Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
(COMMENT)Do you have any proof for your assertion?The territory subject to the Mandate was never a "colonial project."
British military, Zionist gangs, IDF attacking Palestinian civilians. Starting around1917 and continuing today.RE: Who Are The Palestinians? Part 2
※→ P F Tinmore, et al,
This is another one of those nebulous claims.
(COMMENT)It was the Palestinians who were attacked.The Arab Palestinian decided it was in their best interest to choose conflict
What (presumably Jewish) military force attacked what Palestinian Government? When was this alleged attack?
Most Respectfully,
R
British military, Zionist gangs, IDF attacking Palestinian civilians. Starting around1917 and continuing today.RE: Who Are The Palestinians? Part 2
※→ P F Tinmore, et al,
This is another one of those nebulous claims.
(COMMENT)It was the Palestinians who were attacked.The Arab Palestinian decided it was in their best interest to choose conflict
What (presumably Jewish) military force attacked what Palestinian Government? When was this alleged attack?
Most Respectfully,
R
I see that the UN disagrees with itself.RE: Who Are The Palestinians? Part 2
※→ P F Tinmore, et al,
I just gave it to you. Example:
• Implementation of the Declaration on the Granting of Independence to Colonial Countries and Peoples
(COMMENT)Do you have any proof for your assertion?The territory subject to the Mandate was never a "colonial project."
For this year, see the following table Page 5:
• TERRITORIES TO WHICH THE DECLARATION ON THE GRANTING
OF INDEPENDENCE TO COLONIAL COUNTRIES AND PEOPLES
CONTINUES TO APPLY (AS OF 2016)
Most Respectfully,
R
(COMMENT)Reaffirming the importance of the universal realization of the right of peoples to self-determination, national sovereignty and territorial integrity and of the speedy granting of independence to colonial countries and peoples as imperatives for the full enjoyment of all human rights,
12. Strongly condemns the continued violations of the human rights of the peoples still under colonial and foreign domination and alien subjugation, the continuation of the illegal occupation of Namibia, and South Africa's attempts to dismember its Territory, the perpetuation of the racist minority regime in southern Africa and the denial to the Palestinian people of their inalienable national rights;
18. Strongly condemns those Governments that do not recognize the right to self-determination and independence of all peoples still under colonial and foreign domination and alien subjugation, notably the peoples of Africa and the Palestinian people;
A/RES/37/43. Importance of the universal realization of the right of peoples to self-determination and of the speedy granting of independence to colonial countries and peoples for the effective guarantee and observance of human rights
The Palestinians were citizens of territory defined by international borders. The people have the right to independence and sovereignty.RE: Who Are The Palestinians? Part 2
※→ P F Tinmore, et al,
This is another strange Arab Palestinian Notion thing.
(COMMENT)Indeed, there is that pesky right to territorial integrity thing.• Article 2, Palestine National Charter:
Palestine, with the boundaries it had during the British Mandate, is an indivisible territorial unit.
The "right to Territorial Integrity" ASSUMES that there is some sovereign territory to have integrity over.
What territory did the Arab Palestinians have sovereignty over in which the integrity was violated?
ANSWER: None
Most Respectfully,
R
Britain called it Palestine because that was what it was.Do you have any proof for your assertion?The territory subject to the Mandate was never a "colonial project."
Britain named the British Mandate “palestine”
The Palestinians were citizens of territory defined by international borders. The people have the right to independence and sovereignty.RE: Who Are The Palestinians? Part 2
※→ P F Tinmore, et al,
This is another strange Arab Palestinian Notion thing.
(COMMENT)Indeed, there is that pesky right to territorial integrity thing.• Article 2, Palestine National Charter:
Palestine, with the boundaries it had during the British Mandate, is an indivisible territorial unit.
The "right to Territorial Integrity" ASSUMES that there is some sovereign territory to have integrity over.
What territory did the Arab Palestinians have sovereignty over in which the integrity was violated?
ANSWER: None
Most Respectfully,
R
The Palestinians were citizens of territory defined by international borders. The people have the right to independence and sovereignty.RE: Who Are The Palestinians? Part 2
※→ P F Tinmore, et al,
This is another strange Arab Palestinian Notion thing.
(COMMENT)Indeed, there is that pesky right to territorial integrity thing.• Article 2, Palestine National Charter:
Palestine, with the boundaries it had during the British Mandate, is an indivisible territorial unit.
The "right to Territorial Integrity" ASSUMES that there is some sovereign territory to have integrity over.
What territory did the Arab Palestinians have sovereignty over in which the integrity was violated?
ANSWER: None
Most Respectfully,
R
[ Palestinians, like Al-Husseini (The Farhoud in Baghdad in 1942) and the Palestinian mentioned in this article, seem to have the need to travel outside of Palestine to kill Jews. Why? ]
More than 450 people were scheduled to attend a bar mitzvah at Istanbul’s Neve Shalom Synagogue on September 6, 1986 — but the congregants’ prayers were short-lived.
On that day, terrorists working with Palestinian militant Abu Nidal, opened fire with automatic weapons inside the synagogue, killing 22 people, before dousing their bodies with gasoline and setting them on fire.
Among the casualties were three Persian Jews, including one of my relatives — Mizrah Babazadeh.
(full article online)
The Neve Shalom Synagogue Massacre in Turkey
The Churchill White Paper of 3 June 1922, officially Correspondence with the Palestine Arab Delegation and the Zionist Organisation was drafted at request of Sir Winston Churchill in response to the 1921 Jaffa Riots which began with intra-Jewish violence escalated into Arab attacks against Jews. Although the attacks were primarily facilitated by the Arabs, the British White Paper concluded that the violence was sparked by resentment towards Jewish Zionists and the perceived favoritism towards them by the British, as well as Arab fears of subjugation. While maintaining Britain's commitment to the Balfour declaration and its promise of a Jewish National Home in Palestine, "internationally guaranteed" and "recognized to rest upon ancient historic connection," the paper emphasized that the establishment of a Jewish National Home would not impose a Jewish nationality on the Arab inhabitants of Palestine, and "the status of all citizens of Palestine in the eyes of the law shall be Palestinian".[1] To reduce tensions between the Arabs and Jews in Palestine the paper called for a limitation of Jewish immigration to "the economic capacity of the country to absorb new arrivals".[2] This limitation was considered a great setback to many in the Zionist movement,[3] though unlike the later White Paper of 1939, it acknowledged the necessity that "the Jewish community in Palestine should be able to increase its numbers by immigration", "as of right not of sufferance".
Churchill White Paper - Wikipedia
The Churchill White Paper of 3 June 1922, officially Correspondence with the Palestine Arab Delegation and the Zionist Organisation was drafted at request of Sir Winston Churchill in response to the 1921 Jaffa Riots which began with intra-Jewish violence escalated into Arab attacks against Jews. Although the attacks were primarily facilitated by the Arabs, the British White Paper concluded that the violence was sparked by resentment towards Jewish Zionists and the perceived favoritism towards them by the British, as well as Arab fears of subjugation. While maintaining Britain's commitment to the Balfour declaration and its promise of a Jewish National Home in Palestine, "internationally guaranteed" and "recognized to rest upon ancient historic connection," the paper emphasized that the establishment of a Jewish National Home would not impose a Jewish nationality on the Arab inhabitants of Palestine, and "the status of all citizens of Palestine in the eyes of the law shall be Palestinian".[1] To reduce tensions between the Arabs and Jews in Palestine the paper called for a limitation of Jewish immigration to "the economic capacity of the country to absorb new arrivals".[2] This limitation was considered a great setback to many in the Zionist movement,[3] though unlike the later White Paper of 1939, it acknowledged the necessity that "the Jewish community in Palestine should be able to increase its numbers by immigration", "as of right not of sufferance".
Churchill White Paper - Wikipedia
Secondly...I said from the Palestinian view, put yourselves in their shoes. They certainly see it as their land taken in a war and never returned.
The Arab Palestinians have constructed a narrative which absolves them of all responsibility both for the conflict and for creating a solution to the conflict. Its a narrative which denies reality. Their view is not right. Neither factually, nor morally.Who's view is right? A lot of arguments for both sides there and most of these issues don't involve facts but deep emotional ties to the same bit of land.
The right to territorial integrity means that a State has the right not to have its borders violated by other States. It does not prohibit the division of a State into two or more parts as outlined in a peace treaty. Witness Yugoslavia. Was Yugoslavia's "territorial integrity" violated when she split into the numerous new States? Of course not.Indeed, there is that pesky right to territorial integrity thing.
So any offer to dismantle Palestine is not a peace Settlement?
