So why do people hate Israel? - Page 127




 
--
 
April 8th, 2013  
senojekips
 
 

Topic: Hasbara Trolls


Hasbara: Is supposedly word of Hebrew origin basically meaning "truth is the truth" or "explanation" although there is no real exact translation that I can find. A rather odd word considering that in it's most recent connotation today it is used to describe a blatant cover up, or outright lies and distortions.

About the time that cheap Internet connections became readily accessible to the man in the street and cheap movie cameras became a reality, many of Israel's earlier Human rights abuses, atrocities and lies were suddenly being dragged out and exposed to the previously unknowing public, for the first time. To counter this sudden barrage of what Israel had previously taken great pains to keep concealed from the rest of the world, the Israeli Foreign Ministry and various pro Zionist/Israel groups set about setting up loosely linked "Hasbara" groups consisting of pro-Zionist supporters who were asked to try and either, explain away the Israeli crimes, (tell only the Israeli point of view, or just straight out, lie about it). Failing that, discredit those who published any critical information regarding Israel, and wherever possible, have the material removed from the net by by flooding ISPs with complaints claiming,... Yes, you guessed it, "Anti-Semitism". This was especially noticeable on such public sites as YouTube etc, where a number of factual videos showing Israel for what it was and still is, were removed,... They have nearly all since been replaced, and YouTube is now at least aware of what is going on.

Most of these misguided persons see it as a voluntary service to Zionism and/or Israel, but there have been a number of cases of individuals actually being paid by pro Zionist groups, or receiving "in kind" support, free internet accounts, promise of "educational" trips to Israel or other inducements. As well as which there are official Israeli government groups often staffed by members of the military, as a "service to the State"



The most interesting question, the answer of which would give you some indication as to this country's motives, is one you must ask yourself, "how many other governments in the world have to induce their own citizens and supporters to help try and cover up past atrocities, breaches of international law and crimes against humanity"? Many of these acts already subject to UN resolutions, and about a third of them binding resolutions of the Security Council, and all of them condemned by International Human rights groups.

As you get into the subject it can be quite interesting reading, just seeing the extents to which these clowns will go. For example, many of the better networked groups are based in Universities and colleges where they actually publish printed guides as to how to best present your case, the use of psychology and tactics, pointing out what to say and more importantly what not to say, how to "minimise" certain damaging words, the use of standard phrases and replies and of course, what subjects and terms to avoid, and failing all that, how to best derail the subject. Their groups also provide coaching sessions and have mentors to aid those who find they have talked themselves into a corner etc.

Does any of the above sound familiar? It should. (Yes, other than those obvious Hasbara trolls who come here trying to justify the unjustifiable, even I have been using some of their tactics. Fight fire with fire)

These people are in fact the modern day Internet equivalent of the 1930s-1945 pro Nazi propagandists, and the more recent Holocaust deniers, all rolled into one, who both attempting to excuse Israel's appalling past record of war crimes and Human Rights abuses and make the ludicrous claim the they (the Israelis) are somehow the "victims" in all this.
April 9th, 2013  
Del Boy
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by VDKMS
Nice try Seno, but useless. That organisation (globalresearch) is just a leftwing anti Israel (in fact anti West) group, "rife with anti-Jewish conspiracy theory and Holocaust denial." It's founder, Michel Chossudovsky, is not without critisism. In his own country , Canada, Terry O'Neill included him in his list of "Canada's nuttiest professors, those whose absurdity stands head and shoulders above their colleagues."

It's time that you start looking for real facts instead of writings you like.

If Israel was what you describe her to be there would have been a revolution long time ago. Instead, most Jews, Arabs, Christians, Druze and Bedouins love Israel otherwise they would have fled to your beloved Palestine.

The reason you think why I was away is wrong. See, it's the same old song. You THINK you know, but you are far from the truth.

Among other things I was working on my oldtimer (1976 Lincoln Mark IV), upgraded Windows XP to 7 and using XBMC to catalog my movies (1.642 as of today) , MediaMonkey for my music (about 10.000 songs) and Foobar2000 to play them. I have also installed X-plane 9 but didn't have much time to play with it.

Tip: you can buy DVD's and CD's at Amazon UK for 1 pence plus shipping.
ABSOLUTELY. Same ol', same ol '. Being attacked by Seno is like being savaged by a dead sheep. He now appears to be trying to learn Hebrew - one word at a time!!
April 9th, 2013  
D.J
 
Ever ask yourself why during the 30 year period - between 1917 to 1947 - thousands of Jews throughout the world woke up one morning and decided to leave their homes and go to Palestine? The majority did this because they heard that a future national home for the Jewish people was being established in Palestine, on the basis of the League of Nations obligation under the “Mandate for Palestine” document. The “Mandate for Palestine,” an historical League of Nations document, laid down the Jewish legal right to settle anywhere in western Palestine, between the Jordan River and the Mediterranean Sea, an entitlement unaltered in international law. The “Mandate for Palestine” was not a naive vision briefly embraced by the international community. Fifty-one member countries – the entire League of Nations – unanimously declared on July 24, 1922:
“Whereas recognition has been given to the historical connection of the Jewish people with Palestine and to the grounds for reconstituting their national home in that country.”
Any attempt to negate the Jewish people’s right to Palestine - Eretz-Israel, and to deny them access and control in the area designated for the Jewish people by the League of Nations is a serious infringement of international law.

The legally binding document was conferred on April 24, 1920 at the San Remo Conference, and its terms outlined in the Treaty of Sčvres on August 10, 1920. The Mandate’s terms were finalized and unanimously approved on July 24, 1922, by the Council of the League of Nations, which was comprised at that time of 51 countries, and became operational on September 29, 1923.
The “Mandate for Palestine” was not a naive vision briefly embraced by the international community in blissful unawareness of Arab opposition to the very notion of Jewish historical rights in Palestine. The Mandate weathered the test of time: On April 18, 1946, when the League of Nations was dissolved and its assets and duties transferred to the United Nations, the international community, in essence, reaffirmed the validity of this international accord and reconfirmed that the terms for a Jewish National Home were the will of the international community, a “sacred trust” – despite the fact that by then it was patently clear that the Arabs opposed a Jewish National Home, no matter what the form.

Many seem to confuse the “Mandate for Palestine” (The Trust), with the British Mandate (The Trustee). The “Mandate for Palestine” is a League of Nations document that laid down the Jewish legal rights in Palestine. The British Mandate, on the other hand, was entrusted by the League of Nations with the responsibility to administrate the area delineated by the “Mandate for Palestine.”
Great Britain (The Mandatory or Trustee) did turn over its responsibility to the United Nations as of May 14, 1948. However, the legal force of the League of Nations’ “Mandate for Palestine” (The Trust) was not terminated with the end of the British Mandate. Rather, the Trust was transferred over to the United Nations. Arabs, the UN and its organs, and lately the International Court of Justice (ICJ) as well, have repeatedly claimed that the Palestinians are a native people – so much so that almost everyone takes it for granted. The problem is that a stateless Palestinian people is a fabrication. The word Palestine is not even Arabic.

In a report by His Majesty’s Government in the United Kingdom to the Council of the League of Nations on the administration of Palestine and Trans-Jordan for the year 1938, the British made it clear: Palestine is not a State, it is the name of a geographical area. Palestine is a name coined by the Romans around 135 CE from the name of a seagoing Aegean people who settled on the coast of Canaan in antiquity – the Philistines. The name was chosen to replace Judea, as a sign that Jewish sovereignty had been eradicated following the Jewish Revolts against Rome. In the course of time, the Latin name Philistia was further bastardized into Palistina or Palestine. During the next 2,000 years Palestine was never an independent state belonging to any people, nor did a Palestinian people distinct from other Arabs appear during 1,300 years of Muslim hegemony in Palestine under Arab and Ottoman rule. During that rule, local Arabs were actually considered part of, and subject to, the authority of Greater Syria ( Suriyya al-Kubra). Historically, before the Arabs fabricated the concept of Palestinian peoplehood as an exclusively Arab phenomenon, no such group existed. This is substantiated in countless official British Mandate-vintage documents that speak of the Jews and the Arabs of Palestine – not Jews and Palestinians.

In fact, before local Jews began calling themselves Israelis in 1948 (when the name “Israel” was chosen for the newly-established Jewish State), the term “Palestine” applied almost exclusively to Jews and the institutions founded by new Jewish immigrants in the first half of the 20th century, before the state’s independence. Encouraged by their success at historical revisionism and brainwashing the world with the “Big Lie” of a Palestinian people, Palestinian Arabs have more recently begun to claim they are the descendants of the Philistines and even the Stone Age Canaanites. Based on that myth, they can claim to have been “victimized” twice by the Jews: in the conquest of Canaan by the Israelites and again by the Israelis in modern times – a total fabrication.Archeologists explain that the Philistines were a Mediterranean people who settled along the coast of Canaan in 1100 BCE. They have no connection to the Arab nation, a desert people who emerged from the Arabian Peninsula. As if that myth were not enough, former PLO Chairman Yasir Arafat also claimed, “Palestinian Arabs are descendants of the Jebusites,” who were displaced when King David conquered Jerusalem. Arafat also argued that “Abraham was an Iraqi.” One Christmas Eve, Arafat declared that “Jesus was a Palestinian,” a preposterous claim that echoes the words of Hanan Ashrawi, a Christian Arab who, in an interview during the 1991 Madrid Conference, said: “Jesus Christ was born in my country, in my land,” and claimed that she was “the descendant of the first Christians,” disciples who spread the gospel around Bethlehem some 600 years before the Arab conquest. If her claims were true, it would be tantamount to confessing that she is a Jew!

Contradictions abound; Palestinian leaders claim to be descended from the Canaanites, the Philistines, the Jebusites and the first Christians. They also “hijacked” Jesus and ignored his Jewishness, at the same time claiming the Jews never were a people and never built the Holy Temples in Jerusalem.
--
April 9th, 2013  
D.J
 
The artificiality of a Palestinian identity is reflected in the attitudes and actions of neighboring Arab nations who never established a Palestinian state themselves.
The rhetoric by Arab leaders on behalf of the Palestinians rings hollow. Arabs in neighboring states, who control 99.9 percent of the Middle East land, have never recognized a Palestinian entity. They have always considered Palestine and its inhabitants part of the great “Arab nation,” historically and politically as an integral part of Greater Syria a designation that extended to both sides of the Jordan River. In the 1950s, Jordan simply annexed the West Bank since the population there was viewed as the brethren of the Jordanians. Jordan’s official narrative of “Jordanian state-building” attests to this fact:

“Jordanian identity underlies the significant and fundamental common denominator that makes it inclusive of Palestinian identity, particularly in view of the shared historic social and political development of the people on both sides of the Jordan. ... The Jordan government, in view of the historical and political relationship with the West Bank ... granted all Palestinian refugees on its territory full citizenship rights while protecting and upholding their political rights as Palestinians (Right of Return or compensation).”

The Arabs never established a Palestinian state when the UN in 1947 recommended to partition Palestine, and to establish “an Arab and a Jewish state” (not a Palestinian state, it should be noted). Nor did the Arabs recognize or establish a Palestinian state during the two decades prior to the Six-Day War when the West Bank was under Jordanian control and the Gaza Strip was under Egyptian control; nor did the Palestinian Arabs clamor for autonomy or independence during those years under Jordanian and Egyptian rule.
The creation of an Arab state in eastern Palestine (today Jordan) on 77 percent of the landmass of the original Mandate intended for a Jewish National Home in no way changed the status of Jews west of the Jordan River, nor did it inhibit their right to settle anywhere in western Palestine, the area between the Jordan River and the Mediterranean Sea.

The “Mandate for Palestine” document did not set final borders. It left this for the Mandatory to stipulate in a binding appendix to the final document in the form of a memorandum. However, Article 6 of the “Mandate” clearly states:

“The Administration of Palestine, while ensuring that the rights and position of other sections of the population are not prejudiced, shall facilitate Jewish immigration under suitable conditions and shall encourage, in co-operation with the Jewish agency referred to in Article 4, close settlement by Jews on the land, including State lands and waste lands not required for public purposes.”

Article 25 of the “Mandate for Palestine” entitled the Mandatory to change the terms of the Mandate in the territory east of the Jordan River:

“In the territories lying between the Jordan and the eastern boundary of Palestine as ultimately determined, the Mandatory shall be entitled, with the consent of the Council of the League of Nations, to postpone or withhold application of such provision of this Mandate as he may consider inapplicable to the existing local conditions ...”

These documents are the last legally binding documents regarding the status of what is commonly called “the West Bank and Gaza.”

The September 16, 1922 memorandum is also the last modification of the official terms of the Mandate on record by the League of Nations or by its legal successor – the United Nations – in accordance with Article 27 of the Mandate that states unequivocally:

“The consent of the Council of the League of Nations is required for any modification of the terms of this mandate.”

United Nations Charter recognizes the UN’s obligation to uphold the commitments of its predecessor – the League of Nations.

The Mandate survived the demise of the League of Nations. Article 80 of the UN Charter implicitly recognizes the “Mandate for Palestine” of the League of Nations.
This Mandate granted Jews the irrevocable right to settle anywhere in Palestine, the area between the Jordan River and the Mediterranean Sea, a right unaltered in international law and valid to this day. Jewish settlements in Judea and Samaria (i.e. the West Bank), Gaza and the whole of Jerusalem are legal.
The International Court of Justice reaffirmed the meaning and validity of Article 80 in three separate cases:

· ICJ Advisory Opinion of July 11, 1950: in the “question concerning the International States of South West Africa.”

· ICJ Advisory Opinion of June 21, 1971: “When the League of Nations was dissolved, the raison d’etre (French: “reason for being”) and original object of these obligations remained. Since their fulfillment did not depend on the existence of the League, they could not be brought to an end merely because the supervisory organ had ceased to exist. ... The International Court of Justice has consistently recognized that the Mandate survived the demise of the League (of Nations).”

· ICJ Advisory Opinion of July 9, 2004: regarding the “legal consequences of the construction of a wall in the occupied Palestinian territory.”

In other words, neither the ICJ nor the UN General Assembly can arbitrarily change the status of Jewish settlement as set forth in the “Mandate for Palestine,” an international accord that has never been amended. All of western Palestine, from the Jordan River to the Mediterranean Sea, including the West Bank and Gaza, remains open to Jewish settlement under international law.
April 9th, 2013  
BritinBritain
 
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Del Boy
ABSOLUTELY. Same ol', same ol '. Being attacked by Seno is like being savaged by a dead sheep. He now appears to be trying to learn Hebrew - one word at a time!!
Hold up, the living dead is rattling his chains again. Someone should put that stake back through his heart.
April 9th, 2013  
senojekips
 
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by D.J
The artificiality of a Palestinian identity is reflected in the attitudes and actions of neighboring Arab nations who never established a Palestinian state themselves.
The dribblings of an idiot.

What chance did the Palestinians or any one else have, whilst they were obeying the law and waiting for the formation of the Pan Arab state agreed to by the Brits, the Zionist Terror groups drove out the officially mandated administration who had just finished fighting one war, and then encouraged the illegal immigration by European Jews who subsequently drove the native people into the neighbouring countries where they remain to this day in defiance of International Law
[quote=Israel Law Resource Center]
Israeli Violations of International law:CREATION OF THE STATE OF ISRAEL (1947-1954)*

1. ILLEGAL ACQUISITION OF LAND BY FORCE: Israel annexes land occupied by force during 1948 war (lands external to those (illegally) given by the UN partition plan (that was never ratified.) laws & principles violated, international response.
2. FORBIDDING CIVILIANS THE RIGHT TO RETURN TO THEIR HOMES FOLLOWING THE END OF ARMED CONFLICT: Israeli government enacts laws, and employs its military to keep aproximately 750,000 Palestinian Arab civilians from returning to their homes following the end of fighting both in 1948 and in the occupied territories in 1967. Israel then violates UN resolutions ordering them to respect Palestinian's right to return to their homes (laws & principles violated, international response).
3. ILLEGAL POPULATION TRANSFER: Israel settles Israeli citizens in hundreds of Israeli settlements on occupied land not originally given to them in the UN Partition Plan (laws & principles violated, international response).
5. DESTRUCTION OF HOLY PLACES, AND INTERFERING WITH MINISTERS OF RELIGION PERFORMING THEIR RELIGIOUS DUTIES: Israeli forces have destroyed Muslim holy places, and interfered with the religious work of Muslim Imams (ministers) (laws & principles violated, international response).
7. ILLEGAL PRACTICE OF COLLECTIVE PUNISHMENT: Israel repeatedly practices collective punishment against Palestinian acts of rebellion wherein an entire community is punished for the actions of a few (laws & principles violated, international response).
[/quote]

Quote:
Originally Posted by D.J
“Jordanian---snip---
WTF did that come from? What has Jordan got to do with the illegal Zionist occupation of Palestine?


Quote:
Originally Posted by D.J
In other words, neither the ICJ nor the UN General Assembly can arbitrarily change the status of Jewish settlement as set forth in the “Mandate for Palestine,” an international accord that has never been amended.
They don't have to, for the same reason that it was never voted upon by the UN, no one had the right to arbitrarily promise the land of another people to a third party, any agreement to do this was illegal. No where is it stated in the UN Charter that this can occur.

Quote:
Originally Posted by D.J
All of western Palestine, from the Jordan River to the Mediterranean Sea, including the West Bank and Gaza, remains open to Jewish settlement under international law.
Absolute rubbish,... You are telling lies again, and to an audience who is already aware of that fact.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Israel Law resource center
Israeli Violations of International law: ISRAELI OCCUPATION (1967-present)
8. ILLEGAL MILITARY OCCUPATION: The current Israeli occupation of Palestinian territories is illegal. Military actions and occupations are considered legal only if they are based on self-defense (as Israel claims) or are designed to benefit the native population of the occupied areas, but it is now clear that Israel's occupation is illegal because Israeli implementation of it clearly is about:
  • (1) Acquisition of land into Israel by force, and
  • (2) Economic exploitation of the occupied areas via building up de facto Annexation on occupied lands --
    • (A) Extensive modification of local laws, and
    • (B) Building Israeli settlements on occupied lands (illegal population transfer),
    • (C) Building separation barrier not on border but through Palestinian communities displacing over 200,000 Palestinian civilians separating them from their families, work, schools, hospitals, etc.
  • (3) Inhumane suppression of rebellion is implemented through --
    • (A) Practice of Collective Punishment, and
    • (B) Extensive violations of Palestinian Human Rights.
All 7 of these policy actions are illegal according to international law (see details below), which thus makes the occupation itself illegal. Press HERE for more details and quotes from the law concerning the legality of Israel's occupation.
1. ILLEGAL ACQUISITION OF LAND BY FORCE: Israel annexes land taken by force during the 1967 war (East Jerusalem and Golan Heights) (laws & principles violated, international response).
2. FORBIDDING CIVILIANS THE RIGHT TO RETURN TO THEIR HOMES FOLLOWING THE END OF ARMED CONFLICT: Israeli government enacts laws, and employs its military to keep Palestinian Arab civilians from returning to their homes following the end of fighting in the occupied territories in 1967. Israel then violates UN resolutions ordering them to respect Palestinian's right to return to their homes (laws & principles violated, international response).
3. ILLEGAL POPULATION TRANSFER: Israel settles Israeli citizens in hundreds of Israeli settlements on occupied Palestinian land (laws & principles violated, international response).
4. ILLEGAL MODIFICATION OF LOCAL LAW: Israel radically modifies local law following 1967 occupation beyond what is allowable under international law (violating Palestinian human rights and to the benefit of Israel's economy and the Israeli settlements on occupied Palestinian lands, and actually creating de facto annexation of much of the occupied territories) (laws & principles violated, international response).
6. ILLEGAL DE FACTO ANNEXATION: Israel creates de facto annexation of much of Palestinian territories occupied during 1967 war (as it radically alters local laws in order to apply Israeli law to the Israeli settlements on occupied Palestinian lands, and in violation of Palestinian rights of self-determination largely to the benefit of the Israeli economy) (laws & principles violated, international response).
7. ILLEGAL PRACTICE OF COLLECTIVE PUNISHMENT: Israel repeatedly practices collective punishment against Palestinian acts of rebellion wherein an entire community is punished for the actions of a few (laws & principles violated, international response).
9. VIOLATIONS OF RIGHT TO SELF-DETERMINATION: Israel significantly violates the inalienable rights of self-determination of the Palestinian people (when it expropriated significant amounts of Palestinian land from Palestinians to build Israeli settlements, separation barriers, highways, and other structures which benefit Israeli citizens and businesses, but which also severely interfere with Palestinians' ability to work and do business, go to school, access medical facilities, and visit with members of their own families) (laws & principles violated, international response).
15. GENOCIDE: Although numbers of massacres and other lethal methodologies have been documented throughout the history of the Zionists and the State of Israel, evidence suggests that the overall intention of the Zionists and the government of Israel was to drive the Palestinian Arab people out of the area rather than to destroy them as is required by the definition of Genocide. On the other hand, there is some evidence that Israel intended to destroy the society and culture and economy of those Arabs that refused to leave, which under the modern definition, this would be considered to be Genocide. (laws & principles violated, international response).
April 9th, 2013  
senojekips
 
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by BritinAfrica
Hold up, the living dead is rattling his chains again. Someone should put that stake back through his heart.
I couldn't see his Bullsh!t, I've got him on ignore. I guess he must be on day release, and already he's off his medication. Obviously he's still miffed that I pointed out what a liar he is, last time he was out.
April 9th, 2013  
D.J
 
Professor Eugene Rostow concurred with the ICJ’s opinion as to the “sacredness” of trusts such as the “Mandate for Palestine”:

“‘A trust’ – as in Article 80 of the UN Charter – does not end because the trustee dies ... the Jewish right of settlement in the whole of western Palestine – the area west of the Jordan – survived the British withdrawal in 1948. ... They are parts of the mandate territory, now legally occupied by Israel with the consent of the Security Council.”

The British Mandate left intact the Jewish right to settle in Judea, Samaria and the Gaza Strip. Explains Professor Rostow:

“This right is protected by Article 80 of the United Nations Charter, which provides that unless a trusteeship agreement is agreed upon (which was not done for the Palestine Mandate), nothing in the chapter shall be construed in and of itself to alter in any manner the rights whatsoever of any states or any peoples or the terms of existing international instruments to which members of the United Nations may respectively be parties.
“The Mandates of the League of Nations have a special status in international law. They are considered to be trusts, indeed ‘sacred trusts.’
“Under international law, neither Jordan nor the Palestinian Arab ‘people’ of the West Bank and the Gaza Strip have a substantial claim to the sovereign possession of the occupied territories.”

It is interesting to learn how Article 80 made its way into the UN Charter. Professor Rostow recalls:

“I am indebted to my learned friend Dr. Paul Riebenfeld, who has for many years been my mentor on the history of Zionism, for reminding me of some of the circumstances which led to the adoption of Article 80 of the Charter. Strong Jewish delegations representing differing political tendencies within Jewry attended the San Francisco Conference in 1945. Rabbi Stephen S. Wise, Peter Bergson, Eliahu Elath, Professors Ben-Zion Netanayu and A. S. Yehuda, and Harry Selden were among the Jewish representatives. Their mission was to protect the Jewish right of settlement in Palestine under the mandate against erosion in a world of ambitious states. Article 80 was the result of their efforts.”

You think you know the truth but you cannot see the wood for the trees. I would suggest that you spend a little more time studying Middle East history in more substantial detail.
April 9th, 2013  
BritinBritain
 
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by senojekips
I couldn't see his Bullsh!t, I've got him on ignore. I guess he must be on day release, and already he's off his medication. Obviously he's still miffed that I pointed out what a liar he is, last time he was out.
I never mentioned his name, yet you knew who I was talking about.

I don't have him on ignore because its like coming across a road accident, its hard to look away.
April 9th, 2013  
senojekips
 
 
Oh yes, I know the truth. History? which history are you talking about the Israeli version of history, or the facts as recognised by the international community?

You last blatant lie is an indication as to who needs to wake up and learn a bit about what is going on.

Quote:
"All of western Palestine, from the Jordan River to the Mediterranean Sea, including the West Bank and Gaza, remains open to Jewish settlement under international law"

Sorry to inform you. but the ICJ has already ruled on all occupied territories right back to those stolen in the 1948 war, and that their continued occupation is illegal as already posted here. Secondly International law clearly states: "
Occupation Must Never Lead To Sovereignty over Occupied or Conquered Lands of the Enemy People or Nation."

The British mandate was only responsible for that which happened whilst they were the administrators, they left nothing, when they were forced out by Zionist terror groups, everything went with them as they were the only people mandated. No Jewish homeland was ever put in place during this time, as the Zionist terror groups drove the Brits out before any arrangement could be worked out. A plan which was stillborn anyway, as it would have required the agreement of the native population as the mandate stated clearly that the Brits must administer the Palestinian territories in the interests of it's native population.

The subsequent illegal occupation and war were illegal as nowhere was it stated that the Zionist terror groups who drove the Brits out, could just take over the process themselves. They were not mandated, so in effect it could be successfully argued that the whole of Israel is actually only an occupied territory.


Resolution 181 was only ever a "recommendation" it was never ratified, and could not be ratified under international law, unless agreed to by the native people of Palestine, or Canadian people in the case of Canada etc. The Balfour declaration (basis of your sacred trust) was similarly flawed, as the land had already promised as a pan Arab state five years prior to the Balfour declaration being mooted.
 


Similar Topics
Israel rightfully own the West Bank .
Israel strikes Beirut suburb, tightens blockade
A conversation with Iranian dissident (MUST READ)
Palestinians
American racism