Do Palestinians Have the Right to Defend Themselves?

[toastman]

P F Tinmore, et al,

Well, you are not listening.

P F Tinmore, et al,

Yes, here is something to agree with.

Yes, that region of the world has flip-flopped so many times,...​

​

So true, however, it was relatively stable and peaceful during the Ottoman period. When Palestine was carved out after WWI, all of the people who lived there became Palestinian citizens. There is no evidence that that amicable relationship would not continue.

(COMMENT)

Well, first off --- that peaceful period was under the sovereign control of the Sultan of the Ottoman Empire. It was not a result of any peaceful pursuits of autonomous efforts of the Arabs.

The fact that "all of the people who lived there became Palestinian citizens" was a consequence of the Principle Allied Powers deciding that was the high road they wanted to take. They did not have to extend those rights to the govern. They did so because they felt it was the right thing to do. A set of decisions they have come to regret. At that time, the Arabs had virtually nothing to do with the creation of those rights as they were totally alien concepts to the Arab Muslims. Who --- became citizens of the (whatever geography they determined was) territory to which the Mandate applied --- was a decision of the Allied Powers and the Council; not a decision of the Arabs --- and not a decision of the Ottomans or the Turks.

Then Britain landed with the Balfour Declaration in its pocket and fucked everything up big time. There has been nothing but death and destruction since.

(COMMENT)

Well not exactly. The Arabs of that region and the Ottoman were enemies of the Allied Powers. In fact, the first office of governance over the entire region was The Occupied Enemy Territory Administration (OETA 1918-1920). It was territory lost in war --- and under the Law of Conquest active in 1918, the captured territory (the area covered by OETA) went to the victors. That customary law was really not set assign until 1945 and the UN Charter granting territorial integrity.

The death and destruction over that very small path of land was not entirely the fault of the Arab; but, pretty damn close. Even today, the Arab Palestinian desperately tries to argue and claim that they have the right to suicide bomb, ambush, --- kidnap and kill civilians in every sort of helpless category (the old, infirm, school age, clergy, etc) they claim they have the right to hijack ships and conduct piracy on the high seas. Every day they demonstrate that the need to carve-out a special plot of land is necessary and essential to the safety, preservation and development of the Jewish National Home.

Most Respectfully,
R

...and under the Law of Conquest active in 1918, the captured territory (the area covered by OETA) went to the victors. That customary law was really not set assign until 1945 and the UN Charter granting territorial integrity.​

Then why do UN resolutions say that the Palestinians have the right to territorial integrity if they have no territory?

(COMMENT)

The Palestine (defined as the territory to which the Mandate applied) is pre-1945. The State of Palestine (defined by the Declaration of Independence of 1988) is an entirely different place and time. The territorial integrity of today's contemporary Palestine Affirms the need to enable the Palestinian people to exercise their sovereignty over their territory occupied since 1967; not the HAMAS or PLO Palestine --- as defined "from the river to the sea, and from north to south," and qualified the "land of the Palestinian people and its homeland and its legitimate right."

Remember, The Palestinians have no borders or demarcations to rely upon. The Israelis do.

Someday when the Palestinians negotiate their sovereignty, they can apply their right of territorial integrity. Everyone has the right to earn a billion dollars if you want. I have that right and you have that right. It just so happens that Warren Buffet has that right. Warren Buffet was smart and hard working and earn an estimated net worth US$70.9 Billion (April 2015). Why do you and I have the right, but not the money. Well we were not as smart as Warren Buffet, or as hard working as Warren Buffet. But if we do ever amass $70 Billion --- we can reach in our back pocket and pull out that right to earn it. The same goes for the Palestinian and their rights. Just because you have a right, doesn't mean you have the object of that right.

Most Respectfully,
R

sovereignty over their territory occupied since 1967; not the HAMAS or PLO Palestine --- as defined "from the river to the sea, and from north to south," and qualified the "land of the Palestinian people and its homeland and its legitimate right."

That does not look correct.

...before a lasting peace can be established in Palestine is the question of
the disposition of the more than 700,000 Arab refugees who during the
Palestine conflict fled from their homes in what is now Israeli occupied
territory and are at present living as refugees in Arab Palestine and
the neighboring Arab states.

FRUS Foreign relations of the United States 1949. The Near East South Asia and Africa Israel

The June 1967 Arab-Israeli War resulted in a vast expansion of the Zionist colonial project in Palestine, a seizure of territory that much of the world recognizes as an illegal occupation. But it wasn’t the first illegitimate occupation.

That first occupation began with a project calling itself the State of Israel. Its armed wing is known as the Israeli Defense Forces (IDF). It occupied Western Palestine in 1948 and still does to this day.

Occupation of Palestine started in 1948

...and Palestinians living as Israeli citizens in 1948 occupied Palestine...

1948 Internally Displaced Persons Palestinians

The 69-page book explores the emergence of these parties and their programs and their influence in the political life of the Palestinians in the 1948 occupied territories.

Al-Zaytouna Centre - Information Report 25 Arab Parties in 1948 Occupied Palestine in Israel

"The June 1967 Arab-Israeli War resulted in a vast expansion of the Zionist colonial project in Palestine"

If this is true, then why did Israel give back the Sinai in 1979 (they actually offered to give it back following the sic day war, but Egypt signed the Khartoum Resolution", offer to give back the Golan for a peace treaty (Syria also signed the Khartoum Resolution) and have offered to give up virtually the entire West Bank for a peace offer with the Palestinians (who have refused every one) ?
The answer is because the 'Zionist colonial project' is pure 100% Palestinian propaganda. It's simply not true.

 

[toastman]

P F Tinmore, et al,

Well, you are not listening.

P F Tinmore, et al,

Yes, here is something to agree with.

Yes, that region of the world has flip-flopped so many times,...​

​

So true, however, it was relatively stable and peaceful during the Ottoman period. When Palestine was carved out after WWI, all of the people who lived there became Palestinian citizens. There is no evidence that that amicable relationship would not continue.

(COMMENT)

Well, first off --- that peaceful period was under the sovereign control of the Sultan of the Ottoman Empire. It was not a result of any peaceful pursuits of autonomous efforts of the Arabs.

The fact that "all of the people who lived there became Palestinian citizens" was a consequence of the Principle Allied Powers deciding that was the high road they wanted to take. They did not have to extend those rights to the govern. They did so because they felt it was the right thing to do. A set of decisions they have come to regret. At that time, the Arabs had virtually nothing to do with the creation of those rights as they were totally alien concepts to the Arab Muslims. Who --- became citizens of the (whatever geography they determined was) territory to which the Mandate applied --- was a decision of the Allied Powers and the Council; not a decision of the Arabs --- and not a decision of the Ottomans or the Turks.

Then Britain landed with the Balfour Declaration in its pocket and fucked everything up big time. There has been nothing but death and destruction since.

(COMMENT)

Well not exactly. The Arabs of that region and the Ottoman were enemies of the Allied Powers. In fact, the first office of governance over the entire region was The Occupied Enemy Territory Administration (OETA 1918-1920). It was territory lost in war --- and under the Law of Conquest active in 1918, the captured territory (the area covered by OETA) went to the victors. That customary law was really not set assign until 1945 and the UN Charter granting territorial integrity.

The death and destruction over that very small path of land was not entirely the fault of the Arab; but, pretty damn close. Even today, the Arab Palestinian desperately tries to argue and claim that they have the right to suicide bomb, ambush, --- kidnap and kill civilians in every sort of helpless category (the old, infirm, school age, clergy, etc) they claim they have the right to hijack ships and conduct piracy on the high seas. Every day they demonstrate that the need to carve-out a special plot of land is necessary and essential to the safety, preservation and development of the Jewish National Home.

Most Respectfully,
R

...and under the Law of Conquest active in 1918, the captured territory (the area covered by OETA) went to the victors. That customary law was really not set assign until 1945 and the UN Charter granting territorial integrity.​

Then why do UN resolutions say that the Palestinians have the right to territorial integrity if they have no territory?

(COMMENT)

The Palestine (defined as the territory to which the Mandate applied) is pre-1945. The State of Palestine (defined by the Declaration of Independence of 1988) is an entirely different place and time. The territorial integrity of today's contemporary Palestine Affirms the need to enable the Palestinian people to exercise their sovereignty over their territory occupied since 1967; not the HAMAS or PLO Palestine --- as defined "from the river to the sea, and from north to south," and qualified the "land of the Palestinian people and its homeland and its legitimate right."

Remember, The Palestinians have no borders or demarcations to rely upon. The Israelis do.

Someday when the Palestinians negotiate their sovereignty, they can apply their right of territorial integrity. Everyone has the right to earn a billion dollars if you want. I have that right and you have that right. It just so happens that Warren Buffet has that right. Warren Buffet was smart and hard working and earn an estimated net worth US$70.9 Billion (April 2015). Why do you and I have the right, but not the money. Well we were not as smart as Warren Buffet, or as hard working as Warren Buffet. But if we do ever amass $70 Billion --- we can reach in our back pocket and pull out that right to earn it. The same goes for the Palestinian and their rights. Just because you have a right, doesn't mean you have the object of that right.

Most Respectfully,
R

sovereignty over their territory occupied since 1967; not the HAMAS or PLO Palestine --- as defined "from the river to the sea, and from north to south," and qualified the "land of the Palestinian people and its homeland and its legitimate right."

That does not look correct.

...before a lasting peace can be established in Palestine is the question of
the disposition of the more than 700,000 Arab refugees who during the
Palestine conflict fled from their homes in what is now Israeli occupied
territory and are at present living as refugees in Arab Palestine and
the neighboring Arab states.

FRUS Foreign relations of the United States 1949. The Near East South Asia and Africa Israel

The June 1967 Arab-Israeli War resulted in a vast expansion of the Zionist colonial project in Palestine, a seizure of territory that much of the world recognizes as an illegal occupation. But it wasn’t the first illegitimate occupation.

That first occupation began with a project calling itself the State of Israel. Its armed wing is known as the Israeli Defense Forces (IDF). It occupied Western Palestine in 1948 and still does to this day.

Occupation of Palestine started in 1948

...and Palestinians living as Israeli citizens in 1948 occupied Palestine...

1948 Internally Displaced Persons Palestinians

The 69-page book explores the emergence of these parties and their programs and their influence in the political life of the Palestinians in the 1948 occupied territories.

Al-Zaytouna Centre - Information Report 25 Arab Parties in 1948 Occupied Palestine in Israel

"That first occupation began with a project calling itself the State of Israel. Its armed wing is known as the Israeli Defense Forces (IDF). It occupied Western Palestine in 1948 and still does to this day."

In your dreams moron. Even the Palestinians recognize that territory as being Israel's. What the fuck is wrong with you? You have got to be the most unaware poster concerning this conflict.

 

[toastman]

This is the state of Palestine

That is not up for debate

 

[RoccoR]

montelatici, et al,

I think you are confusing me.

I've seen this before. These are two separate and distinct events that happened in different areas of the Middle East at different intervals in time.

EVENT ONE: The Arab Revolt was initiated by the Sherif Hussein bin Ali (Sharif Ali)

The Arab Revolt of COL Lawrence fame, began (o/a) 5 June 1916 and ended in 1918 [Armistice of Mudros (30 October 1918)]. Forces commanded by Sharif Ali, and Emir Faisal, attacked the Ottoman garrison at Medina. This revolt was largely active in the Arab Hejaz. Nearly every source agrees that when Sharif Ali, on seeing an opportunity to secure Arab lands from Ottoman control, launched the famous Arab Revolt. These Arab Bedouin Tribes, opposing secular nationalism in favor of the potential promise by the British to a Kingdom (leading to a pan-Islamic nation). In view of these growing consequences, in June 1916, Sharif Ali, as head of the Arab nationalists and in alliance with Britain and France, initiated the Great Arab Revolt against Ottoman rule. But --- it was done to accomplish the objective to establish a single independent and unified Arab state stretching from Aleppo (Syria) to Aden (Yemen). Not to assist the Allied Powers. This pan-Arab view of Sharif Ali conflicted with the plans for the House of Saud to unify the various tribes, sheikhs, emirates, and other kingdoms in the Arabian Peninsula; a campaign that would last some three decades (1902 - 1932) and the Unification of the Kingdom, 23 September 1932 (Independence). In the final analysis, King Ali bin al-Hussein, the eldest brother of Abdullah and Faisal, lost the throne of the Kingdom of the Hejaz to Abdel Aziz bin Saud of Najd (House of Saud).​

EVENT TWO:

The "Arab revolt" in Palestine (AKA: "The Great Uprising") took place between (15 April) 1936 --- 1939. It was a nationalist uprising by Palestinian Arabs in Mandatory Palestine against British colonial rule. This is not to be confused with the rise of the Muslim Insurgency know as the Palestinian Black Hand founded late 1929 or early 1930 (by Sheikh Izz ad-Din al-Qassam) eventually killed in a manhunt in late 1935. The Sheikh (al-Qassam) moved to Haifa in 1921 (after his attempt to start a revolt in Syria failed and the French Sécurité began to close in) and began anew in the recruitment and training of the easily molded Arab peasants; Sheikh al-Qassam was a Palestinian Muslim preacher.​

"The Arabs of that region and the Ottoman were enemies of the Allied Powers..."

No, the Arabs of the region participated in the Great Arab Revolt against the Turks allied with the British.

(COMMENT)

Now follow this closely. This is the part that most people miss.

​

The Arab Irregular Force (AIF) associated with COL T.E. Lawrence were Bedouins from the Hejaz; not affiliated to the House of Saud. Those AIF essentially follow the Hejaz Rail Line north from Median to Aqaba --- then bypassing Amman on the East ---and going into Syria (Damascus) and north to almost Aleppo. The AIF of COL Lawrence never touched the territory of west of the Jordan River. What we call the Arab Palestinian was never part of the Arab Revolt and never assisted the Allied Powers.

If you look at the Battle Map. You will see that the British Empire's Egyptian Expeditionary Force (EEF) during the Sinai and Palestine Campaign are engaging the Turkish 4th, 7th and 8th Armies; four enemy Corps on the West side of the Jordan River. There are no AIF west of Dera. If you look half way up the right side of the map you will see a box marked ARAB (XXXX); that is the AIF.

​

Most Respectfully,
R

 

[Phoenall]

"The Arabs of that region and the Ottoman were enemies of the Allied Powers..."

No, the Arabs of the region participated in the Great Arab Revolt against the Turks allied with the British.

And in the process murdered Jews and Christians

 

[Phoenall]

P F Tinmore, et al,

Yes, here is something to agree with.

Yes, that region of the world has flip-flopped so many times,...​

​

So true, however, it was relatively stable and peaceful during the Ottoman period. When Palestine was carved out after WWI, all of the people who lived there became Palestinian citizens. There is no evidence that that amicable relationship would not continue.

(COMMENT)

Well, first off --- that peaceful period was under the sovereign control of the Sultan of the Ottoman Empire. It was not a result of any peaceful pursuits of autonomous efforts of the Arabs.

The fact that "all of the people who lived there became Palestinian citizens" was a consequence of the Principle Allied Powers deciding that was the high road they wanted to take. They did not have to extend those rights to the govern. They did so because they felt it was the right thing to do. A set of decisions they have come to regret. At that time, the Arabs had virtually nothing to do with the creation of those rights as they were totally alien concepts to the Arab Muslims. Who --- became citizens of the (whatever geography they determined was) territory to which the Mandate applied --- was a decision of the Allied Powers and the Council; not a decision of the Arabs --- and not a decision of the Ottomans or the Turks.

Then Britain landed with the Balfour Declaration in its pocket and fucked everything up big time. There has been nothing but death and destruction since.

(COMMENT)

Well not exactly. The Arabs of that region and the Ottoman were enemies of the Allied Powers. In fact, the first office of governance over the entire region was The Occupied Enemy Territory Administration (OETA 1918-1920). It was territory lost in war --- and under the Law of Conquest active in 1918, the captured territory (the area covered by OETA) went to the victors. That customary law was really not set assign until 1945 and the UN Charter granting territorial integrity.

The death and destruction over that very small path of land was not entirely the fault of the Arab; but, pretty damn close. Even today, the Arab Palestinian desperately tries to argue and claim that they have the right to suicide bomb, ambush, --- kidnap and kill civilians in every sort of helpless category (the old, infirm, school age, clergy, etc) they claim they have the right to hijack ships and conduct piracy on the high seas. Every day they demonstrate that the need to carve-out a special plot of land is necessary and essential to the safety, preservation and development of the Jewish National Home.

Most Respectfully,
R

Even today, the Arab Palestinian desperately tries to argue and claim that they have the right to suicide bomb, ambush, --- kidnap and kill civilians in every sort of helpless category (the old, infirm, school age, clergy, etc) they claim they have the right to hijack ships and conduct piracy on the high seas.​

Do have links to that crap?

Will the ones you use be good enough ?

 

[Phoenall]

P F Tinmore, et al,

Yes, here is something to agree with.

Yes, that region of the world has flip-flopped so many times,...​

​

So true, however, it was relatively stable and peaceful during the Ottoman period. When Palestine was carved out after WWI, all of the people who lived there became Palestinian citizens. There is no evidence that that amicable relationship would not continue.

(COMMENT)

Well, first off --- that peaceful period was under the sovereign control of the Sultan of the Ottoman Empire. It was not a result of any peaceful pursuits of autonomous efforts of the Arabs.

The fact that "all of the people who lived there became Palestinian citizens" was a consequence of the Principle Allied Powers deciding that was the high road they wanted to take. They did not have to extend those rights to the govern. They did so because they felt it was the right thing to do. A set of decisions they have come to regret. At that time, the Arabs had virtually nothing to do with the creation of those rights as they were totally alien concepts to the Arab Muslims. Who --- became citizens of the (whatever geography they determined was) territory to which the Mandate applied --- was a decision of the Allied Powers and the Council; not a decision of the Arabs --- and not a decision of the Ottomans or the Turks.

Then Britain landed with the Balfour Declaration in its pocket and fucked everything up big time. There has been nothing but death and destruction since.

(COMMENT)

Well not exactly. The Arabs of that region and the Ottoman were enemies of the Allied Powers. In fact, the first office of governance over the entire region was The Occupied Enemy Territory Administration (OETA 1918-1920). It was territory lost in war --- and under the Law of Conquest active in 1918, the captured territory (the area covered by OETA) went to the victors. That customary law was really not set assign until 1945 and the UN Charter granting territorial integrity.

The death and destruction over that very small path of land was not entirely the fault of the Arab; but, pretty damn close. Even today, the Arab Palestinian desperately tries to argue and claim that they have the right to suicide bomb, ambush, --- kidnap and kill civilians in every sort of helpless category (the old, infirm, school age, clergy, etc) they claim they have the right to hijack ships and conduct piracy on the high seas. Every day they demonstrate that the need to carve-out a special plot of land is necessary and essential to the safety, preservation and development of the Jewish National Home.

Most Respectfully,
R

Every day they demonstrate that the need to carve-out a special plot of land is necessary and essential to the safety, preservation and development of the Jewish National Home.​

You forgot to mention inside Palestine.

And you refuse to give it it's full title MANDATE FOR PALESTINE. Why is that ?

 

[Phoenall]

P F Tinmore, et al,

Yes, here is something to agree with.

Yes, that region of the world has flip-flopped so many times,...​

​

So true, however, it was relatively stable and peaceful during the Ottoman period. When Palestine was carved out after WWI, all of the people who lived there became Palestinian citizens. There is no evidence that that amicable relationship would not continue.

(COMMENT)

Well, first off --- that peaceful period was under the sovereign control of the Sultan of the Ottoman Empire. It was not a result of any peaceful pursuits of autonomous efforts of the Arabs.

The fact that "all of the people who lived there became Palestinian citizens" was a consequence of the Principle Allied Powers deciding that was the high road they wanted to take. They did not have to extend those rights to the govern. They did so because they felt it was the right thing to do. A set of decisions they have come to regret. At that time, the Arabs had virtually nothing to do with the creation of those rights as they were totally alien concepts to the Arab Muslims. Who --- became citizens of the (whatever geography they determined was) territory to which the Mandate applied --- was a decision of the Allied Powers and the Council; not a decision of the Arabs --- and not a decision of the Ottomans or the Turks.

Then Britain landed with the Balfour Declaration in its pocket and fucked everything up big time. There has been nothing but death and destruction since.

(COMMENT)

Well not exactly. The Arabs of that region and the Ottoman were enemies of the Allied Powers. In fact, the first office of governance over the entire region was The Occupied Enemy Territory Administration (OETA 1918-1920). It was territory lost in war --- and under the Law of Conquest active in 1918, the captured territory (the area covered by OETA) went to the victors. That customary law was really not set assign until 1945 and the UN Charter granting territorial integrity.

The death and destruction over that very small path of land was not entirely the fault of the Arab; but, pretty damn close. Even today, the Arab Palestinian desperately tries to argue and claim that they have the right to suicide bomb, ambush, --- kidnap and kill civilians in every sort of helpless category (the old, infirm, school age, clergy, etc) they claim they have the right to hijack ships and conduct piracy on the high seas. Every day they demonstrate that the need to carve-out a special plot of land is necessary and essential to the safety, preservation and development of the Jewish National Home.

Most Respectfully,
R

...and under the Law of Conquest active in 1918, the captured territory (the area covered by OETA) went to the victors. That customary law was really not set assign until 1945 and the UN Charter granting territorial integrity.​

Then why do UN resolutions say that the Palestinians have the right to territorial integrity if they have no territory?

Because the UN are steering them towards full statehood and all that goes with it. It is the next step on free determination that they are loathe to take because it will show they are not interested in peace just conquest, violence and murder.

 

[Phoenall]

P F Tinmore, et al,

Yes, here is something to agree with.

Yes, that region of the world has flip-flopped so many times,...​

​

So true, however, it was relatively stable and peaceful during the Ottoman period. When Palestine was carved out after WWI, all of the people who lived there became Palestinian citizens. There is no evidence that that amicable relationship would not continue.

(COMMENT)

Well, first off --- that peaceful period was under the sovereign control of the Sultan of the Ottoman Empire. It was not a result of any peaceful pursuits of autonomous efforts of the Arabs.

The fact that "all of the people who lived there became Palestinian citizens" was a consequence of the Principle Allied Powers deciding that was the high road they wanted to take. They did not have to extend those rights to the govern. They did so because they felt it was the right thing to do. A set of decisions they have come to regret. At that time, the Arabs had virtually nothing to do with the creation of those rights as they were totally alien concepts to the Arab Muslims. Who --- became citizens of the (whatever geography they determined was) territory to which the Mandate applied --- was a decision of the Allied Powers and the Council; not a decision of the Arabs --- and not a decision of the Ottomans or the Turks.

Then Britain landed with the Balfour Declaration in its pocket and fucked everything up big time. There has been nothing but death and destruction since.

(COMMENT)

Well not exactly. The Arabs of that region and the Ottoman were enemies of the Allied Powers. In fact, the first office of governance over the entire region was The Occupied Enemy Territory Administration (OETA 1918-1920). It was territory lost in war --- and under the Law of Conquest active in 1918, the captured territory (the area covered by OETA) went to the victors. That customary law was really not set assign until 1945 and the UN Charter granting territorial integrity.

The death and destruction over that very small path of land was not entirely the fault of the Arab; but, pretty damn close. Even today, the Arab Palestinian desperately tries to argue and claim that they have the right to suicide bomb, ambush, --- kidnap and kill civilians in every sort of helpless category (the old, infirm, school age, clergy, etc) they claim they have the right to hijack ships and conduct piracy on the high seas. Every day they demonstrate that the need to carve-out a special plot of land is necessary and essential to the safety, preservation and development of the Jewish National Home.

Most Respectfully,
R

The fact that "all of the people who lived there became Palestinian citizens" was a consequence of the Principle Allied Powers deciding that was the high road they wanted to take.​

Then Britain came by catering to the agenda of foreigners and fucked that up. There has been nothing but death and destruction ever since. Britain took the low road.

LINK ?

 

[Phoenall]

P F Tinmore, et al,

Well, you are not listening.

P F Tinmore, et al,

Yes, here is something to agree with.

Yes, that region of the world has flip-flopped so many times,...​

​

So true, however, it was relatively stable and peaceful during the Ottoman period. When Palestine was carved out after WWI, all of the people who lived there became Palestinian citizens. There is no evidence that that amicable relationship would not continue.

(COMMENT)

Well, first off --- that peaceful period was under the sovereign control of the Sultan of the Ottoman Empire. It was not a result of any peaceful pursuits of autonomous efforts of the Arabs.

The fact that "all of the people who lived there became Palestinian citizens" was a consequence of the Principle Allied Powers deciding that was the high road they wanted to take. They did not have to extend those rights to the govern. They did so because they felt it was the right thing to do. A set of decisions they have come to regret. At that time, the Arabs had virtually nothing to do with the creation of those rights as they were totally alien concepts to the Arab Muslims. Who --- became citizens of the (whatever geography they determined was) territory to which the Mandate applied --- was a decision of the Allied Powers and the Council; not a decision of the Arabs --- and not a decision of the Ottomans or the Turks.

Then Britain landed with the Balfour Declaration in its pocket and fucked everything up big time. There has been nothing but death and destruction since.

(COMMENT)

Well not exactly. The Arabs of that region and the Ottoman were enemies of the Allied Powers. In fact, the first office of governance over the entire region was The Occupied Enemy Territory Administration (OETA 1918-1920). It was territory lost in war --- and under the Law of Conquest active in 1918, the captured territory (the area covered by OETA) went to the victors. That customary law was really not set assign until 1945 and the UN Charter granting territorial integrity.

The death and destruction over that very small path of land was not entirely the fault of the Arab; but, pretty damn close. Even today, the Arab Palestinian desperately tries to argue and claim that they have the right to suicide bomb, ambush, --- kidnap and kill civilians in every sort of helpless category (the old, infirm, school age, clergy, etc) they claim they have the right to hijack ships and conduct piracy on the high seas. Every day they demonstrate that the need to carve-out a special plot of land is necessary and essential to the safety, preservation and development of the Jewish National Home.

Most Respectfully,
R

...and under the Law of Conquest active in 1918, the captured territory (the area covered by OETA) went to the victors. That customary law was really not set assign until 1945 and the UN Charter granting territorial integrity.​

Then why do UN resolutions say that the Palestinians have the right to territorial integrity if they have no territory?

(COMMENT)

The Palestine (defined as the territory to which the Mandate applied) is pre-1945. The State of Palestine (defined by the Declaration of Independence of 1988) is an entirely different place and time. The territorial integrity of today's contemporary Palestine Affirms the need to enable the Palestinian people to exercise their sovereignty over their territory occupied since 1967; not the HAMAS or PLO Palestine --- as defined "from the river to the sea, and from north to south," and qualified the "land of the Palestinian people and its homeland and its legitimate right."

Remember, The Palestinians have no borders or demarcations to rely upon. The Israelis do.

Someday when the Palestinians negotiate their sovereignty, they can apply their right of territorial integrity. Everyone has the right to earn a billion dollars if you want. I have that right and you have that right. It just so happens that Warren Buffet has that right. Warren Buffet was smart and hard working and earn an estimated net worth US$70.9 Billion (April 2015). Why do you and I have the right, but not the money. Well we were not as smart as Warren Buffet, or as hard working as Warren Buffet. But if we do ever amass $70 Billion --- we can reach in our back pocket and pull out that right to earn it. The same goes for the Palestinian and their rights. Just because you have a right, doesn't mean you have the object of that right.

Most Respectfully,
R

Remember, The Palestinians have no borders or demarcations to rely upon. The Israelis do.

You have that backwards.

Palestine has international borders.

Israel is defined by armistice lines.

Then you base the rest of your post of false premise.

Again with this LIE The MANDATE FOR PALESTINE has borders, the nation of Palestine refuses to state its borders. Israel is defined in part by International treaty that sets it borders in stone. Now when did the Palestinians negotiate their borders and sign to accept them ?
It should be easy to produce the treaty, that is if there ever was one .....................

 

[Phoenall]

P F Tinmore, et al,

Well, you are not listening.

P F Tinmore, et al,

Yes, here is something to agree with.

Yes, that region of the world has flip-flopped so many times,...​

​

So true, however, it was relatively stable and peaceful during the Ottoman period. When Palestine was carved out after WWI, all of the people who lived there became Palestinian citizens. There is no evidence that that amicable relationship would not continue.

(COMMENT)

Well, first off --- that peaceful period was under the sovereign control of the Sultan of the Ottoman Empire. It was not a result of any peaceful pursuits of autonomous efforts of the Arabs.

The fact that "all of the people who lived there became Palestinian citizens" was a consequence of the Principle Allied Powers deciding that was the high road they wanted to take. They did not have to extend those rights to the govern. They did so because they felt it was the right thing to do. A set of decisions they have come to regret. At that time, the Arabs had virtually nothing to do with the creation of those rights as they were totally alien concepts to the Arab Muslims. Who --- became citizens of the (whatever geography they determined was) territory to which the Mandate applied --- was a decision of the Allied Powers and the Council; not a decision of the Arabs --- and not a decision of the Ottomans or the Turks.

Then Britain landed with the Balfour Declaration in its pocket and fucked everything up big time. There has been nothing but death and destruction since.

(COMMENT)

Well not exactly. The Arabs of that region and the Ottoman were enemies of the Allied Powers. In fact, the first office of governance over the entire region was The Occupied Enemy Territory Administration (OETA 1918-1920). It was territory lost in war --- and under the Law of Conquest active in 1918, the captured territory (the area covered by OETA) went to the victors. That customary law was really not set assign until 1945 and the UN Charter granting territorial integrity.

The death and destruction over that very small path of land was not entirely the fault of the Arab; but, pretty damn close. Even today, the Arab Palestinian desperately tries to argue and claim that they have the right to suicide bomb, ambush, --- kidnap and kill civilians in every sort of helpless category (the old, infirm, school age, clergy, etc) they claim they have the right to hijack ships and conduct piracy on the high seas. Every day they demonstrate that the need to carve-out a special plot of land is necessary and essential to the safety, preservation and development of the Jewish National Home.

Most Respectfully,
R

...and under the Law of Conquest active in 1918, the captured territory (the area covered by OETA) went to the victors. That customary law was really not set assign until 1945 and the UN Charter granting territorial integrity.​

Then why do UN resolutions say that the Palestinians have the right to territorial integrity if they have no territory?

(COMMENT)

The Palestine (defined as the territory to which the Mandate applied) is pre-1945. The State of Palestine (defined by the Declaration of Independence of 1988) is an entirely different place and time. The territorial integrity of today's contemporary Palestine Affirms the need to enable the Palestinian people to exercise their sovereignty over their territory occupied since 1967; not the HAMAS or PLO Palestine --- as defined "from the river to the sea, and from north to south," and qualified the "land of the Palestinian people and its homeland and its legitimate right."

Remember, The Palestinians have no borders or demarcations to rely upon. The Israelis do.

Someday when the Palestinians negotiate their sovereignty, they can apply their right of territorial integrity. Everyone has the right to earn a billion dollars if you want. I have that right and you have that right. It just so happens that Warren Buffet has that right. Warren Buffet was smart and hard working and earn an estimated net worth US$70.9 Billion (April 2015). Why do you and I have the right, but not the money. Well we were not as smart as Warren Buffet, or as hard working as Warren Buffet. But if we do ever amass $70 Billion --- we can reach in our back pocket and pull out that right to earn it. The same goes for the Palestinian and their rights. Just because you have a right, doesn't mean you have the object of that right.

Most Respectfully,
R

sovereignty over their territory occupied since 1967; not the HAMAS or PLO Palestine --- as defined "from the river to the sea, and from north to south," and qualified the "land of the Palestinian people and its homeland and its legitimate right."

That does not look correct.

...before a lasting peace can be established in Palestine is the question of
the disposition of the more than 700,000 Arab refugees who during the
Palestine conflict fled from their homes in what is now Israeli occupied
territory and are at present living as refugees in Arab Palestine and
the neighboring Arab states.

FRUS Foreign relations of the United States 1949. The Near East South Asia and Africa Israel

The June 1967 Arab-Israeli War resulted in a vast expansion of the Zionist colonial project in Palestine, a seizure of territory that much of the world recognizes as an illegal occupation. But it wasn’t the first illegitimate occupation.

That first occupation began with a project calling itself the State of Israel. Its armed wing is known as the Israeli Defense Forces (IDF). It occupied Western Palestine in 1948 and still does to this day.

Occupation of Palestine started in 1948

...and Palestinians living as Israeli citizens in 1948 occupied Palestine...

1948 Internally Displaced Persons Palestinians

The 69-page book explores the emergence of these parties and their programs and their influence in the political life of the Palestinians in the 1948 occupied territories.

Al-Zaytouna Centre - Information Report 25 Arab Parties in 1948 Occupied Palestine in Israel

How about some proper sources and not looney left pro islam ones.

 

[Billo_Really]

Such is war, and blame the arab muslims for it all

Just like the Nazis blamed the Jews.

 

[Phoenall]

Such is war, and blame the arab muslims for it all

Just like the Nazis blamed the Jews.

Did they really, then how about a link showing where the Nazis blamed the Jews for the destruction and deaths in gaza ?

That was what my reply was to, so lets see you squirm out of this without showing yourself up.

 

[toastman]

Such is war, and blame the arab muslims for it all

Just like the Nazis blamed the Jews.

Not even close. Try again.

 

[P F Tinmore]

P F Tinmore, et al,

Well, you are not listening.

P F Tinmore, et al,

Yes, here is something to agree with.

​

So true, however, it was relatively stable and peaceful during the Ottoman period. When Palestine was carved out after WWI, all of the people who lived there became Palestinian citizens. There is no evidence that that amicable relationship would not continue.

(COMMENT)

Well, first off --- that peaceful period was under the sovereign control of the Sultan of the Ottoman Empire. It was not a result of any peaceful pursuits of autonomous efforts of the Arabs.

The fact that "all of the people who lived there became Palestinian citizens" was a consequence of the Principle Allied Powers deciding that was the high road they wanted to take. They did not have to extend those rights to the govern. They did so because they felt it was the right thing to do. A set of decisions they have come to regret. At that time, the Arabs had virtually nothing to do with the creation of those rights as they were totally alien concepts to the Arab Muslims. Who --- became citizens of the (whatever geography they determined was) territory to which the Mandate applied --- was a decision of the Allied Powers and the Council; not a decision of the Arabs --- and not a decision of the Ottomans or the Turks.

Then Britain landed with the Balfour Declaration in its pocket and fucked everything up big time. There has been nothing but death and destruction since.

(COMMENT)

Well not exactly. The Arabs of that region and the Ottoman were enemies of the Allied Powers. In fact, the first office of governance over the entire region was The Occupied Enemy Territory Administration (OETA 1918-1920). It was territory lost in war --- and under the Law of Conquest active in 1918, the captured territory (the area covered by OETA) went to the victors. That customary law was really not set assign until 1945 and the UN Charter granting territorial integrity.

The death and destruction over that very small path of land was not entirely the fault of the Arab; but, pretty damn close. Even today, the Arab Palestinian desperately tries to argue and claim that they have the right to suicide bomb, ambush, --- kidnap and kill civilians in every sort of helpless category (the old, infirm, school age, clergy, etc) they claim they have the right to hijack ships and conduct piracy on the high seas. Every day they demonstrate that the need to carve-out a special plot of land is necessary and essential to the safety, preservation and development of the Jewish National Home.

Most Respectfully,
R

...and under the Law of Conquest active in 1918, the captured territory (the area covered by OETA) went to the victors. That customary law was really not set assign until 1945 and the UN Charter granting territorial integrity.​

Then why do UN resolutions say that the Palestinians have the right to territorial integrity if they have no territory?

(COMMENT)

The Palestine (defined as the territory to which the Mandate applied) is pre-1945. The State of Palestine (defined by the Declaration of Independence of 1988) is an entirely different place and time. The territorial integrity of today's contemporary Palestine Affirms the need to enable the Palestinian people to exercise their sovereignty over their territory occupied since 1967; not the HAMAS or PLO Palestine --- as defined "from the river to the sea, and from north to south," and qualified the "land of the Palestinian people and its homeland and its legitimate right."

Remember, The Palestinians have no borders or demarcations to rely upon. The Israelis do.

Someday when the Palestinians negotiate their sovereignty, they can apply their right of territorial integrity. Everyone has the right to earn a billion dollars if you want. I have that right and you have that right. It just so happens that Warren Buffet has that right. Warren Buffet was smart and hard working and earn an estimated net worth US$70.9 Billion (April 2015). Why do you and I have the right, but not the money. Well we were not as smart as Warren Buffet, or as hard working as Warren Buffet. But if we do ever amass $70 Billion --- we can reach in our back pocket and pull out that right to earn it. The same goes for the Palestinian and their rights. Just because you have a right, doesn't mean you have the object of that right.

Most Respectfully,
R

sovereignty over their territory occupied since 1967; not the HAMAS or PLO Palestine --- as defined "from the river to the sea, and from north to south," and qualified the "land of the Palestinian people and its homeland and its legitimate right."

That does not look correct.

...before a lasting peace can be established in Palestine is the question of
the disposition of the more than 700,000 Arab refugees who during the
Palestine conflict fled from their homes in what is now Israeli occupied
territory and are at present living as refugees in Arab Palestine and
the neighboring Arab states.

FRUS Foreign relations of the United States 1949. The Near East South Asia and Africa Israel

The June 1967 Arab-Israeli War resulted in a vast expansion of the Zionist colonial project in Palestine, a seizure of territory that much of the world recognizes as an illegal occupation. But it wasn’t the first illegitimate occupation.

That first occupation began with a project calling itself the State of Israel. Its armed wing is known as the Israeli Defense Forces (IDF). It occupied Western Palestine in 1948 and still does to this day.

Occupation of Palestine started in 1948

...and Palestinians living as Israeli citizens in 1948 occupied Palestine...

1948 Internally Displaced Persons Palestinians

The 69-page book explores the emergence of these parties and their programs and their influence in the political life of the Palestinians in the 1948 occupied territories.

Al-Zaytouna Centre - Information Report 25 Arab Parties in 1948 Occupied Palestine in Israel

How about some proper sources and not looney left pro islam ones.

What proof do you have for what you say?

 

[P F Tinmore]

P F Tinmore, et al,

You, yourself have attempted to justify that the Arab Palestinian has the right to attack civilian Israeli objects; to use any and all means including terrorism.

Posting #156 in which you try to argue that it is OK (not a crime) for Palestinians to Kill members of the Occupying Power because it is not a crime ("The nationals of an occupying power are not protected persons."). What you did not tell them is that a Palestinian who commit an offence which is solely intended to harm the Occupying Power, an attempt on the life or limb of members of the occupying forces or administration, or a grave collective danger, or seriously damage the property of the occupying forces or administration or the installations used by them, or is guilty of espionage, of serious acts of sabotage against the military installations of the Occupying Power or of intentional offences which have caused the death of one or more persons, IS punishable under Article 68 of the Fourth Geneva Convention. This is very similar to the justification you used (Post #99) to defend the use of violence (or the threat of violence) against civilians in order to attain goals that are political or religious or ideological in nature.

Another one of my favorites is Posting #29 wherein you argue that HAMAS cannot be a terrorist organization ("whole terrorist name calling thing is a load of horse crap") because "Hamas does not fight outside its own territory and does not attack protected persons." This suggests that Israel is not sovereign and that attacks on Israel are purely domestic (contained within a Palestinian State); (you argument being that "HAMAS does not operate outside of Palestine") so "How is that international?" (Post #40) Talk about a bunch of crap.

• Posting #7
• Posting #70
• Posting #76
• Posting #110

Even today, the Arab Palestinian desperately tries to argue and claim that they have the right to suicide bomb, ambush, --- kidnap and kill civilians in every sort of helpless category (the old, infirm, school age, clergy, etc) they claim they have the right to hijack ships and conduct piracy on the high seas.​

​

Do have links to that crap?

(OBSERVATION)

Watch: Hamas Official Heaps Praise on 'Heroic' Kidnap Operation
Hamas 'political bureau' official Muhammad Nazal, hails abduction of three Israeli teenagers as a 'milestone in the Palestinian struggle'.

Netanyahu: Mashal made it clear Hamas was committed to fighting Israel
Prime minister addresses Abbas condemnation of kidnapping for the first time, saying if the PA president really means them, he is obligated to end his pact with Hamas.

Hamas Calls Special Press Conference, Says Nothing Important
Hamas (Hamas senior official, Salah Bardawil) claims they didn’t kidnap the boys, but they praise whoever did.

(COMMENT)

As I've said before, one of the many faces of Arab Palestinian terrorism is the use of violent acts intended to create and instill fear in the mind of non-combatants (civilians), perpetrated for a religious, political, or ideological goal; which deliberately target of non-combatants. Which is not only advocating the attack on civilians in violation of Rule #6 (Civilians are protected against attack, unless and for such time as they take a direct part in hostilities.) of Customary IHL and Protocol Additional to the Geneva Conventions of 12 August 1949, and relating to Part IV : Civilian population #Section I -- General protection against effects of hostilities.

In an article published July 16, 2013, a Senior Hamas Official, Dr 'Issam Adwan, former Minister of Palestinian Refugee Affairs, stated that the Islamic Resistance Movement (HAMAS) Is Entitled To Attack:

• Israel's Embassies,
• Israeli Interests,
• Israeli Officials Worldwide –
• The Interests of Israeli Allies, supporting the US
• (And of course) US interests.

They glorify the Jihadist and Fedayeen that engage and kill civilian non-combatants.

Now, you are not going to tell me that you did not know that Palestinians killed half the Israeli Olympic Team in Munich; of when they hijacked El Al Flight 426 (1968), Dawson's Field Hijackings (1970), Air France Flight 139 (1976), Lufthansa Flight 181 (1977), TWA Flight 847 (1985), EgyptAir Flight 648 (1985), and Pan Am Flight 73 (1986). Or who remembers when the Palestine Liberation Front (PLF) hijacked the Italian MS Achille Lauro liner off the coast of Egypt. And just how many rocket and mortars have the Palestinians fired (18,928 Rocket & Mortar attacks between 2001-2014)?

And there just isn't enough space here for me to append the charts for all the bombings:

• 2001 (40 bombings)
• 2002 (47 bombings)
• 2003 (23 bombings)
• 2004 (17 bombings)
• 2005 (9 bombings)

And these are actions and not words. The language of the Hostile Arab Palestinian has not changed since 1948. The tone is just updated. Even as we speak, they boast about reconstructing tunnels into Israeli sovereignty.

• HAMAS using Heavy Machinery to accelerate Attack Tunnels
• Business Insider
  • AVI ISSACHAROFF, THE TIMES OF ISRAEL
  • APR. 15, 2015,
  Hamas has begun using heavy machinery and engineering tools to accelerate the excavation of attack tunnels leading from the Gaza Strip under the Israeli border, sources in the Palestinian enclave told the Times of Israel Wednesday.

I think this makes my point that there are plenty of "LINKS" out there that demonstrate you perspective as well as how the Palestine both dramatize and demonstrate their position on advocating violence and attempting to present that they have some special dispensation to attack both civilians and the Occupation Force.

Most Respectfully,
R

You, yourself have attempted to justify that the Arab Palestinian has the right to attack civilian Israeli objects; to use any and all means including terrorism.

It is Israel's war against the civilian Palestinian people. It can end the war any time it wants.

Why do they whine about a few casualties?

 

[toastman]

P F Tinmore, et al,

You, yourself have attempted to justify that the Arab Palestinian has the right to attack civilian Israeli objects; to use any and all means including terrorism.

Posting #156 in which you try to argue that it is OK (not a crime) for Palestinians to Kill members of the Occupying Power because it is not a crime ("The nationals of an occupying power are not protected persons."). What you did not tell them is that a Palestinian who commit an offence which is solely intended to harm the Occupying Power, an attempt on the life or limb of members of the occupying forces or administration, or a grave collective danger, or seriously damage the property of the occupying forces or administration or the installations used by them, or is guilty of espionage, of serious acts of sabotage against the military installations of the Occupying Power or of intentional offences which have caused the death of one or more persons, IS punishable under Article 68 of the Fourth Geneva Convention. This is very similar to the justification you used (Post #99) to defend the use of violence (or the threat of violence) against civilians in order to attain goals that are political or religious or ideological in nature.

Another one of my favorites is Posting #29 wherein you argue that HAMAS cannot be a terrorist organization ("whole terrorist name calling thing is a load of horse crap") because "Hamas does not fight outside its own territory and does not attack protected persons." This suggests that Israel is not sovereign and that attacks on Israel are purely domestic (contained within a Palestinian State); (you argument being that "HAMAS does not operate outside of Palestine") so "How is that international?" (Post #40) Talk about a bunch of crap.

• Posting #7
• Posting #70
• Posting #76
• Posting #110

Even today, the Arab Palestinian desperately tries to argue and claim that they have the right to suicide bomb, ambush, --- kidnap and kill civilians in every sort of helpless category (the old, infirm, school age, clergy, etc) they claim they have the right to hijack ships and conduct piracy on the high seas.​

​

Do have links to that crap?

(OBSERVATION)

Watch: Hamas Official Heaps Praise on 'Heroic' Kidnap Operation
Hamas 'political bureau' official Muhammad Nazal, hails abduction of three Israeli teenagers as a 'milestone in the Palestinian struggle'.

Netanyahu: Mashal made it clear Hamas was committed to fighting Israel
Prime minister addresses Abbas condemnation of kidnapping for the first time, saying if the PA president really means them, he is obligated to end his pact with Hamas.

Hamas Calls Special Press Conference, Says Nothing Important
Hamas (Hamas senior official, Salah Bardawil) claims they didn’t kidnap the boys, but they praise whoever did.

(COMMENT)

As I've said before, one of the many faces of Arab Palestinian terrorism is the use of violent acts intended to create and instill fear in the mind of non-combatants (civilians), perpetrated for a religious, political, or ideological goal; which deliberately target of non-combatants. Which is not only advocating the attack on civilians in violation of Rule #6 (Civilians are protected against attack, unless and for such time as they take a direct part in hostilities.) of Customary IHL and Protocol Additional to the Geneva Conventions of 12 August 1949, and relating to Part IV : Civilian population #Section I -- General protection against effects of hostilities.

In an article published July 16, 2013, a Senior Hamas Official, Dr 'Issam Adwan, former Minister of Palestinian Refugee Affairs, stated that the Islamic Resistance Movement (HAMAS) Is Entitled To Attack:

• Israel's Embassies,
• Israeli Interests,
• Israeli Officials Worldwide –
• The Interests of Israeli Allies, supporting the US
• (And of course) US interests.

They glorify the Jihadist and Fedayeen that engage and kill civilian non-combatants.

Now, you are not going to tell me that you did not know that Palestinians killed half the Israeli Olympic Team in Munich; of when they hijacked El Al Flight 426 (1968), Dawson's Field Hijackings (1970), Air France Flight 139 (1976), Lufthansa Flight 181 (1977), TWA Flight 847 (1985), EgyptAir Flight 648 (1985), and Pan Am Flight 73 (1986). Or who remembers when the Palestine Liberation Front (PLF) hijacked the Italian MS Achille Lauro liner off the coast of Egypt. And just how many rocket and mortars have the Palestinians fired (18,928 Rocket & Mortar attacks between 2001-2014)?

And there just isn't enough space here for me to append the charts for all the bombings:

• 2001 (40 bombings)
• 2002 (47 bombings)
• 2003 (23 bombings)
• 2004 (17 bombings)
• 2005 (9 bombings)

And these are actions and not words. The language of the Hostile Arab Palestinian has not changed since 1948. The tone is just updated. Even as we speak, they boast about reconstructing tunnels into Israeli sovereignty.

• HAMAS using Heavy Machinery to accelerate Attack Tunnels
• Business Insider
  • AVI ISSACHAROFF, THE TIMES OF ISRAEL
  • APR. 15, 2015,
  Hamas has begun using heavy machinery and engineering tools to accelerate the excavation of attack tunnels leading from the Gaza Strip under the Israeli border, sources in the Palestinian enclave told the Times of Israel Wednesday.

I think this makes my point that there are plenty of "LINKS" out there that demonstrate you perspective as well as how the Palestine both dramatize and demonstrate their position on advocating violence and attempting to present that they have some special dispensation to attack both civilians and the Occupation Force.

Most Respectfully,
R

You, yourself have attempted to justify that the Arab Palestinian has the right to attack civilian Israeli objects; to use any and all means including terrorism.

It is Israel's war against the civilian Palestinian people. It can end the war any time it wants.

Why do they whine about a few casualties?

This is easily one of the dumbest things I've heard you say. You need to stop reading so much Palestinian propaganda, it's really interfering with your common sense.

 

[Billo_Really]

Did they really, then how about a link showing where the Nazis blamed the Jews for the destruction and deaths in gaza ?

That was what my reply was to, so lets see you squirm out of this without showing yourself up.

Oh, the little jerk-off pre-teen just realized he put his foot in his mouth and is now trying to back-track. Too bad, punk. What you said is already out there.

"...blame the arab muslims for it all"​

Just like the Nazis blamed the Jews for all their problems.

 

[Billo_Really]

Not even close. Try again.

Not only was that close, it was the nail on the head.

How is it not?

 

[P F Tinmore]

P F Tinmore, et al,

Well, you are not listening.

P F Tinmore, et al,

Yes, here is something to agree with.

​

So true, however, it was relatively stable and peaceful during the Ottoman period. When Palestine was carved out after WWI, all of the people who lived there became Palestinian citizens. There is no evidence that that amicable relationship would not continue.

(COMMENT)

Well, first off --- that peaceful period was under the sovereign control of the Sultan of the Ottoman Empire. It was not a result of any peaceful pursuits of autonomous efforts of the Arabs.

The fact that "all of the people who lived there became Palestinian citizens" was a consequence of the Principle Allied Powers deciding that was the high road they wanted to take. They did not have to extend those rights to the govern. They did so because they felt it was the right thing to do. A set of decisions they have come to regret. At that time, the Arabs had virtually nothing to do with the creation of those rights as they were totally alien concepts to the Arab Muslims. Who --- became citizens of the (whatever geography they determined was) territory to which the Mandate applied --- was a decision of the Allied Powers and the Council; not a decision of the Arabs --- and not a decision of the Ottomans or the Turks.

Then Britain landed with the Balfour Declaration in its pocket and fucked everything up big time. There has been nothing but death and destruction since.

(COMMENT)

Well not exactly. The Arabs of that region and the Ottoman were enemies of the Allied Powers. In fact, the first office of governance over the entire region was The Occupied Enemy Territory Administration (OETA 1918-1920). It was territory lost in war --- and under the Law of Conquest active in 1918, the captured territory (the area covered by OETA) went to the victors. That customary law was really not set assign until 1945 and the UN Charter granting territorial integrity.

The death and destruction over that very small path of land was not entirely the fault of the Arab; but, pretty damn close. Even today, the Arab Palestinian desperately tries to argue and claim that they have the right to suicide bomb, ambush, --- kidnap and kill civilians in every sort of helpless category (the old, infirm, school age, clergy, etc) they claim they have the right to hijack ships and conduct piracy on the high seas. Every day they demonstrate that the need to carve-out a special plot of land is necessary and essential to the safety, preservation and development of the Jewish National Home.

Most Respectfully,
R

...and under the Law of Conquest active in 1918, the captured territory (the area covered by OETA) went to the victors. That customary law was really not set assign until 1945 and the UN Charter granting territorial integrity.​

Then why do UN resolutions say that the Palestinians have the right to territorial integrity if they have no territory?

(COMMENT)

The Palestine (defined as the territory to which the Mandate applied) is pre-1945. The State of Palestine (defined by the Declaration of Independence of 1988) is an entirely different place and time. The territorial integrity of today's contemporary Palestine Affirms the need to enable the Palestinian people to exercise their sovereignty over their territory occupied since 1967; not the HAMAS or PLO Palestine --- as defined "from the river to the sea, and from north to south," and qualified the "land of the Palestinian people and its homeland and its legitimate right."

Remember, The Palestinians have no borders or demarcations to rely upon. The Israelis do.

Someday when the Palestinians negotiate their sovereignty, they can apply their right of territorial integrity. Everyone has the right to earn a billion dollars if you want. I have that right and you have that right. It just so happens that Warren Buffet has that right. Warren Buffet was smart and hard working and earn an estimated net worth US$70.9 Billion (April 2015). Why do you and I have the right, but not the money. Well we were not as smart as Warren Buffet, or as hard working as Warren Buffet. But if we do ever amass $70 Billion --- we can reach in our back pocket and pull out that right to earn it. The same goes for the Palestinian and their rights. Just because you have a right, doesn't mean you have the object of that right.

Most Respectfully,
R

Remember, The Palestinians have no borders or demarcations to rely upon. The Israelis do.

You have that backwards.

Palestine has international borders.

Israel is defined by armistice lines.

Then you base the rest of your post of false premise.

No, YOU have that wrong. Israel has international boundaries with Egypt and Jordan. That's just a fact. There's no going around that.

"Then you base the rest of your post of false premise"
This is what you post when you have no rebuttal. What exactly did he post that was based on false premise?

Israel claims borders on Palestinian land.

Interesting legal concept.