Finally, Israel and Palestine is a US election issue.

[Roudy]

9/11 inside job, montelatici, et al,

Oh, more whining.

(COMMENT)

And I suppose that the Arab Palestinian is clean as the driven snow; 99 and 44 one-hundredths percent pure. And the Arab Palestinians never attacked the Olympics, and the Palestinians never killed a single American, and the Palestinians never hijacked a single plane or committed piracy on the high seas. I suppose that the Palestinians never committed a suicide bombing in against a purely civilian target, never attacked a school bus or the infirm or disabled. And I suppose that the Arab Palestinian did not fire a single rocket indiscriminately into Israel.

I suppose that all these civilians were located away from Arab Palestinian paramilitary activities. I suppose that there were not paramilitary targets in close proximity to densely populated civilian vicinities.

The lack of military prowess and the ineffectiveness of paramilitary activities and terrorist operations is no excuse. The Arab Palestinian Terrorist have said many times that they would kill more Israeli civilians if they could. It has only been within the last week that we discussed how the barbaric and bloodthirsty Arab Palestinians want to legitimize the Arabs in killing civilians.

If the international community places a moratorium on the prohibition against directly targeting the civilian population (as suggested), that would make your whole argument here invalid and immaterial. That would place the Arab Palestinian Population in great peril; not that the Israelis would intentionally target innocent civilians.

Most Respectfully,
R

Of course the Palestinians are not "as clean as the driven snow" but they are the ones that were driven from their homes and relegated to refugee camps. It is not unnatural for people that have undergone the horrors they have undergone to lash out. The Palestinians, after all, are not behaving any differently than the non-whites in South Africa and Rhodesia, the FLN in Algeria, the Tamils, the IRA, etc., etc. What bothers me are people such as yourself that will not ever admit that the migration of European Jews to Palestine and their success (with the help of the West in general) in evicting the native people and creating a state at the expense of the native people has no bearing on the behavior of the non-Jews (Muslims and Christians) of Palestine.

"...but they are the ones that were driven from their homes and relegated to refugee camps."

I mean, what a shame that the Arabs-Moslem squatters were forced from their homes in 1948 when the failed genocide by the Arab-Moslem armies was begun.

And, I think we can agree that the treatment of the Pal'istanians by the Arab-Moslem world is terrible. Those Pal'istanian internment camps in Jordan and elsewhere in the Arab-Moslem Middle East..., oh, the humanity, (sniff sniff).

Thank you for agreeing that the native people of Palestine were forced from their homes by European invaders.

I never agreed to that. Your reading comprehension skills are lacking.

As you should know, the Egyptian, Syrian and Lebanese squatters were not "native people".

How can the people that were living in Palestine for thousands of years before the Europeans arrived be squatters. How can people born in Europe be natives of Palestine. Do you have a different definition of native than the standard one?

Native people mein arsh!

 

[Roudy]

What did we expect from a guy who calls himself "9-11 inside handjob", that he not be a supporter of Palestinian IslamoNazism?

I bet you 9-11 inside handjob is a big supporter of Comrade Sanders.

 

[RoccoR]

montelatici, et al,

At the turn of the century, the senior leadership of the most influential powers thought it was necessary to support, preserve, and promote safeguards for the Jewish culture and Jewish heritage.

By 1988, European Powers convince the Sultan to allow foreign Jews to settle in the Region of Palestine with the understanding the Jews would do so gradually and not in a hugely massive way; all at one time. The Government of the Ottoman Empire passing a law prohibiting the sale of state land to non-Ottoman citizens (1892) throughout Syria; including the Jews in the region now called Palestine. The 1903 Kishinev Massacre occurs which prompts an exodus of half a million Jews from Russia. This was followed by the Blood Rites allegations and demonization of Jewish ritual in the Beilis Trial.

Let this one go.

... some great power makes a Balfour type declaration that would authorize the removal of the Jews as the Balfour declaration authorized the removal of the native people to make room for the Europeans.

Wait, what? You think the Balfour Declaration authorized the removal of people based on their ethnicity (ethnic cleansing)?

(COMMENT)
People who think on this order, no matter the explanation, will always think on this order. It is what makes them what they are.
You have no chance to convince them otherwise.

What do you think the Balfour Declaration intended?

(COMMENT)

The Balfour Declaration was drafted in recognition of the fact that anti-semitic influences, even in Europe, were not enlightened enough, to be trusted and protected by law. The world famous trial of Captain Alfred Dreyfus, a French General Staff Officer and Jewish, made it clear that without regard to the protection promised to every citizen, political personalities and military leaders could not be relied upon to apply protections equally or fairly. Jews were going to be persecuted under the color of law unless they were provided a place to which they could defend themselves and govern. The Balfour Declaration was not unique. It was a variation on the 1988 Theme started before the Great War (WWI).

Most Respectfully,
R

 

[montelatici]

It doesn't matter what the Europeans wanted to do with the Jews. Don't you get it? The Muslims and Christians of Palestine were dispossessed because of a European/U.S. decision to transfer hordes of European Jews to Palestine. It was wrong, a crime.

It was no less a crime than the The Treaty of Tordesillas which authorized Spain and Portugal to dispossess the native americans.

 

[Roudy]

It doesn't matter what the Europeans wanted to do with the Jews. Don't you get it? The Muslims and Christians of Palestine were dispossessed because of a European/U.S. decision to transfer hordes of European Jews to Palestine. It was wrong, a crime.

It was no less a crime than the The Treaty of Tordesillas which authorized Spain and Portugal to dispossess the native americans.

Since there was never a Palestine or Palestinian state for the last 700 years of Ottoman rule and you don't mention the strong Jewish presence both before and during the Ottoman Empire, your statement is both meaningless and false.

 

[P F Tinmore]

montelatici, et al,

At the turn of the century, the senior leadership of the most influential powers thought it was necessary to support, preserve, and promote safeguards for the Jewish culture and Jewish heritage.

By 1988, European Powers convince the Sultan to allow foreign Jews to settle in the Region of Palestine with the understanding the Jews would do so gradually and not in a hugely massive way; all at one time. The Government of the Ottoman Empire passing a law prohibiting the sale of state land to non-Ottoman citizens (1892) throughout Syria; including the Jews in the region now called Palestine. The 1903 Kishinev Massacre occurs which prompts an exodus of half a million Jews from Russia. This was followed by the Blood Rites allegations and demonization of Jewish ritual in the Beilis Trial.

Let this one go.

... some great power makes a Balfour type declaration that would authorize the removal of the Jews as the Balfour declaration authorized the removal of the native people to make room for the Europeans.

Wait, what? You think the Balfour Declaration authorized the removal of people based on their ethnicity (ethnic cleansing)?

(COMMENT)
People who think on this order, no matter the explanation, will always think on this order. It is what makes them what they are.
You have no chance to convince them otherwise.

What do you think the Balfour Declaration intended?

(COMMENT)

The Balfour Declaration was drafted in recognition of the fact that anti-semitic influences, even in Europe, were not enlightened enough, to be trusted and protected by law. The world famous trial of Captain Alfred Dreyfus, a French General Staff Officer and Jewish, made it clear that without regard to the protection promised to every citizen, political personalities and military leaders could not be relied upon to apply protections equally or fairly. Jews were going to be persecuted under the color of law unless they were provided a place to which they could defend themselves and govern. The Balfour Declaration was not unique. It was a variation on the 1988 Theme started before the Great War (WWI).

Most Respectfully,
R

Pfffft, illegal external interference.

 

[RoccoR]

P F Tinmore, et al,

First, let me apologize. I kept typing 1988 when I should have typed 1888.

montelatici, et al,

At the turn of the century, the senior leadership of the most influential powers thought it was necessary to support, preserve, and promote safeguards for the Jewish culture and Jewish heritage.

By 1988, European Powers convince the Sultan to allow foreign Jews to settle in the Region of Palestine with the understanding the Jews would do so gradually and not in a hugely massive way; all at one time. The Government of the Ottoman Empire passing a law prohibiting the sale of state land to non-Ottoman citizens (1892) throughout Syria; including the Jews in the region now called Palestine. The 1903 Kishinev Massacre occurs which prompts an exodus of half a million Jews from Russia. This was followed by the Blood Rites allegations and demonization of Jewish ritual in the Beilis Trial.

Let this one go.

... some great power makes a Balfour type declaration that would authorize the removal of the Jews as the Balfour declaration authorized the removal of the native people to make room for the Europeans.

Wait, what? You think the Balfour Declaration authorized the removal of people based on their ethnicity (ethnic cleansing)?

(COMMENT)
People who think on this order, no matter the explanation, will always think on this order. It is what makes them what they are.
You have no chance to convince them otherwise.

What do you think the Balfour Declaration intended?

(COMMENT)

The Balfour Declaration was drafted in recognition of the fact that anti-semitic influences, even in Europe, were not enlightened enough, to be trusted and protected by law. The world famous trial of Captain Alfred Dreyfus, a French General Staff Officer and Jewish, made it clear that without regard to the protection promised to every citizen, political personalities and military leaders could not be relied upon to apply protections equally or fairly. Jews were going to be persecuted under the color of law unless they were provided a place to which they could defend themselves and govern. The Balfour Declaration was not unique. It was a variation on the 1988 Theme started before the Great War (WWI).

Most Respectfully,
R

Pfffft, illegal external interference.

(COMMENT)

I don't understand. The Arab Palestinians had no sovereignty over any of the territory. Just how can you say that it was Illegal when the Sultan approved immigration, and the Mandate approved immigration as the successor government.

The Arabs had no reason for complaint. The had just as much sovereignty after the War as before the War; exactly none.

Most Respectfully,
R

 

[P F Tinmore]

P F Tinmore, et al,

First, let me apologize. I kept typing 1988 when I should have typed 1888.

montelatici, et al,

At the turn of the century, the senior leadership of the most influential powers thought it was necessary to support, preserve, and promote safeguards for the Jewish culture and Jewish heritage.

By 1988, European Powers convince the Sultan to allow foreign Jews to settle in the Region of Palestine with the understanding the Jews would do so gradually and not in a hugely massive way; all at one time. The Government of the Ottoman Empire passing a law prohibiting the sale of state land to non-Ottoman citizens (1892) throughout Syria; including the Jews in the region now called Palestine. The 1903 Kishinev Massacre occurs which prompts an exodus of half a million Jews from Russia. This was followed by the Blood Rites allegations and demonization of Jewish ritual in the Beilis Trial.

Let this one go.

Wait, what? You think the Balfour Declaration authorized the removal of people based on their ethnicity (ethnic cleansing)?

(COMMENT)
People who think on this order, no matter the explanation, will always think on this order. It is what makes them what they are.
You have no chance to convince them otherwise.

What do you think the Balfour Declaration intended?

(COMMENT)

The Balfour Declaration was drafted in recognition of the fact that anti-semitic influences, even in Europe, were not enlightened enough, to be trusted and protected by law. The world famous trial of Captain Alfred Dreyfus, a French General Staff Officer and Jewish, made it clear that without regard to the protection promised to every citizen, political personalities and military leaders could not be relied upon to apply protections equally or fairly. Jews were going to be persecuted under the color of law unless they were provided a place to which they could defend themselves and govern. The Balfour Declaration was not unique. It was a variation on the 1988 Theme started before the Great War (WWI).

Most Respectfully,
R

Pfffft, illegal external interference.

(COMMENT)

I don't understand. The Arab Palestinians had no sovereignty over any of the territory. Just how can you say that it was Illegal when the Sultan approved immigration, and the Mandate approved immigration as the successor government.

The Arabs had no reason for complaint. The had just as much sovereignty after the War as before the War; exactly none.

Most Respectfully,
R

That's OK, I knew what you meant. I am not picayune about typos.

Palestine is a territory defined by international borders. The Palestinians are the normal residents and citizens of the land.

You have never been able to explain, other than some foreign criminals wanting to steal their land, how the Palestinians became exempt from universal rights.

 

[Lipush]

P F Tinmore, et al,

What would be even more embarrassing is to see US Political Personalities lock step behind the leaders of designated terrorist organizations.

It is truly embarrassing to watch our politicians line up at AIPAC with their knee pads on..

(COMMENT)

Remember, without regards to the deflection about criteria, the US has designated a half-dozen (or so) Arab Palestinians as terrorists organization. Here are a few:

• 10/8/1997 HAMAS

• 10/8/1997 Harakat ul-Mujahidin (HUM)

• 10/8/1997 Palestine Liberation Front (PLF)

• 10/8/1997 Palestinian Islamic Jihad (PIJ)

• 10/8/1997 Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine (PFLF)

• 10/8/1997 PFLP-General Command (PFLP-GC)
​

Just because YOU believe in and provide passive support to --- and tacitly approve of --- organization threatens the security of United States nationals or the national security of the United States; does not mean that you should criticise those that take an opposing point of view.

Most Respectfully,
R

Are you still pimping Israel's terrorist propaganda crap?

Are you still Hamas' spokesman?

 

[Phoenall]

It doesn't matter what the Europeans wanted to do with the Jews. Don't you get it? The Muslims and Christians of Palestine were dispossessed because of a European/U.S. decision to transfer hordes of European Jews to Palestine. It was wrong, a crime.

It was no less a crime than the The Treaty of Tordesillas which authorized Spain and Portugal to dispossess the native americans.

and your whinging and whining means nothing when you look to the international laws of that time. They allowed the LoN to take control of the former Ottoman empire and dispose of it how they saw fit. There was no crime other than the one perpetrated by the arab muslims who decided they had won and the land was theirs, so they went to war to win it back. Since that time the arab muslims have compounded their crimes by engaging in violence, terrorism, war crimes and genocide. They have eradicated 90% of the Christians in Palestine in the last 7 years by forced conversion, ethnic cleansing and mass murder.
As for treaties being crimes what about the dhimmi laws and the pact of Umar that turned Jews and Christians into nothing short of slaves

 

[Phoenall]

montelatici, et al,

At the turn of the century, the senior leadership of the most influential powers thought it was necessary to support, preserve, and promote safeguards for the Jewish culture and Jewish heritage.

By 1988, European Powers convince the Sultan to allow foreign Jews to settle in the Region of Palestine with the understanding the Jews would do so gradually and not in a hugely massive way; all at one time. The Government of the Ottoman Empire passing a law prohibiting the sale of state land to non-Ottoman citizens (1892) throughout Syria; including the Jews in the region now called Palestine. The 1903 Kishinev Massacre occurs which prompts an exodus of half a million Jews from Russia. This was followed by the Blood Rites allegations and demonization of Jewish ritual in the Beilis Trial.

Let this one go.

... some great power makes a Balfour type declaration that would authorize the removal of the Jews as the Balfour declaration authorized the removal of the native people to make room for the Europeans.

Wait, what? You think the Balfour Declaration authorized the removal of people based on their ethnicity (ethnic cleansing)?

(COMMENT)
People who think on this order, no matter the explanation, will always think on this order. It is what makes them what they are.
You have no chance to convince them otherwise.

What do you think the Balfour Declaration intended?

(COMMENT)

The Balfour Declaration was drafted in recognition of the fact that anti-semitic influences, even in Europe, were not enlightened enough, to be trusted and protected by law. The world famous trial of Captain Alfred Dreyfus, a French General Staff Officer and Jewish, made it clear that without regard to the protection promised to every citizen, political personalities and military leaders could not be relied upon to apply protections equally or fairly. Jews were going to be persecuted under the color of law unless they were provided a place to which they could defend themselves and govern. The Balfour Declaration was not unique. It was a variation on the 1988 Theme started before the Great War (WWI).

Most Respectfully,
R

Pfffft, illegal external interference.

Yes by the arab muslims, don't forget that part.

 

[Phoenall]

P F Tinmore, et al,

First, let me apologize. I kept typing 1988 when I should have typed 1888.

montelatici, et al,

At the turn of the century, the senior leadership of the most influential powers thought it was necessary to support, preserve, and promote safeguards for the Jewish culture and Jewish heritage.

By 1988, European Powers convince the Sultan to allow foreign Jews to settle in the Region of Palestine with the understanding the Jews would do so gradually and not in a hugely massive way; all at one time. The Government of the Ottoman Empire passing a law prohibiting the sale of state land to non-Ottoman citizens (1892) throughout Syria; including the Jews in the region now called Palestine. The 1903 Kishinev Massacre occurs which prompts an exodus of half a million Jews from Russia. This was followed by the Blood Rites allegations and demonization of Jewish ritual in the Beilis Trial.

Let this one go.(COMMENT)
People who think on this order, no matter the explanation, will always think on this order. It is what makes them what they are.
You have no chance to convince them otherwise.

What do you think the Balfour Declaration intended?

(COMMENT)

The Balfour Declaration was drafted in recognition of the fact that anti-semitic influences, even in Europe, were not enlightened enough, to be trusted and protected by law. The world famous trial of Captain Alfred Dreyfus, a French General Staff Officer and Jewish, made it clear that without regard to the protection promised to every citizen, political personalities and military leaders could not be relied upon to apply protections equally or fairly. Jews were going to be persecuted under the color of law unless they were provided a place to which they could defend themselves and govern. The Balfour Declaration was not unique. It was a variation on the 1988 Theme started before the Great War (WWI).

Most Respectfully,
R

Pfffft, illegal external interference.

(COMMENT)

I don't understand. The Arab Palestinians had no sovereignty over any of the territory. Just how can you say that it was Illegal when the Sultan approved immigration, and the Mandate approved immigration as the successor government.

The Arabs had no reason for complaint. The had just as much sovereignty after the War as before the War; exactly none.

Most Respectfully,
R

That's OK, I knew what you meant. I am not picayune about typos.

Palestine is a territory defined by international borders. The Palestinians are the normal residents and citizens of the land.

You have never been able to explain, other than some foreign criminals wanting to steal their land, how the Palestinians became exempt from universal rights.

For starters all that was defined was the MANDATE OF PALESTINE and this included trans Jordan. The inhabitants became citizens of the mandate of Palestine as stated in the various LoN documents.
What universal rights were in existence in 1917, 1921, 1923, 1931, 1947 and 1948 that the inhabitants of the mandate of Palestine were exempt from.
You cant say that the rights granted under international law of 1990 were broken as they did not exist until 1990. And in the case of Palestine most "rights" were not in existence until 1967 when the UN decided to make them universal rights.

 

[RoccoR]

P F Tinmore, et al,

Well, this is a trick question. Every time you ask it, it starts off the same way. NO ONE denied any of the basic rights to the Arab Palestinians. Remembering, of course, that the actual Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR) is not law. It was adopted in December 1948, but several attempts to bring it into law as a Convention in the same way as the companion International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (CESCR) and the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (CCPR) were
Adopted and opened for signature, ratification and accession.

Having said that, clearly the Arab Palestinians have exercised their right of self-determination several times since the release from the Enemy Occupied Territory Administration. Even today, the UN does not consider the Non-Self-Governing and Trust Territory.

Palestine is a territory defined by international borders. The Palestinians are the normal residents and citizens of the land.

You have never been able to explain, other than some foreign criminals wanting to steal their land, how the Palestinians became exempt from universal rights.

(COMMENT)

At the current time, there is no Palestinian territories that has valid international defined borders. While there were the Demarcations associated with the former Mandate that terminated in 1948, those are historical and not internationally defined. But since they were surveyed, Lebanon and Syria still use them relative to the Armistice Lines, which are not borders.

The remainder of the international boundaries for Israel, are defined by treaties. The UN and the International community in general, consider the reaffirmation of the right of the Palestinian people to self-determination and to independence in their "State of Palestine" (alla 1988) on the Palestinian territory occupied since 1967; when the General Assembly Votes Overwhelmingly to Accord Palestine ‘Non-Member Observer State’ Status in United Nations.

The Arab Palestinians can be considered "normal residents and citizens of the land," as you've stated. But that does not change the intent of the Ottoman Sovereign in 1888 (in the previous posting). And next year, the Balfour Declaration of November 2, 1917, will be a century old.

Finally, it should be remembered that the right of self-determination can be exercised in the negative direction as well as the positive direct. The Arab Palestinians exercised their right of self-determination several times:

​

• Prior to November 1923, three successive proposals were put forward by the mandatory Government with a view to the closer association of the Arab community with the Administration of Palestine. Towards all these proposals the Arabs adopted the same attitude, namely, refusal to co-operate in measures which they considered did not satisfy their aspirations.

• Of course the Arab Community declined to participate in the Partition Plan; including the establishment of an additional Arab State.

• The Palestinians voted in the Jordanian Parliament to the ascend to the Annexation.

• The Palestinians adopted both the 1993 and 1995 Oslo Accords.

* The Palestinians chose to recognize the State of Israel, but no the Jewish State as outlined in the Partition Plan.
​

This is just a thumbnail look at the issues, in a set of broad brush strokes.

Most Respectfully,
R

 

[USAF 2023]

But here we are in an American election year and Bernie Sanders is calling for a more “even-handed” approach to the Palestinians; Vice President Joe Biden has expressed his “overwhelming frustration” with Benjamin Netanyahu; even Hillary Clinton – who, of course, is going to be the next US President – has managed (just) to refer to “damaging actions” by Israel, “including with respect to settlements”.

Not exactly earth-shattering stuff, and they’ve all uttered the usual prayers. America is committed to Israel’s security which is “non-negotiable” (Clinton) and the US is Israel’s “only absolute friend” (Biden). The future President Clinton picked up 56 rounds of applause when she addressed Aipac, Israel’s most powerful lobbyists, in New York last month – that’s 18 more rounds than Netanyahu got when he addressed Congress a year ago, but he also received 23 standing ovations from the would-be Knesset members who represent American voters.

Let’s not get romantic. La Clinton even offered “a new 10-year defence memorandum of understanding” with Israel to Aipac, made the usual references to “Palestinian terrorists” and “Iran’s continued aggression”, and repeated the mantra that “Israel and America are seen as a light unto the nations” – albeit not, perhaps, unto the Palestinian ‘nation’.

“I would vigorously oppose any attempt by outside parties,” she announced, “to impose a solution, including by the UN Security Council”. In other words, goodbye to UN Security Council Resolution 242 – Israeli withdrawal from territories occupied in 1967 – which was supposed to be the foundation stone of the whole wretched peace process.

Yet the shift in emphasis is clearly there. Sanders is Jewish – his father was an immigrant from eastern Europe – and most of his family died in the Nazi Holocaust. You might expect he would try to outgun Hillary in her support for Israel. Yet he accused her of devoting “only one sentence... that even mentioned the Palestinian people” in her Aipac hug-in, only “one line on the Palestinian people”.

This was not strictly accurate, although a close reading of La Clinton’s text shows that her references to Palestinians were more in the form of an appendage to Israeli security than a denunciation of Palestinian “suffering” – a word that Sanders has actually used about the occupied Arabs of Palestine.

Bernie believes “Israel must have the right to exist in peace and security, just as the Palestinians must have the right to a homeland in which they and they alone control their political system and their economy”. To that extent, it’s the usual stuff: no mention of Palestinian security – that will be left to Israel – but they can do what they like inside their pathetic little “homeland”.

Robert Fisk: Finally, Israel and Palestine is a US election issue. It's about time
who knows what might happen?

Doesn't matter. The " 67 Borders" and " Right of Return" isn't going to happen.

 

[P F Tinmore]

P F Tinmore, et al,

Well, this is a trick question. Every time you ask it, it starts off the same way. NO ONE denied any of the basic rights to the Arab Palestinians. Remembering, of course, that the actual Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR) is not law. It was adopted in December 1948, but several attempts to bring it into law as a Convention in the same way as the companion International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (CESCR) and the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (CCPR) were
Adopted and opened for signature, ratification and accession.

Having said that, clearly the Arab Palestinians have exercised their right of self-determination several times since the release from the Enemy Occupied Territory Administration. Even today, the UN does not consider the Non-Self-Governing and Trust Territory.

Palestine is a territory defined by international borders. The Palestinians are the normal residents and citizens of the land.

You have never been able to explain, other than some foreign criminals wanting to steal their land, how the Palestinians became exempt from universal rights.

(COMMENT)

At the current time, there is no Palestinian territories that has valid international defined borders. While there were the Demarcations associated with the former Mandate that terminated in 1948, those are historical and not internationally defined. But since they were surveyed, Lebanon and Syria still use them relative to the Armistice Lines, which are not borders.

The remainder of the international boundaries for Israel, are defined by treaties. The UN and the International community in general, consider the reaffirmation of the right of the Palestinian people to self-determination and to independence in their "State of Palestine" (alla 1988) on the Palestinian territory occupied since 1967; when the General Assembly Votes Overwhelmingly to Accord Palestine ‘Non-Member Observer State’ Status in United Nations.

The Arab Palestinians can be considered "normal residents and citizens of the land," as you've stated. But that does not change the intent of the Ottoman Sovereign in 1888 (in the previous posting). And next year, the Balfour Declaration of November 2, 1917, will be a century old.

Finally, it should be remembered that the right of self-determination can be exercised in the negative direction as well as the positive direct. The Arab Palestinians exercised their right of self-determination several times:

• Prior to November 1923, three successive proposals were put forward by the mandatory Government with a view to the closer association of the Arab community with the Administration of Palestine. Towards all these proposals the Arabs adopted the same attitude, namely, refusal to co-operate in measures which they considered did not satisfy their aspirations.

• Of course the Arab Community declined to participate in the Partition Plan; including the establishment of an additional Arab State.

• The Palestinians voted in the Jordanian Parliament to the ascend to the Annexation.

• The Palestinians adopted both the 1993 and 1995 Oslo Accords.

* The Palestinians chose to recognize the State of Israel, but no the Jewish State as outlined in the Partition Plan.
​

This is just a thumbnail look at the issues, in a set of broad brush strokes.

Most Respectfully,
R

• Prior to November 1923, three successive proposals were put forward by the mandatory Government with a view to the closer association of the Arab community with the Administration of Palestine. Towards all these proposals the Arabs adopted the same attitude, namely, refusal to co-operate in measures which they considered did not satisfy their aspirations.​

Indeed, the Palestinians did not want to legitimize the colonial project.

 

[P F Tinmore]

P F Tinmore, et al,

Well, this is a trick question. Every time you ask it, it starts off the same way. NO ONE denied any of the basic rights to the Arab Palestinians. Remembering, of course, that the actual Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR) is not law. It was adopted in December 1948, but several attempts to bring it into law as a Convention in the same way as the companion International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (CESCR) and the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (CCPR) were
Adopted and opened for signature, ratification and accession.

Having said that, clearly the Arab Palestinians have exercised their right of self-determination several times since the release from the Enemy Occupied Territory Administration. Even today, the UN does not consider the Non-Self-Governing and Trust Territory.

Palestine is a territory defined by international borders. The Palestinians are the normal residents and citizens of the land.

You have never been able to explain, other than some foreign criminals wanting to steal their land, how the Palestinians became exempt from universal rights.

(COMMENT)

At the current time, there is no Palestinian territories that has valid international defined borders. While there were the Demarcations associated with the former Mandate that terminated in 1948, those are historical and not internationally defined. But since they were surveyed, Lebanon and Syria still use them relative to the Armistice Lines, which are not borders.

The remainder of the international boundaries for Israel, are defined by treaties. The UN and the International community in general, consider the reaffirmation of the right of the Palestinian people to self-determination and to independence in their "State of Palestine" (alla 1988) on the Palestinian territory occupied since 1967; when the General Assembly Votes Overwhelmingly to Accord Palestine ‘Non-Member Observer State’ Status in United Nations.

The Arab Palestinians can be considered "normal residents and citizens of the land," as you've stated. But that does not change the intent of the Ottoman Sovereign in 1888 (in the previous posting). And next year, the Balfour Declaration of November 2, 1917, will be a century old.

Finally, it should be remembered that the right of self-determination can be exercised in the negative direction as well as the positive direct. The Arab Palestinians exercised their right of self-determination several times:

• Prior to November 1923, three successive proposals were put forward by the mandatory Government with a view to the closer association of the Arab community with the Administration of Palestine. Towards all these proposals the Arabs adopted the same attitude, namely, refusal to co-operate in measures which they considered did not satisfy their aspirations.

• Of course the Arab Community declined to participate in the Partition Plan; including the establishment of an additional Arab State.

• The Palestinians voted in the Jordanian Parliament to the ascend to the Annexation.

• The Palestinians adopted both the 1993 and 1995 Oslo Accords.

* The Palestinians chose to recognize the State of Israel, but no the Jewish State as outlined in the Partition Plan.
​

This is just a thumbnail look at the issues, in a set of broad brush strokes.

Most Respectfully,
R

At the current time, there is no Palestinian territories that has valid international defined borders.​

Link?

 

[P F Tinmore]

P F Tinmore, et al,

Well, this is a trick question. Every time you ask it, it starts off the same way. NO ONE denied any of the basic rights to the Arab Palestinians. Remembering, of course, that the actual Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR) is not law. It was adopted in December 1948, but several attempts to bring it into law as a Convention in the same way as the companion International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (CESCR) and the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (CCPR) were
Adopted and opened for signature, ratification and accession.

Having said that, clearly the Arab Palestinians have exercised their right of self-determination several times since the release from the Enemy Occupied Territory Administration. Even today, the UN does not consider the Non-Self-Governing and Trust Territory.

Palestine is a territory defined by international borders. The Palestinians are the normal residents and citizens of the land.

You have never been able to explain, other than some foreign criminals wanting to steal their land, how the Palestinians became exempt from universal rights.

(COMMENT)

At the current time, there is no Palestinian territories that has valid international defined borders. While there were the Demarcations associated with the former Mandate that terminated in 1948, those are historical and not internationally defined. But since they were surveyed, Lebanon and Syria still use them relative to the Armistice Lines, which are not borders.

The remainder of the international boundaries for Israel, are defined by treaties. The UN and the International community in general, consider the reaffirmation of the right of the Palestinian people to self-determination and to independence in their "State of Palestine" (alla 1988) on the Palestinian territory occupied since 1967; when the General Assembly Votes Overwhelmingly to Accord Palestine ‘Non-Member Observer State’ Status in United Nations.

The Arab Palestinians can be considered "normal residents and citizens of the land," as you've stated. But that does not change the intent of the Ottoman Sovereign in 1888 (in the previous posting). And next year, the Balfour Declaration of November 2, 1917, will be a century old.

Finally, it should be remembered that the right of self-determination can be exercised in the negative direction as well as the positive direct. The Arab Palestinians exercised their right of self-determination several times:

• Prior to November 1923, three successive proposals were put forward by the mandatory Government with a view to the closer association of the Arab community with the Administration of Palestine. Towards all these proposals the Arabs adopted the same attitude, namely, refusal to co-operate in measures which they considered did not satisfy their aspirations.

• Of course the Arab Community declined to participate in the Partition Plan; including the establishment of an additional Arab State.

• The Palestinians voted in the Jordanian Parliament to the ascend to the Annexation.

• The Palestinians adopted both the 1993 and 1995 Oslo Accords.

* The Palestinians chose to recognize the State of Israel, but no the Jewish State as outlined in the Partition Plan.
​

This is just a thumbnail look at the issues, in a set of broad brush strokes.

Most Respectfully,
R

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

A/RES/37/43. Importance of the universal realization of the right of peoples to self-determination and of the speedy granting of independence to colonial countries and peoples for the effective guarantee and observance of human rights​

How can the Palestinians have the inalienable right to territorial integrity if they have no territory? Hmmm?

 

[Hollie]

P F Tinmore, et al,

Well, this is a trick question. Every time you ask it, it starts off the same way. NO ONE denied any of the basic rights to the Arab Palestinians. Remembering, of course, that the actual Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR) is not law. It was adopted in December 1948, but several attempts to bring it into law as a Convention in the same way as the companion International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (CESCR) and the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (CCPR) were
Adopted and opened for signature, ratification and accession.

Having said that, clearly the Arab Palestinians have exercised their right of self-determination several times since the release from the Enemy Occupied Territory Administration. Even today, the UN does not consider the Non-Self-Governing and Trust Territory.

Palestine is a territory defined by international borders. The Palestinians are the normal residents and citizens of the land.

You have never been able to explain, other than some foreign criminals wanting to steal their land, how the Palestinians became exempt from universal rights.

(COMMENT)

At the current time, there is no Palestinian territories that has valid international defined borders. While there were the Demarcations associated with the former Mandate that terminated in 1948, those are historical and not internationally defined. But since they were surveyed, Lebanon and Syria still use them relative to the Armistice Lines, which are not borders.

The remainder of the international boundaries for Israel, are defined by treaties. The UN and the International community in general, consider the reaffirmation of the right of the Palestinian people to self-determination and to independence in their "State of Palestine" (alla 1988) on the Palestinian territory occupied since 1967; when the General Assembly Votes Overwhelmingly to Accord Palestine ‘Non-Member Observer State’ Status in United Nations.

The Arab Palestinians can be considered "normal residents and citizens of the land," as you've stated. But that does not change the intent of the Ottoman Sovereign in 1888 (in the previous posting). And next year, the Balfour Declaration of November 2, 1917, will be a century old.

Finally, it should be remembered that the right of self-determination can be exercised in the negative direction as well as the positive direct. The Arab Palestinians exercised their right of self-determination several times:

• Prior to November 1923, three successive proposals were put forward by the mandatory Government with a view to the closer association of the Arab community with the Administration of Palestine. Towards all these proposals the Arabs adopted the same attitude, namely, refusal to co-operate in measures which they considered did not satisfy their aspirations.

• Of course the Arab Community declined to participate in the Partition Plan; including the establishment of an additional Arab State.

• The Palestinians voted in the Jordanian Parliament to the ascend to the Annexation.

• The Palestinians adopted both the 1993 and 1995 Oslo Accords.

* The Palestinians chose to recognize the State of Israel, but no the Jewish State as outlined in the Partition Plan.
​

This is just a thumbnail look at the issues, in a set of broad brush strokes.

Most Respectfully,
R

• Prior to November 1923, three successive proposals were put forward by the mandatory Government with a view to the closer association of the Arab community with the Administration of Palestine. Towards all these proposals the Arabs adopted the same attitude, namely, refusal to co-operate in measures which they considered did not satisfy their aspirations.​

Indeed, the Palestinians did not want to legitimize the colonial project.

P F Tinmore, et al,

Well, this is a trick question. Every time you ask it, it starts off the same way. NO ONE denied any of the basic rights to the Arab Palestinians. Remembering, of course, that the actual Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR) is not law. It was adopted in December 1948, but several attempts to bring it into law as a Convention in the same way as the companion International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (CESCR) and the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (CCPR) were
Adopted and opened for signature, ratification and accession.

Having said that, clearly the Arab Palestinians have exercised their right of self-determination several times since the release from the Enemy Occupied Territory Administration. Even today, the UN does not consider the Non-Self-Governing and Trust Territory.

Palestine is a territory defined by international borders. The Palestinians are the normal residents and citizens of the land.

You have never been able to explain, other than some foreign criminals wanting to steal their land, how the Palestinians became exempt from universal rights.

(COMMENT)

At the current time, there is no Palestinian territories that has valid international defined borders. While there were the Demarcations associated with the former Mandate that terminated in 1948, those are historical and not internationally defined. But since they were surveyed, Lebanon and Syria still use them relative to the Armistice Lines, which are not borders.

The remainder of the international boundaries for Israel, are defined by treaties. The UN and the International community in general, consider the reaffirmation of the right of the Palestinian people to self-determination and to independence in their "State of Palestine" (alla 1988) on the Palestinian territory occupied since 1967; when the General Assembly Votes Overwhelmingly to Accord Palestine ‘Non-Member Observer State’ Status in United Nations.

The Arab Palestinians can be considered "normal residents and citizens of the land," as you've stated. But that does not change the intent of the Ottoman Sovereign in 1888 (in the previous posting). And next year, the Balfour Declaration of November 2, 1917, will be a century old.

Finally, it should be remembered that the right of self-determination can be exercised in the negative direction as well as the positive direct. The Arab Palestinians exercised their right of self-determination several times:

• Prior to November 1923, three successive proposals were put forward by the mandatory Government with a view to the closer association of the Arab community with the Administration of Palestine. Towards all these proposals the Arabs adopted the same attitude, namely, refusal to co-operate in measures which they considered did not satisfy their aspirations.

• Of course the Arab Community declined to participate in the Partition Plan; including the establishment of an additional Arab State.

• The Palestinians voted in the Jordanian Parliament to the ascend to the Annexation.

• The Palestinians adopted both the 1993 and 1995 Oslo Accords.

* The Palestinians chose to recognize the State of Israel, but no the Jewish State as outlined in the Partition Plan.
​

This is just a thumbnail look at the issues, in a set of broad brush strokes.

Most Respectfully,
R

• Prior to November 1923, three successive proposals were put forward by the mandatory Government with a view to the closer association of the Arab community with the Administration of Palestine. Towards all these proposals the Arabs adopted the same attitude, namely, refusal to co-operate in measures which they considered did not satisfy their aspirations.​

Indeed, the Palestinians did not want to legitimize the colonial project.

Indeed, there were no 'Pal'istanians.

 

[RoccoR]

ILOVEISRAEL fanger, et al,

I don't think this will be much of an election issue. I think both parties are equally interested in the positive development of the Lavant and the resources. Economic, commercial, industrial and scientific development on the same level as Israel; and certainly it is not within the capability and potential of Arabs of Palestine to achieve any comparable outcomes in the area of human development.

.Robert Fisk: Finally, Israel and Palestine is a US election issue. It's about time
who knows what might happen?

Doesn't matter. The " 67 Borders" and " Right of Return" isn't going to happen.

(COMMENT)

In particular the "Right of Return" has been over exaggerated. Because the UNRWA, overrun with Arab Palestinian workers, has been inflating the numbers by altering the definition of a refugee.

What is known as the 1967 borders is a set of old Armistice Lines. But the line is indefensible. The Arabs of Palestine have attacked Israel at least a half dozen times. This is what as known as the Arab Palestinians unqualified armed aggressor potential; with the open threats as the vocalizeetion of policy.

Most Resectfully,
R

 

[P F Tinmore]

P F Tinmore, et al,

Well, this is a trick question. Every time you ask it, it starts off the same way. NO ONE denied any of the basic rights to the Arab Palestinians. Remembering, of course, that the actual Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR) is not law. It was adopted in December 1948, but several attempts to bring it into law as a Convention in the same way as the companion International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (CESCR) and the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (CCPR) were
Adopted and opened for signature, ratification and accession.

Having said that, clearly the Arab Palestinians have exercised their right of self-determination several times since the release from the Enemy Occupied Territory Administration. Even today, the UN does not consider the Non-Self-Governing and Trust Territory.

Palestine is a territory defined by international borders. The Palestinians are the normal residents and citizens of the land.

You have never been able to explain, other than some foreign criminals wanting to steal their land, how the Palestinians became exempt from universal rights.

(COMMENT)

At the current time, there is no Palestinian territories that has valid international defined borders. While there were the Demarcations associated with the former Mandate that terminated in 1948, those are historical and not internationally defined. But since they were surveyed, Lebanon and Syria still use them relative to the Armistice Lines, which are not borders.

The remainder of the international boundaries for Israel, are defined by treaties. The UN and the International community in general, consider the reaffirmation of the right of the Palestinian people to self-determination and to independence in their "State of Palestine" (alla 1988) on the Palestinian territory occupied since 1967; when the General Assembly Votes Overwhelmingly to Accord Palestine ‘Non-Member Observer State’ Status in United Nations.

The Arab Palestinians can be considered "normal residents and citizens of the land," as you've stated. But that does not change the intent of the Ottoman Sovereign in 1888 (in the previous posting). And next year, the Balfour Declaration of November 2, 1917, will be a century old.

Finally, it should be remembered that the right of self-determination can be exercised in the negative direction as well as the positive direct. The Arab Palestinians exercised their right of self-determination several times:

• Prior to November 1923, three successive proposals were put forward by the mandatory Government with a view to the closer association of the Arab community with the Administration of Palestine. Towards all these proposals the Arabs adopted the same attitude, namely, refusal to co-operate in measures which they considered did not satisfy their aspirations.

• Of course the Arab Community declined to participate in the Partition Plan; including the establishment of an additional Arab State.

• The Palestinians voted in the Jordanian Parliament to the ascend to the Annexation.

• The Palestinians adopted both the 1993 and 1995 Oslo Accords.

* The Palestinians chose to recognize the State of Israel, but no the Jewish State as outlined in the Partition Plan.
​

This is just a thumbnail look at the issues, in a set of broad brush strokes.

Most Respectfully,
R

• Prior to November 1923, three successive proposals were put forward by the mandatory Government with a view to the closer association of the Arab community with the Administration of Palestine. Towards all these proposals the Arabs adopted the same attitude, namely, refusal to co-operate in measures which they considered did not satisfy their aspirations.​

Indeed, the Palestinians did not want to legitimize the colonial project.

P F Tinmore, et al,

Well, this is a trick question. Every time you ask it, it starts off the same way. NO ONE denied any of the basic rights to the Arab Palestinians. Remembering, of course, that the actual Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR) is not law. It was adopted in December 1948, but several attempts to bring it into law as a Convention in the same way as the companion International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (CESCR) and the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (CCPR) were
Adopted and opened for signature, ratification and accession.

Having said that, clearly the Arab Palestinians have exercised their right of self-determination several times since the release from the Enemy Occupied Territory Administration. Even today, the UN does not consider the Non-Self-Governing and Trust Territory.

Palestine is a territory defined by international borders. The Palestinians are the normal residents and citizens of the land.

You have never been able to explain, other than some foreign criminals wanting to steal their land, how the Palestinians became exempt from universal rights.

(COMMENT)

At the current time, there is no Palestinian territories that has valid international defined borders. While there were the Demarcations associated with the former Mandate that terminated in 1948, those are historical and not internationally defined. But since they were surveyed, Lebanon and Syria still use them relative to the Armistice Lines, which are not borders.

The remainder of the international boundaries for Israel, are defined by treaties. The UN and the International community in general, consider the reaffirmation of the right of the Palestinian people to self-determination and to independence in their "State of Palestine" (alla 1988) on the Palestinian territory occupied since 1967; when the General Assembly Votes Overwhelmingly to Accord Palestine ‘Non-Member Observer State’ Status in United Nations.

The Arab Palestinians can be considered "normal residents and citizens of the land," as you've stated. But that does not change the intent of the Ottoman Sovereign in 1888 (in the previous posting). And next year, the Balfour Declaration of November 2, 1917, will be a century old.

Finally, it should be remembered that the right of self-determination can be exercised in the negative direction as well as the positive direct. The Arab Palestinians exercised their right of self-determination several times:

• Prior to November 1923, three successive proposals were put forward by the mandatory Government with a view to the closer association of the Arab community with the Administration of Palestine. Towards all these proposals the Arabs adopted the same attitude, namely, refusal to co-operate in measures which they considered did not satisfy their aspirations.

• Of course the Arab Community declined to participate in the Partition Plan; including the establishment of an additional Arab State.

• The Palestinians voted in the Jordanian Parliament to the ascend to the Annexation.

• The Palestinians adopted both the 1993 and 1995 Oslo Accords.

* The Palestinians chose to recognize the State of Israel, but no the Jewish State as outlined in the Partition Plan.
​

This is just a thumbnail look at the issues, in a set of broad brush strokes.

Most Respectfully,
R

• Prior to November 1923, three successive proposals were put forward by the mandatory Government with a view to the closer association of the Arab community with the Administration of Palestine. Towards all these proposals the Arabs adopted the same attitude, namely, refusal to co-operate in measures which they considered did not satisfy their aspirations.​

Indeed, the Palestinians did not want to legitimize the colonial project.

Indeed, there were no 'Pal'istanians.

The automatic, ipso facto, change from Ottoman to Palestinian nationality was dealt with in Article 1, paragraph 1, of the Citizenship Order, which declared:

“Turkish subjects habitually resident in the territory of Palestine upon the 1st day of August, 1925, shall become Palestinian citizens.”​

Genesis of Citizenship in Palestine and Israel