If you cut and paste stuff, at least take the time time to UNDERSTAND what you are cutting and pasting. Otherwise you expose your ignorance for the world to see.
You STILL haven't got the faintest clue what the discussion about the UN(SC) is all about and how international relations work. Countries exchange favors all the time, and the UNSC veto is one of the bargaining chips the permanent members use for that purpose. A permanent member can veto a UNSC resolution either because of its own national interests, or because it is doing a favor to another country (which may also be a permanent member) and for which it expects a favor in return.
As for GA resolutions, they are just a PR stunt because any country with the military/economic muscle can ignore those resolutions. The only resolutions which have any teeth are UNSC resolutions because they are backed by the military muscle of the major powers.
So, when you say that Israel has legitimacy by the UN, it is the same as saying that Israel has legitimacy because the world military powers gave it that legitimacy.
As for your repeated refusal to acknowledge what the Balfour Declaration means, you are welcome to live in your delusions. The world does not have to share your fantasy.
It doesn't matter how you interpret it, or what 3001 reasons the Brits gave for supporting the Zionist cause. What matters is what they did, their actions, which resulted in large scale migration of Jews into Palestine and creation of Israel as a Jewish State.
You have not explained why a permanent member would need another permanent member to veto something.
You are yet to provide a single example of someone vetoing, as a bargaining chip.
I do not consider US vetoting on Israel, Russia vetoting on Syria, Iraq as such examples.
Give facts and not only theoretical possibilities. Not worthy of a "think tank".
You consider the publishing the resolution here, a denial of its contents?
Then you continue running down open doors.
Noone denies that votes in any democratic institution can be bargained with.
Noone denies that the Important resolutions are done in the SC, GA resolution can be ignored.
Noone denies that Britain allowed large scale immigration of jews.
That the plan was to create a Jewish state is definitely in doubt.
You then ignore the fact that Chad, Rwanda, Lithuania, all members of the Security Council
are not "world military powers".
The only possible argument is that the world powers created the UN, and therefore
it is they that are responsible for this decisions, but that is like arguing that God is always responsible
for all human crimes, because he created humans with a free will.
Are You always this unlucky when you are thinking?