Who Are The Palestinians? Part 2

[P F Tinmore]

 

[thetor]

Coyote

Thank you for reminding me to call out all the hate, and not just one side's.

Here's the compelling argument which I think can be found here. Part of self-determination is the right to self-identification. Many Arab Palestinians identify strongly with both Jordanians and Syrians, and claim that all three are the same people. In fact, many argue that the current problems of those peoples are a direct result of the artificial separation of what really is ONE people.

This opens up the potential for a number of different solutions to the Arab Palestinians plight. We are not just restricted to a tiny piece of land adjoining Israel if we think in this way. There are other options. And it might provide all sorts of benefits to Arabs in all three/four places.

It is all so simple...Just give the Palestinians their land........and Joe The Palestinians are not the same as other Arabs as they are a Semitic People like some Jews are........But not all Jews of course(the European Zionist Type who are converts to Judiaism but are other peoples from central asia originally)The Question I ask Shusha is,why do you Hate the cousins of the Jews,the Palestinians,what have they ever done to real Jews,who they lived WITH,... IN harmony FOR THOUSANDS OF YEARS??????obviously that changed after 1948...due to Terrorism,Murder and mayhem by the Jews 1948 onwards.../TOR

 

[thetor]

I'll tell you why this matters, JoelT1

You see, you actually have a really viable and compelling argument. You just aren't able to put it into the form of a compelling argument because it gets all tangled up with your hate.

I'll tell you why this matters, JoelT1

You see, you actually have a really viable and compelling argument. You just aren't able to put it into the form of a compelling argument because it gets all tangled up with your hate.

The conflict is theological not territorial: Islamic rejection of Jewish political independence ie Israel. The matter is way beyond your grasp,

No Jews lived in all arab?islamic States....a few still do...but most were expelled or left after 1948,some went to Israel,others to the US and Europe.

 

[P F Tinmore]

 

[P F Tinmore]

 

[rylah]

It is all so simple...Just give the Palestinians their land

It's simple - when Israelis give lands to Arabs rockets and riots follow.
Palestinians already got Jew free Gaza and the whole of Jordan (77% of the mandate).
Now, after trying to overthrow the govt in Jordan, they demand a Jew free Palestine.

See the pattern?

 

[rylah]

Palestinians are not the same as other Arabs

From a Palestinian institute

Deir al 'Asal al Fauqa Village Profile

History Deir al ‘Asal al Fauqa is an ancient village , the name of the village is derived from the word “Honey”, as historically, village residents used to keep bees and produce honey. Village officials remark that most of the families in the village have roots to the Arabian Peninsula from the Shamar tribe.
http://vprofile.arij.org/hebron/pdfs/Deir al 'Asal al Fauqa_pr_en.pdf

Shammar tribe

The tribe of Shammar (Arabic: شمّر Šammar) is an Arab Qahtanite tribe, descended from the ancient tribe of Tayy. It is one of the largest and most influential Arab tribes, with an estimated around 12 million members in the world: 3 million in Iraq, over 6.5 million inSaudi Arabia (concentrated in Ha'il), a Syrian population thought to exceed 0.5 million, and an unknown number in Jordan, Kuwait, and Qatar.[1] The current seat of the tribe's leadership is in the city of Mosul in Northern Iraq. In its "golden age", around 1850, the tribe ruled much of central and northern Arabia from Riyadh to the frontiers of Syria and the vast area known as Al Jazira in Northern Iraq....
In the 17th century, a large section of the Shammar left Jabal Shammar under the leadership of the Al Jarba and settled in Iraq, reaching as far as the northern city ofMosul, their current stronghold.

 

[rylah]

the Palestinians,what have they ever done to real Jews,who they lived WITH,... IN harmony FOR THOUSANDS OF YEARS??????obviously that changed after 1948...due to Terrorism,Murder and mayhem by the Jews 1948 onwards.../TOR

Arabs massacred their Jewish neighbors in Palestine long before any Zionist ever shot a bullet.

Written by a Palestinian Jew of Safed about the Arab massacres of 1834:

"Now I have come to announce the large losses and afflictions that have been created in Israel in four countries, ie Jerusalem,and Hebron and the Upper Galilee, namely Safed. And the lower Galilee, namely the city of Tabriya. By the hands of the plunderers and looters that rose in the country. And they come only upon the Jews...
On Sunday, eight days in the month of Sivan, the looters, inhabitants of the villages joined with the inhabitants of the cities. They had weapons of war and shields and fell upon all the Jews and stripped their clothes from men and women. They expelled them naked from the city, and plundered all their property...
The remnants were coerced and raped whether men or women. Tore all the Torah scrolls, and their talit and tefilin and the city was abandoned... This was so for 33 days, so was done in the city of Safed, so was done in other towns."

Periodicals of people of Israel in Eretz Israel - Menachem Mendel ben- Aaaron 1800-1873
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Q.Harmony much?

 

[rylah]

I'll tell you why this matters, JoelT1

You see, you actually have a really viable and compelling argument. You just aren't able to put it into the form of a compelling argument because it gets all tangled up with your hate.

I'll tell you why this matters, JoelT1

You see, you actually have a really viable and compelling argument. You just aren't able to put it into the form of a compelling argument because it gets all tangled up with your hate.

The conflict is theological not territorial: Islamic rejection of Jewish political independence ie Israel. The matter is way beyond your grasp,

No Jews lived in all arab?islamic States....a few still do...but most were expelled or left after 1948,some went to Israel,others to the US and Europe.

The condition of Jews in Palestine was worse than in any Arab Muslim country.
Added to the Arab massacres, there were Turks that made sure to bankrupt the weak Jewish communities, especially in Jerusalem.

 

[RoccoR]

RE: Who Are The Palestinians? Part 2
※→ P F Tinmore, et al,

And here is a huge mistake in understanding.

√ There is a huge difference between having "citizenship" and having "sovereignty."​

• Under what authority does any Arab Palestinian Party claim sovereignty over any territory?

They are the legal citizens of Palestine.

(COMMENT)

Under the first, the Palestine Election Order, which set the language for the Palestine Citizenship Order of 1925, was establishing the citizenship to the territory under the Mandate; which was arbitrary and set at the discretion of the Allied Powers.

Prior to the Election Order and the Citizenship Order, both authored by the British as the Mandatory Power. The issue evolved first with the surrender and formal occupation 1918 (Armistice of Mudros) and remained in transition until the enactment of the Election Order (1922) and the Citizenship Order (1925). The customary international law of the time was that the “the population follows the change of sovereignty in matters of
nationality.” BUT, there was no sovereignty under the trusteeship of the Mandate. Thus, in the interim period between the the establishment of the Mandate and the release of the Mandate, the Palestinian Citizenship was governed by the Mandatory Power.

Like the Palestinians, Syria and Lebanon established there own laws concerning nationalities --- which were enacted under the authority of the French High Commissioner (not so coincidentally in 1925).

In this case → Citizenship and Nationality are established follow the Sovereignty; which the respective High Commissioners held in trust.

(DEFINITION) Sovereignty in the sense of contemporary public international law denotes the basic
international legal status of a state that is not subject, within its territorial jurisdiction, to the
governmental, executive, legislative, or judicial jurisdiction of a foreign state or to foreign law
other than public international law.

What is SOVEREIGNTY?
The possession of sovereign power; supreme political authority; paramount control of the constitution and frame of government and Its administration ; the self-sufficient source of political power, from which all specific political powers are derived; the international independence of a state, combined with the right and power of regulating its internal affairs without foreign dictation; also a political society, or state, which is sovereign and independent.
Law Dictionary: What is SOVEREIGNTY? Definition of SOVEREIGNTY (Black's Law Dictionary) ​

Citizenship is dependent on the rules of the Sovereign, not the other way around. Citizenship is not a prerequisite for Territorial Sovereignty. The Ottoman Emperor was not Arab, but was the sovereign over all the territory in the Middle East.

Most Respectfully,
R

 

[JoelT1]

Joseph Farah: Myths of palestine and palestinians http://www.wnd.com/2000/10/1696/

 

[JoelT1]

Joseph Farah: Myths of palestine and palestinians http://www.wnd.com/2000/10/1696/

 

[P F Tinmore]

√ There is a huge difference between having "citizenship" and having "sovereignty."

So, sovereignty is not for the citizens. It belongs to some assholes from Europe.

Link?

 

[P F Tinmore]

The customary international law of the time was that the “the population follows the change of sovereignty in matters of
nationality.” BUT, there was no sovereignty under the trusteeship of the Mandate.

So you are saying that people follow the sovereignty but the sovereignty vanished? The Mandate was an administration. It had no sovereignty. The sovereignty stayed with the people

 

[P F Tinmore]

Remi Kanazi

 

[Hollie]

Songs / poetry for the Death Cult.

 

[Hollie]

Songs / poetry for the Death Cult.

 

[RoccoR]

RE: Who Are The Palestinians? Part 2
※→ P F Tinmore, et al,

You have twisted this for so long, you are beginning to believe it.

The customary international law of the time was that the “the population follows the change of sovereignty in matters of
nationality.” BUT, there was no sovereignty under the trusteeship of the Mandate.

So you are saying that people follow the sovereignty but the sovereignty vanished? The Mandate was an administration. It had no sovereignty. The sovereignty stayed with the people

(CASE EXAMPLES)

I am an American Citizen in Ohio. If I step over the border into Ontario, I am still an American Citizen. In the first case, I am an American in Sovereign US Territory. In the second case, I am an American in sovereign Canadian Territory.

On March 30th. 1867, the US purchased the Alaskan Territory from Russia. On March 30, the people of Alaska were Russian under Russian Sovereignty. On April 1st, the Territory was under US Sovereignty. The Treaty of Cessions (Article IIII) stipulated that:

The inhabitants of the ceded territory, according to their choice, reserving their natural allegiance, may return to Russia within three years; but if they should prefer to remain in the ceded territory, they, with the exception of uncivilized native tribes, shall be admitted to the enjoyment of all the rights, advantages, and immunities of citizens of the United States, and shall be maintained and protected in the free enjoyment of their liberty, property, and religion. The uncivilized tribes will be subject to such laws and regulations as the United States may, from time to time, adopt in regard to aboriginal tribes of that country.​

Article III was a variant of self-determination.

Citizenship follows Sovereignty; sovereignty does not follow citizenship.

(COMMENT)

At the end of the War, the collapse of the Ottoman Empire (1918) and the formality of cession of the territory by the Republic of Turkey (1924), the territory under Mandate was NOT the sovereign territory of any nation.

• ARTICLE I6. Treaty of Lausanne •

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.

The provisions of the present Article do not prejudice any special arrangements arising from neighbourly relations which have been or may be concluded between Turkey and any limitrophe countries.
​

Article 16 to the Treaty of Lausanne replaced Article 132 in the Treaty of Sevres:
http://www.hri.org/docs/sevres/part3.html

• ARTICLE 132 Treaty of Sevres •

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.

Turkey undertakes to recognise and conform to the measures which may be taken now or in the future by the Principal Allied Powers, in agreement where necessary with third Powers, in order to carry the above stipulation into effect.​

Final Point: I did not say that the Mandate had sovereignty. The Allied Powers determined what powers the Mandatory would exercise over the territory. It was always envisioned that the administration of Palestine, within such boundaries as may be determined by the Principal Allied Powers, placed in the hands of the Mandatory Power.

Some argue that Article 132 was more explicit and some favor Article 16. In any event, the indigenous population (habitual residents) did not transfer with any authority --- none. Even citizenship was determined at the pleasure of the Citizenship Order (and the Election Order before it) written by the Mandatory.

Most Respectfully,
R

 

[Coyote]

Coyote

Thank you for reminding me to call out all the hate, and not just one side's.

Here's the compelling argument which I think can be found here. Part of self-determination is the right to self-identification. Many Arab Palestinians identify strongly with both Jordanians and Syrians, and claim that all three are the same people. In fact, many argue that the current problems of those peoples are a direct result of the artificial separation of what really is ONE people.

This opens up the potential for a number of different solutions to the Arab Palestinians plight. We are not just restricted to a tiny piece of land adjoining Israel if we think in this way. There are other options. And it might provide all sorts of benefits to Arabs in all three/four places.

Coyote

Thank you for reminding me to call out all the hate, and not just one side's.

Here's the compelling argument which I think can be found here. Part of self-determination is the right to self-identification. Many Arab Palestinians identify strongly with both Jordanians and Syrians, and claim that all three are the same people. In fact, many argue that the current problems of those peoples are a direct result of the artificial separation of what really is ONE people.

This opens up the potential for a number of different solutions to the Arab Palestinians plight. We are not just restricted to a tiny piece of land adjoining Israel if we think in this way. There are other options. And it might provide all sorts of benefits to Arabs in all three/four places.

It is an interesting arguement and not one I had considered before. I think though, there are a couple of points to consider. One is that we now have years and generations who self identify as Palestinians. All peoples start the peopleshood process somewhere whether ancient or relatively recent. The other is about ties. Deep ties to the land itself. For many Jews it's based on their ancient historical cultural heritage, for many Palestinians it is living there and passing the same parcels down through the generations. I think self identification is important to the right of self determination.

 

[Coyote]

Coyote

Thank you for reminding me to call out all the hate, and not just one side's.

Here's the compelling argument which I think can be found here. Part of self-determination is the right to self-identification. Many Arab Palestinians identify strongly with both Jordanians and Syrians, and claim that all three are the same people. In fact, many argue that the current problems of those peoples are a direct result of the artificial separation of what really is ONE people.

This opens up the potential for a number of different solutions to the Arab Palestinians plight. We are not just restricted to a tiny piece of land adjoining Israel if we think in this way. There are other options. And it might provide all sorts of benefits to Arabs in all three/four places.

It is all so simple...Just give the Palestinians their land........and Joe The Palestinians are not the same as other Arabs as they are a Semitic People like some Jews are........But not all Jews of course(the European Zionist Type who are converts to Judiaism but are other peoples from central asia originally)The Question I ask Shusha is,why do you Hate the cousins of the Jews,the Palestinians,what have they ever done to real Jews,who they lived WITH,... IN harmony FOR THOUSANDS OF YEARS??????obviously that changed after 1948...due to Terrorism,Murder and mayhem by the Jews 1948 onwards.../TOR

The Palestinians are a mixture of peoples that include Arabs and other peoples who have been in that area since ancient times.

I'm not sure why you single out the "European Zionist Type" as if they are a separate species. They aren't. All peoples who where split in migrations or overrun in conquests would most likely would have to intermarry to survive. What defines them as a people though is the continuity of a culture more then genetics. If you are going to attempt to split them that way then you have to recognize the same in the Palestinians who's population includes relatively recent immigrants from other Arab areas.