Do Palestinians Have the Right to Defend Themselves?

[Roudy]

So there was never a Palestinian state or people. It's all a myth that never actually came to fruition. At least we agree on something.

In 1327,King Robert the Bruce declared that he wanted to be buried in PALESTINE,there has always been a PALESTINE and THERE ALWAYS WILL BE Roudy,much of the pro Jewish lobby on here try to declare that only Jews were in the Holy Land...this often happens when a group overthrows the indigenous population and create their on country...same with the Americans against the Native Indians,Australians against the Aborigines,Turkey against the Armenians .It is a justification to the interlopers for their behaviour.............steve...Roudy you should accept my posts as they are factual in content......there is always a reason why people act and behave the way they do............but in reality it is Guilt fundamentally.....Australia said Sorry to the way they were treated some years ago......We admitted our terrible treatment.

Israel,Turkey and all,are still going through this process

And we have 750,000 refugees from "a land without people."

The Zionists have always been full of crap.

Arab refugees from a war started by themselves.

The Zionists went from Europe to Palestine so that the Palestinians could start a war with them?

You are a hoot.

Jews had maintained a presence throughout the millennia. Jerusalem the capital of Palestine was majority Jewish in 1896. Hebron had an ancient Jewish community which Arab animals committed ethnic cleansing on in 1929.

Zionists went to The BRITISH mandate of Palestine to join their brethren and form a Jewish homeland. At the same time hoards of Arabs invaded and the savages started a civil war with the Jews. Arab leader was a certified Nazi who wanted to commit genocide on the Jews and Christians.

Hitler s Mufti Catholic Answers

 

[Roudy]

The savages are those that invaded Palestine from Europe with the intent settle there and evict the local people. The Europeans attacked the local people. Those are just facts.

The savagery was started by the Arabs when they attacked the ancient Jews of Hebron in 1929.

Facts according to Monte. What a joke.

 

[Roudy]

One needs only look at Muslim behavior today, to determine what would be the destiny of the Jews and Christians and their holy sites, had the savage Arabs actually succeeded in defeating the Jews.

Hitler s Mufti Catholic Answers

 

[montelatici]

The Covenant of the League of Nations gave provisional independence to certain former Ottoman possessions (Class A Mandates) of which Palestine was one.

"Certain communities formerly belonging to the Turkish Empire have reached a stage of development where their existence as independent nations can be provisionally recognized subject to the rendering of administrative advice and assistance by a Mandatory until such time as they are able to stand alone. The wishes of these communities must be a principal consideration in the selection of the Mandatory."

I include the subsequent paragraphs to make sure that the tiresome refrain that somehow Palestine was not among the Class A Mandates. The Mandates of other classes are, in fact, identified in subsequent paragraphs.

"Other peoples, especially those of Central Africa, are at such a stage that the Mandatory must be responsible for the administration of the territory under conditions which will guarantee freedom of conscience and religion, subject only to the maintenance of public order and morals, the prohibition of abuses such as the slave trade, the arms traffic and the liquor traffic, and the prevention of the establishment of fortifications or military and naval bases and of military training of the natives for other than police purposes and the defence of territory, and will also secure equal opportunities for the trade and commerce of other Members of the League.

There are territories, such as South-West Africa and certain of the South Pacific Islands, which, owing to the sparseness of their population, or their small size, or their remoteness from the centres of civilisation, or their geographical contiguity to the territory of the Mandatory, and other circumstances, can be best administered under the laws of the Mandatory as integral portions of its territory, subject to the safeguards above mentioned in the interests of the indigenous population."

Avalon Project - The Covenant of the League of Nations

 

[RoccoR]

P F Tinmore, et al,

Again, your timeline of what becomes a right and when --- is fouled-up.

P F Tinmore, et al,

Don't delude yourself. That is not what is said at all.

montelatici, et al,

Yes, I appreciate the clarification and understand.

It does make that point.

(COMMENT)

Port to .pdf Report: A/AC.14/32 11 November 1947 AD HOC COMMITTEE ON THE PALESTINIAN QUESTION --- REPORT OF SUB-COMMITTEE 2 [link to .pdf]

And it is a valid point, but not one that effects the:

• Original intention of the Allied Powers at San Remo.
• The Article 22 requirement to be able to stand alone.
• The General Assembly evaluation on the UNSCOP Partition Plan Recommendation.

Of course, there is a lot in what was not said. This particular report was an ALL Muslim report.

Composition and terms of reference of Sub-Committee

1. Sub-Committee 2 on Palestine was set up on 23 October 1947 following the decision of the Ad Hoc Committee of Palestine to establish two Sub-Committees. By virtue of the authority conferred on him by the Ad Hoc Committee, the Chairman nominated the following countries as members of Sub-Committee 2: Afghanistan, Colombia, Egypt, Iraq, Lebanon, Pakistan, Saudi Arabia, Syria, and Yemen.​

The terms of reference of the Sub-Committee were as follows:

1. “To draw up a detailed plan for the future government of Palestine in accordance with the basic principles expressed in the proposals submitted to the General Assembly by the delegations of Saudi Arabia and Iraq (documents A/317 and A/328, respectively) and the proposal submitted to the Ad Hoc Committee by the delegation of Syria (document A/AC.14/22); and

2. To incorporate this plan in the form of recommendations.”
​

And these insights were incorporated into the UNSCOP Recommendation.

Just to be fair, the main point that this UNSCOP Report tried to convey was that:

"It will be be seen that there is not a single sub-district in which the percentage of Jewish land ownership exceeds 39 per cent, and in nine out of the sixteen sub-districts, their percentage of ownership is less than 5 percent." (Bottom of Page 43)​

Most Respectfully,
R

Of course this discussion is merely academic. No matter who owns it, it is still Palestinian Land.

Jews own land in the US and it is still US land.

Palestinian land? For 700 years it was Ottoman land, then it became British land. There was never a Palestinian people or a Palestinian state. As the UN records show, "Palestinian" is a relatively new phenomenon.

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.

Mandate for Palestine - League of Nations 32nd session - Minutes of the Permanent Mandates Commission 18 August 1937 ​

(COMMENT)

That is not a proper interpretation at all. All people needed an identity and a country to assume responsibility for them. The Nationality Law did that. It placed the Mandatory as the responsible government over the territory to which the Mandate of Palestine applied. The Nationality was "Palestinian" (citizens of the territory to which the Mandate Applied). This very same logic was used in the territories to which the Mandates of Lebanon, Syria, and Iraq applied.

Don't read more into it than is said. We are talking about sovereignty and independence. And you will not find anything, prior to 1988, that indicates that the people indigenous to the territory to which the Mandate applied were ever sovereign or independent. In fact, you find the exact opposite:

• 
  "Palestine is today a legal entity but it is not a sovereign state. Palestine is a territory administered under mandate by His Majesty (in respect of the United Kingdom), who is entirely responsible both for its internal administration and for its foreign affairs.
  
  "After the 15th May, 1948, Palestine will continue to be a legal entity but it will still not be a sovereign state because it will not be immediately self-governing. The authority responsible for its administration will, however, have changed.

That is the description. Your interpretation is entirely incorrect.

Most Respectfully,
R

Don't read more into it than is said. We are talking about sovereignty and independence.​

Actually we are talking about the right to sovereignty and independence as subsequent UN resolutions have affirmed.

Palestine was born under foreign military occupation and that status remains to today. They have never had the opportunity to exercise their rights.

(COMMENT)

No UN Resolution comes before 1945. And No UN Resolution expands the concept of "sovereignty and independence" to a status above the roll of the majority of the Council of the League of Nations set by treaty.

The idea that "Palestine was born under foreign military occupation" is ambiguous at best. Yes the 1988 Declared Palestine (territories occupied by Israel in 1967) was born under "occupation." Palestine (the territory to which the former Mandate applied) was created solely by the Allied Powers (within such boundaries as may be determined by the Principal Allied Powers).

The Arab Palestinian had a number of opportunities to exercise their rights (pertaining to that era in time) and generally used it (with the exception of 1951 and 1988) in a negative or obstructive fashion. Clearly, in 1988, the Palestinians Declared Independence. And in doing so --- exercised their right --- as it existed then.

Most Respectfully,
R

 

[montelatici]

The savages are those that invaded Palestine from Europe with the intent settle there and evict the local people. The Europeans attacked the local people. Those are just facts.

The savagery was started by the Arabs when they attacked the ancient Jews of Hebron in 1929.

Facts according to Monte. What a joke.

Firstly, Europeans were the first to attack the locals, well before Hebron. They attacked the locals and killed them as has been discovered by researchers in the Ottoman archives in Istanbul.

"Petitions sent by locals to the Ottoman sultan in Istanbul reveal the complexity of early encounters between local villagers and new European immigrants."

"We, the residents of villages neighboring with the Jewish colonies of Daran [Rehovot] and Lun Kara (Rishon Leztion)," and complain that the Jews "wanted to strip the camel owner of their clothes, money and camels, but these men refused to give their camels and escaped from Lun Kara with their camels, protecting each other [to seek refuge with] men of the law… The above mentioned Jews attacked our villages, robbed and looted our property, killed and even damaged the family honor, all this in a manner we find hard to put in words."

New documents reveal early Palestinian attitudes toward Zionist settlements - Israel News Haaretz

The Arab Jews in Hebron were not targeted unless they allied themselves with the European colonists. In fact, about 4/5s of the Jews killed in Hebron were European Jews.

"Rabbi Slonim, who had tried to shelter the Jews, was approached by the rioters and offered a deal. If all the Ashkenazi yeshiva students were given over to the Arabs, the rioters would spare the lives of the Sephardi community.

Rabbi Slonim refused to turn over the students. The Arabs killed him on the spot.

By the end of the massacre, 12 Sephardi Jews and 55 Ashkenazi Jews were murdered."


The Hebron Massacre of 1929 Jewish Virtual Library

 

[Roudy]

From Monte's site:

The Avalon Project The Palestine Mandate

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.

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

ART. 11.

The Administration may arrange with the Jewish agency mentioned in Article 4 to construct or operate, upon fair and equitable terms, any public works, services and utilities, and to develop any of the natural resources of the country, in so far as these matters are not directly undertaken by the Administration. Any such arrangements shall provide that no profits distributed by such agency, directly or indirectly, shall exceed a reasonable rate of interest on the capital, and any further profits shall be utilised by it for the benefit of the country in a manner approved by the Administration.

******

So ya see, YOU'RE FULLA SHIT.

Once again you got your butt kicked. I'm beginning to think you enjoy it.

 

[Roudy]

The savages are those that invaded Palestine from Europe with the intent settle there and evict the local people. The Europeans attacked the local people. Those are just facts.

The savagery was started by the Arabs when they attacked the ancient Jews of Hebron in 1929.

Facts according to Monte. What a joke.

Firstly, Europeans were the first to attack the locals, well before Hebron. They attacked the locals and killed them as has been discovered by researchers in the Ottoman archives in Istanbul.

"Petitions sent by locals to the Ottoman sultan in Istanbul reveal the complexity of early encounters between local villagers and new European immigrants."

"We, the residents of villages neighboring with the Jewish colonies of Daran [Rehovot] and Lun Kara (Rishon Leztion)," and complain that the Jews "wanted to strip the camel owner of their clothes, money and camels, but these men refused to give their camels and escaped from Lun Kara with their camels, protecting each other [to seek refuge with] men of the law… The above mentioned Jews attacked our villages, robbed and looted our property, killed and even damaged the family honor, all this in a manner we find hard to put in words."

New documents reveal early Palestinian attitudes toward Zionist settlements - Israel News Haaretz

The Arab Jews in Hebron were not targeted unless they allied themselves with the European colonists. In fact, about 4/5s of the Jews killed in Hebron were European Jews.

"Rabbi Slonim, who had tried to shelter the Jews, was approached by the rioters and offered a deal. If all the Ashkenazi yeshiva students were given over to the Arabs, the rioters would spare the lives of the Sephardi community.

Rabbi Slonim refused to turn over the students. The Arabs killed him on the spot.

By the end of the massacre, 12 Sephardi Jews and 55 Ashkenazi Jews were murdered."


The Hebron Massacre of 1929 Jewish Virtual Library

Yeah? You forgot that ALL the Jews fled from Hebron, after the savagery by the Arabs.

And are you actually promoting that it was the Jewish MINORITY that were attacking the Arab / Muslim majority who happened to rule Southern Syria as the Ottomans called this mythical Palestine for 700 years?

More insanity by Monte.

 

[montelatici]

From Monte's site:

The Avalon Project The Palestine Mandate

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.

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

ART. 11.

The Administration may arrange with the Jewish agency mentioned in Article 4 to construct or operate, upon fair and equitable terms, any public works, services and utilities, and to develop any of the natural resources of the country, in so far as these matters are not directly undertaken by the Administration. Any such arrangements shall provide that no profits distributed by such agency, directly or indirectly, shall exceed a reasonable rate of interest on the capital, and any further profits shall be utilised by it for the benefit of the country in a manner approved by the Administration.

******

So ya see, YOU'RE FULLA SHIT.

Once again you got your butt kicked. I'm beginning to think you enjoy it.

So what is your point? Does this change the fact that Jews came from Europe to colonize Palestine? Britain was a colonial power itself. Again, what is your point?

 

[montelatici]

The savages are those that invaded Palestine from Europe with the intent settle there and evict the local people. The Europeans attacked the local people. Those are just facts.

The savagery was started by the Arabs when they attacked the ancient Jews of Hebron in 1929.

Facts according to Monte. What a joke.

Firstly, Europeans were the first to attack the locals, well before Hebron. They attacked the locals and killed them as has been discovered by researchers in the Ottoman archives in Istanbul.

"Petitions sent by locals to the Ottoman sultan in Istanbul reveal the complexity of early encounters between local villagers and new European immigrants."

"We, the residents of villages neighboring with the Jewish colonies of Daran [Rehovot] and Lun Kara (Rishon Leztion)," and complain that the Jews "wanted to strip the camel owner of their clothes, money and camels, but these men refused to give their camels and escaped from Lun Kara with their camels, protecting each other [to seek refuge with] men of the law… The above mentioned Jews attacked our villages, robbed and looted our property, killed and even damaged the family honor, all this in a manner we find hard to put in words."

New documents reveal early Palestinian attitudes toward Zionist settlements - Israel News Haaretz

The Arab Jews in Hebron were not targeted unless they allied themselves with the European colonists. In fact, about 4/5s of the Jews killed in Hebron were European Jews.

"Rabbi Slonim, who had tried to shelter the Jews, was approached by the rioters and offered a deal. If all the Ashkenazi yeshiva students were given over to the Arabs, the rioters would spare the lives of the Sephardi community.

Rabbi Slonim refused to turn over the students. The Arabs killed him on the spot.

By the end of the massacre, 12 Sephardi Jews and 55 Ashkenazi Jews were murdered."


The Hebron Massacre of 1929 Jewish Virtual Library

Yeah? You forgot that ALL the Jews fled from Hebron, after the savagery by the Arabs.

And are you actually promoting that it was the Jewish MINORITY that were attacking the Arab / Muslim majority who happened to rule Southern Syria as the Ottomans called this mythical Palestine for 700 years?

More insanity by Monte.

No, just posted an article from an Israeli newspaper. I make no claims, the Israeli authors made the claim that the settlers attacked the Arabs through the study of Ottoman archives.

 

[Roudy]

From Monte's site:

The Avalon Project The Palestine Mandate

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.

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

ART. 11.

The Administration may arrange with the Jewish agency mentioned in Article 4 to construct or operate, upon fair and equitable terms, any public works, services and utilities, and to develop any of the natural resources of the country, in so far as these matters are not directly undertaken by the Administration. Any such arrangements shall provide that no profits distributed by such agency, directly or indirectly, shall exceed a reasonable rate of interest on the capital, and any further profits shall be utilised by it for the benefit of the country in a manner approved by the Administration.

******

So ya see, YOU'RE FULLA SHIT.

Once again you got your butt kicked. I'm beginning to think you enjoy it.

So what is your point? Does this change the fact that Jews came from Europe to colonize Palestine? Britain was a colonial power itself. Again, what is your point?

Are you having reading comprehension problems? It doesn't refer to any colonization. It does however clearly state that the land is to be the future Jewish homeland, for the Jews that were already there, and those that are coming.

 

[Roudy]

The savages are those that invaded Palestine from Europe with the intent settle there and evict the local people. The Europeans attacked the local people. Those are just facts.

The savagery was started by the Arabs when they attacked the ancient Jews of Hebron in 1929.

Facts according to Monte. What a joke.

Firstly, Europeans were the first to attack the locals, well before Hebron. They attacked the locals and killed them as has been discovered by researchers in the Ottoman archives in Istanbul.

"Petitions sent by locals to the Ottoman sultan in Istanbul reveal the complexity of early encounters between local villagers and new European immigrants."

"We, the residents of villages neighboring with the Jewish colonies of Daran [Rehovot] and Lun Kara (Rishon Leztion)," and complain that the Jews "wanted to strip the camel owner of their clothes, money and camels, but these men refused to give their camels and escaped from Lun Kara with their camels, protecting each other [to seek refuge with] men of the law… The above mentioned Jews attacked our villages, robbed and looted our property, killed and even damaged the family honor, all this in a manner we find hard to put in words."

New documents reveal early Palestinian attitudes toward Zionist settlements - Israel News Haaretz

The Arab Jews in Hebron were not targeted unless they allied themselves with the European colonists. In fact, about 4/5s of the Jews killed in Hebron were European Jews.

"Rabbi Slonim, who had tried to shelter the Jews, was approached by the rioters and offered a deal. If all the Ashkenazi yeshiva students were given over to the Arabs, the rioters would spare the lives of the Sephardi community.

Rabbi Slonim refused to turn over the students. The Arabs killed him on the spot.

By the end of the massacre, 12 Sephardi Jews and 55 Ashkenazi Jews were murdered."


The Hebron Massacre of 1929 Jewish Virtual Library

Yeah? You forgot that ALL the Jews fled from Hebron, after the savagery by the Arabs.

And are you actually promoting that it was the Jewish MINORITY that were attacking the Arab / Muslim majority who happened to rule Southern Syria as the Ottomans called this mythical Palestine for 700 years?

More insanity by Monte.

No, just posted an article from an Israeli newspaper. I make no claims, the Israeli authors made the claim that the settlers attacked the Arabs through the study of Ottoman archives.

Ha ha ha. A leftist Israeli newspaper. Did you read what the "conflict" was about? Two Arab boys stole grapes from a Jewish vineyard, and were caught, so they got their asses kicked. You compare that to the Hebron massacre incited by the Nazi mufti, which wiped out the entire historical Jewish history of Hebron? You are pathetic.

Ottoman Turks practiced institutionalized racism and persecution on the Jews in the holy land. They gave preference to the Arabs as fellow Muslims, which is why the Arabs invaded during the Ottoman rule, and kept coming after the collapse of the Ottoman Empire.

So now that you're quoting a leftist propoganda site, I suppose I can quote "Arabs or ex Palestinians" who happen to tell the truth about the situation and its history.

 

[montelatici]

You have a general comprehension problem. Going to a place on another continent, evicting the locals and creating one's own state is called colonization. That's what colonization is, you nitwit. Sheesh.

 

[Roudy]

That's if the locals were evicted, which they weren't. And if the locals were locals and not Arab colonizers and invaders, sheesh.

 

[montelatici]

The savages are those that invaded Palestine from Europe with the intent settle there and evict the local people. The Europeans attacked the local people. Those are just facts.

The savagery was started by the Arabs when they attacked the ancient Jews of Hebron in 1929.

Facts according to Monte. What a joke.

Firstly, Europeans were the first to attack the locals, well before Hebron. They attacked the locals and killed them as has been discovered by researchers in the Ottoman archives in Istanbul.

"Petitions sent by locals to the Ottoman sultan in Istanbul reveal the complexity of early encounters between local villagers and new European immigrants."

"We, the residents of villages neighboring with the Jewish colonies of Daran [Rehovot] and Lun Kara (Rishon Leztion)," and complain that the Jews "wanted to strip the camel owner of their clothes, money and camels, but these men refused to give their camels and escaped from Lun Kara with their camels, protecting each other [to seek refuge with] men of the law… The above mentioned Jews attacked our villages, robbed and looted our property, killed and even damaged the family honor, all this in a manner we find hard to put in words."

New documents reveal early Palestinian attitudes toward Zionist settlements - Israel News Haaretz

The Arab Jews in Hebron were not targeted unless they allied themselves with the European colonists. In fact, about 4/5s of the Jews killed in Hebron were European Jews.

"Rabbi Slonim, who had tried to shelter the Jews, was approached by the rioters and offered a deal. If all the Ashkenazi yeshiva students were given over to the Arabs, the rioters would spare the lives of the Sephardi community.

Rabbi Slonim refused to turn over the students. The Arabs killed him on the spot.

By the end of the massacre, 12 Sephardi Jews and 55 Ashkenazi Jews were murdered."


The Hebron Massacre of 1929 Jewish Virtual Library

Yeah? You forgot that ALL the Jews fled from Hebron, after the savagery by the Arabs.

And are you actually promoting that it was the Jewish MINORITY that were attacking the Arab / Muslim majority who happened to rule Southern Syria as the Ottomans called this mythical Palestine for 700 years?

More insanity by Monte.

No, just posted an article from an Israeli newspaper. I make no claims, the Israeli authors made the claim that the settlers attacked the Arabs through the study of Ottoman archives.

Ha ha ha. A leftist Israeli newspaper. Did you read what the "conflict" was about? Two Arab boy stoles grapes from a Jewish vineyard, and were caught, so they got their asses kicked. You compare that to the Hebron massacre incited by the Nazi mufti? You are pathetic. Ottoman Turks practiced institutionalized racism and persecution on the Jews in the holy land. They gave preference to the Arabs as fellow Muslims, which is why they invaded, during the Ottoman rule and kept coming after they collapsed.

So now that you're quoting a leftist propoganda site, I suppose I can quote "Arabs or ex Palestinians" who happen to tell the truth about the situation and its history.

So, now an Israeli newspaper is also considered Arab propaganda. Here you can download it directly from the academic institution if you don't trust the Israeli press.

Petitioning the Sultan by Yuval Ben-Bassat Roberto Mazza - Academia.edu

All your ravings and bullshit, don't make your case, by the way. They lead to a suspicion of emotional issues.

 

[montelatici]

That's if the locals were evicted, which they weren't. And if the locals were locals and not Arab colonizers and invaders, sheesh.

The locals were evicted. Making irrational claims do not help your case at all.

 

[Roudy]

Ottoman Turk oppression and persecution of Jews in the holy land is factual. The Arabs as fellow Muslims took advantage and further incited the Ottomans into persecuting them even more.

Even though there was persecution by Muslim savages, Jews still kept coming and maintained a presence throughout the 700 years. The invaders are the Arabs.

 

[Roudy]

That's if the locals were evicted, which they weren't. And if the locals were locals and not Arab colonizers and invaders, sheesh.

The locals were evicted. Making irrational claims do not help your case at all.

Link?

 

[P F Tinmore]

montelatici, et al,

Yes, I appreciate the clarification and understand.

It does make that point.

Rocco,

The subcommittee report that addressed the legality, authority etc. of the UN General Assembly to partition the land is another document prepared by a subcommittee created for that purpose. Title reproduced below. It is not directly accessible it must be downloaded as a pdf. It was reproduced probably via mimeogrpah so the quality is low but it is legible.

Distr.
UNRESTRICTED

A/AC.14/32
11 November 1947

ORIGINAL: ENGLISH

I only wanted to make the land ownership point in this case.

(COMMENT)

Port to .pdf Report: A/AC.14/32 11 November 1947 AD HOC COMMITTEE ON THE PALESTINIAN QUESTION --- REPORT OF SUB-COMMITTEE 2 [link to .pdf]

And it is a valid point, but not one that effects the:

• Original intention of the Allied Powers at San Remo.
• The Article 22 requirement to be able to stand alone.
• The General Assembly evaluation on the UNSCOP Partition Plan Recommendation.

Of course, there is a lot in what was not said. This particular report was an ALL Muslim report.

Composition and terms of reference of Sub-Committee

1. Sub-Committee 2 on Palestine was set up on 23 October 1947 following the decision of the Ad Hoc Committee of Palestine to establish two Sub-Committees. By virtue of the authority conferred on him by the Ad Hoc Committee, the Chairman nominated the following countries as members of Sub-Committee 2: Afghanistan, Colombia, Egypt, Iraq, Lebanon, Pakistan, Saudi Arabia, Syria, and Yemen.​

The terms of reference of the Sub-Committee were as follows:

1. “To draw up a detailed plan for the future government of Palestine in accordance with the basic principles expressed in the proposals submitted to the General Assembly by the delegations of Saudi Arabia and Iraq (documents A/317 and A/328, respectively) and the proposal submitted to the Ad Hoc Committee by the delegation of Syria (document A/AC.14/22); and

2. To incorporate this plan in the form of recommendations.”
​

And these insights were incorporated into the UNSCOP Recommendation.

Just to be fair, the main point that this UNSCOP Report tried to convey was that:

"It will be be seen that there is not a single sub-district in which the percentage of Jewish land ownership exceeds 39 per cent, and in nine out of the sixteen sub-districts, their percentage of ownership is less than 5 percent." (Bottom of Page 43)​

Most Respectfully,
R

The terms of reference of the Sub-Committee were as follows:

1. “To draw up a detailed plan for the future government of Palestine...
----------------------
In political philosophy, the phrase consent of the governed refers to the idea that a government's legitimacy and moral right to use state power is only justified and legal when derived from the people or society over which that political power is exercised. This theory of consent is historically contrasted to the divine right of kings and has often been invoked against the legitimacy of colonialism. Article 21 of the United Nation's 1948 Universal Declaration of Human Rights states that "The will of the people shall be the basis of the authority of government".
-----------------------
The Palestinians universally rejected a foreign created government imposed on them.They had the right to reject this foreign imposition.

 

[P F Tinmore]

P F Tinmore, et al,

Again, your timeline of what becomes a right and when --- is fouled-up.

P F Tinmore, et al,

Don't delude yourself. That is not what is said at all.

Of course this discussion is merely academic. No matter who owns it, it is still Palestinian Land.

Jews own land in the US and it is still US land.

Palestinian land? For 700 years it was Ottoman land, then it became British land. There was never a Palestinian people or a Palestinian state. As the UN records show, "Palestinian" is a relatively new phenomenon.

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.

Mandate for Palestine - League of Nations 32nd session - Minutes of the Permanent Mandates Commission 18 August 1937 ​

(COMMENT)

That is not a proper interpretation at all. All people needed an identity and a country to assume responsibility for them. The Nationality Law did that. It placed the Mandatory as the responsible government over the territory to which the Mandate of Palestine applied. The Nationality was "Palestinian" (citizens of the territory to which the Mandate Applied). This very same logic was used in the territories to which the Mandates of Lebanon, Syria, and Iraq applied.

Don't read more into it than is said. We are talking about sovereignty and independence. And you will not find anything, prior to 1988, that indicates that the people indigenous to the territory to which the Mandate applied were ever sovereign or independent. In fact, you find the exact opposite:

• 
  "Palestine is today a legal entity but it is not a sovereign state. Palestine is a territory administered under mandate by His Majesty (in respect of the United Kingdom), who is entirely responsible both for its internal administration and for its foreign affairs.
  
  "After the 15th May, 1948, Palestine will continue to be a legal entity but it will still not be a sovereign state because it will not be immediately self-governing. The authority responsible for its administration will, however, have changed.

That is the description. Your interpretation is entirely incorrect.

Most Respectfully,
R

Don't read more into it than is said. We are talking about sovereignty and independence.​

Actually we are talking about the right to sovereignty and independence as subsequent UN resolutions have affirmed.

Palestine was born under foreign military occupation and that status remains to today. They have never had the opportunity to exercise their rights.

(COMMENT)

No UN Resolution comes before 1945. And No UN Resolution expands the concept of "sovereignty and independence" to a status above the roll of the majority of the Council of the League of Nations set by treaty.

The idea that "Palestine was born under foreign military occupation" is ambiguous at best. Yes the 1988 Declared Palestine (territories occupied by Israel in 1967) was born under "occupation." Palestine (the territory to which the former Mandate applied) was created solely by the Allied Powers (within such boundaries as may be determined by the Principal Allied Powers).

The Arab Palestinian had a number of opportunities to exercise their rights (pertaining to that era in time) and generally used it (with the exception of 1951 and 1988) in a negative or obstructive fashion. Clearly, in 1988, the Palestinians Declared Independence. And in doing so --- exercised their right --- as it existed then.

Most Respectfully,
R

The idea that "Palestine was born under foreign military occupation" is ambiguous at best​

By 1924 Palestine had been under British military occupation for several years. That occupation was supposed to change to a mandate. For Britain that was just a name change. It continued its military occupation until it left in 1948.