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

[Phoenall]

Palestine was "legal entity"

Government of Palestine and consequently also on the part of His Britannic Majesty's Government, in its capacity as Mandatory Power for Palestine,

Interesting. If I might make an observation, if Palestine was a legal entity and had a government seperate and distinct from HBMG, then it qualifies as a state, does it not? Even under Montevideo requirements Palestine had a territory, a population, and a government. Just because that government was controlled by a foreign power (Britain) does not in any way detract from it's status as a state.

Read it again rat boy and see that the government was a mandatory until such a time as the people could form a nation and sh0ow self determination. It was not a state until 1948 when the Jews declared independence

 

[Phoenall]

P F Tinmore, et al,

The Treaties of Lausanne and Versailles do not set an obligation anything for the Allied Powers. Nor do they create a territorial space called Palestine. Neither Treaty relinquishes any rights or title to any inhabitance.

P F Tinmore, et al,

Now you're just being silly.

The Mandate was not Palestine.

You are just pimping Israeli propaganda.

(COMMENT)

As I said. The Palestine Order in Council which defines the meaning of Palestine in the geopolitical setting is published two days before the Mandate.

"The limits of this Order are the territories to which the Mandate for Palestine applies, hereinafter described as Palestine."​

Fact in itself, unmanipulated, is hardly anyone's propaganda. When you make a statement in fact, but in such a way that an improper conclusion can be drawn from the inference, that is the spread (intentionally or unintentionally) of misinformation.

"Participation in the United Nations forums that refer to a "State of Palestine" does not constitute US recognition of Palestinian statehood, UN Ambassador Susan Rice said.

"Any reference to the 'State of Palestine' in the United Nations, including the use of the term 'State of Palestine' on the placard in the Security Council or the use of the term 'State of Palestine' in the invitation to this meeting or other arrangements for participation in this meeting, do not reflect acquiescence that Palestine is a state," Rice, the US envoy to the world body, said Wednesday at a Security Council debate on the Middle East.

The United States was one of seven nations, including Israel, that voted Nov. 29 against elevating the Palestine Liberation Organization's status to non-member state in the General Assembly. The motion passed with 138 voting for and 41 abstaining."
SOURCE: Jerusalem Post 13 April 2016 By JTA Reprinted 01/24/2013 13:36
​

I'm not sure your supposition that "I am pimping Israeli propaganda" is fallacious reasoning or Criticism as a fallacy. But it certainly does not address the point.

Most Respectfully,
R

The Order in Council was two years before Palestine became a successor state. Of course it would be described by different terminology.

(COMMENT)

Where, in either treaty, is Palestine mentioned.

There is no question that all the member nations understood that the Empire/Republic the Allied Powers had ALL TITLES AND RIGHTS pertaining to Palestine. And why should the Arab Palestinians of today even concern themselves with these treaties when the Arab Palestine was not even a party to the treaties?

Most Respectfully,
R

I have posted many things saying that Palestine is a state. You have posted nothing saying that it is not.

You have failed to show when this state came into existence and who was its head of government. Without either it could not be a state.
Every single link given shows that Palestine was never a state, and all you have is a paper by an islamonazi propagandist that uses false data as the only evidence to support his claims. Every single treaty he uses is manipulated and altered to meet with his personal POV, and you ride in on his back.

 

[P F Tinmore]

Palestine was "legal entity"

Government of Palestine and consequently also on the part of His Britannic Majesty's Government, in its capacity as Mandatory Power for Palestine,

Interesting. If I might make an observation, if Palestine was a legal entity and had a government seperate and distinct from HBMG, then it qualifies as a state, does it not? Even under Montevideo requirements Palestine had a territory, a population, and a government. Just because that government was controlled by a foreign power (Britain) does not in any way detract from it's status as a state.

Read it again rat boy and see that the government was a mandatory until such a time as the people could form a nation and sh0ow self determination. It was not a state until 1948 when the Jews declared independence

There are multiple UN resolutions stating the the Palestinians have the right to self determination.

Could you post some stating the same things for the Jews?

 

[Phoenall]

Challenger, P F Tinmore, et al,

You both are having troube with your memory.

Interesting. If I might make an observation, if Palestine was a legal entity and had a government seperate and distinct from HBMG, then it qualifies as a state, does it not? Even under Montevideo requirements Palestine had a territory, a population, and a government. Just because that government was controlled by a foreign power (Britain) does not in any way detract from it's status as a state.

(COMMENT)

Yes, this is a bit complicate for you.

Great Britain (HBMG) is a government that covered the entire British Empire. And in being part of the British Empire, you have that citizenship,

In the first half of the 20th Century (1900 -1949) de facto citizenship of the United Kingdom and the British Empire (AKA British Subjects), was any person born in the United Kingdom or the British Empire, including the independent dominions (but not including protectorates). Palestine was a territory under a Mandate issued by the League of Nations (LoN) in agreement with the Allied Powers that held the Title and Rights.

That is a very different thing being a Citizen of the territory under the Mandate for Palestine, a territory subject to the Order in Council and the Allied Powers have agreed to entrust to a Mandatory, selected by Allied Power, the administration of the territory of Palestine, which formerly belonged to the Turkish Empire, within such boundaries as may be fixed by them. The Mandate was monitored and supervised by the Permanent Mandates Commission of the LoN.

Mandate

League of Nations
Written by: The Editors of Encyclopædia Britannica
Alternative title: mandated territory

Mandate, an authorization granted by the League of Nations to a member nation to govern a formerGerman or Turkish colony. The territory was called a mandated territory, or mandate.
​

Great Britain maintained and acted as the Government of Palestine,; but it was not a colonial holding and was not under British Sovereignty.

BIG DIFFERENCE!

Do not confuse the de facto "Government of Palestine" as a government by the Arab inhabitants and for the Arab inhabitance. In fact, the High Commissioner has governed Palestine with the aid of Councils consisting exclusively of British officials during the entire period between 1922 and 1948. Every attempt by the High Commissioner to engage the Arab Palestinians to establish an Arab Agency was declined on the ground that it would not satisfy the aspirations of the Arab people.

I have posted many things saying that Palestine is a state. You have posted nothing saying that it is not.

(COMMENT)

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------​

UN Palestine Commission
27 February 1948

UNITED NATIONS
Department of Public Information
Press and Publications Bureau
Lake Success, New York
​

Press Release PAL/138
27 February 1948
​

UK MEMORANDUM NAMES COMMISSION
AS SUCCESSOR GOVERNMENT
​

The Government of the United Kingdom, in a memorandum on the "Legal Meaning of the Termination of the Mandate", has advised the United Nations Palestine Commission that so far the Mandatory Power is concerned the United Nations Commission will be the Government of Palestine after 15 May 1948.

The memorandum, transmitted to the Commission by the British Delegation to the United Nations, sets forth the position of the Mandatory Power with respect to the question of the successor government in Palestine after the termination of the British mandate. Pertinent excerpts from the memorandum are as follows:

"Palestine is today a legal entity but it is not a sovereign state. Palestine is a territory administered under mandate by His Majesty (in respect of the United Kingdom), who is entirely responsible both for its internal administration and for its foreign affairs.
"After the 15th May, 1948, Palestine will continue to be a legal entity but it will still not be a sovereign state because it will not be immediately self-governing. The authority responsible for its administration will, however, have changed.
"Where the sovereignty of Palestine lies at the present time is a disputed and perhaps academic legal question about which writers have expressed a number of different conclusions. Where the sovereignty of Palestine will lie after the 15th May, 1948, is perhaps also a question on which different views will be held, but so far as His Majesty's Government are aware, it is a question which it is unnecessary to answer in connection with any practical issues.

"After the 15th May, 1948, the United Nations Commission will be the Government of Palestine. It does not seem very material whether it is considered to be the de facto or the de jure Government. In any case, its title to be the Government of Palestine will rest on the resolution of the General Assembly.

"His Majesty's Government will recognize the United Nations Commission as the authority with which to make an agreement regarding the transfer of the assets of the Government of Palestine."

​

The Palestine Commission has adopted the following statement of policy with respect to the continuity of employment of present employees of the Mandatory administration in Palestine, and has requested the Mandatory Power to publish the statement or circulate it to all employees of the present Government in Palestine:

"The United Nations Palestine Commission, being under the terms of the resolution of the General Assembly responsible for the administration of Palestine immediately following the termination of the Mandate, hereby calls upon all present employees of the Palestine administration to continue their service with the successor authority in Palestine when the British Mandate is terminated. It is the policy of the United Nations Palestine commission as the successor authority to maintain services on the same terms and with the same rights for employees as those enjoyed under the Mandatory Government. The Commission requests all present employees of the Palestine Administration to inform at the earliest possible date, the Mandatory Government for communication to the Commission, whether they would be willing to remain in the service of the successor administration of Palestine on such terms."
​

The next meeting of the Commission will be on Monday, March 1, at 3 P.M.​

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------​

This was a joint release by the UN, the UNPC, and The British Mandatory. It has been published here many times.

In you claim, you say that you have "posted many things saying that Palestine is a state." Well the question becomes:

• If the Ottoman Empire/Turkish Republic surrendered the Title and Rights of these territories to the Allied Powers, and the Allied Powers maintained positive control of these territories, when did the territories become self-government and establish a state?
​

And please don't use the All Palestine Government as your claim. It could not even establish self-government in the Gaza Strip. It was dissolved in 1959 by its creator (Egypt).

Most Respectfully,
R

"After the 15th May, 1948, Palestine will continue to be a legal entity but it will still not be a sovereign state because it will not be immediately self-governing.​

Does that mean that it is a non self governing territory?

By immediately do they mean a planned sovereign state in the future?

Lets just say the UN has spoken on this matter and found you to be in error.

No it does not mean it was a non self governing territory, as it was governed by the mandatory. Which was Britain until may14, and then the UN from may15. In 1949 the UN accepted Israel as the government of the land.

The door was left open for both parties to take advantage, and as usual the Palestinians missed the bus and have still not shown free determination or the ability to stand on their own feet.

 

[Phoenall]

Challenger, P F Tinmore, et al,

You both are having troube with your memory.

Not at all, I never said sovereign. Interesting that the government of Palestine was to be handed over to the U.N. so that means an infrastructure of government existed to be passed on, had the Zionists not seceded.

Correct the MANDATE which was in place at the time. Spelt out in the LoN treaties and mandate documents. Something I have tried to educate you on these past 4 years but you ignore the truth because it means that you are wrong

 

[Phoenall]

Challenger, P F Tinmore, et al,

You both are having troube with your memory.

Not at all, I never said sovereign. Interesting that the government of Palestine was to be handed over to the U.N. so that means an infrastructure of government existed to be passed on, had the Zionists not seceded.

Does this mean hat Israel stole the land from the UN?

No as it was never the UN's land.


AND NOW YOU ARE JUST BEING SILLY BECAUSE THE PENNY FINALLY DROPPED. The LoN owned the land and made it into one of many mandates, the mandatories of those mandates did not own the land. International law of 1923 states that the land known as Jewish Palestine was to be granted as the Jewish NATIONal home. This means that the Jews took up their birthright in 1948 and took control of their land. The only stealing was done by Jordan and Egypt when they stole the land the UN tried to palm of on the Palestinians.

 

[RoccoR]

P F Tinmore, et al,

This is an interesting question.

"After the 15th May, 1948, Palestine will continue to be a legal entity but it will still not be a sovereign state because it will not be immediately self-governing.

Does that mean that it is a non self governing territory?

By immediately do they mean a planned sovereign state in the future?

(COMMENT)

• Mandates and Trusteeship at the turn into the 20th Century, different than States and Protectorates.

Mandates (like the Mandate for Palestine) had governments as usually assigned by the Allied Powers. What make the Mandate for Palestine, out of the several British Mandate and Protectorates (9 in the Arab Realm). I say that with the reservation that not all Mandates are the same as the Post Great War Mandates. The current UN Mandate for Iraq is a very different Mandate from that of the post-WWI era.

To ANSWER the first Question:

• In the case of the territory of Palestine, the 1922-1948 Mandate: non-self governing only meant that the Government of Palestine was not that established by the inhabitants. And it was the continuous rejection of the regional Arabs to participate in the development of governance pursuant to Article 22 "the tutelage of such peoples." During the period 1922 and 1923 the High Commissioner attempted to entice participation.
• THUS: It was not that they Arab Palestinians were prevented from self-governance, but rather, the declined to take such steps as preparatory for self-governance and Independence.
​

to ANSWER the second Question:

• The language of "immediate" depends on the Arab Palestinian participation in Article 22 Criteria. In fact, they actually did use language that would suggest Independence and Sovereignty at some point in the future. ALL the territory situated outside the frontiers of Turkey were, at some point, to be granted independence. But as Article 16 Treaty of Lausanne points out, "the future of these territories and islands being settled or to be settled by the parties concerned." The Allied Powers held the Title and Rights to these territories and would decide on the partitioning; and Arab and Jews gradually receiving greater and greater levels of autonomy until total self-governance is achieved. And in early 1948, the Arab Higher Committee --- AGAIN --- rejected to participate in the "Steps Preparatory to Independence."
​

The Arab Palestinians seldom, if ever, accept the consequences of their actions. In this case, the Hostile Arab Palestinians declined to participate --- THEREFORE they have no real cause for complaint.

Most Respectfully,
R

 

[Phoenall]

Palestine was "legal entity"

Government of Palestine and consequently also on the part of His Britannic Majesty's Government, in its capacity as Mandatory Power for Palestine,

Interesting. If I might make an observation, if Palestine was a legal entity and had a government seperate and distinct from HBMG, then it qualifies as a state, does it not? Even under Montevideo requirements Palestine had a territory, a population, and a government. Just because that government was controlled by a foreign power (Britain) does not in any way detract from it's status as a state.

Read it again rat boy and see that the government was a mandatory until such a time as the people could form a nation and sh0ow self determination. It was not a state until 1948 when the Jews declared independence

There are multiple UN resolutions stating the the Palestinians have the right to self determination.

Could you post some stating the same things for the Jews?

Why as it is a right of everyone, and as you know UN resolutions are not international law but recommendations.



UNPO: Self-determination



The principle of self-determination is prominently embodied in Article I of the Charter of the United Nations. Earlier it was explicitly embraced by US President Woodrow Wilson, by Lenin and others, and became the guiding principle for the reconstruction of Europe following World War I. The principle was incorporated into the 1941 Atlantic Charter and the Dumbarton Oaks proposals which evolved into the United Nations Charter. Its inclusion in the UN Charter marks the universal recognition of the principle as fundamental to the maintenance of friendly relations and peace among states. It is recognized as a right of all peoples in the first article common to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights and the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights which both entered into force in 1976. 1 Paragraph 1 of this Article provides:

All peoples have the right to self-determination. By virtue of that right they freely determine their political status and freely pursue their economic, social and cultural development.






So when will the Palestinians exercise this right and take control of their own lives, instead of making false claims that they are refused this right. Who refuses them this right, and how is it refused. You need to look up what it means before making any more stupid claims.

 

[P F Tinmore]

Palestine was "legal entity"

Government of Palestine and consequently also on the part of His Britannic Majesty's Government, in its capacity as Mandatory Power for Palestine,

Interesting. If I might make an observation, if Palestine was a legal entity and had a government seperate and distinct from HBMG, then it qualifies as a state, does it not? Even under Montevideo requirements Palestine had a territory, a population, and a government. Just because that government was controlled by a foreign power (Britain) does not in any way detract from it's status as a state.

Read it again rat boy and see that the government was a mandatory until such a time as the people could form a nation and sh0ow self determination. It was not a state until 1948 when the Jews declared independence

There are multiple UN resolutions stating the the Palestinians have the right to self determination.

Could you post some stating the same things for the Jews?

Why as it is a right of everyone, and as you know UN resolutions are not international law but recommendations.



UNPO: Self-determination



The principle of self-determination is prominently embodied in Article I of the Charter of the United Nations. Earlier it was explicitly embraced by US President Woodrow Wilson, by Lenin and others, and became the guiding principle for the reconstruction of Europe following World War I. The principle was incorporated into the 1941 Atlantic Charter and the Dumbarton Oaks proposals which evolved into the United Nations Charter. Its inclusion in the UN Charter marks the universal recognition of the principle as fundamental to the maintenance of friendly relations and peace among states. It is recognized as a right of all peoples in the first article common to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights and the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights which both entered into force in 1976. 1 Paragraph 1 of this Article provides:

All peoples have the right to self-determination. By virtue of that right they freely determine their political status and freely pursue their economic, social and cultural development.






So when will the Palestinians exercise this right and take control of their own lives, instead of making false claims that they are refused this right. Who refuses them this right, and how is it refused. You need to look up what it means before making any more stupid claims.

All peoples have the right to self-determination.=​

What is the meaning of peoples?

 

[P F Tinmore]

P F Tinmore, et al,

This is an interesting question.

"After the 15th May, 1948, Palestine will continue to be a legal entity but it will still not be a sovereign state because it will not be immediately self-governing.

Does that mean that it is a non self governing territory?

By immediately do they mean a planned sovereign state in the future?

(COMMENT)

• Mandates and Trusteeship at the turn into the 20th Century, different than States and Protectorates.

Mandates (like the Mandate for Palestine) had governments as usually assigned by the Allied Powers. What make the Mandate for Palestine, out of the several British Mandate and Protectorates (9 in the Arab Realm). I say that with the reservation that not all Mandates are the same as the Post Great War Mandates. The current UN Mandate for Iraq is a very different Mandate from that of the post-WWI era.

To ANSWER the first Question:

• In the case of the territory of Palestine, the 1922-1948 Mandate: non-self governing only meant that the Government of Palestine was not that established by the inhabitants. And it was the continuous rejection of the regional Arabs to participate in the development of governance pursuant to Article 22 "the tutelage of such peoples." During the period 1922 and 1923 the High Commissioner attempted to entice participation.
• THUS: It was not that they Arab Palestinians were prevented from self-governance, but rather, the declined to take such steps as preparatory for self-governance and Independence.
​

to ANSWER the second Question:

• The language of "immediate" depends on the Arab Palestinian participation in Article 22 Criteria. In fact, they actually did use language that would suggest Independence and Sovereignty at some point in the future. ALL the territory situated outside the frontiers of Turkey were, at some point, to be granted independence. But as Article 16 Treaty of Lausanne points out, "the future of these territories and islands being settled or to be settled by the parties concerned." The Allied Powers held the Title and Rights to these territories and would decide on the partitioning; and Arab and Jews gradually receiving greater and greater levels of autonomy until total self-governance is achieved. And in early 1948, the Arab Higher Committee --- AGAIN --- rejected to participate in the "Steps Preparatory to Independence."
​

The Arab Palestinians seldom, if ever, accept the consequences of their actions. In this case, the Hostile Arab Palestinians declined to participate --- THEREFORE they have no real cause for complaint.

Most Respectfully,
R

And it was the continuous rejection of the regional Arabs to participate in the development of governance pursuant to Article 22 "the tutelage of such peoples."​

Load of crap, Rocco. The Palestinians were blocked at every turn for self governance.

 

[RoccoR]

P F Tinmore, et al,

Not quite.

Challenger, P F Tinmore, et al,

You both are having troube with your memory.

Not at all, I never said sovereign. Interesting that the government of Palestine was to be handed over to the U.N. so that means an infrastructure of government existed to be passed on, had the Zionists not seceded.

Does this mean hat Israel stole the land from the UN?

(COMMENT)

You have to examine the entire timeline. The territory that is called the 1967 occupied Palestinian territory (oPt) was not taken from the Allied Powers or the Arab Palestinians.

• The West Bank was occupied by Israel from sovereign Jordanian territory.
• The Gaza Strip was occupied by Israel from Egyptian Military Governorship.

The original land outline in Part II Section B (GA Res-181) was, in coordination with the Successor Government, subject to Jewish Self-Determination on the termination of the Mandate [Chapter I- Article 1(2) of the CHarter] after completion of the Steps Preparatory to Independence.

Lands absorbed in 1949, were Armistice Arrangements pursuant to UN Mediation.

• In the case of the West Bank, the territory was delimited as Israel under the Treaty of 1994.
• In the case of the Gaza Strip, the territory was delimited as Israel under the Treaty of 1979.

Again, the Hostile Arab Palestinians declined to participate in a Peace Treaty following the Khartoum Resolution passed by the Arab League in the wake of the 1967 war is famous for the "Three Nos" articulated in the third paragraph: No peace with Israel, no recognition of Israel, and no negotiations with Israel.

Most Respectfully,
R

 

[RoccoR]

P F Tinmore, et al,

Yes, this is an undefined term.

All peoples have the right to self-determination.=​

What is the meaning of peoples?

(COMMENT)

I think this is a red herring approach to derail the discussion.

• See The meaning of indigenous peoples.

I attach this every time. If it does not included so facet or fraction of people, please let me know.

Most Respectfully,
R

 

[P F Tinmore]

P F Tinmore, et al,

Not quite.

Challenger, P F Tinmore, et al,

You both are having troube with your memory.

Not at all, I never said sovereign. Interesting that the government of Palestine was to be handed over to the U.N. so that means an infrastructure of government existed to be passed on, had the Zionists not seceded.

Does this mean hat Israel stole the land from the UN?

(COMMENT)

You have to examine the entire timeline. The territory that is called the 1967 occupied Palestinian territory (oPt) was not taken from the Allied Powers or the Arab Palestinians.

• The West Bank was occupied by Israel from sovereign Jordanian territory.
• The Gaza Strip was occupied by Israel from Egyptian Military Governorship.

The original land outline in Part II Section B (GA Res-181) was, in coordination with the Successor Government, subject to Jewish Self-Determination on the termination of the Mandate [Chapter I- Article 1(2) of the CHarter] after completion of the Steps Preparatory to Independence.

Lands absorbed in 1949, were Armistice Arrangements pursuant to UN Mediation.

• In the case of the West Bank, the territory was delimited as Israel under the Treaty of 1994.
• In the case of the Gaza Strip, the territory was delimited as Israel under the Treaty of 1979.

Again, the Hostile Arab Palestinians declined to participate in a Peace Treaty following the Khartoum Resolution passed by the Arab League in the wake of the 1967 war is famous for the "Three Nos" articulated in the third paragraph: No peace with Israel, no recognition of Israel, and no negotiations with Israel.

Most Respectfully,
R

Lands absorbed in 1949, were Armistice Arrangements pursuant to UN Mediation.​

Not true. All of Palestine was still Palestine according to the armistice agreements.

Don't forget that Israel signed those agreements.

 

[RoccoR]

P F Tinmore, et al,

This is another side-line.

[
There are multiple UN resolutions stating the the Palestinians have the right to self determination.

Could you post some stating the same things for the Jews?

(COMMENT)

It is either a Planet-wide human right encompassing all people, or it is not a "Human Right." And if it doesn't encompass the very people that were included in the Balfour Declaration, and all the linage of material thereafter, then it is irrelevant.

I suggest you make an argument as to why self-determination,

• The observer for the State of Palestine responded by declaring: “The right to self-determination belongs to all, and doesn’t come after negotiations.”

The Palestinians have exercised there "right to self-determination" several times.

Most Respectfully,
R

 

[P F Tinmore]

P F Tinmore, et al,

Yes, this is an undefined term.

All peoples have the right to self-determination.=​

What is the meaning of peoples?

(COMMENT)

I think this is a red herring approach to derail the discussion.

• See The meaning of indigenous peoples.

I attach this every time. If it does not included so facet or fraction of people, please let me know.

Most Respectfully,
R

How does that relate to the discussion at hand?

 

[RoccoR]

P F Tinmore, et al,

Yes, so exactly where does it say that?

Lands absorbed in 1949, were Armistice Arrangements pursuant to UN Mediation.​

Not true. All of Palestine was still Palestine according to the armistice agreements.

Don't forget that Israel signed those agreements.

(COMMENT)

Remember, each Armistice agreement is between "ISRAEL" and some other Arab Aggressor Nation. It does not matter what the Hostile Arabs call the demarcation. What matters is who exercises sovereign control. The adoption of not recognizing Israel is a well known ploy. Don't fool yourself. The Lebanese, Syrians, Jordanians, and Egyptian that surround Israel knows exactly who controls what borders. And if that is not clear, the read the treaties. The International Boundaries are discussed in detail and are recognized even now.

Most Respectfully,
R

 

[RoccoR]

P F Tinmore, et al,

You asked for the meaning of "peoples."

P F Tinmore, et al,

Yes, this is an undefined term.

All peoples have the right to self-determination.=​

What is the meaning of peoples?

(COMMENT)

I think this is a red herring approach to derail the discussion.

• See The meaning of indigenous peoples.

I attach this every time. If it does not included so facet or fraction of people, please let me know.

Most Respectfully,
R

How does that relate to the discussion at hand?

(COMMENT)

I gave you the UN FACT SHEET that discusses "peoples."

Your argument is probably going to challenge on the fact sheet is focused on "INDIGENOUS PEOPLES" and not just the (stand-alone) "peoples" of the Charter.

If you want to split hairs, than go right ahead.

Most Respectfully,
R

 

[P F Tinmore]

P F Tinmore, et al,

Yes, so exactly where does it say that?

Lands absorbed in 1949, were Armistice Arrangements pursuant to UN Mediation.​

Not true. All of Palestine was still Palestine according to the armistice agreements.

Don't forget that Israel signed those agreements.

(COMMENT)

Remember, each Armistice agreement is between "ISRAEL" and some other Arab Aggressor Nation. It does not matter what the Hostile Arabs call the demarcation. What matters is who exercises sovereign control. The adoption of not recognizing Israel is a well known ploy. Don't fool yourself. The Lebanese, Syrians, Jordanians, and Egyptian that surround Israel knows exactly who controls what borders. And if that is not clear, the read the treaties. The International Boundaries are discussed in detail and are recognized even now.

Most Respectfully,
R

You are confusing military control (occupation) with sovereignty. Military occupations do not acquire sovereignty.

 

[P F Tinmore]

P F Tinmore, et al,

Yes, so exactly where does it say that?

Lands absorbed in 1949, were Armistice Arrangements pursuant to UN Mediation.​

Not true. All of Palestine was still Palestine according to the armistice agreements.

Don't forget that Israel signed those agreements.

(COMMENT)

Remember, each Armistice agreement is between "ISRAEL" and some other Arab Aggressor Nation. It does not matter what the Hostile Arabs call the demarcation. What matters is who exercises sovereign control. The adoption of not recognizing Israel is a well known ploy. Don't fool yourself. The Lebanese, Syrians, Jordanians, and Egyptian that surround Israel knows exactly who controls what borders. And if that is not clear, the read the treaties. The International Boundaries are discussed in detail and are recognized even now.

Most Respectfully,
R

Remember, each Armistice agreement is between "ISRAEL"...​

Misleading. The agreements were Egyptian-Israeli, etc.. A place called Israel was not mentioned in the armistice agreements.

 

[RoccoR]

P F Tinmore, et al,

Well, that is your opinion.

P F Tinmore, et al,

Yes, so exactly where does it say that?

Lands absorbed in 1949, were Armistice Arrangements pursuant to UN Mediation.​

Not true. All of Palestine was still Palestine according to the armistice agreements.

Don't forget that Israel signed those agreements.

(COMMENT)

Remember, each Armistice agreement is between "ISRAEL" and some other Arab Aggressor Nation. It does not matter what the Hostile Arabs call the demarcation. What matters is who exercises sovereign control. The adoption of not recognizing Israel is a well known ploy. Don't fool yourself. The Lebanese, Syrians, Jordanians, and Egyptian that surround Israel knows exactly who controls what borders. And if that is not clear, the read the treaties. The International Boundaries are discussed in detail and are recognized even now.

Most Respectfully,
R

You are confusing military control (occupation) with sovereignty. Military occupations do not acquire sovereignty.

(COMMENT)

SOVEREIGNTY
In the context of Rights and Duties of States, the Restatement of the Law Third states:

"'Sovereignty' is a term used in many senses and is much abused. As used here, it implies a state's lawful control over it's territory generally to the exclusion of other states, authority to govern in that territory, and authority to apply law there."


Most Respectfully,
R