Sunday, August 30, 2015

THE FAISAL-WEIZMANN AGREEMENT 3 January 1919 His Royal Highness the Emir Feisal, representing and acting on behalf of the Arab


TWISTS AND TURNS

The Faisal-Weizmann Agreement January 3, 1919 was a great beginning of Jewish and Arab cooperation. However, it was short-lived. The three White Papers and the Peel Commission, while trying to uphold the Balfour promise succumbed over time to Arab terrorism and influence.

THE FAISAL-WEIZMANN AGREEMENT

3 January 1919
His Royal Highness the Emir Feisal, representing and acting on behalf of the Arab Kingdom of Hedjaz, and Dr. Chaim Weizmann, representing and acting on behalf of the Zionist Organization, mindful of the racial kinship and ancient bonds existing between the Arabs and the Jewish people, and realizing that the surest means of working out the consummation of their natural aspirations is through the closest possible collaboration in the development of the Arab State and Palestine, and being desirous further of confirming the good understanding which exists between them, have agreed upon the following:
Article III
In the establishment of the Constitution and Administration of Palestine, all such measures shall be adopted as will afford the fullest guarantees for carrying into effect the British Government’s Declaration of the 2nd of November, 1917. (Balfour Declaration)
Article IV
All necessary measures shall be taken to encourage and stimulate immigration of Jews into Palestine on a large scale, and as quickly as possible to settle Jewish immigrants upon the land through closer settlement and intensive cultivation of the soil...
(signed) Faisal Ibn Hussein
signed) Chaim Weizmann
“Faisal Ibn Hussein bin Ali al-Hashemi, was for a short time King of Greater Syria in 1920, and later King of Iraq. He was a member of the Hashemite dynasty. Chaim Weizmann was President of the Zionist Organization, and the first President of the State of Israel.
Faisal’s father, Hussein bin Ali, the Sharif of Mecca and King of Hedjas, formally endorsed the Balfour Declaration in the Treaty of Sevres (the peace treaty between the Ottoman Empire and Allies at the end of World War I) of 10 August 1920, along with the other Allied powers. Under Arab pressure, the King later unilaterally reneged on this treaty.”

The following remarks are summaries of the White Papers and the Peel Commission

WHITE PAPER OF 1922

After 1921 Arab riots and slaughter of Jews, Churchill issued a White Paper in 1922 stating that the Balfour Declaration could not be amended and that the Jews were in Palestine by right.
Churchill declared: “But in order that this [Jewish] community should have the best prospect of free development and provide a full opportunity for the Jewish people to display its capacities, it is essential that it should know that it is in Palestine as of right and not on the sufferance. That is the reason why it is necessary that the existence of a Jewish National Home in Palestine should be internationally guaranteed, and that it should be formally recognized to rest upon ancient historic connection.”
At the same time, to appease Arab violence, the government decided to create an Arab nation from all of the land east of the Jordan River removing 76% of Palestine from Jewish habitation. Churchill also hinted that he might have to regulate Jewish immigration to Palestine if the Jewish population grew too fast. The Arabs found that the more they rioted, the more Britain limited Jewish immigration.

WHITE PAPER OF 1930

More Arab riots and another White Paper. This paper hinted at the need to curtail Jewish immigration to the area originally designated by the Balfour Declaration as a homeland for the Jewish people.

THE PEEL COMMISSION JULY 1937

At the height of 1936-1939 Arab riots, a royal commission of inquiry headed by Lord Robert Peel went to Palestine to investigate. He recommended that the British Mandate be abolished and the country divided between two peoples with Jerusalem becoming an international city under British rule. He saw no injury to Arabs with Jewish immigration. The British accepted the recommendation. The Jews rejected it as the portion given for a Jewish state was miniscule. The Arabs rejected it because they wanted no Jews and no Jewish state. The proposal was shelved.

THE WHITE PAPER OF 1939

As the fierce riots by Arabs in Palestine continued, the British produced yet another White Paper. This infamous paper is known for its closure of Israel’s ancient homeland to Jewish immigration - at the very time Jews were beginning to lose their lives in Europe under Nazism. Instead of enabling Jews to flee to their ancient homeland, Britain virtually slammed the door shut to millions of Jews who were about to be slaughtered.
Britain, whose sole claim to ruling the Holy Land was because of the spoils of war, decided that over the next five years of 1940-1944, a maximum of 75,000 more Jewish immigrants could come to Israel.
After that, Britain would let the Arab majority decide if more Jews could come. This paper also placed restrictions on Jews buying land from Arabs. Thus Britain, who was given the unique opportunity to fulfill the ancient prophecies of the Bible, promising that one day the Jews would come back to live in their promised land, failed to give the Jewish people their homeland and are thus complicit in allowing 6,000,000 million Jews to be slaughtered in World War II.
Incidentally, there were members of the House of Commons who opposed this White Paper, asserting that it was in opposition to the Balfour Declaration. But it was approved by the House of Commons on 23 May 1939 by 268 votes to 179.
The 1939 White Paper was rejected by Jews, Arabs (for opposite reasons) and the League of Nations. Because of bureaucracy, the British refused to let even a total of 75,000 jews immigrate.
Britain decided there would be no Jewish or Arab state on the remaining 24 percent of Palestine.

2 comments:

  1. True Jewish Legal Rights for The Land

    and

    Israel's True Legal Foundation

    under International Law

    (fundamental breakthrough discovery)

    Traitorous Israeli officials teach us – in one way or another – that Britain owned Mandate for Palestine. Therefore they call the Mandate "British". That is 100% false. We have discovered British and International Mandatory Law. Both specifically explained that the "Mandatory" by no means could imply being an owner.

    It is also important to notice that all the legal definitions describe "Mandatory" (or "Mandatary" in American spelling) via requirements and obligations, not via rights and permissions.

    "His Britannic Majesty" is clearly designated in the Mandate as a "Mandatory". According to the Mandatory Law, that explicitly means that Britain is NOT the owner of the Mandate, and the Mandate is NOT British.

    Being the Mandatory for Jewish Mandate for Palestine, Britain signed to have all the legal responsibilities and punishments for breaking the Mandate. So Britain should be kept accountable. This breakthrough legal discovery creates perfect legal basis to protect Israeli Army from all international court persecutions. Together with the Arab-Jewish Treaty on Jewish Homeland in Palestine this fundamental discovery allows to crash the entire backbone of terrorism. Please learn particular details in our concise http://summary.NYMEI.org

    IN THE BRITISH LAW we can refer to the "Story on Bailm. Sec. 138; 1 Brown, Civ. Law, 382; Halif. Anal. Civ. Law, 70", to the "Mr. Justice Story", to the explanations of Sir William Jones.

    IN THE U.S. LAW we can refer to the explanations of Mr. Chancellor Kent, as well as to many other basic laws and precedents.

    All these sources explicitly describe "Mandatory" not as the owner, but the one who" engages to do some act without reward" and "to be when one undertakes, without recompense, to do some act for the other in respect to the thing bailed".

    Thus the lawful owners of all Palestine and the lawful owners of Mandate for Palestine are the Jewish people. Jewish ownership of Palestine is based NOT on some "Great Powers" imperialistic decision (as traitorous Israeli officials teach us), but on Arab-Jewish Treaty on Jewish Homeland in Palestine.

    Jewish Mandate for Palestine is one of the essential international ratifications of this ownership. The ratifications was done by the official Arab delegation and by all the nations of the world including Turkey (former sovereign of this territory). Official Arab delegation ratified Arab-Jewish Treaty during Paris Peace Conference. Turkey ratified Arab-Jewish Treaty together with Jewish Mandate for Palestine via the Treaty of Lausanne.

    ReplyDelete
  2. True Jewish Legal Rights for The Land

    and

    Israel's True Legal Foundation

    under International Law

    (fundamental breakthrough discovery)

    Traitorous Israeli officials teach us – in one way or another – that Britain owned Mandate for Palestine. Therefore they call the Mandate "British". That is 100% false. We have discovered British and International Mandatory Law. Both specifically explained that the "Mandatory" by no means could imply being an owner.

    It is also important to notice that all the legal definitions describe "Mandatory" (or "Mandatary" in American spelling) via requirements and obligations, not via rights and permissions.

    "His Britannic Majesty" is clearly designated in the Mandate as a "Mandatory". According to the Mandatory Law, that explicitly means that Britain is NOT the owner of the Mandate, and the Mandate is NOT British.

    Being the Mandatory for Jewish Mandate for Palestine, Britain signed to have all the legal responsibilities and punishments for breaking the Mandate. So Britain should be kept accountable. This breakthrough legal discovery creates perfect legal basis to protect Israeli Army from all international court persecutions. Together with the Arab-Jewish Treaty on Jewish Homeland in Palestine this fundamental discovery allows to crash the entire backbone of terrorism. Please learn particular details in our concise http://summary.NYMEI.org

    IN THE BRITISH LAW we can refer to the "Story on Bailm. Sec. 138; 1 Brown, Civ. Law, 382; Halif. Anal. Civ. Law, 70", to the "Mr. Justice Story", to the explanations of Sir William Jones.

    IN THE U.S. LAW we can refer to the explanations of Mr. Chancellor Kent, as well as to many other basic laws and precedents.

    All these sources explicitly describe "Mandatory" not as the owner, but the one who" engages to do some act without reward" and "to be when one undertakes, without recompense, to do some act for the other in respect to the thing bailed".

    Thus the lawful owners of all Palestine and the lawful owners of Mandate for Palestine are the Jewish people. Jewish ownership of Palestine is based NOT on some "Great Powers" imperialistic decision (as traitorous Israeli officials teach us), but on Arab-Jewish Treaty on Jewish Homeland in Palestine.

    Jewish Mandate for Palestine is one of the essential international ratifications of this ownership. The ratifications was done by the official Arab delegation and by all the nations of the world including Turkey (former sovereign of this territory). Official Arab delegation ratified Arab-Jewish Treaty during Paris Peace Conference. Turkey ratified Arab-Jewish Treaty together with Jewish Mandate for Palestine via the Treaty of Lausanne.

    ReplyDelete