Thousands rally against Israel in Istanbul

​

And the smart people they were... they and their descendants are now Israeli citizens, enjoying comfort and freedoms unheard of elsewhere in the Middle East. Hey, did you know that many Arab Israelis have vouched to uproot themselves and move out, if area where they live falls under Palestinian control? What do the know, the rest of Palestinians do not? Or, the other way to present it, it is painfully obvious why Palestinians are dying to get into Israel

 

You wouldn't accept/dismissed 'zionism-Israel' on a mere (and easily checkable) Benny Morris letter.
You wouldn't accept/dismissed CAMERA on the mere (and easily checkable) Testimony of the of the Captain of the Liberty.
Mainly, because you couldn't answer.
While I did answer your idiot violinist Suarez.

In response to your ignorant-of-the-issue suggestion that the 1/3 of the population/Jews got 56% of the land:

It was, and is, a big issue if one wants to claim the partition was unfair solely on percents. A common anti-Israeler Whine.
Too bad for you I'm here.

Answered a few hours ago by me in another string you mistakenly replied in.

Me: This is BS, and an Editorial Opinion from your Violinist Thomas Suarez. ('State of Terror').
The Fallacy:
Being that because terrorism is mentioned in an intelligence document, it is THE reason for Resolution 181, the Partition/creation/separation of Israel and Palestine!

Of course, this is !diotic, as the Mandate was going to end, and end inevitably separating the two peoples.
If anything, the Brits had swayed more to the Arab side between the Wars, and contrary to their, and League of Nations promise to the Jews for all of Palestine, the had to divide it because of ARAB objections, not Jewish ones.
(They also partitioned India/Pakistan in 1947)​

No, not merely suggesting.
Faisal, who negotiated the break up for the Arabs agreed to it.

The 1919 agreement BETWEEN the Arab state and 'Palestine'/the Jewish one.

http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/...aisaltext.html
or take your pick https://www.google.com/search?q=Fai...19&aqs=chrome..69i57&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8

Faisal-Weizman agreement 1919​

His Royal Highness the Emir FAISAL, representing and acting on behalf of the Arab Kingdom of HEJAZ, AND Dr. Chaim Weizmann, representing and acting on behalf of the Zionist Organization, mindful of the racial kinship and ancient bonds existing between the Arabs and the Jewish people, and realising that the surest means of working out the consummation of their national aspirations, is through the closest possible collaboration in the development of the Arab State and Palestine, and being desirous further of confirming the good understanding which exists between them, have agreed upon the following articles:

Article I
The Arab State and Palestine in all their relations and undertakings shall be controlled by the most cordial goodwill and understanding and to this end Arab and Jewish duly accredited agents shall be established and maintained in their respective territories.

Article II
Immediately following the completion of deliberations of the Peace Conference, the definite boundaries BETWEEN the Arab State and Palestine shall be determined by a commission to be agreed upon by the parties hereto.

Article III
In the establishment of the Constitution and Administration of Palestine all such measures shall be adopted as will afford the fullest guarantees for carrying into effect the British Government’s Declaration of the 2nd of November, 1917 (Balfour Declaration-SEH).

Article IV
All necessary measures will be taken to encourage and stimulate immigration of Jews into Palestine on a large scale, and as quickly as possible to settle Jewish immigrants upon the land through closer settlement and intensive cultivation of the soil. In taking such measures the Arab peasants and tenant farmers shall be protected in their rights, and shall be assisted in forwarding their economic development.
< snip >​

But between the Wars, Britain got more pro-Arab, and Palestine was divided yet again to please them by UN Resolution 181.
So, of all the arbitrary Ottoman break-up states, only Israel was by a UN vote, and half what they were promised.
Nonetheless, the Arabs rejected it.
Alas...

There's quite alot there. and you mischaracterize it. Morris 'admits' there were no broadcasts, not no calls to leave.

And I might add, Morris was the #1 cited Historical revisionist, #1 cited advocate for 'palestinians' until about a dozen years ago.
Benny Morris and his 'book "Birth of the Palestinian refugee problem", 1989 (and subsequent works) is/was the basis for the whole pro-Palestine/"New Historian"/Revisionist movement that spawned all other who followed (Pappe, Shlaim, Shavit, etc). And all of their works depended on the falsehoods in 'Birth' debunked by Karsh and real history.
Morris' 'Birth' was the pro-Palestinian bible.

He only changed his tune after archives were released, as well has being taken to task/BUSTED by Efraim Karsh in his book: Fabricating Israeli History: The "New Historians".
also see Karsh's
1999 - Benny Morris and the Reign of Error :: Middle East Quarterly
2005 - Benny Morris's Reign of Error, Revisited: The Post-Zionist Critique :: Middle East Quarterly

The fact that Morris is on the other side now was necessitated in the light of new facts/critiques, devastates the the whole bogus movement he spawned.

So when you blithely or ignorantly say "Morris himself", it's NOT like he was ever Mr pro-Israel/Mr Zionist settler.
He may still be to the anti-Israel side of Center, if not in the Pappe sell-out/Lying/Leftist MFer camp.
+

 

Firstly, you didn't answer my question: If "you" already have all "you" need, why do "you" always want more?

Israel's "dealings" with the US are obscenely one-sided in every aspect in that Israel is always playing the victim card for which
the world's glut of holocaust® museums are simply one example of tiresome Israeli whining
Meanwhile. AIPAC etc is relentless in its quest get more of everything to proceed with their ethnic cleansing of Palestine & maintenance of the Gaza concentration camp.

The America I support has nothing to do with the installation of Concentration Camps such as the ones called for by Moshe Feiglin, Deputy Speaker of the Israeli Knesset and member of Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s ruling Likud Party:

"Israeli official calls for concentration camps in Gaza and 'the conquest of the entire Gaza Strip, and annihilation of all fighting forces and their supporters'"

• Moshe Feiglin is Deputy Speaker of the Israeli Knesset
• He posted the message on his Facebook page at the weekend
• Plan includes shipping the people living in Gaza across the world
• IDF would 'exterminate nests of resistance' as part of his plan
• The Gaza war has left more than 1,800 Palestinians dead

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...fighting-forces-supporters.html#ixzz4r533poyd
EXCERPT "Moshe Feiglin, Deputy Speaker of the Israeli Knesset and member of Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s ruling Likud Party, posted the inflammatory message on his Facebook page at the weekend.

He lays out a detailed plan for the destruction of Gaza - which includes shipping its residents across the world - in a letter he addressed to the Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu.

In the letter he expresses his desire for the IDF to find areas on the Sinai border to establish 'tent encampments...until relevant emigration destinations are determined.'

He says that the supply of electricity and water to the Gaza would be disconnected before being 'shelled with maximum fire power.'"CONTINUED

The Israeli government is, regrettably, full of murderous Right Wing extremists such as Feiglin which has caused many American Jews to alienate themselves from Israel:

"The Growing Gap Between Israel And American Jews"
http://www.momentmag.com/growing-gap-israel-american-jews/

EXCERPT "Because most American Jews today are no longer in love with Israel in the way that they were during the period following 1967, there is a tendency to see the relationship as newly troubled and in terminal decline. "CONTINUED

AND

"Are American Jews Giving Up on Israel?"
http://foreignpolicy.com/2017/07/28/are-american-jews-giving-up-on-israel/

EXCERPT Some diaspora Jews, furious with a series of legislative blows from Israel’s ultra-Orthodox religious establishment, are now threatening to stitch up their deep pockets once and for all.

“The rift is real,” says Seth Farber, a modern Orthodox rabbi who leads ITIM, an organization that offers assistance to Israelis in navigating the country’s religious bureaucracy. “[Jews who are not ultra-Orthodox] are not just shifting uncomfortably. They are saying: This is not the Israel that we know.”CONTINUED

 

4some..?

Oh ma ladies I'm coming...

 

Wow look at all the radical terrorists.

Some one bomb them all while we have them in one place before they escape!

Then fly over isahell and bomb them all to.

This is not sarcasm. This is what the world needs and demands.

And end to terrorism, both muslime and jew.

 

Sounds like an easy task, but the problem is that "someone" went on holiday. By the time "someone" comes back, all will have dispersed except for isahell. It wouldn't be fair to just bomb that one alone, besides.... usisahell would retaliate and that would be the end of "someone"!!!

 

Falsifiability is the name of the scientific game. Any hypothesis or theory whose predictions are not falsifiable is not scientific. So far predictions made by the "earth revolve around the sun" theory match observations, so there's no reason to challenge it.

"God" hypothesis is not falsifiable. "Earth revolves around the sun" is. That's one difference between belief and science.

That's a fact, sure, but the conspiracy theories built around this fact are opinions.

To understand what happened there, you'll have to build a theoretical model of the towers being hit by the planes, then check if the predictions made by your model match the observed reality. The conspiracy theories fans are going about this backwards. They imagine that some of the observed realities are proof of conspiracy, and build their model based on those observations.

The first model is falsifiable, thus scientific. The second is not, it uses its own conclusion as premise, which is a logical fallacy.

All we have to do now is check how many politicians or political organizations around the globe have been in contact with American diplomats and other politicians in the last, say, 50 years, how many of those have had American backing at one point or another in this period of time, and how many acceded to power through democratic elections in their countries. Then we can build a model of American involvement and influence whose predictions will match observed reality.

It's impossible to build such a model based on a single observed possible outcome of the model. It's like forbidding your child to drink water because someone, somewhere, died of water poisoning.

I'm trying to tell you that it's impossible to decide one way or another based on the evidence you provided. Your model does not say how all this secret meetings and hushed political gossip could lead to Erdogan being elected - several times - by a very large group of voters in democratic elections. This is a fatal flaw for your theory. Show me that your theory predicts such an outcome if you want me to take it seriously.

No, you're wrong, the sort of evidence I'd accept is scientific evidence.

Are you serious? It's self-explanatory.

You forget that 22 years old Israelis usually are army veterans, many of them with experience in combat, many of them officers. I could accept your unlikely scenario for one moron with too much hormones, but there were five men there.

 

I didn't choose to believe Aydinlik is socialist, this is what google told me. Sue google.

You have a point here however. I was wrong to base my opinion on personal dislike for the newspaper political orientation. Changed my position, see the previous post.

Oh, please. This is clearly a joke.

Good for her. Smart woman.

Remember my question "Abramowitz who"?

Politics is a science too, with predictable outcomes.
Signed
The Other Abramowitz

The Courage to Care Award has been awarded by ADL to the Turkish people, not Erdogan himself.

There's a very good reason why Turkey isn't a member of the EU. Think about it, then we'll go back to puppeteers and their goals.

We'll talk about Batasuna &stuff later.

 

Much Ado About Nothing. Many pathetic insults just to come up with one argument, that the Kalifaatstaat was found in the 80ies, which does not change one bit. In Germany it was registeres since 1994. Which makes your accusation that Germany did not fight an association which did not even exist here rather ridiculous. The Islamic world especially Turkey spawns these terror organisazions, even the Gülen Islamistt. When it turns - bis surprise against them - they start crying and accuse evil aliens.

Nevertheless you dont know nothing about the politics you wanna discuss. So I am not gonna answer your silly questions.

 

It is public knowledge, at least it should be for those who feel entitled to be judge and jury over who has to die and who may live.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Nations_Partition_Plan_for_Palestine

 

I am not posting at the moment as I am not well and do not have the energy for anything bar a simple post. However please quit these accusations. First of all your link does not say that the Palestinian Arabs 'started' the civil war as the person I was speaking to said. Now please provide proper evidence of this or quit being so cheeky. Secondly I have never got into any game of 'who should live and who should die'. I do not support anyone dying. Clearly you have ideas of who you want to kill or you would never have said such an inflammatory thing. Now put your money where your mouth is and provide proof that the Palestinian Arab's started the 'civil war' and that as that poster was saying that was justification for the ethnic cleansing and refusal to give them any state since.

 

Well this contains so much contradiction, I dont know how to react:

1. Do you feel sick and dont want a further discussion here til your power bar has regenerated or so you want me to go on and provide evidence?
2. Although you play here judge and jury, you want me to stop such accusations? Well, what you want, you made a judgement who is the only responsible side for this conflict. So you are judge and jury, aren't you?
3. Well, in the same comment you find these accusations inflammatory you make yourself the same accusations, although I never was here judge and jury.

I dont know exactly what you want from me, please elaborate. For first, if I should send you my best wishes and continue another time when you recovered or if you wanna continue and want evidence.

 

The Balfour declaration gives the rights of Palestinians over the Jewish immigrants.
Nothing may be done against the civil rights of those Palestinians.
And according to this, they all got the right to return to the land they owned
and the Jew only gets what is left.

 

My drandfather and grandmother from my father side is all Palestinains when they arrived to the Land of Israel. I have documents to prove it.

 

of course you do.

 

You DO know what these ladies do to you, if they caught you in the wrong, right?

 

Get well soon.

 

I would be surprised if the Balfour Declaration gave the Arabs ANY enforceable rights as it was significantly written & influenced by vocal, powerful & later violent Zionist lobbies & Terrorist Gangs.

"Zionism in Britain: a Neglected Chronicle"
https://www.counterpunch.org/2015/08/28/zionism-in-britain-a-neglected-chronicle/

EXCERPT "Christopher Mayhew (Undersecretary for Labour Foreign Secretary, Ernest Bevin. The Commons, 11 July 1948.) drew on Doreen Ingrams’ Palestine Papers 1917-1922, which highlights that the first drafts of the Balfour Declaration were written under the direction of Zionists (Lord Rothschild and Chaim Weizmann) on Balfour’s invitation. Weizmann had ready access to Balfour. Thus Weizmann to Balfour, 30 May 1918

For Mayhew:

“The secret of the Zionists’ success has lain in the existence of a large, lively and influential Jewish community in Britain. [In the context of deliberations regarding the Balfour Declaration in 1917, supporters of Zionism, whether Jewish or non-Jewish …if they were not in positions of power themselves, they usually had easy access to those who were.

Christopher Mayhew’s first personal brush with Zionism was upon receipt of a letter dated 5 December 1946:

“We are determined this time to squash you British sons of a bitch and we declare war to the finish against the British. For every Jew you stinking British pigs kill in Palestine you will pay a thousandfold in fetid English blood. The [Lahome Herut Israel] has passed sentence of death on the British pig Mayhew. The execution will soon take place by silent and new means.”

At that time, letter bombs were received by several people. One such package was sent to an avowed anti-Zionist Roy Farran, which killed his brother.”CONTINUED


While the Arabs who had minimal if any lobbies influencing the British Government' policies were spilling their blood fighting the Ottoman Turks as they agreed to under the McMahon Agreement(1), the Zionists were comfortably ensconced in London threatening & cajoling members of the British Government into abrogating The McMahon Agreement in favor of the disastrous and pro Zionist Balfour Declaration.

Zionist lobbies then & now, in London and elsewhere have proven themselves to be among the most duplicitous, ruthless, cowardly & grasping entities on the political spectrum.







(1) "The McMahon Agreement"
http://www.historylearningsite.co.u...ddle-east-1917-to-1973/the-mcmahon-agreement/

EXCERPT "The McMahon-Hussein Agreement of October 1915 was accepted by Palestinians as a promise by the British that after World War One, land previously held by the Turks would be returned to the Arab nationals who lived in that land. The McMahon-Hussein Agreement was to greatly complicate Middle East history and seemed to directly clash with the Balfour Declaration of 1917."

CONTINUED

 

How about read it and be surprised? It simple does say, specifically "to understand clearly" that the rights indigenous population are totally protected. So that does mean, no ethnic cleansing, no banning them to go home.

 

You have lost your marbles. Gone completely mad and are just writing gibberish. I will leave you to get the help you need. Or you could of course do what we were talking about "Now put your money where your mouth is and provide proof that the Palestinian Arab's started the 'civil war' and that as that poster was saying that was justification for the ethnic cleansing and refusal to give them any state since."

 

There is nothing to answer. All you said was

As it happens I did look into that letter and considered an answer. so if you are so keen you can have it.


First there was no Jewish State. The recommendation did not go on to the security council who anyway could not have forced this against the will of the people. The Israelis proclaimed their own state. However even further, it would appear that the main reason why the Zionists were offered the State, and more of the State than was in any way just, was because of fear of more terrorism from the Zionists and not just in Israel but throughout the World as well as the hope that this would stop, at least for a while the continued expansion of the Zionist State which the British and the United States knew would happen.

• Resolution 181 was the capitulation to Zionist terrorism (1947)

In addition both the US and the UK knew that there would not be a Palestinian State.

US & British officials knew that the promised Palestinian state would not be (1947-4

The links are to the British archives.

There was no State that the Palestinians were trying to destroy. The Zionists wanted one yes. They had managed by fair means and foul to get a vote recommending it by the UN yes but that was non binding and it then went dead. Israel declared her own State and much to the consternation of the US State Department Truman immediately recognised it.

Hey you like Churchill do you not. Unfortunately I cannot find this but Churchill was in the area around 1919 and agreed to speak to them as they were saying No, they did not want a Jewish home in their homeland. He was somewhat patronising as you can imagine and told them he didn't need to see them but had agreed to be polite. He said he had heard they did not want a Jewish Home and that was a pity because there was going to be one. He then said that they themselves were going to benefit enormously from that...and then he said but you have not noticed the end bit - you know "it being clearly understood that nothing shall be done which may prejudice the civil and religious rights of existing non-Jewish communities in Palestine" and spent a paragraph telling them that they absolutely meant that and that was how it would be so they had absolutely nothing to worry about. Liar. I wish I could find it but it was at a site I never go to and I cannot remember what it was called.

Nor can it be said that they were the first to fight and that the Zionists only reacted. Absolutely not. They had Plan D which they put into Operation in April of 48 beginning with Qastel on April the third. Operation Nachshon they called it and it went on to take and get rid of the inhabitants of Qastel and Tiberias which appear to have had no defence as well Haifa which had a minimum defence and was definitely wrong footed when the only Arab Officer ran off on hearing what Stockwell was up to and that there would be no protection for the Arabs by the British Army but they had no way of defending themselves anyway. The only place where there was a good and stoic Arab defence was in Jaffa which was a town even by the partition plan given to the arabs - though interestingly enough in that link Gluck presented it said originally it was going to go to the Zionists so we can believe they wanted it....but this surely is the beginning of civil war. The Zionists with high quality modern weapons attacking and taking possession of the cities they wanted. Benny seems to believe that people need to write that they are up to ethnic cleansing if they are but that is not so. Blatman quotes the prosecutor in the trial of Radovan Karadzic, a Bosnian-Serb leader convicted for the ethnic cleansing of Muslims in Bosnia:

quoted in this extremely well sourced if somewhat long article on Morris's change of mind

https://www.foreignpolicyjournal.co...l-of-the-ethnic-cleansing-of-palestine/#_edn4


You see you believe that Morris is the king of the Kings but he is a Professor and there are plenty of other professors who like him have studied the archives which are now closed, and they think he is just playing to the gallery. In 87 he was criticising those he called the 'old historians' for turning their eyes away from the truth it order to justify what Israel had done as others now say he himself is doing that. It did cost Morris. He came very near to having to leave Israel because of his 87 book. He could not get a job anywhere. Luckily for him the then President of Israel sorted that out for him but it must have been tough. We are now in a very different situation. Most of the people who were there at the beginning are now dead, Muslims are the hated ones of the West. so so easy just to say Oh yes I got it wrong. As I said he is criticised by other Israeli Jewish Professors. Blatman and Baruch Kimmerling. Neither Pappe nor Ava Shlaim have changed their minds at all.

The War of the Israeli Historians

in this one Shlaim talks of Karsh's criticism of his work

A Totalitarian Concept of History

Here he speaks about The Debate About 1948
Now the British Archives are not comparable with a supposed Professor who changes his mind depending on circumstances. Pappe estimates that 350,000 had been forced out before the Zionists declared their state. Morris has apparently said more than 300,000 but less than 400,000 so that sounds reasonable. Yes, the people ran because they were terrified. They had every reason to be terrified as I have written about in previous posts. Even the few Arabs who wanted to fight had very little to fight with old weapons and very little ammunition whereas the Zionist fighters were well armed. They had no chance so they ran for their lives. They had to. Could they come back Of course not. As soon as they ran their houses were destroyed and they were shot if they tried to get back in. Yes, that is ethnic cleansing which they had spoken about doing again and again and again calling it transfer.

Suarez book however State of Terror - How terrorism created modern Israel has been endorsed by Ilan Pappe

http://state-of-terror.net/

and is recommended by pretty much all the British Jewish groups who are not happy with how Israel went - jfjfp, Free Speech on Israel and so on. The book goes on till 67. Here is review from one of our Jewish Labour Members

http://labourbriefing.squarespace.com/home/2017/2/2/another-false-flag?rq=thomas suarez

So if the archives make you so upset, I hate to think what reading the book would do to you. The archives are the backbone of it. Without them it would not exist. So as they are using the Nazi word I will give you an archive in which they speak of this, though it happens quite often. No they are not talking about Gas Chambers and mass executions but they are talking about having the same mentality.

US Intelligence Report: Zionism in Palestine (1943)

Here Judah Magnes, Hebrew University President talks about his concerns about Totalitarianism
Judah Magnes rails against the totalitarianism gripping the Yishuv (1947)

There are several links to archives talking about about Nazi, totalitarian parallels

http://paldocs.net/

Now In 'What Price Israel' Lilienthal speaks at length about the Zionists refusing to allow offers of immigration to other Displaced Persons particularly but not restricted to the Roosevelt one given above. Now I can remember years and years ago saying how that was what should have happened, safe countries like the States and UK should have opened their doors to DP's...and it turns out the offer was made. Lilienthal also mentions more than once his concern that reception Judah Magnes received - someone who he deeply respected. As far as Displaced Persons, well Finkelstein has already spoken about the massive pressure which was put on Jews in Displaced Person's Camps to say they wanted to go to Palestine. In " In the Shadow of the Holocaust.The Struggle Between Jews and Zionists in the Aftermath of World War 11, by Grodzinsky,
working in the Psychology Department of some University in Israel at the time, confirms this. The first poll in such a camp found that only 16% of the Jews in these camps wanted to go to Palestine. Most wanted to go to the US. Lilienthal also speaks of this in What Price Israel.

so what Suarez speaks about is covered in other books through out time. He just found an enormous amount of Archives to suport his book. Of course he has been called an antisemite for daring to write such things. However our House of Lords investigated and found that this was not so. Researching and writing a book on archives is not antisemitism.

http://www.skyscraperpublications.c...omas-Suarez-defended-in-House-of-Lords-report

You may be interested in Free Speech on Israel's review of the book
http://freespeechonisrael.org.uk/thomas-suarez/

That is as far as I can get today.

 

There was tons to answer in those two Links.
You still haven't.

So after all the wasted text and time driveling up half a leftist book/kook... (maybe someone else thinks volume=right)
You have no answer to the Incoherence of your goofy claim.
That in any case, the two people's would have been separated/Stated, as they had to do almost the same time in India/Pakistan.

as they all had known since....
1919's Faisal-Weizmann agreement, (and 40 years of significant immigration before it), in which Faisal agreed to the Jewish National Home in Palestine. All of it.
IOW, after a decade of anti-Israel trash, you were apparently unaware of it!...

as you were about the conflict's foremost player/Morris.
and his narrative, and it's transition/flip based on facts.

Now go back to Patagonian Friends of Justice in Gaza, or whatever more genteel Stormfront you post on.
You lost (badly) no matter how long your posts/burial attempts are.
+

 

Amazing litt-al-guy!
You're the only Arab who likes Balfour and Faisal-Weizman!

IOW, ALL of Palestine being a Jewish state with some worker bee felahin.
Pretty much what was there for a thousand+ years. A few rich guys and a few hundred thousand tenant farmers, who would and did, Squat anywhere for work.
As they did in Iraq, Kuwait, etc. in the last part of the 20th C until they were kicked out. What is that? Like Double/Triple 'refugees'.

IOW, It really never mattered which EXACT part of Stinking Desert National Park they inhabited.
+

 

You are just like your random Jew apologist citing the Balfour declaration, and omitting that all the rights of the indigenous population are protected. All in order to claim the land belongs to the Jew. While the declaration is clear on it, that immigrants are 2nd class and only get what is left. Hence the Jew must accept that all the Arabs return to their properties and they whamoos the hell out. Must accept in order to not be in total violation of international law, and remain a bunch of ethnic cleansing thieves.