The NEWER Official Discussion Thread for the creation of Israel, the UN and the British Mandate

[P F Tinmore]

No link. No evidence. No fact of history.

Pay attention as to what happened in 1924.

Would you like to try any other year?

Sure, Palestine has always been the poster child of external interference.

 

[Sixties Fan]

Sure, Palestine has always been the poster child of external interference.

Can't answer.

No answers lead to no answers.

 

[rylah]

Indeed, by the League of Nations.

Poor troll.

Then why can't you ever quote it?

No land was ever legally transferred to Jordan, or any Arab state.

 

[RoccoR]

RE: The NEWER Official Discussion Thread for the creation of Israel, the UN, and the British Mandate
SUBTOPIC: What is a recommendation?
※→ P F Tinmore, rylah, et al,

recommendation(s) ‘The term “recommendation” is most frequently used to describe
non-binding suggestions of international organs…. Many organizations use “resolution” in
the same context…. “Recommendation” is used to denote a binding rule of law only in one
constitution [that of the European Coal and Steel Community]’: Schermers and Blokker ,
International Institutional Law (4th rev. ed.), 755.
SOURCE: Parry & Grant Encyclopaedic Dictionary of International Law • Rev. 3d ed. of: Parry and Grant • 2nd ed. 2004 © 2009 by Oxford University Press, Inc. pg 510

Ah yes, the Recommendation that was rejected and never implemented by the Security Council. Didn't happen.

(COMMENT)

Periodically, I notice that someone tends to make this same foolish argument. As if the Security Council needed to approve a General Assembly Resolution, or that the Hostile Arab Palestinians (HoAP) had some say as to whether Jewish Council for Independence needed Hostile Arrab Palestinian Approval.

The Palestine Commission, at its 75th Meeting today, adjourned sine die
During today's brief meeting, Dr. Eduardo Morgan (Panama) said that this resolution of the Assembly merely "relieves responsibility. The Commission has not been dissolved. In fact the resolution of last November 29 has been implemented."

One of the most used tactics by the HoAP is to suggest that there is some fault with the argument put forth with no supporting evidence. In this case, there is the suggestion or implication that the HoAP rejection in early 1948. It would be a decision that would pleague them to this very day. The process of creating self-governing institutions would be a huge mistake. It would not stop the Jewish Council from taking positive steps forward and building the most humanly developed nation in the Region.
.

Most Respectfully,
R

 

[RoccoR]

RE: The NEWER Official Discussion Thread for the creation of Israel, the UN, and the British Mandate
SUBTOPIC: Making of a State
※→ P F Tinmore, rylah, et al,

Wow, I cannot believe you said this.

Indeed, by the League of Nations.

Poor troll.

Then why can't you ever quote it?

No land was ever legally transferred to Jordan, or any Arab state.

(COMMENT)
.
I do not know of any independent sovereignty that was created by the League of Nations or the Treaty of Lausanne.

Maybe you can help this poor little Italian Boy find these citations.

.

Most Respectfully,
R

 

[P F Tinmore]

RE: The NEWER Official Discussion Thread for the creation of Israel, the UN, and the British Mandate
SUBTOPIC: Making of a State
※→ P F Tinmore, rylah, et al,

Wow, I cannot believe you said this.



(COMMENT)
.
I do not know of any independent sovereignty that was created by the League of Nations or the Treaty of Lausanne.

Maybe you can help this poor little Italian Boy find these citations.

.

Most Respectfully,
R

The mandate entrenched the Zionist political right with the American British intervention against the Palestinian side. It was a direct challenge to the international law which gave the native population a right for independence. A right that was acceded by the article 22 of the League Charter which gave the Turkish liberated areas, like Palestine a right for independence with the League administrative advice by the mandated power. The imposition of the Balfour Declaration as the bases of the mandate contravened the self-determination principle which the League came to uphold. In the words of Henry Cattan, a specialist in international law, "... the implementation of the mandate has created an irregular and abnormal situation which continues at this time, and even constitutes the basis of the Arab-Israeli conflict. The invalidity of the mandate and its one sided implementation in favor of the Jews are matters that would have to be taken into account in any eventual settlement of the conflict. And to ignore these facts [...] can hardly be accepted by legal theory or by international law"<51>. The illegality of the mandate came from its illegal basis of the Balfour Declaration which gave a non-owner (Britain) the right to donate Palestine to the Jews in contradiction with its agreements with the Arab for independence.

https://www.jstor.org/stable/pdf/26448686.pdf

 

[Sixties Fan]

The mandate entrenched the Zionist political right with the American British intervention against the Palestinian side. It was a direct challenge to the international law which gave the native population a right for independence. A right that was acceded by the article 22 of the League Charter which gave the Turkish liberated areas, like Palestine a right for independence with the League administrative advice by the mandated power. The imposition of the Balfour Declaration as the bases of the mandate contravened the self-determination principle which the League came to uphold. In the words of Henry Cattan, a specialist in international law, "... the implementation of the mandate has created an irregular and abnormal situation which continues at this time, and even constitutes the basis of the Arab-Israeli conflict. The invalidity of the mandate and its one sided implementation in favor of the Jews are matters that would have to be taken into account in any eventual settlement of the conflict. And to ignore these facts [...] can hardly be accepted by legal theory or by international law"<51>. The illegality of the mandate came from its illegal basis of the Balfour Declaration which gave a non-owner (Britain) the right to donate Palestine to the Jews in contradiction with its agreements with the Arab for independence.

https://www.jstor.org/stable/pdf/26448686.pdf

" It was a direct challenge to the international law which gave the native population a right for independence."

The Jewish People ARE the native, indigenous people/Nation of Palestine.

The Mandate for Palestine to rebuild the Jewish nation ON the Jewish Homeland, was beyond legal.

Only a Jew hater like Tinmore decides and spreads that the Jews are not the Indigenous people of the Land but the Invaders which the Arabs have been since the 7th century CE.


Find whatever site you like which says whatever you wish them to say and will continue to make you believe what you want to believe.


Jews Belong in JUDEA

Arabs belong in Arabia.

Jews were left with only 20% of their homeland after 1948.

Arab Muslims and many European Jew haters want the Jews to be sovereign of ZERO land.

That is the way Christians and Muslims, some of them, like to see the Jews.

Landless, homeless, and helpless.

 

[P F Tinmore]

RE: The NEWER Official Discussion Thread for the creation of Israel, the UN, and the British Mandate
SUBTOPIC: What is a recommendation?
※→ P F Tinmore, rylah, et al,

recommendation(s) ‘The term “recommendation” is most frequently used to describe
non-binding suggestions of international organs…. Many organizations use “resolution” in
the same context…. “Recommendation” is used to denote a binding rule of law only in one
constitution [that of the European Coal and Steel Community]’: Schermers and Blokker ,
International Institutional Law (4th rev. ed.), 755.
SOURCE: Parry & Grant Encyclopaedic Dictionary of International Law • Rev. 3d ed. of: Parry and Grant • 2nd ed. 2004 © 2009 by Oxford University Press, Inc. pg 510


(COMMENT)

Periodically, I notice that someone tends to make this same foolish argument. As if the Security Council needed to approve a General Assembly Resolution, or that the Hostile Arab Palestinians (HoAP) had some say as to whether Jewish Council for Independence needed Hostile Arrab Palestinian Approval.



One of the most used tactics by the HoAP is to suggest that there is some fault with the argument put forth with no supporting evidence. In this case, there is the suggestion or implication that the HoAP rejection in early 1948. It would be a decision that would pleague them to this very day. The process of creating self-governing institutions would be a huge mistake. It would not stop the Jewish Council from taking positive steps forward and building the most humanly developed nation in the Region.
.

Most Respectfully,
R

Palestine had a local nationalism to liberate the country from foreign British-Zionist control. By adopting a Zionist line, the US put itself in the camp of the aggressor. Historically, Americans and Zionists alike had the same experience of fighting Native Americans and Palestinians respectively.

https://www.jstor.org/stable/pdf/26448686.pdf

 

[P F Tinmore]

" It was a direct challenge to the international law which gave the native population a right for independence."

The Jewish People ARE the native, indigenous people/Nation of Palestine.

The Mandate for Palestine to rebuild the Jewish nation ON the Jewish Homeland, was beyond legal.

Only a Jew hater like Tinmore decides and spreads that the Jews are not the Indigenous people of the Land but the Invaders which the Arabs have been since the 7th century CE.


Find whatever site you like which says whatever you wish them to say and will continue to make you believe what you want to believe.


Jews Belong in JUDEA

Arabs belong in Arabia.

Jews were left with only 20% of their homeland after 1948.

Arab Muslims and many European Jew haters want the Jews to be sovereign of ZERO land.

That is the way Christians and Muslims, some of them, like to see the Jews.

Landless, homeless, and helpless.

Thank you Mr. Israeli talking points.

 

[Sixties Fan]

Thank you Mr. Israeli talking points.

You do know that they are not "talking points. It is the truth.

You do not accept the truth that is your problem.

Hating Jews is very costly for the world.

But what do you care? Nothing at all.

Nothing like being a loser in the world of Jew hatred, hey, Tinmore?

 

[rylah]

The mandate entrenched the Zionist political right with the American British intervention against the Palestinian side.

Zionism in those days was a full-on socialist revolutionary movement,
while Arab imperialists and British imperialists fought on the same side.

Do you ever get anything correct?

 

[Sixties Fan]

The story of Israel’s creation is one of the most improbable in human history: After millennia of exile and dispersion, the Jewish people once again had a state of their own. The unlikelihood of this outcome is matched only by the dramatic events that precipitated it, and it is not surprising that nearly 75 years after the United Nations resolution that partitioned the British mandate in Palestine, scholars are still trying to make sense of it all. Two new books will help readers better understand how the aftermath of World War II and the beginning of the Cold War affected Israel’s rebirth.

The first twist in the story comes early in Nick Reynold’s The 1945–1952 British Government’s Opposition to Zionism and the Emergent State of Israel. After a decade in power, Great Britain’s Tories lost the July 1945 election to the Labour Party, then led by Clement Attlee. Labour’s party platform called for abolishing restrictions on Jewish immigration to Palestine and reaffirmed the Balfour Declaration. Hugh Dalton, who subsequently became chancellor of the exchequer, thundered at the party conference, “It is morally wrong and politically indefensible to impose obstacles to the entry into Palestine now of any Jews who desire to go there.”

(full article online)

How British and American Elites Failed to Stop the Jewish State

Two new books bring to life the knife-edge moment when the British Empire was being liquidated and the U.S. national security establishment tried and failed to block the birth of Israel

www.tabletmag.com

 

[rylah]

Palestine had a local nationalism to liberate the country from foreign British-Zionist control.

"Local nationalism"...

Those greedy Arab imperialists
demanding an exclusive domination
over the entire Middle East and North Africa?

Tell us why they don't deserve a humiliating defeat by a minority.

 

[RoccoR]

RE: The NEWER Official Discussion Thread for the creation of Israel, the UN, and the British Mandate
※→ P F Tinmore, et al,

I am confused thas to what part in Posting #1804 (supra) was not understandable.

The mandate entrenched the Zionist political right with the American British intervention against the Palestinian side.

[/QUOTE]
(COMMENT)

There was no intervention by the Americans and the British. The purpose of the Mandate was articulated in the Preamble of the Mandate.

It was a direct challenge to the international law which gave the native population a right for independence. A right that was acceded by the article 22 of the League Charter which gave the Turkish liberated areas, like Palestine a right for independence with the League administrative advice by the mandated power.

[/QUOTE]
(COMMENT)

In 1924, there was no "International Law" concerning the "native populations."

The Treaty of Lausanne did not mention "natives" or "native populations."

The Treaty of Lausanne was binding between the parties to the treaty. The Arab Palestinians were NOT a party to the treaty. The treaty does not promise the Arab Palestinians anything.

The imposition of the Balfour Declaration as the bases of the mandate contravened the self-determination principle which the League came to uphold.

[/QUOTE]
(COMMENT)

The League of Nations was formed AFTER the Great War (WWI). The League of Nations did NOT come to hold up the principles of self-determination. The Treaty of Lausanne did NOT mention the principle f "Self-Determination even once.

In the words of Henry Cattan, a specialist in international law, "... the implementation of the mandate has created an irregular and abnormal situation which continues at this time, and even constitutes the basis of the Arab-Israeli conflict. The invalidity of the mandate and its one sided implementation in favor of the Jews are matters that would have to be taken into account in any eventual settlement of the conflict. And to ignore these facts [...] can hardly be accepted by legal theory or by international law"<51>. The illegality of the mandate came from its illegal basis of the Balfour Declaration which gave a non-owner (Britain) the right to donate Palestine to the Jews in contradiction with its agreements with the Arab for independence.

[/QUOTE]
(COMMENT)

This theme is out of context with the ground truth as it evolved between the Armistice of Mudros (1918) and the Declaration of Israeli Independence (1948).

It is a matter of perspective as to whether the Mandate was the proximate cause of the conflict, or if it was the uncooperative attitude of the Arab Palestinian.

The Mandate was not invalidated in any fashion by either the Supreme Council of the Allied Powers or any are of the League of Nations. The Mandate was created by the agreement of the Allied Powers.

There may never be an "eventual settlement of the conflict." The Egyptians made peace (1979) with the Israelis, and the Jordanians made peace (1994) with the Israelis. That treaties covered the international boundaries between the Mediterranean Sea at Rafah and Aqaba, and then north, from Aqaba to the border with Syria. And the northern border with Lebanon (2000), covered by the Letter from the Lebanese Government. Please take notice that the international border encapsulates both the Gaza Strip and the West Bank.

---

---

(∑Ω)

Just as the "Tinmore" commentary implies that the actions taken by the Allied Powers ... can hardly be accepted by legal ... is an attempt to retroactively apply 21st Century Customary Practice to an early 20th Century (100 years ago) way in which the Allied Powers handling of the small area of the overall territory the Mandate covered. And once again you use this statement (non-owner (Britain)] Real Estate termonology. We are discussing sovereignty and self-governing institutions.

Most Respectfully,
R

 

[P F Tinmore]

And once again you use this statement (non-owner (Britain)] Real Estate termonology. We are discussing sovereignty and self-governing institutions.

I don't know why this could confuse you. When Balfour made that promise to the Zionists, Palestine was still under Ottoman sovereignty. After the war Britain did not annex or otherwise claim sovereignty over the territory.

It is quite simple. Palestine was not Britain's to give away.

 

[Hollie]

I don't know why this could confuse you. When Balfour made that promise to the Zionists, Palestine was still under Ottoman sovereignty. After the war Britain did not annex or otherwise claim sovereignty over the territory.

It is quite simple. Palestine was not Britain's to give away.

What was given away?

Link?

 

[P F Tinmore]

The Treaty of Lausanne did not mention "natives" or "native populations."

It did, it just didn't use that term. The people who lived there got the territory. The people who lived there got the nationality. The people who lived there got the citizenship. The people who lived there got the sovereignty.

In article 22 of the LoN Covenant, the people who lived there were to be led to independence.

In the 1925 Palestine Citizenship Order, stated that the people who lived there would become Palestinian citizens.

In subsequent UN resolutions, the people who live there (the Palestinian people in Palestine) have the right to self determination, independence, sovereignty, and territorial integrity.

It is what I call the people of the place. Nowhere does anyone mention that the people from someplace else get anything.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

In subsequent UN resolutions, the people who live there (the Palestinian people in Palestine) have the right to self determination, independence, sovereignty, and territorial integrity.

Do they have it yet?

 

[Sixties Fan]

The Roots of Zionism | Honest Reporting

Many young people have been inspired by Herzl's phrase "If you will it, it is no dream." But what are the roots of Zionism and the story behind Israel?

honestreporting.com

 

[Sixties Fan]

Michael Weimers was a strikingly handsome, English-educated immigrant from Germany who earned the moniker “King of the Negev” because of the airlifts he orchestrated to besieged Jewish communities in the south. His efforts to erect vital airfields ultimately helped liberate Israel’s vast Negev desert at that key turning point in the war.

He was a pioneering meteorologist and air force officer who in his day enjoyed the admiration of his peers. But for some reason his memory suddenly disappeared upon death. Unlike ace pilot Modi Alon, the commander of Israel’s first fighter squadron and hero of its first aerial assault, who crashed to death after a bombing mission, and David “Mickey” Marcus, Israel’s first modern general and architect of the Burma Road to Jerusalem, who was accidentally shot dead by a local sentry and later immortalized in film by Kirk Douglas, Weimers’ legacy simply vanished.

Michael Weimers in Israel in an undated photoCOURTESY OF MICHAEL WEIMERS’ FAMILY

(full article online)

The Forgotten Savior of the Southern Israeli Desert

How an awkward German refugee helped liberate southern Israel in the 1948 War of Independence

www.tabletmag.com