still practised by the muslims today, which is why we see so many horrific videos of beheadings at the hands of muslims.


----------



## Coyote (Mar 23, 2015)

Phoenall said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> > Phoenall said:
> ...



By some.


----------



## Coyote (Mar 23, 2015)

Phoenall said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> > Phoenall said:
> ...




Really?  Where was that?


----------



## Challenger (Mar 23, 2015)

Phoenall said:


> I have read many works by well renowned academics...



Name them and their books that you've allegedly read.


----------



## Phoenall (Mar 23, 2015)

P F Tinmore said:


> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> > P F Tinmore,  et al,
> ...






Sorry to spoil your day but many parts of many nations are not owned by the nationals or nations they are in. An example would be the many US military


Coyote said:


> Phoenall said:
> 
> 
> > Coyote said:
> ...






 By most by command of their religion, to do otherwise puts them at risk of death. Try researching islam for a change instead of just repeating what the muslims say parrot fashion.


----------



## Phoenall (Mar 23, 2015)

Coyote said:


> Phoenall said:
> 
> 
> > Coyote said:
> ...






 On this board.


----------



## Phoenall (Mar 23, 2015)

Challenger said:


> Phoenall said:
> 
> 
> > I have read many works by well renowned academics...
> ...






 Define Zionist and Zionism in your own words first........................


----------



## Challenger (Mar 23, 2015)

Phoenall said:


> Challenger said:
> 
> 
> > aris2chat said:
> ...



Amazon.co.uk palestine and the arab-israeli conflict Books


----------



## Challenger (Mar 23, 2015)

Phoenall said:


> Challenger said:
> 
> 
> > Phoenall said:
> ...



No such place.


----------



## Challenger (Mar 23, 2015)

Coyote said:


> Challenger said:
> 
> 
> > Phoenall said:
> ...



Otranto is in Italy, not Spain. That's what threw me, but that's all you can expect from Phoney, he makes it up as he goes along.


----------



## P F Tinmore (Mar 23, 2015)

Phoenall said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> > Phoenall said:
> ...


*Jewish National Home​*
What does that mean?


----------



## RoccoR (Mar 23, 2015)

P F Tinmore,  et al,

No...  That would be wrong.



P F Tinmore said:


> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> > P F Tinmore,  et al,
> ...


*(COMMENT)*

Ownership and sovereignty are not related in most cases.

I can own land in Canada, it doesn't affect the sovereignty; still Canadian Sovereignty.

A Canadian can own land in the US.  It doesn't effect sovereignty; still American Sovereignty.

Just because the land is inside a specific sovereignty, does not mean that sovereignty owns it.  Ownership does not generally affect the sovereignty.

Most Respectfully,
R


----------



## RoccoR (Mar 23, 2015)

P F Tinmore,  et al,

Yes, what was that.



P F Tinmore said:


> *Jewish National Home*​
> What does that mean?


*(REFERENCE)*

06/03/1922 "Churchill White Paper" - UK Secretary of State for the Colonies

"They would draw attention to the fact that the terms of the Declaration referred to *do not contemplate that Palestine as a whole should be converted into a Jewish National Home,* but that such a Home should be founded in Palestine."

When it is asked *what is meant by the development of the Jewish National Home in Palestine*, it may be answered that it is not the imposition of a Jewish nationality upon the inhabitants of Palestine as a whole, but the further development of the existing Jewish community, with the assistance of Jews in other parts of the world, in order that it may become a center in which the Jewish people as a whole may take, on grounds of religion and race, an interest and a pride. But in order that this community should have the best prospect of free development and provide full opportunity for the Jewish people to display its capacities, *it is essential that it should know that it is in Palestine as of right and not on sufferance. That is the reason why it is necessary that the existence of a Jewish National Home in Palestine should be internationally guaranteed, and that it should be formally recognized to rest upon ancient historic connection.*​
In the Churchill White Paper, two points were made very clear:

The establishment of the Jewish National Home would not include a "forced" imposition of Jewish Nationality on the Arab Palestinian.
The Jewish National Home would not include the entire landscape of the territory to which the Mandate applied _(Article 25 - for the Hashemite Kingdom)_.
Jewish National Home in Palestine should be internationally *guaranteed.*
It may become a* center *in which the Jewish people as a whole may take.
08/12/1922 Mandate C. 529. M. 314.1922. VI.  League of Nations Mandate for Palestine
_Note that Article 4 and Article 6 and Article 7 --- are essential in the understanding the magnitude.  Key Points:

First --- "*it is essential that it should know that it is in Palestine *​__*as of right and not on sufferance*__*.*_​
_Jewish agency shall be recognized as a public body_
_The purpose of advising and co-operating with the Administration of Palestine in such --- as may affect the establishment of the Jewish national home_
_Economic, _
_Social _
_and other matters _

_Secure the co-operation of all Jews _
_Willing to assist in the establishment of the Jewish national home._

_Facilitate Jewish immigration_
_Shall encourage close settlement by Jews on the land, including _
_State lands and _
_waste lands not required for public purposes._


Facilitate the acquisition of Palestinian citizenship 
Jews who take up their permanent residence in Palestine

*(COMMENT)*

Yes, there are key factors.

When it talks about Jewish Nationality, it protects the Arab population from it being forced upon them, but does not exclude the use of Jewish Nationality _(suggesting a state)(it cannot impose Jewish Nationality on the Arab community)_.  The over all magnitude of the Jewish National Home is much greater than just a few farms or parcels of land.  The magnitude is reflected in the fact that immigration and land acquisition, along with citizenship are required.  It is of a magnitude that it will have Economic and Social implications.

The meaning does not demand an independent nation, but it certainly does not preclude such a solution for the Jewish National Home.

Most Respectfully,
R


----------



## P F Tinmore (Mar 24, 2015)

RoccoR said:


> P F Tinmore,  et al,
> 
> No...  That would be wrong.
> 
> ...


Good post.

The theory of popular sovereignty drives customary international law. It is the people who are sovereign. Governments are sovereign as extensions of the people. governments derive their legitimacy from the will of the people.

Look at the standard list of the peoples rights. They are:

The right to self determination without external interference.

The right to independence and sovereignty.

The right to territorial integrity.​
Who has these rights? The tenets of a state tell us. A state has a permanent population and a defined territory. The people of the place have these rights. The people from another place do not.

Territorial integrity is important. It is reiterated in several places. Acts of aggression are illegal. Acquiring territory through war is illegal. Annexing occupied territory is illegal.

There is no question as to who "owns" land.


----------



## Challenger (Mar 24, 2015)

RoccoR said:


> Challenger,  et al,
> 
> Yes --- I'm not sure we are talking about the same thing.
> 
> ...



Not quite. Your post fails to explain the reasons the Palestinian Muslim majority rejected these attempts and also omits this section from your own source: 

"71. Meanwhile the Administration was preparing for a renewed attempt to establish self-governing institutions in Palestine. Elections were held in all the municipalities following the enactment of a new Municipal Corporations Ordinance in January , 1934. At the end of 1935, the High Commissioner communicated to the Jewish and Arab leaders proposals for the creation of a Legislative Council...

72. This project was rejected as unacceptable by the Zionists. The Arabs, although critical of its details, were ready to discuss it..."

A AC.14 8 of 2 October 1947

Ultimately, the Zionists were happy to accept any measure that furthered their agenda while unsurprisingly the Palestinian majority rejected such measures, and vice versa. Palestinian Muslims chose their own path to self government, the fact it did not necessarily adhere to institutions that Britain and the Western powers wanted or envisaged is irrelevant. Did they make bad decisions? With hindsight, yes they did, but at the time it was touch and go that the British would abandon Palestine in 1938-39; had they done so we might well have a peaceful and stable Palestine and a less radicalised Middle East in general. But that's just speculation.


----------



## Phoenall (Mar 24, 2015)

Challenger said:


> Phoenall said:
> 
> 
> > Challenger said:
> ...







 Cant see any proof of anything in your link to a commercial outlet, I believe that advertising on this board is against the rules under zone 2.


----------



## Phoenall (Mar 24, 2015)

Challenger said:


> Phoenall said:
> 
> 
> > Challenger said:
> ...






 Yes there is


----------



## Phoenall (Mar 24, 2015)

Challenger said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> > Challenger said:
> ...






 There are "bone" churches all over Europe  if you look, just that there are many in Spain from the Islamic period using the bones of martyred |Christians and Jews.


----------



## Phoenall (Mar 24, 2015)

P F Tinmore said:


> Phoenall said:
> 
> 
> > P F Tinmore said:
> ...






 Same thing as the arab national home, Syrian national home, Iraqi national home and American national home. The homeland of the people who live there. The arab muslims had been given 5 national homes taking up 99.9% of Palestine as agreed with the British prior to WW1.


----------



## Challenger (Mar 24, 2015)

Phoenall said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> > Phoenall said:
> ...



Drivel. "National homes" are not "Nation states".


----------



## Challenger (Mar 24, 2015)

Phoenall said:


> Challenger said:
> 
> 
> > Phoenall said:
> ...



I'll take that as an admission you haven't read any "works by well renowned academics" and are just making things up as usual.


----------



## Challenger (Mar 24, 2015)

Phoenall said:


> Challenger said:
> 
> 
> > Coyote said:
> ...



Yes, the Roman Catholic Spanish are well known for placing the bones of Jewish people in their churches, although I suppose they could have been left-overs from the Inquisition. oh, BTW, we've moved well beyond this little "diversion", but it's only polite to let the slow catch up.


----------



## Dogmaphobe (Mar 24, 2015)

Coyote said:


> Who said I was ok with it?
> 
> Work on your reading skills.



Tens of thousands of your postings across multiple boards say you are o.k. with it.

When Muslims in Britain rape British children as a product of their supremacist mind set, you defend them while attacking anybody who objects. When a fat Islamist toad says she wants all Jews in one place so they can be exterminated more easily, you defend her while demanding people attack Jews, instead.  Whenever ANY discussion appears that revolves around Muslim behavior, you are right there like Pavlov's pooch salivating away with your conditioned responses. 

 A Muslim can do no wrong in your myopic little world, and every time they do, you are right there trying to change the subject to an attack on somebody else, instead.


----------



## RoccoR (Mar 24, 2015)

P F Tinmore,  et al,

Yes, but there is still a gap between us pertaining to the application of these concepts as it applies to the territories to which the former Mandate applied.  And --- when did the Palestinians being to assume these "rights."

Where in international law does it discuss these rights?



P F Tinmore said:


> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> > P F Tinmore,  et al,
> ...


*(COMMENT)*

You and I have very different ideas about what sovereignty means --- and what it is --- and how it relates to people and territorial integrity.

*Sovereignty*
_First published Sat May 31, 2003; substantive revision Tue Jun 8, 2010
_
Sovereignty, though its meanings have varied across history, also has a core meaning, _supreme authority within a territory_. It is a modern notion of political authority. Historical variants can be understood along three dimensions — the holder of sovereignty, the absoluteness of sovereignty, and the internal and external dimensions of sovereignty. The state is the political institution in which sovereignty is embodied. An assemblage of states forms a sovereign states system. 

Each component of this definition highlights an important aspect of the concept. First, a holder of sovereignty possesses authority. That is to say, the person or entity does not merely wield coercive power, defined as A's ability to cause B to do what he would otherwise not do. Authority is rather what philosopher R.P. Wolff proposed: “the right to command and correlatively the right to be obeyed” (Wolff, 1990, 20). What is most important here is the term “right,” connoting legitimacy. A holder of sovereignty derives authority from some mutually acknowledged source of legitimacy — natural law, a divine mandate, hereditary law, a constitution, even international law. In the contemporary era, some body of law is ubiquitously the source of sovereignty.

But if sovereignty is a matter of authority, it is not a matter of mere authority, but of supreme authority. Supremacy is what makes the constitution of the United States superior to the government of Pennsylvania, or any holder of sovereignty different from a police chief or corporate executive. The holder of sovereignty is superior to all authorities under its purview. Supremacy, too, is endemic to modernity. During the Middle Ages, manifold authorities held some sort of legal warrant for their authority, whether feudal, canonical, or otherwise, but very rarely did such warrant confer supremacy.

A final ingredient of sovereignty is territoriality, also a feature of political authority in modernity. Territoriality is a principle by which members of a community are to be defined. It specifies that their membership derives from their residence within borders. It is a powerful principle, for it defines membership in a way that may not correspond with identity. The borders of a sovereign state may not at all circumscribe a “people” or a “nation,” and may in fact encompass several of these identities, as national self-determination and irredentist movements make evident. It is rather by simple virtue of their location within geographic borders that people belong to a state and fall under the authority of its ruler. It is within a geographic territory that modern sovereigns are supremely authoritative.​
Understanding the implications that "sovereignty" emits --- is the first step in understanding the relationship between the Arab Palestinian and the territory they inhabit.  Being an long term inhabitant does not imply sovereignty or even the right to sovereignty.   Remembering that _“Sovereignty itself is, of course, not subject to law,  for it is the author and source of law; …..”_



P F Tinmore said:


> Look at the standard list of the peoples rights. They are:
> 
> The right to self determination without external interference.
> 
> ...



*NOTE:*  (See Specific Comments Below)
_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  29 NOV 78​
_Reaffirms _the inalienable right of all peoples under colonial rule, foreign domination and alien subjugation to self-determination, freedom and independence in conformity with General Assembly Resolution 1514 (XV) and other relevant resolutions of the United Nations;  A/RES/3246 (XXIX)  29 November 1974​
1._ Affirms _the legitimacy of the struggle of peoples under colonial and alien domination recognized as being entitled to the right of self-determination to restore to themselves that right by any means at their disposal;
2._ Recognizes _the right of peoples under colonial and alien domination in the legitimate exercise of their right to self-determination to seek and receive all kinds of moral and material assistance, in accordance with the resolutions of the United Nations and the spirit of the Charter of the United Nations;
3. _Calls upon _all Governments that deny the right to self-determination of peoples under colonial and alien domination to recognize and observe that right in accordance with the relevant international instruments and the principles and spirit of the Charter;
4. _Considers _that the acquisition and retention of territory in contravention of the right of the people of that territory to self-determination is inadmissible and a gross violation of the Charter;
5._ Condemns _those Governments that deny the right to self-determination of peoples recognized as being entitled to it, especially of the peoples of southern Africa and Palestine; A/RES/2649 30 NOV 70​
*(COMMENT)*

The Universal Declaration of Human Rights [General Assembly resolution 217 (III)] (1948)(UDHR) the standard list as you say, in which "Everyone is entitled to all the rights and freedoms set forth in this Declaration, without distinction of any kind, such as race, color, sex, language, religion, political or other opinion, national or social origin, property, birth or other status. Furthermore, no distinction shall be made on the basis of the political, jurisdictional or international status of the country or territory to which a person belongs, whether it be independent, trust, non-self-governing or under any other limitation of sovereignty.

HOWEVER, if you examine the 30 Articles of UDHR, you will soon discover that individually or collectively these three "standard rights" you've identified are NOT included as part of the UDHR.

Self-determination became documented in 1945 when it was included in the United Nations Charter.  However the principle argument against its universal application is that it applied to existing states under the Charter and not to independent, trusts, non-self-governing entities, or other limited sovereignties. Nor would it apply to break-away peoples or national groups. However, self-determination has evolved over time from being an undefined principle to a conceptual right, after the 1960 UN Declaration on the Granting of Independence to Colonial Peoples A/RES/1514(XV), when the term came to denote decolonization; hence the colonization mantra by the Arab Palestinian. Still, under General Assembly Resolution 1514 (XV) self-determination applied to territories and not to peoples.   While pro-democracies champions argue that sovereign powers are delegated to the agencies of government from the people, sovereignty itself remains with the people, by whom and for whom all government exists and acts.”  However, that is only in the limited case of a functioning democracy or a strong stable republic.

In point of fact, other than Article 2(4) of the UN Charter, there is not one single international law that supports specifically “unilateral secessions.”  The UN Declaration on Principles of International Law concerning Friendly Relations and Co-operation among States (1970) and the UN Vienna Declaration and Programme of Action (1993) are just two examples of pronouncements that endorse the right of self-determination of peoples. And the new argument arises that, such a right is not intended to authorize actions in order to dismember or impair the territorial integrity or political unity of a sovereign state (in our case:  Israel).  Besides, such international documents are declarations, and not treaties or conventions, what makes them non-binding to the signing states, according to the international law.



P F Tinmore said:


> Who has these rights? The tenets of a state tell us. A state has a permanent population and a defined territory. The people of the place have these rights. The people from another place do not.
> 
> Territorial integrity is important. It is reiterated in several places. Acts of aggression are illegal. Acquiring territory through war is illegal. Annexing occupied territory is illegal.


*(COMMENT)*

Yes, it is agreed to an extent that there are some important legal concepts and basis that back up the territorial integrity of a sovereign state, such as:

Article 1(2), Article 2(4), and Article 55 of the UN Charter; 
"Equal rights" and "self-determination" of peoples, are two separate concepts.  It does not establish "self-determination" as a "right to the people" but a motive for action by the people.

Article 3(b) of the African Union Charter; 
Defend the sovereignty, territorial integrity and independence of its Member States.  _(Not the dismemberment or act to impair the territorial integrity or political unity of another sovereign state; it is not applicable to independent, trusts, non-self-governing entities, or other limited sovereignties.)_

Article 1 and Article 3 of the Montevideo Convention (1933).
This is a separate and distinct conversation pertaining to the specific application of the Convention, even if it applied to the Middle East, as to the meaning and intent.




P F Tinmore said:


> There is no question as to who "owns" land.


*(COMMENT)*

Who "owns the land" is irrelevant to the questions of:

Sovereignty
Territorial Integrity
Ownership is a matter of specific property tort law that governs the various forms of ownership and tenancy in real property and in personal property, within the common civil law system.  It is not a component or determining element in the case of international territorial integrity or in the recognition of sovereignty.

Most Respectfully,
R


----------



## aris2chat (Mar 24, 2015)

Challenger said:


> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> > Challenger,  et al,
> ...



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

Many arabs stayed and now live as Israelis.  Most of those that left did so at arab urging.  Arabs created the refugee problem rather than find a solution or relocated the refugees to land the jews of the region were forced out of.


----------



## Coyote (Mar 24, 2015)

Dogmaphobe said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> > Who said I was ok with it?
> ...



Well good - then you should be able to come with links 



> When Muslims in Britain rape British children as a product of their supremacist mind set, *you defend them *while attacking anybody who objects.



Really now?  That's quite an accusation.  Please link to anyplace where I defended rapists or admit you are once again making shit up.



> *When a fat Islamist toad says she wants all Jews in one place so they can be exterminated more easily, you defend her while demanding people attack Jews*, instead.  Whenever ANY discussion appears that revolves around Muslim behavior, you are right there like Pavlov's pooch salivating away with your conditioned responses.



Interesting spin you put on that discussion.  I defended her based on her *rebuttal*.  Where did I "demand" people attack Jews? * I didn't you lying ass. * I attacked the person *who was doing the interview*.  Does he represent all Jews? *No.*  Is he *above reproach* because he's Jewish? *No.*

It's amusing though that you refused to condemn an Israeli MP for saying something similar.  Maybe because she's "hot" I guess (according to your buddy), and not Muslim, or maybe you accept her rebuttal but won't give the Muslim student the same chance.   Like a typical mysoganist,  you call  her a "fat toad".



> A Muslim can do no wrong in your myopic little world, and every time they do, you are right there trying to change the subject to an attack on somebody else, instead.



This coming from someone who's sole purpose seems to be to villify Muslims simply because they are Muslims.  Please, give it a rest.  Oh, and while you're at it why don't you find some actual quotes to support your claims?

I'm pretty sure they will never appear...*because they never do, do they?*

Your debate style consists of little more than personal attacks, broad brushing and knee-jerk labeling.  I see it every time some counters one of your claims - your style never changes.


----------



## Coyote (Mar 24, 2015)

Phoenall said:


> Challenger said:
> 
> 
> > Coyote said:
> ...



There are many?  Really?  Can you provide some links?  I never heard of them before so had to look them up and while there are a number throughout Europe, there was only one that held bones of those from an Islamic conflict and it was Catholics.  You might want to remember that THEY did not like Jews either then.  I seriously doubt they would include Jewish bones.  Their attitude was more likely "good riddance".


----------



## Coyote (Mar 24, 2015)

Phoenall said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> > Phoenall said:
> ...



Syran and Iraqi's are different peoples...actually collections of different peoples.  That would be like saying we should give put Germans, Italians and British into one and call it "Eurpean national home".


----------



## Challenger (Mar 24, 2015)

Coyote said:


> Phoenall said:
> 
> 
> > P F Tinmore said:
> ...



As if there's not enough instability in the middle East, you want a European civil war too?! I think we'll win though...join up with the italians to kick the Germans out then live off pizza and pasta served with a nice Chianti and call the place "Britaly".


----------



## Challenger (Mar 24, 2015)

aris2chat said:


> Challenger said:
> 
> 
> > RoccoR said:
> ...



The Mandatory failed on all counts and there is no evidence that the native Palestinian population left at Arab urging, other than the oft quoted situation at Haifa which was the exception, rather than the rule. Given the ethnic cleansing by the Zionists started before the declaration of the state of Israel, they cannot claim the Arabs created the refugee problem.


----------



## P F Tinmore (Mar 24, 2015)

RoccoR said:


> P F Tinmore,  et al,
> 
> Yes, but there is still a gap between us pertaining to the application of these concepts as it applies to the territories to which the former Mandate applied.  And --- when did the Palestinians being to assume these "rights."
> 
> ...


In point of fact, other than Article 2(4) of the UN Charter, there is not one single international law that supports specifically “unilateral secessions.”​
This does not apply to the Palestinians at all. This only applies to groups of people wanting to break away from a state.


----------



## Phoenall (Mar 24, 2015)

P F Tinmore said:


> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> > P F Tinmore,  et al,
> ...






The provision was made in the Mandate for Palestine when the LoN created trans Jordan as the arab muslims national home. This left the arab muslims and Christians with many options, from staying where they were as full citizens of the Jewish national home ( some took this option and are now living in Israel as full citizens ). They could relocate to trans Jordan and receive a small bounty to help them move and set up home, or they could relocate to any of the other nations created under the LoN Mandate system, again with a small bounty to assist in the move and to set up home. The last option was to take up arms and start a war because they followed the teachings of their religion. The last option is the one chosen by the majority of the arab muslims, and if the LoN knew then what we know now they would have torn up the various mandates and placed garrisons inside those nations to put down any terrorism and violence. Removing the Mandate principles and taking full control of the land as they could under International law at that time.

As you say the illegal arab muslim migrants do not have any rights, but the legally invited Jews do.


----------



## Phoenall (Mar 24, 2015)

Challenger said:


> aris2chat said:
> 
> 
> > Challenger said:
> ...





 Nor is there any evidence that the Jews physically evicted 750,000 arab muslims, not when there are interviews with them were they state they were told to go by the arab armies


----------



## Phoenall (Mar 24, 2015)

P F Tinmore said:


> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> > P F Tinmore,  et al,
> ...






Which did not apply at the time because the UN was not formed at that time.


----------



## P F Tinmore (Mar 24, 2015)

Phoenall said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> > RoccoR said:
> ...


The provision was made in the Mandate for Palestine when the LoN created trans Jordan as the arab muslims national home.​
How about providing a link to that.


----------



## aris2chat (Mar 24, 2015)

Coyote said:


> Phoenall said:
> 
> 
> > P F Tinmore said:
> ...



both were ruled by king faisal


----------



## Phoenall (Mar 24, 2015)

Challenger said:


> Phoenall said:
> 
> 
> > P F Tinmore said:
> ...





 LINK ? ? ?


----------



## Challenger (Mar 24, 2015)

Phoenall said:


> Challenger said:
> 
> 
> > aris2chat said:
> ...



Oh, there's plenty of evidence for the Zionist colonial militias evicting the native population of Palestine, best catalogued in this book, The Ethnic Cleansing of Palestine Amazon.co.uk Ilan Pappe 9781851685554 Books but that's one of many.


----------



## Phoenall (Mar 24, 2015)

Challenger said:


> Phoenall said:
> 
> 
> > Challenger said:
> ...






 That would be you as that is your typical neo Marxist trait. Unlike you I don't link to a commercial site selling books and claim it proves my claim.


----------



## Phoenall (Mar 24, 2015)

P F Tinmore said:


> Phoenall said:
> 
> 
> > P F Tinmore said:
> ...







 Mandate for Palestine of course, or don't you know how to find the evidence yourself.


----------



## Phoenall (Mar 24, 2015)

Challenger said:


> Phoenall said:
> 
> 
> > Challenger said:
> ...






So you believe that Jewish bones have Jew stamped on them do you. The mass murders of Jews and Christians were thrown into mass graves and the bodies jumbled up. So how did the people coming after say that this is the body of a Jew throw it back in the hole, that is the body of a Christian keep it.

Your lack of intelligence and Anti Semitism shines out like a beacon.


----------



## Phoenall (Mar 24, 2015)

Challenger said:


> Phoenall said:
> 
> 
> > Challenger said:
> ...






 Is that the best you can do some left wing hypocrite that hates his own people. How about first hand testimony from an arab muslim himself ?

Refugee - Arab states told Arabs to leave Israel in 1948 war - YouTube


----------



## Phoenall (Mar 24, 2015)

Coyote said:


> Phoenall said:
> 
> 
> > Challenger said:
> ...





 Lets see if I can make this easy enough for you to understand.

 1)  5000 people hacked to death in Spain by the muslims

 2) dismembered bodies thrown in a pit all jumbled up

 3) nothing to distinguish the bones religion ( no dna testing and no religion written on the bones )

 4) so the Christians who build the churches cant say Jew throw them back in the hole.

 5) see how stupid I have just made you look, and how you slipped in some Jew hatred and Anti Semitism.


----------



## Challenger (Mar 24, 2015)

Phoenall said:


> Challenger said:
> 
> 
> > Phoenall said:
> ...



Not the best I can do, just the best comprehensive and scholarly catalogue written by a respected academic who is hated by the Zionist Right for telling the truth about the ethnic cleansing carried out by the Zionists in 1948. 

Professor Ilan Papp - Arab and Islamic Studies - University of Exeter

As for video soundbites, they don't back your assertions, especially the one translated by Palestine Media Watch, that beacon of objectivity.


----------



## Challenger (Mar 24, 2015)

Phoenall said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> > Phoenall said:
> ...



So how do YOU know there were any Jewish people present?


----------



## Phoenall (Mar 24, 2015)

Coyote said:


> Phoenall said:
> 
> 
> > P F Tinmore said:
> ...







 Did I say any different, or is it your Jew hatred coming out again. No as they are distinct nationalities, so have their own national homes ( nations/states/countries). But arabs see themselves as one nationality as proven by the 1948 war of independence when 5 arab countries came together under arab nationalism and invaded Israel.


----------



## Phoenall (Mar 24, 2015)

Challenger said:


> Phoenall said:
> 
> 
> > Coyote said:
> ...






 Documentary evidence of the massacres by surviving Jews and Christians, are you that stupid that you think there were no proofs at the time of the massacres. Much like the mass graves being found in Iraq and Nigeria at the moment that are found to contain mixed up bodies.


----------



## Coyote (Mar 24, 2015)

Phoenall said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> > Phoenall said:
> ...



What Jew hatred?  You have yet to post a link.  I've repeatedly said I support Israel's right to exist.  Get over yourself.  Your claim states that "arab muslims" yada yada and you then you talk about an arab national home and a blah blah blah - totally contradicting yourself.  Rights and nations aren't measured by how many each religion "gets".


----------



## Phoenall (Mar 24, 2015)

P F Tinmore said:


> Phoenall said:
> 
> 
> > P F Tinmore said:
> ...






 Mandate for palestine


----------



## Coyote (Mar 24, 2015)

Phoenall said:


> Challenger said:
> 
> 
> > Phoenall said:
> ...



Please provide evidence then, that Jewish bones were included in those bone churches.  Frankly - you didn't even get the country right, what makes this claim any more credible?  Only one church - when I googled it - had bones from an Islamic conflict.


----------



## Challenger (Mar 24, 2015)

Phoenall said:


> Challenger said:
> 
> 
> > Phoenall said:
> ...



LINK!


----------



## Challenger (Mar 24, 2015)

Coyote said:


> Phoenall said:
> 
> 
> > Challenger said:
> ...



Is that the one in Otranto?

"On August 12, 800 citizens were taken to the hill of Minerva, now called the Hill of the Martyrs, and beheaded because they refused to renounce their *Catholic faith*. Their remains were taken to the cathedral and the skulls preserved in the altar piece as a prominent reminder of these 800 martyrs."


----------



## Coyote (Mar 24, 2015)

Phoenall said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> > Phoenall said:
> ...



How exactly is it anti-semitism to point out that the Catholics did not like Jews?  They certainly didn't treat them well but if you call that "liking" then whatever floats your boat dude.


----------



## RoshanNair (Mar 24, 2015)

Muslims, please grow a pair and "end the occupation" yourselves. Stop whining to any tom, dick, and harry at the UN to come and liberate your precious Palestinians. History attests that the Arabs originally conquered Palestine from the Byzantines, so what right have you to piss and moan about the Zionists doing the same to you 1300 years later?


----------



## Phoenall (Mar 24, 2015)

Coyote said:


> Phoenall said:
> 
> 
> > Coyote said:
> ...







 Yet demonise and deride them at every opportunity, making claims based on islamonazi sources about the alleged atrocities committed. Then bully other posters who give a differing POV and try and belittle them until the rest of team Palestine joins in and supports your false claims. Don't forget countries are not necessarily nations, as the same nationality can live in more than 1 country. Just look at the French who spread across into Spain and Belgium. The British are spread across England, Wales, Ireland and Scotland. Not every nation is a federation like the US, or how Russia was until it split into separate nations


----------



## P F Tinmore (Mar 24, 2015)

Phoenall said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> > Phoenall said:
> ...


Nice duck. Where does it say what you said?


----------



## Phoenall (Mar 24, 2015)

Coyote said:


> Phoenall said:
> 
> 
> > Coyote said:
> ...





 The Jew hatred was in your snide comment about them not including Jewish bones without thinking about how you would say that these bones are Jewish.


----------



## Phoenall (Mar 24, 2015)

P F Tinmore said:


> Phoenall said:
> 
> 
> > P F Tinmore said:
> ...






 How is it a duck I have given you the link many times so it should be easy enough to find. The mandate for Palestine contains the details so why don't you look.


----------



## RoccoR (Mar 24, 2015)

P F Tinmore,  et al,

If this is all you found to place an objection with, we must be close to an agreement.



P F Tinmore said:


> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> > In point of fact, other than Article 2(4) of the UN Charter, there is not one single international law that supports specifically “unilateral secessions.”
> ...


*(REFERENCE)*

While that is the more narrow view of "secession," the real meaning is much broader: *Secession* (derived from the Latin term _secessio_) is the act of withdrawing from an organization, union, military alliance or especially a political entity. Threats of secession can also be a strategy for achieving more limited goals.

*(COMMENT)*

I tend to think that the three principles the Palestinians have latched onto (outside the use of force) are much to do about nothing, in terms of applicability:

The right to self determination without external interference.
The right to independence and sovereignty.
The right to territorial integrity.
The reason that the Arab Palestinians are subject to occupation and security containment is because they pose a threat to Israel:

The Arab Palestinians have denied Israel the "territorial integrity" through assault, terrorism and conventional rocket fire.  Israel is a member of the UN and entitled to defend itself.
The Arab Palestinian will never recognize the validity of the partition plan adopted by the General Assembly; and consider that any attempt by the Jewish people to establish a Jewish state in Arab territory (the territory to which the British Mandate formerly applied) as an act of aggression.  The further denies the right to self determination as an applicable concept.  And it denies the State of Israel the right to independence and sovereignty.
The Arab Palestinian sees Palestine as Arab Territory from the river to the sea, and from north to south, is a land of the Palestinian people and its homeland and its legitimate right, and do not recognize the legitimacy of "Israel" in any part of Palestine.  This nullifies the right to territorial integrity.
If these principles do not apply to Israel, formed pursuant to the Steps Preparatory to Independence as established by the General Assembly, then they cannot be either inalienable or universal.

*Excerpts from the Churchill White Paper of 1922*:

Further, it is contemplated that the status of all citizens of Palestine in the eyes of the law shall be Palestinian, and it has never been intended that they, or any section of them, should possess any other juridical status. So far as the Jewish population of Palestine are concerned it appears that some among them are apprehensive that His Majesty's Government may depart from the policy embodied in the Declaration of 1917. It is necessary, therefore, once more to affirm that these fears are unfounded, and that that Declaration, *re affirmed by the Conference of the Principle Allied Powers at San Remo and again in the Treaty of Sevres, is not susceptible of change.*

That is the reason why it is necessary that the existence of a *Jewish National Home in Palestine should be internationally guaranteed*, and that it should be formally recognized to rest upon ancient historic connection.
---
There is no reasonable expectation that the Arab Palestinian, given a relaxed security environment, will not rearm and reinitiate an insurgency and terrorist campaign against Israel.  

Most Respectfully,
R


----------



## P F Tinmore (Mar 24, 2015)

Phoenall said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> > Phoenall said:
> ...


Because your link does not say what you said.


----------



## P F Tinmore (Mar 24, 2015)

Phoenall said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> > Phoenall said:
> ...


Because your link does not say what you said.


----------



## Phoenall (Mar 24, 2015)

Challenger said:


> Phoenall said:
> 
> 
> > Challenger said:
> ...






 BULLCRAP he is as bad as Milliband the self serving Jewish neo Marxist that sold his soul to the devil, and sold his own brother down the river.


----------



## Phoenall (Mar 24, 2015)

Coyote said:


> Phoenall said:
> 
> 
> > Challenger said:
> ...






 So Spain was not ruled by the muslims now, according to you. And the muslims did not massacre many Christians and Jews in Spain according to you. And that they did their usual practice of throwing the dismembered bodies into mass graves, according to you.
 Have you got it yet according to you the muslims did nothing, according to you the muslims are still doing nothing, according to you Jews were not killed at the same time as Christians. According to you the Jews do not have the right to a national home, according to you the arab muslims should be given Israel on a plate.

 Now try looking for bone churches and see how many there are in reality, then look for muslim massacres in Spain. Or try Andalucía the Islamic name for Spain


----------



## Phoenall (Mar 24, 2015)

P F Tinmore said:


> Phoenall said:
> 
> 
> > P F Tinmore said:
> ...






 PROOF ? ? ? ? ?


----------



## P F Tinmore (Mar 24, 2015)

RoccoR said:


> P F Tinmore,  et al,
> 
> If this is all you found to place an objection with, we must be close to an agreement.
> 
> ...


The Arab Palestinians have denied Israel the "territorial integrity" through assault, terrorism and conventional rocket fire. Israel is a member of the UN and entitled to defend itself.​
You always crack me up with this one. Where is Israel's legitimate territory?


----------



## P F Tinmore (Mar 24, 2015)

Phoenall said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> > Phoenall said:
> ...


That's all I ask. Quote the passage that says what you say.


----------



## Phoenall (Mar 24, 2015)

P F Tinmore said:


> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> > P F Tinmore,  et al,
> ...






 I have given the link from the Mandate for Palestine already


 *Delineating the final geographical area of Palestine designated for the Jewish National Home on September 16, 1922, as described by the Mandatory*:

PALESTINE


INTRODUCTORY.


POSITION, ETC.


Palestine lies on the western edge of the continent of Asia between Latitude 30º N. and 33º N., Longitude 34º 30’ E. and 35º 30’ E.

On the North it is bounded by the French Mandated Territories of Syria and Lebanon, on the East by Syria and Trans-Jordan, on the South-west by the Egyptian province of Sinai, on the South-east by the Gulf of Aqaba and on the West by the Mediterranean. The frontier with Syria was laid down by the Anglo-French Convention of the 23rd December, 1920, and its delimitation was ratified in 1923. Briefly stated, the boundaries are as follows: -

_ North_. – From Ras en Naqura on the Mediterranean eastwards to a point west of Qadas, thence in a northerly direction to Metulla, thence east to a point west of Banias.

_ East_. – From Banias in a southerly direction east of Lake Hula to Jisr Banat Ya’pub, thence along a line east of the Jordan and the Lake of Tiberias and on to El Hamme station on the Samakh-Deraa railway line, thence along the centre of the river Yarmuq to its confluence with the Jordan, thence along the centres of the Jordan, the Dead Sea and the Wadi Araba to a point on the Gulf of Aqaba two miles west of the town of Aqaba, thence along the shore of the Gulf of Aqaba to Ras Jaba.

_ South_. – From Ras Jaba in a generally north-westerly direction to the junction of the Neki-Aqaba and Gaza-Aqaba Roads, thence to a point west-north-west of Ain Maghara and thence to a point on the Mediterranean coast north-west of Rafa.

_ West_. – The Mediterranean Sea.


----------



## Phoenall (Mar 24, 2015)

P F Tinmore said:


> Phoenall said:
> 
> 
> > P F Tinmore said:
> ...







 How many more times will you play this stupid game, I have given you the link now read it.


----------



## P F Tinmore (Mar 24, 2015)

RoccoR said:


> P F Tinmore,  et al,
> 
> If this is all you found to place an objection with, we must be close to an agreement.
> 
> ...


If these principles do not apply to Israel, formed pursuant to the Steps Preparatory to Independence as established by the General Assembly, then they cannot be either inalienable or universal.​

Resolution 181 was a non binding recommendation. It has nothing to do with the creation of Israel.


----------



## Coyote (Mar 24, 2015)

Phoenall said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> > Phoenall said:
> ...



It's not snide at all.  *It's pointing out what a dumbass you being when you can't even get your facts or countries straight because you are so eager to accuse others of being "Jew haters"*

Bone churches: 9 of the Strangest Bone Churches of Europe BootsnAll

Most were not the result of conflicts but ossuaries that built up over time as graves were emptied and refilled.

The church you were talking about, that you couldn't even get in the right country is Otranto: This Church Houses A Bloody History With The Bones Of A Massacre Decorating The Walls

813 Christian resisters of the Ottoman invasion were beheaded there in the 15th century.


From the article: 
_Bone churches by and large tend to be structures into which piles of bones have been placed. The Capela dos Ossos in the Church of St. Francis in Evora, Portugal, on the other hand, seems to be made of bones. The very walls of the chapel have bones in them, with cement holding everything together. Even the pillars supporting the ceiling have skulls running up and down them.

Built in the 16th century, the Capela dos Ossos (or Chapel of Bones) was built with the goal of pointing out how short life is. The poem at the chapel’s entrance emphasizes this, as it reads in part, “Where are you going in such a hurry, traveler? Pause … You have no greater concern than this one. … Recall how many have passed from this world, reflect on your similar end. Our bones that are here await yours
_​Jews flourished fairly well under the Ottoman's (compared with Christian Europe at the time)...and given the attitudes towards Jews in Christian Europe - it's pretty hard to believe they'd number among the martyrs in Oranto's bone church.

I can't find any other examples of bone churches that were compiled as a result of conflicts with Muslims.


----------



## P F Tinmore (Mar 24, 2015)

Phoenall said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> > Phoenall said:
> ...


As long as you keep ducking.


----------



## Humanity (Mar 24, 2015)

Phoenall said:


> Or try Andalucía the Islamic name for Spain



Just a minor point Phoney but the Islamic name, Al-Andalus covered the Iberian peninsula and a bit of France for a short while, NOT just Spain.


----------



## Coyote (Mar 24, 2015)

Phoenall said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> > Phoenall said:
> ...



Huh???  How on earth did you come up with that?



> And the muslims did not massacre many Christians and Jews in Spain according to you.



Where did I say that?



> And that they did their usual practice of throwing the dismembered bodies into mass graves, according to you.



Really...according to me?

Dude - we were talking about a frigging bone church and now you've suddenly exploded all over the place.









> Have you got it yet according to you the muslims did nothing, according to you the muslims are still doing nothing, according to you Jews were not killed at the same time as Christians.



Have you got it yet that you've exploded all over the place into stuff we never even discussed?



> According to you the Jews do not have the right to a national home, according to you the arab muslims should be given Israel on a plate.



Really now....where did I say that Phoenall? 



> Now try looking for bone churches and see how many there are in reality, then look for muslim massacres in Spain. Or try Andalucía the Islamic name for Spain



I did.  Maybe it's time you do it and try to substantiate your claims.


----------



## Coyote (Mar 24, 2015)

RoshanNair said:


> Muslims, please grow a pair and "end the occupation" yourselves. Stop whining to any tom, dick, and harry at the UN to come and liberate your precious Palestinians. History attests that the Arabs originally conquered Palestine from the Byzantines, so what right have you to piss and moan about the Zionists doing the same to you 1300 years later?



Because we're (I hope) a bit more civilized now.  That is debatable however.


----------



## Coyote (Mar 24, 2015)

Phoenall said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> > Phoenall said:
> ...



Really?  How about providing a link to this alleged "demonising" and "deriding" of Jews?



> Then bully other posters who give a differing POV and try and belittle them until the rest of team Palestine joins in and supports your false claims.



Oh right, so asking for a link to support your claims is  not "bullying" and "belittling"?



> Don't forget countries are not necessarily nations, as the same nationality can live in more than 1 country. Just look at the French who spread across into Spain and Belgium. The British are spread across England, Wales, Ireland and Scotland. Not every nation is a federation like the US, or how Russia was until it split into separate nations



Of course.


----------



## RoshanNair (Mar 24, 2015)

Coyote said:


> RoshanNair said:
> 
> 
> > Muslims, please grow a pair and "end the occupation" yourselves. Stop whining to any tom, dick, and harry at the UN to come and liberate your precious Palestinians. History attests that the Arabs originally conquered Palestine from the Byzantines, so what right have you to piss and moan about the Zionists doing the same to you 1300 years later?
> ...



That is precisely the problem. Modern "civilization" has emasculated us. Israel conquers Palestine and rather than rallying to fight and liberate themselves from under Israel, as was the norm throughout history against any "occupying" power, the Palestinians have resorted to whining and liberals around the world have conveniently enabled them to continue.


----------



## RoccoR (Mar 24, 2015)

P F Tinmore,  et al,

I not even sure this is a legitimate question.



P F Tinmore said:


> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> > The Arab Palestinians have denied Israel the "territorial integrity" through assault, terrorism and conventional rocket fire. Israel is a member of the UN and entitled to defend itself.
> ...


*(REFERENCE)*

Post #70 - No Palestinian State
Post $46 - No Palestinian State

*(COMMENT)*

Relative to Israel are identified in the treaties in the REFERENCE Postings.  There are no real borders with respect to Israel and Palestine, as the Palestinians have not negotiated any boundaries.  The closest simulated boundary are the Armistice demarcation lines.

Thus, it is the State of Palestine that has no boundaries.

Israel has boundaries by treaty.

Most Respectfully,
R


----------



## aris2chat (Mar 24, 2015)

Coyote said:


> Phoenall said:
> 
> 
> > Coyote said:
> ...



Aleppo has organs incorporated into the mosque wall


----------



## Coyote (Mar 24, 2015)

RoshanNair said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> > RoshanNair said:
> ...



Given past penchants for genocide, mass-buriels, torture, execution without trial, discrimmination, etc....na...I don't


aris2chat said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> > Phoenall said:
> ...



I'm not sure I needed to know that.....


----------



## RoshanNair (Mar 24, 2015)

Coyote said:


> RoshanNair said:
> 
> 
> > Coyote said:
> ...



Those atrocities are obscene and should be condemned in the strongest terms. But combat and warfare are norms of human organization and society. Why should the Palestinians be cast out and treated like the special needs child when there is nothing "special" about their plight at all?


----------



## aris2chat (Mar 24, 2015)

aris2chat said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> > Phoenall said:
> ...



In Idris there is a mosque with a tomb in the wall.  Both are supposed to be forbidden in Islam.  No grave, no shrine in or under a mosque.

Iran many of the mosques are shrines with tombs or mausoleum.  Bodies are supposed to be shrouded and buried in the ground.


----------



## Uncensored2008 (Mar 24, 2015)

Maybe free Palestine is cheaper than free beer?


----------



## Coyote (Mar 24, 2015)

aris2chat said:


> aris2chat said:
> 
> 
> > Coyote said:
> ...



I did not know that either - interesting and thanks for posting it.  It was interesting reading about bone churches - totally new to me!


----------



## P F Tinmore (Mar 24, 2015)

RoccoR said:


> P F Tinmore,  et al,
> 
> I not even sure this is a legitimate question.
> 
> ...


At what time and under what circumstances did Palestine's borders disappear.


----------



## RoccoR (Mar 24, 2015)

P F Tinmore,  et al,

If you discount all the General Assembly Resolutions which are non-binding, then the Palestinians are really in trouble.



P F Tinmore said:


> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> > P F Tinmore,  et al,
> ...


*(COMMENT)*

Damn near all basic human rights are documented by GA Resolutions.



			
				UN General Assembly Resolution 273 III --- 11 May 1949 said:
			
		

> *273 (III). Admission of Israel to membership in the United Nations*​
> _Having received_ the report of the Security Council on the application of Israel for membership in the United Nations,1/
> 
> _Noting_ that, in the judgment of the Security Council, Israel is a peace-loving State and is able and willing to carry out the obligations contained in the Charter,
> ...



*The Core International Human Rights Instruments and their monitoring bodies*
There are ten core international human rights instruments. Each of these  instruments (9 human rights treaties and the Optional Protocol to the CAT) has established a committee of experts to monitor implementation of the treaty provisions by its States parties. Some of the treaties are supplemented by optional protocols dealing with specific concerns.

_Date
Monitoring Body_
ICERD International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination 
21 Dec 1965
CERD
ICCPR International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights 
16 Dec 1966
CCPR
ICESCR International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights 
16 Dec 1966
CESCR
CEDAW Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women 
18 Dec 1979
CEDAW
CAT Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment 
10 Dec 1984
CAT
CRC Convention on the Rights of the Child 
20 Nov 1989
CRC
ICMW International Convention on the Protection of the Rights of All Migrant Workers and Members of Their Families 
18 Dec 1990
CMW
CPED International Convention for the Protection of All Persons from Enforced Disappearance 
20 Dec 2006
CED
CRPD Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities 
13 Dec 2006
CRPD
ICESCR - OP Optional Protocol to the Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights 
10 Dec 2008
CESCR
ICCPR-OP1 Optional Protocol to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights 
16 Dec 1966
CCPR
ICCPR-OP2 Second Optional Protocol to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, aiming at the abolition of the death penalty 
15 Dec 1989
CCPR
OP-CEDAW Optional Protocol to the Convention on the Elimination of Discrimination against Women 
10 Dec 1999
CEDAW
OP-CRC-AC Optional protocol to the Convention on the Rights of the Child on the involvement of children in armed conflict 
25 May 2000
CRC
OP-CRC-SC Optional protocol to the Convention on the Rights of the Child on the sale of children, child prostitution and child pornography 
25 May 2000
CRC
OP-CRC-IC Optional Protocol to the Convention on the Rights of the Child on a communications procedure 
14 Apr 2014

CRC
OP-CAT Optional Protocol to the Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment 
18 Dec 2002
SPT
OP-CRPD Optional Protocol to the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities 
12 Dec 2006
CRPD​
Most Respectfully,
R


----------



## montelatici (Mar 24, 2015)

RoccoR said:


> P F Tinmore,  et al,
> 
> If you discount all the General Assembly Resolutions which are non-binding, then the Palestinians are really in trouble.
> 
> ...



Yeah right

UN Security Council Resolution 
*Resolution 446 (1979)*
*of 22 March 1979*

"1. _Determines_ that the policy and practices of Israel in establishing settlements in the Palestinian and other Arab territories occupied since 1967 have no legal validity and constitute a serious obstruction to achieving a comprehensive, just and lasting peace in the Middle East;

2. _Strongly deplores_ the failure of Israel to abide by Security Council resolutions 237 (1967) of 14 June 1967, 252 (1968) of 21 May 1968 and 298 (1971) of 25 September 1971 and the consensus statement by the President of the Security Council on 11 November 1976 2/ and General Assembly resolutions 2253 (ES-V) and 2254 (ES-V) of 4 and 14 July 1967, 32/5 of 28 October 1977 and 33/113 of 18 December 1978;


*3. Calls once more upon Israel, as the occupying Power, to abide scrupulously by the 1949 Fourth Geneva Convention, to rescind its previous measures and to desist from taking any action which would result in changing the legal status and geographical nature and materially affecting the demographic composition of the Arab territories occupied since 1967, including Jerusalem, and, in particular, not to transfer parts of its own civilian population into the occupied Arab territories;"*


----------



## Challenger (Mar 24, 2015)

Phoenall said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> > Phoenall said:
> ...


Oh good grief, do us all a favour and take your medication. Then read a decent history book. If you can't or won't read a decent history book, try reading this at least. History of the Jews in Spain - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia


----------



## RoccoR (Mar 24, 2015)

P F Tinmore,  et al,

The territory covered by the Mandate for Palestine, within such boundaries as may be determined by the Principal Allied Powers, and as defined in the Palestine Order in Council, had boundaries established.  It was not a political entity obligated in any any way to the Arabs.  

Palestine the nation, the state or the independent and self-governing territory was not established until 1988.  The was no other territory, except that covered by the administration of the Mandate.



P F Tinmore said:


> At what time and under what circumstances did Palestine's borders disappear.


*(ANSWER)*

Palestine did not have demarcation lines or borders until 1988.  

*(REFERENCE)

PRE-1923: THE SHAPING OF MODERN NATIONS SAID:*
A detailed description of the lengthy process that ultimately led to the final determination of boundaries for the French and British mandates, which, in turn, informed the borders of modern Lebanon, Syria, Jordan, and Israel, is beyond the scope of this work, but can be found in the works of Ra'anan (1955), Sachar (1969; 1979; 1987b), Hof (1985), and Fromkin (1989). The final boundaries between the French and British mandates, which later became the borders between Israel, Lebanon, Syria, and Jordan, were worked out by an Anglo-French commission set up to trace the frontier on the spot. Their results were submitted in February 1922 and signed by the British and French governments in March 1923 (Ra'anan 1955; Hof 1985). The following outline of events leading up to the Anglo-French Convention in 1923 emphasizes only certain decisions, and is based on the works mentioned above.​*SOURCE: **This is the old United Nations University website.*

*POSITION of the territories* to which the Mandate for Palestine applies, hereinafter described as "Palestine."

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

On the North it is bounded by the French Mandated Territories of Syria and the Lebanon, on the East by Syria and Trans-Jordan, on the South-west by the Egyptian province of Sinai, on the South-east by the Gulf of `Aqaba and on the West by the Mediterranean. The frontier with Syria was laid down by the Anglo-French Convention of the 23rd December, 1920, and its delimitation was ratified in 1923. Briefly stated, the boundaries are as follows:--
_
North.--From Ras en Naqura on the Mediterranean eastwards to a point west of Qadas, thence in a northerly direction to Metulla, thence east to a point west of Banias.
East.--From Banias in a southerly direction east of Lake Hula to Jisr Banat Ya'pub, thence along a line east of the Jordan and the Lake of Tiberias and on to El Hamme station on the Samakh--Deraa railway line, thence along the centre of the river Yarmuq to its confluence with the Jordan, thence along the centres of the Jordan, the Dead Sea and the Wadi `Araba to a point on the Gulf of `Aqaba two miles west of the town of `Aqaba, thence along the shore of the Gulf of `Aqaba to Ras Jaba.
South.--From Ras Jaba in a generally north-westerly direction to the junction of the Neki--`Aqaba and Gaza--`Aqaba Roads, thence to a point west-north-west of `Ain Maghara and thence to a point on the Mediterranean coast north-west of Rafa.
West.--The Mediterranean Sea.
_​*(COMMENT)*

Even the ICJ Advisory Opinion General List No. 131 states that the territorial boundaries of the Mandate for Palestine were laid down by various instruments, in particular on the eastern border by a British memorandum of 16 September 1922 and an Anglo-Transjordanian Treaty of 20 February 1928.  But nothing in the opinion substantiates the claim that the Arabs have something greater then the contemporary Occupied Territories.  

Most Respectfully,
R


----------



## Challenger (Mar 24, 2015)

aris2chat said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> > Phoenall said:
> ...



Not any more, unless they're recent additions. Syria clashes destroy ancient Aleppo minaret - BBC News


----------



## aris2chat (Mar 24, 2015)

Challenger said:


> Phoenall said:
> 
> 
> > Coyote said:
> ...



The persecution and massacres of the jews?  The forced conversion?  Hundreds of thousand killed or forced to leave?


----------



## RoccoR (Mar 24, 2015)

montelatici,  et al,

What rights does UNSC Resolution 446 confer?



montelatici said:


> Yeah right
> 
> UN Security Council Resolution
> *Resolution 446 (1979)
> ...


*(COMMENT)*

All this says, in pre-Oslo Language, is that the GCIV is in play.  It doesn't yet recognize the agreed upon Israeli Authority in Area "C"; as Oslo II has yet to come.

Most Respectfully,
R


----------



## aris2chat (Mar 24, 2015)

Challenger said:


> aris2chat said:
> 
> 
> > Coyote said:
> ...




You are aware there are around a hundred mosques in Aleppo and minarets are not part of any interior walls or mosque itself.


----------



## P F Tinmore (Mar 24, 2015)

RoccoR said:


> P F Tinmore,  et al,
> 
> The territory covered by the Mandate for Palestine, within such boundaries as may be determined by the Principal Allied Powers, and as defined in the Palestine Order in Council, had boundaries established.  It was not a political entity obligated in any any way to the Arabs.
> 
> ...


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;​
It is interesting that the Palestinians have the right to territorial integrity when you say they have no territory.

Perhaps you should dispense with the smoke and answer the question.


----------



## Phoenall (Mar 25, 2015)

P F Tinmore said:


> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> > P F Tinmore,  et al,
> ...






 That is right it was the Mandate for Palestine that set in motion the creation of Israel. It was also the same mandate system that set in motion the creation of Jordan, Syria, Iraq and iran.


----------



## Phoenall (Mar 25, 2015)

P F Tinmore said:


> Phoenall said:
> 
> 
> > P F Tinmore said:
> ...






 You are the one ducking because you ignore links already posted, ones you never reply to because you know they are true


Humanity said:


> Phoenall said:
> 
> 
> > Or try Andalucía the Islamic name for Spain
> ...





Correct but it was mostly Spain,  just as Palestine is mostly Jordan 78% to be precise.


----------



## Phoenall (Mar 25, 2015)

Coyote said:


> Phoenall said:
> 
> 
> > Coyote said:
> ...







 I have and you denied their credibility because they go against your brainwashing


----------



## Phoenall (Mar 25, 2015)

P F Tinmore said:


> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> > P F Tinmore,  et al,
> ...






 When the nation of Israel made agreement with two of its neighbours Egypt and Jordan


----------



## Phoenall (Mar 25, 2015)

montelatici said:


> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> > P F Tinmore,  et al,
> ...







 And just where does it say or else we will arrest you for breach of these laws ?

 The same UN has called upon hamas and fatah to stop all violence and terrorism and to negotiate peace with their neighbours and mutual agreed borders.


----------



## Phoenall (Mar 25, 2015)

P F Tinmore said:


> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> > P F Tinmore,  et al,
> ...






 Which has been answered but you ignore them


----------



## Challenger (Mar 25, 2015)

Phoenall said:


> montelatici said:
> 
> 
> > RoccoR said:
> ...



Zionists have never negotiated in good faith. As proved by Bibbi recently


----------



## Coyote (Mar 25, 2015)

Phoenall said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> > Phoenall said:
> ...



Oh?  

What links have you provided to show that there are multiple bone churches created from the victims of "Muslim massacres"?


----------



## P F Tinmore (Mar 25, 2015)

Phoenall said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> > RoccoR said:
> ...


None of them have any authority over Palestine's borders.


----------



## RoccoR (Mar 25, 2015)

P F Tinmore,

This particular passage is from General Assembly Resolution 33/24 (1978)*(again - NON-BINDING - not law)* pertaining to:


*Importance of the universal realization of the right of peoples to self-determination and of the speedy granting of independence​*
*to colonial countries and peoples for the effective guarantee and observance of human rights*​



P F Tinmore said:


> 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;​
> It is interesting that the Palestinians have the right to territorial integrity when you say they have no territory.
> 
> Perhaps you should dispense with the smoke and answer the question.


*(COMMENT)*

This passage say that all people under alien and colonial domination have the right to:

self-determination, 
national independence, 
*territorial integrity, *and 
national unity and sovereignty without external interference
In 1978 --- it does not say, confer, or otherwise indicate any specific territory in which these rights might be exercised.  NOR does it say that the peoples of Namibia, Zimbabwe, or Palestine have any particular outstanding claim.

If the Palestinian People were to ever get territory, then the Palestinians have the right to territorial integrity.  But not for a decade --- until 1988 --- did the Palestinian people stake a claim territorially.

In 1978, the:

West Bank was sovereign Jordanian Territory, having been annexed by the Hashemite Kingdom, under the parliamentary process and right of self-determination.  That Jordanian sovereign territory was then occupied by Israeli Forces when Arab Forces, staging for an attack, were successfully engaged.
The Gaza Strip was under occupied by Israeli Forces, authority taken from the administration of the Egyptian Military Governorship; the All Palestine Government having been dissolved and disbanded by the Egyptian Government in 1959.
To be forthright in this discussion, it should be acknowledged that in 1977, when UN Sub-Commission first laid-out the ground work for the resolution, the subject of self-determination was dealt with at considerable length, and expressly affirmed the character of _*jus cogens*_ of the principle of the self-determination of peoples; that is the a norm --- from which no partial revocation or abolition of a law is permitted (inalienable); "respect for the principle of the equal rights of all peoples and of their right of self-determination;" and certainly not unique to Palestinians.   The concept applies to self-determination for everyone --- everywhere.  It implies that it is respected by international law.  

So, in 1978, the Arab Palestinians of the West Bank were Jordanian Nationals; while the Arab Palestinians in the Gaza Strip were under the national umbrella of the occupation power.

In 1978, other than the Gaza Strip, there was no Palestinian Territory.  But 1979, the Treaty between the Egyptian Government and Israel establish a permanent boundary between Egypt and Israel --- recognized international boundary between Egypt and the "former mandated territory of Palestine."  This is important because it includes all of the Gaza Strip on the Israeli side of the border.

This raises the question as to what "territory" the Arab Palestinian might control at that time (1978) --- or what was considered as "territorial integrity" for Palestinians?

*(SMOKE SCREEN)*

Yes, there is a smoke screen here, but it is not from me.  Pro-Palestinians claim territorial integrity, but never identify what territory that is and when they establish Arab Palestinian control _(a competent government)_ over that territory. 

When the Arab Palestinian celebrated their non-member observer State status in the United Nations (2012), it did so with the delineation that the right of the Palestinian people to self-determination and to independence in their State of Palestine on the Palestinian territory occupied since 1967; but does not stipulate what territory that is.  Israel occupied Jordanian territory in 1967 and the Egyptian Governorship.  

What territory do the Palestinians claimed to have controlled in 1978; or even in 1967?  If you can answer that question, I can answer the question on territorial integrity.

Most Respectfully,
R


----------



## RoccoR (Mar 25, 2015)

P F Tinmore,  et al,

Where did you get the location of the borders.  Who or what gave the Palestinians "authority over anything?"



P F Tinmore said:


> Phoenall said:
> 
> 
> > P F Tinmore said:
> ...


*(COMMENT)*

This is a frivolous agrument.  What are "Palestine's Borders?"

Most Respectfully,
R


----------



## P F Tinmore (Mar 25, 2015)

RoccoR said:


> P F Tinmore,
> 
> This particular passage is from General Assembly Resolution 33/24 (1978)*(again - NON-BINDING - not law)* pertaining to:
> 
> ...


Yes, there is a smoke screen here, but it is not from me. Pro-Palestinians claim territorial integrity, but never identify what territory that is and when they establish Arab Palestinian control _(a competent government)_ over that territory.​
As you should know "control" is not a criterion for the people to have rights. People in non self governing territories have the right to territorial integrity.

You question Palestine's territory. This 1946 survey map of Palestine clearly defines Palestine's international boundaries.







These boundaries were claimed in Palestine's 1948 declaration of independence.

HAVE SOLEMNLY RESOLVED TO DECLARE PALESTINE IN ITS ENTIRETY AND WITHIN ITS BOUNDARIES AS ESTABLISHED BEFORE THE TERMINATION OF THE BRITISH MANDATE AN INDEPENDENT STATE ...

A C.1 330 of 14 October 1948​
And, of course, these same international boundaries were referenced in the 1949 UN armistice agreements. So Palestine's international boundaries remained unchanged in 1949.

UN resolution 3324 of 1978 said that the Palestinians had the right to territorial integrity.

I think it is clear what territory they were talking about.


----------



## RoccoR (Mar 25, 2015)

P F Tinmore,  _et al,_

Nothing in this comment is credible.



P F Tinmore said:


> These boundaries were claimed in Palestine's 1948 declaration of independence.
> 
> HAVE SOLEMNLY RESOLVED TO DECLARE PALESTINE IN ITS ENTIRETY AND WITHIN ITS BOUNDARIES AS ESTABLISHED BEFORE THE TERMINATION OF THE BRITISH MANDATE AN INDEPENDENT STATE ...
> 
> ...


*(COMMENT)*

First, 1946 survey map of Palestine clearly defines Palestine's international boundaries as Palestine was define in 1946.  At that time, by the Palestine Order in Council, Palestine was that territory to which the Mandate applied.  It has noting to do with Palestinian territorial sovereignty or integrity.

The *All-Palestine Government* was established by the Arab League on 22 September 1948 during the 1948 Arab-Israeli War; not by the Arab Palestinian People.

The Prime Minister of the Gaza-seated administration was Ahmed Hilmi Pasha _(Ottoman born in Lebanese area)_, and the President was Hajj Amin al-Husseini _(Jerusalem born)_, former Chairman of the Arab Higher Committee (created by the Arab League).
The All-Palestine Government was under official Egyptian protection, but it had no executive role; remained under Egyptian control through the 1948-49 Arab Israeli War and in exile in Cairo, managing Gazan affairs from outside.  The effective jurisdiction of the All Palestine Government was limited to the Gaza Strip subject to Egyptian Military Oversight.
In 1959, the All-Palestine Government was officially disbanded with some components merged into the United Arab Republic (coming under formal Egyptian military administration) who appointed Egyptian Military Governors in Gaza. The All-Palestine Government's credentials _(bona fide sovereign state) _were dependent on effective reliance from Egyptian military support,  Egyptian political and economic power.  With the disillusionment in 1959 --- there was NO ALL-PALESTINE GOVERNMENT in 1978 --- no surviving government with a claim to the entirety of the territory formerly under Mandate.
The Map you posted _(Map No. 103.1 (b) February 1956 United Nations BASE MAP: Survey of Palestine, April 1946. Modified) _is first generation model of the Partition Plan A/RES/181(II) --- and *Annex A to resolution 181 (II) of the General Assembly,* *dated 29 November 1947*.   _(It is even marked Annex A in the upper right-hand corner.)_  The Survey, a Survey of Palestine prepared by *Government of Palestine (then under British military occupation/Mandate)* for the United Nation Special Committee on Palestine (UNSCOP) in 1946, was still defined by the Palestine Order in Council:  "the territories to which the Mandate for Palestine applies, hereinafter described as Palestine."  Between October, 1917, and September, 1918, the whole of Palestine was occupied by the Allied Forces under General Allenby and placed temporarily under a British military administration known as the Allied Occupied Enemy Territory Administration (OETA).  If you go to the Survey of Palestine prepared by *Government of Palestine *you will find it is all about the Mandate.  It is one of the great _(the best single source)_ documents that captures the principle concepts surrounding the Mandate Period.

"UN Resolution 3324 of 1978" was written a decade before the Palestinians declared independence.

Most Respectfully,
R


----------



## aris2chat (Mar 25, 2015)

Coyote said:


> Phoenall said:
> 
> 
> > Coyote said:
> ...



Sedlec Ossuary  bones of Muslims
Deir el-Zour Armenian victims of genocide.  It was destroyed by IS

Skull Chapel in Czermana are victims of Islamic invasion


----------



## P F Tinmore (Mar 25, 2015)

RoccoR said:


> P F Tinmore,  _et al,_
> 
> Nothing in this comment is credible.
> 
> ...


First, 1946 survey map of Palestine clearly defines Palestine's international boundaries as Palestine was define in 1946. At that time, by the Palestine Order in Council, Palestine was that territory to which the Mandate applied.​
Those were Palestine's international borders as defined in 1922, and valid in the 1946 map, and were still valid in the 1949 armistice agreements. Even Israel agreed to those borders in 1949.

The Mandate was a temporarily assigned administration that held Palestine in trust. It had no land or borders of its own. It is irrelevant to this discussion.


----------



## P F Tinmore (Mar 25, 2015)

RoccoR said:


> P F Tinmore,  _et al,_
> 
> Nothing in this comment is credible.
> 
> ...


The *All-Palestine Government* was established by the Arab League on 22 September 1948 during the 1948 Arab-Israeli War; not by the Arab Palestinian People.​
And Israel was declared by the foreign Jewish Agency that was created in Zurich by the foreign World Zionist Organization.

Do you have a point here?


----------



## toastman (Mar 25, 2015)

P F Tinmore said:


> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> > P F Tinmore,  _et al,_
> ...



Israel never agreed to any Palestinian borders in 1949. Your interpretation of the armistice agreements in false. 

The map you keep posting shows PROPOSED borders. Why can't you find a map that CLEARLY shows Palestine's permanent borders in a map which does NOT say partition plan???


----------



## toastman (Mar 25, 2015)

RoccoR said:


> P F Tinmore,  _et al,_
> 
> Nothing in this comment is credible.
> 
> ...


What's funny is that he always talks about how the Partition Plan was a flop and meant nothing, yet he ALWAYS uses a partition plan map


----------



## RoccoR (Mar 25, 2015)

P F Tinmore,  et al,

Palestine _(within such boundaries as may be determined by the Principal Allied Powers)_ is officially defined by the territory to which the Mandate applies; it was not defined by the Arab and not defined by the Ottoman.

I think I explained the process before, several times.



P F Tinmore said:


> Those were Palestine's international borders as defined in 1922, and valid in the 1946 map, and were still valid in the 1949 armistice agreements. Even Israel agreed to those borders in 1949.
> 
> The Mandate was a temporarily assigned administration that held Palestine in trust. It had no land or borders of its own. It is irrelevant to this discussion.


*(COMMENT)*

The territory to which Palestine Mandate applied was NOT decided in 1922 --- thus the border you describe was not fix yet.  These borders were not decided by the Arab Palestinian, or any indigenous representative.  They were not national boundaries.  The boundaries were not final until 1924 with the last transfer from Syria.

The *Paulet–Newcombe Agreement* or *Paulet-Newcombe Line*, also known as the *Franco-British Boundary Agreements*, were a sequence of agreements signed between 1920-23 between the British and French governments regarding the position and nature of the boundary between the Mandates of Palestine and Mesopotamia, attributed to Great Britain, and the Mandate of Syria and the Lebanon, attributed to France. The agreements fixed the line of the Syrian-Palestinian border_ (now the Syrian-Israeli border) _between the Mediterranean Sea and the town of Al-Hamma. The agreement takes its name from French Lieutenant Colonel N. Paulet and British Lieutenant Colonel S. F. Newcombe, who were appointed to lead the Boundary Commission.

The boundary between the forthcoming British and French mandates was defined in broad terms in the 1920 "Franco-British Convention on Certain Points Connected with the Mandates for Syria and the Lebanon, Palestine and Mesopotamia", signed in Paris, on 23 December 1920.  That agreement placed the bulk of the Golan Heights in the French sphere. The treaty also established a joint commission to settle the precise details of the border and mark it on the ground.

The commission submitted its final report on 3 February 1922, which included a number of amendments. It was approved with some caveats by the French and British governments on 7 March 1923, several months before Britain and France assumed their Mandatory responsibilities on 29 September 1923.​
"The boundary between the forthcoming British and French mandates was defined in broad terms. That agreement placed the bulk of the Golan Heights in the French sphere. The treaty also established a joint commission to settle the border and mark it on the ground. The commission submitted its final report on 3 February 1922, and it was approved with some caveats by the British and French governments on 7 March 1923, several months before Britain and France assumed their Mandatory responsibilities on 29 September 1923.  In accordance with the same process, a nearby parcel of land that included the ancient site of Dan was transferred from Syria to Palestine early in 1924. In this way the Golan Heights became part of the French Mandate of Syria. When the French Mandate of Syria ended in 1944, the Golan Heights remained part of the newly independent state of Syria."

*Border with Egypt*

The international border between the Ottoman Empire and the British Empire was drawn in 1906. According to the personal documents of the British colonel Wilfed A. Jennings Bramley, who influenced the negotiations, the border mainly served British military interests—it furthered the Ottomans as much as possible from the Suez Canal, and gave Britain complete control over both Red Sea gulfs—Suez and Aqaba, including the Straits of Tiran. At the time, the Aqaba branch of the Hejaz railway had not been built, and the Ottomans therefore had no simple access to the Red Sea. The British were also interested in making the border as short and patrollable as possible, and did not take into account the needs of the local residents in the negotiations.

The 1949 Armistice Agreement between Israel and Egypt was ratified on February 24, 1949. The armistice line between these countries followed the international border except along the Gaza Strip, which remained under Egyptian occupation.

The Israel-Egypt Peace Treaty, signed on March 26, 1979 created an officially recognized international border along the 1906 line. A dispute arose over the marking of the border line at its southernmost point, in Taba. Taba was on the Egyptian side of the armistice line of 1949, but Israel claimed that Taba had been on the Ottoman side of a border agreed between the Ottomans and British Egypt in 1906, and that there had previously been an error in marking the line. The issue was submitted to an international commission composed of one Israeli, one Egyptian, and three outsiders. In 1988, the commission ruled in Egypt's favor, and Israel returned Taba to Egypt later that year.

Egypt withdrew any claim to the Gaza Strip. The border between Israel and the Gaza Strip is subject to further negotiations.​*Border with Jordan*

The Israel-Jordan Treaty of Peace was signed on October 26, 1994. The treaty resolved territorial and border issues that were ongoing since the 1948 war. The treaty specified and fully recognized the international border between Israel and Jordan. Upon its signing, the Jordan andYarmouk Rivers, the Dead Sea, the Emek Ha'arva/Wadi Araba and the Gulf of Aqaba were officially designated as the borders between Israel and Jordan, and the border between Jordan and the territory occupied by Israel in 1967. For the latter, the agreement requires that the demarcation use a different presentation, and that it carry the following disclaimer:

"This line is the administrative boundary between Jordan and the territory which came under Israeli military government control in 1967. Any treatment of this line shall be without prejudice to the status of the territory."

(See: _Israel-Jordan Peace Treaty, Annex I, Israel-Jordan International Boundary Delimitation and Demarcation_.[18])

In 1988, Jordan withdrew any claim to the West Bank. The border between Israel and the West Bank will be negotiated between Israel and the Palestinian Authority.​
*Border with Palestine*

There has been no productive negotiations with the authorities in the State of Palestine concerning the establishment of borders.  The PLO-Negotiations Affairs Department  sees the 1967 border (not further identified) is the internationally-recognized border between Israel and the occupied Palestinian territories.

Most Respectfully,


----------



## RoccoR (Mar 25, 2015)

P F Tinmore,  et al,

The Jewish Agency was entirely staffed by Palestinian Citizens as required by law.



P F Tinmore said:


> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> > P F Tinmore,  _et al,_
> ...


*(COMMENT)*

Yes, the APG was controlled by the Arab League.  The Jewish Agency (staffed by citizens), in so far as it performed in accordance with the Mandate, was controlled by the Government of Palestine (Mandatory of the UK).

The Arab Higher Committee had by 1924, declined to establish a Arab Agency, and became totally belligerent in building a nation or becoming self-governing.

Most Respectfully,
R


----------



## Coyote (Mar 25, 2015)

aris2chat said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> > Phoenall said:
> ...



Sedlec wasn't Muslim, I think the claim that it was built of Muslim bones was a hoax designed to inflame Muslims: Sedlec Ossuary Cemetery Church of All Saints with the Ossuary

Likewise, Czermana was not victims of Islamic invasion (did Muslims invade Poland?) - according to wikipedia: The chapel was built in 1776 by the Czech local parish priest Wacław Tomaszek. It is the mass grave of people who died during the Thirty Years’ War (1618–1648), three Silesian Wars (1740–1763), as well as of people who died because of cholera epidemics, plague, syphilis and hunger.[2]

Deir el-Zour is, in a sense, and it's also  a memorial and museum to a genocide that is still denied -- if I'm thinking of the same place you are? Armenian Genocide Memorial Church Der Zor - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia  ISIS has destroyed so many historical and beautiful places


----------



## P F Tinmore (Mar 25, 2015)

RoccoR said:


> P F Tinmore,  et al,
> 
> Palestine _(within such boundaries as may be determined by the Principal Allied Powers)_ is officially defined by the territory to which the Mandate applies; it was not defined by the Arab and not defined by the Ottoman.
> 
> ...


Palestine _(within such boundaries as may be determined by the Principal Allied Powers)_ is officially defined by the territory to which the Mandate applies; it was not defined by the Arab and not defined by the Ottoman.​
As were all of the other new states in the ME.

What is your point?


----------



## P F Tinmore (Mar 25, 2015)

RoccoR said:


> P F Tinmore,  et al,
> 
> Palestine _(within such boundaries as may be determined by the Principal Allied Powers)_ is officially defined by the territory to which the Mandate applies; it was not defined by the Arab and not defined by the Ottoman.
> 
> ...


The territory to which Palestine Mandate applied was NOT decided in 1922 --- bla, bla, bla, bla, bla, bla, bla, bla, bla, bla, bla, bla, bla, bla.

What relevance is this to Palestine's international borders on the 1946 map?

I don't see your point.


----------



## P F Tinmore (Mar 25, 2015)

RoccoR said:


> P F Tinmore,  et al,
> 
> The Jewish Agency was entirely staffed by Palestinian Citizens as required by law.
> 
> ...


Yes, the APG was controlled by the Arab League. The Jewish Agency (staffed by citizens), in so far as it performed in accordance with the Mandate, was controlled by the Government of Palestine (Mandatory of the UK).​
The Jewish Agency was a creature of the Mandate. It was to serve as a consultant to the Mandate and serve at the Mandate's pleasure.

When the Mandate left it no longer had a legitimate function.


----------



## RoccoR (Mar 25, 2015)

P F Tinmore,  et al,

Yes, this happens with you periodically.



P F Tinmore said:


> As were all of the other new states in the ME.
> 
> What is your point?


*(COMMENT)*

Between here and Posting 446, you have opened a number of issue that has propelled the discussion:

You always crack me up with this one. Where is Israel's legitimate territory?
Resolution 181 was a non binding recommendation. It has nothing to do with the creation of Israel.
What relevance is this to Palestine's international borders on the 1946 map?
Israel's legitimate territory:

First, about three-quarters of Israel's perimeter has permanent boundaries (borders) established with Egypt and Jordan.  And these borders directly interface with the West Bank and the Gaza Strip.  

The remaining quarter of the perimeter is govern by a set of Armistice Lines with Lebanon and Syria.  The Armistice Lines between Israel and the two Arab countries of Syria and Lebanon, have no common segments with the 1988 State of Palestine. 

The West Bank and the Gaza Strip have a _de facto_ border lines with Israel using the former Armistice Lines established in 1949.  But these Armistice Line have not been documented with an Armistice Agreement between Israel and the State of Palestine (West Bank + Gaza Strip); but rather the Oslo Accords through the Permanent Status of Negotiations.  Permanent status negotiations will commence as soon as possible, but not later than May 4, 1996, between the Parties. It is understood that these negotiations shall cover remaining issues, including: Jerusalem, refugees, settlements, security arrangements, borders, relations and cooperation with other neighbors, and other issues of common interest.
Resolution 181 and the relationship with the creation of Israel _(and Palestine for that matter)_:

Both the Declaration of Independence for the States of Israel and Palestine, cite the A/RES/181(II) as an authority.
A decade later, both the States of Israel and Palestine reaffirm the international legitimacy and respects General Assembly Resolution 181 (II).
The applicable Resolutions that admit Israel to the UN and accord to Palestine non-member observer State status in the United Nations cite General Assembly Resolution 181 (II) as an applicable reference.
I think that each of the last couple responses provides valuable insight into the issue surround the questions.

Most Respectfully,
R


----------



## RoccoR (Mar 25, 2015)

P F Tinmore,  et al,

The Map you provided does not have the boundary or borders to Palestine as you suggest Palestine to be.



P F Tinmore said:


> What relevance is this to Palestine's international borders on the 1946 map?
> 
> I don't see your point.


*(COMMENT)*

The borders marked on the map are the borders to the territory covered by the Mandate for Palestine, and the Government of Palestine (that of the Mandatory, UK).

Most Respectfully,
R


----------



## RoccoR (Mar 25, 2015)

P F Tinmore,  et al,

The function of the Jewish Agency was not a matter of concern for Arabs.



P F Tinmore said:


> [
> Yes, the APG was controlled by the Arab League. The Jewish Agency (staffed by citizens), in so far as it performed in accordance with the Mandate, was controlled by the Government of Palestine (Mandatory of the UK).​
> The Jewish Agency was a creature of the Mandate. It was to serve as a consultant to the Mandate and serve at the Mandate's pleasure.
> 
> When the Mandate left it no longer had a legitimate function.


*(COMMENT)*

The Jewish Agency was recognized and functioned as a public body under the Mandate.  On the termination of the Mandate and the institution and establishment of the Jewish State of Israel, the provisional government assimilated the Jewish Agency.

Most Respectfully,
R


----------



## toastman (Mar 25, 2015)

P F Tinmore said:


> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> > P F Tinmore,  et al,
> ...


Why do yiu hate the truth so much?


----------



## P F Tinmore (Mar 25, 2015)

RoccoR said:


> P F Tinmore,  et al,
> 
> The Map you provided does not have the boundary or borders to Palestine as you suggest Palestine to be.
> 
> ...


OK, but:

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,...*​

The Mandate was not Palestine. It worked inside Palestine with no land or borders of it own.

Didn't Britain say that Palestine would continue to be a legal entity after the Mandate left.

The 1949 UN armistice recognized the continued existence of Palestine and its international boundaries.


----------



## aris2chat (Mar 25, 2015)

Coyote said:


> aris2chat said:
> 
> 
> > Coyote said:
> ...




~alaiwah, a pakistani wordpress site

>>In the city of Sedelik of the Czech Republic, there is an interesting church.



This church is not made of wood, nor it is made of cement, nor it is made of metal, but instead it is made of parts of Muslims.

In the year of 1218, the Pope of that time, to show pride, ordered the construction of a church bringing the bones of Muslims killed for its construction.

The order was sent to the country by bringing the bones of 40,000 Muslims.<<


----------



## aris2chat (Mar 25, 2015)

also .....

Death on Display Sedlec Ossuary


----------



## RoccoR (Mar 25, 2015)

P F Tinmore,  et al,

Well you are close.



P F Tinmore said:


> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> > P F Tinmore,  et al,
> ...


*(COMMENT)*

To correct your comment:  The Mandate formed a government over a specific territory --- Palestine as defined by the Order in Council.

Yes, Palestine is a legal entity.  But it is not self-governing and not in the hands of the Arab Palestinian _(in 1946 and not until 1988)_.  It was a territory.

No the Armistice did not recognize the existence of Palestine; that was not an intent and not a purpose.  The Armistice was four agreements between Israel and four Arab Aggressors.  But as you are so fond of pointing-out, the Armistice Demarcation Line is *not to be construed in any sense as a political or territorial boundary*, and is delineated without prejudice to rights, claims and positions of either Party to the Armistice as regards ultimate "settlement of the Palestine question.  The armistice agreements were intended to serve only as interim agreements until replaced by permanent peace treaties.

Most Respectfully,
R


----------



## P F Tinmore (Mar 25, 2015)

RoccoR said:


> P F Tinmore,  et al,
> 
> Yes, this happens with you periodically.
> 
> ...


First, about three-quarters of Israel's perimeter has permanent boundaries (borders) established with Egypt and Jordan. And these borders directly interface with the West Bank and the Gaza Strip.​
If the Palestinians have the right to territorial integrity, as UN resolutions state, Where did Israel get the authority to claim borders on Palestinian land?


----------



## RoccoR (Mar 25, 2015)

P F Tinmore,  et al,

The war was between Israel (defending) and the four prinicle Arab Nations; Egypt, Jordan, Lebanon, and Syria (aggressors).  The armistice agreements were intended to serve only as interim agreements until replaced by permanent peace treaties.



P F Tinmore said:


> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> > P F Tinmore,  et al,
> ...


*(COMMENT)*

There were four Armistice Agreements, thus the need to end the war that started in 1948 with the Arab Invasion, will end when each of the parties to the conflict sign a Peace Treaty.  The war has ended between Israel and two of the four opponents; Egypt (1979), Jordan (1994).  The Palestinians, were not an independent party to the conflict.

There was no sovereignty known as Palestine to be concerned about "territorial integrity" prior to 1988.  From 1967 to 2005, Gaza was Israel Occupied Palestinian Territory.  From 1967 to 1988 the West Bank was Israeli Occupied Jordanian Territory.  From 1988 to present, the West Bank was Israeli Occupied Palestinian Territory.

Since 1988, the State of Palestine has not attempted to negotiate the any of the topics under the permanent status of negotiation under the Oslo Accords; including borders.

The State of Palestine has yet to demonstrate that it has the ability to establish its borders and enforce them.

Most Respectfully,
R


----------



## P F Tinmore (Mar 25, 2015)

RoccoR said:


> P F Tinmore,  et al,
> 
> The war was between Israel (defending) and the four prinicle Arab Nations; Egypt, Jordan, Lebanon, and Syria (aggressors).  The armistice agreements were intended to serve only as interim agreements until replaced by permanent peace treaties.
> 
> ...


That didn't answer my question.

However,

There was no sovereignty known as Palestine to be concerned about "territorial integrity" prior to 1988​
Palestine's territorial integrity was mentioned in UN resolution 3324 in *1978.*


----------



## Coyote (Mar 25, 2015)

aris2chat said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> > aris2chat said:
> ...



That's interesting - I'll have to research further because what I heard was it was a hoax designed to anger Muslims - most interesting!


----------



## toastman (Mar 25, 2015)

P F Tinmore said:


> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> > P F Tinmore,  et al,
> ...





P F Tinmore said:


> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> > P F Tinmore,  et al,
> ...


Then provide a map of Palestine with it;s international boundaries clearly marked. A map that DOESN'T say partition plan.


----------



## toastman (Mar 25, 2015)

P F Tinmore said:


> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> > P F Tinmore,  et al,
> ...



First off, it's not Israel claiming the boundaries. Second, the boundaries are not on Palestinian land. PAlestinian land is the Gaza Strip and the West Bank.
The Tinmore land transfer law doesn't apply to real life, remember ?






No matter how hard you try, you cannot refute the fact that Israel has permanent international boundaries


----------



## P F Tinmore (Mar 25, 2015)

toastman said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> > RoccoR said:
> ...








OK, now how about a map of Israel without the armistice lines.


----------



## toastman (Mar 25, 2015)

P F Tinmore said:


> toastman said:
> 
> 
> > P F Tinmore said:
> ...



That is an ancient map. That is not Palestine. That is Israel. Palestine is inside Israel.


----------



## Vigilante (Mar 25, 2015)

There can be NO PEACE, ALL muslims must be eradicated!

*New Poll Shows What a Majority of Palestinians Think About Peace With Israel(68% support rockets)*

The Blaze ^
A majority of Palestinians say they support rocket attacks on Israel and nearly half favor renewing an armed intifada, according to a new public opinion poll. The poll from the Ramallah-based Palestinian Center for Policy and Survey Research released Tuesday found that 68 percent of Palestinians in the West Bank and Gaza said they support launching rockets from Gaza at Israel if Israel does not lift its Gaza blockade....


----------



## aris2chat (Mar 26, 2015)

Vigilante said:


> There can be NO PEACE, ALL muslims must be eradicated!
> 
> *New Poll Shows What a Majority of Palestinians Think About Peace With Israel(68% support rockets)*
> 
> ...



Israel just conducted a raid on a cell they have infiltrated in the WB.  It was a hamas cell about the set off an explosion, small one, then as everyone came to help they were going to set off a much large bomb.

Best thing is preventing not suffering the event after the fact.

Bravo


----------



## Phoenall (Mar 26, 2015)

Challenger said:


> Phoenall said:
> 
> 
> > montelatici said:
> ...







 More anti semitic Jew hatred by use of the term Zionist out of context and as a racist slur.   All you are doing is using the term Zionist instead of Jew so you wont be seen as a racist. Sorry wont work as we an see right through your islamonazi/neo Marxist stooge brainwashing


----------



## Phoenall (Mar 26, 2015)

Coyote said:


> Phoenall said:
> 
> 
> > Coyote said:
> ...






 None and this is off topic. If I did this I would be punished  ! ! ! ! ! !        WHY ?


----------



## Phoenall (Mar 26, 2015)

P F Tinmore said:


> Phoenall said:
> 
> 
> > P F Tinmore said:
> ...







 Because the 1988 nation of Palestine does not have any borders until it negotiates them as it declared it would. You forget that borders are not unilateral and need to be agreed on by nations or treaty. And the Mandate for Palestine only ever defined the Mandates borders


----------



## Challenger (Mar 26, 2015)

Phoenall said:


> Challenger said:
> 
> 
> > Phoenall said:
> ...



Have you never heard of Christian Zionism, you moron? Not all Jewish people are Zionists and not all Zionists are Jewish. Christian Zionism - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia

I don't see Jewish people as any sort of "race" nor do I "hate" Jewish people any more than any other human being. The only "haters" and "racists" on this forum seem to be the pro-Israel Zionist crowd, of which you are very prominent. You want to see the face of a true hater, go look in the mirror.


----------



## Phoenall (Mar 26, 2015)

P F Tinmore said:


> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> > P F Tinmore,
> ...







 Yes the MANDATE FOR PALESTINE and not the nation of Palestine. And this map you produce is nothing more than a proposal by a committee and as such is not valid as borders. As I said borders are not unilateral and you cant claim land another nation already claims. Nor can Egypt claim Palestine as they already have their own nation. So that declaration was declared void by the UN on both those grounds.


----------



## Challenger (Mar 26, 2015)

Phoenall said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> > Phoenall said:
> ...



You started this with your continual B.S. now you're bleating about being off topic.  moving the goalposts again? 






[


----------



## Phoenall (Mar 26, 2015)

P F Tinmore said:


> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> > P F Tinmore,  _et al,_
> ...







 Here we go round and round again beause tinny cant grasp the simplest of concepts. The 1922 treaty states that they are the BORDERS OF THE MANDATE FOR PALESTINE  and also said  HERINAFTER SHORTENED TO PALESTINE.

 If as you say the Mandate is irrelevant then it could not have defined these borders, nor could it give land to the Hashemite's to create Syria and Jordan. So make your mind up did the Mandate apply to all the Islamic states it allowed to set up on land it owned after the treaty of surrender with the ottomans. Or is it all still Ottoman land and the various nations subject to Turkish rule.


----------



## Phoenall (Mar 26, 2015)

P F Tinmore said:


> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> > P F Tinmore,  _et al,_
> ...






 No it was declared by Jews who were legal Palestinian citizens in line with International laws of that time


----------



## Phoenall (Mar 26, 2015)

Challenger said:


> Phoenall said:
> 
> 
> > Challenger said:
> ...






 You are using the term Zionist out of context, much as people like you used the term Israeli out of context. This is because if you used the term Jew or Jewish then you would be shown to be a racist. Once the term Israeli used out of context became seen as a racist term people like you changed to using the term Zionist and Zionism out of context as a substitute for Jew.
 This will be used until decent people realise that you are being a racist white supremacist Jew hater, then you will find another term of reference.


----------



## Phoenall (Mar 26, 2015)

Challenger said:


> Phoenall said:
> 
> 
> > Coyote said:
> ...






 What goal posts did I move, and how is the post on topic.


----------



## Challenger (Mar 26, 2015)

aris2chat said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> > Phoenall said:
> ...



Not according to the Smithsonian website:
"From the road, it would be easy to overlook this small, unassuming chapel located in one of the oldest towns in southwestern Poland. But the wooden doors hide a spectacular, macabre interior. The skulls and leg bones of over 3,000 victims of wars and plagues cover the walls and ceiling, and a crypt below, accessible through a trapdoor, houses over 21,000 additional remains. Between 1776 and 1804, the local priest, Vaclav Tomasek, painstakingly gathered, cleaned and carefully arranged skeletons recovered from numerous, shallow mass graves left by the Thirty Years’ War, Silesian Wars and cholera outbreaks. Modeled off of similar ossuaries and catacombs in Rome, the chapel was intended as a shrine for the dead, as well as a “memento mori” for the living.

On the church’s altar, Tomasek placed the bones of important figures and curiosities, including the skull of the local mayor, skulls with bullet holes, a skull deformed by syphilis and the bones of a supposed giant. When the chapel's creator passed away in 1804, his skull was placed on the altar as well."

This Creepily Beautiful Chapel in Czermna Poland Is Constructed Out of Thousands of Human Bones Travel Smithsonian

and also Skull Chapel Czermna - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia

Not a Muslim in sight until 1671, and even then the nearest they got was western Ukraine.


----------



## Challenger (Mar 26, 2015)

Phoenall said:


> Challenger said:
> 
> 
> > Phoenall said:
> ...



Oh good grief. I'll use the term in whatever context I see fit, thanks, and leave it up to the reader to make up their own mind who the true haters and nut-jobs on this forum are. 
*
Israeli* is a nationality, not a race.
*Jewish *refers to adherents to Judaism, a monotheist religion, not a race.
*Zionist* is a follower of an irridentist political ideolgy based on the disposession by force and continuing oppression of an innocent native people in order to fullfill some fairy tale fantasy written by a bunch of fundamentalist religious fanatics.

We clear now?


----------



## RoccoR (Mar 26, 2015)

P F Tinmore,  et al,

You do know that, in addition to A/RES/33/24 being non-binding, that it does not identify any territory specific to the Palestinians.  And there was no specific claim made by the Palestinians to self-determination and independence, over any specific territory occupied by the Israelis.  The State of Israel did not deny the Palestinians the right to self-determination.  

The West Bank was Jordanian territory.  And the People of Gaza made no specific decree one way or the other.



P F Tinmore said:


> That didn't answer my question.
> 
> However,
> 
> ...


(OBSERVATION)

Citation Correction:  A/RES/33/24 29 Nov 1978

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;​
*(COMMENT)*

It reaffirms the inalienable right; (Namibia, Zimbabwe and Palestinian people) and ALL PEOPLES.  It does not say that the Palestinian People have territory; just the "right" if they had territory.     Certainly in 1978, the West Bank was Jordanian Territory.  There is an argument to be made that in 1978, the Palestinians had to "right" concerning the Gaza Strip.

But having a "right" to take action concerning self-determination, national independence, territorial integrity, and national unity and sovereignty, does not mean that you actually have a territory or must have success.  No one has to give-up anything to the Palestinians --- no matter what "right" they claim.

I have the right to earn a million dollars, and to own property, that does not mean that someone has to give me anything.  The same is true for self-determination, national independence, territorial integrity, and national unity and sovereignty.


What action did the Palestinians take regarding any attempt at self-determination?
What action did the Palestinians take regarding the establishment of independence?
What action did the Palestinians take to establish:
(a) a permanent population; 
(b) a defined territory; 
(c) government; and 
(d) capacity to enter into relations with the other states.​
It is a matter of record that the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO), the sole legitimate representative of the Palestinian people in any Palestinian territory that is liberated. (Seventh Arab League Summit 1974) did not declare independence until 1988.  In fact, the Palestinians through the Arab Higher Committee, rejected the Partition Plan and attempted through the use of force to overturn the will of the General Assembly and deny the State of Israel its inalienable rights _(self-determination, national independence, territorial integrity, and national unity and sovereignty)_.  In 1978 --- the 1948 War Independence had not yet come to a conclusion; a state of war still existed between Israel and the aggressor Arab League countries _(including Lebanon, Syria, Jordan, and Egypt)_. The UN indignation, expressed in the non-binding resolution on decolonization was a bit premature, _in the accusation of_ the denial to the Palestinian people of their inalienable national rights.  The resumption of hostilities in 1967 as a defensive move in light of the Straits Closure and the Marshaling of Forces along the Syrian Armistice Line and the Egyptian Armistice Line lead directly to the occupation.  The Sneak attack in 1973, by the very same Arab League Forces was merely a continuation of 1948 War of Independence.  The Occupation of the various territories was a strategic defense move to avert further aggression.

Most Respectfully,
R


----------



## montelatici (Mar 26, 2015)

The aggressors in 1948 were the Europeans, who attacked the non-Jews that remained in the Jew part of the partition.  The Arab states intervened in an attempt to stop the ethnic cleansing and genocide.

" a report prepared by the intelligence services of the Israeli army, dated 30 June 1948 and entitled “The emigration of Palestinian Arabs in the period 1/12/1947-1/6/1948”. This document sets at 391,000 the number of Palestinians who had already left the territory that was by then in the hands of Israel, and evaluates the various factors that had prompted their decisions to leave. “At least 55% of the total of the exodus was caused by our (Haganah/IDF) operations.” To this figure, the report’s compilers add the operations of the Irgun and Lehi, which “directly (caused) some 15%... of the emigration”. A further 2% was attributed to explicit expulsion orders issued by Israeli troops, and 1% to their psychological warfare. This leads to a figure of 73% for departures caused directly by the Israelis. In addition, the report attributes 22% of the departures to “fears” and “a crisis of confidence” affecting the Palestinian population. As for Arab calls for flight, these were reckoned to be significant in only 5% of cases..."

The expulsion of the Palestinians re-examined - Le Monde diplomatique - English edition


----------



## Humanity (Mar 26, 2015)

Phoenall said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> > Phoenall said:
> ...



Mostly Spain?

It was virtually the whole of Portugal!


----------



## Phoenall (Mar 26, 2015)

Challenger said:


> Phoenall said:
> 
> 
> > Challenger said:
> ...






No as you are putting your anti semitic slant on it

 Yes Israeli is a Nationality

 No Jewish is a race, culture and member of a religion

And Zionist is a person that believes the dispossessed Jews of the world should have a homeland and once a homeland is achieved  to have the right to defend that homeland from attack.


What you all a Zionist is nothing more than a muslim or a neo Marxist, as both those ideologies follow those rules. So now we know that you are a LYING POS RACIST JEW HATER that would like to see every Jew in Israel murdered in cold blood by the muslims


----------



## P F Tinmore (Mar 26, 2015)

Phoenall said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> > RoccoR said:
> ...


What international law was that?


----------



## toastman (Mar 26, 2015)

montelatici said:


> The aggressors in 1948 were the Europeans, who attacked the non-Jews that remained in the Jew part of the partition.  The Arab states intervened in an attempt to stop the ethnic cleansing and genocide.
> 
> " a report prepared by the intelligence services of the Israeli army, dated 30 June 1948 and entitled “The emigration of Palestinian Arabs in the period 1/12/1947-1/6/1948”. This document sets at 391,000 the number of Palestinians who had already left the territory that was by then in the hands of Israel, and evaluates the various factors that had prompted their decisions to leave. “At least 55% of the total of the exodus was caused by our (Haganah/IDF) operations.” To this figure, the report’s compilers add the operations of the Irgun and Lehi, which “directly (caused) some 15%... of the emigration”. A further 2% was attributed to explicit expulsion orders issued by Israeli troops, and 1% to their psychological warfare. This leads to a figure of 73% for departures caused directly by the Israelis. In addition, the report attributes 22% of the departures to “fears” and “a crisis of confidence” affecting the Palestinian population. As for Arab calls for flight, these were reckoned to be significant in only 5% of cases..."
> 
> The expulsion of the Palestinians re-examined - Le Monde diplomatique - English edition


Liar !Arab invasion

Jews were attacked and massacred WAY before any Arab was killed. Also, the Arab invasion was pre planned. They threatened before hand that if Israel were to become a reality, they would destroy it.

Either way, they clearly are the aggressors as they attacked Israel first when they had no part of the original fight. Not to mention the whole 5 on 1 surrounding Israel thing.


----------



## aris2chat (Mar 26, 2015)

Challenger said:


> aris2chat said:
> 
> 
> > Coyote said:
> ...



Muslims from 1444 to 1699 in Poland.  Chapel was built  1776 from bones in a mass grave.  Christians would not have been buried in mass graves but enemy muslims would have been.
Plague avoided poland.


----------



## RoccoR (Mar 26, 2015)

P F Tinmore, _et al,_

Yes, our friend "Phoenall" is absolutely correct.



P F Tinmore said:


> Phoenall said:
> 
> 
> > No it was declared by Jews who were legal Palestinian citizens in line with International laws of that time
> ...


*(COMMENT)*

Palestine Citizenship Order of 24 July 1925 (Statutory Rules and Orders, I925, No. 777; which came into force on 1 August 1925)
Article 7 of the Palestine Mandate required the Administration of Palestine to enact a nationality law.

The regulations under the Immigration Ordinance, 1925, set up a statutory procedure for the introduction of Jewish immigrant labour into Palestine. The Palestinian Citizenship Order in Council, 1925, facilitates the acquisition of Palestinian nationality by persons settling in the country, including those who opted for Palestinian citizenship under the Palestine Legislative Council Election Order in Council, 1922.

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

The Mandate and Citizenship

Class A mandates (Syria, Palestine, Iraq, Lebanon and Transjordan) recognised the peoples of these territories to have reached advanced stage of development and their independence could be recognised once they have achieved a capacity to govern themselves. It is universally and legally accepted that sovereignty in the mandatory territories lie in the inhabitants of the territory in question (Article 22 of the Covenant of The League of Nations).

In Palestine, citizenship status for those living in the country was governed by The Palestine Citizenship Order-in-Council of 24 July 1925 which came into force on 1 August 1925. It regulated Palestine citizenship for the duration of the Mandate. All subjects habitually resident in Palestine on 1 August 1925 became Palestine citizens. Citizenship could also be acquired by birth. Persons born to Palestinian fathers (no matter where that birth took place) acquired Palestine citizenship. Any other person could also acquire citizenship by means of naturalization, subject only to the length of period of residency.

Under International Law, Palestine, throughout the Mandatory period, was to receive administrative assistance and advice from the Mandatory to help it set up its own government. Already, Palestine had its fixed boundaries, its government institutions, its own currency and, in 1934, its national anthem.​Special Note:  Because of the Nature of the cultures, UNRWA document pertaining to The laws and procedures relating Women's Nationality _(Contemporary Laws)_ is available merely for greater detail.  But this information applies to now --- as opposed to then.

Most Respectfully,
R


----------



## P F Tinmore (Mar 26, 2015)

An excellent read, Rocco, thanks for the link.

Partition and the Law - 1948


----------



## montelatici (Mar 26, 2015)

The aggressors are the people that come from somewhere else and conquer a place with an existing population.  How can you not understand that basic fact?  Jews from Europe went to Palestine with a clear intent to evict the Christians and Muslims and make it a Jewish state.  That is an invasion you lunatic.


----------



## toastman (Mar 26, 2015)

montelatici said:


> The aggressors are the people that come from somewhere else and conquer a place with an existing population.  How can you not understand that basic fact?  Jews from Europe went to Palestine with a clear intent to evict the Christians and Muslims and make it a Jewish state.  That is an invasion you lunatic.


The fact that you attack me personally shows how frustrated you are.

Poor Monti cannot accept the truth. You cannot change the definition of a word to suit your agenda. Any land that was conquered had nothing to with the immigration process. Oh, and it was the ARABS that started the war you are talking about. Jews conquered land AFTER they were attacked by 5  countries.. 

The word invasion has several definitions, none of which apply to the European immigration. But the main definition is a military offensive 

Go to your doctor Monti, maybe he can treat you for your truth allergies..


----------



## montelatici (Mar 26, 2015)

*What action did the Palestinians take regarding any attempt at self-determination?*
The Christians and Muslims of the Palestinian Delegation in London attempted to peacefully convince the Mandatory to accept their constitution for an independent state as early as 1922.  In the first letter the Palestinian Delegation of Muslims and Christians wrote, in part:

_"The Delegation requests that the constitution for Palestine should—
_


_
(1) Safeguard the civil, political and economic interests of the People.
(2) Provide for the creation of a national independent Government in accordance with the spirit of paragraph 4, Article 22, of the Covenant of the League of Nations."_

*What action did the Palestinians take regarding the establishment of independence?*
The Arab revolt for independence of 1936-1939 was waged against the Europeans (British and Jewish).  The 1937 Mandatory Report goes into detail regarding this "terrorism" that cost the lives of British soldiers.

Mandate for Palestine - Report of the Mandatory to the LoN 31 December 1937 


*What action did the Palestinians take to establish:*
*(a) a permanent population; 
*
The Christians and Muslims were always a permanent population in Palestine.  What are you going on about?

*(b) a defined territory; 
*
The territory of Palestine was clearly defined. 

(*c) government; and 
*
The Christians and Muslims wanted to establish a Government and pleaded with the British to allow them to do so as early as 1922

"The Delegation are, therefore, convinced that nothing will safeguard their interests but the creation of a National Government on the lines laid down in No. 2 of our demands found at the close of our letter to you dated 21st February, 1922. A National Government is the only authority that is competent to decide what is good and what is bad for these people.

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 

*(d) capacity to enter into relations with the other states. 
*
The British would not allow the Christians and Muslims to establish their Government  which would have had the capacity to enter into relations with other states, nor did they recognize the proposed Palestinian constitution, but the Christians and Muslims spent months in London trying to convince the British.

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


----------



## P F Tinmore (Mar 26, 2015)

toastman said:


> montelatici said:
> 
> 
> > The aggressors are the people that come from somewhere else and conquer a place with an existing population.  How can you not understand that basic fact?  Jews from Europe went to Palestine with a clear intent to evict the Christians and Muslims and make it a Jewish state.  That is an invasion you lunatic.
> ...


Jews conquered land AFTER they were attacked by 5 countries..​
What did they conquer from those 5 countries?


----------



## toastman (Mar 26, 2015)

P F Tinmore said:


> toastman said:
> 
> 
> > montelatici said:
> ...



Nothing .


----------



## P F Tinmore (Mar 26, 2015)

RoccoR said:


> P F Tinmore,  et al,
> 
> You do know that, in addition to A/RES/33/24 being non-binding, that it does not identify any territory specific to the Palestinians.  And there was no specific claim made by the Palestinians to self-determination and independence, over any specific territory occupied by the Israelis.  The State of Israel did not deny the Palestinians the right to self-determination.
> 
> ...



What action did the Palestinians take to establish:
(a) a permanent population; 
(b) a defined territory; 
(c) government; and 
(d) capacity to enter into relations with the other states.
----------------
A and B they already had.

C and D they couldn't do with a gun in their face.


----------



## P F Tinmore (Mar 26, 2015)

toastman said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> > toastman said:
> ...


Then why your stupid post?


----------



## toastman (Mar 26, 2015)

P F Tinmore said:


> toastman said:
> 
> 
> > P F Tinmore said:
> ...


Why your stupid question? You know Israel conquered nothing from the 5 Arab states.

They conquered land allotted to the Palestinians AFTER they were attacked by 5 Arab states AND Palestinian militias. I forgot to post that last one, but you should have already known that.


----------



## P F Tinmore (Mar 26, 2015)

toastman said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> > toastman said:
> ...


So Israel conquered Palestinian land because it was attacked by 5 foreign countries?


----------



## toastman (Mar 26, 2015)

P F Tinmore said:


> toastman said:
> 
> 
> > P F Tinmore said:
> ...


Did you not read my post ?? Palestinian also fought against Israel n that war. They didn't conquer Palestinian land. They conquered land allotted to the Palestinians ...


----------



## P F Tinmore (Mar 26, 2015)

toastman said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> > toastman said:
> ...


Palestine had no army.


----------



## toastman (Mar 26, 2015)

P F Tinmore said:


> toastman said:
> 
> 
> > P F Tinmore said:
> ...


Palestinian militias took part in the offensive against Israel. One of the was called the Holy War Army.


----------



## P F Tinmore (Mar 26, 2015)

toastman said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> > toastman said:
> ...


Look at any video of the conflict. It is always Israel's military pounding Palestinian civilians.


----------



## toastman (Mar 26, 2015)

P F Tinmore said:


> toastman said:
> 
> 
> > P F Tinmore said:
> ...


Propaganda videos maybe. I've read many articles about the war. It was not just Israel bombing Palestinians. Take your Palestinian glasses off


----------



## montelatici (Mar 26, 2015)

The Jews were European colonists from another continent.  They invaded.  Full stop.


----------



## toastman (Mar 26, 2015)

montelatici said:


> The Jews were European colonists from another continent.  They invaded.  Full stop.


Colonists LOL. Your propaganda knows no bounds. 

You can keep saying they invaded if you want Monti, but at the end of the day, anyone can see how easily I proved you to be wrong.


----------



## aris2chat (Mar 26, 2015)

toastman said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> > toastman said:
> ...




did you really expect?


----------



## Phoenall (Mar 27, 2015)

P F Tinmore said:


> Phoenall said:
> 
> 
> > P F Tinmore said:
> ...





 MANDATE FOR PALESTINE


----------



## Phoenall (Mar 27, 2015)

montelatici said:


> The aggressors are the people that come from somewhere else and conquer a place with an existing population.  How can you not understand that basic fact?  Jews from Europe went to Palestine with a clear intent to evict the Christians and Muslims and make it a Jewish state.  That is an invasion you lunatic.






 Why cant you understand that this applies to the arab muslims who came illegally and took the land from the Jews. That was an armed invasion you MORON as they were not invited by the land legal owners. The muslims have a clear intent to take over the world and either massacre or convert by force the indigenous peoples of the world.
 IT IS WRITTEN IN THE KORAN THAT YOU FOLLOW


----------



## Phoenall (Mar 27, 2015)

montelatici said:


> *What action did the Palestinians take regarding any attempt at self-determination?*
> The Christians and Muslims of the Palestinian Delegation in London attempted to peacefully convince the Mandatory to accept their constitution for an independent state as early as 1922.  In the first letter the Palestinian Delegation of Muslims and Christians wrote, in part:
> 
> _"The Delegation requests that the constitution for Palestine should—
> ...







 BULLSHIT


----------



## Phoenall (Mar 27, 2015)

P F Tinmore said:


> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> > P F Tinmore,  et al,
> ...






Nope they had illegal immigrants with no right to any land, no defined territory at all as they had no treaty giving them any. Unless you can find one that says the NATION OF PALESTINE will have this defined terrotory


----------



## Phoenall (Mar 27, 2015)

P F Tinmore said:


> toastman said:
> 
> 
> > P F Tinmore said:
> ...






 Yep life is a bitch when you take part on the losing side.


----------



## Phoenall (Mar 27, 2015)

P F Tinmore said:


> toastman said:
> 
> 
> > P F Tinmore said:
> ...






 Nor did Israel .............................. So your point is what


----------



## Phoenall (Mar 27, 2015)

P F Tinmore said:


> toastman said:
> 
> 
> > P F Tinmore said:
> ...







 Can you prove they are civilians then, they could just as easily be insurgents that don't wear any uniform


----------



## Phoenall (Mar 27, 2015)

montelatici said:


> The Jews were European colonists from another continent.  They invaded.  Full stop.







 WRONG AGAIN as they were invited to migrate and settle by the lands LEGAL OWNERS.  It was the arab muslims that were the invaders and aggressors


----------



## montelatici (Mar 27, 2015)

Phoenall said:


> montelatici said:
> 
> 
> > The aggressors are the people that come from somewhere else and conquer a place with an existing population.  How can you not understand that basic fact?  Jews from Europe went to Palestine with a clear intent to evict the Christians and Muslims and make it a Jewish state.  That is an invasion you lunatic.
> ...



There were no Jews in Palestine when Muslim converts from Christianity (led by Arabians) conquered the land from the Romans (Byzantines).  The people of Palestine were Christians, as was required by Roman law.  You are such a moron you can't figure out how moronic you are. LOL

The invasion was a European invasion of Palestine on the part of European Jews.  It is just a fact, before 1850 there hardly any Jews in Palestine and no European Jews  by 1948 the Europeans had conquered the land through war and evicted most of the Christians and Muslims that were living on it.  That is an invasion.  No ifs, ands or buts about it.


----------



## RoccoR (Mar 27, 2015)

P F Tinmore,  toastman, et al,

This is a matter of practical semantics and political rhetoric.  The Arab Military Forces _(Lebanon, Syria, Iraq, Transjordan, and Egypt)_, the Arab Palestinians indigenous _(irregular militia of the Arab Higher Committee)_, and the Jewish Forces _[Jewish Brigade formed during WWII, and their irregular forces (the Haganah, the Palmach, and the Irgun --- folded into the new Israeli Defense Force (IDF)]_ now declared independent and sovereign Israel, all had a slightly different perspective on the situation in mid-May 1948.  And these varying perspective account for the differing interpretation of events in their individual realities.

Today, the word "conquer" is probably not the best choice of words.

*(ESPECIALLY FOR P F Tinmore)* When the last of the Mandatory (UK) Forces departed on the midnight between 14 May and 15 May, it left behind an unusual set of conditions behind --- in its wake.  And I should, give credit to P F Tinmore's previous attempts to bring this out.  The Successor Government for the withdrawing UK Mandatory was the UN Palestine Commission (UNPC).  However --- by UK demand, the UNPC was not to arrive and take up Administration until the withdraw was complete (political end-fighting).  But on the Morning of 15 May, Arab Military Forces simultaneously crossed their respective borders and engaged Israeli Forces.  Thus, the Israeli War of Independence was on --- and the UN was in the process of replacing the UNPC _(Lake Success, New York) _with yet another successor government --- Count Bernadotte, United Nations Mediator, appointed by the General Assembly on the same day as the five Arab nations invaded.



			
				Mitchell Bard said:
			
		

> Excerpts:  The 1948 War:
> Violence in the Holy Land broke out almost immediately after the UN announced partition on November 29, 1947. Jamal Husseini, the Arab Higher Committee's spokesman, had told the UN prior to the partition vote the Arabs would drench "the soil of our beloved country with the last drop of our blood . . .
> 
> Arabs Take Responsibility
> ...



Within weeks of the escalated conflict, Israel had occupied most of the territory formerly cover by the Mandate, with the exception of the "West Bank" of the Jordan, and the Gaza Strip, held by Egyptian forces. 



P F Tinmore said:


> toastman said:
> 
> 
> > Did you not read my post ?? Palestinian also fought against Israel n that war. They didn't conquer Palestinian land. They conquered land allotted to the Palestinians ...
> ...


*(COMMENT)*

There was no country of Palestine, with Arab Sovereignty.  Autonomy had been rejected as unsatisfactory by the AHC.  There were Arab Palestinians, but they declined to establish an "Arab State;" and failed to take by force the whole of the territory formally covered by the Mandate.  At the signing of the last Armistice Agreement, there was no territory that was not already under the effective control of either Israel, Egypt and Jordan.

Most Respectfully,
R


----------



## P F Tinmore (Mar 27, 2015)

RoccoR said:


> P F Tinmore,  toastman, et al,
> 
> This is a matter of practical semantics and political rhetoric.  The Arab Military Forces _(Lebanon, Syria, Iraq, Transjordan, and Egypt)_, the Arab Palestinians indigenous _(irregular militia of the Arab Higher Committee)_, and the Jewish Forces _[Jewish Brigade formed during WWII, and their irregular forces (the Haganah, the Palmach, and the Irgun --- folded into the new Israeli Defense Force (IDF)]_ now declared independent and sovereign Israel, all had a slightly different perspective on the situation in mid-May 1948.  And these varying perspective account for the differing interpretation of events in their individual realities.
> 
> ...


Indeed, and "effective control" is a term that defines a military occupation.

In 1949 the UN divided Palestine into three areas of military occupation with the armistice lines that were specifically not to be political or territorial boundaries.


----------



## toastman (Mar 27, 2015)

P F Tinmore said:


> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> > P F Tinmore,  toastman, et al,
> ...


The armistice agreements did no such things. That is just another Tinmore lie. 
The armistice agreements were signed wayyyy before the treaties between Israel and Jordan & Israel and Egypt were signed, that gave Israel permanent international boundaries with those two countries.


----------



## P F Tinmore (Mar 27, 2015)

toastman said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> > RoccoR said:
> ...


Interesting.

Under what authority did Israel claim boundaries on Palestinian land?


----------



## toastman (Mar 27, 2015)

P F Tinmore said:


> toastman said:
> 
> 
> > P F Tinmore said:
> ...


It's not Palestinian land. It's Israeli land. And it it not Israel who is claiming the borders. 
Palestinian land is Gaza and The West Bank.
Israel's permanent international boundaries are not up for debate.


----------



## toastman (Mar 27, 2015)

Palestinian land   

You're too funny Tinmore.


----------



## toastman (Mar 27, 2015)




----------



## P F Tinmore (Mar 27, 2015)

toastman said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> > RoccoR said:
> ...


Interesting.

Under what authority did Israel claim boundaries on Palestinian land?


toastman said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> > toastman said:
> ...


In both the Egyptian and Jordanian 1949 armistice agreements (that Israel signed) the Negev was Palestine.

What happened since then?


----------



## P F Tinmore (Mar 27, 2015)

toastman said:


>


Read the disclaimer on the bottom of that map.


----------



## Phoenall (Mar 27, 2015)

montelatici said:


> Phoenall said:
> 
> 
> > montelatici said:
> ...






 Which islamonazi website did you get that crap from. There were Jews in Palestine from 2500 BCE right up until the present day.  Read this for the history of the Jews during the Roman period

History of Palestine - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia

 And see that the Jews were present all the way through the Roman reign. Christianity did not become Romanised until near the end of the Roman Empire.


 The European Jews were invited by the lands LEGAL OWNERS so it was not an invasion at all. The last 10 invasion's have all been by muslims over the last 1,000 years.


----------



## toastman (Mar 27, 2015)

P F Tinmore said:


> toastman said:
> 
> 
> > P F Tinmore said:
> ...



No it wasn't. You're even going against what the U.N says is Palestinian land


----------



## Phoenall (Mar 27, 2015)

P F Tinmore said:


> toastman said:
> 
> 
> > P F Tinmore said:
> ...







 Mandate for Palestine land if you read the treaties, to become Israel after the UN had accepted Israel into the family.


----------



## toastman (Mar 27, 2015)

P F Tinmore said:


> toastman said:
> 
> 
> >
> ...



Every map on the UN page says that. Has nothing to do with Israel..


"The Israel-Jordan Treaty of Peace was signed on October 26, 1994. The treaty resolved territorial and border issues that were ongoing since the 1948 war. The treaty specified and fully recognized the international border between Israel and Jordan

"The Israel-Egypt Peace Treaty, signed on March 26, 1979 created an officially recognized international border along the 1906 line, with Egypt renouncing all claims to the Gaza Strip"

Borders of Israel - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia


----------



## RoccoR (Mar 27, 2015)

P F Tinmore, et al,

I think you have something wrong here.



P F Tinmore said:


> In both the Egyptian and Jordanian 1949 armistice agreements (that Israel signed) the Negev was Palestine.
> 
> What happened since then?


(REFERENCE)

1949 Armistice Agreement Israel-Egypt
1949 Armistice Agreement Israel-Jordan

*(COMMENT)*

As you said, the Arab Palestinian needs to remember that:

The Arab Palestinian was not a party to the Armistice Agreements; the were between Israel and its adjacent Arab States _(Egypt, Jordan, Lebanon and Syria)_.
The Armistice Agreements simple stopped the movement of the FEBA _(Forward Edge of the Battle Area)_.
The Armistice Demarcation Lines were intended to be temporary arrangement, separating hostile forces, not to be construed in any sense as a political or territorial boundary.
I cannot find in either Armistice Agreement where the disposition of forces in the Negev Dessert is discussed.  Can you point that out to me.  If you are talking about the phrases:

Article III-2, 1949 Armistice Agreement Israel-Egypt  wherein it says:  "and shall be beyond the Egypt-Palestine frontier."
Article V, 1d, 1949 Armistice Agreement Israel-Jordan wherein it says:  "to the southernmost tip of Palestine,"
It should be remembered that the intent of the conflict was to dissolve the newly formed State of Israel, and establish Arab control over the entirety of the territory to which the Mandate of Palestine formerly applied.  No where in any of the Armistice Agreements assign any territory to the entity of Palestine _(the capacity of the government to exercise jurisdiction over all control of the territory)  _or the control of Palestinian Forces.  For one reason, that would be beyond the scope and intent of the Armistice Arrangements; for another, there was no party to the conflict know as Palestine, thus no area of control.  And of course, Israel was originally apportioned the Negev in the General Assembly Resolution 181(II):  The Partition Plan.  

The Peace Treaty between Israel-Egypt (1979) and Israel-Jordan (1994), came after both the continuation of the 1948 War in 1967 and again in 1973.  In both of those outbreaks of hostilities, the "sovereign control" _(the capacity of the government to exercise jurisdiction over the territory)_ of the Negev Desert was never in question - in the hands of the Israelis.  The Arab instigation and incitement of armed conflict in both cases saw an unqualified military defeat of Arab Forces.  

Most Respectfully,
R


----------



## montelatici (Mar 27, 2015)

RoccoR said:


> P F Tinmore, et al,
> 
> I think you have something wrong here.
> 
> ...



"It should be remembered that the intent of the conflict was to dissolve the newly formed State of Israel, "

It should be remembered that the intent of the conflict was to protect the Christians and Muslims from Jewish aggression which was intended to ethnically cleanse and/or eliminate the non-Jews living in the portion of Palestine illegally assigned to the Europeans.


----------



## RoccoR (Mar 27, 2015)

montelatici,  et al,

That is the political cover the Arabs use to justify their armed invasion _(by five countries)_.



montelatici said:


> It should be remembered that the intent of the conflict was to protect the Christians and Muslims from Jewish aggression which was intended to ethnically cleanse and/or eliminate the non-Jews living in the portion of Palestine illegally assigned to the Europeans.


*(COMMENT)*

In the last 6 decades (plus), slowly the institutional knowledge about the real reasons for the the 1948 Invasion, by the Arab Coalition, has been painted over, camouflaged and faded by the pro-Palestinian perpetual victim rhetoric.  But back then (1948), the ground truth was clearly known.

Arabs Take Responsibility
The UN blamed the Arabs for the violence.  Arab opposition to the plan of the Assembly of 29 November 1947 took the form of organized efforts by strong Arab elements, to prevent its implementation of the Jewish self-determination and the establishment of the Jewish State; the Arab intention was to thwart its objectives by threats and acts of violence, including repeated armed incident and events. The UN Palestine Commission was never permitted by the Arabs or British to go to Palestine to implement the resolution. On February 16, 1948, the Commission reported to the Security Council:​
Powerful Arab interests, both inside and outside Palestine, are defying the resolution of the General Assembly and are engaged in a deliberate effort to alter by force the settlement envisaged therein.
Para 3c, A/AC.21/9 S/676 16 February 1948​The real reasons were hard to distinguish and articulate.  But there is little doubt that in addition to crushing the development of a Jewish National Home, the surrounding Arab countries apparently wanted to divvy-up the territory formerly under Mandate, and add it the sovereignty.  Certainly Egypt and Jordan had staked-out their territorial cuts (the Gaza Strip and West Bank), while the military expeditions Lebanon and Syria were unsuccessful. 

Most Respectfully,
R
​


----------



## Indofred (Mar 27, 2015)

*



			Free Palestine
		
Click to expand...

*
*That's what the Jews thought when they invaded.
Why pay for it when we can steal it for nothing?*


----------



## toastman (Mar 27, 2015)

Indofred said:


> *
> 
> 
> 
> ...


An invasion is a military offensive. Jewish immigration only means an invasion to propagandists, and Jew hating Muslims , like yourself.


----------



## toastman (Mar 27, 2015)

montelatici said:


> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> > P F Tinmore, et al,
> ...


That is the most pathetic lie you have come up with Monti. It really says a lot about you when all you have is propaganda is lies.

What's funny is that you claim Israel started the Six day war because they attacked first, but when FIVE, yes FIVE Arab states combine and surround Israel with the clear intent of destroying the newly founded state, you come up with this garbage excuse.


----------



## toastman (Mar 27, 2015)

RoccoR said:


> montelatici,  et al,
> 
> That is the political cover the Arabs use to justify their armed invasion _(by five countries)_.
> 
> ...


Excellent post Rocco. Specially the bold    

One thing I have learned about many pro Palestinian propagandists when I joined this site is that they simply hate the truth, as it conflicts with their agenda


----------



## P F Tinmore (Mar 28, 2015)

toastman said:


> Indofred said:
> 
> 
> > *
> ...


Palestine was born under military occupation and troop strength against them was even increased in the '30s.

It definitely was a military invasion.


----------



## hortysir (Mar 28, 2015)

montelatici said:


> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> > P F Tinmore, et al,
> ...


Really?
I would like to read over the sources supporting that opinion


----------



## toastman (Mar 28, 2015)

P F Tinmore said:


> toastman said:
> 
> 
> > Indofred said:
> ...



A Jewish military invaded Mandatory Palestine from Europe and started attacking Palestinians ? Link?


----------



## P F Tinmore (Mar 28, 2015)

toastman said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> > toastman said:
> ...


I didn't say that. Israel (the mooch capital of the world) mooched Britain's military for their invasion.


----------



## toastman (Mar 28, 2015)

P F Tinmore said:


> toastman said:
> 
> 
> > P F Tinmore said:
> ...



No they didn't. Is this another Tinmore lie ? Where's your link ?

You cannot just make up definitions to suit your agenda .

Oh, and 'Palestine' is the mooch capital of the world.


----------



## Indofred (Mar 28, 2015)

toastman said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> > toastman said:
> ...



Some people deny the holocaust as well.


----------



## Phoenall (Mar 28, 2015)

montelatici said:


> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> > P F Tinmore, et al,
> ...







 HOW ABOUT ALINK SHOWING THAT IT WAS ILLEGAL THEN Abdul. Or are you being fed this crap by your imam.


----------



## Phoenall (Mar 28, 2015)

Indofred said:


> *
> 
> 
> 
> ...







 Explain again how they invade their own land give to them by the lands legal owners ?


----------



## Phoenall (Mar 28, 2015)

P F Tinmore said:


> toastman said:
> 
> 
> > Indofred said:
> ...







And it still took until 1988 before the arab muslims became  a nation of sorts, the world is still waiting for them to fulfil their promises of a peace treaty and mutually agreed borders.


----------



## Phoenall (Mar 28, 2015)

Phoenall said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> > toastman said:
> ...





Indofred said:


> toastman said:
> 
> 
> > P F Tinmore said:
> ...






 And unfortunately for you they happen to be mainly muslims.


----------



## Phoenall (Mar 28, 2015)

P F Tinmore said:


> toastman said:
> 
> 
> > P F Tinmore said:
> ...







LINK ? ? ? ?


----------



## P F Tinmore (Mar 28, 2015)

Phoenall said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> > toastman said:
> ...


Military courts were established, awarding 58 death sentences by the end of 1938, apart from numerous life imprisonments. 93/ To interdict support for the guerrillas, a barbed-wire fence, called the "Teggert line" was set up along portions of the Syrian, Transjordanian and Lebanese borders.
"Throughout 1937 British armed forces in Palestine had amounted to no more than two infantry brigades. In July 1938, two additional infantry battalions, two squadrons of the Royal Air Force, an armoured car and cavalry unit, and a battle cruiser were endeavouring to suppress terrorism which, since April, had become open rebellion. *By the end of October there were in the country eighteen infantry battalions, two cavalry regiments, a battery of howitzers, and armoured car units, or a total of 18,000 to 20,000 troops, while some 2,930 additional British police were recruited during the year.* A virtual military reoccupation of the country proved necessary to deal with the explosion of bombs and land mines, the murder and snipings which were almost daily occurrences. Heavy military concentrations alone preserved a semblance of order in the northern and central parts of the country,

Mandated Palestine - The beginning of Palestinian resistance​
The LoN Covenant called for the Mandate to render administrative assistance and advice.

That is some serious administrative assistance and advice.


----------



## toastman (Mar 28, 2015)

P F Tinmore said:


> Phoenall said:
> 
> 
> > P F Tinmore said:
> ...


What does Britains military might have to do with the link Phoenall and I are asking for ? 

How did you come up with the idea that Israel mooched Britain's military?


----------



## Phoenall (Mar 28, 2015)

P F Tinmore said:


> Phoenall said:
> 
> 
> > P F Tinmore said:
> ...






 Time to read and understand the Mandate for Palestine as it says this


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


*ART. 9.*
The Mandatory shall be responsible for seeing that the judicial system established in Palestine shall assure to foreigners, as well as to natives, a complete guarantee of their rights.

Respect for the personal status of the various peoples and communities and for their religious interests shall be fully guaranteed. In particular, the control and administration of Wakfs shall be exercised in accordance with religious law and the dispositions of the founders.


 Guess you are not researching the subject well enough................


----------



## P F Tinmore (Mar 28, 2015)

toastman said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> > Phoenall said:
> ...


*According to the surveys conducted at the time, it was not Britain that the Arabs had opted for to run the Palestine Mandate. They had opted for the United States to be their supervisory body. The Zionist leadership opted for the trusteeship of Great Britain over Palestine and when Turkish rule formally ended under the Treaty of Sevres on 10 August 1920, the Zionists ensured that the famous Balfour Declaration was embodied in it under Article 22.​*​Yet, it is worth remembering that the British Mandate over Palestine was ratified in July 1922 by the League of Nations, but did not come into effect until September 1923. But it could not become operational until peace with Turkey was signed and sealed in August 1924. So legally speaking, Palestine from 1917 (when the Balfour Declaration was issued) until 1924 (when the peace Treaty was ratified with Turkey - a total of 7 years) was 'occupied territory'. This means that Britain remained bound by the restrictions of the Hague Convention of 1907 outlining the laws of war and war crimes. Where are the legal brains today to stand by this?

Preparing the Ground - 1948​
The US would not have implemented the Zionist plan to take over Palestine.

It would require military force to impose their plan onto Palestine. Britain was on board to do it.


----------



## Phoenall (Mar 28, 2015)

P F Tinmore said:


> toastman said:
> 
> 
> > P F Tinmore said:
> ...






 The Mandate dates from 1922 not 1948, and the arabs agreed with Britain being the mandate power. They could not change ship in the middle of an ocean so they were stuck with Britain. In 1948 Britain had already given up the Mandate  and the UN took over.

 Your link is hardly what could be called  non partisan as it only puts the arab muslim side of the story.


----------



## P F Tinmore (Mar 28, 2015)

Phoenall said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> > toastman said:
> ...


You can link to something that says different.


----------



## Phoenall (Mar 29, 2015)

P F Tinmore said:


> Phoenall said:
> 
> 
> > P F Tinmore said:
> ...







 So simple to do that it is laughable

 The Sykes-Picot Agreement did not call for Arab sovereignty, but for the "suzerainty of an Arab chief" and "an international administration, the form of which is to be decided upon after consultation with Russia, and subsequently in consultation with the other allies, and the representatives of the Sherif of Mecca."

At the Peace Conference in 1919, Emir Faisal, speaking on behalf of King Hussein, asked for Arab independence, or at minimum the right to pick the mandatory.[14] In the end,* he recommended an Arab state under a British mandate

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/British_Mandate_for_Palestine_(legal_instrument)*


----------



## toastman (Mar 29, 2015)

P F Tinmore said:


> toastman said:
> 
> 
> > P F Tinmore said:
> ...



Absolutely NOTHING in your link suggest that Israel mooched Britain's military. Looks like it is another Tinmore lie.

Zionist takeover of Palestine? Palestinian propaganda. Jews never took over land until being attacked by Arab states and Palestinians. 

Funny, 5 Arab states surround the region and attack the newly founded state with the help of Palestinian militias, with the intent of destroying it, but instead Israel ends up going on the offensive after beginning the war on the defensive , and manage to increase their territory. 
Now almost 7 decades later, propagandists are trying to re write history and make Israel look like the aggressor..

People are entitled to their own opinion, but not to their own facts.


----------



## P F Tinmore (Mar 29, 2015)

toastman said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> > toastman said:
> ...


The Palestinians were at home minding their own business.

What was the Zionist scum doing there?


----------



## toastman (Mar 29, 2015)

P F Tinmore said:


> toastman said:
> 
> 
> > P F Tinmore said:
> ...



What a stupid question and massive deflection.

So I guess we can agree that you "Israel mooched Britain's military" statement is a lie....


----------



## toastman (Mar 29, 2015)

Is this the Palestinians minding their own business?



1929 Hebron massacre - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia


----------



## P F Tinmore (Mar 29, 2015)

toastman said:


> Is this the Palestinians minding their own business?
> 
> 
> 
> 1929 Hebron massacre - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia


Are you trying to start history in the middle?


----------



## Phoenall (Mar 29, 2015)

P F Tinmore said:


> toastman said:
> 
> 
> > P F Tinmore said:
> ...







 The Palestinians just so happened to be Zionists, that is their home. It was the arab muslim scum that invaded and attacked the Palestinians minding their own business


----------



## Phoenall (Mar 29, 2015)

P F Tinmore said:


> toastman said:
> 
> 
> > Is this the Palestinians minding their own business?
> ...





 We can go back as far as you want till we get to the massacre that started it all in Medina 635 C.E.


----------



## toastman (Mar 29, 2015)

P F Tinmore said:


> toastman said:
> 
> 
> > Is this the Palestinians minding their own business?
> ...



1834 Hebron massacre - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia

or

1517 Hebron attacks - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia

Albeit the latter did not involve Palestinians


----------



## montelatici (Apr 1, 2015)

Phoenall said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> > toastman said:
> ...



The Jews came from another continent.  How can they have been "minding their own business"?


----------



## toastman (Apr 1, 2015)

montelatici said:


> Phoenall said:
> 
> 
> > P F Tinmore said:
> ...


So there were no Jews living in the region that didn't come from Europe ??


----------



## Phoenall (Apr 2, 2015)

montelatici said:


> Phoenall said:
> 
> 
> > P F Tinmore said:
> ...






 They were invited to settle by the LANDS LEGAL OWNERS with a view to creating a NATIONAL HOME FOR THE JEWS. To this end they were granted mandate Palestinian citizenship. The only invaders were arab muslims that had no right to be there


----------



## theliq (Apr 2, 2015)

toastman said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> > toastman said:
> ...


Then why mention it


----------



## theliq (Apr 2, 2015)

Phoenall said:


> montelatici said:
> 
> 
> > Phoenall said:
> ...


The State of Israel was never ratified...therefore ILLEGAL.......but you know that because I have told you


----------



## Challenger (Apr 2, 2015)

Phoenall said:


> montelatici said:
> 
> 
> > Phoenall said:
> ...



Britain never owned Palestine, so had no legal right to invite anyone to settle there against the will of the indigenous population, who were overwhelmingly Muslims. Every Jewish European setting foot in Palestine was, and still is an illegal immigrant.


----------



## Phoenall (Apr 2, 2015)

theliq said:


> Phoenall said:
> 
> 
> > montelatici said:
> ...







 Hey your a muslim so I don't believe a word you say, muslims LIE so much they even have a phrase for it    Kithman and Taqiya


----------



## Phoenall (Apr 2, 2015)

Challenger said:


> Phoenall said:
> 
> 
> > montelatici said:
> ...








 TRy the LoN who did own the land after accepting the surrender of the Ottomans. Part of the deal was to hand over ownership of all the future Mandates, not just Palestine.   The Ottomans invited the Jews to migrate and settle because the arab muslims refused to do so. Then the LoN invited the Jews to migrate and settle with the view to building a National Home.   Now where did you get the fantasy about Britain owning the land ?   And where did you get the fantasy that the arab muslims were indigenous to Palestine. Read the International laws of 1922 and see who were the illegal immigrants.


----------



## P F Tinmore (Apr 2, 2015)

Phoenall said:


> Challenger said:
> 
> 
> > Phoenall said:
> ...


Of course you cannot quote any documents to back up all your blabber.


----------



## Phoenall (Apr 2, 2015)

P F Tinmore said:


> Phoenall said:
> 
> 
> > Challenger said:
> ...







 Do you want them all again so you can run away screaming because I have shown you to be a complete and utter moron again


Armistice of Mudros - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia

UNTC

Mandate for Palestine - League of Nations 12 August 1922


----------



## P F Tinmore (Apr 2, 2015)

Phoenall said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> > Phoenall said:
> ...


Where do they say what you said?

Quote the passages.


----------



## toastman (Apr 2, 2015)

Challenger said:


> Phoenall said:
> 
> 
> > montelatici said:
> ...


I have news for you bub . It ain't called Palestine no more, it's called Israel. Deal with. Or don't, who cares. But stop whining.


----------



## toastman (Apr 2, 2015)

Challenger said:


> Phoenall said:
> 
> 
> > montelatici said:
> ...


BTW, the Palestinians never owned Palestine either. They only declared independence in 1988, using resolution 181. Just like Israel did


----------



## Challenger (Apr 2, 2015)

Phoenall said:


> Challenger said:
> 
> 
> > Phoenall said:
> ...



Drivel. 
There was no transfer of ownership. The Arabs declared a unitary state which the British and French subsequently suppressed to create a series of "mandates", so they could further their colonial agendas. You also conflate an Ottoman invitation to Jewish people expelled from Spain with some sort of fantasy "open house policy" centuries later.  The League of Nations did not own Palestine, show us the title deeds or any treaty giving ownership of Palestine to the League of Nations.


----------



## toastman (Apr 2, 2015)

Challenger said:


> Phoenall said:
> 
> 
> > Challenger said:
> ...


The Palestinians also did not OWN Palestine . 

"British and French subsequently suppressed to create a series of "mandates", so they could further their colonial agendas"

Can you back this statement up ?


----------



## Challenger (Apr 2, 2015)

toastman said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> > toastman said:
> ...



Neither event did, 1834 Egyptian troops were the perpetrators, 1517 was an attack during an Ottoman Turk-Egyptian Mamluk war.


----------



## P F Tinmore (Apr 2, 2015)

Challenger said:


> Phoenall said:
> 
> 
> > Challenger said:
> ...


That is true. They took control but did no take possession.

which are *inhabited by peoples* not yet able to stand by themselves

that the *well-being and development of such peoples form a sacred trust* of civilisation

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.

Avalon Project - The Covenant of the League of Nations​
They are talking about the native inhabitants, not foreign colonists.


----------



## Challenger (Apr 2, 2015)

toastman said:


> Challenger said:
> 
> 
> > Phoenall said:
> ...



Arab Kingdom of Syria - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia


----------



## toastman (Apr 2, 2015)

Challenger said:


> toastman said:
> 
> 
> > Challenger said:
> ...



A kingdom that lasted four months...what's your point ?


----------



## Phoenall (Apr 2, 2015)

P F Tinmore said:


> Phoenall said:
> 
> 
> > P F Tinmore said:
> ...






 Read them and see, no good cherry picking when you need the full context, and I am sick of cherry picking for you the same passages only to have you repeatedly ask for them again.


----------



## Phoenall (Apr 2, 2015)

Challenger said:


> Phoenall said:
> 
> 
> > Challenger said:
> ...






 LINKS ? ? ? ? ?


----------



## Phoenall (Apr 2, 2015)

P F Tinmore said:


> Challenger said:
> 
> 
> > Phoenall said:
> ...






 Yep the Jewish native inhabitants not the non existent arab muslims.


----------



## P F Tinmore (Apr 2, 2015)

Phoenall said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> > Phoenall said:
> ...


Because they don't say what you say they say.

That is why I asked for specific passages.


----------



## montelatici (Apr 2, 2015)

Phoenall said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> > Challenger said:
> ...



You mean these "non-existent Arab Muslims" in 1896?




Phoenall said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> > Challenger said:
> ...



You mean these "non-existent Muslim Arabs" in 1896? Who along with the Christian Arabs were around 95% of the population of Palestine?


----------



## Phoenall (Apr 3, 2015)

P F Tinmore said:


> Phoenall said:
> 
> 
> > P F Tinmore said:
> ...






 They did the last 20 times I posted them, and you went silent for a few days. Nothing has changed the Mandate For Palestine still says that the land of Palestine is for the Jews. The surrender treaty still hands the land to the LoN and the list of LoN treaties still spell out that the arab muslims had their share.


----------



## Phoenall (Apr 3, 2015)

montelatici said:


> Phoenall said:
> 
> 
> > P F Tinmore said:
> ...







 And when are you going to produce the ottoman census records for that period, or do they show the arab muslim to be non existent across most of Palestine....................


----------



## Challenger (Apr 3, 2015)

Phoenall said:


> montelatici said:
> 
> 
> > Phoenall said:
> ...



Probably when you produce all the links or citations you've been asked to produce and failed to do so. I won't hold my breath.


----------



## Phoenall (Apr 3, 2015)

Challenger said:


> Phoenall said:
> 
> 
> > montelatici said:
> ...







 Have done, but because they don't meet with your neo Marxist POV you ignore them


----------



## Challenger (Apr 7, 2015)

Phoenall said:


> Challenger said:
> 
> 
> > Phoenall said:
> ...



OK, refresh my memory then, you don't need to provide the links, just the post numbers, dates you posted them and thread titles.


----------



## Phoenall (Apr 7, 2015)

Challenger said:


> Phoenall said:
> 
> 
> > Challenger said:
> ...






 Most threads on this board, and also on the ark, deep blue and sink or swim.

 Now how about you refresh my mind and tell me why you have been banned from posting on at least of these boards ?


----------



## Challenger (Apr 7, 2015)

Phoenall said:


> Challenger said:
> 
> 
> > Phoenall said:
> ...



Yup, trolling PUI or just off your meds. 

The only one of those "boards" I've ever heard of is Sink or Swim, and I'm still waiting for my registration to be processed there by the Admins, so I've never been banned from any of them. 

The only reason I found Sink or Swim, is because I Googled "Phoenall" and found you were a regular contributor there and from the exerpts availble, were being lambasted by the membership there as much as you are here, so curiosity got the better of me and I thought I'd register to see what they were saying about you.


----------



## westwall (Apr 7, 2015)

*ADDRESS the OP folks.*


----------



## member (Apr 8, 2015)

hortysir said:


> End the Occupation"
> 
> That was a bumper sticker I saw today.
> 
> So there are several Arab states in the region and only one Jewish state, but Israel is "occupying" Palestine?






 I'm so sick of this 

 Boo-hoo - occupying garbage.

As far as I'm concerned -- Israel UNOCCUPIED the Gaza Strip and turned into the Gaza Circus.

Infighting, continual terroristic activity, continuous corruption - get the hell out of here.

The Palestinians have proven they are INCAPABLE of running their own 'state.'






 Fuck them and their stupid women-covering, 

 terrorist thug existence.



 



They should all be transported to an 

 island allllll unto themselves in the middle of the biggest ocean on the face of the earth.......along with the rest of those other fossils from yemen, afghanistan, Libya, THE CONGO, (yeah, the Congo, brrr) ETC - so they too can ALL be UNTO themselves in the middle of the ocean away from normal civilization.


----------



## mrjingles (May 19, 2015)

member said:


> hortysir said:
> 
> 
> > End the Occupation"
> ...



I think they're doing just fine killing each other in Iraq and Syria


----------



## mrjingles (May 19, 2015)

Lets get back to the supposed occupation. When Jordan returns the east Bank we can discuss the west bank. Further, does anyone know that the Golan used to be part of Palestine?


----------



## hortysir (May 19, 2015)

And Atlantis used to be part of Hortyville.

See?
I can make up countries too


----------



## mrjingles (May 19, 2015)

Free Atlantis


----------



## aris2chat (May 19, 2015)

mrjingles said:


> Lets get back to the supposed occupation. When Jordan returns the east Bank we can discuss the west bank. Further, does anyone know that the Golan used to be part of Palestine?



Consider that 60+% of Jordan's population today is palestinian, not jordanian.


----------



## ForeverYoung436 (Jul 1, 2015)

hortysir said:


> End the Occupation"
> 
> That was a bumper sticker I saw today.
> 
> So there are several Arab states in the region and only one Jewish state, but Israel is "occupying" Palestine?


 
Why do we never see FREE KURDISTAN or CHECHNYA or TIBET bumper stickers?


----------



## Phoenall (Jul 1, 2015)

ForeverYoung436 said:


> hortysir said:
> 
> 
> > End the Occupation"
> ...








 Because they are not free, but cost. Who in their right mind would pay for palestine


----------



## aris2chat (Jul 1, 2015)

ForeverYoung436 said:


> hortysir said:
> 
> 
> > End the Occupation"
> ...


----------



## P F Tinmore (Jul 1, 2015)

ForeverYoung436 said:


> hortysir said:
> 
> 
> > End the Occupation"
> ...


You travel in the wrong circles.


----------



## theliq (Jul 1, 2015)

ForeverYoung436 said:


> hortysir said:
> 
> 
> > End the Occupation"
> ...


There are plenty of them,but obviously NOT in the US you frequent,mainly because the population do not know where these places are but thank you for your support of the Muslim, Southern Russian State of Chechnya in their struggle for independence....see Guys some Jews do love Muslims.

FEY......I am just too smart for you,and you know it,I am theliq....still educating dumb Jewish Americans

For your information,in 1944 Stalin,deported 100,000's of Chechins and the total population of Ingushetia(also now Muslims) to Khazakstan and it was there they converted to Islam,on their return in the late 60's - 70's  Chechnya/Ingushetia settled again in their original area,where they had been since appro., 10,000BC both peoples and those in western Dagestan are Nakh peoples.....as you would know all these communities have been fighting for Independence since prior to the break up of the Soviet Union......and Chechnya inparticular feeling the full brunt of Russian brutality,moreover the Ingushetians skirmish with North Ossetia in the mid 90's who had Russian backing........much like the tactics the Russians are using in the Ukraine today.
This is also one of the reasons Putin has been tentative in NOT helping fight against ISIS etc., he does not want these maniacs infiltrating Russia's southern states and Khazakstan(the southern crescent) creating trouble in these areas.


----------



## Phoenall (Jul 2, 2015)

theliq said:


> ForeverYoung436 said:
> 
> 
> > hortysir said:
> ...







 CAn you produce some credible evidence of this 10,000 B.C. and then explain why the Chechyans are trying to murder innocent people in Russia. A friend of mine lives and works in Moscow and he says the Russian Brown bears don't go hungry since the muslims started terrorism, and they now have a taste for chechyans


----------



## joesakic (Jul 5, 2015)

P F Tinmore said:


> Challenger said:
> 
> 
> > Phoenall said:
> ...


Excellent video.More jews should listen to Norman Finkelstein, true Torah Jews, the jfjfp. There are some Jews that remember what persecution and apartheid they suffered and would not 
Iike to see that happen again.


----------



## Coyote (Jul 7, 2015)

Phoenall said:


> theliq said:
> 
> 
> > ForeverYoung436 said:
> ...



Maybe it's payback for what the Soviets did to them: The Massive Deportation of the Chechen People How and why Chechens were Deported - Online Encyclopedia of Mass Violence


----------



## Phoenall (Jul 7, 2015)

Coyote said:


> Phoenall said:
> 
> 
> > theliq said:
> ...







 And the brown bears around Moscow have a taste for Chechens after the suicide bomb attacks from a few years back. You wont find many muslims in Moscow now, the Muscovites know how to treat them.


----------



## Coyote (Jul 7, 2015)

Phoenall said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> > Phoenall said:
> ...



Sounds like the Nazis.


----------



## Phoenall (Jul 7, 2015)

Coyote said:


> Phoenall said:
> 
> 
> > Coyote said:
> ...







 Did they solve their terrorist problems using natural means as well ?

 Or are you defending islamonazi terrorism ?


----------



## Coyote (Jul 7, 2015)

Phoenall said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> > Phoenall said:
> ...



The Soviet treatment of the Chechnyans was "islamonazi" terrorism?


----------



## montelatici (Jul 7, 2015)

Coyote said:


> Phoenall said:
> 
> 
> > Coyote said:
> ...



I can only imagine who you are responding to.  LOL


----------



## Phoenall (Jul 8, 2015)

Coyote said:


> Phoenall said:
> 
> 
> > Coyote said:
> ...








 I forgot you are an American so cant process English comprehension. Would it help if I translated it into Farsi or Urdu ?


----------



## Phoenall (Jul 8, 2015)

montelatici said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> > Phoenall said:
> ...







 Because you are a coward


----------



## jferry1111 (Oct 6, 2015)

The answer is yes they are occupying Palestine.  From the lack of authority given to the Palestinians, to the continuously decreasing land owned in the West Bank and Gaza Strip, the Israeli, 'settlers' have intruded on the Palestinians land.  

http://www.nullifidian.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/08/palestinian-loss-of-land-1946-2010.jpg


----------



## Delta4Embassy (Oct 6, 2015)

hortysir said:


> End the Occupation"
> 
> That was a bumper sticker I saw today.
> 
> So there are several Arab states in the region and only one Jewish state, but Israel is "occupying" Palestine?



How long until legal countries aren't 'occupying' another? How long did it take for the US to be the US and not the occupiers of Native Nations land?

Aren't most countries built upon the conquored remnants of some previous one?


----------



## jillian (Oct 6, 2015)

hortysir said:


> End the Occupation"
> 
> That was a bumper sticker I saw today.
> 
> So there are several Arab states in the region and only one Jewish state, but Israel is "occupying" Palestine?



the pope, as per most of what he's said, had it right on this issue, too.



> Francis was quoted as saying that “anyone who does not recognize the Jewish people and the State of Israel — and their right to exist — is guilty of anti-Semitism."



‘Not recognizing Israel as Jewish is anti-Semitic, Pope says’


----------



## jillian (Oct 6, 2015)

jferry1111 said:


> The answer is yes they are occupying Palestine.  From the lack of authority given to the Palestinians, to the continuously decreasing land owned in the West Bank and Gaza Strip, the Israeli, 'settlers' have intruded on the Palestinians land.
> 
> http://www.nullifidian.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/08/palestinian-loss-of-land-1946-2010.jpg



Palestine was just the name given to the area by the british during the mandate.

there is no such thing as "Palestine" as a country.

there is no such thing as a Palestinian.

they are Jordanian and lived in trans-Jordan before it was cut up by the brits. why doesn't Jordan let them in?

hint: because Jordan doesn't want them.


----------



## Uncensored2008 (Oct 6, 2015)

jferry1111 said:


> The answer is yes they are occupying Palestine.  From the lack of authority given to the Palestinians, to the continuously decreasing land owned in the West Bank and Gaza Strip, the Israeli, 'settlers' have intruded on the Palestinians land.
> 
> http://www.nullifidian.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/08/palestinian-loss-of-land-1946-2010.jpg




Oh look, a liar for Allah - how unique..


----------



## docmauser1 (Oct 6, 2015)

Challenger said:


> Correct.


Once palistanians change their occupation, it'll become incorrect, of course


----------



## Phoenall (Oct 6, 2015)

jferry1111 said:


> The answer is yes they are occupying Palestine.  From the lack of authority given to the Palestinians, to the continuously decreasing land owned in the West Bank and Gaza Strip, the Israeli, 'settlers' have intruded on the Palestinians land.
> 
> http://www.nullifidian.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/08/palestinian-loss-of-land-1946-2010.jpg






 Islamonazi propaganda as this is not factual at all, it is only the 1967 map that is accurate and valid the others do not relate to Palestine or Israel


----------



## Humanity (Oct 6, 2015)

Phoenall said:


> jferry1111 said:
> 
> 
> > The answer is yes they are occupying Palestine.  From the lack of authority given to the Palestinians, to the continuously decreasing land owned in the West Bank and Gaza Strip, the Israeli, 'settlers' have intruded on the Palestinians land.
> ...



And we believe every word you say without any supporting evidence Phoney don't we!

Oh wait, your name is Phoney... A proven racist liar... Hmmm maybe we won't!


----------



## Phoenall (Oct 6, 2015)

Humanity said:


> Phoenall said:
> 
> 
> > jferry1111 said:
> ...






 So produce the evidence that disputes what I say, or are you in a corner again so resort to your usual childish personal abuse. Try to grow up before you find yourself with no friends at all, not even those in Palestine.


----------



## Penelope (Oct 6, 2015)

jillian said:


> hortysir said:
> 
> 
> > End the Occupation"
> ...





jillian said:


> jferry1111 said:
> 
> 
> > The answer is yes they are occupying Palestine.  From the lack of authority given to the Palestinians, to the continuously decreasing land owned in the West Bank and Gaza Strip, the Israeli, 'settlers' have intruded on the Palestinians land.
> ...



Read my signature. Funny I don't believe that article;


----------



## jillian (Oct 6, 2015)

poor jew-hating Penelope.


----------



## rylah (Oct 6, 2015)

Penelope said:


> jillian said:
> 
> 
> > hortysir said:
> ...



Those 'Arab" villages were probably built on top of the older Jewish ones and renamed, just like the did with The Temple Mount and other Jewish and Christian buildings sites.

Remember- Islam came to replace Judaism and Christianity, plagiarizing them and building  on their ruins.


----------



## jillian (Oct 6, 2015)

rylah said:


> Penelope said:
> 
> 
> > jillian said:
> ...



not to mention that after a war, like where the grand mufti of Jerusalem told his people to leave and they'd send the jews into the sea, stuff happens.

I've never seen the jew-haters demand my great grandfather's property in Belarus be returned to me.

or the jewish land in Persia/iran, Syria, Lebanon, yemen.... etc.

but why would the jew-haters concern themselves with that when they can whine that terrorists lost a war.


----------



## Penelope (Oct 6, 2015)

jillian said:


> poor jew-hating Penelope.



Please read my signature.
*“Jewish villages were built in the place of Arab villages. You do not even know the names of these Arab villages, and I do not blame you because geography books no longer exist, not only do the books not exist, the Arab villages are not there either…There is not one single place built in this country that did not have a former Arab Population.”*
– Moshe Dayan, from Ha’aretz, April 4, 1969


----------



## jillian (Oct 6, 2015)

Penelope said:


> jillian said:
> 
> 
> > poor jew-hating Penelope.
> ...



I read it.... it's unsourced and unlinked... no matter who you "credit" it to.

poor little anti-Semite.


----------



## Penelope (Oct 6, 2015)

jillian said:


> Penelope said:
> 
> 
> > jillian said:
> ...



No its linked. Jill how rich coming from you , a semite, a true one, I'm anti Zionist and they are not semites.


----------



## rylah (Oct 6, 2015)

jillian said:


> rylah said:
> 
> 
> > Penelope said:
> ...



But be sure that they consider it a muslim property/land...just that Belarus doesn't attract them yet. One of the reason is they have a very strong leader who's too much a traditional Slav to mess with.


----------



## rylah (Oct 6, 2015)

Penelope said:


> jillian said:
> 
> 
> > Penelope said:
> ...



And that's all that's needed to be confirmed as a racist low life.

Funny thing- Jews been chased and persecuted around the world for being Jewish (even secular) but once coming to Israel they become all of a sudden Russians, poles and what not, just not Jews.

Hard time pleasing you low-life Jew-haters...you change your mind all the time- is it genetic or just personal inferiority complex?


----------



## hortysir (Oct 6, 2015)

Penelope said:


> jillian said:
> 
> 
> > poor jew-hating Penelope.
> ...


You might want to check out the book Patterns of Evidence


----------



## Penelope (Oct 6, 2015)

rylah said:


> Penelope said:
> 
> 
> > jillian said:
> ...



Jews are not a race, good grief. No I'm not inferior to them. You must be since you mention it. I'm actually superior.


----------



## Humanity (Oct 6, 2015)

Phoenall said:


> Humanity said:
> 
> 
> > Phoenall said:
> ...



No need Phoney...

It's already been done... Thats what you responded to...

So where's your evidence, other than your insane rantings, to disprove the post?

Well, like virtually every post you make, you can't produce one. You just bang on with your ridiculous belief that you are right and everyone else is wrong and expect everyone to believe the insanity of a proven zionut, Islamophobe, racist liar...

Yeah, like that works in the REAL world!


----------



## Penelope (Oct 6, 2015)

hortysir said:


> Penelope said:
> 
> 
> > jillian said:
> ...



Oh were the Jewish on the site and changed the saying , which they do you know , how they edit Wiki articles and make stuff more bias in their favor.  Seems they do it all the time, so its so hard to keep up with their changes. They are constantly rewriting history.


----------



## hortysir (Oct 6, 2015)

Penelope said:


> hortysir said:
> 
> 
> > Penelope said:
> ...


Psst......
There is a world of research that can be done/found away fromWiki


----------



## P F Tinmore (Oct 6, 2015)

Penelope said:


> jillian said:
> 
> 
> > Penelope said:
> ...


Indeed, look at all of those fake Christian freakazoids who are Zionists.

And look at the "Jewish" atheists. "We don't believe in god but he gave us this land."  What a bunch of nutters.


----------



## Phoenall (Oct 7, 2015)

rylah said:


> Penelope said:
> 
> 
> > jillian said:
> ...






 Like Ram was renamed Ramallah and Jerusalem al quds. Most other places now carry their original Hebrew names


----------



## Phoenall (Oct 7, 2015)

P F Tinmore said:


> Penelope said:
> 
> 
> > jillian said:
> ...







 More islamonazi propaganda as you have not shown one single Jew as having ever said that.    Makes you the nutter repeating this lie all the time


----------



## Phoenall (Oct 7, 2015)

Penelope said:


> jillian said:
> 
> 
> > poor jew-hating Penelope.
> ...







 And have you shown any supporting evidence of this false claim ?


----------



## Phoenall (Oct 7, 2015)

Penelope said:


> jillian said:
> 
> 
> > Penelope said:
> ...






 yes to just one source, and is unsupported making it a false claim. But then you always use unsupported claims don't you


----------



## Phoenall (Oct 7, 2015)

Humanity said:


> Phoenall said:
> 
> 
> > Humanity said:
> ...






 NOPE you produce islamonazi propaganda that is unsupported hoping that it will be taken as fact.  The maps themselves show that this is a LIE as it shows Palestine as a nation in 1946 when it was no such thing. It shows the partition plan as being a fact when the arab muslims rejected it and then shows the state of Palestine as little islands.


----------



## Phoenall (Oct 7, 2015)

Penelope said:


> hortysir said:
> 
> 
> > Penelope said:
> ...






 Strange when you look you find that most of the edits are done by muslims, care to explain why this is


----------



## Penelope (Oct 7, 2015)

hortysir said:


> Penelope said:
> 
> 
> > hortysir said:
> ...



I know that is where I get my most info , from some of their links.


----------



## Penelope (Oct 7, 2015)

hortysir said:


> Penelope said:
> 
> 
> > jillian said:
> ...



I believe they were a sect of the Canaanites  who got leprosy and got thrown into the desert, Moses and his group, and then came back in the land of Canaan. There is no evidence that they were slaves in Egypt or built the pyramids, they (the Egyptians) used skilled labor for those, must like a road construction crew here, everyone had a job. After all they learned monotheism while in Babylon, and then some came back and settled in Judea and called themselves "jews"
Someone making some more money off the Hebrew story, is all that is.

also who cares who they were, anymore than who the Palestinians were, who I believe are the Canaanites who never left the area, and that is why some are jews, Christians and Muslims.

So while there are still some "jews, who practice Judaism there, most are Zionist.


----------



## hortysir (Oct 7, 2015)

Penelope said:


> hortysir said:
> 
> 
> > Penelope said:
> ...


But, by your own admission, their info can be edited at will by whoever wants to.
Try reading a book.
There are an abundance online for free.


----------



## Phoenall (Oct 7, 2015)

Penelope said:


> hortysir said:
> 
> 
> > Penelope said:
> ...







 Because finding ones that meet you POV is so easy after islamonazi cyber terrorists have edited the entries


----------



## Penelope (Oct 7, 2015)

hortysir said:


> Penelope said:
> 
> 
> > hortysir said:
> ...



Not that one, thanks. Why would anyone waste their money on yet another story trying their best to prove the greatest story is true.

Really, I wish more people would read non fiction books, than rely on the Bible for all their info.
Apparently by suggesting that book , is what you might be interested in, but try reading something besides another book trying their best to prove the stuff in the OT happened.


----------



## Phoenall (Oct 7, 2015)

Penelope said:


> hortysir said:
> 
> 
> > Penelope said:
> ...







 And yet you fail to produced any evidence of this apart from wiki articles written/edited by islamonazi propagandists. So easy to research when the tools are on wiki to do so.

 Then those "canaanites" must have been wiped out by the arab muslims after 7C as the Muslims claim they are all arabs from the south.


----------



## Phoenall (Oct 7, 2015)

Penelope said:


> hortysir said:
> 
> 
> > Penelope said:
> ...






 Once again you claim the OT is Jewish when it is not. The OT is the Grecoroman interpretation of the Torah with much of it changed to suit the Roman elite who where all perverts.


----------



## hortysir (Oct 7, 2015)

Penelope said:


> hortysir said:
> 
> 
> > Penelope said:
> ...


Actually that book shows how the most commonly accepted accounts are wrong by about 700 years, meaning that the Jews made their exodus 700yrs  before Ramesses


----------

