Your Jsource website gives this comment:
According to the Peel Commission, appointed by the British Government to investigate the cause of the 1936 Arab riots, "the field in which the Jewish National Home was to be established was understood, at the time of the Balfour Declaration, to be the whole of historic Palestine, including Transjordan."
Where does it get that quotation from? I read the text of the Peel commission report, and nowhere did I find that quote. Nowhere in the enitre Peel report did I find anything even remotely suggesting that the British recognized all of Palestine as rightfully belonging to the Jews (not that such recognition has any relevence).
So I ask you again: show me a single document, British or League of Nations, that says the Jews are to receive all the land of Palestine for a state.
I find it ammusingly ironic that the pro-Zionist crowd is relying so heavily upon League of Nations mandates to support their case while at the same time flaunting and disparaging the UN, which is nothing more than a post-war version of the League of Nations.
Not that I give much weight to either the UN or League of Nations. I fail to see how Birtish declarations or mandates issued by a now defunct globalist bureaucracy have any relevence today.
Where is the text you're relying on? Secondly, the British, at the time of the Declaration ("understood, at the time of the Balfour Declaration, to be the whole of historic Palestine, including Transjordan") understood that, not by 1937 which by then they had already turned their backs on the "National Home" concept. You're misreading the quote.
So I ask you again: show me a single document, British or League of Nations, that says the Jews are to receive all the land of Palestine for a state.
You are misreading the document. It speaks about not prejudicing the civil or religious rights of the others there, i.e., those who would live under the "National Home for the Jews". In other words, not prejucing what would eventually become minority interests in the "National Home" because of Jewish immigration. The "National Home" in the entirety of the British Mandate is exactly what Balfour was referring to. "Palestine" was understood in law to be both areas East and West of the Jordan. I don't see why that is difficult for you to understand.
Maybe we can sharpen your concern without having to go back and forth. It is accepted that the British never noted "state" in the "Balfour Declaration". Neither do they suggest that the Jews "are to receive all the land of Palestine for a state." The Balfour Declaration was as close as possible, however, to advancing a state and national claim for the Jews in that area without explicitly stating same. But the issue is not limited to that obviously. The national aspirations were inevitable after the seeds were sown. Both respect to Arab nationalism and Jewish nationalism.
"Please show me a single document that promised the Jews the entire area West of the Jordan.". You then use the quite different verbiage here:"So I ask you again: show me a single document, British or League of Nations, that says the Jews are to receive all the land of Palestine for a state."
These obviously mean different things as I have stated to you above. My answer was to your first query. The second was not part of your initial query.