Who Are The Palestinians?

[Phoenall]

Leased from the Israeli government so the people are still living on land with a title deed. The arab muslims never bothered to put this in place because they have not taken the last step, so goodbye all the arab muslims without valid land registry titles

Not that ownership of a piece of land is even relevant.

Somebody who rents an apartment in NYC has the same rights to country as someone who owns a farm in Kansas. Even homeless people have the right to nationality and citizenship.

But they don't have the rights to my land or country do they, and that is what you don't or cant understand. The arab muslims migrated illegally to Palestine to steal land after the Jews had made it productive, a very common tactic of the arab muslims. Without the certificate of citizenship the people are illegal immigrants, and they need to have the land title so they can pay their taxes and other dues. The later is where the arab muslims fail as they don't want to pay taxes or be liable for conscription.

The only migration to Palestine from 1920 to 1946 of any consequence was European immigration, legal and illegal. As confirmed in the UN's A/364 Report which was in prepared as part of the partition plan:

Quit lying Phoney.

"14. It will have been noticed that not only has there been a remarkably rapid increase in the total population of Palestine but also the proportion of Jews in the total has greatly increased, from 12.91 -per cent in 1922 to 32.96 per cent in 1946. Conversely, of course, the Arab proportion has fallen since 1922. The Moslem proportion of the population (almost entirely Arab) has fallen from about 75 per cent of the total to 60 per cent, and the Christian proportion (very largely Arab) from 11 per cent to 8 per cent. Thus, at the present time about one-third of the total settled population is Jewish.

(b)IMMIGRATION AND NATURAL INCREASE

15. These changes in the population have been brought about by two forces: natural increase and immigration. The great increase in the Jewish population is due in the main to immigration. From 1920 to 1946, the total number of recorded Jewish immigrants into Palestine was about 376,000, or an average of over 8,000 per year. The flow has not been regular, however, being fairly high in 1924 to 1926, falling in the next few years (there was a net emigration in 1927) and rising to even higher levels between 1933 and 1936 as a result of the Nazi persecution in Europe. Between the census year of 1931 and the year 1936, the proportion of Jews to the total population rose from 18 per cent to nearly 30 per cent.

16. The Arab population has increased almost entirely as a result of an excess of births over deaths. Indeed, the natural rate of increase of Moslem Arabs in Palestine is the highest in recorded statistics,1 a phenomenon explained by very high fertility rates coupled with a marked decline in death rates as a result of improved conditions of life and public health, The natural rate of increase of Jews is also relatively high, but is conditioned by a favorable age distribution of the population due to the high rate of immigration.

A 364 of 3 September 1947

Just because there are no statistics on Arab migration to mandatory Palestine, it doesn't mean it didn't happen.

Of course there are statistics on Arab immigration to mandatory Palestine that is how the report was able to determine that "The Arab population has increased almost entirely as a result of an excess of births over deaths."

What part of that statement do you not understand?

But it does not actually say that does it, in reality it says APPARENTLY because the author was an anti semitic Jew hater in the pay of the islamonazi's. It is a complete impossibility for a 3rd world nation to produce that many live births with their scant medical knowledge. We cant even achieve that today in the west, and we have state of the art medical practises. The demographics you so love shows that the arab muslims must have migrated in from Syria, Jordan and Egypt. Then the UN reports state that out of 1500 illegal immigrants over 1000 were arab muslims. You saw this in black and white and have never been able to refute it, so you just deny its existence because it destroys your RACIST LIES

 

[Phoenall]

Phoenall, P F Tinmore, et al,

OK, again, don't drag in immigration issues, or the issue of civil land ownership on a private basis. Neither if these had a direct impact on the matter of sovereignty; also some people believe that they are matter of important consideration when discussing the status of the modified (by war and conquest) Jewish State and Arab State. In fact, there is a question as to whether the issues of "illegal immigration" and "citizenship" have a critical bearing on the right of self-determination and the competing concepts of "statehood."

But they don't have the rights to my land or country do they, and that is what you don't or cant understand. The arab muslims migrated illegally to Palestine to steal land after the Jews had made it productive, a very common tactic of the arab muslims. Without the certificate of citizenship the people are illegal immigrants, and they need to have the land title so they can pay their taxes and other dues. The later is where the arab muslims fail as they don't want to pay taxes or be liable for conscription.

(REFERENCE)

• Declaratory And Constitutive Theories Of State Recognition In International Law
• Judicial Reasoning and the Doctrine of Precedent in State Recognition

(PREFACE)

Palestinian Statehood under International Law​

An Analysis and Discussion by John M. B. Balouziyeh, Esq.

(COMMENT)

Rather than rewrite the "Balouziyeh" Analysis, I should just let you read it for yourself. As the the author points out, "The recognition of statehood is a rather complex area of international law subject to competing tests and theories." And "Balouziyeh" was speaking directly to the question: The question of Palestine, as a State, and the two theories that provide guidance as to the legal recognition of an entity’s sovereignty in the international community:

(i) the declarative theory; and
(ii) the constitutive theory.​

This is going to become a mess. There are going to be very touchy and risky soul searching exercises over this issue. And, because of the various terrorist organizations connected to the question, there are going to be some tricky risk assessments on what can be said in the open, and what is better left unsaid.

Most Respectfully,
R

Your link: Palestinian Statehood under International Law
is a critique of Palestinian statehood in reference to the 2012 UN resolution. This is considerably after the fact in reference to my post.

It would be hard to argue that Israel does not have a government or a population. However, its territory has been in dispute since the country declared its existence in 1948.

If all that mattered were the Montevideo criteria, any warlord or group that could assemble enough force could carve out a new State simply by controlling a territory and nothing else.

What Makes a State The New International Law

Palestine’s territory is subject to much dispute, with some proponents of a Palestinian state arguing that Palestine encompasses the territory of the West Bank and Gaza Strip, and other advocates arguing that Palestine encompasses all of modern day Israel, which they contend is not a legitimate State. The question of a “defined territory” is thus subject to much dispute.

Palestinian Statehood under International Law​

So when did Palestine take control of the land it has yet to claim as a nation. Why is it refusing to take the next step in free determination after 27 years. What is holding the Palestinians back from taking those steps they promised to take last year and talk peace and mutual borders with all of their neighbours.

No one is stopping them from exercising these rights under international law but themselves

 

[Phoenall]

Here you are on page 185. You see the facts are on my side Mr. Propaganda.

View attachment 40980

A Survey of Palestine Volume 1 Berman Jewish Policy Archive NYU Wagner

How many more times are you going to link to this fiction that bears no resemblance to reality. But even this shows arab muslim ILLEGAL IMMIGRATION to Palestine albeit in lesser figures that the real numbers.

 

[Phoenall]

Here you are on page 185. You see the facts are on my side Mr. Propaganda.

View attachment 40980

A Survey of Palestine Volume 1 Berman Jewish Policy Archive NYU Wagner

If facts are on your side, then why do you always lie and post so much propaganda on a daily basis. You have been here less time than most Palestinian pro facts are on your side, then why do you always lie and post so much propaganda on a daily basis. You have been here less time than most Palestinian propagandists yet you have establishes yourself as one of the buggest propsganda spewers here..you are number two after Tinmore

The problem is that you believe that posting fact that contradicts Zionist/Israeli lies is propaganda. Posting fact is not propaganda, can't you quite grasp that fact?

They are only facts because they support your islamonazi POV. When the same reports are used to show you are wrong you claim they are Zionist propaganda. So the above link must be Zionist propaganda

 

[Phoenall]

BTW, people like you who keep running around claiming "I post facts all the time, I post facts !!!" , are actually the same people who lie all the time. Sorry Monti, but posting the occasional fact doesn't take away from your compulsive lying and immense propaganda.

I only provide the facts from source documents. I never lie, I just post what the source documents state. I don't post fact occasionally, I post fact all the time. You can make all the false claims you want. Facts are not propaganda, your propagation of Zionist lies is propaganda. I really don't know why I even argue with you. You just can't accept the facts.

You LIE constantly and you know it. You only post those facts that support your islamofascist POV and ignore the rest that destroys your "facts". It is you that refuses to accept the facts and keeps going back to made up propaganda and fiction to support your POV

 

[Phoenall]

Phoenall, P F Tinmore, et al,

OK, again, don't drag in immigration issues, or the issue of civil land ownership on a private basis. Neither if these had a direct impact on the matter of sovereignty; also some people believe that they are matter of important consideration when discussing the status of the modified (by war and conquest) Jewish State and Arab State. In fact, there is a question as to whether the issues of "illegal immigration" and "citizenship" have a critical bearing on the right of self-determination and the competing concepts of "statehood."

But they don't have the rights to my land or country do they, and that is what you don't or cant understand. The arab muslims migrated illegally to Palestine to steal land after the Jews had made it productive, a very common tactic of the arab muslims. Without the certificate of citizenship the people are illegal immigrants, and they need to have the land title so they can pay their taxes and other dues. The later is where the arab muslims fail as they don't want to pay taxes or be liable for conscription.

(REFERENCE)

• Declaratory And Constitutive Theories Of State Recognition In International Law
• Judicial Reasoning and the Doctrine of Precedent in State Recognition

(PREFACE)

Palestinian Statehood under International Law​

An Analysis and Discussion by John M. B. Balouziyeh, Esq.

(COMMENT)

Rather than rewrite the "Balouziyeh" Analysis, I should just let you read it for yourself. As the the author points out, "The recognition of statehood is a rather complex area of international law subject to competing tests and theories." And "Balouziyeh" was speaking directly to the question: The question of Palestine, as a State, and the two theories that provide guidance as to the legal recognition of an entity’s sovereignty in the international community:

(i) the declarative theory; and
(ii) the constitutive theory.​

This is going to become a mess. There are going to be very touchy and risky soul searching exercises over this issue. And, because of the various terrorist organizations connected to the question, there are going to be some tricky risk assessments on what can be said in the open, and what is better left unsaid.

Most Respectfully,
R

You are correct in differentiating sovereignty from private land ownership, but one of the many Zionist myths that many of the Israel firsters ascribe to is that the European Jews purchased the land in Palestine which became Israel. This is untrue.

As far as immigration/migration, this is another Zionist myth that these same posters believe which claims that the Christians and Muslims migrated to Palestine. This is also patently untrue, as the record shows the European Jews made up the vast majority of the migrants to Palestine, about 95%.

And, what cannot be denied is that Israel was a latter day European colonial project, regardless of the purported legality of the project. So, in simple terms, Europeans went to the Middle East to evict the local population to create their own colony and subsequently declare itself a state at the expense of the local, indigenous people.

WHY DO YOU LIE SO MUCH

Time to show your lies and get you to answer for them

When did anyone make the claim that European Jews bought the land that became Israel, that is an islamonazi LIE. They had no need to buy any land as in 1923 the LoN granted them full ownership of the remaining 22% of Palestine

When did any one claim that the Christians migrated to Palestine, this is another islamonazi LIE as the Christians had existed since 70 C.E. in Palestine. The arab muslims are the illegal immigrants as they were not invited to migrate yet as your own links show made up 60% of the total illegal migration figures according to the British mandate.

When have you proven that the granting of 22% of Palestine was an European colonial project, when all the evidence points to there being an arab muslim colonial project. Here we have LIE 3 as the Jews came from all over the world to settle in their National Home and invited the indigenous muslims and Christians to stay and live in peace as full citizens. It was always the intentions of the arab muslims to create their own colony while destroying Israel and wiping out the Jews.

 

[Phoenall]

Here you are on page 185. You see the facts are on my side Mr. Propaganda.

View attachment 40980

A Survey of Palestine Volume 1 Berman Jewish Policy Archive NYU Wagner

If facts are on your side, then why do you always lie and post so much propaganda on a daily basis. You have been here less time than most Palestinian pro facts are on your side, then why do you always lie and post so much propaganda on a daily basis. You have been here less time than most Palestinian propagandists yet you have establishes yourself as one of the buggest propsganda spewers here..you are number two after Tinmore

The problem is that you believe that posting fact that contradicts Zionist/Israeli lies is propaganda. Posting fact is not propaganda, can't you quite grasp that fact?

All someone has to do is read your posts to see that your biggest enemy is the truth. I never said that your stats about Arab immigration were false BTW.

But you think that because you post a few documents here and there, that you only post facts. Of course, that is not true. It doesn't take a genius to see that you mainly post Palestinian propaganda and lies, and that you allergic to the truth. Now THOSE are facts, whether you try to deny it or not.

If you want to be taken seriously, you need to change your propaganda ways, and stop with your compulsive lying.

No, the facts are what they are. LoN, Mandatory and UN resolutions and reports are facts, not lies. It is not propaganda, which is what you peddle. It is you who compulsively propagate lies. I only post fact. Just making false claims does not make what you post true.

Reports can be lies to hide the reality as many fraudulent people can tell you. And as many victims of such lies will testify.

What you post is partial evidence that only supports your POV, often starting in the middle of a sentence because the start alters the whole context. As in the Covenant of the LoN that says "Some people are ready for independence" which you alter to " people are ready for independence "

 

[P F Tinmore]

Phoenall, P F Tinmore, et al,

OK, again, don't drag in immigration issues, or the issue of civil land ownership on a private basis. Neither if these had a direct impact on the matter of sovereignty; also some people believe that they are matter of important consideration when discussing the status of the modified (by war and conquest) Jewish State and Arab State. In fact, there is a question as to whether the issues of "illegal immigration" and "citizenship" have a critical bearing on the right of self-determination and the competing concepts of "statehood."

But they don't have the rights to my land or country do they, and that is what you don't or cant understand. The arab muslims migrated illegally to Palestine to steal land after the Jews had made it productive, a very common tactic of the arab muslims. Without the certificate of citizenship the people are illegal immigrants, and they need to have the land title so they can pay their taxes and other dues. The later is where the arab muslims fail as they don't want to pay taxes or be liable for conscription.

(REFERENCE)

• Declaratory And Constitutive Theories Of State Recognition In International Law
• Judicial Reasoning and the Doctrine of Precedent in State Recognition

(PREFACE)

Palestinian Statehood under International Law​

An Analysis and Discussion by John M. B. Balouziyeh, Esq.

(COMMENT)

Rather than rewrite the "Balouziyeh" Analysis, I should just let you read it for yourself. As the the author points out, "The recognition of statehood is a rather complex area of international law subject to competing tests and theories." And "Balouziyeh" was speaking directly to the question: The question of Palestine, as a State, and the two theories that provide guidance as to the legal recognition of an entity’s sovereignty in the international community:

(i) the declarative theory; and
(ii) the constitutive theory.​

This is going to become a mess. There are going to be very touchy and risky soul searching exercises over this issue. And, because of the various terrorist organizations connected to the question, there are going to be some tricky risk assessments on what can be said in the open, and what is better left unsaid.

Most Respectfully,
R

Your link: Palestinian Statehood under International Law
is a critique of Palestinian statehood in reference to the 2012 UN resolution. This is considerably after the fact in reference to my post.

It would be hard to argue that Israel does not have a government or a population. However, its territory has been in dispute since the country declared its existence in 1948.

If all that mattered were the Montevideo criteria, any warlord or group that could assemble enough force could carve out a new State simply by controlling a territory and nothing else.

What Makes a State The New International Law

Palestine’s territory is subject to much dispute, with some proponents of a Palestinian state arguing that Palestine encompasses the territory of the West Bank and Gaza Strip, and other advocates arguing that Palestine encompasses all of modern day Israel, which they contend is not a legitimate State. The question of a “defined territory” is thus subject to much dispute.

Palestinian Statehood under International Law​

So when did Palestine take control of the land it has yet to claim as a nation. Why is it refusing to take the next step in free determination after 27 years. What is holding the Palestinians back from taking those steps they promised to take last year and talk peace and mutual borders with all of their neighbours.

No one is stopping them from exercising these rights under international law but themselves

Palestine has mutual and undisputed borders with all of its neighbors.

What is there to negotiate?

 

[toastman]

Phoenall, P F Tinmore, et al,

OK, again, don't drag in immigration issues, or the issue of civil land ownership on a private basis. Neither if these had a direct impact on the matter of sovereignty; also some people believe that they are matter of important consideration when discussing the status of the modified (by war and conquest) Jewish State and Arab State. In fact, there is a question as to whether the issues of "illegal immigration" and "citizenship" have a critical bearing on the right of self-determination and the competing concepts of "statehood."

But they don't have the rights to my land or country do they, and that is what you don't or cant understand. The arab muslims migrated illegally to Palestine to steal land after the Jews had made it productive, a very common tactic of the arab muslims. Without the certificate of citizenship the people are illegal immigrants, and they need to have the land title so they can pay their taxes and other dues. The later is where the arab muslims fail as they don't want to pay taxes or be liable for conscription.

(REFERENCE)

• Declaratory And Constitutive Theories Of State Recognition In International Law
• Judicial Reasoning and the Doctrine of Precedent in State Recognition

(PREFACE)

Palestinian Statehood under International Law​

An Analysis and Discussion by John M. B. Balouziyeh, Esq.

(COMMENT)

Rather than rewrite the "Balouziyeh" Analysis, I should just let you read it for yourself. As the the author points out, "The recognition of statehood is a rather complex area of international law subject to competing tests and theories." And "Balouziyeh" was speaking directly to the question: The question of Palestine, as a State, and the two theories that provide guidance as to the legal recognition of an entity’s sovereignty in the international community:

(i) the declarative theory; and
(ii) the constitutive theory.​

This is going to become a mess. There are going to be very touchy and risky soul searching exercises over this issue. And, because of the various terrorist organizations connected to the question, there are going to be some tricky risk assessments on what can be said in the open, and what is better left unsaid.

Most Respectfully,
R

Your link: Palestinian Statehood under International Law
is a critique of Palestinian statehood in reference to the 2012 UN resolution. This is considerably after the fact in reference to my post.

It would be hard to argue that Israel does not have a government or a population. However, its territory has been in dispute since the country declared its existence in 1948.

If all that mattered were the Montevideo criteria, any warlord or group that could assemble enough force could carve out a new State simply by controlling a territory and nothing else.

What Makes a State The New International Law

Palestine’s territory is subject to much dispute, with some proponents of a Palestinian state arguing that Palestine encompasses the territory of the West Bank and Gaza Strip, and other advocates arguing that Palestine encompasses all of modern day Israel, which they contend is not a legitimate State. The question of a “defined territory” is thus subject to much dispute.

Palestinian Statehood under International Law​

So when did Palestine take control of the land it has yet to claim as a nation. Why is it refusing to take the next step in free determination after 27 years. What is holding the Palestinians back from taking those steps they promised to take last year and talk peace and mutual borders with all of their neighbours.

No one is stopping them from exercising these rights under international law but themselves

Palestine has mutual and undisputed borders with all of its neighbors.

What is there to negotiate?

Show me a map of Palestine that clearly identifies all her internationally recognized boundaries. Not a map that says partition plan.

 

[MJB12741]

BTW, people like you who keep running around claiming "I post facts all the time, I post facts !!!" , are actually the same people who lie all the time. Sorry Monti, but posting the occasional fact doesn't take away from your compulsive lying and immense propaganda.

I only provide the facts from source documents. I never lie, I just post what the source documents state. I don't post fact occasionally, I post fact all the time. You can make all the false claims you want. Facts are not propaganda, your propagation of Zionist lies is propaganda. I really don't know why I even argue with you. You just can't accept the facts.

LMAO! Them poppies must be good this year, eh Monte?

 

[Phoenall]

Phoenall, P F Tinmore, et al,

OK, again, don't drag in immigration issues, or the issue of civil land ownership on a private basis. Neither if these had a direct impact on the matter of sovereignty; also some people believe that they are matter of important consideration when discussing the status of the modified (by war and conquest) Jewish State and Arab State. In fact, there is a question as to whether the issues of "illegal immigration" and "citizenship" have a critical bearing on the right of self-determination and the competing concepts of "statehood."

But they don't have the rights to my land or country do they, and that is what you don't or cant understand. The arab muslims migrated illegally to Palestine to steal land after the Jews had made it productive, a very common tactic of the arab muslims. Without the certificate of citizenship the people are illegal immigrants, and they need to have the land title so they can pay their taxes and other dues. The later is where the arab muslims fail as they don't want to pay taxes or be liable for conscription.

(REFERENCE)

• Declaratory And Constitutive Theories Of State Recognition In International Law
• Judicial Reasoning and the Doctrine of Precedent in State Recognition

(PREFACE)

Palestinian Statehood under International Law​

An Analysis and Discussion by John M. B. Balouziyeh, Esq.

(COMMENT)

Rather than rewrite the "Balouziyeh" Analysis, I should just let you read it for yourself. As the the author points out, "The recognition of statehood is a rather complex area of international law subject to competing tests and theories." And "Balouziyeh" was speaking directly to the question: The question of Palestine, as a State, and the two theories that provide guidance as to the legal recognition of an entity’s sovereignty in the international community:

(i) the declarative theory; and
(ii) the constitutive theory.​

This is going to become a mess. There are going to be very touchy and risky soul searching exercises over this issue. And, because of the various terrorist organizations connected to the question, there are going to be some tricky risk assessments on what can be said in the open, and what is better left unsaid.

Most Respectfully,
R

Your link: Palestinian Statehood under International Law
is a critique of Palestinian statehood in reference to the 2012 UN resolution. This is considerably after the fact in reference to my post.

It would be hard to argue that Israel does not have a government or a population. However, its territory has been in dispute since the country declared its existence in 1948.

If all that mattered were the Montevideo criteria, any warlord or group that could assemble enough force could carve out a new State simply by controlling a territory and nothing else.

What Makes a State The New International Law

Palestine’s territory is subject to much dispute, with some proponents of a Palestinian state arguing that Palestine encompasses the territory of the West Bank and Gaza Strip, and other advocates arguing that Palestine encompasses all of modern day Israel, which they contend is not a legitimate State. The question of a “defined territory” is thus subject to much dispute.

Palestinian Statehood under International Law​

So when did Palestine take control of the land it has yet to claim as a nation. Why is it refusing to take the next step in free determination after 27 years. What is holding the Palestinians back from taking those steps they promised to take last year and talk peace and mutual borders with all of their neighbours.

No one is stopping them from exercising these rights under international law but themselves

Palestine has mutual and undisputed borders with all of its neighbors.

What is there to negotiate?

When did they make these mutual borders with Egypt, Jordan and Israel then. How about a link to each of the treaties signed by the Palestinian leadership to prove this ?

Don't try and palm off the proposed boundaries of the Mandate of Palestine as the borders of the nation of Palestine either

 

[P F Tinmore]

Phoenall, P F Tinmore, et al,

OK, again, don't drag in immigration issues, or the issue of civil land ownership on a private basis. Neither if these had a direct impact on the matter of sovereignty; also some people believe that they are matter of important consideration when discussing the status of the modified (by war and conquest) Jewish State and Arab State. In fact, there is a question as to whether the issues of "illegal immigration" and "citizenship" have a critical bearing on the right of self-determination and the competing concepts of "statehood."

But they don't have the rights to my land or country do they, and that is what you don't or cant understand. The arab muslims migrated illegally to Palestine to steal land after the Jews had made it productive, a very common tactic of the arab muslims. Without the certificate of citizenship the people are illegal immigrants, and they need to have the land title so they can pay their taxes and other dues. The later is where the arab muslims fail as they don't want to pay taxes or be liable for conscription.

(REFERENCE)

• Declaratory And Constitutive Theories Of State Recognition In International Law
• Judicial Reasoning and the Doctrine of Precedent in State Recognition

(PREFACE)

Palestinian Statehood under International Law​

An Analysis and Discussion by John M. B. Balouziyeh, Esq.

(COMMENT)

Rather than rewrite the "Balouziyeh" Analysis, I should just let you read it for yourself. As the the author points out, "The recognition of statehood is a rather complex area of international law subject to competing tests and theories." And "Balouziyeh" was speaking directly to the question: The question of Palestine, as a State, and the two theories that provide guidance as to the legal recognition of an entity’s sovereignty in the international community:

(i) the declarative theory; and
(ii) the constitutive theory.​

This is going to become a mess. There are going to be very touchy and risky soul searching exercises over this issue. And, because of the various terrorist organizations connected to the question, there are going to be some tricky risk assessments on what can be said in the open, and what is better left unsaid.

Most Respectfully,
R

Your link: Palestinian Statehood under International Law
is a critique of Palestinian statehood in reference to the 2012 UN resolution. This is considerably after the fact in reference to my post.

It would be hard to argue that Israel does not have a government or a population. However, its territory has been in dispute since the country declared its existence in 1948.

If all that mattered were the Montevideo criteria, any warlord or group that could assemble enough force could carve out a new State simply by controlling a territory and nothing else.

What Makes a State The New International Law

Palestine’s territory is subject to much dispute, with some proponents of a Palestinian state arguing that Palestine encompasses the territory of the West Bank and Gaza Strip, and other advocates arguing that Palestine encompasses all of modern day Israel, which they contend is not a legitimate State. The question of a “defined territory” is thus subject to much dispute.

Palestinian Statehood under International Law​

So when did Palestine take control of the land it has yet to claim as a nation. Why is it refusing to take the next step in free determination after 27 years. What is holding the Palestinians back from taking those steps they promised to take last year and talk peace and mutual borders with all of their neighbours.

No one is stopping them from exercising these rights under international law but themselves

Palestine has mutual and undisputed borders with all of its neighbors.

What is there to negotiate?

Show me a map of Palestine that clearly identifies all her internationally recognized boundaries. Not a map that says partition plan.

 

[toastman]

LOL That's what I thought, nothing as usual. Just lies.

Palestine does not have internationally recognized borders. If they did, you would not have trouble posting a map that clearly identifies them like I have with Israel.
Fail.

 

[Phoenall]

Phoenall, P F Tinmore, et al,

OK, again, don't drag in immigration issues, or the issue of civil land ownership on a private basis. Neither if these had a direct impact on the matter of sovereignty; also some people believe that they are matter of important consideration when discussing the status of the modified (by war and conquest) Jewish State and Arab State. In fact, there is a question as to whether the issues of "illegal immigration" and "citizenship" have a critical bearing on the right of self-determination and the competing concepts of "statehood."

(REFERENCE)

• Declaratory And Constitutive Theories Of State Recognition In International Law
• Judicial Reasoning and the Doctrine of Precedent in State Recognition

(PREFACE)

Palestinian Statehood under International Law​

An Analysis and Discussion by John M. B. Balouziyeh, Esq.

(COMMENT)

Rather than rewrite the "Balouziyeh" Analysis, I should just let you read it for yourself. As the the author points out, "The recognition of statehood is a rather complex area of international law subject to competing tests and theories." And "Balouziyeh" was speaking directly to the question: The question of Palestine, as a State, and the two theories that provide guidance as to the legal recognition of an entity’s sovereignty in the international community:

(i) the declarative theory; and
(ii) the constitutive theory.​

This is going to become a mess. There are going to be very touchy and risky soul searching exercises over this issue. And, because of the various terrorist organizations connected to the question, there are going to be some tricky risk assessments on what can be said in the open, and what is better left unsaid.

Most Respectfully,
R

Your link: Palestinian Statehood under International Law
is a critique of Palestinian statehood in reference to the 2012 UN resolution. This is considerably after the fact in reference to my post.

It would be hard to argue that Israel does not have a government or a population. However, its territory has been in dispute since the country declared its existence in 1948.

If all that mattered were the Montevideo criteria, any warlord or group that could assemble enough force could carve out a new State simply by controlling a territory and nothing else.

What Makes a State The New International Law

Palestine’s territory is subject to much dispute, with some proponents of a Palestinian state arguing that Palestine encompasses the territory of the West Bank and Gaza Strip, and other advocates arguing that Palestine encompasses all of modern day Israel, which they contend is not a legitimate State. The question of a “defined territory” is thus subject to much dispute.

Palestinian Statehood under International Law​

So when did Palestine take control of the land it has yet to claim as a nation. Why is it refusing to take the next step in free determination after 27 years. What is holding the Palestinians back from taking those steps they promised to take last year and talk peace and mutual borders with all of their neighbours.

No one is stopping them from exercising these rights under international law but themselves

Palestine has mutual and undisputed borders with all of its neighbors.

What is there to negotiate?

Show me a map of Palestine that clearly identifies all her internationally recognized boundaries. Not a map that says partition plan.

So what exactly does this prove as it has no legend to say what it shows.

 

[P F Tinmore]

Who are the Palestinians?

Claire Hajaj

 

[P F Tinmore]

Your link: Palestinian Statehood under International Law
is a critique of Palestinian statehood in reference to the 2012 UN resolution. This is considerably after the fact in reference to my post.

It would be hard to argue that Israel does not have a government or a population. However, its territory has been in dispute since the country declared its existence in 1948.

If all that mattered were the Montevideo criteria, any warlord or group that could assemble enough force could carve out a new State simply by controlling a territory and nothing else.

What Makes a State The New International Law

Palestine’s territory is subject to much dispute, with some proponents of a Palestinian state arguing that Palestine encompasses the territory of the West Bank and Gaza Strip, and other advocates arguing that Palestine encompasses all of modern day Israel, which they contend is not a legitimate State. The question of a “defined territory” is thus subject to much dispute.

Palestinian Statehood under International Law​

So when did Palestine take control of the land it has yet to claim as a nation. Why is it refusing to take the next step in free determination after 27 years. What is holding the Palestinians back from taking those steps they promised to take last year and talk peace and mutual borders with all of their neighbours.

No one is stopping them from exercising these rights under international law but themselves

Palestine has mutual and undisputed borders with all of its neighbors.

What is there to negotiate?

Show me a map of Palestine that clearly identifies all her internationally recognized boundaries. Not a map that says partition plan.

So what exactly does this prove as it has no legend to say what it shows.

Oh jeese, why do you want to embarrass yourself? Obviously the dotted lines are the international borders.

Article V

1. The Armistice Demarcation Line shall follow the international boundary between the Lebanon and Palestine.

The Avalon Project Lebanese-Israeli General Armistice Agreement March 23 1949​

You can look in the other armistice agreements and see the same thing.

 

[toastman]

So when did Palestine take control of the land it has yet to claim as a nation. Why is it refusing to take the next step in free determination after 27 years. What is holding the Palestinians back from taking those steps they promised to take last year and talk peace and mutual borders with all of their neighbours.

No one is stopping them from exercising these rights under international law but themselves

Palestine has mutual and undisputed borders with all of its neighbors.

What is there to negotiate?

Show me a map of Palestine that clearly identifies all her internationally recognized boundaries. Not a map that says partition plan.

So what exactly does this prove as it has no legend to say what it shows.

Oh jeese, why do you want to embarrass yourself? Obviously the dotted lines are the international borders.

Article V

1. The Armistice Demarcation Line shall follow the international boundary between the Lebanon and Palestine.

The Avalon Project Lebanese-Israeli General Armistice Agreement March 23 1949​

You can look in the other armistice agreements and see the same thing.

First off, there is no border between 'Palestine' and Lebanon.

Second, you are the one embarrassing yourself, as you have provided nothing but an Arabic version of Palestine before Israel. Nowhere on the Map does it say or show anything about borders..

Try again.

 

[toastman]

Your link: Palestinian Statehood under International Law
is a critique of Palestinian statehood in reference to the 2012 UN resolution. This is considerably after the fact in reference to my post.

It would be hard to argue that Israel does not have a government or a population. However, its territory has been in dispute since the country declared its existence in 1948.

If all that mattered were the Montevideo criteria, any warlord or group that could assemble enough force could carve out a new State simply by controlling a territory and nothing else.

What Makes a State The New International Law

Palestine’s territory is subject to much dispute, with some proponents of a Palestinian state arguing that Palestine encompasses the territory of the West Bank and Gaza Strip, and other advocates arguing that Palestine encompasses all of modern day Israel, which they contend is not a legitimate State. The question of a “defined territory” is thus subject to much dispute.

Palestinian Statehood under International Law​

So when did Palestine take control of the land it has yet to claim as a nation. Why is it refusing to take the next step in free determination after 27 years. What is holding the Palestinians back from taking those steps they promised to take last year and talk peace and mutual borders with all of their neighbours.

No one is stopping them from exercising these rights under international law but themselves

Palestine has mutual and undisputed borders with all of its neighbors.

What is there to negotiate?

Show me a map of Palestine that clearly identifies all her internationally recognized boundaries. Not a map that says partition plan.

So what exactly does this prove as it has no legend to say what it shows.

It proves that Tinmore cannot handle the truth that 'Palestine' does not have internationally recognized boundaries.

 

[Phoenall]

So when did Palestine take control of the land it has yet to claim as a nation. Why is it refusing to take the next step in free determination after 27 years. What is holding the Palestinians back from taking those steps they promised to take last year and talk peace and mutual borders with all of their neighbours.

No one is stopping them from exercising these rights under international law but themselves

Palestine has mutual and undisputed borders with all of its neighbors.

What is there to negotiate?

Show me a map of Palestine that clearly identifies all her internationally recognized boundaries. Not a map that says partition plan.

So what exactly does this prove as it has no legend to say what it shows.

Oh jeese, why do you want to embarrass yourself? Obviously the dotted lines are the international borders.

Article V

1. The Armistice Demarcation Line shall follow the international boundary between the Lebanon and Palestine.

The Avalon Project Lebanese-Israeli General Armistice Agreement March 23 1949​

You can look in the other armistice agreements and see the same thing.

Firstly it is not obvious as there are no words to say these are the International borders of the non existent nation of Palestine. No legend means it does not tell you anything at all

If you look at the armistice agreements you will see that they very clear state that these are not to be seen as international borders.


So once again you let yourself be shown as a complete idiot as usual.

 

[P F Tinmore]

Palestine has mutual and undisputed borders with all of its neighbors.

What is there to negotiate?

Show me a map of Palestine that clearly identifies all her internationally recognized boundaries. Not a map that says partition plan.

So what exactly does this prove as it has no legend to say what it shows.

Oh jeese, why do you want to embarrass yourself? Obviously the dotted lines are the international borders.

Article V

1. The Armistice Demarcation Line shall follow the international boundary between the Lebanon and Palestine.

The Avalon Project Lebanese-Israeli General Armistice Agreement March 23 1949​

You can look in the other armistice agreements and see the same thing.

Firstly it is not obvious as there are no words to say these are the International borders of the non existent nation of Palestine. No legend means it does not tell you anything at all

If you look at the armistice agreements you will see that they very clear state that these are not to be seen as international borders.


So once again you let yourself be shown as a complete idiot as usual.

That is correct. The armistice lines were specifically not to be political or territorial borders.

The armistice lines were to follow, not erase or replace, the existing international borders.