Who Are The Palestinians? Part 2

[P F Tinmore]

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

BTW, the US and Palestine had a trade agreement in 1932.

(COMMENT)

In 1932, "Palestine" was the short title for the British Government of Palestine (Order in Council).

.........View attachment 278789
Most Respectfully,
R

The Order in Council was when Palestine was still an enemy occupied territory. There was a change in rules after Palestine became a state.

For Britain, the change from an occupying power to a Mandate was merely a name change. It still acted like an occupying power.

 

[Hollie]

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

BTW, the US and Palestine had a trade agreement in 1932.

(COMMENT)

In 1932, "Palestine" was the short title for the British Government of Palestine (Order in Council).

.........View attachment 278789
Most Respectfully,
R

The Order in Council was when Palestine was still an enemy occupied territory. There was a change in rules after Palestine became a state.

For Britain, the change from an occupying power to a Mandate was merely a name change. It still acted like an occupying power.

Pal’istan was never an enemy occupied territory..

These types of nonsense claims only serve to discredit your attempt at argument.

Pal’istan never became a State.

These types of nonsense claims only serve to discredit your attempt at argument.

 

[Hollie]

Yeah, why not. Blame the Great Satan

Pretty standard.


Saudi Arabia arrests Hamas members, terror group blames US

i24NEWS

 

[P F Tinmore]

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

BTW, the US and Palestine had a trade agreement in 1932.

(COMMENT)

In 1932, "Palestine" was the short title for the British Government of Palestine (Order in Council).

.........View attachment 278789
Most Respectfully,
R

The Order in Council was when Palestine was still an enemy occupied territory. There was a change in rules after Palestine became a state.

For Britain, the change from an occupying power to a Mandate was merely a name change. It still acted like an occupying power.

Pal’istan was never an enemy occupied territory..

These types of nonsense claims only serve to discredit your attempt at argument.

Pal’istan never became a State.

These types of nonsense claims only serve to discredit your attempt at argument.

You wouldn't back up those allegations, would you?

Of course not.

 

[Hollie]

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

BTW, the US and Palestine had a trade agreement in 1932.

(COMMENT)

In 1932, "Palestine" was the short title for the British Government of Palestine (Order in Council).

.........View attachment 278789
Most Respectfully,
R

The Order in Council was when Palestine was still an enemy occupied territory. There was a change in rules after Palestine became a state.

For Britain, the change from an occupying power to a Mandate was merely a name change. It still acted like an occupying power.

Pal’istan was never an enemy occupied territory..

These types of nonsense claims only serve to discredit your attempt at argument.

Pal’istan never became a State.

These types of nonsense claims only serve to discredit your attempt at argument.

You wouldn't back up those allegations, would you?

Of course not.

Indeed, I think you're befuddled over allegations.

Can you indeed support your "enemy occupied territory" claim?

 

[RoccoR]

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

BLUF: This is wrong: "The Order in Council was when Palestine was still an enemy occupied territory."

(COMMENT)
In 1932, "Palestine" was the short title for the British Government of Palestine (Order in Council).

The Order in Council was when Palestine was still an enemy occupied territory. There was a change in rules after Palestine became a state.

For Britain, the change from an occupying power to a Mandate was merely a name change. It still acted like an occupying power.

(COMMENT)

The Interim Report on the Civil Administration began on 1 JULY 1920; three months after the decisions of the Allied Powers at San Remo.

The Occupied Enemy Territory Administration (OETA) ended on 1 JULY 1920 with the beginning of the Civil Administration.

The Palestine Order in Council was issued two years afterwords on: 10 August 1922. Palestine did not become a state [a) a permanent population; b) a defined territory; c) government; and d) capacity to enter into relations with the other states]. In fact, there are still arguments as to whether the Arabs of Palestine were ever able to establish a functional government over a defined territory.

.........
Most Respectfully,
R

 

[P F Tinmore]

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

BLUF: This is wrong: "The Order in Council was when Palestine was still an enemy occupied territory."

(COMMENT)
In 1932, "Palestine" was the short title for the British Government of Palestine (Order in Council).

The Order in Council was when Palestine was still an enemy occupied territory. There was a change in rules after Palestine became a state.

For Britain, the change from an occupying power to a Mandate was merely a name change. It still acted like an occupying power.

(COMMENT)

The Interim Report on the Civil Administration began on 1 JULY 1920; three months after the decisions of the Allied Powers at San Remo.

The Occupied Enemy Territory Administration (OETA) ended on 1 JULY 1920 with the beginning of the Civil Administration.

The Palestine Order in Council was issued two years afterwords on: 10 August 1922. Palestine did not become a state [a) a permanent population; b) a defined territory; c) government; and d) capacity to enter into relations with the other states]. In fact, there are still arguments as to whether the Arabs of Palestine were ever able to establish a functional government over a defined territory.

.........View attachment 278822
Most Respectfully,
R

In fact, there are still arguments as to whether the Arabs of Palestine were ever able to establish a functional government over a defined territory.

Being occupied doesn't help.

 

[Hollie]

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

BLUF: This is wrong: "The Order in Council was when Palestine was still an enemy occupied territory."

(COMMENT)
In 1932, "Palestine" was the short title for the British Government of Palestine (Order in Council).

The Order in Council was when Palestine was still an enemy occupied territory. There was a change in rules after Palestine became a state.

For Britain, the change from an occupying power to a Mandate was merely a name change. It still acted like an occupying power.

(COMMENT)

The Interim Report on the Civil Administration began on 1 JULY 1920; three months after the decisions of the Allied Powers at San Remo.

The Occupied Enemy Territory Administration (OETA) ended on 1 JULY 1920 with the beginning of the Civil Administration.

The Palestine Order in Council was issued two years afterwords on: 10 August 1922. Palestine did not become a state [a) a permanent population; b) a defined territory; c) government; and d) capacity to enter into relations with the other states]. In fact, there are still arguments as to whether the Arabs of Palestine were ever able to establish a functional government over a defined territory.

.........View attachment 278822
Most Respectfully,
R

In fact, there are still arguments as to whether the Arabs of Palestine were ever able to establish a functional government over a defined territory.

Being occupied doesn't help.

Being helpless and ineffective is not much of an excuse. I have a sense that your one-liners are merely attempts to sidestep accepting responsibly.

The inability of the Arabs-Moslems to participate in any steps toward establishing a functioning government and establishing sovereign control of territory falls to a failure of the Arabs-Moslems. There have been nothing but excuses for decades.

 

[Sixties Fan]

Palestinian Authority media is controlled by PA Chairman Abbas himself. A statement by the General Supervisor of the Official PA Media Ahmad Assaf who has the rank of minister and was appointed by Abbas demonstrates that Abbas actively involves himself in determining the content of the official PA media:

"Assaf expressed his pride that the official media is representing the cause of the Martyrs, the wounded, and the prisoners under the instructions of [PA] President Mahmoud Abbas, who is constantly reemphasizing that this is our people's most important cause."
[Official PA daily Al-Hayat Al-Jadida, July 26, 2019]

Assaf made this statement in July at a tribute ceremony held at the Palestine Broadcasting Corporation headquarters in Ramallah for "journalists who are members of the official media."
Abbas' control over the content of the media is effective. Earlier this month, a Palestinian Martyrs' association honored the head of PA media Ahmad Assaf for doing precisely what Abbas had instructed: "To serve the Martyrs and their families and the prisoners and their families":

"Secretary-General of the National Association of the Families of the Martyrs of Palestine Muhammad Sbeihat honored General Supervisor of the Official [PA] Media [with the rank of] Minister Ahmad Assaf for the role that the official media plays in serving the Martyrs and their families and the prisoners and their families."
[Official PA daily Al-Hayat Al-Jadida, Sept. 3, 2019]

Numerous earlier statements confirming the PA's control of the media have been exposed by Palestinian Media Watch. For example, two officials employed at PA TV explained how they see their role: The director general of PA TV, Khaled Sukkar, explained that PA TV "is not a neutral media outlet; it is a media outlet with a national cause." [Official PA TV News, July 23, 2018] Programs Division Director of official PA TV Nizar Al-Ghoul also stated that PA TV is not merely for entertainment but a central part of the "struggle." He referred to Ahmad Assaf, explaining that he "would follow everything small and large, direct every assignment, and follow the details. He surprises you when he calls you to ask about a tiny detail in some program." [Official PA TV, Palestine This Morning, Aug. 5, 2018]

(full article online)

Abbas dictates content of PA media: Promote terrorists - PMW Bulletins

 

[Rigby5]

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

BTW, the US and Palestine had a trade agreement in 1932.

(COMMENT)

In 1932, "Palestine" was the short title for the British Government of Palestine (Order in Council).

.........View attachment 278789
Most Respectfully,
R

The Order in Council was when Palestine was still an enemy occupied territory. There was a change in rules after Palestine became a state.

For Britain, the change from an occupying power to a Mandate was merely a name change. It still acted like an occupying power.

Pal’istan was never an enemy occupied territory..

These types of nonsense claims only serve to discredit your attempt at argument.

Pal’istan never became a State.

These types of nonsense claims only serve to discredit your attempt at argument.

Wrong.
Palestine was promised independence by the Allies in WWI, if they would revolt against the Ottoman Empire.
They did, and the result is that Palestine was declared an independent state in the Treaty of San Remo, the Treaty of Sevres, and the Treaty of Lausanne.
The only thing unfinished was the certification of Palestine's legitimate government.
Partition of the Ottoman Empire - Wikipedia

In contrast, there is no legal basis for Israel to exist at all, and the UN just created Israel out of thin air as the most expedient way to rid themselves of the problem.

 

[Rigby5]

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

BLUF: This is wrong: "The Order in Council was when Palestine was still an enemy occupied territory."

(COMMENT)
In 1932, "Palestine" was the short title for the British Government of Palestine (Order in Council).

The Order in Council was when Palestine was still an enemy occupied territory. There was a change in rules after Palestine became a state.

For Britain, the change from an occupying power to a Mandate was merely a name change. It still acted like an occupying power.

(COMMENT)

The Interim Report on the Civil Administration began on 1 JULY 1920; three months after the decisions of the Allied Powers at San Remo.

The Occupied Enemy Territory Administration (OETA) ended on 1 JULY 1920 with the beginning of the Civil Administration.

The Palestine Order in Council was issued two years afterwords on: 10 August 1922. Palestine did not become a state [a) a permanent population; b) a defined territory; c) government; and d) capacity to enter into relations with the other states]. In fact, there are still arguments as to whether the Arabs of Palestine were ever able to establish a functional government over a defined territory.

.........View attachment 278822
Most Respectfully,
R

In fact, there are still arguments as to whether the Arabs of Palestine were ever able to establish a functional government over a defined territory.

Being occupied doesn't help.

Being helpless and ineffective is not much of an excuse. I have a sense that your one-liners are merely attempts to sidestep accepting responsibly.

The inability of the Arabs-Moslems to participate in any steps toward establishing a functioning government and establishing sovereign control of territory falls to a failure of the Arabs-Moslems. There have been nothing but excuses for decades.

That is ridiculous.
Palestine has always had a functioning government.
Even when it was occupied by the Ottoman Empire, the entirely local government structure was manned by Palestinians.
During the British Mandate occupation, it again was almost entirely Palestinians who ran the country, dealt with sanitation and water, etc.
The ONLY thing the Palestinians were lacking was defense, and that was a deliberate fault caused by the British.
And it is obvious the Palestinians currently supply a perfectly adequate government in Gaza and the West Bank, where they are allowed to by the illegally occupying Israelis.

The country that has yet failed to provide for a government capable of not constantly committing war crimes, is Israel.
Never has a country been so in violation of international law.
If there is any country that should be labeled rogue and taken over by the UN, it is Israel.
Going back to 1949, immediately Israel committed war crimes by not allowing refugees who fled the violence, to return to their homes and properties. That is criminal by any definition.

 

[rylah]

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

BLUF: This is wrong: "The Order in Council was when Palestine was still an enemy occupied territory."

(COMMENT)
In 1932, "Palestine" was the short title for the British Government of Palestine (Order in Council).

The Order in Council was when Palestine was still an enemy occupied territory. There was a change in rules after Palestine became a state.

For Britain, the change from an occupying power to a Mandate was merely a name change. It still acted like an occupying power.

(COMMENT)

The Interim Report on the Civil Administration began on 1 JULY 1920; three months after the decisions of the Allied Powers at San Remo.

The Occupied Enemy Territory Administration (OETA) ended on 1 JULY 1920 with the beginning of the Civil Administration.

The Palestine Order in Council was issued two years afterwords on: 10 August 1922. Palestine did not become a state [a) a permanent population; b) a defined territory; c) government; and d) capacity to enter into relations with the other states]. In fact, there are still arguments as to whether the Arabs of Palestine were ever able to establish a functional government over a defined territory.

.........View attachment 278822
Most Respectfully,
R

In fact, there are still arguments as to whether the Arabs of Palestine were ever able to establish a functional government over a defined territory.

Being occupied doesn't help.

Being helpless and ineffective is not much of an excuse. I have a sense that your one-liners are merely attempts to sidestep accepting responsibly.

The inability of the Arabs-Moslems to participate in any steps toward establishing a functioning government and establishing sovereign control of territory falls to a failure of the Arabs-Moslems. There have been nothing but excuses for decades.

That is ridiculous.
Palestine has always had a functioning government.
Even when it was occupied by the Ottoman Empire, the entirely local government structure was manned by Palestinians.
During the British Mandate occupation, it again was almost entirely Palestinians who ran the country, dealt with sanitation and water, etc.
The ONLY thing the Palestinians were lacking was defense, and that was a deliberate fault caused by the British.
And it is obvious the Palestinians currently supply a perfectly adequate government in Gaza and the West Bank, where they are allowed to by the illegally occupying Israelis.

The country that has yet failed to provide for a government capable of not constantly committing war crimes, is Israel.
Never has a country been so in violation of international law.
If there is any country that should be labeled rogue and taken over by the UN, it is Israel.
Going back to 1949, immediately Israel committed war crimes by not allowing refugees who fled the violence, to return to their homes and properties. That is criminal by any definition.

Are You writing the 1002nd?

Sanitation...a place under a tree sanitation.
Diseases and swamps don't develop all over the land when it's being used.
The land was the most impoverished and neglected province of the entire Caliphate.

 

[Hollie]

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

BLUF: This is wrong: "The Order in Council was when Palestine was still an enemy occupied territory."

(COMMENT)
In 1932, "Palestine" was the short title for the British Government of Palestine (Order in Council).

The Order in Council was when Palestine was still an enemy occupied territory. There was a change in rules after Palestine became a state.

For Britain, the change from an occupying power to a Mandate was merely a name change. It still acted like an occupying power.

(COMMENT)

The Interim Report on the Civil Administration began on 1 JULY 1920; three months after the decisions of the Allied Powers at San Remo.

The Occupied Enemy Territory Administration (OETA) ended on 1 JULY 1920 with the beginning of the Civil Administration.

The Palestine Order in Council was issued two years afterwords on: 10 August 1922. Palestine did not become a state [a) a permanent population; b) a defined territory; c) government; and d) capacity to enter into relations with the other states]. In fact, there are still arguments as to whether the Arabs of Palestine were ever able to establish a functional government over a defined territory.

.........View attachment 278822
Most Respectfully,
R

In fact, there are still arguments as to whether the Arabs of Palestine were ever able to establish a functional government over a defined territory.

Being occupied doesn't help.

Being helpless and ineffective is not much of an excuse. I have a sense that your one-liners are merely attempts to sidestep accepting responsibly.

The inability of the Arabs-Moslems to participate in any steps toward establishing a functioning government and establishing sovereign control of territory falls to a failure of the Arabs-Moslems. There have been nothing but excuses for decades.

That is ridiculous.
Palestine has always had a functioning government.
Even when it was occupied by the Ottoman Empire, the entirely local government structure was manned by Palestinians.
During the British Mandate occupation, it again was almost entirely Palestinians who ran the country, dealt with sanitation and water, etc.
The ONLY thing the Palestinians were lacking was defense, and that was a deliberate fault caused by the British.
And it is obvious the Palestinians currently supply a perfectly adequate government in Gaza and the West Bank, where they are allowed to by the illegally occupying Israelis.

The country that has yet failed to provide for a government capable of not constantly committing war crimes, is Israel.
Never has a country been so in violation of international law.
If there is any country that should be labeled rogue and taken over by the UN, it is Israel.
Going back to 1949, immediately Israel committed war crimes by not allowing refugees who fled the violence, to return to their homes and properties. That is criminal by any definition.

Palestine was an administrative sanjac of the Ottoman Empire during that caliphate. During the mandate period, the Brits were the government.

Your claim that the Pals supply a "perfectly adequate government in Gaza and the West Bank" is problematic. While the PA is claimed to be the sole representative of the Pals, that is clearly not the reality as the PA in the West Bank and Hamas in Gaza are separate, antagonistic entities occupying defined turf little different than street gangs.

The notion of "perfectly adequate government in Gaza and the West Bank" is further problematic in the sense that heavily armed islamic terrorists as a "government" erases any pretense of adequate government. The PA and Hamas controlled Gaza survive on a forever welfare fraud known as UNRWA.

 

[Sixties Fan]

Hundreds of Palestinian refugees demonstrated outside the Canadian Embassy in Beirut on Sept. 5 to request asylum in Canada or the European Union, the second such protest in the last month. The most surprising aspect of these demonstrations is that they have been so long in coming. Only now, after more than 70 years, are Palestinians publicly protesting the fact that they alone, of all the world’s refugees, are denied the most basic of refugee rights—the right to seek resettlement in a safe third country.
-----

In other words, the West has kept Palestinian refugees in miserable limbo for 70 years and deprived them of their basic right to resettlement in order to hold a gun to Israel’s head: Either make enough political concessions to the Palestinians and/or Arab states that they’ll deign to grant citizenship to their own brethren, or risk being flooded by millions of “refugees” and their descendants, who will destroy the Jewish state demographically. Just like the Palestinian Authority, the West has been treating these Palestinians as political game pieces rather than human beings with needs, wants and rights of their own. And as the protests in Lebanon show, Palestinians are increasingly fed up with this role.

Any resettlement program would have to be led by an international agency like UNHCR. Though an Israeli official ludicrously asserted in August that Israel is actively promoting emigration from Gaza, in reality, this isn’t something Israel can do much about. As I’ve explained in more detail elsewhere, neither Palestinians nor other countries would feel comfortable cooperating with Israel as part of such an effort.

But what Israel and its supporters can and should do is wage a full-throated campaign to demand that the international community finally choose: Either admit that the Palestinians aren’t actually refugees or finally start treating them as real refugees. If the former, it should dismantle UNRWA and use the agency’s $1.2 billion budget to encourage the places where Palestinians now live to start providing them with citizenship and basic services. And if the latter, it should dismantle UNRWA, transfer responsibility for Palestinian refugees to UNHCR and finally grant them the basic right of resettlement.

After 70 years, it’s long past time to stop treating millions of Palestinians as nothing but perpetual pawns in a war to destroy Israel.

(full article online)

Palestinians are tired of being the only refugees denied the right to resettlement

 

[RoccoR]

RE: Who Are The Palestinians? Part 2
⁜→ Rigby5, et al,

The Arab Palestinians did not revolt against the Ottoman Empire.

Wrong.
Palestine was promised independence by the Allies in WWI, if they would revolt against the Ottoman Empire.
They did, and the result is that Palestine was declared an independent state in the Treaty of San Remo, the Treaty of Sevres, and the Treaty of Lausanne.
The only thing unfinished was the certification of Palestine's legitimate government.
Partition of the Ottoman Empire - Wikipedia

In contrast, there is no legal basis for Israel to exist at all, and the UN just created Israel out of thin air as the most expedient way to rid themselves of the problem.

(COMMENT)

Both the President and the Prime Minister were former Army Officers in the Ottoman Army.

You are confusing the Arab Palestinians with the Bedoin Irregular Cavary provided by the King of the Hejaz. The sons of the King were given two countries to be Kings over, Jordan and Iraq.

........
Most Respectfully,
R

 

[Shusha]

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

BTW, the US and Palestine had a trade agreement in 1932.

(COMMENT)

In 1932, "Palestine" was the short title for the British Government of Palestine (Order in Council).

.........View attachment 278789
Most Respectfully,
R

The Order in Council was when Palestine was still an enemy occupied territory. There was a change in rules after Palestine became a state.

For Britain, the change from an occupying power to a Mandate was merely a name change. It still acted like an occupying power.

Pal’istan was never an enemy occupied territory..

These types of nonsense claims only serve to discredit your attempt at argument.

Pal’istan never became a State.

These types of nonsense claims only serve to discredit your attempt at argument.

Wrong.
Palestine was promised independence by the Allies in WWI, if they would revolt against the Ottoman Empire.
They did, and the result is that Palestine was declared an independent state in the Treaty of San Remo, the Treaty of Sevres, and the Treaty of Lausanne.
The only thing unfinished was the certification of Palestine's legitimate government.
Partition of the Ottoman Empire - Wikipedia

In contrast, there is no legal basis for Israel to exist at all, and the UN just created Israel out of thin air as the most expedient way to rid themselves of the problem.

It is very strange that you, like Tinmore, bring up the Treaties of Sevres and Lausanne, San Remo agreements and the Mandate for Palestine as support for the ridiculous notion that there is no legal basis for Israel to exist, when those treaties in fact ARE the legal basis for Israel to exist (along with the principle of self-determination in customary law).

Treaty of Sevres specifically charges the High Contracting Parties to establish a National Home (state) for the Jewish people. It also specifically excludes Palestine as an independent state:

ARTICLE 95.

The High Contracting Parties agree to entrust, by application of the provisions of Article 22, the administration of Palestine, within such boundaries as may be determined by the Principal Allied Powers, to a Mandatory to be selected by the said Powers. The Mandatory will be responsible for putting into effect the declaration originally made on November 2, 1917, by the British Government, and adopted by the other Allied Powers, in favour of the establishment in Palestine of a national home for the Jewish people, it being clearly understood that nothing shall be done which may prejudice the civil and religious rights of existing non-Jewish communities in Palestine, or the rights and political status enjoyed by Jews in any other country.

The Mandatory undertakes to appoint as soon as possible a special Commission to study and regulate all questions and claims relating to the different religious communities. In the composition of this Commission the religious interests concerned will be taken into account. The Chairman of the Commission will be appointed by the Council of the League of Nations.

as contrasted with Article 94 which gives Syria and Mesopotamia the status of independent states.

ARTICLE 94.

The High Contracting Parties agree that Syria and Mesopotamia shall, in accordance with the fourth paragraph of Article 22.

Part I (Covenant of the League of Nations), be provisionally recognised as independent States subject to the rendering of administrative advice and assistance by a Mandatory until such time as they are able to stand alone.



Its absolutely ridiculous for you, like Tinmore, to ignore this legal recognition of Jewish rights.

 

[P F Tinmore]

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

BLUF: This is wrong: "The Order in Council was when Palestine was still an enemy occupied territory."

(COMMENT)
In 1932, "Palestine" was the short title for the British Government of Palestine (Order in Council).

The Order in Council was when Palestine was still an enemy occupied territory. There was a change in rules after Palestine became a state.

For Britain, the change from an occupying power to a Mandate was merely a name change. It still acted like an occupying power.

(COMMENT)

The Interim Report on the Civil Administration began on 1 JULY 1920; three months after the decisions of the Allied Powers at San Remo.

The Occupied Enemy Territory Administration (OETA) ended on 1 JULY 1920 with the beginning of the Civil Administration.

The Palestine Order in Council was issued two years afterwords on: 10 August 1922. Palestine did not become a state [a) a permanent population; b) a defined territory; c) government; and d) capacity to enter into relations with the other states]. In fact, there are still arguments as to whether the Arabs of Palestine were ever able to establish a functional government over a defined territory.

.........View attachment 278822
Most Respectfully,
R

In fact, there are still arguments as to whether the Arabs of Palestine were ever able to establish a functional government over a defined territory.

Being occupied doesn't help.

Being helpless and ineffective is not much of an excuse. I have a sense that your one-liners are merely attempts to sidestep accepting responsibly.

The inability of the Arabs-Moslems to participate in any steps toward establishing a functioning government and establishing sovereign control of territory falls to a failure of the Arabs-Moslems. There have been nothing but excuses for decades.

That is ridiculous.
Palestine has always had a functioning government.
Even when it was occupied by the Ottoman Empire, the entirely local government structure was manned by Palestinians.
During the British Mandate occupation, it again was almost entirely Palestinians who ran the country, dealt with sanitation and water, etc.
The ONLY thing the Palestinians were lacking was defense, and that was a deliberate fault caused by the British.
And it is obvious the Palestinians currently supply a perfectly adequate government in Gaza and the West Bank, where they are allowed to by the illegally occupying Israelis.

The country that has yet failed to provide for a government capable of not constantly committing war crimes, is Israel.
Never has a country been so in violation of international law.
If there is any country that should be labeled rogue and taken over by the UN, it is Israel.
Going back to 1949, immediately Israel committed war crimes by not allowing refugees who fled the violence, to return to their homes and properties. That is criminal by any definition.

Are You writing the 1002nd?

Sanitation...a place under a tree sanitation.
Diseases and swamps don't develop all over the land when it's being used.
The land was the most impoverished and neglected province of the entire Caliphate.

Another bullshit Israeli talking point.

Palestine produced a surplus of food that was exported to foreign markets.

 

[P F Tinmore]

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

BTW, the US and Palestine had a trade agreement in 1932.

(COMMENT)

In 1932, "Palestine" was the short title for the British Government of Palestine (Order in Council).

.........View attachment 278789
Most Respectfully,
R

The Order in Council was when Palestine was still an enemy occupied territory. There was a change in rules after Palestine became a state.

For Britain, the change from an occupying power to a Mandate was merely a name change. It still acted like an occupying power.

Pal’istan was never an enemy occupied territory..

These types of nonsense claims only serve to discredit your attempt at argument.

Pal’istan never became a State.

These types of nonsense claims only serve to discredit your attempt at argument.

Wrong.
Palestine was promised independence by the Allies in WWI, if they would revolt against the Ottoman Empire.
They did, and the result is that Palestine was declared an independent state in the Treaty of San Remo, the Treaty of Sevres, and the Treaty of Lausanne.
The only thing unfinished was the certification of Palestine's legitimate government.
Partition of the Ottoman Empire - Wikipedia

In contrast, there is no legal basis for Israel to exist at all, and the UN just created Israel out of thin air as the most expedient way to rid themselves of the problem.

It is very strange that you, like Tinmore, bring up the Treaties of Sevres and Lausanne, San Remo agreements and the Mandate for Palestine as support for the ridiculous notion that there is no legal basis for Israel to exist, when those treaties in fact ARE the legal basis for Israel to exist (along with the principle of self-determination in customary law).

Treaty of Sevres specifically charges the High Contracting Parties to establish a National Home (state) for the Jewish people. It also specifically excludes Palestine as an independent state:

ARTICLE 95.

The High Contracting Parties agree to entrust, by application of the provisions of Article 22, the administration of Palestine, within such boundaries as may be determined by the Principal Allied Powers, to a Mandatory to be selected by the said Powers. The Mandatory will be responsible for putting into effect the declaration originally made on November 2, 1917, by the British Government, and adopted by the other Allied Powers, in favour of the establishment in Palestine of a national home for the Jewish people, it being clearly understood that nothing shall be done which may prejudice the civil and religious rights of existing non-Jewish communities in Palestine, or the rights and political status enjoyed by Jews in any other country.

The Mandatory undertakes to appoint as soon as possible a special Commission to study and regulate all questions and claims relating to the different religious communities. In the composition of this Commission the religious interests concerned will be taken into account. The Chairman of the Commission will be appointed by the Council of the League of Nations.

as contrasted with Article 94 which gives Syria and Mesopotamia the status of independent states.

ARTICLE 94.

The High Contracting Parties agree that Syria and Mesopotamia shall, in accordance with the fourth paragraph of Article 22.

Part I (Covenant of the League of Nations), be provisionally recognised as independent States subject to the rendering of administrative advice and assistance by a Mandatory until such time as they are able to stand alone.



Its absolutely ridiculous for you, like Tinmore, to ignore this legal recognition of Jewish rights.

Its absolutely ridiculous for you, like Tinmore, to ignore this legal recognition of Jewish rights.

By foreigners.

 

[Shusha]

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

(COMMENT)

In 1932, "Palestine" was the short title for the British Government of Palestine (Order in Council).

.........View attachment 278789
Most Respectfully,
R

The Order in Council was when Palestine was still an enemy occupied territory. There was a change in rules after Palestine became a state.

For Britain, the change from an occupying power to a Mandate was merely a name change. It still acted like an occupying power.

Pal’istan was never an enemy occupied territory..

These types of nonsense claims only serve to discredit your attempt at argument.

Pal’istan never became a State.

These types of nonsense claims only serve to discredit your attempt at argument.

Wrong.
Palestine was promised independence by the Allies in WWI, if they would revolt against the Ottoman Empire.
They did, and the result is that Palestine was declared an independent state in the Treaty of San Remo, the Treaty of Sevres, and the Treaty of Lausanne.
The only thing unfinished was the certification of Palestine's legitimate government.
Partition of the Ottoman Empire - Wikipedia

In contrast, there is no legal basis for Israel to exist at all, and the UN just created Israel out of thin air as the most expedient way to rid themselves of the problem.

It is very strange that you, like Tinmore, bring up the Treaties of Sevres and Lausanne, San Remo agreements and the Mandate for Palestine as support for the ridiculous notion that there is no legal basis for Israel to exist, when those treaties in fact ARE the legal basis for Israel to exist (along with the principle of self-determination in customary law).

Treaty of Sevres specifically charges the High Contracting Parties to establish a National Home (state) for the Jewish people. It also specifically excludes Palestine as an independent state:

ARTICLE 95.

The High Contracting Parties agree to entrust, by application of the provisions of Article 22, the administration of Palestine, within such boundaries as may be determined by the Principal Allied Powers, to a Mandatory to be selected by the said Powers. The Mandatory will be responsible for putting into effect the declaration originally made on November 2, 1917, by the British Government, and adopted by the other Allied Powers, in favour of the establishment in Palestine of a national home for the Jewish people, it being clearly understood that nothing shall be done which may prejudice the civil and religious rights of existing non-Jewish communities in Palestine, or the rights and political status enjoyed by Jews in any other country.

The Mandatory undertakes to appoint as soon as possible a special Commission to study and regulate all questions and claims relating to the different religious communities. In the composition of this Commission the religious interests concerned will be taken into account. The Chairman of the Commission will be appointed by the Council of the League of Nations.

as contrasted with Article 94 which gives Syria and Mesopotamia the status of independent states.

ARTICLE 94.

The High Contracting Parties agree that Syria and Mesopotamia shall, in accordance with the fourth paragraph of Article 22.

Part I (Covenant of the League of Nations), be provisionally recognised as independent States subject to the rendering of administrative advice and assistance by a Mandatory until such time as they are able to stand alone.



Its absolutely ridiculous for you, like Tinmore, to ignore this legal recognition of Jewish rights.

Its absolutely ridiculous for you, like Tinmore, to ignore this legal recognition of Jewish rights.

By foreigners.

Well, yes. That's how international law works. Its, you know, international.

 

[Hollie]

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

BLUF: This is wrong: "The Order in Council was when Palestine was still an enemy occupied territory."
(COMMENT)

The Interim Report on the Civil Administration began on 1 JULY 1920; three months after the decisions of the Allied Powers at San Remo.

The Occupied Enemy Territory Administration (OETA) ended on 1 JULY 1920 with the beginning of the Civil Administration.

The Palestine Order in Council was issued two years afterwords on: 10 August 1922. Palestine did not become a state [a) a permanent population; b) a defined territory; c) government; and d) capacity to enter into relations with the other states]. In fact, there are still arguments as to whether the Arabs of Palestine were ever able to establish a functional government over a defined territory.

.........View attachment 278822
Most Respectfully,
R

In fact, there are still arguments as to whether the Arabs of Palestine were ever able to establish a functional government over a defined territory.

Being occupied doesn't help.

Being helpless and ineffective is not much of an excuse. I have a sense that your one-liners are merely attempts to sidestep accepting responsibly.

The inability of the Arabs-Moslems to participate in any steps toward establishing a functioning government and establishing sovereign control of territory falls to a failure of the Arabs-Moslems. There have been nothing but excuses for decades.

That is ridiculous.
Palestine has always had a functioning government.
Even when it was occupied by the Ottoman Empire, the entirely local government structure was manned by Palestinians.
During the British Mandate occupation, it again was almost entirely Palestinians who ran the country, dealt with sanitation and water, etc.
The ONLY thing the Palestinians were lacking was defense, and that was a deliberate fault caused by the British.
And it is obvious the Palestinians currently supply a perfectly adequate government in Gaza and the West Bank, where they are allowed to by the illegally occupying Israelis.

The country that has yet failed to provide for a government capable of not constantly committing war crimes, is Israel.
Never has a country been so in violation of international law.
If there is any country that should be labeled rogue and taken over by the UN, it is Israel.
Going back to 1949, immediately Israel committed war crimes by not allowing refugees who fled the violence, to return to their homes and properties. That is criminal by any definition.

Are You writing the 1002nd?

Sanitation...a place under a tree sanitation.
Diseases and swamps don't develop all over the land when it's being used.
The land was the most impoverished and neglected province of the entire Caliphate.

Another bullshit Israeli talking point.

Palestine produced a surplus of food that was exported to foreign markets.

It seems the major export now and for decades in the past has been Islamic terrorism.