Do Palestinians Have the Right to Defend Themselves?

[P F Tinmore]

P F Tinmore, et al,

Members of UN Committees must avoid impropriety and the appearance of impropriety in all of the members activities.” Otherwise is detracts from the confidence in the organization.

Why is that a dis-qualifier for you?

(COMMENT)

The Arab League was a confederation formed in 1945. The Arab Higher Committee was reconstituted the same year by the Arab League. The Arab League consisted of Egypt, Iraq, Lebanon, Saudi Arabia, Syria, Jordan, and Yemen and later joined by Libya, Sudan, Morocco, Tunisia, Kuwait, Algeria, Bahrain, Mauritania, Oman, Qatar, Somalia, and the United Arab Emirates. Sub-Committee 2 were from: Afghanistan, Colombia, Egypt, Iraq, Lebanon, Pakistan, Saudi Arabia, Syria, and Yemen.

The cross connect and associates are clear: Egypt, Iraq, Lebanon, Saudi Arabia, Syria, and Yemen. The same nations that submitted the report were the same nations that attacked Israel on their Independence Day.

It is the case that these countries could have been ignored when the other members of the General Assembly realized that this was just part of the Powerful Arab interests, both inside and outside Palestine, are defying the resolution of the General Assembly and are engaged in a deliberate effort to alter by force the settlement envisaged therein.

Most Respectfully,
R

You are still sliming the source while not addressing the content.

 

[Phoenall]

None of the reports have been proven to be false. It is just the UN presenting the facts on the ground prior to partition. It isn't a white paper, it is the report to the General Assembly setting forth the facts on the ground on which the partition of Palestine was executed. And, of course the data presented to the General Assembly was fact.

You claimed that your links were Zionist propaganda so how about proving it Abdul. Because the links we use are yours when we destroy your POV and it is you that claims they are false.
It says in the heading WHITE PAPER so why do you LIE you RACIST POS. And as you have found out it has no legal standing and was ignored and finally binned

 

[Phoenall]

So, no OFFICIAL sites proving that actual evictions and ethnic cleansing occurred. Just bullshit opinions, IslamoNazi sites, speculations, and false propaganda.

Like I thought.

You got nothin'.

What do you classify as an "official" site?

A site that doesn't publish opinion pieces by terrorist ass kissers and leftist morons.

So in other words any site you don't agree with, or tells the truth, figures.

An opinion is not fact, moron. And that site is very low on facts.

Prove it.

I did from the site itself when I posted its mission.

 

[Phoenall]

Phoenall, montelatici, Challenger, Roudy, et al,

For most of my time participating in the "Israel and Palestine Forum" the general process involved has been adversarial; more concerned with resolving sport and narrow controversies than with finding the ultimate truth and a workable solution. There has been a plethora of sources used in this forum; anywhere from papers written by prisoners, to designer dissertations by ever well respected personalities. One of the unique problems of this forum is that it is adversarial in the conventional sense (pro 'versus' con); but, the two principle opponents (pro-Israeli and pro-Palestinian) are both on the positive side of the same question. Yet in the reality of the situation is that they both are 180º out of sync with each other and with their interpretations of reality being blinded to evidence in fact. One aspect that is seen more than any other is the concept of "propaganda." Each side professes to claims that they condemn all forms of propaganda which is either designed or likely to provoke or encourage and threat to the peace, breach of the peace, or act of aggression.

Propaganda is a systematic effort to persuade; not unlike a debate; with each opponent attempting to use the art of persuasion to their advantage. Thus the issue is not the truth or falsehood of what is said. Depending on your perspective or approach to the Israel-Palestine Forum, you might observe (through powers of deduction) the two general ways in which both sides use the techniques:

• Propaganda is the spreading of information and ideas to advance a cause or discredit an opposing cause.
• Propaganda is spreading of information and ideas to advance a cause or discredit an opposing cause.

Both of these techniques attempt to shape perceptions, manipulate cognition, and direct behavior to achieve a response that furthers the desired intent of the agenda, using what evidence and logic there is to project the image towards the expected outcome.

In learning the craft of rhetoric, . . . critics have deliberately drawn distinctions between rhetoric and propaganda. On the other hand, evidence of the conflation of rhetoric and propaganda, under the general notion of persuasion, has become increasingly obvious, especially in the forum, where forum participants seem incapable of differentiating among the suasory forms (both out of Necessity and dangerously close to Paradox) of communication pervasive now in our heavily mediated society. . . .

never yet came across a terrorist arse licker or a leftist moron that could utter more than 2 words truthfully.

Now that's funny. You are a pathological liar. I haven't see you post one fact on this site. All you do is repeat Zionist propaganda.

So all your links are Zionist propaganda are they Abdul, because I have used thos to prove you wrong and to be a RACIST LIAR.

Want to post table 1 again that tells the truth about land ownership?

99% of my links are to UN archives, academic archives or similar and represent fact. All you have proven is that you are a poor propagandist and even less capable liar.

(COMMENT)

It is important to note that the label “ad hominem” is ambiguous, and that not every kind of "ad hominem" argument is fallacious. But as I have said before,
"There is no universally accepted definition of lying to others. The OED definition of lying is as follows:

To lie =df to make a false statement with the intention to deceive.​

There are several problems with this definition. According to it, a person who makes a statement that she believes to be true — a person who makes a truthful statement — with the intention to deceive another person, is lying, if, unbeknownst to her, the statement is false." SOURCE: Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy

"Questions central to the philosophical discussion of lying to others and other-deception (or interpersonal deceiving) may be divided into two kinds.

• Questions of the first kind are definitional. They include the questions of how lying is to be defined, and how deceiving is to be defined, and whether lying is a form of intended deception.
• Questions of the second kind are moral. They include the questions of whether lying and deceiving are (defeasibly --- meaning capable of being annulled or invalidated) morally wrong, and whether, if either lying or deception, or both, are defeasibly morally wrong, they are ever morally obligatory, and not just merely morally permissible. SOURCE: SEP

You will notice that I nearly always choose to challenge questionable or incorrect data with evidentiary remarks from an unimpeachable source; the is the capable of being annulled or invalidated by verifiable sources.

EXAMPLE: We have a member who is quite fond of saying: General Assembly Resolution 181(II) "never happened." I do not counter with "You are a pathological liar" OR that You are a "Zionist propagandist" OR You are a "RACIST LIAR." (Bad form and bad behavior.) In stead, I counter with a very strong public statement that take the form of a UN Press Release PAL/169 17 May 1948, which says: "In fact the resolution of last November 29 has been implemented."​

I make a difference between good manners and good breeding; Politeness works everywhere, all the time. Even in this discussion group and forum.

Most Respectfully,
R

EXAMPLE: We have a member who is quite fond of saying: General Assembly Resolution 181(II) "never happened." I do not counter with "You are a pathological liar" OR that You are a "Zionist propagandist" OR You are a "RACIST LIAR." (Bad form and bad behavior.) In stead, I counter with a very strong public statement that take the form of a UN Press Release PAL/169 17 May 1948, which says: "In fact the resolution of last November 29 has been implemented."​

You post that quote a lot. The only issue I have with it is that other sources say different and there are no facts on the ground to validate that assertion.

Are the other sources UN derived, as they should know better than anyone if a Resolution was implemented or not. That is the deciding factor, not some self serving Islamic big mouth changing words in treaties to match their religious convictions. Non UN sources are suspect in this case.

 

[Phoenall]

montelatici, et al,

Ad hoc analysis or report is the term commonly used to describe a product (analytical report, statistical analysis or model, or other report or summary of data) produced one time to answer a single, specific question.

None of the reports have been proven to be false. It is just the UN presenting the facts on the ground prior to partition. It isn't a white paper, it is the report to the General Assembly setting forth the facts on the ground on which the partition of Palestine was executed. And, of course the data presented to the General Assembly was fact.

(COMMENT)

For instance, A/AC.14/32 of 11 November 1947 ---- the AD HOC COMMITTEE ON THE PALESTINIAN QUESTION REPORT OF SUB-COMMITTEE 2 submitted by members of Sub-Committee 2: Afghanistan, Colombia, Egypt, Iraq, Lebanon, Pakistan, Saudi Arabia, Syria, and Yemen. The appearance of bias and impropriety is a phrase referring to a situation which show prima facie evidence in specific circumstances might seem to raise ethics questions and a clear and precise exhibition of such bias must be made. In this case, the report was accepted and included for the record (not disqualified) because the misfeasance and malfeasance (subverting the course of the General Assembly) had not become apparent until after November 29; when 7 of the 8 member nations participated in a coalition military operation on the day of Israeli independence.

Most Respectfully,
R

In this case, the report was accepted and included for the record (not disqualified) because the misfeasance and malfeasance (subverting the course of the General Assembly) had not become apparent until after November 29; when 7 of the 8 member nations participated in a coalition military operation on the day of Israeli independence.​

Why is that a dis-qualifier for you?

Ulterior motives by 7 of the 8 member states invading because their recommendations were not passed.

 

[Phoenall]

While it is lofty to say --- that all peoples have the right of self-defense and the right of self-determination, in reality the price of such an ideal can be too much to endure.

What price freedom?

DEATH

 

[Phoenall]

P F Tinmore, et al,

Members of UN Committees must avoid impropriety and the appearance of impropriety in all of the members activities.” Otherwise is detracts from the confidence in the organization.

Why is that a dis-qualifier for you?

(COMMENT)

The Arab League was a confederation formed in 1945. The Arab Higher Committee was reconstituted the same year by the Arab League. The Arab League consisted of Egypt, Iraq, Lebanon, Saudi Arabia, Syria, Jordan, and Yemen and later joined by Libya, Sudan, Morocco, Tunisia, Kuwait, Algeria, Bahrain, Mauritania, Oman, Qatar, Somalia, and the United Arab Emirates. Sub-Committee 2 were from: Afghanistan, Colombia, Egypt, Iraq, Lebanon, Pakistan, Saudi Arabia, Syria, and Yemen.

The cross connect and associates are clear: Egypt, Iraq, Lebanon, Saudi Arabia, Syria, and Yemen. The same nations that submitted the report were the same nations that attacked Israel on their Independence Day.

It is the case that these countries could have been ignored when the other members of the General Assembly realized that this was just part of the Powerful Arab interests, both inside and outside Palestine, are defying the resolution of the General Assembly and are engaged in a deliberate effort to alter by force the settlement envisaged therein.

Most Respectfully,
R

You are still sliming the source while not addressing the content.

Only to you because you are MYOPIC when it comes to arab nationalist blame

 

[Phoenall]

Don't think I have commented on this thread before...

Mainly because I don't like the question... It's pretty dumb to be honest!

However, for what it's worth...

EVERYONE has the right to defend themselves!

And before one or two of the Zionist 'activists' asks, YES, even the Israelis!

Which is all Israel has ever done since its creation and legitimate acceptance by the world. It is not self defence to fire illegal weapons at Israeli civilians, that is a war crime and an act of war.

 

[Phoenall]

Hmm, is Israel launching rockets at them? Is Israel sending suicide bombers into "Palestine" to blow up pizza shops, buses and such? Are Israelis going into mosques and shooting down people? Are Israelis driving cars into bus and trains stops in "Palestine"? Are Israelis going into supermarkets and buses in "Palestine" and stabbing people?

Please tell me exactly what they need to defend themselves from besides themselves.

Israelis take Palestinian land and settle on it, bulldoze or blow up Palestinian homes, destroy Palestinian crops and kill thousands of Palestinian women and children with stand-off weapons. Of course the Palestinians have to defend themselves.

And so do the Israeli's, the problem is Israel is 100 years advanced on he arab muslims in warfare so will aleways come out on top. The stupidity of arab muslms thinking that their god will protect them is laughable, and they still lay down their lives for nothing. What have they achieved with their terrorist "defence" since 1929 apart from more dead and more homeless arab muslims.


By the way the land is Jewish under INTERNATIONAL LAW and you cant alter that.

MANDATE FOR PALESTINE once again.

 

[Challenger]

...the two general ways in which both sides use the techniques:

• Propaganda is the spreading of information and ideas to advance a cause or discredit an opposing cause.
• Propaganda is spreading of information and ideas to advance a cause or discredit an opposing cause.

Two general ways?

As you cited me in that post, please be advised I tend to respond in kind, depending who I'm dealing with and rarely, if ever, suffer fools gladly. If you want to discuss a topic seriously, you could always start it in the clean debate zone and I'll happily participate if it's of interest to me and I have a reasonable understanding of it. Unfortunately, there's no guarantee the Hasbarists won't follow.

 

[theliq]

...the two general ways in which both sides use the techniques:

• Propaganda is the spreading of information and ideas to advance a cause or discredit an opposing cause.
• Propaganda is spreading of information and ideas to advance a cause or discredit an opposing cause.

Two general ways?

As you cited me in that post, please be advised I tend to respond in kind, depending who I'm dealing with and rarely, if ever, suffer fools gladly. If you want to discuss a topic seriously, you could always start it in the clean debate zone and I'll happily participate if it's of interest to me and I have a reasonable understanding of it. Unfortunately, there's no guarantee the Hasbarists won't follow.

"Fools" being the operative word here Challenger,in your post..steve

 

[Challenger]

...the two general ways in which both sides use the techniques:

• Propaganda is the spreading of information and ideas to advance a cause or discredit an opposing cause.
• Propaganda is spreading of information and ideas to advance a cause or discredit an opposing cause.

Two general ways?

As you cited me in that post, please be advised I tend to respond in kind, depending who I'm dealing with and rarely, if ever, suffer fools gladly. If you want to discuss a topic seriously, you could always start it in the clean debate zone and I'll happily participate if it's of interest to me and I have a reasonable understanding of it. Unfortunately, there's no guarantee the Hasbarists won't follow.

"Fools" being the operative word here Challenger,in your post..steve

Not really, but paid or unpaid trolls/shills, probably.

 

[P F Tinmore]

montelatici, et al,

Ad hoc analysis or report is the term commonly used to describe a product (analytical report, statistical analysis or model, or other report or summary of data) produced one time to answer a single, specific question.

None of the reports have been proven to be false. It is just the UN presenting the facts on the ground prior to partition. It isn't a white paper, it is the report to the General Assembly setting forth the facts on the ground on which the partition of Palestine was executed. And, of course the data presented to the General Assembly was fact.

(COMMENT)

For instance, A/AC.14/32 of 11 November 1947 ---- the AD HOC COMMITTEE ON THE PALESTINIAN QUESTION REPORT OF SUB-COMMITTEE 2 submitted by members of Sub-Committee 2: Afghanistan, Colombia, Egypt, Iraq, Lebanon, Pakistan, Saudi Arabia, Syria, and Yemen. The appearance of bias and impropriety is a phrase referring to a situation which show prima facie evidence in specific circumstances might seem to raise ethics questions and a clear and precise exhibition of such bias must be made. In this case, the report was accepted and included for the record (not disqualified) because the misfeasance and malfeasance (subverting the course of the General Assembly) had not become apparent until after November 29; when 7 of the 8 member nations participated in a coalition military operation on the day of Israeli independence.

Most Respectfully,
R

In this case, the report was accepted and included for the record (not disqualified) because the misfeasance and malfeasance (subverting the course of the General Assembly) had not become apparent until after November 29; when 7 of the 8 member nations participated in a coalition military operation on the day of Israeli independence.​

Why is that a dis-qualifier for you?

Ulterior motives by 7 of the 8 member states invading because their recommendations were not passed.

Their invasion had nothing to do with the UN.

 

[Phoenall]

montelatici, et al,

Ad hoc analysis or report is the term commonly used to describe a product (analytical report, statistical analysis or model, or other report or summary of data) produced one time to answer a single, specific question.

None of the reports have been proven to be false. It is just the UN presenting the facts on the ground prior to partition. It isn't a white paper, it is the report to the General Assembly setting forth the facts on the ground on which the partition of Palestine was executed. And, of course the data presented to the General Assembly was fact.

(COMMENT)

For instance, A/AC.14/32 of 11 November 1947 ---- the AD HOC COMMITTEE ON THE PALESTINIAN QUESTION REPORT OF SUB-COMMITTEE 2 submitted by members of Sub-Committee 2: Afghanistan, Colombia, Egypt, Iraq, Lebanon, Pakistan, Saudi Arabia, Syria, and Yemen. The appearance of bias and impropriety is a phrase referring to a situation which show prima facie evidence in specific circumstances might seem to raise ethics questions and a clear and precise exhibition of such bias must be made. In this case, the report was accepted and included for the record (not disqualified) because the misfeasance and malfeasance (subverting the course of the General Assembly) had not become apparent until after November 29; when 7 of the 8 member nations participated in a coalition military operation on the day of Israeli independence.

Most Respectfully,
R

In this case, the report was accepted and included for the record (not disqualified) because the misfeasance and malfeasance (subverting the course of the General Assembly) had not become apparent until after November 29; when 7 of the 8 member nations participated in a coalition military operation on the day of Israeli independence.​

Why is that a dis-qualifier for you?

Ulterior motives by 7 of the 8 member states invading because their recommendations were not passed.

Their invasion had nothing to do with the UN.

It is what instigated it in 1947 when the UN issued 181 and the arab muslims threatened to invade and wipe out the Jews. They are GREEDY ARROGANT and VIOLENT and they use any excuse to spill blood

 

[P F Tinmore]

montelatici, et al,

Ad hoc analysis or report is the term commonly used to describe a product (analytical report, statistical analysis or model, or other report or summary of data) produced one time to answer a single, specific question.

None of the reports have been proven to be false. It is just the UN presenting the facts on the ground prior to partition. It isn't a white paper, it is the report to the General Assembly setting forth the facts on the ground on which the partition of Palestine was executed. And, of course the data presented to the General Assembly was fact.

(COMMENT)

For instance, A/AC.14/32 of 11 November 1947 ---- the AD HOC COMMITTEE ON THE PALESTINIAN QUESTION REPORT OF SUB-COMMITTEE 2 submitted by members of Sub-Committee 2: Afghanistan, Colombia, Egypt, Iraq, Lebanon, Pakistan, Saudi Arabia, Syria, and Yemen. The appearance of bias and impropriety is a phrase referring to a situation which show prima facie evidence in specific circumstances might seem to raise ethics questions and a clear and precise exhibition of such bias must be made. In this case, the report was accepted and included for the record (not disqualified) because the misfeasance and malfeasance (subverting the course of the General Assembly) had not become apparent until after November 29; when 7 of the 8 member nations participated in a coalition military operation on the day of Israeli independence.

Most Respectfully,
R

In this case, the report was accepted and included for the record (not disqualified) because the misfeasance and malfeasance (subverting the course of the General Assembly) had not become apparent until after November 29; when 7 of the 8 member nations participated in a coalition military operation on the day of Israeli independence.​

Why is that a dis-qualifier for you?

Ulterior motives by 7 of the 8 member states invading because their recommendations were not passed.

Their invasion had nothing to do with the UN.

It is what instigated it in 1947 when the UN issued 181 and the arab muslims threatened to invade and wipe out the Jews. They are GREEDY ARROGANT and VIOLENT and they use any excuse to spill blood

They went in to defend the natives against dispossession.

What are you talking about?

 

[montelatici]

montelatici, et al,

Ad hoc analysis or report is the term commonly used to describe a product (analytical report, statistical analysis or model, or other report or summary of data) produced one time to answer a single, specific question.

(COMMENT)

For instance, A/AC.14/32 of 11 November 1947 ---- the AD HOC COMMITTEE ON THE PALESTINIAN QUESTION REPORT OF SUB-COMMITTEE 2 submitted by members of Sub-Committee 2: Afghanistan, Colombia, Egypt, Iraq, Lebanon, Pakistan, Saudi Arabia, Syria, and Yemen. The appearance of bias and impropriety is a phrase referring to a situation which show prima facie evidence in specific circumstances might seem to raise ethics questions and a clear and precise exhibition of such bias must be made. In this case, the report was accepted and included for the record (not disqualified) because the misfeasance and malfeasance (subverting the course of the General Assembly) had not become apparent until after November 29; when 7 of the 8 member nations participated in a coalition military operation on the day of Israeli independence.

Most Respectfully,
R

In this case, the report was accepted and included for the record (not disqualified) because the misfeasance and malfeasance (subverting the course of the General Assembly) had not become apparent until after November 29; when 7 of the 8 member nations participated in a coalition military operation on the day of Israeli independence.​

Why is that a dis-qualifier for you?

Ulterior motives by 7 of the 8 member states invading because their recommendations were not passed.

Their invasion had nothing to do with the UN.

It is what instigated it in 1947 when the UN issued 181 and the arab muslims threatened to invade and wipe out the Jews. They are GREEDY ARROGANT and VIOLENT and they use any excuse to spill blood

They went in to defend the natives against dispossession.

What are you talking about?

That they were unable to protect the Christians and Muslims of Palestine from the European onslaught does not mean it was not the right thing to do.

 

[Phoenall]

montelatici, et al,

Ad hoc analysis or report is the term commonly used to describe a product (analytical report, statistical analysis or model, or other report or summary of data) produced one time to answer a single, specific question.

(COMMENT)

For instance, A/AC.14/32 of 11 November 1947 ---- the AD HOC COMMITTEE ON THE PALESTINIAN QUESTION REPORT OF SUB-COMMITTEE 2 submitted by members of Sub-Committee 2: Afghanistan, Colombia, Egypt, Iraq, Lebanon, Pakistan, Saudi Arabia, Syria, and Yemen. The appearance of bias and impropriety is a phrase referring to a situation which show prima facie evidence in specific circumstances might seem to raise ethics questions and a clear and precise exhibition of such bias must be made. In this case, the report was accepted and included for the record (not disqualified) because the misfeasance and malfeasance (subverting the course of the General Assembly) had not become apparent until after November 29; when 7 of the 8 member nations participated in a coalition military operation on the day of Israeli independence.

Most Respectfully,
R

In this case, the report was accepted and included for the record (not disqualified) because the misfeasance and malfeasance (subverting the course of the General Assembly) had not become apparent until after November 29; when 7 of the 8 member nations participated in a coalition military operation on the day of Israeli independence.​

Why is that a dis-qualifier for you?

Ulterior motives by 7 of the 8 member states invading because their recommendations were not passed.

Their invasion had nothing to do with the UN.

It is what instigated it in 1947 when the UN issued 181 and the arab muslims threatened to invade and wipe out the Jews. They are GREEDY ARROGANT and VIOLENT and they use any excuse to spill blood

They went in to defend the natives against dispossession.

What are you talking about?

No that was the excuse they used, the real reason was because they could not stand to see a little oasis of non arab muslim control in the M.E. On top of this there was the commands of the Koran that told them to take back the land of Dar al Harb and wipe out the Jews. The natives finally had control of the land, and the interlopers were about to get taught a lesson. The arab muslim combined forces were destroyed and the UN had to step in and call a ceasefire before Israel showed the world what cowards the arab muslims were.

 

[Phoenall]

In this case, the report was accepted and included for the record (not disqualified) because the misfeasance and malfeasance (subverting the course of the General Assembly) had not become apparent until after November 29; when 7 of the 8 member nations participated in a coalition military operation on the day of Israeli independence.​

Why is that a dis-qualifier for you?

Ulterior motives by 7 of the 8 member states invading because their recommendations were not passed.

Their invasion had nothing to do with the UN.

It is what instigated it in 1947 when the UN issued 181 and the arab muslims threatened to invade and wipe out the Jews. They are GREEDY ARROGANT and VIOLENT and they use any excuse to spill blood

They went in to defend the natives against dispossession.

What are you talking about?

That they were unable to protect the Christians and Muslims of Palestine from the European onslaught does not mean it was not the right thing to do.

Then explain why the savage beasts of islam have decimated the Christians of the M.E. for the last 1400 years

 

[P F Tinmore]

In this case, the report was accepted and included for the record (not disqualified) because the misfeasance and malfeasance (subverting the course of the General Assembly) had not become apparent until after November 29; when 7 of the 8 member nations participated in a coalition military operation on the day of Israeli independence.​

Why is that a dis-qualifier for you?

Ulterior motives by 7 of the 8 member states invading because their recommendations were not passed.

Their invasion had nothing to do with the UN.

It is what instigated it in 1947 when the UN issued 181 and the arab muslims threatened to invade and wipe out the Jews. They are GREEDY ARROGANT and VIOLENT and they use any excuse to spill blood

They went in to defend the natives against dispossession.

What are you talking about?

No that was the excuse they used, the real reason was because they could not stand to see a little oasis of non arab muslim control in the M.E. On top of this there was the commands of the Koran that told them to take back the land of Dar al Harb and wipe out the Jews. The natives finally had control of the land, and the interlopers were about to get taught a lesson. The arab muslim combined forces were destroyed and the UN had to step in and call a ceasefire before Israel showed the world what cowards the arab muslims were.

Load of crap.

It is because the people who already lived there were getting the boot.

 

[Phoenall]

Ulterior motives by 7 of the 8 member states invading because their recommendations were not passed.

Their invasion had nothing to do with the UN.

It is what instigated it in 1947 when the UN issued 181 and the arab muslims threatened to invade and wipe out the Jews. They are GREEDY ARROGANT and VIOLENT and they use any excuse to spill blood

They went in to defend the natives against dispossession.

What are you talking about?

No that was the excuse they used, the real reason was because they could not stand to see a little oasis of non arab muslim control in the M.E. On top of this there was the commands of the Koran that told them to take back the land of Dar al Harb and wipe out the Jews. The natives finally had control of the land, and the interlopers were about to get taught a lesson. The arab muslim combined forces were destroyed and the UN had to step in and call a ceasefire before Israel showed the world what cowards the arab muslims were.

Load of crap.

It is because the people who already lived there were getting the boot.

Explain then why the arab muslims have been attacking the Jews relentlessly since 635C.E. and why the mentally deranged false prophet made it a command of islam to KILL THE JEWS

The people who already lived there were the Jews and they were getting a National Home that the arab muslims did not want them to get.