What is Palestine? {Saxon wårolord vs Яome

[Saxon wårolord]

What is Palestine(السلطة الوطنية الفلسطينية)?

A tool? An entity?


The debate is open!

[Saxon wårolord]

Given that the 'Palestinian authority' was admitted into the arab league in 1976; its former actions were heavily influenced by the latter to be admitted.

As matter of example Eritrea, India, Brazil and Venezuela are mere observers!

[Каие]

Don't post in other people's debate threads. How many times must I say this?

I'll respond later btw.

[Saxon wårolord]

Given that the 'Palestinian authority' was admitted into the arab league in 1976; its former actions were heavily influenced by the latter to be admitted.

As matter of example Eritrea, India, Brazil and Venezuela are mere observers!

Another fact: The policy of the arab league doesn't differ in Palestine.

Here's a map of the Arab league:



And here's a map of the countries which don't consider Israel's existance:



They are almost entirely similar.....There are exceptions such as Egypt and Jordan however.

The final proof of its implication in the creation of what appears to be its tool is this statement which has now been globalized on the international diplomatic scenery:

"Statement by the Arab League upon
the Declaration of the
State of Israel
(May 15, 1948)
Palestine was part of the former Ottoman Empire subject to its law and represented in its parliament. The overwhelming majority of the population of Palestine were Arabs. There was in it a small minority of Jews that enjoyed the same rights and bore the same responsibilities as the (other) inhabitants, and did not suffer any ill-treatment on account of its religious beliefs. The holy places were inviolable and the freedom of access to them was guaranteed.

The Arabs have always asked for their freedom and independence. On the outbreak of the First World War, and when the Allies declared that they were fighting for the liberation of peoples, the Arabs joined them and fought on their side with a view to realizing their national aspirations and obtaining their independence. England pledged herself to recognize the independence of the Arab countries in Asia, including Palestine. The Arabs played a remarkable part in the achievement of final victory and the Allies have admitted this.

In 1917 England issued a declaration in which she expressed her sympathy with the establishment of a National Home for the Jews in Palestine. When the Arabs knew of this they protested against it, but England reassured them by affirming to them that this would not prejudice the right of their countries to freedom and independence or affect the political status of the Arabs in Palestine. Notwithstanding the legally void character of this declaration, it was interpreted by England to aim at no more than the establishment of a spiritual centre for the Jews in Palestine, and to conceal no ulterior political aims, such as the establishment of a Jewish State. The same thing was declared by the Jewish leaders.

When the war came to an end England did not keep her promise. Indeed, the Allies placed Palestine under the Mandate system and entrusted England with (the task of carrying it out), in accordance with a document providing for the administration of the country, in the interests of its inhabitants and its preparation for the independence which the Covenant of the League of Nations recognized that Palestine was qualified to have.

England administered Palestine in a manner which enabled the Jews to flood it with immigrants and helped them to settle in the country. (This was so) notwithstanding the fact that it was proved that the density of the population in Palestine had exceeded the economic capacity of the country to absorb additional immigrants. England did not pay regard to the interests or rights of the Arab inhabitants, the lawful owners of the country. Although they used to express, by various means, their concern and indignation on account of this state of affairs which was harmful to their being and their future, they (invariably) were met by indifference, imprisonment and oppression.

As Palestine is an Arab country, situated in the heart of the Arab countries and attached to the Arab world by various ties - spiritual, historical, and strategic - the Arab countries, and even the Eastern ones, governments as well as peoples, have concerned themselves with the problem of Palestine and have raised it to the international level; (they have also raised the problem) with England, asking for its solution in accordance with the pledges made and with democratic principles. The Round Table Conference was held in London in 1939 in order to discuss the Palestine question and arrive at the just solution thereof. The Governments of the Arab States participated in (this conference) and asked for the preservation of the Arab character of Palestine and the proclamation of its independence. This conference ended with the issue of a White Paper in which England defined her policy towards Palestine, recognized its independence, and undertook to set up the institutions that would lead to its exercise of the characteristics of (this independence). She (also) declared that her obligations concerning the establishment of a Jewish national home had been fulfilled, since that home had actually been established. But the policy defined in the (White) Paper was not carried out. This, therefore, led to the deterioration of the situation and the aggravation of matters contrary to the interests of the Arabs.

While the Second World War was still in progress, the Governments of the Arab States began to hold consultations regarding the reinforcement of their cooperation and the increasing of the means of their collaboration and their solidarity, with a view to safeguarding their present and their future and to participating in the erection of the edifice of the new world on firm foundations. Palestine had its (worthy) share of consideration and attention in these conversations. These conversations led to the establishment of the League of Arab States as an instrument for the cooperation of the Arab States for their security, peace and well-being. The Pact of the League of Arab States declared that Palestine has been an independent country since its separation from the Ottoman Empire, but the manifestations of this independence have been suppressed due to reasons which were out of the control of its inhabitants. The establishment of the United Nations shortly afterwards was an event about which the Arabs had the greatest hopes. Their belief in the ideals on which that organization was based made them participate in its establishment and membership.

Since then the Arab League and its (member) Governments have not spared any effort to pursue any course, whether with the Mandatory Power or with the United Nations, in order to bring about a just solution of the Palestine problem: (a solution) based upon true democratic principles and compatible with the provisions of the Covenant of the League of Nations and the (Charter) of the United Nations, and which would (at the same time) be lasting, guarantee peace and security in the country and prepare it for progress and prosperity. But Zionist claims were always an obstacle to finding such a solution, (as the Zionists), having prepared themselves with armed forces, strongholds and fortifications to face by force anyone standing in their way, publicly declared (their intention) to establish a Jewish State.

When the General Assembly of the United Nations issued, on 29 November 1947, its recommendation concerning the solution of the Palestine problem, on the basis of the establishment of an Arab State and of another Jewish (State) in (Palestine) together with placing the City of Jerusalem under the trusteeship of the United Nations, the Arab States drew attention to the injustice implied in this solution (affecting) the right of the people of Palestine to immediate independence, as well as democratic principles and the provisions of the Covenant of the League of Nations and (the Charter) of the United Nations. (These States also) declared the Arabs' rejection of (that solution) and that it would not be possible to carry it out by peaceful means, and that its forcible imposition would constitute a threat to peace and security in this area. The warnings and expectations of the Arab States have, indeed, proved to be true, as disturbances were soon widespread throughout Palestine. The Arabs clashed with the Jews, and the two (parties) proceeded to fight each other and shed each other's blood. Whereupon the United Nations began to realize the danger of recommending the partition (of Palestine) and is still looking for a way out of this state of affairs.

Now that the British mandate over Palestine has come to an end, without there being a legitimate constitutional authority in the country, which would safeguard the maintenance of security and respect for law and which would protect the lives and properties of the inhabitants, the Governments of the Arab States declare the following:

First: That the rule of Palestine should revert to its inhabitants, in accordance with the provisions of the Covenant of the League of Nations and (the Charter) of the United Nations and that (the Palestinians) should alone have the right to determine their future.

Second: Security and order in Palestine have become disrupted. The Zionist aggression resulted in the exodus of more than a quarter of a million of its Arab inhabitants from their homes and in taking refuge in the neighbouring Arab countries. The events which have taken place in Palestine have unmasked the aggressive intentions and the imperialist designs of the Zionists, including the atrocities committed by them against the peace-loving Arab inhabitants, especially in Dayr Yasin, Tiberias and others. Nor have they respected the inviolability of consuls, as they have attacked the consulates of the Arab States in Jerusalem. After the termination of the British mandate over Palestine the British authorities are no longer responsible for security in the country, except to the degree affecting their withdrawing forces, and (only) in the areas in which these forces happen to be at the time of withdrawal as announced by (these authorities). This state of affairs would render Palestine without any governmental machinery capable of restoring order and the rule of law to the country, and of protecting the lives and properties of the inhabitants.

Third: This state of affairs is threatening to spread to the neighbouring Arab countries, where feeling is running high because of the events in Palestine. The Governments of the Member States of the Arab League and the United Nations are exceedingly worried and deeply concerned about this state of affairs.

Fourth: These Governments had hoped that the United Nations would have succeeded in finding a peaceful and just solution of the problem of Palestine, in accordance with democratic principles and the provisions of the Covenant of the League of Nations and (the Charter) of the United Nations, so that peace, security and prosperity would prevail in this part of the world.

Fifth: The Governments of the Arab States, as members of the Arab League, a regional organization within the meaning of the provisions of Chapter VIII of the Charter of the United Nations, are responsible for maintaining peace and security in their area. These Governments view the events taking place in Palestine as a threat to peace and security in the area as a whole and (also) in each of them taken separately.

Sixth: Therefore, as security in Palestine is a sacred trust in the hands of the Arab States, and in order to put an end to this state of affairs and to prevent it from becoming aggravated or from turning into (a state of) chaos, the extent of which no one can foretell; in order to stop the spreading of disturbances and disorder in Palestine to the neighbouring Arab countries; in order to fill the gap brought about in the governmental machinery in Palestine as a result of the termination of the mandate and the non-establishment of a lawful successor authority, the Governments of the Arab States have found themselves compelled to intervene in Palestine solely in order to help its inhabitants restore peace and security and the rule of justice and law to their country, and in order to prevent bloodshed.

Seventh: The Governments of the Arab States recognize that the independence of Palestine, which has so far been suppressed by the British Mandate, has become an accomplished fact for the lawful inhabitants of Palestine. They alone, by virtue of their absolute sovereignty, have the right to provide their country with laws and governmental institutions. They alone should exercise the attributes of their independence, through their own means and without any kind of foreign interference, immediately after peace, security, and the rule of law have been restored to the country. At that time the intervention of the Arab states will cease, and the independent State of Palestine will cooperate with the (other member) States of the Arab League in order to bring peace, security and prosperity to this part of the world. The Governments of the Arab States emphasize, on this occasion, what they have already declared before the London Conference and the United Nations, that the only solution of the Palestine problem is the establishment of a unitary Palestinian State, in accordance with democratic principles, whereby its inhabitants will enjoy complete equality before the law, (and whereby) minorities will be assured of all the guarantees recognized in democratic constitutional countries and (whereby) the holy places will be preserved and the rights of access thereto guaranteed.

Eighth: The Arab States most emphatically declare that (their) intervention in Palestine was due only to these considerations and objectives, and that they aim at nothing more than to put an end to the prevailing conditions in (Palestine). For this reason, they have great confidence that their action will have the support of the United Nations; (that it will be) considered as an action aiming at the realization of its aims and at promoting its principles, as provided for in its Charter."


This declaration gives us a clear picture of the "Palestinian authority"'s role in this 'conflict': A tool of the arab league.

[Каие]

I thought you were going to start with a more detailed opening argument? Seeing as you are the proposer of the debate.... your point is the one I'm challenging.

[Saxon wårolord]

Well?

[Saxon wårolord]

Palestinian political parties aren't internally provided but externally furnished.....by.....members.....of.....The Arab league!

Watch the video:

>http://video.google.com/videoplay?do...0119196868617#

[Каие]

Well... I hardly understand your point. The title of the debate is''What is Palestine''.... and you're saying.. what? It's not a state? Not a nation? Not a legal entity? Not legitimate.... what? The article and in particular the areas you quoted are in no setting a definition for Palestine, but merely showing agony at the fact that Palestine is an ally of the Arab league. Until you clarify your point, and do so properly, I have nothing I can respond to.

[Saxon wårolord]

This is the argument you have to encounter:

The maps, the declaration and the video show a single thing.....That the 'Palestinian authority' is no more than a mere tool of the Arab league.

It's main political parties are fournished by Arab league members thus maintaining the Arab league's hegemony on the 'Palestinian authority'.
This process was under construction even before the creation of the Jewish state: The establishment of political families (Arafat is the best example) like in Lebanon was the rough basis of this intergration.
The country's political dissensions are part of a diversion program designed to fuel anger and attract attention from the Arab league member's internal politics.

[Каие]

The maps, the declaration and the video show a single thing.....The 'Palestinian authority' is a mere tool of the Arab league.

That may be, but however the Palestinian National Authority is not Palestine. The PNA is of the same calibre as Robespierre '' Committee of Public Safety'' during the French Revolution. The Committee governed France, but the Committee was not France itself. If you're using ''Palestinian Authority'' as a euphemism for ''Palestine'' or if you're arguing the nation, or indeed State, of Palestine is the same thing as the Palestinian National Authority, than your argument is disingenuous and a massive hike up the wrong mountain as well as thoroughly dishonest and counter productive, and quite frankly is neither here nor there in this debate.

However if you are not saying that, and are trying to say that the PNA, Abbas and his mates, are puppets of the Arab League.... I would argue that the PNA is not a tool of the Arab League at all, or at least not any more. In fact, the PNA is a tool of Israel.

Israel created it; In 1994 under the Oslo Accords, Israel created the Palestinian Authority.

Israel decides what it's remit is; Signified by the Israeli conditions under Oslo which split the West Bank and Gaza into Areas A, B and C. Only A being areas administered and policed by the PNA. Only Israel can change the status of each district to either A, B or C, and can do so arbitrarily.

Israel decides what it's budget is; Israel is the body which transfers the tax receipts from taxes levied on Palestinians in the occupied territories, and can withhold these funds at any time, for any reason I.e. After Hamas won the election in 2006. These tax receipts make up 50% of the PNA's budget. The other 50% of the budget is raised through foreign aid, of which the ENTIRE Arab League offers only $120 million, compared to the $280 million from the USA and $320 million from the EU and Norway.

Israel also decides who is in it; Israel tried to ban Hamas from joining an all unity government after their shock win in 2006.

According to those facts above, and the PNA's performance and behaviour during the Israeli assault on Gaza, the insinuation that the PNA is solely a puppet and creation of the Arab League is an inaccurate one and a great manipulation of the facts on display. It is much more of a puppet of the Israeli state than it is of the Arab League.

Then again all of that is now rather void since Palestinian territories now enjoy two corrupt and immoral governments, one in the West Bank and one in Gaza.

It's main political parties are fournished by Arab league members thus maintaining the Arab league's hegemony on the 'Palestinian authority'.

They are not. The main political parties are the PLO, led by Fatah, and the HAMAS movement. The PLO is an entirely Palestinian organisation which has in the past been at war with Lebanon, Syria, Egypt and Jordan.. was HARDLY funded by the Arab League to attack and fight against the Arab League. Likewise HAMAS takes it's support mainly from Iran and the non-affiliated non-nationalist Islamic Brotherhood.

This process was under construction even before the creation of the Jewish state:

The Arab states were against the creation of a Palestinian State, or the creation of a Palestinian executive or government. shown most clearly by the fact that immediately after the 1949 ceasefire with Israel, Lebanon and Syria annexed north and north-eastern Palestine, Jordan annexed the West Bank, and Egypt annexed Gaza. So if what you say is true, the Arab League had a very strange way of going about creating a Palestinian Authority.

The establishment of political families (Arafat is the best example)

A common misconception, but a misconception nonetheless. Arafat Al-Husseini family, is not linked in any way, shape or form to Imam Mohammed Amin Al-Husayni's family.

The country's political dissensions are part of a diversion program designed to fuel anger and attract attention from the Arab league member's internal politics.

It is normally those who are completely ignorant of the very basics of this war and the thoughts of it's people who assume that the Palestinians and Arabs hold no ill-will towards Palestine's Arab neighbours. Only someone purposefully putting his head in the sand can say that the Palestinians don't mind being confined to live as 3rd class non-citizens in shanty town refugee camps worse than some of the worst areas of Africa, in Lebanon, for example.

[Saxon wårolord]

That may be, but however the Palestinian National Authority is not Palestine. The PNA is of the same calibre as Robespierre '' Committee of Public Safety'' during the French Revolution. The Committee governed France, but the Committee was not France itself. If you're using ''Palestinian Authority'' as a euphemism for ''Palestine'' or if you're arguing the nation, or indeed State, of Palestine is the same thing as the Palestinian National Authority, than your argument is disingenuous and a massive hike up the wrong mountain as well as thoroughly dishonest and counter productive, and quite frankly is neither here nor there in this debate.

Let it be, your claims aren't backed by any arguments.

However if you are not saying that, and are trying to say that the PNA, Abbas and his mates, are puppets of the Arab League.... I would argue that the PNA is not a tool of the Arab League at all, or at least not any more. In fact, the PNA is a tool of Israel.
Israel created it; In 1994 under the Oslo Accords, Israel created the Palestinian Authority.

Israel decides what it's remit is; Signified by the Israeli conditions under Oslo which split the West Bank and Gaza into Areas A, B and C. Only A being areas administered and policed by the PNA. Only Israel can change the status of each district to either A, B or C, and can do so arbitrarily.

What makes you think so? The PNA was institutionnalized in 1994 during the Oslo accords.....though the conditions weren't decided by Israel: They were decided by the internal commitments represented by the U.S.A, Egypt, Russia, The U.N, The E.U and....The Arab league! Area A is administrated by the PNA....even though Hamas is also represented in area A! The 'Aza strip is also part of the PNA hence its self-sufficiency
was a result of the Oslo accords.

Israel decides what it's budget is; Israel is the body which transfers the tax receipts from taxes levied on Palestinians in the occupied territories, and can withhold these funds at any time, for any reason I.e. After Hamas won the election in 2006. These tax receipts make up 50% of the PNA's budget. The other 50% of the budget is raised through foreign aid, of which the ENTIRE Arab League offers only $120 million, compared to the $280 million from the USA and $320 million from the EU and Norway.

Why didn't you mention the fact that Israel isn't providing tax receipts anymore?
Because this leaves the Arab league as one of its largest contributaries?

Israel also decides who is in it; Israel tried to ban Hamas from joining an all unity government after their shock win in 2006.

But it didn't, so Israel's supposed hegemony on the PNA is not as truthful as it seems:

Hamas is still active in the West bank.

According to those facts above, and the PNA's performance and behaviour during the Israeli assault on Gaza, the insinuation that the PNA is solely a puppet and creation of the Arab League is an inaccurate one and a great manipulation of the facts on display. It is much more of a puppet of the Israeli state than it is of the Arab League.

Yet there is no valuable proof to support your claim....

Then again all of that is now rather void since Palestinian territories now enjoy two corrupt and immoral governments, one in the West Bank and one in Gaza.

Maybe a proof of that the PNA is well unique?

They are not. The main political parties are the PLO, led by Fatah, and the HAMAS movement. The PLO is an entirely Palestinian organisation which has in the past been at war with Lebanon, Syria, Egypt and Jordan.. was HARDLY funded by the Arab League to attack and fight against the Arab League. Likewise HAMAS takes it's support mainly from Iran and the non-affiliated non-nationalist Islamic Brotherhood.

Then why does the declaration I've posted above signal us a 'sudden' interest from the Arab league towards the 'Palestinian cause'?

The Arab states were against the creation of a Palestinian State, or the creation of a Palestinian executive or government. shown most clearly by the fact that immediately after the 1949 ceasefire with Israel, Lebanon and Syria annexed north and north-eastern Palestine, Jordan annexed the West Bank, and Egypt annexed Gaza. So if what you say is true, the Arab League had a very strange way of going about creating a Palestinian Authority.

That's not what the declaration shows. But you are ,none-the-less; correct: It took some time for the Arab league to spot the profit it could get through the creation of a Palestinian state.

A common misconception, but a misconception nonetheless. Arafat Al-Husseini family, is not linked in any way, shape or form to Imam Mohammed Amin Al-Husayni's family.

Your claim would be true if Yasser Arafat hadn't claimed belonging to the Al-Husayni clan (defacto being the Mufti's nephew) in Amnon Kapeliuk's book : Arafat l'irréductible.

It is normally those who are completely ignorant of the very basics of this war and the thoughts of it's people who assume that the Palestinians and Arabs hold no ill-will towards Palestine's Arab neighbours. Only someone purposefully putting his head in the sand can say that the Palestinians don't mind being confined to live as 3rd class non-citizens in shanty town refugee camps worse than some of the worst areas of Africa, in Lebanon, for example.

I make a clear distinction between Palestinian and PNA representatives: the latter are mere tools.

The first however were surely confined in refugee camps......by the Lebanese and Jordanians!

Their situation however cannot be compared to the Darfuri one in the sense that the PNA's HDI is of 0,7 (satisfactory to say the least: the Palestinian authority is thus richer than Moldova and Morocco).

[Каие]

Let it be, your claims aren't backed by any arguments.

I genuinely failed to understand what you meant here. I wasn't making any claims, I was just trying to work out what your claim was, considering this is your debate, and I am supposed to be responding to your claims. However from the rest of your post here I think I got my answer. You are indeed treating the PNA and Palestine as the separate entities that they are.

What makes you think so? The PNA was institutionnalized in 1994 during the Oslo accords.....though the conditions weren't decided by Israel: They were decided by the internal commitments represented by the U.S.A, Egypt, Russia, The U.N, The E.U and....The Arab league!

The Arab League wasn't present at the Oslo talks, as they don't recognise Israel as a sovereign nation. Only the US, Russia, Israel and the PLO were.

Area A is administrated by the PNA....even though Hamas is also represented in area A!

Hamas is not in the PNA. They were barred from government by Abbas when they took over the Gaza Strip.

The 'Aza strip is also part of the PNA hence its self-sufficiency was a result of the Oslo accords.

No it wasn't. Gaza was given it's self sufficiency by Sharon, 11 years after Oslo. Post-Sharon Israeli governments reversed the self sufficiency by putting it under blockade and effective siege.

Why didn't you mention the fact that Israel isn't providing tax receipts anymore?

Because it is providing tax receipts, now that Hamas is no longer in government.

Because this leaves the Arab league as one of its largest contributaries?

Nope, even then it still greatly lags behind Europe, the US, Russia, the World Bank, the IMF and assorted charities.

But it didn't, so Israel's supposed hegemony on the PNA is not as truthful as it seems:

As a matter of fact it has. Hamas is not legal in areas B and C. Not to mention that half of Hamas's elected MPs were arrested by Israel.

Hamas is still active in the West bank.

An irrelevance to our argument, since above you already agreed that the PNA and the WEST BANK are not the same thing. Hamas is not active in the PNA, despite having 44% of seats, thanks entirely to Israel's actions in removing them.

Yet there is no valuable proof to support your claim....

Of course there isn't when chooses to purposefully disregard all evidence presented to him, and literally claim no evidence was ever presented to him. Naturally he would come to the conclusion that there was 'no evidence'. However it is clear to everyone who is not the aforementioned person, that evidence was presented, perhaps evidence people may disagree with, or refuse to believe, or demand proof of, but nonetheless evidence.

Maybe a proof of that the PNA is well unique?

Indeed, a Palestinian said to me recently ''we're the only people with no country, but two governments''. I personally suggest they adopt Libertarianism.

Then why does the declaration I've posted above signal us a 'sudden' interest from the Arab league towards the 'Palestinian cause'?

It was ''sudden'' because the Arab League itself was brand new at the time, and because the declaration of Israeli independence was also ''sudden''.

That's not what the declaration shows. But you are ,none-the-less; correct: It took some time for the Arab league to spot the profit it could get through the creation of a Palestinian state.

You're operating under the assumption here that the Arab states are good and innocent. Of course the Arabs are exploiting Palestine's cause for their own needs, as is everyone else in the world. No one really cares about Palestine, not even the bleeding heart foreign activists. It's all politics. The bleeding hearts need a bogeyman, Israel, the Arabs need a distraction, Palestine, and the Israelis need a distraction, Palestine and the Arabs.

Your claim would be true if Yasser Arafat hadn't claimed belonging to the Al-Husayni clan (defacto being the Mufti's nephew) in Amnon Kapeliuk's book : Arafat l'irréductible.

I'd like to see a verbatim quote of that claim.

If it is however true, as you say, I still would not be surprised in the least. Arab leaders (and indeed Muslim leaders) have a habit and a history of claiming descent from an important group, man or family. The King of Jordan lays claim to a Hashimi ancestry, the Kings of Morocco and Saudi Arabia claim descent from the Prophet himself, Saddam Hussein also 'discovered' a direct descent from the Prophet.

I'm sure you can see why they claim such things, and in particular why Arafat would make such a claim, and more obviously why he would get away with it. Furthermore, I'd like to point out that it doesn't actually matter whom someone is descended from, I assure you the picture is not bright on the Israeli side either.

I make a clear distinction between Palestinian and PNA representatives: the latter are mere tools.

The first however were surely confined in refugee camps......by the Lebanese and Jordanians!

Naturally, considering the new born Israeli state was pro-active in it's refugee problem by expelling them in the first place, to avert such an issue. Then again, such a fact is worthless and irrelevant when considering the modern and contemporary refugee problem. Because the Arabs are just as bad as Israel, it does not absolve Israel of anything whatsoever.

Their situation however cannot be compared to the Darfuri one in the sense that the PNA's HDI is of 0,7 (satisfactory to say the least: the Palestinian authority is thus richer than Moldova and Morocco).

All that figure proves is that Palestine is more than capable of governing itself, and governing itself extremely well, if only they were not so cruelly occupied.Then again, Palestine receives a disproportionate amount of attention compared to black people in Sudan, hence making that very possible.

[Saxon wårolord]

I genuinely failed to understand what you meant here. I wasn't making any claims, I was just trying to work out what your claim was, considering this is your debate, and I am supposed to be responding to your claims. However from the rest of your post here I think I got my answer. You are indeed treating the PNA and Palestine as the separate entities that they are.

This is our (TWC's) debate.

The Arab League wasn't present at the Oslo talks, as they don't recognise Israel as a sovereign nation. Only the US, Russia, Israel and the PLO were.

Some of its members do recognize Israel as a sovereign nation (Jordan, Egypt): I maintain the claim.

Hamas is not in the PNA. They were barred from government by Abbas when they took over the Gaza Strip.

Even Hamas members are active in Ramallah ad occupy important places there.

No it wasn't. Gaza was given it's self sufficiency by Sharon, 11 years after Oslo. Post-Sharon Israeli governments reversed the self sufficiency by putting it under blockade and effective siege.

Sharon did no more than evacuate the 'Jewish settlements' situated in the north and north-east of 'Aza: The only thing he gave was land.

Because it is providing tax receipts, now that Hamas is no longer in government.

We've stopped since the 2006 elections in 'Aza.

Nope, even then it still greatly lags behind Europe, the US, Russia, the World Bank, the IMF and assorted charities.

It may contribute with a larger wage even though the main advantage of the Arab league's aid is that it never stops.
In contrast; American, Russian and European aid can stop immediatly following diplomatic tensions.

As a matter of fact it has. Hamas is not legal in areas B and C. Not to mention that half of Hamas's elected MPs were arrested by Israel.

Hamas is illegal regarding international law and Fatah but it is widely tolerated and supported in the B and C areas.

An irrelevance to our argument, since above you already agreed that the PNA and the WEST BANK are not the same thing. Hamas is not active in the PNA, despite having 44% of seats, thanks entirely to Israel's actions in removing them.

Israel wasn't the only one responsible for removing Hamas officials (via Shin Beith indicatives).
Fatah also has its responsability by killing and ousting its members in 2007.
Hamas is actually making a comeback in Ramallah.

Indeed, a Palestinian said to me recently ''we're the only people with no country, but two governments''. I personally suggest they adopt Libertarianism.

That's something most people don't understand: Libertarianism doesn't work in the Near east.
As a matter of evidence Rome itself had to appoint puppet leaders and brutalize the population.

It was ''sudden'' because the Arab League itself was brand new at the time, and because the declaration of Israeli independence was also ''sudden''.

The Arab league wasn't 'brand new': it already had 7 members and 3 years of political knowledge behind its closet.
The Arab league completely anticipated the creation of Israel and was trying to prevent it as early as in the early 1930s.

You're operating under the assumption here that the Arab states are good and innocent.

The only fact that I consider Palestine as a tool of the Arab league lowers the latter to the USSR's level in my eyes.

Of course the Arabs are exploiting Palestine's cause for their own needs, as is everyone else in the world. No one really cares about Palestine, not even the bleeding heart foreign activists. It's all politics.

At last! Something on which we can both agree!

The bleeding hearts need a bogeyman, Israel, the Arabs need a distraction, Palestine, and the Israelis need a distraction, Palestine and the Arabs.

You'll hence approve that the members of the Arab league use the Palestinian cause as a diversion from their internal politics.

I'd like to see a verbatim quote of that claim.

Why don't you buy Amnon Kapeliuk's book then?

If it is however true, as you say, I still would not be surprised in the least. Arab leaders (and indeed Muslim leaders) have a habit and a history of claiming descent from an important group, man or family. The King of Jordan lays claim to a Hashimi ancestry, the Kings of Morocco and Saudi Arabia claim descent from the Prophet himself, Saddam Hussein also 'discovered' a direct descent from the Prophet.

I agree, exageration is this conflict's fossil fuel after all.

I'm sure you can see why they claim such things, and in particular why Arafat would make such a claim, and more obviously why he would get away with it. Furthermore, I'd like to point out that it doesn't actually matter whom someone is descended from, I assure you the picture is not bright on the Israeli side either.

I do see the main reasons of such claims but I would like you to explain why the 'Israeli side isn't bright either'.

Naturally, considering the new born Israeli state was pro-active in it's refugee problem by expelling them in the first place, to avert such an issue. Then again, such a fact is worthless and irrelevant when considering the modern and contemporary refugee problem. Because the Arabs are just as bad as Israel, it does not absolve Israel of anything whatsoever.

Some 750,000 Palestinians followed their Jordanian neighbours' advice and left Israel.
Another 100,000 were expelled by Israeli forces.....However the majority did leave by consent towards other Arab nations.
That's how they finished in Jordan before being expelled towards southern Lebanon.

All that figure proves is that Palestine is more than capable of governing itself, and governing itself extremely well, if only they were not so cruelly occupied.Then again, Palestine receives a disproportionate amount of attention compared to black people in Sudan, hence making that very possible.

Any nation is capable of governing itself.....however I wouldn't count on some sort of 'occupation' to take the blame.
Corruption and internal divisions also have a role to play.