Widening Of The Buffer Zone

[P F Tinmore]

toastman, et al,

Well, at least as far as the US, and most nations of the world were concerned; this is true.

The Palestinians did not need a "new" country. The old one was fine.

They never had one. Countries that exist don't need to declare independence again.
1988 was when a Palestinian state came into existence. You cannot refute that.

(COMMENT)

However, there was a different perspective held prior to 1988, particularly by the Arab Palestinian.

Those of us working counterintelligence and anti-terrorism in the Allied Command during the mid-1980's followed closely the international counterterrorism case of the 1985 piracy of the "Achille Lauro" in the Mediterranean Sea [U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York - 816 F. Supp. 930 (S.D.N.Y 1993) March 29, 1993]. This is the case in which the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO) attempted to argued that the PLO was a sovereign state and thus immune from this suit. However the court held that the PLO did not meet the criteria of a "state" closely enough to justify treating it as a foreign sovereign or state in this litigation.

To my knowledge, the Status of Palestine has never been tested since, and has changed over time (evolutionary development).

Certainly today, indirectly the UN has given sufficient recognition that it would be hard to argue that the State of Palestine does not exist and that it includes the Gaza Strip and the West Bank (territories considered occupied since 1967).

Most Respectfully,
R

There are many political opinions about the existence of Palestine.

From what I have found:

Legally it does.

Politically (at least in the West) it does not.

Tinmore, if you want to know the history of Palestine and not be so confused, look in Encylopaedia Brittanica. A true, unbiased account. It will cure you of all that drivel you spout.

No thanks.

I will stick to original source documents.

aka the Lies you keep posting.............[/QUOTE]
So you are calling source documents lies?

WOW!

 

[Hossfly]

toastman, et al,

Well, at least as far as the US, and most nations of the world were concerned; this is true.

The Palestinians did not need a "new" country. The old one was fine.

They never had one. Countries that exist don't need to declare independence again.
1988 was when a Palestinian state came into existence. You cannot refute that.

(COMMENT)

However, there was a different perspective held prior to 1988, particularly by the Arab Palestinian.

Those of us working counterintelligence and anti-terrorism in the Allied Command during the mid-1980's followed closely the international counterterrorism case of the 1985 piracy of the "Achille Lauro" in the Mediterranean Sea [U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York - 816 F. Supp. 930 (S.D.N.Y 1993) March 29, 1993]. This is the case in which the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO) attempted to argued that the PLO was a sovereign state and thus immune from this suit. However the court held that the PLO did not meet the criteria of a "state" closely enough to justify treating it as a foreign sovereign or state in this litigation.

To my knowledge, the Status of Palestine has never been tested since, and has changed over time (evolutionary development).

Certainly today, indirectly the UN has given sufficient recognition that it would be hard to argue that the State of Palestine does not exist and that it includes the Gaza Strip and the West Bank (territories considered occupied since 1967).

Most Respectfully,
R

There are many political opinions about the existence of Palestine.

From what I have found:

Legally it does.

Politically (at least in the West) it does not.

Tinmore, if you want to know the history of Palestine and not be so confused, look in Encylopaedia Brittanica. A true, unbiased account. It will cure you of all that drivel you spout.

No thanks.

I will stick to original source documents.[/QUOTE]
That's your misfortune, Bub. Brittanica is as authentic as a document. It has been used as legal proof in many court cases. You are too hard-headed for your own good.

 

[eagle1462010]

toastman, et al,

Well, at least as far as the US, and most nations of the world were concerned; this is true.

They never had one. Countries that exist don't need to declare independence again.
1988 was when a Palestinian state came into existence. You cannot refute that.

(COMMENT)

However, there was a different perspective held prior to 1988, particularly by the Arab Palestinian.

Those of us working counterintelligence and anti-terrorism in the Allied Command during the mid-1980's followed closely the international counterterrorism case of the 1985 piracy of the "Achille Lauro" in the Mediterranean Sea [U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York - 816 F. Supp. 930 (S.D.N.Y 1993) March 29, 1993]. This is the case in which the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO) attempted to argued that the PLO was a sovereign state and thus immune from this suit. However the court held that the PLO did not meet the criteria of a "state" closely enough to justify treating it as a foreign sovereign or state in this litigation.

To my knowledge, the Status of Palestine has never been tested since, and has changed over time (evolutionary development).

Certainly today, indirectly the UN has given sufficient recognition that it would be hard to argue that the State of Palestine does not exist and that it includes the Gaza Strip and the West Bank (territories considered occupied since 1967).

Most Respectfully,
R

There are many political opinions about the existence of Palestine.

From what I have found:

Legally it does.

Politically (at least in the West) it does not.

Tinmore, if you want to know the history of Palestine and not be so confused, look in Encylopaedia Brittanica. A true, unbiased account. It will cure you of all that drivel you spout.

No thanks.

I will stick to original source documents.

aka the Lies you keep posting.............

So you are calling source documents lies?

WOW![/QUOTE]
I'm calling you a Liar.....................

I've posted the Mandate map from historical records....................you ignore them..................

Why aren't your people bombing Jordan for stealing your land...................oops...........

Oh I forgot, they are your kind................and ALL JEWS MUST DIE....................

Which is the ultimate goal of your propaganda anyway.

 

[P F Tinmore]

toastman, et al,

Well, at least as far as the US, and most nations of the world were concerned; this is true.

The Palestinians did not need a "new" country. The old one was fine.

They never had one. Countries that exist don't need to declare independence again.
1988 was when a Palestinian state came into existence. You cannot refute that.

(COMMENT)

However, there was a different perspective held prior to 1988, particularly by the Arab Palestinian.

Those of us working counterintelligence and anti-terrorism in the Allied Command during the mid-1980's followed closely the international counterterrorism case of the 1985 piracy of the "Achille Lauro" in the Mediterranean Sea [U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York - 816 F. Supp. 930 (S.D.N.Y 1993) March 29, 1993]. This is the case in which the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO) attempted to argued that the PLO was a sovereign state and thus immune from this suit. However the court held that the PLO did not meet the criteria of a "state" closely enough to justify treating it as a foreign sovereign or state in this litigation.

To my knowledge, the Status of Palestine has never been tested since, and has changed over time (evolutionary development).

Certainly today, indirectly the UN has given sufficient recognition that it would be hard to argue that the State of Palestine does not exist and that it includes the Gaza Strip and the West Bank (territories considered occupied since 1967).

Most Respectfully,
R

There are many political opinions about the existence of Palestine.

From what I have found:

Legally it does.

Politically (at least in the West) it does not.

Tinmore, if you want to know the history of Palestine and not be so confused, look in Encylopaedia Brittanica. A true, unbiased account. It will cure you of all that drivel you spout.

No thanks.

I will stick to original source documents.

That's your misfortune, Bub. Brittanica is as authentic as a document. It has been used as legal proof in many court cases. You are too hard-headed for your own good.[/QUOTE]
How about quoting the part about resolution 181 not being implemented.

 

[P F Tinmore]

(COMMENT)

However, there was a different perspective held prior to 1988, particularly by the Arab Palestinian.

Those of us working counterintelligence and anti-terrorism in the Allied Command during the mid-1980's followed closely the international counterterrorism case of the 1985 piracy of the "Achille Lauro" in the Mediterranean Sea [U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York - 816 F. Supp. 930 (S.D.N.Y 1993) March 29, 1993]. This is the case in which the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO) attempted to argued that the PLO was a sovereign state and thus immune from this suit. However the court held that the PLO did not meet the criteria of a "state" closely enough to justify treating it as a foreign sovereign or state in this litigation.

To my knowledge, the Status of Palestine has never been tested since, and has changed over time (evolutionary development).

Certainly today, indirectly the UN has given sufficient recognition that it would be hard to argue that the State of Palestine does not exist and that it includes the Gaza Strip and the West Bank (territories considered occupied since 1967).

Most Respectfully,
R

There are many political opinions about the existence of Palestine.

From what I have found:

Legally it does.

Politically (at least in the West) it does not.

Tinmore, if you want to know the history of Palestine and not be so confused, look in Encylopaedia Brittanica. A true, unbiased account. It will cure you of all that drivel you spout.

No thanks.

I will stick to original source documents.

aka the Lies you keep posting.............

So you are calling source documents lies?

WOW!

I'm calling you a Liar.....................

I've posted the Mandate map from historical records....................you ignore them..................

Why aren't your people bombing Jordan for stealing your land...................oops...........

Oh I forgot, they are your kind................and ALL JEWS MUST DIE....................

Which is the ultimate goal of your propaganda anyway.[/QUOTE]
Can you provide a link for that?

 

[Hossfly]

toastman, et al,

Well, at least as far as the US, and most nations of the world were concerned; this is true.

They never had one. Countries that exist don't need to declare independence again.
1988 was when a Palestinian state came into existence. You cannot refute that.

(COMMENT)

However, there was a different perspective held prior to 1988, particularly by the Arab Palestinian.

Those of us working counterintelligence and anti-terrorism in the Allied Command during the mid-1980's followed closely the international counterterrorism case of the 1985 piracy of the "Achille Lauro" in the Mediterranean Sea [U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York - 816 F. Supp. 930 (S.D.N.Y 1993) March 29, 1993]. This is the case in which the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO) attempted to argued that the PLO was a sovereign state and thus immune from this suit. However the court held that the PLO did not meet the criteria of a "state" closely enough to justify treating it as a foreign sovereign or state in this litigation.

To my knowledge, the Status of Palestine has never been tested since, and has changed over time (evolutionary development).

Certainly today, indirectly the UN has given sufficient recognition that it would be hard to argue that the State of Palestine does not exist and that it includes the Gaza Strip and the West Bank (territories considered occupied since 1967).

Most Respectfully,
R

There are many political opinions about the existence of Palestine.

From what I have found:

Legally it does.

Politically (at least in the West) it does not.

Tinmore, if you want to know the history of Palestine and not be so confused, look in Encylopaedia Brittanica. A true, unbiased account. It will cure you of all that drivel you spout.

No thanks.

I will stick to original source documents.

That's your misfortune, Bub. Brittanica is as authentic as a document. It has been used as legal proof in many court cases. You are too hard-headed for your own good.

How about quoting the part about resolution 181 not being implemented.[/QUOTE]
Screw Resolution 181. It don't mean diddly.

 

[RoccoR]

P F Tinmore, et al,

There is some ground here we can probably agree on.

There are many political opinions about the existence of Palestine.

From what I have found:

Legally it does.

(COMMENT)

If one does not examine the nature of today's State of Palestine, from a strict compliance perspective, there are plenty that would argue that it is a tangible state. It exists in a tangle and reactive form. This is true even in the "West."

Politically (at least in the West) it does not.

(COMMENT)

If one looks at the "State of Palestine" from its stated legal form, one might argue that what is described under the Basic Law is not the reality of the "State of Palestine" today. Likewise, it depends on which Arab Palestinian faction one listens to --- to understand what they believe is the legitimate representative of the Arab Palestinian people.

It is also just as arguable to determine if there is truly a "Unity Government" --- or --- if it is a government that has a gangster-like coercive element imbedded within it that disputed the general claim that the "State of Palestine" is that "territory occupied since 1967 (oPt);" or if it is "from the river to the sea, and from north to south."

It is also arguable as to whether the majority of the Arab Palestinians accept that the 1967 border is the "internationally-recognized border" between Israel and the oPt, as in the position held by the PLO Negotiations Affairs Department (NAD).


Most Respectfully,
R

 

[eagle1462010]

There are many political opinions about the existence of Palestine.

From what I have found:

Legally it does.

Politically (at least in the West) it does not.

Tinmore, if you want to know the history of Palestine and not be so confused, look in Encylopaedia Brittanica. A true, unbiased account. It will cure you of all that drivel you spout.

No thanks.

I will stick to original source documents.

aka the Lies you keep posting.............

So you are calling source documents lies?

WOW!

I'm calling you a Liar.....................

I've posted the Mandate map from historical records....................you ignore them..................

Why aren't your people bombing Jordan for stealing your land...................oops...........

Oh I forgot, they are your kind................and ALL JEWS MUST DIE....................

Which is the ultimate goal of your propaganda anyway.

Can you provide a link for that?[/QUOTE]
Posted the maps many moons ago........ignored by you because it doesn't fit your version of history.

 

[P F Tinmore]

P F Tinmore, et al,

There is some ground here we can probably agree on.

There are many political opinions about the existence of Palestine.

From what I have found:

Legally it does.

(COMMENT)

If one does not examine the nature of today's State of Palestine, from a strict compliance perspective, there are plenty that would argue that it is a tangible state. It exists in a tangle and reactive form. This is true even in the "West."

Politically (at least in the West) it does not.

(COMMENT)

If one looks at the "State of Palestine" from its stated legal form, one might argue that what is described under the Basic Law is not the reality of the "State of Palestine" today. Likewise, it depends on which Arab Palestinian faction one listens to --- to understand what they believe is the legitimate representative of the Arab Palestinian people.

It is also just as arguable to determine if there is truly a "Unity Government" --- or --- if it is a government that has a gangster-like coercive element imbedded within it that disputed the general claim that the "State of Palestine" is that "territory occupied since 1967 (oPt);" or if it is "from the river to the sea, and from north to south."

It is also arguable as to whether the majority of the Arab Palestinians accept that the 1967 border is the "internationally-recognized border" between Israel and the oPt, as in the position held by the PLO Negotiations Affairs Department (NAD).


Most Respectfully,
R

Israel is constantly complaining that Palestinian maps and those in other Arab states "erase" Israel.

Palestinian Maps Omitting Israel Jewish Virtual Library

Denying Israel s right to exist PMW

Israel is commonly called "48" or "1948" as in 1948 occupied Palestine. Palestinians living in Israel are called 48 Palestinians.

As far as I can tell, this is correct. Palestine has been a state or country under occupation since its inception. Nobody has posted any documentation to the contrary.

 

[toastman]

P F Tinmore, et al,

There is some ground here we can probably agree on.

There are many political opinions about the existence of Palestine.

From what I have found:

Legally it does.

(COMMENT)

If one does not examine the nature of today's State of Palestine, from a strict compliance perspective, there are plenty that would argue that it is a tangible state. It exists in a tangle and reactive form. This is true even in the "West."

Politically (at least in the West) it does not.

(COMMENT)

If one looks at the "State of Palestine" from its stated legal form, one might argue that what is described under the Basic Law is not the reality of the "State of Palestine" today. Likewise, it depends on which Arab Palestinian faction one listens to --- to understand what they believe is the legitimate representative of the Arab Palestinian people.

It is also just as arguable to determine if there is truly a "Unity Government" --- or --- if it is a government that has a gangster-like coercive element imbedded within it that disputed the general claim that the "State of Palestine" is that "territory occupied since 1967 (oPt);" or if it is "from the river to the sea, and from north to south."

It is also arguable as to whether the majority of the Arab Palestinians accept that the 1967 border is the "internationally-recognized border" between Israel and the oPt, as in the position held by the PLO Negotiations Affairs Department (NAD).


Most Respectfully,
R

Israel is constantly complaining that Palestinian maps and those in other Arab states "erase" Israel.

Palestinian Maps Omitting Israel Jewish Virtual Library

Denying Israel s right to exist PMW

Israel is commonly called "48" or "1948" as in 1948 occupied Palestine. Palestinians living in Israel are called 48 Palestinians.

As far as I can tell, this is correct. Palestine has been a state or country under occupation since its inception. Nobody has posted any documentation to the contrary.

LOL what ? You have not posted any documentation to what YOU just said.

You don't even know when Palestine's inception was.

 

[toastman]

You see that folks? Tinmore's evidence that there was a country named Palestine in 1948 is a t-shirt that says Palestine 1948

 

[Phoenall]

Read the MANDATE for PALESTINE and then say it had no rights, because if you do then the rights given to all the arab muslim groups are also null and void.

 

[P F Tinmore]

 

[Phoenall]

P F Tinmore, et al,

This shows a distinct misunderstanding of the Jewish Agency and it relationship to the government.

And ? No mention of foreign.

Zurich Switzerland is not foreign to Palestine?

Thats not what I meant. In your link it says the agency was approved under the terms of the mandate. Being foreign or not is irrelevant.

It was relevant. The Jewish Agency was a foreign organization that was created by the foreign World Zionist Organization to represent the Zionists to the mandate. It had no authority inside the mandate and after the mandate left it had no right to stay in Palestine.

This is the foreign organization that created Israel inside Palestine without the approval of the people.

(COMMENT)

The Jewish Agency [non-governmental organization (NGO) --- Once Called the Palestine Zionist Executive (PZE)] was created in accordance with Articles 4 and 6 of the Mandate. After the adoption of the Partition Plan and the appointment of the UN Palestine Commission (UNPC) to be the successor Government on the termination of the Mandate, the Jewish Agency for Palestine, was the designated representatives to assist the commission. This was a critical function in working together with ALL jews (zionist and non-zionist) in building the Jewish National Home under the provisions of the Mandate. It is an organization that was organic to that purpose and is as indigenous to that purpose as any Arab Palestinian organization of a comparable nature; including the establishment of the Arab Higher Committee by the Arab League (also a foreign parent organization).
Prior to the Declaration of Independence for the Jewish State, Israel, the Jewish Agency --- was instrumental in establishing the two key Jewish Councils which came together and blended to form the Provision Government of Israel (the People's Council and the National Council). After the termination of the Mandate, and upon the Declaration of Independence, the Jewish Agency was thereafter an NGO under the umbrella of the Provisional Government of Israel.

The Arab Palestinian had no say into the evolutionary process of the Jewish Agency, or to dictate the mission, goals or objectives of the Agency.

Most Respectfully,
R

So, how does this conflict with my post?

Because they did not exert any outside influence on the arab muslims rights to declare independence, that was done by another foreign agency the arab league.

 

[Phoenall]

AND THE REST YOU SKIMMED OVER

and co-operating with the Administration of Palestine in such economic, social and other matters as may affect the establishment of the Jewish national home


Which changes your version completely

 

[fanger]

ART. 5.
The Mandatory shall be responsible for seeing that no Palestine territory shall be ceded or leased to, or in any way placed under the control of the Government of any foreign Power.

The Avalon Project The Palestine Mandate

 

[RoccoR]

fanger, et al,

Why did you cite Article 5?

ART. 5.
The Mandatory shall be responsible for seeing that no Palestine territory shall be ceded or leased to, or in any way placed under the control of the Government of any foreign Power.

The Avalon Project The Palestine Mandate

(COMMENT)

There was no territory ceded or leased to a foreign power.

Most Respectfully,
R

 

[Phoenall]

And your evidence of this is what exactly, your own fantasy world. How about a link to support your claim

 

[Phoenall]

P F Tinmore, et al,

Now we are just quibbling over derivative authority versus statutory authority.

In all matters relating to the Administration of Palestine, the authority was derivative; even the authority of the Mandatory (UK).

[

Where in your link does it say that the Jewish agency "had no authority inside the mandate and after the mandate left it had no right to stay in Palestine" ?

From Rocco's post:

The "Jewish Agency" (JA) was a prerequisite established under Article 4, The Mandate For Palestine; established in 1929. The JA had to be accredited by the World Zionist Organization (WZO) under the Article 4, "as a public body for the purpose of advising and co-operating with the Administration of Palestine in such economic, social and other matters as may affect the establishment of the Jewish national home."​

It was an advisory organization. It had no authority. It was a part of the mandate and had no function absent the mandate.

(COMMENT)

In January 1947, the Jewish Agency was unequivocally the designated representatives to assist the UN Palestine Commission in the establishment of an Independent State. This was completely outside the scope of the Mandate. That is because it was amid the transition.

Your argument is now convoluted. With regard to True Authority, you are correct. The Jewish Agency had no true authority any more than the Arab Higher Committee had any authority. All authority was administered and delegated to the Mandatory. That does not diminish that contributions made by the Jewish Agency in the utimate establishment of the Jewish National Home.

In terms of authority to exercise the right of self-determination, the Jewish Agency, had all the authority required to complete the Steps Preparatory to Independence for the Provisional Government to Declare Independence; much much more than that of the Arab Palestinian; this is self evident in the face of the fact that it was accomplished. A goal towards nationalism which the Arab Palestinian were unable to attain.

You want to call it "advisory" --- so be it. In reality --- they built a nation that endures to this day and is self-governing and economically stable and sound. What did the Arab Palestinian accomplish?

You as a proPalestinian can criticize the Israeli all you want, but in the end, they have a nation working towards peace. In contrast, the Arab Palestinian has a dysfunctional operations that is monetarily parasitic and Jihadist in nature working towards the continuation of conflict.

Most Respectfully,
R

Indeed, and all of that was in violation of the inalienable rights of the native population.

You know, the Palestinians, that the lying sacks of shit in Israel have always claimed did not exist.[/QUOTE]




Not as they were applied in 1920 when the Mandate was undertaken, and the only Palestinians at that time were the Jews. The arab muslims called themselves Syrians.

 

[fanger]