Peace Talks - Will Israel Really Withdraw?

It doesn't. But it does show just how empty your claim is that the mandate provides approval for 'a Jewish nation in part of the mandate', and THAT is the point that was being discussed.

So is that the only part of all of my detailed and referenced rebuttals regarding the 1917/1922 creation of a Jewish nation that you disagree with?

 

You now say that ‘Balfour’ was “an initial step … to be finalized later”. Wersted, you are guilty of yet another sham. Here is your original post:

You originally claimed that ‘Balfour’ ’offered … a Jewish nation’.
Now you put up a strawman argument about 'later finalization', and you pretend that you were in the right all along. In the process you malign Shiva. THAT is dishonest debating. You have been caught out twice in a row now.

But then, when you frantically wriggling on the end of a string with your original 'Balfour offers Jewish nation' thesis in tatters, what better tactic that to pretend that you had maintained something else?

 

I think the only scam is the one that you are trying to orchestrate here on this forum for your self indulgence by the serpentine way that you present your mythical case...

On Feb 21, 1922 British protectorate over Egypt ended...
on Mar 16, 1922 Britain recognized Kingdom of Egypt under Fouad I with joint Anglo-Egyptian sovereignty over the Sudan.
on Jul 24, 1922 The League of Nations council approves the Mandate for Palestine and Iraq. Arab Congress at Nablus rejects Brit. Mandate for Palest. Does any of this rebut our contention that ‘Balfour’ or the 1922 documents do NOT ‘offer a Jewish sovereign nation? It does not. Well, maybe he will get to it later.


Sep, 1922 Churchill White Paper eliminates Trans-Jordan from area pledged as Jewish National Home in Palest. as invoked. British Gov. obtains the League of Nation's consent to postpone or withhold the application of the 'Jewish National Home' provision of the Mandate in East Palest. 77% of the Mandate 'East of the Jordan river' is now administered by Emir Abdullah from the Hedjaz within the Palestine Mandate. Does any of this rebut our contention that ‘Balfour’ or the 1922 documents do NOT ‘offer a Jewish sovereign nation? It does not. Well, maybe he will get to it later.

As explained on Jul 24, 1922... An Arab Congress at Nablus rejects Brit. Mandate for Palest. Does any of this rebut our contention that ‘Balfour’ or the 1922 documents do NOT ‘offer a Jewish sovereign nation? It does not. Well, maybe he will get to it later.

What is written above is not clear... non-Jewish part????????????
There was no 'non-Jewish part' THE MANDATE WAS A UNIT THAT INCLUDED CISJORDAN AND TRANSJORDAN!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Does any of this rebut our contention that ‘Balfour’ or the 1922 documents do NOT ‘offer a Jewish sovereign nation? It does not. Well, maybe he will get to it later.

I suggest you gives us some substantiation of your 1st of August event...
The last British soldier left Palestine on June 30, 1948...

If you suggest termination of the Mandate as a theoretical act of leaving Palestine... this seems irrelevant since... termination means... enough already let me get out of here... Does any of this rebut our contention that ‘Balfour’ or the 1922 documents do NOT ‘offer a Jewish sovereign nation? It does not. Well, maybe hewill get to that later.
[/quote]
Hey, wait a minute!! He has finished.
Correct.
But nowhere did he show any evidence for his claim that “the only scam is the one that you are trying to orchestrate here on this forum for your self indulgence by the serpentine way that you present your mythical case...”
Relax, relax. You will get used to it. HBendor makes a claim. Then he provides half a dozen or so irrelevant strawmen, then 6 weeks later he trumpets that he destroyed your reasoned and referenced thesis that Balfour did not offer the Jews a sovereign nation. That's how many of the Zionist supporters argue. Take a look at wersted.

 

Unless you are an idiot, then it would be obvious that the balfour letter would not be the final document, since it did not go into detail on any issues.

What is hilarious is how hard you keep trying to prove me wrong on any point you think you can scrape up, as if I have been your daddy your whole life....

I also enjoy and laugh at reading about how you keep "winning" arguments, and declaring how well you are doing, yet outside of the usual brain-dead morons jewhaters who habit this forum, you're the only one who keeps claiming it.

To summarize, the concept of a jewish-sovereign state was initially authorized and put into diplomatic and legal play by the balfour declaration, whose borders, shape and size was ultimately defined by the partition plan.

To those with a qualitative understanding of the history, this is well known and not open to interpretation.

But you and a few other racist/jewhaters/dimwits can keep trying to re-frame past, widely known history and facts as much as you like. Just pretend its the same silly putty/playdoh you play with in your spare time now...

 

Quote: Uruknet.info

This lethal scrap of paper, which called itself a declaration of sympathy with Jewish Zionist aspirations, actually said... "His Majesty's Government view with favour the establishment in Palestine of a national home for the Jewish people, and will use their best endeavours to facilitate the achievement of this object, it being clearly understood that nothing shall be done which may prejudice the civil and religious rights of existing and non-Jewish communities..."

Was Balfour completely off his head? The Allied Powers, in correspondence between Sir Henry McMahon and Sharif Hussein Ibn Ali of Mecca, had already promised independence to Arab leaders in return for their help in defeating Germany's ally, Turkey.

But Balfour was a Zionist convert, as were many others in the corridors of power in London at that time. Among them were Lloyd George and, to my dismay, Winston Churchill.

So much for those independence of that war monger alcoholic and manic depressive "Churchill"! That paragon of virtue! I think not!

Regards
Highlander

 

I didn't see Shiva admitting anything of the sort....but then I don't interpret everything from a pro-Zionist POV.

It would be really good if you took your zionist rose coloured glasses off and actually read what is being said on here..with references etc which prove your's (or the Hasbara) interpretation wrong.

<<< Mod Edit: Insult Removed >>>

And do you think that a nation which runs scared at the very thought that the rest of their lives may not always be plain sailing and perfect, as Israel appears to expect, is actually capable of running a country as normal as every other country which faces adversity and copes with it?

 

Please substantiate the above... Balfour, Lloyd George and Churchill...

Especially Churchill who lumped off 77% of the Mandate for Palestine and gave it to an Arab upstart from the Hedjaz, who also invented Art. 25 and sandwiched it in the 28 Articles of the Mandate.

You blurt 'Zionist' as if it was some sickness... Well T. E. Lawrence (of Arabia) was pro Arab and a non Zionist... How do you explain that?

The Cairo Conference of 12 of March 1921 was attended by forty experts on one or more facets of British Policy in the Middle East... I must sadly say that the majority did not like Jews, were Neutral, some did have an aversion to Jews. The Only one who spoke in favor of the Zionists was Colonel Richard Meinertzhagen...

 

The question which predominate here is as follow... Apparently you fail to reconcile the fact that Jewish Home/Jewish Nation declared independence by Ben Gurion on May 14, 1948...

Israel Declared its Independence in 1948...
David Ben-Gurion reads the Israeli Declaration of Independence, 14 May 1948.
Recognition of such and its membership accepted at the United Nations (UN) as its 59th member on 11 May 1949.

So what you and others are proselytizing is completely irrelevant!!!!
If there was any illegality to process Israel's admission to the (UN) this of course would have been DRAWN IN LIMELIGHT IN HISTORY for all to read and ponder.

 

Yes he did, when he realized that he is not going to re-interpret 80 years of legal and diplomatic doctrine no matter how hard he tries...

Neither you nor any of your cohorts has even come close to proving my claims incorrect, nor will they. I have 80 years of history and the best legal minds behind me, who all understand, along with most of the general public, that the balfour declaration was the first building block towards the re-instation of a jewish-sovereign state in the middle east.

The more the weak posters claim "victory", the more obvious it is that they have no ability to achieve it.

For those who are joining the thread late, here is the balfour language showing that the intent was to create a jewish sovereign nation within the Mandate territory:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Balfour_Declaration_of_1917

"His Majesty's Government view with favour the establishment in Palestine of a national home for the Jewish people..."

 

I am a proud Zionist and I carry this as a sign of honor on my lapel.
vs your Neturei Karta burning the Israeli flag on Purim... I am sorry for you.

 

And that would have been in which post? I am sure you can link me to the post in which he says that the Balfour Letter or the Mandate for Palestine have a legal basis which authorised a Jewish state. I can't find anyrhing.

He may well have said that there is no way now we can go back until the days before the Mandate allowed the influx of Zionists into Palestine.....but that is not the same thing as saying that either document was any basis for assuming a Jewish State was to be imposed against the wishes of the majority of the inhabitants of Palestine.

Well, we don't expect to prove you are talking through a hole in the back of your head to you. Debate with those who do not recognise facts are a waste of time if the intention is to change their minds..because closed minded are not reachable.

What we do, and what you allow..nay, encourage us to do by regurgitating Hasbara sound bites, is place the facts, rather than Zionist interpretation of the facts, before those who read forums and have only ever been subject to Zionist propaganda.

Do you not find it interesting that there has been a gradual reluctance to accept Israel's interpretation of much of Zionist history and Israel's justification of much of Israel's actions since the internet has grown and there has been more news sources than the usual Rupert Murdoch/Fox News bias?

And that epitomises the ever more frantic Hasbara posts with not one item of "fact" in support but a few documents interpreted through the prism of Zionism. And this despite the fact that clarification of them has been made on more than one occasion by the country which wrote the Balfour Letter and drafted the Mandate for Palestine.

For those who are joining the thread late, here is the balfour language showing that the intent was NOT to create a jewish sovereign nation within the Mandate territory:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Balfour_Declaration_of_1917

"His Majesty's Government view with favour the establishment in Palestine of a national home for the Jewish people". Note the a and note the and will use their best endeavours to facilitate the achievement of this object, it being clearly understood that nothing shall be done which may prejudice the civil and religious rights of existing non-Jewish communities in Palestine, or the rights and political status enjoyed by Jews in any other country

and further note......that the White Paper of 1922 said "His Majesty's Government therefore now declare unequivocally that it is not part of their policy that Palestine should become a Jewish State. They would indeed regard it as contrary to their obligations to the Arabs under the Mandate, as well as to the assurances which have been given to the Arab people in the past, that the Arab population of Palestine should be made the subjects of a Jewish State against their will."

 

I wouldn't mind wearing it there, either.

 

Apparently I am not looking forward to manners or good judgment either.

 

No we defend ourselves from murderers ensconced in Gaza.

We absorbed 10,000 missiles (all kind) from Gaza... Any country would have scorched the strip but according to you we are the murderers because we still defend ourselves and we have not yet surrendered.

Yes, yes, we will surrender in your dreams, but in reality we will REACT to all attacks.

 

God bless us..........you defend yourself from Gaza, which you hasve under seige since 1998?
You have stopped medical aid and food aid going into Gaza for 12 years, you thought your Nazi tactics would work like it did for your namesake Hitler!
But you never realised the resilience of the Palestinians!
Nor of the work done by Hammas to stop the Palestinians from real starvation,
But You do have to keep bombing the tunnels!
You thought your friend Abbas (after you poisoned Arafat) would be the Judas and sell out the Palestinians!
Well look at the mockery of the Clinton Mitchell Abbas fiasco! Your Egyptian pariah another slug doing your bidding. But everyone knows!
Abbas is the leader of nothing! He cannot pledge the Palestinian nation to anything but the antics of your genocidal lot and the other Zionist supporter Clinton seem to think Abbas has legitimacy which everyone knows is not the case! Abbas lost his elected remit in January 2010 when he left office!
Oooh and those children and women you brave IDF soldiers used as human shield's was a good SS tactic! But that's what your lot is all about!
The 102 items Gold-stone report highlighted ......you know the one's.....crimes against humanity.......murdering little children, using body parts and selling them, sexual abuse against minors....Oooh but that's allowed in your religion, according to the Talmud providing the are Goyem and more than 3 years old!
But remember those 16 year old Lebanon boy's and men, the 2000 that kick your 40000 IDF soldiers butts! Not so easy when they can defend themselves is it! You're to used to killing unarmed civilians women and children!
AS for the10000 missiles.......that goes with the rest of the Zionist propaganda, bollocks!

Carry on dreaming your nightmare scenario's...........but one day......your lot will get its just deserts.

Highlander

 

Well that's the fault of bad parenting.......but then again that's obvious!

Regards
Highlander

 

You mean the one who denied the Foreign Secretary's approval of the Hussein-MacMahon promise and couldn't understand the geography that was addressed? That Churchill? The one who by doing so, opened the gate to introduce 'Balfour' into the Mandate for Palestine? That Winston? You mean he did not assist the Zionist cause by doing this?

 

Not at all. Why are you confusing 1922 with 1948? I am on record many times as noting that Ben Gurion, in his declaration of Israeli independence, pointedly referred to UN General Assembly resolution 181 as the underpinning justification.

You, HBendor, on the other hand are on record as stating that 181 is 'void' and that approval for a Jewish state was given by San Remo (you later adjusted that to the Mandate for Palestine).

I see that you now realise the error of your analysis. Good. Progress is being made.

But of course you do realise that with that post above, you have acknowledged the validity of '181'. Combine this with the Mandate Holder's undertaking to abide by the outcome of '181' and a whole new world will open before you, HBendor. For instance, you will realise why the Mandate lasted, at most, until 1 August 1948, and is not, as you have previously claimed on this forum, still in operation. Oh, and that in turn means that you can no longer use it as justification for the illegal Jewish settlements in Palestine. WOW!! What a change wrought by your one short post!!

 

And notwithstanding all of that anecdotal crap and ad hominem attack, you are still unable to show (and never have been) where 'Balfour' offered the Jews a sovereign state, whether then or in the future. You just SAY it did. Sorry mate, but your 'say so' counts for zip here. Now show where Balfour authorised this future Jewish sovereign state, as opposed to a homeland IN Palestine (as it so clearly did), or get off the pot.

 

Precisely, Highlander, and that fact that Lord Grey, British Secretary of State, gave his specific approval to McMahon's draft is also coveniently swept under the carpet. What IS highlighted, is that McMahon, some 20+ years later, says that he never meant the land promised to the Arabs to include Palestine. Well that is tough tittly, because the black-and-white words that he wrote (with approval), say EXACTLY that.

Is it twisted to believe that McMahon had to utter this drivel when the sheer selfish duplicity became obvious to all the world that the Brits had promised one thing to the Arabs in 1915, and then made an utterly contradictory promise to the Jews in 1917? And that that duplicity and self-interest seeking led directly to the riots of the 1920s and 1947 and to the entire debacle that followed.

Well done Britannia!! Your jingoist imperial arrogance has landed us all deep in the crap. Ask the firemen at ground zero.

 

Which documents refer to 'nation-states', wersted? Once again you are lip-flapping instead of referencing. I invite you for the 5th time - show us where.

 

Why should anyone here show you anything since you have already introduced yourself as an authority (my way or no way) on the subject matter, when realistically you are just learning on the job.

An authoritative person has the last word -- but you sir have not yet started learning the subject matter and you already describe yourself as the Myth finder when in reality you seem to be the 'Myth maker' dangling several straw men on the same string.

 

I take it that means that you can't show us where either. Thought not.
So when you are found wanting you resort to .... ad hominems .... of course
The Myth remains busted ... and rightly so.

 

Where is the "ad hominem" ? Perhaps you do not even know what "ad hominem" means...

 

Wersted you have been called "dumbass zionist" by the grand whatever...
It behooves you to report it... These people are starting to gang up again.

Your reports are accurate. Also... 77% of Palestine was purposely lobbed off the Mandate to form Arab Palestine now called Jordan before Transjordan and before that Trans-Jordan. 79% of the population of this artificial so called state is made out of Palestinian stock.