Abu Mazen: Pre-67 Land Also "Occupied"

As I already wrote to you:
And that one document of the UN that stated that the special committee of the UN regarding "Palestine" will stop to exist because of Resolution 181, but since Resolution 181 never been implemented nor accepted by the two sides (only by the Jews), then there is no basis for the termiantion of the document of the Mandate. Hecne, Article 80 is still protecting on the rights that were given to the Jews in 1922.

 

deny....deny....deny.

that's all you do. It makes me sad.

 

Not deying, but only relying on facts. Facts that you provided.

 

you don't understand the facts. you misrepresent them to push your Neo-Zionist agenda. this is why many folks hate Israel.

 

Not really. I understand the facts and represent them as they are.

 

Unfortunately for the Zionists, Israel declared it's state on the basis of 181, anything blue on that map could therefore legitimately be classed as the limit of sovereignty of the Israeli state, everything else is Palestine- that isn't Lebanon, Syria, Jordan or Egypt.

 

The Jews declered Israel as a state on the basis of the recognition for a state for the Jewish people in "Palestine", and the Jews didnt declere the state under te bounderies of Resoluton 181.

Israel was established in "Palestine", and Israel is not existing on a seperate land from "Palestine".
"Palestine" is the Land of Israel, and according to the document of the Mandate the Land of Israel (after we will exclude Trans-Jordan) is for the state for the Jewish people.


BTW- in 1920 Faisal signed on an agreement with Weizmann that said there that Trans-Jordan will be for the arabs of the region, while what will be left from "Palestine" (which means the territory where Israel was established + WB + Gaza) will be for the state for the Jewish people.
Please watch what Mudar Zahran, a Jordanian-"Palestinain" said:
[video=youtube;PqFZOF3G3OQ]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PqFZOF3G3OQ[/video]

 

That's an enduring myth. In fact they did, look at your own declaration of Independance. The new state was recognised by the U.S. and U.S.S.R. on the basis of 181.

Mudar Zahran has no credibility, Jordan kicked him out a while back and he lives in the UK. most Palestinians believe he works for Mossad.

 

The recognition of Israel in Resolution 181 was the basis to Ben-Gurion's decleration on the new state of Israel.
If Israel was been established on the bounderies of Resolution 181 (which means that Resolution 181 was fulfilled), then it means that there are an Arab country in Gaza, WB and the Golan, like Resolution 181 wanted to., but we all know that it is not true.

The Arabs blame anyone who doesnt bash Israel, on been connected to the Mossad. It is not a fact that he is bias just because some "Palestinians" blame himת with no sourcesת that he is connected to the Mossad.

 

et al,

I know that the pro-Palestinians say this on a regular basis; but, it is not a very good argument.

(REFERENCES)

• 11/15/1988 A/43/827 S/20278 Declaration of State of Palestine - Palestine National Council

• 03/25/1999 A/53/879 S/1999/334 Jerusalem - Letter from Palestine

• 06/2011 REAFFIRMED by PLO-Negotiation Affairs Department Recognizing the Palestinian State on the 1967 border & Admission of Palestine as a Full Member of the United Nations
​

(COMMENT)

Periodically, the Palestinians flip-flop on the issues, depending on the agenda de jour they wish to support.

In the first reference, the 1988 Declaration of Independence, the PLO stated:

"Pursuant to the resolutions of the Arab Summit Conferences and on the basis of the international legitimacy embodied in the resolutions of the United Nations since 1947"
​

In the Second Reference, the Letter dated 25 March 1999 from the Permanent Observer of Palestine to the United Nations addressed to the Secretary-General, the Permanent Observer stated:

"For the Palestinian side, and since the strategic decision to forge a peace on the basis of coexistence, resolution 181 (II) has become acceptable. The resolution provides the legal basis for the existence of both the Jewish and the Arab States in Mandated Palestine. According to the resolution, Jerusalem should become a corpus separatum, which the Palestinian side is willing to take into consideration and to reconcile with the Palestinian position that East Jerusalem is part of the Palestinian territory and the capital of the Palestinian State. The Palestinian side adheres to international legitimacy and respects General Assembly resolution 181 (II), as well as Security Council resolution 242 (1967), the implementation of which is the aim of the current Middle East peace process."
​

The third reference of the PLO-NAD, reaffirmed the statement mad in the Palestinian Declaration of Independence, stating:

"“Whereas the Palestinian people reaffirms most definitively its inalienable rights in the land of its patrimony: Now by virtue of natural, historical and legal rights, and the sacrifices of successive generations who gave of themselves in defense of the freedom and independence of their homeland; In pursuance of Resolutions adopted by Arab Summit Conferences and relying on the authority bestowed by international legitimacy as embodied in the Resolutions of the United Nations Organization since 1947; And in exercise by the Palestinian Arab people of its rights to self-determination, political independence and sovereignty over its territory”.
​

In the February 1948 Communicated to the Secretary-General by Mr. Isa Nakhleh, Representative of the Arab Higher Committee --- the ORIGINAL THREAT communicated by the Hostile Arab Palestinians, through the Arab Higher Committee Delegation wanted to stress several aspects, which have been consistant by each and every combative Palestinian organization to the present day:

(a) The Arabs of Palestine will never recognize the validity of the extorted partition recommendations or the authority of the United Nations to make them.
(g) The Arabs of Palestine made a solemn declaration before the United Nations, before God and history, that they will never submit or yield to any power going to Palestine to enforce partition. The only way to establish partition is first to wipe them out — man, woman and child.
​

I think they are in support of it this week. But I'm not entirely sure. Mr Khalid Mishaal, the Chief of the Political Bureau of the Islamic Resistance Movement (HAMAS) delivered a dissertation at a conference convened by Al-Zaytouna Centre for Studies & Consultations, Beirut, on 28-29 November 2012 under the title: “The Islamists in the Arab World and the Palestinian Issue, In Light of the Arab Uprisings.” In part this statement said:

"This is what drives us, the Hamas movement and other resistance movements, to take this political stance as long as it is not at the expense of the rest of the Palestinian land and does not contain any abandonment of our rights or any part of our land, nor include any recognition of “Israel.”
​

You simply cannot answer this question, one way or the other, without knowing what the hostile agenda is dominate at the time of the question.

Most Respectfully,
R

NOTE:
Hamas political thought and stances in light of the …
https://www.middleeastmonitor.com/downloads/documents/130319...
1 Hamas’ political thought and stances in light of the Arab uprisings By Khalid Mishaal . This document was originally a paper presented by Mr Khalid Mishaal ...

 

I guess the Permanant Observer of "Palestine" in the UN forget that Resolution 242, that he said in the letter that the "Palestinian" side will respect resolution 242 as well as resolution 181, only applicable to states only and not to a non-state entities like the PLO that control as the PA in the WB:

Also resolution 242 was only a reccomendations for the parties that were involved in the Six Days war:

Furthermore, Resolution 242 did not force a withdrawal from all the territories Israel ceptured during the war, and thus when Israel withdraw from territories it held during the 1967 war, Israel fulfilled resolution 242. Hence the UN cant now present to Israel the will to fulfill this resolution that was already been fulfilled by Israel.

You can read what former US ambassador to the UN Goldberg, one of the drafters of Resolution 242 said about it:

Source: http://www.acpr.org.il/pp/pp173-grief-E.pdf

So the Arabs in 1999 couldnt say that they will respect resolution 242, because this resolution already been fulfilled. Moreover that even the PLO cant really use Resolution 242 as a "legal argument" against Israel, because the PLO is not a state, and also that resolution 242 only referred to the parties that fought Six Days war.

And in regard to Resolution 181- the latter of the "Palestinians" said that they accepted resolution 181, but they really dont, because the one and only time that resolution 181 was presented before the Arabs it was in 1947, by the UN, and in that crucial time, when if they would agreed to it, it would be then valid, they rejected it, and thus made Resolution 181 unvalid to be fulfilled.
There is no second chences in acceptance a resolutions. If in the point of time when you actually have an offer to accept a resolution of the UN and you choose not to, then that's it, you cant go back. It's not "Back to the Future" here.

In 1999, the time of the latter you presented here, that been written by the PLO shows that the PLO accept resolutions, but in the other hands if we will take a look what the PLO did against Israel in 1999, and even in the 80's (the time of you first source) we will get a very different picture of hostality against Israel and a terror attacks that the PLO made against Israelies all over Israel.
So yes, you can answer this question if we will take a look not only on what kind of statements the Arabs made toward the world, but if we will also exemine what they did at the time of such statements. And by doing so the picture will be presented to us.

 

and yet YOU say the Mandate for Palestine is still in effect!!!

LOL!!!!

- - - Updated - - -

that is a lie.

when Israel declared its independence in 1948, it was on the borders issued by UNGA 181.

 

That's because the UN Charter protects the rights that were granted to the Jews in the document of the Mandate until today.

Isreal as a state was accepted to be a UN mamber in May 1949. Thus, the UN accepted Israel not based on the bounderies on UNGA 181, but on a different ones.

 

until the mandate is concluded, which it was

- - - Updated - - -

the UN accepted Israel as a member state BECAUSE of UNGA 181

 

The British Mandate indeed over, while the document wasnt.

The UN accepted Israel as a UN mamber not based on the bounderies on UNGA 181, but on a different ones.

 

Prove it.

 

Interesting that the PLO doesn't define its borders in your documents. The 1988 declaration was superflouos as there has been a previous declaration in 1948.

 

Challenger, et al,

Yessssss! This is another one of those peculiar claims made periodically.

(REFERENCE)

• 10/14/1948 A/C.1/330 All-Palestine Government - Cablegram from Premier and Acting Foreign Secretary to SecGen --- Declaration of Independence

(COMMENT)

I am very aware of the 28 September 1948 bid by the All Palestine Government (APG)(formed as an Egyptian Client State) of Arab nationalists, lead by Haj Amin al-Husseini, a former enemy officer of the Ottoman Army turned Sherifian (WWI) as well as a distinguished NAZI collaborator (WWII) --- and --- a former enemy General Officer of the Ottoman Army, Ahmed Hilmi Pasha (WWI).

SOURCE: Encyclopedia.com Post–World War II concept for forming an Arab government for the whole of Palestine after the end of the British mandate

"The Egyptian defeat deprived the All-Palestine Government of its last and exceedingly tenuous hold on Palestinian soil, forcing it to transfer its seat from Gaza to Cairo. Its weakness was exposed for all to see, its prestige slumped, and its authority was undermined. In Cairo, the Government of All-Palestine gradually fell apart because of its impotence, ending up four years later as a department of the Arab League. Thereafter, it continued to exist in name only until Egypt's President Gamal Abdel Nasser closed its offices in 1959."​

The APG Declaration stakes claim to all the territory in which the Mandate of Palestine applied; to include the portion that the Provisional Government of Israel (PGI) outlined by the General Assembly for the Jewish State. The Jewish Declaration of Independence comes more than four months prior to the APG bid. And the Israeli Declaration was fully coordinated with the UN Palestine Commission (UNPC) prior to the announcement. AND, at the final meeting of the UNPC, Dr. Eduardo Morgan (Panama) noted that (for the record and Public Release PAL/169 17 MAY 48): "The Commission has not been dissolved. In fact the resolution of last November 29 has been implemented."

At the time of the PLO announcement and Declaration of 1988, the APG had been disbanded for nearly a decade. The PLO was recognized as the sole legitimate representative of the Palestinian people in any Palestinian territory that is liberated.

At no time, during its period of operation, did the APG exercise sovereign control over any territory within the boundaries established by the Allied Powers. Whereas, at the time of the announced independence, the State of Israel exercised sovereignty, over the territory partitioned by the UN, and then as the War of Independence progressed, sovereign control expanded over other territory as the forward edge of battle followed retreating Arab Forces. This additional territory was enclosed by the Armistice Lines of 1949.

BTW: Most Declarations of Independence do not outline the boundaries it controls.

Most Respectfully,
R

 

dishonest nonsense.

the Mandate is over. it was concluded in 1948.

 

Correct! the British Mandate did end in 1948, while the document of the Mandate wasnt.

 

With great pleasure.
The UN accepted Israel as a UN mamber on May 11th, 1949. That was after the representatives of Israel already signed an agreements (that was known as "The Rhodes Agreements") with Egypt, that was in Fabruary 1949, with Lebanon that was in March 1949 and with Jordan that was in April 3rd, 1949.
A little bit more then a month was passed and in May 11th, 1949 the UN voted and accepted Israel as a UN mamber after the armistic agreements with Egypt, Lebanon and Jordan were already been signed and been already entered into force. Only the armistic agreement with Syria was signed two months after Israel was accepted as a UN mamber, but the rest of the agreements were already entered into force before the UN accepted Israel, and thus the UN accepted Israel under the bounderies as was detelied in Rhodes Agreements with Egypt, Lebanon and Jordan.

Source'1: http://www.un.org/en/members/
Source'2: http://www.encyclopedia.com/doc/1G2-3424600280.html

 

Challenger, et al,

Your question implies that the UN deliberation body was deaf, dumb, and blind, as to not know the status and situation of Israel at the time the General Assembly accepted the favorable recommendation from the Security Council, and then debated the issues, to include boundaries.

(REFERENCE)

• Applications to the United Nations:

• 29 November 1948 S-1093 Application to the Security Council​

• 2 December 1948 A-752 Application to the General Assembly via the Secretary General​

• 5 MAY 1949 A/AC.24/SR.45 54. Application of Israel for admission to membership in the United Nations (A/81 (continued)

• 11 MAY 1949 A/RES/273 (III) Admission of Israel to membership in the United Nations​

(COMMENT)

When the General Assembly decided to admit Israel to membership in the United Nations; it was after a clear and frank discussion of the border issue; as well as the political maneuvering by the Arab League to stall any such decision in favor of Israel. The Arab delegations and Higher Committee had adopted a policy that the Arabs of Palestine will never recognize the validity of the partition recommendations or the authority of the United Nations [A/RES/181(II)]. The UN, recognizing that very powerful powerful Arab interests were attempting to circumvent the resolution of the General Assembly and were engaged in a deliberate effort to alter by force the Partition Plan and the outcome of Israel's successful defense against Arab Military Intervention, digested the facts and still voted in favor of membership.

There are only "rare" cases in political statesmanship and tradecraft that such an element called "proof" enters into the deliberations. To ask for proof, is a "trick question" --- a dilemma all on its own. What we do know is that for several decades, the Arab Countries followed a consistent policy of "non-recognition" of Israel; and consistently muddied the waters by calling the former Armistice Line anything by an International Boundary. This policy was reaffirmed by the Khartoum Resolution passed by the Arab League as a Post-War position in 1967: No peace with Israel, no recognition of Israel, and no negotiations with Israel (AKA: The Three No's). The Hostile Arab-Palestinians could string the Israelis along indefinitely by never really cooperating in any long-term peace effort; and could manipulate a low intensity conflict that would never leave the matter resolved.

It wasn't until after the 1973 Yom Kipper War that Egypt and later Jordan, began to see how unproductive the continued support of insurgents, terrorists, Jihadist, Fedayeen and other associated radicalize Islamic Movements and Asymmetric opponents were as the disputes dragged-on. It was in the two treaties which set the internationally recognized boundaries around three-quarters of Israel. Oddly enough, both sets of boundaries encapsulated the West Bank and Gaza Strip (without prejudice to the Palestinians).

In any event, the acceptance by the UN in 1949 of Israel into its membership had nothing to do with the internationally recognized boundaries; as the UN General Assembly understood that the Armistice outlined more territory to Israel then the UNSCOP recommended --- and (relative to the West Bank and Gaza Strip) the NO formal boundaries were set until 1995 and 1979; respectively.

Most Respectfully,
R

 

Yeah...this may come as a shock to you but ceasefire agreements do not constitute recognition of boundaries or borders, neither does membership of the U.N.

 

Whereas the usual rambling spinning of events from RoccoR comes as no surprise the few jems contained therein are of interest. To date only one neighbouring country recognises an international border with Zionist Israel and that's Jordan. Egypt defined the limit of it's sovereignty along the border with the former state of mandatory Palestine. Whereas Egypt does not claim any territory beyond that line, it implicitly does not recognise Zionist israeli sovereignty over occupied Palestinian territories along that border.

In any event, since the state of Israel was proclaimed and admitted into the U.N. "after a clear and frank discussion of the border issue" the U.N. was clear that Zionist Israel's sovereignty was restricted to the borders set out in GA res 181; the attempt by the new state to have the territory conquered in the 1948 war included in that sovereinty was rejected by the U.N. pending a final status resolution with the Palestinians. So far this has never happened and since it is inadmissable to acquire territory through any form of warfare, defensive or not, the territories controlled by Israel outside the ga 181 borders remain occupied Palestinian land.

 

The Rhodes Agreements formed the bounderies with Jordan, Egypt, Lebanon and Syria until 1967 whe the Six Days war erupted.