HELP - Israel vs Palestinians - Educate me

[Mojo2]

What if it turns out that the leading Arab/Muslims of that day agreed with the idea?

In short, Katz shows that...

the 1919 League of Nations vote to adopt the plan did not (as conventional wisdom now wrongly supposes) unilaterally impose a decision on the Arab peoples of the Middle East without their input.

In fact, the League of Nations acted as direct result of a 1919 Arab treaty with Jewish leaders.

[ame=http://www.amazon.com/product-reviews/0553117785/ref=acr_offerlistingpage_text?ie=UTF8&showViewpoints=1]Amazon.com: Customer Reviews: Battleground: Fact and Fantasy in Palestine[/ame]

Are you actually trying to use a book review as proof?

Are you referring to Emir Feisal's delegation at the Paris Peace Conference in 1919?

The Paris Peace Conference

The delegation of the Hijaz (now Saudi Arabia), led by Sherif Husain's son, Emir Feisal, was the only Arab delegation at the Conference, and presented the Arab case for independence, although their credentials were not recognized by all Arab leaders.

In a nutshell, the Arabs were under-represented in that conference.

'Any excuse will do,' I guess you'd say.

Look, Billo.

There WERE no Palestinian people.

There WAS no Palestine nation.

The only Arab sovereign for thousands of miles of sand and camels and not much more else was the only one who spoke for Arabs in this vast, sparsely populated, largely nomadic region, was the one who gave his blessings or his thumbs down to ALL Arab matters of the time.

This matter was no different.

He spoke for the Arabs.

Before the birth of George W. Bush, Feisal was "The Decider" of his day.

And he decided.

And just like we have a derogatory term for those who renege on a deal after it was made by two competent parties I think you are just venturing into the great area reserved for "Indian Givers" and for "sore losers."

The Jews didn't steal anything from anyone.

End of story.

 

[Mojo2]

Just read the link, then rephrase your question.

That's a book review!

One might imagine you would be allergic to knowledge but i didn't think your malady would prevent you from gaining insight from EVERY informed source.

So, are you telling me that you only gain enlightenment from Comedy Central and your Muslim friends?

If something worth knowing is printed in a book review you can't gain from it?

How about a newspaper?

Or a magazine?

Can you learn from a book?

Do you accept information if it comes to you in the form of a letter?

Are text messages out of bounds?

What do you do at street intersections when the sign says, "Walk" or "Don't Walk"?

Do you disregard the message because you can't figure out the meaning because it's not on a piece of paper of your liking???

No wonder you are uninformed when it comes to this Palestinian mess.

 

[Challenger]

...One might imagine you would be allergic to knowledge but i didn't think your malady would prevent you from gaining insight from EVERY informed source....

That's the whole point "Battlegound" is NOT what any objective academic historian would consider an "informed source". Shmuel Katz was a terrorist and far right politician who wrote a fantasy novel and called it "history"- you'll be quoting Joan Peters and Alan Dershowitz next!

 

[Billo_Really]

'Any excuse will do,' I guess you'd say.

Look, Billo.

There WERE no Palestinian people.

There WAS no Palestine nation.

The only Arab sovereign for thousands of miles of sand and camels and not much more else was the only one who spoke for Arabs in this vast, sparsely populated, largely nomadic region, was the one who gave his blessings or his thumbs down to ALL Arab matters of the time.

This matter was no different.

He spoke for the Arabs.

Before the birth of George W. Bush, Feisal was "The Decider" of his day.

And he decided.

And just like we have a derogatory term for those who renege on a deal after it was made by two competent parties I think you are just venturing into the great area reserved for "Indian Givers" and for "sore losers."

The Jews didn't steal anything from anyone.

End of story.

I don't give a shit what name you call them, or that area of the world, the fact remains, there was a million Arabs who had been living there for generations and they have rights to. You cannot move into an area and automatically have more rights than the people already living there.

I explained what Feisal's problem was and the link I referenced was the UN's official website. If I'm so uninformed, how did I know what your book was about by just reading the liner notes? I don't think his name was mentioned, so how did I come up with that, if I'm so uninformed?

 

[Billo_Really]

You drink Instant Headache? Wild Irish Rose? You're a tough hombre, Billo.

Actually, I can't really drink any more. According to my doctor, I can't even have Mountain Dews. "Too much sugar!", he say's.

I'll tell ya, when it gets to the point where salt and sugar kick your ass, it's time to go!

 

[aris2chat]

One Of The Most Beautiful, Accurate And True Cartoons Ever! A Masterpiece! | Globe Today

 

[P F Tinmore]

What if it turns out that the leading Arab/Muslims of that day agreed with the idea?



Amazon.com: Customer Reviews: Battleground: Fact and Fantasy in Palestine

Are you actually trying to use a book review as proof?

Are you referring to Emir Feisal's delegation at the Paris Peace Conference in 1919?

The Paris Peace Conference

The delegation of the Hijaz (now Saudi Arabia), led by Sherif Husain's son, Emir Feisal, was the only Arab delegation at the Conference, and presented the Arab case for independence, although their credentials were not recognized by all Arab leaders.

In a nutshell, the Arabs were under-represented in that conference.

'Any excuse will do,' I guess you'd say.

Look, Billo.

There WERE no Palestinian people.

There WAS no Palestine nation.

The only Arab sovereign for thousands of miles of sand and camels and not much more else was the only one who spoke for Arabs in this vast, sparsely populated, largely nomadic region, was the one who gave his blessings or his thumbs down to ALL Arab matters of the time.

This matter was no different.

He spoke for the Arabs.

Before the birth of George W. Bush, Feisal was "The Decider" of his day.

And he decided.

And just like we have a derogatory term for those who renege on a deal after it was made by two competent parties I think you are just venturing into the great area reserved for "Indian Givers" and for "sore losers."

The Jews didn't steal anything from anyone.

End of story.

There WERE no Palestinian people.

There WAS no Palestine nation.

Now all you need to do is to get millions of Palestinians to believe that load of crap.

Good luck with that.

 

[Daniyel]

One Of The Most Beautiful, Accurate And True Cartoons Ever! A Masterpiece! | Globe Today

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_ZY8m0cm1oY

Awesome video, I think the next state will be suggested to the Arabs would.. nah they don't deserve such generosity

 

[PredFan]

All anyone needs to know:

There are two types of Palastinians; terrorists, and terrorists who haven't gotten their marching orders yet.

 

[Challenger]

Here's a link to the UK's list of proscribed terrorist organizations. There is a theme, defined by association to a certain politico-religious ideology that is undeniable and accounts for the overwhelming majority of those on the list.

Identify for us what the connecting theme is.


https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/proscribed-terror-groups-or-organisations--2

The connecting theme is your racist hatred for all of them.

I was sure you would slither away instead of addressing the salient point.

Has anyone else noticed Hamas is not on the list, just the al-Qassam Brigades. Despite intense American and Zionist Israeli pressure successive British governments have refused to include Hamas' political wing on the list.

 

[Daniyel]

Are you actually trying to use a book review as proof?

Are you referring to Emir Feisal's delegation at the Paris Peace Conference in 1919?

In a nutshell, the Arabs were under-represented in that conference.

'Any excuse will do,' I guess you'd say.

Look, Billo.

There WERE no Palestinian people.

There WAS no Palestine nation.

The only Arab sovereign for thousands of miles of sand and camels and not much more else was the only one who spoke for Arabs in this vast, sparsely populated, largely nomadic region, was the one who gave his blessings or his thumbs down to ALL Arab matters of the time.

This matter was no different.

He spoke for the Arabs.

Before the birth of George W. Bush, Feisal was "The Decider" of his day.

And he decided.

And just like we have a derogatory term for those who renege on a deal after it was made by two competent parties I think you are just venturing into the great area reserved for "Indian Givers" and for "sore losers."

The Jews didn't steal anything from anyone.

End of story.

There WERE no Palestinian people.

There WAS no Palestine nation.

Now all you need to do is to get millions of Palestinians to believe that load of crap.

Good luck with that.

Tinmore, I really like the way you present it.
If millions of Palestinians would believe suicide bombing would get them 72 virgins..well, its not hard at all!

 

[irosie91]

'Any excuse will do,' I guess you'd say.

Look, Billo.

There WERE no Palestinian people.

There WAS no Palestine nation.

The only Arab sovereign for thousands of miles of sand and camels and not much more else was the only one who spoke for Arabs in this vast, sparsely populated, largely nomadic region, was the one who gave his blessings or his thumbs down to ALL Arab matters of the time.

This matter was no different.

He spoke for the Arabs.

Before the birth of George W. Bush, Feisal was "The Decider" of his day.

And he decided.

And just like we have a derogatory term for those who renege on a deal after it was made by two competent parties I think you are just venturing into the great area reserved for "Indian Givers" and for "sore losers."

The Jews didn't steal anything from anyone.

End of story.

There WERE no Palestinian people.

There WAS no Palestine nation.

Now all you need to do is to get millions of Palestinians to believe that load of crap.

Good luck with that.

Tinmore, I really like the way you present it.
If millions of Palestinians would believe suicide bombing would get them 72 virgins..well, its not hard at all!

I do understand that what I say next will be derided-----but I will say it anyway. I have stated that
thru many decades of my life I encountered ---and also worked with and socialized with LOTS and LOTS
of muslims------now I say it------->>**** <drum roll> I have never encountered a group of persons--
educated persons -----SO CREDULOUS when it comes to their own ---ideology, creed---and its
particular propaganda. No chance of questioning the partyline no matter how untenable
it is. --------what is said in the mosque is FACT!!!! what is written in the Koran is FACT!!!!
---whatever is "Islamic" ----IS!!!!! I even saw it in a mosque-----I was a guest so ----I politely
commented on the "sermon"----on the way home OH!!!! what a faux pas NO DISCUSSION--
just swallow it whole!!!!!!!!! needless to say----my own experience in life-----did not include---
lack of discussion and lack of debate

 

[aris2chat]

A child could understand this

 

[Challenger]

A child could understand this...

...and only a child would be taken in by it.

 

[toastman]

Are you actually trying to use a book review as proof?

Are you referring to Emir Feisal's delegation at the Paris Peace Conference in 1919?

In a nutshell, the Arabs were under-represented in that conference.

'Any excuse will do,' I guess you'd say.

Look, Billo.

There WERE no Palestinian people.

There WAS no Palestine nation.

The only Arab sovereign for thousands of miles of sand and camels and not much more else was the only one who spoke for Arabs in this vast, sparsely populated, largely nomadic region, was the one who gave his blessings or his thumbs down to ALL Arab matters of the time.

This matter was no different.

He spoke for the Arabs.

Before the birth of George W. Bush, Feisal was "The Decider" of his day.

And he decided.

And just like we have a derogatory term for those who renege on a deal after it was made by two competent parties I think you are just venturing into the great area reserved for "Indian Givers" and for "sore losers."

The Jews didn't steal anything from anyone.

End of story.

There WERE no Palestinian people.

There WAS no Palestine nation.

Now all you need to do is to get millions of Palestinians to believe that load of crap.

Good luck with that.

Interesting how you call the truth a 'load of crap'.

 

[Kondor3]

The connecting theme is your racist hatred for all of them.

I was sure you would slither away instead of addressing the salient point.

Has anyone else noticed Hamas is not on the list, just the al-Qassam Brigades. Despite intense American and Zionist Israeli pressure successive British governments have refused to include Hamas' political wing on the list.

These are the same people that arrogantly took over the Holy Land from the Turks and made promises to both Jews and Arabs that they could not keep and who ultimately pulled-up stakes and left them to slaughter each other the very split second that the Mandate was over, right?

These are the same people whose Kings issued Edicts of Expulsion of all the Jews in centuries past, right?

These are the same people who ended-up obliged to kiss Arab ass in order to keep the oil flowing, once they lost their Empire, right?

These are the same people who ruled over the Middle East at-large for more than a century and who grew accustomed to dealing with treacherous Arabs, while never having the same exposure and opportunity to deal with the Jews in like fashion, right?

These are the same people whose Empire Lite (Commonwealth) and its cohesion depends in part upon remaining in the good graces of the Arabs, right?

These are the same people who fancy themselves as superior to America and who are always looking for ways to play peacemaker to subtly show-up their aggressive 'special' allies, right?

These are the same people who signed the Munich Accords in 1938 and abandoned the Czechs to a horrific fate despite their treaty obligations, right?

And, I'm sure, a half-dozen or more additional reasons for the Brits to keep the lines of communication open between themselves and as many Arab polities as is practicable.

Who knows why the Brits do this?

They don't seem overly-fond of Jews or Israel, so that comes as no particular surprise.

 

[Kondor3]

'Any excuse will do,' I guess you'd say.

Look, Billo.

There WERE no Palestinian people.

There WAS no Palestine nation.

The only Arab sovereign for thousands of miles of sand and camels and not much more else was the only one who spoke for Arabs in this vast, sparsely populated, largely nomadic region, was the one who gave his blessings or his thumbs down to ALL Arab matters of the time.

This matter was no different.

He spoke for the Arabs.

Before the birth of George W. Bush, Feisal was "The Decider" of his day.

And he decided.

And just like we have a derogatory term for those who renege on a deal after it was made by two competent parties I think you are just venturing into the great area reserved for "Indian Givers" and for "sore losers."

The Jews didn't steal anything from anyone.

End of story.

There WERE no Palestinian people.

There WAS no Palestine nation.

Now all you need to do is to get millions of Palestinians to believe that load of crap.

Good luck with that.

Interesting how you call the truth a 'load of crap'.

God knows that's the truth.

You tell them that Palestine never existed as a State.

You have vast and overwhelming documentary proof of that state of affairs.

And still they call it a load of crap.

Well... Paleestinians are not known for their strong grasp of Reality.

 

[P F Tinmore]

Now all you need to do is to get millions of Palestinians to believe that load of crap.

Good luck with that.

Interesting how you call the truth a 'load of crap'.

God knows that's the truth.

You tell them that Palestine never existed as a State.

You have vast and overwhelming documentary proof of that state of affairs.

And still they call it a load of crap.

Well... Paleestinians are not known for their strong grasp of Reality.

That does not matter. People in non self governing territories have rights also.

1. The subjection of peoples to alien subjugation, domination and exploitation constitutes a denial of fundamental human rights, is contrary to the Charter of the United Nations and is an impediment to the promotion of world peace and co-operation.

2. All peoples have the right to self-determination; by virtue of that right they freely determine their political status and freely pursue their economic, social and cultural development.

3. Inadequacy of political, economic, social or educational preparedness should never serve as a pretext for delaying independence.

4. All armed action or repressive measures of all kinds directed against dependent peoples shall cease in order to enable them to exercise peacefully and freely their right to complete independence, and the integrity of their national territory shall be respected.

5. Immediate steps shall be taken, in Trust and Non-Self-Governing Territories or all other territories which have not yet attained independence, to transfer all powers to the peoples of those territories, without any conditions or reservations, in accordance with their freely expressed will and desire, without any distinction as to race, creed or colour, in order to enable them to enjoy complete independence and freedom.

6. Any attempt aimed at the partial or total disruption of the national unity and the territorial integrity of a country is incompatible with the purposes and principles of the Charter of the United Nations.

7. All States shall observe faithfully and strictly the provisions of the Charter of the United Nations, the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and the present Declaration on the basis of equality, non-interference in the internal affairs of all States, and respect for the sovereign rights of all peoples and their territorial integrity.

The United Nations and Decolonization - Declaration

Whether Palestine is a state or not is subject to political opinion, but at the end of the day it is irrelevant.

 

[Kondor3]

...That does not matter. People in non self governing territories have rights also...

Looks good on paper, doesn't it?

Now, all you have to do is to make that operative in the Real World, in this context.

...Whether Palestine is a state or not is subject to political opinion, but at the end of the day it is irrelevant.

That, too, looks good on paper, Tinny.

 

[Challenger]

I was sure you would slither away instead of addressing the salient point.

Has anyone else noticed Hamas is not on the list, just the al-Qassam Brigades. Despite intense American and Zionist Israeli pressure successive British governments have refused to include Hamas' political wing on the list.

These are the same people that arrogantly took over the Holy Land from the Turks and made promises to both Jews and Arabs that they could not keep and who ultimately pulled-up stakes and left them to slaughter each other the very split second that the Mandate was over, right?

These are the same people whose Kings issued Edicts of Expulsion of all the Jews in centuries past, right?

These are the same people who ended-up obliged to kiss Arab ass in order to keep the oil flowing, once they lost their Empire, right?

These are the same people who ruled over the Middle East at-large for more than a century and who grew accustomed to dealing with treacherous Arabs, while never having the same exposure and opportunity to deal with the Jews in like fashion, right?

These are the same people whose Empire Lite (Commonwealth) and its cohesion depends in part upon remaining in the good graces of the Arabs, right?

These are the same people who fancy themselves as superior to America and who are always looking for ways to play peacemaker to subtly show-up their aggressive 'special' allies, right?

These are the same people who signed the Munich Accords in 1938 and abandoned the Czechs to a horrific fate despite their treaty obligations, right?

And, I'm sure, a half-dozen or more additional reasons for the Brits to keep the lines of communication open between themselves and as many Arab polities as is practicable.

Who knows why the Brits do this?

They don't seem overly-fond of Jews or Israel, so that comes as no particular surprise.

Whatever. Who was it that said, "to Jaw Jaw is always better than to "war war" Civilized nations always keep their options open; today's enemy becomes tomorrow's friend and vice versa. That's something Zionist Israel seems to have persistently failed to grasp.