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

[Sixties Fan]

http://www.jewishpress.com/indepth/...ab-settlers-in-the-land-of-israel/2018/12/26/

 

[Sixties Fan]

What the U.N. needs to admit about the “Palestinian” refugees

 

[Sixties Fan]

Appeasement: The Murderous Legacy of Haj Amin al-Husseini

 

[Sixties Fan]

What Hitler and the Grand Mufti Really Said

 

[RoccoR]

RE: The Official Discussion Thread for the creation of Israel, the UN and the British Mandate
⁜→ Sixties Fan, et al,

Yes, I have contributed and commented many times on this very subject.

What the U.N. needs to admit about the “Palestinian” refugees

(COMMENT)

When a quasi-World Body like the UN jacks up the numbers by tying the descendants to the rolls of the refugee, we call this "Malfeasance" (wrongdoing under the color of law, especially by a public official). Every country has a problem with these rodents running area and calling themselves diplomats.

Most Respectfully,
R

 

[Sixties Fan]

A Tour of the Holy Land 1831-1910

 

[P F Tinmore]

A Tour of the Holy Land 1831-1910

Good post, thanks.

The markets (bazaars) played a key role. They were very picturesque and aroused the wonderment of pilgrims who flocked to photograph them, in particular the markets of Jaffa, Jerusalem and Bethlehem, as mementos of their visit to the Holy Land. These markets served not only for the sale of goods but were also the place where most of the artisans practised their crafts. There were special markets for the various craftsmen and merchants: metalworkers, tanners, oil vendors, butchers, etc. In certain markets (mainly those in the principal towns), fellaheen offered their produce for direct sale. Thus, there were special livestock markets in Jerusalem (in the Sultan's Pool) and Jaffa, while Safed had a market for grain and charcoal.

During the 19th century the economy of the towns of the Holy Land was largely based on agriculture. Their inhabitants owned fields and orchards in the vicinity and the more affluent among them gained their livelihood by exploiting the labour of the fellaheen.

[2] This was the situation up to the mid-19th century. Towards the end of that century gradual improvements were introduced.​

Palestine was really held back by Ottoman leases and 33% tax on production. With that being gone, there was a lot more money for investments.

 

[Sixties Fan]

Chaim of Arabia: The First Arab-Zionist Alliance - Jewish Review of Books

 

[Sixties Fan]

My Right Word: On the East Side of the Jordan

 

[Sixties Fan]

Should we inform her that the only reason a "Palestine" was created by the League of Nations was to reconstitute the historic Jewish national home?

__________________

A comment:

Ariel, and if you read the Hebrew word for Palestine on the top right of the passport, you would see, in parentheses, the abbreviation, also in Hebrew, for “the land of Israel” (א״י) as the description for what Palestine was.

(full article online)

My Right Word: One for the Dumb Jews Category

 

[Sixties Fan]

Jeremy Hunt: Cap on Jewish immigration to Palestine in 1939 was ‘black moment’

 

[Natural Citizen]

Rocco, you have some good postings, brother.

 

[RoccoR]

RE: The Official Discussion Thread for the creation of Israel, the UN and the British Mandate
⁜→ Sixties Fan, et al,

I cannot argue that 1939 was not a bad year; but I tend to think that a series of event in the few years immediately prior to the 1939 decisions was the spark that led the British to that rash decision that implemented a limitation on Jewish Immigration and restrictions on land titles (and title buy-outs) that were being encouraged by Jewish Leaders in the backdrop of the Jewish National Home..

Jeremy Hunt: Cap on Jewish immigration to Palestine in 1939 was ‘black moment’

(COMMENT)

The trigger that lit the fuze began in late 1935 with the man-hunt and shoot-out with the Palestinian Black Hand (the first major terrorist group) → (culminating with the fatal shooting of Izz ad-Din al-Qassam, quasi-cleric by day and terrorist by night, → a close associate of the Grand Mufti) was a series of tit-for-tat attacks to fatal confrontations in April 1936. In May 1936, the flashpoint was when the very influential Cleric (former Ottoman Army Officer) Amin al-Husseini, Grand Mufti of Jerusalem, instigated 'Palestine Day' and advocated (incited additional violence) the General Strike a month later (16 May). This was further supported by the Arab Higher Committee (AHC)(the bandwagon effect). That series of actions and reaction pushed the consequence into what became the Great Arab Revolt (1936 - 1939). The Foreign Office wanted to stave off the impending violence and hurriedly attempted to appraise the AHC and the leaders of the revolt with the new limitations on immigration and restriction on further land purchases. The Jewish Agency was paying a very fair price for the ownership or control of real property (real estate) and/or a controlling interest in real property and outstanding mortgages, liens and leases. The elitist of the Arab Palestinian Community was receiving just compensation and the Banks were making a fair profit (if not more) in the transactions. But the Arab Palestinians were playing both sides; onside making a profit and the other side painting the Jewish Agency as a sinister entity stealing the land.

It is just my thought that the entire decade (1930-1939) was a very bad decade for both sides that were not making money on the events. The Arab Elite thought that if the uprising was significant enough and the Jewish Population did not grow very much, that the Jewish Agency might abandon the holdings and the Arab Elite could reclaim the real property.

No one got what they wanted. Politically speaking (which is the way the British framed things) the growth of Arab distrust of the British and the Jews was never repaired and was only widened with the rise of the NAZI's in 1939, events like Kristallnacht, and the beginning of the Jewish Roundup throughout Europe. It was a time in which no one wants to take responsibility and closed their eyes to the adverse happening of the day. The "White Paper of 1939" added to the confusion; so much so, that the Foreign Office stated emphatically (a faster back peddling the world has never seen in the British Empire) that:

“the policy set out in the White Paper was not in accordance with the interpretation which, in agreement with the Mandatory Power and the Council, the Commission had always placed upon the Palestine Mandate.”​

(GAME OVER)

There was no likely scenario in which the peace could be maintained. The repercussion of the mistakes of the decade of the 1930s was never to be undone.

At that point, (In my personal opinion) the game was lost. Politically, the Allied Powers (either the WWI version or WWII version) would never bring the political situation back under control.

Just My Thumbnail View on how things unfolded and the impact...

Most Respectfully,
R

 

[P F Tinmore]

RE: The Official Discussion Thread for the creation of Israel, the UN and the British Mandate
⁜→ Sixties Fan, et al,

I cannot argue that 1939 was not a bad year; but I tend to think that a series of event in the few years immediately prior to the 1939 decisions was the spark that led the British to that rash decision that implemented a limitation on Jewish Immigration and restrictions on land titles (and title buy-outs) that were being encouraged by Jewish Leaders in the backdrop of the Jewish National Home..

Jeremy Hunt: Cap on Jewish immigration to Palestine in 1939 was ‘black moment’

(COMMENT)

The trigger that lit the fuze began in late 1935 with the man-hunt and shoot-out with the Palestinian Black Hand (the first major terrorist group) → (culminating with the fatal shooting of Izz ad-Din al-Qassam, quasi-cleric by day and terrorist by night, → a close associate of the Grand Mufti) was a series of tit-for-tat attacks to fatal confrontations in April 1936. In May 1936, the flashpoint was when the very influential Cleric (former Ottoman Army Officer) Amin al-Husseini, Grand Mufti of Jerusalem, instigated 'Palestine Day' and advocated (incited additional violence) the General Strike a month later (16 May). This was further supported by the Arab Higher Committee (AHC)(the bandwagon effect). That series of actions and reaction pushed the consequence into what became the Great Arab Revolt (1936 - 1939). The Foreign Office wanted to stave off the impending violence and hurriedly attempted to appraise the AHC and the leaders of the revolt with the new limitations on immigration and restriction on further land purchases. The Jewish Agency was paying a very fair price for the ownership or control of real property (real estate) and/or a controlling interest in real property and outstanding mortgages, liens and leases. The elitist of the Arab Palestinian Community was receiving just compensation and the Banks were making a fair profit (if not more) in the transactions. But the Arab Palestinians were playing both sides; onside making a profit and the other side painting the Jewish Agency as a sinister entity stealing the land.

It is just my thought that the entire decade (1930-1939) was a very bad decade for both sides that were not making money on the events. The Arab Elite thought that if the uprising was significant enough and the Jewish Population did not grow very much, that the Jewish Agency might abandon the holdings and the Arab Elite could reclaim the real property.

No one got what they wanted. Politically speaking (which is the way the British framed things) the growth of Arab distrust of the British and the Jews was never repaired and was only widened with the rise of the NAZI's in 1939, events like Kristallnacht, and the beginning of the Jewish Roundup throughout Europe. It was a time in which no one wants to take responsibility and closed their eyes to the adverse happening of the day. The "White Paper of 1939" added to the confusion; so much so, that the Foreign Office stated emphatically (a faster back peddling the world has never seen in the British Empire) that:

“the policy set out in the White Paper was not in accordance with the interpretation which, in agreement with the Mandatory Power and the Council, the Commission had always placed upon the Palestine Mandate.”​

(GAME OVER)

There was no likely scenario in which the peace could be maintained. The repercussion of the mistakes of the decade of the 1930s was never to be undone.

At that point, (In my personal opinion) the game was lost. Politically, the Allied Powers (either the WWI version or WWII version) would never bring the political situation back under control.

Just My Thumbnail View on how things unfolded and the impact...

Most Respectfully,
R

In 1936 to1939 Britain's stupid came around to bite them on the ass. They discovered that their scheme was unworkable. No shit Sherlock, people have been telling you that for 20 years.

 

[Hollie]

RE: The Official Discussion Thread for the creation of Israel, the UN and the British Mandate
⁜→ Sixties Fan, et al,

I cannot argue that 1939 was not a bad year; but I tend to think that a series of event in the few years immediately prior to the 1939 decisions was the spark that led the British to that rash decision that implemented a limitation on Jewish Immigration and restrictions on land titles (and title buy-outs) that were being encouraged by Jewish Leaders in the backdrop of the Jewish National Home..

Jeremy Hunt: Cap on Jewish immigration to Palestine in 1939 was ‘black moment’

(COMMENT)

The trigger that lit the fuze began in late 1935 with the man-hunt and shoot-out with the Palestinian Black Hand (the first major terrorist group) → (culminating with the fatal shooting of Izz ad-Din al-Qassam, quasi-cleric by day and terrorist by night, → a close associate of the Grand Mufti) was a series of tit-for-tat attacks to fatal confrontations in April 1936. In May 1936, the flashpoint was when the very influential Cleric (former Ottoman Army Officer) Amin al-Husseini, Grand Mufti of Jerusalem, instigated 'Palestine Day' and advocated (incited additional violence) the General Strike a month later (16 May). This was further supported by the Arab Higher Committee (AHC)(the bandwagon effect). That series of actions and reaction pushed the consequence into what became the Great Arab Revolt (1936 - 1939). The Foreign Office wanted to stave off the impending violence and hurriedly attempted to appraise the AHC and the leaders of the revolt with the new limitations on immigration and restriction on further land purchases. The Jewish Agency was paying a very fair price for the ownership or control of real property (real estate) and/or a controlling interest in real property and outstanding mortgages, liens and leases. The elitist of the Arab Palestinian Community was receiving just compensation and the Banks were making a fair profit (if not more) in the transactions. But the Arab Palestinians were playing both sides; onside making a profit and the other side painting the Jewish Agency as a sinister entity stealing the land.

It is just my thought that the entire decade (1930-1939) was a very bad decade for both sides that were not making money on the events. The Arab Elite thought that if the uprising was significant enough and the Jewish Population did not grow very much, that the Jewish Agency might abandon the holdings and the Arab Elite could reclaim the real property.

No one got what they wanted. Politically speaking (which is the way the British framed things) the growth of Arab distrust of the British and the Jews was never repaired and was only widened with the rise of the NAZI's in 1939, events like Kristallnacht, and the beginning of the Jewish Roundup throughout Europe. It was a time in which no one wants to take responsibility and closed their eyes to the adverse happening of the day. The "White Paper of 1939" added to the confusion; so much so, that the Foreign Office stated emphatically (a faster back peddling the world has never seen in the British Empire) that:

“the policy set out in the White Paper was not in accordance with the interpretation which, in agreement with the Mandatory Power and the Council, the Commission had always placed upon the Palestine Mandate.”​

(GAME OVER)

There was no likely scenario in which the peace could be maintained. The repercussion of the mistakes of the decade of the 1930s was never to be undone.

At that point, (In my personal opinion) the game was lost. Politically, the Allied Powers (either the WWI version or WWII version) would never bring the political situation back under control.

Just My Thumbnail View on how things unfolded and the impact...

Most Respectfully,
R

In 1936 to1939 Britain's stupid came around to bite them on the ass. They discovered that their scheme was unworkable. No shit Sherlock, people have been telling you that for 20 years.

Yours is quite the Islamist sense of entitlement.

 

[Rehmani]

Jew are wasting their time and others because masaya is not coming and they are not special race 3000 years has bee passed. Jew don't believe in God but believe in Juhda - Gd means they consider themselves special and God has nothing to do with it. I am trying to clear their mind that if you are special then where all those special jews and they were not jew or Juhda race they were Abraham PBUH reace and why jew are playing in undercover if they are special why they don't play on level ground with every one and if they special they should produce something special.

 

[RoccoR]

RE: The Official Discussion Thread for the creation of Israel, the UN and the British Mandate
⁜→ Rehmani, et al,

I'm not sure this is a valid line of thought. This is a faith-based argument; an argument that suggests that one side of the belief is valid and the other is not. And in that determination, the judgment is made as to who is right or wrong.

Jew are wasting their time and others because Masaya is not coming and they are not special race 3000 years has bee passed. Jew don't believe in God but believe in Juhda - Gd means they consider themselves special and God has nothing to do with it. I am trying to clear their mind that if you are special then where all those special jews and they were not jew or Juhda race they were Abraham PBUH reace and why jew are playing in undercover if they are special why they don't play on level ground with every one and if they special they should produce something special.

(COMMENT)

Claims centered on ancient legacies are seldom valid, thousands of years later. In that time literally, hundreds of sovereignties have risen and fallen. Whether you believe a claim of sovereignty or a territorial title was granted by a deity or not, is not relevant. It is not recognized by law. Claims of sovereignty and territorial title are established by customary and secular codified law. Once you enter a "belief" and "faith" in a deity into the equation, the Rule of Law become degraded.

Most Respectfully,
R

 

[Sixties Fan]

RE: The Official Discussion Thread for the creation of Israel, the UN and the British Mandate
⁜→ Rehmani, et al,

I'm not sure this is a valid line of thought. This is a faith-based argument; an argument that suggests that one side of the belief is valid and the other is not. And in that determination, the judgment is made as to who is right or wrong.

Jew are wasting their time and others because Masaya is not coming and they are not special race 3000 years has bee passed. Jew don't believe in God but believe in Juhda - Gd means they consider themselves special and God has nothing to do with it. I am trying to clear their mind that if you are special then where all those special jews and they were not jew or Juhda race they were Abraham PBUH reace and why jew are playing in undercover if they are special why they don't play on level ground with every one and if they special they should produce something special.

(COMMENT)

Claims centered on ancient legacies are seldom valid, thousands of years later. In that time literally, hundreds of sovereignties have risen and fallen. Whether you believe a claim of sovereignty or a territorial title was granted by a deity or not, is not relevant. It is not recognized by law. Claims of sovereignty and territorial title are established by customary and secular codified law. Once you enter a "belief" and "faith" in a deity into the equation, the Rule of Law become degraded.

Most Respectfully,
R

Rocco, he is on delegitimizing anything Jewish, especially the Jews of today as being descendants of Jews.

He is a Muslim. He is a Christian. He is anything and everything and knows all about Jews and their history. "Knows" that they have achieved Nothing.
"Trust him".

Wrong thread, as I have said many times.

Most respectfully

 

[Rehmani]

RE: The Official Discussion Thread for the creation of Israel, the UN and the British Mandate
⁜→ Rehmani, et al,

I'm not sure this is a valid line of thought. This is a faith-based argument; an argument that suggests that one side of the belief is valid and the other is not. And in that determination, the judgment is made as to who is right or wrong.

Jew are wasting their time and others because Masaya is not coming and they are not special race 3000 years has bee passed. Jew don't believe in God but believe in Juhda - Gd means they consider themselves special and God has nothing to do with it. I am trying to clear their mind that if you are special then where all those special jews and they were not jew or Juhda race they were Abraham PBUH reace and why jew are playing in undercover if they are special why they don't play on level ground with every one and if they special they should produce something special.

(COMMENT)

Claims centered on ancient legacies are seldom valid, thousands of years later. In that time literally, hundreds of sovereignties have risen and fallen. Whether you believe a claim of sovereignty or a territorial title was granted by a deity or not, is not relevant. It is not recognized by law. Claims of sovereignty and territorial title are established by customary and secular codified law. Once you enter a "belief" and "faith" in a deity into the equation, the Rule of Law become degraded.

Most Respectfully,
R

R; I agreed. But that is exactly what jew have to understand. I only want from jew that please lead normal life. Because we want to know you, just as Christian and Muslim, Hindus, Buddhist and others introduce to each others.

 

[Sixties Fan]

As part of the Palestinian Authority’s latest ploy to avoid direct negotiations with Israel, it is now absurdly claiming that United Nations Resolution 181, passed by the U.N. General Assembly in November 1947, gave Palestinian Arabs a “right” to a state and the “right” to U.N. membership.

In fact, U.N. Resolution 181 merely recommended partitioning the remaining 22 percent of the Palestine Mandate into Jewish and Arab states. (The British previously wrongfully carved off 78 percent of the mandate, which Britain held in trust for reestablishing the Jewish homeland, and gave it to Jordan.) A mere recommendation of partition, which the Arabs immediately rejected in favor of a war to annihilate Israel, is not a “right.”

Subscribe to The JNS Daily Syndicate by email and never miss our top stories
The immediate rejection by the Arabs of the 1947 partition plan recommendation rendered the partition recommendation null and void. Instead of agreeing to partition, six Arab nations promptly launched a war to destroy the Jewish state, in which the Arabs murdered 6,000 Jews—1 percent of Israel’s Jewish population. In that war, Jordan seized, and illegally occupied for 19 years, Judea/Samaria and the eastern portion of Jerusalem, containing the Jewish people’s holiest sites. Interestingly, the Palestinian Arabs made no claim for a state when Jordan controlled those areas.

Further, the United Nations has no right to carve off and grant a Palestinian Arab state in any of Israel’s land. The 1922 Palestine Mandate was a “sacred trust” held by Britain, under international law, for the sole purpose of reconstituting the Jewish homeland. The Palestine Mandate gave no national rights to the Arabs. (“Palestinians” used to mean Jews at that time.) U.N. Charter Article 80 (adopted in 1945) preserved intact—even after expiration of the mandate—all rights granted to the Jewish people under the British Mandate for Palestine. The U.N. Charter thus made it unlawful for the U.N. to alter the Jewish people’s right to the mandatory area via any resolution. The only lawful method of altering any of Israel’s rights to the Mandatory area (which includes all of Israel and Judea/Samaria), is via agreement by Israel and the party seeking a portion of Israel’s land.

The P.A. is now also falsely and misleadingly claiming Israel is violating the 1993–1995 Oslo Accords, and that Jerusalem, refugees and settlements must be final-status issues whose status must not be changed pending the outcome of the permanent status negotiations. First of all, in fact, the Oslo Accords (1995) only state the status of the West Bank and Gaza should not be changed pending the outcome of permanent status negotiations. This provision means that the Palestinian Arabs cannot declare a state in Gaza or the West Bank (Judea/Samaria) without negotiations. For years, the P.A. has refused to negotiate. Hence, the P.A.’s desire to unilaterally declare a Palestinian Arab state is unlawful under Oslo.

(full article online)

Palestinian Arabs never received ‘right’ to statehood or UN membership