Thieving Israeli soldiers not prosecuted

Not really. I have no problem of writing anything, but it will be a repeat on my last comment, so it better to just let you read my last comment then repeat my self like a broken record.

 

"The Brits gave the responsibility over the documen of the Mandate, not to find a solution for Arabs and Jews, but to fulfill what was been written in the Mandate, and after they failed to fulfilled it they gave the responsiblity over it back to the UN in th summer of 1947."
It is an hisorical fact.
The document of the Mandate laid down the rules and responsibility of the Mandatory power, which was agreed by the League of Nations that it will be Britian because of Balfour Declaration and because of Sykes-Picot Agreement. But at the same time, if the Brits gave back the responsibility to the UN, then the document of the Mandate cant in the responsibility of the Brits, but in the responsibility of the UN, and it is up for the UN to find a new Mandatory power to enforce the document of the Mandate, and since the UN hasnt done it, then the responsibility over the document of the Mandate is in the hand of the UN. "

As already stated goal of mandate has been achieved since 1948 the day the mandate ending with state of Israel proclaimed, I even quoted Britain the former mandatory saying a Jewish national home has been established in Palestine. Britain never transferred mandate over to UN. They referred the problem of achieving independence for the population of Palestine to the UN due to Jews and Arabs failing to agree on how Palestine was to become independent with the UN effectively acting as mediator between two sides to recommend a solution acceptable to both sides. This led to not legally binding UNGA resolution rejected by the Arabs and Britain announcing end of mandate after that since it would not enforce any solution not agreed upon by both sides. The fact is you haven't quoted a single document(if mandate document was transferred to the UN then would either/and official British or UN document that says mandate document was transferred, you have never provided any official document like that) or source that says mandate document was transferred to the UN. Until you come back with one you are making it up.

 

I'm not here to repeat myself over and over and over and over and over again in the same thread. If you want my reply, you could read the comment which I referred you to. If you dont want to read it, dont read- I'm not responsible for your actions.

 

really? how so?

 

So where does the document of the Mandate is mentioning the exact boundries of that national home? Does it mentions that the boundries of the national Jewish home will be the boundries of Israel today? If not, then the document of the Mandate wasnt fulfilled. Right, that there is no necessity that this Jewish national home will be reconstitute over all of "Palestine", but since Judea and Samaria + the current Israel is not all of "Palestine", but only parts of, then it indeed can be include Judea and Samaria in this Jewish national home. After all the Brits already fixed the boundries one time only when they gave back Trans-Jordan to the Hashemite family.

It did, in the summer of 1947.

The Brits was responsible to fulfill the document of the Mandate- recosntitute a Jewish national home in "Palestine", while the civil rights of the non-Jewish communities will be kept. This is the "solution" that was needed to be fulfilled, and still need to be fulfilled. And why I'm saying that it need still to be fulfilled? read the above to know why.

The Brits in November 1947 was not a responsible over the document of the Mandate, and they terminated indeed the British Mandate, while the document of the Mandate has kept.

You already gave an evidence that the Brits gave back the responsibility the to UN.

- - - Updated - - -

How so what?

 

document was fulfilled as soon as a Jewish national home in Palestine was created.

regardless of its size and boundaries.

 

As I already wrote to xavierphoenix:
So where does the document of the Mandate is mentioning the exact boundries of that national home? Does it mentions that the boundries of the national Jewish home will be the boundries of Israel today? If not, then the document of the Mandate wasnt fulfilled. Right, that there is no necessity that this Jewish national home will be reconstitute over all of "Palestine", but since Judea and Samaria + the current Israel is not all of "Palestine", but only parts of, then it indeed can be include Judea and Samaria in this Jewish national home. After all the Brits already fixed the boundries one time only when they gave back Trans-Jordan to the Hashemite family.

 

says you and only you.

 

History says so, not me.

 

History isn't a person.

There is not one single legitimate and credible historian who says the Mandate for Palestine is not concluded or fulfilled into all the land from the river to the sea is part of Israel.

not one.

 

International law exeprts say so according to inetrnational law.

 

there is not one single expert in international law who says the Mandate for Palestine is not concluded or fulfilled untill all the land from the river to the sea is part of Israel.

 

There are several of them that say that. I already showed you that.

 

you have shown none that say this

 

I shoed numerous of times.

 

no, you've done no such thing.

 

I've dont it numerous of times.

 

never happened.

got any proof?

Ive seen none

 

Quote above is Stuntman's response to Ronstar stating
History isn't a person.
There is not one single legitimate and credible historian who says the Mandate for Palestine is not concluded or fulfilled into all the land from the river to the sea is part of Israel.
not one.

I don't think you have quoted any historians that says the mandate wasn't concluded or the mandate is still active as examples you cited like Rostow and Stone aren't historians, they are experts on international law .
International law experts aren't the same as history experts with international law experts; expertise is on knowing international law and history experts; expertise is on history ie knowing what happened in the past and events that have led to the present. Also as already noted before the fact is majority of international law experts including those like John Dugard, Theodore Meron, Christine Chanet, etc. contradict ones you cited like Rostow and Stone saying that Israel is an occupying power requiring them to abide by 4th Geneva Convetions and 1907 Hague Regulations. You also keep making up that mandate document transferred to UN with no source and no official documents from the British and the UN saying mandate document was transferred to the UN. That won't change until you quote an actual source that says mandate document was transferred to UN.

 

I did happen. You just need to re-read my previous comments about that subject to see it, but I guess you prefer to ignore my comments, and thus why are you continue to qoute me, if eventually you will ignore me?

 

It is in contradicting to Article 80 of the UN Charter that protects the document of the Mandate.
After all the UN didnt terminated the document of the Mandate, but only the British Mandate.

You've already given the source that shows that the Brits gave the responsibility to the UN.

 

due to your incorrect response

 

It is quite correct, because I already cited inernational law exeprts that agree with me.

 

no you didn't, you cited a bunch of Israeli right-wingers wanna-be experts who disagree with the international community and Israeli supreme court

 

Not all of them are Israelis.
Please re-read my comment number #220.