Israel's Legal Right To Exist

[P F Tinmore]

NO, I don't see a problem. No, the Israelis don't see a problem.

Of course the thieves do not see a problem.

 

[P F Tinmore]

The problem is your inability to visualize TWO sandboxes.

What two sandboxes? The Zionist assholes set up shop in the Palestinian's sandbox.

 

[Hollie]

The problem is your inability to visualize TWO sandboxes.

What two sandboxes? The Zionist assholes set up shop in the Palestinian's sandbox.

The Pal'istanians sandbox? The Arabs-Moslems you call Pal'istanians never owned the geographic area of Pal'istan.

This has been explained to you dozens of times but instead of accepting the facts, you choose to promote falsehood.

 

[Hollie]

NO, I don't see a problem. No, the Israelis don't see a problem.

Of course the thieves do not see a problem.

Israel did not come into existence by being "stolen" from anyone.

How is it that you still understand nothing of the history surrounding the area when all of this has been explained to you?

 

[Bleipriester]

The problem is your inability to visualize TWO sandboxes.

What two sandboxes? The Zionist assholes set up shop in the Palestinian's sandbox.

The Pal'istanians sandbox? The Arabs-Moslems you call Pal'istanians never owned the geographic area of Pal'istan.

This has been explained to you dozens of times but instead of accepting the facts, you choose to promote falsehood.

Your explanations why one people should have a country and another not are simply insufficient. In the course of time the region saw many peoples and rulers and you are randomly picking one of them and claim it is theirs. What if I say, the Romans once ruled there and not the Jews so it is Roman? The is no Rome today, you say? Didn´t bother you that there was no Israel in 1948, right?
If the Israelis have a right to have a country, the Palestinians have the same right. You deny it?

 

[montelatici]

The problem is your inability to visualize TWO sandboxes.

What two sandboxes? The Zionist assholes set up shop in the Palestinian's sandbox.

The Pal'istanians sandbox? The Arabs-Moslems you call Pal'istanians never owned the geographic area of Pal'istan.

This has been explained to you dozens of times but instead of accepting the facts, you choose to promote falsehood.

They owned over 90% of it as late as 1945 you moron. After reading the facts hundreds of times you still lie through your teeth like the pathological liar that you are.

 

[RoccoR]

P F Tinmore, et al,

You keep saying this. It seems to be a central point with you.

NO, I don't see a problem. No, the Israelis don't see a problem.

Of course the thieves do not see a problem.

(COMMENT)

This particular sandbox was within the Sovereignty of the Ottoman Empire until Armistice of Mudros (1918), and the the entirety of the Sandbox came under the Occupied Enemy Territory Administration (OETA). Then later when the Treaty of Sevres (1920) was concluded, the Civil Administration began what was to become the Territroy to which the Mandate of Palestine applied.

• Article 16 Armistice of Mudros: "Surrender of all garrisons in Hejaz, Assir, Yemen, Syria, and Mesopotamia to the nearest Allied commander; and the withdrawal of troops from Cilicia, except those necessary to maintain order, as will be determined under Clause 5."

• Article 132 Treaty of Severs: Outside her frontiers as fixed by the present Treaty Turkey hereby renounces in favour of the Principal Allied Powers all rights and title which she could claim on any ground over or concerning any territories outside Europe which are not otherwise disposed of by the present Treaty.

• Article 16 of the Treaty of Lausanne effectively replaced Article 132 of the Treaty of Sevres:

Turkey hereby renounces all rights and title whatsoever over or respecting the territories situated outside the frontiers laid down in the present Treaty and the islands other than those over which her sovereignty is recognised by the said Treaty, the future of these territories and islands being settled or to be settled by the parties concerned.
​

As you can see, in each case, the intension of the Sovereign Power (Ottoman Empire/Turkish Republic) was to surrender/renounce the Title and Rights of the territory in favor of the Allied Powers.

(QUESTION)

If the Jewish People, who's immigration was facilitated into the territory, as agreed upon by the Allied Powers, and published in Article 6, Mandate of Palestine:

Who (and when) did the Jewish People take the Title and Rights from?
​

It is my contention that if there was a victim to an unsubstantiated theft, it was not the Arab Palestinian; having no sovereign Title and Rights to the territory in question.

Most Respectfully,
R

 

[montelatici]

The Palestinians wanted self determination in Palestine.

The Jews wanted self determination in Palestine.

You don't see a problem.

You have just managed to sum up a year of discussion between you and I. And a decade of me having this discussion on forums. And a hundred years of conflict.

NO, I don't see a problem. No, the Israelis don't see a problem.

You see a problem. The Palestinians see a problem. Because to them (and you) it is a zero sum game.

Self-determination is not determined by the size of the sandbox in which you are self-determinative. Both the Jewish people and the Arab Palestinian people can have a sandbox. The fact that I have a sandbox does not in ANY way prohibit you from also having a sandbox.

The problem is your inability to visualize TWO sandboxes.

No, the problem is the Jews have never considered the possibility of two sandboxes, and never will. The Zionists always intended to remove the non-Jews from all of Palestine.

 

[RoccoR]

montelatici, et al,

I think the intention of our friend HOLLIE" was to express "soverenty" and not "ownership."

The problem is your inability to visualize TWO sandboxes.

What two sandboxes? The Zionist assholes set up shop in the Palestinian's sandbox.

The Pal'istanians sandbox? The Arabs-Moslems you call Pal'istanians never owned the geographic area of Pal'istan.

This has been explained to you dozens of times but instead of accepting the facts, you choose to promote falsehood.

They owned over 90% of it as late as 1945 you moron. After reading the facts hundreds of times you still lie through your teeth like the pathological liar that you are.

(COMMENT)

You are indicating ownership, which has nothing to do with political sovereignty (what HOLLIE was taling about).

Most Respectfully,
R

 

[montelatici]

P F Tinmore, et al,

You keep saying this. It seems to be a central point with you.

NO, I don't see a problem. No, the Israelis don't see a problem.

Of course the thieves do not see a problem.

(COMMENT)

This particular sandbox was within the Sovereignty of the Ottoman Empire until Armistice of Mudros (1918), and the the entirety of the Sandbox came under the Occupied Enemy Territory Administration (OETA). Then later when the Treaty of Sevres (1920) was concluded, the Civil Administration began what was to become the Territroy to which the Mandate of Palestine applied.

• Article 16 Armistice of Mudros: "Surrender of all garrisons in Hejaz, Assir, Yemen, Syria, and Mesopotamia to the nearest Allied commander; and the withdrawal of troops from Cilicia, except those necessary to maintain order, as will be determined under Clause 5."

• Article 132 Treaty of Severs: Outside her frontiers as fixed by the present Treaty Turkey hereby renounces in favour of the Principal Allied Powers all rights and title which she could claim on any ground over or concerning any territories outside Europe which are not otherwise disposed of by the present Treaty.

• Article 16 of the Treaty of Lausanne effectively replaced Article 132 of the Treaty of Sevres:

Turkey hereby renounces all rights and title whatsoever over or respecting the territories situated outside the frontiers laid down in the present Treaty and the islands other than those over which her sovereignty is recognised by the said Treaty, the future of these territories and islands being settled or to be settled by the parties concerned.
​

As you can see, in each case, the intension of the Sovereign Power (Ottoman Empire/Turkish Republic) was to surrender/renounce the Title and Rights of the territory in favor of the Allied Powers.

(QUESTION)

If the Jewish People, who's immigration was facilitated into the territory, as agreed upon by the Allied Powers, and published in Article 6, Mandate of Palestine:

Who (and when) did the Jewish People take the Title and Rights from?
​

It is my contention that if there was a victim to an unsubstantiated theft, it was not the Arab Palestinian; having no sovereign Title and Rights to the territory in question.

Most Respectfully,
R

The Christians and Muslims had sovereign rights to the territory as its inhabitants, pursuant to Article 22 of the Covenant of the League of Nations, which takes precedence over any other previous or subsequent agreement.

The Jews, through the British, took title and rights from the native Christians and Muslims that inhabited Palestine. The Christians and Muslims had civil title (property rights) to over 90% of the land of Palestine as late as 1945, as validated by the United Nations.

 

[RoccoR]

montelatici, Shusha, P F Tinmore, et al,

I think up are purposely trying to misinterpret what "SHUSHA" was saying.

The Palestinians wanted self determination in Palestine.

The Jews wanted self determination in Palestine.

You don't see a problem.

You have just managed to sum up a year of discussion between you and I. And a decade of me having this discussion on forums. And a hundred years of conflict.

NO, I don't see a problem. No, the Israelis don't see a problem.

You see a problem. The Palestinians see a problem. Because to them (and you) it is a zero sum game.

Self-determination is not determined by the size of the sandbox in which you are self-determinative. Both the Jewish people and the Arab Palestinian people can have a sandbox. The fact that I have a sandbox does not in ANY way prohibit you from also having a sandbox.

The problem is your inability to visualize TWO sandboxes.

No, the problem is the Jews have never considered the possibility of two sandboxes, and never will. The Zionists always intended to remove the non-Jews from all of Palestine.

(COMMENT)

SHUSHA did not speak in opposition to the "Two-State." SHUSHA was speaking in terms of a solution; a political alternative (a Two-State Solution). This political solution dates back to the 1937 Peel Commission. The Peel Commission recommendation was criticized on the distribution of territory. Had the Peel Commission plan been adopted, the Jewish State or Jewish National Home would have been destroyed by now. The Mandate Enclave would have folded it tents (like they always do) and the Jewish State would have been overrun.

Most Respectfully,
R

 

[MJB12741]

The Palestinians wanted self determination in Palestine.

The Jews wanted self determination in Palestine.

You don't see a problem.

You have just managed to sum up a year of discussion between you and I. And a decade of me having this discussion on forums. And a hundred years of conflict.

NO, I don't see a problem. No, the Israelis don't see a problem.

You see a problem. The Palestinians see a problem. Because to them (and you) it is a zero sum game.

Self-determination is not determined by the size of the sandbox in which you are self-determinative. Both the Jewish people and the Arab Palestinian people can have a sandbox. The fact that I have a sandbox does not in ANY way prohibit you from also having a sandbox.

The problem is your inability to visualize TWO sandboxes.

No, the problem is the Jews have never considered the possibility of two sandboxes, and never will. The Zionists always intended to remove the non-Jews from all of Palestine.

Now THAT'S funny! Do you think maybe it is the Palestinians who do not want an independent state?

Maybe Palestinians don’t want two states

 

[RoccoR]

montelatici, et al,

Yes, but again:

It is my contention that if there was a victim to an unsubstantiated theft, it was not the Arab Palestinian; having no sovereign Title and Rights to the territory in question.

The Christians and Muslims had sovereign rights to the territory as its inhabitants, pursuant to Article 22 of the Covenant of the League of Nations, which takes precedence over any other previous or subsequent agreement.

The Jews, through the British, took title and rights from the native Christians and Muslims that inhabited Palestine. The Christians and Muslims had civil title (property rights) to over 90% of the land of Palestine as late as 1945, as validated by the United Nations.

(COMMENT)

1. Your concept of a connection between "Sovereignty" and your "civil title (property rights) to over 90% of the land" is simply wrong.

2. The Title and Rights were passed to the Allied Powers by the previous Sovereign. Your contention that the Jewish Immigrants took the "title and rights from the native Christians and Muslims" is simply not borne-out by the facts. No matter how the Jewish People came into the Sovereignty called Israel, no territory was taken from the Arabs until AFTER the composite Arab League Forces broke their frontier in Armed Aggression.

In the Period between May 1948 and November 1988, there was Arab Sovereignty of any kind. And it remains to be seen if the Arab Palestinian can actually secure a sovereignty. Depending on the definition you us for sovereignty, there is no place where the Arab Palestinian is the absolute authority; except for the Gaza Strip.

Most Respectfully,
R

 

[montelatici]

As I stated, the Jews never intended to share the sandbox. The Christians and Muslims were prescient, notwithstanding the British denials, and did not take up arms early or effectively enough to stave off the invasion of their land.

 

[montelatici]

The Palestinians wanted self determination in Palestine.

The Jews wanted self determination in Palestine.

You don't see a problem.

You have just managed to sum up a year of discussion between you and I. And a decade of me having this discussion on forums. And a hundred years of conflict.

NO, I don't see a problem. No, the Israelis don't see a problem.

You see a problem. The Palestinians see a problem. Because to them (and you) it is a zero sum game.

Self-determination is not determined by the size of the sandbox in which you are self-determinative. Both the Jewish people and the Arab Palestinian people can have a sandbox. The fact that I have a sandbox does not in ANY way prohibit you from also having a sandbox.

The problem is your inability to visualize TWO sandboxes.

No, the problem is the Jews have never considered the possibility of two sandboxes, and never will. The Zionists always intended to remove the non-Jews from all of Palestine.

Now THAT'S funny! Do you think maybe it is the Palestinians who do not want an independent state?

Maybe Palestinians don’t want two states

Agreed, it is time for the non-Jews to give up on the two-state solution. The facts on the ground make it impossible now.

 

[P F Tinmore]

As you can see, in each case, the intension of the Sovereign Power (Ottoman Empire/Turkish Republic) was to surrender/renounce the Title and Rights of the territory in favor of the Allied Powers.

Indeed, and they held the territory in trust on behalf of the inhabitants. It is the people who have the right to sovereignty.

Look it up.

 

[P F Tinmore]

Who (and when) did the Jewish People take the Title and Rights from?

When did the Jews get title and rights?

Link?

 

[P F Tinmore]

I think the intention of our friend HOLLIE" was to express "soverenty" and not "ownership."

No, Israel just has military control.

 

[montelatici]

montelatici, et al,

Yes, but again:

It is my contention that if there was a victim to an unsubstantiated theft, it was not the Arab Palestinian; having no sovereign Title and Rights to the territory in question.

The Christians and Muslims had sovereign rights to the territory as its inhabitants, pursuant to Article 22 of the Covenant of the League of Nations, which takes precedence over any other previous or subsequent agreement.

The Jews, through the British, took title and rights from the native Christians and Muslims that inhabited Palestine. The Christians and Muslims had civil title (property rights) to over 90% of the land of Palestine as late as 1945, as validated by the United Nations.

(COMMENT)

1. Your concept of a connection between "Sovereignty" and your "civil title (property rights) to over 90% of the land" is simply wrong.

2. The Title and Rights were passed to the Allied Powers by the previous Sovereign. Your contention that the Jewish Immigrants took the "title and rights from the native Christians and Muslims" is simply not borne-out by the facts. No matter how the Jewish People came into the Sovereignty called Israel, no territory was taken from the Arabs until AFTER the composite Arab League Forces broke their frontier in Armed Aggression.

In the Period between May 1948 and November 1988, there was Arab Sovereignty of any kind. And it remains to be seen if the Arab Palestinian can actually secure a sovereignty. Depending on the definition you us for sovereignty, there is no place where the Arab Palestinian is the absolute authority; except for the Gaza Strip.

Most Respectfully,
R

I stated clearly that civil title to property was separate from sovereignty.

Your understanding of sovereignty of the territories in question after WW1 is confused. Sovereignty of the former Turkish territories passed to the "inhabitants" and was held in trust, for said inhabitants, by the League of Nations. The League of Nations subsequently issued Mandates to members of the League of Nations that agreed to provide tutelage to the "inhabitants" to allow for their self-determination.

The British and Jews were successful in camouflaging the real intent. The intent was to prevent the inhabitants of Palestine from exercising their right to self-determination, as per the Covenant, until enough Europeans could be transferred to the territory, enabling the Europeans to wrest control of the land by force and expel as many of the native people as possible. This is clear in retrospect, and with the benefit of hindsight, the various declaration of the British are also very clear in setting forth their intent.

The Christians and Muslims will never have sovereignty or self-determination in Palestine, the Jews have seen to that. The Christians and Muslims do not have sovereignty in Gaza, they do not control their territorial sea, air space or land borders. You have no argument from me.

 

[P F Tinmore]

montelatici, Shusha, P F Tinmore, et al,

I think up are purposely trying to misinterpret what "SHUSHA" was saying.

The Palestinians wanted self determination in Palestine.

The Jews wanted self determination in Palestine.

You don't see a problem.

You have just managed to sum up a year of discussion between you and I. And a decade of me having this discussion on forums. And a hundred years of conflict.

NO, I don't see a problem. No, the Israelis don't see a problem.

You see a problem. The Palestinians see a problem. Because to them (and you) it is a zero sum game.

Self-determination is not determined by the size of the sandbox in which you are self-determinative. Both the Jewish people and the Arab Palestinian people can have a sandbox. The fact that I have a sandbox does not in ANY way prohibit you from also having a sandbox.

The problem is your inability to visualize TWO sandboxes.

No, the problem is the Jews have never considered the possibility of two sandboxes, and never will. The Zionists always intended to remove the non-Jews from all of Palestine.

(COMMENT)

SHUSHA did not speak in opposition to the "Two-State." SHUSHA was speaking in terms of a solution; a political alternative (a Two-State Solution). This political solution dates back to the 1937 Peel Commission. The Peel Commission recommendation was criticized on the distribution of territory. Had the Peel Commission plan been adopted, the Jewish State or Jewish National Home would have been destroyed by now. The Mandate Enclave would have folded it tents (like they always do) and the Jewish State would have been overrun.

Most Respectfully,
R

Indeed, the "two state solution" (stealing land from one to give to another) has been on the table for eighty years and those assholes still can't get that pig to fly.