Who Are The Palestinians? Part 2

[Sixties Fan]

Saudi Writer: The Arab League Summits Are Completely Pointless; Palestinian Leaders – First And Foremost Jerusalem Mufti Al-Husseini And PLO Leader Arafat – Damaged The Palestinian Cause The Most

 

[P F Tinmore]

Article 6 facilitation of immigration

The Immigration law was imposed on Palestine at the point of a gun by foreign powers with the opposition of the people.

How is that not an attack?

 

[P F Tinmore]

Article 16, makes the determination as to the status of immigrants.

Link?

 

[Sixties Fan]

Article 6 facilitation of immigration

The Immigration law was imposed on Palestine at the point of a gun by foreign powers with the opposition of the people.

How is that not an attack?

Wars have consequences.
To the winners go the spoils.
The Muslim Arabs and Turks had kept their spoils for centuries since the 7th century. It is the same thing with every Empire.

Ottoman Empire lost. They were not the indigenous people of the land. Neither are the Arabs living there.

The Arab Muslims refused living next to a sovereign Israel. Check my thread. It is all there on how Al Husseini has shaped all of your thoughts about this conflict. How he was on the side of Germany and not the British.

Germany lost. Ottomans lost. Husseini lost.
And just like the Austrian named Adolf, he had a hard time accepting the defeat and went into action to keep the Jews from having any rights on their ancestral land, and went to killing Christians, Jews and others before, during and after WWII.

You follow some great people with some great ideas of self appointed superiority to other peoples.

 

[RoccoR]

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

This is very easy. I'm surprised you have not grasped it.

Article 6 facilitation of immigration

The Immigration law was imposed on Palestine at the point of a gun by foreign powers with the opposition of the people.

How is that not an attack?

(COMMENT)

During the period mid-July 1920 (when the Enemy Occupied Territory Administration hand-off was accomplished) through May 1948 (termination of the Mandate) the effective control was established the Government of Palestine as an international framework from which to begin. The British Mandatory wanted to establish a self-government institution wherein the inhabitants would govern autonomously in Palestine. This was blocked by the Arab Community. Several attempts were made to establish the framework through which the Arab Palestinian population of Palestine could be brought into cooperation with the government; for eventual autonomy. The Arab Palestinians refuse and rejected the offers to be incorporated into the self-governing institution (The Government of Palestine). Thus, during the period, the British High Commissioner governed Palestine, consisting exclusively of British officials.

The High Commissioner did NOT hold a gun to his own head, or to the heads of the board members of the Governing Council when making decisions. For all intent and purposes, the His Majesty's Hign Commissioner was "The Government of Palestine." The Arab Palestinian declined to participate in government (three attempts were made in 1923 by the Governing Council alone).

• The Arab Palestinians declined to participate → the Arab Palestinians had no room to complain about the consequences.​

This pattern of an offer and declination was a pattern that has been followed since 1923. AGAIN, this is a crutch for the Arab Palestinians to justify their lawlessness and violence. By 1929, the Hostile Arab Palestinians had removed themselves so far away from anything resembling Diplomacy that jihadist band like the Palestinian Black Hand (formed by Sheikh Izz ad-Din al-Qassam) began to develop.

• The Arab Palestinian had decided that the path they should follow is one of violence.​

There are examples in the world where the end result is so clearly associated then in the case of the Arab Palestinians NOT accepting the consequences of their actions.

Most Respectfully,
R

 

[Shusha]

Article 16, makes the determination as to the status of immigrants.

Link?

One of the things that absolutely confounds me about you is this sort of "posting style" (read: avoidance).

Why are you asking for a link?

Do you not know what Rocco is referring to? (Which is silly because its been posted for you a couple dozen times).

Or are you saying that Article 16 doesn't say what Rocco thinks it says? (In which case, make your point instead of asking for a link, although that would be entirely foolish concerning Article 16).

Or are you trying to convince readers that Rocco doesn't know what he is talking about? (PAHLEESE! Just don't).

Or are you just avoiding discussion?

Personally, I think it is a tactic you use to distract from a valid and entirely correct point from your opponents. "Look over here!"

 

[RoccoR]

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

This has been printed so many times, it now has its own bandwidth.

Article 16, makes the determination as to the status of immigrants.

Link?

(COMMENT)

• Lausanne Treaty: Part I
POLITICAL CLAUSES
Article 16, 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.
​

The treaty handed the future of the territory to the concerned parties; the Arab Palestinians not being one of them.

Most Respectfully,
R

 

[P F Tinmore]

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

This has been printed so many times, it now has its own bandwidth.

Article 16, makes the determination as to the status of immigrants.

Link?

(COMMENT)

• Lausanne Treaty: Part I
POLITICAL CLAUSES
Article 16, 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.
​

The treaty handed the future of the territory to the concerned parties; the Arab Palestinians not being one of them.

Most Respectfully,
R

Where does Article 16 mention immigration.

The treaty handed the future of the territory to the concerned parties; the Arab Palestinians not being one of them.

Article 22 of the LoN Covenant suggests that the people concerned were the inhabitants of the territories.

 

[Hollie]

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

This has been printed so many times, it now has its own bandwidth.

Article 16, makes the determination as to the status of immigrants.

Link?

(COMMENT)

• Lausanne Treaty: Part I
POLITICAL CLAUSES
Article 16, 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.
​

The treaty handed the future of the territory to the concerned parties; the Arab Palestinians not being one of them.

Most Respectfully,
R

Where does Article 16 mention immigration.

So, you agree that the Arab-Moslem invaders / squatters were there illegally.

 

[P F Tinmore]

Article 6 facilitation of immigration

The Immigration law was imposed on Palestine at the point of a gun by foreign powers with the opposition of the people.

How is that not an attack?

Wars have consequences.
To the winners go the spoils.
The Muslim Arabs and Turks had kept their spoils for centuries since the 7th century. It is the same thing with every Empire.

Ottoman Empire lost. They were not the indigenous people of the land. Neither are the Arabs living there.

The Arab Muslims refused living next to a sovereign Israel. Check my thread. It is all there on how Al Husseini has shaped all of your thoughts about this conflict. How he was on the side of Germany and not the British.

Germany lost. Ottomans lost. Husseini lost.
And just like the Austrian named Adolf, he had a hard time accepting the defeat and went into action to keep the Jews from having any rights on their ancestral land, and went to killing Christians, Jews and others before, during and after WWII.

You follow some great people with some great ideas of self appointed superiority to other peoples.

Nice duck.

 

[P F Tinmore]

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

This has been printed so many times, it now has its own bandwidth.

Article 16, makes the determination as to the status of immigrants.

Link?

(COMMENT)

• Lausanne Treaty: Part I
POLITICAL CLAUSES
Article 16, 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.
​

The treaty handed the future of the territory to the concerned parties; the Arab Palestinians not being one of them.

Most Respectfully,
R

Where does Article 16 mention immigration.

So, you agree that the Arab-Moslem invaders / squatters were there illegally.

Nice duck.

 

[Hollie]

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

This has been printed so many times, it now has its own bandwidth.

Article 16, makes the determination as to the status of immigrants.

Link?

(COMMENT)

• Lausanne Treaty: Part I
POLITICAL CLAUSES
Article 16, 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.
​

The treaty handed the future of the territory to the concerned parties; the Arab Palestinians not being one of them.

Most Respectfully,
R

Where does Article 16 mention immigration.

So, you agree that the Arab-Moslem invaders / squatters were there illegally.

Nice duck.

I knew you couldn’t answer. Your usual retreat was expected.

 

[P F Tinmore]

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

This has been printed so many times, it now has its own bandwidth.

Link?

(COMMENT)

• Lausanne Treaty: Part I
POLITICAL CLAUSES
Article 16, 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.
​

The treaty handed the future of the territory to the concerned parties; the Arab Palestinians not being one of them.

Most Respectfully,
R

Where does Article 16 mention immigration.

So, you agree that the Arab-Moslem invaders / squatters were there illegally.

Nice duck.

I knew you couldn’t answer. Your usual retreat was expected.

It is you who ducked the question.

 

[Hollie]

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

This has been printed so many times, it now has its own bandwidth.

(COMMENT)

• Lausanne Treaty: Part I
POLITICAL CLAUSES
Article 16, 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.
​

The treaty handed the future of the territory to the concerned parties; the Arab Palestinians not being one of them.

Most Respectfully,
R

Where does Article 16 mention immigration.

So, you agree that the Arab-Moslem invaders / squatters were there illegally.

Nice duck.

I knew you couldn’t answer. Your usual retreat was expected.

It is you who ducked the question.

That’s another of your typical retreats when you can’t address the issue. Totally predictable.

 

[P F Tinmore]

Where does Article 16 mention immigration.

So, you agree that the Arab-Moslem invaders / squatters were there illegally.

Nice duck.

I knew you couldn’t answer. Your usual retreat was expected.

It is you who ducked the question.

That’s another of your typical retreats when you can’t address the issue. Totally predictable.

Do try to keep up.

 

[Hollie]

So, you agree that the Arab-Moslem invaders / squatters were there illegally.

Nice duck.

I knew you couldn’t answer. Your usual retreat was expected.

It is you who ducked the question.

That’s another of your typical retreats when you can’t address the issue. Totally predictable.

Do try to keep up.

Nice duck.

 

[RoccoR]

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

I thin you are reading to much into the Article 22; and that you do not understand the meaning of a "party."

Where does Article 16 mention immigration.

(COMMENT)

Article 16 gives much greater sweeping powers than the limited power over immigration. Article 16, as I indicated in the Previous Posting, covers "the future of these territories and islands being settled or to be settled by the parties concerned.

Article 22 of the LoN Covenant suggests that the people concerned were the inhabitants of the territories.

(COMMENT)

Article 22 makes no such suggestion at all. The Covenant (or Treaty or an international agreement) is a communique and agreement between the signatories (the parties concerned).

• Article 2 VIENNA CONVENTION ON THE LAW OF TREATIES •
Use of terms

1. For the purposes of the present Convention:

(a) 'treaty' means an international agreement concluded between States in written form and governed by international law, whether embodied in a single instrument or in two or more related instruments and whatever its particular designation;

(b) 'ratification', 'acceptance', 'approval' and 'accession' mean in each case the international act so named whereby a State establishes on the international plane its consent to be bound by a treaty;

(c) 'full powers' means a document emanating from the competent authority of a State designating a person or persons to represent the State for negotiating, adopting or authenticating the text of a treaty, for expressing the consent of the State to be bound by a treaty, or for accomplishing any other act with respect to a treaty;

(d) 'reservation' means a unilateral statement, however phrased or named, made by a State, when signing, ratifying, accepting, approving or acceding to a treaty, whereby it purports to exclude or to modify the legal effect of certain provisions of the treaty in their application to that State;

(e) 'negotiating State' means a State which took part in the drawing up and adoption of the text of the treaty;

(f) 'contracting State' means a State which has consented to be bound by the treaty, whether or not the treaty has entered into force;

(g) 'party' means a State which has consented to be bound by the treaty and for which the treaty is in force;

(h) 'third State' means a State not a party to the treaty;

(i) 'international organization' means an intergovernmental organization.​

At the time the League of Nations was established 1919, there was no "State" or other autonomous body in the Middle East area under the Sykes-Picot Agreement, known as "Palestine." Palestine (a Ghost Nation) is not listed as a "State which has consented to be bound" to the Covenant. And, there was no competent authority for "Palestine" to represent the Ghost Nation.

All these things have meaning. You, as well as, the International Community, trying to maintain international peace and security, → we need to understand the claims we make and the impact our words carry.

Most Respectfully,
R

 

[member]

How does anyone or any nation even begin to negotiate peace with a people who prefer death over life?

Well, it seems that Zionists threaten with the death of our entire planet, if their regime is in danger:

Van Creveld was quoted in David Hirst's The Gun and the Olive Branch(2003) as saying:

We possess several hundred atomic warheads and rockets and can launch them at targets in all directions, perhaps even at Rome. Most European capitals are targets for our air force. Let me quote General Moshe Dayan:

'Israel must be like a mad dog, too dangerous to bother.'

I consider it all hopeless at this point. We shall have to try to prevent things from coming to that, if at all possible. Our armed forces, however, are not the thirtieth strongest in the world, but rather the second or third.

We have the capability to take the world down with us. And I can assure you that that will happen before Israel goes under.[30]


Samson Option - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia

How can you negotiate with people who have chosen to behave like "mad dogs"?
How can you negotiate with people who threaten to destroy the entire planet?

"May 18, 2015"








- How can you negotiate with people who have chosen to behave like "mad dogs"?
- How can you negotiate with people who threaten to destroy the entire planet?

....God wants us to "Love Thy Neighbor" - I understand that -- I don't want to hurt no one....









brr.


.............we have to continue to be politically correct about things....


- behave like "mad dogs"?
- threaten to destroy the entire planet







brr.




hamass [I.J., all of them] = "mad dogs" - i want to love them [as my neighbor] - but, can't. Too much *evil* vomitus from them. .

.........and reading the + their mental state.

Brr.

brr....

Terrorist souls...

(don't worry, they do burn in hell).

 

[P F Tinmore]

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

I thin you are reading to much into the Article 22; and that you do not understand the meaning of a "party."

Where does Article 16 mention immigration.

(COMMENT)

Article 16 gives much greater sweeping powers than the limited power over immigration. Article 16, as I indicated in the Previous Posting, covers "the future of these territories and islands being settled or to be settled by the parties concerned.

Article 22 of the LoN Covenant suggests that the people concerned were the inhabitants of the territories.

(COMMENT)

Article 22 makes no such suggestion at all. The Covenant (or Treaty or an international agreement) is a communique and agreement between the signatories (the parties concerned).

• Article 2 VIENNA CONVENTION ON THE LAW OF TREATIES •
Use of terms

1. For the purposes of the present Convention:

(a) 'treaty' means an international agreement concluded between States in written form and governed by international law, whether embodied in a single instrument or in two or more related instruments and whatever its particular designation;

(b) 'ratification', 'acceptance', 'approval' and 'accession' mean in each case the international act so named whereby a State establishes on the international plane its consent to be bound by a treaty;

(c) 'full powers' means a document emanating from the competent authority of a State designating a person or persons to represent the State for negotiating, adopting or authenticating the text of a treaty, for expressing the consent of the State to be bound by a treaty, or for accomplishing any other act with respect to a treaty;

(d) 'reservation' means a unilateral statement, however phrased or named, made by a State, when signing, ratifying, accepting, approving or acceding to a treaty, whereby it purports to exclude or to modify the legal effect of certain provisions of the treaty in their application to that State;

(e) 'negotiating State' means a State which took part in the drawing up and adoption of the text of the treaty;

(f) 'contracting State' means a State which has consented to be bound by the treaty, whether or not the treaty has entered into force;

(g) 'party' means a State which has consented to be bound by the treaty and for which the treaty is in force;

(h) 'third State' means a State not a party to the treaty;

(i) 'international organization' means an intergovernmental organization.​

At the time the League of Nations was established 1919, there was no "State" or other autonomous body in the Middle East area under the Sykes-Picot Agreement, known as "Palestine." Palestine (a Ghost Nation) is not listed as a "State which has consented to be bound" to the Covenant. And, there was no competent authority for "Palestine" to represent the Ghost Nation.

All these things have meaning. You, as well as, the International Community, trying to maintain international peace and security, → we need to understand the claims we make and the impact our words carry.

Most Respectfully,
R

This is a little unusual because the Ottoman/Turkish empire was carved up into new states. Upon the signing of the Treaty of Lausanne these new states came into being. As successor states they had rights and obligations under treaty and international law. Notably the rule of state succession in regard to nationality and citizenship. The land and the people were transferred to the respective new state.

 

[RoccoR]

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

This is entirely incorrect. And for that era, it was not unusual at all. The practices that followed the Great War (WWI) were in accordance with the Treaty of Westphalia. And much of the international practices of the modern-day owe their origins to the Treaty of Westphalia. It was the same practices that gave the US former Spanish holdings (Cuba, Guam, Puerto Rico, and the transferred sovereignty of the Philippines to the United States).

• Peace of Westphalia, European settlements of 1648, which brought to an end the Eighty Years’ War between Spain and the Dutch and the German phase of the Thirty Years’ War. The peace was negotiated, from 1644, in the Westphalian towns of Münster and Osnabrück. The Spanish-Dutch treaty was signed on January 30, 1648. The treaty of October 24, 1648, comprehended the Holy Roman emperor Ferdinand III, the other German princes, France, and Sweden. England, Poland, Russia, and the Ottoman Empire were the only European powers that were not represented at the two assemblies. Some scholars of international relations credit the treaties with providing the foundation of the modern state system and articulating the concept of territorial sovereignty.

Over the course of the last half-century, there has been much misinformation about what this and that Treaty had to say; and the application of successor state protocols. And these teardrops of misinformation have grown into a monster.

This is a little unusual because the Ottoman/Turkish empire was carved up into new states. Upon the signing of the Treaty of Lausanne, these new states came into being. As successor states, they had rights and obligations under the treaty and international law. Notably the rule of state succession in regard to nationality and citizenship. The land and the people were transferred to the respective new state.

(COMMENT)

The Lausanne Treaty was signed on 24 July 1923 by the British Empire, France, Italy, Japan, Greece, Romania, and the "Serbo-Croat-Slovene" State on one part and Turkey on the other. NO Middle Eastern State or Nation, Past or Present, signed the Treaty of Lausanne. AND, the Allied Powers determined the carve-outs for the emerging states in the Middle East, not the Treaty. Article 3 of the Treaty of Lausanne spoke to "Syria" and "Iraq." But you will note that the Treaty of Lausanne defaults to the Franco-Turkish Agreement of the 20th October 1921.

Most Respectfully,
R