Explanation of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict

[montelatici]

The Jews attacked Palestinian towns and began evicting Christians and Muslims long before the Arab League was able to mobilize a force to prevent the massacre and eviction of the Christians and Muslims. It was the intent of the Jews to expel every Christian and Muslim. They would have been successful in doing so had the Arab League not intervened. As such 10%-15% of the Christians and Muslims were saved from massacre and/or eviction thanks to the Arab Leagues's intervention.

"Yosef Weitz, who was at the time director of the Jewish National Fund’s Lands Department. This man of noted Zionist convictions confided to his diary on 20 December 1940: “It must be clear that there is no room in the country for both people (...) the only solution is a Land of Israel, at least a western Land of Israel without Arabs. There is no room here for compromise. (...) There is no way but to transfer the Arabs from here to the neighbouring countries(...) Not one village must be left, not one (bedouin) tribe.”

The expulsion of the Palestinians re-examined - Le Monde diplomatique - English edition

 

[montelatici]

More nonsense. When Zion puppets are running out of arguments they drop their mask...

Oh really? Jordan and it's Jordanians--particularly Western Jordanians--are linguistically, culturally, religiously, and ethnically identical to "Palestinians."

Even if true: How is this a reason to expel the Palestinians from their land?

Let me start my response with this: I'm not a social justice warrior; I'm not making a social justice point. I don't give a fuck about the prehistoric underpinnings of this inter-tribal bloodbath. I find the reaching back into antiquity for the first-cause rationalizations that validate the brutality those rock-chucking retards in the Middle-East inflict upon each other (and all of us too) to be tedious and unproductive. Mostly because it's all full of lies--from BOTH sides. Hence, that narrative is not something I'm going to give weight to. Don't even bring it up.

That said, there is a point in recent history that helps define the situation clearly. That point is May 14, 1948. On that date, in the region that the Western powers knew as "Palestine," the Jewish People's Council introduced to the world the sovereign state of Israel; recognized by both the United States of America and the Soviet Union--the most powerful sovereign powers of the time.

Now, correct me if I'm wrong, but I understand that the "Palestinian" nation of Israel was attacked on the very day of its birth, by hostile Arab/Islamic nations surrounding it--and those hostile foreign nations sponsored traitors within the Arab/Islamic population of Israel.

It occurs to me that these Arab/Islamic Israelis ("Palestinians") actually belonged (briefly) to a nation in somewhere between May 14th and May 15th, 1948. They belonged to a nation that asserted a commitment to "foster the development of the country for the benefit of all its inhabitants; ... be based on freedom, justice and peace as envisaged by the prophets of Israel; ... ensure complete equality of social and political rights to all its inhabitants irrespective of religion, race or sex; it will guarantee freedom of religion, conscience, language, education and culture;..."

Yet these "Palestinians" chose to fight with the forces of hostile invading nations, against their own newly formed nation (i.e. Israel)--and then they lost. They could have fought with their own countrymen in defense of their nation, but they chose otherwise. It's pretty self evident why Israel wanted nothing to do with those back-stabbing shit-birds.

You cannot deny that Jewish "Palestinians" (Israelis) stood up as the valid sovereign organization on the eve that Great Britain abandoned its administrative control of the region. You cannot claim that Arab/Islamic "Palestinians" stood up as a valid sovereign organization to make a competing claim. And you cannot deny that (aided by foreign nations) certain Arab/Islamic Israelis went beyond contesting the legitimacy of Israeli sovereignty, but went all the more farther by embracing the invaders of their own lands--traitors to their nation and traitors to themselves.

Considering the behavior of the progeny of those traitors, I'm entirely unsurprised that Israelis are unwelcoming to them; and yet I am wholly surprised at the restraint Israel has exercised in not obliterating them from the planet in the manner that they have clearly been so capable of doing all this time.

I think these "Palestinians" have been barred from citizenship in the surrounding Arab/Islamic nations (most notably Jordan and Syria) because the citizens of those nations weren't too keen on patriating the traitors to Israel that they sponsored in 1948 (after all, traitors ARE traitors regardless of which side they sell-out to); and they sensibly maintain that same position of disdain for the trouble-making posterity of those traitors.

If I'm not wrong about this, it seems apparent to me that the right thing for these Palestinians to do is accept that their forebears lost for them any claim to a homeland in Israel when they turned against their countrymen and lost; and (in light of their behavior since) they should accept with gratitude any accommodations they get now. One of those accommodations really ought to be the possibility of patriation by the sponsor nations of their treason.

Let me correct you.

Thank you. Please do.

The surrounding Arab states did not attack the Jews in Palestine.

Well, they most certainly did. That they did so is historical fact.

The surrounding Arab states intervened in an attempt to prevent the Jews in Palestine from massacring and evicting the Christians and Muslims under the Plan Dalet.

Semantics. I find the reaching back into antiquity for the first-cause rationalizations that validate the brutality those rock-chucking retards in the Middle-East inflict upon each other (and all of us too) to be tedious and unproductive. Mostly because it's all full of lies--from BOTH sides. Hence, that narrative is not something I'm going to give weight to. Don't even bring it up.

That said, there is a point in recent history that helps define the situation clearly. That point is May 14, 1948. On that date, in the region that the Western powers knew as "Palestine," the Jewish People's Council introduced to the world the sovereign state of Israel; recognized by both the United States of America and the Soviet Union--the most powerful sovereign powers of the time.

The Jews intended to massacre and evict as many non-Jews from the area illegally assigned to them as indicated by Plan Dalet.

Or, alternatively the Jews intended to evict or otherwise remove the soon-to-be traitors to the nascent state of Israel, sponsored by the surrounding Arab/Islamic nations who were conspicuously planning to claim the Palestinian territory for themselves.

You see? This is why I don't give a fuck about anything before May 14, 1948. I just don't give a fuck about the prehistoric underpinnings of this inter-tribal blood-bath. While I understand that May 13, 1948 is not pre-history, I draw the line at last moment the previous recognized sovereign in control of the region left, and the next recognized sovereign took over.

The Christians and Muslims knew this was the plan and had every right to attempt to prevent the Jews from implementing their plan for ethnic cleansing and genocide.

This nothing but appeal to emotion. And hearsay semantics. Which is why I don't give a fuck about anything before May 14, 1948.

The Palestinians continue to have every right to attempt to regain their land in any way possible including demographics, which is probably how they will regain their land eventually.

No. No they don't.

These Arab/Islamic Israelis ("Palestinians") actually belonged (briefly) to a nation in somewhere between May 14th and May 15th, 1948. They belonged to a nation that asserted a commitment to "foster the development of the country for the benefit of all its inhabitants; ... be based on freedom, justice and peace as envisaged by the prophets of Israel; ... ensure complete equality of social and political rights to all its inhabitants irrespective of religion, race or sex; it will guarantee freedom of religion, conscience, language, education and culture;..."

Yet these "Palestinians" chose to fight with the forces of hostile invading nations, against their own newly formed nation (i.e. Israel)--and then they lost. They could have fought beside their own countrymen in defense of their nation, but they chose otherwise.

The right thing for these "Palestinians" to do is accept that their forebears lost for them any claim to a homeland in Israel when they turned against their countrymen and lost; and (in light of their behavior since) they should accept with gratitude any accommodations they get now. One of those accommodations really ought to be the possibility of patriation by the sponsor nations of their treason. Jordan seems to be the best likely candidate.

That the Arab states were unsuccessful in preventing the massacre of Christians and Muslims and their eviction by the Jews does not mean that the their intervention was in anyway unjustified.

I'm not a social justice warrior; I'm not making a social justice point. I don't give a fuck about the prehistoric underpinnings of this inter-tribal bloodbath. I find the reaching back into antiquity for the first-cause rationalizations that validate the brutality those rock-chucking retards in the Middle-East inflict upon each other (and all of us too) to be tedious and unproductive. Mostly because it's all full of lies--from BOTH sides. Hence, that narrative is not something I'm going to give weight to. Don't even bring it up.

I will not only bring it up, I will repeat it, because it is fact. All you do is repeat Zionist propaganda derived from Zionist sources. That is, you post bullshit, I post fact. The Jews had no intention of allowing the Christians and Muslims to remain. The only reason 10%-15% of Christians and Muslims were not expelled or massacred by the Jews was as a result of the Arab League's intervention. Left to their own devices the Jews would have expelled or killed every Christian and Muslim. This was the plan prior to Israel's independence.

" Yosef Weitz, who was at the time director of the Jewish National Fund’s Lands Department. This man of noted Zionist convictions confided to his diary on 20 December 1940: “It must be clear that there is no room in the country for both people (...) the only solution is a Land of Israel, at least a western Land of Israel without Arabs. There is no room here for compromise. (...) There is no way but to transfer the Arabs from here to the neighbouring countries(...) Not one village must be left, not one (bedouin) tribe.”

Seven years later, Weitz found himself in a position to put this radical programme into effect. Already, in January 1948, he was orchestrating the expulsion of Palestinians from various parts of the country. In April he proposed - and obtained - the creation of “a body which would direct the Yishuv’s war with the aim of evicting as many Arabs as possible”. This body was unofficial at first, but was formalised at the end of August 1948 into the “Transfer Committee” which supervised the destruction of abandoned Arab villages and/or their repopulation with recent Jewish immigrants, in order to make any return of the refugees impossible. Its role was extended, in July, to take in the creation of Jewish settlements in the border areas."

The expulsion of the Palestinians re-examined - Le Monde diplomatique - English edition

 

[rylah]

Do You speak of Balestinians or Jebustinians as Arafat later indiicated?

 

[Phoenall]

The Jews attacked Palestinian towns and began evicting Christians and Muslims long before the Arab League was able to mobilize a force to prevent the massacre and eviction of the Christians and Muslims. It was the intent of the Jews to expel every Christian and Muslim. They would have been successful in doing so had the Arab League not intervened. As such 10%-15% of the Christians and Muslims were saved from massacre and/or eviction thanks to the Arab Leagues's intervention.

"Yosef Weitz, who was at the time director of the Jewish National Fund’s Lands Department. This man of noted Zionist convictions confided to his diary on 20 December 1940: “It must be clear that there is no room in the country for both people (...) the only solution is a Land of Israel, at least a western Land of Israel without Arabs. There is no room here for compromise. (...) There is no way but to transfer the Arabs from here to the neighbouring countries(...) Not one village must be left, not one (bedouin) tribe.”

The expulsion of the Palestinians re-examined - Le Monde diplomatique - English edition

Even this link says that the arab muslims abandoned their homes and where not forcibly evicted.


Between the partition plan for Palestine adopted by the General Assembly of the United Nations on 29 November 1947 and the 1949 ceasefire that ended the Arab-Israeli war, begun by the invasion of 15 May 1948, several hundred thousand Palestinians abandoned their homes in territory that ended up occupied by Israel (1).


And the only dissenters where communists and left wing Zionists


But it does not say that the arab league had not started their incitement to violence before the birth of Israel, in fact it says that from 1947 the arab league had been engaged in attacks on the Jews.

Once again sent to the dunce corner by your own links.

 

[Phoenall]

Oh really? Jordan and it's Jordanians--particularly Western Jordanians--are linguistically, culturally, religiously, and ethnically identical to "Palestinians."

Even if true: How is this a reason to expel the Palestinians from their land?

Let me start my response with this: I'm not a social justice warrior; I'm not making a social justice point. I don't give a fuck about the prehistoric underpinnings of this inter-tribal bloodbath. I find the reaching back into antiquity for the first-cause rationalizations that validate the brutality those rock-chucking retards in the Middle-East inflict upon each other (and all of us too) to be tedious and unproductive. Mostly because it's all full of lies--from BOTH sides. Hence, that narrative is not something I'm going to give weight to. Don't even bring it up.

That said, there is a point in recent history that helps define the situation clearly. That point is May 14, 1948. On that date, in the region that the Western powers knew as "Palestine," the Jewish People's Council introduced to the world the sovereign state of Israel; recognized by both the United States of America and the Soviet Union--the most powerful sovereign powers of the time.

Now, correct me if I'm wrong, but I understand that the "Palestinian" nation of Israel was attacked on the very day of its birth, by hostile Arab/Islamic nations surrounding it--and those hostile foreign nations sponsored traitors within the Arab/Islamic population of Israel.

It occurs to me that these Arab/Islamic Israelis ("Palestinians") actually belonged (briefly) to a nation in somewhere between May 14th and May 15th, 1948. They belonged to a nation that asserted a commitment to "foster the development of the country for the benefit of all its inhabitants; ... be based on freedom, justice and peace as envisaged by the prophets of Israel; ... ensure complete equality of social and political rights to all its inhabitants irrespective of religion, race or sex; it will guarantee freedom of religion, conscience, language, education and culture;..."

Yet these "Palestinians" chose to fight with the forces of hostile invading nations, against their own newly formed nation (i.e. Israel)--and then they lost. They could have fought with their own countrymen in defense of their nation, but they chose otherwise. It's pretty self evident why Israel wanted nothing to do with those back-stabbing shit-birds.

You cannot deny that Jewish "Palestinians" (Israelis) stood up as the valid sovereign organization on the eve that Great Britain abandoned its administrative control of the region. You cannot claim that Arab/Islamic "Palestinians" stood up as a valid sovereign organization to make a competing claim. And you cannot deny that (aided by foreign nations) certain Arab/Islamic Israelis went beyond contesting the legitimacy of Israeli sovereignty, but went all the more farther by embracing the invaders of their own lands--traitors to their nation and traitors to themselves.

Considering the behavior of the progeny of those traitors, I'm entirely unsurprised that Israelis are unwelcoming to them; and yet I am wholly surprised at the restraint Israel has exercised in not obliterating them from the planet in the manner that they have clearly been so capable of doing all this time.

I think these "Palestinians" have been barred from citizenship in the surrounding Arab/Islamic nations (most notably Jordan and Syria) because the citizens of those nations weren't too keen on patriating the traitors to Israel that they sponsored in 1948 (after all, traitors ARE traitors regardless of which side they sell-out to); and they sensibly maintain that same position of disdain for the trouble-making posterity of those traitors.

If I'm not wrong about this, it seems apparent to me that the right thing for these Palestinians to do is accept that their forebears lost for them any claim to a homeland in Israel when they turned against their countrymen and lost; and (in light of their behavior since) they should accept with gratitude any accommodations they get now. One of those accommodations really ought to be the possibility of patriation by the sponsor nations of their treason.

Let me correct you.

Thank you. Please do.

The surrounding Arab states did not attack the Jews in Palestine.

Well, they most certainly did. That they did so is historical fact.

The surrounding Arab states intervened in an attempt to prevent the Jews in Palestine from massacring and evicting the Christians and Muslims under the Plan Dalet.

Semantics. I find the reaching back into antiquity for the first-cause rationalizations that validate the brutality those rock-chucking retards in the Middle-East inflict upon each other (and all of us too) to be tedious and unproductive. Mostly because it's all full of lies--from BOTH sides. Hence, that narrative is not something I'm going to give weight to. Don't even bring it up.

That said, there is a point in recent history that helps define the situation clearly. That point is May 14, 1948. On that date, in the region that the Western powers knew as "Palestine," the Jewish People's Council introduced to the world the sovereign state of Israel; recognized by both the United States of America and the Soviet Union--the most powerful sovereign powers of the time.

The Jews intended to massacre and evict as many non-Jews from the area illegally assigned to them as indicated by Plan Dalet.

Or, alternatively the Jews intended to evict or otherwise remove the soon-to-be traitors to the nascent state of Israel, sponsored by the surrounding Arab/Islamic nations who were conspicuously planning to claim the Palestinian territory for themselves.

You see? This is why I don't give a fuck about anything before May 14, 1948. I just don't give a fuck about the prehistoric underpinnings of this inter-tribal blood-bath. While I understand that May 13, 1948 is not pre-history, I draw the line at last moment the previous recognized sovereign in control of the region left, and the next recognized sovereign took over.

The Christians and Muslims knew this was the plan and had every right to attempt to prevent the Jews from implementing their plan for ethnic cleansing and genocide.

This nothing but appeal to emotion. And hearsay semantics. Which is why I don't give a fuck about anything before May 14, 1948.

The Palestinians continue to have every right to attempt to regain their land in any way possible including demographics, which is probably how they will regain their land eventually.

No. No they don't.

These Arab/Islamic Israelis ("Palestinians") actually belonged (briefly) to a nation in somewhere between May 14th and May 15th, 1948. They belonged to a nation that asserted a commitment to "foster the development of the country for the benefit of all its inhabitants; ... be based on freedom, justice and peace as envisaged by the prophets of Israel; ... ensure complete equality of social and political rights to all its inhabitants irrespective of religion, race or sex; it will guarantee freedom of religion, conscience, language, education and culture;..."

Yet these "Palestinians" chose to fight with the forces of hostile invading nations, against their own newly formed nation (i.e. Israel)--and then they lost. They could have fought beside their own countrymen in defense of their nation, but they chose otherwise.

The right thing for these "Palestinians" to do is accept that their forebears lost for them any claim to a homeland in Israel when they turned against their countrymen and lost; and (in light of their behavior since) they should accept with gratitude any accommodations they get now. One of those accommodations really ought to be the possibility of patriation by the sponsor nations of their treason. Jordan seems to be the best likely candidate.

That the Arab states were unsuccessful in preventing the massacre of Christians and Muslims and their eviction by the Jews does not mean that the their intervention was in anyway unjustified.

I'm not a social justice warrior; I'm not making a social justice point. I don't give a fuck about the prehistoric underpinnings of this inter-tribal bloodbath. I find the reaching back into antiquity for the first-cause rationalizations that validate the brutality those rock-chucking retards in the Middle-East inflict upon each other (and all of us too) to be tedious and unproductive. Mostly because it's all full of lies--from BOTH sides. Hence, that narrative is not something I'm going to give weight to. Don't even bring it up.

I will not only bring it up, I will repeat it, because it is fact. All you do is repeat Zionist propaganda derived from Zionist sources. That is, you post bullshit, I post fact. The Jews had no intention of allowing the Christians and Muslims to remain. The only reason 10%-15% of Christians and Muslims were not expelled or massacred by the Jews was as a result of the Arab League's intervention. Left to their own devices the Jews would have expelled or killed every Christian and Muslim. This was the plan prior to Israel's independence.

" Yosef Weitz, who was at the time director of the Jewish National Fund’s Lands Department. This man of noted Zionist convictions confided to his diary on 20 December 1940: “It must be clear that there is no room in the country for both people (...) the only solution is a Land of Israel, at least a western Land of Israel without Arabs. There is no room here for compromise. (...) There is no way but to transfer the Arabs from here to the neighbouring countries(...) Not one village must be left, not one (bedouin) tribe.”

Seven years later, Weitz found himself in a position to put this radical programme into effect. Already, in January 1948, he was orchestrating the expulsion of Palestinians from various parts of the country. In April he proposed - and obtained - the creation of “a body which would direct the Yishuv’s war with the aim of evicting as many Arabs as possible”. This body was unofficial at first, but was formalised at the end of August 1948 into the “Transfer Committee” which supervised the destruction of abandoned Arab villages and/or their repopulation with recent Jewish immigrants, in order to make any return of the refugees impossible. Its role was extended, in July, to take in the creation of Jewish settlements in the border areas."

The expulsion of the Palestinians re-examined - Le Monde diplomatique - English edition

Nowhere in your link can I find any mention of you NAZI RACIST claims that the Jews were planning to wipe out the muslims and Christians.

The only people expelled by Israel where fifth columnists, known terrorists, agitators and criminals. And as another of your links showed these amounted to under 12,000 people. The rest left of their own accord.

 

[LOki]

Oh really? Jordan and it's Jordanians--particularly Western Jordanians--are linguistically, culturally, religiously, and ethnically identical to "Palestinians."

Even if true: How is this a reason to expel the Palestinians from their land?

Let me start my response with this: I'm not a social justice warrior; I'm not making a social justice point. I don't give a fuck about the prehistoric underpinnings of this inter-tribal bloodbath. I find the reaching back into antiquity for the first-cause rationalizations that validate the brutality those rock-chucking retards in the Middle-East inflict upon each other (and all of us too) to be tedious and unproductive. Mostly because it's all full of lies--from BOTH sides. Hence, that narrative is not something I'm going to give weight to. Don't even bring it up.

That said, there is a point in recent history that helps define the situation clearly. That point is May 14, 1948. On that date, in the region that the Western powers knew as "Palestine," the Jewish People's Council introduced to the world the sovereign state of Israel; recognized by both the United States of America and the Soviet Union--the most powerful sovereign powers of the time.

Now, correct me if I'm wrong, but I understand that the "Palestinian" nation of Israel was attacked on the very day of its birth, by hostile Arab/Islamic nations surrounding it--and those hostile foreign nations sponsored traitors within the Arab/Islamic population of Israel.

It occurs to me that these Arab/Islamic Israelis ("Palestinians") actually belonged (briefly) to a nation in somewhere between May 14th and May 15th, 1948. They belonged to a nation that asserted a commitment to "foster the development of the country for the benefit of all its inhabitants; ... be based on freedom, justice and peace as envisaged by the prophets of Israel; ... ensure complete equality of social and political rights to all its inhabitants irrespective of religion, race or sex; it will guarantee freedom of religion, conscience, language, education and culture;..."

Yet these "Palestinians" chose to fight with the forces of hostile invading nations, against their own newly formed nation (i.e. Israel)--and then they lost. They could have fought with their own countrymen in defense of their nation, but they chose otherwise. It's pretty self evident why Israel wanted nothing to do with those back-stabbing shit-birds.

You cannot deny that Jewish "Palestinians" (Israelis) stood up as the valid sovereign organization on the eve that Great Britain abandoned its administrative control of the region. You cannot claim that Arab/Islamic "Palestinians" stood up as a valid sovereign organization to make a competing claim. And you cannot deny that (aided by foreign nations) certain Arab/Islamic Israelis went beyond contesting the legitimacy of Israeli sovereignty, but went all the more farther by embracing the invaders of their own lands--traitors to their nation and traitors to themselves.

Considering the behavior of the progeny of those traitors, I'm entirely unsurprised that Israelis are unwelcoming to them; and yet I am wholly surprised at the restraint Israel has exercised in not obliterating them from the planet in the manner that they have clearly been so capable of doing all this time.

I think these "Palestinians" have been barred from citizenship in the surrounding Arab/Islamic nations (most notably Jordan and Syria) because the citizens of those nations weren't too keen on patriating the traitors to Israel that they sponsored in 1948 (after all, traitors ARE traitors regardless of which side they sell-out to); and they sensibly maintain that same position of disdain for the trouble-making posterity of those traitors.

If I'm not wrong about this, it seems apparent to me that the right thing for these Palestinians to do is accept that their forebears lost for them any claim to a homeland in Israel when they turned against their countrymen and lost; and (in light of their behavior since) they should accept with gratitude any accommodations they get now. One of those accommodations really ought to be the possibility of patriation by the sponsor nations of their treason.

Let me correct you.

Thank you. Please do.

The surrounding Arab states did not attack the Jews in Palestine.

Well, they most certainly did. That they did so is historical fact.

The surrounding Arab states intervened in an attempt to prevent the Jews in Palestine from massacring and evicting the Christians and Muslims under the Plan Dalet.

Semantics. I find the reaching back into antiquity for the first-cause rationalizations that validate the brutality those rock-chucking retards in the Middle-East inflict upon each other (and all of us too) to be tedious and unproductive. Mostly because it's all full of lies--from BOTH sides. Hence, that narrative is not something I'm going to give weight to. Don't even bring it up.

That said, there is a point in recent history that helps define the situation clearly. That point is May 14, 1948. On that date, in the region that the Western powers knew as "Palestine," the Jewish People's Council introduced to the world the sovereign state of Israel; recognized by both the United States of America and the Soviet Union--the most powerful sovereign powers of the time.

The Jews intended to massacre and evict as many non-Jews from the area illegally assigned to them as indicated by Plan Dalet.

Or, alternatively the Jews intended to evict or otherwise remove the soon-to-be traitors to the nascent state of Israel, sponsored by the surrounding Arab/Islamic nations who were conspicuously planning to claim the Palestinian territory for themselves.

You see? This is why I don't give a fuck about anything before May 14, 1948. I just don't give a fuck about the prehistoric underpinnings of this inter-tribal blood-bath. While I understand that May 13, 1948 is not pre-history, I draw the line at last moment the previous recognized sovereign in control of the region left, and the next recognized sovereign took over.

The Christians and Muslims knew this was the plan and had every right to attempt to prevent the Jews from implementing their plan for ethnic cleansing and genocide.

This nothing but appeal to emotion. And hearsay semantics. Which is why I don't give a fuck about anything before May 14, 1948.

The Palestinians continue to have every right to attempt to regain their land in any way possible including demographics, which is probably how they will regain their land eventually.

No. No they don't.

These Arab/Islamic Israelis ("Palestinians") actually belonged (briefly) to a nation in somewhere between May 14th and May 15th, 1948. They belonged to a nation that asserted a commitment to "foster the development of the country for the benefit of all its inhabitants; ... be based on freedom, justice and peace as envisaged by the prophets of Israel; ... ensure complete equality of social and political rights to all its inhabitants irrespective of religion, race or sex; it will guarantee freedom of religion, conscience, language, education and culture;..."

Yet these "Palestinians" chose to fight with the forces of hostile invading nations, against their own newly formed nation (i.e. Israel)--and then they lost. They could have fought beside their own countrymen in defense of their nation, but they chose otherwise.

The right thing for these "Palestinians" to do is accept that their forebears lost for them any claim to a homeland in Israel when they turned against their countrymen and lost; and (in light of their behavior since) they should accept with gratitude any accommodations they get now. One of those accommodations really ought to be the possibility of patriation by the sponsor nations of their treason. Jordan seems to be the best likely candidate.

That the Arab states were unsuccessful in preventing the massacre of Christians and Muslims and their eviction by the Jews does not mean that the their intervention was in anyway unjustified.

I'm not a social justice warrior; I'm not making a social justice point. I don't give a fuck about the prehistoric underpinnings of this inter-tribal bloodbath. I find the reaching back into antiquity for the first-cause rationalizations that validate the brutality those rock-chucking retards in the Middle-East inflict upon each other (and all of us too) to be tedious and unproductive. Mostly because it's all full of lies--from BOTH sides. Hence, that narrative is not something I'm going to give weight to. Don't even bring it up.

I will not only bring it up, I will repeat it, because it is fact.

I'm not disputing or affirming your "facts." They are irrelevant to my point for the precise reasons I submitted, which you refuse to acknowledge.

Seriously. Don't bother to bring it up. It's meaningless to the whole world of people who do not give a fuck about the rationalizations that validate the brutality those rock-chucking retards in the Middle-East inflict upon each other.

All you do is repeat Zionist propaganda derived from Zionist sources. That is, you post bullshit, I post fact.

Ah. I see clearly. All that which fails to validate the brutality your favored rock-chucking retards in the Middle-East inflict upon the other rock-chucking retards is "Zionist propaganda derived from Zionist sources," "bullshit."

You are obviously an antisemitic ideologue. Good for you, Pumpkin.

You know what Cupcake? I don't give a fuck that you're the grand-fucking-dragon of your own personal illuminati lodge that claims the sole monopoly on what is "fact."

What you post looks just like the lies submitted by "Zionist" propagandists. You're both clown-shoes.

The Jews had no intention of allowing the Christians and Muslims to remain.

Yet they remain.

The only reason 10%-15% of Christians and Muslims were not expelled or massacred by the Jews was as a result of the Arab League's intervention.

So this Arab League that failed to prevent the existence of the nation of Israel--which was establishing their sovereignty through massacring Christians and Muslims--managed to do what?... help establish the existence of the state of Israel by preventing the massacre Christians and Muslims? Gotcha.

Left to their own devices the Jews would have expelled or killed every Christian and Muslim.

Yet they are still there. The Arab League ENTIRELY powerless to prevent further expulsions or "massacres." So very strange.

This was the plan prior to Israel's independence.

Well. I hate to break this to you Cupcake; while I recognize the actual existence of "Plan Dalet" and what it says, considering the fine relationship Israel has with Christians and Muslims in their country who do not behave like violent sociopaths, either they were not as committed to this "plan" in the manner your dogma insists, or there really was no such "plan" (in the manner your dogma insists) in the first place.

Either way, I don't give a fuck about the rationalizations that validate the brutality those rock-chucking retards in the Middle-East inflict upon each other.

 

[montelatici]

Even if true: How is this a reason to expel the Palestinians from their land?

Let me start my response with this: I'm not a social justice warrior; I'm not making a social justice point. I don't give a fuck about the prehistoric underpinnings of this inter-tribal bloodbath. I find the reaching back into antiquity for the first-cause rationalizations that validate the brutality those rock-chucking retards in the Middle-East inflict upon each other (and all of us too) to be tedious and unproductive. Mostly because it's all full of lies--from BOTH sides. Hence, that narrative is not something I'm going to give weight to. Don't even bring it up.

That said, there is a point in recent history that helps define the situation clearly. That point is May 14, 1948. On that date, in the region that the Western powers knew as "Palestine," the Jewish People's Council introduced to the world the sovereign state of Israel; recognized by both the United States of America and the Soviet Union--the most powerful sovereign powers of the time.

Now, correct me if I'm wrong, but I understand that the "Palestinian" nation of Israel was attacked on the very day of its birth, by hostile Arab/Islamic nations surrounding it--and those hostile foreign nations sponsored traitors within the Arab/Islamic population of Israel.

It occurs to me that these Arab/Islamic Israelis ("Palestinians") actually belonged (briefly) to a nation in somewhere between May 14th and May 15th, 1948. They belonged to a nation that asserted a commitment to "foster the development of the country for the benefit of all its inhabitants; ... be based on freedom, justice and peace as envisaged by the prophets of Israel; ... ensure complete equality of social and political rights to all its inhabitants irrespective of religion, race or sex; it will guarantee freedom of religion, conscience, language, education and culture;..."

Yet these "Palestinians" chose to fight with the forces of hostile invading nations, against their own newly formed nation (i.e. Israel)--and then they lost. They could have fought with their own countrymen in defense of their nation, but they chose otherwise. It's pretty self evident why Israel wanted nothing to do with those back-stabbing shit-birds.

You cannot deny that Jewish "Palestinians" (Israelis) stood up as the valid sovereign organization on the eve that Great Britain abandoned its administrative control of the region. You cannot claim that Arab/Islamic "Palestinians" stood up as a valid sovereign organization to make a competing claim. And you cannot deny that (aided by foreign nations) certain Arab/Islamic Israelis went beyond contesting the legitimacy of Israeli sovereignty, but went all the more farther by embracing the invaders of their own lands--traitors to their nation and traitors to themselves.

Considering the behavior of the progeny of those traitors, I'm entirely unsurprised that Israelis are unwelcoming to them; and yet I am wholly surprised at the restraint Israel has exercised in not obliterating them from the planet in the manner that they have clearly been so capable of doing all this time.

I think these "Palestinians" have been barred from citizenship in the surrounding Arab/Islamic nations (most notably Jordan and Syria) because the citizens of those nations weren't too keen on patriating the traitors to Israel that they sponsored in 1948 (after all, traitors ARE traitors regardless of which side they sell-out to); and they sensibly maintain that same position of disdain for the trouble-making posterity of those traitors.

If I'm not wrong about this, it seems apparent to me that the right thing for these Palestinians to do is accept that their forebears lost for them any claim to a homeland in Israel when they turned against their countrymen and lost; and (in light of their behavior since) they should accept with gratitude any accommodations they get now. One of those accommodations really ought to be the possibility of patriation by the sponsor nations of their treason.

Let me correct you.

Thank you. Please do.

The surrounding Arab states did not attack the Jews in Palestine.

Well, they most certainly did. That they did so is historical fact.

The surrounding Arab states intervened in an attempt to prevent the Jews in Palestine from massacring and evicting the Christians and Muslims under the Plan Dalet.

Semantics. I find the reaching back into antiquity for the first-cause rationalizations that validate the brutality those rock-chucking retards in the Middle-East inflict upon each other (and all of us too) to be tedious and unproductive. Mostly because it's all full of lies--from BOTH sides. Hence, that narrative is not something I'm going to give weight to. Don't even bring it up.

That said, there is a point in recent history that helps define the situation clearly. That point is May 14, 1948. On that date, in the region that the Western powers knew as "Palestine," the Jewish People's Council introduced to the world the sovereign state of Israel; recognized by both the United States of America and the Soviet Union--the most powerful sovereign powers of the time.

The Jews intended to massacre and evict as many non-Jews from the area illegally assigned to them as indicated by Plan Dalet.

Or, alternatively the Jews intended to evict or otherwise remove the soon-to-be traitors to the nascent state of Israel, sponsored by the surrounding Arab/Islamic nations who were conspicuously planning to claim the Palestinian territory for themselves.

You see? This is why I don't give a fuck about anything before May 14, 1948. I just don't give a fuck about the prehistoric underpinnings of this inter-tribal blood-bath. While I understand that May 13, 1948 is not pre-history, I draw the line at last moment the previous recognized sovereign in control of the region left, and the next recognized sovereign took over.

The Christians and Muslims knew this was the plan and had every right to attempt to prevent the Jews from implementing their plan for ethnic cleansing and genocide.

This nothing but appeal to emotion. And hearsay semantics. Which is why I don't give a fuck about anything before May 14, 1948.

The Palestinians continue to have every right to attempt to regain their land in any way possible including demographics, which is probably how they will regain their land eventually.

No. No they don't.

These Arab/Islamic Israelis ("Palestinians") actually belonged (briefly) to a nation in somewhere between May 14th and May 15th, 1948. They belonged to a nation that asserted a commitment to "foster the development of the country for the benefit of all its inhabitants; ... be based on freedom, justice and peace as envisaged by the prophets of Israel; ... ensure complete equality of social and political rights to all its inhabitants irrespective of religion, race or sex; it will guarantee freedom of religion, conscience, language, education and culture;..."

Yet these "Palestinians" chose to fight with the forces of hostile invading nations, against their own newly formed nation (i.e. Israel)--and then they lost. They could have fought beside their own countrymen in defense of their nation, but they chose otherwise.

The right thing for these "Palestinians" to do is accept that their forebears lost for them any claim to a homeland in Israel when they turned against their countrymen and lost; and (in light of their behavior since) they should accept with gratitude any accommodations they get now. One of those accommodations really ought to be the possibility of patriation by the sponsor nations of their treason. Jordan seems to be the best likely candidate.

That the Arab states were unsuccessful in preventing the massacre of Christians and Muslims and their eviction by the Jews does not mean that the their intervention was in anyway unjustified.

I'm not a social justice warrior; I'm not making a social justice point. I don't give a fuck about the prehistoric underpinnings of this inter-tribal bloodbath. I find the reaching back into antiquity for the first-cause rationalizations that validate the brutality those rock-chucking retards in the Middle-East inflict upon each other (and all of us too) to be tedious and unproductive. Mostly because it's all full of lies--from BOTH sides. Hence, that narrative is not something I'm going to give weight to. Don't even bring it up.

I will not only bring it up, I will repeat it, because it is fact. All you do is repeat Zionist propaganda derived from Zionist sources. That is, you post bullshit, I post fact. The Jews had no intention of allowing the Christians and Muslims to remain. The only reason 10%-15% of Christians and Muslims were not expelled or massacred by the Jews was as a result of the Arab League's intervention. Left to their own devices the Jews would have expelled or killed every Christian and Muslim. This was the plan prior to Israel's independence.

" Yosef Weitz, who was at the time director of the Jewish National Fund’s Lands Department. This man of noted Zionist convictions confided to his diary on 20 December 1940: “It must be clear that there is no room in the country for both people (...) the only solution is a Land of Israel, at least a western Land of Israel without Arabs. There is no room here for compromise. (...) There is no way but to transfer the Arabs from here to the neighbouring countries(...) Not one village must be left, not one (bedouin) tribe.”

Seven years later, Weitz found himself in a position to put this radical programme into effect. Already, in January 1948, he was orchestrating the expulsion of Palestinians from various parts of the country. In April he proposed - and obtained - the creation of “a body which would direct the Yishuv’s war with the aim of evicting as many Arabs as possible”. This body was unofficial at first, but was formalised at the end of August 1948 into the “Transfer Committee” which supervised the destruction of abandoned Arab villages and/or their repopulation with recent Jewish immigrants, in order to make any return of the refugees impossible. Its role was extended, in July, to take in the creation of Jewish settlements in the border areas."

The expulsion of the Palestinians re-examined - Le Monde diplomatique - English edition

Nowhere in your link can I find any mention of you NAZI RACIST claims that the Jews were planning to wipe out the muslims and Christians.

The only people expelled by Israel where fifth columnists, known terrorists, agitators and criminals. And as another of your links showed these amounted to under 12,000 people. The rest left of their own accord.

" Yosef Weitz, who was at the time director of the Jewish National Fund’s Lands Department. This man of noted Zionist convictions confided to his diary on 20 December 1940: “It must be clear that there is no room in the country for both people (...) the only solution is a Land of Israel, at least a western Land of Israel without Arabs. There is no room here for compromise. (...) There is no way but to transfer the Arabs from here to the neighbouring countries(...) Not one village must be left, not one (bedouin) tribe.”

Seven years later, Weitz found himself in a position to put this radical programme into effect. Already, in January 1948, he was orchestrating the expulsion of Palestinians from various parts of the country. In April he proposed - and obtained - the creation of “a body which would direct the Yishuv’s war with the aim of evicting as many Arabs as possible”. This body was unofficial at first, but was formalised at the end of August 1948 into the “Transfer Committee” which supervised the destruction of abandoned Arab villages and/or their repopulation with recent Jewish immigrants, in order to make any return of the refugees impossible. Its role was extended, in July, to take in the creation of Jewish settlements in the border areas."

The expulsion of the Palestinians re-examined - Le Monde diplomatique - English edition

 

[Billy_Kinetta]

Israel is slowly grabbing more land.

Good. They should have annexed the whole block in 1967. That would have been the end of it.

 

[montelatici]

Even if true: How is this a reason to expel the Palestinians from their land?

Let me start my response with this: I'm not a social justice warrior; I'm not making a social justice point. I don't give a fuck about the prehistoric underpinnings of this inter-tribal bloodbath. I find the reaching back into antiquity for the first-cause rationalizations that validate the brutality those rock-chucking retards in the Middle-East inflict upon each other (and all of us too) to be tedious and unproductive. Mostly because it's all full of lies--from BOTH sides. Hence, that narrative is not something I'm going to give weight to. Don't even bring it up.

That said, there is a point in recent history that helps define the situation clearly. That point is May 14, 1948. On that date, in the region that the Western powers knew as "Palestine," the Jewish People's Council introduced to the world the sovereign state of Israel; recognized by both the United States of America and the Soviet Union--the most powerful sovereign powers of the time.

Now, correct me if I'm wrong, but I understand that the "Palestinian" nation of Israel was attacked on the very day of its birth, by hostile Arab/Islamic nations surrounding it--and those hostile foreign nations sponsored traitors within the Arab/Islamic population of Israel.

It occurs to me that these Arab/Islamic Israelis ("Palestinians") actually belonged (briefly) to a nation in somewhere between May 14th and May 15th, 1948. They belonged to a nation that asserted a commitment to "foster the development of the country for the benefit of all its inhabitants; ... be based on freedom, justice and peace as envisaged by the prophets of Israel; ... ensure complete equality of social and political rights to all its inhabitants irrespective of religion, race or sex; it will guarantee freedom of religion, conscience, language, education and culture;..."

Yet these "Palestinians" chose to fight with the forces of hostile invading nations, against their own newly formed nation (i.e. Israel)--and then they lost. They could have fought with their own countrymen in defense of their nation, but they chose otherwise. It's pretty self evident why Israel wanted nothing to do with those back-stabbing shit-birds.

You cannot deny that Jewish "Palestinians" (Israelis) stood up as the valid sovereign organization on the eve that Great Britain abandoned its administrative control of the region. You cannot claim that Arab/Islamic "Palestinians" stood up as a valid sovereign organization to make a competing claim. And you cannot deny that (aided by foreign nations) certain Arab/Islamic Israelis went beyond contesting the legitimacy of Israeli sovereignty, but went all the more farther by embracing the invaders of their own lands--traitors to their nation and traitors to themselves.

Considering the behavior of the progeny of those traitors, I'm entirely unsurprised that Israelis are unwelcoming to them; and yet I am wholly surprised at the restraint Israel has exercised in not obliterating them from the planet in the manner that they have clearly been so capable of doing all this time.

I think these "Palestinians" have been barred from citizenship in the surrounding Arab/Islamic nations (most notably Jordan and Syria) because the citizens of those nations weren't too keen on patriating the traitors to Israel that they sponsored in 1948 (after all, traitors ARE traitors regardless of which side they sell-out to); and they sensibly maintain that same position of disdain for the trouble-making posterity of those traitors.

If I'm not wrong about this, it seems apparent to me that the right thing for these Palestinians to do is accept that their forebears lost for them any claim to a homeland in Israel when they turned against their countrymen and lost; and (in light of their behavior since) they should accept with gratitude any accommodations they get now. One of those accommodations really ought to be the possibility of patriation by the sponsor nations of their treason.

Let me correct you.

Thank you. Please do.

The surrounding Arab states did not attack the Jews in Palestine.

Well, they most certainly did. That they did so is historical fact.

The surrounding Arab states intervened in an attempt to prevent the Jews in Palestine from massacring and evicting the Christians and Muslims under the Plan Dalet.

Semantics. I find the reaching back into antiquity for the first-cause rationalizations that validate the brutality those rock-chucking retards in the Middle-East inflict upon each other (and all of us too) to be tedious and unproductive. Mostly because it's all full of lies--from BOTH sides. Hence, that narrative is not something I'm going to give weight to. Don't even bring it up.

That said, there is a point in recent history that helps define the situation clearly. That point is May 14, 1948. On that date, in the region that the Western powers knew as "Palestine," the Jewish People's Council introduced to the world the sovereign state of Israel; recognized by both the United States of America and the Soviet Union--the most powerful sovereign powers of the time.

The Jews intended to massacre and evict as many non-Jews from the area illegally assigned to them as indicated by Plan Dalet.

Or, alternatively the Jews intended to evict or otherwise remove the soon-to-be traitors to the nascent state of Israel, sponsored by the surrounding Arab/Islamic nations who were conspicuously planning to claim the Palestinian territory for themselves.

You see? This is why I don't give a fuck about anything before May 14, 1948. I just don't give a fuck about the prehistoric underpinnings of this inter-tribal blood-bath. While I understand that May 13, 1948 is not pre-history, I draw the line at last moment the previous recognized sovereign in control of the region left, and the next recognized sovereign took over.

The Christians and Muslims knew this was the plan and had every right to attempt to prevent the Jews from implementing their plan for ethnic cleansing and genocide.

This nothing but appeal to emotion. And hearsay semantics. Which is why I don't give a fuck about anything before May 14, 1948.

The Palestinians continue to have every right to attempt to regain their land in any way possible including demographics, which is probably how they will regain their land eventually.

No. No they don't.

These Arab/Islamic Israelis ("Palestinians") actually belonged (briefly) to a nation in somewhere between May 14th and May 15th, 1948. They belonged to a nation that asserted a commitment to "foster the development of the country for the benefit of all its inhabitants; ... be based on freedom, justice and peace as envisaged by the prophets of Israel; ... ensure complete equality of social and political rights to all its inhabitants irrespective of religion, race or sex; it will guarantee freedom of religion, conscience, language, education and culture;..."

Yet these "Palestinians" chose to fight with the forces of hostile invading nations, against their own newly formed nation (i.e. Israel)--and then they lost. They could have fought beside their own countrymen in defense of their nation, but they chose otherwise.

The right thing for these "Palestinians" to do is accept that their forebears lost for them any claim to a homeland in Israel when they turned against their countrymen and lost; and (in light of their behavior since) they should accept with gratitude any accommodations they get now. One of those accommodations really ought to be the possibility of patriation by the sponsor nations of their treason. Jordan seems to be the best likely candidate.

That the Arab states were unsuccessful in preventing the massacre of Christians and Muslims and their eviction by the Jews does not mean that the their intervention was in anyway unjustified.

I'm not a social justice warrior; I'm not making a social justice point. I don't give a fuck about the prehistoric underpinnings of this inter-tribal bloodbath. I find the reaching back into antiquity for the first-cause rationalizations that validate the brutality those rock-chucking retards in the Middle-East inflict upon each other (and all of us too) to be tedious and unproductive. Mostly because it's all full of lies--from BOTH sides. Hence, that narrative is not something I'm going to give weight to. Don't even bring it up.

I will not only bring it up, I will repeat it, because it is fact.

I'm not disputing or affirming your "facts." They are irrelevant to my point for the precise reasons I submitted, which you refuse to acknowledge.

Seriously. Don't bother to bring it up. It's meaningless to the whole world of people who do not give a fuck about the rationalizations that validate the brutality those rock-chucking retards in the Middle-East inflict upon each other.

All you do is repeat Zionist propaganda derived from Zionist sources. That is, you post bullshit, I post fact.

Ah. I see clearly. All that which fails to validate the brutality your favored rock-chucking retards in the Middle-East inflict upon the other rock-chucking retards is "Zionist propaganda derived from Zionist sources," "bullshit."

You are obviously an antisemitic ideologue. Good for you, Pumpkin.

You know what Cupcake? I don't give a fuck that you're the grand-fucking-dragon of your own personal illuminati lodge that claims the sole monopoly on what is "fact."

What you post looks just like the lies submitted by "Zionist" propagandists. You're both clown-shoes.

The Jews had no intention of allowing the Christians and Muslims to remain.

Yet they remain.

The only reason 10%-15% of Christians and Muslims were not expelled or massacred by the Jews was as a result of the Arab League's intervention.

So this Arab League that failed to prevent the existence of the nation of Israel--which was establishing their sovereignty through massacring Christians and Muslims--managed to do what?... help establish the existence of the state of Israel by preventing the massacre Christians and Muslims? Gotcha.

Left to their own devices the Jews would have expelled or killed every Christian and Muslim.

Yet they are still there. The Arab League ENTIRELY powerless to prevent further expulsions or "massacres." So very strange.

This was the plan prior to Israel's independence.

Well. I hate to break this to you Cupcake; while I recognize the actual existence of "Plan Dalet" and what it says, considering the fine relationship Israel has with Christians and Muslims in their country who do not behave like violent sociopaths, either they were not as committed to this "plan" in the manner your dogma insists, or there really was no such "plan" (in the manner your dogma insists) in the first place.

Either way, I don't give a fuck about the rationalizations that validate the brutality those rock-chucking retards in the Middle-East inflict upon each other.

It's not just Plan Dalet, there was every intention of the European Jews to colonize Palestine from the beginning.

New York Times July 20, 1899

Zionists planned to colonize Palestine in 1899 NY Times

Jewish Telegraphic Agency July 25, 1926

Successful Jewish Colonization Will Extend Beyond Palestine Frontier, Weizmann Tells Actions Committ

“Due to the success of our colonization work in Palestine proper, it is possible that eventually our colonization work will be extended beyond the frontiers of Transjordania. It is true that the Palestine government has not taken a clear stand in regard to its economic policy, but well founded demands have every prospect of being agreed to. A great deal has been achieved during the last months,”

Successful Jewish Colonization Will Extend Beyond Palestine Frontier Weizmann Tells Actions Committ Jewish Telegraphic Agency

And in 1940 the director of the Jewish National Fund's Lands Department was clear on the Jewish intentions:


" Yosef Weitz, who was at the time director of the Jewish National Fund’s Lands Department. This man of noted Zionist convictions confided to his diary on 20 December 1940: “It must be clear that there is no room in the country for both people (...) the only solution is a Land of Israel, at least a western Land of Israel without Arabs. There is no room here for compromise. (...) There is no way but to transfer the Arabs from here to the neighbouring countries(...) Not one village must be left, not one (bedouin) tribe.”

Seven years later, Weitz found himself in a position to put this radical programme into effect. Already, in January 1948, he was orchestrating the expulsion of Palestinians from various parts of the country. In April he proposed - and obtained - the creation of “a body which would direct the Yishuv’s war with the aim of evicting as many Arabs as possible”. This body was unofficial at first, but was formalised at the end of August 1948 into the “Transfer Committee” which supervised the destruction of abandoned Arab villages and/or their repopulation with recent Jewish immigrants, in order to make any return of the refugees impossible. Its role was extended, in July, to take in the creation of Jewish settlements in the border areas."

The expulsion of the Palestinians re-examined - Le Monde diplomatique - English edition

 

[Davey T]

“If tomorrow, Israel laid down its arms and announced, ‘We will fight no more,’ what would happen? And if the Arab countries around Israel laid down their arms and announced, ‘We will fight no more,’ what would happen?” Prager asks. “In the first case, there would be an immediate destruction of the state of Israel and mass murder of its Jewish population. In the second case, there would be peace the next day.”

I believe Israel don’t have any goal to conquer more territory or to eliminate all the arabs around Israel. I believe Mr.Prager. Don’t you think he’s right? If you don’t, show your vision of the problem.

How about Israel just comply with international law and end the illegal and immoral occupation and blockade?

The occupation is the cause of all the violence.

What occupation? Israel is trying to live in the middle of people that swear to their destruction. You have to realize that the Palestinians have sworn to the destruction of Israel. Right? If the Palestinians would say Israel could live in peace, there would be no war. Why is Israel the only country that can't defend itself?

 

[Davey T]

“If tomorrow, Israel laid down its arms and announced, ‘We will fight no more,’ what would happen? And if the Arab countries around Israel laid down their arms and announced, ‘We will fight no more,’ what would happen?” Prager asks. “In the first case, there would be an immediate destruction of the state of Israel and mass murder of its Jewish population. In the second case, there would be peace the next day.”

I believe Israel don’t have any goal to conquer more territory or to eliminate all the arabs around Israel. I believe Mr.Prager. Don’t you think he’s right? If you don’t, show your vision of the problem.

If tomorrow, Israel laid down its arms and announced, ‘We will fight no more,’ what would happen?​

The Palestinians would regain their rights.

They govern there own area. What are you talking about?

 

[montelatici]

Did the Europeans that colonized Palestine believe that the inhabitants would welcome the colonization of their land and homes? Did the colonists believe that the local inhabitants would just sit back and not resist colonization? What planet are you living on?

 

[montelatici]

“If tomorrow, Israel laid down its arms and announced, ‘We will fight no more,’ what would happen? And if the Arab countries around Israel laid down their arms and announced, ‘We will fight no more,’ what would happen?” Prager asks. “In the first case, there would be an immediate destruction of the state of Israel and mass murder of its Jewish population. In the second case, there would be peace the next day.”

I believe Israel don’t have any goal to conquer more territory or to eliminate all the arabs around Israel. I believe Mr.Prager. Don’t you think he’s right? If you don’t, show your vision of the problem.

If tomorrow, Israel laid down its arms and announced, ‘We will fight no more,’ what would happen?​

The Palestinians would regain their rights.

They govern there own area. What are you talking about?

They govern their own area? If they governed their own area there wouldn't be Israeli settlements in their area, you moron.

 

[Bleipriester]

By occupation You mean kicking Syrian ass hard for trying to annihilate Israel.
Well that's war for big men, what You loose You don't whine 'bout.

Nonsense. Syria stopped Israel´s advance in Syria and Lebanon.
Don´t deflect from the topic, btw.

How's that deflection? I merely answered You,
it's just that You see those territories as "occupied" even though it was accepted after 67 that Israel needed new borders to hold the state. Of course after those Syrians, Egyptians and other neighbors went to war of ANNIHILATION of Israel...You talk to me of "occupied".
It was a strategic place taken back from enemies.

In Your opinion that's the explanation for the conflict...but I think You're mistaking
Your own propaganda the conflict started much earlier.
Golan heights are claimed by no one except Israel.

The conflict started in 1948. Since then, Israel launched many raids on its neighbors. Syria has always been a backer of Lebanon.
As for Golan, except for Israel, nobody has ever accepted the occupation.

The conflict started in 1920 when the LoN first broached the subject of granting part of Palestine for the Jews national home. That was also when pan arab nationalism started up and resorted to violent means to achieve their aims.
Golan was destined to be part of Israel from 1923 and it was only when Syria claimed it that it became an issue

Do you mean the following?
When Israel claims it it has to be Israeli.
When Syria claims it it has to be Israeli, too?

It is interesting, however, so please give a link.

 

[Bleipriester]

The video starts from a false premise:

NETANYAHU:

"there will be no Palestinian state"

Netanyahu If I m elected there will be no Palestinian state - Israel election 2015 - - Haaretz Daily Newspaper Israel News

Indeed. The Palestinian state already exists... Jordan.

More nonsense. When Zion puppets are running out of arguments they drop their mask...

Oh really? Jordan and it's Jordanians--particularly Western Jordanians--are linguistically, culturally, religiously, and ethnically identical to "Palestinians."

Even if true: How is this a reason to expel the Palestinians from their land?

Because they did not accept the UN resolution calling on them to stop all belligerence and live in peace. Makes them fifth columnists and liable to deportation, just as it would in the USA

So the IDF lives in peace with the Palestinians?

Israeli blitz leaves trauma and grief in Gaza s Ground Zero

 

[Bleipriester]

More nonsense. When Zion puppets are running out of arguments they drop their mask...

Oh really? Jordan and it's Jordanians--particularly Western Jordanians--are linguistically, culturally, religiously, and ethnically identical to "Palestinians."

Even if true: How is this a reason to expel the Palestinians from their land?

Let me start my response with this: I'm not a social justice warrior; I'm not making a social justice point. I don't give a fuck about the prehistoric underpinnings of this inter-tribal bloodbath. I find the reaching back into antiquity for the first-cause rationalizations that validate the brutality those rock-chucking retards in the Middle-East inflict upon each other (and all of us too) to be tedious and unproductive. Mostly because it's all full of lies--from BOTH sides. Hence, that narrative is not something I'm going to give weight to. Don't even bring it up.

That said, there is a point in recent history that helps define the situation clearly. That point is May 14, 1948. On that date, in the region that the Western powers knew as "Palestine," the Jewish People's Council introduced to the world the sovereign state of Israel; recognized by both the United States of America and the Soviet Union--the most powerful sovereign powers of the time.

Now, correct me if I'm wrong, but I understand that the "Palestinian" nation of Israel was attacked on the very day of its birth, by hostile Arab/Islamic nations surrounding it--and those hostile foreign nations sponsored traitors within the Arab/Islamic population of Israel.

It occurs to me that these Arab/Islamic Israelis ("Palestinians") actually belonged (briefly) to a nation in somewhere between May 14th and May 15th, 1948. They belonged to a nation that asserted a commitment to "foster the development of the country for the benefit of all its inhabitants; ... be based on freedom, justice and peace as envisaged by the prophets of Israel; ... ensure complete equality of social and political rights to all its inhabitants irrespective of religion, race or sex; it will guarantee freedom of religion, conscience, language, education and culture;..."

Yet these "Palestinians" chose to fight with the forces of hostile invading nations, against their own newly formed nation (i.e. Israel)--and then they lost. They could have fought with their own countrymen in defense of their nation, but they chose otherwise. It's pretty self evident why Israel wanted nothing to do with those back-stabbing shit-birds.

You cannot deny that Jewish "Palestinians" (Israelis) stood up as the valid sovereign organization on the eve that Great Britain abandoned its administrative control of the region. You cannot claim that Arab/Islamic "Palestinians" stood up as a valid sovereign organization to make a competing claim. And you cannot deny that (aided by foreign nations) certain Arab/Islamic Israelis went beyond contesting the legitimacy of Israeli sovereignty, but went all the more farther by embracing the invaders of their own lands--traitors to their nation and traitors to themselves.

Considering the behavior of the progeny of those traitors, I'm entirely unsurprised that Israelis are unwelcoming to them; and yet I am wholly surprised at the restraint Israel has exercised in not obliterating them from the planet in the manner that they have clearly been so capable of doing all this time.

I think these "Palestinians" have been barred from citizenship in the surrounding Arab/Islamic nations (most notably Jordan and Syria) because the citizens of those nations weren't too keen on patriating the traitors to Israel that they sponsored in 1948 (after all, traitors ARE traitors regardless of which side they sell-out to); and they sensibly maintain that same position of disdain for the trouble-making posterity of those traitors.

If I'm not wrong about this, it seems apparent to me that the right thing for these Palestinians to do is accept that their forebears lost for them any claim to a homeland in Israel when they turned against their countrymen and lost; and (in light of their behavior since) they should accept with gratitude any accommodations they get now. One of those accommodations really ought to be the possibility of patriation by the sponsor nations of their treason.

You say that Israel has been attacked since its recreation. But others say, its the other way round, among them was the SU.

And the facts on the ground show that from May 15 1948 Israel has been under constant attack

Would you mind to share these facts with me?

 

[Bleipriester]

Israel is slowly grabbing more land.

Good. They should have annexed the whole block in 1967. That would have been the end of it.

Don´t show up with right to exist stuff, then.

 

[LOki]

Let me start my response with this: I'm not a social justice warrior; I'm not making a social justice point. I don't give a fuck about the prehistoric underpinnings of this inter-tribal bloodbath. I find the reaching back into antiquity for the first-cause rationalizations that validate the brutality those rock-chucking retards in the Middle-East inflict upon each other (and all of us too) to be tedious and unproductive. Mostly because it's all full of lies--from BOTH sides. Hence, that narrative is not something I'm going to give weight to. Don't even bring it up.

That said, there is a point in recent history that helps define the situation clearly. That point is May 14, 1948. On that date, in the region that the Western powers knew as "Palestine," the Jewish People's Council introduced to the world the sovereign state of Israel; recognized by both the United States of America and the Soviet Union--the most powerful sovereign powers of the time.

Now, correct me if I'm wrong, but I understand that the "Palestinian" nation of Israel was attacked on the very day of its birth, by hostile Arab/Islamic nations surrounding it--and those hostile foreign nations sponsored traitors within the Arab/Islamic population of Israel.

It occurs to me that these Arab/Islamic Israelis ("Palestinians") actually belonged (briefly) to a nation in somewhere between May 14th and May 15th, 1948. They belonged to a nation that asserted a commitment to "foster the development of the country for the benefit of all its inhabitants; ... be based on freedom, justice and peace as envisaged by the prophets of Israel; ... ensure complete equality of social and political rights to all its inhabitants irrespective of religion, race or sex; it will guarantee freedom of religion, conscience, language, education and culture;..."

Yet these "Palestinians" chose to fight with the forces of hostile invading nations, against their own newly formed nation (i.e. Israel)--and then they lost. They could have fought with their own countrymen in defense of their nation, but they chose otherwise. It's pretty self evident why Israel wanted nothing to do with those back-stabbing shit-birds.

You cannot deny that Jewish "Palestinians" (Israelis) stood up as the valid sovereign organization on the eve that Great Britain abandoned its administrative control of the region. You cannot claim that Arab/Islamic "Palestinians" stood up as a valid sovereign organization to make a competing claim. And you cannot deny that (aided by foreign nations) certain Arab/Islamic Israelis went beyond contesting the legitimacy of Israeli sovereignty, but went all the more farther by embracing the invaders of their own lands--traitors to their nation and traitors to themselves.

Considering the behavior of the progeny of those traitors, I'm entirely unsurprised that Israelis are unwelcoming to them; and yet I am wholly surprised at the restraint Israel has exercised in not obliterating them from the planet in the manner that they have clearly been so capable of doing all this time.

I think these "Palestinians" have been barred from citizenship in the surrounding Arab/Islamic nations (most notably Jordan and Syria) because the citizens of those nations weren't too keen on patriating the traitors to Israel that they sponsored in 1948 (after all, traitors ARE traitors regardless of which side they sell-out to); and they sensibly maintain that same position of disdain for the trouble-making posterity of those traitors.

If I'm not wrong about this, it seems apparent to me that the right thing for these Palestinians to do is accept that their forebears lost for them any claim to a homeland in Israel when they turned against their countrymen and lost; and (in light of their behavior since) they should accept with gratitude any accommodations they get now. One of those accommodations really ought to be the possibility of patriation by the sponsor nations of their treason.

Let me correct you.

Thank you. Please do.

The surrounding Arab states did not attack the Jews in Palestine.

Well, they most certainly did. That they did so is historical fact.

The surrounding Arab states intervened in an attempt to prevent the Jews in Palestine from massacring and evicting the Christians and Muslims under the Plan Dalet.

Semantics. I find the reaching back into antiquity for the first-cause rationalizations that validate the brutality those rock-chucking retards in the Middle-East inflict upon each other (and all of us too) to be tedious and unproductive. Mostly because it's all full of lies--from BOTH sides. Hence, that narrative is not something I'm going to give weight to. Don't even bring it up.

That said, there is a point in recent history that helps define the situation clearly. That point is May 14, 1948. On that date, in the region that the Western powers knew as "Palestine," the Jewish People's Council introduced to the world the sovereign state of Israel; recognized by both the United States of America and the Soviet Union--the most powerful sovereign powers of the time.

The Jews intended to massacre and evict as many non-Jews from the area illegally assigned to them as indicated by Plan Dalet.

Or, alternatively the Jews intended to evict or otherwise remove the soon-to-be traitors to the nascent state of Israel, sponsored by the surrounding Arab/Islamic nations who were conspicuously planning to claim the Palestinian territory for themselves.

You see? This is why I don't give a fuck about anything before May 14, 1948. I just don't give a fuck about the prehistoric underpinnings of this inter-tribal blood-bath. While I understand that May 13, 1948 is not pre-history, I draw the line at last moment the previous recognized sovereign in control of the region left, and the next recognized sovereign took over.

The Christians and Muslims knew this was the plan and had every right to attempt to prevent the Jews from implementing their plan for ethnic cleansing and genocide.

This nothing but appeal to emotion. And hearsay semantics. Which is why I don't give a fuck about anything before May 14, 1948.

The Palestinians continue to have every right to attempt to regain their land in any way possible including demographics, which is probably how they will regain their land eventually.

No. No they don't.

These Arab/Islamic Israelis ("Palestinians") actually belonged (briefly) to a nation in somewhere between May 14th and May 15th, 1948. They belonged to a nation that asserted a commitment to "foster the development of the country for the benefit of all its inhabitants; ... be based on freedom, justice and peace as envisaged by the prophets of Israel; ... ensure complete equality of social and political rights to all its inhabitants irrespective of religion, race or sex; it will guarantee freedom of religion, conscience, language, education and culture;..."

Yet these "Palestinians" chose to fight with the forces of hostile invading nations, against their own newly formed nation (i.e. Israel)--and then they lost. They could have fought beside their own countrymen in defense of their nation, but they chose otherwise.

The right thing for these "Palestinians" to do is accept that their forebears lost for them any claim to a homeland in Israel when they turned against their countrymen and lost; and (in light of their behavior since) they should accept with gratitude any accommodations they get now. One of those accommodations really ought to be the possibility of patriation by the sponsor nations of their treason. Jordan seems to be the best likely candidate.

That the Arab states were unsuccessful in preventing the massacre of Christians and Muslims and their eviction by the Jews does not mean that the their intervention was in anyway unjustified.

I'm not a social justice warrior; I'm not making a social justice point. I don't give a fuck about the prehistoric underpinnings of this inter-tribal bloodbath. I find the reaching back into antiquity for the first-cause rationalizations that validate the brutality those rock-chucking retards in the Middle-East inflict upon each other (and all of us too) to be tedious and unproductive. Mostly because it's all full of lies--from BOTH sides. Hence, that narrative is not something I'm going to give weight to. Don't even bring it up.

I will not only bring it up, I will repeat it, because it is fact.

I'm not disputing or affirming your "facts." They are irrelevant to my point for the precise reasons I submitted, which you refuse to acknowledge.

Seriously. Don't bother to bring it up. It's meaningless to the whole world of people who do not give a fuck about the rationalizations that validate the brutality those rock-chucking retards in the Middle-East inflict upon each other.

All you do is repeat Zionist propaganda derived from Zionist sources. That is, you post bullshit, I post fact.

Ah. I see clearly. All that which fails to validate the brutality your favored rock-chucking retards in the Middle-East inflict upon the other rock-chucking retards is "Zionist propaganda derived from Zionist sources," "bullshit."

You are obviously an antisemitic ideologue. Good for you, Pumpkin.

You know what Cupcake? I don't give a fuck that you're the grand-fucking-dragon of your own personal illuminati lodge that claims the sole monopoly on what is "fact."

What you post looks just like the lies submitted by "Zionist" propagandists. You're both clown-shoes.

The Jews had no intention of allowing the Christians and Muslims to remain.

Yet they remain.

The only reason 10%-15% of Christians and Muslims were not expelled or massacred by the Jews was as a result of the Arab League's intervention.

So this Arab League that failed to prevent the existence of the nation of Israel--which was establishing their sovereignty through massacring Christians and Muslims--managed to do what?... help establish the existence of the state of Israel by preventing the massacre Christians and Muslims? Gotcha.

Left to their own devices the Jews would have expelled or killed every Christian and Muslim.

Yet they are still there. The Arab League ENTIRELY powerless to prevent further expulsions or "massacres." So very strange.

This was the plan prior to Israel's independence.

Well. I hate to break this to you Cupcake; while I recognize the actual existence of "Plan Dalet" and what it says, considering the fine relationship Israel has with Christians and Muslims in their country who do not behave like violent sociopaths, either they were not as committed to this "plan" in the manner your dogma insists, or there really was no such "plan" (in the manner your dogma insists) in the first place.

Either way, I don't give a fuck about the rationalizations that validate the brutality those rock-chucking retards in the Middle-East inflict upon each other.

It's not just Plan Dalet, there was every intention of the European Jews to colonize Palestine from the beginning.

New York Times July 20, 1899

Zionists planned to colonize Palestine in 1899 NY Times

Jewish Telegraphic Agency July 25, 1926

Successful Jewish Colonization Will Extend Beyond Palestine Frontier, Weizmann Tells Actions Committ

“Due to the success of our colonization work in Palestine proper, it is possible that eventually our colonization work will be extended beyond the frontiers of Transjordania. It is true that the Palestine government has not taken a clear stand in regard to its economic policy, but well founded demands have every prospect of being agreed to. A great deal has been achieved during the last months,”

Successful Jewish Colonization Will Extend Beyond Palestine Frontier Weizmann Tells Actions Committ Jewish Telegraphic Agency

And in 1940 the director of the Jewish National Fund's Lands Department was clear on the Jewish intentions:


" Yosef Weitz, who was at the time director of the Jewish National Fund’s Lands Department. This man of noted Zionist convictions confided to his diary on 20 December 1940: “It must be clear that there is no room in the country for both people (...) the only solution is a Land of Israel, at least a western Land of Israel without Arabs. There is no room here for compromise. (...) There is no way but to transfer the Arabs from here to the neighbouring countries(...) Not one village must be left, not one (bedouin) tribe.”

Seven years later, Weitz found himself in a position to put this radical programme into effect. Already, in January 1948, he was orchestrating the expulsion of Palestinians from various parts of the country. In April he proposed - and obtained - the creation of “a body which would direct the Yishuv’s war with the aim of evicting as many Arabs as possible”. This body was unofficial at first, but was formalised at the end of August 1948 into the “Transfer Committee” which supervised the destruction of abandoned Arab villages and/or their repopulation with recent Jewish immigrants, in order to make any return of the refugees impossible. Its role was extended, in July, to take in the creation of Jewish settlements in the border areas."

The expulsion of the Palestinians re-examined - Le Monde diplomatique - English edition

I don't give a fuck about the prehistoric underpinnings of this inter-tribal bloodbath. I find the reaching back into antiquity for the first-cause rationalizations that validate the brutality those rock-chucking retards in the Middle-East inflict upon each other (and all of us too) to be tedious and unproductive. Mostly because it's all full of lies--from BOTH sides. Hence, that narrative is not something I'm going to give weight to. Don't even bring it up.

So, in light of your most recent contribution, the right thing for these "Palestinians" to do is still; accept that their forebears lost for them any claim to a homeland in Israel when they turned against their countrymen and lost; and (in light of their behavior since) they should accept with gratitude any accommodations they get now. One of those accommodations really ought to be the possibility of patriation by the sponsor nations of their treason. Jordan seems to be the best likely candidate

 

[Billy_Kinetta]

Israel is slowly grabbing more land.

Good. They should have annexed the whole block in 1967. That would have been the end of it.

Don´t show up with right to exist stuff, then.

There is no "right to exist". It has nothing to do with rights, but the ability to keep what you have by whatever means necessary, whether alone or in partnership with others. Thus has it been throughout human history.

 

[montelatici]

Let me correct you.

Thank you. Please do.

The surrounding Arab states did not attack the Jews in Palestine.

Well, they most certainly did. That they did so is historical fact.

The surrounding Arab states intervened in an attempt to prevent the Jews in Palestine from massacring and evicting the Christians and Muslims under the Plan Dalet.

Semantics. I find the reaching back into antiquity for the first-cause rationalizations that validate the brutality those rock-chucking retards in the Middle-East inflict upon each other (and all of us too) to be tedious and unproductive. Mostly because it's all full of lies--from BOTH sides. Hence, that narrative is not something I'm going to give weight to. Don't even bring it up.

That said, there is a point in recent history that helps define the situation clearly. That point is May 14, 1948. On that date, in the region that the Western powers knew as "Palestine," the Jewish People's Council introduced to the world the sovereign state of Israel; recognized by both the United States of America and the Soviet Union--the most powerful sovereign powers of the time.

The Jews intended to massacre and evict as many non-Jews from the area illegally assigned to them as indicated by Plan Dalet.

Or, alternatively the Jews intended to evict or otherwise remove the soon-to-be traitors to the nascent state of Israel, sponsored by the surrounding Arab/Islamic nations who were conspicuously planning to claim the Palestinian territory for themselves.

You see? This is why I don't give a fuck about anything before May 14, 1948. I just don't give a fuck about the prehistoric underpinnings of this inter-tribal blood-bath. While I understand that May 13, 1948 is not pre-history, I draw the line at last moment the previous recognized sovereign in control of the region left, and the next recognized sovereign took over.

The Christians and Muslims knew this was the plan and had every right to attempt to prevent the Jews from implementing their plan for ethnic cleansing and genocide.

This nothing but appeal to emotion. And hearsay semantics. Which is why I don't give a fuck about anything before May 14, 1948.

The Palestinians continue to have every right to attempt to regain their land in any way possible including demographics, which is probably how they will regain their land eventually.

No. No they don't.

These Arab/Islamic Israelis ("Palestinians") actually belonged (briefly) to a nation in somewhere between May 14th and May 15th, 1948. They belonged to a nation that asserted a commitment to "foster the development of the country for the benefit of all its inhabitants; ... be based on freedom, justice and peace as envisaged by the prophets of Israel; ... ensure complete equality of social and political rights to all its inhabitants irrespective of religion, race or sex; it will guarantee freedom of religion, conscience, language, education and culture;..."

Yet these "Palestinians" chose to fight with the forces of hostile invading nations, against their own newly formed nation (i.e. Israel)--and then they lost. They could have fought beside their own countrymen in defense of their nation, but they chose otherwise.

The right thing for these "Palestinians" to do is accept that their forebears lost for them any claim to a homeland in Israel when they turned against their countrymen and lost; and (in light of their behavior since) they should accept with gratitude any accommodations they get now. One of those accommodations really ought to be the possibility of patriation by the sponsor nations of their treason. Jordan seems to be the best likely candidate.

That the Arab states were unsuccessful in preventing the massacre of Christians and Muslims and their eviction by the Jews does not mean that the their intervention was in anyway unjustified.

I'm not a social justice warrior; I'm not making a social justice point. I don't give a fuck about the prehistoric underpinnings of this inter-tribal bloodbath. I find the reaching back into antiquity for the first-cause rationalizations that validate the brutality those rock-chucking retards in the Middle-East inflict upon each other (and all of us too) to be tedious and unproductive. Mostly because it's all full of lies--from BOTH sides. Hence, that narrative is not something I'm going to give weight to. Don't even bring it up.

I will not only bring it up, I will repeat it, because it is fact.

I'm not disputing or affirming your "facts." They are irrelevant to my point for the precise reasons I submitted, which you refuse to acknowledge.

Seriously. Don't bother to bring it up. It's meaningless to the whole world of people who do not give a fuck about the rationalizations that validate the brutality those rock-chucking retards in the Middle-East inflict upon each other.

All you do is repeat Zionist propaganda derived from Zionist sources. That is, you post bullshit, I post fact.

Ah. I see clearly. All that which fails to validate the brutality your favored rock-chucking retards in the Middle-East inflict upon the other rock-chucking retards is "Zionist propaganda derived from Zionist sources," "bullshit."

You are obviously an antisemitic ideologue. Good for you, Pumpkin.

You know what Cupcake? I don't give a fuck that you're the grand-fucking-dragon of your own personal illuminati lodge that claims the sole monopoly on what is "fact."

What you post looks just like the lies submitted by "Zionist" propagandists. You're both clown-shoes.

The Jews had no intention of allowing the Christians and Muslims to remain.

Yet they remain.

The only reason 10%-15% of Christians and Muslims were not expelled or massacred by the Jews was as a result of the Arab League's intervention.

So this Arab League that failed to prevent the existence of the nation of Israel--which was establishing their sovereignty through massacring Christians and Muslims--managed to do what?... help establish the existence of the state of Israel by preventing the massacre Christians and Muslims? Gotcha.

Left to their own devices the Jews would have expelled or killed every Christian and Muslim.

Yet they are still there. The Arab League ENTIRELY powerless to prevent further expulsions or "massacres." So very strange.

This was the plan prior to Israel's independence.

Well. I hate to break this to you Cupcake; while I recognize the actual existence of "Plan Dalet" and what it says, considering the fine relationship Israel has with Christians and Muslims in their country who do not behave like violent sociopaths, either they were not as committed to this "plan" in the manner your dogma insists, or there really was no such "plan" (in the manner your dogma insists) in the first place.

Either way, I don't give a fuck about the rationalizations that validate the brutality those rock-chucking retards in the Middle-East inflict upon each other.

It's not just Plan Dalet, there was every intention of the European Jews to colonize Palestine from the beginning.

New York Times July 20, 1899

Zionists planned to colonize Palestine in 1899 NY Times

Jewish Telegraphic Agency July 25, 1926

Successful Jewish Colonization Will Extend Beyond Palestine Frontier, Weizmann Tells Actions Committ

“Due to the success of our colonization work in Palestine proper, it is possible that eventually our colonization work will be extended beyond the frontiers of Transjordania. It is true that the Palestine government has not taken a clear stand in regard to its economic policy, but well founded demands have every prospect of being agreed to. A great deal has been achieved during the last months,”

Successful Jewish Colonization Will Extend Beyond Palestine Frontier Weizmann Tells Actions Committ Jewish Telegraphic Agency

And in 1940 the director of the Jewish National Fund's Lands Department was clear on the Jewish intentions:


" Yosef Weitz, who was at the time director of the Jewish National Fund’s Lands Department. This man of noted Zionist convictions confided to his diary on 20 December 1940: “It must be clear that there is no room in the country for both people (...) the only solution is a Land of Israel, at least a western Land of Israel without Arabs. There is no room here for compromise. (...) There is no way but to transfer the Arabs from here to the neighbouring countries(...) Not one village must be left, not one (bedouin) tribe.”

Seven years later, Weitz found himself in a position to put this radical programme into effect. Already, in January 1948, he was orchestrating the expulsion of Palestinians from various parts of the country. In April he proposed - and obtained - the creation of “a body which would direct the Yishuv’s war with the aim of evicting as many Arabs as possible”. This body was unofficial at first, but was formalised at the end of August 1948 into the “Transfer Committee” which supervised the destruction of abandoned Arab villages and/or their repopulation with recent Jewish immigrants, in order to make any return of the refugees impossible. Its role was extended, in July, to take in the creation of Jewish settlements in the border areas."

The expulsion of the Palestinians re-examined - Le Monde diplomatique - English edition

I don't give a fuck about the prehistoric underpinnings of this inter-tribal bloodbath. I find the reaching back into antiquity for the first-cause rationalizations that validate the brutality those rock-chucking retards in the Middle-East inflict upon each other (and all of us too) to be tedious and unproductive. Mostly because it's all full of lies--from BOTH sides. Hence, that narrative is not something I'm going to give weight to. Don't even bring it up.

So, in light of your most recent contribution, the right thing for these "Palestinians" to do is still; accept that their forebears lost for them any claim to a homeland in Israel when they turned against their countrymen and lost; and (in light of their behavior since) they should accept with gratitude any accommodations they get now. One of those accommodations really ought to be the possibility of patriation by the sponsor nations of their treason. Jordan seems to be the best likely candidate

They did not "turn against their countrymen" they elected to resist being murdered or expelled by the colonists from Europe. As the record shows, the Europeans intended to kill or evict every non-Jew in the territory. The Palestinians have every legal right, under international law, to seek to reacquire their homes and land.